Doctoral Degree Regulations

DISCLAIMER: The English version of the “Promotionsordnung” should support our international students during their doctoral studies. It is not legally binding!

TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT DRESDEN
Doctoral Degree Regulations for the Faculty of Environmental Sciences
As at 22/08/2014

In accordance with § 40, 88 (1) No. 2, 13 (4) Clause 1 of the law on the freedom of universities in the free state of Saxony (Saxon Freedom of Universities Act - SächsHSFG) from 10/12/2008 (Saxon legal and regulatory code (SächsGVBI), p. 900), last altered on 18/12/2012 (SächsGVBI. p. 568), the Faculty Board of the Faculty of Environmental Sciences at the Technische Universität Dresden has issued the following Doctoral Degree Regulations.

The personal, official, and functional titles as well as the academic degrees mentioned in these regulations apply to women and men equally.

§ 1 Scope

These regulations govern the implementation of the Doctoral Degree Regulations at the Faculty of Environmental Sciences.

§ 2 Doctoral Degrees

(1) The Faculty of Environmental Sciences may grant the following degrees for the Technische Universität Dresden following a doctoral examination procedure.

Doctor rerum silvaticarum (Dr. rer. silv.),
Doktoringenieur (Dr.-Ing.)
Doctor rerum naturalium (Dr. rer. nat.) or
Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.).

In order to obtain the Ph.D., the successful completion of the corresponding study course - abiding by the applicable study regulations - is required.

(2) Based on the decision of the Faculty Board, the Technische Universität Dresden may also award the degrees

Doctor rerum silvaticarum honoris causa (Dr. rer. silv. h. c.),
Doktoringenieur honoris causa (Dr.-Ing. h.c.) or
Doctor rerum naturalium honoris causa (Dr. rer. nat. h. c.)

§ 3 Doctoral Studies

(1) The completion of Doctoral Studies, including a Doctoral Degree, serves as proof of both the particular ability of the candidate to conduct independent research as well as the candidate’s academic education beyond general study objectives within a specific area of expertise. The Results presented in the dissertation must contribute substantially to the further development of a research field, its theories, and methods.

(2) This proof shall be provided through the dissertation (§10) and the public defence (§ 11), except for the case of an honorary doctorate (§18).

§ 4 Doctoral Committees

(1) The committee responsible for doctorates is the Faculty Board. Its Doctoral Board functions as a permanent committee representing the Faculty.

(2) The Doctoral Board consists of the Dean or Associate Dean as chairperson, two lecturers from each discipline, and one postdoctoral staff member from each discipline as voting members, as well as the Dean’s office as an advisory member. The members of the Doctoral Board are appointed by the Faculty Board for a term of three years. Reappointment is possible. With the beginning of individual doctoral examination procedures, the Doctoral Board appoints a Doctoral Committee for the tasks appointed to them (according to these regulations), its chairman, and the reviewers. The Doctoral Board is quorate if at least five members, including the chairperson, are present.

(3) The Doctoral Committee consists of at least four members, which must include the chairperson and the reviewers. Usually, lecturers are appointed to the Doctoral Committee. It is possible to appoint TUD Young Investigators from the faculty as well as other scientists (whether university-internal or -external) with qualifications adequate for habilitation. The chairperson must be a lecturer from the faculty; for reviewers, §10 Section 4 applies. The chairperson cannot be the reviewer simultaneously. When implementing cooperative doctoral examination procedures with a university of applied sciences, a lecturer from said responsible university must be a member of the Doctoral Committee. The Doctoral Committee is quoral if more than half of its members, including the chairperson, are present.

(4) The meetings of the Doctoral Board and the Doctoral Committee are not public. Members are obligated to maintain confidentiality. Doctoral Board and Doctoral Committee decide through a simple majority. In case of a tied vote, the vote of the chairperson is decisive.

§ 5 General Rules of Procedure and Appeal Proceedings

(1) Decisions of the responsible committees for doctoral examination procedures are conveyed to the candidates in written form. Negative Decisions are given by the chairperson of the responsible committee in a notice open to appeal, which must be justified and provide information on the legal remedies.

(2) There is a formal procedure for the appeal against decisions with administrative act quality during the doctoral examination procedure. The Faculty Board is the authority responsible for appeals. The appeal must be filed with the Dean. Decisions during the examination procedure with an administrative act quality are, in particular:

Non-acceptance of the doctoral candidate into the doctoral candidate list leading to the non-admission to doctoral studies, as well as the revocation of the acceptance as a doctoral candidate
Non-commencement of doctoral examination procedures
Non-acceptance of the dissertation
Evaluation of the examination components
Non-admission to re-do examination components
An inconclusive termination of the doctoral examination procedures
Non-granting of the doctorate

(3) Upon a written request, the candidate will be granted access to the doctoral examination records after the completion of the doctoral examination procedures.

§ 6 Admission to Doctoral Studies

(1) Those individuals shall be admitted to doctoral examination procedures who

have earned a diploma or master’s degree at a university or have passed the state examination in an area relevant for the doctoral programme with an overall grade of at least “good”
fulfil the personal conditions for having a doctorate
have not already finished doctoral examination procedures unsuccessfully twice, or who are not already participating in pending doctoral examination procedures
have submitted a request according to § 8 to be accepted as doctoral candidates with all required documents.

(2) Furthermore, those individuals shall be admitted to doctoral examination procedures who

have a diploma or master’s degree at a university or have passed the state examination in a subject which is outside of the doctoral programme with an overall grade of at least “good”
have completed a bachelor’s degree in an area relevant for the doctoral programme with an overall grade of at least “very good”

and have completed the aptitude assessment according to § 7 Section 1 No. 2 to 4 apply accordingly.

(3) Graduates of a University of Applied Sciences may be admitted in a cooperative process.

(4) Those individuals shall not be admitted to doctoral examination procedures who

do not fulfill the conditions of § 1 and § 2
hire or have hired agents for the purposes of demonstrating doctorate opportunities in exchange for money
pay fees as well as make use of free services in connection with the doctoral examination procedures and the preparation for them which contradict the aim and purpose of an examination procedure
perform or have performed paid services in connection with the doctoral examination procedures and their preparation which contradict the aim and purpose of an examination procedure

(5) The Doctoral Board decides on the recognition of international examinations and degrees of equivalent value in consideration of agreements on equivalence. In case of doubt, the opinion of the Sächsisches Staatsministeriums für Wissenschaft und Kunst must be obtained. In cases where applicants are permitted to use a degree obtained from abroad in the form of a German degree authorised to lead to a doctoral programme, this degree shall be recognised as equivalent.

(6) In all cases, the Doctoral Board shall decide on the admission to doctoral studies in the course of the decision on acceptance as a doctoral candidate according to § 8.

§ 7 Eligibility Procedure

(1) For applicants according to § 6 Section 2 No. 1, the eligibility for doctoral studies is determined through an oral examination in the desired field of study as well as to associated disciplines. In order to establish their aptitude for doctoral studies, applicants according to § 6 Section 2 No. 2 must submit a research paper in the desired field of study, in addition to the oral assessment. The oral examination is equivalent in its requirements to those of an oral subject or module examination in a diploma or master’s examination. The research paper is equivalent to a final paper within a diploma or master’s examination. The applicable diploma or master’s examination regulations of the faculty should be drawn on accordingly for the eligibility procedure in case nothing is specified in the following.

(2) The oral assessment is conducted by at least two examiners or one examiner in the presence of an expert observer. The research paper is assessed by two examiners. The examiners must be researchers from the faculty who are qualified to teach. They are appointed by the Doctoral Board upon the collective suggestion of the envisaged academic supervisor and the Dean of Studies of the relevant subject area. Said Doctoral Board also determines the two further examination subjects from the associated disciplines upon the same suggestion. In this respect, a first examiner must be appointed - always from the doctoral field of study - in all cases.

(3) In order to achieve a positive outcome of the eligibility procedure, the oral assessment and the research paper must both be passed with a grade of at least “good”.

(4) The results of the tests in the eligibility procedure is given to the applicant by the first examiner in writing. In the case of a negative evaluation, this shall take place through a notice which can be appealed; the appeal procedure shall also be conducted by the first examiner in consideration of all participating examiners.

§ 8 Acceptance as a Doctoral Candidate

(1) Those who fulfil the admission conditions according to § 6 and intend to commence doctoral studies in the Faculty of Environmental Sciences must request acceptance as a doctoral candidate. A request of acceptance as a doctoral candidate is equivalent to the applicant’s statement towards the faculty of the intention to earn a doctorate within 6 years.

(2) The request must be submitted to the chairman of the Doctoral Board in writing. The following should be submitted additional to the request:

the intended dissertation topic and the desired degree
the written declaration from a lecturer at the faculty or a TUD Young Investigator at the faculty of their readiness to supervise the applicant during the writing of the dissertation according to paragraph 4; for cooperative procedures this should additionally include the written declaration of readiness of a lecturer at the university,
proof of the admission conditions according to § 6
a tabular and hand-signed CV with a description of the applicant’s scientific career including officially certified copies of the documentary proof of additionally completed studies or examinations
a written declaration of any previously unsuccessful doctoral examination procedure
a written declaration that these Doctoral Degree Regulations have been recognised and
the written declaration that a current certificate of good conduct to be sent to the faculty according to § 30 (5) of the Federal Central Registry Law (Bundeszentralregistergesetz-BZRG) has been requested from the responsible registry office.

(3) The Doctoral Board decides on the acceptance or rejection as a doctoral candidate. The acceptance as a doctoral candidate must be rejected if the admission conditions according to § 6 have not been fulfilled. The acceptance must also be rejected if the applicant does not satisfy the personal conditions for having a doctorate. The decisions must also be made in consideration of the certificate of good conduct according to (2) No. 7. The acceptance can be linked with the issuing of requirements, i.e. additional pieces of work or examinations amounting to a maximum of two to three semesters or 15 ECTS, to be completed as part of the doctoral studies and passed with an average grade of “good”. Options for coursework and examinations can be found in the range of offers from the diploma and master’s degree programmes of the faculty. In the event of acceptance, the applicant is registered on the doctoral candidate list to be kept by the faculty; a doctoral relationship is formed between the faculty and the candidate, the applicant receives the status of doctoral candidate and is admitted to the doctoral programme. With the acceptance of the doctoral candidate, the candidate is obliged to abide by the “Guidelines for ensuring good research practice, avoiding misconduct in research and dealing with breaches”.

(4) The supervision of the doctoral candidate is carried out by a lecturer of the faculty or a TUD Young Investigator from the faculty (academic supervisor). In the event that the supervision is not continuously ensured, e.g. if the academic supervisor retires or a contract expires, an additional lecturer or researcher from the faculty who is qualified to teach is supposed to be appointed as a second supervisor. The Doctoral Board decides on this matter. A supervision agreement which follows the recommendations of the DFG and the Graduate Academy of the Technische Universität Dresden must be concluded between the academic supervisor and the doctoral candidate.

(5) The acceptance of the doctoral candidate may be revoked if the status of the completion of the dissertation or the hitherto existing results do not meet the expectation that the doctoral examination procedure can be successfully completed. The doctoral candidate must be consulted before the revocation. The final decision is made by the Doctoral Board. The doctoral candidate may, after being accepted as a doctoral candidate, also notify the chairperson of the Doctoral Board in writing that they no longer wish to obtain a doctorate. All aforementioned cases shall terminate the doctoral relationship with the faculty and result in the unsuccessful termination of the doctoral examination procedures. The doctoral candidate must be removed from the doctoral candidate list.

§ 9 Commencing Doctoral Examination Procedures

(1) Doctoral examination procedures are begun at the official request of the doctoral candidate. The request for beginning doctoral examination procedures must be submitted to the chairman of the Doctoral Board in writing. The request must include:

a tabular and hand-signed CV showing the applicant’s personal and professional career as well as their education;
a copy of the notice regarding the acceptance of the doctoral candidate according to § 8 and officially certified copies of the documentary proof of compliance with any requirements made,
the dissertation in five bound copies and an electronic version on a data storage medium,
a bibliography of the doctoral candidate’s research publications
the written declaration of the doctoral candidate according to the draft attached in Annex 1 and
the written declaration that a current certificate of good conduct to be sent to the faculty according to § 30 (5) of the BZRG has been requested from the responsible registry office.

Furthermore, without a claim for consideration, suggestions for the consultant may be attached. Documents which were already components of the request for acceptance as a doctoral candidate and which require no changes may be recognised as valid.

(2) The withdrawal of the request to begin doctoral examination procedures by the doctoral candidate is permitted as long as they have not already begun. In this case the request will be considered as not having been made. If, after beginning doctoral examination procedures, the doctoral candidate indicates that they no longer wish to continue, this will result in the termination of the doctoral examination procedures and be considered as an unsuccessful attempt at doctoral study. In this case only the electronic copy of the submitted dissertation will be kept in the doctoral records.

(3) The Doctoral Board will decide on the beginning of the doctoral examination procedures. This beginning will be declined if compliance with the requirements possibly bound with acceptance as a doctoral candidate is not proven. Commencing doctoral examination procedures will also be declined if the personal conditions for having a doctorate are no longer given for the doctoral candidate. The decision must also be made in consideration of the certificate of good conduct according to (1) No. 6. Finally, commencing doctoral examination procedures must be declined if there are grounds which would lead to the withdrawal of the doctoral degree. If the doctoral examination procedures are not begun for reasons as per clauses 3 to 5, § 15 applies. In this case, only the electronic copy of the submitted dissertation will be kept in the doctoral records.

(4) After they have begun, the chairman of the Doctoral Board will assign the doctoral examination procedures to the Doctoral Committee for their further continuation; here, § 4 (3) applies. The doctoral candidate will receive a written notice from the chairman of the Doctoral Board regarding the beginning of procedures. The notice to the doctoral candidate regarding the beginning of the doctoral examination procedure also includes information regarding the composition of the Doctoral Committee and the consultants.

§ 10 Dissertation

(1) The dissertation must prove the ability to perform in-depth, independent scientific work. It should contribute significantly to the relevant scientific field, contain new scientific findings, and meet high scientific demands respecting the applied methods and presentation.

(2) The dissertation is an isolated piece of individual work done by a doctoral student. Alternatively, with the written approval of the dissertation supervisor, the dissertation can also be undertaken by submitting a series of professional scientific articles (cumulative dissertation) It must correspond to a monographic dissertation in terms of quality and intrinsic coherence.To do this, at least two topically related professional articles that have already been published in, or at least accepted by, international journals with an evaluation system or specialist publications with an evaluation system must be submitted; however, works published prior to the application for admission as a doctoral student are not permitted. The topical context of the works and their methodical/technical background must be presented by the doctoral student in writing in a separate paper; together with the professional articles submitted, it forms the dissertation. Co-authorships are permitted for cumulative theses if the doctoral student is the lead author of the professional article and their individual doctoral work can be clearly distinguished and assessed; this must be outlined and confirmed in writing by the dissertation supervisor at the beginning of the doctoral process. For authorship, § 6 Section 1 and 2 of the “Guidelines on Ensuring Good Scientific Practice, Avoiding Scientific Misconduct, and Dealing With Violations” (“Richtlinie zur Sicherung guter wissenschaftlicher Praxis, zur Vermeidung wissenschaftlichen Fehlverhaltens und für den Umgang mit Verstößen”) apply.

(3) The dissertation must usually be in German or English. The Doctoral Board decides upon exceptions in consultation with the dissertation supervisor, provided that the doctoral student requests this at the same time as applying for admission as a doctoral student. Full references for the source material and other utilized material must be provided. Work that has already been submitted for previous examinations or graduations may not be used as the dissertation. The prior publication of parts of the dissertation requires written approval from the scientific supervisor.

(4) The dissertation is assessed by three reviewers, who must be established in the scientific field of the dissertation. One reviewer must be an appointed professor of the Technische Universität Dresden in accordance with § 60 or §62 SächsHSFG (Sächsisches Hochschulfreiheitsgesetz [Freedom of Higher Education Institutions Act]). Other reviewers may be TUD Young Investigators from the Faculty, university professors, or junior professors, or they must be able to give proof of Habilitation-level work as a minimum. The lead reviewer is usually the scientific supervisor. One of the reviewers must not belong to the Dresden University of Technology. In the case of cumulative theses, only one reviewer may be a co-author of the professional article on which the dissertation is based. In the event of cooperative doctoral procedures with graduates of a University of Applied Sciences, a lecturer of the University should be appointed as a reviewer.

(5) The reviewers provide the Doctoral Committee with personal and independent reports recommending whether to accept or reject the work as a dissertation. If acceptance is recommended, the dissertation is graded by the reviewers with the following grades:

magna cum laude (1.0)      very good
(particularly outstanding work)

cum laude              (2.0)      good
(above-average work)

rite (3.0)      satisfactory
(work corresponding to average requirements)

If the acceptance of the dissertation is refused, it shall be graded with

non sufficit (4.0) dissatisfactory
(work not satisfying requirements)

To differentiate assessments, the half-grades 1.3 (very good), 1.7 (good), 2.3 (good), 2.7 (rite), and 3.3 (rite) can also be awarded. The grade 3.7 is not permitted. The report by the scientific supervisor should also include comments on compliance with the “Guidelines on Ensuring Good Scientific Practice, Avoiding Scientific Misconduct, and Dealing With Violations”, as well as comments on the collection and quality of data for experimental and empirical parts of the dissertation.

(6) The report should be submitted to the Chair of the Doctoral Committee within three months. If the production of the report is delayed despite repeated reminders about fees, the Doctoral Board may revoke the appointment of the defaulting reviewer and appoint a new one. The same applies in the event that a reviewer cannot produce the report for unforeseeable reasons.

(7) If a reviewer recommends that the dissertation is returned to the doctoral student for amendment or revision, the Doctoral Committee will have decisive power on this matter. If the Doctoral Committee cannot reach an agreement on this, it will call in a further university lecturer as a reviewer, to be appointed by the Doctoral Board at their proposal. The Doctoral Committee may set a reasonable period of six months for resubmission of the revised dissertation. A returned dissertation may only be resubmitted once. For a resubmitted dissertation, new reports - or amendments to existing reports - must be requested from the reviewers.

(8) Following receipt of all reports, the dissertation will be displayed in the office of the spokesperson for the relevant specialist department for a period of two weeks, and the display will be announced. Within the display period, the university lecturer and scientific employees of the faculty have the right to inspect the dissertation, reports and proposed grades, and to submit and justify their personal vote for or against the acceptance of the dissertation to the chairman of the Doctoral Committee in writing. The doctoral student is also entitled to inspect the reports and proposed grades.

(9) Following the lapse of the display period, the Doctoral Committee shall make a decision on the foundations of the reports and the votes submitted on the acceptance or rejection of the dissertation. If the dissertation is rejected, the doctoral procedure shall end; § 12 Section 1 shall apply. A copy of the rejected dissertation shall be retained by the reviewers in the doctoral records.

§ 11 Public Defence

(1) The public defence should show whether the doctoral student can present the results developed in the dissertation and defend them in response to questions and objections in a subsequent discussion; it should also show whether they have a scientific education exceeding that of university study.

(2) Following acceptance of the dissertation, the chair of the Doctoral Committee sets the deadline for the defence and invites the doctoral student in writing. The notification period will be two weeks. The chair of the Doctoral Committee also invites the members of the Doctoral Committee, and publicly announces the date of the defence.

(3) The defence is led by the chair of the Doctoral Committee. It is usually performed in German or English. The doctoral committee may make a decision deviating from this in exceptional cases if the doctoral student, in agreement with the Doctoral Committee, promptly requests this from the chair of the Doctoral Board.

(4) The defence covers the dissertation and the fields of science that the topic of the dissertation is based on or allocated to. It begins with a presentation by the doctoral student, which may not last longer than 30 minutes. In the following scientific discussion, all those present are authorized to ask questions. The chair of the Doctoral Committee may reject questions not relating to the scientific subject. The discussion should last at least 30 minutes and 90 minutes at the longest, to be ended by the chairperson.

(5) Immediately following the defence, the Doctoral Committe decides on its assessment. When doing so, the presentation and the disputation is graded separately with the attributes stated in § 10 Section 5. If the defence is not passed, § 12 Section 2 applies.

(6) If the dissertation and the defence are passed, the Doctoral Committee determines the overall grade for the doctoral procedure. The arithmetic mean of the individual grades of the report, presentation, and disputation is used to calculate the overall grade. When doing so, the second digit after the decimal point is disregarded. The possible grades are:

summa cum laude (1,0) = outstanding

magna cum laude (1,1 – 1,5) = very good

cum laude (1,6 – 2,5) = good

rite (2,6 – 3,5) = satisfactory

non sufficit (3,6 – 4,0) = dissatisfactory

The chair of the Doctoral Committee informs those present at the verbal examination of whether the student has passed.

(7) The fundamental course of the defence must be recorded by a secretary, who is suggested by the Doctoral Board and appointed by the Chair of the Doctoral Committee; the record must be signed by the secretary and the chair of the doctoral commission, and filed in the doctoral records.

§ 12 Reproduction of Failed Doctoral Work

(1) Following completion of the doctoral procedure in accordance with § 10 Section 9 (2) and rejection of the dissertation, the doctoral student may make one further attempt at the doctoral procedure. To do so, they may make a new application to commence the doctoral procedure in accordance with § 9 after six months at the earliest. With the application, another dissertation or a fundamentally revised version of the initial work with the same topic must be submitted. In the event of recommencing the doctoral procedure, the Doctoral Committee that was appointed for the first doctorate attempt shall be appointed again. If the second doctoral procedure, too, ends unsuccessfully, no further doctorate applications to the faculty are permitted.

(2) If the defence is not passed, it can be repeated within the same doctoral procedure once within a year, but at the earliest after six months, upon written application by the doctoral student. The application may be made after 2 months at the earliest. If the repeated defence is not passed or performed within the specified period of time, the doctoral procedure will be terminated.

§ 13 Publication of the Dissertation

(1) The doctoral student is obliged to make the accepted and approved dissertation appropriately available to the scientific community within a period of one year after the defence. This obligation is fulfilled five printed and bound copies on archival, wood-free, and acid-free paper and supplying an electronic version with all images, tables and graphics, whereby the data format and data storage device must be agreed upon with the Saxony Regional, State and University Library of Dresden (Sächsische Landesbibliothek - Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Dresden, SLUB). If third-party rights prevent the publication of previously published professional articles in the case of a cumulative dissertation, references to the publicly available articles shall be sufficient for the previously published parts of the dissertation.

(2) The cover sheet must be designed according to the latest SLUB recommendations. On the back of the title page of all copies, accordance with the original dissertation must be stated, including the title as well as the location and date of the dissertation.

(3) If the dissertation has been altered from the text presented to the reviewers, it may be published as a dissertation within the faculty only with the consent of the supervisor.

(4) The doctoral student must provide proof that the copies have been provided to the Saxony Regional, State and University Library of Dresden in the form of a receipt.

(5) In exceptional cases, to be justified specially, the doctoral committee can allow the submission deadline to be exceeded upon application by the doctoral student. If the deadline set is culpably surpassed, all rights acquired from work within the doctoral procedure and the procedure itself will be terminated without awarding an academic degree. § 15 Section 1 (3-5) applies accordingly in this case.

§ 14 Conclusion of Doctoral Examination Procedures

(1) Following a positive procedure, the Chair of the Doctoral Committee transfers the doctoral procedure back to the Doctoral Board. The Board checks whether the doctoral procedure has been performed without any procedural errors. If it is determined that the procedure has been performed orderly, the Doctoral Board arranges the production of the doctoral degree and striking of the doctoral student off the doctorate list.

(2) The doctoral degree states the surname, first and middle names, academic grade, and the date and place of birth of the doctoral student, as well as the title of the dissertation, the academic degree awarded, and the overall grade. It is produced on the date of the verbal examination, and bears the signatures of the rector and the Dean of the faculty as well as the seal of the Technische Universität Dresden.

(3) The Dean of the faculty gives the doctoral student the degree in an appropriate format as soon as written confirmation of the submission of the copies in accordance with §13 has been received by the Dean’s office. The doctoral procedure is thereby completed. The conclusion of the procedure must be announced publicly to the faculty.

(4) Following completion of the doctoral procedure, the doctoral student is authorized to bear the academic title awarded with the degree.

§15 Termination of Doctoral Examination Procedures

(1) The doctoral procedure may be terminated without a result at any time following the decision to admit the doctoral student if issues arise that prevent the awarding of the academic title. In particular, this applies to deception when proving the fulfillment of admission requirements or doctoral work, as well as to issues affecting the candidate’s personal prerequisites for bearing the doctoral title. Upon the unsuccessful termination of the doctoral procedure, all legal positions and claims that the doctoral student has acquired in the doctoral procedure so far will lapse. They will be removed from the doctorate list. The Doctoral Board will make the decision on termination at its own discretion.

(2) The doctoral student must have a hearing before the termination of the doctoral procedure. In cases of suspicion of scientific misconduct, the “Guidelines on Ensuring Good Scientific Practice, Avoiding Scientific Misconduct, and Dealing With Violations” apply for the procedure.

§16 Withdrawal of Degree

(1) The awarding of the doctoral degree shall be withdrawn if the doctoral student has committed deceit when proving the fulfillment of admission requirements or doctoral work, or other issues arise that would have prevented the awarding of the doctoral degree. The Faculty Board will make this decision.

(2) If the subject-specific criteria for admission as a doctoral student were not met without the doctoral student intending deceit, and if this issue only becomes known following the awarding of the academic grade, this error shall be rectified by passing the doctoral work.

(3) In cases of suspicion of scientific misconduct, the “Guidelines on Ensuring Good Scientific Practice, Avoiding Scientific Misconduct, and Dealing With Violations” apply for the procedure.

§ 17 Structured Doctoral Programme and Joint International Graduation

(1) The doctorate can also be acquired within the scope of a structured doctorate programme or a joint international doctoral procedure, provided that the faculty of environmental sciences or individual university lecturers within it are involved.

(2) The performance of such procedures shall be governed separately for the individual case, or generally between the faculty and the educational institution involved. When doing so, it must be ensured that the doctoral student acquires and proves the qualification required under these doctoral degree regulations. The contractual regulations shall apply in addition to the provisions of these doctorate regulations. In case of doubt, the doctoral committee will make a decision on whether this equivalence is given.

(3) In the event of a joint doctoral procedure, at least two university lecturers from the faculty of environmental sciences must be on the doctoral commission. These university lecturers may only be appointed with the approval of the Doctoral Board.

§ 18 Honorary Doctorate

(1) The honorary award of a doctorate in accordance with §2 Section. 2 honours persons who have acquired special merits in the field of science in which the faculty is involved, and have a special connection to the faculty. The person to be honoured may not be active at the Dresden University of Technology on a full-time basis.

(2) An application for the honorary award of a doctorate can be made to the Faculty Board by at least two professors of the faculty with adequate grounds.

(3) The Faculty Board make a decision on the application by secret ballot. A Doctoral Committee to be appointed by the board and not including the applicants, reviews the merits of the person to be honoured, obtains at least two external reports, and gives the Faculty Board a recommendation for decision. In the secret ballot, all members of the extended Faculty Board are authorized to vote. The decision is made based on a three-quarters majority of those present and authorized to vote.

(4) The Faculty Board’s decision to award an honorary doctorate must be confirmed by the senate.

(5) The honorary doctorate is awarded by giving a certificate signed by the rector and the Dean in an appropriate format. The grounds and merits must be summarised on the certificate. The honorary doctorate is awarded by the rector. The rector may assign this right to the Dean of the faculty.

(6) The awarding of the doctorate must be declared to the Saxony State Minister for Science and Art (Sächsisches Staatsminister für Wissenschaft und Kunst).

§ 19 Entry into Force and Transitional Regulations

(1) These regulations enter into force on the date of publication in the official notices of the Technische Universität Dresden. Upon the entry into force of these regulations, the doctoral regulations of the Faculty of Environmental Sciences of 2 May 2005 become ineffective

(2) All doctoral procedures beginning after their entry into force shall be undertaken on the basis of these regulations. Decisions on admission as a doctoral student that were already made prior to the entry into force of these regulations retain their validity; beyond that, however, these regulations apply. Doctoral procedures already commenced on the date of the entry into force of these regulations are completed on the basis of the provisions of the doctoral regulations of the faculty of environmental sciences of 2 May 2005.

Produced on the basis of the resolution of the board of the Faculty of Environmental Sciences of 28 July 2014 and approval by the office of the Rector of 12 August 2014. Dresden, 22/08/2014

The Rector of the Technische Universität Dresden

Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. DEng/Auckland Hans Müller-Steinhagen

Annex I

Note on the commencement of the doctoral procedure

1. I hereby assure that I have produced the present work without inadmissible help from third parties and without aids other than those stated; ideas taken directly or indirectly from external sources are identified as such.

2. When selecting and evaluating the material and also when producing the manuscript, I have received support from the following persons: ....

3. No further persons were involved in the intellectual production of the present work. In particular, I have not received help from a commercial doctoral adviser. No third parties have received monetary benefits from me, either directly or indirectly, for work relating to the content of the presented dissertation.

4. The work has not previously been presented in the same or a similar format to another examination body in Germany or abroad, nor has it - unless it is a cumulative dissertation - been published. 5. If this concerns a cumulative dissertation in accordance with §10 Section 2, I assure compliance with the conditions specified there.

6. I confirm that I acknowledge the doctoral regulations of the Faculty of Environmental Sciences of the Technische Universität Dresden.

Location, date

Doctoral student’s signature

Annex II

Declaration of conformity:

I hereby confirm the accordance of this copy with the original dissertation on the topic:

“Topic of the dissertation xxx xxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxx xxx xxx xxxxxxxxxx”

.........................................................
Location, date

.........................................................
Signature (first name surname)