WRITTEN QUESTION E-1351/02 by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE)and Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Alternative routes for the Sofia-Kulata motorway.
Date: 2002-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Bulgaria, EU financing, environmental law, environmental protection, impact study, motorway

C 301 E/132

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

is a NUTS III terrritorial unit and so cannot be eligible for Objective 1. In view of its socio-
Teruel
economic problems the entire province has Objective 2 eligibility for the current programming period,
population density being one of the eligibility criteria for this Objective. The province’s particular situation
has already been taken into consideration in the single programming document for Aragon.

low population density areas are given specific treatment in the regional State aid system
Further,
guidelines. First,
low population density is a sufficient criterion for regional aid to be eligible for
exceptional treatment under Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty. Second, the maximum level of investment
aid that can be granted in such regions has been set at 30 % net grant equivalent instead of the 20 % that is
the normal rule. These provisions cover all of the province of Teruel.

To establish a solid and transparent legal basis the Commission in February 2001 adopted a proposal for a
Parliament and Council Regulation on establishment of a common classification of Territorial Units for
Statistics (NUTS) (2). This has been the subject of a report to Parliament and is at present under discussion
in the Council. One of its purposes is to secure application of objective criteria in the definition of Member
States’ regions in order to guarantee impartiality and comparability when regional statistics are compiled.
For Spain Annex II to the proposal places the Autonomous Communities at NUTS level II.

For the purpose of defining cohesion policy for the period after 2006 the Commission with publication of
the Second Report on Economic and Social Cohesion (3) launched a wide-ranging debate. In the report the
Commission examines as a possible priority for future cohesion policy zones with grave geographical or
including low population density. The debate is in progress and in due time the
natural handicaps,
Commission will in the Third Cohesion Report make proposals to the Council and Parliament on the best
way of taking account of these specific factors in regional policy.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
(2) OJ C 180 E, 26.6.2001.
(3) COM(2001) 24 final.

(2002/C 301 E/144)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1351/02

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

(13 May 2002)

Subject: Alternative routes for the Sofia-Kulata motorway

For the construction of the Sofia-Thessaloniki motorway, Bulgaria has opted for a route through the valley
of the Struma near the town of Kresna. Originally, five variant routes were prepared, but it seems that the
only variant to which consideration has genuinely been given is widening and alteration of the existing
motorway which follows the course of the Struma river via the Kresna gorge.

The Commission is undoubtedly aware of the existence of the E-79 Highway Sofia-Kulata Motorway
Feasibility Study & Design (SPEA Ingegneria Europea, November 2000), which rules out two possible routes
for the planned motorway because they would be too expensive. The two alternative routes outside the
Kresna valley are not described at all.

1. What does the Commission think of the quality of this study, which is two pages long and was
drawn up using EUR 394 000 in funding from PHARE?

In answer to written questions by Erik Meijer (E-3147/00 (1)) and Alexander de Roo (E-0220/01 (2)), the
Commission referred to an EIA report which was to be drawn up and which was duly published at the end

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/133

of December 2001. Bulgarian environmental organisations are highly critical of this EIA report, in which
the alternatives are not properly considered and virtually no attention is devoted to the principles of the
directives on wild birds and habitats.

2. What is the Commission’s assessment of the quality of this EIA report?

(1) OJ C 174 E, 19.6.2001, p. 20.
(2) OJ C 261 E, 18.9.2001, p. 65.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2002)

The original terms of reference of the PHARE contract for the feasibility study and design project of the
E-79 Sofia (cid:1) Kulata Motorway had not required SPEA to look for alternatives outside the existing E-79
alignment and roadbed in studying the section of the Struma Motorway between Kresna and Kulata, but to
take account that the presence of protected flora in the Struma river gorge was reported. It was understood
at this time that this gorge, through which passes the existing road, was not a protected area, except a part
of it (Tisata reserve) registered as a Corine sub-site.

The draft feasibility study for the Struma Motorway, including the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA),
was submitted to the Commission in December 2000. The submitted EIA report was not accepted by the
Commission, as it was considered not to be complete. The Ministry of Environment and Water of Bulgaria
also decided to reject the proposed EIA report on a similar basis.

The draft feasibility report also included a very preliminary assessment, at pre-feasibility level, of alternative
corridors avoiding the Kresna Gorge. This preliminary assessment, as noted in the draft feasibility report,
was undertaken by SPEA on their own initiative and apparently following a verbal request from the
Bulgarian Road Administration. In any case, the Commission did not accept this as being an adequate
examination of alternatives. Both SPEA and the Bulgarian Road Administration confirm that there was no
additional contract or disbursement involved in the production of this very preliminary assessment.

There has not been any complementary study financed by PHARE to identify alternative routes outside the
E-79 existing corridor, nor has any project of this kind yet been proposed for financing by a Community
instrument. In the case where such proposals were made, the Commission would certainly be ready to
consider them.

The preliminary EIA for the Struma Motorway was finalised by SPEA in November 2001 and submitted to
the Ministry of Environment and Water. The subsequent public meetings required by the Bulgarian
legislation were held in March 2002 with the participation of the interested public and non-governmental
organisations (NGOs). The Ministry of Environment and Water is still reviewing the EIA following the
public meeting and the Commission is not aware that any decision has yet been taken.

It is only after the completion of the Bulgarian internal procedure that the Commission becomes involved
in the process.

(2002/C 301 E/145)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1353/02

by Freddy Blak (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Cost-effectiveness of the EU-US fellowship programme

(6 May 2002)

An EU-US fellowship programme was set up 20 years ago, whereby EU officials may be sent on long-term
missions to American academic institutes while keeping their Commission salary. In the 1999 discharge
resolution (A5-0113/2001), the Commission was asked by Parliament to carry out an evaluation of the
cost-effectiveness of the programme, as there were serious doubts concerning the added value of this
programme.