WRITTEN QUESTION E-1355/01

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission

(7 May 2001)

Subject: Electromagnetic pollution

In 1999 the Commission, aware of growing public concern at electromagnetic pollution and the lack of legal provisions on the subject, decided to propose Council Recommendation 1999/519/EC(1) on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz).

Since then, both the rapid spread of mobile telephone masts and the publication of numerous studies on their harmful effects on the environment and health are adding to public concern throughout the EU.

Spain, a country which already has more than 22 000 mobile phone base stations, provides a vivid example of the current lack of legal provisions and the inadequacy of the Council Recommendation on electromagnetic pollution. In the absence of an adequate legislative reference framework, many local councils are opting to adopt municipal orders restricting and regulating the installation of such infrastructure and also taking account of aspects relating to the non-thermal effects of this type of pollution. Moreover, the central government is restricting itself to drawing up a royal decree (future Regulation-Law 11/98) which is to include some of the criteria set out in Recommendation 1999/519/EC.

In Spain, this has produced the paradoxical situation whereby some residents have mobile phone masts located slightly more than six metres away from their homes, which ensures that they are protected from possible thermal effects of electromagnetic pollution but not against its non-thermal effects, a situation which has already been the subject of complaints by people affected in the courts of Valencia, Murcia and Gijón.

The example provided by the experience of Spanish local councils demonstrates the need to standardise legislation and to go further in curbing electromagnetic pollution, which must not be seen solely in terms of its thermal effects.

Would the Commission be prepared to submit a proposal for a directive on electromagnetic pollution which would go beyond the substance of the 1999 Recommendation and include the necessary measures to protect the environment and human health, laying down criteria and limits to reduce or, wherever possible, eliminate such pollution?

(1) OJ L 199, 30.7.1999, p. 59.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2001)

As mentioned by the Honourable Member in her question, on 12 July 1999 the Council adopted Recommendation 1999/519/EC on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) including the transmission frequencies used by mobile telephone systems.

In the face of the very rapid development of these systems and the fears to which they give rise in terms of the health of exposed people, the Commission has decided to take all the necessary precautionary measures. It has therefore asked the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment, attached to the Directorate-General for Health and Consumer Protection, to reexamine the matter and deliver, in autumn 2001, a new scientific opinion on the risks to human health caused by exposure and on adequate protective measures.

The Commission will take any action it considers necessary in the light of the report's conclusions.

The attention of the Honourable Member is further drawn to Community legislation on ensuring that products such as base stations and mobile phones are safe. In order to comply with this legislation (Directive 1999/5/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity(1) and Council Directive 73/23/EEC of 19 February 1973 on the harmonisation of the laws of Member States relating to electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage limits(2)) manufacturers need to ensure that products comply with strict safety standards following the latest scientific advice such as laid down in the Council Recommendation.

(1) OJ L 91, 7.4.1999.

(2) OJ L 77, 26.3.1973.