WRITTEN QUESTION P-3924/03 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Seaworthiness of the Geroi Sevastopolya.
Date: 2003-12-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Baltic States, Community acquis, Cyprus, Malta, Russia, accession to the European Union, maritime law, maritime safety, oil pollution, pollution from ships, prevention of pollution

C 84 E/742

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

219 days (i.e. 60 % of the year), which means that it ceased to flow out at Cullera. It should be noted that
both the Júcar Basin Hydrological Plan and the National Hydrological Plan assign the total remaining
resources of the Júcar in Tous to various uses or reserves for extraction. This explains the tiny ecological
water flow between Tous and Antella, and the absence of any ecological water flow from Antella onwards:
the planning administration was aware that it had assigned the river’s entire resources to various users, and
was therefore unable legally to establish an ecological water flow, since there were no resources to do so.

How does the Commission intend to apply the principle of ‘no deterioration’, and demand a minimum
in accordance with Framework Water Directive 2000/60/EC (1) under these
ecological water flow,
that the middle and lower reaches of the Júcar are a Site of
furthermore,
conditions, considering,
Community Interest under Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC (2)?

And how can the Commission claim that this water transfer is ecologically viable, when it is obvious that
for half of most years the river cannot supply the water transfer even if its own flow were completely
eliminated, and taking account of the fact that the envisaged savings in traditional agriculture are utterly
implausible and would be to the detriment of the Albufera Natural Park?

(1) OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2004)

The Commission is aware of the extremely low flows in the lower reaches of the Júcar river.

The proposed transfer of water from the Júcar to the Vinalopó is based on the assumption that significant
savings of water use will be made in the upper reaches of the Júcar as a result of improvements to be
made to the irrigation systems in the region. The water which is ‘saved’ as a result of these improvements
in efficiency will be transferred to the Vinalopó. Given that the water which is planned to be transferred
will become available as a result of savings in current water use, the Commission does not believe there
will be any deterioration in the status of the Júcar as a result of the proposed transfer.

The Hydrological Plan of the Júcar river watershed also considers the improvement of the traditional
irrigation systems deserved by the ‘Acequia Real del Jucar’, which may result in new ‘saved’ resources
available for the lower reaches of the river.

With regard to the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (1), the requirement to achieve good
ecological and chemical status by 2015 will apply to the river Júcar in the same way that it applies to all
bodies of surface water in the EU. Similarly, the requirements of the Habitats Directive (2) must also be
respected.

(1) Directive 2000/60/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for

Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 192, 20.7.2002.

(2) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora,

OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2004/C 84 E/0838)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3924/03

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Seaworthiness of the Geroi Sevastopolya

(16 December 2003)

The Russian single-hulled vessel, the Geroi Sevastopolya, has set sail from the Latvian port of Ventspils
with 55 000 tonnes of fuel similar to the kind the Prestige was carrying. According to information
published in the media, the 24-year-old tanker is not in the best condition for sailing, obliging the
Commission to send inspectors to Latvia, as a preventative measure, to examine its state of repair.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/743

Given the current sensitivity in Europe over maritime safety and the damage to the marine environment:

(cid:1) Can the Commission state what kind of inspections the Geroi Sevastopolya was subject to?

(cid:1) Can the Commission confirm that the vessel was transporting 55 000 tonnes of fuel similar to that

aboard the Prestige?

(cid:1) Does the Commission not consider that the three Baltic acceding countries should begin to bring their

legislation on maritime safety in line with that in force in the EU earlier than 1 May 2004?

(cid:1) Can the Commission provide information about the differences in legislation between the accession

countries and the present Member States?

(cid:1) Can the Commission provide information about Maltese and Cypriot

legislation regarding the

registration of vessels and state whether those countries’ laws meet Community standards?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2004)

The Erika and Prestige accidents highlighted the disastrous consequences that major fuel oil spills have for
the environment and for coastal economies. Against this background, the Commission’s attention was
drawn to the case of the Russian single-hulled tanker Geroi Sevastopolya, which was due to leave the
Latvian port of Ventspils bound for Singapore, carrying around 50 000 tonnes of heavy fuel oil along the
coasts of Europe on its way.

At the Commission’s initiative, a team of inspectors from several EU countries, coordinated by the
European Maritime Safety Agency, inspected the vessel before it set sail from Ventspils. The inspectors
found no grounds warranting detention of the vessel by the Latvian authorities.

It should be added that the Commission reacted very swiftly following the Prestige accident,
its first
proposals being designed precisely to prohibit heavy fuel oil being carried in such vessels. These measures
were adopted by the Council and the European Parliament, and since 21 October 2003 no single-hulled
oil tanker carrying heavy fuel oil has been allowed to enter or leave an EU port.

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that it is important that these measures be applied
early by all the accession States, and made this point to the Ministers at the Transport Council of
5 December 2003, inviting them to the necessary steps as quickly as possible to stop allowing single-
hulled vessels carrying heavy fuel oil into their ports.

As for differences in legislation between the accession countries and the current Member States, the
framework legislation of the accession States is in place and it is in line with the Community acquis.
However, the accession countries still need to finalise their adoption of the most recent measures, such as
the ‘Erika’ I and II packages.

With more specific regard to Malta and Cyprus, the regulatory framework in these countries regarding
flags is, as indicated above, not yet fully in line with the Community acquis. However, the Maltese and
Cypriot flags have undertaken to step up their efforts to be removed as soon as possible from the blacklist
of the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control. In accordance with Article 211 of the
EC Treaty, as of 1 May 2004 the Commission will ensure that these States apply Community law properly.