# CE2004078EN.01004101.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/41

---

(2004/C 78 E/0040)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1670/03

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission

(19 May 2003)

Subject:   Authorisation by the Commission of projects harmful to the Natura 2000 network

Subject:

At the end of April the Spanish press reported the Commission's decision to authorise, for economic reasons, three projects with a serious impact on the environment. The projects are the extension of the port of Rotterdam (Holland), the exploitation of a coalmining area in North Rhineland (Germany) and the building of a new railway line in Bothnia (Sweden). Apparently, in all three cases the Community authorities acknowledged that the projects would have ‘harmful effects’ on protected areas included in the Natura 2000 network.

The decision has aroused great concern among the population and ecologists because, although the deterioration of any natural area is a serious matter, the destruction, for economic reasons, of the Natura 2000 zones which the European Union itself decided to create is even more serious.

Bearing in mind that according to the regulations governing the Community funds projects which damage protected areas or the environment in general cannot receive aid.

Can the Commission say whether it can confirm or deny the information published about the three projects referred to above?

Whether these projects receive any kind of Community funding?

Whether it can guarantee that the principle of trying to find sustainable alternatives was observed appropriately in each of the cases mentioned?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(30 July 2003)

(30 July 2003)

On 24 April 2003 the Commission adopted four opinions according to Article 6 (4) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1) (the ‘Habitats Directive’). These opinions concern an operational master plan of the Prosper Haniel Colliery near Bottrop (North Rhine-Westfalia), a planned industrial area near Siegen/Freudenberg (North Rhine-Westfalia), the Development Plan ‘Mainport Rotterdam’ and the Bothnia Railway project from Nordmaling to Umea (Sweden).

1

According to article 6(4) of Directive 92/43/EEC, a plan or a project may be carried out in spite of significant negative implications for a Natura 2000 site, in the absence of alternative solutions, if it is justified for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature. In this case the Member States shall take all compensatory measures necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected. Where the affected site hosts a priority natural habitat type and/or a priority species, and if considerations relating to human health, public safety or beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment cannot be invoked, the project can be justified, further to an opinion from the Commission, by other imperative reasons of overriding public interest.

The Commission can confirm that, for all three development projects referred to by the Honourable Member, favourable opinions were issued on 24 April 2003, stating that the respective development projects can be executed for reasons of overriding public interest on the condition that the necessary compensation measures to ensure the overall protection of the coherence of Natura 2000 shall be taken. A negative opinion was issued in relation with the planned industrial area near Trupbach/Siegen, as in this case, neither the search for alternative solutions, nor the provision of compensatory measures had been dealt with in a satisfactory way. The four Commission opinions include relevant information on the projects and their effects, as well as on the examination of possible alternative solutions and the planned compensatory measures. The Commission invites the Honourable Member to refer to the detailed text of the opinions for more details on these aspects.

In all three cases mentioned by the Honourable Member the provisions of article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive for authorising projects that may lead to a significant deterioration of a Natura 2000 site were applied and a favourable opinion was issued by the Commission. As a consequence, and insofar as other aspects of the Union's environmental legislation are respected, there is no legal obstacle from this point of view for a possible Community funding for these projects. However, so far the Commission has not received any request in this sense.

---

(1)  OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

1

---