E-PRTR Refit evaluation and Article 17 official data review Meeting of the E-PRTR Expert Group 27 November 2014 Andreas Grangler DG Environment Unit C.3 – Air & Industrial emissions 1 1

Table of contents E-PRTR Article 17 official data review E-PRTR REFIT evaluation E-PRTR / IE Expert Group workshop 14 January ─ follow up Project setup – stakeholder consultation 2

E-PRTR Article 17 data review (1) Commission to review data provided (Article 7) and assess the operation of the E-PRTR Member States (MS) and other reporting countries to provide information on practice and measures taken(Article 16) regarding The reporting by operators (Article 5) QA and assessment (Article 9) Access to information (Article 10(2)) Awareness rising (Article 15) Confidentiality (Article 11) Penalties (Article 20) Questionnaire Commission Decision 2010/205/EU First reporting cycle covered years 2007-2009 First Commission report to Parliament and Council COM111(2013) 3

E-PRTR Article 17 data review (2) Second report by MS covers years 2010-2013 instead of 2010- 2012 (e.g. IEEG-4 paper sent to expert group on 30 April 2014) Questionnaire the same as first reporting cycle (2010/205/EU) Deadline 30 Sept 2014, so far reports from 23 Member States available Next steps: Review of data provided 2010-2013 and assess the Article 16 reports - 2015 Report to Parliament and Council - 2016 4

E-PRTR REFIT evaluation (1) Ex-post evaluation to verify, whether the expected results and impacts of EU-regulation have been achieved  is the E-PRTR fit for purpose? Commissions “Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme” (REFIT), objectives: Check if fit for purpose against needs/objectives Simplify legislation Cut red tape, reduce administrative burden and costs E-PRTR selected to be evaluated1 in 2015 1Communication “Regulatory Fitness and Performance (REFIT): results and next steps” COM(2013)685 5

E-PRTR REFIT evaluation (2) More information http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/refit/index_en.htm 6

Streamlining reporting E-PRTR / IE Expert Group workshop 14 January ─ follow up IEEG-3 paper IEEG Meeting 13 June 2013 Comments Implementing Decision IED 2012/795/EU Annex I (2014) Annex II (2017) OJ L 349 p.57 19.12.2012 IEEG/E-PRTR workshop 14 Jan 2014 IEEG-4 paper IEEG Meeting 6 May2014 2012 2013 2014 7

1 2 3 Integration Web form Web form Web form 8 Article 17 official data review 1 2 3 Integration Web form Web form Web form 8

Interim summary Because of synergies, consolidate in one single project: Article 17 official review – project 2015 E-PRTR REFIT evaluation – project 2015 Further analysis on streamlining reporting 3 9

Project setup 2015 E-PRTR REFIT Evaluation Criteria: Effectiveness Efficiency Coherence Relevance EU-added value Public Consultation Spring 2015 Triennial Article 17 review Assessment of the implementation (Article 16) Analysis of the use and users of E-PRTR data Scope analysis Final reports Stakeholder Consultation Literature Stakeholder Workshop Sep/Oct 2015 2015 10

Objectives of the E-PRTR (exemplarily) Public access to information Participation in environmental affairs Improve environmental performance Promote transparency and accountability in the sphere of the environment Better knowledge of pollution/exposure to pollutants 11

Effectiveness (exemplarily) Were the initial expectations on the E-PRTR achieved? What other factors contributed to the changes? What unexpected / unintended changes resulting from the Regulation can be identified? 12

Efficiency (exemplarily) To what extent is the effort / are the costs justified compared to the benefits? If identified, what exactly is causing inefficiencies? Costs in comparison to other reporting measures? Evidence for simplification / streamlining? 13

Coherence (exemplarily) Evidence to make the Regulation clearer and easier to understand? Is the Regulation coherent internally? External coherence with other applicable regulations in the field of reporting on industrial emissions/installations? 14

Relevance (exemplarily) Do the objectives of the Regulation still correspond to the current needs within the EU? Are there obsolete, unnecessary or missing provisions or gaps in the Regulation? Has the Regulation (and the website) adapted to technical and scientific progress? Are there any new needs to be addressed? 15

Relevance (exemplarily) Do the objectives of the Regulation still correspond to the current needs within the EU? Are there obsolete, unnecessary or missing provisions or gaps in the Regulation? Has the Regulation (and the website) adapted to technical and scientific progress? Are there any new needs to be addressed? 16

EU-added value (exemplarily) Overall perception of the E-PRTR among stakeholders and citizens? What is the additional value resulting from the E-PRTR Regulation, compared to what could be achieved at national levels? Do the issues addressed by the Regulation continue to require action at EU level? 17

Thank you very much! DG ENV C.3 (E-PRTR) http://prtr.ec.europa.eu/ http://ec.europa.eu/environment/industry/stationary /eper/implementation.htm Andreas.Grangler@ec.europa.eu +32-2-29-66700