opinion parliamentary committee, 14 July 2026
On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2008/98/EC, 2010/75/EU, (EU) 2015/2193 and (EU) 2024/1785 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards simplification of some requirements and reduction of administrative burden
Document ITRE-AD-787849 · (COM(2025)0986 – C100336/2025 – 2025/0394(COD))
Committee on Industry, Research and Energy · Rapporteur: Jüri Ratas
AI:In short
The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy gives its opinion on the Commission proposal to simplify environmental directives. It proposes amendments to cut administrative burden, remove the environmental management system obligation, and simplify rules on best available techniques and derogations. The amendments delete the EMS obligation and related recitals, remove the chemicals inventory and transformation plan requirements, and extend permit reconsideration from 4 to 8 years. They introduce a presumption that costs are disproportionate where they exceed 10 % of total capital investment cost, and set a 10 % cost difference threshold for the strictest end of the BAT-AEL range. They also extend crisis derogations to six months, allow Member States 12 months to comply, and require a Commission evaluation by 30 June 2027.
Position. The committee proposes targeted amendments to simplify environmental legislation, reduce administrative burden, remove the EMS obligation, and introduce a presumption of disproportionality for derogations, while preserving environmental objectives.
Key points
- The rapporteur welcomes the Commission proposal but says it does not reach the ambition needed for the Union's simplification and competitiveness goals.
- The opinion aims to reduce administrative burden, simplify environmental management system requirements, remove duplicative obligations and allow flexibility in timelines, while preserving environmental objectives.
- It seeks to strengthen legal certainty by clarifying best available techniques rules and creating a presumption of disproportionality between costs and environmental benefits, drawing on the Net-Zero Industry Act.
- Amendment 1 adds to Recital 4 that digital solutions should be promoted to streamline procedures and reduce administrative burden.
- Amendments 2 to 8 delete the environmental management system obligation and related recitals, including the chemicals inventory, audit and transformation plan requirements.
- Amendment 11 requires the European Chemicals Agency to keep data accessible to waste treatment operators.
- Amendment 12 sets an eight-year review cycle for BAT reference documents, with each exchange of information not exceeding four years.
- Amendments 13 to 17 delete several points in Article 14 of Directive 2010/75/EU, including paragraph 4.
- Amendments 19 and 20 require emission limit values to take into account the entire BAT-AEL range and not exceed the lenient end, with a 10 % cost difference presumed unreasonable.
- Amendments 22 and 24 allow derogations where costs exceed 10 % of total capital investment cost, and extend crisis derogations to six months, renewable once.
- Amendments 26 and 28 extend permit reconsideration from 4 to 8 years and set indicative emission limit values for emerging techniques within 6 years.
- Amendments 30 and 31 give Member States 12 months to comply and require a Commission evaluation by 30 June 2027, including a review of environmental legislation's impact on competitiveness.
Who is affected
- Operators, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, which face complex reporting and procedural requirements.
- Competent authorities, which assess costs and environmental benefits and may rebut the presumption of disproportionality.
- Member States, which must bring into force compliance laws within 12 months.
- The European Chemicals Agency, which must keep data accessible to waste treatment operators.
- The Commission, which must carry out an evaluation by 30 June 2027.
Figures and deadlines
- 10 % cost difference for achieving the strictest end of the BAT-AEL range presumed unreasonable.
- 10 % of total capital investment cost threshold for presumption of disproportionate costs.
- Crisis derogation not granted for more than six months, renewable for a maximum of six months.
- Permit conditions reconsidered within 8 years of publication of BAT conclusions.
- Indicative emission limit values for emerging techniques within 6 years of publication of BAT conclusions.
- Member States must comply with the Directive by 12 months from entry into force.
- Commission evaluation by 30 June 2027.
- Emission limit value not applicable to combustion plants firing gas with more than 5 % hydrogen.
Written by AI from the full text · every figure comes from the text · ¶ opens the paragraph · 25 Sept 2026 · Report a problem
Full text
Jump to an amendment (48)
- Amendment 1
- Amendment 2
- Amendment 3
- Amendment 4
- Amendment 5
- Amendment 6
- Amendment 7
- Amendment 8
- Amendment 9
- Amendment 10
- Amendment 11
- Amendment 12
- Amendment 13
- Amendment 14
- Amendment 15
- Amendment 16
- Amendment 17
- Amendment 18
- Amendment 19
- Amendment 20
- Amendment 21
- Amendment 22
- Amendment 23
- Amendment 24
- Amendment 25
- Amendment 26
- Amendment 27
- Amendment 28
- Amendment 29
- Amendment 30
- Amendment 31
- Amendment 32
- Amendment 33
- Amendment 34
- Amendment 35
- Amendment 36
- Amendment 37
- Amendment 38
- Amendment 39
- Amendment 40
- Amendment 41
- Amendment 42
- Amendment 43
- Amendment 44
- Amendment 45
- Amendment 46
- Amendment 47
- Amendment 48
Short justification 285 paragraphs
The rapporteur welcomes the Commission’s proposal and its objective to streamline and simplify the implementation of environmental legislation while maintaining a high level of environmental protection. However, the proposal does not yet reach the level of ambition needed to fully deliver on the Union’s simplification and competitiveness goals. Further improvements are therefore necessary to ensure that the framework becomes more proportionate, workable and futureproof.
Against this background, the ITRE opinion introduces targeted and pragmatic adjustments to the Commission proposal. These changes aim to reduce unnecessary administrative burden and complexity, in particular by significantly simplifying the approach to environmental management system requirements, removing duplicative or outdated obligations, and allowing greater flexibility in implementation timelines. This is intended to facilitate compliance for operators, especially small and mediumsized enterprises, which are disproportionately affected by complex reporting and procedural requirements. At the same time, the opinion preserves the core environmental objectives of the legislation.
The opinion also strengthens legal certainty and regulatory predictability by clarifying key provisions related to the application of Best Available Techniques (BAT) and by establishing a more operational and transparent framework for derogations. In particular, the introduction of a presumption of disproportionality between costs and environmental benefits ensures that requirements remain realistic and economically viable in practice. The proposed disproportionality principle in Article 15(5), including the presumption threshold, draws on a comparable approach under the NetZero Industry Act, thereby ensuring coherence with existing Union legislation and supporting a stable and predictable investment environment.
Overall, the draft opinion reflects a balanced approach that combines simplification, flexibility and legal clarity. It seeks to ensure that environmental legislation remains effective and ambitious, while being better adapted to economic and technological realities and more conducive to competitiveness, innovation and sustainable growth.
AMENDMENTS
The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy submits the following to the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, as the committee responsible:
Amendment 1
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (4) In the context of the Commission’s commitment to reduce reporting burdens and compliance costs, advance interoperability, and enhance competitiveness, it is necessary to adapt certain provisions in Directives 2008/98/EC8 , 2010/75/EU9 , (EU) 2015/219310 and (EU) 2024/178511 of the European Parliament and of the Council whilst maintaining the policy objectives of the European Green Deal, and the Sustainable Finance Action Plan12 . | (4) In the context of the Commission’s commitment to reduce reporting burdens and compliance costs, advance interoperability, and enhance competitiveness, it is necessary to adapt certain provisions in Directives 2008/98/EC8 , 2010/75/EU9 , (EU) 2015/219310 and (EU) 2024/178511 of the European Parliament and of the Council whilst maintaining the policy objectives of the European Green Deal, and the Sustainable Finance Action Plan12 . The use of digital solutions, designed to ensure appropriate protection of confidential business information and data security, is to be promoted wherever possible to streamline procedures, improve data quality and availability, and reduce administrative burden for operators and competent authorities. |
| 8 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/98/oj). | 8 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/98/oj). |
| 9 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, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2010/75/oj). | 9 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, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2010/75/oj). |
| 10 Directive (EU) 2015/2193 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from medium combustion plants (OJ L 313, 28.11.2015, p.1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2015/2193/oj). | 10 Directive (EU) 2015/2193 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from medium combustion plants (OJ L 313, 28.11.2015, p.1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2015/2193/oj). |
| 11 Directive (EU) 2024/1785 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 April 2024 amending Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) and Council Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste (OJ L, 2024/1785, 15.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1785/oj). | 11 Directive (EU) 2024/1785 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 April 2024 amending Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) and Council Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste (OJ L, 2024/1785, 15.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1785/oj). |
| 12 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 8 March 2018, ‘Action Plan: Financing Sustainable Growth’, COM/2018/097 final. | 12 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 8 March 2018, ‘Action Plan: Financing Sustainable Growth’, COM/2018/097 final. |
Amendment 2
Proposal for a directive
Read the rest (273 paragraphs)
Recital 7
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (7) With a view to simplifying requirements on operators and companies, and reduce the administrative burden stemming from the preparation of the environmental management system (‘EMS’) pursuant to Article 14a of Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council14 while maintaining equivalent standards as regards the protection of human health and the environment, it is appropriate to allow, under certain conditions, several installations to be covered by a single EMS. Where, in a Member State, two or more installations are under the control of the same operator, or if the installations are under the control of different operators but belong to the same company which is formed in accordance with the legislation of a Member State, those installations may be covered by a single EMS. | (7) In order to simplify requirements on operators and companies, and reduce the administrative burden stemming from the preparation of the environmental management system (‘EMS’) pursuant to Article 14a of Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council14 while maintaining equivalent standards as regards the protection of human health and the environment, it is appropriate to remove the EMS obligation. |
| 14 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, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2010/75/oj). | 14 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, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2010/75/oj). |
Amendment 3
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (8) To ensure greater consistency with existing EMS schemes such as EMAS or ISO 14001, which can be implemented at facility or company level, operators should be able to adjust the organisational level of the EMS according to the nature, scale and complexity of their installations (installation, facility or company level). | deleted |
Amendment 4
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (9) With a view to simplifying requirements on operators and reducing their administrative burden, the requirements set out in Article 14a of Directive 2010/75/EU for operators to develop, as part of the installation’s EMS, a chemicals inventory of the hazardous substances present in or emitted from the installation; a risk assessment of the impact of such substances on human health and the environment, as well as an analysis of the possibilities for substituting them with safer alternatives or reducing their use or emissions should be deleted, without prejudice to, where relevant, similar requirement for a chemical inventory set under other Union legislation. | deleted |
Amendment 5
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (10) In light of Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Protocol (No 2) on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, the requirement on the Commission in Article 14a(4) of Directive 2010/75/EU to adopt by 31 December 2025 an implementing act specifying the information contained in an EMS that is relevant for publication should be deleted without prejudice to the Member States obligation to ensure that the relevant information set out in the EMS and listed in Article 14a(2) of that Directive is made available on the internet, free of charge and without restricting access to registered users; in consistency with the public’ rights to access environmental information held by, or for, public authorities, both upon request and through active dissemination. | deleted |
Amendment 6
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (11) With a view to simplifying requirements on operators and reducing their administrative burden, the requirement set out in Article 14a(4) of Directive 2010/75/EU for the EMS to be audited should be deleted as other EMS schemes such as EMAS or ISO 14001, already contain provisions regarding regular internal and external auditing. | deleted |
Amendment 7
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (12) With a view to simplifying requirements on operators and reducing their administrative burden, the requirement set out in Article 14a(4) of Directive 2010/75/EU for operators to prepare and implement an EMS by 2027 should be postponed to 2030. Such EMS should be prepared in accordance with the revised Article 14a. | deleted |
Amendment 8
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (13) With a view to simplifying requirements and reducing administrative burden stemming from the implementation of Directive 2010/75/EU, the requirement set out in Article 27d of that Directive that Member States should require from operators by 30 June 2030 the inclusion in their EMS an indicative transformation plan should be deleted. References to transformation plans and to Article 27d which are present in Article 14a(2) point (f), and Articles 27e and 76 of Directive 2010/75/EU need to be deleted accordingly. | deleted |
Amendment 9
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (15a) In order to simplify and enhance legal certainty in the application of derogations from emission levels associated with the best available techniques, it is appropriate to introduce in Directive 2010/75/EU, in clearly defined circumstances, a rebuttable presumption that the costs of achieving such emission levels are disproportionate to the corresponding environmental benefits. |
Amendment 10
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (20a) In order to reduce administrative burden for both operators and competent authorities and to enhance regulatory predictability, it should be appropriate to extend the interval for the reconsideration of permit conditions under Directive 2010/75/EU. |
Amendment 11
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b
Directive 2008/98/EC
Article 9 – paragraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The European Chemicals Agency shall maintain the data submitted to it pursuant to paragraph 1, point (ia). | 2. The European Chemicals Agency shall maintain the data submitted to it pursuant to paragraph 1, point (ia), and shall ensure that such data remain accessible to waste treatment operators. |
Amendment 12
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 13 – paragraph 1
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (-1) in Article 13, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: | |
| 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 human health or environmental protection, the European Chemicals Agency and the Commission. That exchange of information shall aim at an eight-year review cycle of BAT reference documents prioritising the documents that have the highest potential to improve the protection of human health or the environment. The duration of the exchange of information referred to in the first subparagraph shall not exceed four years for each individual BAT reference document. | "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 the European Chemicals Agency and the Commission. That exchange of information shall aim at an eight-year review cycle of BAT reference documents prioritising the documents that have the highest potential to improve the protection of human health or the environment. The duration of the exchange of information referred to in the first subparagraph shall not exceed four years for each individual BAT reference document. |
(Directive 2010/75/EU)
Amendment 13
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point -1 a – point a – point i (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point aa
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (-1a)– Article 14 is amended as follows: | |
| (a) paragraph 1 is amended as follows: | |
| (i) point (aa) is deleted; |
Amendment 14
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point -1 a – point a – point ii (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – points ba and bb
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ii) points (ba) and (bb) are deleted; |
Amendment 15
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point -1 a – point a – point iii (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point d – point iii
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iii) in point (d), point (iii) is deleted; |
Amendment 16
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point -1 a – point a – point iv (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – point h
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iv) point (h) is replaced by the following: | |
| (h) conditions for assessing compliance with the emission limit values and environmental performance limit values or a reference to the applicable requirements specified elsewhere. | ‘(h) conditions for assessing compliance with the emission limit values or a reference to the applicable requirements specified elsewhere.’; |
Amendment 17
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point -1 a – point b (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 14 – paragraph 4
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) paragraph 4 is deleted. |
Amendment 18
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 14a
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) Article 14a is replaced by the following: | (1) Article 14a is deleted. |
| [...] |
Amendment 19
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a – point a – point i (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1a) Article 15 is amended as follows: | |
| (a) paragraph 3 is amended as follows: | |
| (i) in first subparagraph, the introductory wording is replaced by the following: | |
| 3. The competent authority shall set the strictest achievable emission limit values by applying BAT in the installation, considering the entire range of the emission levels associated with the best available techniques (“BAT-AELs”) to ensure that, under normal operating conditions, emissions do not exceed the 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 of the entire BAT-AEL range, analysing the feasibility of meeting the strictest end of the BAT-AEL range and demonstrating the best overall performance that the installation can achieve by applying BAT as described in BAT conclusions, having regard to possible cross-media effects. The emission limit values shall be set through either of the following: | ‘3. The competent authority shall set emission limit values, taking into account the entire range of the emission levels associated with the best available techniques (“BAT-AELs”) to ensure that, under normal operating conditions, emissions do not exceed the lenient end of the 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 of the entire BAT-AEL range, analysing the feasibility of meeting the strictest end of the BAT-AEL range and demonstrating the best overall performance that the installation can reasonably achieve by applying BAT as described in BAT conclusions, having regard to possible cross-media effects. A cost difference of more than 10 % for achieving the strictest end of the BAT-AEL range vis-à-vis the lenient end of the BAT-AEL range shall be presumed unreasonable. The emission limit values shall be set through either of the following:’; |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 20
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a – point a – point ii (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ii) the second subparagraph is replaced by the following: | |
| Where the emission limit values are set in accordance with point (b), the competent authority shall, at least annually, assess the results of emission monitoring in order to ensure that emissions under normal operating conditions have not exceeded the BAT-AELs. | ‘Where the emission limit values are set in accordance with point (b), the competent authority shall, at least annually, assess the results of emission monitoring in order to ensure that emissions under normal operating conditions have not exceeded the lenient end of the BAT-AELs.’ |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 21
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1a – point b (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 15 – paragraph 4
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) paragraph 4 is deleted. |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 22
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a – point c (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 15 – paragraph 5
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (c) paragraph 5 is replaced by the following: | |
| 5. By way of derogation from paragraph 3, and without prejudice to Article 18, the competent authority may, in specific cases, set emission limit values higher than the BAT-AELs. Such a derogation may apply only where an assessment shows that the achievement of BAT-AELs as described in BAT conclusions would lead to disproportionately higher costs compared to the environmental benefits due to: | "5. By way of derogation from paragraph 3, and without prejudice to Article 18, the competent authority may set emission limit values higher than the BAT-AELs. Such a derogation may apply where an assessment shows that the achievement of BAT-AELs as described in BAT conclusions would lead to disproportionately higher costs compared to the environmental benefits due to: |
| (a) the geographical location or the local environmental conditions of the installation concerned; or | (a) the geographical location or the local environmental conditions of the installation concerned; or |
| (b) the technical characteristics of the installation concerned. The competent authority shall document in an annex to the permit conditions the reasons for derogating from paragraph 3, and the result of the assessment referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph and the justification for the conditions imposed. | (b) the technical characteristics of the installation concerned. |
| For the purposes of this paragraph, disproportionately higher costs shall be presumed where the incremental costs of achieving the emission levels associated with the applicable BAT conclusions exceed 10 % of the total capital investment cost of the transformation project concerned, as documented in the permit application. The operator shall not be required to demonstrate disproportionality by further assessment where the threshold is met. The competent authority may rebut the presumption only where it establishes, on the basis of objective evidence, that the environmental benefits of compliance with the BAT-associated emissions levels would substantially outweigh the incremental compliance costs in the specific circumstances of the installation concerned. | |
| The competent authority shall document in an annex to the permit conditions the reasons for derogating from paragraph 3, and the result of the assessment referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph and the justification for the conditions imposed. | |
| The emission limit values set in accordance with the first subparagraph shall, however, not exceed the emission limit values set out in the Annexes to this Directive, where applicable. | |
| Derogations granted in accordance with this paragraph shall respect the principles set out in Annex II. The competent authority shall ensure that the operator provides an assessment of the impact of the derogation on the concentration of the pollutants concerned in the receiving environment and in any case ensure that no significant pollution is caused and that a high level of protection of the environment as a whole is achieved. Derogations shall not be granted where they could put at risk compliance with environmental quality standards referred to in Article 18. | Derogations granted in accordance with this paragraph shall respect the principles set out in Annex II. The competent authority shall ensure that the operator provides an assessment of the impact of the derogation on the concentration of the pollutants concerned in the receiving environment and in any case ensure that no significant pollution is caused and that a high level of protection of the environment as a whole is achieved. |
| The competent authority shall re-assess whether derogations granted in accordance with this paragraph are justified, every four years or as part of each reconsideration of the permit conditions pursuant to Article 21, where such reconsideration occurs earlier than four years after the derogation was granted. | The competent authority shall re-assess whether derogations granted in accordance with this paragraph are justified, every four years or as part of each reconsideration of the permit conditions pursuant to Article 21, where such reconsideration occurs earlier than four years after the derogation was granted. |
| The Commission shall adopt an implementing act to establish a standardised methodology for assessing the disproportionality between the costs of implementation of the BAT conclusions and the potential environmental benefits referred to in the first subparagraph. That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 75(2). | The Commission shall adopt an implementing act to establish a standardised methodology for assessing the disproportionality between the costs of implementation of the BAT conclusions and the potential environmental benefits referred to in the first subparagraph. That implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 75(2). |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 23
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a – point d (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 15 – paragraph 6
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (d) paragraph 6 is deleted; |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 24
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a – point e (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 15 – paragraph 7
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (e) paragraph 7 is replaced by the following: | |
| 7. By way of derogation from paragraphs 3 and 4, and provided that no significant pollution is caused and all measures resulting in less pollution have been exhausted, the competent authority may set less strict emission limit values or environmental performance limit values in the event of a crisis due to extraordinary circumstances beyond the control of the operator and Member States, leading to a severe disruption or shortage of: | "7. By way of derogation from paragraphs 3 and 4 the competent authority may set less strict emission limit values in the event of a crisis due to extraordinary circumstances beyond the control of the operator and Member States, leading to a severe disruption or shortage of: |
| (a) energy supplies, provided that there is an overriding public interest in security of energy supply; | (a) energy supplies, provided that there is an overriding public interest in security of energy supply; |
| (b) resources, materials or equipment essential for the operator to perform activities of public interest, in compliance with the applicable emission limit values or environmental performance limit values; or | (b) resources, materials or equipment essential for the operator to perform activities of public interest, in compliance with the applicable emission limit values; or |
| (c) essential resources, materials or equipment where the production output compensates for such shortage or disruption, for reasons of public health or public safety or for other imperative reasons of overriding public interest. | (c) essential resources, materials or equipment where the production output compensates for such shortage or disruption, for reasons of public health or public safety or for other imperative reasons of overriding public interest. |
| The derogation shall not be granted for more than three months. If the reasons justifying the granting of a derogation persist, the derogation may be prolonged for a maximum period of three months. As soon as the supply conditions are restored or where there is an alternative to the energy supplies, resources, materials or equipment, the Member State shall ensure that the decision to set less strict emission limit values and environmental performance limit values ceases to have effect, and the installation shall comply with permit conditions set in accordance with paragraphs 3 and 4. The Member States shall take measures to ensure that emissions resulting from the derogation referred to in the first subparagraph are monitored. The competent authority shall make information on the derogation and the conditions imposed publicly available in accordance with Article 24 (2). | The derogation shall not be granted for more than six months. If the reasons justifying the granting of a derogation persist, the derogation may be prolonged for a maximum period of six months. As soon as the supply conditions are restored or where there is an alternative to the energy supplies, resources, materials or equipment, the Member State shall ensure that the decision to set less strict emission limit values ceases to have effect, and the installation shall comply with permit conditions set in accordance with paragraphs 3 and 4. The Member States shall take measures to ensure that emissions resulting from the derogation referred to in the first subparagraph are monitored. The competent authority shall make information on the derogation and the conditions imposed publicly available in accordance with Article 24 (2). |
| The Commission may, where necessary, assess and further clarify, through guidance, the criteria to be taken into account for the application of this paragraph. Member States shall notify the Commission of any derogation granted under this paragraph, including the reasons justifying the granting of the derogation and the conditions imposed. The Commission shall assess whether the derogation granted is justified having due regard to the criteria set in this paragraph. If the Commission raises objections within 2 months of the notification by the Member State, the Member States shall without delay revise the derogation accordingly. | The Commission may, where necessary, assess and further clarify, through guidance, the criteria to be taken into account for the application of this paragraph. Member States shall notify the Commission of any derogation granted under this paragraph, including the reasons justifying the granting of the derogation and the conditions imposed. |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 25
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 b (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 18
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1b) Article 18 is replaced by the following: | |
| Article 18 | ‘Article 18 |
| Environmental quality standards | Environmental quality standards |
| Where an environmental quality standard requires stricter conditions than those achievable by the use of the best available techniques, additional measures shall be included in the permit, with a view to reducing the specific contribution of the installation to the pollution occurring in the relevant area, without prejudice to other measures which may be taken to comply with environmental quality standards. | "Where an environmental quality standard requires stricter conditions than those achievable by the use of the best available techniques, additional measures may be included in the permit without prejudice to other measures which may be taken to comply with environmental quality standards. |
| Where stricter conditions have been included in the permit in accordance with the first paragraph, the competent authority shall assess the impact of the stricter conditions on the concentration of the pollutants concerned in the receiving environment. | |
| Where the load of pollutants emitted by the installation has a quantifiable or measurable effect on the environment, Member States shall ensure that the concentration of the pollutants concerned in the receiving environment is monitored. The results of such monitoring shall be transmitted to the competent authority. | |
| Where monitoring and measurement methods for the pollutants concerned are set out in other relevant Union legislation, such methods, including effect-based methods as appropriate, shall be used for the purpose of the monitoring referred to in the third paragraph. |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 26
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 c (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1c) In Article 21(3), the first subparagraph is replaced by the following: | |
| 3. Within 4 years of publication of decisions on BAT conclusions in accordance with Article 13(5) relating to the main activity of an installation, the competent authority shall ensure that: | "3. Within 8 years of publication of decisions on BAT conclusions in accordance with Article 13(5) relating to the main activity of an installation, the competent authority shall ensure that: |
| (a) all the permit conditions for the installation concerned are reconsidered and, if necessary, updated to ensure compliance with this Directive, in particular, with Article 15(3), (4) and (5), where applicable; | (a) all the permit conditions for the installation concerned are reconsidered and, if necessary, updated to ensure compliance with this Directive, in particular, with Article 15(3) and (5), where applicable; |
| (b) the installation complies with those permit conditions. | (b) the installation complies with those permit conditions.’; |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 27
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 d (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 27a – paragraph 3
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1d) in Article 27a(3), first subparagraph, point g is deleted; |
Amendment 28
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 e (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Article 27c
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1e) Article 27c is replaced by the following: | |
| Article 27c | ‘Article 27c |
| Emission levels and indicative environmental performance values associated with emerging techniques | Emission levels and indicative environmental performance values associated with emerging techniques |
| By way of derogation from Article 21(3), the competent authority may set: | "By way of derogation from Article 21(3), the competent authority may set: |
| (a) 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 do not, under normal operating conditions, exceed emission levels associated with emerging techniques as laid down in the decisions on BAT conclusions; | (a) indicative 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 do not, under normal operating conditions, exceed emission levels associated with emerging techniques as laid down in the decisions on BAT conclusions.’; |
| (b) indicative environmental performance values consistent with the decisions on BAT conclusions. |
Amendment 29
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (6) Annexes I, Ia and V are amended in accordance with Annex I to this Directive. | (6) Annexes I, Ia, II and V are amended in accordance with Annex I to this Directive. |
Amendment 30
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [ 24 months from date of entry into force of this Directive] at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. | Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [ 12 months from date of entry into force of this Directive] at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions. |
Amendment 31
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article 5a | |
| Review | |
| By 30 June 2027, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of the amendments contained in this Directive and shall present a report on its main findings to the European Parliament and to the Council. Where appropriate, the report shall be accompanied by a legislative proposal. The evaluation shall, in particular, include: | |
| a) a review of the existing environmental legislation and the assessment of its impact on the competitiveness of the European industry; | |
| b) an overview of further measures to effectively simplify environmental legislation and reduce administrative burden for the European industry and European agriculture sector. |
Amendment 32
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2 a – point a (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – subparagraph –1 (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2a. Annex II to Directive 2010/75/EU is amended as follows: | |
| (a) the following subparagraph is inserted: | |
| ‘The principles set out in this Annex shall apply without prejudice to the presumption of disproportionality established in Article 15(5), third subparagraph.’; |
Amendment 33
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point b (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – subparagraph –1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) the following subparagraph is inserted: | |
| ‘The level of detail required for the assessment referred to in Article 15(5) shall be proportionate to the circumstances of the case and, where that presumption applies, shall be limited to what is necessary to verify that the conditions for its application are fulfilled.’; |
Amendment 34
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point c (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – point 1.1
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (c) point 1.1 is replaced by the following: | |
| 1.1. Costs referred to in Article 15(5) shall be the costs of complying with the emission levels associated with best available techniques and include both capital costs and operating costs. Wider social or economic costs shall not be included. | ‘1.1. Costs referred to in Article 15(5) shall be the costs of complying with the emission levels associated with best available techniques and include both capital costs and operating costs.’; |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 35
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point d (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – point 1.2
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (d) point 1.2 is replaced by the following: | |
| 1.2. The evaluation of the costs shall be quantitative, and supported by a qualitative assessment. | ‘1.2. The evaluation of the costs shall be quantitative, and supported by a qualitative assessment, unless the presumption of disproportionality referred to in Article 15(5) applies, in which case a simplified demonstration of costs shall be sufficient.’; |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 36
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point e (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – point 1.4
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (e) point 1.4 is replaced by the following: | |
| 1.4. The application for a derogation shall clearly identify the source of the costs and the methods used to calculate them, including the discount rate mentioned in point 1.3(c) and the estimation of uncertainties associated with the costs evaluation. | ‘1.4. The application for a derogation shall clearly identify the source of the costs and the methods used to calculate them. Where the presumption of disproportionality applies, the operator shall only be required to demonstrate that the threshold set out in Article 15(5) has been met.’; |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 37
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point f (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – point 1.5
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (f) point 1.5 is replaced by the following: | |
| 1.5. Costs evaluated by the operator shall be assessed by the competent authority, based on information from other sources such as technology providers, peer-reviewed research, expert judgements or data from other installations where best available techniques were recently installed. | ‘1.5. Costs evaluated by the operator shall be assessed by the competent authority. That assessment shall be proportionate and may rely on simplified methodologies where the presumption of disproportionality applies or where the environmental impact of the installation is limited.’; |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 38
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point g (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – point 2.2
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (g) point 2.2 is replaced by the following: | |
| 2.2. The evaluation of environmental benefits shall be quantitative (in monetary terms) and supported by a qualitative assessment. Established pollutant damage costs shall be used where available. | ‘2.2. The evaluation of environmental benefits shall, where appropriate, be quantitative (in monetary terms) and supported by a qualitative assessment. Where monetisation is not feasible or where the presumption of disproportionality applies, a qualitative assessment shall be sufficient. |
(2010L0075)
Amendment 39
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point h (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – point 2.4
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (h) point 2.4 is replaced by the following: | |
| 2.4. The application for a derogation shall clearly identify the source of the environmental benefits information and the methods used to calculate the environmental benefits, including the discount rate mentioned in point 1.3 (c) and the estimate of uncertainties associated with the evaluation of the environmental benefits. | ‘2.4. The application for a derogation shall clearly identify the source of the environmental benefits information and the methods used. The level of detail required shall be proportionate and may be limited where the presumption of disproportionality applies.’; |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 40
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point i (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – point 2.5
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (i) point 2.5 is replaced by the following: | |
| 2.5. Environmental benefits evaluated by the operator shall be assessed by the competent authority, based on expert judgement or data from other installations where the best available techniques were recently installed. | ‘2.5. Environmental benefits evaluated by the operator shall be assessed by the competent authority, taking into account the proportionality of the assessment and the availability of data.’; |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 41
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point j (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – point 3.1
| Present text | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (j) point 3.1 is replaced by the following: | |
| 3.1. For the purpose of determining if there is a disproportionality, the costs of complying with the emission levels associated with best available techniques, and the benefits of such compliance, shall be compared. | ‘3.1. For the purpose of determining if there is a disproportionality, the costs of complying with the emission levels associated with best available techniques, and the benefits of such compliance, shall be compared, unless disproportionality is presumed in accordance with Article 15(5).’; |
(02010L0075)
Amendment 42
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point k (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – point 3.2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (k) in point 3.2, the following subparagraph is inserted: | |
| ‘Where the presumption of disproportionality applies, the comparison mechanism may be omitted unless the competent authority seeks to rebut that presumption.’; |
Amendment 43
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point l (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – point 3.3 (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (l) the following point is added: | |
| ‘3.3 Where the competent authority seeks to rebut the presumption of disproportionality, it shall demonstrate, on the basis of objective and verifiable evidence, that: | |
| (a) the environmental benefits of compliance with the emission levels associated with best available techniques are substantial; | |
| (b) those benefits clearly outweigh the incremental costs in the specific circumstances of the installation concerned; and | |
| (c) failure to apply those emission levels would risk significant pollution or non-compliance with environmental quality standards.’; |
Amendment 44
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 2a – point m (new)
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex II – paragraph 1 a
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (m) the following paragraph is added: | |
| ‘The application of this Annex shall be proportionate to the scale, nature and environmental impact of the installation concerned.‘; |
Amendment 45
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 3 – point a – paragraph 1
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex V – PART 1 – point 6 –Footnote 5
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (5) The emission limit value is not applicable to combustion plants firing gas with more than 20 % (by volume) of hydrogen. In such case, Member States shall ensure that the overall load of NOx eventually released into the air over one year is not increased compared to the situation where the emissions from the installation concerned remained compliant with emission limit values set out in this point for NOx for the combustion of natural gas, without prejudice to stricter measures required pursuant to Article 18.; | (5) The emission limit value is not applicable to combustion plants firing gas with more than 5 % (by volume) of hydrogen. In such case, Member States shall ensure that the overall load of NOx eventually released into the air over one year is not increased compared to the situation where the emissions from the installation concerned remained compliant with emission limit values set out in this point for NOx for the combustion of natural gas, without prejudice to stricter measures required pursuant to Article 18. |
Amendment 46
Proposal for a directive
Annex I – point 3 – point b
Directive 2010/75/EU
Annex V – PART 2 – point 6
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| The emission limit value is not applicable to combustion plants firing gas with more than 20 % (by volume) of hydrogen. In such case, Member States shall ensure that the overall load of NOx eventually released into the air over one year is not increased compared to the situation where the emissions from the installation concerned remained compliant with emission limit values set out in this point for NOx , without prejudice to stricter measures required pursuant to Article 18.; | The emission limit value is not applicable to combustion plants firing gas with more than 5% (by volume) of hydrogen. In such case, Member States shall ensure that the overall load of NOx eventually released into the air over one year is not increased compared to the situation where the emissions from the installation concerned remained compliant with emission limit values set out in this point for NOx , without prejudice to stricter measures required pursuant to Article 18. |
Amendment 47
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 1 – point a
Directive (EU) 2015/2193
Annex II – part 1 – tables 1, 2 and 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (*) The emission limit value is not applicable to combustion plants firing gas with more than 20 % (by volume) of hydrogen. Member States shall ensure that the overall load of NOx eventually released into the air over one year is not increased compared to the situation where the emissions from the installation concerned remained compliant with emission limit values set out in Part 1 of Annex II for NOx for the combustion of natural gas, without prejudice to stricter measures required pursuant to Article 6 (9).; | (*) The emission limit value is not applicable to combustion plants firing gas with more than 5 % (by volume) of hydrogen. Member States shall ensure that the overall load of NOx eventually released into the air over one year is not increased compared to the situation where the emissions from the installation concerned remained compliant with emission limit values set out in Part 1 of Annex II for NOx for the combustion of natural gas, without prejudice to stricter measures required pursuant to Article 6 (9). |
Amendment 48
Proposal for a directive
Annex II – point 1 – point b
Directive (EU) 2015/2193
Annex II – part 2 – tables 1 and 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (*) The emission limit value is not applicable to combustion plants firing gas with more than 20 % (by volume) of hydrogen. Member States shall ensure that the overall load of NOx eventually released into the air over one year is not increased compared to the situation where the emissions from the installation concerned remained compliant with emission limit values set out in Part 2 of Annex II for NOx for the combustion of natural gas, without prejudice to stricter measures required pursuant to Article 6 (9).; | (*) The emission limit value is not applicable to combustion plants firing gas with more than 5 % (by volume) of hydrogen. Member States shall ensure that the overall load of NOx eventually released into the air over one year is not increased compared to the situation where the emissions from the installation concerned remained compliant with emission limit values set out in Part 2 of Annex II for NOx for the combustion of natural gas, without prejudice to stricter measures required pursuant to Article 6 (9). |
Annex: declaration of input 1 paragraph
The rapporteur for opinion declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not include in his opinion input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.
Procedure pages
How the committees handled the text, and how their members voted on it.
Procedure – committee asked for opinion 1 paragraph
| Title | Amending Directives 2008/98/EC, 2010/75/EU, (EU) 2015/2193 and (EU) 2024/1785 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards simplification of some requirements and reduction of administrative burden | |
| References | COM(2025)0986 – C10-0336/2025 – 2025/0394(COD) | |
| Committee(s) responsible Date announced in plenary | ENVI 9.2.2026 | |
| Opinion by Date announced in plenary | ITRE 9.2.2026 | |
| Rapporteur for opinion Date appointed | Jüri Ratas 17.3.2026 | |
| Discussed in committee | 3.6.2026 | |
| Date adopted | 14.7.2026 | |
| Result of final vote | +: –: 0: | 47 35 3 |
Final vote by roll call by the committee asked for opinion 3 paragraphs
47 · For
- ECR
- Alessandro Ciriani, Ondřej Krutílek, Daniel Obajtek, Diego Solier, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Beata Szydło, Francesco Torselli, Kris Van Dijck, Mariateresa Vivaldini, Anna Zalewska
- ESN
- Markus Buchheit, Siegbert Frank Droese, Marcin Sypniewski
- EPP
- Wouter Beke, Hildegard Bentele, Alexander Bernhuber, Borys Budka, Raúl de la Hoz Quintano, Christian Ehler, Jan Farský, Niels Flemming Hansen, Krzysztof Hetman, Seán Kelly, Willemien Koning, Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Angelika Niebler, Mirosława Nykiel, Virgil-Daniel Popescu, Jüri Ratas, Aura Salla, Paulius Saudargas, Matej Tonin, Dimitris Tsiodras, Marion Walsmann, Andrea Wechsler, Angelika Winzig
- Patriots
- Majbritt Birkholm, Barbara Bonte, Paolo Borchia, Jaroslav Bžoch, András Gyürk, Ondřej Knotek, Sebastian Kruis, Jana Nagyová, Aleksandar Nikolic, Julie Rechagneux, Auke Zijlstra
35 · Against
- No group
- Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă
- Renew
- Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Christophe Grudler, Martin Hojsík, Yvan Verougstraete, Emma Wiesner, Michal Wiezik
- S&D
- Annalisa Corrado, Matthias Ecke, Sofie Eriksson, Niels Fuglsang, Lina Gálvez, Jens Geier, Bruno Gonçalves, Nicolás González Casares, Giorgio Gori, Eero Heinäluoma, Dan Nica, Thomas Pellerin-Carlin, Tsvetelina Penkova, Elena Sancho Murillo, Bruno Tobback, Nicola Zingaretti
- The Left
- Marc Botenga, Per Clausen, Rudi Kennes, Jussi Saramo, Dario Tamburrano
- Greens
- Michael Bloss, Alexandra Geese, Isabella Lövin, Sara Matthieu, Ville Niinistö, Jutta Paulus, Villy Søvndal
3 · Abstained
- Renew
- João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Morten Løkkegaard, Ana Vasconcelos