WRITTEN QUESTION E-0322/00 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Irregularities at the Las Cárvacas rubbish dump in Madrid.
21. 11. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 330 E/125 Article 5. 7 of the SPS Agreement of the World trade organisation sets out a framework for sanitary or phytosanitary regulatory measures that affect international trade, where scientific evidence is insufficient. The Commission considers that the guidelines for the application of the precautionary principle proposed in the communication, are not only consistent with Article 5. 7 but also an appropriate tool to apply the said Article. Therefore, the application of this principle should not contravene the international obligations of the Community. With regard to the issue of product liability, the Commission points out that in July 1999 it adopted a green paper (1). The Commission is presently analysing the comments received on the green paper and will present a report on the application of the product liability directive by the end of this year. (1) COM(1999) 396 final ü Liability for Defective Productsí. (2000/C 330 E/139) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0322/00 by Laura GonzÆlez `lvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission Subject: Irregularities at the Las CÆrvacas rubbish dump in Madrid (11 February 2000) In response to Petition No 288/97 which was submitted to the European Parliament by the Plataforma Cívica y Ecológica de la Casa de Campo de Valdebebasí, the Commission opened infringement procedure A-98/2162 against Spain for its failure to comply with Directive 75/442/EEC (1) on waste, as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC (2). By means of a decree dated 27 March 1998 the Madrid city authorities ordered Vertederos del Norte S. L. to close the illegal and unauthorised rubbish dump at La Dehesa, in the Las CÆrvacas district of Madrid, and instructed the company to clean up the site. Furthermore, the Madrid Regional Directorate-General for Environmental Quality and Assessment ordered the Madrid city authorities to instruct the company to undertake 14 specific projects to seal the dump and clean up the site, including the planting of trees and other forms of vegetation. Despite the issue of such an order the company did not apply any of the remedial measures, for which reason a further instruction was issued on 14 January 1999, ordering the site to be sealed off. On 30 July 1999 the above-mentioned Directorate-General approved the sealing-off and cleansing project submitted by Vertederos del Norte S. L. , which was to be carried out within an eight-month period starting on the date on which the work began. However, no cleaning-up work has so far been undertaken and the rubbish dump is in the same state as it was when it was instructed to close. Can the Commission say what stage has been reached in infringement procedure A-98/2162 against Spain? What are the expected dates for the start and the finish of the project to seal off and clean up the rubbish dump? Could the Commission arrange for the project to be speeded up? Why are the Spanish authorities responsible refusing to notify the Plataforma Cívicaí (which launched the petition) regarding the progress of the project? (1) OJ L 194, 25. 7. 1975, p. 39. (2) OJ L 78, 26. 3. 1991, p. 32. Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (16 March 2000) Following several complaints concerning illegal rubbish dumps, the Commission has decided to bring an infringement action against Spain. As part of this it delivered a reasoned opinion as a result of the failure to comply with Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste in connection with, among other things, the illegal dump at Las CÆrcavas. including that at Las CÆrcavas, C 330 E/126 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21. 11. 2000 The Commission is not aware of the reasons given by the Spanish authorities justifying the refusal to pass on information concerning the progress made by this project. In any case, Article 4 of Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 (1), on the freedom of access to information on the environment provides that a person who considers that his request for information has been unreasonably refused or ignored, or has been inadequately answered by a public authority, may seek a judicial or administrative review of the decision in accordance with the relevant national legal system. (1) OJ L 158, 23. 6. 1990. (2000/C 330 E/140) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0323/00 by Laura GonzÆlez `lvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (11 February 2000) Subject: Environmental impact of the planned airport at Castellón (Spain) On the basis of a project involving the construction of airport facilities at Castellón and, additionally, a special plan allowing protected land to be used for the construction of airport facilities, the Valencia regional authorities are planning to build an airport in the vicinity of Bell-Lloc del Pla and Vilanova díAlcolea. According to the objections raised against the project, such an airport: ü would seriously alter the various ecosystems in the area and have an adverse effect on a range of habitats protected under Council Directive 92/43/EEC (1) and on wild birds protected under Directive 79/409/EEC (2), such as sylvia undata, caprimilgus europeus, galerida theklae and, in particular, circus pyargus, the colony of which is the only one in Europe which nests on Mediterranean scrubland and one of the few species which nests on natural vegetation. Furthermore, the airport would be located close to Prat de Cabanes (the home of protected species) and to the Desierto de las Palmas nature area, and also in an area crossed by migratory birds, with all the attendant risks to air traffic; ü would have a significantly greater noise impact on people living in the vicinity than has been calculated in an environmental impact study which is now obsolete on account of subsequent changes made to the project; ü would not be operational from the safety point of view on account of frequent morning and evening mist and fog, hazardous winds and its location amongst mountains, circumstances which would be aggravated by the alignment of the runway in a southwest-northeast direction (the only one possible in view of the mountainous topography). In view of all the above facts, could the Commission verify, with specific reference to this project, whether or not the abovementioned directives have been complied with and could it ask the Spanish authorities to halt, as a precautionary measure, any construction work or other activity in the area? (1) OJ L 206, 22. 7. 1992, p. 7. (2) OJ L 103, 25. 4. 1979, p. 1. Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (31 March 2000) Firstly, it should be noted that the area where the airport to which the Honourable Member refers is due to be built has not been classified by the Spanish authorities as a special protection area for birds under Article 4 of Council Directive 79/409/EEC (1) of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds. Neither has it been identified by the scientific community as an áimportant area for birdsí in the inventory prepared for the Commission in 1998 by national experts and Birdlife. Moreover, the Spanish authorities have not identified it as a site of Community importance for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network under Council