do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2189/96 by Ole KRARUP to the Commission. Environmental impact assessment directive
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, KRARUP
Subjects: application of EU law, building permit, building regulations, competence of the Member States, directive (EU), engineering structure, environmental impact, environmental protection, national law, public authorities













EUR-Lex - 91996E2189 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2189

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2189/96 by Ole KRARUP to the Commission. Environmental impact assessment directive  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0060 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2189/96 by Ole Krarup (NI) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Environmental impact assessment directiveI regret that the Commission's answer to question E-0771/96 ((OJ C 322, 20.10.1996, p. 6. )) does not deal with all the points raised. I would therefore ask the Commission to consider whether a developer can be considered entitled to proceed with aproject so long as permission has not been given by all the competent authorities under national legislation; in Article 1(2), development consent is defined as 'the decision of the competent authority or authorities which entitles the developer to proceed with the project'.Can a national authority legitimately grant a developer such consent when the approval of one or more other national authorities, required under the environmental impact assessment directive and/or national legislation, has not been granted?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (24 September 1996)Under Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the affects of certain public and private projects on the environment ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. )) there is only a requirement to carry out an environmental impact assessment (EIA) before development consent is granted. It follows from the principle laid down in the definition of development consent that the EIA shall be carried out before the developer is entitled to proceed with the project. The Directive leaves it to the Member States to integrate the EIA into existing planning procedures or into procedures to be established.The Directive does not require that the developer can only proceed with the project when all authorizations under national law concerning the project have been granted. This is a matter of national competence. The matter raised therefore only relates to national law and the Commission has no comments on the precise question asked.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2185/96 by Undine-Uta BLOCH von BLOTTNITZ to the Commission. Study tour of a Slovene delegation on nuclear safety aspects
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: BLOCH VON BLOTTNITZ, European Parliament
Subjects: EU financing, exchange of information, nuclear power station, nuclear safety, technical cooperation













EUR-Lex - 91996E2185 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2185

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2185/96 by Undine-Uta BLOCH von BLOTTNITZ to the Commission. Study tour of a Slovene delegation on nuclear safety aspects  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0090 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2185/96 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Study tour of a Slovene delegation on nuclear safety aspectsThe Commission's Directorate-General IA (external relations) and Directorate B (relations with Central Europe) arranged for a Slovene delegation to do a study tour of various European nuclear plants from 15-19 April 1996. The programme for the tour approximates very closely to a proposal which the European Atomic Forum (Foratom) had submitted to the Commission previously.1. Does the Commission ever call on the Foratom organization to organize study tours or similar awareness-raising activities on the subject of nuclear energy? If not, how does the Commission explain that Foratom's proposal was taken over by the Commission virtually unchanged?2. Who paid for this fact-finding trip, from what resources, and for exactly how much?If the tour was financed by Foratom whether wholly or in part, what is the legal basis for this form of cooperation between the Commission and industry?3. Who took part in the fact-finding tour and how were they chosen?4. How does the Commission ensure that a hearing is also given to anti-nuclear positions in the course of such activities?Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (30 September 1996)The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its joint answer to Written Questions E-2047/96, 2074/96 to 2079/96 and E-2113/96 by Mrs Gredler and others ((See page 75. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2186/96 by Undine-Uta BLOCH von BLOTTNITZ to the Commission. Tariff quotas on pet food originating in the Faroe Islands
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: BLOCH VON BLOTTNITZ, European Parliament
Subjects: Faroes, animal nutrition, import (EU), marine mammal, originating product, pet food, tariff quota













EUR-Lex - 91996E2186 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2186

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2186/96 by Undine-Uta BLOCH von BLOTTNITZ to the Commission. Tariff quotas on pet food originating in the Faroe Islands  


Official Journal C 072 , 07/03/1997 P. 0018 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2186/96 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Tariff quotas on pet food originating in the Faroe IslandsIn the Official Journal of 6 July 1996 the Commission published Regulation (EC) No 1302/96 ((OJ L 167, 6.7.1996, p. 8. )) concerning 'annual Community tariff quotas of dog or cat food and fish food, originating in, and coming from the Faroe Islands'.1. Is the raw material for the finished products covered by the regulation the meat from those sea mammals slaughtered by Faroe fishermen year after year in the most cruel manner in spite of worldwide protests?2. If not, what are the raw materials for the finished products designated by the regulation?3. If so, how does the Commission view the fact that sea mammals protected by international conventions are slaughtered for the manufacture of pet food, and what action will the Commission take to stop this?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (26 September 1996)Commission Regulation (EC) 1302/96 ((OJ L 167, 6.7.1996. )) of 5 July 1996 amending Regulation (EEC) No 641/92 on rules of application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 478/92 for annual Community tariff quotas of dog or cat food and fish food, originating in, and coming from the Faroe Islands, to which the Honourable Member refers, applies to only one of the two tariff quotas provided for in Council Regulation No 478/92/EEC, namely a tariff quota of 5000 tonnes of fish food under CN code 2309 90 41. The other tariff provided for in the aforementioned Council Regulation, relative to 1000 tonnes of dog and cat food under CN code 2309 10 11, was deliberately omitted because:- this product can freely be imported into the Community since 1 January 1996 (under the GATT Agreements);- the Faroe Islands have not exported this product for years, and the company producing it has been declared bankrupt.Contacted by the Commission regarding the remaining quota (5000 tonnes of fish food under CN code 2309 90 41), the Faroe Island authorities certify that no whale meat is used in the composition. These products are composed of about 75% meal or fish oil; the remainder consists of binders (starch) and vitamins.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2187/96 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. UK Hum
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, WHITE
Subjects: United Kingdom, United States, noise, noise level, noise pollution, scientific research













EUR-Lex - 91996E2187 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2187

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2187/96 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. UK Hum  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0060 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2187/96 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: UK HumScientists have identified a phenomenon of a perceived low frequency sound known as the 'UK Hum' which is said to affect 6% of the UK population. 2% of the population of the USA is said to be affected by a similar phenomenon.Is the Commission aware of any occurrences in other Member States of the European Union and, if so, does it have any information as to the geographical distribution?Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (24 September 1996)The Commission has no information about this perceived low frequency sound.No research is currently in progress on this question at Community level.