Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty concerning the common position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on waste (the Waste Framework Directive)
Date: 2008-01-09
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU environmental policy, environmental protection, hazardous waste, waste management, waste recycling

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 9.1.2008 
COM(2007) 863 final 

2005/0281 (COD) 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty 

concerning the 

common position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of the European 
Parliament and of the Council on waste (the Waste Framework Directive) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
2005/0281 (COD) 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty 

concerning the 

common position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of the European 
Parliament and of the Council on waste (the Waste Framework Directive) 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

1. 

BACKGROUND 

Date of transmission of the proposal to the EP and the Council 
(document COM(2005)667 final – 2005/0281COD): 

26 December 2005 

Date  of  the  opinion  of  the  European  Economic  and  Social 
Committee: 

19 June 2006 

Date of the opinion of the European Parliament, first reading: 

13 February 2007 

Date of adoption of the common position: 

20 December 2007 

2. 

OBJECTIVE OF THE COMMISSION PROPOSAL 

The  overall  aim  of  this  proposal  is  to  optimise  the  provisions  of  the  Waste  Framework 
Directive (75/442/EEC) whilst maintaining its essential structure and key provisions.  

The principle objectives of the revision are to: 

– 

– 

– 

3. 

simplify  and  modernise  the  Waste  Framework  Directive  as  well  as  Directive 
75/439/EEC  on  the  disposal  of  waste  oils  and  Directive  91/689/EEC  on  hazardous 
waste, that are proposed for repeal and partial integration into the Waste Framework 
Directive,  

implement  a  more  ambitious  and  more  effective  waste  prevention  policy,  notably 
through  the  obligation  for  the  Member  States  to  develop  waste  prevention 
programmes, 

encourage the re-use and recycling of waste. 

COMMENTS ON THE COMMON POSITION 

3.1 

General comments 

The Commission accepted in full, in part or in principle 48 of the 120 amendments proposed 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
by the European Parliament in its first reading. 54 amendments have now been incorporated, 
either verbatim or in spirit, in the common position. 

The Commission accepted all the amendments which sought to clarify definitions usefully, or 
added  new  definitions  for  terms  that  are  used  in  the  articles.  The  Commission  accepted 
amendments  that  clarified  the  notion  of  a  five  step  waste  hierarchy  and  the  principle  of 
producer  responsibility,  and  in  principle,  amendments  that  introduced  further  recycling  and 
re-use targets. The Commission did not accept amendments which narrowed the scope of the 
Directive,  weakened  the  environmental  protection  offered  by  the  directive,  created 
disproportionate  administrative  burdens,  such  as  amendments  related  to  the  definition  of 
recovery or the hazardous waste elements, or that sought to change entries in the annexes that 
are subject to international agreements. 

The Council has now agreed to incorporate in  spirit  most  of the Parliamentary amendments 
relating  to  by-products,  producer  responsibility,  the  polluter  pays  principle,  and  additional 
definitions. 

The Commission considers that the Common Position adopted on 20 December 2007 does not 
alter the approach or aims of the Proposal and can thus accept it as it stands. 

3.2 

Detailed comments 

3.2.1 

Parliamentary  amendments  accepted  in  full,  in  part  or  in  principle  by  the 
Commission and incorporated in full, in part or in principle in the common position 

Amendments 1, 7, 8, 14, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 27, 28, 30, 31, 34, 40, 44, 45, 47, 56, 64, 66, 77, 
78, 90, 94, 101, 112, 131, 157, 168 and 173 have been incorporated to varying degrees. They 
added  additional  recitals  or  definitions,  provided  clarifications,  incorporated  the  revised 
comitology wordings, specified a five step waste hierarchy with flexible implementation, and 
introduced articles on biological waste and enforcement and sanctions. Amendment 141 has 
been partly incorporated as regards the promotion of separate collection of waste. Art 35 on 
(extended) producer responsibility was accepted by the Commission in principle in a way that 
respects the need to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market. 

3.2.2 

Parliamentary amendments rejected by the Commission but incorporated in full, in 
part or in principle in the common position 

Amendment 5 concerning re-use was rejected by the Commission as it focused the recitals on 
erroneous environmental objectives and its practical implications were not clear, but has been 
partly incorporated in the common position in a form that is clearer in its application and in 
line with the five step waste hierarchy. 

Amendments  15,  134,  102,  123  and  126  relate  to  the  scope  of  the  Directive.  They  were 
rejected by the Commission, but have been partly incorporated in the common position in a 
form that is more limited or more precise in its application and the resulting text is therefore 
acceptable. 

Amendments  39,  81,  82,  86  and  158  were  rejected  by  the  Commission  as  they  were 
incompatible  with  the  international  obligations  of  the  Community.  They  have  been  partly 
reflected in the common position by adding clarifications in Annexes and recitals. 

Amendment 59 on permits was rejected by the Commission, but the spirit of this amendment 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
has been incorporated in the common position in a way that is acceptable. 

Amendments  107  and  121  were  rejected  by  the  Commission,  but  the  spirit  of  these 
amendments (an article on by-products) has been incorporated into the common position in a 
way  that  matches  the  Interpretative  Communication  on  waste  and  by-products  produced  by 
the Commission on this subject in February 20071, and is therefore acceptable. 

Amendments 67 and 151 were rejected by the Commission as they simply repeated existing 
text  from  the  Waste  Shipment  Regulation,  but  the  spirit  of  these  amendments  has  been 
incorporated in a way that is legally meaningful and therefore acceptable. 

Amendments  4,  24,  36,  89  and  115  were  rejected  by  the  Commission  for  various  reasons, 
such  as  being  too  vague,  adding  no  advantage  to  the  text,  creating  legal  uncertainty  or 
unnecessary  administrative  burden.  Certain  elements  of  these  amendments  have  been, 
however, incorporated to a limited extent into the common position. 

3.2.3 

Parliamentary  amendments  rejected  by  the  Commission  and  the  Council  and  not 
incorporated in the common position 

Amendments 2, 3, 9, 10, 12 and 13 were rejected by both institutions and not incorporated. 
These  amendments  proposed  recitals  that  were  focused  on  erroneous  environmental 
objectives  or  were  too  vague,  or  deleted  recitals  that  explained  elements  retained  in  the 
common position. 

Amendments 17, 26, 29 and 32 were rejected by both institutions and not incorporated as they 
either  related  to  additional  definitions  for  terms  not  used  in  the  common  position  text,  or 
confused existing definitions. 

Amendments  169,  48,  170  and  171  were  rejected  by  both  institutions  and  not  incorporated 
because  there  is  no  advantage  in  annexing  the  European  waste  list  to  the  Directive  or  in 
making it directly applicable, and because the list is designed for waste classification rather 
than data collection purposes. 

Amendment 37 was rejected by both institutions and not incorporated as the waste prevention 
targets are too blunt – too difficult for some Member States and not challenging enough for 
others. Amendment 70 was rejected as it is important that the progress of the national waste 
prevention programmes can be measured. 

Amendments 84, 85, 87 and 88 were rejected by both institutions and not incorporated as they 
are incompatible with the international obligations of the Community. 

Amendments 41, 103, 138 and 153 were rejected by both institutions and not incorporated as 
they infringed the Commission's right of initiative. 

Amendments 43, 46, 52, 53, 54, 58, 65, 83, 91, 93, 108, 109 and 127 were rejected by both 
institutions  and  not  incorporated  as  they  would  create  legal  uncertainty  and  were  likely  to 
create unnecessary litigation, or were unworkable or inappropriate for this Directive. 

1 

COM(2007)59 final. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Amendments 50, 51, 52, 60, 61, 68, 71, 72, 79, 80, 161, 172 and 188 were rejected by both 
institutions and not incorporated as they would create disproportionate administrative burden. 

Amendments 98 and 113 were rejected by both institutions and not incorporated as they posed 
risks  to  human  and  animal  health  and  would  remove  a  ban  on  the  feeding  of  such  catering 
waste to pigs that is laid down in animal and human health legislation. 

3.2.4 

Parliamentary  amendments  accepted  in  full,  in  part  or  in  principle  by  the 
Commission but not incorporated in the common position 

Amendments 6, 11, 33, 38, 49, 62, 63, 69, 74, 92, 95-97, 104 and 140 were accepted in full, in 
part or in principle by the Commission but not incorporated. They related to language in the 
recitals,  presentational  changes,  additional  definitions  for  terms  not  used  in  the  common 
position  text,  procedural  requirements,  the  promotion  of  preparation  for  re-use,  additions  to 
the annex IV listing examples of waste prevention measures, timing of the waste prevention 
programmes,  waste  prevention  and  recycling  targets,  and  the  duration  for  which  records  of 
hazardous waste must be kept. 

3.2.5 

Additional changes made by the Council to the Proposal 

In Article 2, as well as the changes corresponding to Parliament's amendments, the exclusions 
for unexcavated contaminated soil, radioactive waste, decommissioned explosives and certain 
agricultural  materials  are  made  unconditional  and  an  additional  exclusion  is  added  for 
sediments  that  are  relocated  inside  of  surface  waters.  In  addition,  the  exclusion  for  certain 
agricultural  materials  is  extended  to  forestry.  In  Article  2,  animal  by-products  are  excluded 
from the scope of the Directive, except those which are destined for incineration, landfilling 
or  use  in  a  biogas  or  composting  plant.  In  the  framework  of  the  forthcoming  revision  of 
Regulation  (EC)  No  1774/2002  on  animal  by-products,  the  Commission  will  clarify  the 
distinction  between  the  use  of  tallow  as  a  fuel  for  combustion  in  a  thermal  boiler  and  the 
disposal of tallow with regard to the application of the Waste Incineration Directive. 

In Article 3, the definition of 'preparing for re-use' is added to clarify the distinction between 
re-use of products as a waste prevention activity, and re-use of waste as a waste management 
operation. 

In Article 3c,  the  relationship between  the end of waste procedure  and the recycling  targets 
under other relevant waste legislation is specified, as is the situation for determining end of 
waste where no Community wide end of waste criteria are set. 

In  Article  5,  an  obligation  to  separately  collect  waste  is  introduced  where  this  facilitates 
recovery and is technically, environmentally and economically practical. 

In  Articles  5  and  6,  the  comitology  procedures  introducing  a  mechanism  that  would  have 
allowed  for  further  efficiency  criteria  to  be  set  and  for  the  relegation  of  environmentally 
doubtful recovery operations to disposal have been deleted. 

In  Article  7a,  as  well  as  the  five  step  waste  hierarchy  corresponding  to  Parliament 
amendments, the text specifies that the hierarchy should be applied with reference to life cycle 
thinking  and  overall  environmental  impacts  taking  into  account  the  principles  of  precaution 
and sustainability, technical feasibility and economic viability, protection of resources as well 
as the overall environmental, human health, economic and social impacts. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
Articles  8  and  9  are  amended  to  make  it  clear  that  Member  States  may  make  producers  of 
products  responsible  for  the  costs  of  managing  such  products  when  they  become  waste,  or 
may hold them responsible for any mismanagement of this waste.  

Article  10  is  amended  to  allow  Member  States  to  block  shipments  of  waste  to  municipal 
incinerators that are considered as recovery operations, where it has been established that such 
shipments would have the consequence that national waste would have to be disposed of or 
that waste would have been treated in a way that is not in coherence with their national waste 
management plan. It also clarifies that the principles of proximity and self-sufficiency do not 
mean  that  each  and  every  Member  State  must  possess  the  full  range  of  final  recovery 
facilities. 

A new Article 18 (2a) specifies that Member States may apply measures in order to preserve a 
national priority for the regeneration of waste oils, including restricting shipments out of their 
territory of waste oils for combustion. 

Article 19 is amended to integrate the original Article 20 and specify that the Member States 
may integrate  the  waste permit  with other environmental permits  where the  requirements in 
Article 19 are respected. 

Article 25a is amended to introduce greater precision in the mandate for the Commission to 
take implementing measures. 

Article 26 is reorganised, with a number of elements for the waste management plans being 
made optional. 

Article  26a  is  amended  to  make  waste  prevention  targets  for  the  national  waste  prevention 
programmes  optional,  although  benchmarks  for  such  programmes  are  made  obligatory.  The 
timing  for  the  first  programmes  is  delayed  to  five  years  after  the  entry  into  force  of  the 
Directive. 

Article  35  provides  for  a  new  implementing  measure,  the  specification  of  the  formula  in 
Annex II R1 to local climatic conditions, if necessary. 

4. 

CONCLUSION 

The changes introduced by the Council help to clarify the proposal in a number of important 
areas.  Although  they  weaken  the  proposed  simplification  potential  in  certain  areas,  and  the 
Articles  on  waste  prevention,  waste  management  plans,  as  well  as  certain  aspects  of  the 
internal  market  relating  to  products  and  waste  for  recovery,  the  overall  text  remains 
acceptable. The Commission therefore accepts the common position adopted on 20 December 
2007. 

EN 

6 

   EN