WRITTEN QUESTION E-0709/00 by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Sellafield and Cap de La Hague reprocessing plants.
20. 2. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 53 E/19 (2001/C 53 E/023) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0709/00 by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission Subject: Sellafield and Cap de La Hague reprocessing plants (17 March 2000) As a signatory to the OSPAR Convention, the Commission is pursuing the objective of reducing radioactivity levels in the entire biotope of European sees and the North-East Atlantic to the natural level by the year 2020. In a question tabled in January attention was repeatedly drawn to the continuing contamination of European seas by the Sellafield and Cap de La Hague nuclear reprocessing plants. The OSPAR Convention states that the measured values for artificial man-made radionuclides should 1. be as close to zero as possible by the year 2020 in the entire biotope of European seas and the North-East Atlantic. In view of trends in values recorded over recent years, does the Commission believe that the continued operation of the reprocessing plants can be reconciled with this objective? If so, what scientific basis (pleas quote studies) or other evidence is there for this belief? 2. What thought has the Commission given to the question of whether the continuing low-dose radiation of many successive generations of inhabitants of the contaminated coastal areas will give rise to genetic damage? If for this assessment? is the scientific basis (please quote studies) it sees no such risk, what 3. Does the Commission intend, in cooperation with the OSPAR commission, to subject the reproces- sing facilities to more rigorous inspections from now on? What future action and measures, including budgetary aspects, are planned by the Commission to achieve the objectives set out by the OSPAR signatories? Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (18 May 2000) 1. In signing the Oslo-Paris (OSPAR) Sintra statement of 23 July 1998 the signatory ministers and the Commission emphasised their commitment to a number of aims of OSPAR set out in that political statement. Specifically, in respect of radioactive substances, the contracting parties, meeting within the framework of the OSPAR commission, committed themselves to ensuring that discharges, emissions and losses of radioactive substances are reduced by the year 2020 to levels where the additional concentrations in the marine environment, above historic levels, resulting from such discharges, emissions and losses, are close to zero. At that time the contracting parties adopted an objective and strategy for the purposes of directing the future work of the OSPAR commission with regard to radioactive substances. The responsibility for assessing the effectiveness of measures in that strategy, and progress made, rests with the OSPAR commission by quinquennial review and, if necessary, modification of the strategy. The Commission is committed to assisting the OSPAR commission in its work. The OSPAR strategy 2. the OSPAR commission identify with regard to radioactive substances includes a commitment that radioactive substances and human activities which give rise to concern about the impact of discharges, emissions or losses of radioactive substances and that this identification should take account of results of scientific investigations relevant to radioactive substances in the marine environment. Assessments made, and the programmes and measures adopted, to achieve the OSPAR commissionís objective, involve among other things the application of the precautionary principle. The work of the OSPAR commission would therefore be expected to address adequately the scientific issues the Honourable Member raises. 3. The Commission is committed to participating in the work of OSPAR at a number of levels in respect of radioactive substances and is undertaking a study for the update of the Marína project on the radiological exposure of the Community from radioactivity in North European marine waters. This work is mentioned in the OSPAR strategy with regard to radioactive substances and the Commission has taken account of the views of OSPAR, regarding the scope and nature of the study, in order to assist the OSPAR commissionís work. As part of its strategy with respect to radioactive substances OSPAR is looking in detail at reprocessing. The OSPAR commissionís strategy with regard to radioactive substances requires C 53 E/20 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 20. 2. 2001 OSPAR to take account of the outcome of a study by the nuclear energy agency of the Organisation for economic cooperation and development (OECD) concerning a thorough review and assessment of the reprocessing and non-reprocessing options for spent fuel management. The OECD has involved the Commission in the preparation of this report for OSPAR. The Commission will continue to carry out a programme of verifications in Member States under Article 35 Euratom Treaty. The Commission does not have any plans to carry out inspections of reprocessing facilities in co-operation with the OSPAR commission, since, while the Commission has a right of access under Article 35 of the Euratom Treaty, this would be outside the OSPAR commissionís mandate. (2001/C 53 E/024) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0722/00 by Carles-Alfred Gasòliba i Böhm (ELDR) to the Commission (17 March 2000) Subject: Community procedure for the recording and placing on the market of active substances and plant protection products Council Directive 91/414/EEC (1) of 15 July 1991 introduced a new system for the recording and placing on the market of plant protection products, together with a non-standard procedure for the recording of active substances and products containing those substances, which hitherto had been produced and circulated freely. SMEs are now feeling the severe impact of this unusual state of affairs as the number of substances added to Annex I of the Directive grows. In some instances, a party which gives notification of an active substance included in Annex I interprets Article 13(3)(d) of the Directive for its own ends rather than in keeping with Community principles and allows a third party to gain access to supplies of the substance and to the protected data it has requested, but charges outrageous prices in the process and attaches unreasonable conditions, given the market concerned. Those with exclusive rights take this course of action to force small and medium-sized competitors which have been working with such substances until their inclusion under Annex I of the Directive off the market. Is the Commission aware of the threat which the aforementioned practice, based on a specific reading of the Directive, poses to SMEs in the plant protection sector? Likewise, is it aware of the danger which might emerge for traditional producers of active substances or manufacturers of plant protection products which use certain active substances in their products? Is it the Commissionís intention to permit such a practice? Does the Commission intend to ensure that third parties seeking access to protected data should pay fixed amounts based exclusively on the cost of the file drawn up by the first notifying party, irrespective of the intended use of the data, and on the nature of applicantsí products, their share of the market and their capacity and potential in terms of distribution and marketing? What measures does it intend to adopt to counteract the adverse effects of the Directive on SMEs in the sector? (1) OJ L 230, 19. 8. 1991, p. 1. Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (28 April 2000) The use of plant protection products is regulated by Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 (1) concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. The main objectives of this Directive are to (a) ensure a high level of protection of human health, for the consumer and for the producers of agricultural commodities, (b) ensure a high level of protection of the environment and resources and (c) ensure free circulation of plant protection products and agricultural produce in the Community. The Directive provides for a positive list of accepted active substances that are considered as safe for human and animal health and the environment after a thorough evaluation. Member States can only authorise a plant protection product if the active substances it contains are listed in the positive list and