WRITTEN QUESTION P-1682/03 by Enrico Ferri (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Monitoring the safety of maritime traffic and the environmental impact of the project to dredge the Gulf of La Spezia (Italy).
Date: 2003-05-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, Liguria, dredging, environmental impact, exchange of information, harbour installation, maritime safety, maritime transport, project evaluation, public health

C 51 E/124

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 2003)

On 4 February 2003, the Court of Auditors expressed the wish that the Tripartite Agreement (TA)
concluded on 19 March 1999 not be re-conducted by tacit agreement but be amended in certain respects.
In a short while the Commission has established a new text after consultation of the European Investment
Bank (EIB) on the basis of modifications proposed by the Court of Auditors. Until the signature of the
amended TA by the Presidents of the three Institutions concerned, there is a mutual consensus that the
expired TA be further applied. The Parliament’s requests are taken into account in so far as they do not
request that modifications be brought to the EC Treaty.

In accordance with paragraph 34 of Parliament’s resolution of November 2002 the Commission will
inform the Parliament and send the amended Tripartite Agreement.

The extent of the right of control of the Court of Auditors in respect of the EIB’s activity in managing
Community expenditure and revenue is determined by Article 248 of the EC Treaty. On the one hand,
according to Article 248(2) the Court of Auditors shall examine whether the financial management of all
revenue and expenditure has been sound. On the other hand, Article 248(3) stipulates that to this effect
the Court of Auditors has access to the information necessary for the audit of Community expenditure and
revenue managed by the Bank and that the TA governs this right of access. Like the expired TA, the
amended TA will provide for such rules governing the Court’s right of access to information.

The amended TA will be signed in a single Community language that will form the authentic text.
The Commission will also see to it that a translation into other Community languages will be available
upon request.

(2004/C 51 E/140)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1682/03

by Enrico Ferri (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 May 2003)

Subject: Monitoring the safety of maritime traffic and the environmental impact of the project to dredge

the Gulf of La Spezia (Italy)

The Port Authority of La Spezia has launched a project to dredge the approach channel to the Port of La
Spezia at a depth of 15 m by removing 40 000 m3 of sediment with a view to allowing huge container
ships of 6500/6800 TEU to enter the port. This project would involve a substantial extension of the port
and an increase in maritime traffic. The Regional Administrative Court of Genoa has ordered that the
project be put on hold. The project has the dual effect of having a negative impact on the environment
and on the health of citizens living in the area around the port, given that the area has already been
reclaimed (leading to the dispersal of the pollutant substances on the sea bed). The second effect of the
project would be a considerable increase in traffic in the Port of La Spezia, which would have an adverse
impact on shipping safety.

Does the Commission not consider that this plan could have disastrous consequences from the point of
view of its impact on the environment, given that the intention is to excavate a sea bed which has already
been excavated for a long time?

The project would also concern areas adjacent to the port which are considered Sites of Community
Interest (SCIs) (even though not all of the port has been recognised as an SCI (cid:1) see reply to previous
Question H-0849/02 (1)).

Does the Commission not consider that this work would involve a further accumulation and dispersal of
the harmful substances already present in those areas and would ruin the international
image of the
so-called Gulf of the Poets?

Does the Commission not think that the extension of the port (as explicitly stated in the dredging project)
and the ensuing increase in maritime traffic would have a negative impact on safety at sea?

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/125

The Commission,

(cid:1) having regard to Articles 174, 175 and 176 of the Treaty,

(cid:1) having regard to EU legislation on maritime safety and traffic, most recently the Commission

Communication on improving safety at sea in response to the ‘Prestige’ accident,

(cid:1) having regard to Council Directive 92/43/EEC (2) of 21 May 1992,

(cid:1) having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 (3) of 27 June 2002 establishing a European Maritime

Safety Agency,

(cid:1) having regard to the proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive concerning pollution
for pollution-related

including criminal penalties,

from ships and the introduction of penalties,
offences,

(cid:1) whereas Directive 85/337/EEC (4) provides for environmental

impact assessments (EIAs) of certain
public and private projects, including, as specifically stated in Annex 1(8) and Annex 2(13) projects
concerning port installations and involving an increase in maritime traffic, which is the declared
objective of the dredging project:

1. Can the Commission conduct an investigation into the current situation and check what impact this

project would have on maritime safety and traffic standards?

2. Can the Commission conduct an investigation into the compatibility of

this project with the

environment?

(1) Written reply of 1 April 2003.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
(3) OJ L 208, 5.8.2002, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 2003)

The Commission has previously replied to the Honourable Member’s oral question H-0849/02 during
question time at Parliament’s January 2003 session, on this subject. On the basis of new information
provided by the Honourable Member, the project seems to be an extention of the existing port of La
Spezia, and is thus covered by Annex II point 13 of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the
assessment of 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 (1). In such cases the Member States have to
determine, either through a case by case examination or according to thresholds or criteria, whether the
project is to be made subject to an assessment taking into account the relevant selection criteria set out in
Annex III of the Directive. However, on the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member,
the Commission has no reason to assume that the EIA Directive is not being correctly applied.

As regards Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of
wild fauna and flora, it is not clear from the information provided by the Honourable Member whether it
is likely that the project will lead to a significant impact on a proposed Site of Community Importance
(pSCI), and if that is the case, whether an appropriate assessment of its effects on the site was carried out.

Concerning the alleged negative impact on safety at sea, the Commission does not have any indication that
the project to dredge the approach channel to the port of La Spezia would breach the provisions of
Community maritime safety legislation as mentioned by the Honourable Member. The fact that the project
would lead to an increase in maritime traffic, and to a possible increase of polluting substances due to the
works involved, does not necessarily mean that it is not in line with existing Community maritime safety
legislation, which deals mainly with ships’ safety standards, traffic monitoring and prevention of pollution
from ships.

On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member, the Commission has no reason to
assume that Community legislation is not being correctly applied. If the Honourable Member can provide
detailed information enabling the Commission to assess these issues in relation to the above-mentioned
Directives, the Commission will then be able to investigate this matter.

(1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.