WRITTEN QUESTION E-2038/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 July 2002)

Subject: European contributions to financing of the controversial extension of the airport of the Bulgarian capital Sofia in close proximity to urban neighbourhoods and residential centres

1. Is it true that PHARE granted the sum of EUR 7,6 million for technical assistance, project planning and supervisory control at a time when a restricted plan costing no more than EUR 184 million, rather than the present USD 254,7 million, was envisaged, and that this sum was granted on the grounds that the first tranche of the EUR 60 million loan awarded by the European Investment Bank in September 1997 would not otherwise be paid, whereas in fact a contribution of EUR 50 million was subsequently made by ISPA in April 2000 while the planning stage was still in progress and before the environmental impact assessment had been completed?

2. Why was the project considered urgent during all its preliminary stages, so urgent that there was no time to consider the many alternatives proposed, and yet five years later, despite contributions from the European Union, the EIB and a development fund in Kuwait, it is still in the development phase?

3. In the opinion of the Commission, is this combination of urgency, financial aid granted at a time when the consequences were not yet entirely clear, an absence of alternatives, and shortcomings in the content and implementation of the environmental impact assessment one which can be repeated in future projects, or can lessons be learned from it so that a more cautious approach is taken in future?

4. To what extent do Greek airport plans mean that there is less need for a large increase in flight capacity in Bulgaria?

5. What are the possibilities at this stage of using the funds available to study an alternative site located further away from the conurbation, so that the harmful environmental effects are minimised and renewed social pressure does not arise within a very short period to relocate to another site?

Answer given by Mr. Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(27 September 2002)

1. The Commission confirms that financial contributions of EUR 4 932 905 and EUR 2 661 005 from the PHARE program were granted in 1999 to support respectively technical assistance for project management and design and technical assistance for the financial and commercial management of the Sofia airport development project.

Subsequently, the Bulgarian authorities applied for ISPA assistance for the construction phase of the airport. A grant of EUR 50 million from ISPA was approved by the Commission for works relating to the new terminal and related infrastructure, following the favourable opinion of the ISPA management committee in July 2000.

The project was in its design phase at the time of the ISPA application, but a full environmental impact assessment (EIA) on the Master Plan for the airport's development had been undertaken by the Bulgarian authorities in 1996 and all the required documentation was submitted to the Commission with the application for ISPA assistance. The recommendations of the EIA were taken into account in the planning and design of the project. Moreover, the ISPA grant was made conditional on carrying out a full EIA on all the sub-projects involved in the development based on the detailed project designs. These assessments have now been completed along with the required consultations of the public and environmental authorities.

2. Large and complex projects of this kind take a considerable time to develop in view of the many technical, financial and environmental factors involved. There is also a need to take account of a wide range of requirement and interests. It is recognised that the Sofia airport project has taken longer than originally anticipated, but it is now past its development phase with the main works tenders having been launched this year (2002).

3. The Commission undertakes an assessment of all aspects of a proposal in order to ensure that projects submitted for assistance meet the requirements of the relevant regulations. It is not always possible to ensure that every aspect of the project is fully defined before approval of the financial assistance, but safeguards are put in place to ensure that the legal requirements, especially with regard to the environment, are fully met by the beneficiary, for example, via the conditions under which assistance is granted.

4. The Commission does not consider that Greek airports represent a realistic alternative to the air transport needs of Bulgaria.

5. The Commission has no plans to fund a study of alternative sites for Sofia airport.