Annexes to COM(2017)665 - Report on the application in the Member States of Directive 96/82/EC on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances for the period 2012-2014 - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2017)665 - Report on the application in the Member States of Directive 96/82/EC on the control of major-accident hazards involving ... |
|---|---|
| document | COM(2017)665  |
| date | November 16, 2017 |
Between 2000 and 2014 a total of 490 accidents were reported to the eMARS database. Out of those, 421 were major accidents fulfilling at least one criterion of Annex VI 19 to the Seveso-II-Directive. This means that there are on average 30 major accidents per year. Around 70% of the major accidents occurred in upper-tier establishments. As can be seen in Figure 10 , overall the number of major accidents remains relatively stable despite the increase in the number of sites covered by the Seveso-II-Directive. In addition, Figure 11 suggests that the number of fatalities has reduced since 2000 which could indicate that the impact of accidents might be reducing. It is in particular encouraging that no offsite fatality was reported after 2004.
Figure 11: Number of onsite and offsite fatalities in 2000- 2014
The reasons for reporting major accidents have not changed much over the years. Among the hazardous phenomena involved in the reported accidents, toxic release appears to be the most frequent. This correlates with the fact that the majority of accidents involve toxic and/or flammable substance. Considering also the number of establishments, the collected data shows that the petrochemical & oil refineries sector are most prone to major accidents.
Figure 12: Reasons for reporting major accidents in eMARS for the period 2000-2014 20 , 21
The eMARS database includes limited information about socio-economic consequences (e.g. lost property, environmental damage, job-loss, image loss, long-term impact on the neighbourhood). Only 124 out of 490 accidents reported include such data to some extent. Typically, this is limited to the immediate impact (e.g. insured losses) and does not consider wider or long-term impacts (e.g. job-loss, environmental damage). More substantial information about socio-economic consequences is publically available only for a small number of exceptional major accidents. The United Kingdom's Health and Safety Executive has developed a methodology for modelling the economic consequences for some impacts of a major accident 22 . Although this excludes certain important impacts (including environmental damage), applying this approach to the European Union suggests an annual impact in the order of several billion Euro. While improved knowledge of socio-economic consequences would be useful to better understand the impact and benefits of the legislative framework, it would constitute a significant effort to collect such information more systematically.
4.Conclusions and way forward
Considering the very high rate of industrialisation in the European Union, the Seveso-II-Directive has contributed to achieving a low frequency of major accidents. It is widely considered as a benchmark for industrial accident policy and has been a role model for legislation in many countries world-wide.
The above analysis confirms that the Seveso-II-Directive is working properly. The practical implementation and enforcement of the Seveso-II-Directive has further improved in most areas, and in particular industry operators are complying to a large extent with the requirements regarding safety reports and internal emergency plans. However, as was observed already for the previous reporting periods, efforts are still needed in some fields in a small number of Member States. This concerns in particular the development and testing of external emergency plans, providing information to the public and inspections. However, while these shortcomings may have increased the risk, there is no evidence that this has already resulted into a higher rate of major accidents in those Member States.
Despite the increase in the number of establishments covered by the Seveso-II-Directive, overall the annual number of major accidents remained stable around 30 per year and there are indications that their impact is decreasing.
The findings covering the previous reporting period have been taken into account by the Commission in the review of the Seveso-II-Directive, which has led to the adoption of the Seveso-III-Directive. The new Directive improves the right of the public to be appropriately informed, making certain provisions also applicable to lower-tier establishments. It includes detailed rules to guarantee adequate consultation of the public on individual projects and introduces stricter provisions on inspections. Compliance with the Seveso-III-Directive is, therefore, expected to contribute to the necessary improvements highlighted in this report.
The Commission will closely monitor progress on these issues and continue to assist Member States to further improve their level of performance, through various supporting activities and enforcement action as appropriate.
The Commission will also continue working on simplification of reporting process thus reducing administrative burden whilst improving the relevance and quality of the data deducted from the reports. To achieve this, the monitoring systems will be reviewed also with a view to develop indicators to better monitor the implementation and assess the performance of the Seveso-III-Directive.
(1) Directive 96/82/EC, OJ L 10, 14.1.1997, p.13; amended by Directive 2003/105/EC, OJ L 345, 31.12.2003, p.97
(2) Directive 2012/18/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances, amending and subsequently repealing Council Directive 96/82/EC Text with EEA relevance, OJ L 197, 24.7.2012, p. 1–37
(3) Document (C(2011) 4598 final, Commission Implementing Decision of 30.06.2011
(4) https://emars.jrc.ec.europa.eu Major Accident Reporting System ()
(5) http://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/26c9aa63-523e-11e7-a5ca-01aa75ed71a1
(6) Document C(2004)3335
(7) C(2007)3842 Document
(8) Document C(2010)5422 final
(9) Document C(2013) 4035 final
(10) https://circabc.europa.eu/w/browse/4cc9ca17-0920-4d8a-8796-6ffa170612b7
(11) Based on Member States' reports
(12) Data on 1996 and 1999 is not fully comparable due to differing definitions on establishments and installations. Several installations in the same establishment may have been reported individually which explains the apparent decrease in 2002.
(13) This data excludes the 187 establishments for which the competent authorities decided an external emergency plan was not required in accordance with Article 11(6) of the Seveso-II-Directive.
(14) This data excludes the 187 establishments for which the competent authorities decided an external emergency plan was not required in accordance with Article 11(6) of the Seveso-II-Directive.
(15) Some values are over 100% due to variations in the number of establishments during the reporting period.
(16) Some Member States reported mixed systems, e.g. depending on the regional approach. For the purpose of this report, these Member States were accounted as applying systematic appraisal.
(17) Near misses are, for instance, serious safety relevant incidents which eventually did not lead to an accident as the situation was eventually brought under control.
(18) This graph only shows UTE because the number of LTE is only available as of the 2009-2011 reporting period, as explained earlier in this report. However, it can be assumed that including LTE would actually not change the overall picture as the increase of LTE and UTE is largely similar over the years. Statistically reliable data on accidents is not available prior to 1991.
(19) For editorial simplification, for the purpose of this chapter, the term 'major accident' refers to the 421 accidents that were reported as fulfilling at least one criterion of Annex VI. For the other reported accidents it is not easily possible to establish whether they constitute major accidents or other kinds of accidents that were reported on a voluntary basis e.g. for the purpose of lesson learning.
(20) Sum of reasons is higher than the total number of accidents reported because an accident may fulfil several reasons.
(21) The criteria behind the reasons can be summarised as follows:
(22) http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr1055.htm