1 Development of Electronic Reporting Tools for IPPC Directive and WI Directive Workshop – Sessions One and Two (IPPC) Tuesday 3 rd March 2009 Meeting.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Basic Principles of GMP
Advertisements

Best Available Techniques (BAT)
18 Copyright © 2005, Oracle. All rights reserved. Distributing Modular Applications: Introduction to Web Services.
Pollutant Emissions to Water E-PRTR Reporting requirements Thematic Eionet Workshop 11 September 2008.
1 European Commission, DGENV.D. 3 Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes.
The Implementation Structure DG AGRI, October 2005
The Managing Authority –Keystone of the Control System
1 Managing Authority Conducting a self assessment 10 June 2008 A. Badrichani – DG Regional Policy – Audit Unit J3.
European Commission: Environment Directorate General Slide: 1 ECCP Aviation Working Group Mandate and draft work programme Directorate C – Air and Chemicals.
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Michigan Electronic Grants System Plus
2 HOME DELIVERED MEALS Waiver Workshop Presented by: Regional and Local Services (RLS) Access and Intake /Area Agency on Aging (A&I/AAA) May 27-28, 2009.
European Commission DG Environment Implementation of the European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (European PRTR, E-PRTR) Namur, 7 February 2007.
Privacy Impact Assessment Future Directions TRICARE Management Activity HEALTH AFFAIRS 2009 Data Protection Seminar TMA Privacy Office.
Configuration management
Software change management
Fact-finding Techniques Transparencies
Customer Service.
ABC Technology Project
1 AirWare : urban and industrial air quality assessment and management Release R5.3 beta DDr. Kurt Fedra Environmental Software & Services GmbH A-2352.
European Commission Directorate-General for Energy and Transport n° 1 Air Quality & CAFE AREHNA WORKSHOP Kos, 3-5 May 2003 Mrs Michèle LEPELLETIER.
Jaan Hellat 13/06/2007 European Integrated Pollution Prevention Control directive – what is it, impact on emission regulations – status and future trends.
VOORBLAD.
EU FORMAL REGULATION – TYPES OF STANDARDS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OBJECTIVES ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS.
EU FORMAL REGULATION – TYPES of STANDARD MINIMUM EMISSION STANDARD (sometimes known as LIMIT VALUES) UNIFORM EMISSION STANDARD.
Summary of relevant information in the CAFE Position paper on PM Martin Meadows UNECE PMEG Berlin, 23 & 24 May 2005.
1 Development of Electronic Reporting Tools for IPPC Directive and WI Directive Workshop – Objective and next steps Tuesday 3 rd March 2009 Meeting room.
25 seconds left…...
1 Development of Electronic Reporting Tools for IPPC Directive and WI Directive Workshop – Session Three (WI) Tuesday 3 rd March 2009 Meeting room 0A,
1 Workshop on inventories of greenhouse gas emissions from aviation and navigation May 2004, Copenhagen EU greenhouse gas emission trends and projections.
1 Future plans for the development and implementation of WISE Tim Lack ETC Water.
Slippery Slope
We will resume in: 25 Minutes.
Module 12 WSP quality assurance tool 1. Module 12 WSP quality assurance tool Session structure Introduction About the tool Using the tool Supporting materials.
1 EGTEI – 22 November 2011 Nadine ALLEMAND – EGTEI secretariat VOC monitoring issues in the Gothenburg Annex.
Hellenic Ministry for the Environment, Spatial Planning and Public Works Greek Experience on the Implementation of EPER REPORTING IN GREECE Η ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗ.
Workshop Inspire MIG-P/MSCPs and Reporting under environmental aquis January 2015 JRC Ispra Andreas Grangler DG Environment Unit C.3 – Air & Industrial.
1 Inspection of LCPs: System for Inspection. ECENA Training Workshop Bristol, March 2008.
Air Quality Governance in the ENPI East Countries Regulation of non-Annex I activities in the CR and UK Monika P ř ibylová.
Large Combustion Plants Data reporting – data management and quality assurance processes Daniel Martin-Montalvo Alvarez Industrial Pollution Group Air.
EPER reporting process in Hungary with emphasis on the experiences Edina Gampel Counsellor National Inspectorate for Environment, Nature and Water Budapest,
The IPPC Directive and its implementation Alexandre Paquot European Commission Environment Directorate-General Phare Capacity.
The Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) 2010/75/EU Gabriella Gerzsenyi & Menno Verheij European Commission, DG Environment Industrial Emissions Unit 03.
1 Review of the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) and National Emission Ceilings (NEC) Directives Marianne Wenning DG ENV, Head of Unit,
BERCEN plenary meeting Sofia, March 18, 2005 Agenda item 8 Draft Scope and Proposed Location of BERCEN Training 2005 BERCEN Secretariat.
1 Short overview of the implementation of IPPC, LCP, Seveso II, Waste Landfill and Incineration directives Short overview of the implementation of IPPC,
Quality of EPER 2004 data Tinus Pulles This work is partly performed under contract with DG Environment (070402/2006/440841/MAR/C4). within the ETC-ACC.
The IED/ELVs as seen through the Eyes of a User of Combustion Plant Dr Tim Rotheray.
CROATIA Country Report IPPC Directive: implementation, problems, constraints, open questions,… Anita Pokrovac Patekar, B. Sc. Pharm. Ministry of Environmental.
The current legal situation
E-PRTR incompleteness check Irene Olivares Industrial Pollution Group Air and Climate Change Programme Eionet NRC workshop on Industrial Pollution Copenhagen.
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.
Main flexibility tools for the adoption of high emission standards for LCPs set in the new Industrial Emissions Directive Gerard Lipinski Coordinator of.
BAT - BREF Their scope Rob Kramers Senior advisor InfoMil.
Reporting on industrial installations
Streamlining of Industrial Emissions Reporting
Methodology for policy evaluation on Large Combustion Plants
IPPC Directive Discussion on Reporting on ELV and BAT 4th Reporting Questionnaire, Q. 6.1 IEEG meeting 7 December 2010.
Implementation of the IPPCD – Data on ELV and BAT
Expert Advisory Forum on priority substances
IPPC Review Stakeholder Hearing
Reduction of total releases from unintentional production of POPs
Introduction to the first meeting of the IPPC Review Advisory Group
Data specifications for IED Annex II Module 4
Large Combustion Plants dataflow management
WFD CIS Working Group Meeting Brussels, 4/4/2019
Presentation transcript:

1 Development of Electronic Reporting Tools for IPPC Directive and WI Directive Workshop – Sessions One and Two (IPPC) Tuesday 3 rd March 2009 Meeting room 0A, DG ENV, Avenue de Beaulieu, Brussels Peter Stouthuysen

2 4/5. Session One: Tool 1 (Implementation of IPPC Directive)

3 IPPC: Explanation of general approach Restructuring of questionnaire Use of pre-filled answers and standardised answers Guidance and validation rules

4 Restructuring of questionnaire: –Thematic regrouping based on LDK analysis of the previous reporting period ( ) to improve the logics of the questionnaire’s structure. –5(6) major themes: 1)General description 2)Permit application and determination process 3)Access to information, public participation and transboundary cooperation 4)Compliance and enforcement 5)Views of Member States 6)Coverage of activities and installations (not in this presentation) Based on the questionnaire’s template, this will be incorporated into the tool. –Content of questionnaire kept –Tool available in all EU languages IPPC: Explanation of general approach

5 IPPC: Use of pre-filled answers and standardised answers Pre-filled answers : –Based on answers from previous reporting periods some questions will have pre-filled answers –Text in English –MS will have the possibility to amend these answers if necessary. –Pre-filled answers will generally be the summaries made by LDK –General Binding Rules: information gathered in the GBR project will also be used to define pre-filled answers.

6 IPPC: Use of pre-filled answers and standardised answers Standardised answers: –If possible standardised answers are defined instead of open text boxes. –Simplest form of standardised answer: YES/NO –Sources to determine standardised answers: −Analysis of implementation reports ( ) by LDK (2007) −IPPC expert judgement −Suggestions from MS as part of the project –MS can select the relevant answer(s) through −Option box: MS can select one (and only one) selection from a number of options. For example: −Tick box: MS can make multiple selections from a number of options. For example:

7 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers ORIGINAL QUESTION 1.1.Have any significant changes been made since the last reporting period ( ) to national or sub-national legislation and to the permitting system(s) that implement Directive 96/61/EC? If so, describe these changes and the reasons for them, and provide references to new legislation.

8 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers Restructuring 1. General descripition

9 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers Restructuring

10 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers ORIGINAL QUESTION 5.1.Describe any changes made since the last reporting period in the organisational structure of the permitting procedures (levels of authorities, distribution of competencies, etc.).

11 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers Restructuring 1. General descripition

12 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers Restructuring

13 IPPC: Guidance and validation rules Guidance: –Where appropriate, guidance is provided by means of additional information or by allowing only a certain data type as answer. –Questions containing conditional clauses are marked such as ‘If available’ or ‘If known’ are marked as ‘Optional’ –Guidance document will be circulated to Member States to support and guide them for filling the electronic questionnaire Validation rules: –IT tools to see if the correct type of answer is given: –For example: −Option box: only one answer can be selected −Number box: only numbers are allowed −Validation of sum of numbers given (f.e. numbers of installations)

14 IT Functionality Allows for upload / import of XML files for responses Use of Web Forms Validation and Quality Assurance Checks Export (via Transformations) to HTML and other formats Built on EEA Reportnet

15 6/7. Session Two: Tool 2 (ELV and BAT Reporting

16 ELV and BAT: Selection of 2 sectors (LCP and Chlor-alkali) LCP: electricity generation sector (coal, lignite and liquid fuels) Main reasons for selecting this sector: –Upcoming review of the LCP BREF –Highest emissions of key air pollutants –Inventory under LCP Directive: no information on ELVs or on techniques applied –Because of the large number of installations, focus on −specific sector: electricity generation −specific type of fuels: coal, lignite and liquid (no gas, no gas turbines) −6 largest NOx emitters for each of the following capacity categories: – MWth – MWth –> 300 MWth

17 ELV and BAT: Selection of 2 sectors (LCP and Chlor-alkali) LCP: electricity generation sector (coal, lignite and liquid fuels) Focus of permit information gathering: –Combustion activity (not fuel storage, fuel handling, pre-treatment of the fuels,….) –Emissions to air: −NOx, SO2, CO, dust and Hg (for coal/lignite fired plants) –Emissions to water (in case of water emissions from flue gas treatment) −Suspended solids, COD, Nitrogen compounds, sulphate, sulphite, sulphide and Hg (for coal/lignite fired plants) –Information on techniques applied −Possibility to select techniques in a tick box (based on BREF LCP)

18 ELV and BAT: Selection of 2 sectors (LCP and Chlor-alkali) Chlor-Alkali: Main reasons for selecting this sector: –Upcoming review of the Chlor-Alkali BREF –Follow-up of Commission initiative launched on implementation assessment in this sector (questions to the IEG) –Good spread of the industry throughout the EU but limited number of installations (+/- 80 installations in 20 MS) −Therefore, information on all the installations will be gathered –Conversion programme for Mercury cells −Phase-out not yet completed in several installations −ELVs in the transition period?

19 ELV and BAT: Selection of 2 sectors (LCP and Chlor-alkali) Chlor-alkali Focus of permit information gathering: –Conversion of mercury cells –Emissions to air: −Chlorine −Hg and compounds (for Mercury cells) –Emissions to water −Chlorate, Bromate (for Membrane cells) −Hg and compounds (for Mercury cells) –At this stage, no specific questions on the techniques applied – MS views welcome.

20 ELV and BAT reporting tool: general approach Similar approach as for Tool 1: –Pre-anwers and standardised answers if available –Guidance texts where appropriate Structure: 3 themes: –General information –Technical background information –ELV/BAT information

21 ELV and BAT reporting tool: LCP General information –Facility name: based on EPER/E-PRTR – database –Facility E-PRTR code: based on EPER/E-PRTR – database –Installation’s GIS coordinates: based on EPER/E-PRTR – database –Year the permit has last been updated: YYYY –Status of the installation under the IPPCD: new/existing –If available, weblink to permit:______

22 ELV and BAT reporting tool: LCP Technical background information Facility level –How many combustion plants does this facility consist of?: ___ –What is the total rated thermal input of the combustion plant(s) at facility level in MWth?: ___ Combustion plant level –What is the total rated thermal input of the combustion plant in MWth?: ___ –What is the fuel use of the combustion plant?: option box + number –What is the status of the plant under the LCP Directive: existing / ’old’new / ’new’ new –In case of solid fuel firing, what type of combustion process is used?: Option box –Is this a co-generation plant? Yes/No

23 ELV and BAT reporting tool: LCP Definition of “Combustion plant”: A "combustion plant" is in principle to be understood as a combination of (one or more) technical units in which fuels are combusted and which are sharing a common stack. It is assumed that the emission limit values and techniques to prevent/reduce emissions are applied at the plant level. If this would not be the case, this should be indicated and reporting can then be done at a more aggregate/disaggregate level, but the configuration of the "plant" reported should be provided (number of units, stacks, rated thermal input).

24 ELV and BAT reporting tool: LCP ELV/BAT information ELVs set in permit for emissions to air - limited list of pollutants ( NOx, SO2, CO, dust and Hg (for coal/lignite fired plants)) –Standardised answers for: −Unit (mg/ Nm³ or t/year) −ELV related time period −Reference conditions to improve comparability between different plants –Information requested on actual monitored emissions during reporting period. (expressed in same unit as ELV) –Techniques that are applied? (Non-limited Option box with BAT from BREF LCP)

25 ELV and BAT reporting tool: LCP ELV/BAT information ELVs set in permit for emissions to water (resulting from waste gas treatment) – limited list of pollutants (Suspended solids, COD, Nitrogen compounds, sulphate, sulphite, sulphide and Hg (for coal/lignite fired plants)) –Standardised answers for: −Unit (mg/l or t/year) −ELV related time period −Reference conditions to improve comparability between different plants –Information requested on actual monitored emissions during reporting period. (expressed in same unit as ELV) –Techniques that are applied? (Non-limited Option box with BAT from BREF LCP)

26 ELV and BAT reporting tool: LCP

27 ELV and BAT reporting tool: Chlor-alkali General information (same as for LCP) –Facility name: based on EPER/E-PRTR – database –Facility E-PRTR code: based on EPER/E-PRTR – database –Installation’s GIS coordinates: based on EPER/E-PRTR – database –Year the permit has last been updated: YYYY –Status of the installation under the IPPCD: new/existing –If available, weblink to permit:______

28 ELV and BAT reporting tool: Chlor-alkali Technical background information –Does the installation consist of several chlorine production lines? Yes/No −If Yes, how many:____ –What is the total chlorine production capacity of the installation (tons)?: ___ –Which was/were the process(es) applied for the chlorine production at the end of the reporting period?: diaphragm/membrane/mercury −If diaphragm or membrane: –Conversion from mercury? Yes/No –If yes, when? YYYY −If Mercury: –When is conversion complete? YYYY –Indicate on which basis the planing for conversion has been decided by CA? ____

29 ELV and BAT reporting tool: Chlor-alkali ELV/BAT information ELVs set in permit for emissions to air/water - limited list of pollutants depending on process (air: Chlorine, Hg and compounds (for Mercury cells); water: Chlorate, Bromate (for Membrane cells),Hg and compounds (for Mercury cells)) –Standardised answers for: −Unit (air: mg/ Nm³ / water: mg/l or t/year) −ELV related time period −Reference conditions to improve comparability between different plants –Information requested on actual monitored emissions during reporting period. (expressed in same unit as ELV)