Procedure completed
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | ENVI | BLOKLAND Johannes (EDD) | |
| Opinion | PETI | DESCAMPS Marie-Hélène (PPE-DE) |
Legal Basis RoP 052
Activites
-
2003/11/19
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
-
T5-0508/2003
summary
The European Parliament adopted a resolution based on its own-initiative report drafted by Johannes BLOKLAND (EDD, Netherlands) on the Waste Framework Directive. (Please see the summary of 04/11/03.) Parliament asked the Commission to rreview Directive 75/442/EEC with a view to establishing clear and enforceable conditions for the definition of waste disposal and waste recovery operations. These conditions should be based on minimum quality criteria such as: - the calorific value of the waste to be incinerated; - emissions of pollutants into air, water and soil; - separation of waste flows; - energy efficiency of incineration/co-incineration plants; - capacity to destroy organic components; - capacity to concentrate inorganic components or dramatically reduce their volume; - absence of hazardous substances in the end-product of co-incineration. It called on the Commission and Member States to set up a permanent waste Steering and Advisory Committee, along the lines of the existing structures applying to the Clean Air For Europe Strategy, so as to allow thorough and consistent monitoring and coordination of implementation of current waste legislation and stakeholder consultation on all waste legislation.�
-
T5-0508/2003
summary
- 2003/11/04 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
-
2003/09/04
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
-
2003/05/19
Non-legislative basic document published
-
COM(2003)0250
summary
PURPOSE : to present a report on the implementation of Community waste legilsation. CONTENT : This report deals in particular with the implementation of -Directive 75/442/EECon waste; -Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste (replaced Directive 78/319/EEC: -Directive 75/439/EEC on the disposal of waste oils; -Directive 86/278/EEC on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture; -Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste. The definition of 'waste' and of related waste management terminology, such as recovery and disposal, are essential elements for the implementation of the European waste management policy as well as for the functioning of the internal market in this field. The Commission has taken measures to establish a consolidated European Waste Catalogue (EWC), which is now set down in Commission Decision 2000/532/EC. Since the previous implementation report for 1995-1997 the Commission considers that a number of Member States (Austria, Italy, Luxembourg, UK) still do not transpose the waste definition correctly into national law. As regards the definition of hazardous waste in particular, the situation has improved since the last report but it appears that there are still a few Member States that have not fully transposed all the elements of this definition. The number of countries that have established separate collection systems for hazardous household waste has increased since the previous report. The report goes on to discuss the hierarchy of principles, which are: waste prevention, recycling, energy recovery and safe disposal. The following points emerge: -From the information provided by Member States, it remains unclear whether and how much waste has been prevented within the EU. According to data supplied on waste generation, it appears that household waste per capita has increased as compared to the previous period while hazardous waste is stabilised. -The success of waste recycling differs widely between Member States. The mean recycling rate for domestic waste for the fifteen Member States is 26% (ranging from 8% to 63%). The mean recycling rate for hazardous waste is also about 27% (ranging from 5% to 77%). This indicates an overall increasing tendency although a number of Member States achieve still modest rates of recycling. Furthermore, available data on packaging indicate an increase in recovery and recycling of packaging waste. -As it is not clear how Member States distinguish between incineration with and without energy recovery, both operations have to be considered together. As regards household waste the mean rate was 23%, with Denmark and Luxembourg reporting rates as high as 58% and 56% respectively. Even with energy recovery though, incineration is generally, according to the hierarchy of principles mentioned above, an inferior option to other waste treatment alternatives further up the waste hierarchy, such asreuse and material recycling. -Despite a decreasing tendency, a good number of Member States continue to rely heavily on landfilling as means of disposing their domestic waste, with the average being 45%. The mean rate of landfilling for hazardous waste is lower (22%) but another 27% in average was reported as ·other treatment·. Most Member States reported that they had attained high degrees of self-sufficiency in terms of waste disposal of around 99%, which essentially restates the position of the previous implementation report for 1995-1997. -As regards waste oils, separate collection is an essential prerequisite for their sound management. The average collection rate has increased compared to the previous period. There is, however, room for improvement as 20% of the waste oils is still illegally dumped or illegally burnt, thus strongly harming the environment. In particular some Member States have to improve significantly their collection rates, setting up more efficient collection systems. The hierarchy of principles for waste oils management · regeneration, combustion and safe destruction/tipping · is still insufficiently implemented. As far as the recovery of waste oils is concerned, the use of waste oils as fuels remains by far the predominant option for the management of waste oils. Regeneration is still very scarce in the EU. In that context, the Commission has launched infringement proceedings against 12 Member States for not giving in practice the priority to regeneration. The main constraints preventing the Member States from giving the priority to regeneration continue to be of an economical nature.�
-
COM(2003)0250
summary
Documents
- Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2003)0250
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A5-0394/2003
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T5-0508/2003
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
| activities/0/docs/0/text/0 |
Old
PURPOSE : to present a report on the implementation of Community waste legilsation.
CONTENT : This report deals in particular with the implementation of
-Directive 75/442/EECon waste;
-Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste (replaced Directive 78/319/EEC:
-Directive 75/439/EEC on the disposal of waste oils;
-Directive 86/278/EEC on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture;
-Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste.
The definition of 'waste' and of related waste management terminology, such as recovery and disposal, are essential elements for the implementation of the European waste management policy as well as for the functioning of the internal market in this field. The Commission has taken measures to establish a consolidated European Waste Catalogue (EWC), which is now set down in Commission Decision 2000/532/EC.
Since the previous implementation report for 1995-1997 the Commission considers that a number of Member States (Austria, Italy, Luxembourg, UK) still do not transpose the waste definition correctly into national law. As regards the definition of hazardous waste in particular, the situation has improved since the last report but it appears that there are still a few Member States that have not fully transposed all the elements of this definition. The number of countries that have established separate collection systems for hazardous household waste has increased since the previous report.
The report goes on to discuss the hierarchy of principles, which are: waste prevention, recycling, energy recovery and safe disposal. The following points emerge:
-From the information provided by Member States, it remains unclear whether and how much waste has been prevented within the EU. According to data supplied on waste generation, it appears that household waste per capita has increased as compared to the previous period while hazardous waste is stabilised.
-The success of waste recycling differs widely between Member States. The mean recycling rate for domestic waste for the fifteen Member States is 26% (ranging from 8% to 63%). The mean recycling rate for hazardous waste is also about 27% (ranging from 5% to 77%). This indicates an overall increasing tendency although a number of Member States achieve still modest rates of recycling. Furthermore, available data on packaging indicate an increase in recovery and recycling of packaging waste.
-As it is not clear how Member States distinguish between incineration with and without energy recovery, both operations have to be considered together. As regards household waste the mean rate was 23%, with Denmark and Luxembourg reporting rates as high as 58% and 56% respectively. Even with energy recovery though, incineration is generally, according to the hierarchy of principles mentioned above, an inferior option to other waste treatment alternatives further up the waste hierarchy, such asreuse and material recycling.
-Despite a decreasing tendency, a good number of Member States continue to rely heavily on landfilling as means of disposing their domestic waste, with the average being 45%. The mean rate of landfilling for hazardous waste is lower (22%) but another 27% in average was reported as ·other treatment·. Most Member States reported that they had attained high degrees of self-sufficiency in terms of waste disposal of around 99%, which essentially restates the position of the previous implementation report for 1995-1997.
-As regards waste oils, separate collection is an essential prerequisite for their sound management. The average collection rate has increased compared to the previous period. There is, however, room for improvement as 20% of the waste oils is still illegally dumped or illegally burnt, thus strongly harming the environment. In particular some Member States have to improve significantly their collection rates, setting up more efficient collection systems. The hierarchy of principles for waste oils management · regeneration, combustion and safe destruction/tipping · is still insufficiently implemented. As far as the recovery of waste oils is concerned, the use of waste oils as fuels remains by far the predominant option for the management of waste oils. Regeneration is still very scarce in the EU. In that context, the Commission has launched infringement proceedings against 12 Member States for not giving in practice the priority to regeneration. The main constraints preventing the Member States from giving the priority to regeneration continue to be of an economical nature.�
New
The European Commission's report intended to inform the other Community Institutions, Member States and the interested public of the implementation of Community legislation for the period 1998 to 2000, in particular the implementation of Directive 75/442/EEC on waste; Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste; Directive 75/439/EEC on the disposal of waste oils; Directive 86/278/EEC on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture, and Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste. The results shown in this paper made it clear that Directive 94/62/EC had encouraged increases in the recovery and recycling of packaging waste. In addition, although total tonnages of packaging waste continued to increase in most Member States, a decoupling between economic growth and growth of packaging waste had occurred for the EU as a whole and for many individual Member States in particular in the period 1997 to 1999. The directive had to be implemented by Member States by 1996. It was therefore reasonable to assume that most of the increases in the recycling and recovery of packaging waste from 1997 to 1999 were the direct result of the directive.
It was possible to make a rough estimate of about EUR 200 million for the environmental savings that had resulted from these higher rates of recycling and recovery, though it was not possible to say exactly how much of this was due to the implementation of Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste. It was not possible at present to evaluate more fully the effects of the directive, since such an exercise would require additional analytical work.
Additionally, the results of a cost-benefit study on possible targets supported the feasibility and usefulness of a considerable increase in recycling and recovery targets in the proposed revision of the Packaging Directive.
Despite positive results achieved the progress made with the implementation of Community waste legislation could not yet be considered satisfactory. The number of infringement procedures reflected well the current state of play. Significant efforts were therefore needed to achieve full implementation of Directives 75/442/EEC, 91/689/EEC, 75/439/EEC, 86/278/EEC and 94/62/EC, focusing in particular on the hierarchy of principles of waste management.�
|
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|