WRITTEN QUESTION P-3830/03 by Juan Ferrández Lezaun (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Spanish NHP infrastructure tendering.
Date: 2003-12-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, award of contract, competition law, cost-benefit analysis, environmental law, hydrology, inland waterway, services contract

C 78 E/652

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Can the Commission therefore say what measures it is considering in order to take account of the
commitments already made by these organisations, bearing in mind the promise that funding would be
maintained until the end of 2004?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(3 February 2004)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written E-3007/03 by Mr Santini (1)

(1) See page 448.

(2004/C 78 E/0694)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3830/03

by Juan Ferrández Lezaun (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Spanish NHP infrastructure tendering

(8 December 2003)

The Spanish Government has begun tendering for the infrastructure of the river Ebro water transfer, and
specifically, two sections thereof, in the provinces of Almeria (section 46/subsection 1) and Murcia (section
41/subsection 1).

As both Commissioner Bolkestein himself and the Spanish Ministry have acknowledged, the Spanish
Government failed to comply with Directive 92/50/EEC (1) on the awarding of public service contracts, by
failing to respect the rules on openness to competition in awarding a service contract.

In this case, the Commission decided, despite the Spanish Government’s repeated infringements in this
area, not to open infringement proceedings against it, nor oblige it to re-run the tendering process.

Has the Commission been following the tendering process for the two aforementioned water transfer
infrastructure sections? If so, can it confirm that Directive 92/50/EEC on coordinating the awarding of
public service contracts has been respected?

Can the Commission confirm that these two water transfer sections respect Community environmental
legislation? If not, which provisions does it infringe, and why? What measures is the Commission going to
take in this connection?

Can the Commission confirm that these two water-transfer building operations have been preceded by a
cost-benefit, project-viability and socio-economic impact assessment, as required by Regulation (EC) 1260/
1999 (2)?

Can the Commission confirm whether as of now,
building of these two sections of the water transfer? If so, what are the figures for each section?

it has guaranteed Community co-funding for the

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2004)

like to clarify that the service contracts for environmental studies
The Commission would first of all
referred to in its reply to the questions by the Honourable Members De Roo (H-0563/03) during question
time at Parliament’s Plenary session of October 2003 (1) and Dührkop (H-688/03) during question time at
Parliament’s Plenary session of November 2003 (2) were awarded by Trasagua some time ago. The
Commission decided not to bring infringement proceedings regarding these specific contracts, for the
reasons stated in its answer to these questions. The contracts which the Honourable Member now enquires

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/653

about are part of new calls for tender recently issued by Trasagua. In fact, Trasagua has published separate
tenders for works contracts, relating to the construction of the infrastructure for the transfer of waters
from the river Ebro, and for service contracts, relating to consultancy on various aspects of the works on
the infrastructure. To the extent that their value goes beyond the Union thresholds, such works contracts
must comply with Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 on the co-ordination of procedures for the award
of public works contracts (3), whereas service contracts are subject to Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992
on the co-ordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (4). The Commission
understands that the Honourable Member refers in particular to compliance of the service contracts at
stake with the requirements of Directive 92/50/EEC. Indeed, those contracts involve consultancy and
assistance services to the management of the works, environmental direction and health and safety
coordination for the construction of the two sections of the infrastructure. According to the information
available to the Commission, tender notices concerning those contracts were published in the Official
Journal S 229 of 27 November 2003, and S 230 of 28 November 2003. Furthermore, the Commission
would like to point out that the Spanish authorities undertook to ensure that Trasagua applies in full the
Community public procurement rules when awarding public contracts. The Commission does not dispose
at this stage of any information allowing it to believe that this undertaking is not being honoured.

to conclude that

The Commission does not have specific information on the water transfer infrastructures at stake to allow
the
legislation.
they do not comply with Community environmental
it
Commission does not receive this type of information automatically, except
for projects which are
financed by the Cohesion Fund or for which the Community financing through the Structural Funds
exceeds EUR 50 million.

In fact,

Thirdly, as far as the need for a cost-benefit analysis, an analysis of the economic viability and the socio-
economic impact of the projects is concerned, in line with the requirements of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (5) they will only
be required if there is a request for Community co-financing and the projects are considered major ones.

Indeed, up to now the Commission has not received any request
infrastructures which are the subject matter of the tendering.

for the financing of

the two

(1) Oral reply, 21.10.2003.
(2) Written reply, 18.11.2003.
(3) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.
(4) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.
(5) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2004/C 78 E/0695)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3833/03

by Roberto Bigliardo (UEN) to the Commission

(12 December 2003)

Subject: Provincial authorities’ involvement in the management of EU Structural Funds

In the context of EU Structural Fund programming, responsibility for the use of Community funds lies
with the relevant regional authorities, with the involvement of local authorities (cid:1) in this instance, at
provincial level. In Objective 1 regions, including in Italy, provincial authorities have, under framework
agreements concluded with the relevant regional authorities, taken on a significant role in the management
of funds available under the Regional Operational Programme (ROP).

1.
Given the above, can the Commission state whether the authorities in Objective 1 regions in Italy
should in fact provide for the involvement of provincial authorities in the management of ROP funds and
whether this might not act as a barrier to the funds being used on schedule as a result of lengthy
coordination procedures?