WRITTEN QUESTION E-4010/00 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Routing of Prague-Dresden motorway via nature reserve and Czech eligibility for joint financing.
Date: 2000-12-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Czechia, EU financing, environmental protection, impact study, motorway, mountain region, protected area

C 261 E/18

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 2001)

The railways of the Member States have all been developed as national systems with different standards
concerning electrification, signalling, loading gauge and other basic parameters. The signalling and safety
systems differ from network to network and obstruct the interoperability of locomotives and trainsets.
Generally a locomotive used in cross-border services must be fitted with the equipment necessary to
comply with the various train protection systems in use on the networks, which is the case with the Thalys
and Eurostar trains operating between Belgium, Germany, France,
the Netherlands and the United
Kingdom. The safety requirements of the networks are laid down in national legislation and have to be
applied in a non-discriminatory manner to all operators.

The present situation represents, however, a major obstacle to the development of an interoperable trans-
European rail system and has been the subject of several initiatives of the Commission during the last
years. Since 1990 the Community has stimulated, also financially, the development of a harmonised
European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) that should remove one of the major technical
obstacles to the circulation of trains across the borders. Council Directive 96/48/EC of 23 July 1996, on
the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system (1) provides for the establishing of
technical specifications for interoperability (TSI) of subsystems, e.g. control/command and signalling, of
the high-speed system. ERTMS will be the future standard for the signalling system of the European high-
speed rail system. A similar Directive on the interoperability of the conventional trans-European rail
system (2) was proposed last year and is expected to be adopted early in 2001. In 2001 the Commission
also intends to make a proposal on the harmonisation of safety regulations in the Member States.

Indusi is the train protection system which has been in use in Germany for many years. Generally it is a
requirement under the relevant German legislation that locomotives running on the network be fitted with
the Indusi equipment. The regional services referred by the Honourable Member are operated by the
French and German railways, SociØtØ nationale des chemins de fer fran(cid:231)ais (SNCF) and Deutsche
Bundesbahn (DB). DB has since September 1996 been granted a temporary exemption from the German
regulations, due to a delay in the adaptation of the French locomotives, which are normally equipped with
KVB, the corresponding French safety system. To ensure a comparable safety level the railway operator has
been obliged to provide an assistant to accompany the driver on the German lines. The question refers to
the latest expiry of this exemption. According to information from the German Ministry of Transport the
exemption was renewed on 30 November 2000 for a new two-year period, after which it is expected that
the French locomotives will be equipped with Indusi.

The proposed Directive on conventional rail interoperability aims at harmonising the signalling and safety
systems of the networks, thus making it unnecessary in the future to multiply safety equipment for traction
units running across borders.

(1) OJ L 235, 17.9.1996.
(2) OJ C 89 E, 28.3.2000.

(2001/C 261 E/018)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4010/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(21 December 2000)

Subject: Routing of Prague-Dresden motorway via nature reserve and Czech eligibility for joint financing

1.
Is the Commission aware of the Czech government(cid:146)s intention to route the D8 motorway, which will
connect Prague with the German city of Dresden, through the Elbe (Labe) river valley, with the result that
the protected landscape and nature reserve of CeskØ Stredohor(cid:237) in the unique Bohemian low mountain
range of volcanic origin close to the German border will be cut in two?

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/19

Is the Commission further aware that the above nature reserve had previously been protected by the
2.
Czech Environment Ministry, but that the Ministry subsequently issued a licence in accordance with which
the public interest of the proposed motorway was deemed to be so important that it justified derogation
from that protected status in favour of the proposed route?

3.
Has it come to the Commission(cid:146)s attention that the Czech government has systematically failed
hitherto at subsequent planning stages to give any consideration whatsoever to an alternative route farther
to the west through the brown coal-mining region near the town of Most, designated as route R7, which
can probably be constructed without a significant increase in costs?

4.
Can the Commission confirm that, as required by the Espoo Convention, there will be an environ-
mental impact assessment, on which the nearby German border region can be expected to have its say, but
that the Czech government considers the construction of this motorway as a purely internal matter, any
interference in which from abroad should be resisted?

Can the Commission confirm that implementation of the Czech plans to build the D8 is dependent

5.
on joint financing to the extent of € 130 million by (Institutions of) the European Union?

6.
Is the Commission prepared, in consideration of good-neighbourly relations, the Czech Republic(cid:146)s
application for European Union accession, the provisions applicable within the Union on the protection of
nature and the environment, and responsible investment of Union financing, to promote efforts, at
subsequent stages in developing and implementing road-building projects, to have alternatives to the D8
taken seriously into consideration?

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

(21 March 2001)

The D8 motorway is part of the trans-European multimodal corridor IV and is identified as part of the
backbone road network for the Czech Republic in the transport infrastructure needs assessment (TINA)
report of October 1999 for the candidate countries. The Commission has been made aware informally by
Czech non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that depending on the routing of the motorway the nature
reserve Ceske Stredohori might be affected. The same NGO representatives addressed the fact that the
Czech Environment Ministry has issued a derogation from the Czech Nature Protection Act to allow the
construction and put forward their criticism of the procedure in terms of planning and decision making.

If Community pre-accession funding is involved in such infrastructure projects the candidate countries are
obliged to comply with requirements similar to those contained in the acquis. In this particular case it
would mean that to obtain Instrument for Structural policies for pre-accession (ISPA) co-funding the Czech
government would have to ensure that an environmental impact assessment (EIA) using similar standards
as those required by the Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on
the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1) is carried out.
The Community has already implemented its obligations under the Espoo Convention via this Directive,
which ensures that affected countries would be consulted.

According to information obtained by the Commission, the Czech Republic intends to implement its
obligations under the Espoo Convention through the new EIA Act, which was approved by the Czech
Parliament in February 2001, and is scheduled to enter into force in January 2002. Until then the existing
EIA Act will stay in force.

Before any Community funding is granted, the applicant country will also have to investigate whether
environmentally sensitive areas are affected which might fall in future under the protection of the Council
Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and
flora (2) or the Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (3). The
provisions of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive ensures that negative environmental impacts on sensitive
areas are taken into consideration in case plans or projects are likely to have effect on those areas. By

C 261 E/20

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

definition (cid:145)environmentally sensitive areas(cid:146) in the field of nature should be sites which have been identified
by the national authorities as sites to be designated or proposed for the Natura 2000 network as laid down
in the Habitats and the Birds Directives. As long as no lists of such sites have been identified by the
competent authorities, which is the case in the Czech Republic, the following types of sites shall be
regarded as (cid:145)environmentally sensitive areas(cid:146) in the field of nature protection: (a) sites listed in the latest
inventory on important bird areas for candidate countries (IBA 2000, prepared by Birdlife International)
and (if available) equivalent more detailed scientific inventories endorsed by national authorities;
(b) wetlands of international
importance designated under Ramsar Convention or qualifying for such
protection, (c) areas to which the Bern Convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural
(d) areas
habitats (Article 4) applies,
protected under national nature conservation legislation.

in particular sites meeting the criteria of the Emerald network,

As already mentioned, the D8 motorway is included as a transport link in the TINA network. As such,
projects included in the TINA network, and therefore, related to stretches of this motorway are potentially
eligible for ISPA co-financing. So far the Commission adopted a decision the 29 December 2000 on co-
financing project preparation for a number of Czech transport projects, including four schemes related to
the D8 motorway located between Usti nad Labem and the German border at Petrovice. The objective of
this project preparation facility is to assist the Czech Republic in preparing projects which are in line with
the acquis, including all the information required by the ISPA Regulation.

After having finalized the project preparation for the Prague-Dresden motorway, the Czech Republic might
submit an application form for ISPA funding to the Commission. The Commission will then perform a
detailed examination of the application, including the environmental impact assessment of the schemes,
consideration of environmental sensitive areas, and the proper consideration of alternatives, prior to
reaching any decision on whether to submit a proposal to the ISPA Management Committee for co-
financing the construction works.

In conclusion, the Commission will give proper consideration to the issue of the nature reserve Ceske
Stredohori in the event of it being affected by any scheme for which ISPA infrastructure co-financing will
be requested.

(1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(3) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2001/C 261 E/019)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4034/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(3 January 2001)

Subject: 133 Committee

The 133 Committee is the real power behind and decision-making centre for the European Union(cid:146)s
commercial policy. It takes its name from Article 133 of the Treaty of Amsterdam. That article provides
for the establishment of a special committee appointed by the Council to assist the European Commission.
The 133 Committee constitutes the link between the European Commission and the Council.

Each Member State has one full and one substitute member to represent it on that committee. Those civil
servants take important decisions relating to international trade issues such as the banana dispute, the
supply of medicinal products to poor countries and the American levy on European steel. The Council
resolves any political problems and ratifies the decisions taken by the committee. Some proposals are
debated solely within the committee and approved en bloc by Coreper (the national civil servants
appointed to the European Union) without further debate.