Transcript REC Powerpoint template

Recent Developments
Regarding the PRTR
Protocol, EPER, E-PRTR and
Experience of EU Member
States
Magda Tóth Nagy
Public Participation Program
Belgrade, August 31, 2006
Contents
• The Legal Base in
Aarhus Convention
• PRTR Protocol
• From EPER to EPRTR
• Examples from EU
Countries (UK,
Netherlands, Hungary,
Czech Republic)
www.rec.org
Legal Base for PRTR Protocol in the
Aarhus Convention
Aarhus Convention requires each Party take steps:
...“to establish progressively ... a coherent, nationwide system
of pollution inventories or registers on a structured,
computerized and publicly accessible database compiled
through standardized reporting.” . [Art. 5, par. 9]
… “At their first meeting, review the experience in implementing
provisions of art. 5, par.9 and consider what steps are
necessary to develop further the system referred to in that
paragraph, taking into account international processes and
developments, including the elaboration of an appropriate
instrument concerning pollution release and transfer registers
or inventories ….” [Art. 10, par. 2(i)]
www.rec.org
Development of PRTR Protocol
•
Sept 2000: UNECE Committee on Environmental
Policy establishes Working Group on PRTR
to develop legally binding instrument
for adoption in Kiev
•
Feb 2001 – Jan 2003:
Negotiations over draft
protocol take place in PRTR WG
•
21 May 2003: Kiev Protocol
on Pollutant Release and Transfer
Registers of the Aarhus Convention
adopted and signed by 36 countries
and the EC at 5th ‘Environment for
Europe’ Conference
www.rec.org
Main Features of the PRTR Protocol
• Objective of Protocol:
“… to enhance public access to
information through the establishment of
coherent, integrated, nationwide PRTRs
…which could facilitate public
participation in environmental decisionmaking as well as contribute to the
prevention and reduction of pollution of
the environment”
• Public access is fundamental
www.rec.org
Main Features of the PRTR Protocol:
Core Elements
Obligation on each Party to establish a PRTR
which is:
• publicly accessible and user-friendly
• presents standardized, timely data on a structured,
computerised database
• covers releases and transfers from certain major
point sources
• begins to include some diffuse sources (e.g.
transport, agriculture, small- and medium-sized
enterprises)
• has limited confidentiality provisions
• allows public participation in its development and
modification
www.rec.org
Main Features of the PRTR Protocol
Based on system of reporting which is:
• mandatory
• annual
• multimedia (air, water and land)
• facility-specific (point sources)
• pollutant-specific for releases
• pollutant-specific or waste-specific for
transfers
Implies obligations for private sector
www.rec.org
Facilities Covered
Annex I includes:
•
Thermal power stations and refineries
•
Mining and metallurgical industries
•
Chemical plants
•
Waste and waste-water
management plants
•
Paper and timber industries
•
Intensive livestock production
and aquaculture
•
Food and beverage production
Total: 64 activities
www.rec.org
Pollutants Covered
Annex II includes:
•
Greenhouse gases
•
Acid rain pollutants
•
Ozone-depleting substances
•
Heavy metals
•
Certain carcinogens, such
as dioxins
TOTAL: 86 pollutants
National registers may include
additional facilities and substances
www.rec.org
Main Features of the PRTR Protocol
PRTRs should:
• Be accessible through the Internet free of
charge
• Be searchable according to the separate
parameters (facility, pollutant, location, medium
etc)
• Provide links to other PRTRs and to other
relevant registers
Protocol is minimum instrument - ‘a floor but
not a ceiling’
www.rec.org
Ongoing Actvities
• Working Group on PRTRs established in Kiev
to prepare for entry into force
• Setting up the ‘institutional architecture’:
rules of procedure, compliance mechanism,
financial arrangements and technical
assistance mechanism, international
cooperation and reporting
• Preparation of technical guidance on
implementation
www.rec.org
Next Steps for PRTR Protocol
• Parties required to work towards convergence
between PRTR systems
• Co-ordination with other international processes
(e.g. IOMC/IFCS, OECD, UNEP, UNITAR, EU, NACEC etc)
• Open to non-Parties to Convention and non-ECE
States
• Possible “Next-step” issues:
 Storage
 On-site transfers
 Cooperation with other MEA reporting instruments (e.g. Stockholm
POPs Convention, ICCM)
 Convergence of PRTR systems in region and globally
www.rec.org
EU Processes towards PRTR Protocol:
European Pollutant Emission Register
Main objectives of EPER:
• enhance public access to and awareness of
releases of 50 key pollutants from medium and
large sized facilities in EU
• provide a new data source for large point
sources for development and improvement of
indicators and assessments
• 15 states +2 delivered their data of reporting year 2001 in
June 2003
• 56 industrial activities, 20,000 facilities
• Emissions to air and water, transfer off-site of pollutants
in water
www.rec.org
EPER WEBSITE: www.eper.cec.eu.int
Published on Internet in Feb. 2004 by the EC and EEA
www.rec.org
EU Processes towards the PRTR
Protocol: EPER
Reporting years / to Commission:
2001
EPER June 2003 (15 + NO+HU)
2004
EPER June 2006 (25 states)
2007
E-PRTR
2008
E-PRTR
• In 2003: 9376 facilities reported
www.rec.org
From EPER to E-PRTR
•
•
EPER
E-PRTR
50 pollutants
56 activities
86 pollutants
64 activities
+
+
+
•
reporting every
three years
annual reporting
+
•
•
releases to land
off-site transfers (waste)
diffuse sources ???
public participation
European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR)
Regulation developed and adopted (166/2006, January 2006)
EC ratified PRTR Protocol February 2006
www.rec.org
Examples from EU Countries: UK
• England and Wales National Pollutant Inventory (NPI)
serves four separate “acts”
•
•
•
•
Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (IPPC)
Pollution Prevention and Control (PPC)
Radioactive Substances Act 1993
Sewage treatment works in England subject to a Ministerial Direction under the Water
Industries Act
• Covers 170 chemical substances and 65 radioactive
substances
•
Information available online, may also be accessed through In Your Backyard
Web mapping site, along with environmental monitoring data
• Scotland’s Pollutant Release Inventory covers 173
substances released to air and water
•
Information about individual pollutants, sites that returned data and
background information is accessible online by post code, pollutant and
company name
www.rec.org
Examples from EU countries: The
Netherlands
• Pollutant Emission Register (PER): 32 years history
• until April 1, 2004 run by Inspectorate of VROM;
• policy aspects: substances, methodology, financial aspects, priority setting;
• for GHG: separate process (WEB);
• since April 1: NL Environmental Assessment Agency is
responsible for annual set of emmisson data
•
Responsibilities of VROM: provides financial means on an annual basis, decides upon
priorities, new / improved methodologies; reporting obligations (EU, UNFCCC,
UNECE);
• Different institutions participate in coordinating Working
Group and Task Forces
• Includes about 170 substances in the PER (most of them
because of international reporting obligations)
www.rec.org
Examples from EU countries: The
Netherlands
• Data collection from August, processing until February, reporting in
“Environmental Balance” in May, processing until June, validation, registered
in EEA database in August, available to public in September in
“Milieucompendium” and “Datawarehouse”
• Annual Environmental Report (by individual companies):
•
•
•
Activity Data and Emission data;
Companies responsible for correct data;
Data validation by Regional/ local Authority
• Electronic format: since 2004
• Operation:
•
•
50 people involved (~20 at EAA)
Annual budget: ~ €2,5 Mio at EAA, activities of other institues are financed
“in kind”
www.rec.org
Examples from EU countries: The
Netherlands
• Standard reporting format to industry
• Reporting:
• About 250 facilities: individual reporting based on
Environmental Reporting Decree
• About 500 facilities: individual reporting based on
voluntary agreements with industrial branches
• About 40.000 facilities: emissions calculated by
combining statistical information, emission factors, etc.
• Estimate is calculated for all industrial
sector and for non-point sources
www.rec.org
Examples from EU Countries:
Hungary
• Gradual approach
• EPER established based on
IPPC regulation,193/2001(X.19.)
• 1000 IPPC facilities in Hungary
• 86 facilities in first EPER reporting in 2003
(18 combustion installations, 4-4 pulp and paper industry, basic organic
chemicals industry and pharmaceutical industry,..)
• Database prepared, partial data availability:
waste will be included in 2006 (on 2004)
• 2nd EPER reporting underway
www.rec.org
Examples from EU Countries:
Hungary - Steps
2003-2005
• Methodology and minimum requirements created for EPER
• 1st EPER reporting in 2003
• Evaluation of experiences (data quality, new databases, software to
support reporting)
2006-2007
• 2nd EPER reporting (2006)
• Amendments to legal base to implement Protocol and E-PRTR
• Further databases and their integration (expansion of EPER with waste
transfer and discharges to land and underground waters database)
• Inclusion of data on hazardous materials and activities
• Examining requirements of PRTR Protocol
2008-2009
• Establishing integrated E-PRTR
• 1st E-PRTR Report
• Ratification of PRTR Protocol
www.rec.org
Examples from EU Countries:
Hungary
http://eper-prtr.kvvm.hu
www.rec.org
Examples from EU Countries:
Hungary
www.rec.org
Examples from EU Countries: Czech
Republic
• Czech Integrated Pollution Register (IPR)
established in 2005 based on the law No. 76/2002 on
setting up IPR, including reporting requirements and the
responsibility of reporter (EPER and PRTR)
• The regulation No. 368 /20003 includes details
about the list of facilities, thresholds,
methodology of defining the pollutants, reporting
forms, NOSE-P code, etc.
• On-line database including data on 72
pollutants
• Hosted by the CENIA Agency
www.rec.org
Examples from EU Countries: Czech
Republic
• From 2009, 88 pollutants will be included
• Some of the thresholds have been defined higher than
required by EPER or PRTR Protocol
• Reporting both electronically and in written paper
form
• Deadline for submitting reports about previous year:
February 15
• Customer service
• Brochures, publications for promotion, guide for capacity
building and training
• Website:
www.irz.cz
www.ceu.cz
www.bezk.ecn.cz/irz
www.rec.org
Further Information
Magda Tóth Nagy
Public Participation Program
REC
[email protected]
www.rec.org
www.rec.cz
www.unece.org/env/pp/prtr
aarhusclearinghouse.unece.org
www.eper.cec.eu.int
www.rec.org