OPINION OF THE COMMISSION pursuant to Article 251 (2), third subparagraph, point (c) of the EC Treaty, on the European Parliament's amendments to the Council's common position regarding the proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL relating to the Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise - AMENDING THE PROPOSAL OF THE COMMISSION pursuant to Article 250 (2) of the EC Treaty

1. Introduction

Article 251, paragraph 2, letter c) of the Treaty establishing the European Community establishes that the Commission gives an opinion on the amendments proposed by the European Parliament in the second reading. The Commission sets out its opinion below on the 10 amendments proposed by Parliament.

2. Background

- Date of transmission of the proposal to the European Parliament and Council (COM(2000)468): 26 July 2000

- Date on which the European Parliament gave its opinion at first reading: 14 December 2000

- Date on which the Economic and Social Committee adopted its opinion: 29 November 2000

- Date on which the Committee of the Regions adopted its opinion: 14 February 2001

- Date on which the Commission adopted its amended proposal: (because of the short period between European Parliament's first reading - 14/12/2000 - and the Council's political agreement on a common position - 18/12/2000, the Commission did not have the opportunity to adopt an amended proposal)

- Date on which the Common Position was adopted by Council: 7 June 2001

- Date on which the Common Position was received by the EP: 13 June 2001

- Date on which the Commission communicated its view on the Common Position (SEC(2001)892 final): 8 June 2001

On 3 October 2001 the European Parliament at its Second Reading adopted 10 amendments. Parliament mainly makes the case for daughter directive to be proposed by the Commission setting limit values for noise from sources, modifies the timetable of the common position and reintroduces some of the Commission's original proposal wording.

3. Purpose of the proposal

Environmental noise is a serious health problem, which reduces the health and quality of life of over 90 million people in the EU. The Commission agreed to take action to address the problem in its 1996 Green Paper on Future Noise Policy. The objective of this Proposal is to provide a common basis for tackling the noise problem across the EU. Its underlying principles are similar to those for other overarching environment policy directives:

- Monitoring the environmental problem; by requiring member states to submit noise data for major roads, railways, airports and agglomerations to us using harmonised noise indicators Lden and Lnight. These common indicators will enable us to produce a strategic noise map showing the number of people annoyed and sleep-disturbed respectively

- Producing local noise action plans; these are for competent authorities to draw up and publish with close public participation. The measures in the plans are entirely at the discretion of the competent authorities, but they must be published, even where the decision is to take no action at all.

- Informing and consulting the public; in line with the principles of the Aarhus Convention

Developing a long-term EU strategy, which includes objectives to reduce the number of people affected by noise in the longer term, and provides a framework for developing existing Community policy on noise reduction from source

4. Opinion of the Commission on the amendments by the European Parliament

On 3 October 2001 the European Parliament adopted 10 amendments. 6 amendments have been accepted by the Commission in full (Amendments 4, 18, 30, 31, 32 & 35). The remaining 4 amendments (Amendments 3, 11, 20 & 33) cannot be accepted.

4.1. Amendments accepted by the Commission

* The Commission accepts amendment 4, which reinstates the Commission's initial proposal wording for the objectives of the directive laid down in article 1 ("to avoid, prevent or reduce harmful effects on human health due to exposure to noise"), in replacement of the common position's text ("to combat on a prioritised basis").

* The Commission accepts amendments 30, 31, 32 & 35, that seek to partly reintroduce technical specifications for noise mapping from the original Commission's proposal. These amendments will allow for a better protection of quiet areas while at the same time seeking compromise with the Council.

* Amendment 18 seeks to reintroduce the original deadline proposed by the Commission for provision by Member States of information on the agglomeration and infrastructures concerned by the second phase of noise mapping. The Commission can support amendment 18. However, some attention will need to be paid to the general consistency of the timetable of the directive, with a view to avoiding incoherent or inappropriate deadlines (since only this deadline was modified).

4.2. Amendments rejected by the Commission

* Amendments 3 and 33 insert in recital 4 and in article 1 new clauses making the case for proposals from the Commission, within three years from the entry into force of the directive, for "daughter directives laying down binding quality standards for all sources of emission". As already stated during the debate in Parliament, the Commission believes that it would be premature to consider setting new limit values before any noise maps have been produced - i.e. before any comparable information about noise exposure of populations across Europe is available. Besides, the expressions "quality standards" and "all sources of emission" are not defined in the particular context of the proposed directive. For these reasons, the Commission cannot accept amendments 3 and 33.

* Amendment 11 reinstates the obligation to use the common noise indicators Lden and Lnight for acoustical planing and noise zoning. The Council agreed that common indicators should be used only for the purpose of strategic noise mapping (global assessment of the noise exposure situation in Member States to which the Directive is now limited), while the evaluation of the need for more harmonisation of indicators (i.e. for acoustical planning and noise zoning) was postponed to the evaluation clause under article 11. For this reason, the Commission cannot support amendment 11.

* Amendment 20 deletes the two-phase approach for action plans for noise from roads and railways; however, this approach is kept for noise maps. This will lead to "minor" roads and railways having action plans drawn up without the information from the noise maps - whose preparation will not be compulsory in the first phase. Amendment 20 is therefore likely to introduce inconsistencies in the implementation of the directive. For this reason, the Commission cannot support amendment 20.

5. Conclusion

Pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty, the Commission amends its proposal as set out above.