WRITTEN QUESTION E-1802/02

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(24 June 2002)

Subject: A-8 Cantabrian motorway (Asturias, Spain): compliance with Community law

The projected sections of the A-8 Cantabrian motorway (Principality of Asturias, Spain) that run from Tamón to Otur and from Otur to the border with the province of Lugo, and which are funded by the ERDF, will affect five of the ten Asturian municipalities with the largest milk quotas. The farms concerned have received European funding under a Leader programme. In the last five years, over 400 million pesetas have been invested in more than

200 start-up plans for young farmers and almost 600 improvement plans. A great many of these farms, having received Community funding, will see their activities restricted or curtailed.

This contradictory use of Community funds has been exacerbated by failure to comply with Directive 85/337/EEC(1), as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC(2). The Directive lays down that, for this type of infrastructure project, studies of three alternatives must be conducted, and this has not been taken into consideration. What is more, separate environmental impact studies have been carried out for the same infrastructure project. This method tends towards a positive assessment, and does not give an overall view of the environmental and social impact of the motorway. This environmental impact will be all the more pronounced in the case of the section entering Galicia, as this will run through the Eo Estuary, which is a special protection area for birds and contains flora and fauna habitats protected by the Habitats Directive.

Is the Commission aware of this construction project and the adverse consequences it would have for those five Asturian municipalities?

Does the Commission not feel that, pursuant to Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended by Directive 97/11/EC, the Spanish authorities should consider an alternative that has the minimum environmental and social impact on the area?

What measures will the Commission take, in the case in point, to guarantee compliance with Community legislation in this field?

(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

(5 August 2002)

First of all, I should mention that the Commission has received a complaint raising the same concerns as the Honourable Member regarding the Tamón-Otur section of the A-8 motorway. The Commission is now checking whether the project in question complies with the applicable Community law.

The Commission has not, however, received any reports that Community law has been incorrectly applied with regard to the section between Otur and the border with the province of Lugo. Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, and Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(1) may be applicable to the planned motorway section in question. The Commission has therefore asked the Spanish authorities to submit their comments on the case reported by the Honourable Member and to ensure that Community law is applied correctly in this case.

In addition, Directive 85/337/EEC stipulates that the project categories listed in Annex I, such as the motorway project referred to in this written question, should be subject to an environmental impact assessment. The Directive does not, however, establish the criteria for choosing between the alternatives assessed.

The integrated operational programme for the Principality of Asturias makes provision for the outstanding sections of the A-8 Cantabrian motorway to be financed under the Structural Fund. According to the information received from the Spanish authorities, public utility inquiries prior to the project have been carried out for the sections in question. No requests for cofinancing have so far been received from the Spanish authorities.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.