Seveso III Directive compliance · Directive 2012/18/EU
Your control of major accident hazards, measured article by article and converted into a costed action plan.
10 themes, a 5-level scale. And the action that moves each level to the next.
The framework’s 10 themes, already written from L1 to L5. One company, one business unit, or 300 at once.
Seveso III Directive compliance · Directive 2012/18/EU
10 themes, 5-level scale.
Nordhavn Industries
53 / 100
They measure their maturity with Datamensio
An example
This could be your situation.
Take one company as an example: three sites, three spreadsheets, no shared answer.
Nobody can consolidate.
Nordhavn Industries, 2,400 people in Hamburg, Lyon and Porto. A client asks where the group stands. Each site answers in its own spreadsheet, with its own scales.
Three weeks, a single base.
One Directive 2012/18/EU (Seveso III) assessment launched across all three sites at once, from the managers’ interview notes. The framework was already written, its 10 themes and levels L1 to L5 too.
Two costs avoided before being committed.
A score of 53 out of 100, with the gap concentrated on three themes. The AI companion spotted that two actions duplicated those of another audit. The committee report took one sentence to request.
What it saved them
- 3sites measured on the same base, instead of three questionnaires to reconcile
- 2duplicate actions caught before the spend
- 1committee report, with no manual rework
These figures are an example. They could be yours.
The standard imposes processes. Datamensio says where you stand.
01
The framework is already written
Themes, questions and levels L1 to L5, all written. You do not start from an empty spreadsheet.
02
The score lands the same day
Online, by self-assessment link or in interview. Theme by theme, comparable over time.
03
The gap becomes a costed plan
Every step up carries its action. The AI prioritises on expected effect, not on the order of the standard.
04
Progress can be demonstrated
Campaign after campaign, against your target and against your own past. That is what your board asks for.
The maturity scale
One level, the next, and the action that links the two.
It is this mechanism, one level, the level above, and the action that connects them, that turns an inspection finding into a trajectory.
Are critical risk control measures tested, with results acted upon?
- N1
No list of critical risk control measures. Any testing that occurs falls under routine maintenance, unrelated to accident scenarios.
- N2
Critical measures are listed in the safety report. Tests are carried out, but frequencies and pass criteria vary from one unit to another.
- N3
Each critical measure has a performance criterion, a test frequency and a record. Unavailability is reported and covered by compensatory measures.
- N4
Test results feed indicators tracked in safety reviews. Repeated failures trigger a review of the barrier or the associated scenario.
- N5
Performance criteria are revised based on lessons learned at site and sector level, with traceable revisions and verification of their effect on residual risk.
Action to move from L2 to L3
Draw up a single list of critical risk control measures derived from major scenarios, attach a pass criterion and a test frequency to each, and put the review of unavailability and compensatory measures on the agenda of the site’s monthly safety review.
« With Datamensio, we meet our objectives far more efficiently. The ERDF inspection services and our supervising ministry particularly appreciated an approach that gives them reliable data. »
Director, CCI 94CCI Île-de-France
« We believe this is the most suitable solution to scale our transformation project and measure impact according to our needs. »
Maja SucekChief Operating Officer, Interreg Danube
Rarely on its own
Frameworks combine. Put several together to cover your business, or have the AI write yours.
Take your first measurementon SEVESO.
What this framework covers
Directive 2012/18/EU, known as Seveso III, has applied since 1 June 2015. It classifies establishments according to the quantities of dangerous substances present, as lower-tier or upper-tier, and scales obligations accordingly: notification to the competent authority, major accident prevention policy, and, for upper-tier sites, a safety report, safety management system, internal emergency plan and public information. It also requires the identification of domino effects and consideration of natural hazards.
In practice, the difficulty is not knowing the obligations but knowing where the set-up genuinely stands between two inspections. Is the safety report consistent with the installation as it actually operates today, after successive modifications? Are the risk control measures identified as critical actually tested, with results acted upon? Do internal emergency plan exercises produce corrective actions tracked through to closure, or a report filed away?
One confusion comes up often: Seveso III falls under environmental law, transposed in France into the hazardous installations regime, not labour law. ATEX obligations, Directive 89/391/EEC or Directive 92/104/EEC concern worker protection and coexist with Seveso without replacing it. Another point to watch is the alignment of Seveso classification with the CLP Regulation: a change in a substance’s classification or a shift in stock can push an establishment from lower-tier to upper-tier without any process change.
The hazardous installations inspection works on compliance: a requirement is either met or flagged as a finding. The maturity assessment answers a different question. It places each practice on a progressive scale, from a documented set-up to a proven and continuously improved practice, and points to the precise action that moves it up a level. The two are complementary: the assessment prepares for the inspection and structures the improvement programme, the inspection checks.
The framework is ready to use in Datamensio. You can adapt it to your set-up, whether a single site, a multi-operator platform or a portfolio of establishments: the AI adjusts the themes, questions and levels, or builds a variant from your safety reports, your safety management system and your inspection reports.
Reference standard: Directive 2012/18/EU (Seveso III)
The themes assessed
Substance inventory and classification
Inventory of dangerous substances and their quantities, application of the aggregation rule, consistency with CLP classification, notification to the competent authority, and updates after modification.
Major accident prevention policy
Formalisation of the document, management commitment, prevention objectives, roll-out on the ground, periodic review and consistency with group policy.
Safety management system
Organisation and responsibilities, hazard identification and assessment, operational control, management of modifications, lessons-learned management, performance monitoring, audits and management reviews.
Safety report and accident scenarios
Identification of hazardous phenomena, quantification of effects, probability and severity, mapping of effect zones, updates after modification or new knowledge.
Risk control measures
Technical and organisational barriers, performance criteria, testing and maintenance, traceability of unavailability, compensatory measures.
Domino effects and external hazards
Identification of neighbouring establishments, information exchange, consideration of floods, earthquakes and other natural hazards, security-related risks.
Emergency plans and crisis management
Internal emergency plan, coordination with the external emergency plan, firefighting resources and containment of firefighting water, exercises, training of response teams, follow-up on exercise outcomes.
Public information and consultation
Availability of required information, informing populations within effect zones, public participation in decisions, transparency of accident and incident data.
Accident notification and lessons learned
Detection and qualification of events, reporting to the authority, root cause analysis, dissemination of lessons, follow-up on corrective actions through to closure.
Land-use planning and control of urbanisation
Consideration of effect zones in planning documents, easements, dialogue with local authorities, monitoring of projects near the establishment.
A short version of the framework is available for the online self-assessment.
Frequently asked questions
Does the assessment amount to a Seveso compliance certificate?
No. Seveso compliance is checked by the hazardous installations inspectorate, based on the safety report and site visits. Datamensio measures the maturity of your set-up, documents the gaps, and produces the action plan that prepares you for that check.
How is this different from a regulatory compliance audit?
An audit ends with a finding, the requirement is met or it is not. The assessment places the practice on five levels and points to the action that moves it up a notch. It shows what an audit does not: how solid the set-up really is over time.
Does the framework distinguish between lower-tier and upper-tier?
Yes. Obligations specific to upper-tier sites, safety report, formalised safety management system, internal emergency plan, are assessed separately. A lower-tier establishment can neutralise these themes or use them as a progression target.
How long does the assessment take?
The short version can be completed in a single session by the site’s HSE manager. The full version, run collaboratively with operations, maintenance, engineering and management, generally takes one to two weeks, most of the time going into gathering evidence.
Can the framework be adapted to our organisation?
Yes. Questions, levels and themes can be changed, and you can add your own prefectural orders or group standards. The AI can also build a variant from your safety reports and inspection reports.
How do we compare several establishments with each other?
The same framework is rolled out to each site, then scores per theme are compared across business units and over time. Individual action plans are consolidated into a cross-site roadmap, which the AI groups by priority.
How does this assessment relate to ISO 14001 or ATEX obligations?
There is significant overlap on document management, control of modifications and lessons learned. Assessments remain separate, but the cross-framework roadmap cross-references them to avoid duplicating actions.
Where is the data hosted?
In France, with OVH, backed up at Scaleway. No transfer outside the European Union. The AI models used can be selected, including from European solutions.