WRITTEN QUESTION No. 4037/98 by Wilfried TELKÄMPER Risks posed by EDF's nuclear power station at Fessenheim on the Upper Rhine in Alsace
11. 10. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 289/117 Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (11 February 1999) The common agricultural policy plays an important role in supporting marginal areas which are 1. frequently characterised by extensive farming methods. Livestock premiums and, to a certain extent, compensatory allowances for farmers in less-favoured areas contribute significantly towards ensuring the viability and continuation of farming in such areas. The common organisation of markets specifically includes an additional extensification premium for cattle herds with a maximum density of 1,4 livestock units (LUs) per hectare, as well as the requirement for a maximum density of 2,0 LUs per hectare for premiums to be granted. However, particularly under agri-environmental programmes (Council Regulation (EEC) 2078/92 of 30 June 1992 on agricultural production methods compatible with the requirements of the protection of the environment and the maintenance of the countryside (1)) Member States are encouraged to devise measures designed to promote extensive production which is beneficial to the environment, in order either to sustain existing extensive methods or to provide incentives for reducing livestock density. Evaluation has shown that Member States’ programmes focus mainly on the latter type of measure. Regulation (EC) 950/97 on improving the efficiency of agricultural structures (2) provides for farmers to 2. be granted investment aid for improving animal welfare in the egg and poultry sector, provided that there is no increase in capacity. Such aid is subject to the general requirements and aid ceilings stipulated in the Regulation. However, since it is for Member States to decide 4 in the light of their priorities 4 whether to grant this form of aid and for their authorities to approve individual applications, the Commission does not have information on funding for projects relating to flow pen systems for laying hens. (1) OJ L 215, 30. 7. 1992. (2) OJ L 142, 2. 6. 1997. (1999/C 289/154) WRITTEN QUESTION E-4037/98 by Wilfried Telkämper (V) to the Council (11 January 1999) Subject: Risks posed by EDF’s nuclear power station at Fessenheim on the Upper Rhine in Alsace On 11 December 1998 the second generating unit of the Fessenheim nuclear power station had to be shut down because of deformation of a flexible metal bellows in the cooling system. The first unit was shut down in August 1998 for the same reason. What information does the Council have of the nature, extent and impact of the incident at the Fessenheim power station and does it see a need for an inspection of the power station and the security system by an independent expert institution to provide the public in Switzerland, Germany and France with adequate protection against any risk? Reply (29 March 1999) The Community provisions in force provide neither for notification of the Council nor for intervention on its part as regards the incidents referred to by the Honourable Member. The Council can only share the concern for adequate protection of the public and would point out in this connection that Directive 96/29/Euratom (1), by laying down strengthened standards for the protection of the health of the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation, is an important factor here. (1) OJ L 159, 29. 6. 1996, p. 1