Commissie daagt Portugal voor de rechter wegens inbreuken op EU-milieuwetten (en)

The European Commission is pursuing legal action against Portugal for breaches of EU laws on protection of the environment in six separate cases. The EU laws in question concern nature conservation, water and impact assessment. Among other things, these laws are aimed at ensuring that important wildlife sites are safeguarded and water resources protected. In three cases the Commission is taking Portugal to the European Court of Justice. In the other three cases, Portugal will receive final warnings, the last step before Court action.

Environment Commissioner, Stavros Dimas said: "I would urge Portugal, which has already achieved a generally good level of nature site designations, to now strengthen its efforts to ensure good nature management. It is also important that Portugal speeds up its transposition of directives and installs much-needed waste-water treatment plants."

Decisions to refer Portugal to the Court of Justice

The Commission has decided to refer Portugal to the Court in three cases:

;
• The first decision concerns nature conservation. Portugal has failed to designate sufficient special protection areas (SPAs) for the conservation of steppic birds under the EU Wild Birds Directive^[1]. Steppic habitats, which in south-western Europe are generally dry, treeless, open farmland areas, support a specialized community of birds including the Great Bustard (Otis tarda), the Little Bustard (Tetrax tetrax) and the Stone Curlew (Burhinus oedicnimus). These threatened species have particular habitat requirements and have suffered declines due to land use changes. The Wild Birds Directive requires Member States to designate important sites for threatened wild bird species. In July 1999, the Commission made a decision to refer Portugal to Court for insufficient SPA designation but this was suspended following subsequent good overall progress by Portugal on designation. However, a review of the situation has shown that Portugal still needs to do more for steppic birds. The Commission is therefore relaunching the Court case.
;
• The second decision also concerns nature conservation and relates to modifications to a special protection area for birds: In 2003 the Portuguese authorities decided to reduce the size of the protected bird area of "Moura/Mourao/Barrancos". This is an important area for a large number of protected wild bird species (Crane, Eagle owl, Black vulture, Booted eagle and Griffon vulture).

Such changes to protected areas are only allowed if they are scientifically justified. In this case, the Commission considers that they are not, and the changes mean that the birds living there will not get the protection envisaged.

;
• The third decision relates to EU water legislation. Along with several other Member States, Portugal has failed to transpose into national law the requirements of the Water Framework Directive^[2]. This forms the cornerstone of EU water protection policy and establishes a framework for protecting all types of water bodies across the EU. The directive aims, among other things, at protecting and enhancing the status of water resources as well as promoting sustainable water use based on long-term protection of water resources. The deadline for Member States to transpose it was 22 December 2003.

Final warnings sent to Portugal

In three cases, the Commission has sent Portugal final written warnings, known as "Reasoned Opinions," aimed at securing compliance with EU environmental requirements. In the absence of a satisfactory response, the Commission may later decide to refer these cases to the Court.

;
• The first case concerns the Alqueva Dam, the biggest dam in Europe, which serves Portugal's driest region and which was co-financed by the European Union. In February 2002, the gates of the dam were closed. However, studies had not at that time been concluded on the ecological safeguards necessary for sites protected under the EU Wild Birds Directive and Habitats Directive^[3] which are situated downstream of the dam in the Guadiana Valley and Estuary. In particular, it is necessary for these sites to receive minimum flows of water to retain their natural features and richness. Portugal has not provided the Commission with satisfactory evidence that safeguards provided for in the Habitats Directive have been respected.
;
• The second case concerns Portugal's implementation of EU rules on environmental impact assessment. These rules are set out in the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive which was adopted in 1985 and modified in 1997^[4]. They are aimed at ensuring that authorities have good environmental information to hand before they make decisions on environmentally significant projects. They are also aimed at allowing the public to participate in the decision-making process. Having examined Portugal's implementing legislation, the Commission has concluded that it is not in line with several of the Directive's requirements. By way of example, the criteria for screening whether individual projects require an assessment are not fully incorporated into Portuguese law. The Portuguese legislation also fails to require that developers provide information on alternatives to the projects that they propose. The Portuguese authorities have recognised the need for legislative improvements, but satisfactory new legislation is still lacking.
;
• The third case relates to a failure by Portugal to install advanced (`tertiary') waste-water treatment systems to serve 18 Portuguese agglomerations. These agglomerations discharge their waste water into waters that are designated as being "sensitive" principally due to the problem of eutrophication (nutrient enrichment causing harmful algal blooms).

The agglomerations are: Albufeira/Armaçao de Pêra; Barreiro/Moita/Palhais; Beja; Chaves; Corroios/Quinta da Bomba; Curia/Tamengo; Elvas; Feira (Bacia da Ribeira de Caster); Feira (Bacia da Ribeira de Lage); Lamego; Moita; Montijo; Quinta do Conde; Sao Joao da Madeira; Sao Pedro do Sul/Vouzela; Seixal; Viseu e Feira (Ribeira de Rio Maior). Under the terms of the 1991 Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive^[5], tertiary wastewater treatment systems should have been installed by the end of 1998 to remove the nutrients which cause eutrophication.

Legal Process

Article 226 of the Treaty gives the Commission powers to take legal action against a Member State that is not respecting its obligations.

If the Commission considers that there may be an infringement of EU law that warrants the opening of an infringement procedure, it addresses a "Letter of Formal Notice" (first written warning) to the Member State concerned, requesting it to submit its observations by a specified date, usually two months.

In the light of the reply or absence of a reply from the Member State concerned, the Commission may decide to address a "Reasoned Opinion" (final written warning) to the Member State. This clearly and definitively sets out the reasons why it considers there to have been an infringement of EU law and calls upon the Member State to comply within a specified period, normally two months.

If the Member State fails to comply with the Reasoned Opinion, the Commission may decide to bring the case before the European Court of Justice. Where the Court of Justice finds that the Treaty has been infringed, the offending Member State is required to take the measures necessary to conform.

Article 228 of the Treaty gives the Commission power to act against a Member State that does not comply with a previous judgement of the European Court of Justice. The article also allows the Commission to ask the Court to impose a financial penalty on the Member State concerned.

For current statistics on infringements in general, please visit the following web-site:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/droit_com/index_en.htm#infractions ;

^[1] Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds

^[2] Directive 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy

^[3] Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna

^[4] Council Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment

^[5] Council Directive 91/271/EEC