WRITTEN QUESTION P-1874/99 by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission. Noise pollution at Barcelona airport.
C 219 E/42 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 1. 8. 2000 Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (23 November 1999) The Commission has been following the potential nuclear safety implications of the year 2000 (Y2K) problem since 1998 and has undertaken a number of actions, as well as collecting relevant information. The International atomic energy agency has a Y2K programme to assist various states, including Russia. The Agency is also co-ordinating international Y2K nuclear safety activities. In June 1998, the Commission discussed the Y2K problem with all European nuclear regulatory authorities, and the Russian authority, Gosatomnadzor. At a meeting in January 1999, the Commission again discussed the issue, asked for progress reports and offered assistance. Gosatomnadzor has since requested assistance with developing regulatory procedures for Y2K and the project has been launched. Gosatomnadzor again reported on the Y2K situation in Russian nuclear power plants during a meeting in June 1999. No problems with safety critical systems had been identified and Gosatomnadzor planned to execute Y2K inspections of nuclear power plants in the second half of 1999. Rosenergoatom, the central utility that operates the Kola plant, recently carried out a mission to assess its Y2K preparedness. The United States department of energy participated in this mission as an observer. The mission found that the Kola plant has made progress with the process of assessing the effect of Y2K on its systems. No problems with safety critical systems were found. Problems in a number of other systems were identified. The plant intends to correct the most significant problems before the end of 1999. The Commission has concluded a contract with the World association of nuclear operators and they have visited Kola recently. Their mission has included assistance to the plant with its contingency planning. As can be seen from the above, the Russian authorities have undertaken a number of actions and the Commission is encouraging them to develop these actions further. Nevertheless it should be recalled that nuclear safety is a national responsibility and it is the Russian operators and nuclear regulatory authority that have responsibility for the safety of the plant, not the Commission. (2000/C 219 E/049) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1874/99 by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission (12 October 1999) Subject: Noise pollution at Barcelona airport For some time now, people living in close proximity to Barcelona airport, particularly inhabitants from the Gavà municipality, have been complaining about the high noise pollution levels of many aircraft making their approach to the airport, even at night. It would appear that the culprits are often aircraft from the former USSR which fail to comply with European regulations. Can the Commission provide information on the extent to which the competent authorities at Barcelona airport have been applying and taking further action on the relevant Community regulations? Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (29 October 1999) The Commission has no evidence of any infringement of the Community legislation on aircraft noise by the Spanish authorities, in particular by the authorities of Barcelona airport. The Commission can however provide some general information concerning aircraft noise. 1. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 219 E/43 Council Directive 92/14/EC of 2 March 1992 on the limitation of the operation of aeroplanes covered by Part II, Chapter 2, Volume 1 of Annex 16 to the Convention on international civil aviation, second edition (1988) (1) aims at gradually phasing out those aircraft (the co-called Chapter 2 aircraft) that do not meet the most recent noise standard. The phase-out started on 1 April 1995 and will be finalised on 1 April 2002. This Directive provides for a derogation from the phase-out until 1 April 2002 for aircraft fitted with engines having a by-pass ratio of more than 2, which is the case for some of the Russian built aircraft. (1) OJ L 76, 23. 3. 1992, amended by Council Directive 98/20/EC, OJ L 107, 7. 4. 1998. (2000/C 219 E/050) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1891/99 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission (29 October 1999) Subject: Field trials of genetically modified crops When the Commission agreed to field trails of genetically modified crops, did it take into account Article 130r(2) of the Maastricht Treaty establishing the EU? Community policy on the environment shall aim at a high level of protection taking into account the diversity of situations in the various regions of the Community. It shall be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay. Environmental protection requirements must be integrated into the definition and implementation of other Community policies. In this context, harmonisation measures answering these requirements shall include, where appro- priate, a safeguard clause allowing Member States to take provisional measures, for non-economic environmental reasons, subject to a Community inspection procedure. Will the Commission explain how the decision on GM trials was arrived at? Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (7 December 1999) Field trials of genetically modified (GM) crops are authorised under Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms (1). Part B of the Directive sets out the authorisation procedure for deliberate releases of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) for research and development purposes. The Directive is based on the principle that preventive action should be taken in relation to releases which may affect the environment and that due attention should be paid to the protection of human health and the environment when controlling the risks from release of GMOs. The Directive insists that a case by case environmental risk assessment must be carried out prior to any release. Article 4 of the Directive states that Member States shall ensure that all appropriate measures are taken to avoid adverse effects on human health and the environment which might arise from a deliberate release. It also requires each Member State to designate a competent authority responsible for carrying out the requirements of the Directive. In practical terms, a release for research and development purposes, such as a GM crop field trial, can only happen with the consent of the competent authority for the Member State concerned. In order to gain consent, a notification must be submitted by the company or person concerned. The notification must