WRITTEN QUESTION E-3671/02 by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Air pollution caused by ceramics production in Castellón province (Spain).
Date: 2002-12-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community of Valencia, air quality, application of EU law, ceramics, degree of pollution, exchange of information, quality standard

C 161 E/130

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

10.7.2003

In view of the fact that this latest accident occurred in European waters, will the Commission say what
measures it took to secure the passage and safety of ships in its waters? In particular, did the Commission
contact the competent US authorities to ascertain the precise cause of this unprecedented accident? Finally,
can the Commission say whether there was any leakage of the tanker’s hazardous cargo?

Answer given by Ms de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(3 February 2003)

As the Honourable Member recalls, on 13 November 2002 the Norwegian LNG carrier ‘Norman Lady’
very likely struck the periscope of the US nuclear submarine Oklahoma City to the east of the Strait of
Gibraltar.

The company Leif Höegh, which owns the ship, stated that only its double bottom had been damaged and
that the 30 crew members had not been in any danger. Furthermore, there had been no pollution.

In terms of scale, this accident cannot be compared to the collision between the US nuclear submarine
Greenville and a Japanese fishing training vessel, which caused the death of nine sailors off Hawaii in
February 2001.

Following this regrettable incident, the Commission did not make contact with the US authorities and did
not plan to take any specific measures. In fact, it does not have any powers in the field of the navigation of
warships such as nuclear submarines.

Thus, the extensive measures designed to improve maritime safety in European Union waters adopted in
the Erika II package, particularly Directive 2002/59/EC (1) on monitoring maritime traffic, are part of the
legal order established within the International Maritime Organisation and concern only commercial
vessels.

Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the coastal state in charge of monitoring the collision zone and the
authorities of the flag states to determine the causes of the accident and to check that navigation rules
were complied with.

(1) Directive 2002/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a Community
vessel traffic monitoring and information system and repealing Council Directive 93/75/EEC, OJ L 208, 5.8.2002.

(2003/C 161 E/134)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3671/02

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(18 December 2002)

Subject: Air pollution caused by ceramics production in Castellón province (Spain)

The EU’s legislation on air pollution is based on the legal definition of air quality values, so as to enable
each Member State subsequently to regulate emission levels with a view to ensuring the prescribed air
quality standards.

In Spain, the legislation on industrial air pollution (except in the case of large combustion plants) is based
on Law 38/1972 and Decree 833/1975, which lay down emission limits that are between three and ten
times higher than the average for the most industrialised Member States (e.g. Germany, France and Italy).

The requirements for complying with these limits is very low for emissions via chimneys and almost non-
existent for fugitive emissions.

10.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161 E/131

In the case of the production of tiles and ceramic frits in Spain, 90 % of which takes place in Castellón
province in the Valencia region, the legislative circumstances and the social and economic weight of the
industry in the province have created a situation in which there is almost no control over emissions: the
current inmission levels for solid particles (PM10) and heavy metals, such as arsenic, chromium and lead,
are in excess of the threshold values laid down in the EU’s existing or proposed legislation.

In the face of this deterioration in air quality, the Spanish government is failing to comply with either its
own legislation or the principles of transparent information, by refusing access to information on air
pollution in Castellón province.

Is the Commission aware of this situation in Castellón province, in the context of the high concentration
there of tile and ceramic frit production?

Does the Commission not consider that these circumstances are encouraging unfair competition in the EU,
with companies being allowed to operate without applying the corrective measures required in their
operation licences?

What action will the Commission take to ensure compliance with the Community legislation on industrial
atmospheric emissions by this industry in Castellón province?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(10 February 2003)

The Commission is aware that the province of Castellón is an important area for the ceramics industry in
Spain.

For the time being two legislative instruments concerning the ceramic industry are in place.

The first is the Council Directive 84/360/EEC of 28 June 1984 on the combating of air pollution from
industrial plants (1). Installations which received a permit for operation after 30 June 1987 are obliged to
take preventive measures against air pollution applying best available technology not entailing excessive
costs. The authorities are required to ensure that installations which started operation before that date are
gradually adapted to best available technology. This Directive, which is in force until 30 October 2007, is
applicable to all installations producing ceramics.

The second instrument is Council Directive 96/61/EC, of 24 September 1996, concerning integrated
pollution prevention and control (IPPC) (2). Installations which received a permit after 30 October 1999 or
which are changed substantially, are obliged to operate in such a way that all appropriate preventive
measures are taken against pollution through the application of best available techniques. Existing
installations are obliged to operate in compliance with the Directive by 30 October 2007. This Directive is
applicable for ceramics producing installations exceeding a certain capacity threshold.

The deadline for the transposition of Directive 96/61/EC expired on 30 October 1999. It must be noted
that pursuant to the infringement procedure launched by the Commission, under Article 226 of the EC
Treaty, the Court of Justice in its judgement of 7 March 2002 (3) has declared that the Kingdom of Spain
has failed to fulfil its obligations not having transposed Directive 96/61/EEC into the Spanish law.

The Spanish authorities have communicated to the Commission the Law 16/2002, of 1 July 2002,
concerning integrated pollution prevention and control. This law has been published in the Official Journal
No 157 of 2 July 2002. This piece of legislation is the transposition of Directive IPPC into the Spanish
legal system.

For your information the Commission intends to organise an exchange of information between Member
States and the ceramic industry on what constitutes best available techniques in the framework of the IPPC
Directive for this sector. The work is expected to start in the beginning of 2003 and should be finalised
within about two years.

As required by Council Directive 1999/30/EC of 22 April 1999 relating to limit values for sulphur
dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter (PM10) and lead in ambient air, the
Spanish authorities informed the Commission on the air quality within their territory.

C 161 E/132

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

10.7.2003

For the province of Castellón, they reported no exceedance of the limit values laid down by the Directive
for PM10 and lead. The Commission will write to the Spanish authorities asking whether their assessment
of air quality covers the areas close to ceramics production sites. Currently, there is no Community
legislation regulating ambient air concentrations of any other heavy metals.

(1) OJ L 188, 16.7.1984.
(2) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996.
(3) Case C-29/01.

(2003/C 161 E/135)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3674/02

by Paolo Pastorelli (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 December 2002)

Subject: The Foal Levy

The approach of the season for the birth of thoroughbred foals, starting in January 2003, once again raises
the recurring problem of the Foal Levy imposed by the Irish authorities on all European horse-breeders
who want their brood-mares to give birth in Ireland. Since the revenue from the levy is used to fund
measures for the benefit of local breeders at the expense of those from other Union countries, does the
Commission not consider that this practice,
including the exemption for Irish and British breeders,
constitutes a clear and unequivocal infringement of Articles 88 and 89 of the Treaty, by allowing unfair
competition and measures aimed at circumventing the rules of a free market? Can it also provide relevant
documentation to show why such a blatant legislative abuse is allowed and, if so, say what steps it intends
to take to put an end to this practice, which discriminates against breeders residing in other Union
countries?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2003)

The Commission is already investigating the issue raised by the Honourable Member. The Commission has
contacted the Irish authorities on the question in order to get their position on the matter and to collect all
relevant information about the Foal Levy. The information provided by the Irish authorities is currently
being evaluated on the basis of Articles 87-89 and of article 95 of the EC Treaty, in order to identify more
clearly whether further action is needed.

(2003/C 161 E/136)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3678/02

by Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 2002)

Subject: German wind farm close to Netherlands border locality of Bellingwolde

In October 1998 a number of residents of Bellingwolde (Bellingwedde municipality, Groningen province)
learned of a plan to build a wind farm (Windpark Rhede) 200 metres from the border on German territory
(and about 300 metres from the nearest houses) consisting of 22 wind turbines reaching a total height of
60 to 70 metres, and each with a maximum output of 1,5 MW. Ultimately, in September 2001, 17 wind
turbines, each 135 metres high, and with an output of 1,8 MW, were erected in the ‘Rheder Moor’ (in the
north-west of the Emsland administrative district in the German municipality of Rhede), about 350 metres
from the Netherlands-German border.

For local residents, the wind farm means disruption in the form of noise, cast shade, obstruction of view,
ground vibrations, electro-magnetic disturbance, property devaluation and degradation of living space.