WRITTEN QUESTION E-0237/03 by Gerardo Galeote Quecedo (PPE-DE)and Juan Ojeda Sanz (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Dumping of fuel in Algeciras Bay.
Date: 2003-02-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Gibraltar, coastal protection, environmental law, environmental liability, harbour installation, penalty, polluter pays principle, pollution control measures, pollution from ships

C 222 E/170

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

18.9.2003

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0235/03 and P-0352/03

(13 May 2003)

In the context of the report (1) from the Commission on implementation of Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty:
‘measures to assist the outermost regions’, the Council, during the first semester of 2003 has planned to
examine the Commission proposals concerning on the one hand modifications to the POSEI regime (2) and
on the other, the modification of the Regulation (3) introducing a scheme to compensate for the additional
costs incurred in the marketing of certain fishery products from the outermost regions. These proposals
have not yet been officially presented to the Council.

Furthermore, the Council will examine the 2nd Interim Report on Economic and Social Cohesion, which
presents an update of the analysis of the situation and trends emerging in the regions, along with the main
topics of the debate on future cohesion policy after enlargement.

(1) COM(2002) 723 final.
(2) Regulations 1452/2001, 1453/2001 and 1454/2001.
(3) Regulation 579/2002.

(2003/C 222 E/196)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0237/03

by Gerardo Galeote Quecedo (PPE-DE)
and Juan Ojeda Sanz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 February 2003)

Subject: Dumping of fuel in Algeciras Bay

Algeciras Bay has become a refuse dump for ships that regularly sail through the Straits of Gibraltar.
Environmental organisations and local representatives have for years been denouncing the fact that the
coastline is vulnerable owing to the lack of resources available for implementing a penalty system that
would act as a deterrent.

Moreover, the nature of the bunkering activities carried on in Gibraltar very often contravenes the London
Convention and Marpol regulations, since because there is no refinery nor quay at which to refuel,
veritable floating fuel depots (cid:1) such as the tanker Vemamagna (cid:1) are being used, which are only 600
metres off the Spanish coast and not under the supervision or control of the port of Gibraltar.

The Commission will agree that these activities pose a major environmental risk. Does it not consider that
bunkering rules and regulations need to be tightened up? Have any steps been taken to ensure compliance
with the environmental regulations governing such situations?

The Commission is working on a proposal for a regulation which will
impose criminal penalties on
anyone who pollutes the sea deliberately or through gross negligence. Can the Commission indicate when
this proposal will be presented and whether it will apply to the case in point?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 2003)

Regarding the risks posed by refuelling activities in Algeciras Bay and Gibraltar, the Commission would
refer the Honourable Members to its answer to Oral Question H-0800/02 by Mr García Margallo y Marfil
at Parliament’s December 2002 session (1).

18.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222 E/171

The Commission can confirm that on 5 March it adopted a legislative proposal to apply criminal sanctions
to any shipowner, shipper, classification society or other person responsible for pollution through gross
negligence. The proposed text would introduce strict rules relating to pollution, including unlawful tank
cleaning operations as well as refuelling activities.

(1) Oral answer of 17.12.2002.

(2003/C 222 E/197)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0244/03

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject: Non-compliance in Greece with the Kyoto Protocol on climate change and unsatisfactory

implementation of Regulation (EC) NO 2037/2000 on substances that deplete the ozone layer

According to the Commission’s second report (1) on the implementation of Decision 93/389/EEC (2) in
Greece, greenhouse gas emissions rose during 2000 to 8.7 index points above the linear target path for the
period 2008-2010, which the Member States set to meet the Kyoto targets. Moreover, Greece is failing
satisfactorily to implement Regulation (EC) 2037/2000 (3) on substances that deplete the ozone layer and
has not established any system to promote their recovery pursuant to Article 16, paragraph 6 of that
Regulation.

Is the Commission satisfied with the measures taken by Greece in respect of emissions of the gases listed in
the annex to the Kyoto Protocol (cid:1) carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O),
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) (cid:1) and what measures
will the Commission take to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Greece in CO2 equivalents?

Why has the Commission taken no measures in response to the unsatisfactory implementation in Greece
of Regulation (EC) 2037/2000 and, in particular, the failure to implement Article 16 which requires that
used ozone-depleting substances (e.g. CFCs etc.) be recovered? What measures will it take to prevent the
dumping of appliances containing controlled substances (e.g. refrigerators) on rubbish tips in Greece?

In the Commission’s view, what measures would be appropriate to reduce greenhouse gases and to reduce
and recover used ozone-depleting substances in Greece?

(1) COM(2002) 702 final.
(2) OJ L 167, 9.7.1993, p. 31.
(3) OJ L 244, 29.9.2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(21 February 2003)

Climate change

The actual emissions show that Greece (cid:1) together with eight other Member States (cid:1) had not made
sufficient progress until the year 2000 (the latest year for which data are available) towards their burden-
sharing target under the Kyoto Protocol if it is assumed that progress towards the target is linear (see also
the latest annual report on the monitoring of Community greenhouse gases) (1). The most recent
projections available with existing measures (baseline) indicate that the Greek emissions will see an increase
by 35,6 % from 1990 levels in the year 2010, while Greece’s legally binding burden-sharing target is
+ 25 % only. Other projections taking account of additional measures have not yet been reported to the
Commission. These new projections incorporating the latest list of policies and measures would be useful
its
in assessing the extent

to which the additional measures identified will help Greece to meet