WRITTEN QUESTION P-1089/01

by Pier Casini (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 March 2001)

Subject: Road works to improve the junction between the Via Emilia and the SS (state highway) Selice Montanara and link the Via Borghi to the Via Marzabotto, in the commune of Imola

Article 152 of the Treaty establishing the European Community requires the European Union to ensure a high level of human health protection. Community policy on the environment, as specified in Article 174 et seq. of the EC Treaty, is based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken and that environmental damage should be rectified as a priority. The programme of the current (Swedish) presidency of the Council, moreover, reflects its interest in environmental problems. The preventive principle is enshrined in the provisions of Council Directives 85/337/EEC(1) and 97/11/EC(2) relating to environmental impact assessment, which recently gave rise to an action for infringement (1999/2181) brought on the basis of Article 226 against Italy with reference to the legislation of certain regions, including Emilia Romagna. Yet the Commune of Imola has allowed work to begin on the project which is the subject of the present question despite the absence of an adequate acoustic impact study or indeed any form of environmental impact assessment.

The opinion of the regional environmental agency (ARPA) for Emilia Romagna is basically opposed to the projected road works being carried out without suitable modifications. This matter is also the subject of Petition no. 553/2000 to the European Parliament, which the Committee on Petitions accepted as admissible on 24 January 2001.

In view of the foregoing:

1. What immediate measures does the Commission intend to take to ensure the relevant Italian authorities comply with Community environmental legislation, which the Commune of Imola has flagrantly breached, in the light of the settled case-law of the Court of Justice and the position adopted by the Commission itself in drawing up its reasoned opinion in connection with infringement proceedings 1999/2181?

2. To avert the risk of serious and irreparable damage to the health of citizens living in the area concerned and their right to a wholesome environment, what urgent action does the Commission consider it would be appropriate to support to ensure a serious analysis of the environmental and acoustic impact is carried out and to make such an assessment an essential prerequisite for the implementation of the second stage of the project, which has not been started yet and which, unlike the first part, is due to be financed entirely from public funds?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

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

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(25 April 2001)

According to Council Directives 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment(1) and 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997(2), which has modified Directive 85/337/EEC, Member States are obliged to ensure that, before consent is given, projects likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue, inter alia, of their nature, size or location are made subject to a requirement for development consent and an assessment with regard to their effects. Projects covered by the Directive are identified in the Annexes. The Commission has the task of ensuring the correct application of Community law and, therefore, in this case, of assessing whether the Community legislation on environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been correctly applied in the Member State concerned.

On the basis of the information given by the Honourable Member, the work to which the question makes reference, an urban road and a junction with an extra-urban road, could fall either into class 10 d) Construction of roads, harbours, including fishing harbours, and airfields (projects not listed in Annex I) of Annex II of Directive 85/337/EEC prior to the amendments or into class 10 e) Construction of roads, harbours and port installations, including fishing harbours (projects not included in Annex I) of Annex II of Directive 85/337/EEC, as modified by Directive 97/11/EC.

Under Directive 85/337/EEC prior to the amendments, projects falling into Annex II are to be made subject to an EIA where Member States consider that their characteristics so require. However, Member States are considered to be obliged to make a pre-assessment in order to establish whether Annex II projects need to be made subject to an EIA procedure. Under Directive 85/337/EEC, as modified, for Annex II projects, Member States are obliged to determine through a case-by-case examination or thresholds or by the setting of criteria whether the project shall be made subject to an assessment in accordance with Articles 5 to 10.

In order to identify the correct Community law to be applied it is necessary to check when the request for development consent was submitted to the competent authority: projects whose requests for development consent were submitted to a competent authority before 14 March 1999 are governed by the provisions of Directive 85/337/EEC (prior to its 1997 amendment).

The Commission has already opened a complaint on the project and a letter has been sent to the Italian authorities to request information on the issue. The Commission will take the appropriate steps in order to ensure the observance of Community law.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.