WFD CIS Working Group Meeting Brussels, 4/4/2019

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
© European Communities, 2007 Purpose The European Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Bureau (European IPPC Bureau) of the JRC/IPTS was set up.
Advertisements

The Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) 2010/75/EU
Industrial Pollution Control and Risk Management: IPPC Neil Emmott Environment Directorate-General 7 April 2006.
EU Wetland conservation policy. Communication on the Wise Use and Conservation of Wetlands (1995) => first European document dedicated exclusively.
1 Towards an improved policy on industrial emissions - Impacts on the waste management industry - Marianne Wenning European Commission, DG ENV.C.4 FEAD.
1 1 st EIONET Workshop on Industrial Pollution 04 March 2015 Andreas Grangler DG Environment Unit C.4 (new!) – Industrial emissions E-PRTR Refit evaluation.
The IPPC Directive and EPER Iksan van der Putte. Objectives of IPPC (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) To prevent or minimise emissions To.
1 Inspection of LCPs: System for Inspection. ECENA Training Workshop Bristol, March 2008.
BAT as a main tool for minimisation of the negative impact of industrial activities Aivi Sissa Tallinn – Estonia 27 – 28 March 2008.
The Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) 2010/75/EU Gabriella Gerzsenyi & Menno Verheij European Commission, DG Environment Industrial Emissions Unit 03.
The Sevilla process for supporting the implementation of the IPPC Directive Michael Parth Tallinn – Estonia 27 – 28 March 2008.
The IPPC Directive and its implementation Alexandre Paquot European Commission Environment Directorate-General Phare Capacity.
Ministry of Waters and Environmental Protection, ROMANIA 1 BERCEN 1 st Exchange program – November 2002 Croatia PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS IN COOPERATION.
European Commission, Technical Assistance Information Exchange Unit (TAIEX), DG Enlargement in co-operation with The Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and.
The Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) 2010/75/EU Gabriella Gerzsenyi & Menno Verheij European Commission, DG Environment Industrial Emissions Unit 03.
The European IPPC Bureau Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) Seville, Spain Internet E.mail : Don.
Recommendation 2001/331/EC: Review and relation to sectoral inspection requirements Miroslav Angelov European Commission DG Environment, Unit A 1 Enforcement,
Aqua publica europea – ceep – EurEau Workshop on the Drinking Water Directive 7 October 2015, Milan Evaluation of the DWD – the European Commission perspective.
Fitness Check of environmental monitoring and reporting Stakeholder Workshop 19/20 Nov 2015 Joachim D'Eugenio Steve White DG Environment European Commission.
How to start with the implementation of IPPC Directive Czech Republic Czech Environmetal Inspectorate.
E-PRTR Refit evaluation and Article 17 official data review 1 2 nd Global Round Table on PRTRs 25 November 2015 Andreas Grangler.
Fitness Check of environmental monitoring and reporting MIG-P meeting 4 Dec 2015 Joachim D'Eugenio Steve White DG Environment European Commission.
CROATIA Country Report IPPC Directive: implementation, problems, constraints, open questions,… Anita Pokrovac Patekar, B. Sc. Pharm. Ministry of Environmental.
The current legal situation
DG ENV Environmental assessment procedures for energy infrastructure projects of common interest (PCIs)
1 Review of the IPPC Directive and related legislation Second Meeting Of Working Group E On Priority Substances 17 October 2007 Filip FRANCOIS – DG ENV.
Integrated and Planned Enforcement of Environmental Law Phare Twinning Project CZ03/IB/EN/01 1 The IPPC Directive Introduction to the philosophy Rob Kramers.
Introduction to the philosophy
BAT - BREF Their scope Rob Kramers Senior advisor InfoMil.
First position of the Belgian industry about the
The interim evaluation of Horizon 2020 – the way forward
- Progress and planning- European Commission
EU Reference Centres for Animal Welfare
The role of IMPEL in promoting the implementation and enforcement of European environmental law Giuseppe Sgorbati & Michael Nicholson IMPEL
Preparations for post-2020 Impact Assessment European Commission Directorate General for Regional and Urban Policy Unit DGA Policy.
Fitness check on chemicals legislation (excluding REACH)
Fitness Check of environmental monitoring and reporting
The role of the ECCP (1) The involvement of all relevant stakeholders – public authorities, economic and social partners and civil society bodies – at.
Working Group on estuaries and coastal zones
The partnership principle in the implementation of the CSF funds ___ Elements for a European Code of Conduct.
Animal Welfare EU Strategy
Introduction to Better Regulation
Commission's activities
Expert Advisory Forum on priority substances
Review of Annexes I and II of the Groundwater Directive 2006/118/EC
IPPC Review Stakeholder Hearing
Ambient Air Quality Directives
Ex ante conditionalities in cohesion policy:
E-PRTR Refit evaluation and Article 17 official data review
Commission report on Art. 8 WFD Monitoring programmes
FEAD Evaluation Partnership meeting 10 March, 2016 DG EMPL G4
- Progress and planning- European Commission
Inter-Service Group meetings
Review of Environmental Monitoring and Reporting
Reduction of total releases from unintentional production of POPs
Recast of the Drinking Water Directive COM(2017) 753 final Commission adoption: th meeting of the CIS Ad-hoc Task-Group on water reuse 3.
Fitness Check EU Water Policy
Fitness Check of EU Freshwater Policy
Embedding Governance & Participation in the European Structural Funds
Towards an improved policy on industrial emissions Third Meeting Of Working Group E On Priority Substances 3 March 2008.
Introduction to the first meeting of the IPPC Review Advisory Group
Finalisation of study report
Drinking Water Directive review and
Revision of Decision 2010/477/EU
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
EU Water Policy and Legislation Recent developments and next steps
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Finalisation of study report
Assessment of Member States‘ 2nd River Basin Management Plans
Industrial Emissions Directive Targeted stakeholder survey
Presentation transcript:

WFD CIS Working Group Meeting Brussels, 4/4/2019 Evaluation of the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) 2010/75/EU IED Contribution to Water Policies WFD CIS Working Group Meeting Brussels, 4/4/2019

IED - the main EU instrument regulating pollution from industrial installations IED aims to achieve a high level of protection of human health and the environment taken as a whole by reducing harmful industrial emissions across the EU in particular through application of Best Available Techniques (BAT) in Permits. Covers more than 50 000 installations in Europe Large variety of industrial or agro-industrial activities: Industrial sectors covered (annex I): 1. Energy industries 4. Chemical industries 2. Metal industries 5. Waste management 3. Mineral industries 6. Other – e.g. intensive livestock farming

Share of emissions to water Source: “Contribution of industry to pollutant emissions to air and water” 2014 (agro)industrial under IED (agro)industrial regulated elsewhere or unregulated non-(agro)industrial

Emissions to water by chemical and sector Cl Fl Metals TOC Total P Total N AOX

Change in emissions to water Absolute emissions and GVA Sum of ecotoxicity

Important IED provisions Member States must ensure installations use best available techniques (BAT) (Article 11) Permit conditions must include emission limit values for all relevant pollutants (Annex II) based on using BAT (Article 14) Monitoring requirements (Article 16) Based on BATc, competent authority determines frequency Groundwater every 5 years, soil every 10 years Environmental Quality Standards (Article 18) Site closure & remediation – Baseline report (Article 22) Environmental inspections (Article 23) Inspection plans and programmes Site visit frequency based on risk appraisal of installation (highest risk yearly )–(lowest risk 3-yearly) Access to information/ public participation (Article 24) and access to justice (Article 25)

Installation level data (techniques, emissions, ...) BAT information exchange (Technical Working Group) a.k.a. “Seville Process” Installation level data (techniques, emissions, ...) Commission (IPPC Bureau +DG ENV) Member State experts Industry experts NGO experts Four main groups of stakeholders Relies on the TWG having equal access to instant the installation level data i.e. what techniques are used and the environmental performance associated with that technique. Two outputs of the process; a BREF and, within the BREF, BAT conclusions Key elements of the process: Cooperative Consensual Technical Transparent BREF (BAT reference document (with BAT conclusions) Committee adoption of BAT conclusions BAT conclu- sions 12

Why? IED Evaluation 7 predecessor Directives Evaluation Impact Assessment COM(2007) 843 Member State reporting EPRTR emissions data IED adopted 2010/75/EU

What? IED Evaluation Evidence-based judgement Ex-post - how (well) does the IED work? Assess performance versus initial objectives Gather a factual basis for assessment Assess: What has happened? Why has it happened? How much has changed due to the IED? What are intended / unintended effects? Evidence of causality Broad public and stakeholder consultation

What? IED Evaluation IED initial objectives Generic prevent, reduce and as far as possible eliminate pollution arising from industrial activities Specific (from impact assessment) Increase legislative effectiveness by supporting MS to implement BAT based permitting Strengthen provisions on enforcement and environmental improvement, while stimulating innovation, Cutting unnecessary administrative burden and simplifying legislation, Better contribute to the objectives of the Thematic Strategies

IED Evaluation Roadmap Effectiveness: Efficiency: Relevance: The extent to which the IED objectives have been achieved; The process of elaborating BREFs and BAT Conclusions; The emissions monitoring and reporting process. Efficiency: The extent to which the costs are justified, given the impact of the IED and the benefits it has delivered; Whether there are significant differences between Member States in implementation; Whether efficiency could have been improved; The extent to which administrative burden has been reduced with respect to initial expectations. Relevance: The extent to which the IED objectives still correspond to the needs of the EU; Whether the IED is able to respond to new or emerging environmental issues. Coherence: The extent to which the IED is internally consistent and coherent; The extent to which the IED is coherent with other EU environmental and wider EU policies, and with market based instruments. EU added value: What the added-value from the IED is, compared to what is likely to have been achieved by Member States in its absence.

When? IED Evaluation Evaluation process (indicative timing) Political validation Roadmap published* Comments assessed 2019: Bulk of the process (in progress) assistance from contractors addressing evaluation questions mid-2019: stakeholder consultations 2020: Dissemination & Follow-up * https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/initiatives/ares-2018-4758971_en Commission Staff Working Document

IED Evaluation Stakeholder consultation Mid 2019 (indicative) Public Consultation (12 weeks) Generic part Specific part Targeted Consultation Interviews Focus Groups 2 Workshops Confirm scope of consultation Increase participation Validate findings 5 broad stakeholder categories

IED Evaluation 3 Questions to WFD Experts Is the IED ensuring that industry contributes sufficiently to achieving the goals of EU water legislation? If not, what are the problems? In water bodies with compliance problems are IED provisions correctly applied? Feedback welcome (possibly with evidence) ! Email by 30/4/2019 cosmin.codrea@ec.europa.eu ian.hodgson@ec.europa.eu

IED Evaluation Thank you