CELEX: C2000/335/48
Language: en
Date: 2000-11-25 00:00:00
Title: Case C-309/00: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Nederlandse Raad van State by order of 8 August 2000 in the case of PPG Industries Fiber Glass B.V. and Minister van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelĳke Ordening en Milieubeheer

C 335/26                EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                      25.11.2000
2.a) If the first question must be answered in the affirmative          2.   If it follows from the answer to the abovementioned
      and therefore the shipment of waste oil with a PCB                     questions that an operation such as the processing of fly
      content of over 50 ppm must always be regarded as a                    ash does not fall within the scope of R5, are the lists of
      shipment of waste for disposal, can an objection be                    operations in Annexes II A and II B of the Framework
      raised to the shipment pursuant to Article 4(3)(b)(i) of               Directive exhaustive or is one of these lists exhaustive,
      Regulation No 259/93 solely on account of the need to                  and if so which one?
      achieve self-sufficiency at national level without showing
      that self-sufficiency at national level is necessary to           3.a) On the basis of which criteria must it be decided whether
      achieve self-sufficiency at Community level?                           an operation must be regarded as disposal or recovery
                                                                             within the meaning of Article 1 of the Framework
2.b) If so, is Regulation No 259/53, in so far as it permits such            Directive?
      a prohibition on exports solely on the basis of the
      principle of self-sufficiency at national level, compatible       3.b) If an operation can be classified both as a disposal
      with Article 29 of the Treaty establishing the European                operation and a recovery operation, must priority be
      Community?                                                             given to the list in Annex II A or II B when classifying
                                                                             that operation or does neither of the two lists take
                                                                             precedence over the other?
( 1) OJ 1996 L 243, p. 31.
( 2) OJ 1987, L 42, p. 43.
                                                                        4.   Must the view of the competent authority of the Member
( 3) OJ 1993 L 30, p. 1.
( 4) OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39.                                                   State of dispatch or of the Member State of destination
                                                                             be regarded as decisive as regards whether an operation
                                                                             must be classified as disposal or recovery?
                                                                        5.a) If the shipment of the fly ash must be regarded as a
                                                                             shipment of waste for disposal, can an objection to
                                                                             the shipment be raised pursuant to Article 4(3)(b)(i) of
                                                                             Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 (2) of 1 February 1993 on
                                                                             the supervision and control of shipments of waste within,
                                                                             into and out of the European Community solely on
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Nederlandse
                                                                             account of the need to achieve self-sufficiency at national
Raad van State by order of 8 August 2000 in the case of
                                                                             level without showing that self-sufficiency at national
N.V. Slibverwerking Noord-Brabant and Glückauf Sond-
                                                                             level is necessary to achieve self-sufficiency at Community
ershausen Entwicklungs- und Sicherungsgesellschaft mbH
                                                                             level?
and Minister van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening
                          en Milieubeheer
                                                                        5.b) If so, is Regulation No 259/53, in so far as it permits such
                                                                             a prohibition on exports solely on the basis of the
                          (Case C-308/00)                                    principle of self-sufficiency at national level, compatible
                                                                             with Article 29 of the Treaty establishing the European
                                                                             Community?
                          (2000/C 335/47)
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                  (1) OJ 1975, L 194, p. 39.
European Communities by order of 8 August 2000 by the                   (2) OJ 1993 L 30, p. 1.
Nederlandse Raad van State (Council of State), Netherlands,
which was received at the Court Registry on 16 August 2000,
for a preliminary ruling in the case of N.V. Slibverwerking
Noord-Brabant and Glückauf Sondershausen Entwicklungs-
und Sicherungsgesellschaft mbH and Minister van Volkshuis-
vesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer on the follow-
ing questions:
                                                                        Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Nederlandse
1.a) Must the operation, recycling/reclamation of other inor-
                                                                        Raad van State by order of 8 August 2000 in the case
      ganic materials, referred to under R5 of Annex II B
                                                                        of PPG Industries Fiber Glass B.V. and Minister van
      to Directive 75/442/EEC (1) on waste (hereinafter: ‘the            Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer
      Framework Directive’) be interpreted as also covering ‘re-
      use’ within the meaning of Article 3(b)(i) of the Frame-
      work Directive?                                                                            (Case C-309/00)
1.b) How must R5 be interpreted, in view of the answer to the                                   (2000/C 335/48)
      above question? For the operation referred to therein to
      exist is it necessary that the substance be submitted to a
      treatment, can be used several times or can be taken              Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
      back?                                                             European Communities by order of 8 August 2000 by the
 ---pagebreak--- 25.11.2000            EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 335/27
Nederlandse Raad van State (Council of State), Netherlands,            1.a) Must the operation, recycling/reclamation of metals and
which was received at the Court Registry on 16 August 2000,                 metal compounds, referred to under R4 of Annex II B
for a preliminary ruling in the case of PPG Industries Fiber                to Directive 75/442/EEC (1) on waste (hereinafter: ‘the
Glass B.V. and Minister van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke                   Framework Directive’) be interpreted as also covering ‘re-
Ordening en Milieubeheer on the following questions:                        use’ within the meaning of Article 3(b)(i) of the Frame-
                                                                            work Directive?
1.a) Must the operation, recycling/reclamation of other inor-
     ganic material, referred to under R5 of Annex II B to
     Directive 75/442/EEC(1) on waste (hereinafter: ‘the               1.b) How must R4 be interpreted, in view of the answer to the
     Framework Directive’) be interpreted as also covering ‘re-             above question? For the operation referred to therein to
     use’ within the meaning of Article 3(b)(i) of the Frame-               exist is it necessary that the substance be submitted to a
     work Directive?                                                        treatment, can be used several times or can be taken
                                                                            back?
1.b) How must R5 be interpreted, in view of the answer to the
     above question? For the operation referred to therein to          2.   If it follows from the answer to the abovementioned
     exist is it necessary that the substance be submitted to a             questions that an operation such as the treatment of
     treatment, can be used several times or can be taken                   ferrous chloride solution does not fall within the scope of
     back?                                                                  R4, are the lists of operations given in Annexes II A and
                                                                            II B of the Framework Directive exhaustive or is one of
2.   If it follows from the answer to the abovementioned                    these lists exhaustive, and if so which one?
     questions that an operation such as the filling of clay pits
     does not fall within the scope of R5, are the lists of
     operations in Annexes II A and II B of the Framework              3.a) On the basis of which criteria must it be decided whether
     Directive exhaustive or is one of these lists exhaustive,              an operation must be regarded as disposal or recovery
     and if so which one?                                                   within the meaning of Article 1 of the Framework
                                                                            Directive?
3.a) On the basis of which criteria must it be decided whether
     an operation must be regarded as disposal or recovery             3.b) If an operation can be classified both as a disposal
     within the meaning of Article 1 of the Framework                       operation and a recovery operation, must priority be
     Directive?                                                             given to the list in Annex II A or II B when classifying
                                                                            that operation or does neither of the two lists take
3.b) If an operation can be classified both as a disposal
                                                                            precedence over the other?
     operation and a recovery operation, must priority be
     given to the list in Annex II A or II B when classifying
     that operation or does neither of the two lists take              4.a) If the shipment of the ferrous chloride solution must be
     precedence over the other?                                             regarded as a shipment of waste for disposal, can
                                                                            an objection to the shipment be raised pursuant to
4.   Must the view of the competent authority of the Member                 Article 4(3)(b)(i) of Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 (2) of
     State of dispatch or of the Member State of destination                1 February 1993 on the supervision and control of
     be regarded as decisive as regards whether an operation                shipments of waste within, into and out of the European
     must be classified as disposal or recovery?                            Community solely on account of the need to achieve self-
                                                                            sufficiency at national level without showing that self-
(1) OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39.                                                   sufficiency at national level is necessary to achieve self-
                                                                            sufficiency at Community level?
                                                                       4.b) If so, is Regulation No 259/53, in so far as it permits such
                                                                            a prohibition on exports solely on the basis of the
                                                                            principle of self-sufficiency at national level, compatible
                                                                            with Article 29 of the Treaty establishing the European
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Nederlandse                       Community?
Raad van State by order of 8 August 2000 in the case
of Stork Veco B.V. and Minister van Volkshuisvesting,
           Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer
                        (Case C-310/00)
                        (2000/C 335/49)
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of 8 August 2000 by the                  (1) OJ 1975 L 194, p. 39.
Nederlandse Raad van State (Council of State), Netherlands,            (2) OJ 1993 L 30, p. 1.
which was received at the Court Registry on 16 August 2000,
for a preliminary ruling in the case of Stork Veco B.V.
and Minister van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en
Milieubeheer on the following questions: