WRITTEN QUESTION E-0304/02 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL)and Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Toxic cloud in Cartagena (Spain).
Date: 2002-02-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Region of Murcia, accident prevention, air quality, application of EU law, chemical fertiliser, fire, industrial pollution, prevention of pollution

C 277 E/32

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.11.2002

Following publication of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1681/94 of 11 July 1994 concerning
irregularities and the recovery of sums wrongly paid in connection with the financing of structural
policies and the organisation of an information system in this field (2)
the Commission gave the
Member States precise written instructions on the timetable and structure of the irregularity reports. It
plans a specific audit for each Member State on the notification system provided for by that Regulation
and on its information system.

(1) OJ L 290, 23.10.1997.
(2) OJ L 178, 12.7.1994.

(2002/C 277 E/033)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0304/02

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL)
and Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 February 2002)

Subject: Toxic cloud in Cartagena (Spain)

Cartagena (Spain) and its surroundings have suffered for many years from a high level of air pollution.
Cartagena is, in fact, one of the most polluted cities in Spain.

On Saturday 27th, an enormous cloud of apparently toxic matter was produced by the explosion of several
tonnes of chemical fertiliser composed of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium stored in a silo belonging
to the Fertiberia company, in a petrochemical complex on the outskirts of the city. The cloud affected
some 6 000 people living nearby, and also spread to some parts of the city itself. Two of the firemen
involved in extinguishing the blaze had to be taken to hospital as a result of skin rashes caused by the
pollution. Furthermore, those affected by the cloud have complained about the tardiness with which the
authorities took the requisite emergency measures.

Is the Commission aware of this?

Do the products of the Fertiberia company fall within the scope of Directive 84/360/EEC (1) on the
combating of air pollution from industrial plants?

What action can the Commission take vis-à-vis the appropriate authorities to ensure that the latter
guarantee that the air quality limit values established by Directive 80/779/EEC (2), and the air quality
standards for nitrogen dioxide (Directive 85/203/EEC (3)) are respected?

What measures does the Commission suggest should be taken to prevent any recurrence of this type of
accident?

(1) OJ L 188, 16.7.1984, p. 20.
(2) OJ L 229, 30.8.1980, p. 30.
(3) OJ L 87, 27.3.1985, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2002)

The Spanish authorities informed the Commission about the accident at the Fertiberia fertiliser production
plant in Cartagena, Murcia, on Wednesday 30 January 2002, thereby strictly complying with Article 15(1)
of Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving
dangerous substances (1), also known as the Seveso Directive, which was transposed into Spanish law by
Royal Decree 1254/1999.

Article 15(1) states that ‘Member States shall
inform the Commission as soon as practicable of major
accidents which have occurred within their territory’ as soon as such accidents meet certain severity
criteria laid down in the Directive.

14.11.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 277 E/33

Fertiberia is part of a group of establishments covered by the Seveso Directive, the aim of which is to
prevent major accidents involving dangerous substances and to limit their effects on people and the
environment.

All the provisions of Directive 96/82/EC apply to Fertiberia.

In particular, the firms must produce a safety report which, inter alia, must:

? demonstrate that major-accident hazards have been identified and that the necessary measures have
been taken to prevent such accidents and to limit their consequences for people and the environment;

? demonstrate that adequate safety and reliability have been incorporated into the design, construction,
operation and maintenance of any installation, storage facility, equipment and infrastructure connected
with its operation which are linked to major-accident hazards inside the establishment.

It should be noted that Directive 96/82/EC contains other requirements, such as making the safety report
available to the public and drawing up internal and external emergency plans. Article 18 of the Directive
also calls on the competent authorities to organise a system of inspections or other measures appropriate
to the type of establishment concerned.

It should also be pointed out that Article 14(1)(c) of the Directive requires firms to inform the competent
authorities of the steps envisaged to alleviate the medium- and long-term effects of the accident and to
prevent any recurrence of such an accident.

The Commission therefore believes that accident risks and their consequences can be substantially reduced
if firms strictly apply Directive 96/82/EC and the competent authorities carry out appropriate monitoring.

The installation in question has, according to the information available to the Commission, been in
operation since 1969. It can be considered to be a ‘plant for the manufacture of basic inorganic chemicals’
as referred to in Annex I to Council Directive 84/360/EEC of 28 June 1984 on the combating of air
pollution from industrial plants. According to that Directive, the operation of the installation is subject to
prior authorisation.

For plants already authorised or in operation before the 1 July 1987, Member States have to implement
policies and strategies for their gradual adaptation to the best available technology, taking into account,
inter alia, the remaining lifetime of the plant, the nature and volume of the polluting emissions and the
desirability of not entailing excessive costs for the plant concerned.

Directive 84/360/EEC will be repealed by the end of October 2007. However, chemical installations for the
production of basic inorganic chemicals are also covered by Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September
1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control (2) (see annex I, point 4.2). For the Fertiberia
installation, the competent authority has to ensure that it operates in accordance with the requirements of
the Directive by the end October 2007 at the latest. Under the Directive, the installation must be operated
in such a way that all appropriate preventive measures against pollution are taken, no significant pollution
is caused, waste production is controlled, energy is used efficiently, accidents are prevented and the site is
returned to a satisfactory state upon cessation of the activity. An integrated permit is required, with permit
conditions based on best available techniques, taking into account the technical characteristics of the
installation, its geographical location and the local environmental conditions.

It should be noted that under both Directives it is up to the competent authority to prescribe binding
emission limit values in the individual permit.

An information exchange, organised by the Commission, to determine the best available techniques for the
fertiliser industry started in October 2001. A final reference document should be ready within two years.

As regards Council Directives 80/779/EC of 15 July 1980 on air quality limit values and guide values for
sulphur dioxide and suspended particulates and 85/203/EEC of 7 March 1985 on air quality standards for
nitrogen dioxide, Member States are required to take appropriate measures to ensure that the limit values

C 277 E/34

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.11.2002

are met, and to draw up action plans for the progressive improvement in air quality in those areas where
the limit values can be expected to be exceeded. They must also inform the Commission whenever the
limit values are exceeded. It should be noted, however, that these directives are primarily aimed at limiting
pollution from routine emission sources rather than to reduce the risk of accidental release.

(1) OJ L 10, 14.1.1997.
(2) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996.

(2002/C 277 E/034)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0307/02

by Marie Isler Béguin (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(11 February 2002)

Subject: Malta and environmental directives

The republic of Malta officially applied for membership of the European Union in June 1990 and renewed
its application in February 1999.

Malta, like the other applicant countries, it is therefore required to incorporate into its national legislation
all provisions regarding the Community acquis.

This harmonisation between the Member States and applicant states makes it possible to uphold the rights
and duties of their citizens and ensure the conservation of their heritage.

The geographical situation of Malta, an island situated between the continents of North Africa and Europe,
places it exactly along the migratory routes of the bird populations crossing the first external border of the
enlarged EU and its territory protected by Community legislation.

During accession negotiations with the Maltese Government, did the Commission take full account of the
importance of the strategic situation of the island of Malta for migrant birds and its irreplaceable value in
terms of ornithological biodiversity and its responsibility to all the Member States in this respect?

Can the Commission give its assurance that no exemption clauses based on any local hunting traditions
will be adopted which could compromise the full application of Community environmental directives, in
particular those concerning birds and habitats in the republic of Malta once it becomes a member of the
EU?

Does the Commission fully subscribe to the need for fully binding protection of the ornithological heritage
at this new border of the enlarged EU?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(13 March 2002)

One of the general principles established by the Commission for all the accession negotiations is that there
can be no derogations from the Community acquis and any transitional measures must be of limited
duration and scope. Any request for a transitional period must also be fully substantiated and accompanied
by a plan for implementing the acquis during the transitional period.

These general principles apply to the Environment chapter, and in particular to Council Directives 92/43/
EEC of 21 May on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1) (‘Habitats Directive’)
and 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (2). The Commission fully subscribes to
the objective of protecting natural habitats and birds in the expanded European Union, in accordance with
the relevant Community legislation.