Bescherming wilde vogels: Commissie start procedures tegen Duitsland (en)

The European Commission has decided to send Germany a final written warning over inadequate protection of wild birds. The Commission has also decided to take no action over complaints concerning the potential impact on protected nature areas of works at Frankfurt Airport. The Commission's investigation showed that the works would result in no overall harm to nature areas, as measures were taken by the German authorities to compensate for nature losses due to the works.

Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas i said: "I am pleased that the projects at Frankfurt Airport will result in no overall harm to habitats or species. Our impact assessments of the projects have found that no 'priority' habitats or species - ie, those at particular risk - would be affected. Alternative locations for the projects were assessed but their environmental impact would have been at least as high. The Commission accepted the German authorities' view that the projects are merited on the grounds of overriding public interest. However, further progress is still needed in designating adequate bird protection areas in several parts of Germany."

Final written warning over inadequate designation of bird conservation areas

The Commission has decided to send Germany a final written warning over inadequate protection of wild birds. Germany has failed to designate a sufficient number and size of special protection areas for birds under the EU directive on the conservation of wild birds.[1] The Birds Directive is the key piece of EU legislation setting out measures for the protection, management and control of all species of naturally occurring birds, as well as introducing rules to protect their habitats. The directive requires member states to establish a general system of protection for the bird species it covers.

The latest scientific studies indicate that Germany's protected areas should be bigger and more numerous in order to afford an adequate level of conservation. The biggest shortcomings are in the state of Lower Saxony, but site designations are also inadequate in eight other states: Baden-Württemberg, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland Palatinate, Saarland, Saxony, Schleswig Holstein and Thuringia.

Closure of investigations into various works at Frankfurt Airport

The Commission has decided to close its investigations into several complaints about the environmental impacts arising from various works projects at Frankfurt Airport. These involve the construction of a new runway and two maintenance hangars as well as the relocation of a transformer station. Complaints were received by the Commission that the projects would have serious impacts on existing or proposed protected areas under the EU's two key pieces of nature protection legislation: the Habitats Directive,[2] and the Birds Directive.

Under the terms of the Habitats Directive, infrastructure projects justified on the grounds of `overriding public interest' can be pursued provided that compensation measures[3] needed to ensure the overall coherence of the EU's Natura 2000 network of protected areas are taken. Germany has taken such compensation measures and the Commission is satisfied that they are adequate. The Commission has therefore decided to close its investigations without taking any action.

In a separate case, the Commission is pursuing its investigation of the new northwest runway at Frankfurt Airport, which is situated close to a chemicals plant. The Commission is in contact with the German authorities to make sure that the land-use planning rules of the EU's Seveso II Directive[4] are respected (see IP/04/422).

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, again by issuing a first written warning ("Letter of Formal Notice") and then a second and final written warning ("Reasoned Opinion"). The article then allows the Commission to ask the Court to impose a financial penalty on the Member State concerned.

For current statistics on infringements in general see:

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

[1] Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds

[2] Directive 92/43/EC

[3] such as the designation of other nature areas for the affected habitats and species

[4] Council Directive 96/82 on the control of major accident hazards involving dangerous substances