Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-002345/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Valentina Palmisano (The Left)
Local environmental associations are complaining about the serious disparities in how the stakeholders involved in the approval process for the Acciaierie d’Italia steelworks’ integrated environmental permit (IEP) are being treated. These groups claim that they were not officially sent the final investigation opinion for the IEP (which contains 477 technical specifications), even though they are formally part of the approval procedure and had, in this capacity, previously submitted specific comments.
The final investigation opinion was, however, sent to the plant’s operator, who was in a position to study it and propose changes, therefore exerting a clear influence on the drafting of the final opinion. The environmental associations claim that they have received neither the first nor the second PIC, nor plant management’s proposals, thus preventing them from putting forward any arguments and playing an effective role in the approval process.
In the light of Directive 2010/75/EU on industrial emissions and the Aarhus Convention, both of which guarantee the right to public participation and transparency in environmental proceedings:
- 1.Is the Commission aware of the state of affairs described above?
- 2.Does it think that the Taranto steelworks’ EIP approval procedure has been carried in accordance with EU law?
- 3.Will the Commission check whether Italy is complying with its obligations under Directive 2010/75/EU and the Aarhus Convention?
Submitted: 11.6.2025