WRITTEN QUESTION E-0500/01 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. Dumping of munitions and radioactive waste in EU waters.
Date: 2001-02-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, access to information, marine pollution, radioactive waste

C 318 E/68

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

Article 7 of the EIA Directive obliges Member States, which are aware that a project is likely to have
significant effects on the environment in another Member State, to inform this other Member State of the
project. The latter may ask to participate in the environmental
impact assessment procedure of the
Member State in whose territory the project is intended to be carried out. The Member States concerned
are required to enter into consultations regarding the potential transboundary effects of the projects and
measures envisaged to reduce or eliminate such effects.

Since it seems that the (cid:145)Iron Rhine(cid:146) can only be reopened if all Member States through which it crosses
agree to the reopening, the project will not only be carried out in one Member State. Therefore, each
Member State concerned has the possibility to assess and take account of the impacts of the project on its
territory in the framework of
It is only if there were additional
transboundary effects, which the Commission cannot envisage at this stage, that the procedure under
Article 7 of the EIA Directive would seem to be relevant in this context.

its own administrative procedure.

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

(2001/C 318 E/069)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0500/01

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 February 2001)

Subject: Dumping of munitions and radioactive waste in EU waters

The Commission will be aware that hundreds of thousands of tonnes of munitions,
including shells,
bombs, landmines, grenades and phosphorous flares, were dumped by the UK Government prior to 1973
in the Irish Sea, at Beaufort(cid:146)s Dyke off the south-west of Scotland, and that low level radioactive waste was
also dumped in the Irish Sea during the 1950s and 1960s.

Is the Commission aware of other instances of dumping of munitions and radioactive waste in EU waters,
and, if so, of what materials, at what locations, and by whom?

What, if any, action is the Commission taking to ensure that such materials can cause no harm to human
or aquatic life?

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

(11 May 2001)

As confirmed in the reply to Written Questions E-4005/97 by Mr Macartney (1) and P-2495/97 by
Mrs McKenna (2), the Commission is aware of past dumping of radioactive waste at Beaufort(cid:146)s Dyke and
a number of other locations.

Between 1950 and 1963, low-level radioactive waste was also dumped in the English Channel by Belgium
and the United Kingdom, other disposal sites in the North East Atlantic were used until 1982. All sites are
(cid:145)The radiological exposure of the population of the
listed in a report published by the Commission:
European Community from radioactivity in North European marine waters, project (cid:147)Mar(cid:237)na(cid:148)(cid:146) (Radiation
Protection 47, 1990).

The Commission has no additional information on the dumping of munitions.

The Mar(cid:237)na study is now being updated. A comprehensive assessment will be made of the radiation
exposure resulting from dumped solid materials and radioactive effluent discharged in North European
marine waters. This will constitute an important basis for the achievement of the strategy on radioactive
substances under the Oslo-Paris (OSPAR) Convention, agreed at the Ministerial Meeting in Sintra in 1998.

13.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 318 E/69

The assessment will to a large extent be based on the results of monitoring of levels of radioactivity in
marine samples as carried out by Member States in compliance with Article 35 of the Euratom Treaty, and
communicated to the Commission under Article 36 of the Euratom Treaty.

The new Mar(cid:237)na study will look into any possible health detriment to the European population and any
possible detriment to aquatic life.

(1) OJ C 310, 15.12.1998.
(2) OJ C 60, 25.2.1998.

(2001/C 318 E/070)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0510/01

by Karla Peijs (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 February 2001)

Subject: TEN(cid:146)s and the development of the inland waterways

A report on bottlenecks in waterways was submitted to the European Commission (Round Table on
bottlenecks in waterways, 23 November 2000, Lille, France).

The report, drawn up by the inland waterway sector, reviews the status of the trans-European transport
network of waterways five years after the European TEN framework decisions were put in place. The
Report reviews the history of the TEN policies, starting with the White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness
and Employment (1992). The initial list of projects has been evaluated and defined in further detail by the
Christophersen Group and has been shaped by the principles established at the Essen Council in 1994. The
result was a fine-tuning of the major transport projects and the outcome was the following: A list of
14 priority projects which does not contain any projects related to inland waterways: while recognising
that public investment in infrastructure is under severe pressure as a result of budgetary constraints, it is
nevertheless regrettable that waterways development finds itself at the bottom of the priority list.

The waterways network urgently needs investment in its infrastructure in order to facilitate intermodal
transport (sea-river, river-rail, river-road), to remove a number of existing bottlenecks and to construct
a number of missing links that will enhance the network function.

In view of the increasing lack of space and the fact that waterborne transport is cheap, clean and green:

(cid:129) Why has the Commission not allocated a larger share of

the EU-TEN funds to stimulate the

development of the waterways network (1,5 % to inland waterways compared to 55 % to rail)?

(cid:129) Can the Commission explain why it has not played a more active role in the coordination to develop

TEN waterways projects crossing national borders?

(cid:129) In view of the enlargement of the European Union, what actions has the Commission in mind to
realise optimal inland waterway-transport on the Danube towards the Black Sea (e.g. obstructions
between Straubing and Vilshofen)?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 2001)

The inland waterway network is part of the trans-European network (TEN) defined by Decision No 1692/
96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 on Community guidelines for the
development of the trans-European transport network (1).

Decisions on the Community funding that the Commission may award under the budget line for the
Trans-European Transport Network to projects of common interest associated with the various modes of
transport are the outcome of a detailed examination of whether such projects comply with all the
in the relevant regulation (2). One criterion is the (cid:145)maturity(cid:146) of projects
conditions and criteria set
(particularly in technical and financial
In the interests of managing the Community budget
the Commission can therefore only support projects for which a sound implementation
efficiently,

terms).