WRITTEN QUESTION E-0518/00

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(28 February 2000)

Subject: Environmental impact assessment and the protection of species

The council of the city of Leverkusen has noted with approval the attached decision on B-Plan No 143/III Hornpottweg and instructed the administration to consider possible planning variants for the link to the planned industrial area.

The area is well-known because of its importance for bird migration and as a buffer zone for the adjoining nature reserve in the municipal area of Cologne, and it is one of the moorland, dry grassland and inland dune biotypes which are at serious risk.

Many of the species relevant to North Rhine-Westphalia according to the EC bird conservation directive (79/409/EEC(1)) and many of the migratory bird species regularly occurring in North Rhine-Westphalia as referred to in Article 4(2) of the EC bird conservation directive for which protective measures are needed occur in this area or use it as a stopover point on their migratory passage. Applications from the Working Party on Biotype Networking of the Cologne, Leverkusen and Rheinisch-Bergischer Kreis groups of BUND (Association for Nature and Environmental Protection Germany) for the area to be protected as a nature reserve have been unsuccessful.

Several points of the environmental impact assessment undertaken in the context of the preparation decision conclude that the project should not be implemented.

1. Does the Commission believe that the EIA is consistent with the new EU directives?

2. Does the Commission agree that the bird conservation directive and the protection of the area as a stopover point for migrating birds should be given a high priority?

3. Does the Commission take the view that the competent authorities should not simply dismiss the clearly adverse outcome of the EIA?

4. Does the Commission agree that particular account needs to be taken of the protection of nature and species in agglomerations?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(11 April 2000)

The Commission agrees that Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds(1) (Birds Directive) is of great importance in each Member State and is to be respected by every competent authority. Therefore the Commission has launched a number of infringement proceedings concerning the realisation of projects in SPAs, in addition to the general infringement proceedings dealing with the failure of Germany to designate sufficient special protection areas (SPA). The Commission also holds the view that nature and species protection is especially important in urban areas.

However, the literature about important bird areas in Europe indicates that there is no site of European importance in Leverkusen (no indication of a national importance or regional importance for the area concerned is known to the Commission). In line with the subsidiarity principle the Commission therefore considers the case mentioned by the Honourable Member falls under the competence of the Member State.

For sites of local importance, even those hosting some species of the Birds Directive or a habitat of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (Habitats Directive)(2), the Honourable Member should address herself to the authorities of the Member State.

The subsidiarity principle is also relevant to the question of how to handle the results of the environmental impact assessment concerning the birds value of the site. Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (EIA Directive)(3) in Article 8 lays down that information gathered pursuant to Articles 5, 6 and 7 must be taken into consideration in the development consent procedure. However, an adverse outcome of the EIA does not necessarily lead to a decision to dismiss the project.

The material provided concerning the consent procedure of the council of the city of Leverkusen on the B-Plan No 143/III Hornpottweg does not prove an infringement of the EIA Directive. According to the consent, a comprehensive evaluation of all different effects of the construction plan has been carried out. The material provided does not allow an assessment of how far the EIA was considered in the consent procedure and public consultations have been executed.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(3) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.