Facts

Blaser AG operates a concrete plant in the municipality of Walkringen and applied for the conversion and change of use of the facility into a residual waste solidification plant. X. and other co-parties filed a complaint against the granted building permit. The Federal Court dismissed the complaint. The main points of the judgment are: - The complainants argued that the project violates the planning obligation in the waste sector pursuant to Art. 31 et seq. of the Environmental Protection Act (EPA). The Administrative Court did not enter into this, as the complainants had not raised this in the objection procedure. The Federal Court left this question open, as it could examine the subsidiary consideration of the Administrative Court on waste planning. - The Federal Court stated that the planning obligation under Art. 31 et seq. EPA is to be handled differently for municipal waste and "other waste". For the "other waste" concerned here, there is only a limited planning obligation of the cantons. - The Federal Court affirmed the need for the residual waste solidification plant, insofar as it is intended to process residues from the incineration of municipal waste. For the remaining part of the plant, it considered the need to be given. - The Federal Court denied the necessity of a structure plan designation and a special land use plan for the residual waste solidification plant. In terms of its spatial impact and spatial planning significance, it does not differ significantly from a production facility in an industrial zone. - The Federal Court found…