yandex rtb 1
ГоловнаЗворотній зв'язок
yande share
Главная->Право->Содержание->Джерела європейського права навколишнього середовища75

Європейське право навколишнього середовища

Джерела європейського права навколишнього середовища75

adapting Directive 67/548/EEC to technical progress for the 28th time, had to be transposed by 31 July 2002. In this context, Member States are still frequently late in notifying their implementing measures. In such cases, the Commission rigorously commences proceedings for noncommunication to make Member States meet their obligations. Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 concerning the placing on the market of biocidal products33 was due to be transposed by the Member States by no later than 14 May 2000. At the end of 2002, there were still a few Member States who had not yet notified their implementing measures. Animal experiments are covered by Directive 86/609/EEC on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States regarding the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes. Certain problems with the conformity of the Directive persist. The Commission issued a reasoned opinion under Article 228 to Ireland for not complying with the Court’s judgment of 18 October 2001, to the effect that Ireland has failed to adopt all the measures necessary to ensure the correct implementation of Articles 2(d), 11 and 12 of the Directive as well as to provide for an adequate system of penalties for non-compliance with the requirements of the Directive (Case C-354/99). In its judgment of 12 September 2002, the Court found that France had not correctly transposed Articles 4, 7(3), 11, 12(2), 18(1) and (3) and 22(1) of the Directive (Case C-152/00). The Advocate-General proposed in his Opinion of 26 September 2002 that the Court declares that the Netherlands has not transposed Article 11 and 22(1) of the Directive (Case C-205/01). Infringement actions against Spain and Belgium for bad application of the Directive were continued.

A new Directive revising the original framework for regulating the release of GMOs in the Community34 had to be transposed into national law by 17 October 2002. The original regulatory framework, which was established by the 1990 Directive35, was established in response to concerns that the release of GMOs might lead to irreversible damage to the environment. A 1996 review identified several aspects of the original framework that needed clarification and improvement. As a result, Directive 90/220/EEC was revised and replaced by Directive 2001/18/EC. The revised Directive maintains the structure of the old directive, but improves the strictness and transparency of the provisions, notably creating a more effective and efficient authorisation procedure. Infringement cases for non­communication of transposal measures were opened against fourteen Member States who had failed to meet the deadline of 17 October 2002.

8. Waste

The Waste Framework Directive (Directive 75/442/EEC, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC) requires that prior authorisation be obtained for waste-disposal and wasterecovery sites; in the case of waste-disposal, the authorisation must lay down conditions to contain the environmental impact. Member States still have problems in fully and correctly implementing its provisions into national law.

33  OJ L 123, 24.4.1998, p. 1.

34  Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC.

35  Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms.

   

 77

76Розділ 3

In 2002, the Commission took a number of infringement actions involving bad application of the Waste Framework Directive. Most of the implementation difficulties concern the application of the Waste Framework Directive to specific installations. This is at the root of the large number of complaints primarily concerned with local waste dumping problems (illegal landfills and/or uncontrolled treatment of waste, non-existent or insufficient environmental impact assessments, uncontrolled dumps, controversial siting of planned controlled tips, mismanagement of lawful tips, water pollution caused by directly discharged waste). The Commission uses individual cases to detect more general problems concerning incorrect application of Community law, such as the absence or inadequacy of waste management plans, based on the assumption that an illegal dump may provide evidence of an unsatisfied need for adequate waste management. Another category of bad application of the waste legislation are cases concerning inadequate waste planning. They cover a range of failings, relating variously to plans as required by Article 7 of the Waste Framework Directive, plans for management of dangerous waste as required by Article 6 of Directive 91/689/EEC, and special plans for packaging waste, as required by Article 14 of Directive 94/62/EC. During 2002, the Court condemned three Member States for having breached Article 7(1) of the Waste Framework Directive, Article 6(1) of Directive 91/689/EEC and Article 14 of Directive 94/62/EC for insufficient waste management plans36. The Commission is following-up these cases under Article 228 in order to ensure compliance with the Court judgments.

The case-law on the definition of waste under the Waste Framework Directive was confirmed and further developed by the preliminary ruling given by the Court in 18 April 2002 (Case C-9/00 Palin Granit). The Court held that the holder of leftover stone resulting from stone quarrying which is stored for an indefinite length of time to await possible use discards or intends to discard that leftover stone, which is accordingly to be classified as waste within the meaning of the Directive. The place of storage of leftover stone, its composition and the fact, even if proven, that the stone does not pose any real risk to human health or the environment are not relevant criteria for determining whether the stone is to be regarded as waste. Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste37 clarifies the legal framework in which landfill sites are authorised in the Member States. This Directive was to be transposed by 16 July 2001. For landfills coming into operation after, as well as those existing on, this date, requirements have been tightened by this Directive. By the end of 2002, several Member States still had not adopted and communicated their transposal measures to the Commission and the Commission had to start court proceedings. Regarding Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste, Member States still had problems in transposing the national legislation correctly. An overview of the stage of proceedings reached in these cases is given in Annex IV, Part 3. As regards the application of the Directive, the Commission had commenced infringement proceedings in 1998 against a number of Member States which had failed to provide the Commission with particular information required in relation to establishments or undertakings carrying out disposal and/or recovery of hazardous waste. In its judgment of 13

Case C-292/99 concerning France, Case C-35/00 concerning the United Kingdom and Case C-466/99 concerning Italy. OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, p. 1.

   

 78

 

28