1. 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

2. 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

3. 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
First Commission report to Parliament and Council COM111(2013) 3

4. E-PRTR Article 17 data review (2)
Second report by MS covers years instead of (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 and assess the Article 16 reports
Report to Parliament and Council 4

5. 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

6. E-PRTR REFIT evaluation (2)
More information 6

7. 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
IEEG/E-PRTR workshop 14 Jan 2014
IEEG-4
paper
IEEG Meeting 6 May2014
2012
2013
2014 7

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

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? 15

16. 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

17. 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

18. Thank you very much! DG ENV C.3 (E-PRTR) http://prtr.ec.europa.eu/
/eper/implementation.htm