WRITTEN QUESTION E-0329/00 by Mauro Nobilia (UEN) to the Commission. Monopoly of the Italian Register of Shipping (R.I.N.A.).
C 330 E/128 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21. 11. 2000 The effects which the project may have on the environment have already become apparent with the arrival of the heavy machinery to be used for the construction work (which has led to the destruction of native woodlands in the vicinity of the protected area known as the Desierto de Las Palmas Natural Park) and with the setting off of explosions needed to blast out tunnels (which caused a fire to break out). The project has been approved by the Spanish authorities, even though the statutory declaration of environ- mental impact has not been produced. The only thing which does exist is a study which is quite inadequate as a means of assessing environmental risks and which, in addition, does not exactly cover the route in its final form since it does not include the town of Oropesa. Furthermore, the study does not address essential considerations such as future emissions caused by passing trains, the issue of waste, noise pollution or the micro-climatic effect of the embankments. In the light of the facts set out above, the Spanish authorities could be infringing Community law, in particular Directive 97/11/EC (1) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. Since, according to two billboards which have been erected at the construction site, the project is receiving 85 % of its funding from the EU via the Cohesion Fund, does the Commission not think that Community funding for the construction work should be suspended until a proper environmental impact statement has been drawn up? Could the Commission say what stage it has reached in dealing with Petition No 99/4495, which was submitted by the Asociación Benicàssim Pro Enterramiento del Ferrocarril? (1) OJ L 73, 14. 3. 1997, p. 5. Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (29 March 2000) The Commission finds Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1) to be applicable to this project. It will not hesitate to take all necessary steps to ensure compliance with Community law in this case. In examining the complaint, the Commission will keep the complainant informed of developments. (1) OJ L 175, 5. 7. 1985, amended by Directive 97/11/EC of 3. 3. 1997. (2000/C 330 E/142) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0329/00 by Mauro Nobilia (UEN) to the Commission (11 February 2000) Subject: Monopoly of the Italian Register of Shipping (R. I. N. A. ) The Italian Register of Shipping (R. I. N. A. ), established in 1861, checks and inspects the seaworthiness and safety of merchant ships. This body, governed by private law, has the task of classifying vessels and can consequently issue the internationally valid safety certificates essential for navigation. That being the case, could the Commission: ü ascertain whether the fact that the R. I. N. A. is a body governed by private law is incompatible with the monopoly powers which it exercises at national level for the purposes of certifying the safety of merchant ships; ü ascertain whether the fact that shipowners serve on the R. I. N. A. management board is contrary to Community rules, since the shipowners are placed in the awkward position of supervising themselves; ü take steps, if it thinks fit, with a view to setting up a supranational body to oversee the actions of bodies such as the R. I. N. A. ? 21. 11. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 330 E/129 Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (13 March 2000) The transposition into the Italian law of Council Directive 94/57/EC (1) put an end to the monopoly that the Italian register of shipping (RINA) enjoyed in Italy for the issuance of safety certificates to merchant ships. The Italian law was adopted in 1998 and from that date onwards classification societies other than RINA will be in a position to carry out statutory tasks (arising from the international conventions) on behalf of the Italian administration. The private legal nature of RINA does not contravene with the provisions regulating the Community-wide recognition of classification societies laid down in the above mentioned Directive. The presence of shipowners on the board of directors is a normal practice for classification societies. Together with the shipowners, there are other representatives of the shipping industry on the board of directors of these organisations. Their role is to guide the activities of the classification society, mainly by indicating their needs and requesting the establishment of specific rules. Of course, what needs to be verified is the compliance of RINA ü and of the other recognised organisations ü with the provisions of criterion A. 6 of the Annex to the above mentioned Directive. This criterion states that áthe organization should not be controlled by shipowners or shipbuilders, or by others engaged commercially in the manufacture, equipping, repair or operation of ships. The organization should not be substantially dependent on a single commercial enterprise for its revenueí. Compliance of RINA with these provisions will be verified during the forthcoming assessment to be carried out by the Commission. The possibility of establishing a body to assess the activities of the classification societies in a centralised and harmonised manner has recently been raised by several interested parties. The Commission is at present in the process of analysing the feasibility and possible implications of the establishment of such a body. The Commission will keep the Parliament duly informed of its decisions on this matter in the shortest possible time. (1) Council Directive 94/57/EC of 22 November 1994 on common rules and standards for ship inspection and survey organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations (OJ L 319, 12. 12. 1994). (2000/C 330 E/143) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0330/00 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (11 February 2000) Subject: Grant of a licence to conduct test borings for gas in the De Biesboschí National Park in the Netherlands 1. Is the Commission aware of the new licence granted on 13 January 2000 by the Netherlands Economic Affairs Minister to the Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschapij NV (NAM ü Netherlands Petroleum Company) to conduct boring operations for the Andel-2í concessionary area situated between Schoon- hoven, Dordrecht and Hertogenbosch in the provinces of South Holland, Gelderland and North Brabant? 2. Is the Commission aware that the concessionary area referred to in paragraph 1 above includes not only farming and residential areas, but also the De Biesbosch river area, connected to it by a slender one- kilometre wide strip of land situated between the Nieuwe Merwede (on the north side) and the Amer (on the south side), a former fresh-water tidal area that is home to a large number of rare plant and animal species and has enjoyed national-park status since 1994? 3. Is the Commission aware of the Netherlands governmentís reasons for including the De Biesbosch area referred to in paragraph 2 above with the rest of the Andel-2í concessionary area, and does it agree that the area would not have been included unless it had been expressly intended to leave open the option of conducting natural-gas boring operations within a national park area? 4. Can the Commission confirm that De Biesbosch is one of the areas to which the European habitats and birds directive applies, and that oil-boring operations in that area can result in unintended disruption to plant and animal life, and, by way of land subsidence and further soil pollution (following earlier damage by 112 000 tons of petroleum-retaining soil and catalytic converter waste by a company (Shell) with a 50 %-shareholding in NAM on the north side of the Biesbosch?