----

(2004/C 33 E/152)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1702/03

by Laura González Alvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 May 2003)

Subject:   Environmental impact of the Arenas-Molledo and Pesquera-Reinosa sections and Molledo-Pesquera sub-section of the Cantabria-Meseta motorway (Cantabria, Spain)

The projected route of the Cantabria-Meseta motorway, and in particular of the Arenas-Molledo, Pesquera-Reinosa and Molledo-Pesquera sections, has caused great concern among local inhabitants, citizens' associations and the public at large, owing to its lack of respect for the countryside and especially for the Saja National Reserve, and to the destruction of an large proportion of the area's historical heritage. Numerous irregularities have occurred, such as the continuation of work on the Arenas-Molledo subsection before the Directorate-General for Environmental Quality and Assessment had reached its decision, and the occupation of land without the requisite compulsory purchase order.

The environmental impact assessments conducted have lacked rigour, and the construction of the Corrales-Arenas de Iguña section of the motorway has had serious repercussions, including the obliteration of Monte Fresneda, the Muriago watercourse and a Roman road.

Is the Commission aware of this situation? What measures will it take to guarantee the application, in the case in point, of Community legislation on the environment, and more specifically of Directive 85/337/EEC (1) on environmental impact assessments and Directive 92/43/EEC (2) on the protection of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(14 July 2003)

The Commission is aware of the facts mentioned by the Honourable Member in connection with the project for the Cantabria-Meseta motorway

In 1997 a complaint was made regarding this road because of the alleged wrong application of Directive 85/337/EEC (3) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Directive 97/11/EC (4).

When the Commission investigated the case, it ascertained that the Spanish authorities had conducted an impact assessment for this project in accordance with the abovementioned Directive. The complaint was therefore closed.

The complainants recently expressed their concern about changes to particular sections of the road.

Modifications to a motorway section are covered by Annex II-12 to the abovementioned Directive 85/337/EEC. The projects included in this Annex are those referred to in Article 4(2) of the Directive which must accordingly be subject to an impact assessment if Member States consider that their characteristics so require.

This Directive is of a procedural nature and obliges Member States to conduct an impact assessment on particular projects which could have significant adverse effects on the environment. Once the assessment has been completed, the competent authority decides whether or not the project will be carried out. The Commission does not have the power to impose the choice of a specific section on a Member State. This choice is exclusively up to the national competent authorities.

According to the information available, the motorway does not cross or border on any site proposed by the Spanish authorities as a site of Community importance pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 (5).

Consequently, and taking account of the fact that the motorway project has been subject to the mandatory impact assessment procedure as required by the abovementioned Directive, the Commission has no power to intervene in this case as it has not been able to establish any infringement of Community law.

----

(1)OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

(2)OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

(3)OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(4)OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(5)OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

----