27. 11. 78 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 283/25 
ANNEX 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
The following parts of the Section's opinion were altered as a result of the adoption of amendments at 
the plenary session. 
Page 3, paragraph 1.8 
'Official type-approval of equipment and machinery is of central importance in ensuring safety. This 
type-approval must be based on constantly updated information provided by ergonomics — infor­
mation which is anyway vital in its own right for any strategy of safety and accident prevention.' 
Voting 
For: 18, against: 16, abstentions : 6. 
Page 6, the third indent of paragraph 2.8 
'— the responsibility of the employer and the worker in applying safety regulations.' 
Voting 
For: 44, against: 2, abstentions : 7. 
Page 13, paragraph 3.6.3 
'A specific allocation of money for this work, administered in liaison with the European Foundation 
in Dublin, might be a useful measure.' 
Voting 
Unanimous. 
Opinion on the draft Council recommendation of 8 December 1977 to the Member States 
regarding methods of evaluating the cost of pollution control to industry 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 10 of 12 January 1978, page 6. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 5 January 1978 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic and 
Social Committee in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community. 
No C 283/26 Official Journal of the European Communities 27. 11. 78 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 160th 
plenary session held in Brussels on 20 and 21 June 1978. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, and in particular Article 198 
thereof, 
Having regard to the request made by the Council of 
the European Communities on 6 January 1978 for an 
opinion, 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 31 
January 1978 instructing the Section for Protection of 
the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs 
to draw up an opinion and a report on the matter, 
Having regard to the opinion issued by the Section for 
Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Con­
sumer Affairs, on 13 June 1978, 
Having regard to the report submitted by the rappor­
teur, Mr van Campen, 
Having regard to the discussions at its 160th plenary 
session held on 20 and 21 June 1978 (meeting of 20 
June 1978), 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
unanimously: 
1. General comments 
1.1. The Committee is gratified to see that the Com­
mission is seeking to achieve greater compatibility of the 
cost of pollution control to industry in the various 
Member States. Environmental policy, industrial policy 
and employment policy will all be served by an under­
standing of the financial repercussions of environmental 
legislation currently on the statute book. A better un­
derstanding in this area could also facilitate harmoniz­
ation of legislation. Costs are however merely one as­
pect of the entire environmental problem. Anti-pol­
lution measures also entail advantages in so far as they 
improve the environment. Although such advantages 
are frequently impossible to quantify in cash terms, they 
are of considerable importance and constitute the ulti­mate objective of environmental policy. In ad­
dition, measures taken by industry to protect the en­
vironment often save money. 
1.2. The explanatory memorandum should therefore 
perhaps spell out the whys and wherefores of the re­
commendation's limited objectives. Otherwise the fact 
that it deals only with the cost of anti-pollution 
measures may be the source of all sorts of misunder­
standing. 
1.3. The Committee would also point out the state 
planning measures, such as for example the location of 
plant and buildings, can sometimes prevent costs in the 
long term. 
1.4. The recommendation arises from the commitment 
in the 'action to be taken on the economic aspects of 
anti-pollution measures' envisaged in Chapter 9 of Title 
I of Part II of the programme of action of the European 
Communities on the environment (approved by the 
Council declaration of 22 November 1973 (1)). The 
Committee regrets that the Commission has taken such 
a long period to commence the implementation of the 
Council declaration. It understands that the delay can 
be attributed to the complexity of the problem. 
1.5. Assuming that the recommendation also covers 
industrialized agriculture, the costs of pollution control 
to agriculture as a whole should be investigated. In 
addition, consideration should be given to investigating 
the costs which bodies governed by public law incur in 
meeting their environmental responsibilities to 
the general public. 
1.6. The recommendation relates in particular to the 
evaluation of the cost of pollution control in specific 
branches of industry. The extent to which the proposed 
measures will alleviate pollution (Part I (5) (II)) should 
also be investigated. The objectives of the environmen­
tal programme should, however, be clearly spelt out 
before the cost and cost-effectiveness of the measures 
entailed is calculated. The preliminary technical survey 
referred to in Part I (2) of the Annex deals with the ef­
ficiency of existing procedures and plant as compared 
with other available techniques but such procedures and 
(!) OJNoC 112,20. 12. 1973. 
27. 11. 78 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 283/27 
plant would naturally be limited to meeting the re­
quirements of existing pollution control regulations in 
the Member State. New policy measures of more strin­
gent pollution control standards would involve an as­
sessment of the benefits in relation to the increased 
burden on industry. However, the costs of such new 
policy measures may require the generation of ex­
traneous data in addition to that produced under this 
recommendation. 
1.7. While acknowledging the importance of the data 
which may be provided, the Committee notes that the 
effectiveness of the recommendation depends on the 
collaboration of the Member States. The discretionary 
nature of a response might be more positively influ­
enced by prescribing a time schedule and an order of 
priorities of sectors to be surveyed in accordance with 
the recommendation. 
1.8. The Committee observes that there is, as yet, no 
general harmonization of pollution control standards in 
the Community. It considers that harmonization of 
pollution control requirements in the Community 
should be a major objective of the environmental pro­
tection programme so that competition is not distorted 
by variations in the pollution control cost burden. 
1.9. The Committee is concerned with the effect on the 
international trade of any decline in the competitive 
position of industrial production in the Community. 
This can arise from decisions to impose further cost 
burdens on selected industrial sectors by an extension of 
pollution control obligations based on data of doubtful 
comparability and especially in the absence of similar 
studies from non-Member States. 
1.10. This difficulty was foreseen in the qualification 
in the Council declaration on the principles of a 
Community environment policy. 'The cost of preventing 
and eliminating nuisances must in principle be borne by 
the polluter. However, there may be certain exceptions 
and special arrangements, in particular for transitional 
periods, provided that they cause no significant distor­
tion to international trade and investment' (Part 
I (5) (II)). 
1.11. The choice of location of existing or new indus­
tries can be influenced by the rigidity of the application 
of local pollution control standards. Existing industries 
could be induced to transfer complete installations to 
another country where production regulations would 
have the cost advantage of less stringent conditions and therefore the imposition of more exacting control of the 
withdrawal of exceptions under the 'polluter-pays prin­
ciple' could affect the investment and employment 
prospects. It is, therefore, desirable to persevere in the 
efforts to achieve a high degree of international cooper­
ation and uniformity in pollution control. 
2. Specific comments on the Annex to the recommen­
dation 
2.1. The recommendation does not clearly define the 
sphere of operations. The term 'industry', 'branch of 
industry', and 'sector' are used indiscriminately. There 
should be less ambiguity here. The range of application 
of the recommendation would affect most industries. 
The extent of the task and diversity of industry calls for 
a coordination of data and the recommendation could 
usefully specify priorities in various branches of indus­
try. It is obvious that sectors with special problems in 
the environmental field should take priority. 
2.2. The Committee agrees with the scope and 
methodology of the preliminary technical survey 
(termed the 'descriptive phase') which would have to be 
undertaken by specialized personnel, and involving 
representatives of the industrial sectors surveyed. 
2.3. The subsequent 'assessment phase' following the 
technical survey would determine the proportion of 
overall costs which can be attributed to the require­
ments of pollution control (termed 'pollution control 
relevancy factor'). The calculation of this pollution 
control relevancy factor can involve difficult problems 
of costing especially in complicated industrial processes 
which have process modifications imposed by the re­
quirements of pollution control or, in some instances, 
the introduction of new product manufacture to elim­
inate or absorb the pollution emissions of earlier pro­
cesses. 
2.4. One would expect that 'expenditure on main­
tenance' should properly be included under the general 
heading of 'running costs'. 
2.5. A number of industry's cost items (research, zon­
ing measures, green belts, etc.) have been omitted. To 
ensure that the recommendation is applied flexibly, the 
explanatory memorandum should state that the list of 
costs given is by no means exhaustive. The preliminary 
technical survey should make it possible to determine 
the costs to be investigated in a specific sector. 
2.6. Information on the exact absolute levels of each 
pollutant emitted before and after installation of the 
No C 283/28 Official Journal of the European Communities 27. 11. 78 
control plant may not be readily available in respect of 
every old installation; in anticipation of any such diffi­
culty an alternative reference to the current operation of 
the plant should be acceptable. 
2.7. While annual production 'volume' is requested, 
the 'capacity' of the plant's production process would 
be indicative of size and the 'value' of annual pro-
Done at Brussels, 20 June 1978. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, and in particular Article 100 
thereof, 
Having regard to the request by the Council of the 
European Communities on 22 May 1978 for an opinion, duction would also have a relevance to the cost of pol­
lution control. 
2.8. Historic encouragement may have influenced the 
installation but information on current inducements 
would be of interest in the event of further extensions of 
pollution control. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Basil de FERRANTI 
Having regard to its Rules of Procedure, and in particu­
lar Article 22 thereof, 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 
30 May 1978 instructing the Section for Economic and 
Financial Questions to draw up an opinion on the matter, 
Having regard to the oral report submitted by the rap­
porteur, Mr Miller, and the discussions at its meeting 
on 7 June 1978, Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 77/799/EEC concern­
ing mutual assistance by the competent authorities of the Member States in the field of 
direct taxation 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 127 of 1 June 1978, page 8. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 19 May 1978 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic and 
Social Committee in accordance with Article 100 of the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 100th 
plenary session held in Brussels on 20 and 21 June 1978.