siteshasgonehandinhandwithadetaileddiscussionofmanagementmeasureswithownersandusers,
while in others there has been virtually no consultation of interested parties. This has caused muchcontroversyinsomeMemberStates,promptingaseriesofadministrativeandlegaldifficultieswhichhavedelayedthesubmissionofproposals.
Itshouldnonethelessbenotedthatlandownersandlocalrepresentatives inevitably considerthe local
interestsofasite,oreveninterestsnotdirectlyrelatedtotheconservationofhabitats.Communitylists,ontheotherhand,arecompiledwithaneyetotheEuropeanconservationinterest,whichmaybedifferent
fromthelocalinterest.ItfallsprimarilytotheauthoritiesoftheMemberStatestostrikeabalancebetween
whataresometimesdivergentinterests.TheCommission,meanwhile,isobligedbyDirective92/43/ECtorefersolelytothecriteriaspecifiedinthatDirective.
(1) CouncilDirective92/43/EECof21May1992ontheconservationofnaturalhabitatsandofwildfaunaandflora,
OJL206,22.7.1992.
(2004/C58E/181) WRITTENQUESTIONE-2417/03
byEskoSeppänen(GUE/NGL)totheCommission
(21July2003)
Subject:Banningtheuseoftar
TherehasbeenabigdebateintheFinnishmediaconcerningamatterwhichasfarasIknowdoesnot
evenfallwithintheCommission’scompetence.IthasbeenallegedthattheCommissionisbanningtheuseoftar.TarisanaturalproductwhichatonetimewasanimportantsourceofprosperityandwellbeingformanypeopleinFinlandandwhichispreparedusinglong-standingtraditionalmethods.OnwhatgroundsdoestheCommissionproposetobantheuseoftarforanypurpose(includingcaulkingboats,etc.)andwhatisthelegalbasisfortheproposedban?
AnswergivenbyMrsWallströmonbehalfoftheCommission
(11September2003)
TheCommissionwouldliketodrawtheattentionoftheHonourableMembertothefactthatthereare
differenttypesoftarincludingcoaltarandwoodtar,whichareproducedbydistillationofcoalandwoodrespectively.Itistherefore,strictlyspeaking,notcorrecttorefertothemasnaturalproducts.Inaddition,itiswellknownthattarscontainalargenumberofverydangeroussubstances,inparticularcarcinogenicsubstances,suchaspolycyclicaromatichydrocarbons(PAH).
Inhisquestion,theHonourableMemberisprobablyreferringtowoodtar,andmorespecificallypinetar,
whichisproducedbydrydistillationofpinewoodandisusedforthepurposeofwoodpreservation.
WoodpreservativesareregulatedbyDirective98/8/ECoftheParliamentandtheCouncilof16February
1998ontheplacingofbiocidalproductsonthemarket(
1).Amongotherthings,theDirectiveestablishes
thatonlyauthorisedbiocidalproductsmaybeplacedonthemarketandusedandthatonlyproductscontainingactivesubstanceslistedinAnnexIorIAoftheDirectivecanbeauthorised.Foranactivesubstancetobelisted,acomprehensivedossierhastobesubmittedthatallowstheevaluationofallriskstohumanhealthandtheenvironmentposedbythesubstance.
TheDirectiveforeseesthatduringa10-yeartransitionperiod,allexistingactivesubstances(i.e.those
alreadyonthemarketinbiocidesatthedateofentryintoforceoftheDirective)willhavetobeevaluatedwithregardtotheirsafetyforhumanhealthandtheenvironment.AccordingtoRegulation(EC)No1896/2000of7September2000onthefirstphaseoftheprogrammereferredtoinArticle16(2)ofDirective98/8/EC(
2),existingactivesubtanceshadtobeidentifiedby28March2002,andthosewhichoperators
wouldliketohaveincludedinAnnexIorIAoftheDirectivehadtonotifythembythesamedate.Altogetherabout950substanceshavebeenidentified(amongthemalsopinetar)andabout400notified.C58E/168 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
The Commission will soon adopt a Regulation that will contain the lists of identified and notified
substances as well as the workplan for the submission of complete dossiers and their evaluation(forexample,dossiersforwoodpreservativeswillhavetobesubmittedby28March2004).TheStandingCommitteeonBiocidalproductsgaveafavourableopiniononthedraftRegulationon11June2003andtheParliamenthasbeendulyinformedofthedrafttextandtheoutcomeofthevote.
Substancesthathavebeennotifiedcanstayonthemarketuntiladecisionontheacceptabilityoftherisks
tohumanhealthandtheenvironmenthasbeentaken.Forsubstancesthathaveonlybeenidentified,nooperatorwillsubmitacompletedossierandthereforetheirsafetyforhumanhealthortheenvironmentcannotbeevaluated.TheRegulationwillthereforelaydownthatsuchsubstanceswillhavetobephasedoutwithinaperiodofgraceofthreeyearsfromadoptionoftheRegulation.
Thiswillapplytoallthe550substancesthathaveonlybeenidentifiedincludingpinetar.However,atany
timeacompanyortheauthoritiesofMemberStatescouldproduceacompletedossierthatwouldallowtheevaluationofthesubstance,whichcouldleadtoitsinclusionintooneoftheAnnexesofDirective98/8/ECanditscontinueduse,providedthatallsafetyrequirementsoftheDirectivearefulfilled.TheFinnishauthoritieshavealreadyraisedthespecificissueofpinetarintheframeworkoftheimplementationoftheDirectiveandfurtherinformationcanbefoundontheCommission’swebsite(
3)andthewebsiteofthe
Finnishauthorities(4).
(1) OJL123,24.4.1998.
(2) OJL228,8.9.2000.
(3) http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/biocides/manualofdecisions030618.pdf(pages27/28ofthedocument).
(4) http://www.ymparisto.fi/ympsuo/kemik/terva.htm
(2004/C58E/182) WRITTENQUESTIONE-2435/03
byIldaFigueiredo(GUE/NGL)totheCommission
(22July2003)
Subject:Restrictionsonthemovementofheavyvehicles
Morethan40000PortugueseprofessionaldriversregularlycrossvariousEuropeanUnioncountriesinthe
courseoftheirworkforhaulagecompaniestransportingheavygoods.
Thereareanumberofrestrictionsonthemovementofheavygoodsvehicles,asisthecaseinFrance,
wherevehiclesweighingmorethan3500kgarenotpermittedtotravelonSundays.
Withoutwishingtoquestiontheneedtoregulatethesector,particularlywithregardtorestrictionson
movement, minimum rest periods and maximum working hours for drivers, there are exceptionalsituationswhichshouldbetakenintoaccount.
Forexample,adrivermaybeonlyamatterofminutesawayfromtheborderbutisnotabletocrossit
beforethestartoftheban,inwhichcaseheisobligedtoremaintherefor24hourseventhoughheisalreadyonhiswayhome.
CantheCommissionsaywhatmeasuresitwilltaketoregulatesuchsituations,afterhearingthesocial
partners(businessorganisationsandtradeunionsrepresenting thesector)andtheMemberStatelegalauthoritiesinvolvedandtakingaccountofthevariousinterestsinplay?6.3.2004EN C58E/169 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion