WRITTEN QUESTION E-3063/00

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

(2 October 2000)

Subject: Discharge of fuel oil into the River Tajo (Toledo, Spain)

On 1 August 2000 fuel oil originating from spillage from a tank at the plant in Aceca de Villaseca de La Sagra (Toledo) was discharged into the River Tajo. The company which owns the plant and the Spanish authorities admit that the volume concerned was 25 000 litres, although environmental organisations in the region maintain that quantities in excess of that figure have already been removed from the river.

Managers at the Aceca plant took several hours to detect the leak which caused the discharge and to alert the authorities.

It is known that there have been major staff cuts at the plant in recent years, with the result that fewer staff are deployed to monitor the safety of the installations.

Bearing in mind that the discharge will end up in a river which the President of Castilla-La Mancha has described as a sewer full of filth that is still called a river only out of historical inertia and that charges and counter-charges are regularly made by the Spanish Government and the Autonomous Community of Castilla-La Mancha concerning who is responsible for the situation, will the Commission, by virtue of its powers in the field of public health and environmental protection, open an investigation to determine whether the Spanish authorities are conducting proper checks on the installations at Aceca and other plants where potential risks may arise to ensure that situations of this kind do not recur?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 2000)

The facilities mentioned by the Honourable Member could be covered by Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances(1). That Directive requires any action needed to be taken in order to prevent major hazards involving dangerous substances and to limit the impact on human life and the environment of any such hazards. The implementation of Directive 96/82/EC depends on the amounts of those substances present at those facilities.

Article 5 of the Directive lays down the general requirements placed on operators. Article 11 of the Directive sets out in detail the requirements placed on the Member States with regard to emergency plans. Article 14 of the Directive specifies the information to be provided by operators following a major accident. Article 18 of the Directive requires Member States to ensure that the relevant authorities set up an inspection system or other means of monitoring that are suited to the type of establishment in question.

Directive 96/82/EC was transposed into Spanish law via the RD 1254/1999 de 16 de julio, por el que se aprueban medidas de control de los riesgos inherentes a los accidentes graves en los que intervengan sustancias peligrosas. The requirements set out in Articles 5, 11, 14 and 18 are covered by the Real Decreto 1254/1999. This being the case and in the light of the information available the Commission cannot assume that Directive 96/82/EC has been infringed in this instance. However, if the Honourable Member were able to provide information enabling a question mark to be placed over the correct implementation of the Directive when the accident to which he refers took place, the Commission will take care the examine that information very closely in order to confirm compliance with the environmental legislation applying.

(1) OJ L 10, 14.1.1997.