WRITTEN QUESTION E-1493/02 by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Biological sewage treatment plants in Greece.
Date: 2002-05-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Greece, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, management, project management, technical cooperation, water treatment

C 28 E/112

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

The Estonian Competition Board employs 42 civil servants, including 13 lawyers.

A comparison with Member States is not relevant in view of the present legal framework: Under the rules
for the implementation of Article 63(1)(i),
the Europe Agreement establishing an
association between the Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of
Estonia, of the other part, it is explicitly stated that cases falling under Article 63(1) and (2) of the Europe
Agreement are dealt with by the Commission on the Community side and the Competition Board on the
Estonian side. Inside the Community, on the other hand, Member States do not at present have a legal
obligation to have national competition authorities (although most of them have found it useful to
establish such an authority).

(1)(ii) and (2) of

(1) COM(2001) 700 final.

(2003/C 28 E/126)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1493/02

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Biological sewage treatment plants in Greece

(29 May 2002)

The Commission recently took the decision to bring proceedings against Greece in the Court of Justice for
its failure to observe the final deadline for setting up a third-generation sewage treatment plant in the
region of Elefsina. The final deadline expired in 1998(!). The proceedings could also involve a further
11 areas in the vicinity of sensitive ecosystems which have not observed Community directives or binding
dates. More precisely, according to reports in the Greek press, since 1998 tertiary treatment plants should
have been completed in 16 Greek towns with populations of over 10 000 in sensitive areas. However, the
number of towns which complied with the directive was only four (!), while the Greek authorities justify
themselves by saying that the degree of compliance in 1998 was equally low in other Member States … At
the present time, four years later, 12 tertiary biological treatment plants have been completed in Greece in
areas in the close vicinity of sensitive outfall points (such as the Gulf of Arta, the Lefkada straits, etc.),
while the other four plants, at Thriasio, Grevena, Kilkis and Thiva, remain unfinished.
In fact, the
construction of the plant at Thriasio is still at the drawing-board stage!

There are, however, also problems associated with the monitoring of the operation of the plants by the
central administration or the local authorities which, according to a study carried out by Athens
University, has left 30 % of the plants facing serious operational problems (e.g. inadequate maintenance,
shortages of consumables, unrepresentative sampling etc.). According to the same study,
in many
instances, the sewage treatment plants were never operational, an example being Serifos where the plant
was completed in 1994 with Community and national funding, but is not in operation because of mistakes
in the planning of the project.

Is the Commission familiar with this matter and what are its views thereon? Which of the above projects
received funding and what were the exact amounts? Is it possible that further action will be taken against
Greece in the Court of Justice for the other delays in building biological sewage treatment plants which
should have been completed since 1998, as referred to above? If so, which projects by name? Does the
Commission intend to intercede with the Greek authorities and in what manner to persuade them to put
an end to these enormous delays in building biological sewage treatment plants and the failure of the local
authorities to monitor and check on their operation?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(22 July 2002)

The Commission is following the implementation process of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May
1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment (1)
In this
context, the Commission has already initiated three individual infringement procedures against Greece for
failure to comply with this Directive. These infringements concern the municipalities of Athens, Elefsina
and Thessaloniki. Further investigations, with the view to assessing that the provisions and the deadlines
are implemented, are underway. The Commission will not hesitate to take all the necessary measures,
including action under Article 226 of the EC Treaty, in order to ensure that Community legislation is
correctly applied.

in all the Member States,

including Greece.

6.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28 E/113

the Commission has requested the Greek
As far as Structural and Cohesion Funds are concerned,
authorities to provide the information about the individual projects that have been funded and the exact
amounts involved. This will be forwarded to the Honourable Member upon receipt.

Furthermore, the Commission has conducted review meetings in recent months to assess in partnership
with the Greek authorities the scale of the task remaining to be done, in an effort to ensure that the most
urgent investment requirements are undertaken as soon as possible in order to improve compliance with
the relevant Community legislation.

As is foreseen in the Community support framework for the current programming period 2000-2006, the
Greek authorities are establishing a technical support entity to give guidance where necessary to municipal
authorities in particular,
for their
maintenance and operation after completion.

for the proper design of sewage treatment plants, and support

This should help to avoid the problems in the maintenance and operation of previously completed sewage
treatment plants of the kind referred to by the Honourable Member. The decision of the Greek government
to establish bodies (DEYAs) with the appropriate competence and financial capacity is also a positive step
which should improve efficiency in the building and operation of sewage treatment plants.

(1) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991.

(2003/C 28 E/127)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1506/02

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Production of vinegar from dried grapes

(29 May 2002)

From ancient times vinegar has been made in Greece from sun-dried grapes (mainly the Corinthian
variety);
in the Greek Food Code it is described as ‘genuine vinegar’ and is exported very successfully
throughout the world.

In the regulation on wine, (EC) No 1493/1999 (1), in spite of the fact that there is a reference to wine
vinegar, there is no clear stipulation that vinegar made from dried grapes is wine vinegar, although the
regulation states that dried grape alcohol is equivalent to vinous alcohol.

Since the production of vinegar from dried grapes is an activity which supports producers, particularly
those from an especially backward and poor region such as the Peloponnese, can the Commission say
whether it will make the requisite amendments to Regulation No 1493/99, in order to clearly stipulate that
vinegar from sun-dried grapes is wine vinegar, as is in fact the case, and to bring it into line with dried
grape alcohol?

(1) OJ L 179, 14.7.1999, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2002)

Dried grape alcohol is not defined in Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 on common organisation of
the market in wine but is treated as a like product to wine alcohol when used in production of liqueur
wine as defined in the Annex to that Regulation. But Council Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89 of 29 May
1989 laying down general rules on the definition, description and presentation of spirit drinks (1) defines
wine spirit and raisin spirit quite differently (Article 1(4)(d) and (h)).

A distinction must also be drawn in the case of vinegar. Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/
1999 defines wine vinegar as vinegar … obtained exclusively by acetous fermentation of wine.