WRITTEN QUESTION E-2169/03 by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Further data for urgent action to protect the SPA Valloni e Steppe pedegarganiche in Apulia (Italy).
Date: 2003-06-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Apulia, EU control, complaint to the Commission, environmental impact, environmental protection, fund (EU), project evaluation, protected area

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/215

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(6 August 2003)

The Fifth Framework Programme and the model contract established for research and technological
development (RTD) actions under that programme provide for a maximum advance fund of 40 % of the
total Community financial contribution, whether the indirect action is a cooperative research project
(CRAFT) or a traditional research project. The actual amount of the advance fund provided depends on the
length of the project, the nature of the project and the expected expenditure over the first period and any
financial security that may be imposed by the Commission.

The model contract requires that this advance fund be recuperated in part, over the life of the project, at
the time of each subsequent payment for costs incurred. Specifically the contract states that ‘On each
periodic payment, an amount corresponding to a part of the initial advance shall be recovered, which
amount is calculated on the basis of the relation between the eligible costs approved by the Commission
and the forecast expenses for the period considered.’ Therefore, generally speaking either where actual
costs incurred or approved are low or where forecast expenses are low, a greater proportion of the
advance fund will be recuperated. In certain exceptional cases, it might be that the entire advance fund
would be recuperated at a periodic payment, particularly in short-term projects such as CRAFT projects.

For the Sixth Framework Programme a different approach is foreseen. Generally speaking, the advance
fund (pre-financing) will be up to a maximum of 85 % of the first 18 months of the project. This amount
will be settled at the end of the first periodic payment and a new pre-financing for the next 18 months
will be granted (again up to 85 % of the costs expected to be incurred during that period). In this way the
advance funds will keep tandem with the actual costs incurred. For projects lasting one year or less, the
maximum pre-financing possible is 80 % of the total Community financial contribution unless the contract
is governed by collective responsibility of the contractors (1),
in which case 85 % of the total can be
provided.

(1) Or where the contractors are public bodies.

(2004/C 51 E/236)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2169/03

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(30 June 2003)

Subject: Further data for urgent action to protect the SPA ‘Valloni e Steppe pedegarganiche’

in Apulia

(Italy)

In its answer to question E-0406/03 (1), the Commission stated that a file had been opened on the case of
the protection of the SPA ‘Valloni e Steppe pedegarganiche’ in Apulia (Italy).

It now appears necessary to point out that, pending concrete action by the Commission, this site is still in
jeopardy from circumstances which are causing severe and often irreversible damage to species and
habitats protected under the Community directives, namely:

(cid:1) construction work is continuing within the SPA, with no compensatory measures;

(cid:1) the technical panel set up by the Ministry of the Environment has only met three times, and not at all

since 10 April 2001;

(cid:1) the municipality of Manfredonia has submitted additional plans which will cause further damage to
the SPA, yet these plans have been funded by the Apulia Region with Community monies (PEP Apulia
‘Natural resources’ (cid:1) EAGGF, Measure 1.4, Action B (cid:1) Agricultural
2000-2006 (cid:1) priority area I,
planning and extensive hydraulic forest projects for soil protection);

(cid:1) the ANAS (the Italian national roads authority) and the municipality of San Giovanni Rotondo have
submitted a scheme for expanding the municipal highway to four lanes, which would severely damage
the rocky sections of the SPA;

C 51 E/216

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

(cid:1) on 4 February 2003 the Apulia Region issued a set of environmental guidelines (No 21 (cid:1) Official
Bulletin of the Republic, 11 March 2003, No 27), relating to the applicability of environmental impact
and risk assessment to the projects under the ‘Manfredonia Regional Pact’. This document does not
properly consider the question of impact on habitats and species protected under the Community
directives. Furthermore, it does not propose suitable compensation measures, and seems intended to
justify the projects already carried out in breach of the directives. LIPU (the Italian League for Bird
Protection) has already lodged a complaint against this measure with the Administrative Tribunal in
Bari;

(cid:1) the management plan for the SPA, drawn up under the LIFE project ‘Urgent measures for the
protection of Natura 2000 sites in the Gargano National Park (cid:1) LIFE Natura No 4 3200/98/491’, has
not been adopted by either the Apulia Region or the municipality of Manfredonia;

(cid:1) according to statements by the parties to the Regional Pact, the additional protocol to the contract
does not provide for any investment in compensation measures; it refers to productive investment
only.

Can the Commission state what measures it

1.
deterioration of this site?

is taking to secure an immediate stop to the

Can it state what action it is taking to ensure that Community funds are not used for projects within

2.
this site that breach the Community directives?

(1) OJ C 280 E, 21.11.2003, p. 54.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(6 August 2003)

The Commission is continuing its inquiry within the framework of the complaint file opened and within
the limits of power conferred upon it by the EC Treaty.

The information given by the Honourable Member has been added to the complaint file mentioned above
and will be taken into account in the assessment of the complaint. The Apulia Region Decision of
4 February 2003 on the application of environmental impact and risk assessment to the projects under the
‘Manfredonia Regional Pact’ has been sent to the Commission and it is currently being assessed.

The scheme submitted by ANAS (the Italian national roads authority) and the municipality of San
Giovanni Rotondo to expand the municipal highway into four lanes could be examined under: Council
Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private
projects on the environment (1), as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 (2); Council
Directives 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (3) and 92/43/EEC of 21 May
1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (4).

However, considering that no specific grounds have been provided on which to base a complaint, a breach
of these Directives cannot be identified at present. If the Honourable Member could provide detailed
information that enables the Commission to assess the issue of the municipal highway in relation to the
Directives mentioned above, the Commission would also be able to investigate this aspect of the matter.

the influence of

As regards LIFE, it is a fact that the Puglia Region and the Manfredonia municipality have not adopted the
management plan drafted as part of the LIFE project. However, the beneficiary, the Gargano National Park,
informed the Commission that negotiations were under way to ensure that any projects or plans within
the SPA ‘Valloni e steppe pedegarganiche’ would be submitted to the Park management for their opinion.
Therefore,
the Park would be extended to the whole SPA. The Commission’s
understanding is that, given that the management plan was adopted by the Park and, according to Park
management, will form the basis for the future (mandatory) Park plan, this provides the same type of
guarantees that would be in place if the plan had been adopted by the regional and local authorities.
It should also be noted that the Italian Environment Ministry, under a separate LIFE-Nature project, is
developing guidelines for the drafting and adoption of management plans. The resulting guidelines were
only published in the Italian Official Journal in September 2002, and an accompanying technical manual is
only due at the end of 2003.

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/217

With regard to the possible funding under the Community Structural Funds, Measure 1.4 of the Regional
Operational Programme (ROP) for Puglia 2000-2006 (cid:1) European Agricultural Guarantee and Guidance
Fund (EAGGF), of an additional plan proposed by Manfredonia municipality, the Commission does not
have any information at this stage about individual projects covered by this measure. On this subject, it
should be stressed that the local implementation of projects cofinanced by the Structural Funds is the
responsibility of the Member States in the framework of subsidiarity.

Measure 1.4 of the Puglia ROP is concerned with activities to restore the hydrological and geological
functions of the natural and forestry systems and agricultural land. This measure is based on Article 33,
for rural
11th indent, of Council Regulation (EC) NO 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support
development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and
repealing certain Regulations (5). In the framework of this measure, the programming complement of the
ROP Puglia provides for a selection criterion which gives priority to projects in protected areas (SCI, SPA
and parks).

Projects cofinanced by this measure, which should, by its nature, have a positive impact on the
environment, must comply, among other things, with Community and national environmental provisions,
as must all projects cofinanced by the Community Structural Funds.

The Commission will not hesitate, as the Guardian of the EC Treaty, to take all necessary measures,
including infringement procedures under Article 226 of the EC Treaty, in order to ensure that relevant
Community law is observed.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(3) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(4) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(5) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2004/C 51 E/237)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2179/03

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(30 June 2003)

Subject: EU/Korea Scientific and Technological Agreement

When does the Commission intend to sign the EU/Korea Scientific and Technological Agreement? Would
the Commission agree that it would be a positive step to have such an agreement as soon as possible?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(29 July 2003)

The possibility of an Union/Korea scientific & technological cooperation Agreement was first discussed, on
request of Korea, during the meeting between the Korean science Minister, H. Park and the Member of the
Commission responsible for Research in Brussels on 16 May 2003.

Korea as a major industrialised country and an Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) Member has notable scientific and technological capabilities in selected areas; it spends close to
3 % of its gross domestic product (GDP) on research, 3/4ths of which stemming from the private sector.

While it has developed a noteworthy and vibrant scientific cooperation with the different Member States
(Germany, France, Italy, United Kingdom, etc.), Korea wishes to develop its scientific cooperation with the
Union as such so as to more evenly balance its cooperation with its other partners such as the United
States and Japan.