C-396/00
ECLI:EU:C:2001:679
- Súd
- Súdny dvor Európskej únie
- IČS
- 62000CC0396
- Zdroj
- eur-lex.europa.eu ↗
COMMISSION v ITALY
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL JACOBS delivered on 11 December 2001 '
1. In this case, brought pursuant to considered "sensitive areas" as defined Article 226 EC, the Commission alleges under Article 5, Member States shall ensure that the Italian Republic has infringed that collection systems are provided at the Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May latest by 31 December 1998 for agglomer- 1991 concerning urban waste water treat- ations of more than 10 000 p.e.' 3 ment. 2 The infringement alleged by the Commission concerns discharges of urban waste water of the city of Milan.
5. Article 4 lays down general rules govern- ing the urban waste water covered by the Directive. 2. The objective of the Directive, according to Article 1, is to protect the environment from the adverse effects of waste water discharges. 6. Article 5 of the Directive provides as follows:
3. Article 2(1) of the Directive defines 'urban waste water' as 'domestic waste ' 1 . For the purposes of paragraph 2, water or the mixture of domestic waste Member States shall by 31 December 1993 water with industrial waste water and/or identify sensitive areas according to the run-off rain water'. criteria laid down in Annex II.
4. Article 3(1), second subparagraph, pro- 2. Member States shall ensure that urban vides that: 'For urban waste water dis- waste water entering collecting systems charging into receiving waters which are shall before discharge into sensitive areas
3 — 1 p.c. {population equivalent) is defined in Article 2(6) as 1 — Original language: English. 'the organic biodegradable load having a five-day biochemi- 2 — OJ 1991 L 135, p. 40. cal oxygen demand (BOD5) of 60 g of oxygen per day'.
I - 3951
OPINION OF MR JACOBS — CASE C-396/00
be subject to more stringent treatment than 8. A Member State does not have to that described in Article 4, by 31 De- identify sensitive areas for the purpose of cember 1998 at the latest for all discharges this Directive if it implements the treatment from agglomerations of more than 10 000 established under paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 p.e. over all its territory.'
3. Discharges from urban waste water 7. By Decree 152 of 11 May 1999 the treatment plants described in paragraph 2 Italian Republic identified as sensitive shall satisfy the relevant requirements of areas, among others, the Po delta and the Annex I B. These requirements may be coastal areas of the north-west Adriatic amended in accordance with the procedure from the mouth of the Adige to Pesaro and laid down in Article 18. the water-courses which flow into them over a distance of 10 kilometres from the coast.
4. Alternatively, requirements for individ- ual plants set out in paragraphs 2 and 3 above need not apply in sensitive areas 8. Before the adoption of that Decree by where it can be shown that the minimum the Italian authorities, the Commission had percentage of reduction of the overall load asked the Italian Government for infor- entering all urban waste water treatment mation on progress in the collection and plants in that area is at least 75% for total treatment of urban waste water of Milan. It phosphorus and at least 75% for total its reply the Italian Government referred to nitrogen. a project for the construction of three treatment plants covering 95% of the waste. The Commission concluded from that reply that the conurbation of Milan had no treatment plant for urban waste water, so that the waste from about 2 700 000 inhabitants flowed, without 5. Discharges from urban waste water prior treatment, into the Lambro-Olona treatment plants which are situated in the river system, a tributary of the River Po, relevant catchment areas of sensitive areas which in turn flowed into the Adriatic in an and which contribute to the pollution of area which was very polluted. these areas shall be subject to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4.
9. By letter dated 30 April 1999 the Com- mission formally gave notice of a possible infringement of Article 5(2) of the Direc-
I - 3952
COMMISSION v ITALY
tive consisting of the failure to subject the an equivalent treatment prescribed by urban waste water of Milan to more Article 4 of the Directive. stringent treatment than secondary treat- ment. The Italian authorities contested the allegation, inter alia on the ground that there was no obligation to subject the waste to a more stringent treatment since the water did not pass, or did not pass directly, to an area identified as sensitive by the 12. In its defence the Italian Republic relies Decree. on a single argument, which is in essence that the urban waste water of Milan is not discharged directly into a sensitive area. According to the Italian Government, the fact that the waste water is discharged into the Lambro-Olona river complex, a tribu- tary of the Po which in turn flows into the Adriatic in a very polluted area, is beside 10. Finding that response unsatisfactory, the point. The River Po itself has not been the Commission delivered a reasoned identified as a sensitive area for the whole opinion on 21 January 2000. In their reply of its length but only at its delta, more than to that opinion the Italian authorities 300 kilometres from Milan. None the less maintained their position and announced the Government points out that steps are that a declaration of a state of emergency being taken to advance the construction of had been requested which would make the three treatment plants. possible a simplified procedure for the construction of the three treatment plants envisaged for Milan.
13. The Commission had anticipated the Italian Government's argument and con- tends in its application that the argument 11. In its application, lodged at the Court runs counter to the clear terms of the on 26 October 2000, the Commission Directive. The argument assumes that, contends that the Italian Republic has according to the Directive, it is legitimate failed to fulfil its obligations under to exclude from any treatment the waste Article 5(2) of the Directive by not ensur- from a large city such as Milan merely ing that by 31 December 1998 at the latest because the waste is not discharged directly the discharges of urban waste water of the into a sensitive area. According to the city of Milan, located within a basin flow- Commission, however, it is clear from ing into the areas of the delta of the River Article 5(2) and (5) of the Directive that Po and the north-west coast of the Adriatic all waste water from agglomerations of Sea — areas defined by Decree 152 of the more than 10 000 p.e. — therefore includ- Italian Republic of 11 May 1999 as sensi- ing Milan — which is discharged into a tive within the meaning of Article 5 of the sensitive area had to be subject, no later Directive — were subjected to more strin- than 31 December 1998, to a more strin- gent treatment than secondary treatment or- gent treatment.
I - 3953
OPINION OF MR JACOBS — CASE C-396/00
14. In my opinion the Commission's con- collecting systems shall before discharge tention is clearly right inasmuch as it can into sensitive areas be subject to more make no difference in my view whether the stringent treatment than that described in waste is discharged directly or indirectly Article 4. Those provisions make no dis- into a sensitive area. Article 3(1), second tinction between direct and indirect dis- subparagraph, refers to urban waste waters charge. Moreover to introduce such a discharging into receiving waters which are distinction would clearly defeat the objec- considered sensitive areas, and Article 5(2) tive of the Directive. requires that urban waste water entering
Conclusion
15. Accordingly the Court should in my opinion:
(1) declare that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(2) of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste water treatment by not ensuring that by 31 December 1998 at the latest the discharges of urban waste water of the city of Milan, located within a basin flowing into the areas of the delta of the River Po and the north-west coast of the Adriatic Sea — areas defined by Decree 152 of the Italian Republic of 11 May 1999 as sensitive within the meaning of Article 5 of the Directive — were subjected to more stringent treatment than second- ary treatment or an equivalent treatment prescribed by Article 4 of the Directive;
(2) order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.
I - 3954