WRITTEN QUESTION E-3992/03 by Giles Chichester (PPE-DE)and Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Presentation of the peer review on the Kozloduy nuclear power plant.
Date: 2004-01-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Bulgaria, accession to the European Union, decommissioning of power stations, nuclear power station, nuclear safety

C 88 E/664

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

support system for banana producers in the ACP countries fails to meet the most basic requirements as
regards transparency and objectivity, and that banana producers in Côte d’Ivoire are unacceptably placed at
a disadvantage.

When will the Commission propose the necessary amendments to the rules in force?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2004)

The individual amounts being allocated annually to each traditional African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP)
banana supplier are calculated in accordance with the criteria set out in Commission Regulation (EC)
No 1609/1999 (1). In particular, the cost, insurance, freight (CIF) price as shown in the Eurostat statistics is
used as a benchmark to measure the competitiveness gap between ACP and third countries suppliers,
whereas the importance of the banana sector in the economy of the countries concerned is reflected by
fixed calculation factors listed in the Commission Regulation. This calculation basis is uniform for all
beneficiaries and thereby ensures transparency and objectivity.

Recently representatives of the banana growers on the Ivory Coast have approached the Commission and
expressed their concern about the method used when establishing the relevant data on import into the
Community. The Commission is looking further into the matter and will also be discussing the issue with
the Member States’ customs administrations in the near future.

This has been communicated to the banana growers organisation on the Ivory Coast (OCAB) in recent
correspondence.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1609/1999 of 22 July 1999 laying down the detailed rules for the implementation
of Council Regulation (EC) No 856/1999 establishing a special framework of assistance to traditional ACP suppliers
of bananas, OJ L 190, 23.7.1999.

(2004/C 88 E/0682)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3992/03

by Giles Chichester (PPE-DE)
and Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 January 2004)

Subject: Presentation of the peer review on the Kozloduy nuclear power plant

Referring to the letter from the President of Bulgaria, Mr Parvanov, to the Council and the Commission
dated 24 October 2002 requesting a safety peer review of the Kozloduy nuclear power plant’s units 3 and
4, and bearing in mind that the Terms of Reference (TOR) for that review were issued to the Commission
on 28 January 2003, recalling that the peer review then took place on 16 and 17 November 2003, can
the Commission now confirm that no more time will be wasted in conveying the expected positive results
of the review to both Council and the Bulgarian Government with a recommendation that the closure
demand for the said units, now having no technical or economic justification, be withdrawn and that no
pre-condition of plant closure should exist with regard to the accession of Bulgaria to the European
Union?

(2004/C 88 E/0683)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3993/03

by Giles Chichester (PPE-DE)
and Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 January 2004)

Subject: Review of the closure dates for the Kozloduy nuclear power plant units

Given that the agreement dated 29 November 1999 between the Council and the Bulgarian Government
(brought about by the Commission) to close four units of the Kozloduy nuclear power plant as a condition
of Bulgaria’s accession to the EU was based on 10-year-old criteria, and given that, in 2002, the IAEA
declared that these units ‘now correspond to the level of improvements seen at plants of similar vintage