TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR WORK UNDER THE AUSPICES OF IMPEL

Transcription

1 TOR Reference.: Author(s): Horst Büther Version: Date: TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR WORK UNDER THE AUSPICES OF IMPEL 1. Work type and title 1.1 Identify which Expert Team this needs to go to for initial consideration Industry Waste and TFS Water and land Nature protection Cross-c utting tools and approaches Type of work you need funding for Exchange visits Peer reviews (e.g. IRI) Conference Development of tools/guidance Comparison studies Assessing legislation (checklist) Other (please describe): 1.3 Full name of work (enough to fully describe what the work area is) Mutual joint visits of industry inspectors and regulators to achieve a level playing field implementation of the IED 1.4 Abbreviated name of work or project Supporting IED Implementation Page 1 of 9

2 2. Outline business case (why this piece of work?) 2.1 Name the legislative driver(s) where they exist (name the Directive, Regulation, etc.) Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) Air Quality Directive Seveso III Directive 2.2 Link to IMPEL MASP priority work areas 1. Assist members to implement new legislation 2. Build capacity in member organisations through the IMPEL Review Initiatives 3. Work on problem areas of implementation identified by IMPEL and the European Commission 2.3 Why is this work needed? (background, motivations, aims, etc.) IMPEL already has done some work on facilitating the implementation of the IED into the day to day work of competent authorities. Especially the projects on IED inspections and IED permitting but also the IRIs and the DTRT and easytools projects paved the way for a better understanding and enforcement of the IED obligations. To follow up with guidance and creation of a level playing field within Europe it is highly recommendable to foster the exchange of authorities dealing with the IED. Comparing the implementation of the IED with the Seveso Directive there is a difference regarding the common activities of the competent authorities. The Seveso Community under the leadership of the Committee of Competent Authorities (CCA) is performing yearly mutual joint visits since some years to support a common application of the Directive especially when it comes to inspections. This has developed to a very valuable activity with the aim to reduce the implementation gap and foster a level playing field. The success of this approach shall be applied to the implementation of the IED within a long running IMPEL activity of the Industry Expert Team. Another aim of the activity is to take on board the requirements of the EU Commission for Life+ support. 2.4 Desired outcome of the work (what do you want to achieve? What will be better / done differently as a result of this project?) The project aims at better implementing the IED with special regard to permitting, participation of the public, and increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of environmental inspections and surveillance, through: application of risk criteria in a strategic way with a view to assessing, evaluating and mitigating the most serious types of non-compliance with the IED; development of best practice examples in the application of BAT conclusions and the compilation of baseline report on soil and ground water contamination; optimising the communication with and active dissemination to the public of the results of inspection and surveillance work; fostering cooperation and coordination between different inspection and surveillance bodies with a view to streamlining and optimising the use of inspection and surveillance resources; development of reaction methods after serious environmental complaints; creation and use of electronic records of inspection and surveillance work with a view to enabling the efficiency and effectiveness of such work to be more easily measured and evaluated. Page 2 of 9

3 2.5 Does this project link to any previous or current IMPEL projects? (state which projects and how they are related) The projects on IED inspections and IED permitting but also the IRIs and the DTRT and easytools projects are linked to this activity. The results of the projects on Compliance Management Systems and Complementary Approaches to achieve Compliance are of great value too. The 2014 project on Derogations from BAT-AEL s under IED will in addition be taken into account. 3. Structure of the proposed activity 3.1 Describe the activities of the proposal (what are you going to do and how?) First the activity will start as an IMPEL project running for 2 years to pave the way for a common understanding of the goals and to develop a work programme. Within these two years a Life+ application shall be prepared and launched. The members of the project team will consist of members of the Industry Expert Team. They are responsible to prepare the yearly joint meeting of (all) members of the Industry Expert Team. The yearly joint meeting has the character of a technical workshop. During these workshops the approaches of national authorities will be presented and discussed, exchange of best practice will be facilitated, common inspections including site visits will be organised, and the implementation of the IED will be supported. Back to back with the workshop there will be a conference on implementation of the IED and other industry related European law. Also other members of the Industry and Air Expert Team will be invited to the conference to contribute to the development of IMPEL activities needed to foster the common implementation of the IED and other industry related European environmental law and create a level playing field. In a second step new tools to support permitting and inspection will be developed. The results of the project on implementation gaps and discussions with the Commission will be used to identify priority needs for action concerning non-compliance with the IED. Tools already developed by IMPEL, like IRAM, will be adapted, and data bases and forms for electronic inspection reports that can be used for active publication of the reports on the internet shall be developed. Joint inspections together with Water, Waste, Nature and Seveso authorities to reduce costs and optimise the enforcement of the European inspection obligations shall also be performed and tested for future collaboration. Another aspect of the second step will be work on special topics like level playing field application of BAT, content and comprehension of baseline reports, extent of operator selfmonitoring of soil and groundwater, mandatory inspection after serious complaints, or reporting obligations of the operators. In a third step the application of the tools by the national member authorities shall be supported and checked by performing country visits. These country visits will be combined with site visits to see how the tools are working in the field. In an extra meeting training sessions for the application of the Integrated Risk Assessment Methodology will be prepared. The methodology was developed by an IMPEL project especially for the implementation of the IED and can be used as web tool by all IMPEL member authorities. The training sessions shall be performed at a later stage. Page 3 of 9

4 3.2 Describe the products of the proposal (what are you going to produce in terms of output / outcome?) Outputs: Work program for better implementation of the IED Results from technical workshops and conferences on implementation of EU industrial law Best practice approaches Supporting tools for permitting, inspection, reporting and enforcement Electronic check lists for permitting and inspections, and inspection report templates Definition and description of non-compliance levels Results of integrated inspection approaches Country visits on IED application and use of supporting tools Common approaches to deal with new demands of the IED like use of BAT, derogations, baseline reports, self-monitoring, handling of complaints, and reporting obligations Outcome: Reduction of the IED implementation gap and a level playing field within IMPEL member states 3.3 Describe the milestones of this proposal (how will you know if you are on track to complete the work on time?) In the following only the milestones of step 1 (first year) are described in detail because the further step depend on the results of the first year. STEP 1 Common understanding and development of the work program: until May 2015 Workshop: country approaches / best practices / site visit: June 2015 Conference on implementation of EU industry related environmental law Development of guidance and best practice examples: until October 2015 Preparation of the Life+ application: until December 2015 STEP 2 Implementation gaps, dissemination of results, cooperation with other authorities Development of tools Joint inspections STEP 3 Application of the tools Country visits and joint inspections 3.4 Risks (what are the potential risks for this project and what actions will be put in place to mitigate these?) The first risk is that only a few countries collaborate within this activity. The new IMPEL strategic approach for actively encourage and support passive members shall be used to mitigate this risk. The second risk is that there is not enough money in the budget to support the active participation of all interested competent authorities. To mitigate this risk in the long run the project aims at extra financial support through Life+ support from the EU Commission. The third risk is that outputs of the project are only recognized by a small group of active project members. The new strategic IMPEL approach on communication of IMPEL results shall be used to mitigate this risk (see item 8). Page 4 of 9

5 4. Organisation of the work 4.1 Lead (who will lead the work: name, organisation and country) this must be confirmed prior to submission of the TOR to the General Assembly) Horst Büther, Regional Government Cologne, Germany 4.2 Project team (who will take part: name, organisation and country) Austria Günter Dussing Belgium Martine Blondeel (Flanders) Jean-Pierre Janssens (Brussels) Olivier Dekyvere (Wallonie) Croatia Dubravka Pajkin Tuckar Cyprus NN Czech Republic Tomáš Augustin Estonia Reeli Sildnik Finland Jaakko Vesivalo Germany Horst Büther (Project lead) Hartmut Teutsch Wulf Böckenhaupt Italy Romano Ruggeri (ARPA Sardegna) Alfredo Pini (ISPRA) Fabio Colonna (ARPA Lombardia) Glauco Spanghero (ARPA Friuli Venezia Giulia) Netherlands Henry Hiltjesdam (Province of Overijssel) Pieter Roos (Ministerie I&M) NN (DCMR) Poland NN Portugal Filipe Vitorino (IGAMAOT) Marco Candeias (IGAMAOT) Paulo Pires (Regional Inspectorate of Azores Islands) Romania Florin Homorean Slovenia Vladimir Kaiser Spain María Jesús Mallada Viana (La Roja) Maria Milagros Pereira Carneiro (Galizia) Iñaki Bergareche Urdampileta (Galizia) Carlos Bernácer Sales (Valencia) Sweden Eva Dalenstam UK Chris McDonald Barry Sheppard 4.3 Other IMPEL participants (name, organisation and country) Further environmental officers of different national competent IED authorities to participate in the technical workshop and the conference, especially members of the Industry Expert Team Other non-impel participants (name, organisation and country) Close contact with desk officers of the EU Commission dealing with industry related environmental law Page 5 of 9

6 5. High level budget projection of the proposal. In case this is a multi-year project, identify future requirements as much as possible Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 (exact) How much money do you 49,000 49,000 Depends on ditto require from IMPEL? Life+ How much money is to be cofinanced 20,000 10,000 ditto ditto Total budget 69,000 59,000 ditto ditto 6. Detailed event costs of the work for year 1 Travel (max 360 per return journey) Event 1 6,840 <Project group meeting> <March 2015> <Cologne, Germany> <20> <2/2> Event 2 12,240 <Conference/workshop> <June 2015> <tbd> <35> <3/3> Event 3 6,840 <Project group meeting> <September 2015> <tbd> <20> <2/2> Event (19 travelling (34 travelling (19 travelling Hotel (max 90 per night) 3,420 (for 19 9,180 (for 34 3,420 (for (for 2 Catering (max 25 per day) 1,000 (for 20 2,625 (for 35 1,000 (for (for 4 Total costs 11,260 24,045 11,260 1,280 <IRAM meeting> (2 travelling <April 2015> <Cologne/Germany> <4> <2/2> Total costs for all events 26,640 16,380 4,825 47,845 Page 6 of 9

7 7. Detailed other costs of the work for year Are you using a consultant? 7.2 What are the total costs for the consultant? 20, Who is paying for the consultant? 7.4. What will the consultant do? 7.5 Are there any additional costs? 7.6 What are the additional costs for? 7.7 Who is paying for the additional costs? Germany, has to be confirmed on a yearly basis In the future financing is planned by Life+ budget Transformation of the project outputs into a format that can be used by all competent IED authorities and preparation of material that can be used for IMPEL communication purposes. Namely: Transport of inspectors, web based tools 1. Transport of inspectors to industry sites during the technical workshops 2. Development of web based tools 1. IMPEL: 1, t in the first year 7.8. Are you seeking other funding sources? Namely: Life+ application 7.9 Do you need budget for communications around the project? If so, describe what type of activities and the related costs Namely: As with the results of the easytools project some member countries might prefer to have individual presentations of the project results for their competent authorities. The costs are normally covered by the inviting countries but this might not always be the case. All paper based PR material shall be paid by the IMPEL budget: 155 Page 7 of 9

8 8. Communication and follow-up (checklist) 8.1 Indicate which communication materials will be developed throughout the project and when (all to be sent to the communications officer at the IMPEL secretariat) What TOR * Interim report * Project report * Progress report(s) Press releases News items for the website * News items for the e-newsletter Project abstract * IMPEL at a Glance Other, (give details): PPP for project presentation By when Amended v June 2015 October 2015 II Q/y Conferenc/workshop Start / Conference/works. Start / after 3. meeting After 3. meeting October 2015 After 3. meeting 8.2 Milestones / Scheduled meetings (for the website diary) See Images for the IMPEL image bank 8.4 Indicate which materials will be translated and into which languages 8.5 Indicate if web-based tools will be developed and if hosting by IMPEL is required 8.6 Identify which groups/institutions will be targeted and how 8.7 Identify parallel developments / events by other organisations, where the project can be promoted Project abstract / IMPEL at a glance: at least German, Italian, Portuguese, Slovenian, Romanian; languages of the participating countries of the technical workshop This is not foreseen for the first year The main target group consists of competent authorities for IED implementation and Industry and Air Experts. They will be targeted by the means under 8.1 and by discussion at other IMPEL events. CCA TG 2 meetings, IRIs, meetings with COM (especially in preparation of the Life+ application), TFS technical workshops, national IMPEL meetings, international conferences (e.g. Lessons learnt from accidents). ) Templates are available and should be used. *) Obligatory Page 8 of 9

9 9. Remarks Is there anything else you would like to add to the Terms of Reference that has not been covered above? In case of doubts or questions please contact the IMPEL Secretariat. Draft and final versions need to be sent to the IMPEL Secretariat in word format, not in PDF. Thank you. Page 9 of 9