Greece ESIA Amendment 3

Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Installations Report Page 2 of 211

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 17 1.1 Project Title 17 1.2 Project Type and Size 17 1.3 Project Location 18 1.4 Project Classification 19 1.5 Project Developer 20 1.6 Study Team 20

2 Description of Approved Project 21 2.1 TAP Project Overview 21 2.1.1 Project Rationale 21 2.1.2 Brief Technical Description 21 2.1.3 TAP System Throughput 22 2.1.4 Project Schedule 22 2.1.5 TAP Design Philosophy 22 2.1.6 Applicable Codes and Standards 23 2.2 Main Project Components in Greece 24 2.2.1 Pipeline 24 2.2.2 Block-Valve Stations (BVS) 24 2.2.3 Compressor Stations (CS) 25 2.2.3.1 Layout and design 26 2.2.4 Temporary Facilities 26 2.2.4.1 Storage and Pipe Yards 26 2.2.4.2 Construction Camps 26 2.3 Project Progress since Permitting 26

3 Project Modifications 28 3.1 Changes in Blockvalve Stations (BVS) Locations 28 3.2 Changes to the Blockvalve Stations (BVS) Design 28 3.3 Changes in Pipeyards (PYs) Locations 29 3.4 Changes in Construction Camps (CAMPs) Locations 29 3.5 Minor Changes to the Pipeline Route 30 3.6 Rationale for Project Modifications 31

4 Legislative and Policy Framework 32 4.1 Introduction 32 4.2 Legal Basis for the Third Amendment to the ESIA 32 4.3 Changes to the ESIA Legal Framework since ESIA Submission 33

5 Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline 36

Page 3 of 211

5.1 Introduction 36 5.2 Relocation of Block Valve Station 01 (BVS01) 36 5.2.1 Proposed location of BVS01 36 5.2.2 Physical environment 37 5.2.2.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 37 5.2.2.2 Soil and subsoil 37 5.2.2.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 38 5.2.3 Biological Environment 38 5.2.4 Socioeconomic Environment 39 5.2.5 Cultural Heritage Environment 39 5.3 Relocation of Block Valve Station 05 (BVS05) 39 5.3.1 Physical environment 40 5.3.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 40 5.3.1.2 Soil and subsoil 40 5.3.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 41 5.3.2 Biological Environment 41 5.3.3 Socioeconomic Environment 42 5.3.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 42 5.4 Relocation of Block Valve Station 06 (BVS06) 42 5.4.1 Physical environment 43 5.4.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 43 5.4.1.2 Soil and subsoil 43 5.4.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 44 5.4.2 Biological Environment 44 5.4.3 Socioeconomic Environment 45 5.4.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 45 5.5 Relocation of Block Valve Station 09 (BVS09) 45 5.5.1 Physical environment 46 5.5.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 46 5.5.1.2 Soil and subsoil 46 5.5.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 47 5.5.2 Biological Environment 47 5.5.3 Socioeconomic Environment 48 5.5.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 48 5.6 Relocation of Block Valve Station 10 (BVS10) 48 5.6.1 Physical environment 49 5.6.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 49 5.6.1.2 Soil and subsoil 49 5.6.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 50 5.6.2 Biological Environment 50 5.6.3 Socioeconomic Environment 51 5.6.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 51 5.7 Relocation of Block Valve Station 13 (BVS13) 51 5.7.1 Physical environment 52 5.7.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 52 5.7.1.2 Soil and subsoil 52 5.7.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 53 5.7.2 Biological Environment 53

Page 4 of 211

5.7.3 Socioeconomic Environment 54 5.7.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 54 5.8 Relocation of Block Valve Station 15 (BVS15) 54 5.8.1 Physical environment 55 5.8.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 55 5.8.1.2 Soil and subsoil 55 5.8.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 56 5.8.2 Biological Environment 56 5.8.3 Socioeconomic Environment 57 5.8.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 57 5.9 Relocation of Block Valve Station 16 (BVS16) 57 5.9.1 Physical environment 58 5.9.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 58 5.9.1.2 Soil and subsoil 58 5.9.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 59 5.9.2 Biological Environment 59 5.9.3 Socioeconomic Environment 60 5.9.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 60 5.10 Relocation of Block Valve Station 18 (BVS18) 60 5.10.1 Physical environment 61 5.10.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 61 5.10.1.2 Soil and subsoil 61 5.10.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 62 5.10.2 Biological Environment 62 5.10.3 Socioeconomic Environment 63 5.10.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 63 5.11 Relocation of Block Valve Station 19 (BVS19) 63 5.11.1 Physical environment 64 5.11.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 64 5.11.1.2 Soil and subsoil 64 5.11.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 65 5.11.2 Biological Environment 65 5.11.3 Socioeconomic Environment 66 5.11.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 66 5.12 Relocation of Block Valve Station 21 (BVS21) 66 5.12.1 Physical environment 67 5.12.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 67 5.12.1.2 Soil and subsoil 67 5.12.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 68 5.12.2 Biological Environment 68 5.12.3 Socioeconomic Environment 69 5.12.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 69 5.13 Relocation of Block Valve Station 22 (BVS22) 69 5.13.1 Physical environment 70 5.13.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 70 5.13.1.2 Soil and subsoil 70 5.13.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 71 5.13.2 Biological Environment 71

Page 5 of 211

5.13.3 Socioeconomic Environment 72 5.13.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 72 5.14 Relocation of Pipeyard 01 (PY01) 72 5.14.1 Physical Environment 73 5.14.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 73 5.14.1.2 Soil and subsoil 74 5.14.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 74 5.14.2 Biological Environment 74 5.14.3 Socioeconomic Environment 76 5.14.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 76 5.15 Relocation of Pipeyard 08 (PY08) 76 5.15.1 Physical environment 77 5.15.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 77 5.15.1.2 Soil and subsoil 77 5.15.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 78 5.15.2 Biological Environment 78 5.15.3 Socioeconomic Environment 78 5.15.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 78 5.16 Relocation of Pipeyard 10 (PY10) 78 5.16.1 Physical environment 79 5.16.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 79 5.16.1.2 Soil and subsoil 80 5.16.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 80 5.16.2 Biological Environment 80 5.16.3 Socioeconomic Environment 81 5.16.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 82 5.17 Relocation of Pipeyard 13 (PY13) 82 5.17.1 Physical environment 83 5.17.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 83 5.17.1.2 Soil and subsoil 83 5.17.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 84 5.17.2 Biological Environment 84 5.17.3 Socioeconomic Environment 85 5.17.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 85 5.18 Plot size change of PY04 and PY09 86 5.19 Relocation of Construction Camp 03 (CAMP03) 87 5.19.1 Physical environment 88 5.19.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 88 5.19.1.2 Soil and subsoil 88 5.19.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 89 5.19.2 Biological Environment 89 5.19.3 Socioeconomic Environment 89 5.19.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 89 5.20 Relocation of Construction Camp 04 (CAMP04) 90 5.20.1 Physical environment 90 5.20.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 90 5.20.1.2 Soil and subsoil 91 5.20.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 91

Page 6 of 211

5.20.2 Biological Environment 91 5.20.3 Socioeconomic Environment 91 5.20.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 92 5.21 Relocation of Construction Camp 06 (CAMP06) 92 5.21.1 Physical environment 92 5.21.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 92 5.21.1.2 Soil and subsoil 93 5.21.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 93 5.21.2 Biological Environment 93 5.21.3 Socioeconomic Environment 94 5.21.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 94 5.22 Relocation of Construction Camp 07 (CAMP07) 94 5.22.1 Physical environment 95 5.22.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 95 5.22.1.2 Soil and subsoil 95 5.22.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 96 5.22.2 Biological Environment 96 5.22.3 Socioeconomic Environment 96 5.22.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 96 5.23 Relocation of Construction Camp 08 (CAMP08) 97 5.23.1 Physical environment 97 5.23.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 97 5.23.1.2 Soil and subsoil 98 5.23.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 98 5.23.2 Biological Environment 98 5.23.3 Socioeconomic Environment 98 5.23.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 98 5.24 Plot size change of CAMP01 and CAMP02 99 5.25 Proposed rerouting at Kipoi (IP 0002-03 – IP 0002-14) 100 5.25.1 Physical environment 101 5.25.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 101 5.25.1.2 Soil and subsoil 101 5.25.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 101 5.25.2 Biological Environment 102 5.25.3 Socioeconomic Environment 102 5.25.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 102 5.26 Proposed rerouting at Komotini Airport (IP0251-10-02 – IP 0251-10-07) 102 5.26.1 Physical environment 103 5.26.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 103 5.26.1.2 Soil and subsoil 103 5.26.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 104 5.26.2 Biological Environment 104 5.26.3 Socioeconomic Environment 104 5.26.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 104 5.27 Proposed rerouting at Amvrosia (IP0251-15 – IP 0290-01) 105 5.27.1 Physical environment 106 5.27.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 106 5.27.1.2 Soil and subsoil 106

Page 7 of 211

5.27.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 106 5.27.2 Biological Environment 106 5.27.3 Socioeconomic Environment 107 5.27.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 107 5.28 Proposed rerouting at Krinides (IP 0450-05 – IP 0450-07) 107 5.28.1 Physical environment 108 5.28.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 108 5.28.1.2 Soil and subsoil 108 5.28.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 109 5.28.2 Biological Environment 109 5.28.3 Socioeconomic Environment 109 5.28.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 109 5.29 Proposed rerouting at Kalamonas (IP 0450-16-01 – IP 0450-19) 110 5.29.1 Physical environment 110 5.29.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 110 5.29.1.2 Soil and subsoil 111 5.29.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 111 5.29.2 Biological Environment 111 5.29.3 Socioeconomic Environment 111 5.29.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 112 5.30 Proposed rerouting at Lachanas (IP 0618-01 – IP 0618-03) 112 5.30.1 Physical environment 113 5.30.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 113 5.30.1.2 Soil and subsoil 113 5.30.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 114 5.30.2 Biological Environment 114 5.30.3 Socioeconomic Environment 114 5.30.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 114 5.31 Proposed rerouting at Drymos (IP 0677-07-01 – IP 0677-08) 115 5.31.1 Physical environment 115 5.31.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 115 5.31.1.2 Soil and subsoil 116 5.31.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 116 5.31.2 Biological Environment 116 5.31.3 Socioeconomic Environment 116 5.31.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 117 5.32 Proposed rerouting at Mikro Monastiri (IP 1042-01 – IP 1042-03) 117 5.32.1 Physical environment 118 5.32.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 118 5.32.1.2 Soil and subsoil 118 5.32.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 118 5.32.2 Biological Environment 118 5.32.3 Socioeconomic Environment 119 5.32.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 119 5.33 Proposed rerouting at Loudias river (IP 1046-01 – IP 1046-03) 119 5.33.1 Physical environment 120 5.33.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 120 5.33.1.2 Soil and subsoil 120

Page 8 of 211

5.33.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 121 5.33.2 Biological Environment 121 5.33.3 Socioeconomic Environment 121 5.33.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 121 5.34 Proposed rerouting at Agia Fotini (IP 1110 – IP 1110-02) 122 5.34.1 Physical environment 122 5.34.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 122 5.34.1.2 Soil and subsoil 123 5.34.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 123 5.34.2 Biological Environment 123 5.34.3 Socioeconomic Environment 123 5.34.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 124 5.35 Proposed rerouting at Verga (IP 1224 – IP 1224-02) 124 5.35.1 Physical environment 125 5.35.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 125 5.35.1.2 Soil and subsoil 125 5.35.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 126 5.35.1.4 Biological Environment 126 5.35.2 Socioeconomic Environment 126 5.35.3 Cultural Heritage Environment 126 5.36 Proposed rerouting at Chiliodendro (IP 1273-02-01 – IP 1273-02-02) 127 5.36.1 Physical environment 127 5.36.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology 127 5.36.1.2 Soil and subsoil 128 5.36.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 128 5.36.2 Biological Environment 128 5.36.3 Socioeconomic Environment 128 5.36.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 129

6 Stakeholder Engagement 129

7 Environmental Monitoring Results 129

8 Impact Assessment and Mitigation Measures 130 8.1 Relocation of Block Valve Station 01 (BVS01) 130 8.1.1 Physical environment 130 8.1.1.1 Geology 130 8.1.1.2 Soil and subsoil 130 8.1.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 130 8.1.2 Biological Environment 131 8.1.3 Socioeconomic Environment 131 8.1.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 131 8.1.5 Approval from authorities 132 8.2 Relocation of Block Valve Station 05 (BVS05) 132 8.2.1 Physical environment 132 8.2.1.1 Geology 132 8.2.1.2 Soil and subsoil 132 8.2.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 133 8.2.2 Biological Environment 133

Page 9 of 211

8.2.3 Socioeconomic Environment 133 8.2.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 134 8.2.5 Approval from authorities 134 8.3 Relocation of Block Valve Station 06 (BVS06) 134 8.3.1 Physical environment 134 8.3.1.1 Geology 134 8.3.1.2 Soil and subsoil 135 8.3.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 135 8.3.2 Biological Environment 135 8.3.3 Socioeconomic Environment 136 8.3.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 136 8.3.5 Approval from authorities 136 8.4 Relocation of Block Valve Station 09 (BVS09) 137 8.4.1 Physical environment 137 8.4.1.1 Geology 137 8.4.1.2 Soil and subsoil 137 8.4.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 137 8.4.2 Biological Environment 138 8.4.3 Socioeconomic Environment 138 8.4.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 138 8.4.5 Approval from authorities 139 8.5 Relocation of Block Valve Station 10 (BVS10) 139 8.5.1 Physical environment 139 8.5.1.1 Geology 139 8.5.1.2 Soil and subsoil 139 8.5.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 140 8.5.2 Biological Environment 140 8.5.3 Socioeconomic Environment 140 8.5.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 141 8.5.5 Approval from authorities 141 8.6 Relocation of Block Valve Station 13 (BVS13) 141 8.6.1 Physical environment 141 8.6.1.1 Geology 141 8.6.1.2 Soil and subsoil 142 8.6.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 142 8.6.2 Socioeconomic Environment 142 8.6.3 Cultural Heritage Environment 143 8.6.4 Approval from authorities 143 8.7 Relocation of Block Valve Station 15 (BVS15) 144 8.7.1 Physical environment 144 8.7.1.1 Geology 144 8.7.1.2 Soil and subsoil 144 8.7.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 144 8.7.2 Biological Environment 145 8.7.3 Socioeconomic Environment 145 8.7.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 145 8.7.5 Approval from authorities 146 8.8 Relocation of Block Valve Station 16 (BVS16) 146

Page 10 of 211

8.8.1 Physical environment 146 8.8.1.1 Geology 146 8.8.1.2 Soil and subsoil 146 8.8.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 147 8.8.2 Biological Environment 147 8.8.3 Socioeconomic Environment 147 8.8.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 148 8.8.5 Approval from authorities 148 8.9 Relocation of Block Valve Station 18 (BVS18) 148 8.9.1 Physical environment 148 8.9.1.1 Geology 148 8.9.1.2 Soil and subsoil 149 8.9.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 149 8.9.2 Biological Environment 149 8.9.3 Socioeconomic Environment 150 8.9.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 150 8.9.5 Approval from authorities 150 8.10 Relocation of Block Valve Station 19 (BVS19) 151 8.10.1 Physical environment 151 8.10.1.1 Geology 151 8.10.1.2 Soil and subsoil 151 8.10.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 151 8.10.2 Biological Environment 152 8.10.3 Socioeconomic Environment 152 8.10.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 152 8.10.5 Approval from authorities 153 8.11 Relocation of Block Valve Station 21 (BVS21) 153 8.11.1 Physical environment 153 8.11.1.1 Geology 153 8.11.1.2 Soil and subsoil 153 8.11.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 154 8.11.2 Biological Environment 154 8.11.3 Socioeconomic Environment 154 8.11.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 155 8.11.5 Approval from authorities 155 8.12 Relocation of Block Valve Station 22 (BVS22) 155 8.12.1 Physical environment 155 8.12.1.1 Geology 155 8.12.1.2 Soil and subsoil 156 8.12.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 156 8.12.2 Biological Environment 156 8.12.3 Socioeconomic Environment 157 8.12.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 157 8.12.5 Approval from authorities 157 8.13 Relocation of Pipeyard 01 (PY01) 158 8.13.1 Physical environment 158 8.13.1.1 Geology 158 8.13.1.2 Soil and subsoil 158 8.13.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 159

Page 11 of 211

8.13.2 Biological Environment 159 8.13.2.1 Socioeconomic Environment 160 8.13.3 Cultural Heritage Environment 161 8.13.4 Approval from authorities 161 8.14 Relocation of Pipeyard 08 (PY08) 162 8.14.1 Physical environment 162 8.14.1.1 Geology 162 8.14.1.2 Soil and subsoil 162 8.14.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 163 8.14.2 Biological Environment 163 8.14.3 Socioeconomic Environment 164 8.14.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 165 8.14.5 Approval from authorities 165 8.15 Relocation of Pipeyard 10 (PY10) 166 8.15.1 Physical environment 166 8.15.1.1 Geology 166 8.15.1.2 Soil and subsoil 166 8.15.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 167 8.15.2 Biological Environment 167 8.15.3 Socioeconomic Environment 168 8.15.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 169 8.15.5 Approval from authorities 169 8.16 Relocation of Pipeyard 13 (PY13) 170 8.16.1 Physical environment 170 8.16.1.1 Geology 170 8.16.1.2 Soil and subsoil 170 8.16.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 171 8.16.2 Biological Environment 171 8.16.3 Socioeconomic Environment 172 8.16.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 172 8.16.5 Approval from authorities 172 8.17 Relocation of Construction Camp 03 (CAMP03) 173 8.17.1 Physical environment 173 8.17.1.1 Geology 173 8.17.1.2 Soil and subsoil 173 8.17.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 174 8.17.2 Biological Environment 174 8.17.3 Socioeconomic Environment 175 8.17.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 175 8.17.5 Approval from authorities 175 8.18 Relocation of Construction Camp 04 (CAMP04) 175 8.18.1 Physical environment 175 8.18.1.1 Geology 175 8.18.1.2 Soil and subsoil 176 8.18.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 177 8.18.2 Biological Environment 177 8.18.3 Socioeconomic Environment 177 8.18.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 178 8.18.5 Approval from authorities 178

Page 12 of 211

8.19 Relocation of Construction Camp 06 (CAMP06) 178 8.19.1 Physical environment 178 8.19.1.1 Geology 178 8.19.1.2 Soil and subsoil 178 8.19.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 179 8.19.2 Biological Environment 180 8.19.3 Socioeconomic Environment 180 8.19.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 180 8.19.5 Approval from authorities 181 8.20 Relocation of Construction Camp 07 (CAMP07) 181 8.20.1 Physical environment 181 8.20.1.1 Geology 181 8.20.1.2 Soil and subsoil 181 8.20.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 182 8.20.2 Biological Environment 182 8.20.3 Socioeconomic Environment 183 8.20.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 183 8.20.5 Approval from authorities 183 8.21 Relocation of Construction Camp 08 (CAMP08) 183 8.21.1 Physical environment 183 8.21.1.1 Geology 183 8.21.1.2 Soil and subsoil 184 8.21.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 185 8.21.2 Biological Environment 185 8.21.3 Socioeconomic Environment 185 8.21.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 185 8.21.5 Approval from authorities 186 8.22 Proposed rerouting at Kipoi (IP 0002-03 – IP 0002-14) 186 8.22.1 Physical environment 186 8.22.1.1 Geology 186 8.22.1.2 Soil and subsoil 186 8.22.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 186 8.22.2 Biological Environment 187 8.22.3 Socioeconomic Environment 187 8.22.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 187 8.23 Proposed rerouting at Komotini Airport (IP0251-10-02 – IP 0251-10-07) 188 8.23.1 Physical environment 188 8.23.1.1 Geology 188 8.23.1.2 Soil and subsoil 188 8.23.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 188 8.23.2 Biological Environment 188 8.23.3 Socioeconomic Environment 189 8.23.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 189 8.23.5 Approval from authorities 189 8.24 Proposed rerouting at Amvrosia (IP0251-15 – IP 0290-01) 190 8.24.1 Physical environment 190 8.24.1.1 Geology 190 8.24.1.2 Soil and subsoil 190 8.24.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 190

Page 13 of 211

8.24.2 Biological Environment 190 8.24.3 Socioeconomic Environment 191 8.24.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 191 8.24.5 Approval from authorities 191 8.25 Proposed rerouting at Krinides (IP 0450-05 – IP 0450-07) 192 8.25.1 Physical environment 192 8.25.1.1 Geology 192 8.25.1.2 Soil and subsoil 192 8.25.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 192 8.25.2 Biological Environment 192 8.25.3 Socioeconomic Environment 193 8.25.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 193 8.25.5 Approval from authorities 193 8.26 Proposed rerouting at Kalamonas (IP 0450-16-01 – IP 0450-19) 194 8.26.1 Physical environment 194 8.26.1.1 Geology 194 8.26.1.2 Soil and subsoil 194 8.26.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 194 8.26.2 Biological Environment 194 8.26.3 Socioeconomic Environment 195 8.26.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 195 8.26.5 Approval from authorities 195 8.27 Proposed rerouting at Lachanas (IP 0618-01 – IP 0618-03) 196 8.27.1 Physical environment 196 8.27.1.1 Geology 196 8.27.1.2 Soil and subsoil 196 8.27.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 196 8.27.2 Biological Environment 196 8.27.3 Socioeconomic Environment 197 8.27.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 197 8.27.5 Approval from authorities 197 8.28 Proposed rerouting at Drymos (IP 0677-07-01 – IP 0677-08) 198 8.28.1 Physical environment 198 8.28.1.1 Geology 198 8.28.1.2 Soil and subsoil 198 8.28.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 198 8.28.2 Biological Environment 198 8.28.3 Socioeconomic Environment 199 8.28.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 199 8.28.5 Approval from authorities 199 8.29 Proposed rerouting at Mikro Monastiri (IP 1042-01 – IP 1042-03) 200 8.29.1 Physical environment 200 8.29.1.1 Geology 200 8.29.1.2 Soil and subsoil 200 8.29.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 200 8.29.2 Biological Environment 200 8.29.3 Socioeconomic Environment 201 8.29.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 201 8.29.5 Approval from authorities 201

Page 14 of 211

8.30 Proposed rerouting at Loudias river (IP 1046-01 – IP 1046-03) 202 8.30.1 Physical environment 202 8.30.1.1 Geology 202 8.30.1.2 Soil and subsoil 202 8.30.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 202 8.30.2 Biological Environment 202 8.30.3 Socioeconomic Environment 203 8.30.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 203 8.30.5 Approval from authorities 203 8.31 Proposed rerouting at Agia Fotini (IP 1110 – IP 1110-02) 204 8.31.1 Physical environment 204 8.31.1.1 Geology 204 8.31.1.2 Soil and subsoil 204 8.31.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 204 8.31.2 Biological Environment 204 8.31.3 Socioeconomic Environment 205 8.31.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 205 8.31.5 Approval from authorities 205 8.32 Proposed rerouting at Verga (IP 1224 – IP 1224-02) 206 8.32.1 Physical environment 206 8.32.1.1 Geology 206 8.32.1.2 Soil and subsoil 206 8.32.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 206 8.32.2 Biological Environment 206 8.32.3 Socioeconomic Environment 207 8.32.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 207 8.32.5 Approval from authorities 207 8.33 Proposed rerouting at Chiliodendro (IP 1273-02-01 – IP 1273-02-02) 208 8.33.1 Physical environment 208 8.33.1.1 Geology 208 8.33.1.2 Soil and subsoil 208 8.33.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity 208 8.33.2 Biological Environment 208 8.33.3 Socioeconomic Environment 209 8.33.4 Cultural Heritage Environment 209 8.33.5 Approval from authorities 209 8.34 Plot size changes in temporary installations 210

9 Conclusions 211

Table of tables

Table 1-1 Administrative Setting of the TAP Project in Greece 19 Table 2-1 Summary of Installed Capacity at Compressor Stations – Approved Project Design 25 Table 3-1 Changes in BVS Location along the Pipeline Route 28 Table 3-2 Changes in PYs Location along the Pipeline Route 29 Table 3-3 Changes in CAMPs Location along the Pipeline Route 30 Table 3-4 Changes in Pipeline Route 30

Page 15 of 211

Table 5-1 Flora species of conservation interest in the oak forest neighboring PY01 81 Table 8-1 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 131 Table 8-2 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 133 Table 8-3 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 135 Table 8-4 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 138 Table 8-5 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 140 Table 8-6 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 142 Table 8-7 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 145 Table 8-8 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 147 Table 8-9 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 149 Table 8-10 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 152 Table 8-11 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 154 Table 8-12 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity 156 Table 8-13 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil 158 Table 8-14 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil 162 Table 8-15 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil 166 Table 8-16 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil 170 Table 8-17 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil 173 Table 8-18 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil 176 Table 8-19 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil 179 Table 8-20 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil 181 Table 8-21 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil 184

Table of Figures

Figure 1-1 Trans Adriatic Pipeline Project Location 18 Figure 2-1 Southern Gas Corridor 21 Figure 5-1 Relocation of Block Valve Station 01 (BVS01) 37 Figure 5-2 Area of BVS01 (VP-1; IP 0046) 38 Figure 5-3 Relocation of Block Valve Station 05 (BVS05) 40 Figure 5-4 Area of BVS05 (VP-2; IP 0289) 41 Figure 5-5 Relocation of Block Valve Station 06 (BVS06) 43 Figure 5-6 Area of BVS06 (VP-3; IP 0322) 44 Figure 5-7 Relocation of Block Valve Station 09 (BVS09) 46 Figure 5-8 Area of BVS09 (VP-4; IP 0450-24) 47 Figure 5-9 Relocation of Block Valve Station 10 (BVS10) 49 Figure 5-10 Area of BVS10 (VP-5; IP 0502) 50 Figure 5-11 Relocation of Block Valve Station 13 (BVS13) 52 Figure 5-12 Area of BVS13 (VP-6; IP 0637-02) 53 Figure 5-13 Relocation of Block Valve Station 15 (BVS15) 55 Figure 5-14 Area of BVS15 (VP-9; IP 1006) 56 Figure 5-15 Relocation of Block Valve Station 16 (BVS16) 58 Figure 5-16 Area of BVS16 (VP-15; IP 1030) 59 Figure 5-17 Relocation of Block Valve Station 18 (BVS18) 61 Figure 5-18 Area of BVS18 (VP-16; IP 1064) 62 Figure 5-19 Relocation of Block Valve Station 19 (BVS19) 64 Figure 5-20 Area of BVS19 (VP-17; IP 1102) 65 Figure 5-21 Relocation of Block Valve Station 21 (BVS21) 67 Figure 5-22 Area of BVS21 (VP-13; IP 1175) 68 Figure 5-23 Relocation of Block Valve Station 22 (BVS22) 70 Figure 5-24 Area of BVS22 (VP-14; IP 1234) 71

Page 16 of 211

Figure 5-25 Relocation of Pipeyard 01 (PY01) 73 Figure 5-26 Distribution of souslik-like holes in GPY01 75 Figure 5-27 Souslik-like holes in GPY01 76 Figure 5-28 Relocation of Pipeyard 08 (PY08) 77 Figure 5-29 Relocation of Pipeyard 10 (PY10) 79 Figure 5-30 Quercus fraineto forest stand (91M0) in the immediate vicinity but outside the boarders of PY10 81 Figure 5-31 Relocation of Pipeyard 13 (PY13) 83 Figure 5-32 Clover within PY13 85 Figure 5-33 Plot size of PY04 86 Figure 5-34 Plot size of PY09 87 Figure 5-35 Relocation of Construction Camp 03 (CAMP03) 88 Figure 5-36 Relocation of Construction Camp 04 (CAMP04) 90 Figure 5-37 Relocation of Construction Camp 06 (CAMP06) 92 Figure 5-38 The proposed location of CAMP06 from its south side 94 Figure 5-39 Relocation of Construction Camp 07 (CAMP07) 95 Figure 5-40 Relocation of Construction Camp 08 (CAMP08) 97 Figure 5-41 Plot size of CAMP01 99 Figure 5-42 Plot size of CAMP02 100 Figure 5-43 Proposed rerouting at Kipoi (IP 0002-03 – IP 0002-14) 101 Figure 5-44 Proposed rerouting at Komotini Airport (IP0251-10-02 – IP 0251-10-07) 103 Figure 5-45 Proposed rerouting at Amvrosia (IP0251-15 – IP 0290-01) 105 Figure 5-46 Proposed rerouting at Krinides (IP 0450-05 – IP 0450-07) 108 Figure 5-47 Proposed rerouting at Kalamonas (IP 0450-16-01 – IP 0450-19) 110 Figure 5-48 Proposed rerouting at Lachanas (IP 0618-01 – IP 0618-03) 113 Figure 5-49 Proposed rerouting at Drymos (IP 0677-07-01 – IP 0677-08) 115 Figure 5-50 Proposed rerouting at Mikro Monastiri (IP 1042-01 – IP 1042-03) 117 Figure 5-51 Proposed rerouting at Loudias river (IP 1046-01 – IP 1046-03) 120 Figure 5-52 Proposed rerouting at Agia Fotini (IP 1110 – IP 1110-02) 122 Figure 5-53 Proposed rerouting at Verga (IP 1224 – IP 1224-02) 125 Figure 5-54 Proposed rerouting at Chiliodendro (IP 1273-02-01 – IP 1273-02-02) 127 Figure 8-1 Road access to PY01 161 Figure 8-2 Road access to PY08 165 Figure 8-3 Road access to PY10 169

Page 17 of 211

1 Introduction 1.1 Project Title

This report constitutes the Third Amendment to the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) of the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) in Greece, which stretches from Kipoi at the Turkish border, via Komotini, Nea Mesimvria (north-west of Thessaloniki) to the Albanian border near the village of Ieropigi.

The ESIA of the TAP project in Greece was submitted to the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change (MEECC) in June 2013 and the project was granted a positive Decision on Approval of Environmental Terms (Protocol. No. 174848) in September 12, 2014.

Following a number of changes to the pipeline route and to the design and location of permanent and temporary installations of the TAP project, the ESIA has been amended twice since and was submitted to the Ministry of Economy, Infrastructure, Shipping and Tourism (former Ministry of Development). As a result, the Decision on Approval of Environmental Terms has been modified on 17/11/2015 and 05/05/2016.

The present Third Amendment to the ESIA describes a few small changes in the design and location of the Block Valve Stations (BVS), the location of pipeyards (PY) and the location of campsites (CAMP) of the TAP project as well as some minor changes to the pipeline route, and assesses the impacts of these changes to the natural, physical, cultural heritage and socioeconomic environment.

1.2 Project Type and Size

The project includes the natural gas pipeline itself as well as temporary infrastructure required for the construction phase and permanent, supporting operational facilities, including block valve stations along the route and two compressor stations in the Greek section (one in Kipoi and a potential second station in the broader area of Serres). More details are provided in Section 2.

The TAP project together with associated projects offers a new gas transportation route between the Caspian Sea and Southern and Central Europe. TAP will transport gas via Greece and Albania, across the Adriatic Sea to southern Italy and further to Western Europe. The Project aims to enhance security of supply as well as to diversify gas supplies for European markets. TAP will initially have a capacity of 10 billion cubic metres per year (bcm/year). As more gas becomes available, TAP will have the capacity to supply an additional 10 bcm per annum of new gas, expanding to 20 bcm/year as required.

Page 18 of 211

1.3 Project Location

The TAP project will start in Greece, close to the Turkish border, and then cross Albania and the Adriatic Sea and come ashore in southern Italy, allowing gas to flow directly from the Caspian region to European markets. Figure 1-1 presents TAP’s route.

Figure 1-1 Trans Adriatic Pipeline Project Location

Source: TAP AG (2014)

In Greece, the project will stretch from Kipoi in the Regional Entity of Evros to the Albanian border in the Regional Entity of Kastoria, for approximately 550 km. From Kipoi to Nea Mesimvria, a section of approximately 365 km, the route follows to a large extent the existing DESFA pipeline. From Nea Mesimvria westwards to the Albanian border the route has a length of 185 km and does not follow any existing gas infrastructure. The TAP project route in North Greece crosses 3 Regions, 13 Regional Entities and 30 Municipalities. The administrative setting of the project is presented in Table 1-1 below.

Page 19 of 211

Table 1-1 Administrative Setting of the TAP Project in Greece

Regions Regional Entities Municipalities Evros Alexandroupoli Arrianon Maronia - Sapes Rodopi Komotini Iasmos Avdira East Macedonia and Thrace Xanthi Xanthi Topiros Nestos Kavala Kavala Doxato Drama Prosotsani Amfipoli Nea Zichni Serres Emmanouil Pappa Serres Iraklia Kilkis Kilkis Central Macedonia Lagada Thessaloniki Oreokastro Chalkidona Pella Pella Skydra Imathia Naousa Pella Edessa Kozani Eordea Florina Amyntaio West Macedonia Kastoria Kastoria Orestida Nestorio Source: EXERGIA (2014)

1.4 Project Classification

According to the Ministerial Decision 1958/2012 and, as amended, Ministerial Decision 20741/27- 4-2012, the TAP project as a whole is classified as category A1 project (Group 11 ‘Transportation

Page 20 of 211

1.5 Project Developer

The project owner is the Trans Adriatic Pipeline AG 5, Chatzigianni Mexi str. 115 28 Athens, Greece Contact person: Kostas Tsirikis, Permitting Lead Greece Phone: +30 213 0104500 Fax: +30 213 0104533 e-mail: [email protected]

TAP consists of the following shareholders: BP (20%), SOCAR (20%), SNAM (20%), Fluxys (19%), Enagás (16%) and Axpo (5%).

1.6 Study Team

The present ESIA Amendment report has been compiled by EXERGIA, Energy and Environment Consultants S.A.

Omirou & Vissarionos 1, 106 72, Athens, Greece Contact person: Kostas Batos, Director of the Environment Dept. Phone: + 30 210 6996185 Fax: + 30 210 6996186 e-mail: [email protected]

The Third Amendment to the ESIA report has been the result of the work of a number of experts from a wide range of disciplines. These experts are mentioned in Section 6 of the Document Guide (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5100).

Page 21 of 211

2 Description of Approved Project

2.1 TAP Project Overview

2.1.1 Project Rationale

The purpose of the TAP Project is to bring gas from new sources in the Caspian Sea to Europe through the so called Southern Gas Corridor. TAP Project will contribute to the security and diversity of Europe’s energy supply by providing the necessary infrastructure to transport gas from the Shah Deniz II field in Azerbaijan by the most direct route, via the pipeline system, to Southern Europe. As part of this plan TAP will be the first pipeline to open the Southern Gas Corridor

Figure 2-1 Southern Gas Corridor

Source: TAP AG Corporate presentation (Oct. ‘14)

2.1.2 Brief Technical Description

The pipeline system in Greece, as described in the ESIA, and Section 3 of the two previous ESIA Amendments (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1004 and GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002), comprises of the following main installations:

 An approximately 550 km long underground pipeline (48 inch) from the Greek/Turkish border to the Greek/ Albanian border;

 Two Compressor Stations – one at Kipoi, Evros (including metering facilities) for the initial throughput of10 bcm/year, and potentially another one in the general vicinity of Serres for the final capacity of 20 bcm/year. Initially in the 10 bcm case this site will only include a block valve and scraper station;

Page 22 of 211

 23 BVS (Block Valve Stations) spaced at a distance of approximately ~30 km apart along the pipeline; and

 Associated facilities required during construction (access roads, construction camps, pipe yards, etc.).

The advances of the technical design of the Project and land availability issues have led to changes to the location and design of some permanent (BVSs) and temporary installations (CAMPs and PYs) as well as some minor changes to the pipeline route. These changes are described in detail in the subsequent sections of this Third Amendment to the ESIA.

2.1.3 TAP System Throughput

Pipeline transportation capacity may be increased from an initial throughput of 10 bcm/year (maximum about 1,350,000 standard cubic meters per hour; average about 1,190,000 standard cubic meters per hour) to 20 bcm/year of natural gas.

The present ESIA Amendment does not introduce any changes to the TAP System Throughput as this was described in the ESIA for the TAP Project.

2.1.4 Project Schedule

The current planning of the Project provides that the commencement of project construction will take place in mid-2016, while first gas flow is expected in the beginning of 2020.

2.1.5 TAP Design Philosophy

The TAP facilities (e.g. compressors and gas turbines) will be designed for a lifetime of 25 years. The pipeline itself is designed for a technical life time of 50 years. The design philosophy is to ensure that the gas transportation system fulfils all safety requirements of the base National and European Codes and Standards and that the impact to the environment is kept to a minimum.

The pipeline and stations will be designed in accordance with requirements resulting from:

 National and local regulations;

 Safety of the people living close to the pipeline and of personnel working near the pipeline;

 Protection of the environment;

Page 23 of 211

 Protection of property and facilities;

 Geotechnical, corrosivity and hydrographical conditions;

 Requirements for construction, operation and maintenance;

 Third party activities.

The pipeline will have a design pressure of 95 barg (bars above atmospheric pressure), which will be sufficient for the TAP capacity base case of 10 bcm/year as well as for the potential future extension of the TAP System capacity to 20 bcm/year.

The present ESIA Amendment does not introduce any changes to the TAP Design Philosophy as this was described in the ESIA for the TAP project.

2.1.6 Applicable Codes and Standards

All Project facilities will be designed in accordance with the European Codes (EN) and National Standards. The EU and National standards must be followed and other standards will be used to supplement these where it is beneficial to do so.

For the TAP in Greece the main codes to be used are shown in Box 2-1.

Box 2-1 Main Pipeline Design Codes

 No Δ3/A/οικ. 4303 ΠΕ 26010 5/3/2012 “Technical Regulation: Natural Gas supply systems — Pipelines for maximum operating pressure over 16 bar”, as amended by No. Δ3/Α/8857 20/0/2012.

 EN1594:2009 “Gas supply systems — Pipelines for maximum operating pressure over 16 bar — Functional requirements”

A large number of other codes and standards will be applied for the design of project subsystems or individual project elements. These are presented in detail in Section 4.1.8 (GPL00-ASP-642-Y- TAE-0052) of the ESIA for the TAP Project. The present ESIA Amendment does not introduce any changes to the applicable codes and standards.

Page 24 of 211

2.2 Main Project Components in Greece

2.2.1 Pipeline

The cross-country pipeline from the Greek/Turkish border to the Greek/Albanian border is approximately 550 km in length and has a diameter of 48’’. The design pressure of the main pipeline is 95 barg (specifically for the part of the pipeline from the point that connects to TANAP to the Compressor Station GCS00, the design pressure is 95,5 barg). The pipeline will be fully buried. The minimum cover depth for the pipeline is 1 m in normal sections, but this can be increased if necessary where additional protection is required or special conditions apply. For example at road and railway crossings, the minimum cover depth is increased to 1.2 m and 1.5 m respectively. The width of the regular construction working strip for the TAP Project is 38 m, and can be reduced to 28 m where physical constraints require. For construction in elevated and/or forested areas the width will potentially be further reduced to a minimum 18 m corridor.

The above technical information relevant to the pipeline is presented in the ESIA and Section 3 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1004) for the TAP Project. However, the advances of the technical design of the Project have led to minor changes to the pipeline route as well as to the specifications of the construction working strip. These changes are described in detail in the subsequent sections of this ESIA Amendment.

2.2.2 Block-Valve Stations (BVS)

As described in the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1004), the TAP project design foresees 22 BVS along the pipeline route while an additional one will be installed at the site allocated for the installation of the Compressor Station in the area of Serres. This BVS will be upgraded to a Compressor Station when sometime in the future the TAP System Throughput increases to 20 bcm/year from the initial 10 bcm/year.

The building structure of the BVS comprises small buildings of a total building surface of about 33 m². They are installed in fenced areas of approx. 700 m². Details on the building structure of the BVS are provided in Annex 2.

The advances of the technical design of the Project and land availability issues have led to changes to the location and design of twelve BVSs. These changes are described in detail in the subsequent sections of this ESIA Amendment.

Page 25 of 211

2.2.3 Compressor Stations (CS)

The pipeline’s initial transportation capacity is characterised by a throughput of 10 bcm/year and will potentially be increased to 20 bcm/year.

According to the information provided in the ESIA for the TAP Project and the Second ESIA Amendment (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002), for the initial capacity of 10 bcm/year, one compressor station in the broader area of Kipoi (GCS00) is foreseen of approximately 30-45 MW (2 operating compressor units and 1 on standby of 15 MW each).

For the 20 bcm/year case, the compressor station GCS00 needs to be developed to 75-90 MW by installation of three additional compressors (15 MW each) with associated facilities (total capacity of 5 operating units and 1 on standby, 15 MW each). Furthermore one additional compressor station located in the vicinity of Serres (GCS01) with a nominal power of approximately 100 – 125 MW (4 operating units and 1 on standby, 25 MW each) is foreseen in the 20 bcm/year case. The indicated MW-figures are related to ISO class1.

In summary, the configuration of the compressor stations, as presented in the ESIA for the TAP pipeline project and the Second ESIA Amendment (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002), is given in the Table below.

Table 2-1 Summary of Installed Capacity at Compressor Stations – Approved Project Design

Pipeline Capacity GCS00, GCS01

GCS00 (Kipoi) 30-45 MW (2 operating and 1 on standby of 15 MW each) , in 10 bcm/year the broader area of the existing DESFA compressor station at Kipoi GCS00 (Kipoi): approx. 75-90 MW (5 operating and 1 on standby of 15 MW each) 20 bcm/year GCS01 (Serres): approx. 100 - 125 MW (4 operating and 1 on standby of 25 MW each), in the broader area south of Serres Source: ETG 2012

The present ESIA Amendment does not introduce any changes to the capacity or configuration of the compressor stations as these were described in the Second ESIA Amendment (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002) for the TAP project.

1 ISO: standard conditions of operation, i.e. Ambient Temperature at 15 deg C, Relative Humidity at 60 % and Ambient Pressure at Sea Level.

Page 26 of 211

2.2.3.1 Layout and design

As presented in the ESIA for the TAP Project and the Second ESIA Amendment (GAL00-EXG- 642-Y-TAE-5002), TAP has defined an area of 36 ha for the investigation of each of the CS sites, within which the CS will be positioned during the final engineering phase. The compressor station facilities GCS00 and GCS01 require a surface of 16.7 ha and 16.3 ha respectively. This area will be fenced. Within this surface, about 10 ha will be hosting installations, buildings or roads. In each compressor station, a scraper station will be installed.

The present ESIA Amendment does not introduce any changes to the layout or design of the compressor stations as these were described in the Second ESIA Amendment (GAL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002) for the TAP project.

2.2.4 Temporary Facilities

2.2.4.1 Storage and Pipe Yards

The current stage of project design foresees the construction of 17 pipe yards along the route of the pipeline. The advances of the technical design of the Project and land availability issues have led to changes to the location of four pipe yards. Additionally, the plot size of another two is slightly changed. These changes are described in detail in the subsequent sections of this ESIA Amendment..

2.2.4.2 Construction Camps

The current stage of project design foresees the construction of 8 construction camps along the route of the pipeline. The advances of the technical design of the Project and land availability issues have led to changes to the location of five construction camps, as well as to a slight change to the plot size of another two. These changes are described in detail in the subsequent sections of this ESIA Amendment.

2.3 Project Progress since Permitting

The submission of the ESIA for the TAP project took place in June 2013 and was supplemented with an Annex Report in early September 2014. The Decision on Approval of Environmental Terms for the TAP project was issued in September 12th 2014. The Amendment to the ESIA was submitted in December 2014 and the Modification of the Decision on Approval of Environmental Terms was issued on 17/11/2015.

Page 27 of 211

The Second Amendment to the ESIA was submitted on 23/11/2015 and the Modification of the Decision on Approval of Environmental Terms was issued on 05/05/2016.

In parallel the following steps have been completed:

 In December 10th 2013, the Host Government Agreement was ratified by the Greek Parliament.

 In July 2014, TAP was granted by the Regulatory Authority for Energy (RAE) with a Permit of an Independent Natural Gas System (INGS).

Page 28 of 211

3 Project Modifications

3.1 Changes in Blockvalve Stations (BVS) Locations

The present Third Amendment to the ESIA introduces changes to the location and design of a number of BVSs. Specifically, 12 out of 23 BVSs are relocated. The table below presents the BVSs that change location, the distance to their approved location and their administrative setting (i.e. Regional Entity and Municipality). Shifting towards the start point of the pipeline route are described as upstream, while those in direction of gas flow towards end of the route are called downstream.

Table 3-1 Changes in BVS Location along the Pipeline Route

Distance to Approved Location A/A BVS (+) Upstream or Regional Entity Municipality (-) Downstream

1 BVS01 610m (+) Evros Alexandroupoli 2 BVS05 700m (+) Rodopi Iasmos 3 BVS06 550m (+) Xanthi Avdiron 4 BVS09 70m (+) Drama Doxato 5 BVS10 170m (-) Serres Nea Zichni 6 BVS13 70m (+) Kilkis Kilkis 7 BVS15 900m (-) Thessaloniki Chalkidona 8 BVS16 550m (-) Thessaloniki Chalkidona 9 BVS18 3400m (-) Pellas Skydra 10 BVS19 90m (+) Pellas Edessa 11 BVS21 380m(+) Kozani Eordaia 12 BVS22 1100m(-) Kastoria Kastoria

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

Location details of the proposed positions are provided in Section 5.

3.2 Changes to the Blockvalve Stations (BVS) Design

As the final engineering considerations for the project are being implemented with regard to the structure and design of the BVSs have been considered.

The total area of the BVS installations will be approx. 1040 m² and will be fenced. The building structure of the BVS comprises small buildings of a total building surface of about 36 m². Additionally, an internal safety railing for the building installation will be installed.

Page 29 of 211

The up-to-date technical drawings with regard to the design of the BVS are presented in Annex 3.2.

3.3 Changes in Pipeyards (PYs) Locations

The present Third Amendment to the ESIA introduces changes to the location of a number of PYs. Specifically, 4 out of 17 PYs are relocated. The table below presents the PYs that change location, the distance and direction to their approved location and their administrative setting (i.e. Regional Entity and Municipality).

Table 3-2 Changes in PYs Location along the Pipeline Route

Distance and Direction to A/A PYs Regional Entity Municipality Approved Location

1 PY01 2000m (SE) Evros Alexandoupoli 2 PY08 5500m (SE) Serres Nea Zichni 3 PY10 3000m (SW) Thessaloniki Lagkadas 4 PY13 1000m (W) Pella Pella

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

Additionally, the plot size of PY04 and PY09 is slightly changed. Location details of the proposed positions are provided in Section 5.

3.4 Changes in Construction Camps (CAMPs) Locations

The present Third Amendment to the ESIA introduces changes to the location of a number of CAMPs. Specifically, 5 out of 8 CAMPs are relocated. The table below presents the CAMPs that change location, the distance and direction to their approved location and their administrative setting (i.e. Regional Entity and Municipality).

Page 30 of 211

Table 3-3 Changes in CAMPs Location along the Pipeline Route

Distance and Direction to A/A CAMPs Regional Entity Municipality Approved Location

1 CAMP03 7500m (NE) Kavala Nestos 2 CAMP04 10500m (NW) Serres Emmanouil Pappa 3 CAMP06 7500m (NE) Pella Pella 4 CAMP07 100m (N) Florina Amyntaio 5 CAMP08 3000m (W) Kastoria Orestida

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

Additionally, the plot size of CAMP01 and CAMP02 is slightly changed. Location details of the proposed positions are provided in Section 5.

3.5 Minor Changes to the Pipeline Route

Twelve route changes are proposed along the basecase route. These changes are all minor – i.e. the distance from the ESIA approved route is in all cases less than 250m - and in all cases the proposed route modifications lie within the ESIA route corridor that was studied in detail in the ESIA and the ESIA Amendment for the TAP Project.

Table 3-4 Changes in Pipeline Route

Rerouting inside ESIA A/A ROUTE IPs Name Municipality (500 m) corridor

1 IP 0002-03 – IP 0002-14 Kipoi Alexandroupoli YES

2 IP0251-10-02 – IP 0251-10-07 Komotini airport Komotini YES

3 IP0251-15 – IP 0290-01 Amvrosia Iasmos YES 4 IP 0450-05 – IP 0450-07 Krinides Kavala YES 5 IP 0450-16-01 – IP 0450-19 Kalamonas Doxato YES

6 IP 0618-01 – IP 0618-03 Lachanas Lagkadas YES

7 IP 0677-07-01 – IP 0677-08 Drymos Lagkadas YES 8 IP 1042-01 – IP 1042-03 Mikro Monastiri Chalkidona YES 9 IP 1046-01 – IP 1046-03 Loudias river Pella YES

10 IP 1110 – IP 1110-02 Agia Fotini Edessa YES

Page 31 of 211

11 IP 1224 – IP 1224-02 Verga Kastoria YES 12 IP 1273-02-01 – IP 1273-02-02 Chiliodendro Kastoria YES

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

Location details of the proposed changes in the pipeline route are provided in Section 5.

3.6 Rationale for Project Modifications

The changes to the location of the BVSs, PYs and CAMPS, studied in the present Third ESIA Amendment, were driven by the results of engineering investigations (i.e. geotechnical) or the land acquisition process, i.e. some of the land parcels were not available or did not have clear ownership titles.

The minor changes to the pipeline route have been the result of more detailed route investigations as well as legitimate requests by project stakeholders.

Page 32 of 211

4 Legislative and Policy Framework

4.1 Introduction

As discussed extensively in Section 3 (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0051) of the ESIA for the TAP Project in Greece, the ESIA has been prepared to comply with National Greek legislation, International environmental and social requirements, with specific regard to those of the European Union Legislative Framework, and in alignment with performance requirements of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD).

The same concept has been applied to the Second Amendment to the ESIA, the preparation of which has taken into account applicable provisions of the Greek environmental legislation as well as international standards and best practice in environmental impact assessment.

The following sections provide a description of the legal basis for the preparation of the Third Amendment to the ESIA and makes reference to legislative developments in environmental permitting since the submission of the ESIA, focusing on likely changes to the overall permitting framework.

4.2 Legal Basis for the Third Amendment to the ESIA

The Third Amendment to the ESIA is prepared in compliance with Law 4014/2011 – the framework law for environmental permitting. Art. 6 of Law 4014/2011 states that an ESIA Amendment study is submitted to the competent environmental authorities in cases of modernisation, extension, improvement or modification of a project for which a Decision of Approval of Environmental Terms has already been granted. On the basis of the information provided with the ESIA Amendment, the competent environmental authority decides whether a new ESIA is required to address the changes to the project or the modification information provided is sufficient to issue the updated Decision of Approval of Environmental Terms.

Art. 11 of Law 4014/2011 specifies the contents of the ESIA Amendment study. According to these specifications, the study should at least contain the following:

 Technical description of the project, prior and after the proposed modifications, focusing on the modifications and accompanied by technical drawings and topographic diagrams as necessary

 Description of the environmental baseline, only with relation to the proposed project modifications

Page 33 of 211

 Brief description of the information resulting from environmental monitoring and control of the Project

 Environmental impact assessment of the proposed project modifications

 Mitigation measures to address the impacts of the proposed project modifications and the corresponding environmental monitoring plan

Art. 11 of Law 4014/2011 also foresees that more detailed specifications on the contents of the ESIA Amendment study are to be issued by the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change (MEECC). These specifications were eventually issued by:

 Ministerial Decision 170225/2014 – Specifications for the contents of environmental permitting dossiers for projects and activities of A category

This MD provides a detailed table of contents and specifications for project developers drafting ESIA reports, Environmental Terms update or Modification Studies. The present Third Amendment to the ESIA complies with the provisions of the MD.

4.3 Changes to the ESIA Legal Framework since ESIA Submission

A number of changes relevant to the environmental permitting framework have taken place since ESIA submission. The most relevant of these changes as well as their effect on the environmental permitting of the TAP Project are discussed below:

 Ministerial Decision 167563/2013 – Specification of the procedures and the criteria of environmental permitting of projects and activities under art. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of Law 4014/2011, according to art. 2 para 13 of the Law, the special forms of the above procedures and any other issue relevant to these procedures

The Ministerial Decision (MD) describes the procedures that have to be followed by the developer and the competent authority during the submission and evaluation of the Environmental Impact Assessment and introduces a number of special forms that have to be used for the exchange of information between the two parties. The Ministerial Decision was issued in April 2013 and came into effect three months after that date, becoming applicable to this ESIA Amendment.

Page 34 of 211

 L. 4217/2013 – Ratification of the Host Government Agreement (HGA) between the Hellenic Republic and Trans Adriatic Pipeline A.G.

The HGA sets out the framework by which the Project will be realized and operated on Greek territory. This includes processes related to land easement and acquisition, the implementation of technical, safety, environmental and social standards and authorization.

 Law 4280/2014 – Environmental upgrade and private urban planning

In its Chapter C, the Law introduces a number of changes to the pertinent Forest Law, in the direction of facilitating the installation of certain infrastructure projects in forest land, among which natural gas pipelines are found.

 Ministerial Decision 1649/45/2014 - Specifications for official review by the authorities and stakeholder engagement and participation during the environmental permitting of Category A projects

The MD provides details for official review by the authorities and stakeholder engagement procedures.

 Joint Ministerial Decision 36060/1155/2013 – Definition of a framework of rules, measures and procedures for the integrated pollution prevention and control from industrial activities, in compliance with EC Directive 2010/75/EC

According to art. 2 and Appendix I, the JMD applies to combustion installations with capacity above 50 MW. For such installations, art. 9 of the JMD provides a number of operating principles under the responsibility of the project owner:

 Undertake all appropriate pollution prevention measures

 Apply Best Available Techniques

 Avoid significant environmental pollution

 Prevent waste generation, according to the waste management hierarchy provided in Law 4042/2012

Page 35 of 211

 In case waste is generated, manage them as per the waste management hierarchy of Law 4042/2012 (i.e. reuse, recycle, recover material or energy, or else dispose of in a way that environmental impacts are minimised).

 Use energy efficiently

 Take necessary measures to avoid accidents and their impacts

 Take the necessary measures during decommissioning in order to ensure pollution prevention and appropriate reinstatement.

Page 36 of 211

5 Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline

5.1 Introduction

The proposed new BVS locations are situated on the pipeline axis and therefore inside the study corridor which has been surveyed and investigated in detail during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation. Similarly, the pipeline reroutings are all located inside the study corridor. Therefore, baseline information remains the same as described in Section 6 of the ESIA report (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006), both of which are frequently referenced in the rest of this section. Exception is the likely impacts to the landscape in relation to the proposed BVS locations, for which a field survey was carried out in order to establish the baseline with regard to landscape and visual sensitivity for the proposed BVS locations.

Regarding the proposed new locations of CAMPs and PYs, some are situated inside or very close to the study corridor which has been surveyed and investigated in detail during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation and therefore, baseline information remains the same as described in Section 6 of the ESIA report (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). For those located outside the ESIA study corridor, field surveys were carried out in order to establish the baseline with regard to biotic environment. Further baseline information was derived by desktop study (literature research), interpretation of satellite images and consultation with the competent Authorities through official correspondence.

5.2 Relocation of Block Valve Station 01 (BVS01)

5.2.1 Proposed location of BVS01

The proposed location of BVS01 is 610 m to the east of the old one, close to IP0046, in Alexandroupolis Municipality of Evros Regional Entity.

Page 37 of 211

Figure 5-1 Relocation of Block Valve Station 01 (BVS01)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.2.2 Physical environment

5.2.2.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS01 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.2.2.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS01 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 38 of 211

5.2.2.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The landscape and visual amenity baseline for the proposed BVS location was established during a dedicated field survey carried out in June and July 2015. The field survey helped in classifying the proposed BVS location in standard landscape units as per the methodology described in the ESIA for the TAP project. In the following, an illustration of the proposed BVS location is provided. Viewpoints (VP) where photos were taken, are presented in the maps of Annex 3.1.

The Block Valve Station 01 (BVS01) is located approximately at IP 0046 in Southern Evros, within the landscape unit defined as «Plain agricultural areas».

Figure 5-2 Area of BVS01 (VP-1; IP 0046)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (June 2015)

5.2.3 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS01 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS01 relocation is in agricultural

Page 39 of 211

5.2.4 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS01 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.2.5 Cultural Heritage Environment

During the preparation of the ESIA and the ESIA Amendment, extensive cultural heritage surveys took place along with consultation and active engagement of the competent archaeological authorities to identify and assess all actual or potential sites of cultural heritage interest or importance. Reference is made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054), where cultural heritage environment is presented in detail. According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed BVS01 relocation.

5.3 Relocation of Block Valve Station 05 (BVS05)

The proposed location of BVS05 is 700 m to the east of the old one, close to IP0251-15-01, in Iasmos Municipality of Rodopi Regional Entity.

Page 40 of 211

Figure 5-3 Relocation of Block Valve Station 05 (BVS05)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.3.1 Physical environment

5.3.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS05 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.3.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS05 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 41 of 211

5.3.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 05 (BVS05) is located approximately at IP 0289, in Komotini-Xanthi plain, within the landscape unit defined as «Plain agricultural areas».

Figure 5-4 Area of BVS05 (VP-2; IP 0289)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (June 2015)

5.3.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS05 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS05 relocation is in agricultural

Page 42 of 211

5.3.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS05 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.3.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

5.4 Relocation of Block Valve Station 06 (BVS06)

The proposed location of BVS06 is 550 m to the east of the old one, close to IP0322, in Avdira Municipality of Xanthi Regional Entity.

Page 43 of 211

Figure 5-5 Relocation of Block Valve Station 06 (BVS06)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.4.1 Physical environment

5.4.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS06 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.4.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS06 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 44 of 211

5.4.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 06 (BVS06) is located approximately at IP 0322, in Komotini-Xanthi plain, within the landscape unit defined as «Plain agricultural areas».

Figure 5-6 Area of BVS06 (VP-3; IP 0322)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (June 2015)

5.4.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS06 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS06 relocation is in agricultural

Page 45 of 211

5.4.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS06 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.4.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed BVS location.

5.5 Relocation of Block Valve Station 09 (BVS09)

The proposed location of BVS09 is just next and to the east of the old one, close to IP0450-24, in Doxato Municipality of Kavala Regional Entity.

Page 46 of 211

Figure 5-7 Relocation of Block Valve Station 09 (BVS09)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.5.1 Physical environment

5.5.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS09 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.5.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS09 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 47 of 211

5.5.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 09 (BVS09) is located approximately at IP 0450-24, in Philippoi plain, within the landscape unit defined as «Plain agricultural areas».

Figure 5-8 Area of BVS09 (VP-4; IP 0450-24)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (June 2015)

5.5.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS09 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS01 relocation is in agricultural

Page 48 of 211

5.5.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS09 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.5.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed BVS09 relocation.

5.6 Relocation of Block Valve Station 10 (BVS10)

The proposed location of BVS10 is 170m to the west of the old one, close to IP0502, in Nea Zichni Municipality of Serres Regional Entity.

Page 49 of 211

Figure 5-9 Relocation of Block Valve Station 10 (BVS10)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.6.1 Physical environment

5.6.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS10 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.6.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS10 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 50 of 211

5.6.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 10 (BVS10) is located approximately at IP 0502, in Serres plain, within the landscape unit defined as «Plain agricultural areas».

Figure 5-10 Area of BVS10 (VP-5; IP 0502)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (June 2015)

5.6.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS10 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS06 relocation is in agricultural

Page 51 of 211

5.6.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS10 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.6.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural during the CH field surveys for the ESIA Amendment, sporadic roof tile fragments of uncertain period were recorded in the BVS10 location.

5.7 Relocation of Block Valve Station 13 (BVS13)

The proposed location of BVS13 is just next and to the northeast of the old one, close to IP0637- 01, in Kilkis Municipality of Kilkis Regional Entity.

Page 52 of 211

Figure 5-11 Relocation of Block Valve Station 13 (BVS13)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.7.1 Physical environment

5.7.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS13 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.7.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS13 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 53 of 211

5.7.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 13 (BVS13) is located at IP 0637-02, in Kroussia Mountains, within the landscape unit defined as «Mixed forested and agricultural areas».

Figure 5-12 Area of BVS13 (VP-6; IP 0637-02)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (June 2015)

5.7.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS13 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS13 relocation is in agricultural

Page 54 of 211

5.7.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS13 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.7.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed BVS13 relocation.

5.8 Relocation of Block Valve Station 15 (BVS15)

The proposed location of BVS15 is 900 m to the west of the old one, close to IP1008, in Chalkidona Municipality of Thessaloniki Regional Entity.

Page 55 of 211

Figure 5-13 Relocation of Block Valve Station 15 (BVS15)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.8.1 Physical environment

5.8.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS15 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.8.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS15 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section

Page 56 of 211

6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.8.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 15 (BVS15) is located approximately at IP 1006, in Gallikos plain, within the landscape unit defined as «Plain agricultural areas».

Figure 5-14 Area of BVS15 (VP-9; IP 1006)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (June 2015)

5.8.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS15 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and

Page 57 of 211

Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS15 relocation is in agricultural land. The area has been extensively surveyed during the preparation of the ESIA and the ESIA Amendment.

5.8.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS15 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved locations. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.8.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed BVS15 relocation.

5.9 Relocation of Block Valve Station 16 (BVS16)

The proposed location of BVS16 is 550 m to the west of the old one, close to IP1030, in Chalkidona Municipality of Thessaloniki Regional Entity.

Page 58 of 211

Figure 5-15 Relocation of Block Valve Station 16 (BVS16)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.9.1 Physical environment

5.9.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS16 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.9.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS16 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 59 of 211

5.9.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 16 (BVS16) is located approximately at IP 1030, in Giannitsa plain, within the landscape unit defined as «Plain agricultural areas».

Figure 5-16 Area of BVS16 (VP-15; IP 1030)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (July 2015)

5.9.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS16 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS16 relocation is in agricultural

Page 60 of 211

5.9.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS16 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.9.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed BVS16 relocation.

5.10 Relocation of Block Valve Station 18 (BVS18)

The proposed location of BVS18 is 3.4 km to the west of the old one, close to IP1064, in Pella Municipality of Pella Regional Entity.

Page 61 of 211

Figure 5-17 Relocation of Block Valve Station 18 (BVS18)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.10.1 Physical environment

5.10.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS18 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.10.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS18 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 62 of 211

5.10.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 18 (BVS18) is located approximately at IP 1064, in Skydra plain, within the landscape unit defined as «Plain agricultural areas».

Figure 5-18 Area of BVS18 (VP-16; IP 1064)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (July 2015)

5.10.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS18 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS18 relocation is in agricultural

Page 63 of 211

5.10.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS18 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.10.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

5.11 Relocation of Block Valve Station 19 (BVS19)

The proposed location of BVS19 is 90 m to the east of the old one, close to IP1102, in Edessa Municipality of Pella Regional Entity.

Page 64 of 211

Figure 5-19 Relocation of Block Valve Station 19 (BVS19)

Proposed location Approved location ESIA Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.11.1 Physical environment

5.11.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS19 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.11.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS19 relocation.. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 65 of 211

5.11.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 19 (BVS19) is located approximately at IP 1102, in Vermio mountain, within the landscape unit defined as «Mountainous forested areas».

Figure 5-20 Area of BVS19 (VP-17; IP 1102)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (July 2015)

5.11.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS19 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS19 relocation is in agricultural

Page 66 of 211

5.11.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS19 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.11.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed BVS19 relocation.

5.12 Relocation of Block Valve Station 21 (BVS21)

The proposed location of BVS21 is 380 m to the east of the old one, close to IP1175, in Eordea Municipality of Kozani Regional Entity.

Page 67 of 211

Figure 5-21 Relocation of Block Valve Station 21 (BVS21)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.12.1 Physical environment

5.12.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS21 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.12.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS21 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 68 of 211

5.12.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 21 (BVS21) is located approximately at IP 1175, in Eordaia, within the landscape unit defined as «Upland agricultural areas».

Figure 5-22 Area of BVS21 (VP-13; IP 1175)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (June 2015)

5.12.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS21 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS21 relocation is in agricultural

Page 69 of 211

5.12.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS21 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.12.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed BVS21 relocation.

5.13 Relocation of Block Valve Station 22 (BVS22)

The proposed location of BVS22 is 1.1 km to the west of the old one, close to IP1234 in Kastoria Municipality of Kastoria Regional Entity.

Page 70 of 211

Figure 5-23 Relocation of Block Valve Station 22 (BVS22)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.13.1 Physical environment

5.13.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed BVS22 relocation. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.13.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed BVS22 relocation. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

Page 71 of 211

5.13.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The Block Valve Station 22 (BVS22) is located approximately at IP 1234, in Askio mountain, within the landscape unit defined as «Upland agricultural areas».

Figure 5-24 Area of BVS22 (VP-14; IP 1234)

Source: EXERGIA field survey (June 2015)

5.13.2 Biological Environment

The proposed BVS22 relocation is relatively close to the approved one, in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved one. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). BVS22 relocation is in agricultural

Page 72 of 211

5.13.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed BVS22 relocation maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.13.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the results of the field survey, extensive ceramic scatter was identified in the area of BVS22.

5.14 Relocation of Pipeyard 01 (PY01)

The proposed location of PY01 is 2 km to the southeast of the old one, in Alexandroupoli Municipality of Evros Regional Entity.

Page 73 of 211

Figure 5-25 Relocation of Pipeyard 01 (PY01)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.14.1 Physical Environment

5.14.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

The proposed location of PY01 is laid on thin – bedded marls alternating with fine – platy sand – stones, with intercalations of conglomerates and tuffs horizons of Paleogene (Molassic sediments) age. With regards to seismicity, the area belongs to zone 1 of low seismicity with acceleration 0.16 g (reference is made to the Map of the seismic hazard zones of Greece). Detailed information on geology, seismicity and geomorphology can be found in Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where presentation of geohazards is provided.

Page 74 of 211

5.14.1.2 Soil and subsoil

The dominant soil type in the area of the proposed location of PY01 is Calcaro-Vertic Cambisol, of medium to high quality, good drainage capacity, low to moderate erosion sensitivity and moderate compaction sensitivity..

More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00- AS P-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006).

5.14.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The largest part of PY01 is located in “plain agricultural area”, similarly to the approved location and specifically in non-irrigated arable land. A smaller part is located in “upland agricultural area”, and specifically pastures. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.14.2 Biological Environment

The biological environment baseline for the proposed PY01 location was established during a dedicated field survey carried out in April 2016.

The main land use is agriculture and PY01 comprises three distinct vegetation types: 1) ploughed field with very sparse grass vegetation, 2) fallow field mostly covered by grass vegetation with gaps in between and 3) clover field of very dense vegetation. The site is surrounded by cultivated fields (mainly clover), fallow fields and natural vegetation of Quercus spp. In the vicinity there are also abandoned agricultural establishments surrounded by meadows and Pinus spp.

The site is located within the current range of Spermophilus citellus in Thrace: although published reports indicate that the species may be locally extinct in Evros, recent field data2 obtained for the TAP project (2012) support the presence of the species near Kipoi and near Kavisos with potential colonies between KP 0 to KP 4 (near Kipoi) and between KP 16 - KP 17 (near Kavisos). The species is reported to occupy several sites in the neighbouring Turkish area (Özkurt & al 2007).

2 http://www.tap- ag.com/assets/07.reference_documents/english/esias/greece/ESIA_Greece_Annex_6.5.4_East_European _Souslik_Baseline_Study.pdf, access 6 April 2016

Page 75 of 211

Within the proposed site, several Spermophilus-like holes3 were observed along field borders, e.g. elevated narrow strips (<100 cm width) of grass established around fields’ perimeter; these strips had not been subjected to agricultural practices, such as ploughing, and maintained wild vegetation. Most of the holes were closed, but some of them were deep enough and showed marks of recent activity. Spermophilus-like holes were also recorded in the adjacent fields, and within an abandoned field of Prunus amygaliformis cultivation as well as a meadow. All of the holes were closed and shallow, except for one hole within the meadow, which seemed to be freshly dug. According to information provided by local people during the field survey, the animal was observed within the survey sites two years ago. Thus, there is some evidence of Spermophilus presence within the study area, as well as within the adjacent fields (Figure 5-26). However the identity of the species in the holes was not verified and Spermophilus-type holes often resemble holes made by Microtus spp.

Figure 5-26 Distribution of souslik-like holes in GPY01

 No evidence of recent Spermophilus presence  Evidence of recent Spermophilus presence

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

3 The following parameters have been considered as adequate evidence to indicate presence of Spermophilus: • Several holes on the ground with diameter > 6 cm, and at least two large holes (diameter > 10 cm) in the same location, freshly dug and leading to a wide tunnel underground • Observation of the animal alive

Page 76 of 211

Figure 5-27 Souslik-like holes in GPY01

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.14.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed PY01 maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio- economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.14.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Literature review and preliminary walk-through inspection did not identify any significant archaeological findings in the proposed location of PY01, while consultation with the Ephorate of Antiquities of Evros has also taken place.

5.15 Relocation of Pipeyard 08 (PY08)

The proposed location of PY08 is 5,5 km to the southeast of the old one, in Nea Zichni Municipality of Serres Regional Entity.

Page 77 of 211

Figure 5-28 Relocation of Pipeyard 08 (PY08)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.15.1 Physical environment

5.15.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

The proposed location of PY08 is laid on recent deposits of Quaternary (Undivided) age. With regards to seismicity, the area belongs to zone 1 of low seismicity with acceleration 0.16 g (reference is made to the Map of the seismic hazard zones of Greece). Detailed information on geology, seismicity and geomorphology can be found to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.15.1.2 Soil and subsoil

The dominant soil type in the proposed location of PY08 is Calcaric Cambisol, of high quality, moderately well drainaged, moderate erosion sensitivity and moderate compaction sensitivity.

Page 78 of 211

More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00- AS P-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006).

5.15.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The proposed PY08 is located in “plain agricultural area”, similarly to the approved location and specifically in an area of mixed annual and permanent crops. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y- TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.15.2 Biological Environment

The proposed location of PY08 comprises agricultural fields. The site is outside the known range of the jackal (Canis aureus) which is reported further west and east of this location (TAP/RSK/EXERGIA, October 2015 – January 2016 unpublished data). The wolf is also absent from the lowland agricultural area of Serres.

5.15.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed PY08 is located in Nea Zichni municipality, whereas the approved one was located in Emmanouil Pappa municipality. Information about the socioeconomic baseline of Nea Zichni municipality can be found in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054).

5.15.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Literature review and preliminary walk-through inspection did not identify any significant archaeological findings in the proposed location of PY08, while consultation with the Ephorate of Antiquities of Serres has also taken place.

5.16 Relocation of Pipeyard 10 (PY10)

The proposed location of PY10 is 3 km to the southwest of the old one, in Lagadas Municipality of Thessaloniki Regional Entity.

Page 79 of 211

Figure 5-29 Relocation of Pipeyard 10 (PY10)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.16.1 Physical environment

5.16.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

The proposed location of PY10 is laid on two-mica and muscovite-plagioclase-microcline gneiss gn (pz) alternating with metasediments of Vertiskos formation (gn2) of Paleozoic (or older) age. With regards to seismicity, the area belongs to zone 2 of medium seismicity with acceleration 0.24 g (reference is made to the Map of the seismic hazard zones of Greece). Detailed information on geology, seismicity and geomorphology can be found in Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

Page 80 of 211

5.16.1.2 Soil and subsoil

The dominant soil type in the area of the proposed location of PY10 is Chromic Luvisol, of medium quality, moderately well drainaged, low erosion sensitivity and high compaction sensitivity.

More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00- AS P-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006).

5.16.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The proposed PY10 is located in land principally occupied by agriculture, with significant areas of natural vegetation, similarly to the approved location. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.16.2 Biological Environment

The biological environment baseline for the proposed PY10 location was established during a dedicated field survey carried out in April 2016.

This proposed site comprises agricultural field which however has not been cultivated during the last year. All flora taxa recorded within the field are ruderal species and weeds common in cultivated sites without conservation interest.

The vegetation type is a ruderal one and it is not included in the Annex I of the Directive 92/43/EU.

The northwestern border of the field comprises Quercus frainetto forest (91M0 “Pannonian- Balkanic turkey oak- sessile oak forests” Habitat type). This habitat type is included in Annex I of the Directive 92/43/EU although not as a priority one. The representativeness and naturalness of this forest stand are considered as “high” as it hosts many typical species of the habitat type. In addition, its structure (e.g. age classes of species, vegetation layers) and functions (e.g. regeneration of species, nutrients cycling) are considered to be indicative of “good conservation status”. The taxa recorded within the forest stand 91M0 that exhibit conservation interest are shown in the table below. None of these taxa is rare or threatened in Greece.

Page 81 of 211

Table 5-1 Flora species of conservation interest in the oak forest neighboring PY01

Taxon Dafis et al. IUCN Cites 92/43/EU (1996) Neottia nidus-avis Least Concern C yes Platanthera sp. C yes Ruscus aculeatus C Annex V Comments:

Neottia nidus-avis: common in beech forests and fairly-common in mesic sites of oak forests in northern Greece.

Platanthera bifolia OR chlorantha: both species common in north and central Greece, populations under no threat

Ruscus aculeatus: very common in northern Greece with sub-populations numbering thousands of individuals Source: EXERGIA (2016)

Figure 5-30 Quercus fraineto forest stand (91M0) in the immediate vicinity but outside the boarders of PY10

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.16.3 Socioeconomic Environment The proposed PY10 maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline

Page 82 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio- economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.16.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

During the preparation of the ESIA and the ESIA Amendment, extensive cultural heritage surveys took place along with consultation and active engagement of the competent archaeological authorities to identify and assess all actual or potential sites of cultural heritage interest or importance. According to information provided in ESIA, at a distance of about 400 m from the proposed location of PY10, the archaeological site of Lachanas – Paliokastro was identified (CH- 8LT-E) of the Iron Age until Byzantine Period, a site with parts of Fortification Walls and arch of a Church, among other antiquities. Reference is made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio- economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054), where cultural heritage environment is presented in more detail.

Besides the existing information for the proposed location of PY10, consultation with the Ephorate of Antiquities of Thessaloniki has also taken place.

5.17 Relocation of Pipeyard 13 (PY13)

The proposed location of PY13 is 1 km to the west of the old one, in Pella Municipality of Pella Regional Entity.

Page 83 of 211

Figure 5-31 Relocation of Pipeyard 13 (PY13)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.17.1 Physical environment

5.17.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

The proposed location of PY13 is laid on flood plain deposits and alluvial deposits of Aliakmon river of Quaternary (Holocene) age. With regards to seismicity, the area belongs to zone 1 of low seismicity with acceleration 0.16 g (reference is made to the Map of the seismic hazard zones of Greece). Detailed information on geology, seismicity and geomorphology can be found in Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.17.1.2 Soil and subsoil

The dominant soil type in the proposed location of PY13 is Calcaric Fluvisol, of very high quality, moderate to poor drainage capacity, low erosion sensitivity and high compaction sensitivity.

Page 84 of 211

More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00- AS P-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006).

5.17.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The proposed PY13 is located in “plain agriculture area” with complex cultivation patterns, similarly to the approved location. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.17.2 Biological Environment

The biological environment baseline for the proposed PY13 location was established during a dedicated field survey carried out in April 2016.

The proposed PY13 stands within the intensively cultivated lowland of Pella. The location itself comprises a clover field (Figure 5-32), a fallow piece of land and Asparagus cultivations. The site was searched for Spermophilus citellus colonies as the species was once known from the Giannitsa plains4; a number of holes was observed along the western site of the field but given their size and small number5 they are unlikely to belong to Spermophilus. They are considered as signs of Microtus presence in the field.

4 Literature as reported in http://www.tap- ag.com/assets/07.reference_documents/english/esias/greece/ESIA_Greece_Annex_6.5.4_West_Europea n_Souslik_Baseline_Study.pdf, access 6 April 2016 5 On evidence of Spermophilus citellus presence, please refer to footnotes for PY01

Page 85 of 211

Figure 5-32 Clover within PY13

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.17.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed PY13 maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio- economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.17.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

The proposed PY13 is located within the ESIA and ESIA Amendment study corridor, for which extensive cultural heritage surveys took place along with consultation and active engagement of the competent archaeological authorities to identify and assess all actual or potential sites of cultural heritage interest or importance. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054), where cultural heritage environment is presented in detail.

Besides the existing information for the proposed location of PY13, consultation with the Ephorate of Antiquities of Pella has also taken place.

Page 86 of 211

5.18 Plot size change of PY04 and PY09

The plot size of PY04 and PY09 is slightly changed due to certain restrictions during the land acquisition process. Figure 5-33 Plot size of PY04

Proposed plot Approved Plot Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

Page 87 of 211

Figure 5-34 Plot size of PY09

Proposed plot Approved Plot Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

All relevant information regarding the physical, biological and socioeconomic environment and cultural heritage is described in Section 6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.19 Relocation of Construction Camp 03 (CAMP03)

The proposed location of CAMP03 is 7,5 km to the northeast of the old one, in Nestos Municipality of Kavala Regional Entity.

Page 88 of 211

Figure 5-35 Relocation of Construction Camp 03 (CAMP03)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.19.1 Physical environment

5.19.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

The proposed location of CAMP03 is mainly laid on alluvial deposits of Quaternary (Holocene) age. With regards to seismicity, the area belongs to zone 1 of low seismicity with acceleration 0.16 g (reference is made to the Map of the seismic hazard zones of Greece). Detailed information on geology, seismicity and geomorphology can be found in Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.19.1.2 Soil and subsoil

The dominant soil type in the proposed location of CAMP03 is Rocks Outcrops, of high quality, well drainaged, moderate erosion sensitivity and moderate compaction sensitivity.

Page 89 of 211

More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00- AS P-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006).

5.19.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The proposed CAMP03 is located in “plain agricultural area” and specifically in a permanently irrigated land compared to the approved location that was inside a non-irrigated arable land. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.19.2 Biological Environment

The proposed site of CAMP03 is part of intensively cultivated land within the river Nestos delta; there are many irrigation canals and fragmented stands of riparian vegetation. The site stands within the larger area (KP 170-176) along the TAP pipeline which is known to host a permanent population of 5 jackal group (or a maximum of 11 animals).

5.19.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed CAMP03 is located in Nestos municipality, whereas the approved one was located in Kavala municipality. Information about the socioeconomic baseline of Nestos municipality can be found in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0054).

5.19.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

During the preparation of the ESIA and the ESIA Amendment, extensive cultural heritage surveys took place along with consultation and active engagement of the competent archaeological authorities to identify and assess all actual or potential sites of cultural heritage interest or importance. According to information provided in ESIA, in the proposed location or vicinity of CAMP03, two cultural heritage sites were identified; the archaeological site of Nea Komi ancient town (CH-13a-E) of the Roman Period and Nea Komi (CH-13-E) potential area of High Archaeological Potential (AHAP) of Roman and Historic Period, an area with ceramic scatters and roof tiles in moderate density. Reference is made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-

Page 90 of 211

Besides the existing information for the proposed location of CAMP03, consultation with the Ephorate of Antiquities of Kavala has also taken place.

5.20 Relocation of Construction Camp 04 (CAMP04)

The proposed location of CAMP04 is 10.5 km to the northwest of the old one, in Emmanouil Pappa Municipality of Serres Regional Entity.

Figure 5-36 Relocation of Construction Camp 04 (CAMP04)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.20.1 Physical environment

5.20.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

The proposed location of CAMP04 is laid on valley deposits and lower terrace system of Quaternary (Undivided) age. With regards to seismicity, the area belongs to zone 1 of low

Page 91 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations seismicity with acceleration 0.16 g (reference is made to the Map of the seismic hazard zones of Greece). Detailed information on geology, seismicity and geomorphology can be found in Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.20.1.2 Soil and subsoil

The dominant soil type in the proposed location of CAMP04 is Calcaric Fluvisol, of medium quality, well drainaged, moderate erosion sensitivity and moderate compaction sensitivity.

More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006).

5.20.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The proposed CAMP04 is located in “plain agricultural area” and specifically in non-irrigated arable land, compared to the approved location that was inside an area of mixed annual and permanent crops. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.20.2 Biological Environment

The proposed site of CAMP04 is part of the intensively cultivated Serres plain. With regard to species of potential ecological interest, there is no evidence of breeding bird taxa or potential Canis aureus territories in the area.

5.20.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed CAMP04 maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio- economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

Page 92 of 211

5.20.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Literature review and preliminary walk-through inspection did not identify any significant archaeological findings in the proposed location of CAMP04, while consultation with the Ephorate of Antiquities of Serres has also taken place.

5.21 Relocation of Construction Camp 06 (CAMP06)

The proposed location of CAMP06 is 7,5 km to the northeast of the old one, in Pella Municipality of Pella Regional Entity.

Figure 5-37 Relocation of Construction Camp 06 (CAMP06)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.21.1 Physical environment

5.21.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology The proposed location of CAMP06 is laid on alluvial deposits. With regards to seismicity, the area belongs to zone 2 of medium seismicity with acceleration 0.24 g (reference is made to the Map of

Page 93 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations the seismic hazard zones of Greece). Detailed information on geology, seismicity and geomorphology can be found in Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.21.1.2 Soil and subsoil

The dominant soil type in the proposed location of CAMP06 is Calcaric Fluvisol, of very high quality, moderate to poor drainage capacity, low erosion sensitivity and high compaction sensitivity.

More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006).

5.21.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The proposed CAMP06 is located in “plain agricultural area” and specifically in a non-irrigated arable land, compared to the approved location that was inside an area of complex cultivation patterns. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.21.2 Biological Environment The biological environment baseline for the proposed CAMP06 location was established during a dedicated field survey carried out in April 2016.

Τhis proposed site of CAMP06 stands within a semi-urbanized piece of land approx. 6,3 km north of the pipeline; buildings of industrial character as well as warehouses are located in the vicinity. It comprises a meadow which in the past was probably part of a larger marsh; sections of the meadow were inundated during the field visit but the species observed were ruderals. The site was searched for Spermophilus citellus colonies as the species was once known from the Giannitsa plains6; no holes were observed and given the possibility that the site is inundated during the wet season the animal is highly improbable to form colonies in the area.

6 Literature as reported in http://www.tap- ag.com/assets/07.reference_documents/english/esias/greece/ESIA_Greece_Annex_6.5.4_West_Europea n_Souslik_Baseline_Study.pdf, access 6 April 2016

Page 94 of 211

Figure 5-38 The proposed location of CAMP06 from its south side

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.21.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed CAMP06 maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio- economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.21.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Literature review and preliminary walk-through inspection did not identify any significant archaeological findings in the proposed location of CAMP06, while consultation with the Ephorate of Antiquities of Pella has also taken place.

5.22 Relocation of Construction Camp 07 (CAMP07)

The proposed location of CAMP07 is 100 m to the north of the old one, in Amyntaio Municipality of Florina Regional Entity.

Page 95 of 211

Figure 5-39 Relocation of Construction Camp 07 (CAMP07)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.22.1 Physical environment

5.22.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

The proposed location of CAMP07 is laid on recent alluvial deposits of Quaternary age. With regards to seismicity, the area belongs to zone 1 of low seismicity with acceleration a =0.16 g (reference is made to the Map of the seismic hazard zones of Greece). Detailed information on geology, seismicity and geomorphology can be found in Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.22.1.2 Soil and subsoil

The dominant soil type in the proposed location of CAMP07 is Calcaric Fluvisol, of very high quality, well drainaged, low erosion sensitivity and high compaction sensitivity.

Page 96 of 211

More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006).

5.22.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The proposed CAMP07 is located in “plain agricultural area” and specifically in non-irrigated arable land, as the approved location. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.22.2 Biological Environment

The biological environment baseline for the proposed CAMP07 location was established during a dedicated field survey carried out in April 2016.

Τhis proposed site of CAMP07 is located south of lake Vegoritida and might have been part of the lake shore in the past before being converted into cultivations. Agricultural redidues suggest that it is used for corn cultivations. The site was searched for Spermophilus citellus colonies as the species was recently reported from the Eordea plain7; no holes were observed.

5.22.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed CAMP07 maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio- economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.22.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

The proposed location of CAMP07 is only 100 m north of the approved one, which is extensively surveyed during the preparation of the ESIA and the ESIA Amendment. Reference is made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE- 0054), where cultural heritage environment is presented in detail.

7 As reported in http://www.tap- ag.com/assets/07.reference_documents/english/esias/greece/ESIA_Greece_Annex_6.5.4_West_Europea n_Souslik_Baseline_Study.pdf, access 6 April 2016

Page 97 of 211

Besides the existing information for the proposed location of CAMP07, consultation with the Ephorate of Antiquities of Florina has also taken place.

5.23 Relocation of Construction Camp 08 (CAMP08)

The proposed location of CAMP08 is 3 km to the west of the old one, in Orestida Municipality of Kastoria Regional Entity.

Figure 5-40 Relocation of Construction Camp 08 (CAMP08)

Proposed location Approved location Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.23.1 Physical environment

5.23.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

The proposed location of CAMP08 is laid on terrace deposits of Quaternary age. With regards to seismicity, the area belongs to zone 1 of low seismicity with acceleration 0.16 g (reference is made to the Map of the seismic hazard zones of Greece). Detailed information on geology, seismicity and geomorphology can be found in Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-

Page 98 of 211

TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.23.1.2 Soil and subsoil

The dominant soil type in the proposed location of CAMP08 is Chromic Vertisol (VRcr), of high quality, moderately well drainaged, moderate erosion sensitivity and high compaction sensitivity.

More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 1006).

5.23.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The proposed CAMP08 is located in “upland agricultural area” and specifically in non-irrigated arable land, as the approved location. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.23.2 Biological Environment

The site stands close to the pipeline (min. distance 125 m) in cultivated land and just next to the highway connecting Kastoria with Ptolemaida. The site stands outside the areas known to host wolves (Canis lupus) and bears (Ursus arctos) south of Kastoria. No bird taxa of conservation interest are known to breed in the vicinity of the site.

5.23.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed CAMP08 maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved location. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio- economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.23.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

The proposed CAMP08 is partly located within the ESIA and ESIA Amendment study corridor, for which extensive cultural heritage surveys took place along with consultation and active engagement of the competent archaeological authorities to identify and assess all actual or

Page 99 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations potential sites of cultural heritage interest or importance. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054), where cultural heritage environment is presented in detail.

Besides the existing information for the proposed location of CAMP08, consultation with the Ephorate of Antiquities of Kastoria has also taken place.

5.24 Plot size change of CAMP01 and CAMP02

The plot size of CAMP01 and CAMP02 is slightly changed due to certain restrictions during the land acquisition process.

Figure 5-41 Plot size of CAMP01

Proposed plot Approved Plot Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

Page 100 of 211

Figure 5-42 Plot size of CAMP02

Proposed plot Approved Plot Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.25 Proposed rerouting at Kipoi (IP 0002-03 – IP 0002-14)

The proposed rerouting in the area of Kipoi (Figure 5-43) is located in Alexandroupoli municipality, has approximately 650m in length and it deviates maximum 15m from the basecase route. It crosses agricultural land of similar type as the basecase route.

Page 101 of 211

Figure 5-43 Proposed rerouting at Kipoi (IP 0002-03 – IP 0002-14)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.25.1 Physical environment

5.25.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of Section 5.2.3 of the Second ESIA Amendment report (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 5002) where a detailed presentation of the area’s geology and geohazards is provided.

5.25.1.2 Soil and subsoil

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Detail information regarding the area’s soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of Section 5.2.5 of the Second ESIA Amendment report (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002).

5.25.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

There are no changes in the type of landscape character where the approved pipeline route and the proposed rerouting are located. The proposed rerouting remains inside the Landscape

Page 102 of 211

Character Type “Hilly shrub lands and grasslands areas”, similarly to the approved route. More details on the landscape type, sensitivity and visual amenity of the proposed rerouting can be found in Section 5.2.6 of the Second ESIA Amendment report (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002).

5.25.2 Biological Environment

The proposed rerouting is located in an area of low, undulating hills, consisting of pastures and abandoned fields as well as a few cultivations. The proposed rerouting does not cross any protected areas/sites of conservation interest. The area has been extensively surveyed during the preparation of the Second ESIA Amendment.

5.25.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the Second ESIA Amendment. Reference is therefore made to Section 5.4 of the Second ESIA Amendment report (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002), which provides detail information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.25.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

During the preparation of the Second ESIA Amendment, extensive cultural heritage surveys took place along with consultation and active engagement of the competent archaeological authorities to identify and assess all actual or potential sites of cultural heritage interest or importance. Reference is made to Section 5.5 – Cultural Heritage Environment (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 5002), where the cultural heritage environment of the area is presented in detail.

According to the existing information on cultural heritage, three (3) sites with pottery scatter were identified in the vicinity of the proposed rerouting.

5.26 Proposed rerouting at Komotini Airport (IP0251-10-02 – IP 0251-10-07)

The proposed rerouting in the area of Komotini Airport (Figure 5-44) is located in Komotini municipality, has approximately 1600m in length and it deviates maximum 250m from the

Page 103 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations basecase route. It crosses agricultural land of similar type as the basecase route. The area has no protection status (the closest protected area is 2400m to the east) and does not host any species of ecological interest.

Figure 5-44 Proposed rerouting at Komotini Airport (IP0251-10-02 – IP 0251-10-07)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.26.1 Physical environment

5.26.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.26.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Page 104 of 211

There are no changes regarding the soil types of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Information regarding soil and subsoil is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. More details on soil types and characteristics can be found in Section 6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.26.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

There are no changes in the type of landscape character where the approved pipeline route and the proposed rerouting are located. The proposed rerouting remains inside a “Plain agricultural area” similarly to the approved route. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.26.2 Biological Environment

The proposed rerouting remains in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved pipeline route. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). The proposed rerouting is in agricultural land and does not cross any priority habitats nor any ecologically sensitive areas. The area has been extensively surveyed during the preparation of the ESIA and the ESIA Amendment.

5.26.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.26.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

During the preparation of the ESIA and the ESIA Amendment, extensive cultural heritage surveys took place along with consultation and active engagement of the competent archaeological

Page 105 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations authorities to identify and assess all actual or potential sites of cultural heritage interest or importance. Reference is made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054), where cultural heritage environment is presented in detail.

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed rerouting.

5.27 Proposed rerouting at Amvrosia (IP0251-15 – IP 0290-01)

The proposed rerouting at Amvrosia (Figure 5-45) is located in Iasmos municipality, has approximately 1700m length and it deviates maximum 150m from the basecase route. It crosses agricultural land of similar type as the basecase route. The area has no protection status (the closest protected area is 1200m to the west) and does not host any species of ecological interest.

Figure 5-45 Proposed rerouting at Amvrosia (IP0251-15 – IP 0290-01)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

Page 106 of 211

5.27.1 Physical environment

5.27.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.27.1.2 Soil and subsoil

5.27.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

5.27.2 Biological Environment

Page 107 of 211

5.27.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintain the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.27.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed rerouting.

5.28 Proposed rerouting at Krinides (IP 0450-05 – IP 0450-07)

The proposed rerouting at Krinides (Figure 5-46) is located in Kavala municipality, has approximately 450m length and it deviates maximum 60m from the basecase route. It crosses agricultural land of similar type as the basecase route. The area has no protection status and does not host any species of ecological interest.

Page 108 of 211

Figure 5-46 Proposed rerouting at Krinides (IP 0450-05 – IP 0450-07)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.28.1 Physical environment

5.28.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.28.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Page 109 of 211

5.28.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

5.28.2 Biological Environment

5.28.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.28.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Page 110 of 211

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are a site of cultural interest (one sherd visible at the edge of the field) was recorded during previous surveys.

5.29 Proposed rerouting at Kalamonas (IP 0450-16-01 – IP 0450-19)

The proposed rerouting at Kalamonas (Figure 5-47) is located in Doxato municipality, has approximately 580m length and it deviates maximum 140m from the basecase route. It crosses agricultural land of similar type as the basecase route. The area has no protection status and does not host any species of ecological interest.

Figure 5-47 Proposed rerouting at Kalamonas (IP 0450-16-01 – IP 0450-19)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.29.1 Physical environment

5.29.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

Page 111 of 211

5.29.1.2 Soil and subsoil

5.29.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

5.29.2 Biological Environment

5.29.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

Page 112 of 211

5.29.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage, a site of cultural interest (extended dense pottery scatter) was recorded in Kalamonas area during previous surveys.

5.30 Proposed rerouting at Lachanas (IP 0618-01 – IP 0618-03)

The proposed rerouting at Lachanas (Figure 5-48) is located in Lagadas municipality, has approximately 120m length and it deviates maximum 11m from the basecase route. It crosses agricultural land of similar type as the basecase route. The area has no protection status (the closest protected area is 1200m to the southwest) and does not host any species of ecological interest.

Page 113 of 211

Figure 5-48 Proposed rerouting at Lachanas (IP 0618-01 – IP 0618-03)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.30.1 Physical environment

5.30.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.30.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Page 114 of 211

6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.30.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

There are no changes in the type of landscape character where the approved pipeline route and the proposed rerouting are located. The proposed rerouting remains inside a “Mixed forested and agricultural area” similarly to the approved route. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and

Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.30.2 Biological Environment

5.30.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.30.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Page 115 of 211

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed rerouting.

5.31 Proposed rerouting at Drymos (IP 0677-07-01 – IP 0677-08)

The proposed rerouting at Drymos (Figure 5-49) is located in Lagadas municipality, has approximately 260m length and it deviates maximum 70 m from the basecase route. It crosses agricultural land of similar type as the basecase route, in the peripheral zone of the National Park of Koronia-Volvi. According to extensive surveys of the basecase route, the area does not host species of ecological interest.

Figure 5-49 Proposed rerouting at Drymos (IP 0677-07-01 – IP 0677-08)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.31.1 Physical environment

5.31.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

Page 116 of 211

6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.31.1.2 Soil and subsoil

5.31.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

5.31.2 Biological Environment

The proposed rerouting remains in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved pipeline route. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). The proposed rerouting is located in the peripheral zone of the National Park of Koronia - Volvi, similarly to the approved route. The area has been extensively surveyed during the preparation of the ESIA and the ESIA Amendment.

5.31.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

Page 117 of 211

5.31.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed rerouting.

5.32 Proposed rerouting at Mikro Monastiri (IP 1042-01 – IP 1042-03)

The proposed rerouting at Mikro Monastiri (Figure 5-50) is located in Chalkidona municipality, has approximately 900m length and it deviates maximum 60 m from the basecase route. It crosses agricultural land of similar type as the basecase route. The area has no protection status and does not host any species of ecological interest.

Figure 5-50 Proposed rerouting at Mikro Monastiri (IP 1042-01 – IP 1042-03)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

Page 118 of 211

5.32.1 Physical environment

5.32.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.32.1.2 Soil and subsoil

5.32.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity There are no changes in the type of landscape character where the approved pipeline route and the proposed rerouting are located. The proposed rerouting remains inside a “Plain agricultural area” similarly to the approved route. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.32.2 Biological Environment

Page 119 of 211

5.32.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.32.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Similar to the approved route, according to the existing information on cultural heritage sites, two areas of potential archaeological interest were recorded during previous surveys in the area of Mikro Monastiri.

5.33 Proposed rerouting at Loudias river (IP 1046-01 – IP 1046-03)

The proposed rerouting at Loudias river (Figure 5-51) is located in Pella municipality, has approximately 2700m in length and it deviates maximum 80 m from the basecase route. It crosses agricultural land of similar type as the basecase route. The area has no protection status and does not host any species of ecological interest.

Page 120 of 211

Figure 5-51 Proposed rerouting at Loudias river (IP 1046-01 – IP 1046-03)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.33.1 Physical environment

5.33.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.33.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Page 121 of 211

5.33.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

5.33.2 Biological Environment

5.33.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.33.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Page 122 of 211

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed rerouting.

5.34 Proposed rerouting at Agia Fotini (IP 1110 – IP 1110-02)

The proposed rerouting at Agia Fotini (Figure 5-52) is located in Edessa municipality, has approximately 300m length and it deviates maximum 30 m from the basecase route. Similar to the basecase route, the rerouting crosses forest land in the area of Flamouria Wildlife Refuge. The area is known to hold bear and wolf territories and has been extensively studied through previous ESIA phases. Expected impacts are similar to the ones already presented along with the excepted mitigations measures.

Figure 5-52 Proposed rerouting at Agia Fotini (IP 1110 – IP 1110-02)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.34.1 Physical environment

5.34.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding

Page 123 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.34.1.2 Soil and subsoil

5.34.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

There are no changes in the type of landscape character where the approved pipeline route and the proposed rerouting are located. The proposed rerouting remains inside a “mountainous forested area” similarly to the approved route. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.34.2 Biological Environment

The proposed rerouting remains in the same type of vegetation and habitat as the approved pipeline route. As a result, the information regarding the biological environment (vegetation and flora, habitats, fauna and protected areas) remains the same as described in ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and ESIA Amendment Section 5 - Environmental Cultural Heritage and Socioeconomic Baseline (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006). The proposed rerouting remains located inside the Flamouria Wildlife Refuge and is known to hold bear and wolf territories, similarly to the approved route. These areas have been extensively surveyed during the preparation of the ESIA and the ESIA Amendment.

5.34.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Page 124 of 211

Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.34.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed rerouting.

5.35 Proposed rerouting at Verga (IP 1224 – IP 1224-02)

The proposed rerouting at Verga (Figure 5-53) is located in Kastoria municipality, has approximately 270m in length and it deviates maximum 117 m from the basecase route. Similar to the basecase route, the rerouting crosses forest land. The area has no protection status and does not host any species of ecological interest.

Page 125 of 211

Figure 5-53 Proposed rerouting at Verga (IP 1224 – IP 1224-02)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.35.1 Physical environment

5.35.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

There are no changes regarding the geological baseline of the proposed pipeline rerouting. Geology, seismicity and geomorphology information is the same as the corresponding information of the ESIA Basecase or ESIA Amendment route. Reference is made to Section 6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.35.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Page 126 of 211

6.2.3 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.35.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

5.35.1.4 Biological Environment

5.35.2 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

5.35.3 Cultural Heritage Environment

Page 127 of 211

Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054), where cultural heritage environment is presented in detail.

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed rerouting.

5.36 Proposed rerouting at Chiliodendro (IP 1273-02-01 – IP 1273-02-02)

The proposed rerouting at Chiliodendro (Figure 5-54) is located in Kastoria municipality, has approximately 110m in length and it deviates maximum 26 m from the basecase route. Similar to the basecase route, the rerouting crosses agricultural land. The area has no protection status and does not host any species of ecological interest.

Figure 5-54 Proposed rerouting at Chiliodendro (IP 1273-02-01 – IP 1273-02-02)

Proposed modification Approved Route Study Corridor 500m

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

5.36.1 Physical environment

5.36.1.1 Geology, Seismicity and Geomorphology

Page 128 of 211

6.2.2.2 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006) where a detailed presentation of geohazards is provided.

5.36.1.2 Soil and subsoil

5.36.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

There are no changes in the type of landscape character where the approved pipeline route and the proposed rerouting are located. The proposed rerouting remains inside a “Upland agricultural area” similarly to the approved route. More details on landscape types, sensitivity and visual amenity can be found in Section 6.2.8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) and Section 5 of the ESIA Amendment report (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1006).

5.36.2 Biological Environment

5.36.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The proposed rerouting maintains the same administrative setting (i.e. belongs to the same municipality) as the approved pipeline route. There are no changes to the socioeconomic baseline compared to the ESIA. Reference is therefore made to ESIA Section 6 - Environmental, Socio-economic and CH Baseline (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0054) which provides information on the socioeconomic environment of the area.

Page 129 of 211

5.36.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

According to the existing information on cultural heritage there are no known sites of archaeological interest in the vicinity of the proposed rerouting.

6 Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder Engagement Activities related to the TAP Project are desribed in detail in Section 7 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0055) and in Section 6 (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1007) of the ESIA Amendment. Due to the small extent and nature of the modifications, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project, which were described and approved by the existing Decision on Approval of Environmental Terms, and no public consultation is required.

7 Environmental Monitoring Results

The engineering design for the TAP Project is still progressing while tendering processes have been launched. No works for any of its components have been undertaken and therefore no monitoring results are available.

Page 130 of 211

8 Impact Assessment and Mitigation Measures

8.1 Relocation of Block Valve Station 01 (BVS01)

8.1.1 Physical environment

8.1.1.1 Geology

Since BVS01 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in geological environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.1.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since BVS01 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.1.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS01 visual receptors sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-1. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Page 131 of 211

Table 8-1 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Plain agricultural VP-1 0.04 View to BVS01 Road Low areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.1.2 Biological Environment

Since BVS01 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.1.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the new location of BVS01 lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. It is easily accessible during construction through the pipeline corridor itself or through existing dirt roads and since it is a small installation, it is not expected to increase construction traffic to any significant extent. During operation, traffic related to BVS will be very limited as it is unmanned.

As a result, any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.1.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Page 132 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

The evidence of roof tile fragments or the relative proximity to sites of potential archaeological interest is not uncommon for large parts of the TAP pipeline route or its permanent and temporary installations and does not necessarily indicate increased cultural heritage sensitivity. The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

8.1.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Evros, the Forestry Office of Alexandroupoli and TOEB of Ferron, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 5101_00-at09).

8.2 Relocation of Block Valve Station 05 (BVS05)

8.2.1 Physical environment

8.2.1.1 Geology

Since BVS05 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in geological environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.2.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since BVS05 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 133 of 211

8.2.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS05 visual receptors sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown inTable 8-2. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Table 8-2 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Plain agricultural VP-2 0.03 View to BVS05 Track Low areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.2.2 Biological Environment

Since BVS05 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.2.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the new location of BVS05 lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. It is easily accessible during construction through the pipeline corridor itself or through existing dirt roads and since it is a small installation, it is not expected to increase construction traffic to any significant extent. During operation, traffic related to BVS will be very limited as it is unmanned.

As a result, any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in

Page 134 of 211

8.2.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since BVS05 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.2.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Rodopi, the Forestry Office of Rodopi and TOEB of Iasmos, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 5101_00-at09).

8.3 Relocation of Block Valve Station 06 (BVS06)

8.3.1 Physical environment

8.3.1.1 Geology

Since BVS06 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in geological environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 135 of 211

8.3.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since BVS06 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.3.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS06 visual receptors sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-3. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Table 8-3 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Plain agricultural VP-3 0.03 View to BVS06 Road Low areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.3.2 Biological Environment

Since BVS06 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 136 of 211

8.3.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since BVS06 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. It is easily accessible during construction through the pipeline corridor itself or through existing dirt roads and since it is a small installation, it is not expected to increase construction traffic to any significant extent. During operation, traffic related to BVS will be very limited as it is unmanned.

8.3.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed BVS06 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.3.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Xanthi, the Forestry Office of Xanthi and TOEB of Thalassia, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 5101_00-at09).

Page 137 of 211

8.4 Relocation of Block Valve Station 09 (BVS09)

8.4.1 Physical environment

8.4.1.1 Geology

Since BVS09 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in geological environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.4.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since BVS09 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.4.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS09 visual receptors sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-4. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Page 138 of 211

Table 8-4 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Plain agricultural VP-4 0.02 View to BVS09 Road Low areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.4.2 Biological Environment

Since BVS09 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.4.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since BVS09 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. It is easily accessible during construction through the pipeline corridor itself or through existing dirt roads and since it is a small installation, it is not expected to increase construction traffic to any significant extent. During operation, traffic related to BVS will be very limited as it is unmanned.

8.4.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed BVS09 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in

Page 139 of 211

8.4.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Drama and the Forestry Office of Drama, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

8.5 Relocation of Block Valve Station 10 (BVS10)

8.5.1 Physical environment

8.5.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed BVS10 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in geological environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.5.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed BVS10 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 140 of 211

8.5.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS10 visual receptors sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-5. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Table 8-5 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Plain agricultural VP-5 0.04 View to BVS10 Track Low areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.5.2 Biological Environment

Since BVS10 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.5.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since BVS10 proposed new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. It is easily accessible during construction through the pipeline corridor itself or through existing dirt roads and since it is a small installation, it is not expected to increase construction traffic to any significant extent. During operation, traffic related to BVS will be very limited as it is unmanned.

As a result, any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in

Page 141 of 211

8.5.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since BVS10 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.5.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Serres, the Forestry Office of Serres and TOEB of Fyllida, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 5101_00-at09).

8.6 Relocation of Block Valve Station 13 (BVS13)

8.6.1 Physical environment

8.6.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in geological environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 142 of 211

8.6.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.6.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS13 visual receptor sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-6. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Table 8-6 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Mixed forested and VP-6 0.04 View to BVS13 Road Low agricultural areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)Biological Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.6.2 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the

Page 143 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations environmental impacts of the Project. It is easily accessible during construction through the pipeline corridor itself or through existing dirt roads and since it is a small installation, it is not expected to increase construction traffic to any significant extent. During operation, traffic related to BVS will be very limited as it is unmanned.

8.6.3 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.6.4 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Kilkis and the Forestry Office of Kilkis, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 144 of 211

8.7 Relocation of Block Valve Station 15 (BVS15)

8.7.1 Physical environment

8.7.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed BVS15 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in geological environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.7.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed BVS15 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.7.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS15 visual receptors sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-7. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Page 145 of 211

Table 8-7 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Plain agricultural VP-9 0.02 View to BVS15 Track Low areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.7.2 Biological Environment

Since BVS15 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.7.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since BVS15 new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. It is easily accessible during construction through the pipeline corridor itself or through existing dirt roads and since it is a small installation, it is not expected to increase construction traffic to any significant extent. During operation, traffic related to BVS will be very limited as it is unmanned.

8.7.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Page 146 of 211

8.7.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Thessaloniki, the Forestry Office of Thessaloniki and TOEB of Agios Athanasios, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y- TAE-5101_00-at09).

8.8 Relocation of Block Valve Station 16 (BVS16)

8.8.1 Physical environment

8.8.1.1 Geology

8.8.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 147 of 211

8.8.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS16 visual receptor sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-8. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Table 8-8 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Plain agricultural VP-15 0.05 View to BVS16 Track Low areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.8.2 Biological Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.8.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. It is easily accessible during construction through the pipeline corridor itself or through existing dirt roads and since it is a small installation, it is not expected to increase construction traffic to any significant extent. During operation, traffic related to BVS will be very limited as it is unmanned.

As a result, any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in

Page 148 of 211

8.8.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.8.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Thessaloniki, the Forestry Office of Thessaloniki and TOEB of Chalkidona, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y- TAE-5101_00-at09).

8.9 Relocation of Block Valve Station 18 (BVS18)

8.9.1 Physical environment

8.9.1.1 Geology

Page 149 of 211

8.9.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.9.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS18 visual receptor sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-9. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Table 8-9 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Plain agricultural VP-16 0.04 View to BVS18 Track Low areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.9.2 Biological Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 150 of 211

8.9.3 Socioeconomic Environment

8.9.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.9.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Edessa and the Forestry Office of Pella, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 151 of 211

8.10 Relocation of Block Valve Station 19 (BVS19)

8.10.1 Physical environment

8.10.1.1 Geology

8.10.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.10.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS19 visual receptor sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-10. BVS 19 is located in agricultural land in a wider “mountainous forested area” landscape character type, which exhibits high sensitivity to landscape changes. However, given the distance to the closer receptor (approx. 80 m) and the type of the receptor (i.e. road), impacts to landscape and visual amenity are considered moderate. Standard mitigation measures, such as the use of building materials and colours that blend into the landscape will reduce impact significance to minor, thus there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Page 152 of 211

Table 8-10 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Mountainous forested VP-17 0.08 View to BVS19 Road High areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.10.2 Biological Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.10.3 Socioeconomic Environment

8.10.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Page 153 of 211

8.10.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Pella and the Forestry Office of Edessa, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

8.11 Relocation of Block Valve Station 21 (BVS21)

8.11.1 Physical environment

8.11.1.1 Geology

8.11.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 154 of 211

8.11.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS21 visual receptor sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-11. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Table 8-11 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Upland agricultural VP-13 0.1 View to BVS21 Track Low areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.11.2 Biological Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.11.3 Socioeconomic Environment

As a result, any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in

Page 155 of 211

8.11.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.11.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Kozani and the Forestry Office of Kozani, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

8.12 Relocation of Block Valve Station 22 (BVS22)

8.12.1 Physical environment

8.12.1.1 Geology

Page 156 of 211

8.12.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.12.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The BVS22 visual receptor sensitivity, as recorded during the landscape and visual amenity survey, is shown in Table 8-12. As evidenced from this table the BVS new location is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas with annual cultivations, a landscape character type of low sensitivity (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642- Y-TAE-0056), where details on impact assessment and mitigation relevant to landscape are provided). The associated impacts to landscape and visual amenity are therefore considered not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Table 8-12 Block Valve Stations Visual Receptors Sensitivity Landscape Distance in km Viewpoint Direction of view Receptor type Sensitivity Character Type to site (approx.) Upland agricultural VP-14 0.06 View to BVS22 Track Low areas

Source: EXERGIA (2015)

8.12.2 Biological Environment

Since the proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with block valve stations construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 157 of 211

8.12.3 Socioeconomic Environment

8.12.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

The proposed BVS new location lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with BVS construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.12.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Kastoria and the Forestry Office of Kastoria, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 158 of 211

8.13 Relocation of Pipeyard 01 (PY01)

8.13.1 Physical environment

8.13.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed PY01 is located in Southern Evros, for which a detailed geohazards and seismic activity assessment has been carried out during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Likely impacts in geological environment associated with PY construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are therefore covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.13.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Key potential impacts to soil and subsoil relevant to the construction; operation and decommissioning of project installations are presented below.

Table 8-13 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil

Construction Phase Operations Phase Decommissioning Phase  Disturbance and degradation of soil  No key potential impacts foreseen  Accidental pollution of soil due to compaction by accidental spills, solid  Accidental pollution of soil by solid and liquid wastes and liquid wastes or spills of hydrocarbons / fuels  Potential disturbance in case subsurface contamination is uncovered during site excavation.

Source: ERM (2013)

The proposed PY01 is a temporary installation; therefore permanent changes of ground surface and loss of soil are not relevant. Since the terrain is essentially flat, soil erosion is not a particular concern. However, due to soil characteristics, construction activities (mainly removal of vegetation and earthworks) can lead to soil compaction.

To avoid or reduce compaction, established mitigation methods will be applied during construction and reinstatement. The site will be re-vegetated immediately after construction, while deep ploughing will be applied.

Page 159 of 211

The risk for soil pollution through accidental spills of fuels and lubricant or improper disposal of waste and wastewater will be minimised by appropriate wastewater treatment, waste management, proper storage and handling of polluting substances, i.e. good housekeeping practices in construction by the EPC contractor. A Spill Contingency and Response Plan to prevent and respond to any spill will be implemented. Accidentally polluted soil will be excavated and disposed of as waste according to the type of pollution.

As a result, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. More detail information on the likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with PY construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are presented in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.13.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The magnitude of impact on the landscape depends on the landscape character, the value of the area concerned, as well as the nature, scale and duration of the particular change in the landscape. The proposed PY01 is situated in purely agricultural land or upland agricultural areas, a landscape character type of low sensitivity. In addition, PY01 is a temporary installation, i.e. it will be operated during construction and it will be reinstated to its former state afterwards. As a result, impacts to landscape and visual amenity are not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

More detail information on the likely impacts in the landscape and visual amenity associated with PY construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y- TAE-1009).

8.13.2 Biological Environment

Based on the baseline information about the biological environment of the proposed location of PY01, presented in Section 5, there may be significant impacts to Spermophilus citellus population due to site construction activities. Spermophilus citellus colonies are prone to local extinction in case where colonies are confirmed to inhabit the site. These small mammals are especially vulnerable during hibernation (September – late April) and after parturition (June). In particular, project activities may result in:

Page 160 of 211

 Direct mortality of the ground squirrel individuals or as a result of the destruction of their burrows

 Change to animal habitat resulting from construction activities applied directly to areas where habitat will be lost, and indirectly to adjacent areas.

 Change to ground squirrel movement patterns.

 Change to ground squirrel behaviour as a result of sensory disturbance. Sensory disturbances include aural disturbances, such as blasting and equipment operation, olfactory, for example machine odour, and/or visual, such as the occurrence of construction personnel and equipment.

A pre-construction survey will be carried out to confirm whether Spermophilus citellus indeed inhabit the site. If the presence of Spermophilus is confirmed, mitigation measures such as the ones presented in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports will need to be applied. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). As a result, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.13.2.1 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed PY01 location maintains the same administrative setting as the approved location, the anticipated socioeconomic impacts are the same and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. A detailed description of these impacts and of the respective mitigation measures on economy, employment and income, land and livelihoods, infrastructure and public services, community health and safety is presented in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642- Y-TAE-1009).

With regard to traffic and transport, Figure 8-1 shows that PY01 can be easily accessed by Egnatia Highway which provides a connection route to the Port of Alexandroupolis, while it has easy access to the pipeline corridor through a secondary road with safe distance from human settlements. As a result, impacts to traffic and transport are considered not significant.

Page 161 of 211

Figure 8-1 Road access to PY01

Access road from Egnatia to PY

Egnatia

Access road to pipeline corridor

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

8.13.3 Cultural Heritage Environment

Although there is no indication of any significant archaeological findings in the proposed location of PY01, any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with PY construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

8.13.4 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Evros, which has issued its positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 162 of 211

8.14 Relocation of Pipeyard 08 (PY08)

8.14.1 Physical environment

8.14.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed PY08 is located in Serres Plain, for which a detailed geohazards and seismic activity assessment has been carried out during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Likely impacts in geological environment associated with PY construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are therefore covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.14.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Key potential impacts to soil and subsoil relevant to the construction; operation and decommissioning of project installations are presented below.

Table 8-14 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil

Source: ERM (2013)

The proposed PY08 is a temporary installation; therefore permanent changes of ground surface and loss of soil are not relevant. Since the terrain is essentially flat, soil erosion is not a particular concern. However, due to soil characteristics, construction activities (mainly removal of vegetation and earthworks) can lead to soil compaction.

Page 163 of 211

8.14.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The magnitude of impact on the landscape depends on the landscape character, the value of the area concerned, as well as the nature, scale and duration of the particular change in the landscape. The proposed PY08 is situated in purely agricultural land of mixed annual and permanent crops, a landscape character type of low sensitivity. In addition, PY08 is a temporary installation, i.e. it will be operated during construction and it will be reinstated to its former state afterwards. As a result, impacts to landscape and visual amenity are not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.14.2 Biological Environment

Based on the baseline information about the biological environment of the proposed location of PY08, presented in Section 5, there are no expected impacts on the assessed ecological variables and thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Page 164 of 211

8.14.3 Socioeconomic Environment

The socioeconomic environment of Nea Zichni municipality, where the proposed PY08 is located, was extensively studied during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. A detailed description of likely project impacts and of the respective mitigation measures on economy, employment and income, land and livelihoods, infrastructure and public services, community health and safety is presented in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

With regard to traffic and transport, Figure 8-2 shows that PY08 can be accessed by Egnatia Highway which provides a connection route to the Ports of Thessaloniki and Kaval, while it has readily access to the pipeline corridor to the north. Typical precautionary measures will have to be adopted for the transport of material to the PY08, including coordination with the traffic police, as discribed in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). As a result, impacts to traffic and transport are considered not significant.

Page 165 of 211

Figure 8-2 Road access to PY08

Egnatia

Access road to pipeline corridor

Access to Egnatia (to the south)

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

8.14.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Although there is no indication of any significant archaeological findings in the proposed location of PY08, any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with PY construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

8.14.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Serres and the Forestry Authority of Serres, which have both issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 166 of 211

8.15 Relocation of Pipeyard 10 (PY10)

8.15.1 Physical environment

8.15.1.1 Geology

Since, the proposed PY10 is located in Kroussia Mountains, for which a detailed geohazards and seismic activity assessment has been carried out during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.. Likely impacts in geological environment associated with PY construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are therefore covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.15.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Key potential impacts to soil and subsoil relevant to the construction; operation and decommissioning of project installations are presented below.

Table 8-15 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil

Source: ERM (2013)

The proposed PY10 is a temporary installation; therefore permanent changes of ground surface and loss of soil are not relevant. Given that the dominant soil type in the area is Chromic Luvisol, soil erosion is not a concern. However, due to soil high compaction sensitivity, construction activities (mainly removal of vegetation and earthworks) can lead to soil compaction.

Page 167 of 211

8.15.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The magnitude of impact on the landscape depends on the landscape character, the value of the area concerned, as well as the nature, scale and duration of the particular change in the landscape. The proposed PY10 is situated in a land principally occupied by agriculture, with significant areas of natural vegetation, a landscape character type of low sensitivity. In addition, PY10 is a temporary installation, i.e. it will be operated during construction and it will be reinstated to its former state afterwards. As a result, impacts to landscape and visual amenity are not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.15.2 Biological Environment

Based on the baseline information about the biological environment of the proposed location of PY10, presented in Section 5, there are no expected impacts on the assessed ecological variables, provided that all construction works remain within the site boundaries and do not affect the neighbouring oak forest, since it represents a habitat type of European Community interest, in good conservation status. As a result, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Page 168 of 211

8.15.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed PY10 location maintains the same administrative setting as the approved location, the anticipated socioeconomic impacts are the same and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. A detailed description of these impacts and of the respective mitigation measures on economy, employment and income, land and livelihoods, infrastructure and public services, community health and safety is presented in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642- Y-TAE-1009).

With regard to traffic and transport, Figure 8-3 shows that PY10 can be easily accessed by Egnatia Highway which provides a connection route to the Port of Thessaloniki, while it has easy access to the pipeline corridor through a secondary road with safe distance from human settlements. As a result, impacts to traffic and transport are considered not significant.

Page 169 of 211

Figure 8-3 Road access to PY10

Access road Egnatia to pipeline corridor

Source: EXERGIA (2016)

8.15.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Any likely impacts on cultural heritage in the proposed area of PY10 and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

8.15.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Forestry Authority of Lagkada, which has issued its positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 170 of 211

8.16 Relocation of Pipeyard 13 (PY13)

8.16.1 Physical environment

8.16.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed PY13 is located in Thessaloniki – Giannitsa Plain, for which a detailed geohazards and seismic activity assessment has been carried out during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Likely impacts in geological environment associated with PY construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are therefore covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.16.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Key potential impacts to soil and subsoil relevant to the construction; operation and decommissioning of project installations are presented below.

Table 8-16 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil

Source: ERM (2013)

The proposed PY13 is a temporary installation; therefore permanent changes of ground surface and loss of soil are not relevant. Given that the dominant soil type in the area is Calcaric Fluvisol, soil erosion is not a concern. However, due to soil high compaction sensitivity, construction activities (mainly removal of vegetation and earthworks) can lead to soil compaction.

Page 171 of 211

8.16.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The magnitude of impact on the landscape depends on the landscape character, the value of the area concerned, as well as the nature, scale and duration of the particular change in the landscape. The proposed PY13 is situated in a purely agricultural land with complex cultivation patterns, a landscape character type of low sensitivity. In addition, PY13 is a temporary installation, i.e. it will be operated during construction and it will be reinstated to its former state afterwards. As a result, impacts to landscape and visual amenity are not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.16.2 Biological Environment

Based on the baseline information about the biological environment of the proposed location of PY13, presented in Section 5, there are no expected impacts on the assessed ecological variables. As a result, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Page 172 of 211

8.16.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed PY13 location maintains the same administrative setting as the approved location, the anticipated socioeconomic impacts are the same and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. A detailed description of likely project impacts and of the respective mitigation measures on economy, employment and income, land and livelihoods, infrastructure and public services, community health and safety is presented in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642- Y-TAE-1009).

With regard to traffic and transport, PY13 can be accessed by National Road E-86 which provides a connection route to the Port of Thessaloniki, while it has readily access to the pipeline corridor (located in the corridor). Typical precautionary measures will have to be adopted for the transport of material to the PY13, including coordination with the traffic police, as discribed in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). As a result, impacts to traffic and transport are considered not significant.

8.16.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Any likely impacts on cultural heritage in the proposed area of PY13 and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

8.16.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Pella and the Forestry Authority of Edessa, which have both issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 173 of 211

8.17 Relocation of Construction Camp 03 (CAMP03)

8.17.1 Physical environment

8.17.1.1 Geology

Since, the proposed CAMP03 is located in Komotini – Xanthi Plain, for which a detailed geohazards and seismic activity assessment has been carried out during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Likely impacts in geological environment associated with camps construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.17.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Key potential impacts to soil and subsoil relevant to the construction; operation and decommissioning of project installations are presented below.

Table 8-17 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil

Source: ERM (2013)

The proposed CAMP03 is a temporary installation; therefore permanent changes of ground surface and loss of soil are not relevant. Since the terrain is essentially flat and the dominant soil type is Rocks Outcrops, soil erosion is not a particular concern. However, due to soil characteristics, construction activities (mainly removal of vegetation and earthworks) can lead to soil compaction.

Page 174 of 211

8.17.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The magnitude of impact on the landscape depends on the landscape character, the value of the area concerned, as well as the nature, scale and duration of the particular change in the landscape. The proposed CAMP03 is situated in a plain agricultural area, a landscape character type of low sensitivity. In addition, CAMP03 is a temporary installation, i.e. it will be operated during construction and it will be reinstated to its former state afterwards. As a result, impacts to landscape and visual amenity are not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

More detail information on the likely impacts in the landscape and visual amenity associated with CAMP construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y- TAE-1009).

8.17.2 Biological Environment Based on the baseline information about the biological environment of the proposed location of CAMP03, presented in Section 5, there are no expected impacts on the assessed ecological variables and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Page 175 of 211

8.17.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since, the socioeconomic environment of Nestos municipality, where the proposed CAMP03 is located, was extensively studied during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. A detailed description of likely project impacts and of the respective mitigation measures on economy, employment and income, land and livelihoods, infrastructure and public services, community health and safety, traffic and transport is presented in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.17.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Any likely impacts on cultural heritage in the proposed area of CAMP03 and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

8.17.5 Approval from authorities

TAP G has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Kavala and the Forestry Authority of Kavala, which have both issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

8.18 Relocation of Construction Camp 04 (CAMP04)

8.18.1 Physical environment

8.18.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed CAMP04 is located in Serres Plain, for which a detailed geohazards and seismic activity assessment has been carried out during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Likely impacts in geological environment associated with camps construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made

Page 176 of 211

8.18.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Key potential impacts to soil and subsoil relevant to the construction; operation and decommissioning of project installations are presented below.

Table 8-18 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil

Source: ERM (2013)

The proposed CAMP04 is a temporary installation; therefore permanent changes of ground surface and loss of soil are not relevant. Since the terrain is essentially flat and the dominant soil type is Calcaric Fluvisol, soil erosion is not a particular concern. However, due to soil characteristics, construction activities (mainly removal of vegetation and earthworks) can lead to soil compaction.

Page 177 of 211

Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.18.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The magnitude of impact on the landscape depends on the landscape character, the value of the area concerned, as well as the nature, scale and duration of the particular change in the landscape. The proposed CAMP04 is situated in a plain agricultural area, a landscape character type of low sensitivity. In addition, CAMP04 is a temporary installation, i.e. it will be operated during construction and it will be reinstated to its former state afterwards. As a result, impacts to landscape and visual amenity are not significant and there is there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.18.2 Biological Environment Based on the baseline information about the biological environment of the proposed location of CAMP04, presented in Section 5, there are no expected impacts on the assessed ecological variables. As a result, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.18.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed CAMP04 location maintains the same administrative setting as the approved location, the anticipated socioeconomic impacts are the same and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. A detailed description of likely project impacts and of the respective mitigation measures on economy, employment and income, land and livelihoods, infrastructure and public services, community health and safety, traffic and transport is presented in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 178 of 211

8.18.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Although there is no indication of any significant archaeological findings in the proposed location of CAMP04, any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with CAMP construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

8.18.5 Approval from authorities

8.19 Relocation of Construction Camp 06 (CAMP06)

8.19.1 Physical environment

8.19.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed CAMP06 is located in Thessaloniki – Giannitsa Plain, for which a detailed geohazards and seismic activity assessment has been carried out during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Likely impacts in geological environment associated with camps construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.19.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Key potential impacts to soil and subsoil relevant to the construction; operation and decommissioning of project installations are presented below.

Page 179 of 211

Table 8-19 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil

Source: ERM (2013)

The proposed CAMP06 is a temporary installation; therefore permanent changes of ground surface and loss of soil are not relevant. Since the terrain is essentially flat and the dominant soil type is Calcaric Fluvisol, soil erosion is not a particular concern. However, due to soil characteristics, construction activities (mainly removal of vegetation and earthworks) can lead to soil compaction.

8.19.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

Page 180 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations type of low sensitivity. In addition, CAMP06 is a temporary installation, i.e. it will be operated during construction and it will be reinstated to its former state afterwards. As a result, impacts to landscape and visual amenity are not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.19.2 Biological Environment Based on the baseline information about the biological environment of the proposed location of CAMP06, presented in Section 5, there are no expected impacts on the assessed ecological variables. As a result, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.19.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed CAMP06 location maintains the same administrative setting as the approved location, the anticipated socioeconomic impacts are the same and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. A detailed description of likely project impacts and of the respective mitigation measures on economy, employment and income, land and livelihoods, infrastructure and public services, community health and safety, traffic and transport is presented in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.19.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Although there is no indication of any significant archaeological findings in the proposed location of CAMP06, any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with CAMP construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP- 642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

Page 181 of 211

8.19.5 Approval from authorities

8.20 Relocation of Construction Camp 07 (CAMP07)

8.20.1 Physical environment

8.20.1.1 Geology

Since, the proposed CAMP07 is located in Eastern Margin of Florina, Vegoritis, for which a detailed geohazards and seismic activity assessment has been carried out during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Likely impacts in geological environment associated with camps construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.20.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Key potential impacts to soil and subsoil relevant to the construction; operation and decommissioning of project installations are presented below.

Table 8-20 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil

Source: ERM (2013)

The proposed CAMP07 is a temporary installation; therefore permanent changes of ground surface and loss of soil are not relevant. Since the terrain is essentially flat and the dominant soil type is Calcaric Fluvisol, soil erosion is not a particular concern. However, due to soil characteristics, construction activities (mainly removal of vegetation and earthworks) can lead to soil compaction.

Page 182 of 211

8.20.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The magnitude of impact on the landscape depends on the landscape character, the value of the area concerned, as well as the nature, scale and duration of the particular change in the landscape. The proposed CAMP07 is situated in a plain agricultural area, a landscape character type of low sensitivity. In addition, CAMP07 is a temporary installation, i.e. it will be operated during construction and it will be reinstated to its former state afterwards. As a result, impacts to landscape and visual amenity are not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.20.2 Biological Environment Based on the baseline information about the biological environment of the proposed location of CAMP07, presented in Section 5, there are no expected impacts on the assessed ecological variables and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

Page 183 of 211

8.20.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed CAMP07 location maintains the same administrative setting as the approved location, the anticipated socioeconomic impacts are the same and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. A detailed description of likely project impacts and of the respective mitigation measures on economy, employment and income, land and livelihoods, infrastructure and public services, community health and safety, traffic and transport is presented in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.20.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Any likely impacts on cultural heritage in the proposed area of CAMP07 and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

8.20.5 Approval from authorities

TAP G has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Florina and the Forestry Authority of Florina, which have both issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

8.21 Relocation of Construction Camp 08 (CAMP08)

8.21.1 Physical environment

8.21.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed CAMP08 is located in Aliakmon River Terraces, for which a detailed geohazards and seismic activity assessment has been carried out during the ESIA and ESIA Amendment, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Likely impacts in geological environment associated with camps construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 184 of 211

8.21.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Key potential impacts to soil and subsoil relevant to the construction; operation and decommissioning of project installations are presented below.

Table 8-21 Key Potential Impacts - Subsurface and Soil

Source: ERM (2013)

The proposed CAMP08 is a temporary installation; therefore permanent changes of ground surface and loss of soil are not relevant. Since the terrain is essentially flat and the dominant soil type is Chromic Vertisol, soil erosion is not a particular concern. However, due to soil characteristics, construction activities (mainly removal of vegetation and earthworks) can lead to soil compaction.

Page 185 of 211

8.21.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

The magnitude of impact on the landscape depends on the landscape character, the value of the area concerned, as well as the nature, scale and duration of the particular change in the landscape. The proposed CAMP08 is situated in an upland agricultural area, a landscape character type of low sensitivity. In addition, CAMP08 is a temporary installation, i.e. it will be operated during construction and it will be reinstated to its former state afterwards. As a result, impacts to landscape and visual amenity are not significant and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.21.2 Biological Environment Based on the baseline information about the biological environment of the proposed location of CAMP08, presented in Section 5, there are no expected impacts on the assessed ecological variables. As a result, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project.

8.21.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed CAMP08 location maintains the same administrative setting as the approved location, the anticipated socioeconomic impacts are the same and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. A detailed description of likely project impacts and of the respective mitigation measures on economy, employment and income, land and livelihoods, infrastructure and public services, community health and safety, traffic and transport is presented in Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.21.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Any likely impacts on cultural heritage in the proposed area of CAMP08 and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA

Page 186 of 211

Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009). The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

8.21.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Kastoria and the Forestry Authority of Kastoria, which have both issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

8.22 Proposed rerouting at Kipoi (IP 0002-03 – IP 0002-14)

8.22.1 Physical environment

8.22.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during the Second ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in geological environment associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning are covered in the Second ESIA Amendment report. Reference is made to Section 8 of the Second ESIA Amendment (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002).

8.22.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during the Second ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the Second ESIA Amendment report. Reference is made to Section 8 of the Second ESIA Amendment (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002).

8.22.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

Given the fact that the pipeline is fully buried along its length, no impacts related to landscape and visual amenity are foreseen for the operation of the pipeline rerouting. As a result, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts during construction and decommissioning are temporary and in general similar to the impacts

Page 187 of 211

8.22.2 Biological Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during the Second ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the Second ESIA Amendment report. Reference is made to Section 8 of the Second ESIA Amendment (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002).

8.22.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during the Second ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the Second ESIA Amendment report. Reference is made to Section 8 of the Second ESIA Amendment (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002).

8.22.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during the Second ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the Second ESIA Amendment report. Reference is made to Section 8 of the Second ESIA Amendment (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5002).

The evidence of pottery scatters is not uncommon for large parts of the TAP pipeline route or its permanent and temporary installations and does not necessarily indicate increased cultural heritage sensitivity. The presence of an archaeologist during construction will ensure that any chance finds will be treated in accordance with the provision of national legislation and TAP ESMS standards.

Page 188 of 211

8.23 Proposed rerouting at Komotini Airport (IP0251-10-02 – IP 0251-10-07)

8.23.1 Physical environment

8.23.1.1 Geology

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in geological environment associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE- 0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.23.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.23.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

8.23.2 Biological Environment

Page 189 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.23.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.23.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.23.5 Approval from authorities

Page 190 of 211

8.24 Proposed rerouting at Amvrosia (IP0251-15 – IP 0290-01)

8.24.1 Physical environment

8.24.1.1 Geology

8.24.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.24.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

8.24.2 Biological Environment

Page 191 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.24.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.24.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.24.5 Approval from authorities

Page 192 of 211

8.25 Proposed rerouting at Krinides (IP 0450-05 – IP 0450-07)

8.25.1 Physical environment

8.25.1.1 Geology

8.25.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.25.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

8.25.2 Biological Environment

Page 193 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.25.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.25.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.25.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Kavala and the Forestry Office of Kavala, which have issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes, except from TOEB Filippon, which was not operative. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 194 of 211

8.26 Proposed rerouting at Kalamonas (IP 0450-16-01 – IP 0450-19)

8.26.1 Physical environment

8.26.1.1 Geology

8.26.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.26.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

Given the fact that the pipeline is fully buried along its length, no impacts related to landscape and visual amenity are foreseen for the operation of the pipeline rerouting and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts during construction and decommissioning are temporary and in general similar to the impacts associated to the basecase pipeline route (reference is made to Section 8.6 of the ESIA (GPL00- ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056).

8.26.2 Biological Environment

Page 195 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.26.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.26.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.26.5 Approval from authorities

Page 196 of 211

8.27 Proposed rerouting at Lachanas (IP 0618-01 – IP 0618-03)

8.27.1 Physical environment

8.27.1.1 Geology

8.27.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.27.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

8.27.2 Biological Environment

Page 197 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.27.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.27.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.27.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Thessaloniki and the Forestry Office of Lagkadas, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 198 of 211

8.28 Proposed rerouting at Drymos (IP 0677-07-01 – IP 0677-08)

8.28.1 Physical environment

8.28.1.1 Geology

8.28.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.28.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

8.28.2 Biological Environment

Although the proposed pipeline rerouting is located in the peripheral zone of the National Park of Koronia - Volvi, it lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation and there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with pipeline

Page 199 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.28.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.28.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.28.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Thessaloniki and the Forestry Office of Thessaloniki, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 200 of 211

8.29 Proposed rerouting at Mikro Monastiri (IP 1042-01 – IP 1042-03)

8.29.1 Physical environment

8.29.1.1 Geology

8.29.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.29.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

8.29.2 Biological Environment

Page 201 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.29.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.29.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.29.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Thessaloniki, the Forestry Office of Thessaloniki and TOEB of Halkidona, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y- TAE-5101_00-at09).

Page 202 of 211

8.30 Proposed rerouting at Loudias river (IP 1046-01 – IP 1046-03)

8.30.1 Physical environment

8.30.1.1 Geology

8.30.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.30.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

8.30.2 Biological Environment

Page 203 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.30.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.30.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.30.5 Approval from authorities

Page 204 of 211

8.31 Proposed rerouting at Agia Fotini (IP 1110 – IP 1110-02)

8.31.1 Physical environment

8.31.1.1 Geology

8.31.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.31.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

8.31.2 Biological Environment

Similarly to the approved pipeline route, the proposed pipeline rerouting is located in the Flamouria Wildlife Refuge which is known to hold bear and wolf territories. The proposed rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, thus there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of

Page 205 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.31.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.31.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.31.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Pella, the Forestry Office of Edessaand TOEB of Edessa, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed

Page 206 of 211

8.32 Proposed rerouting at Verga (IP 1224 – IP 1224-02)

8.32.1 Physical environment

8.32.1.1 Geology

8.32.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.32.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

8.32.2 Biological Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the

Page 207 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on the biological environment associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.32.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.32.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.32.5 Approval from authorities

Page 208 of 211

8.33 Proposed rerouting at Chiliodendro (IP 1273-02-01 – IP 1273-02-02)

8.33.1 Physical environment

8.33.1.1 Geology

8.33.1.2 Soil and subsoil

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts in soil and subsoil associated with BVS or pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00- EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.33.1.3 Landscape and Visual Amenity

8.33.2 Biological Environment

Page 209 of 211

Area Comp. System Disc. Doc.- Ser. Code Code Code Code Type No. Project Title: Trans Adriatic Pipeline – TAP Third Amendment to the ESIA Greece - Small GAL00-EXG-TAE-5101 Document Title: reroutings & changes in Permanent and Temporary Rev.:02 Installations measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.33.3 Socioeconomic Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. As a result any likely impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with pipeline rerouting construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.33.4 Cultural Heritage Environment

Since the proposed pipeline rerouting lies within the pipeline corridor, which has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Any likely impacts on cultural heritage associated with pipeline segment construction, operation and decommissioning and proposed mitigation measures are covered in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports and are not duplicated here. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

8.33.5 Approval from authorities

TAP AG has contacted the competent Archaeology Ephorate of Kastoria, the Forestry Office of Kastoria and TOEB of Aliakmonas, which have all issued their positive opinion on the proposed changes. The relevant correspondence is provided in Annex 6 (GAL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE- 5101_00-at09).

Page 210 of 211

8.34 Plot size changes in temporary installations

PY04, PY09, CAMP01 and CAMP02 have been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation. The slight change in their plot size does not create any additional or different impacts than those already described in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment reports, thus, there is no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project. Reference is made to Section 8 of the ESIA (GPL00-ASP-642-Y-TAE-0056) and Section 8 of the ESIA Amendment (GPL00-EXG-642-Y-TAE-1009).

Page 211 of 211

9 Conclusions

The present Third Amendment to the ESIA describes a number of changes introduced to the design and location of twelve block valve stations, four pipeyards, five campsites and twelve minor pipeline route segments after the modification of the Environmental Terms Approval Decision on 17/11/2015 and 05/05/2016. These changes have taken place as a result of engineering investigations or in the process of acquiring land for the project installations.

The proposed new BVS locations lie on the pipeline axis, within the pipeline corridor that has been studied extensively during ESIA and ESIA Amendment preparation, relatively close to the approved BVS locations. Similarly, all proposed pipeline reroutings lie within the studied pipeline corridor, with maximum deviation of 250m from the basecase route. As a result, likely impacts related to these changes are not significant or are largely similar to the ones already identified, assessed and addressed in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment.

The proposed new pipeyard and campsite locations have been examined with regard to potential environmental impacts relevant to their construction, operation and decommissioning. It should be noted that pipeyards and campsites are temporary project installations, i.e. they will be used during project construction and subsequently they will be reinstated and returned to their prior use. Impact assessment has shown that likely impacts related to the proposed new pipeyard and campsite locations are not significant or are largely similar to the ones already identified, assessed and addressed in the ESIA and ESIA Amendment.

In short, the proposed modifications pose no significant change in the environmental impacts of the Project, which were described and approved by the existing Decision on Approval of Environmental Terms.

Trans Adriatic Pipeline AG-Greece Chatzigianni Mexi 5 11528 Athens, Greece Τel: +30 213 0104500 Fax: +30 213 0104533

[email protected]

www.tap-ag.com

Date 04/2016

Copyright Reserved: This document may not be copied, shown to or placed at disposal of third parties without prior consent of TAP AG. The latest version of the document is registered in the TAP Project’s Database.