WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3912/97 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Seveso directive
Date: 1997-12-11
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: accident prevention, dangerous substance, environmental impact, health control, industrial hazard, pollution control measures, prevention of pollution, public health, safety standard, technical standard













EUR-Lex - 91997E3912 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E3912

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3912/97 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Seveso directive  


Official Journal C 187 , 16/06/1998 P. 0084 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3912/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (11 December 1997)Subject: Seveso directiveFor requirements relating to the protection of the environment and the safety of establishments the directives- of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (85/337/EEC) ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. )),- of 24 September 1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control (96/61/EC) ((OJ L 257, 10.10.1996, p. 26. )) and- of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances (96/82/EC) ((OJ L 10, 14.1.1997, p. 13. ))are of fundamental importance.The last two of these directives must be implemented by the Member States by 1999 at the latest. During the discussions this has prompted a number of views giving rise to the following questions to the Commission have been put forward.Article 14 of Directive 96/61/EC requires the Member States to ensure that the operator of an installation governed by the directive complies with all the conditions of the relevant permit. Article 18 of Directive 96/82/EC requires systematic inspection by the Member States' competent authorities of the establishments governed by the directive.When meeting the inspection requirements of Article 18 of Directive 96/82/EC, are the Member States also required to comply with Article 13 of Directive 96/61/EC where installations are governed by both directives? Does the wording of Article 18(2) of Directive 96/82/EC - 'the programme shall entail at least one on-site inspection made by the competent authority every twelve months of each establishment covered by Article 9' - mean that such inspections may be conducted only by an authority of the Member State in question, or is it also permissible for inspections to be conducted by private organizations or an economic entity of the operator itself?Must on-site inspections by the Member States' authorities pursuant to Article 18(1) include an on-site examination of the technical facilities and organization of the establishment concerned, or may the authority confine itself to an examination of appropriate documents, especially the safety report, and an on-site inspection of the administrative and social buildings? What measures is the Commission taking to ensure that the Member States develop and apply uniform standards in respect of the scale of the inspection programmes referred to in Article 18(2)(a)? Are the reports referred to in Article 18(2)(b) of Directive 96/82/EC to be regarded as a subject on which information is exchanged within the meaning of Article 19(1)?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (29 January 1998)Article 18 of Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances (Seveso II) obliges the Member States to make sure that the competent authorities set up a system of inspections or other control measures appropriate to the installation concerned.This generally worded provision allows the competent authorities a certain leeway in fulfilling their obligations. It is therefore quite conceivable for a competent authority not to carry out the inspections itself but to transfer them to independent, private surveillance bodies. However, the competent authority must in such cases itself make sure that the objectives of the inspection as referred to in Article 18 of the Seveso II Directive are met.The inspections or other control measures must allow a regular, systematic examination of the operational, organisational and management systems at the installation. On-site inspections therefore cannot be confined to the inspection of various documents or simply of the administrative and social buildings. However, it is permissible for individual inspections to concentrate on specific aspects, such as the organisation of the installation.To ensure that the provisions of Article 18 are applied by the Member States in a consistent manner, the Commission, in agreement with the Member States, set up a technical working party in 1997, i.e. long before the Seveso II Directive is due to become mandatory in February 1999, to draw up guidelines for inspections and inspection systems and to put forward proposals for cooperation and an exchange of information between the Member States in this field.For installations covered by the provisions of both the Seveso II Directive and the IPPC Directive, the inspections pursuant to Article 18 of the Seveso II Directive and the reconsideration and updating of permit conditions pursuant to Article 13 of the IPPC Directive may be carried out jointly. As already indicated, this considerably eases the procedure and can also help to save costs not only for the operator but also for the supervisory authorities.The information in the inspection reports to be drawn up in accordance with Article 18(2)(b) may be exchanged as provided for in Article 19(1) so long as current legislation does not require it to be treated confidentially.