WRITTEN QUESTION E-1112/01 by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) and Jorge Moreira da Silva (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Alqueva Dam, Portugal.
Date: 2001-04-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, EU law, Portugal, deforestation, environmental impact, environmental law, environmental policy, impact study, power plant, protection of animal life, water protection, water treatment

C 318 E/206

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

(2001/C 318 E/225)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1112/01

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE)
and Jorge Moreira Da Silva (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 April 2001)

Subject: Alqueva Dam, Portugal

The Alqueva dam, located on the Portuguese section of the Guadiana River, is expected to be completely
built by the end of 2001. The Portuguese Government plans then to start flooding the area and creating
a 250 km2 reservoir (of which 63 km2 in Spain), mainly for irrigation. For that purpose, on February 22
a clearing programme was started that will affect an area of 19 740 ha of one of the most important
natural areas in the Southern Iberian Peninsula, dominated by the montado ecosystem, Mediterranean
woodland and riparian habitats. The disappearance of these priority habitats will be dramatic for several
threatened species of vertebrates. The area is also populated by the Iberian Lynx, as a report financed by
LIFE confirms (Instituto da Conserva(cid:231)ªo da Natureza, 1998, (cid:145)Conservation of the Iberian Lynx(cid:146), LIFE Project
No B4-3200/94/767). The Guadiana River is one of the five still existing Portuguese nuclei and the area to
be cleared, known as Alcarrache-Gadelim, is part of this nucleus.

The reservoir will inundate 94 % of the Guadiana River-Juromenha habitat site and affect the Special Birds
Protection Area of Mourªo-Barrancos. This clearing operation, not subjected to an environmental impact
assessment and without any of the planned minimisation measures being implemented, was started on the
presumption that the dam would be filled up to its full storage level at 152 metres and that water would
be needed for the irrigation of an area larger than 110 000 ha and for a planned diversion from the
Guadiana to the Sado basin. However, the irrigation scheme was not fully defined (crops, water costs,
funding) and the extremely high risk of salinisation of the soil to be irrigated was not considered, nor was
this diversion taken into account in the initial plans or subjected to an environmental impact assessment,
as required under the EC EIA Directive. Portuguese NGOs called for no clearing above the level of
139 metres, which would save more than half a million trees and important protected habitats, while not
precluding any options in the future regarding the actual use of the dam; for clearing to take place in
stages, according to needs, and for a debate to be initiated at national and European level on the viability
of the irrigation plans in the development of Alqueva.

How can the Commission accept that this project can destroy areas which were to be considered

1.
priority areas according to the Habitat Directive?

Can the Commission make sure that all aspects of the project, including the planned diversion from

2.
the Guadiana river to the Sado basin, are fully taken into consideration in the EIA?

Does the Commission think that the irrigation plans related to filling the Alqueva dam up to the level

3.
of 152 m are ecologically and economically sustainable?

4. What has the Commission done to make sure that the waters filling the Alqueva Dam fulfil the
quality targets defined by the Water Framework Directive and the Nitrates Directive?

Is it true that the Cohesion Fund co-financed the Alqueva hydrological power plant to compensate

5.
for the decision not to co-finance with EU funds?

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

(14 June 2001)

The Alqueva dam is part of a multi-purpose project for which Community financing was approved, subject
to a number of conditions, in July 1997 (1). The Portuguese Government decided, in February 1997, to
create an environmental follow-up Commission (Comissªo de Acompanhamento Ambiental das Infraes-

13.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 318 E/207

truturas do Alqueva (cid:129) CAIA) chaired by the Portuguese Environment Ministry, with the participation,
among others, of national and regional environmental authorities and of environmental non-governmental
organisations (NGOs). This Commission is responsible for the follow-up of the environmental aspects of
the project, including the individual Environmental Impact Assessments made for the single components of
the global project. The CAIA is also responsible for verifying the efficiency of the minimisation and
compensation measures as well as environmental monitoring.

The Commission will continue to follow the project closely to ensure that Community law is correctly
applied. This is particularly the case concerning the Alentejo Regional Operational Programme, under
which several of the individual projects will be co-financed, and for which the Commission participates in
the follow-up commission. The Commission will also continue to ask the Portuguese authorities for all
necessary elements to assess the adequate fulfilment of the minimisation and compensation measures that
conditioned the approval of the co-financing.

Specifically addressing the questions asked by the Honourable Members:

(cid:129) The project(cid:146)s Environmental Management Plan includes minimisation and compensation measures, as
recommended by the impact studies and by the evaluation commission. It also mentions explicitly that
sensitive areas from the nature point of view will be excluded from any future irrigation plans. The
Commission has already requested from the Portuguese authorities all the information needed to
ensure that the measures included in the Environmental Management Plan are effectively carried out.
The state of fulfilment of the conditions for the co-financing will evidently be taken into account also
when considering the possible co-financing of individual parts of the project.

(cid:129) The individual components of the global project, including the irrigation plans and the possible water
transfer from the Guadiana basin to the Sado basin, will have to be the object of separate impact
assessments under the terms of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation
of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (2) and of the Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June
1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (3).
The Commission will follow this with particular attention in the framework of the Alentejo Regional
Operational Programme for 2000-2006.

(cid:129) Other alternatives were studied before the Commission(cid:146)s decision on co-financing, and the level of

152 meters was retained as the best option.

(cid:129) The Water Framework Directive (4) sets the obligation that all waters (rivers, lakes, groundwaters and
coastal waters) achieve the objective (cid:145)good status(cid:146) by 2015. It is the responsibility of the concerned
Member States (Spain and Portugal
in this case) to take the necessary measures to achieve this
objective. The Directive sets up a time frame for the implementation of measures to achieve this
objective, and the Commission will be attentive to the progress made by Portugal and Spain in this
matter. As for the Nitrates Directive (5), it establishes a two-level system: Mandatory measures in so-
called (cid:145)nitrate vulnerable zones(cid:146), and a (voluntary) system of promoting good agricultural practice
outside those zones. The Directive does not, however, set obligations to achieve quality objectives
within set deadlines; this has only recently been done under the Water Framework Directive.

(cid:129) In the implementation of the Common Agricultural Policy, the Commission is also carefully checking
whether the measures under the Nitrates Directive are included in the good farming practice,
constituting a pre-condition for certain aid payments in the framework of the Rural Development
the
Programmes
compensation of farmers within the agri-environmental schemes.

(compensatory allowances). Good farming practice is also a yardstick for

(cid:129) Article 8 of the Commission decision concerning the co-financing includes obligations derived from
the Council Directive 91/676/EEC on nitrates. It includes also obligations derived from the Council
Directive 91/271/EEC on urban wastewater treatment (6). Concerning water quantity and quality, it
should also be noted that, in a letter sent to the former Member of the Commission responsible for
regional policy, in March 1997, the Spanish Foreign Minister re-stated the Spanish commitment to
abide by the terms of the convention established in 1968 between Spain and Portugal for the use of
water in international rivers.

C 318 E/208

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

(cid:129) The Cohesion Fund co-financing is limited to the Alqueva hydroelectric plant, and is aimed at the

integration of this plant in the national plan for reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

(1) Decision C(97)2350, of 28 July 1997.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(3) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(4) Directive 2000/60/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for

Community action in the field of waterpolicy (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000).

(5) Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused

by nitrates from agricultural sources (OJ L 375, 31.12.1991).

(6) Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 (OJ L 135, 30.5.1991).

(2001/C 318 E/226)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1116/01

by Esko Sepp(cid:228)nen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 April 2001)

Subject: Enhanced cooperation on the Second Pillar

At the Nice summit a number of decisions were adopted on enhanced cooperation. How does the
Commission interpret the substance of these decisions as regards the Second Pillar? Which activities of the
Security and Defence Policy, currently in preparation in the EU, have not been included in the concept of
enhanced cooperation?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(16 May 2001)

In accordance with the new Treaty of Nice, enhanced cooperation as regards the Second Pillar must
respect:

(cid:129) the principles, objectives, general guidelines and consistency of the common foreign and security

policy and the decisions taken within the framework of that policy;

(cid:129) the powers of the Community;

(cid:129) consistency between all the Union(cid:146)s policies and its external activities.

Where Member States intend to establish enhanced cooperation in respect of the Second Pillar, the
Commission, which shares responsibility with the Council for ensuring the consistency of all the Union(cid:146)s
external activities in the context of its external relations, security, economic and development policies,
must give a prior opinion on the request and forward it to the Council for decision.

Pursuant to the new Treaty of Nice, enhanced cooperation may not relate to matters having military or
defence implications. None the less, closer cooperation between one or more Member States at bilateral
level may be developed in the framework of the Western European Union (WEU) and the North Atlantic
Treaty Organisation (NATO) provided that this cooperation does not contravene or hinder the provisions
of Title V of the EU Treaty.