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

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

4. 4 Restructuring of questionnaire: –Thematic regrouping based on LDK analysis of the previous reporting period (2003-2005) 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. 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. 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 (2003-2005) 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. 7 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers ORIGINAL QUESTION 1.1.Have any significant changes been made since the last reporting period (2003-2005) 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. 8 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers Restructuring 1. General descripition

9. 9 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers Restructuring

10. 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. 11 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers Restructuring 1. General descripition

12. 12 IPPC: Examples of restructuring and pre-answers Restructuring

13. 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. 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. 15 6/7. Session Two: Tool 2 (ELV and BAT Reporting

16. 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: –50-100 MWth –100-300 MWth –> 300 MWth

17. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 26 ELV and BAT reporting tool: LCP

27. 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. 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. 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)