WRITTEN QUESTION E-3683/00 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Amounts allotted under and implementation of the Cohesion Fund.
Date: 2000-11-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Cohesion Fund, EU Member State, distribution of aid, implementation of the budget

C 261 E/4

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

to the Ionian Sea, with construction to be completed by
decided to move the outlet
21 December 1998. Nothing has yet happened, with the result that Community water quality legislation
is being infringed. As the biological sewage plant for Levkada was funded by the Community, will the
Commission intervene to correct this error?

for effluent

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

(31 January 2001)

By ministerial order of 2 August 1999, the Greek authorities identified the straits of Levkada as a sensitive
area under Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment (1).
Therefore Levkada town, which discharges its waste water into these straits, should have been provided
with a collecting system and facilities for the stringent treatment of waste water by 31 December 1998.
Such treatment must include secondary treatment, i.e. biological treatment, followed by tertiary treatment
to reduce nitrogen and phosphorous pollution in the waste water.

In 1999 the Commission began checking the situation in all the agglomerations in the Community which
discharge their waste water into sensitive areas as defined in the Directive. A consolidated report will be
published at the beginning of 2001. The information forwarded by the Greek authorities in 1999 and
2000 indicates that almost none of the 40 agglomerations in Greece which discharge their waste water
into sensitive areas and should therefore have been provided with appropriate collecting and treatment
systems by 31 December 1998 had, by that date, met the requirements of the Directive. In 1999 the
processing capacity of Levkada(cid:146)s waste water treatment plant was still insufficient and the authorities said
that major work had to be done to complete it. This tallies with the information provided by the
Honourable Member. The work funded by the Community was necessary but additional investment is
needed for the plant to meet the requirements of the Directive.

In these circumstances, the Commission intends to initiate infringement proceedings against Greece in
respect of all the agglomerations which do not meet the requirements of the Directive, including Levkada,
and it will ask Greece to take the necessary measures to ensure that its collecting and treatment systems
conform to the provisions thereof.

The authorities concerned have not presented any request for cofinancing of the work on the plant. If they
do, it will be examined in accordance with the project assessment and selection procedures laid down in
national and Community legislation.

(1) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991.

(2001/C 261 E/005)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3683/00

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 November 2000)

Subject: Amounts allotted under and implementation of the Cohesion Fund

Can the Commission say what aggregate amounts were allotted to each Member State under the Cohesion
Fund during the 1994-1999 programming period and what was the out-turn in each country?

Can it say what aggregate amounts have been allotted to each Member State under the Cohesion Fund in
2000 and what has been the out-turn to date in each country?

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/5

How does the Commission view out-turn of the Cohesion Fund during the 1994-1999 programming
period in each of the recipient Member States?

How does the Commission view out-turn of the Cohesion Fund so far in the year 2000 in each of the
recipient Member States?

Does it have any means of rectifying implementation of the Cohesion Fund in recipient Member States that
are not implementing it fully or properly?

Could unused appropriations be transferred to Cohesion Fund countries which are making full and
effective use of the resources allocated to them?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(5 April 2001)

The appropriations allocated to the Member States eligible under the Cohesion Fund in 1993-1999 are
shown in the following table. The rate of implementation of commitment appropriations was 100 % and
all the appropriations available during that period were implemented. Implementation of commitment
appropriations by Member State in 1993-1999 was in line with the allocation by Member State.

Member State

Greece
Spain
Ireland
Portugal
Technical assistance

(€ million)

Implementation
of commitments
1993-1999

2 998,20
9 251,00
1 495,30
3 005,00
8,40

TOTAL

16 757,90

The appropriations allocated to each Member State eligible under the Cohesion Fund and the extent of
implementation for 2000 are shown in the following table.

Member State

Greece
Spain
Ireland
Portugal
Technical assistance

Allocation
2000

1 622,00
447,00
141,00
447,00
2,00

TOTAL

2 659,00

(€ million)

Commitments
2000

Difference
2000

1 490,10
206,40
169,60
377,60
1,70

2 245,40

131,90
240,60
(cid:141) 28,60
69,40
0,30

413,60

Because of the time required to process the new projects submitted for financing from the Cohesion Fund
under Council Regulation (EC) No 1164/94 of 16 May 1994 establishing a Cohesion Fund (1), as amended
by Council Regulations (EC) Nos 1264/1999 (2) and 1265/1999, both of 21 June 1999, (2) implementation
of Cohesion Fund appropriations in 2000 was inevitably concentrated at the end of the year. Indeed, 49 %
of the appropriations were committed in December 2000 and some (€ 413,5 million) could not be
committed before the end of the year. The appropriations not implemented will be carried out to 2001
pursuant to Article 7 of the Financial Regulation (3). The Commission authorised Ireland to exceed its
allocation in order to avoid the risk of losing appropriations if the projects ready for adoption at the end
of 2000 did not permit all the appropriations available at the end of the year to be carried over in
accordance with the conditions imposed by Article 7 of the Financial Regulation.

The difference between implementation and the allocation by Member State eligible under the Cohesion
Fund will be offset in 2001 against each country(cid:146)s forecast allocation.

C 261 E/6

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

lays down an indicative allocation of

It should be noted that Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1164/94, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1264/
1999,
the Cohesion Fund among the
beneficiary Member States for the period 2000-2006. The Commission will do everything possible to
respect these allocations, which reflect a political commitment given at the Berlin European Council. It
should also be remembered that the commitments for 2000 plus those from 2000 carried over to 2001
exhaust the allocation. Adjustments may be made between the Member States eligible under the Cohesion
Fund so that finally these allocations are fully used by the beneficiary countries.

the total resources of

(1) OJ L 130, 25.5.1994.
(2) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
(3) OJ L 356, 31.12.1977.

(2001/C 261 E/006)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3726/00

by Nicholas Clegg (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 November 2000)

Subject: Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted in the UK from unnatural sources

Road transport is responsible for the largest amount of VOC emitted in the UK from unnatural sources.

The stage I Directive (94/63/EC) (1) has been adopted to control VOC emissions from the storage and
distribution of petrol, from terminals to service stations.

As emissions released when a vehicle is refuelled account for even higher levels of VOCs, when will Stage
II recovery controls be introduced?

Furthermore, when will a national standard of air quality to include VOCs be adopted?

(1) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994, p. 24.

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

(1 February 2001)

There are many different sources of emissions of non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs). In
the United Kingdom in 1998 approximately 20 % of total emissions of NMVOCs came from road vehicle
exhausts and a further 7 % from the evaporative losses from road vehicles. In addition, petrol distribution
accounted for approximately 6 % of total British NMVOC emissions. This is to be compared to the
emissions associated with solvent use (27 %), production processes (15 %), offshore oil & gas production
(9 %) and natural sources (9 %).

Regarding air quality standards for NMVOCs the Commission has already brought forward a legislative
proposal for benzene in air which is currently being discussed in Parliament and Council. Legislation for
the other substances contained in Annex I of the Council Directive 96/62/EC of 27 September 1996, on
ambient air quality assessment and management (1) has already been adopted or will be proposed in the
near future.

(State I), was adopted to limit

Parliament and Council Directive 94/63/EC of 20 December 1994 on the control of volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions resulting from the storage of petrol and its distribution from terminals to
service stations,
the emissions of NMVOCs during the storage and
distribution of petrol. In addition, there have been several Directives progressively limiting the exhaust
emissions of NMVOCs from road vehicles and these are expected to reduce emissions substantially over
the next ten years. Furthermore, Directive 98/70/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 13 October
1998 relating to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels and amending Council Directive 93/12/EEC (2)
established the environmental specifications for petrol including the vapour pressure and this is expected
to reduce evaporative emissions during re-fuelling.