WRITTEN QUESTION E-1802/02 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. A-8 Cantabrian motorway (Asturias, Spain): compliance with Community law.
Date: 2002-06-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Principality of Asturias, application of EU law, environmental impact, environmental protection, motorway, project evaluation, regional planning

C 28 E/138

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

was considered. This is contrary to Directive 85/337/EEC (1), as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC (2),
which provides for the study of
thus enabling the option with the least
environmental and social impact to be selected.

three separate routes,

Is the Commission aware of this situation?

Does the Commission feel that Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC, has
been correctly applied in the case in point?

What measures could the Commission take, in conjunction with the Spanish authorities, to ensure that the
alternatives to the projected route are studied and that the one with the least social and environmental
impact is adopted?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 2002)

The Commission was not aware of the situation reported by the Honourable Member. However, the
information given in the written question suggests that the road building project to which the Honourable
Member refers is not covered by Annex I of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985, as amended
by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, on the assessment of the effects of certain public and
private projects on the environment.

instead, the road building project is regarded as covered by Annex II then,

If,
in accordance with
Article 4(2) of the Directive, it is up to the Member State to determine, either on a case-by-case basis or on
the basis of thresholds or criteria set by the Member State or by a combination of both these approaches,
which projects are likely to have a significant impact on the environment and therefore require an
environmental assessment in accordance with Articles 5 to 10 of the Directive. Member States must take
the criteria laid down in Annex III of the Directive into consideration when making that decision.

Moreover, Directive 85/337/EEC does not stipulate a minimum number of alternatives which must be
examined. Annex IV of the Directive lists the information to be provided by a developer, including an
outline of the main alternatives studied and an indication of the main reasons for his choice, taking into
account the environmental effects.

Having examined the information provided by the Honourable Member, the Commission considers that
there are no grounds for suspecting that the Spanish authorities have contravened Directive 85/337/EEC.
Nonetheless, should the Commission receive further information indicating that the Directive has not been
correctly applied, it will take steps to ensure compliance with Community law in the case in point.

Furthermore, according to the information received from the competent Spanish authorities, the road
building project to which the Honourable Member refers is not cofinanced under the Structural Fund.

(2003/C 28 E/161)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1802/02

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(24 June 2002)

Subject: A-8 Cantabrian motorway (Asturias, Spain): compliance with Community law

The projected sections of the A-8 Cantabrian motorway (Principality of Asturias, Spain) that run from
Tamón to Otur and from Otur to the border with the province of Lugo, and which are funded by the
ERDF, will affect five of the ten Asturian municipalities with the largest milk quotas. The farms concerned
have received European funding under a Leader programme. In the last five years, over 400 million pesetas
have been invested in more than 200 start-up plans for young farmers and almost 600 improvement

6.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28 E/139

plans. A great many of these farms, having received Community funding, will see their activities restricted
or curtailed.

This contradictory use of Community funds has been exacerbated by failure to comply with Directive 85/
337/EEC (1), as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC (2). The Directive lays down that, for this type of
infrastructure project, studies of three alternatives must be conducted, and this has not been taken into
consideration. What is more, separate environmental impact studies have been carried out for the same
infrastructure project. This method tends towards a positive assessment, and does not give an overall view
of the environmental and social impact of the motorway. This environmental impact will be all the more
pronounced in the case of the section entering Galicia, as this will run through the Eo Estuary, which is a
special protection area for birds and contains flora and fauna habitats protected by the Habitats Directive.

Is the Commission aware of this construction project and the adverse consequences it would have for
those five Asturian municipalities?

Does the Commission not feel that, pursuant to Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended by Directive 97/11/EC,
the Spanish authorities should consider an alternative that has the minimum environmental and social
impact on the area?

What measures will the Commission take, in the case in point, to guarantee compliance with Community
legislation in this field?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 2002)

First of all, I should mention that the Commission has received a complaint raising the same concerns as
the Honourable Member regarding the Tamón-Otur section of the A-8 motorway. The Commission is now
checking whether the project in question complies with the applicable Community law.

The Commission has not, however, received any reports that Community law has been incorrectly applied
with regard to the section between Otur and the border with the province of Lugo. Council Directive 85/
337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the
environment, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, and Council Directive 92/43/
EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1) may be
applicable to the planned motorway section in question. The Commission has therefore asked the Spanish
authorities to submit their comments on the case reported by the Honourable Member and to ensure that
Community law is applied correctly in this case.

In addition, Directive 85/337/EEC stipulates that the project categories listed in Annex I, such as the
motorway project referred to in this written question, should be subject to an environmental
impact
assessment. The Directive does not, however, establish the criteria for choosing between the alternatives
assessed.

The integrated operational programme for the Principality of Asturias makes provision for the outstanding
sections of the A-8 Cantabrian motorway to be financed under the Structural Fund. According to the
information received from the Spanish authorities, public utility inquiries prior to the project have been
carried out for the sections in question. No requests for cofinancing have so far been received from the
Spanish authorities.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.