WRITTEN QUESTION E-0006/01 by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission. Kerosine discharged at sea.
Date: 2001-01-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Irish Sea, Mediterranean Sea, air safety, aviation fuel, international law, water pollution

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/153

(2001/C 187 E/163)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0001/01

by Adriana Poli Bortone (UEN) to the Commission

(9 January 2001)

Subject: Wages for Italian soldiers in Kosovo

Is the Commission aware that Italian soldiers in Kosovo have not been paid for three months and are
having great difficulty in establishing contact with Italy on account of the very small number of telephone
lines made available to them?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 2001)

No. The matters raised by the Honourable Member are not issues which fall under the competence of the
Commission; they are matters for national authorities.

The Honourable Member is advised to raise her concerns directly with the relevant Italian authorities.

(2001/C 187 E/164)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0006/01

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(17 January 2001)

Subject: Kerosine discharged at sea

Fishermen are aware that aircraft often discharge kerosine into the North Sea. Often tens of thousands of
litres of fuel are involved. In recent years considerable progress has been achieved by imposing a ban on
ships discharging at sea and on incineration at sea etc., but discharges of kerosine have not been tackled.

Is the magnitude of the problem for the ecosystem of the North Sea and the Mediterranean known, is it
possible to restrict or ban such discharges or to permit them only as a last resort, and why have such
measures not been used?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(19 March 2001)

Discharging of fuel by aircraft during flight is a procedure used on long-haul flights in order to reduce
weight in emergency situations to below the safe maximum weight for landing. This takes place only in
the event of rescheduling of the flight in case of technical problems or serious passenger illness. The
procedure emanates from an obligation imposed by international standards Joint Aviation Requirements/
Operations (JAR-OPS), which provide that an operator has the obligation to ensure that the maximum
allowable landing mass of the aeroplane is not exceeded. In this context fuel
jettisoning is explicitly
permitted if a safe procedure is used.

if possible above
Usually for such cases of emergency special airspace is assigned to the aircraft,
unpopulated areas. Given the altitude and aircraft speed at which discharges take place as well as the
turbulence behind the aircraft which transforms the kerosene into a fine mist, only a very small percentage
of the total volume of kerosene reaches the ground. The Commission is not aware of specific environ-
mental impact studies in this field, but according to available information the concentration level per
square kilometre of land or sea would be so low that an affect on ecosystems is unlikely.

C 187 E/154

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

Whilst discharging of kerosene is only used in emergency situations where the life of people is at risk and
given the insignificant effect on ecosystems, banning kerosene discharges does not appear to be a realistic
option.

Furthermore, as the discharging of kerosene represents a substantial financial loss for the air operator,
it can be assumed that it will be used as a measure of last resort only.

(2001/C 187 E/165)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0008/01

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: European Defence and Security Policy and NATO

(17 January 2001)

Do the decisions taken at Nice with regard to the European Defence and Security Policy look seemlessly
and coherently into the wider framework for defence and security policy already in place as part of NATO?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(21 February 2001)

The Commission welcomes the Nice decisions on the European Security and defence policy (ESDP) and
believes they are fully coherent with the wider defence and security policy already in place as part of the
North atlantic treaty organization (NATO).

The Nice decisions concern the Union(cid:146)s ability to act where the Alliance as a whole is not engaged in cases
falling within the so-called (cid:145)Petersberg tasks(cid:146). These relate to crisis management and peacekeeping and do
not cover the issue of the territorial defence of Member States.

NATO(cid:146)s Washington Summit underlined the enhanced role attributed to crisis management policy outside
purely defence considerations. The new structures and capabilities developed under ESDP should be seen as
complementary to those of the alliance.

It is the Commission(cid:146)s understanding that both NATO members and Union Member States are ready to
play a full role in operations of this kind, within the framework of NATO or of the Union and within the
emerging dialogue and cooperation between these two organisations.

There is naturally a need to continue work on the procedural aspects of this cooperation. These are taking
place within the four Union/NATO working groups which have been meeting regularly for the past
months.

(2001/C 187 E/166)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0009/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(9 January 2001)

Subject: Lernout & Hauspie case: financial assistance for Sensus police project

The aim of the Sensus project, the successor to Aventinus,
is to develop an information exchange
programme for European police and intelligence services. The search for appropriate language and speech
technology forms an important part of the project.