WRITTEN QUESTION E-0410/03 by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Russia's transportation of oil through the Baltic.
Date: 2003-02-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Baltic Sea, EU relations, Finland, Russia, bilateral relations, common transport policy, environmental risk prevention, international transport, maritime safety, oil pollution, tanker

C 222 E/192

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

18.9.2003

(2003/C 222 E/219)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0408/03

by Ari Vatanen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 February 2003)

Subject: Oil transport in the Baltic

This winter the tanker Stemnitsa, which sails under the Greek flag and which is not reinforced so as to
resist ice pressure, has, inter alia, collected a cargo of 110 000 tons of crude oil from Primorsk, Russia, at a
time when ice conditions were difficult. The Finnish authorities contacted the Russian authorities about
this, but without result.

The Stemnitsa’s ice vessel classification permits it to sail on condition that the thickness of the ice does not
exceed 40 centimetres, because it has a strengthened bow. The classification bureau ABS was also
responsible for classifying the oil tanker Prestige, which was wrecked off the coast of Spain. According to a
Finnish insurance expert, however, the classification bureau has no knowledge of ice conditions in the Gulf
of Finland. Despite the strengthening of its bow against ice, the Stemnitsa is designed to operate in
summer conditions. Its outer hull is thinner than that of single-hulled vessels and can be crushed more
easily. Under heavy pressure, the inner hull is of no avail, either.

Finland has the capacity to deal with an accident involving around 10 000 tons of oil, so if this vessel were
to go aground it would be a major disaster. An accident similar to that involving the Prestige would have a
massive impact in comparison with the impact of the Prestige’s cargo on the coast of Spain. The volume of
water in the Atlantic is of quite a different order to that in the Gulf of Finland, whose mean depth is only
30 m.

The Finnish State cannot do anything about the vessel’s movements, and Russia can issue any ice pass it
wishes for operations in its own waters. But if the classification bureau were to withdraw the vessel’s ice
classification, the insurance company would refuse to pay for any ice damage.

Soon the Baltic will be virtually an internal sea of the EU. On behalf of concerned members of the public, I
should like to know what urgent action the Commission intends to take to avert any oil damage. How will
the ice classification of vessels be taken into account in EU legislation?

(2003/C 222 E/220)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0410/03

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Russia’s transportation of oil through the Baltic

(17 February 2003)

Mr Prodi, President of the Commission, has promised to raise with Russia’s political leadership the question
of hazards to the environment arising from the transportation of oil through the Baltic, and preparations
for them. This is very welcome, particularly since Prime Minister Kashanov has recently refused to discuss
the matter with Prime Minister Lipponen.

There is particular concern about the following points:

(cid:1) since in the EU it is being made compulsory to carry oil in double-hulled tankers, there is a danger
that old single-hulled vessels will switch to carrying oil on behalf of Russia, which would mean that in
practice the hazards to the environment in the Baltic would be increased rather than reduced;

(cid:1) Russia’s attitude towards the risks associated with the transportation of oil, particularly in icy
conditions: the Russian authorities have issued an ice pass to the Stemnitsa, a tanker which in itself is
modern (it was built in 2000 and has a double bottom and double hull) but is of a standard
substantially inferior to that required, for example, by the Finnish and Swedish authorities and under
the international ice vessel classification scheme, and its strengthened bow would not be sufficient for
it to secure permission to dock in Finland or Sweden under current conditions;

18.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222 E/193

(cid:1) the volume of oil which Russia transports through the Baltic is growing rapidly;

(cid:1) Russia (including Kaliningrad) appears to be utterly unequipped to deal properly with an oil spill of a

magnitude consistent with the volumes being transported.

What will the Commission do to reduce the risks arising from Russia’s transportation of oil in the Baltic? Is
the Commission aware of all the problems, including the above? Apart from the most senior political level,
at what other levels will the Commission make representations on the matter?

(2003/C 222 E/221)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0420/03

by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 February 2003)

Subject: The Stemnitsa

The EU’s future director of maritime safety, Willem de Ruiter, has informed the Finnish media that the
hazard posed by the oil tanker Stemnitsa operating in the Baltic is a matter to be resolved bilaterally by
Finland and Russia, and that the EU cannot do anything about it.

Why can the EU supposedly not take any action in this respect? The Stemnitsa is sailing under the Greek
flag, so that the matter can hardly be regarded as purely one for Finland and Russia. Moreover, the Baltic is
virtually an internal sea of the EU: protecting the Baltic is even a major aspect of the Northern Dimension
programme.

According to Mr de Ruiter, no Community standards exist for the protection of oil tankers against ice
pressure. Yet ice is a natural annual phenomenon in the Northern parts of the EU. It is difficult to see,
therefore, how it would be possible to maintain that the matter does not concern the EU.

What will the Commission do to prevent oil tankers like the Stemnitsa, which are inadequately protected
against ice pressure, from operating in conditions for which they are not designed and in which they
present a serious safety hazard?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0384/03, P-0408/03, E-0410/03 and E-0420/03
given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(14 March 2003)

The Commission is aware of the problem of navigation in the Gulf of Finland and shares the concern of
the Finnish authorities about the risks connected with the transport of hydrocarbons by sea under winter
conditions.

The Commission has closely monitored the situation brought about by the voyage of the oil tanker
Stemnitsa to the Primorski terminal. It has informed the Russian authorities of its concern about the
exceptionally difficult ice conditions in the Gulf of Finland.

Following the ERIKA and Prestige disasters, the Commission has repeatedly highlighted the urgent need for
harmonised measures to prevent new disasters in the Union’s external waters, including the Baltic. Under
the agreement between the Union and Russia, contacts have been established with the Russian authorities
to ensure compliance with the measures which the EU intends to take to secure the transport of
hydrocarbons by sea, and in particular to ban the transport of heavy fuel by single-hull tankers.

However, it should be noted that the Union does not have any legal authority to regulate the passage
through international waters of vessels carrying potentially dangerous cargo, even near the coast of the
Member States and even if such cargo is carried under the icy conditions prevailing in the Baltic in winter.