EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 33/182

(2004/C 33 E/185)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1862/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 June 2003)

Subject: Conflicting information concerning financial returns from, and the impact on the environment and health of, the expansion of Sofia airport

1. Is the Commission aware of the comments made on 24 April 2003 by 23 representatives of Bulgarian organisations concerned with the protection of nature and the environment regarding the effects of preparations for expanding Sofia airport, according to which: (a) the ‘Internal Rate of Return (IRR) for this project will be only 3,6 % (or 1,5 % excluding the ISPA contribution), whilst the Transport Infrastructure Regional Stud/(TIRS) takes as its basis a figure of 12 to 15 % and, for countries with large debts and a low capacity for repayment, even of 25 to 30 %; (b) there has been no comprehensive environmental impact assessment, contrary to Bulgarian law and to Directive 97/11/EC (1), which means that the ‘Health Risk Assessment Report’ (HRAR) concerning effects on the central nervous system, heart, blood vessels and endocrine system of those living in the vicinity of the airport can only be based on indirect criteria; (c) the HRAR states that the number of persons affected by noise nuisance will not fall, but rather increase, partly in view of the fact that separate noise limits have not been laid down for night flights, although, as from April 2002, night flights are again being allowed, following a short ban; (d) those living in the region will lose their houses and agricultural land without adequate compensation for the loss of employment and home?

2. How is it that this information differs so completely from the arguments put forward by the European Investment Bank (EIB — Info & News, 3.12.2002) and from the Commission's answers to my earlier questions E-2037/02 (2) and E-2038/02 (3)?

3. Is this plan being pushed through at any cost for reasons of supposed economic demand or for reasons of national pride, even if it is not possible to comply with existing Bulgarian national or EU rules?

4. Is it still possible to reach a solution involving agreement between all concerned? What steps is the Commission taking to try to achieve this?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(4 August 2003)

The Commission is aware of the letter of 24 April 2003 from representatives of various Bulgarian organisations on the Sofia airport development project. The Member of the Commission responsible for Environmental policy replied on 21 May 2003 on behalf of the Commission. The Directorate-General for Regional Policy, which is responsible for managing the ISPA financial instrument, sent additional technical information on 2 June 2003.

The internal rate of return which is an assessment of financial flows, is only one factor to be taken into account in assessing the viability of projects of this type. In addition, the wider economic benefits must be considered within a longer term perspective.

The Commission is satisfied that in this case the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) met the requirements of the ISPA Regulation (4). The EIA and associated decisions issued by the Ministry of Environment and Waters made a number of recommendations to mitigate adverse effects on the local and wider environment. The issue of noise protection is being given particular attention by the Sofia Airport authorities who have initiated a Noise Protection Project and Aviation Noise Monitoring and Flight Tracking System.

The Commission is informed that, under the Noise Protection Project, measures are to be taken to protect houses and other buildings falling within the defined protection zone. When the new runway is operational and noise monitoring system in place, the situation will be reviewed and additional measures taken if necessary. Moreover, Sofia airport authority will establish an information point to allow residents close to the airport to be kept informed about measures taken, the procedures, their rights, different technical options, etc.

Matters relating to any compensation for persons undergoing relocation is subject to national legislation only. This does not involve the Commission.

The Commission does not consider that there is any inconsistency between the foregoing and the answers given to the Honourable Member's previous Written Questions E-2037/02 and E-2038/02.

The Sofia airport reconstruction project is being undertaken in the context of the overall development of the Bulgarian economy and is in line with the Union's objectives to contribute to the improvement of transport infrastructures in the candidate countries. On the basis of the evidence available to the Commission, the project complies with relevant Community rules.

With regard to environmental concerns, the Commission has insisted on correct procedures being followed by the Bulgarian authorities (e.g. condition on EIA in the ISPA financing memorandum). Moreover, the Commission has urged the Bulgarian authorities to provide full and regular information on all environmental aspects of the project, including measures taken to implement the recommendations of the EIA and Ministry of Environment decisions. The non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are represented on the ISPA monitoring committee, which meets twice a year in Bulgaria to review progress on assisted projects. The Commission also engages in regular formal or informal discussions and correspondence with the NGOs.

(1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.

(2) OJ C 28 E, 6.2.2003, p. 173.

(3) OJ C 52 E, 6.3.2003, p. 123.

(4) Council Regulation (EC) No 1267/1999 of 21 June 1999 establishing an Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession, OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.