Sittings · Compare

What changed

From · opinion parliamentary committee · 2023-03-29 ITRE-AD-736732 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) and Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste

→

To · opinion parliamentary committee · 2023-04-28 AGRI-AD-736485 on the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) and Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste

+704 added · −91 removed · 11 modified paragraphs hide unchanged text

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The Rapporteur supports many elements in the Commission proposal especially regarding the ambition of a more effective Directive and the introduction of a new centre for innovative techniques. The Rapporteur believes that the Industrial Emissions Directive has been and is crucial to lower polluting and emissions from the industrial sector in the European Union, is of the opinion that the Directive brings environmental, climate and health benefits for the European Union; believes that the current working method (the Sevilla process) that is being used to agree upon the Best Available Techniques (BAT) for pollution prevention and control, should be maintained.

It was with great concern that I learned of the European Commission’s proposal regarding the revision of the Industrial Emissions Directive. This proposal sets out the requirements that Member States must impose when granting permission for the construction or extension of industrial installations. As rapporteur of the opinion for the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, I harbour serious doubts regarding the agricultural chapter as proposed by the Commission.

However, the Rapporteur is of the opinion that the Commission proposal puts unjustified burden on operators and overlooks the risk of sub optimisations, believes that the Directive must acknowledge adjustments between contrary environmental values into consideration in order to make this legislation better for climate, environment and people.

- Firstly, I am extremely outraged by the fact that the agricultural sector has been included in the scope of a directive dedicated to industrial emissions. Lumping farmers in with industrialists adds to a negative perception of family-run farms. I remind you that the European agricultural model based on family-run farms guarantees the production of quality food in a secure, sustainable and strategic manner. With food security now an issue of vital geostrategic importance, the European Union should value its agricultural sector, especially family-run farms. It is therefore ill-advised to discourage farmers with such dubious conflations. Imposing additional European legislation on small farmers will not bolster our continent’s geopolitical strategy. On the contrary, these additional requirements are not met with a strengthening of reciprocity in terms of standards, which is something that should play a key role in any trade exchanges with our partners.

On this note, the Rapporteur opposes the deletion of energy efficiency requirements and the introduction of environmental performance limit values. The electrification of industry will require more energy, setting strict consumption requirements is to obstruct the electrification of these sectors.

- Nevertheless, I am, of course, of the opinion that European agriculture must be diversified and made more sustainable. For example, it is undeniable that the agricultural sector must also reduce its emissions. However, this revision is not the best way to go about contributing to this sustainability goal, or, for that matter, to the diversification of our agriculture. Rather, the text the Commission has proposed is counterproductive and encourages a move towards greater concentration in the agricultural sector. Indeed, the agricultural chapter targets all livestock producers, including small and medium operators. In the proposed form, the scope of this revision would place a major administrative and economic burden on farmers breeding chickens, pigs and cattle. The profitability of such enterprises is constantly being undermined by free trade agreements and the unchecked accumulation of regulations, while the largest, agro-industrial, undertakings have been spared such changes. As a result, this proposal gives an undeniable competitive advantage to the biggest businesses, who will have less difficulty in shouldering the additional administrative and economic burden.

Secondly, the Rapporteur is concerned that the Commission overlooks the role of the Sevilla process when implementing the Innovation centre for industrial transformation and emissions (INCITE), believes that the centre will give crucial contribution to the analysis of innovative and emerging techniques. Is however concerned that the Commission proposal suggests that the findings of the centre can be directly included in BREFs without technical assessment in the Sevilla process.

- I therefore suggest that we remove cattle farms from this directive’s scope. These requirements, in the form proposed by the Commission, entail a heavy individual burden for cattle breeders, yet they will not lead to an effective reduction in emissions. These cattle farms are not ‘closed facilities’, which lend themselves to the use of purification techniques such as those employed in the rearing of pigs and poultry, let alone industry. As part of the common agriculture policy (CAP) and national strategic plans (NSPs), I am convinced that the Commission should ensure the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions including those of methane (CH4). However, it should do so using technologies, the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of which, have been demonstrated. This could be implemented by means of specific eco-schemes and low-carbon agricultural initiatives within the framework of the CAP. Initiatives such as these were, in fact, put forward by the European Parliament on 21 October 2021 in its resolution on an EU strategy to reduce methane emissions (2021/2006(INI). While each of the Member States has made commitments in their respective NSPs to reduce their emissions and mitigate agricultural pollution, it is also advisable to maintain the status quo for the pork and poultry sector. This should occur, not only with a view to simplifying public policies (implementation and inspection), but also to ensure their effectiveness.

Thirdly, the rapporteur believes that technical development and innovation is key for the European Union to reach its climate goals. Believes, that innovation and development of new techniques should be given adequate time for implementation. Is therefore, of the opinion that emerging and innovative techniques should be given a longer test period with the possibility of extension by the competent authority to ensure legal certainty for operators.

- In addition, I have noticed that the ammonia (NH3) reduction goals are addressed as part of Directive (EU) 2016/2284 on the reduction of household emissions (National Emission reduction Commitments Directive/‘NEC’). Many Member States have benefitted from this directive to significantly reduce their emissions in this way. Furthermore, many Member States have already gone further than the Commission’s proposal anticipated. Moreover, the ‘NEC’ Directive will come into effect from 2023, and will allow us to reduce emissions more quickly than could be accomplished with the proposed revision of the Industrial Emissions Directive.

The risks of this proposed revision to the Industrial Emissions Directive are therefore clear. The revision threatens to create administrative obligations and additional burdens which will jeopardise the profitability of the most vulnerable farmers’ businesses, thereby leading to cattle becoming more concentrated in certain farms. Indeed, this would entail a drastic reduction of cattle overall, to the detriment of our competitors whose production systems are less ethical (imported deforestation, for example).

For all of these reasons, I am convinced that the Commission’s proposed must be extensively reworked to take into account the real challenges faced by agricultural undertakings.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on ~~Industry, Research~~Agriculture and ~~Energy~~Rural Development calls on the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a directive

Recital 91

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) In order to foster energy efficiency of installations within the scope of Directive 2010/75/EU which are carrying out activities listed in Annex I to Directive 2003/87/EC, it is appropriate to submit those installations to energy efficiency requirements in respect of combustion units or other units emitting carbon dioxide on the site.

(1) The European Green Deal55 is Europe’s strategy to ensure, by 2050, a climate-neutral, clean and circular economy, optimising resource management, minimising pollution while recognising the need for deeply transformative policies. The Union is also committed to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development56 and its Sustainable Development Goals57 . The EU Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability58 of October 2020 and the Zero Pollution Action Plan59 adopted in May 2021 specifically address pollution aspects of the European Green Deal. In parallel, the New Industrial Strategy for Europe60 further emphasises the potential role of transformative technologies. Other particularly relevant policies for this initiative include the ‘Fit for 55’ package61 , the Methane Strategy62 and the Glasgow methane pledge63 , the Climate Adaptation Strategy64 , the Biodiversity Strategy65 , the Farm to Fork strategy66 and the Sustainable Products Initiative67 . Besides, as part of the EU response to the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war, REPowerEU68 proposes a Joint European Action to support the diversification of energy supplies, accelerate the transition to renewable energy and improve energy efficiency.

~~deleted~~

(1) The European Green Deal55 is Europe’s strategy to ensure, by 2050, a climate-neutral, clean and circular economy, optimising resource management, minimising pollution while recognising the need for deeply transformative policies. The Union is also committed to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development56 and its Sustainable Development Goals57 . The EU Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability58 of October 2020 and the Zero Pollution Action Plan59 adopted in May 2021 specifically address pollution aspects of the European Green Deal. In parallel, the New Industrial Strategy for Europe60 further emphasises the potential role of transformative technologies. Other particularly relevant policies for this initiative include the ‘Fit for 55’ package61 , the Methane Strategy62 and the Glasgow methane pledge63 , the Climate Adaptation Strategy64 , the Biodiversity Strategy65 , the Farm to Fork strategy66, the New Circular Economy Action Plan66a, the Sustainable Products Initiative67. Also of relevance is the Commission Communication entitled ‘A long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas –Towards stronger, connected, resilient and prosperous rural areas by 2040’67a. Besides, as part of the EU response to the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war, REPowerEU68 proposes a Joint European Action to support the diversification of energy supplies, accelerate the transition to renewable energy and improve energy efficiency.

__________________

55 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions The European Green Deal; COM(2019) 640 final.

56 https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E

57 https://sdgs.un.org/goals

58 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability Towards a Toxic-Free Environment COM(2020) 667 final.

59 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Pathway to a Healthy Planet for All EU Action Plan: 'Towards Zero Pollution for Air, Water and Soil' COM(2021) 400 final.

60 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A New Industrial Strategy for Europe COM(2020) 102 final.

61 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, 'Fit for 55': delivering the EU's 2030 Climate Target on the way to climate neutrality COM/2021/550 final.

62 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on an EU strategy to reduce methane emissions COM(2020) 663 final.

63 https://www.globalmethanepledge.org/

64 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Forging a climate-resilient Europe - the new EU Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change COM(2021) 82 final.

65 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 Bringing nature back into our lives COM(2020) 380 final.

66 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions A Farm to Fork Strategy for a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food system COM(2020) 381 final.

66a European Parliament resolution of 10 February 2021 on the New Circular Economy Action Plan (2020/2077(INI))

67 COM(2022) 142

67a Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions ‘A long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas – Towards stronger, connected, resilient and prosperous rural areas by 2040’ (COM(2021)0345).

68 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions REPowerEU: Joint European Action for more affordable, secure and sustainable energy; COM(2022) 108 final.

Amendment 2

Proposal for a directive

Recital 152

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15) Providing a high level of protection of human health and the environment as a whole requires inter alia the establishment in permits of emission limit values at a level that ensures compliance with the applicable emission levels associated with the best available techniques set out in the BAT conclusions. Emission levels associated with the best available techniques (BAT-AELs) are usually expressed as ranges, rather than as single values, to reflect the differences within a given type of installations that result in variations in the environmental performances achieved when applying BAT. For example, a given BAT will not deliver the same performance for different installations, some BATs may not be suitable for use in certain installations, or a combination of BATs may be more effective on some pollutants or environmental media than others. The achievement of a high level of protection of human health and the environment as a whole has been jeopardised by the practice of setting emission limit values at the laxest end of the range of emission levels associated with the best available techniques, without considering the potential of a given installation to achieve lower emission levels through the application of best available techniques. Such practice discourages frontrunners from implementing more effective techniques, and hinders the achievement of a level-playing field at a high level of protection of human health and the environment. Competent authorities should therefore be required to set in permits the lowest possible emission limit values which reflect the performance of BAT for the specific installations, taking into consideration the whole range of BAT-AELs and aiming at the best environmental performance possible for the installations; unless the operator demonstrates that applying best available techniques as described in the BAT conclusions only allows the concerned installation to meeting less strict emission limit values.

(2) The European Green Deal announced a revision of Union measures to address pollution from large industrial installations, including reviewing the sectoral scope of the legislation and how to make it fully consistent with climate, energy and circular economy policies. In addition, the Zero Pollution Action Plan, the Circular Economy Action Plan and the Farm to Fork Strategy also call for reducing pollutant emissions at source, including sources not currently within the scope of Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council69. Addressing pollution from certain agro-industrial activities thus requires their inclusion within the scope of that Directive.

(15) Providing a high level of protection of human health and the environment as a whole requires inter alia the establishment in permits of emission limit values at a level that ensures compliance with the applicable emission levels associated with the best available techniques set out in the BAT conclusions. Emission levels associated with the best available techniques (BAT-AELs) are usually expressed as ranges, rather than as single values, to reflect the differences within a given type of installations that result in variations in the environmental performances achieved when applying BAT. For example, a given BAT will not deliver the same performance for different installations, some BATs may not be suitable for use in certain installations, or a combination of BATs may be more effective on some pollutants or environmental media than others. The achievement of a high level of protection of human health and the environment as a whole has been jeopardised by the practice of setting emission limit values at the laxest end of the range of emission levels associated with the best available techniques, without considering the potential of a given installation to achieve lower emission levels through the application of best available techniques. Such practice discourages frontrunners from implementing more effective techniques, and hinders the achievement of a level-playing field at a high level of protection of human health and the environment. Competent authorities should therefore be required to set in permits the lowest possible emission limit values which reflect the BAT-AEL range for the specific installations, taking into consideration the whole range of BAT-AELs and aiming at the best environmental performance possible for the installations; unless the operator demonstrates that applying best available techniques as described in the BAT conclusions only allows the concerned installation to meeting less strict emission limit values.

(2) The European Green Deal announced a revision of Union measures to address pollution from large industrial installations, including reviewing the sectoral scope of the legislation and how to make it fully consistent with climate, energy and circular economy policies. In addition, the Zero Pollution Action Plan, the Circular Economy Action Plan and the Farm to Fork Strategy also call for reducing pollutant emissions at source, including sources not currently within the scope of Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council69. The problem of pollution from large-scale rearing of animals could be addressed by maintaining the current framework.

_________________

69 Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control); OJ L 334, 17.12.2010, p. 17-119.

Amendment 3

Proposal for a directive

Recital 163

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) The contribution of Directive 2010/75/EU to resource and energy efficiency and circular economy in the Union should be made more effective, taking into consideration the ‘Energy Efficiency First’ as a guiding principle of the Union energy policy. Therefore, the permits should establish, where possible, mandatory environmental performance limit values on consumption and resource efficiency levels, including on the use of water, energy and recycled materials, based on the environmental performance levels associated with the best available techniques (BAT AEPLs) set out in decisions on BAT conclusions.

(3) The Union’s extractive industry is key to achieving the aims of the European Green Deal and the EU industrial strategy, including its update. Raw materials are of strategic importance for the digital and green transition, the energy, materials and circular economy transformation and to strengthen EU economic resilience. In order to achieve these objectives, sustainable domestic capacities need to be further developed. This requires effective, tailored and harmonised measures to ensure that the best available techniques are established and employed, thus applying processes that are both the most efficient and have the lowest possible impacts on human health and the environment . The governance mechanisms of Directive 2010/75/EU that closely associate industry experts to the development of consensual and tailored environmental requirements will support the sustainable growth of those activities in the Union. The development and availability of commonly agreed standards will level the Union’s playing field while ensuring a high level of protection of human health and the environment. It is therefore appropriate to include those activities within the scope of Directive 2010/75/EU.

(16) The contribution of Directive 2010/75/EU to resource and energy efficiency and circular economy in the Union should be made more effective, taking into consideration the ‘Energy Efficiency First’ as a guiding principle of the Union energy policy. Therefore, the permits should establish, where possible, indicative environmental performance level values on consumption and resource efficiency levels, including on the consumption of water, energy and raw materials, and their reuse, based on the environmental performance levels associated with the best available techniques (BAT AEPLs) set out in decisions on BAT conclusions, taking into consideration cross-media effects, national conditions and the geographical location of installations.

(3) The Union’s extractive industry is key to achieving the aims of the European Green Deal and the EU industrial strategy, including its update. Raw materials are of strategic importance for the digital and green transition, the energy, materials and circular economy transformation and to strengthen EU economic resilience. In order to achieve these objectives, sustainable domestic capacities need to be further developed according to national specificities. This requires effective, tailored and harmonised measures to ensure that the best available techniques are established and employed, thus applying processes that are both the most efficient and have the lowest possible impacts on human health and the environment . The governance mechanisms of Directive 2010/75/EU that closely associate industry experts to the development of consensual and tailored environmental requirements will support the sustainable growth of those activities in the Union. The development and availability of commonly agreed standards will level the Union’s playing field while ensuring a high level of protection of human health and the environment.

Amendment 4

Proposal for a directive

~~Recital 16 a (new)~~

Recital 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16a) Considering the recurrent droughts and floods in Europe that have a direct impact on water availability for the European industry, which is the largest water consumer in Europe, industrial stakeholders need to carefully consider quantitative and qualitative water risks both on and by their activities. Therefore, European industry needs to be mobilised to achieve a water-smart society and to provide a coherent water strategy, recognising and realising the value of water for the purpose of ensuring water security, safety, and sustainability. All available water sources need to be managed in such a way that water scarcity and pollution is avoided. Water and resource loops are largely closed in order to foster a circular economy and resource efficiency, while ensuring that the water system is resilient against droughts, floods and climate change. Industry needs to ensure that its planned and digitalised management enables prediction and agility to perform under stress as well as uncertainties, and that all relevant stakeholders are involved in water governance.

Rearing of pigs, poultry and cattle cause significant pollutant emissions into the air and water. In order to reduce such pollutant emissions, including ammonia, methane, nitrates and greenhouse gas emissions and thereby improve air, water and soil quality, it is necessary to lower the threshold above which pigs and poultry installations are included within the scope of Directive 2010/75/EU and to include also cattle farming within that scope. Relevant BAT requirements take into consideration the nature, size, density and complexity of these installations, including the specificities of pasture based cattle rearing systems, where animals are only seasonally reared in indoor installations, and the range of environmental impacts they may have. The proportionality requirements in BATs aim to incentivise farmers to implement the necessary transition towards increasingly environmentally friendly agricultural practices.

(4) Large-scale rearing of pigs and poultry can cause environmentally harmful pollutant emissions into the soil, air and water. Member States should address that risk through existing legal frameworks and good practices, including with the support of CAP national strategic plans. Furthermore, Member States should consider engaging in a dialogue with farmers’ representatives via the CAP and the requirements set out in Directive 2010/75/EU or the relevant BAT requirements to ensure the proportionality of the foreseen constraints. In addition to the targets set under the CAP, Directive (EU) 2016/2284 ('NEC')1a sets targets to reduce emissions, including ammonia from agriculture. Therefore, in order to avoid creating an administrative burden and unnecessary overlaps in the existing legislative framework, the current thresholds for pigs and poultry should remain unchanged.

__________________

a Directive (EU) 2016/2284 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016 on the reduction of national emissions of certain atmospheric pollutants, amending Directive 2003/35/EC and repealing Directive 2001/81/EC (OJ L 344, 17.12.2016, p. 1)

Amendment 5

Proposal for a directive

~~Recital 24~~

Recital 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(24) The evaluation of Directive 2010/75/EU found that, even if it should foster the transformation of European industry, it is not dynamic enough and does not sufficiently support the deployment of innovative processes and technologies. It is therefore appropriate to facilitate the testing and deployment of emerging techniques with improved environmental performance, to facilitate cooperation with researchers and industries in publicly funded research projects subject to the conditions foreseen in the relevant European and national funding instruments, as well as to set up a dedicated centre to support innovation by collecting and analysing information on innovative techniques, including emerging techniques, relevant to activities within the scope of that Directive and to characterise their level of development from research to deployment (technology readiness level or ‘TRL’) and their environmental performance. This will also inform the exchange of information on drawing up, reviewing and updating BAT reference documents. Innovative techniques to be collected and analysed by the centre should be at least at the level of technology demonstrated in relevant environment (industrially relevant environment in the case of key enabling technologies) or system prototype demonstration in operation environment (TRL 6-7).

(4a) Sufficient importance should be given to protection of the surrounding environment, but it should be ensured that no additional administrative or financial burden is created for the livestock sector; on the contrary, the activities of these operators need constant stimulus in order to meet all of the current challenges they face.

(24) The evaluation of Directive 2010/75/EU found that, even if it should foster the transformation of European industry, it is not dynamic enough and does not sufficiently support the deployment of innovative processes and technologies. It is therefore appropriate to facilitate the testing and deployment of emerging techniques with improved environmental performance, to facilitate cooperation with researchers and industries in publicly funded research projects subject to the conditions foreseen in the relevant European and national funding instruments, as well as to set up a dedicated centre to support innovation by collecting and analysing information on innovative and emerging techniques, relevant to activities within the scope of that Directive and to characterise their level of development from research to deployment (technology readiness level or ‘TRL’) and their environmental performance. This should be used as a basis for the exchange of information on drawing up, reviewing and updating BAT reference documents. Innovative techniques to be collected and analysed by the centre should be at least at the level of technology demonstrated in relevant environment (industrially relevant environment in the case of key enabling technologies) or system prototype demonstration in operation environment (TRL 6-7).

Amendment 6

Proposal for a directive

Recital 256

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(25) Achieving Union objectives regarding a clean, circular and climate neutral economy by 2050 calls for a deep transformation of the Union economy. Consistently with the 8th Environmental Action Programme, operators of installations covered by Directive 2010/75/EU should therefore be required to include transformation plans in their environmental management systems. Such transformation plans will also complement the Corporate Sustainability Reporting requirements under Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council75by providing a means for concrete implementation of these requirements at installation level. The first priority is the transformation of energy-intensive activities listed in Annex I. Therefore, the operators of energy-intensive installations should produce transformation plans by 30 June 2030. Operators of installations carrying out other activities listed in Annex I should be required to produce transformation plans as part of the permit reconsideration and update following the publication of decisions on BAT conclusions published after 1 January 2030. Whilst the transformation plans should remain indicative documents prepared under the responsibility of the operators, the audit organisation contracted by the operators as part of their environmental management systems should check that they contain the minimum information to be set by the European Commission in an implementing act, and the operators should make the transformation plans public.

(6) With a view to further strengthening public access to environmental information, it is necessary to clarify that permits for installations granted pursuant to Directive 2010/75/EU are to be made available to the public on the Internet, free of charge and without restricting access to registered users. A uniform summary of permits should also be made available to the public under the same conditions.

(25) Achieving Union objectives regarding a clean, circular and climate neutral economy by 2050 calls for a deep transformation of the Union economy. Consistently with the 8th Environmental Action Programme, operators of installations covered by Directive 2010/75/EU should therefore include transformation plans in their environmental management systems. Such transformation plans will also complement the Corporate Sustainability Reporting requirements under Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council75 by providing a means for concrete implementation of these requirements at installation level. The first priority is the transformation of energy-intensive activities listed in Annex I. Therefore, the operators of energy-intensive installations should produce transformation plans at company level by 30 June 2030. Operators of installations carrying out other activities listed in Annex I should be required to produce transformation plans as part of the permit reconsideration and update following the publication of decisions on BAT conclusions published after 1 January 2030. The operator should assess the progress made towards intermediate targets every three years and should update its transformation plan at least every ten years. The ompany level transformation plans c should remain indicative documents prepared under the responsibility of the operators. The operators should make those transformation plans public, taking into account the confidentiality of trade and business secrets.

(6) With a view to further strengthening the access of the public concerned to environmental information, it is necessary to clarify that non-technical information from the installation permits granted pursuant to Directive 2010/75/EU is to be made available upon request to the public concerned on the Internet, free of charge and without restricting access to registered users. A uniform summary of permits should also be made available to the public concerned under the same conditions.

~~_________________~~

75 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC; OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19–76.

Amendment 7

Proposal for a directive

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7~~

Recital 6 a (new)

~~Directive 2010/75/EU~~

~~Article 9 – paragraph 2~~

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

~~(7) In Article 9, paragraph (2) is deleted.~~

(6a) The Commission shall specify in a clear and accessible manner which non-technical information can be made available to the public concerned upon request in order to enhance public interest without affecting the economic activity of the producer. The Commission shall specify who is responsible for the preparation of the non-technical information and the uniform summary. In the event that an environmental assessor is required to synthesise that information, the Commission should establish how its costs will be covered.

~~deleted~~

Amendment 8

Proposal for a directive

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12~~

Recital 12

~~Directive 2010/75/EU~~

~~Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3~~

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The competent authority shall set out in an annex to the permit conditions the reasons for the application of the second subparagraph, including the result of the assessment by the operator of the fulfilment of the required conditions.

(12) To ensure the protection of human health and the environment as a whole, synergies and coordination with other relevant Union environmental legislation are necessary, at all stages of its implementation. Therefore, all relevant competent authorities that ensure compliance with relevant Union environmental legislation should be duly consulted before the granting of a permit under Directive 2010/75/EU.

The competent authority shall set out in an annex to the permit conditions the reasons for the application of the second subparagraph, including the summary of result of the assessment by the operator of the fulfilment of the required conditions.

Amendment 9

Proposal for a directive

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12~~

Recital 13

~~Directive 2010/75/EU~~

~~Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part~~

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The competent authority shall set the strictest possible emission limit values that are consistent with the lowest emissions achievable by applying BAT in the installation, and that ensure that, under normal operating conditions, emissions do not exceed the emission levels associated with the best available techniques (BAT-AELs) as laid down in the decisions on BAT conclusions referred to in Article 13(5). The emission limit values shall be based on an assessment by the operator analysing the feasibility of meeting the strictest end of the BAT-AEL range and demonstrating the best performance the installation can achieve by applying BAT as described in BAT conclusions. The emission limit values shall be set through either of the following:

(13) With a view to continuously improving the environmental performance and safety of the installation, including by preventing waste generation, optimising resource use and water reuse, and preventing or reducing risks associated with the use of hazardous substances, the operator should establish and implement an environmental management system (EMS) in accordance with relevant BAT conclusions, and should make it available to the public. The EMS should also cover the management of risks related to the use of the hazardous substances and an analysis of the possible substitution of hazardous substances by safer alternatives.

Following the publication of decisions on BAT reference documents derived pursuant to this Directive, the competent authority shall set emission limit values that are consistent with the lowest emissions achievable by applying BAT in the installation and taking into account cross-media effects, and that ensure that, under normal operating conditions, emissions do not exceed the emission levels associated with the best available techniques (BAT-AELs) as laid down in those decisions on BAT conclusions referred to in Article 13(5). The emission limit values shall be based on an assessment by the operator analysing the feasibility of meeting the whole BAT-AEL range and demonstrating the lowest emission limit the installation can achieve under normal operating conditions by applying BAT as described in BAT conclusions. The emission limit values shall be set through either of the following:

(13) With a view to continuously improving the environmental performance and safety of the installation, including by preventing waste generation, optimising resource use and water reuse, and preventing or reducing risks associated with the use of hazardous substances, the operator should establish and implement an environmental management system (EMS) in accordance with relevant BAT conclusions, and should make it available to the public upon request. The EMS should also cover the management of risks related to the use of the hazardous substances and an analysis of the possible substitution of hazardous substances by safer alternatives. However, the EMS should maintain the integrity of confidential business information by not publishing information classified as confidential business information or commercially sensitive information.

Amendment 10

Proposal for a directive

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12~~

Recital 19

~~Directive 2010/75/EU~~

~~Article 15 – paragraph 3a~~

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3a. The competent authority shall set environmental performance limit values that ensure that, under normal operating conditions, such performance limits values do not exceed the environmental performance levels associated with BATs as laid down in the decisions on BAT conclusions referred to in Article 13(5).

(19) Environmental quality standards refer to all the requirements set out in Union law, such as Union legislation on air and water; which must be fulfilled at a given time by a given environment or particular part thereof. Therefore it is appropriate to clarify that when granting a permit to an installation, competent authorities should not only set out conditions to ensure compliance of the installation’s operations with the best available techniques conclusions, but should also, where appropriate with a view to reducing the specific contribution of the installation to the pollution occurring in the relevant area, include specific additional conditions in the permit stricter than those set in relevant BAT conclusions, so as to ensure the installation’s compliance with environmental quality standards. Such conditions may consist in setting stricter emission limit values or limiting the operation or capacity of the installation.

3a. The competent authority shall set indicative environmental performance limit levels that ensure that, under normal operating conditions, such performance limits values do not exceed the environmental performance levels associated with BATs as laid down in the decisions on BAT conclusions referred to in Article 13(5).

(19) Environmental quality standards refer to all the requirements set out in Union law, such as Union legislation on air and water; which must be fulfilled at a given time by a given environment or particular part thereof. Therefore it is appropriate to clarify that when granting a permit to an installation, competent authorities should not only set out conditions to ensure compliance of the installation’s operations with the best available techniques conclusions, but should also, where appropriate, plan to reduce the specific contribution of the installation to the pollution occurring in the relevant area, so as to ensure the installation’s compliance with environmental quality standards. At the discretion of Member States, such conditions may consist in setting stricter emission limit values or limiting the operation or capacity of the installation according to national specificities.

Amendment 11

Proposal for a directive

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12~~

Recital 20

~~Directive 2010/75/EU~~

~~Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)~~

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

~~(ba) new investment cycle related to the sustainability transition of the operator’s group.~~

(20) Permit conditions should be regularly reviewed and, where necessary, updated by the competent authority to ensure compliance with relevant legislation. Such review or update should also take place where it is necessary for the installation to comply with an environmental quality standard, including in the case of a new or revised environmental quality standard or where the status of the receiving environment requires a revision of the permit in order to achieve compliance with plans and programmes set under Union legislation, such as the river basin management plans under Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. Agricultural installations should be given sufficient transition time to comply with the new permit conditions so that production, human resources and end consumers are affected as little as possible. The transition period should be determined according to the type and capacity of the installation.

_________________

72 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000).

Amendment 12

Proposal for a directive

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12~~

Recital 22

~~Directive 2012/75/EU~~

~~Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 6 a (new)~~

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The competent authority may, in cases where an installation faces an unforeseen interruption in the supply of raw materials or fuels, establish less strict emission limit values, for a maximum of three months, with the possibility of prolonging that derogation for an additional three months in exceptional cases. Member States shall inform the Commission of any derogation granted pursuant to this paragraph. The derogation shall cease to apply as soon as the supply conditions are sufficient.

(22) As clarified by the case-law of the Court of Justice73, Member States may not restrict legal standing to challenge a decision of a public authority to those members of the public concerned who participated in the preceding administrative procedure to adopt that decision. As also clarified by the case-law of the Court of Justice74, effective access to justice in environmental matters and effective remedies requires inter alia that members of the public concerned should have the right to ask the court or ancompetent independent and impartial body to order interim measures to prevent a given instance of pollution, including, where necessary, through the temporary suspension of the disputed permit. Therefore, it should be specified that legal standing should not be made conditional on the role that the concerned member of the public played during a participatory phase of the decision-making procedures under this Directive. In addition, any review procedure should be fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive, and provide for adequate and effective redress mechanisms, including injunctive relief as appropriate.

(22) As clarified by the case-law of the Court of Justice73, Member States may not restrict legal standing to challenge a decision of a public authority to those members of the public concerned who participated in the preceding administrative procedure to adopt that decision. As also clarified by the case-law of the Court of Justice74, effective access to justice in environmental matters and effective remedies requires inter alia that members of the public concerned should have the right to ask the court or ancompetent independent and impartial body to order interim measures to prevent a given instance of pollution, including, where necessary, through the temporary suspension of the disputed permit. In addition, any review procedure should be fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive, and provide for adequate and effective redress mechanisms, including injunctive relief as appropriate.

_________________

73 Case C–826/18, Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 January 2021; LB and Others v College van burgemeester en wethouders van de gemeente Echt-Susteren; paragraphs 58 and 59.

74 Case C-416/10 Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber), 15 January 2013; Jozef Križan and Others v Slovenská inšpekcia životného prostredia.Križan, paragraph 109.

Amendment 13

Proposal for a directive

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20~~

Recital 27

~~Directive 2012/75/EU~~

~~Chapter IIa – title~~

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

~~PROMOTING INNOVATION’~~

(27) In light of the high number of rearing installations that should be included within the scope of Directive 2010/75/EU, and the relative simplicity of the processes and emissions patterns of such installations, it is appropriate to set out specific administrative procedures for issuing permits and for the operation of the relevant activities which are adapted to the sector, without prejudice to requirements related to public information and participation, monitoring and compliance.

~~ENABLING INNOVATION’~~

(27) In light of the high number of agricultural installations of poultry and pigs that should be included within the scope of Directive 2010/75/EU, and the relative simplicity of the processes and emissions patterns of such agricultural installations, it is appropriate to set out specific administrative procedures for issuing permits, simplified registration procedures and for the operation of the relevant activities which are adapted to the sector, without prejudice to requirements related to public information and participation, monitoring and compliance. In addition, the requirements to issue a permit or to register farms should not create additional administrative or financial burden.

Amendment 14

Proposal for a directive

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22~~

Recital 27 a (new)

~~Directive 2010/75/EU~~

~~Article 27a – paragraph 2~~

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The centre shall collect and analyse information on innovative techniques, including emerging techniques relevant to activities within the scope of this Directive, and characterise their level of development and their environmental performance. The Commission shall take into account the findings of the centre when preparing the work programme for the exchange of information referred to in Article 13(3), point (b), and when drawing up, reviewing and updating the BAT reference documents referred to in Article 13(1).

(27a) The Commission and the Member States shall ensure that farmers have access to sufficient financing for developing and modernising installations as necessary to meet the objectives of this Directive.

2. The centre shall collect and analyse information on innovative techniques, including emerging techniques relevant to activities within the scope of this Directive, and characterise their level of development and their environmental performance. The Commission shall take into account the findings of the centre when preparing the work programme for the exchange of information referred to in Article 13(3), point (b), and when drawing up, reviewing and updating, after an assesment by the technical working group in Sevilla, the BAT reference documents referred to in Article 13(1).

Amendment 15

Proposal for a directive

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22~~

Recital 29

~~Directive 2010/75/EU~~

~~Article 27b – title~~

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

~~Testing of emerging techniques~~

(29) In order to ensure that Directive 2010/75/EU continues meeting its objectives to prevent or reduce emissions of pollutants and achieve a high level of protection of human health and the environment, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission to supplement that Directive in order to establish operating rules containing requirements for activities relating to rearing of poultry, pigs and cattle, and to amend Annexes I and Ia to that Directive by adding an agro-industrial activity to ensure that it meets its objectives to prevent or reduce pollutants emissions and achieve a high level of protection of human health and the environment. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 201677. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.

~~Testing of emerging and innovative techniques~~

(29) In order to ensure that Directive 2010/75/EU continues meeting its objectives to prevent or reduce emissions of pollutants and achieve a high level of protection of human health and the environment, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission to supplement that Directive in order to establish operating rules containing requirements for activities relating to rearing of poultry and pigs. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016 77. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. The operating rules should not preclude the use of emerging techniques nor define or prescribe any specific techniques or technology. They should be based on an integral assessment that takes into account the impact on overall economic sustainability, safety, in particular fire safety, and animal health and welfare.

_________________

77 Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making; OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1–14.

Amendment 16

Proposal for a directive

~~Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22~~

Recital 33

~~Directive 2010/75/EU~~

~~Article 27b – paragraph 1~~

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Without prejudice to Article 18, the competent authority may grant temporary derogations from the requirements set out in Article 15(2) and (3) and from the principles set out in Article 11, points (a) and (b), for the testing of emerging techniques for a total period of time not exceeding 24 months.

(33) It is therefore appropriate for Directive 2010/75/EU to address the right for compensation for damages suffered by individuals. To ensure that individuals can defend their rights against damages to health caused by violations of Directive 2010/75/EU and thereby ensure a more efficient enforcement of that Directive, non-governmental organisations promoting the protection of human health or the environment, including those promoting the protection of consumers and meeting any requirements under national law, as members of the public concerned, should be empowered to engage in proceedings, as the Member States so determine, either on behalf or in support of any victim, without prejudice to national rules of procedure concerning representation and defence before the courts. Member States usually enjoy procedural autonomy to ensure an effective remedy against violations of Union law, subject to the respect of the principles of equivalence and effectivity. However, experience shows that while there is overwhelming epidemiologic evidence on the negative health impacts of pollution on the population, in particular as regards air, it is difficult for the victims of violations of Directive 2010/75/EU under the procedural rules on the burden of proof generally applicable in the Member States to demonstrate a causality link between the suffered harm and the violation. As a result, in the majority of cases, victims of violations of Directive 2010/75/EU do not have an effective way to obtain compensation for the harm caused by such violations. To strengthen the rights of individuals to obtain compensation for violations of Directive 2010/75/EU and to contribute to a more efficient enforcement of its requirements throughout the Union, it is necessary to adapt the burden of proof applicable to such situations. Therefore, when an individual can provide sufficiently robust evidence to give rise to a presumption that the violation of Directive 2010/75/EU is at the origins of the damage caused to the health of an individual, or has significantly contributed to it, it should be for the defendant to rebut that presumption in order to escape his liability.

Without prejudice to Article 18, the competent authority may grant temporary derogations from the requirements set out in Article 15(2) and (3) and from the principles set out in Article 11, points (a) and (b), for the testing of emerging and innovative techniques for a total period of time not exceeding 48 months.

(33) It is therefore appropriate for Directive 2010/75/EU to address the right for compensation for damages suffered by individuals. To ensure that individuals can defend their rights against damages to health caused by violations of Directive 2010/75/EU and thereby ensure a more efficient enforcement of that Directive, non-governmental organisations promoting the protection of human health or the environment, including those promoting the protection of consumers and meeting any requirements under national law, as members of the public concerned, should be empowered to engage in proceedings, as the Member States so determine, either on behalf of or in support of any victim, without prejudice to national rules of procedure concerning representation and defence before the courts. Member States usually enjoy procedural autonomy to ensure an effective remedy against violations of Union law, subject to the respect of the principles of equivalence and effectivity. However, experience shows that while there is overwhelming epidemiologic evidence on the negative health impacts of pollution on the population, in particular as regards air, it is difficult for the victims of violations of Directive 2010/75/EU under the procedural rules on the burden of proof generally applicable in the Member States to demonstrate a causality link between the suffered harm and the violation. As a result, in the majority of cases, victims of violations of Directive 2010/75/EU do not have an effective way to obtain compensation for the harm caused by such violations. To strengthen the rights of individuals to obtain compensation for violations of Directive 2010/75/EU and to contribute to a more efficient enforcement of its requirements throughout the Union, it is necessary to facilitate the burden of proof applicable to such situations.

Amendment 17

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 ~~– paragraph~~–paragraph 1 – point 22-1 (new)

Directive 2010/75/EU

~~Article 27c – paragraph 1~~

Title

~~Text proposed by the Commission~~

Present text

Amendment

By way of derogation from Article 21(3), the competent authority may set emission limit values that ensure that, within 6 years of publication of a decision on BAT conclusions in accordance with Article 13(5) relating to the main activity of an installation, emissions shall not, under normal operating conditions, exceed emission levels associated with emerging techniques as laid down in the decisions on BAT conclusions.

(-1) The title of the Directive is replaced by the following

By way of derogation from Article 15(3) and (3a) and 21(3), the competent authority may, at the request of the operator, set indicative emission limit values that ensure that, within the period in respect of which the competent authority and the operator have carried out an assessment, emissions shall not, under normal operating conditions, exceed emission levels associated with emerging techniques as laid down in the decisions on BAT conclusions.

Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control)

"Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial and agricultural emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control)"

Amendment 18

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 223 – point a

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article ~~27d~~3 – paragraph 1 – ~~subparagraph~~point 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall require that by 30 June 2030 the operator includes in its environmental management system referred to in Article 14a a transformation plan for each installation carrying out any activity listed in points 1, 2, 3, 4, 6.1 a, and 6.1 b of Annex I. The transformation plan shall contain information on how the installation will transform itself during the 2030-2050 period in order to contribute to the emergence of a sustainable, clean, circular and climate-neutral economy by 2050, using the format referred to in paragraph 4.

(3) ‘installation’ means a stationary technical unit within which one or more activities listed in Annex I, in Annex Ia or in Part 1 of Annex VII are carried out, and any other directly associated activities on the same site which have a technical connection with the activities listed in those Annexes and which could have an effect on emissions and pollution;

Member States shall request that by 30 June 2030 the operator includes in its environmental management system referred to in Article 14a an indicative transformation plan for the company’s grouped activities listed in points 1, 2, 3, 4, 6.1 a, and 6.1 b of Annex I. The transformation plan shall contain information on how the company will transform itself during the 2030-2050 period in order to contribute to the emergence of a sustainable, clean, circular and climate-neutral economy by 2050, using the format referred to in paragraph 4. The transformation plan shall include specific information on how the company plans to become more energy, water and resource efficient by laying down the measures that will be implemented to reduce the overall consumption and improve the efficiency of its operations.

(3) ‘installation’ means a stationary technical unit within which one or more activities listed in Annex I or in Part 1 of Annex VII are carried out, and any other directly associated activities on the same site which have a technical connection with the activities listed in those Annexes and which could have an effect on emissions and pollution;

Amendment 19

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 223 – point d

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article ~~27d~~3 – paragraph 21 – ~~subparagraph~~point 117

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall require that, as part of the review of the permit conditions pursuant to Article 21(3) following the publication of decisions on BAT conclusions after 1 January 2030, the operator includes in its environmental management system referred to in Article 14a a transformation plan for each installation carrying out any activity listed in Annex I that is not referred to in paragraph 1. The transformation plan shall contain information on how the installation will transform itself during the 2030-2050 period in order to contribute to the emergence of a sustainable, clean, circular and climate-neutral economy by 2050, using the format referred to in paragraph 4.

(17) ‘the public concerned’ means the public affected or likely to be affected by, or having an interest in, the taking of a decision on the granting or the updating of a permit or of permit conditions; for the purposes of this definition, non-governmental organisations promoting the protection of human health or the environment and meeting any requirements under national law shall be deemed to have an interest;.

Member States shall require that, as part of the review of the permit conditions pursuant to Article 21(3) following the publication of decisions on BAT conclusions after 1 January 2030, the operator includes in its environmental management system referred to in Article 14a a transformation plan at company level, of any activity listed in Annex I that is not referred to in paragraph 1. The transformation plan shall contain information on how the company will transform to become more energy, water and resource efficient by laying down the measures that will be implemented during the 2030-2050 period in order to contribute to the emergence of a sustainable, clean, circular and climate-neutral economy by 2050, using the format referred to in paragraph 4.

(17) ‘the public concerned’ means the public affected or having an interest in, the taking of a decision on the granting or the updating of a permit;

Amendment 20

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d a (new)

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 22 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(da) the following point is inserted:

‘(22a) ‘farm’ or ‘agricultural installation’ means a single unit, both technically and economically, that has a single management, within which activities of large-scale rearing of pigs and poultry listed in Article 70a are carried out;’;

Amendment 21

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d b (new)

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23

Present text

Amendment

(db) point (23) is replaced by the following:

(23) ‘poultry’ means poultry as defined in point 1 of Article 2 of Council Directive 90/539/EEC of 15 October 1990 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in, and imports from third countries of, poultry and hatching eggs*

‘(23) ‘poultry' means poultry as defined in Article 4, point 9, of Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council on transmissible animal diseases*;’;

__________________

* OJ L 303, 31.10.1990, p. 6.

* OJ L 084, 31.3.2016, p. 1

Amendment 22

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point e

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(23b) ‘cattle’ means domestic animals of the species Bos taurus;

deleted

Amendment 23

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point e

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(23c) ‘livestock unit’ or ‘LSU’ means the grazing equivalent of one adult dairy cow producing 3 000 kg of milk annually, without additional concentrated foodstuffs, which is used to express the size of farms rearing different categories of animals, using the conversion rates, with reference to actual production within the calendar year, set out in Annex II to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 808/2014**’.

(23c) ‘livestock unit’ or ‘LSU’ means a standard measurement unit that allows for the aggregation of categories of livestock units covering pigs and poultry the coefficients of which are listed in Annex -Ia, in order to compare those categories;

___________________________

____________________

* Council Directive 2008/120/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs (OJ L 47, 18.2.2009, p. 5).

** Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 808/2014 of 17 July 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ L 227 31.7.2014, p. 18).’;.

Amendment 24

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

‘By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States may set a procedure for the registration of installations covered only by Chapter V or Chapter VIa.’.

‘By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States may set a procedure for the registration of installations covered only by Chapter V’.

Amendment 25

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

This paragraph shall not apply to Chapter VIa.

Amendment 26

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 13 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In order to draw up, review and, where necessary, update BAT reference documents, the Commission shall organise an exchange of information between Member States, the industries concerned, non-governmental organisations promoting environmental protection, the European Chemicals Agency and the Commission.

1. In order to draw up, review and, where necessary, update BAT reference documents, the Commission shall organise an exchange of information between Member States, the industries and farmers concerned, non-governmental organisations promoting environmental protection, the European Chemicals Agency and the Commission.

Amendment 27

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 14a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall require the operator to prepare and implement, for each installation falling within the scope of this Chapter, an environmental management system (‘EMS’). The EMS shall comply with the provisions included in relevant BAT conclusions that determine aspects to be covered in the EMS.

Member States shall require the operator to prepare and implement, for each installation falling within the scope of this Chapter, an environmental system (‘EMS’). The EMS shall comply with the provisions included in relevant BAT conclusions that determine aspects to be covered in the EMS. The Commission shall determine which person or institution is qualified to design the management system and the fund from which the costs shall be covered. The EMS shall be periodically reviewed to ensure its continued suitability, adequacy and effectiveness.

Amendment 28

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11

Directive 2010/75/EU –

Article 14a – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The EMS of an installation shall be made available on the Internet, free of charge and without restricting access to registered users.

3. The EMS of an installation shall be made available on the Internet upon request, free of charge to the public concerned, without restricting access to registered users and without affecting the activities of producers in terms of protecting confidential business information.

Amendment 29

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article ~~27d~~27a – paragraph 3 – point e a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

~~3. The operator shall make its transformation plan as well as the results of the assessment referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 public, as part of the publication of its environmental management system.~~

(ea) representatives of the farmers concerned;

3. The company shall make its transformation plan, its updates as well as the results of the assessment referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 public, as part of the publication of its environmental management system.

Amendment 30

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 27c –paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

In the case of rearing facilities covered by the provisions of Chapter VIa, for provisions associated with emerging techniques, the applicable time limits may be extended up to 17 years.

Amendment 31

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24

Directive 2010/75/EU

Chapter VIa – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR REARING POULTRY, PIGS AND CATTLE

SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR LARGE-SCALE REARING OF POULTRY AND PIGS

Amendment 32

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70a – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

This Chapter shall apply to the activities set out in Annex Ia which reach the capacity thresholds set out in that Annex.

1. This Chapter shall apply to any of the following activities of rearing pigs and poultry reaching the lower threshold:

(a) farm or agricultural installation:

(i) with more than 40 000 places for poultry;

(ii) with more than 2 000 places for production pigs (over 30 kg); or

(iii) with more than 750 places for sows;

(b) farm or agricultural installation of 750 livestock unit (LSU) or more. The approximate equivalent in LSU shall be based on the coefficients established in Annex -Ia to this Directive.

Amendment 33

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70a – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. The Commission and the Member States shall ensure that specialist farmers have access to sufficient financing for developing and modernising installations as necessary to meet the objectives of this Directive.

Amendment 34

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 70b

deleted

Aggregation rule

If two or more installations are located close to each other and if their operator is the same or if the installations are under the control of operators who are engaged in an economic or legal relationship, the installations concerned shall be considered as a single unit for the purpose of calculating the capacity threshold referred to in Article 70a.

Amendment 35

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Permits

Permits and simplified registration procedure

Amendment 36

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States may include requirements for certain categories of installations falling within the scope of this Chapter in the general binding rules referred to in Article 6.

Member States may include requirements for certain categories of farms falling within the scope of this Chapter in the general binding rules referred to in Article 6.

Member States shall specify the procedure for granting a permit in respect of installations falling within the scope of this Chapter. Those procedures shall include at least the information listed in paragraph 2.

Member States shall specify the procedure for granting a permit in respect of farms falling within the scope of this Chapter. Those procedures shall include at least the information listed in paragraph 2.

Amendment 37

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1a. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph of Article 4 and the first paragraph to this Article, Member States may establish a specific simplified procedure for the registration of the agricultural installations covered by this Chapter.

The simplified registration procedure shall be specified in a binding act and include at least a notification by the farmer to the competent authority of the intention to operate an activity.

Member States may use any similar procedure already in place for registration. They shall avoid administrative burden and additional costs for the farmer.

Amendment 38

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 2 –introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Applications for permits shall include at least a description of the following elements:

2. Applications for permits or simplified registration shall include at least a description of the following elements:

Amendment 39

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the installation and its activities

(a) the farm, its buildings and its activities

Amendment 40

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the animal types

(b) the animal type

Amendment 41

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Amendment 42

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) the sources of emissions from the installation;

(d) the sources of emissions from the building where the rearing takes place;

Amendment 43

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 2 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e) the nature and quantities of foreseeable emissions from the installation into each medium.

(e) the nature and quantities of foreseeable emissions from the building where the rearing takes place, into each medium under normal operating conditions.

Amendment 44

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Applications shall also include a non-technical summary of the information referred to in paragraph 2.

3. Applications may include a summary of the information referred to in paragraph 2.

Amendment 45

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 3a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3a. Member States shall issue the permits or confirm the registration within six months from the date of the farmer's application.

Amendment 46

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Member States shall take necessary measures to ensure that the operator informs the competent authority, without delay, of any planned substantial change to the installations falling within the scope of this Chapter which may have consequences for the environment. Where appropriate, the competent authority shall reconsider and update the permit.

4. Member States shall take necessary measures to ensure that the farmer informs the competent authority, without delay, of any planned substantial change to the farm or agricultural installation where the rearing activity takes place, falling within the scope of this Chapter which may have consequences for the environment. Where appropriate and within two months from the notification by the farmer, the competent authority shall reconsider and update the permit.

Amendment 47

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70c – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4a. One year following the full implementation of the authorisation and registration system in Member States, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council assessing the impact of the system on the economic viability of farms falling within the scope of this Directive, taking into account all costs related to complying with the conditions set out in this Directive, in order to adapt certain dispositions emanating from the Directive accordingly.

Amendment 48

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70d – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 70d

deleted

Obligations of the operator

Amendment 49

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70d – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall ensure that the operator carries out monitoring of emissions and of associated environmental performance levels in accordance with the operating rules referred to in Article 70i.

deleted

The operator shall keep a record of, and process, all monitoring results, for a period of at least 6 years, in such a way as to enable the verification of compliance with the emission limit values and environmental performance limit values set out in operating rules referred to in Article 70i.

Amendment 50

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70d – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. In the event of non-compliance with the emission limit values and environmental performance limit values set out in the operating rules referred to in Article 70i, Member States shall require that the operator takes the measures necessary to ensure that compliance is restored within the shortest possible time.

deleted

Amendment 51

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70d – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The operator shall ensure that any land spreading of waste, animal by-products or other residues generated by the installation is undertaken in accordance with the best available techniques, as specified in the operating rules referred to in Article 70i, and other relevant Union legislation and that it does not cause significant pollution of the environment.

deleted

Amendment 52

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70e – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The operator shall, without delay, make available the data and information listed in paragraph 2 of this Article to the competent authority upon request. The competent authority may make such a request in order to verify compliance with the operating rules referred to in Article 70i. The competent authority shall make such a request if a member of the public requests access to the data or information listed in paragraph 2 of this Article.

3. Where appropriate, the farmer shall make available the data and information listed in paragraph 2 of this Article to the competent authority upon duly justified request. The competent authority may make such a request in order to verify compliance with the operating rules referred to in Article 70i. Nonetheless, without prejudice to the second subparagraph of Article 4(2) of Directive 2003/4/EC, at the request of the farmer, parts of such reports that involve sensitive commercial or industrial information, or which include personal data within the meaning of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 that are not strictly necessary for the purpose of this Article, shall not be published.

Amendment 53

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70f – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where non-compliance causes a significant degradation of local air, water or soil conditions, or where it poses, or risks to pose, a significant danger to human health, the operation of the installation shall be suspended by the competent authority until compliance is restored.

deleted

Amendment 54

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70g – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Member States shall ensure that the public concerned are given early and effective opportunities to participate in the following procedures:

1. Member States shall ensure that the public concerned are given early and effective opportunities to be consulted in the following procedures:

Amendment 55

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70g – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) preparation of general binding rules as referred to in Article 6 on permits for installations falling within the scope of this Chapter;

deleted

Amendment 56

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70g – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the granting of a permit for a new installation falling within the scope of this Chapter;

(b) the granting of a permit for a new farm falling within the scope of this Chapter;]

Amendment 57

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70g – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) the granting of an updated permit in accordance with article 70c.4 for any substantial change to an existing installation falling within the scope of this Chapter.

(c) the granting of an updated permit in accordance with article 70c.4 for any substantial change to an existing farm falling within the scope of this Chapter.]

Amendment 58

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70g – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The competent authority shall make available to the public, including systematically via the Internet, free of charge and without restricting access to registered users, the following documents and information:

2. The competent authority shall make available to the public concerned, upon request, the following documents and information:

Amendment 59

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70g – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) the general binding rules referred to in Article 6 applicable to installations falling within the scope of this Chapter;

Amendment 60

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70g – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) the reports of inspections of the installations falling within the scope of this Chapter.

deleted

Amendment 61

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70h – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) they have a sufficient interest;

(a) they have a direct and legitimate interest;

Amendment 62

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70h – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Standing in the review procedure may not be conditional on the role that the concerned member of the public played during a participatory phase of the decision-making procedures under this Directive.

Standing in the review procedure may not be conditional on the role that the member of the public concerned played during a participatory phase of the decision-making procedures under this Directive.

Amendment 63

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70h – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The review procedure shall be fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive, and shall provide for adequate and effective redress mechanisms, including injunctive relief as appropriate.

The review procedure shall be fair, equitable, proportionate, timely and not prohibitively expensive, and shall provide for adequate and effective redress mechanisms.

Amendment 64

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Commission shall establish operating rules containing requirements consistent with the use of best available techniques for the activities listed in Annex Ia, which shall include the following:

The Commission shall, in cooperation with farmers whose production falls within the scope of this Directive, establish operating rules containing requirements consistent with the use of best available techniques for the activities listed in Article 70a, which shall include the following:

Amendment 65

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Amendment 66

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) pollution prevention and mitigation practices;

deleted

Amendment 67

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point f

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(f) other measures consistent with Annex III.

deleted

Amendment 68

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The operating rules shall take into account inter alia the nature, type, size and density of these installations and the specificities of pasture based cattle rearing systems, where animals are only seasonally reared in indoor installations.

The operating rules shall take into account inter alia the nature, type, size and density of these farms.

Amendment 69

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The operating rules shall be based on an integral assessment taking into account the potential effects on, inter-alia, overall economic sustainability, safety, in particular fire safety, and animal health and welfare.

Amendment 70

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The operating rules shall take into account emerging techniques in animal husbandry, as referred to in Article 27(1), and shall lay down the conditions under which the competent authority may grant a permit to a farm using such techniques.

Amendment 71

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The operating rules shall offer a wide range of options and not prescribe the use of a particular technique or technology.

Amendment 72

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 70i – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Member States shall ensure that all the permit conditions for the installations concerned are in compliance with the operating rules referred to in paragraph 1 within 42 months of the entry into force of the delegated act establishing those rules..

3. Member States shall ensure that all the permit conditions for the farms concerned are in compliance with the operating rules referred to in paragraph 1 within 42 months of the entry into force of the delegated act establishing those rules.’.

Amendment 73

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 74 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. In order to allow the provisions of this Directive to meet its objectives to prevent or reduce pollutants emissions and achieve a high level of protection of human health and the environment, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt a delegated act, in accordance with Article 76, to amend Annex I or Annex Ia by including in those Annexes an agro-industrial activity that meets the following criteria:

deleted

(a) it has or is expected to have an impact on human health or the environment, in particular as a consequence of pollutant emissions and use of resources;

(b) its environmental performance diverges within the Union;

(c) it presents potential for improvement in terms of its environmental impact through the application of best available techniques or innovative techniques;

(d) its inclusion within the scope of this Directive is assessed, on the basis of its environmental, economic and social impacts, to have a favourable ratio of societal benefits to economic costs.

Amendment 74

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 32

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 79a – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Member States shall ensure that, as part of the public concerned, non-governmental organisations promoting the protection of human health or the environment and meeting any requirements under national law are allowed to represent the individuals affected and bring collective actions for compensation. Member States shall ensure that a claim for a violation leading to a damage cannot be pursued twice, by the individuals affected and by the non-governmental organisations referred to in this paragraph.

deleted

Amendment 75

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 32

Directive 2010/75/EU

Article 79a – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where there is a claim for compensation in accordance with paragraph 1, supported by evidence from which a causality link may be presumed between the damage and the violation, Member States shall ensure that the onus is on the person responsible for the violation to prove that the violation did not cause or contribute to the damage.

4. Where there is a claim for compensation in accordance with paragraph 1, supported by evidence from which a causality link may be presumed between the damage and the violation, Member States shall ensure that the onus is on the person who made the allegation to prove that the violation caused or contributed to the damage

Amendment 76

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 33 a (new)

Directive 2010/75/EU

Annex -Ia (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(33a) Annex -Ia set out in Annex Ia to this Directive is inserted.

Amendment 77

Proposal for a directive

Annex Ia (new)

Directive 2010/75/EU

Annex -Ia (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

ANNEX -Ia

Conversion rates of animals to livestock units (‘LSU’) referred to in the LSU definition

Pigs

Breeding sows > 50kg

0,5 LSU

Other pigs > 30kg

0,3 LSU

Poultry

Broilers

0,007 LSU

Laying hens

0,014 LSU

Ostriches

0,35 LSU

Turkeys

0,03 LSU

Ducks

0,01 LSU

Geese

0,02 LSU

Other poultry fowls n.e.c.

0,001 LSU

Amendment 78

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 34

Directive 2010/75/EU

Annex Ia

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(34) Annex Ia as set out in Annex II to this Directive is inserted.

deleted

Amendment 79

Proposal for a directive

Annex I – paragraph 1 – point g

Directive 2010/75/EU

Annex I – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 5 – point 5.3 –point a – indent i

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(i) biological treatment (such as anaerobic digestion);

(i) biological treatment (such as anaerobic digestion except for manure);

Amendment 80

Proposal for a directive

Annex II

Directive 2010/75/EU

Annex Ia (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

ANNEX Ia

deleted

Activities referred to in Article 70a

1. Rearing of cattle, pigs or poultry in installations of 150 livestock units (LSU) or more.

2. Rearing of any mix of the following animals: cattle, pigs, poultry, in installations of 150 LSU or more.

The approximate equivalent in LSU is based on the conversion rates established in Annex II to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 808/2014*.

__________________________________

* Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 808/2014 of 17 July 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (OJ L 227, 31.07.2014, p.18).

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date announced in plenary

~~ITRE~~

AGRI

2.5.2022

Date appointed

~~Tomas Tobé~~

Benoît Lutgen

~~7.6.2022~~

3.5.2022

Discussed in committee

~~29.11.2022~~

29.9.2022

24.10.2022

20.4.2023

Date adopted

~~28.3.2023~~

25.4.2023

Result of final vote

Members present for the final vote

Matteo Adinolfi, Nicola Beer, François-Xavier Bellamy, Hildegard Bentele, Tom Berendsen, Vasile Blaga, Paolo Borchia, Marc Botenga, Markus Buchheit, Martin Buschmann, Cristian-Silviu Buşoi, Jerzy Buzek, Maria da Graça Carvalho, Ignazio Corrao, Beatrice Covassi, Ciarán Cuffe, Josianne Cutajar, Nicola Danti, Martina Dlabajová, Christian Ehler, Valter Flego, Niels Fuglsang, Lina Gálvez Muñoz, Jens Geier, Nicolás González Casares, Bart Groothuis, Christophe Grudler, Robert Hajšel, Romana Jerković, Seán Kelly, Izabela-Helena Kloc, Łukasz Kohut, Andrius Kubilius, Marisa Matias, Dan Nica, Angelika Niebler, Niklas Nienaß, Johan Nissinen, Mauri Pekkarinen, Morten Petersen, Markus Pieper, Maria Spyraki, Beata Szydło, Riho Terras, Patrizia Toia, Marie Toussaint, Isabella Tovaglieri, Henna Virkkunen, Pernille Weiss, Carlos Zorrinho

Mazaly Aguilar, Clara Aguilera, Atidzhe Alieva-Veli, Álvaro Amaro, Attila Ara-Kovács, Carmen Avram, Adrian-Dragoş Benea, Benoît Biteau, Daniel Buda, Isabel Carvalhais, Asger Christensen, Ivan David, Paolo De Castro, Jérémy Decerle, Salvatore De Meo, Herbert Dorfmann, Paola Ghidoni, Martin Häusling, Martin Hlaváček, Krzysztof Jurgiel, Jarosław Kalinowski, Elsi Katainen, Norbert Lins, Elena Lizzi, Chris MacManus, Colm Markey, Marlene Mortler, Maria Noichl, Juozas Olekas, Daniela Rondinelli, Bronis Ropė, Bert-Jan Ruissen, Anne Sander, Simone Schmiedtbauer, Veronika Vrecionová, Sarah Wiener, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez

Substitutes present for the final vote

Alex Agius Saliba, Rasmus Andresen, Tiziana Beghin, Franc Bogovič, Jakop G. Dalunde, Pietro Fiocchi, Klemen Grošelj, Martin Hojsík, Marina Kaljurand, Dace Melbārde, Rob Rooken, Bronis Ropė, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Jordi Solé, Susana Solís Pérez

Franc Bogovič, Rosanna Conte, Claude Gruffat, Anja Hazekamp, Pär Holmgren, Benoît Lutgen, Irène Tolleret

Substitutes under Rule 209(7) present for the final vote

~~Pär Holmgren, Sven Simon~~

Catherine Griset, Achille Variati

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION