WRITTEN QUESTION P-1666/01 by Luigi Cocilovo (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Failure to comply with Directive 85/337/EEC and Directive 97/11/EEC.
Date: 2001-06-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: application of EU law, environmental impact, environmental law, environmental protection, impact study, road building

C 364 E/174

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

against limitations on consumer(cid:146)s right to choose a supplier. Examples of such cases treated by the
Commission in the last two years are the interventions against joint selling (e.g. GFU and EDF/CNR),
reinforcements of dominant positions through mergers (e.g. VEBA/VIAG, EDF/EnBW), privileged
network access (e.g. Danish/German and French/UK interconnectors), stranded cost schemes and
locking-in of key customers (Gasnatural/Endesa).

The Commission also agreed that if adoption of the proposals to further liberalise energy markets were
delayed, it would consider adopting itself Decisions or Directives, on the basis of Article 86 (ex Article 90)
of the EC Treaty, and notably its third paragraph, to address possible distortions of competition resulting
from different levels of liberalisation. Such and approach, whereby the Commission adopted Directives
addressed to the Member States based on Article 86(3) of the EC Treaty was previously used in the
telecommunications sector.

(2001/C 364 E/192)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1666/01

by Luigi Cocilovo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 June 2001)

Subject: Failure to comply with Directive 85/337/EEC and Directive 97/11/EEC

In the townships of Conegliano and San Vendemiano, in Treviso Province (Italy), a four-lane highway
known as the Tangenziale sud is at an advanced stage of planning. On account of its length and its nature,
the highway in question is subject under Italian law to environmental impact assessment pursuant to
Annex B of Directive 85/337/EEC (1), as amended by Directive 97/11/EEC (2). Such a project would
seriously and irreversibly damage the locality(cid:146)s last remaining area of farmland and the course of the
Monticano river, which has already been spoilt by pointless construction projects which have altered the
balance thereof without bringing any advantage to the local population (for example, a sports hall which
has never been completed). The project is located in proximity to densely populated areas. Although the
Monticano river is subject to frequent flooding in the area concerned, hydro-geological studies have never
been carried out (cid:129) not even in connection with the recent town-planning scheme. No alternative to the
project has ever been considered, even though the highway in question could be located in proximity to
the nearby motorway corridor without pointlessly threatening the natural and urban environment. No
thought has ever been given to widening the three-lane motorway so that it can absorb provincial traffic.

What action does the Commission intend to take in order to ensure compliance with Community, national
and regional laws on environmental impact assessment (which is the only procedure capable of ensuring
that alternatives which have never been considered in the course of road and infrastructure planning are
assessed), with a view to protecting human health and improving the quality of human life, conserving
variety of species, maintaining a balanced ecosystem and safeguarding the latter(cid:146)s ability to reproduce
itself?

(1) OJ L 216, 3.8.1991, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 15.

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

(10 July 2001)

According to Council Directives 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain
public and private projects on the environment (1) and 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, which has modified
Directive 85/337/EEC, Member States are obliged to ensure that, before consent is given, projects likely to

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/175

have significant effects on the environment by virtue, inter alia, of their nature, size or location are made
subject to a requirement for development consent and an assessment with regard to their effects. Projects
covered by the Directive are identified in the annexes. The Commission has the task of ensuring the
correct application of Community law and, therefore, in this case, of assessing whether the Community
legislation on environmental
impact assessment (EIA) has been correctly applied in the Member State
concerned.

On the basis of the information given by the Honourable Member, the work to which the question makes
reference, could fall either into Annex I or into Annex II of the directive prior to or after the amendments.

Under Directive 85/337/EEC, prior to or after the amendments, projects of the classes listed in Annex I are
to be made subject to an assessment in accordance with Articles 5 to 10.

Under Directive 85/337/EEC prior to the amendments, projects falling into Annex II are to be made
subject to an EIA where Member States consider that their characteristics so require. However, Member
States are considered to be obliged to make a pre-assessment in order to establish whether Annex II
projects need to be made subject to an EIA procedure.

Under Directive 85/337/EEC, as modified, for Annex II projects, Member States are obliged to determine
through a case-by-case examination or thresholds or by the setting of criteria whether the project shall be
made subject to an assessment in accordance with Articles 5 to 10.

In order to identify the correct Community law to be applied, it is necessary to check when the request for
development consent was submitted to the competent authority: projects whose requests for development
consent were submitted to a competent authority before 14 March 1999 are governed by the provisions of
Directive 85/337/EEC (prior to its 1997 amendment).

Not being aware of the situation described by the Honourable Member, the Commission will take the
appropriate steps in order to gather detailed information about it and to ensure the observance of
Community law.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2001/C 364 E/193)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1669/01

by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission

(14 June 2001)

Subject: Daytime running lights and twilight switches

For some time now the Commission has been looking into the impact of daytime running lights and of the
introduction of twilight switches on fuel use and carbon dioxide emissions.

1.
Has this research produced any clear findings yet, and if so, what are the implications for the
possible introduction of compulsory daytime running lights or encouragement of the introduction of
twilight switches in the European Union?

2.

If no clear findings have been made yet, when are they to be expected?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(20 July 2001)

The main point of daytime running lights is in the road safety benefits of their use and for this the
Commission has undertaken several studies and is aware of many others world-wide. The conclusion of
this work is that daytime running lights have a positive safety benefit. However, these studies have been
conducted mainly in northern climates and there is a certain reluctance to automatically extend their
findings to southern countries. At the moment, a study has just been concluded in the South of France and
interim reports on the results are encouraging. Should the final report not be conclusive as to their
generalisation, then the Commission will examine the introduction of twilight switches.