WRITTEN QUESTION E-0050/04 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Conflict over pollution — between the Celulosas de Pontevedra woodpulp factory (Ence, Galicia) and the people and municipal authorities of Pontevedra.
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Galicia, air quality, environmental impact, environmental law, environmental protection, industrial pollution, location of industry, pollution of waterways, pulp and paper industry, urban area

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/753

In the context of the designation procedure referred to above, the Member States take account of the
presence in the sites of habitats and species of Community interest mentioned in Annexes I and II to the
directive.

The Val Jumela (part of the territory of the Val di Fassa) is the only site where there is still a population of
Botrychium simplex, an endemic plant species included in Annex II to Directive 92/43/EEC.

Can the Commission say whether, on the basis of the criteria applicable for drawing up the list of sites of
Community importance, the Val Jumela is to be included in the list of SCIs in the Alpine biogeographic
region and, if not, why not?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2004)

The list of sites of Community importance for the Alpine region was adopted by the Commission on
22 December 2003. This list does not include the area of Val Jumela in the Trento Autonomous Province.

The list of sites adopted by the Commission was based on proposal by the national authorities, and its
ability to reach the objectives of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of
natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, was assessed by the Commission through a process of
bio-geographic seminars, in collaboration with the Topic Centre for Nature Conservation and Biodiversity
of the European Environment Agency. This process had the active participation of environmental non-
governmental organisations (NGOs), land-owners’ organisations and independent experts.

The last bio-geographic seminar for the Alpine region took place in Brussels on 11 and 12 October 2001,
and concluded that the site proposed by Italy for the species Botrychium simplex (‘Dolomiti di Brenta’) was
the only one in which the species had been signalled.

In April 2003, the Commission was informed by the regional section of the World Wide Fund for Nature
(WWF) that the only site for this plant species is actually Val
in further exchanges of
correspondence, that the indication of the species in the site ‘Dolomiti di Brenta’ was based on an old
bibliographic reference but that no plants of this species had been identified in the site for a long time.
Unfortunately, this information was received by the Commission only at a time when the assessment of
the list for the Alpine region had been finalised, and it was impossible to re-open the discussion on
designation of individual sites.

Jumela and,

At this time, the main priority for the Commission is to complete the adoption of the lists of sites of
Community importance for all bio-geographic regions. That process is expected to be concluded in 2004
for the present 15 Member States. Only after that will the Commission be able to start making changes to
the adopted lists on the basis of new proposals by the Member States. In the meantime, Member States
can, of course, adopt measures for the protection of this or other species through their national or regional
legislation.

The Italian authorities are aware of the exchange of information concerning Botrychium simplex.

(2004/C 84 E/0849)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0050/04

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Conflict over pollution (cid:1) between the Celulosas de Pontevedra woodpulp factory (Ence, Galicia)

and the people and municipal authorities of Pontevedra

The Celulosas de Pontevedra woodpulp factory (Ence, Galicia) has occupied, for the last forty years and
more, under an administrative concession, an area of publicly-owned land on the shore of
the
Ría de Pontevedra. This land is now effectively part of the built-up area of the municipality of Pontevedra.

C 84 E/754

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

The factory’s presence prevents further urban development between the two coastal municipalities of
Pontevedra and Marín. The company, formerly publicly-owned and now privatised, has as its main
shareholder the Caixa Galicia bank, which also supplies its chair. Favourably located on the Ria, the Ence
factory operates a highly polluting production cycle: the pollution affects both water and air, has given rise
to numerous protests from the public, and has for years now been the source of an open conflict between
the company and Pontevedra’s municipal authorities: both the general public and the municipal council
wish to see the factory moved elsewhere. However, Ence, with the support of the Galician regional
government, intends to consolidate the factory’s presence, and, indeed, aims to obtain ownership of the
valuable land that it occupies: on that basis, it would build a paper manufacturing plant which would
process part of the woodpulp now produced. Ence is now seeking to enter into partnership with a US
enterprise with a worldwide presence, namely the Atlanta-based Georgia Pacific Corporation. This
company is well-known for being involved in conflicts over the environment and safety, and has been
affected by major accidents (fires, explosions and toxic leaks) leading to the loss of lives and abusive
deforestation in third-world countries.

Is the Commission aware of the situation of the Celulosas de Pontevedra factory, its polluting impact, its
location on publicly-owned urban land, its conflicts with civil society and the municipal authorities of the
Ria (especially the Pontevedra council), and the failure of the Galician regional government and the
Spanish central government to take the necessary preventive action against the severe damage being
caused by this company to the local society and economy?

Has the Commission taken action to prevent this serious damage? Has it taken any steps to institute the
necessary surveillance and monitoring to stop the attempts to consolidate the woodpulp factory in its
present location by building a new paper manufacturing plant in association with the Georgia Pacific
Corporation?

Is the Commission aware that Celulosas de Pontevedra even wishes to end the publicly-owned status of the
430 000 m2 of coastal land on which its factory is located, with the aim of continuing its activities after
the expiry of its administrative concession?

Will the Commission support the Pontevedra municipal council in its campaign to defend the publicly-
owned status of the land occupied by the factory and have the factory moved elsewhere, in a context of
job preservation and implementation of all
the measures required to put an end to the present
unacceptable pollution?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 2004)

On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member, the Commission does not have the
necessary elements to come to a conclusion as to whether or not the installation in question meets the
conditions established in the relevant Community legislation.

Questions concerning the possible occupation of the new site are not within the competence of the
Community. A proposal to build a new paper manufacturing plant, or to change or extend an existing
one, would require an environmental impact assessment under the terms of Council Directive 85/337/EEC
of 27 June 1985 (1) as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/
337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (2) if
the plant was likely to have significant effects on the environment. This would require the public to be
consulted and the competent authority to consider their views and the environmental effects. If of a mind
to approve the application, the competent authority could attach any conditions which might be required,
for example, to provide mitigation of those effects.

Concerning the possible harmful effects of the facilities one must take into account that the installation in
question falls within the scope of Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996, concerning
integrated pollution prevention and control (3) (see activity 6,1 of Annex I). The Directive aims at a high
overall level of environmental protection, by means of prevention and reduction of emissions to air, water
and land, avoidance or reduction of waste production, energy efficiency, accident prevention and, upon
cessation of activities, return of the site to a satisfactory state.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/755

The plant has apparently been in operation for more than forty years and must, therefore, be considered as
an ‘existing installation’ in the meaning of the Directive (see Article 2, point 4). According to Article 5 of
the Directive, the competent authorities have to take the necessary measures in order to ensure that such
an installation operates in full compliance with the provisions of the Directive by 30 October 2007 at the
latest.

For this purpose, the competent authority has to issue an integrated permit (or,
if appropriate, to
reconsider and update an existing permit) containing emission limit values, equivalent parameters or
technical measures based on best available techniques, taking into account the technical characteristics of
the installation concerned, its geographical location and the local environmental conditions (see Article 9(4)
of the Directive).

For the definition of best available techniques, the competent authority can base its requirements on a
reference document for best available techniques (BREF) in pulp and paper manufacturing. This document
is accessible on the web site: (http://eippcb.jrc.es/pages/FAbout.htm).

Data on the most relevant pollutants emitted by the installation are publicly accessible on the website:
www.eper.cec.eu.int as of 23 February 2004.

With the aim of maintaining the air quality where it is good and improving it in other cases, Council
Directive 96/62/EC of 27 September 1996 on ambient air quality assessment and management (4) requires
Member States to assess the air quality throughout its territory. Limit and target values, to be met by a
defined attainment data (2005 to 2010), are set by accompanying Daughter Directives relating to air
pollutants such as sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter (PM10) and lead (5) or carbon
monoxide and benzene (6).
installations are of course potential sources for some of those
components. Member States are obliged to report annually to the Commission the zones and
agglomerations where any limit values plus a defined margin of tolerance (which is decreasing annually
to become zero by the attainment date), are exceeded. In such zones Member States are obliged to draw up
plans and programmes to demonstrate by which measures the limit values can be achieved. Up to now the
Commission did not receive such plans or programmes from Spain relating to the suggested problem area
around the industrial plant in question.

Industrial

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(3) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996.
(4) OJ L 296, 21.11.1996.
(5) OJ L 163, 29.6.1999.
(6) OJ L 313, 13.12.2000.

(2004/C 84 E/0850)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0053/04

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: The suspension of work at the Inzar shipyard (Fene, Galicia) arising from the ban on building

merchant vessels: action of the Commission and the Spanish government

The suspension of work at the Inzar shipyard (Fene, Galicia), arising from the ban on building merchant
vessels which has affected it since 1988 and the dearth of orders for offshore rigs, in the building of which
it was obliged to specialise under its previous name of Astano, with the consequent loss of thousands of
jobs, once again points up the need for action on this problem from the Commission and the Spanish
state, both of which are guilty of negligence on an issue that is crucial for the economy of the Ferrol area
and of Galicia.

Can the Commission provide information on the present state of affairs? Has the Spanish government
submitted the necessary request to enable the shipyard to recommence building merchant vessels? What is
the Commission’s position? What, at all events, needs to be done to enable this shipyard to build such
vessels, as it did in the past when it had a worldwide reputation in the field?