If adjustment can also be requested for small-scale environmental impact assessments, does the project stop while the request is pending? Four questions on Bill No. 2221828 to amend the Environmental Impact Assessment Act

Which stage's materials were read?

This entry reads a bill introduced in the National Assembly by members. The National Assembly legislative status page of the National Participation Legislation Center shows that the bill was introduced by Assembly Member Yoon Jae-ok and 9 others on October 7, 2026 and referred to the Climate, Energy, Environment and Labor Committee on October 8, 2026. Review by the standing committee, review by the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, and a plenary vote did not appear on the page.

The original text was read from the bill PDF downloaded from the detail page. It contains the reasons for the proposal and main contents, the amending text, two articles of addenda, and a comparison table of the current and amended provisions. The description of the bill below is confined to the scope of this original text; the committee's review report and the Government's opinion were not consulted.

Sources for this section: National Participation Legislation Center, National Assembly Legislative Status: Partial Amendment Bill to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (No. 2221828) · Original bill PDF of the Partial Amendment Bill to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (sponsored by Assembly Member Yoon Jae-ok, Bill No. 2221828)

What the current provisions now provide

Article 31 of the current Environmental Impact Assessment Act governs requests for adjustment of the consultation results of an environmental impact assessment. Paragraph (1) provides that, where a project operator or the head of an approval authority objects to the consultation results notified under Article 29, the operator or the head may request the Minister of Climate, Energy and Environment to adjust them, and a project operator required to obtain approval, etc. must make the request through the head of the approval authority. Paragraph (2) requires the Minister to decide whether to make an adjustment, following deliberation by the Environmental Impact Assessment Council, within the period prescribed by Presidential Decree, and to give notice of the decision. Paragraph (3) prohibits the head of an approval authority, etc. that has requested adjustment from approving or finalising the project plan, etc. before receiving that notice, except where the matters related to the request for adjustment are excluded from the project plan.

Small-scale environmental impact assessments are governed separately by Articles 44 and 45. Under Article 44 (2), the head of an approval authority, etc. submits a small-scale environmental impact statement to the Minister and requests consultation before approval or finalisation. Article 45 (1) requires the Minister, after review, to notify the consultation results within the period prescribed by Presidential Decree, and paragraph (3) provides that the Minister may request supplementation or adjustment up to two times and that the head of an approval authority, etc. so requested must comply unless there is a special reason. Paragraph (5) allows the Minister, where there is a concern of significant environmental damage or the like, to give notice requiring the scale, contents or timing of the project to be re-examined.

The current Article 45 and Article 46-2 (Consultation on Changes) contain no provision for requesting adjustment of the consultation results of a small-scale environmental impact assessment, of a request for supplementation or adjustment, or of a notice of re-examination. Subparagraph 2 of Article 8 (1), likewise, lists as a matter for deliberation by the Environmental Impact Assessment Council only the adjustment of the consultation results of an environmental impact assessment under Article 31 (2).

Sources for this section: Korea Law Information Center: Environmental Impact Assessment Act (Act No. 21065, effective October 1, 2025)

What the bill seeks to change

The reasons for the proposal explain that, although small-scale environmental impact assessments go through the same consultation procedure as environmental impact assessments, there is no basis for requesting adjustment, which raises a concern that disputes may end up in litigation and the like. The bill therefore proposes to introduce an adjustment system to restore parity and to prevent projects from being delayed by prolonged conflict.

The amending text moves the current Article 46-2 (Consultation on Changes) to Article 46-3 and inserts a new Article 46-2 (Requests for Adjustment, etc.). Paragraph (1) allows a project operator or the head of an approval authority to request adjustment where it objects to the consultation results notified under Article 45 (1); paragraph (2) applies Article 31 (2) and (3) mutatis mutandis to the decision on whether to adjust and related matters; and paragraph (3) delegates the necessary matters to Presidential Decree. A new paragraph (6) is added to Article 45, allowing adjustment to be requested also where there is an objection to a request for supplementation or adjustment under paragraph (3) or a notice of re-examination under paragraph (5), and applying Article 46-2 mutatis mutandis to that procedure.

Subparagraph 2 of Article 8 (1) is amended to include among the matters for deliberation by the Council the adjustment of the consultation results of a small-scale environmental impact assessment, including where Article 46-2 (2) applies mutatis mutandis, and the article numbers cited in Article 47, which prohibits advance construction, are also corrected. The addenda provide that the Act enters into force six months after its promulgation and that the new adjustment provisions apply from the first case in which consultation is requested under Article 44 (2) after the entry into force.

Sources for this section: Original bill PDF of the Partial Amendment Bill to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (sponsored by Assembly Member Yoon Jae-ok, Bill No. 2221828)

Are approval and finalisation suspended while adjustment is requested?

The new Article 46-2 (2) applies Article 31 (2) and (3) together mutatis mutandis. If Article 31 (3) carries over as it stands, the head of an approval authority, etc. that has requested adjustment cannot approve or finalise the project plan before being notified of the result of the adjustment. The stated purpose of the amendment is to prevent project delays, yet the request for adjustment itself becomes a mechanism that suspends the approval procedure for a certain period.

Article 31 (2) delegates that period to Presidential Decree. The original text does not settle whether the adjustment period will be longer than the consultation period for a small-scale environmental impact assessment, or whether the same period under the Presidential Decree will simply be used. It is worth asking in committee review how the aim of preventing delay fits with the effect of suspending approval, and whether the period should be written into the Act.

In addition, the proviso to Article 31 (3) permits approval where the matters related to the request for adjustment are excluded from the project plan. Because small-scale projects are narrow in scope, one can envisage cases in which excluding the disputed part leaves nothing of the project itself; the original text does not separately address how this proviso would operate for small-scale projects.

Sources for this section: Original bill PDF of the Partial Amendment Bill to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (sponsored by Assembly Member Yoon Jae-ok, Bill No. 2221828) · Korea Law Information Center: Environmental Impact Assessment Act (Act No. 21065, effective October 1, 2025)

Do Article 45 (6) and Article 46-2 bind different objections into the same procedure?

The bill creates two strands of objection. One is an objection to the notice of consultation results under Article 45 (1) (Article 46-2 (1)); the other is an objection to a request for supplementation or adjustment under Article 45 (3) or a notice of re-examination under paragraph (5) (Article 45 (6)). The latter applies Article 46-2 mutatis mutandis, and Article 46-2 in turn applies Article 31 mutatis mutandis. Because this structure involves two layers of mutatis mutandis application, it is difficult to tell from the provisions alone which period and which suspensive effect attach to an objection at which stage.

In particular, Article 45 (3) provides that the head of an approval authority, etc. that receives a request for supplementation or adjustment must comply unless there is a special reason. The original text does not say whether the duty to comply is suspended in the meantime if adjustment is sought against a request for supplementation or adjustment, or how the limit of two requests for supplementation or adjustment is to be counted in relation to requests for adjustment. Nor, in the case of a notice of re-examination, does it specify how far the re-examination of the scale or timing of the project changes if adjustment of the notice is granted.

Sources for this section: Original bill PDF of the Partial Amendment Bill to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (sponsored by Assembly Member Yoon Jae-ok, Bill No. 2221828) · Korea Law Information Center: Environmental Impact Assessment Act (Act No. 21065, effective October 1, 2025)

Why may only project operators and approval authorities request adjustment?

Under the new provision, as under the current Article 31, the persons entitled to request adjustment are the project operator and the head of the approval authority. Only these two actors may seek an adjustment that changes the consultation results in the project's favour; the provisions offer no route for residents of the project area or persons affected by its environmental impact to enter the adjustment procedure.

The current Article 8 (2) requires that the Environmental Impact Assessment Council, when constituted, include private experts such as representatives of residents and civic groups. Thus the fact that residents' representatives may take part in deliberations on adjustment sits alongside the fact that the right to seek adjustment lies only with the project side. The parity referred to in the reasons for the proposal is parity between environmental impact assessments and small-scale environmental impact assessments; committee review may ask how the balance among interested persons is to be viewed.

Sources for this section: Original bill PDF of the Partial Amendment Bill to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (sponsored by Assembly Member Yoon Jae-ok, Bill No. 2221828) · Korea Law Information Center: Environmental Impact Assessment Act (Act No. 21065, effective October 1, 2025)

Will an adjustment system reduce litigation, or merely change its sequence?

The reasons for the proposal state that the absence of a basis for adjustment raises a concern that disputes may end up in litigation and the like. The original text, however, does not settle whether the result of an adjustment may itself be challenged, whether an adjustment decision is subject to administrative litigation, or whether adjustment must be pursued first before an action may be brought.

If adjustment remains an optional procedure, a project operator may consider adjustment and litigation together, and litigation may follow after approval has been suspended for the adjustment period. Whether the aim of reducing litigation is actually achieved appears to depend on how far the effect of the adjustment result is defined; this entry has not examined any case law or review opinions on that point.

Sources for this section: Original bill PDF of the Partial Amendment Bill to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (sponsored by Assembly Member Yoon Jae-ok, Bill No. 2221828)

Commencement and remaining issues

Article 1 of the Addenda provides that the Act enters into force six months after its promulgation, and Article 2 applies the new adjustment provisions from the first case in which consultation on a small-scale environmental impact assessment is requested under Article 44 (2) after the entry into force. The new route to adjustment is not opened for projects that requested consultation before the entry into force and have already received consultation results or a request for supplementation or adjustment.

The adjustment period, the form of the request for adjustment, and the manner of the Council's deliberation are delegated to Presidential Decree, so the actual shape of the system will become clear only once an amendment to the Enforcement Decree is issued. This entry read only the original text at the stage of referral to the standing committee as of October 16, 2026; whether any subsequent amendment or alternative bill incorporates it must be checked again.

Reduced to essentials, three issues remain: whether the adjustment period and the effect of suspending approval should be written into the Act; how to define the relationship between the duty to comply with a request for supplementation or adjustment and a request for adjustment; and how to arrange challenges to the result of an adjustment and the sequence of litigation. Only once these three are settled can it be judged whether the parity and the prevention of delay that the bill speaks of are achieved together.

Sources for this section: Original bill PDF of the Partial Amendment Bill to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (sponsored by Assembly Member Yoon Jae-ok, Bill No. 2221828) · National Participation Legislation Center, National Assembly Legislative Status: Partial Amendment Bill to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (No. 2221828)