WRITTEN QUESTION E-2929/01 by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Answer to Question No E-1569/01 Assessment of the hazards of fireworks materials in the EU.
Date: 2001-10-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: environmental risk prevention, evaluation method, explosive, harmonisation of standards, import, international standard, product safety, storage, transport of dangerous goods

C 160 E/48

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.7.2002

Union démarches will be carried out in order to accelerate progress in the discussions of this issue within
the group of experts which has been specifically set up.

The Commission will closely follow developments at the CCW review.

On an operational
level, the Commission is providing an indirect but tangible contribution to the
reduction of the threat posed by cluster bombs/unexploded ordnance (CB/UXO) through the legal and
budgetary instrument of the anti-personnel landmines Regulations. Decontamination from landmines often
encompasses de-facto clearance of such ammunition; this has been particularly the case with areas such as
Laos and Kosovo.

The Commission will make sure that the lessons learned in these operations will be used in future
interventions.

(2002/C 160 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2929/01

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 October 2001)

Subject: Answer to Question No E-1569/01 ‘Assessment of the hazards of fireworks materials in the EU’

In its answer to Question E-1569/01 (1), the Commission stresses the importance of question 1. What
practical initiatives does the Commission intend to take, however, to eliminate what it also views as the
existing shortcomings in the application of classifications 1.1 to 1.4 UN/ADR to (temporary) storage
facilities for fireworks materials?

This point of is particular importance since with the adoption of this system under the Seveso II

1.
Directive, the Member States are required to apply it to the relevant facilities.

2.
Question 1 is put to the Commission once more. What possibilities does the Commission see for the
UN/ADR tests to be supplemented by a test whereby the materials would be exposed to fire in an enclosed
environment in order to take account of the fact that most fireworks materials are not only transported in
containers but also stored in them?

The Commission’s answer also stresses the importance of question 2. What initiatives does the

3.
Commission intend to take, however, to eliminate the serious failings that exist?

4. What initiatives does the Commission intend to take to ensure that uniform European criteria are
established for the classification of explosive materials and that uniform rules are laid down for their
application?

5.
Question 2 is also put to the Commission once more. Is it possible for the Commission to require all
the Member States to have the classification of explosive materials monitored before import by means of
tests carried out by laboratories accredited in the Community?

(1) See page 2.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(12 December 2001)

In order to take account of the fact that a lot of fireworks materials are not only transported but also
stored in containers, the Commission will, in close co-operation with the Member States, examine ways of
eliminating possible shortcomings in the current test procedures and criteria of the United Nations/
European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (UN/ADR)
classification scheme, including a test whereby the materials would be exposed to fire in an enclosed
environment.

4.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 160 E/49

As already expressed in its answer to the Honourable Member’s Written Question E-1569/01 (1), the
Commission will consider appropriate measures to ensure that the classification and labelling of explosive
and pyrotechnic products, in particular those imported from third countries, is carried out correctly and
therefore reflects the proper hazard potential of the products.

In this context, the Commission emphasises that the important rules are in place, including the general
products safety Directive, Council Directive 92/59/EEC (2), and that one of the main current weaknesses lies
in the area of enforcement. Clearly, the level of enforcement in the Member States could be raised so that
the importation of incorrectly labelled explosives from third countries will in the future be avoided.

(1) See page 2.
(2) OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.

(2002/C 160 E/054)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2943/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 October 2001)

Subject: Protracted settlement procedures following (road) accidents in Switzerland

In answer to question E-1080/0 (1), the Council says that the Commission has taken the initiative of
conducting negotiations with the Swiss Confederation on improving settlement procedures in the case of
accidents in Switzerland involving, for example, a vehicle insured in Switzerland and a vehicle insured in a
Member State of the Community. As the fourth directive on motor vehicle insurance affords no solution to
this problem, the scope of the directive should nonetheless urgently be extended to prevent protracted
claims procedures between EU victims and Swiss insurance companies in the near future.

Loop-holes in Swiss legislation enable insurance companies to withhold for a very long time the payment
of damages resulting from civil liability. This source of legal uncertainty affects EU citizens who are victims
of (road) accidents in Switzerland. They become caught up in a legalistic procedural wrangle with no
prospect of compensation within a reasonable period of time. One of the victims is a citizen of the Belgian
Federation who has been waiting for a number of years for speedy, equitable and fair compensation.

Will the Commission take the initiative with regard to negotiations with the Swiss Confederation on the
above problem by making a recommendation, as set out in Article 300 of the Treaty? If not, why is it
refusing to take such an initiative given that the fourth directive on motor vehicle insurance is inadequate
to ensure a speedy, fair and reasonable solution for EU victims of accidents in Switzerland?

(1) OJ C 364 E, 20.12.2001, p. 41.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(30 November 2001)

As indicated in the previous replies, the Commission has pursued further the exploratory talks with the
Swiss Confederation on the extension of the protection provided by the Fourth Directive (1) on motor
vehicle insurance to claims against Swiss insurance companies. However, the analysis of the current