# CE2004078EN.01072701.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/727 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/727

---

(2004/C 78 E/0777)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1826/03

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 May 2003)

Subject:   High-speed Italian transverse rail route: internal market, environmental impact and productivity of investment

Subject:

The Italian Government has revived the projected transverse high-speed rail link (Lyons-Turin-Venice, Trieste-Ljubljana). In connection with the current environmental impact assessment (EIA) for the Turin-Lyons, Milan-Genoa and Milan-Verona stretches, the leading Italian environmental organisations have pointed out that there have been no: cost-benefit analyses taking economic, technical and environmental factors into account; assessments of the direct and indirect effect of the works and of alternative options, including the zero option; credible planning scenarios and clear project documents; studies relating to environmental impact and the full framework of environmental, rural and urban planning constraints.

In particular:

| — | in the case of the Turin-Lyons line, the impact of the works on tourism in the valley (including the initiation of building works lasting several years and requiring the moving of 8 million square metres of excavated material), hydrogeological risks both at the construction and the operational stage, and the impact on Sites of Community Importance (SCIs), particularly the Casellette wetlands and the Foresto nature reserve, have all been underestimated; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the case of the Turin-Lyons line, the impact of the works on tourism in the valley (including the initiation of building works lasting several years and requiring the moving of 8 million square metres of excavated material), hydrogeological risks both at the construction and the operational stage, and the impact on Sites of Community Importance (SCIs), particularly the Casellette wetlands and the Foresto nature reserve, have all been underestimated;

| — | in the case of the Genoa-Milan line, the implications for many archaeological sites (including Libarna), the hydrogeological implications (a 46 km tunnel, quarries, excavation of sections of the River Scrivia), the impact on 4 SCIs (banks of the River Scrivia, Capanne di Marcarolo, Praglia and Monte Gazzo) and one SRI (Arenziarie di Serravalle) and the loss of agricultural land, woodland and countryside have been underestimated; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the case of the Genoa-Milan line, the implications for many archaeological sites (including Libarna), the hydrogeological implications (a 46 km tunnel, quarries, excavation of sections of the River Scrivia), the impact on 4 SCIs (banks of the River Scrivia, Capanne di Marcarolo, Praglia and Monte Gazzo) and one SRI (Arenziarie di Serravalle) and the loss of agricultural land, woodland and countryside have been underestimated;

| — | in the case of the Milan-Verona line, no study is being carried out of the impact on areas of outstanding natural beauty or importance (including ten areas subject to planning constraints in four municipalities in the Verona district) or on the SCI in Laghetto del Frassino, and there has been no discussion of the protection of hydrological resources and noise pollution. |
| --- | --- |

—

in the case of the Milan-Verona line, no study is being carried out of the impact on areas of outstanding natural beauty or importance (including ten areas subject to planning constraints in four municipalities in the Verona district) or on the SCI in Laghetto del Frassino, and there has been no discussion of the protection of hydrological resources and noise pollution.

What measures does the Commission intend to take to ensure that the EIA procedure is applied correctly, not just in form but in substance, so that it takes account of all the above-mentioned factors which have been excluded from the assessment?

Is the Commission prepared to finance the construction of these sections of line despite the absence of any detailed analysis of the productivity of this investment and of traffic flows?

In particular, does the Commission not intend to consider funding the modernisation of the existing railway line in the case of the Turin-Lyons line?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2003)

(20 June 2003)

In all co-financing granted under the budget for trans-European networks (which applies, for instance, to the studies concerning the Lyon-Turin line), the Member State or Member States responsible for the project must make sure that the project is consistent with EU legislation on protection of the environment, and in particular:

| — | Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 (1), as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EE on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (2); |
| --- | --- |

—

Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 (1), as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EE on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (2);

1

2

| — | ‘Natura 2000’ legislation in accordance with Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (3) and Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (4). |
| --- | --- |

—

‘Natura 2000’ legislation in accordance with Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (3) and Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (4).

3

4

The Commission regards this project as being of major importance in redressing the modal balance of traffic between Western and Eastern Europe across the Alps and through Italy. Projections made in several studies by independent bodies and confirmed by the studies undertaken by Lyon-Turin Ferroviaire, the company responsible for managing the Franco-Italian section of the project, show a substantial increase in goods transport throughout the Alps over the next fifteen years; this is certainly not unconnected with the impact of enlargement. For the moment, the major part of the project, including the Lyon-Turin line, is still under study. These studies — co-financed by the EU from the trans-European network's budget — should among other things serve to hone the economic hypotheses and help to design a model for operating the line that should be sufficiently profitable to attract investors, including from the private sector. The studies also include environmental aspects. The questions concerning excavations and hydrological resources referred to by the Honourable Member are therefore part of Lyon-Turin Ferroviaire's work programme.

The EU is already co-financing the construction of access points to the existing Turin-Lyon line. This work is intended to improve its operation and will make it possible from June 2003 to operate an experimental rail shuttle service between Aiton (France) and Orbassano (Italy). However, capacity on the existing line and its technical characteristics are not compatible with the traffic increase expected in the next few years. The existing line therefore represents a bottleneck preventing the railway from being competitive with the road and hampering implementation of a strategy to redress the modal balance in goods transport across the Alps. Accordingly, only new infrastructure with modern specifications will ensure that rail transport presents a credible alternative to transport by road.

---

(1)  OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

1

(2)  OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

2

(3)  OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

3

(4)  OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

4

---