IP/01/521
Brussels, 6. April 2001
Commission moves against Austria for failing to
apply rules on sewage sludge
The European Commission has decided to send a Reasoned Opinion
(second written warning) to Austria for failing to adopt the national
legislation required to give effect to the Community's Sewage Sludge
Directive. The Directive provides for quality-control checks to be carried out
on sewage sludge used in agriculture, in particular to avoid the build-up of
heavy metals in soil. In Austria, nine Länder have legislative responsibility
for controlling the use of sewage sludge. However, they have either not
adopted any specific legislation, or have adopted legislation that omits
certain Community requirements. Environment Commissioner Margot
Wallström said: "The quality of our food depends on high standards in
agriculture. I urge Austria to make sure that its legislation fully reflects
Community rules on the safe use of sewage sludge."
The Sewage Sludge Directive1 requires that sewage sludge used for agriculture be
regulated by Member States. Austria should have complied with the Directive from
the date of its accession to the Community, i.e. as of 1 January 1995.
Under the Austrian constitution, Austria's nine Länder have the legislative
responsibility for controlling the use of sewage sludge for agriculture. Before the
current proceedings were started in 1999, most of the Länder – with the exception of
Salzburg, the Tyrol and Vienna - had implemented specific sewage sludge laws, but
these laws had serious shortcomings, especially in Carinthia.
Following the Letter of Formal Notice (first written warning) from the Commission in
January 2000, and a subsequent meeting between the Commission and Austrian
officials, Austria provided the Commission with a legal amendment to the law of
Lower Austria and new laws for Vienna and the Tyrol. However, deficiencies still
remain. Salzburg, for example, has still not transposed the Directive, and the
legislation in other Länder often falls short of what is required. The following
summary shows which main provisions of the Directive the Länder have failed to
implement adequately:
1
Council Directive 86/278/EEC on the protection of the environment, and in particular of the
soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture
Carinthia: The prohibition on the use of sewage sludge where soils contain
excessive levels of heavy metals and the requirement to prevent the excessive buildup of heavy metals due to the use of sludge; the rules to be observed when using
sludge, for example, to ensure that water quality is not affected.
Carinthia and Styria: The requirement that sewage sludge be treated, or, if
untreated, have its use specifically authorised.
Burgenland and Carinthia: The prohibition on the use of sludge for certain types of
agriculture (e.g. on soil in which vegetable crops are growing).
Burgenland, Carinthia, Lower Austria, Styria, the Tyrol and Vorarlberg: The
rules for testing sludge and soil.
Burgenland, Carinthia, Lower Austria, Upper Austria, Styria, the Tyrol and
Vorarlberg: The requirement to keep up-to-date records relating to sludge.
Background
As guardian of the EC Treaty, the Commission must ensure that the legal
requirements of the Treaty and adopted legislation are respected by Member States.
The procedure being followed in this case relates to Article 226 of the Treaty, which
gives the Commission powers to take legal action against a Member State that is not
respecting its obligations.
If the Commission considers that there may be an infringement of Community law
which warrants the opening of an infringement procedure, it addresses a "Letter of
Formal Notice" to the Member State concerned, requesting it to submit its
observations by a specified date, usually two months, as in this case.
In the light of the reply or absence of a reply from the Member State concerned, the
Commission may decide to address a "Reasoned Opinion" (or second written
warning) to the Member State, clearly and definitively setting out the reasons why it
considers there to have been an infringement of Community law and calling on the
Member State to comply within a specified period (normally two months).
If the Member State fails to comply with the Reasoned Opinion, the Commission may
decide to bring the case before the European Court of Justice.
2