Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

6.2.

2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 28 E/207

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(9 September 2002)

Under Article 211 of the Customs Code Implementing Provisions (1), customs declarations (in this case
export declarations) must be made out in an official language of the Community accepted by the customs
authorities of the Member State in which the formalities are being carried out. It is for the Member States
to decide which official languages they accept.

Where necessary, the customs authorities of the Member State of destination may ask the declarant or his
representative there for a translation into an official language of that Member State.

(1) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 253, 11.10.1993).

(2003/C 28 E/237) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2240/02


by María Valenciano Martínez-Orozco (PSE) to the Commission

(17 July 2002)

Subject: Stage reached in dealing with complaint 2000/4187

On 5 July 2000 the Directorate-General for the Environment began examining complaint 2000/4187
relating to failure to comply with Directives 79/409/EEC (1) and 92/43/EEC (2) as regards the building of
various sections of the A6 motorway between Segovia and Àvila.

Can the Commission say what stage has now been reached in dealing with this complaint?

Can it say whether it has received any kind of reply from the Spanish authorities in response to the
notification?

What practical measures does the Commission intend to take to settle the matter and ensure compliance
with Community legislation?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.


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

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 2002)

The Commission did receive a complaint in 2000 about the planned construction of a toll motorway
between San Rafael and Segovia which would cross the ‘Umbría de Guadarrama’ site of Community
importance (SCI) for birds.

After checking whether the Spanish authorities should have declared the SCI a Special Protection
Area (SPA) for birds, the Commission sent Spain a letter of formal notice, the first step in infringement
proceedings under Article 226 of the EC Treaty, since the motorway construction project in question
should have followed the procedure laid down in Article 6 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC (1) of 21 May
1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.

However, the reply from the Spanish authorities showed that there was already dense infrastructure in the
corridor that was the planned route of the motorway. It had been excluded from the protection area
declared by the authorities in October 2000 because of the damage to the site by the existing
infrastructure. The Spanish authorities had declared as a Special Protection Area for Birds 90 % of the SCI
covered by the Spanish Ornithological Society (SEO/birdlife) survey.
C 28 E/208 Official Journal of the European Union EN 6.2.2003

The Commission recently sent a letter to the Spanish authorities asking them to adopt and notify measures
to prevent the motorway construction operations disturbing the feeding grounds for the imperial eagle, a
seriously endangered species.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2003/C 28 E/238) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2247/02


by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 July 2002)

Subject: Compliance of EU-funded infrastructure projects with the provisions of EC environmental


legislation  the case of the D8 motorway project in the Czech Republic

The D8 motorway is part of the Berlin-Istanbul IV European multi-modal transport corridor. Two sections
of the motorway part of the Czech side are yet to be built. For the section across Ceske Stredohori
Protected Landscape Area (part of EECONET) the Czech authorities contracted an EIB loan in November
2001. The second section is planned across the SPA (Special Protection Area) for birds in the Eastern
Krusne Hory mountains. Both areas are potential sites for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network.

As regards the section across Ceske Stredohori an EIA was carried out in 1996. However only one option
was assessed, though this practice contradicts the provisions of the EIA Act of the Czech Republic. This
was confirmed by the Legislative Commission of the Czech Minister of Environment in March 1999,
which  following a complaint by environment NGOs  stated that ‘the decision contained formal and
procedural errors, therefore it can not be considered as a decision according to the EIA Act’. The contract
with the EIB for the above loan was signed in November 2001.

Is the Commission aware of the alleged procedural errors committed during the EIA of the D8 motorway
project section across Ceske Stredohori?

How does the Commission ensure the compliance of EIA loans’ concessions and pre-accession funding
with the environment acquis already adopted and implemented in the candidate countries?

How does the Commission, in the framework of the EU’s pre-accession strategy, ensure the compatibility
between the objective of establishing in due time the Natura 2000 sites in the future member states on the
one hand and the implementation of transport infrastructure projects, such as this D8 motorway project,
on the other?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2002)

The section of the D8 motorway across Ceske Sredohori, the so-called section 0805, is being financed by
the European Investment Bank (EIB). Information from the EIB confirmed that the Enviromental Impact
Assessment (EIA) procedures for section 0805 were undertaken in accordance with existing Czech laws
and that the Czech Ministry of Environment imposed the necessary conditions and mitigation measures to
minimise impacts on the Protected Landscape Area. If there is now evidence that national law has been
violated, it might be possible to take the case to the competent national courts. The Commission has no
competence to intervene in such national cases during the pre-accession period.

The Commission has always insisted on the need to apply Community legislation, in particular the EIA
Directive (1) as well as nature protection legislation, to the development of new infrastructure projects
during the pre-accession period. This should apply not only to projects co-financed through Community
pre-accession funds but to any new investment, including of course those benefiting from EIB loans. In this
respect, the Commission has, in the context of the consultation procedure regulated by Article 21 of the
EIB’s Statute, systematically reminded the Bank the need to ensure that procedures concerning EIA and
nature protection are in line with relevant Community legislation for the projects they finance.