WRITTEN QUESTION E-1647/00 by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) and Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Compliance with the Seveso Directive.
Date: 2000-05-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Directive, environmental protection, environmental risk prevention, industrial hazard, location of industry, safety standard

C 113 E/32

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

possession of the Commission(cid:146)s DG XXI, according to a statement by its Director, Mr de Graaf (letter of
23 March 2000 to Italian journalist Fausto Biloslavo), and is being held back on the grounds that it is the
responsibility of the Albanian authorities. For their part, the Albanian authorities say that it is the
European Community(cid:146)s Customs Assistance Mission which is responsible (reply from Director of Albanian
Customs, Petrit Ago).

In the light of the above considerations:

1. Will the Commission make this report public?

2. Will it inform the competent bodies of the European Parliament in good time?

3. Will it say what plausible grounds there may be for holding back this report?

4. What action does it intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 2000)

1. and 3.
The report mentioned by the Honourable Members was established by a joint working group
of Albanian customs officials assisted by experts of the Customs assistance mission in Albania (CAM-A), a
programme which is financed by the Community. The joint working group was formed at the formal
request of the Albanian Minister of finance with the purpose of carrying out the study. The report was
delivered to Mr Ago, the Albanian Director general of Customs, on 29 February 2000. The report is the
property of the Albanian authorities, and as such it is a matter for them to decide whether it should be
made available. The Commission has received a copy of the report and the European Anti-Fraud Office
(OLAF) is aware of it.

2.
As the Honourable Members are aware, the Commission and the Parliament have concluded an inter-
institutional agreement establishing rules on the transmission of documents between the two institutions.
The Commission is seeking the approval of
to deliver the report. The
Commission will keep the Honourable Members informed of any developments in this sense.

the Albanian Government

The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to the reply given to Written Question

4.
E-1367/00 by Mrs Muscardini (1).

(1) OJ C 81 E, 13.3.2001.

(2001/C 113 E/027)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1647/00

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) and Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Compliance with the Seveso Directive

(29 May 2000)

The Seveso Directive is important with regard to the environmental protection and safety standards
required of undertakings.

1.
Does the Seveso Directive lay down the maximum number of potentially hazardous sites which may
be located in any one area? If so, how is this limitation defined (standards, density etc)? If not, is there no
limit at all to the number of potentially hazardous sites in any one area?

2.
Is the Commission aware of any areas in the Belgian Federation where the maximum number of
potentially hazardous sites has been exceeded? If so, in which areas and zones in the Belgian Federation? If
not, will the Commission investigate whether the maximum number of potentially hazardous sites in any
one area has been exceeded in the Belgian Federation?

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/33

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

(17 July 2000)

Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving
1.
dangerous substances (1) (the Seveso II Directive) does not contain any provisions laying down a maximum
number of potentially hazardous sites to be located in a certain area.

However, the Directive recognises that the danger of an accident and its possible consequences may be
increased because of the proximity of certain establishments and the dangerous substances present therein.
It therefore contains a new provision on domino effects that obliges the competent authority to identify
such establishments or groups of establishments and to ensure an exchange of information and co-
operation between the establishments.

Moreover, it contains a new provision recognising that the implications of major-accident hazards should
be taken into account in the land-use planning policies of the Member States. These are obliged to pursue
the aim of the Directive, i.e. prevention of major accidents and the limitation of their consequences for
man and the environment, through controls on the siting of new establishments, modifications to existing
establishments and new developments such as transport links, locations frequented by the public and
residential areas in the vicinity of existing establishments. In the long term, land-use planning policies shall
ensure that appropriate distances between hazardous establishments and residential areas are maintained.
Where such establishments already exist in the vicinity of residential areas, the Seveso II Directive calls for
consideration of additional technical measures so as not to increase the risks to people, in the context of
application of the above mentioned controls. The inclusion of this provision can be regarded as a major
step forward in the process of major accident mitigation.

No. The Seveso II Directive does not establish explicit concentration limits (or maximum numbers) of

2.
potentially hazardous sites in certain areas.

(1) OJ L 10, 14.1.1997.

(2001/C 113 E/028)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1648/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Roadshows by the Belgian Ministry of Economic Affairs and compliance with Community

competition rules

The Belgian Ministry of Economic Affairs organises roadshows to familiarise the public with the Internet.
Apparently only Belgacom and no other service providers have been invited to participate.

Does the Commission consider that this is in line with Community competition rules?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2000)

It would appear from the question put by the Honourable Member that the Belgian Ministry of Economic
Affairs asked Belgacom to organise roadshows to familiarise the public with the Internet, without issuing a
prior call for competition.

In order to determine the scope of the obligations to be met by the awarding authority under applicable
Community law (1), details are required on the subject of the contract concluded between the Ministry in