WRITTEN QUESTION E-1701/02 by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE)and Bárbara Dührkop Dührkop (PSE) to the Commission. The impact of San Sebastián airport's expansion plans on Plaiaundi Ecological Park.
Date: 2002-06-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Basque Country, airport, application of EU law, environmental impact, environmental law, environmental protection, protected area, protected species

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/213

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 June 2002)

Under Community rules it is for Member States to decide what penalties to impose on growers who
infringe regulatory provisions and to take all necessary action for their application.

The proposal for changes in the cotton aid scheme was published on 13 December 1999 (1). Its provisions,
notably the higher percentage reduction in the guide price if the guaranteed national quantity is exceeded
and the possibility afforded to Member States of restricting the areas eligible for aid in line with
environmental criteria, were therefore known many months before the normal sowing date for the 2001/
2002 marketing year. Growers were therefore aware, although the exact terms of the new provisions
adopted by the Council were known only in May 2001, that they had to expect changes in the aid scheme.

The Commission considers that the Community rules on cotton are sufficiently clear. It may however
propose changes or make changes itself if events in the life of the aid scheme so dictate.

(1) COM(1999) 492 final.

(2002/C 301 E/225)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1701/02

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE)
and Bárbara Dührkop Dührkop (PSE) to the Commission

(13 June 2002)

Subject: The impact of San Sebastián airport’s expansion plans on Plaiaundi Ecological Park

Plaiaundi Ecological Park in Txingudi bay, Irún, the second biggest wetland in the Basque country, was
submitted by the Basque authorities for inclusion as one of the Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Sites of
Community Importance (SCIs) within the Natura 2000 network. The designation was based on the wealth
of different species it plays host to: the park was classified as a migration site for many species of bird
listed in Directive 79/409/EEC (1), and it is also the home of unique species such as, amongst others, the
natterjack toad (bufo calamita) listed as being in need of ‘strict protection’ in Annex IV of the Habitats
Directive.

This natural environment is protected by both national and regional legislation, and has also received aid
from the Life-Nature fund, which financed 40 % of the park’s restoration projects. The environmental
achievements of the programme were positively assessed by the European Commission.

However, Plaiaundi Park, and Txingudi bay in general, are at present threatened by the possible negative
impact of the AENA airport management agency’s project to expand nearby San Sebastían airport, where
the agency is wishing to increase air traffic and open the airport up to large aircraft.

Bearing in mind that within the next two years a high-speed train is to run between Irún and Madrid,
which will amply cater for the region’s transport needs, can the Commission provide information on the
situation regarding Txingudi bay and Plaiaundi Park’s designation as an SPA and SCI?

Does the Commission believe that Article 6 (environmental impact analysis) of the overall plan for the
airport has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of Directive 97/11/EC (2) on the evaluation of
the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment?

What concrete measures is the Commission intending to take to ensure that Plaiaundi Park is given
definitive designation as a protected area?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.

C 301 E/214

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(25 July 2002)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Members that the site of Playaundi is included in the
proposal Site of Community Importance (pSCI) named ‘Terrazas y Marismas del Bidasoa’ (ES2120015).
This site with a surface of 109 hectares was proposed as pSCI by the Spanish authorities on
December 1997.

The site of Txingudi was classified as a special protection area (SPA) on 1 of July 1994. The site has a
surface of 134 hectares and overlaps in a 25,5 % with the corresponding Important Bird Area, (IBA),
number 37 ‘Estuario del Bidasoa’ (Txingudi).

The Commission has evaluated positively the project Life-Nature B4-3200/98/489 about a comprehensive
strategy to restore Txingudi bay with the participation of public and private bodies.

The Commission has paid particular attention to the 6th chapter of the San Sebastian Airport Master Plan,
taking into account the available information. This chapter does not match provisions set out by the
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.

Given that the enlargement project of the San Sebastian airport could have a significant impact on the
Natura 2000 sites, the Spanish authorities must fulfill the provisions under Article 6,3 of the Habitats
Directive, Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of
wild fauna and flora (1).

The Commission is not aware of the initiative. The Commission has not received any information from the
Spanish government in relation to any plan or project within this Natura 2000 site, that is why it will
request the Spanish authorities to provide information in relation to the aforementioned project.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2002/C 301 E/226)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1702/02

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 June 2002)

Subject: Storage of spent nuclear fuel

is placed in permanent storage,

In her reply my written question E-1734/97 (1), Commissioner Britt Bjerregaard stated that if spent nuclear
fuel
it should be regarded as radioactive waste and that when it is
transported, even within the EU, the receiving country has the right to refuse approval for its importation.
During the preparations for the signature of the international joint convention on the safety of spent fuel
management and the safety of radioactive waste management, the Commission is apparently entering a
reservation in respect of Article 27 to the effect that (cid:1) on the basis of an interpretation of the Euratom
Treaty (cid:1) within the EU the consent of the receiving country will not be required in the manner laid down
in the joint convention. In addition, a Commission representative has stated at a meeting of the European
Parliament’s Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy that the Commission is drafting
a new directive on the subject. What is the Commission’s interpretation of the EC and Euratom Treaties in
their current form: is there a common market in spent nuclear fuel or does the receiving country have the
right to prohibit its importation and permanent storage?

(1) OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 92.