Opinion of the Commission pursuant to Article 251 (2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty, on the European Parliament's amendments to the Council's Common Position regarding the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and the Council amending Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances amending the proposal of the Commission pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty
Date: 2003-07-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: carcinogenic substance, dangerous substance, drafting of EU law, environmental protection, environmental risk prevention, health risk, industrial hazard, public health, safety standard

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 23.7.2003
COM(2003) 460 final

2001/0257 (COD)

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

pursuant to Article 251 (2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty,
on the European Parliament's amendments
to the Council's Common Position regarding the
Proposal for a

Directive of the European Parliament and the Council amending Council Directive
96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving
dangerous substances

AMENDING THE PROPOSAL OF THE COMMISSION
pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty

2001/0257 (COD)

OPINION OF THE COMMISSION

pursuant to Article 251 (2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty,
on the European Parliament's amendments
to the Council's Common Position regarding the
Proposal for a

Directive of the European Parliament and the Council amending Council Directive
96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving
dangerous substances

1.

INTRODUCTION

Article 251(2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty provides that the Commission is
to  deliver  an  opinion  on  the  amendments  proposed  by  the  European  Parliament  at  Second
Reading.  The  Commission  sets  out  its  opinion  below  on  the  11  amendments  proposed  by
Parliament.

2.

BACKGROUND

–  Date  of  transmission  of  the  Proposal  to  the  European  Parliament  and  Council  (COM

(2001) 624 final – 2001/0257 (COD)): 10 December 2001

–  Date  on  which  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  adopted  its  opinion:  24

April 2002

–  Date on which the European Parliament gave its opinion at First Reading: 3 July 2002

–  Date on which the Commission adopted its Amended Proposal (COM (2002) 540 final –

2001/0257 (COD)): 26 September 2002

–  Date on which the Council adopted the Common Position: 20 February 2003

–  Date on which the Commission communicated its view on the Common Position: 5 March

2003

–  Date on which the Common Position was received by the European Parliament: 13 March

2003

On  19  June  2003,  the  European  Parliament  at  its  Second  Reading  adopted  11  amendments.
Many of these amendments are identical with amendments already tabled at First Reading.

2

3.

PURPOSE OF THE DIRECTIVE

Council  Directive  96/82/EC  of  9  December  19961  on  the  control  of  major-accident  hazards
involving  dangerous  substances  (so-called  Seveso  II  Directive)  aims  at  the  prevention  of
major accidents and the limitation of their consequences for man and the environment, with a
view  to  ensuring  high  levels  of  protection  throughout  the  Community  in  a  consistent  and
effective manner.

The  Proposal  follows  the  Communication  on  the  “Safe  operation  of  mining  activities:  a
follow-up to recent mining accidents” (COM(2000) 664 final) in which the Commission sets
out three key actions in order to increase the safety of mining operations (an amendment of
the Seveso II Directive, an initiative on the management of mining waste and a Best Available
Technologies  reference  document  under  the  IPPC  Directive  (96/61/EC))  and  aims  at
including certain activities of the extractive industries, including tailings disposal facilities.

The Proposal also addresses the fireworks explosion that occurred in Enschede in May 2000
by  proposing  a  better  definition  of  explosive  and  pyrotechnic  substances  along  with  a
decrease  of  qualifying  quantities  for 
the
recommendations  of  two  studies  on  carcinogens  and  substances  dangerous  for  the
environment, it proposes to include more carcinogenic substances and to lower the qualifying
quantities for substances toxic to aquatic environment.

these  substances.  Furthermore,  following 

Consideration  has  also  been  given  as  to  whether  the  explosion  of  the  chemical  site  of  AZF
that occurred in Toulouse on 21 September 2001 necessitates immediate amendments of the
Seveso  II  Directive.  While  the  original  Proposal  did  not  contain  additional  legislative
measures  in  this  respect,  the  Amended  Proposal  introduces  changes  with  regard  to  the
definition  of  and  qualifying  quantities  for  ammonium  nitrate,  land-use  planning  and
information to the public.

4.

OPINION  OF  THE  COMMISSION  ON  THE  AMENDMENTS  BY  THE  EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT

On  19  June  2003,  the  European  Parliament  adopted  11  amendments.  The  Commission  can
accept amendments 8-11. Amendments 1, 2, 4-7 and 12 are not acceptable.

4.1.

Amendments accepted by the Commission

Amendment 8 seeks to reinforce the necessity for training for emergencies by introducing an
explicit reference to training in the section on emergency planning within the description of
the elements of a safety management system in Annex III of the Directive.

Amendment 9 proposes to add to the items to be communicated to the public a map showing
areas  that  might  be  affected  by  the  consequences  of  major  accidents.  The  text  proposed  by
Parliament is identical with the text adopted by the Commission in its Amended Proposal.

Amendments 10 and 11 propose the creation of 2 new entries for potassium nitrate including
their  definitions  and  qualifying  quantities.  The  Commission  has  already  integrated  these
amendments into its Amended Proposal.

1

OJ No L 10, 14.01.1997, p.13.

3

                                                
The Commission considers that the acceptance of these four amendments will help facilitate a
future compromise between the co-legislators.

4.2.

Amendments rejected by the Commission

Amendments 1 and 2 propose to broaden the scope of the mining activities to be covered by
the  Seveso  II  Directive  by  deleting  the  words  “chemical  and  thermal”,  thus  including
mechanical  and  physical  processing  of  minerals.  The  Commission  continues  to  be  of  the
opinion  that  the  Seveso  II  Directive  should  only  apply  where  dangerous  substances  are
brought  onto  site  and  stored  there,  or  where  chemical  and  thermal  processing  take  place.
Where the  processing  is  mechanical  or  physical,  the  only  dangerous  substances  on  site  will
normally be those contained in the minerals extracted. In this context, the Commission would
like to draw Parliament’s attention to its proposal for a Directive on the management of waste
from the extractive industries (COM(2003) 319 final) that was adopted on 2 June 2003. The
measures  in  the  proposal  complement  those  outlined  in  the  Seveso  II  Directive  and  include
the  establishment  of  a  major-accident  prevention  policy  and  a  safety  management  system.
These measures will apply to those waste management facilities that present an accident risk
but will not be covered by the revised Seveso  II Directive. The Commission also rejects the
proposal in amendment 2 to replace the term “active” by “operational”.

Amendment 4 establishes a requirement for operators to inform the competent authority in the
event of a modification of an installation, establishment or storage area. This would introduce
further  bureaucratic  burdens  without  improving  safety,  since  Article  6  already  imposes  an
obligation  on  operators  to  notify  any  significant  increase  in  the  quantity  of  the  dangerous
substance, or any change in the processes employing it.

Amendment  5  proposes  to  impose  an  obligation  on  Member  States  to  ensure  that  different
methods used for drawing up safety reports are harmonised. However, “method” itself is not
defined and it remains unclear what this exactly means. Safety reports will naturally differ as
there  is  a  wide  variety  of  chemical  installations,  and  it  is  hard  to  see  how  a  single  method
could  be  appropriate  under  all  circumstances.  Nevertheless,  the  Commission  encourages
convergence,  and  has  published  a  guidance  document  on  how  to  establish  safety  reports
(http://mahbsrv.jrc.it/GuidanceDocs-SafetyReport.html).

Amendment 6 reintroduces amendment 30 adopted in first reading, obliging the Commission
to  draw  up  guidelines  to  be  used  for  assessing  the  compatibility  between  existing
establishments  covered  by  the  Directive  and  sensitive  areas.  The  Commission  has  already
accepted this amendment in principle, proposing a different wording. In particular, it cannot
accept the restriction of the scope of the guidelines to “existing” establishments.

Amendment  7  would  oblige  the  Commission  to  develop  a  “scheme  of  incentives  and  /  or
funding  for  the  relocation  of  establishments”.  However,  on  the  grounds  of  subsidiarity
considerations,  the  Commission  continues  to  believe  that  such  a  task  falls  to  the  Member
States.  The  Commission  will  monitor  compatibility  of  any  such  scheme  with  European
competition law.

Amendment  12  proposes  references  to  Directive  2000/60/EC  (Water  Framework  Directive)
and Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste. Such references are not necessary in the view
of  the  Commission.  The  Seveso  II  Directive  already  provides  for  the  case  of  unclassified
substances and preparations, and hazardous waste can therefore be covered on the basis of its
properties  as  a  preparation.  The  Commission  also  draws  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  new

4

proposal  for  a  Directive  on  the  management  of  waste  from  the  extractive  industries
(COM(2003) 319 final) contains a reference to Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste.

5.

CONCLUSION

Pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty, the Commission amends its proposal as set out
above.

5