IRO-1 Description of the Processes to Identify and Assess Material Impacts, Risks and Opportunities

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53a] Our materiality assessment helps us to identify and prioritize key ESG topics and material impacts, risks, and opportunities. This ensures our ESG strategy aligns with stakeholder expectations and external requirements. During the materiality assessment in 2024, changes to our material topics were made to align with the ESRS, including regrouping and renaming (sub-)topics and adding new (sub-)topics such as “other work-related rights” and “workers in the value chain.” Based on the impacts, risks and opportunities identified during the materiality assessment, it was determined that nine out of the ten sustainability topics outlined by the ESRS are considered material for OMV. Additionally, entity-specific topics such as process safety, cybersecurity, and economic impact were found to be material. The ESRS sub-topics climate adaptation and corruption and bribery are not material for OMV, but they are material for OMV’s subsidiary Borealis. More information on these sub-topics is included in the E1 and G1 topical chapters.

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53a] The materiality assessment was carried out at Group level, covering all fully consolidated entities, similar to the Company’s financial statements. To gain a comprehensive view of key sustainability topics, the materiality analysis was conducted in five steps, considering impacts, risks, opportunities, and stakeholder expectations.

First, a long list of topics from ESRS, GRI, and SASB sector standards was developed, excluding non-relevant topics, with input from subject matter experts. Second, expert interviews were conducted to identify and formulate impacts, risks, and opportunities for different topics and sub-topics. Third, ten internal and external stakeholder groups, including employees, customers, suppliers, capital market participants, NGOs, authorities, communities, associations, media, and science/research, were consulted to determine their most relevant sustainability topics. The results of the stakeholder consultation were taking into consideration and generally validated the experts’ assessment. Fourth, identified impacts, risks and opportunities across the defined sustainability topics were assessed and scored by subject matter experts in dedicated workshops to determine impact materiality and financial materiality. Finally, topics were prioritized by defining a threshold and considering the results of the previous steps.

This process included a high-level value chain assessment to identify potential impacts, risks, or opportunities likely to arise in OMV’s business divisions and value chain steps. Each impact, risk, and opportunity is linked to at least one OMV business segment (Energy, Fuels & Feedstock, Chemicals) and applicable value chain steps.

The resources we used included internal data (e.g., data collection: quantitative data reports, qualitative reports, internal regulations), third-party data, the judgment of internal subject matter experts, and stakeholder consultations through an online survey to validate and inform subject matter experts’ evaluations.

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53b-i] The materiality impact assessment was conducted for all three of OMV’s business segments, Chemicals, Fuels & Feedstock, and Energy, including the value chain as described under ESRS 2-SBM-1.42c. OMV’s business segments geographical footprint spans Europe, the Middle East, North America, and Asia. OMV prioritized high-risk areas, including regions with stringent regulatory environments or sensitive ecosystems, and closely monitors operations involving resource extraction and refining.

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53d] The results of the materiality assessment were presented and discussed with Senior Management in the Sustainability Coordination Forum and finally approved. The final results were then approved by the OMV Executive Board. The sustainability reporting process, shaped by the results of the materiality assessment, is governed by the Sustainability Directive and the “manage sustainability reporting” process. Both the Directive and the process are integral components of OMV’s overall management framework. The Sustainability Statement, included in the OMV Annual Report, is approved by the OMV Executive Board and the Supervisory Board. ESG topics are also integrated into investment decision-making processes aiming to align investments with sustainability targets. Motions for Executive Board investment decisions include core Environmental and Social (E&S) elements. These elements encompass a wide range of factors that ensure negative impacts and risks are addressed while affirming OMV’s commitment to making positive contributions.

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53b, 53b-iv] The inside-out impact refers to the positive or negative effects of OMV’s regular business or unplanned events and impacts on the environment (air, water, soil, resources, biodiversity) or people (health, safety, socio-economic development and equity, employees, human rights). Impacts were assessed across the Company’s operations and business relationships using the criteria: scale (seriousness of impact), scope (extent), remediability (possibility and extent of restoring the environment or affected individuals), and likelihood (potential impacts), all rated on a scale of 1 to 5. Additionally, potential human rights impacts were considered. Negative impacts were scored based on their severity (scale, scope, and remediability) and likelihood. Positive impacts were scored based on their scale, scope and likelihood. For a potential human rights negative impact, severity took precedence over likelihood. The evaluation considered both positive or negative impacts and their time horizons. For environmental topics, an impact threshold of 8, as recommended by EFRAG, was used due to the availability of established data. For social and governance aspects, OMV adopted a threshold of 5, in order to ensure comprehensive oversight.

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53b-ii] OMV evaluates impacts arising from its own operations as described in IRO 1.53a (e.g., data collection: quantitative data reports, qualitative reports, internal regulations, the judgment of internal subject matter experts) and those resulting from its business relationships. For business relationships, OMV scrutinizes partners and suppliers to ensure alignment with ethical practices and compliance with human rights standards. Regular assessments and audits help identify and address potential risks for both our own operations and business relationships. This holistic approach ensures responsible practices throughout OMV’s value chain, fostering sustainability and minimizing adverse impacts on communities and the environment. [ESRS 2-IRO-1.53b-iii] As described in more detail above, OMV consulted with internal and external stakeholders through an online survey during the materiality assessment. The materiality assessment process was carried out using a top-down approach, relying mainly on the expertise and knowledge of subject matter experts. [ESRS 2-IRO-1.53c-ii] OMV’s definition of risk (outside-in view) represents the uncertainty in OMV objectives, measured by the likelihood or frequency of an event and its consequences, which can result in opportunities (upside) or threats (downside). The risks and opportunities identified refer to potential future events that could adversely affect or enhance OMV’s objectives over various time horizons. Dependencies on natural, human, and social resources, such as regulations related to emissions, energy efficiency, and the increasing share of renewables in the energy mix – which might result in decreased fossil fuel production and loss of sales/revenue – were considered.

The risks and opportunities were assessed against the following set of criteria: magnitude of financial effect (on a scale of 0-none to 3-high) and likelihood of occurrence (on a scale from 0-never to 5-guaranteed). Risk management experts were consulted during the assessment as needed. The financial materiality threshold was defined as 1.5, covering the high and upper range of medium financial effects as material.

The OMV Risk Universe was adapted to incorporate the full spectrum of ESG impacts, risks, and opportunities that can manifest in different forms and change from year to year. The OMV Risk Universe is reviewed annually based on Group requirements. The top-down strategic risk management process is conducted annually to assess and manage risks related to OMV’s strategy, considering internal and external contexts to preserve shareholder and stakeholder value. This process involves long-term risk evaluations and opportunities recognized as part of OMV’s strategic risk profile, identified through scenario modeling or interviews with top management. This process is complemented by a bottom-up, operational mid-term risk management process, which focuses on business uncertainties at the affiliate level and resulting uncertainties around mid-term plan objectives.

Potential risks are linked with those assessed across the organization according to the Enterprise-Wide Risk Management (EWRM) process. Major risks are collected and documented twice a year in a centralized repository, the Active Risk Management System (ARMS), and reported to top management.

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53c i] [S1-AR.45] Understanding the connection between impacts, dependencies, and risks is crucial for effective risk management. When assessing risks, we evaluated the potential impacts on various aspects of OMV and the environment where OMV operates, such as financial, operational, or strategic. On the other side, dependencies can influence the likelihood and severity of risks, and were therefore considered for financial materiality. This means that understanding these dependencies helps in identifying potential points of failure and their cascading effects through the risk events, considering internal and external developments (future requirements for the labor market).

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53c-iii] ESG risks are part of the OMV Risk Universe and they are prioritized in the same manner as any other type of risk by evaluating the potential impact and likelihood to determine which ones require the most attention. The materiality assessment uses existing risk and opportunity data, historical incidents, stakeholder engagement, audits, and sustainable practices to identify material topics and interlinked dependencies. This integrated approach ensures sustainability-related risks are prioritized alongside other risks, supporting informed decision-making and resilient strategy execution. Also see Sustainability Governance.

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53e] The process to identify, assess, and manage impacts and risks is fully integrated into OMV’s overall risk management process and used to evaluate OMV’s overall risk profile and risk management processes. Risks are potential events that, if they occur, can affect OMV’s objectives and have an impact on the environment and society. Details about the process can be found under ESRS 2-IRO-1.53c-i-ii.

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53f] The OMV risk program also includes a structured opportunity management process to identify, mature, and deliver business opportunities across the organization. OMV incorporates this process into its strategic planning, operational reviews, and investment decisions. Cross-functional teams collaborate to identify potential opportunities, assessing their feasibility and alignment with corporate objectives. This holistic approach enables OMV to proactively capture value-adding opportunities, fostering sustainable growth and long-term resilience. [ESRS 2-IRO-1.53g] Information from internal reports, feedback from community grievance mechanisms, operational data, and third-party data were also used during the materiality assessment. This information was primarily sourced from existing ESG topic reporting and workshops with subject matter experts involved in ESG management. Additionally, standards such as GRI and SASB were reviewed to inform the materiality assessment regarding sector-specific impacts. External and internal stakeholders were also included in the assessment. Each value chain segment (upstream, own operations, downstream) was thoroughly evaluated.

[ESRS 2-IRO-1.53h] In previous reporting years, OMV used the Sustainability and Diversity Improvement Act (NaDiVeG) and the GRI guidelines to determine its sustainability materiality. In preparation for CSRD-compliant reporting, OMV completed a comprehensive materiality assessment in accordance with ESRS requirements in 2023, which was thoroughly reviewed in 2024. OMV intends to repeat the materiality assessment at least every three years or if significant changes in the business or market environment occur.

E1 Climate Change

[E1-IRO-1.20a] [E1-IRO-1.21] [E1-IRO-1.AR 11a] The assessment of climate-related impacts, risks, and opportunities as part of our materiality assessment followed the multiple-step process outlined under data point ESRS 2-IRO-1.53a. The Group Sustainability department, responsible for GHG accounting and reporting and sustainability risk management, conducted the impact assessment. Utilizing experts’ judgment and internal qualitative and quantitative reports within the Company, our experts screened operations and plans (short, medium, and long-term) to identify potential and future climate change and energy impacts. Risks and opportunities were evaluated following the same approach. The entire value chain was included in the assessment, aiming to identify both actual and potential impacts, as well as risks and opportunities. [E1-IRO-1.AR 9a] Actual and potential GHG emission sources were identified by screening OMV activities and plans only for our own operations as described under E1, e.g., in the Locked-in Emissions section. [E1-IRO-1.AR 9b] The actual and potential impacts on climate change were assessed as part of the materiality assessment process. See the details in IRO-1-53a/b.

[E1-IRO-1-.20b] [E1-IRO-1.21] [E1-IRO-1.AR 11c] The assessment of physical climate risks follows the Enterprise-Wide Risk Management process. Group Sustainability and Corporate Risk Management collaboratively coordinate a comprehensive analysis of these risks, focusing on several key aspects. They begin by selecting a list of climate change hazards specific to the geographical locations of OMV’s own business operations, based on Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139. Next, the specificity and criticality of OMV’s activities are assessed to better understand how these may be impacted by climate change hazards. Additionally, they evaluate the lifespan of the assets and businesses at risk. The approach to risk management is then developed while bearing in mind that the potential impacts of climate change risks may change over the duration of the business or asset’s life.

With the support of an external consultant who has extensive knowledge and experience, OMV models the physical climate risks, focusing on surface water and riverine flooding, coastal inundation, soil movement, extreme wind, wildfire, freeze-thaw, and extreme heat. The climate change model projects how selected climate-related perils could evolve over time and quantifies the physical damage that could be expected for the asset portfolio. The peril severity is mapped with the percentage of property damage for each asset included in the analysis to understand the potential estimated financial loss, considering the standardized archetypes used to represent OMV asset specifications. The physical risk assessment assumes no significant changes in the replacement value of the assets at risk. [E1–IRO-1.AR 11c] We have considered the potential exposure of our assets to climate-related hazards.

[E1-IRO-1.20b] For the supply chain, an indication of exposure to physical climate-related risks is obtained using a set of climate change risk indicators mapped to the suppliers and their geographical location, in conjunction with the type of services and products supplied.

[E1-IRO-1.20a, 20bb] [E1-IRO-1.21] [E1-IRO-1.AR 11a, 11b] For 2024, the result of the physical risk assessment indicates that the assets analyzed will be largely unaffected by any of the natural hazards until the middle of the century. Up to 2030, the OMV assets analyzed won’t need to adapt to unavoidable impacts of climate change, which confirms that the OMV portfolio is climate-resilient on short-, medium-, and long-term time horizons until 2030, as applicable to business model and strategy.

[E1-IRO-1.21] [E1-IRO-1.AR 11d] The frequency and severity of natural hazards were determined according to the following IPCC climate change pathways: RCP 8.5, a very high baseline emission scenario referred to as “business as usual,” and RCP 4.5, an intermediate emission scenario where global emissions peak around 2040 and decline, stabilizing greenhouse gas concentration by 2100. In addition, OMV performs a robust physical climate vulnerability assessment annually in accordance with the EU Taxonomy. The EU Taxonomy-aligned activities (18.7% of OMV’s total CAPEX was Taxonomy-aligned in 2024) are screened based on business specificity and their geographical location using a set of indices specifically aimed at providing a robust understanding of the changes in future environmental conditions for the respective businesses. For details, see the EU Taxonomy section.

[E1-IRO-1.20b][E1-IRO-1.AR 12a-12c] OMV performs strategic risk management analysis using the risk scenarios to understand the uncertainties around the pace of the energy transition that could affect OMV’s strategy and business model. The main climate-related risks and opportunities (transition and physical) are considered by OMV in its strategic planning or risk management process to determine potential financial implications.

[E1-IRO-1.20c] [E1-IRO-1.AR 12a-12b] The transition risks and opportunities are assessed over short-, medium-, and long-term time horizons as described in the basis for preparation [BP-2.9a], and assessed in the context of the OMV strategy and business model. The transition risks are transversal and thus already well covered by the Enterprise-Wide Risk Management process through a range of financial, operational, and strategic measures that are driven by the transition to a sustainable economy. The following types of transition risks and opportunities are assessed:

• Regulatory, related to policies that promote adaptation to climate change or limit the actions that contribute to the adverse effects of climate change (challenges related to value chain adaptation to the regulatory changes).
• Technological, capturing the downside and upside potentials emerging from technological improvements or innovations that support the transition to a lower-carbon future or energy efficiency.
• Market uncertainties, with a focus on positive or negative market shifts for certain commodities, products, or services (e.g., carbon pricing, oil and gas product demand).
• Reputation, driven by changes in consumer behavior, perceptions of OMV’s contribution to the transition to a sustainable economy, or detraction from the transition to a lower-carbon economy.

[E1-IRO-1.AR 12c-12d] For information about climate transition risk scenario analysis, please refer to Note 3 – Effects of climate change and the energy transition in the Annual Report 2024. Information on identified assets and business activities that are incompatible with or need significant efforts to be compatible is included in section E1, e.g., in the Locked-in Emissions section. [E1-IRO-1.AR 13a-13d] Information on climate scenario analysis is included in Note 3 – Effects of climate change and the energy transition to the Consolidated Financial Statements for year-end December 31, 2024. [E1-IRO-1.AR 15] For further information on base case and “net zero emissions by 2050” assumptions, please refer to Note 3 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for year-end December 31, 2024.

E2 Pollution

[E2-IRO-1.11a] For the identification of OMV’s pollution-related impacts, risks, and opportunities, during the materiality assessment, OMV environmental experts, who are also responsible for pollution-related reporting, screened OMV business activities for actual and potential pollution aspects relating to all dimensions, i.e., air, water, and soil. The screening process involved the assessment of past incidents and potential future scenarios to identify impacts. OMV’s robust environmental governance framework was used for a comprehensive top-down qualitative assessment of impacts, risks, and opportunities. Business-specific inputs have been considered, as have specific inputs from our Community Feedback Mechanisms. Given the complexity and interdependency of environmental pollution matters, OMV acknowledges the importance of a structured and systematic identification and assessment method, such as the LEAP (Locate, Evaluate, Assess, Prepare) approach prescribed by the ESRS. For the first ESRS-compliant materiality assessment carried out in 2024, we have not yet applied this systematic approach guided by a clear methodology. However, in parallel to the materiality assessment and in preparation for reporting, a dedicated workstream has started to develop a LEAP approach that will be used in subsequent years for pollution-, water-, and biodiversity-related matters.

[E2-IRO-1.11b] Internal and external stakeholders, including affected communities, through their proxies were involved during the materiality assessment process. [E2-IRO-1.AR 9a-9b] - 9.b][E2-IRO-1.AR 3] The materiality assessment was carried out mainly using a top-down methodology. While the assessment did not incorporate detailed information about specific site locations, it did rely heavily on the expertise and knowledge of subject matter experts. The identified pollution-related material IROs are linked to OMV’s three business divisions.

[E2-IRO-1.AR 3] During the materiality assessment process for impacts, risks, and opportunities, OMV took into account the provisions outlined in ESRS 2 IRO-1 and IRO-2. [E2-IRO-1.AR 4a] All sub-topics included in the materiality assessment were pollution of air, water, and soil, and they were identified as material for OMV. [E2-IRO-1.AR4b] During the assessment, no dependencies on ecosystems were identified to potentially help to mitigate pollution-related impacts.

E3 Water and Marine Resources

[E3-IRO-1.8a] During the materiality assessment process, OMV environmental experts evaluated business activities for actual and potential impacts, risks, and opportunities related to water and marine resources. The impacts, risks, and opportunities were assessed based on a robust environmental governance framework, with business division-level information considered for the top-down qualitative assessment. The value chain was also included in the evaluation. To identify operations with nature sensitivities, such as activities in areas at risk of water scarcity or water stress, Verisk Maplecroft’s Water Stress Index was considered, the aim being to screen the state of nature including water resources. Risk assessments conducted so far indicate a low to medium water risk level for the majority of OMV’s own operations. The assessment process to scientifically delimit areas at water risk is ongoing, with further details to be analyzed based on the LEAP (Locate, Evaluate, Assess, Prepare) approach and other tools such as the WWF Water Risk Filter and the Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas tool from the World Resources Institute (WRI).

[E3-IRO-1.8b] Internal and external stakeholders, including representatives of affected communities, through their proxies, were involved in the materiality assessment through the online survey. [E3-IRO-1.AR 3] During the materiality assessment process for impacts, risks, and opportunities, OMV took into account the provisions outlined in ESRS 2 IRO-1 and IRO-2. [E3-IRO-1.AR 4a-AR 4b] All water sub-topics, which include the consumption of surface water and groundwater, as well as water withdrawals and discharges, were considered in the materiality assessment. The following water-related sub-topics were identified as material: water consumption, water withdrawal, water discharge, water use, water produced, and generated flowback.

[E3-IRO-1.AR 6] The materiality process concentrated on broader, more comprehensive evaluations and therefore, specific river basins were not considered for the applied top-down approach. However, specific river basin information is considered in the site-specific water management plans for our operations. [E3-IRO-1.AR7] In the materiality assessment OMV did not consider the criteria for defining the status of water bodies according to the relevant Annexes of Directive 2000/60/EC (Water Framework Directive) or the guidance documents provided for its implementation. We will review and consider incorporating these criteria in future assessments.

[E3-IRO-1.AR 15a] [E3-IRO-1.AR 15d] The primary business sectors within our operations related to this material topic are Refining (F&F), Chemicals, and Energy (exploration and production). The materiality assessment utilized a top-down approach, concentrating on broader, overarching evaluations, and did not incorporate detailed information about specific site locations. [E3-IRO-1.AR 10] [E3-IRO-1.15b] Our business does not rely on commodities related to marine resources, given the nature of our operations.

E4 Biodiversity and Ecosystems

[E4-IRO-1.17a] For the identification of impacts, risks, and opportunities, during the materiality assessment, OMV environmental experts applied a top-down qualitative approach to screen OMV’s business activities for actual and potential biodiversity and ecosystem aspects. The value chain was also included in the analysis. In parallel to our materiality assessment, we started to map OMV sites against biodiversity-sensitive areas and to conduct an internal formal assessment for biodiversity risks, in accordance with Environmental Management System policies and the LEAP (Locate, Evaluate, Assess, Prepare) approach.

[E4-IRO-1.17a, 17b] The materiality assessment results will be consolidated with a more specific approach in the coming years, which will continue to follow the guidance and phases of LEAP as recommended by the TNFD. In 2023, OMV started to perform a Group-wide TNFD LEAP assessment to identify and assess nature-related impacts and risks. In the Locate step, all OMV sites were subjected to geospatial analysis to prioritize sites based on ecosystem integrity and biodiversity importance. Various biodiversity data layers provided by integrated biodiversity assessment tools such as layers on protected areas, key biodiversity areas, and IUCN red listed species, as well as freely available layers such as Esri land cover, mean species abundance and water stress were applied. The results of the Locate phase were also used to select six pilot sites across all divisions.

The Evaluate step is based on the direct drivers of biodiversity loss, which include climate change, land use changes, freshwater use changes, and sea use changes, direct exploitation, invasive alien species, pollution of air, water, and soil, and other factors such as disturbances. Additionally, it considers the impacts on the state of species, as well as impacts on the extent and condition of ecosystems, including issues like land degradation, desertification, and soil sealing. During this stage, a corporate impact and dependency register was established by aligning OMV’s activities with data from the ENCORE tool and TNFD sector guidance. The corporate register is used as a starting point for the site-level assessments for the six pilot sites, where the impact drivers are correlated with nature impacts, that is impacts on species, habitats, and ecosystems. To rate the site-level impacts, the magnitude of the effect of nature impacts and receptor sensitivity need to be scored. Dependencies are evaluated in a similar way. The results of the Evaluate phase were used as an input for the Assess step, where risks and opportunities are analyzed. To assess biodiversity risks, OMV makes use of a biodiversity-specific corporate risk register, which is integrated into OMV’s existing HSSE risk management framework.

In the Prepare step, we focused on disclosure, work related to metrics and targets, updating the biodiversity policy, and defining a roadmap for further rollout. As our LEAP assessment is not completed, we cannot disclose a list of material sites yet, nor can we conclude that OMV contributes directly to the impact drivers of land-use changes, freshwater-use changes, and/or sea-use changes. In 2025, we will continue to roll out the LEAP assessment to the remaining priority sites to ultimately yield a list of material sites.

[E4-IRO-1.17c] Following the same scenario used for climate change analysis, the IPCC highlighted how climate change could alter the ecosystems and cause a loss of biodiversity exacerbated by pollution or land use change. By reducing its carbon footprint, OMV intends to minimize the additional stress on nature. In addition, the biodiversity initiatives to which OMV commits are intended to ensure ecosystems protection or restoration that reduces the risk to biodiversity. Nevertheless, OMV commits to further understand the impact of fossil fuel-based business and microplastic on biodiversity. The OMV analysis of biodiversity considers the following dimensions:

• Climate change-related analysis is well covered in E1
• Water is a relevant impact driver to understand OMV resilience using the IPCC climate change scenarios and OMV’s water consumptions
• Potential changes to natural habitats in addition to the factors mentioned above are assumed to have limited implications on OMV activities, considering the nature of the business. This review refers only to the long-term potential implications on OMV’s business, with no analysis of the economic and social resilience in the context of various scenarios used

The materiality assessment determined that there are no transition risks or opportunities associated with biodiversity and ecosystems. This conclusion was reached after applying assessment criteria based on the biodiversity impacts and dependencies.

[E4-IRO-1.17d] The assessment concluded that there are no systemic risks associated with biodiversity. However, it is important to note that systemic risks were thoroughly evaluated and incorporated into the physical climate change analysis. This ensures a comprehensive understanding of potential threats and their broader implications.

[E4-IRO-1.17e-i, 17e-ii] Internal and external stakeholders, including representatives of affected communities, through their proxies, were involved in the materiality assessment through an online survey. The materiality assessment process followed a top-down approach, mainly leveraging the expertise and knowledge of subject matter experts. Consequently, not all relevant criteria were considered, such as specific sites, raw materials production, or sourcing, as our LEAP assessment is still ongoing. [E4-IRO-1.17e-iii] Internal and external stakeholders, including representatives of affected communities, through their proxies, were involved in the materiality assessment through an online survey. The materiality assessment process followed a top-down approach, mainly leveraging the expertise and knowledge of subject matter experts. Consequently, not all relevant criteria were considered, such as specific sites, raw materials production, or sourcing, as our LEAP assessment is still ongoing.

[E4-IRO-1.19, 19a] The assessment by the experts was performed by mapping OMV sites with biodiversity-sensitive areas. We operate inside or near various types of biodiversity-sensitive areas, such as nationally protected areas (NPA), Natura 2000 sites, and key biodiversity areas (KBA). Most of these sensitive areas are Natura 2000 sites. According to our assessments, the total site area in or near sensitive areas accounts for a total operational surface as summarized in the table below. It is important to emphasize that the information provided in the table below is not a statement about negative impacts on sensitive areas. Rather, it merely indicates the proximity of OMV operations to such areas. As our LEAP assessment is still ongoing, we currently cannot say whether the activities conducted at our sites negatively affect biodiversity-sensitive areas.

[E4-IRO-1.19b] In the assessment, we did not consider biodiversity mitigation measures as outlined in various directives and standards, including Directive 2009/147/EC, Council Directive 92/43/EEC, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) as defined in Directive 2011/92/EU, or equivalent national provisions and international standards such as the IFC Performance Standard 6. The directives will be evaluated and potentially integrated in the future. Impacts and mitigation measures in OMV are defined in accordance with the permits obtained for each of our sites. Mitigation measures are applied for significant impacts identified in agreement with the environmental authorities during the regulatory assessment procedure. Permitting and assessment procedures are applicable in all countries in which we operate. When significant impacts are observed or predicted, the mitigation hierarchy is followed, and action planning prioritizes the avoidance and minimization of impacts.

E5 Resources Use and Circular Economy

[E5-IRO-1.11, 11a] The assessment of impacts, risks, and opportunities related to resource use and circular economy was conducted as part of the materiality assessment. The materiality process was carried out using a top-down methodology. While the assessment did not incorporate detailed information about specific site locations, it did rely heavily on the expertise and knowledge of subject matter experts. [E5-IRO-1.11b] One of the steps in the materiality process was consultation with internal and external stakeholders via an online survey. The views of affected communities, through their proxies, were taken into account in the materiality assessment via questionnaires, and we relied on the conclusions from OMV’s community grievances and regular consultations with affected communities to understand their concerns, needs, and priorities. During the materiality assessment process for impacts, risks, and opportunities, OMV took into account the provisions outlined in ESRS 2 IRO-1 and IRO-2.

[E5-IRO-1.AR 7a] All three OMV business segments, Chemicals, Fuels & Feedstock, and Energy, were considered, with a particular focus on Chemicals and F&F, as they are closely associated with resource use and circularity according to the results of the materiality assessment. [E5-IRO-1-AR 7b] We prioritized materials that are relevant for OMV in the circular economy context, such as polymers and chemicals. For waste, we followed the list of existing waste categories in our operations. [E5-IRO-1.AR 7c] [E5-IRO-1.AR 7d] Risks and opportunities were considered as part of the EWRM internal process. The impacts of maintaining a business-as-usual approach regarding the circular economy were not considered as OMV is committed to a net zero transformation journey. [E5-IRO-1.AR 7e] During the materiality assessment, no material risks were identified for the circular economy. [E5-IRO-1.AR 7f] The negative impacts and opportunities are concentrated in the upstream and own operations value chain, including raw materials and services, processing, and manufacturing activities.

G1 Business Conduct

[G1-IRO-1.6] The materiality assessment was carried out using a top-down approach, relying mainly on the expertise and knowledge of subject matter experts, and therefore not all relevant criteria were used in the process, such as location, activity, sector, and the structure of the transactions.