WRITTEN QUESTION E-0920/04 by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission. Treatment of waste oils in Ireland.
Date: 2004-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Ireland, application of EU law, infringement procedure (EU), used oil, waste management, waste recycling

C 88 E/248

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Could the Commission now indicate what response, if any, it has received from the Irish Government in
relation to the reasoned opinion that it sent to Ireland in July 2003 (and announced in IP/03/1108)
regarding Ireland’s failure to bring its legislation into line with the requirements of the Framework Waste
Directive (Council Directive 75/442/EEC (3) on waste, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC (4)) in relation
to urban waste water treatment plants and, specifically, Ireland’s failure to ensure that urban waste water
treatment plants are submitted to the system of permits required by this Directive, which, among other
things, allows the odours from these plants to be regulated and controlled.

What is the Commission’s attitude to the Irish Government’s response, and what action is it now taking, or
proposing to take, with regard to this matter?

(1) OJ C 84 E, 3.4.2004, p. 759.
(2) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p. 40.
(3) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 39.
(4) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

The Reasoned Opinion to which the Honourable Member refers relates to Ireland’s compliance with
Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of
18 March 1991. More specifically, it concerned Ireland’s compliance with the terms of the Directive in
connection with odour emissions from waste-water treatment plants. According to Article 2(1) of the
Directive (1), waste waters are excluded from the scope of the Directive ‘where they are already covered by
other legislation.’ The Commission had contended that, in the absence of other legislation, odour emissions
from Irish waste-water treatment plants needed to be regulated in accordance with Directive 91/156/EEC.
On 7 August 2003, Ireland sought an extension of the time within which to respond. Before any response
was received, on 11 September 2003, the European Court of Justice delivered a judgment 2003 in
Case C-114/01, AvestaPolarit Chrome Oy which interprets the meaning of the phrase ‘where they are
already covered by other legislation’ employed in Article 2(1) of the Directive. In order to take account of
the implications of this judgement for waste waters as well as a number of other waste categories
mentioned in Article 2(1), the Commission notified an additional Letter of Formal Notice to Ireland on
19 December 2003 in the framework of the same infringement procedure (2). Ireland subsequently sought
a two month extension of the period for responding to this, which was granted.

(1) Article 2(1) of the Directive states: ‘The following shall be excluded from the scope of this Directive:

(a) gaseous effluents emitted into the atmosphere;
(b) where they are already covered by other legislation:
(i)
(ii) waste resulting from prospecting, extraction, treatment and storage of mineral resources and the working of

radioactive waste;

quarries;

(iii) animal carcases and the following agricultural waste: faecal matter and other natural, non-dangerous substances

used in farming;

(iv) waste waters, with the exception of waste in liquid form;
(v) decommissioned explosives.’.

(2) 2000/4158.

(2004/C 88 E/0252)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0920/04

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

(26 March 2004)

Subject: Treatment of waste oils in Ireland

What reply, if any, did the Commission receive from Ireland in response to the reasoned opinion that it
sent to Ireland in July 2001 (as announced in press release IP/01/1144) regarding Ireland’s failure to give
priority to the regeneration of waste oils over their disposal in accordance with the Waste Oils Directive
75/439/EEC (1)? What subsequent action did the Commission take, or is still considering taking, with
regard to this matter?

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 23.

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/249

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

The Reasoned Opinion to which the Honourable Member refers related to Ireland’s implementation of a
provision of Council Directive 75/439/EEC of 16 July 1975 that requires Member States to give priority to
the regeneration of waste oils over their disposal. The Commission took similar action against several other
Member States. On 14 November 2001, the Irish authorities responded, explaining that the amount of
waste oil arising in Ireland made waste oil regeneration uneconomic. On 25 April 2002, they provided
copies of two studies which they contended supported this conclusion. An examination of the studies
disclosed wider problems of compliance with the Directive,
in particular a high level of unrecorded
disposal of waste oils in Ireland.
In order to address the wider issues, the Commission notified an
additional Letter of Formal Notice on 11 July 2003, to which Ireland responded on 27 November 2003.
The Commission will make a further decision on the matter later in 2004.

(2004/C 88 E/0253)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0929/04

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(26 March 2004)

Subject: Promotion of dairy products

I have received a letter from a constituent who has asked if there is provision for the promotion of the
dairy industry in the UK. My constituent sells milk-based products and saw the EU-sponsored adverts for
milk on television and wondered if there were other funded schemes available.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2004)

The promotion exercise referred to by the Honourable Member is part of a national milk promotion
campaign, organised by the Dairy Council with joint co-financing (United Kingdom 50 %) from the
European Union.

The Commission jointly funds programmes to promote certain European Union agricultural products, milk
and dairy products being amongst the sectors eligible for support. Promotion campaigns such as this one
are generic in nature and never in favour of any particular brand names or enterprises. They highlight the
advantages of European produce in terms of quality, food safety, nutrition, labelling, animal welfare and
respect for the environment.

The procedure is that the Authority in the Member State responsible for this exercise (in the case of the
United Kingdom this is the Rural Payments Agency) invites professional or inter-professional organisations
representative of
information programmes.
In cooperation with an implementing agency selected by a competitive tendering process, the professional
body drafts a programme according to strict eligibility criteria. There are also set conditions by which the
programme must give due acknowledgement of Community assistance.

to submit draft promotion or

their particular

sector

The Directorate-General for Agriculture has a website offering more detailed information and the address is
as follows: (http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/prom/index_en.htm). This provides a full explanation,
including the legal regulatory basis for the programmes (Regulations (EC) No 2826/2000 (1) and (EC)
No 94/2002 (2)).