WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2823/97 by Wolfgang KREISSL-DÖRFLER to the Commission. Extension of the Munich-Deggendorf-Prague motorway
Date: 1997-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, KREISSL-DOERFLER
Subjects: Bavaria, Czechia, Germany, combined transport, commercial vehicle, environmental impact, motor vehicle pollution, motorway, road building, road network

30. 4. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134/23

(98/C 134/28)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2823/97

by Wolfgang Kreissl-Do¤rfler (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Extension of the Munich-Deggendorf-Prague motorway

Passenger and goods traffic on the Munich-Deggendorf motorway (A 92) has increased considerably since the
opening of the Czech border. It is now planned to extend the motorway to Prague.

Is the EU involved in any way in the extension of this motorway? Is the extension being financed with

1.
funds from the EIB, EBRD, regional aid, the PHARE programme or any other programme?

Is  the  Commission  aware  of  any  calculations  or  studies  of  increases  in  traffic  and  thus  exhaust  gas

2.
emissions, particularly from heavy goods vehicles, as a result of the extension of the A 92 to Prague?

3.
Is  the  Commission  aware  of  any  environmental  impact  assessments  (EIAs)  or  studies  on  the  effects  on
environmental protection in the Bayerischer Wald? What anti-noise measures will there be for the benefit of local
residents, particularly on the Landshut-Deggendorf section?

Have alternatives to extension of the motorway been considered for heavy goods traffic, eg greater use of

4.
combined transport for this section or improvement of the rail infrastructure?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 1997)

No  Community  funding  has  been  either  requested  or  granted  for  the  extension  of  the  A92  Munich-
1.
Deggendorf motorway beyond Deggendorf to Pilsen and Prague. The European regional development fund does
not in any case co-finance the construction of any motorway in Germany.

The Bavarian authorities have informed the Commission that they have no knowledge of any concrete plans to
extend the motorway. The Commission is aware of discussions which are under way in the Czech Republic on
the possibility of such a project, but no decision has yet been made on the matter. Priority is at present being
given  by  the  Czech  government  and  the  Community  to  the  extension  of  the  D5  motorway  Prague-
Pilsen-Nu¤rnberg, which lies on Pan-European transport corridor No IV.

The Commission is aware that there has been a substantial increase in traffic on the Czech section of
2. and 3.
the existing E53 road from Pilsen to Deggendorf, which is close to its full capacity. It is not aware of any studies
on traffic and emissions increases resulting from an extension of the A92 to Prague, nor of any environmental
impact studies in the Bayerischer Wald.

The Commission is not aware of the extent of consideration of alternative transport modes on this route, but
4.
is, in general, concerned to ensure the modally balanced development of infrastructure links with Central and
Eastern Europe.

(98/C 134/29)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2834/97

by Mar(cid:14)·a Sornosa Mart(cid:14)·nez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Protecting the Pego-Oliva marshes (Valencia › Spain)

Last year I tabled a question to the Commission (E-1387/96) (1) on the Pego-Oliva marshes. On behalf of the
Commission, Mrs Bjerregaard replied on 11 July 1996, stating that the Commission had approached the Spanish
authorities for information on certain work, presumed illegal, carried out in the area, and had reminded them that,
the  marshes  being  a  classified  special  protection  area  (SPA)  under  Directive  79/409/EEC (2)  (the  (cid:145)birds(cid:146)
directive(cid:146)), any plan or project likely to affect them must first be assessed (Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC (3)
on habitats). Mrs Bjerregaard said that the Commission had also indicated its intention to suspend LIFE funding
if the Spanish authorities failed to provide a satisfactory response.