1. FEAD ANNUAL CONFERENCE 2008 Future Challenges for the Waste Management Industry Paris, 19 September 2008

2. The proposal for a Directive on Industrial Emissions (IED) and its impact on the European waste management business Carlo Noto La Diega, FISE President, FEAD Vice-President

3. Overview  Consultation process and stakeholder involvement  Re-cast procedure  Scope of the proposed directive  Sevilla process - integrated approach  Making BREFs binding and planning reliability for investments  ELVs vs. BATAELs  Integration of the Waste Incineration Directive (WID)  Comitology  Provisions on site-closure and remediation  Access to information  Cutting “red-tape” 1

4. Consultation process and stakeholder involvement FEAD feels strongly that the consultation procedure on the IPPC review did not allow an adequate exchange FEAD would have preferred a proper assessment of the existing IPPC directive until 2010 instead of proposing IED in 2007 Deadline for implementation of the current IPPC Directive for existing installation was just 30 October 2007 2

5. Re-cast procedure Dir 1999/13/EC: "VOC Solvents Directive" Dir 2001/80/EC: "LCP Directive" Dir 2000/76/EC: "Waste Incineration Directive (WID)" Dir 78/176/EEC, Dir 82/883/EEC, Dir 92/112/EEC: “TiO 2 Directives” Dir 96/61/EC: "IPPC Directive" COM(2007)844: “Ind. Emission Directive (IED)" COM(2007)844: amending only essential elements (grey part) FEAD: in some cases substantial changes were made but not identified as such (i.e. biomass definition) 3

6. Scope of the proposed directive Thresholds as indicated in Annex I, pt. 5 are acceptable In principle, FEAD advocates for the creation of a level-playing field for installations in EU but warns against the impacts of extending the scope to all waste management operations Extending it to all WM operations could become problematic for small and medium enterprises (the same level of compliance is required but in a more simplified way) 4

7. Sevilla process and integrated approach EC Member States Industries NGOs BATs and BREFs descriptive Sevilla process and the integrated approach need to be maintained PERMITS BATs and BREFs binding EC Member States Industries NGOs ? COM(2007)844 final:Dir 96/61/EC (IPPC): 5

8. Making BREFs binding and planning reliability for investments stability and certainty in the permits COM(2007)844: reconsider permit conditions each time an applicable BREF is updated FEAD permit conditions should be reconsidered only if major changes take place and NOT each time a BREF is revised - problematic for the planning reliability - would affect several industry sectors at the same time (horiz. BREF) - would neglect the role of investment cycles - constant updating of general binding rules 6

9. ELVs vs. BATAELs (BAT Associated Emission level): average of the operational emission level BATAEL Max ELV (emission limit value given in the annex of the WID directive) A guide is required to explain how to derive ELVs from BATAELs Safety margin Fluctuation margin ELV reduction due to BATAEL (may be 0) ELV derived from BATAEL

10. Integration of the Waste Incineration Directive (WID) FEAD the implementation of the Waste Incineration Directive (WID) is a success The existing WID provides legal certainty to allow investments in good quality infrastructure + No significant problems which could justify a comprehensive change to the WID WID should be integrated into the IED without substantial modifications 8

11. Comitology COM(2007)844: foresees an extensive use of the Comitology procedure for implementing the future directive 1.Respect of the subsidiarity principle 3.Right of the Compentent Authorities in the Member States to make the final decision 4.Possibly severe impact of the Comitology procedure on the Sevilla process FEAD welcomes efforts to limit the use of the Comitology procedure 2.Involvement of interest groups in the procedures needed, i.e. industry experts, Concerns: 9

12. Provisions on site-closure and remediation COM(2007)844: contains a number of provisions on site closure and remediation FEAD considers these provisions can be excessive; a risk-based approach in line with the future use is more sensible FEAD thinks that the proposed provisions on site closure and remediation should be tackled in a separate directive on soil as this has never been considered in the existing BREFs 10

13. Access to information FEAD welcomes the provisions on access to information for the public Access to information must be guaranteed in line with the provisions of the Arhus Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters 11

14. Cutting “red-tape” FEAD is in favour of cutting red-tape IED should not create an additional burden for the industry without generating environmental benefits and taking into consideration the investment cycles 12

15. Thank you very much for your attention!