WRITTEN QUESTION P-2368/01

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(2 August 2001)

Subject: High-speed railway in Tuscany and sites of Community importance

Badia di Moscheta (Alto Mugello), a hilly area famed for its beauty and rich in historical associations in the vicinity of Florence, is seriously threatened by the building work on the TAV SpA high-speed railway project and especially the 73 kms of tunnelling currently under construction between Florence and Bologna. The work is causing a loss of significant volumes of

quality water resources, subsidence(1) and the drying up and pollution of Apennine streams of high biotic value. The work also currently represents a threat to the delicate pre-karst ecosystem of Monte Morello which, despite being an extremely valuable habitat in the immediate vicinity of Florence and a regional park designated by the Tuscany Region as a site of Community importance on a par with the Conca di Firenzuola (where the Badia di Moscheta and Valle d'Inferno are located(2) and other ecosystems designated as sites of Community importance (Sasso di Castrol, Giogo-Colla di Casaglia) within the meaning of the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC), will be affected by the high-speed railway project. The Moscheta and Felciaione springs are due to be intercepted in August 2001. This may be delayed by a few weeks as a result of the recent suspension of work due firstly to the intense drainage work in the Marzano tunnel and secondly to the order given by Florence Prosecutor's Office to stop work owing to environmental damage.

Will the Commission intervene to ensure that the building of the high-speed railway link is suspended until excavation methods or alternative routes have been identified to avoid irreversible pollution or interference with water resources in the Badia di Moscheta area, designated by the Tuscany region as a site of Community importance?

Will the Commission take the necessary measures to ensure that other sites of Community importance which are threatened by this project are protected (Monte Morello, Sasso di Castrol and Giogo-Colla di Casaglia)?

Will the Commission check that Directive 97/11(3) on environmental impact assessments is complied with during consideration of the above project, given that the hydrogeological impact has not been sufficiently taken into account?

(1) In Luco di Mugello, in addition to streams drying up, a field subsided to seven metres below its original level.

(2) Site of Community importance 37 within the meaning of the Habitats directive (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7) owing to its special environmental value. Tuscany Regional Council Decision No 342 of 10 November 1998 describes the site as one of the most important areas in the region in terms of conservation of many threatened bird species linked to traditional agricultural environments (ortolans, pipits and quails). Used as a hunting ground by many birds of prey, some of which build their nests in adjacent sites. The area contains scarcely disturbed water courses, with underbrush formations along their banks mainly of the Hippophaerhamnoides ssp. fluviatilis type which serve as a habitat for local fish species linked to quality environments. Mammals include the Canis lupus and, among the vertebrates, it is worth noting the Lepidoptera Callimorpha quadripunctata.

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

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 October 2001)

The project mentioned by the Honourable Member is covered by category 7 (lines for long-distance railway traffic) of Annex I of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment(1) whether before or after being amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997.

Under Directive 85/337/EEC, whether before or after being amended by Directive 97/11/EC, projects falling into Annex I are to be made subject to an environmental impact assessment which should identify, describe and assess in an appropriate manner, in the light of each individual case and in accordance with the Articles 4 to 11, the direct and indirect effects of a project on the following factors: human beings, fauna and flora; soil, water, air, climate and the landscape; material assets and the cultural heritage. This assessment should also address the inter-action between these various factors.

In addition, on the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member, it appears that the project could be likely to have a significant effect on certain sites covered by Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(2).

Under Article 6, paragraph 3, of Directive 92/43/EEC, with reference to the sites which, according to the procedure laid down by the directive, will be listed as Sites of Community Importance (SCI) and which will be designated as Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site's conservation objectives.

However, at present, the above mentioned provision cannot yet be applied. The procedure mentioned, which provides that SCIs are chosen from a list of proposed Sites of Community Importance (pSCI), and then designated as SACs, has not been concluded. The sites presently covered by the directive, included those mentioned by the Honourable Member, are still at the stage of proposed sites (pSCI). With reference to pSCIs, Member States have certain obligations to act in a way so as to ensure that the aims of the Directive are not jeopardised. In particular, they are advised to at least abstain from all activities that may cause a proposed site to deteriorate.

In the specific case, not being aware of the situation described by the Honourable Member, the Commission will take the appropriate steps in order to gather detailed information about it and to ensure, within the limits of the EC Treaty, the observance of Community law.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.