Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Report of the Commission on the implementation of Directive 96/61/EC concerning integrated pollution prevention and control
Date: 2005-11-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, EU environmental policy, European standard, air quality, industrial pollution, national implementing measure, polluter pays principle, pollution control measures

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 3.11.2005 
COM(2005) 540 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL  
AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

Report of the Commission on the implementation of Directive 96/61/EC concerning 
integrated pollution prevention and control 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL  
AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

Report of the Commission on the implementation of Directive 96/61/EC concerning 
integrated pollution prevention and control 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

This  report  has  been  prepared  under  Article  16  (3)  of  Council  Directive  96/61/EC 
concerning  integrated  pollution  prevention  and  control1  (the  IPPC  Directive).  The 
report concentrates on the years 2000 to 2002 and is therefore limited to 15 Member 
States. This is the first such report on the implementation of the Directive since its 
entry into effect in October 1999. 

The IPPC Directive aims at achieving integrated prevention and control of pollution 
arising from about 45.000 large industrial installations across the EU 15. It is thereby 
addressing, through a system to determine permit conditions based on Best Available 
Techniques (BAT), the most significant emissions to water,  air and soil,  as well as 
other environmental impacts. 

This report summarises the information transmitted by Member States on the basis of 
a  questionnaire  adopted  by  the  Commission2.  All  Member  States  replied  to  the 
questionnaire.  Most  Member  States  replied  with  delay.  The  Commission  has  not 
checked all the information reported by the Member States in this context, although 
an analysis of the responses has been provided by an external study3 carried out for 
the  Commission.  In  parallel,  and  as  presented  in  this  report,  the  Commission  has 
carried out its own analysis on the conformity of national legislation with the IPPC 
Directive. 

A number of key implementation issues were already raised by the Commission in its 
Communication  “On  the  Road  to  Sustainable  Production”  adopted  in  June  20034. 
This Communication additionally launched a consultation on the implementation and 
possible  further  development  of  the  IPPC  Directive,  the  findings  of  which  are  also 
taken into account in this report. 

1 
2 

3 

4 

OJ L 257, 10.10.1996, p. 26 
Commission  Decision  of  31  May  1999  concerning  the  questionnaire  relating  to  Council  Directive 
96/61/EC concerning integrated pollution prevention and control, OJ L 148, 15.6.1999, p. 39 
“Analysis of Member States’ first implementation reports on the IPPC Directive”, LDK-ECO, June 
2004, see 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ippc/ippc_ms_implementation.htm#ImplementationReps 
COM(2003)  354  final,  On  the  Road  to  Sustainable  Production,  Progress  in  implementing  Council 
Directive 96/61/EC concerning integrated pollution prevention and control 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
2. 

GENERAL PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTATION 

The  IPPC  Directive  has  applied  to  new  installations  since  30  October  1999,  which 
was  the  deadline  for  transposition.  For  existing  installations,  the  final  deadline  to 
achieve full compliance with the Directive is 30 October 2007, unless an installation 
is subject to a “substantial change” before that date. 

Delays in transposition 

Generally, the IPPC Directive has been transposed with considerable delays. At the 
end of 2004, all EU 15 Member States had finally transposed the Directive, but with 
some remaining gaps in the legislation of some Member States.  

The  Commission  has  checked  the  transposition  of  all  old  Member  States.  The 
legislation of new Member States is being checked. A number of shortcomings have 
been  identified  in  the  large  majority  of  Member  States.  Several  Member  States 
(Finland, Sweden and Austria) have modified their legislation according to the points 
made  by  the  Commission  but  infringement  cases  are  on-going  against  Belgium, 
Denmark,  France,  Germany,  Greece,  the  Netherlands,  Luxembourg  and  Spain.  The 
European Court of Justice ruled in 2004 for the first time on incomplete transposition 
of the IPPC Directive in the case of the Austrian legislation5. 

Different approaches to transposition 

A number of different approaches have been used by the various Member States in 
order to transpose the Directive.  

A considerable number of Member States already had integrated permitting systems 
in  place.  Some  Member  States  (for  instance  France  and  Sweden)  only  made 
relatively small changes to their pre-existing national legislation. This has also led to 
a  considerable  diversity  in  the  exact  approaches  used  to  transpose  the  IPPC 
Directive.  In  many  of  these  Member  States  some  elements  of  the  pre-existing 
systems still dominate.  

Other  Member  States  (such  as  Portugal,  Spain  and  Greece)  without  a  pre-existing 
integrated  permitting  system  in  place  usually  developed  new  legislation  as  well  as 
new  integrated  permitting  systems  and  procedures,  following  the  provisions  of  the 
Directive more precisely. Some of them, however, appear to be late in establishing a 
fully operational permitting system. 

Limited number of IPPC permits issued 

Member  States  reported  (for  the  period  until  the  end  of  2002)  around  45.000 
installations falling under the scope of the IPPC Directive. During the first reporting 
period, 5545 installations were granted permits for substantial changes (4750) or as 
new (795) installations. This represents approximately 13 % of all installations.  

These  numbers  do  not  however  reflect  the  total  numbers  of  IPPC  permits  issued 
since  the  reporting  questionnaire  did  not  require  figures  on  new,  updated  or 

5 

C-78/04 Commission / Austria (Judgment of 18.11.2004, OJ C 6 of 08.01.2005 p.18) 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
reconsidered  permits  for  existing  installations  to  be  reported.  As  a  result,  only  a 
partial picture of the implementation situation can be painted at this stage. Member 
States  have  started  permitting  existing  installations  as  well,  or  reconsidering  the 
conditions of existing permits, but no aggregated data for the EU are available at this 
stage. 

Nevertheless,  the  limited  data  available  point  to  significant  variations  between 
Member States concerning the numbers of permits issued. For example, Italy, Spain 
and Portugal each reported less than 10 permits granted for “substantial changes” in 
existing  installations,  whereas  several  other  Member  States  reported  much  higher 
permitting levels for such types of installations. Greece did not provide data on the 
number of permits issued.  

Need to accelerate progress to ensure full implementation by October 2007 

Generally, as noted in the Communication of June 2003, a number of Member States 
the  Directive’s  practical 
limited  progress 
appear 
implementation. 

to  have  made  only 

in 

There  is  therefore  a  concern  that  a  disproportionate  number  of  permit  applications 
will be filed immediately prior to the deadline of October 2007. This may result in a 
disproportionate load on the competent authorities, which may not be able to cope. 
The  end  result  could  be  failure  to  meet  the  deadline  for  the  issue  or  updating  of 
permits,  or  reduced  regulatory  attention  not  meeting  the  full  requirements  of  the 
Directive.  

In  addition,  it  is  not  sufficient  to  simply  issue  a  permit  by  30  October  2007. 
Installations should be given sufficient time to fully comply with the requirements of 
the Directive by this date. In particular, as laid down in Article 9(4) of the Directive, 
all  installations  should  operate  according  to  conditions  fixed  in  a  permit  based  on 
BAT, taking into account the technical characteristics of the installation concerned, 
its geographical location and the local environmental conditions. 

The  Commission  therefore  continues  to  urge  Member  States  to  take  a  planned  and 
proactive approach towards meeting the Directive’s full requirements by 30 October 
2007. 

3. 

SPECIFIC TRANSPOSITION AND IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

General obligations of operators and permit applications 

These  provisions  of  the  Directive  have  generally  been  properly  transposed  by  the 
Member States. 

Coordination between authorities during the permitting procedure 

Member  States  have  developed  different  systems  to  ensure  coordination  between 
authorities.  Some  Member  States  designate  a  single  authority,  while  others  rely  on 
different competent authorities (for instance Portugal where several authorities have 
been  designated  and  are  each  responsible  for  part  for  the  procedure:  coordination, 
consultation and issuing of permits). The coordination between these authorities can 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
be  more  complex  in  certain  Member  States,  e.g.  Germany  and  the  Netherlands, 
which continue, in certain circumstances, to have separate water permits. 

Determination of permit conditions based on BAT  

The  situation  varies  considerably  among  Member  States.  Certain  Member  have 
developed guidance documents to assist competent authorities, while others have not 
published such specific documents. Certain Member States have established sectoral 
legislation based on BAT. 

The  large  majority  of  Member  States  indicate  that  the  BAT  Reference  Documents 
(BREFs) published by the Commission pursuant to Article 16(2) of the Directive on 
the exchange of information on BAT) are taken into account generally and in specific 
cases when determining BAT. However, this is not systematically addressed in all of 
the  relevant  legislation.  It  should  be  noted  that  the  European  Court  of  Justice  has 
used  the  information  published  in  a  BREF  in  the  context  of  an  order6  on  the 
definition of waste. 

Permit conditions and changes to installations 

The majority of Member States have integrated the requirements of the Directive as 
regards the subjects to be covered by permit conditions and the regulation of changes 
made by operators to existing installations. Only the United Kingdom reported that 
specific guidance had been issued to assist competent authorities in the interpretation 
of the notion of “substantial changes” in operation. 

Several  Member  States  (at  least  8)  have  used  the  possibility  laid  down  in  the 
Directive to set up general binding rules, generally in the form of legislation, instead 
of setting certain requirements in individual permit conditions. In many cases, these 
rules were in force prior to the IPPC Directive. 

Reconsideration and review of permits 

Periodic reconsideration and review of permits are key elements to ensure a dynamic 
regulatory  system.  All  Member  States  refer  to  legislative  provisions  for  the 
reconsideration and updating of permits. However, a number of Member States have 
not  established  clear  reconsideration  procedures  including,  for  instance,  specific 
reconsideration frequencies. 

Environmental quality standards 

All  Member  States  have  indicated  that  national  or  regional  legal  acts  transpose  the 
obligation to require additional conditions in IPPC permits where an environmental 
quality standard requires stricter conditions than those achievable by the use of BAT. 
However,  in  most  of  the  Member  States,  no  such  cases  were  reported  as  having 
arisen.  This  could  be  explained  either  by  incomplete  implementation  of  this 
provision  or  by  the  fact  that  BAT  conditions  are  sufficient  to  meet  environmental 
quality standards in specific cases. In the former case, however, the obligation for the 

6 

C-235/02 Prejudicial ruling (Order of 25.01.2004, OJ C 94 of 17.04.04 p. 13) 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Member States to comply with an environmental quality standard remains under the 
other Community instrument which sets that standard.  

Compliance with permit conditions 

through  on-site 

Most  Member  States  have  established  procedures  to  check  compliance  with  permit 
conditions,  generally 
inspections.  The  frequency  for  such 
inspections, as well as the use of “self-monitoring” carried out by the operators or by 
non-administrative bodies (e.g. accredited laboratories), vary among Member States. 
The  requirement  for  operators  to  regularly  inform  the  competent  authorities  of  the 
results  of  the  monitoring  of  releases  has  been  introduced  in  most  Member  States. 
Procedures  for  regular  inspections  are  still  being  developed  in  certain  Member 
States.  

Procedures  and  frequencies  vary  considerably  among  Member  States.  For  instance, 
inspections  are  carried  out  in  Sweden  on  average  every  two  years  for  each 
installation,  France  has  developed  an  annual  programme  of  inspections,  and,  in 
Spain, competent authorities carry out inspections on their own initiative.  

The number of enforcement actions (administrative or criminal) varies considerably 
across  the  Member  States.  For  instance,  the  Netherlands  reported  310  enforcement 
actions  and  France  148  successful  prosecutions,  while  a  number  of  Member  States 
did not provide the number or the type of enforcement actions carried out during the 
reporting period. 

Information and public participation 

All Member States reported legal provisions to ensure the availability of information 
to and participation of the public in the permit procedure. A period of approximately 
one month is typically allowed for public consultation on permit applications.  

Few Member States (e.g. Ireland) indicated that steps were taken to actively inform 
the  public  of  its  right  (for  instance  through  publications,  booklets,  general 
information  campaigns  or  information  on  the  internet)  to  information  and 
participation.  Generally,  the  public  is  informed  through  permit-specific  notices  (for 
instance in newspapers or on official notice boards). 

Member States did not report a significant influence of the restrictions laid down in 
Directive  90/313/EC  on  the  freedom  of  access  to  information  on  the  environment7, 
for instance as regards commercial and industrial confidentiality.  

Transboundary effects  

Member  States  reported  a  very  limited  number  of  cases  where  cross-border 
cooperation  has  taken  place.  This  may  reflect  incomplete  implementation  of  the 
obligation  to  cooperate  between  competent  authorities  of  the  Member  States 
concerned in cases of possible transboundary effects. Most of the Member States did 
not  report  procedures  to  ensure  adequate  public  access  to  information  and 
participation in the permit procedures of other Member States. 

7 

L 158 , 23/06/1990, p. 56 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Reporting of emission limits values  

Compared with the data on representative emission limit values reported previously 
by Member States, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions on increasing or decreasing 
trends  in  these  values.  The  comparison  of  reported  emission  limit  values,  with  the 
objective of verifying their expected convergence, is in most cases not possible due 
to the different ways used by Member States to express these limit values in permits 
(e.g.  over  different  time  periods  or  with  different  statistical  requirements  for 
compliance). In view of the limited use of these data, the Commission will therefore 
seek to make this exercise better adapted to the potential benefits in the context of the 
review of the Directive. 

4. 

COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE IPPC DIRECTIVE  

A general positive assessment of the Directive 

Although  a  number  of  Member  States  stressed  their  limited  practical  experience  in 
the implementation of the IPPC Directive over the reporting period, the general view 
among  Member  States  is  that  this  Directive  is  an  effective  tool  in  combating 
pollution from industrial installations, bringing a number of benefits, in particular as 
regards  the  integrated  and  preventive  approach,  the  implementation  of  permit 
conditions based on BAT, the updating of permits, improved monitoring and access 
to information and public participation in the permit procedure. Some Member States 
underlined that the implementation of the Directive has brought about administrative 
simplification  and  enhanced  dialogue  between  competent  authorities  and  operators. 
BREFs published by the Commission pursuant to Article 16(2) of the Directive are 
considered as useful tools for the determination and dissemination of BAT. 

Some  Member  States  expressed  their  wish  for  greater  technical  coherence  of  the 
IPPC  Directive  with  other  Community  legislation  on  industrial  emissions,  in 
particular Directive 2001/80/EC on the limitation of emissions  of  certain  pollutants 
into  the  air  from  large  combustion  plants8  and  Directive  2000/76/EC  on  the 
incineration of waste9.  

Other comments  

The  Commission  received  around  100  replies  to  its  2003  Communication  on  the 
IPPC  Directive10.  The  very  large  majority  of  stakeholders  do  not  call  for  radical 
changes  in  the  Directive  but  ask  for  regulatory  stability.  However,  a  number  of 
replies suggest technical amendments to improve the Directive. 

In  addition,  several  Member  States  (in  particular  the  United  Kingdom  and  the 
Netherlands) and some industry associations call for a more significant amendment 
of the Directive to provide greater scope for emissions trading, principally for NOx 
and SO2, as an alternative to the current BAT-based permitting process. There is also 

8 
9 
10 

OJ L 309, 27.11.2001, p. 1 
OJ L 332, 28.12.2000, p. 91 
For more information on the consultation, see 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/ippc/ippc_ms_implementation.htm#CommCommunication 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
virtually  a  unanimous  call  for  the  development  of  guidance  documents  on  key 
implementation issues of the Directive. 

In  its  Resolution  of  28  February  2004,  the  European  Parliament  gave  an  overall 
positive  view  towards  the  Directive  and  calls  on  the  Member  States  to  devote  all 
necessary efforts to implement the Directive. Furthermore, the European Parliament 
is  concerned  by  the  “remarkable  variations  in  implementation”  and  calls  for  more 
efforts  to  monitor  the  implementation  of  the  Directive  and  develop  guidance 
documents. 

5. 

NEXT STEPS - ACTION PLAN AND REVIEW OF THE DIRECTIVE 

In  light  of  the  major  challenges  and  issues  raised  by  the  implementation  of  the 
Directive,  the  Commission  is  concerned  about  the  pace  of  implementation  of  the 
Directive  in  a  number  of  Member  States  and  has  therefore  decided  to  intensify  its 
actions  as  presented  below  with  a  view  to  best  ensure  that  full  compliance  will  be 
achieved smoothly and in due time.  

Action 1. Ensure full transposition of the Directive 

A  number  of  Member  States  still  have  not  properly  transposed  the  IPPC  Directive. 
This  has  led  to  several  infringement  cases.  The  Commission  will  pursue  these 
infringement cases diligently to ensure full transposition.  

Action  2.  Enhanced  monitoring  of 
implementation of the IPPC Directive by 30 October 2007 

the  progress  made 

towards 

the  full 

The full implementation of the IPPC Directive by October 2007 remains a challenge 
in  the  large  majority  of  Member  States.  This  requires  rapid  progress  and  stronger 
political  support  and  administrative  resources  from  national  administrations  and 
competent authorities to ensure a timely implementation of the Directive.  

The Commission is therefore setting up indicators to monitor regularly the progress 
made  by  Member  States  towards  meeting  this  deadline  of  30  October  2007.  The 
indicators  will  in  particular  include  information  on  the  number  of  installations 
identified  and  the  number  of  permits  issued  or  updated  by  Member  States.  This 
information will be made available to the public including via the internet.  

The  Commission  will  also  visit  the  authorities  of  the  Member  States  where 
significant additional efforts are required to fully implement the Directive.  

Action 3. Compliance checks  

The  Commission  has  so  far  received  very  few  complaints  on  possible  inadequate 
application of the IPPC Directive in specific installations.  

However,  in  view  of  the  risks  of  possible  abuse  of  the  inherent  flexibility  of  the 
Directive, the Commission has launched several actions to check the application of 
the Directive: 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
•  The  Commission  will  intensify  the  use  of  the  European  Pollutant  Emission 
Register  (EPER)11  to  identify  the  main  industrial  emitters  and  scrutinise  the 
application  of  the  IPPC  Directive  to  these  installations.  In  particular,  the 
Commission  has  identified  installations  which  were  responsible  for  important 
emissions  of  a  specific  pollutant12  and  will  monitor  the  measures  taken  by 
Member  States  to  ensure  that  these  installations  fully  comply  with  the  IPPC 
Directive by 30 October 2007.  

•  The  Commission  has  also  launched  a  project  to  further  review  progress  in 
implementing  the  Directive  in  the  Member  States  and,  in  respect  of  30  specific 
IPPC installations to be selected from across the EU, to assess the extent to which 
the permits and the performance of the installations comply with the requirements 
of the Directive. 

•  In  2006,  the  Commission  will  launch  a  project  to  study  the  extent  to  which  the 
general binding rules set up in certain Member States meet the requirements of the 
Directive.  

If the Commission identifies cases of inadequate application of the Directive, it will 
pursue  all  necessary  actions,  including  through  infringement  procedures  where 
necessary. In this context, a recent ruling of the European Court of Justice13 against 
Greece  may  have  important  consequences  for  potential  implementation  cases 
concerning the IPPC Directive. According to the ECJ, Greece has failed to fulfil its 
obligations  under  Directive  84/360/EEC  on  the  combating  of  air  pollution  from 
industrial  plants14  by  not  defining  the  policies  or  strategies  for  progressively 
adapting,  in  line  with  the  best  available  technology,  a  power  plant  situated  in 
Linoperamata.  

Action 4. Finalisation of the first round of BREFs and start of their review  

BREFs  are  important  tools  for  the  implementation  of  the  Directive.  All  efforts  are 
being made by the Commission to ensure that the first round of BREFs (comprising 
32  BREFs)  is  finalised  around  the  end  of  2005.  In  addition,  the  review  process  of 
certain  existing  BREFs,  where  key  new  information  and  knowledge  resulting  from 
research  is  available,  is  being  discussed  with  Member  States  and  the  industries 
concerned and will start in 2005. 

Action 5. Need to clarify certain legal issues and to technically review the Directive 

Recent consultation with the Member States have found that the interpretation of the 
activity  descriptions  in  Annex  I  of  the  Directive  and  the  term  “installation”  are  the 
main areas where further guidance to support implementation is most requested. The 
Commission  is  therefore  working  in  close  cooperation  with  Member  States  to 
support the preparation of such guidance, to be finalised in 2006 and published via 

11 
12 

13 
14 

Decision 2000/479/EC; OJ L 192, 28.07.2000, see www.eper.cec.eu.int 
See EPER Review Report 
http://www.eper.cec.eu.int/eper/documents/EPER%20Review%20report,%20final.pdf 
C-364/03 Commission / Greece (Judgement of 07.07.2005, OJ C 217 of 03.09.05 p. 9) 
OJ 1984 L 188, p. 20 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
the internet. These guidance documents are inter alia based on existing interpretative 
views provided by the Commission since the adoption of the Directive.  

The  Commission  has  also  identified  the  need  to  technically  review  the  IPPC 
Directive to clarify certain ambiguities and ensure better regulation. In addition, the 
development  of  Thematic  Strategies  as  part  of  the  Sixth  Environmental  Action 
Programme15  has  highlighted  that  the  IPPC  Directive  represents  an  important 
potential contribution to these initiatives, and possible amendments to the Directive 
(in particular as regards its scope) are also being considered in this context. 

Action  6.  Assessment  of  ways  to  streamline  existing  legislation  on  industrial 
emissions in the context of Better Regulation 

the  Legislative  Simplification  Exercise16)  and 

The consultation launched in 2003 through the Communication on implementation of 
the IPPC Directive, as well as discussions in the Council (in particular in the context 
of 
recent  Commission 
Communication “Better Regulation for Growth and Jobs in the European Union”17, 
all point to a need to review the interaction of the IPPC Directive with other pieces of 
legislation.  This  issue  was  also  specifically  addressed  in  reports  published  by  the 
European Union Network for the Implementation and Enforcement of Environmental 
Law (IMPEL)18. 

the 

In  the  context  of  the  review  of  the  IPPC  Directive,  the  Commission  is  therefore 
assessing ways to streamlining existing legislation on industrial emissions (the IPPC 
Directive  and  relevant  sectoral  legislation,  such  as  the  Directives  on  large 
combustion plants, waste incineration and the use of organic solvents19).  

Action  7.  Assessment  of  the  use  of  possible  market-based  instruments  and  other 
incentives 

The IPPC Directive is based on a dynamic concept in view of the definition of BAT. 
However,  in  practice,  once  an  IPPC  permit  has  been  issued,  and  depending  on  the 
approach  taken  by  the  relevant  competent  authority,  operators  may  take  a  minimal 
and static approach to ensuring that the conditions of the permit are complied with in 
a strict sense.  

The  Commission  is  therefore  assessing,  in  the  context  of  the  review  of  the  IPPC 
Directive,  the  development  of  incentives,  for  example  through  market-based 
instruments  (e.g.  emission  trading  schemes,  taxes  and  charges),  to  encourage 
operators  to  go  beyond  regulatory  requirements  imposed  under  the  IPPC  Directive 
and to support innovative environmental technologies.  

15 

16 

17 
18 
19 

the 

example 

conclusions  of 

Decision 1600/2002/EC laying down the Sixth Community Environment Action Programme; OJ L 242, 
10.09.2002, p. 1 
for 
See 
http://ue.eu.int/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/84335.pdf 
COM (2005) 97 final, 16.3.2005 
See http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/impel/  
Council  Directive  1999/13/EC  of  11  March  1999  on  the  limitation  of  emissions  of  volatile  organic 
compounds due to the use of organic solvents in certain activities and installations; OJ L 85, 29.3.1999, 
p. 1. 

the  European  Council  of  23  March  2005, 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
6. 

CONCLUDING REMARKS 

The  IPPC  review  will  proceed  through  2006  and  will  be  concluded  in  2007  by  a 
Commission  Communication  accompanied  by  a  legislative  proposal  if  appropriate. 
The  Commission  is  creating  an  Advisory  Group  on  the  IPPC  Review  to  ensure  a 
consultation and close dialogue with Member States and other stakeholders. A Public 
Hearing will also be organised in 2006. 

The  review  will  evaluate  the  scope  to  improve  the  functioning  of  the  Directive, 
together  with  other  industrial  emissions-related  legislation,  while  not  altering  its 
main underlying principles and level of ambition. However, this should not distract 
Member  States  from  a  proper  and  timely  implementation  of  the  Directive.  In 
particular, Member States’ first priority should remain the full implementation of the 
Directive by 30 October 2007. 

EN 

11 

   EN