WRITTEN QUESTION P-1825/03 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Environmental impact study on the Puente del Arco to El Condado section of the AS-17 highway (Asturias, Spain).
Date: 2003-05-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, application of EU law, environmental impact, environmental law, environmental protection, impact study, road network

C 33 E/174

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 July 2003)

In its judgment of 15 May 2003 in Case C-282/00 RAR v Sinaga (not yet published), the Court of Justice
held that it was for the referring court to assess whether shipments of sugar which had been refined in
the Azores and which had benefited from the specific supply arrangements forming the subject of the
main action possessed the characteristics of traditional shipments.

The Court of Justice stated in paragraphs 43 and 44 of the judgment that

… if the Community legislature intended to take account of traditional trade flows it was not for the
purpose of acknowledging historical rights but in order to prevent the introduction of the specific
supply arrangements, intended for the benefit of the Azores, from resulting in the loss of markets on
which their products were regularly sold.

It follows that the shipments of sugar must satisfy relatively strict conditions in order to be classified
as traditional trade flows or traditional shipments. Those requirements refer as much to the magnitude
of the shipments as to their frequency and the fact that they are ongoing. Sporadic and small-scale
shipments made in the past cannot satisfy those requirements.

The Commission considers that the practice followed up to now of quantifying the volume of products
which may be re-exported or reshipped on the basis of the average annual volume of shipments/exports in
the three years before Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 (1) entered into force is in accordance with the
principles stated by the Court of Justice in the above judgment.

The Commission does not therefore intend to repeal Regulation (EC) No 20/2002 (2) at this stage.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 1600/02 of 15 June 1992 concerning specific measures for the Azores and Madeira

relating to certain agricultural products (cid:1) OJ L 173, 27.6.1992.

(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 20/2002 of 28 December 2001 laying down detailed rules for implementing the
specific supply arrangements for the outermost regions introduced by Council Regulations (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC)
No 1453/2001 and (EC) No 1454/2001 (cid:1) OJ L 8, 11.1.2002.

(2004/C 33 E/176)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1825/03

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

(23 May 2003)

Subject: Environmental impact study on the Puente del Arco to El Condado section of the AS-17 highway

(Asturias, Spain)

In its answer to Written Question E-1801/02 (1) on the same subject the Commission said that Annex IV
of Directive 85/337/EEC (2), as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 (3), on the
assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment lists the information to
be provided by a developer, including an outline of the main alternatives studied and an indication of the
main reasons for his choice, taking into account the environmental effects.

Since 5 August 2002, when the answer was received, has the Commission contacted the Spanish
authorities to find out about the possible alternatives to the route concerned?

Is the Commission aware of the irreparable damage that may be caused by a route which does not take
account of an alternative whose environmental impact would be minimal?

Since this is an urgent matter, what steps will the Commission take vis-à-vis the Spanish authorities in
order to obtain the relevant information?

(1) OJ C 28 E, 6.2.2003, p. 137.
(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(3) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/175

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2003)

As indicated in the answer to Written Question E-1801/02 by the Honourable Member, the road building
projects are not, in principle, covered by Annexes I and II to Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June
1985, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, on the assessment of the effects of
certain public and private projects on the environment.

In any event, it appears that the project has undergone environmental impact assessment. It should be
noted, however, that Directive 85/337/EEC does not specify the criteria by which a project is to be selected
from among the alternative solutions which have been examined, provided the chosen project has been
properly assessed.

In the absence of more specific indications of an infringement of Community law, the Commission did not
feel it was expedient to contact the Spanish authorities in this instance.

Nonetheless,
properly enforced, it will ensure that Community law is complied with.

if the Commission receives additional evidence that Directive 85/337/EEC has not been

(2004/C 33 E/177)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1829/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 June 2003)

Subject: Letters to the Greek Government concerning the use of Community funds and the compliance

with EU legislation

Can the Commission say how many letters have been sent to the Greek Government since 1994 and from
whom (Commissioners, directors-general or heads of division) concerning the proper use of Community
funds for environmental protection purposes and the transposition and proper implementation of
Community environmental legislation?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(14 July 2003)

In accordance with the role assigned to it by Article 155 of the EC Treaty, the Commission maintains
regular and abundant correspondence with the national authorities on the implementation and appropriate
use of EU funds granted to projects contributing to environmental objectives and on the correct
application of EU environmental legislation. The number of letters sent in each case depends on a number
of factors.

For instance, the investigation of a complaint concerning the application of EU environmental law may
comprise several stages involving the dispatch of many successive letters.

When the Commission considers that there is an infringement, it may initiate the procedure provided for
by Article 226 of the EC Treaty which may lead to the matter being brought before the Court of Justice,
preceded by the dispatch of a letter of formal notice and of a reasoned opinion.

However, it is materially and technically impossible to produce statistics showing the total number of
letters which the Commission has sent to the Greek authorities since 1994. However, it is possible to
produce general statistics on the number of complaints or infringements relating to transposition and
application of EU environmental legislation in Greece.