REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL ON THE IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFICIENT FUNCTIONING OF DIRECTIVE 2012/18/EU ON THE CONTROL OF MAJOR-ACCIDENT HAZARDS INVOLVING DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES FOR THE PERIOD 2019-2022
Date: 2025-09-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: accident prevention, application of EU law, climate change, dangerous substance, disclosure of information, environmental impact, industrial accident, industrial hazard, public health

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 19.9.2025  COM(2025) 508 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL ON THE IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFICIENT FUNCTIONING OF DIRECTIVE 2012/18/EU ON THE CONTROL OF MAJOR-ACCIDENT HAZARDS INVOLVING DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES FOR THE PERIOD 2019-2022  
 
 
CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 2 

1.  SUMMARY OF THE MEMBER STATES’ REPORTS ................................ 3 

1.1.  Statistics on establishments ................................................................... 3 

1.1.1.  Number of establishments ....................................................... 3 

1.1.2.  External emergency plans ........................................................ 5 

1.1.3. 

Information to the public ......................................................... 7 

1.1.4. 

Inspections ............................................................................... 9 

1.1.5.  Prohibition of use, penalties and other coercive instruments 11 

1.2.  Statistics on major accidents ............................................................... 12 

2  WAY  FORWARD  TO 

INDUSTRIAL  ACCIDENT 
IMPROVE 
PREVENTION .............................................................................................. 16 

3  CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... 19 

Commission européenne/Europese Commissie, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIQUE/BELGIË - Tel. +32 22991111 

 
 
      
 
 
 
 
 
 
INTRODUCTION 

Major accidents involving dangerous substances pose a significant threat to humans and 
the  environment  and  often  cause  substantial  economic  losses  and  disrupt  sustainable 
growth. 

In this context, Directive 2012/18/EU1 on the control of major accident hazards involving 
dangerous  substances  (‘Seveso  III  Directive’)  sets  out  the  relevant  framework  on  risk 
management  measures  to  prevent  major  accidents  involving  dangerous  substances  and 
ensure  appropriate  preparedness,  prevention  and  response  should  such  accidents 
nevertheless occur. 

This  Directive  had  to  be  transposed  by  Member  States  by  1 June  2015  and  covers 
establishments  where  dangerous  substances  may  be  present  (e.g.  during  processing  or 
storage) in quantities exceeding certain thresholds. Depending on the number of dangerous 
substances present or likely to be present, establishments are categorised into lower and 
upper tiers, with the latter being subject to more stringent requirements. 

The  Seveso  III  Directive  thus  plays  a key  role  in  steering  the  highly  industrialised  EU 
towards zero pollution from industrial accidents, a commitment set out in the European 
Green  Deal and  the Zero  Pollution  Action  Plan.  Member  States  are  to  provide  the 
Commission with a four-yearly report on implementation of the Seveso III Directive, in 
accordance  with  Article 21(2)  thereof.  The  present  report  summarises  Member  States' 
submissions for the period 2019-2022, pursuant to Article 292, to provide information to 
the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  on  the current  state  of  implementation  of  the 
Seveso III Directive. 

It follows a first report which was published in 2021 and covered the period 2015-20183. 

This report includes two parts: 

-  Part I summarises information provided by the Member States on the implementation 
of the Seveso III Directive. Section 1.1 covers information gathered through the reports 
submitted  by  Member  States  in  line  with  Commission  Implementing  Decision 
2014/896/EU4, which focuses on earlier identified problem areas, supplemented with 
data on Seveso establishments extracted from the Seveso Plants Information Retrieval 
System  (eSPIRS)5  database.  The  aim  of  this  summary  is  to  assess  the  level  of 
implementation  of  the  Directive  and  to  identify  any  shortcomings  that  need  to  be 
addressed.  Section  1.2  supplements  the  previous  section  with  data  on  accidents 

(1) Directive 2012/18/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on the control of 
major  accident  hazards  involving  dangerous  substances,  amending  and  subsequently  repealing  Council 
Directive 96/82/EC, OJ L 197, 24.7.2012, p. 1-37. 

(2) Data for United Kingdom were considered for the number of Seveso establishments reported in 2019, 

when the UK was still a Member State. 

(3) Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation and 
efficient functioning of Directive 2012/18/EU on the control of major accident hazards involving dangerous 
substances for the period 2015-2018, 29/09/2021, COM(2021) 599. 

(4)  2014/896/EU:  Commission  Implementing  Decision  of  10 December  2014  establishing  the  format  for 
communicating information from Member States on the implementation of Directive 2012/18/EU of the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the  control of major  accident hazards  involving  dangerous 
substances (notified under document C(2014) 9335). 

(5) EUROPA - eSPIRS Dashboard - European Commission 

2 

 
 
obtained from an analysis of the database of major accidents (eMARS)6, operated by 
the  Major  Accident  Hazard  Bureau  (MAHB)  of  the  Joint  Research  Centre  of  the 
European Commission. 

-  Part II outlines the anticipated actions the Commission will take to work with Member 
States  to  further  improve  the  prevention  of  industrial  accidents  and  preparedness, 
including by addressing shortcomings in implementation. 

As in the case of previous assessments, the findings of this report are primarily based on 
the information contained in the reports submitted by Member States and on their detailed 
analysis7 as well as on other relevant data extracted from eSPIRS and eMARS databases. 

The  27  Member  State  reports  covering  the  2019-2022  reporting  periods  and  previous 
reporting periods are publicly available8. 

1.  SUMMARY OF THE MEMBER STATES’ REPORTS 

All 27 Member States submitted their quadrennial reports to the Commission for the period 
2019-2022. 

1.1. 

Statistics on establishments 

1.1.1.  Number of establishments 

In 2022, a total of 11 059 establishments in the EU27 fell within the scope of the Seveso 
III Directive (cf. Figure 1). This is an increase of 168 additional establishments compared 
to  the  previous  reporting  period,  with  10 836  establishments  reported  in  the  same  27 
Member States in 20189. During the reporting period, the Member States with the largest 
share  of  Seveso  establishments  were  Germany  (34%),  France  (11%),  Italy  (9%),  Spain 
(8%) and Poland (4%). 

The  proportions  of  upper-tier  establishments  (UTE)10  and  lower-tier  establishments 
(LTE)11 were constant during the reporting period and since the previous reporting period, 
with 43% on average being UTE and 57% LTE. 

(6) Major Accident Reporting System (https://emars.jrc.ec.europa.eu). 

(7) Analysis and summary of Member States' reports on implementation of Directive 2012/18/EU on the 
control of major accident hazards involving dangerous substances according to the format established by 
Commission Implementing Decision 2014/896/EU 

(8) https://circabc.europa.eu/w/browse/4cc9ca17-0920-4d8a-8796-6ffa170612b7 

(9)  However,  with  the  withdrawal  of  the  United  Kingdom  from  the  EU,  the  total  number  of  Seveso 
establishments reported in 2022 was lower than the total number of Seveso establishments reported in 2018 
(by 717). This figure included data from the UK, which was at the time the country with the fourth highest 
number of Seveso establishments in the EU. 

(10)  Article 3.2  of  the  Seveso  III  Directive:  ‘lower-tier  establishment’  means  an  establishment  where 
dangerous substances are present in quantities equal to or in excess of the quantities listed in Column 2 of 
Part 1 or in Column 2 of Part 2 of Annex I, but less than the quantities listed in Column 3 of Part 1 or in 
Column 3 of Part 2 of Annex I, where applicable using the summation rule laid down in note 4 to Annex I. 

(11)  Article 3.3  of  the  Seveso  III  Directive:  ‘upper-tier  establishment’  means  an  establishment  where 
dangerous substances are present in quantities equal to or in excess of the quantities listed in Column 3 of 

3 

 
 
 
 
Figure 1: Number of Seveso establishments in 202212 

As shown in Figure 2, a slow but steady increase can be observed until 2018 in the number 
of establishments covered by the Directive. This needs to be put into context with three 
EU enlargement rounds during this period (2004, 2007 and 2013) and a change of scope 
of the Seveso III Directive following the revision of Directive 96/82 of 9 December 1982 
on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances13 (the Seveso-II 
Directive) in 2012. Data on lower-tier establishments were only reported as of the reporting 
period 2009-2011. 

After  2018,  the  withdrawal  of  the  United  Kingdom  from  the  European  Union  led  to  a 
decrease of the total number of Seveso establishments compared to the previous period, as 
the UK was, in 2018, the country with the fourth highest number of Seveso establishments 
in  the  EU  (8%). However,  as  mentioned  above,  it  should  be  noted  that  the  number  of 
Seveso establishments in the same 27 EU Member States increased slightly between 2018 
and 2022. 

Part 1 or in Column 3 of Part 2 of Annex I, where applicable using the summation rule laid down in note 4 
to Annex I. 

(12) Source: eSPIRS. 

(13) Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving 

dangerous substances, OJ L 10, 14.1.1997, p. 13–33. 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 2: Evolution of the number of Seveso establishments 1996-202214 

The most common specific categories of activities falling under the Seveso III Directive 
during the reporting period are15: 

1)  Power generation, supply and distribution (15%) 

2)  Fuel storage (11%) 

3)  Wholesale and retail (9%) 

1.1.2.  External emergency plans 

Article 12(1)(b)  of  the  Seveso  III  Directive  requires  operators  to  supply  competent 
authorities with the information necessary for them to draw up external emergency plans 
(EEPs)  for  upper-tier  establishments.  These  plans  are  important  to  allow  rapid  and 
coordinated response to major accidents and play a vital role in minimising their effects. 
They  also  have  to  be  reviewed  and  tested  at  intervals  of  no  longer  than  three  years 
(Article 12(6) of the Directive). 

(14)  Source:  eSPIRS.  Data  for  1996  and  1999  are  not  fully  comparable  due  to  differing  definitions  on 
establishments and installations. Several installations in the same establishment may have been reported 
individually,  which  explains  the  apparent  decrease  in  2002.  In  addition,  the  classification  of hazardous 
substances classification changed with the Seveso III Directive. 

(15) Source: eSPIRS. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Competent  authorities  may  decide,  in  view  of  the  information  contained  in  the  safety 
report, and giving reasons for their decision, that the requirement to produce an EEP should 
not apply (Article 12(8) of the Directive). 

1.1.2.1. Preparation of external emergency plans 

As shown in Figure 3, at the end of the reporting period, EEPs were drawn up for most 
upper-tier  establishments  for  which  this  was  required.  On  average,  96%  of  upper-tier 
establishments had an EEP during the reporting period, or were authorised not to have one. 

The most common ground invoked by competent authorities to authorise the absence of an 
EEP is that, based on their assessment, consequences of major accidents would not extend 
beyond  the  site  boundary  and/or  would  have  no  potential  risk  to  human  health  and  the 
environment.  Other  justifications  provided  were  the  lack  of  continuous  presence  of 
hazardous substances in the establishment, the lack of vulnerable elements in the elements 
surrounding the establishments, and the limited effects of a potential accident. 

The  remaining  4%  of  upper-tier  establishments  did  not  have  an  EEP,  indicating  non-
compliance with the Seveso III Directive or reporting mistakes. The situation varies among 
the Member States - see Figure 3. 

Figure 3: Share of upper-tier establishments for which an external emergency plan was 
drawn up or not required during the reporting period16 

(16) Source: Member States implementation reports and eSPIRS. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1.1.2.2.Testing and review of external emergency plans 

Concerning the implementation of Article 12(6) of the Seveso III Directive on the review 
and testing of EEP, the 2019-2022 reporting period shows a drop in the number of external 
emergency  plans  which  are  reviewed,  tested,  and  where  necessary  updated  at  suitable 
intervals of no longer than three years compared to the previous reporting period. 

In 2022, 21% of the existing EEP had not been tested in the last three years. This is usually 
explained by the difficulties caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Other reasons invoked 
include lack of human resources, lack of financial resources, and the fact that necessary 
input for external emergency plans was not being provided. The reported information is 
presented in Figure 4. 

Figure  4:  Share  of  upper-tier  establishments  for  which  external  emergency  plans  were  tested 
during 2019-202217 

1.1.3.  Information to the public 

Pursuant to Article 14(1), Member States must ensure that the information referred to in 
Annex  V  is  permanently  available  to  the  public,  including  electronically,  and  that  it  is 
updated where necessary. 

Under Annex V, all establishments are required to provide information on the name and 
location of the site, the site activity, the hazardous substances present, and the date of the 
last  inspection.  Upper-tier  establishments  must  make  additional  information  available, 
including a summary for the public on the nature of the accident hazards, information on 
safety  measures as  well  as relevant  aspects  of the external  emergency plan, and, where 

(17) Source: Member States implementation reports and eSPIRS. 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
applicable, an indication of whether the establishment is close to the territory of another 
Member State with the possibility of a major accident with transboundary effects. 

Member  States  were  requested  to  report  the  share  of  establishments  for  which  the 
information listed in Annex V to the Directive was not available. Overall, this provision is 
well  implemented,  with  information  permanently  available  to  the  public,  including 
electronically,  for  96%  of  all  establishments  across  the  EU.  Most  Member  States  fully 
comply with the provisions of the Seveso III Directive related to the permanent availability 
of information pursuant to Annex V. Only a limited number of Member States reported 
that the information requested under Annex V was not permanently available in relation to 
some upper-tier establishments. For most of them, such information was made available to 
the public upon request. Some reporting mistakes were also identified. 

This information is presented in Figure 5. 

Figure  5:  Share  of  establishments  for  which  the  information  in  Annex  V  is  made  permanently 
available to the public18 

Article 14(2)(a)  requires  that,  for  upper-tier  establishments  only,  Member  States  ensure 
that all persons likely to be affected by a major accident receive regularly, without having 
to request it, information on safety measures and requisite behaviour in the event of a major 
accident. 

In 2022, information on safety measures and requisite behaviour in the event of a major 
accident  was  actively  made  available  to  the  public  concerned  for  96%  of  all  upper-tier 
establishments in the EU27. This is an improvement compared to the previous reporting 
period  during  which  such  information  was  made  available  for  91%  of  all  upper-tier 
establishments in the EU27, with most Member States fully complying with the provisions 

(18) Source: Member States implementation reports. 

8 

 
 
 
 
of the Seveso III Directive and only a few Member States reporting that information is not 
made available. This information is presented in Figure 6 below. 

The most commonly used means by which information on safety measures and requisite 
behaviour was kept permanently available during the reporting period  were the internet 
(22 EU Member States) followed by leaflets (5 EU Member States), newspapers and flyers. 

Figure 6: Percentage (%) of upper-tier establishments for which information on safety measures 
and requisite behaviours were actively made available to the public19 

100%

%
9
9

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
5
9

%
8
9

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
6
9

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

%
0
0
1

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

%
1
8

0

%
5
5

AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK

1.1.4.  Inspections 

Article 20 of the Seveso III Directive requires Member States to put in place an inspection 
system and a programme of inspections for all establishments. Upper-tier establishments 
are to be inspected every 12 months and lower-tier establishments every 36 months, unless 
an inspection programme based on a systematic appraisal is deployed. 

According to Article 20(5), the systematic appraisal of the hazards of the establishments 
concerned must be based on, at least, the potential impacts of the establishments concerned 
on human health and the environment,  as well as on the record of compliance with the 
requirements of the Seveso III Directive. These criteria must ensure at least the same level 
of effectiveness as inspections carried out on an annual or triennial basis. Both upper-tier 
and lower-tier establishments are covered by this provision. 

Where appropriate, relevant findings of inspections carried out under other EU legislation 
are also taken into account. 

Based on data reported by the competent authorities for the reporting period, an average 
of 65% of the upper-tier establishments of the EU27 were inspected at least annually (cf. 

(19) Source: Member States implementation reports and eSPIRS. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure  7).  For  the  remaining  establishments,  the  inspection  programme,  including  the 
frequency of site visits, was based on a systematic appraisal of the major accident hazard 
of the establishment concerned20. 

For lower-tier establishments, inspections were undertaken on average at least once every 
three years in 86% of the lower-tier establishments of the EU27 (cf. Figure 8)21. 

Figure 7: Share of upper-tier establishments inspected by Member States22 

(20)  Some  Member  States  reported  overlapping  data  between  these  types  of  inspections,  as  some 
establishments are inspected based on a systematic appraisal of major accident hazards and also inspected 
at least once a year. 

(21) For upper-tier establishments, some Member States reported overlapping data, as some establishments 

are inspected based on a systematic appraisal while still being inspected every three years. 

(22) Source: Member States implementation reports and eSPIRS. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 8: Share of lower-tier establishments inspected by Member States23 

Overall,  the  proportion  of  upper-tier  establishments  inspected  at  least  annually  has 
decreased for the period 2019-2022 compared to the previous reporting period, with 65% 
of the upper-tier establishments inspected annually against 69% for the previous reporting 
period. However, the proportion of lower-tier establishments subject to an inspection at 
least  every  three  years  has  increased  from  65%  to  86%  since  the  last  reporting  period. 
Several Member States reported that inspections were less frequent in their country during 
the 2019-2022 period because of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

A  majority  of  Member  States  indicated  that  their  national  legislation  or  administrative 
guidance provides for coordinated or joint inspections with inspections carried out under 
other EU legislation, in particular Directive 2010/75/EU on Industrial Emissions (IED)24 
or Directive (EU) 2015/2193 on Medium Combustion Plants (MCPD)25. 

1.1.5.  Prohibition of use, penalties and other coercive instruments 

Under Article 19 of the Seveso III Directive, Member States must prohibit the operation 
of  any  establishment  where  the  measures  taken  by  the  operator  for  the  prevention  and 
mitigation of major accidents are seriously deficient, for example serious failures to take 
the necessary actions identified in the inspection report.  

(23) Source: Member States implementation reports and eSPIRS. 

(24) Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial emissions (integrated 
pollution prevention and control) and Council Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste as amended 
by Directive (EU) 2024/1785 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 April 2024 amending 
(Text with EEA relevance). 

(25) Directive (EU) 2015/2193 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on the 
limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from medium combustion plants (Text with EEA 
relevance). 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
In  total,  during  the  reporting  period,  nine  Member  States  reported  a  prohibition  of 
operation  of  an  establishment  because  the  measures  taken  by  the  operator  for  the 
prevention and mitigation of major accidents were seriously deficient. This concerned 67 
establishments representing 0.6% of all Seveso establishments of the EU27 (cf. Figure 9). 

Figure  9:  Total  number  of  establishments  for  which  the  use  has  been  prohibited  during  the 
reporting period26 

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

17

16

13

12

3

2

LV

HU

IT

NL

RO

DE

2

LT

1

AT

1

ES

1.2. 

Statistics on major accidents 

The  number  of  major  accidents  is  one  of  the  key  indicators  to  measure  the  overall 
effectiveness of the Seveso III Directive in minimising them and their harmful impacts. 
Under  Article 18,  Member  States  are  requested  to  notify  to  the  Commission  the  major 
accidents  which  have  occurred  within  their  territory,  and  which  meet  the  quantitative 
criteria set out in Annex VI: 

-  Criterion  1:  any  major  accident  meeting  the  following  conditions:  Involving 
dangerous substances, causing injury to persons and damage to real estate, causing 
immediate damage to the environment, causing damage to property, causing cross-
border damage. 

-  Criterion 2: An accident or ‘near miss’ which Member States regard as being of 
particular  technical  interest  for  preventing  major  accidents  and  limiting  their 
consequences  and  which  does  not  meet  the  quantitative  criteria  defined  under 
criterion 1. 

Reporting of such events is done via a dedicated database (eMARS)27 placed at the disposal 
of  Member  States  to  facilitate  exchange  of  lessons  learned  from  accidents  involving 
dangerous substances in order to improve chemical accident prevention and mitigation of 
potential consequences. 

(26) Source: Member States implementation reports. 

(27) EUROPA - eMARS Dashboard - European Commission 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Throughout the 2019-2022 reporting period, there were a total of 87 accidents published 
in the eMARS database28 among which 62 were reported as major accidents (meeting the 
first criterion of Annex VI), 24 as near-misses and 1 as an ‘other’ event, as shown in figures 
10 and 11. Throughout the period, most accidents published so far took place in upper-tier 
establishments  (the  timing  of  when  reports  can  be  finalised  and  published  can  vary 
depending on when investigations and legal processes are finally concluded). 

Figure 10: Number of accidents by year of occurrence and by tier in years 2019-202229 

Figure 11: Number of accidents by year of occurrence and by event type in years 2019-202230 

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

1

9

16

7

16

5

24

3

6

2019

2020

2021

2022

Major Accident

Near Miss

Other Event

(28) Source: eMARS. Accidents still being processed or under investigation and accidents in working status 
not reported. 

(29) Source: eMARS. 

(30) Source: eMARS. 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The reporting Member States also publish data on the number of fatalities and injuries in 
major  accidents  and  the  number  of  accidents  that  involved  fatalities  and  injuries  (see 
Figure 12). In total, during the 2019-2022 reporting period, 21 reported incidents involved 
fatalities (39 on-site fatalities and 1 off-site fatality) and 22 incidents involved injuries (127 
on-site injuries and 28 off-site injuries). 35 accidents met the threshold criterion of at least 
two million euros worth of property damage in the establishment, pursuant to point 4(a) of 
Annex VI of the Seveso III Directive. 

Figure 12: Number of fatalities and injuries in Seveso Major Accidents in EU Member States in 
years 2019-202231 

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Fatalities

Injuries

32

2

2019

2

32

21

0

2021

0

21

16

7

2020

7

16

Fatalities

Injuries

27

15

2022

15

27

Throughout  the  2019-2022  period,  the  most  commonly  reported  criteria  out  of  the  six 
provided in Annex VI for the notification of a major accident to the Commission are (cf. 
Figure 13): 

-  quantity of substances involved. 
- 
interest for lessons learned. 
-  damage to property. 

(31) Source: eMARS. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 13: Criteria for reporting major accidents in eMARS for the period 2019-202232 

Cross-border
damage

Immediate environmental damage

0

0

Injury to
persons

Property
damage

Interesting for lessons learned

Substances involved

16

27

28

34

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

When it comes to the industrial activity involved, the collected data shows that chemical 
installations (33 accidents) and the petrochemical & oil refineries sectors (29 accidents) 
have been the most prone to major accidents in the reporting period (cf. Figure 14). 

Figure 14: Number of accidents and incidents by activity type in years 2019-202233 

Waste storage, treatment and disposal

LNG storage and distribution

Production, destruction and storage of
explosives

Processing of metals using electrolytic or
chemical processes

Petrochemical / Oil Refineries

Chemical installations

Power generation, supply and distribution

4

4

4

8

8

17

18

0

5

10

15

20

These data are evidence that the Seveso III Directive significantly contributes to achieving 
a low frequency of major accidents. 

(32) The sum of the criteria for reporting is higher than the total number of reported accidents reported, as 

one accident may fulfil several criteria. 

(33) Source: eMARS. 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 15: Number of accidents related to the number of Seveso plants in years 2015-2022 

2  WAY FORWARD TO IMPROVE INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT PREVENTION 

The data reported by the Member States on the implementation of the Seveso III Directive 
provide useful information to identify actions needed to further improve the prevention of 
industrial accidents. For this purpose, four main levers have been identified: 

1.  improving implementation and compliance. 

2.  applying simplified and streamlined reporting for the next reporting periods; 

3.  strengthening exchanges between the Member States and the Commission on 

lessons learned and good practices. 

4.  addressing the new challenges of industrial safety linked with climate change 

and the energy transition. 

Improvement of the Seveso III Directive implementation and compliance 

The  Seveso  III  Directive  had  to  be  transposed  by  Member  States  by  31 May  2015. 
Transposition measures have been communicated by all Member States. 

Meanwhile, the Commission has been closely monitoring the correct transposition of the 
Directive,  with  six  proceedings  currently  open  against  Member  States  for  failure  to 
correctly transpose the Seveso III-Directive. 

16 

 
 
 
 
The  information  presented  in  Section  1  highlights  a  few  persisting  problems  in  certain 
Member States concerning the implementation and testing of external emergency planning 
(EEP) and public information. The Commission will investigate the underlying reasons for 
non-compliance in those Member States to assess whether these are the result of structural 
issues, in which case the Commission would consider initiating infringement proceedings 
as  appropriate34.  Such  shortcomings  might  lead  to  increased  risks  of  accidents,  thus 
undermining the Directive’s objectives. 

To further support Member States’ implementation efforts, the Commission will continue 
to  address  key  issues  inter  alia  through  exchanges  in  the  dedicated  Seveso  Committee, 
Expert Group and Technical Working Groups, as well as by means of guidance documents 
and technical reports. 

Simplification and streamlining of reporting 

Commission  Implementing  Decision  (EU)  2022/197935  has  been  adopted  in  2022  to 
improve the reporting process under Articles 18(1) and 21(3) for providing information to 
the Commission on the location of industrial plants falling under the scope of the Seveso 
III  Directive  and  on  the  occurrence  of  major  accidents.  The  re-development  by  the 
European Environmental Agency (EEA) of the two Seveso databases eSPIRS and eMARS 
and  their  integration  in  the  ‘European  Industrial  Emission  Portal’36  has  also  led  to  the 
creation  of  a  centralised  ‘one-stop-shop’  providing  a  wealth  of  information  on  various 
aspects related to these industrial plants to competent authorities, industries, NGOs and the 
public.  This  contributes  to  the  ongoing  efforts  to  build  an  integrated  Zero  Pollution 
Monitoring Framework, as set out in the Pathway to a Healthy Planet for All (flagship 9). 

Another Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/113 was adopted on 23 January 
2025 setting out a new format for communicating information from Member States on the 
implementation of the Seveso III Directive37 pursuant to Article 21 of that Directive. 

This new decision aims to improve the relevance and quality of the data provided by the 
Member States while reducing the administrative burden, in line with the Commission’s 
commitments under its new political guidelines for 2024-2029. In that regard, the reporting 
obligations for Member States under this implementing act were significantly simplified 
and  streamlined  in  comparison  with  the  previous  reporting  format  laid  down  under 
Commission  Implementing  Decision  2014/896/EU,  while  also  ensuring  a  meaningful 
collection of information for the next reporting rounds, starting for the period 2023-2026 
(to be reported in 2027), with a focus on numerical and standardised data. 

(34) In line with the enforcement priorities as set out in the Communication ‘EU law: Better results through 

better application’; C(2016)8600 final. 

(35) Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/1979 of 31 August 2022 on establishing the form and 
databases  for  communicating  the  information  referred  to  in  Articles  18(1)  and 21(3)  of  Directive 
2012/18/EU  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the  control  of  major-accident  hazards 
involving dangerous substances and repealing Commission Implementing Decision 2014/895/EU.   

(36) https://industry.eea.europa.eu/ 

(37)  Commission  Implementing  Decision  (EU)  2025/113  of  23 January  2025  establishing  the  format  for 
communicating information from Member States on the implementation of Directive 2012/18/EU of the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the  control of major  accident hazards  involving  dangerous 
substances and repealing Commission Implementing Decision 2014/896/EU. 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Strengthening exchanges between the Member States and the Commission 

The work on lessons learned from major industrial accidents and inspections is a key pillar 
of the Seveso III Directive. It is essential to maintaining industrial safety culture across the 
European Union and improving accident prevention and mitigation. 

Over the last 30 years, the Commission has provided technical and scientific support to 
Member States, in particular by analysing industrial accidents and providing feedback on 
lessons learned. 

During the period covered by this report, the Commission continued to work closely with 
the  Member  States  to  improve  their  capacity  building  where  needed.  This  included  in 
particular the technical  working  group on inspections and  a  programme of mutual joint 
visits  whereby  performance  measures  can  be  identified  and  assessed,  for  example 
preparing a common definition of indicators for inspection, drafting guidance or organising 
workshops  dedicated  to  specific  policy  needs  (e.g.  on  fireworks,  explosives  and 
ammonium nitrates following up some specific major accidents involving those dangerous 
substances). The Commission also provided support to analyse industrial accidents and the 
related risks and consequences. 

Addressing the new challenges of industrial safety linked with climate change, security-
related risks and the energy transition 

The  achievement  of  the  Seveso  III  Directive’s  objectives  is  now  facing  emerging 
challenges associated with the expected escalation in the intensity and frequency of natural 
events from climate change and with the development of new technologies accompanying 
the energy transition. Moreover, the European Union is facing security-related risks linked 
to the Russian aggression on Ukraine and hostile hybrid activities. 

Natural hazards, such as earthquakes, floods, storms, extreme temperatures etc., can trigger 
major  accidents  involving  fires,  explosions  and  toxic  releases  at  establishments  that 
process,  store  or  transport  dangerous  substances.  These  technological  ‘side  effects’  of 
natural-hazard impacts are called ‘Natech’ accidents and, over the past years, have been 
an increased focus of concern in disaster prevention and risk management at local, national 
and international level. 

Furthermore,  with  strong  commitments  in  place  to  decarbonise  the  EU  and  actions 
currently  underway  to  transition  energy  sources,  national  governments  worldwide 
including in the EU are adopting policies and strategies to phase out fossil fuels and switch 
to more sustainable energy sources for climate change mitigation. However, these novel 
techniques involve potential environmental, health and economic hazards, as well as risks 
to future development and public acceptance if they contribute to major accidents. In this 
context, battery and hydrogen safety issues, especially linked to warehouses and storage, 
are considered critical concerns38. 

In this regard, sharing knowledge, experience and good practices between authorities and 
experts  will  be  an  essential  element  of  the  actions  needed  to  ensure  harmonised 
implementation of the Seveso III Directive and to address those emerging challenges. This 

(38)  The  Commission  (MAHB)  and  the  Organisation  for  the  Economic  Cooperation  and  Development 
(OECD)  have  for  example  organised  a  series  of  webinars  on  hydrogen  fuel  risks  since  2023, fostering 
exchange of knowledge and experience on those new risks, together with EU-OECD countries and experts. 

18 

 
 
is key to ensuring that climate mitigation efforts do not lead to environmental pollution 
and disasters and to ensure the safety and well-being of the public in the EU. 

3  CONCLUSIONS 

The  Seveso  III  Directive,  which  covers  over  11 000  establishments  where  dangerous 
substances may be present, plays an important role in steering the highly industrialised EU 
towards  the  zero  pollution  ambition  by  preventing  industrial  accidents.  Over  the  2005-
2022 period, there have been, on average, fewer than 30 major accidents each year in the 
EU, with increasingly reduced impacts. This even went down to 22 major accidents per 
year over the period 2019-202239. This Directive is widely considered as a benchmark for 
industrial  accident  policy  and  has  been  a  role  model  for  legislation  in  many  countries 
worldwide. 

The analysis of the Member States reports shows that the Seveso III Directive is overall 
well implemented in the EU and that there has been an improvement in the implementation 
of the Seveso III Directive provisions compared to the previous reporting period. However, 
the COVID-19 pandemic also triggered specific challenges in carrying out inspections and 
testing external emergency plans. The next reporting period will be important to confirm 
that these challenges were indeed conjunctural. 

Considering  this,  the  Commission  recognises  the  need  for  continued  efforts  to  prevent 
major accidents, as called for in the European Green Deal and the  zero pollution action 
plan. This also ties in with the new political guidelines of the European Commission for 
2024-2029, in which the EU preparedness and security agenda is a key priority. 

Therefore, the Commission remains committed to its cooperation with Member States to 
improve the prevention of, preparedness and response to industrial accidents and to ensure 
harmonised implementation of the Directive in the EU27. In that regard, the Commission 
will further endeavour to strengthen exchanges of best practices for preventing, preparing 
for and responding to industrial accidents with Member States and to facilitate the sharing 
of lessons learnt from past accidents between them.  

Furthermore,  the  Commission  acknowledges  the  need  to  enhance  efforts  on  public 
information  and  communication  to  maintain  a  safety  culture  and  facilitate  effective 
responses in the event of accidents. Safety is not a cost, but an investment40. 

In the changed geopolitical situation and in a context where Europe is warming twice as 
fast as the global average, the nexus between safety, security and environmental aspects of 
climate change adaptation is a high priority for the Commission for the period 2025-2029. 

(39) Data extracted from eMARS, which does not include data on newly created reports for accidents where 
the reports may be in ‘working’ status and data on accidents which are still under investigation. In addition, 
published data in eMARS is partial because reporting of incidents can occur, on average, anywhere between 
six months to two years after the incident has occurred. 

(40) Major accidents can result in direct and indirect impacts that are linked to significant potential costs, such 
as human costs (non-financial and financial) and costs related to evacuation, building damage, business 
disruption, business temporary relocation, and emergency response services. Further, wider impacts can be 
monetised, such as effects on the unemployment rate and the housing market, environmental costs, national 
supply-chain implications, effects on the aviation industry, and costs to the Government of the investigation 
response.  RR1055  Modelling  the  economic  impacts  of  an  accident  at  major  hazard  sites  (hse.gov.uk); 
hazards-26-paper-46-modelling-the-human-and-economic-costs-of-major-industrial-accidents.pdf 
(icheme.org). 

19 

 
 
 
In this regard, the Seveso III Directive is a key instrument to achieve the priorities of the 
new European Preparedness Union strategy41, to better manage risks, prepare for crises, 
and enhance the safety and security of our population. Combined with the Clean Industrial 
Deal42, this will also be the basis for Europe’s sustainable prosperity and competitiveness. 

(41)  Joint  Communication  from  the  European  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the 
European Economic and Social Committee and the  Committee of the Regions on the EU Preparedness 
Strategy, JOIN (2025) 130 Final, 26.3.2025. 

(42) Communication from the European Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. The Clean Industrial  Deal: a joint 
roadmap for competitiveness and decarbonisation, COM(2025) 85 Final, 26.2.2025. 

20