WRITTEN QUESTION E-2413/00 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Landfill for waste from the city of Logroño (Spain).
Date: 2000-07-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Rioja, application of EU law, domestic waste, groundwater, waste management, water pollution

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/147

By (cid:145)proxy caching(cid:146), does the Council mean network caching in general, or are the Council and the
Commission deliberately excluding all other forms of caching from the scope of the Declaration?

If it is the intention of the Declaration to refer to network caching in general, can the Council ensure that
the Common Position text reflects this?

(1) OJ C 108, 7.4.1998, p. 6.

Reply

(10 November 2000)

The Council has not yet adopted its common position concerning the Directive of
the European
Parliament and of the Council on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in
the information society, to which the question refers. Consequently, the Council cannot comment at this
stage on any statements which it might decide to enter in the minutes of the meeting at which it will
adopt its common position.

(2001/C 103 E/165)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2413/00

by Laura GonzÆlez `lvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Landfill for waste from the city of Logroæo (Spain)

(18 July 2000)

Some years ago, the landfill for waste from the city of Logroæo was redesigned using European funds. This
landfill is currently a source of leachates, which are contaminating the waters of the Ebro aquifer.

Is the Commission aware of this situation? What measures can it take so as to be able to assess whether
the competent authorities are fulfilling their obligations in this case and ascertain whether Directive 75/
442/EEC (1) on waste, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC (2), is being enforced correctly?

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 39.
(2) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32.

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

(14 September 2000)

The Commission is unaware of the facts mentioned by the Honourable Member with regard to the
possible pollution of the waters of the Ebro aquifer caused by the landfill for waste from the city of
Logroæo.

Waste treatment is currently regulated by Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (1), as
amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 (2).

Article 4 of the aforementioned Directive says that Member States shall take the necessary measures to
ensure that waste is disposed of without endangering human health and without harming the environ-
ment, and in particular without risk to water, air, soil and plants and animals, without causing a nuisance
through noise or odours, and without adversely affecting the countryside or places of special interest.

C 103 E/148

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

Under Article 9 of Directive 75/442/EEC, any installation or undertaking carrying out waste disposal
operations must obtain authorisation from the competent authority.

In any case the Commission as guardian of the Treaties will take the necessary measures to ensure that
Community law is complied with in the case in point.

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.
(2) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991.

(2001/C 103 E/166)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2414/00

by Laura GonzÆlez `lvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: Project to build a cement factory and quarry in the Sierra de Alconera

The Sierra de Alconera, the proposed site of a cement factory and quarry, has been identified as an area of
importance for bird life.

Given the great ecological value of
Community directives on the environment, namely:

the area concerned,

the project could constitute a breach of

(a) Directive 79/409/EEC (1) on the conservation of wild birds;

(b) Directive 92/43/EEC (2) on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, and

(c) Directive 85/337/EEC (3) on environmental impact assessments.

What action can the Commission take vis-(cid:224)-vis the Spanish authorities in order to establish whether the
aforementioned directives are being complied with and seek to prevent infringements of Community law?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
(3) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

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

(14 September 2000)

The Commission is aware of the project mentioned by the Honourable Member. A complaint has been
filed on the matter.

At the beginning of 1998 a cement manufacturer declared its intention to build a cement factory and
quarry in the Sierra de Alconera, Badajoz. It requested and obtained from the authorities the expropriation
of several mining concessions. In all likelihood the expropriated land was to be the site for the cement
works. The firm also requested permission to operate the quarry; the request for permission for the cement
factory was delayed. The authorities carried out an impact assessment for the quarry and authorised it on
22 July 1998. The plaintiff opposed the siting of the cement factory on the grounds that the impact study
had been badly done since it had taken account of the quarry alone and the project would affect a valuable
nature area.

According to the information received, as regards Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the
conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1), the (cid:145)habitats Directive(cid:146), these installations
are located within the site of Community importance for birds No 273. Furthermore, the lynx, a priority
species in Annex 2 to the habitats Directive, is present in those parts. Article 6(2), (3) and (4) is therefore
applicable to the case in point.