WRITTEN QUESTION E-2251/99 by Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. The location of the Repsol Butano liquid petroleum gas tanks in Alumbres (Murcia ‐ Spain).
Date: 1999-12-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU environmental policy, Region of Murcia, Spain, storage of hydrocarbons

24.10.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 303 E/37

their longer life-time in the atmosphere, can be transported over long distances. The deposition of these
species leads to an excessive supply of nitrogen compounds (eutrophication) of soil and waters while
nitrate and sulphate compounds increase acidity. Both types of impact constitute a serious threat to
ecosystems and biodiversity to which ammonia emissions contribute. Therefore, tackling acidification and
eutrophication requires reducing emissions of ammonia. The Commission is convinced that this does not
conflict with the goal of reducing ozone pollution. On the contrary, the complex links between pollutants
and effects clearly require an integrated approach as brought forward in terms of effect based emission
ceilings for the four relevant pollutants.

(1) COM(9) 125 final, completed by SEC(1999) 2004.

(2000/C 303 E/034)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2251/99

by Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 December 1999)

Subject: The location of the Repsol Butano liquid petroleum gas tanks in Alumbres (Murcia (cid:129) Spain)

The population of Alumbres (Murcia) is extremely concerned by the construction of new liquid gas tanks
by the Repsol Butano company only a few metres from private housing; no alternative site in the entire
Escombreras valley region has been proposed.

Initially, the tanks were to be located 300 metres from the edge of the town. After various protests, they
were moved a further 150 metres away. The local population concerned, given the risk of explosions,
wants them at least 3 kilometres away, as an absolute minimum. The Alumbres area, furthermore, is the
site of no fewer than 14 of the 28 industries classified as harmful, toxic and dangerous in the Murcia
region.

Given that the local people neither enjoy any adequate safety guarantees, nor know what they are
supposed to do if there should be an industrial accident in this Cartagena local authority area, and bearing
in mind the somewhat insensitive response of the authorities, both at local and autonomous regional level,
namely approving measures which have yet to be complied with, I would ask:

1.

Is the Commission aware of the scheme to build these gas tanks?

2. Can the Commission state whether any Community funding has been granted to this project?

3. Does the Commission not believe that the appropriate authorities should draw up a special plan for

the prevention of chemical risks in the locality in question?

4. Can the Commission state whether an environmental impact assessment was submitted, pursuant to
Directive 85/337/EEC (1) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the
environment?

5. Does the Commission not believe that there has been an infringement of the right of citizens to have
all environmental information at their disposal, as laid down in Directive 90/313/EEC (2) concerning
freedom of access to information in environmental matters?

6. Will the Commission seek information as to what measures the competent authorities envisage in
order to guarantee that the project in question is not going to have a serious environmental impact
nor in any way prejudice the quality of life of the people of Alumbres?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990, p. 56.

C 303 E/38

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

24.10.2000

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2000)

The Commission is unaware of the facts mentioned by the Honourable Member.

There has been no funding of the liquefied gas tank farm at Alumbres (Spain) by either the European
Regional Development Fund (ERDF) or the Cohesion Fund.

The facilities mentioned by this question could be covered by Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December
1996, on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances (1). That directive requires
any necessary action to be taken in order to prevent major accidents involving dangerous substances and
in order to limit their effects on both human beings and the environment where such industrial accidents
take place. The implementation of Directive 96/82/EC depends on the quantity of the substances stored in
those facilities. Articles 11 and 12 of Directive 96/82/EC set out in detail the obligations that are
incumbent on the Member States with regard to urgency and intended town-planning-restrictions.
Directive 96/82/EC has been transposed into Spanish law via (cid:145)the R.D. 1254/1999, de 16 de julio, por el
que se aprueban medidas de control de los riesgos inherentes a los accidentes graves en los que
intervengan sustancias peligrosas.(cid:146)

The Commission does not know whether the facilities at issue have been subjected to the impact
assessment procedure provided for by Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment
of the impact of certain public and private projects on the environment. It should, however, be noted that
Article 2 of that directive provides that any projects that are likely to have a significant impact on the
environment, more particularly as a result of their nature, extent or location, must be subjected to an
assessment of their impact before any authorisation is granted. That provision applies to the projects listed
in Annexes I and II to the directive. Article 4.2 provides that the projects listed in Annex II must be
subjected to said procedure if the Member States feel that their characteristics so require. Storage facilities
for petroleum, petrochemical and chemical products are listed in Annex II to the aforementioned directive.
Thus projects falling within this category are assessed in accordance with Articles 5-10 of the directive
where the Member State feels that their characteristics so require. It should be noted that Directive 85/337/
EEC has been amended by Directive 97/11/EC (2). However, under Article 3.2 of Directive 97/11/EC, the
provisions of Directive 85/337/EEC, in the version applying before the amendment, shall apply if a request
for authorisation has been submitted before 14 March 1999.

The information provided by the Honourable Member do not enable it to be confirmed that there has been
an infringement of Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information
on the environment (3). In any case it should be noted that Article 4 of Directive 90/313/EEC lays down
that: (cid:145)A person who considers that his request for information has been unreasonably refused or ignored,
or has been inadequately answered by the public authority, may seek a judicial or administrative review of
the decision in accordance with the relevant national legal system.(cid:146) Directive 90/313/EEC was transposed
into Spanish law by Law 38/1995 of 13 December 1995.

The Commission will contact the Spanish authorities in order to invite them to provide information on the
action intended by the authorities in order to guarantee that this project will not have a serious impact on
the environment and will not impair the quality of life of the inhabitants of Alumbres.

(1) OJ L 10, 14.1.1997.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(3) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990.

(2000/C 303 E/035)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2261/99

by Marie Isler BØguin (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: The recognition of foreign diplomas

(13 December 1999)

The EC Treaty, which provides for the free movement of workers, freedom of establishment and freedom
to provide services as well as the general recognition of educational or professional training qualifications,
is not respected.