WRITTEN QUESTION E-0253/02 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Clophen leak at the DEI steam electric station at Agios Dimitrios in Kozani.
Date: 2002-02-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, application of EU law, environmental law, environmental protection, hazardous waste, toxic substance, waste disposal

29.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 205 E/101

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 March 2002)

Article 2 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 of 13 February 1993 on common organisation of the
market in bananas (1) states that quality standards shall be laid down for bananas, except plantains, that are
to be supplied fresh to the consumer.

The standards themselves are set out in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2257/94 of 16 September 1994
laying down quality standards for bananas (2).

They were adopted following wide consultation with the trade, which already applied its own commercial
standards.

In the interests of producers, the trade and consumers quality standards exist for many agricultural
products.

(1) OJ L 47, 25.2.1993.
(2) OJ L 245, 20.9.1994.

(2002/C 205 E/113)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0253/02

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 February 2002)

Subject: Clophen leak at the DEI steam electric station at Agios Dimitrios in Kozani

On 25 December 2001 an explosion was recorded in the high voltage transformer at the Greek Electricity
Board (DEI) steam electric station at Agios Dimitrios in Kozani, resulting in the leak of toxic gases, such as
Clophen and dioxins. In fact, it was confirmed that of the condensers’ three Clophen containers (each
condenser contains 20-30 kilos of Clophen), two were empty, and those responsible concluded that there
had been a leak of this dangerous substance.

Under Directive 96/59/EC (1) on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls
(PCB/PCT), the Member States must ensure that inventories are compiled of equipment with PCB volumes
of more than 5 dm3, must send summaries of such inventories to the Commission at the latest three years
after the adoption of the Directive, and must draw up plans for the decontamination and/or disposal of
inventoried equipment and the PCBs contained therein, together with outlines for the collection and
subsequent disposal of equipment. In addition, there is considerable concern over the effects which these
toxic substances may have on public health.

In view of the above, can the Commission say whether the relevant Greek authorities are implementing the
above directive and whether they have sent the Commission, under Directive 78/319/EEC (2), a situation
report on the disposal of toxic and dangerous waste in Greece, and if so when?

(1) OJ L 243, 24.9.1996, p. 31.
(2) OJ L 84, 31.3.1978, p. 43.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 2002)

The Commission shares the view of the Honourable Member on the importance of a safe handling and
disposal of equipment containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). As correctly pointed out, Article 4 of
Council Directive 96/59/EC of 16 September 1996 on the disposal of PCBs and polychlorinated terphenyls
(PCTs) requires Member States to establish an inventory of equipment containing more than five litres of
PCBs and to submit a summary of such inventory to the Commission.

C 205 E/102

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

In April 2000, the Commission launched an infringement procedure against Greece for failure to comply
with Articles 4.1 and 11 of Directive 96/59/EC,
in particular for failing to submit a summary of the
inventory of equipment, a plan for disposal of such equipment and the guidelines for collection and
disposal of non-inventoried equipment.
In the frame of an exchange of correspondence, the Greek
authorities communicated some information to the Commission. However, the latter considered that this
information was not sufficient pursuant to the obligations laid down in the Articles 4.1 and 11 of the
Directive. Therefore, the Commission has decided on the 20 December 2001 to bring the matter before
the Court.

Concerning the implementation of Council Directive 91/689/EEC of 12 December 1991 on hazardous
waste (1), the Commission has launched since September 1998 an infringement procedure against Greece
for failure to submit the information required under Article 8 (3) on installations carrying out the recovery
or disposal of hazardous waste. The case is already brought before the Court (case C-33/2001).

As for the report on the implementation of the Directive on hazardous waste, pursuant to Council
Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardizing and rationalizing reports on the implemen-
tation of certain Directives relating to the environment (2), the Greek authorities submitted the reply to the
corresponding questionnaire for the period covering 1998-2000, on 21 November 2001.

(1) OJ L 377, 31.12.1991, p. 20.
(2) OJ L 377, 31.12.1991, p. 48.

(2002/C 205 E/114)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0262/02

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Council

(8 February 2002)

Subject: The Council

Can the Council reconcile Commissioner Lamy’s view that ‘The Franco-German couple is the matrix for
compromise in the European Union, the forerunner for important compromises’, with the statement made
by the President of the Commission’s spokesman that, ‘In our view, no state is more equal than another’,
and if so, how?

Reply

(21 May 2002)

The Council is not in the habit of commenting on statements made by members of the Commission.

(2002/C 205 E/115)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0264/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

Subject: Cases of death, torture and disappearance in Chechnya

(8 February 2002)

Civil and human rights organisations and groups of mothers of Russian soldiers continue to report cases of
death, torture and disappearance in Chechnya, in a campaign intensified by the Russian army which, since
11 September 2001, seems to have been authorised to crush the movement for the independence of
Chechnya by attacking the civilian population and violating human rights.

What view does the Council take of this behaviour on the part of Russia, a country which considers itself a
friend of the EU States?