WRITTEN QUESTION E-1430/03 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Environmental threats in Algeciras Bay.
Date: 2003-04-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, environmental liability, environmental protection, maritime safety, oil pollution, penalty, pollution from ships, prevention of pollution, tanker

C 33 E/118

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (EIA Directive) as amended by
Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, and to Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the
conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (Habitats Directive).

The Honourable Members state that the rural property of Pinya de Rosa is the last natural space of the
coastal strip in the municipality of Blanes with 1 400 meters of coast line including a Tropical Garden
(700 species), a mixed forest of oaks and pines of more than 60 years of age, as well as a rich flora and
fauna in the sea-bed and the coast.

According to the EIA Directive, Member States are obliged to ensure that, before development consent is
given, projects likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue, inter alia, of their nature,
size or location are made subject to an assessment of the environmental effects. Certain infrastructure
projects and projects for tourism and leisure are included in Annex II of the EIA Directive, which could
cover the urbanisation project mentioned by the Honourable Members. In that case Member States have to
determine if the project is likely to have significant effects on the environment on a case-by-case basis or
by using thresholds or criteria. The relevant selection criteria set out in Annex III of the EIA Directive shall
be taken into account. In the affirmative an environmental impact assessment has to be carried out.

Regarding the Habitats Directive, Member States are responsible for the designation of Sites of Community
Importance. These sites have to fulfil the criteria set out in Annex III, stage 1 of the Habitats Directive.
These are based on assessment, at national level, of the relative importance of the sites for each natural
habitat type of Community interest and each species of Community interest whose conservation requires
the designation of Special Areas of Conservation.

According to the information available, the site has not been proposed by the Spanish Authorities as Site
of Community Importance, nor designated as Special Protected Area for birds.

(2004/C 33 E/118)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1430/03

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

Subject: Environmental threats in Algeciras Bay

(24 April 2003)

On 20 January 2003, Greenpeace conducted a protest action in Algeciras Bay against the single-hull tanker
‘Vemamagna’, which was built in 1978 and shows many similarities with the ‘Prestige’. This vessel, which
is owned by the company Vemaoil, flies a flag of convenience. Its presence in the bay constitutes a risk in
itself, and it is also used in highly polluting activities as a floating fuel depot.

On 17 March 2003, the tanker slipped its anchor, started to drift with 70 000 tonnes of fuel on board,
and could have triggered the same kind of catastrophe as the ‘Prestige’.

On 6 December 2002, the Transport Council adopted additional measures to improve safety at sea and
decided that these should be implemented immediately, along the lines suggested by the Commission and
the European Parliament when adopting the Erika I and II packages.

What action will the Commission take to ensure that existing EU measures regarding safety at sea are
applied immediately and in full in the case of this tanker?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 June 2003)

With regard to the measures taken by the Commission to improve maritime safety and the protection of
the environment since the sinking of the Prestige, the Honourable Member is requested to refer to the
Communication of 3 December 2002 and the various interim reports presented to the Community

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/119

institutions: report of 5 March 2003 to the European Council on action to deal with the effects of the
Prestige disaster (1); and the Commission working document reporting on the sinking of the Prestige oil
tanker presented on 19 March 2003 to Parliament’s Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism
during the hearing.

the measures which concern single-hull

tankers such as the Vemamagna more particularly,

Of
the
Commission would draw attention more especially to the proposal for a Regulation which prohibits the
carriage of heavy fuel oil by single-hull tankers to or from Union ports, and accelerates the replacement of
single-hull tankers by double-hull tankers (2). This proposal, which was transmitted to the co-legislators on
20 December 2002, has in the meantime been the subject of agreement within the Council, and a draft
favourable opinion has been adopted by Parliament’s Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and
Tourism. Parliament is therefore expected to adopt it on first reading during its next plenary session in
June 2003.

On 13 March 2001, the Commission also put forward a proposal on the protection of the environment
through criminal law (3), and on 5 March 2003 it sent to Parliament and the Council a proposal for a
Directive (4) on ship-source pollution and the introduction of sanctions, including criminal sanctions, for
pollution offences. This proposal concerns illegal discharges and major oil pollution. It covers the entire
chain of liability. Those who cause pollution will therefore no longer be able to shirk their responsibility.

(1) COM(2003) 105 final.
(2) COM(2002) 780 final.
(3) COM(2001) 139 final, 13 March 2001, OJ C 180, 26.6.2001, as amended by COM(2002) 544 final, 30 September

2002, OJ C 20 E, 28.1.2003.

(4) COM(2003) 092 final.

(2004/C 33 E/119)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1433/03

by Theodorus Bouwman (Verts/ALE) and Rijk van Dam (EDD) to the Commission

Subject: European driver attestation and suspected misuse of ECMT permits

(24 April 2003)

With effect from 19 March 2003, transport companies in the EU are required to use a driver attestation
for drivers from third countries working for them.

Can the Commission indicate to what extent the Member States are complying with the requirement that
took effect on 19 March 2003 on the use of the driver attestation for drivers from third countries, in
accordance with Regulation (EC) No 484/2002 (1)?

Does the Commission agree that the fact that the requirement to hold a driver attestation under Regulation
484 does not apply to ‘third country drivers’ working for transport companies from third countries in
which EU transport companies have a (majority) stake is a serious gap in the law, and one that must be
dealt with? If so, what does the Commission propose to do?

Does the Commission agree that the fact that companies and drivers from third countries that use an
ECMT permit for transport within the EU, in which they are operating virtually without restriction (in
terms of time) throughout the EU’s territory, in effect constitutes improper use of the permit, and that the
situation should be dealt with?

Does the Commission agree that it is undesirable for drivers from ‘third countries’ to hire themselves out
to European transport companies as ‘independent drivers’,
to hold a
European driver attestation? What steps can and will the Commission take to put an end to such practices?

thus evading the requirement

(1) OJ L 76, 19.3.2002, p. 1.