# CE2004084EN.01042401.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/424 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/424

---

(2004/C 84 E/0494)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0531/04

by Elisabeth Schroedter (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(17 February 2004)

Subject:   Construction of a salt-water spa and discharge of thermal salt water from the spa into the River Spree without an environmental impact assessment

Subject:

A salt-water spa is to be built in the town of Burg in Land Brandenburg, Germany. The plans provide for the thermal salt water from the spa to be discharged directly into the River Spree. As a result, the water quality of the river will deteriorate. Current technology involves compressing and depositing the salt. However, discharging it into the water has been approved without a prior environmental impact assessment. Brandenburg's regional government intends to finance the project using EU funding from the ERDF.

| 1. | Is the Commission of the opinion that an envrionmental impact assessment was required in the above case under the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC (1))?
  If so, does the Commission intend to call on Brandenburg's regional government to comply with EU law?
  If not, how does the Commission intend to guarantee the implementation of and compliance with the EU's Water Framework Directive? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the Commission of the opinion that an envrionmental impact assessment was required in the above case under the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC (1))?

1

If so, does the Commission intend to call on Brandenburg's regional government to comply with EU law?

If not, how does the Commission intend to guarantee the implementation of and compliance with the EU's Water Framework Directive?

| 2. | Is the Commission of the opinion that it is compatible with the principles of the Structural Funds as set out in Article 12 of the Regulation laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (2)) that the construction of a salt-water spa in Burg can be directly supported, or its development indirectly supported, by the ERDF despite the failure to comply with the Water Framework Directive?
  If so, how does it justify this?
  If not, will it call on Brandenburg to repay the funds? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is the Commission of the opinion that it is compatible with the principles of the Structural Funds as set out in Article 12 of the Regulation laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (2)) that the construction of a salt-water spa in Burg can be directly supported, or its development indirectly supported, by the ERDF despite the failure to comply with the Water Framework Directive?

2

If so, how does it justify this?

If not, will it call on Brandenburg to repay the funds?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 2004)

(30 March 2004)

Many of the provisions in the Water Framework Directive (3) are not yet operational. As regards discharges, the Water Framework Directive regulates, inter alia, that point source discharges liable to cause pollution must be subject to prior regulation or authorisation by December 2009 at the latest (cf. Article 11 (3g)). In this respect, the Directive does not require an environmental impact assessment sensu Council Directive 85/337/EEC (4) as amended by Directive 97/ll/EC (5). However, the principles and objectives of the Water Framework Directive must be considered by the competent authority when issuing such a permit.

3

4

5

Moreover, Council Directive 85/337/EEC as amended by Directive 97/11/EC on environmental impact assessment is not applicable in this case.

Although the obligation of prior authorisation under the Water Framework Directive would not be applicable in this case, existing Community legislation such as Directive 76/464/EEC (6) provides for similar obligations. However, based on the information available to it, the Commission has no reason to suspect that the authorisation issued by the authorities contradicts this Directive.

6

In consequence, no incompatibility with Article 12 of the Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (7) could be seen and therefore no payment interruption or repayment of funds is foreseen.

7

---

(1)  OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

2

(3)  Directive 2000/60/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy.

3

(4)  Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

4

(5)  Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC, OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

5

(6)  Council Directive 76/464/EEC of 4 May 1976 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community, OJ L 129, 18.5.1976.

6

(7)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds.

7

---