Brussels, 25/11/2011 (Agence Europe) - Most unusually, only three member states saw action taken against them by the European Commission on 24 November for their failure to comply with EU environmental law. Two of the three (Poland and Italy) stand accused of several infringements, however. Environment Commissioner Janez Potocnik recommended that action be taken in the following cases:
Nature protection: Italy will receive a letter of formal notice calling on it to implement three Court of Justice rulings against it - in 2008 and then again twice in 2010 - which found Italian law falls short with regard to the European directive on the protection of wild birds (Directive 79/409/EEC, the “Birds Directive”).
Two of the rulings relate to hunting. On 15 May 2008, the Court found against Italy for improperly authorising the hunting of common starlings and chaffinches in Liguria. Similarly, on 11 November 2010 the Court ruled that the Veneto region had adopted regional legislation authorising hunting of the Italian sparrow (Passer italiae), Eurasian tree sparrow (Passer montanus), the great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), the chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs), the brambling (Fringilla montifringilla), the common starling (Sturnus vulgaris) and the Eurasian collared dove (Streptopelia decaocto), contrary to the provisions of the Birds Directive. Liguria has since amended its legislation and stopped issuing hunting derogations, but in September 2011 it adopted more local legislation for the 2011-2012 hunting season that again breaches Italy's obligations under the Birds Directive. The Veneto region, too, amended its regional legislation in the wake of the ruling, correctly transposing the directive, but the region has continued issuing hunting derogations in breach of Article 9 of the directive.
The Commission, therefore, has sent two letters of formal notice to Italy. Given the urgency of the situation (the hunting seasons in Veneto and Liguria end on 31 December 2011 and on 31 January 2012 respectively), the letters set a one-month time limit for the Italian authorities to reply.
In a separate case, the Court found a number of general failings in the transposition and application of the Birds Directive at national level and in several other regions (including Lombardy, Puglia, Lazio and Tuscany). Although the legislation has been amended, several breaches remain. In particular, the system enabling the Italian government to ensure that regions do not issue hunting derogations in breach of the Directive is still ineffective. Problems also remain at local levels, as the Lombardy and Puglia regions have continued to issue hunting derogations in breach of the directive. A letter of formal notice is therefore being sent and Italy will have two months to reply.
Nitrate pollution of water: Poland will receive a reasoned opinion (second stage of the infringements procedure) for inadequate transposition of Directive 91/67/EC, known as the “Nitrates Directive”, which seeks to prevent the nitrates used in agriculture polluting underground and surface water. The Commission is of the opinion that Poland has not yet designated all the zones which are vulnerable to nitrates pollution, even though this piece of legislation should have been fully incorporated into national law by 2004. This procedure comes on top of the threat hanging over Poland of heavy fines for persistent infringement of the directive on ambient air quality and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (see EUROPE No 10502).
Protection of water quality: Ireland is to receive a reasoned opinion calling on it to bring its national legislation into line with arrangements in Directive 2000/60/EC, the “Water Framework Directive”. The Commission is concerned that Ireland has incorrectly implemented the concept of water services as described in EU water legislation - leading to inappropriate water pricing. One of the measures to achieve the objectives of the directive is the obligation to adopt a cost recovery policy for water services that includes the environmental and resource costs of water use. Ireland is of the opinion that cost recovery should apply only to the supply of drinking water and the disposal and treatment of wastewater. The Commission however sees water services as a wider notion that includes water abstraction for cooling industrial installations and agricultural irrigation, the impoundment or storage of surface waters for navigation purposes, flood protection or hydro power production, and well drilling for agricultural, industrial or private consumption. Ireland will have one month to respond to the reasoned opinion, failing which it may be referred to the Court of Justice. (AN/transl.rt)