WRITTEN QUESTION E-1656/00 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) and Gianfranco Fini (UEN) to the Commission. Nuclear contamination in Severodvinsk (Russia).
Date: 2000-05-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, EU programme, Russia, environmental protection, public health, radioactive pollution, radioactive waste

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/67

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(16 June 2000)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the replies it gave to Oral Question H-50/2000
by Mr Krarup during question time at Parliament(cid:146)s February 2000 part-session (1) and to Written Question
E-34/2000 by Mrs Kinnock (2).

(1) Debates of the Parliament (February 2000).
(2) OJ C 330 E, 21.11.2000, p. 71.

(2001/C 81 E/080)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1654/00

by Concepci(cid:243) Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Vegetable oil imports from Turkey

Pursuant to Commission Regulation No. 2828/93 (1), the Member States must adopt all necessary measures
to verify the destination and use of oils and to ensure that fats to be placed in free circulation are not
stored with other products.

A case of alleged infringements of public health reegulations has come to light involving a consignment of
vegetable oil from Turkey which was not subjected to all the controls called for by the Regulation.

According to press reports, the State Tax Agency in Spain admitted in June last year that such controls
were not duly carried out.

Is the Commission aware of the above?

If so, what measures has the Commission adopted to remedy the situation?

(1) OJ L 258, 16.10.1993, p. 15.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(19 July 2000)

The Commission was not aware of the case referred to by the Honourable Member. In order to be able to
give a more detailed answer, the Commission would be grateful if the Honourable Member would provide
more information. The Commission would also like to stress that Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2828/
93 of 15 October 1993 laying down common rules on verification of the use and/or destination of
imported products falling within CN codes 1515 90 59 and 1515 90 99, cited by the Honourable
Member, does not deal with public health issues.

(2001/C 81 E/081)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1656/00

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) and Gianfranco Fini (UEN) to the Commission

Subject: Nuclear contamination in Severodvinsk (Russia)

(29 May 2000)

Approximately 1300 km north of Moscow and 100 km from the Arctic Circle lies a city which is closed
to foreigners and almost inaccessible even for Russians, who until recently needed a special passport to
enter the city, Severodvinsk. Built by order of Stalin by some 60 000 prisoners in 1936, 35 km west of
Archangel and on the shores of the White Sea, Severodvinsk is buffeted by year-long polar winds, with
winter temperatures reaching minus 30-40(cid:176)C. It was made into a labour camp, where victims of Stalin(cid:146)s

C 81 E/68

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.3.2001

reign of terror were deported, to be subsequently shot or simply left to die of hardship or cold. Between
1936 and 1953, 25 000 people died there. Today the city has a population of 210 000 and the labour
camp has been replaced by two shipyards. In one of these, the Sevmash, nuclear submarines are built
(though officially snow-ploughs are assembled). This is the shipyard which produced typhoon submarines
(or sharks, as they are known in Russian) (cid:129) the largest and most devastating war machines created by
man, 175 metres long and equipped with 20 intercontinental missiles with multiple nuclear warheads.

In this inaccessible city there is a special hospital to which hundreds of deformed children have been
admitted, children affected by strange immune deficiency syndromes leading to deafness. In 1994 and
1995 a former captain of the Russian fleet helped to draft a report on the critical situation in the area,
which is on the brink of becoming one of the most contaminated areas of Russia, a kind of (cid:145)slow-motion
Chernobyl(cid:146). The shipyards contain storage facilities each containing 12 530 cubic metres of solid radio-
active material, reaching a total of 4 620 tonnes. Until 1991 most of the waste was dumped in the nearby
Kara and Barents Seas, while some was dumped in the municipal landfill site. Nobody will ever know how
much nuclear filth is buried around the city. During the repair of the ships and the refuelling of the
reactors, the shipyards release 10 000 cubic metres of radioactive gas. The list goes on and on.

In view of this appalling tragedy for the inhabitants and the children of Severodvinsk, and in view of the
risk of a new Chernobyl with incalculable consequences not only for the Russians, but for the entire world,
and particularly Europe:

1. Does the Commission not consider it a matter of urgency to discuss the above with the Russian
authorities, within the framework of bilateral relations and the PHARE and TACIS programmes?

2. Does it not consider that, for humanitarian and general safety reasons, EU aid should be made subject

to Russia(cid:146)s firm commitment to resolve this dangerous situation in that tormented city?

3. Does it not believe that protecting the environment from radioactive pollution is a priority issue in the

negotiations on enlargement?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2000)

The Commission is very aware of the disastrous environmental situation, not only in the Severodvinsk area
but also, throughout many regions of the Russian Federation (for example in the areas surrounding
Oziorsk in the Southern Urals, Tomsk and Krasnoyarsk). The Commission is already sponsoring many
projects in the North West region with a budget of about € 20 million and is willing to provide assistance
for the remediation of environmental problems resulting from radioactive waste and spent fuel, within a
concerted international effort. Ongoing programmes wholly or partly funded by the Community in
Northwest Russia include those supported by TACIS, including the International science and technology
centre (ISTC), and International association for the promotion of the cooperation with scientists from the
independent states of the former Soviet Union (INTAS) and other budgetary lines e.g. environment.
A number of reports assessing the situation in this part of the world have already been published.

is being supported to assess the environmental and
Specifically concerning Severodvinsk, a project
radiological consequences from mismanagement of radioactive waste in the two shipyards and from the
discharge of radioactive liquid waste in the municipal sewage system. Contractors for the project have
already visited the city and report good co-operation with local institutes. The results of this project will be
published towards the end of 2001.

It is the general understanding of the international community that, taking into account the immensity of
the problem, joint efforts must play a very important role in addressing the situation. This is the objective
of the discussions on the multilateral nuclear environmental programme in Russia (MNEPR) which have
been under way for more than one year.

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/69

together with the United States and Norway, have made some progress on this
The Community,
agreement with the Russian Federation, but some important issues still have to be resolved (nuclear
liability, exemption from taxes and duties, and access to the sites of implementation). The Commission
wishes to see these issues resolved and the MNEPR signed by the Russian Federation before making further
substantial grants on major investment projects. The Russians are well aware of this position. However, in
view of the urgency of the situation, in parallel to negotiations within the MNEPR, the Commission is
continuing to cooperate with some Member States and third countries including the United States and
Norway, in joint actions in Northwest Russia.

With regard to the enlargement process, the Commission would point out that environment is one of the
points under the accession negotiations. Since the Russian Federation is not one of the accession countries,
the Severodvinsk situation has no direct implications for these negotiations.

(2001/C 81 E/082)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1681/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Buying-out arrangement for Netherlands pig farms

Appropriations intended for running down Netherlands pig herds are being used to buy up pig farms in
Flanders. The Netherlands measure consequently risks overshooting the mark at European level: the
upward pressure on the volume of fertiliser and manure produced in the Low Countries as a whole will
not change.

Since the Commission:

(a)

Is aware of the serious problems with which the Flemish Region is confronted owing to the presence
of significant quantities of phosphates and nitrates (E-2686/99), and

(b) Has brought a complaint before the European Court of Justice against Netherlands fertiliser policy,

a coordinated approach to the fertiliser problem in the Low Countries clearly is urgently required

1. Will the Commission ask the Netherlands government to take action to stop appropriations intended
for running down Netherlands pig herds from being used to buy up pig farms in Flanders, having regard
to the serious problems with which the Flemish Region is confronted owing to the presence of significant
quantities of phosphates and nitrates (E-2686/99), and to the complaint brought by the Commission
before the European Court of Justice against Netherlands fertiliser policy? If not, why not?

2. Will the Commission ask the Netherlands government to take action to stop appropriations intended
for running down Netherlands pig herds from being used to buy up pig farms in Flanders, since the
Netherlands measure risks overshooting the mark at European level (the upward pressure on the volume of
fertiliser and manure in the Low Countries as a whole will not change)? If not, why not, and does the
Commission consider the practice of buying up Flemish pig farms with appropriations released under the
Netherlands buy-out arrangement as compatible with a European approach to the fertiliser problem?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 July 2000)

The Commission is currently examining an existing scheme for the (intensive) livestock sector in the
Netherlands under state aid rules.

The Dutch authorities have confirmed that subsidies can only be granted after approval of the scheme by
the Commission. The statement that Dutch farmers are using subsidies granted for decreasing their pig
stock to buy capacity in Flanders has not been substantiated. Moreover, the Flemish authorities state that it