WRITTEN QUESTION E-1312/02 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL), Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE)and Elisabeth Schroedter (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Urgency and capacity of the planned motorway through the Kresna gorge in Bulgaria and deadline for inclusion of the area in the Natura 2000 network.
Date: 2002-05-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Bulgaria, EU aid, Greece, accession to the European Union, aid system, environmental protection, protected area, road building, trans-European network, transport network

14.11.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 277 E/185

As it gives a clear indication on the line chosen by the Ministry of Environment of Bulgaria, it is important
to recall what Ms Iliaz, Deputy Minister for the Environment, stated on this issue in the same above-
mentioned letter to the Council of Europe. She wrote:
insists that
alternative scenarios of the Project [for the construction of the Sofia ) Thessaloniki motorway] be
developed for the construction of the part of the Struma motorway between the towns of Simitli and
Kresna’.

‘[T]he Ministry of Environment

the Union pre-accession instruments will only accept

In relation to this issue, the Commission, on various occasions and at different levels, has repeatedly
stressed that
to finance projects that are in
compliance with the Community environmental acquis. This applies, in particular, to the need to assess the
impacts of the projects on the environment on the basis of provisions similar to those included in the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive (1).

Therefore, should the project for the construction of the Sofia ) Kulata motorway be submitted for ISPA
funding, the Commission will carefully examine the project in order to make sure that all the relevant
Community environmental acquis is duly complied with.

As far as the Commission is aware, a complete feasibility study, including possible alternative routes
3.
outside the Kresna Gorge, has not yet been undertaken. Therefore, the Commission is not in the position
to express a reasoned opinion on this issue.

impact assessment (EIA) for the Kresna Gorge section
In the case that the preliminary environmental
(which was submitted to the Ministry of Environment and Water of Bulgaria in November 2001 (see
question 2) were approved by Bulgarian authorities, the Commission would then have the opportunity to
verify if and how the issue of alternatives has been addressed.

4.
As already stated on various occasions, the Commission repeats that it intends to use all the
instruments at its disposal to make sure that the project to build the Struma Motorway is developed in line
with the requirements of the Community acquis.

(1) Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of

certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(2002/C 277 E/207)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1312/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL), Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE)
and Elisabeth Schroedter (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(7 May 2002)

Subject: Urgency and capacity of the planned motorway through the Kresna gorge in Bulgaria and deadline

for inclusion of the area in the Natura 2000 network

In the Commission’s view, to what extent was the decision to construct or upgrade the trans-
1.
European corridor No 4 between Sofia and Thessaloniki
in the form of a motorway, despite the low
projections for traffic on the route, influenced by the fear of political unrest concerning the ‘Autoput
Bratstvo i Jedinstvo’ (Motorway of brotherhood and unity) built 40 years ago in the then Yugoslavia, which
still provides the shortest possible route, straight through Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia and Macedonia, for road
traffic between EU Member States Austria and Greece?

Does political harmony along the route referred to in paragraph 1 mean that there is now less need

2.
to build parallel expressways through Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria?

To what extent is the choice of route and the urgency of construction linked to the Olympic Games

3.
to be held in Athens in 2004? Is that any real expectation that this road link will be open by then?

C 277 E/186

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.11.2002

4. When does the Commission expect the Kresna gorge and surrounding area to be designated as a
Natura 2000 area? Will this be done when Bulgaria joins the EU or not until later? Will such designation
take place before construction of the E79 motorway or will it occur only after final decisions have been
taken on the route of this motorway?

5.
How does the Commission intend to convince the Bulgarian government of the need to opt for one
of the alternatives which would restrict traffic through the Kresna gorge to local traffic and tourism in
view of the area’s environmental importance and would shift through traffic onto one of the possible road
connections outside the area or onto the existing rail link?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2002)

1. and 2.
The Commission is not aware of any direct link between ‘the decision to construct or upgrade
the trans-European corridor No 4 between Sofia and Thessaloniki in the form of a motorway’ and the
‘fear of political unrest concerning the’Autoput Bratstvo i Jedinstvo‘(Motorway of brotherhood and unity)
built 40 years ago in the then Yugoslavia’.

3.
As indicated in the Parliament’s and Council’s Decision No 1692/96/EC of 23 July 1996 on
Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (1), the establishment
and development of trans-European transport networks throughout the territory of the Community have
the specific objectives of ensuring the sustainable mobility of persons and goods under the best possible
social, environmental and safety conditions and integrating all modes of transport, taking account of their
comparative advantages. Projects of common interest, the implementation of which should contribute to
the development of
the Community, have been identified through these
guidelines.

the network throughout

Therefore, the choice to designate corridor No 4 was based on the above-mentioned criteria and followed
the guidelines set out in the Community legislation.

The timetable for the completion of the part of corridor No 4 between Sofia and the Bulgarian/Greek
border at Kulata will mainly depend on the decisions of the Bulgarian government.

4.
The obligation for Bulgaria to contribute to the creation of the Natura 2000 network with the
designation of special areas of conservation, as indicated in the Habitats Directive (2), and of special
protection areas, as indicated in the Birds Directive (3), will arise upon accession.

The Commission is not in the position to assess whether the possible designation by the Bulgarian
authorities of the Kresna Gorge as a Natura 2000 area will take place before the planned construction of
the Sofia-Kulata motorway, whatever the final decision on the alignment of this latter may be.

5.
On various occasions and at different levels, the Commission has repeatedly stressed that the
Community financing instruments will only accept to finance projects that are in compliance with the
Community environmental acquis. This applies, in particular, to the need to assess the impacts of the
projects on the environment on the basis of provisions similar to those included in the Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive (4).

Part of the Kresna Gorge is listed in the latest inventory of Important Bird Areas (IBA 2000) prepared by
Bird Life International in 2000. The Commission therefore considers this as a site of importance for nature
conservation for the purpose of the application of the ISPA instrument. Therefore, should Bulgaria apply
for Community assistance through ISPA for the construction of the Sofia ) Kulata part of Corridor N. 4,
the Commission would make sure that an appropriate environmental assessment according to the EIA
directives, and to Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive is carried out.

14.11.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 277 E/187

like all the other candidate countries, has committed itself to comply with the
In addition, Bulgaria,
Community environmental acquis, even before accession, in relation to every new investment project. This
therefore also ensures that projects, which are financed in Bulgaria through sources other than those of the
Community, will have to comply with the standards set
in the Community environmental acquis.
Therefore, in addition to the directive on the environmental impact assessment, the Habitats and Birds
Directives would also have to be complied with.

Through these instruments, the Commission would do its utmost to make sure that the rich Bulgarian bio-
diversity is protected in conformity with the Community acquis.

(1) OJ L 228, 9.9.1996.
(2) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora,

OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(3) Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(4) Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of

certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(2002/C 277 E/208)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1317/02

by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 April 2002)

Subject: Fish imports to Poland

The fishing industry in the UK, and in particular in the Shetland Islands, is currently being denied an equal
level of access to the Polish market for their fish products in comparison to their Norwegian counterparts.
Import tariffs on British imports of fish remain in place, while Norway receives favourable access under a
bilateral agreement with Poland.

The Commission has recently, on behalf of the Community, agreed an additional protocol to the EU/
Poland Europe Agreement phasing out import tariffs on fish products. Will the Commission outline the
measures agreed and confirm the date on which they will definitively enter into force?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 June 2002)

The Commission confirms the situation described by the Honourable Member. The Additional Protocol
laying down reciprocal trade concessions for fisheries products between the Communities and the Republic
of Poland has been adopted by the Council. Pending the completion of the Polish internal procedures, the
specific provisions regarding tariff reductions will be implemented through autonomous measures. Poland
will on its side also apply the trade concessions contained in the Protocol through autonomous measures,
without awaiting the conclusion of its lengthy internal procedures leading to the formal entry into force of
the Protocol. It is expected that both parties will set the autonomous measures into force on 1 July 2002
on the condition that the necessary procedures have been completed.

The measures agreed are reciprocal and can be outlined as follows:

) For all fisheries products, except herring products, both parties will grant each other three step equal
tariff reductions: one third of the most favoured nation (MFN) tariff at the entry into force, an
additional one third reduction one year later, and free trade two years after the entry into force of the
measures.