WRITTEN QUESTION E-2824/99

by Elisabeth Schroedter (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Transport of large quantities of dangerous waste from Hungary into EU countries

In the next few days 14 000 tonnes of waste and soil residues containing PCBs are due to be transported from Garé in Hungary into European Union countries for incineration although Hungary has sufficient facilities for the incineration and final storage of that waste.

1. Does the Commission know whether and to what extent Regulation (EEC) No 259/93(1) on the supervision and control of cross-border shipment of waste has already been adopted and transposed into national law in the countries applying for accession, such as Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic (the latter two as transport corridors)?

2. Does the Commission know whether the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 relating to preventive environmental protection, public order, public safety and health protection and applicable to transport conditions, carriers and the authorities responsible for authorising such shipments of dangerous waste are actually being complied with?

3. Has the Commission exercised its supervisory powers in this respect, and if so, what was the outcome?

4. Does the Commission believe that the principle of proximity took precedence when the decision as to the place of incineration was taken to transport highly dangerous waste from Garé to distant EU countries?

- If so, how does it justify this decision?

- If not, what action is it taking to prevent any danger to the population and the environment?

(1) OJ L 30, 6.2.1993, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 2000)

Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the Community does not apply as

such to third countries. However, irrespective of future accession to the Community, both Hungary, the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic are parties to the Basel Convention on transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their safe disposal and are therefore bound by the control procedures of the Convention as outlined notably in its Articles 4 to 9.

For the area of the Community, Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 transposes the provisions of the Basel Convention. On the understanding that the shipment in question is an import of waste for disposal into the Community, Articles 19 and 20 of Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 are relevant. According to Article 19 (3), the export country, in this case Hungary, is required to present a duly motivated request to the authority of the importing Member State on the basis that it does not have and cannot reasonably acquire the technical capacity and the necessary facilities in order to dispose of the waste in an environmentally sound manner. Furthermore, import into the Community presupposes notification to the authority of destination, i.e. the Member State of import. According to Article 20 (6), the shipment may only be effected after the notifier has received authorisation from the authority of destination, i.e., the Member State in question. The authorisation may also be subject to transport conditions pursuant to Article 20 (5). The Commission does not dispose of any information which would indicate that the relevant procedures have not been respected for the imports in question.

The Commission as such does not exercise any control functions with regard to specific waste shipments under the Regulation. The supervision and control procedures established by the Regulation and directly applicable in the Member States are applied by the authorities designated by the Member States according to Article 36 of the Regulation.

As noted above, the need to take account of the proximity principle in the case of waste imports into the Community is reflected in Article 19 (3). This serves to transpose Article 4 (9) (a) of the Basel Convention which balances the objective of proximity in waste disposal with the need for waste disposal in an environmentally sound manner.

The Commission does not have sufficient information on the case in question to enable it to assess whether or not the disposal of the waste in question could have also taken place in Hungary in an environmentally sound manner.