24 th IMPEL Plenary Meeting, 1 3 December 2004 Amsterdam Draft Conclusions

Transcription

1 24 th IMPEL Plenary Meeting, 1 3 December 2004 Amsterdam Draft Conclusions Session 1 Welcome and Overview Welcome /Ministerial Address On behalf of the Dutch Presidency and on behalf of the State Secretary for the Environment, Mr Gerard Wolters, Inspector General of the Netherlands, Inspectorate for Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM), welcomed the participants of the 24 th IMPEL Plenary Meeting to Amsterdam and wished them every success in their meeting. In his welcome address he emphasised that strong implementation and enforcement were vital to achieving a better environment. Mr Wolters highlighted the important role of IMPEL in this regard and acknowledged the good work undertaken by IMPEL so far. In particular the informality of the network has contributed to its success. Mr Gernot Schnabl replied on behalf of IMPEL and the Commission and thanked Mr Wolters and the Dutch Presidency for hosting and preparing the 24 th IMPEL Plenary Meeting. Adoption of agenda The agenda was adopted. Report by IMPEL Secretariat The meeting noted the report. IMPEL rules final adoption The meeting agreed on amendments to the chapters on the enlarged Troika, ToRs and Financing and adopted the final version of the IMPEL rules. Future cooperation with BERCEN / new pre-accession network and application for IMPEL Membership by Croatia The meeting agreed to accept the application for IMPEL membership by Croatia and welcomed Croatia as new IMPEL member. The meeting took note of the Commission s presentation on the transformation of BERCEN into the new pre-accession network on implementation and enforcement of environmental law,similar to the former AC-IMPEL network), i.e. use of the BERCEN structure/context to carry out activities that are tailored to the specific needs of the candidate countries. 1

2 The meeting noted the call to establish closer links with the BERCEN network, in particular by providing expertise to peer reviews and reporting, as well as the inclusion of a separate point for reporting on BERCEN activities on the agenda of future IMPEL Plenary Meetings (see also BERCEN proposal to the 22 nd IMPEL Plenary Meeting). IMPEL member countries were encouraged to explore possibilities to support the BERCEN network. The BERCEN network coordinator might also contact IMPEL members directly. After discussion of the strategic restructuring of BERCEN at its next Plenary (16-17 December 2004), a proposal on BERCEN pre-accession activities and future links with IMPEL will be prepared and tabled at the IMPEL Plenary in Luxembourg. Adoption of final IMPEL project reports - Waste related conditions in environmental permits (Finland) The meeting adopted the report and accepted that minor factual corrections to the German part of the report will be introduced, before it will be put on the IMPEL website. The Commission will bring the report and its findings to the attention of the colleagues who work on the thematic strategy on waste prevention and recycling and on the IPPC Directive respectively. Presentations The meeting heard a presentation from Ms Alida Oppers, VROM, on the national compliance strategy. In the Netherlands there are about 450 pieces of legislation that include enforcement tasks for the Inspectorate for Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM). In order to deceide/identify which task should be performed with priority and which not, and how to enforce compliance in a smart way, the Inspectorate has developed a compliance strategy. This strategy is based on risk and compliance indicators as well as on knowledge of reasons for non-compliance. Mr John Carstensen, UNEP, informed the meeting about the UNEP Guidelines for implementing MEAs and their supporting manual. In 2002, the UNEP guidelines for implementing MEAs were adopted. These guidelines are advisory and provide approaches for enhancing compliance with multilateral environmental agreements and strengthening the enforcement of laws implementing those agreements. The supporting manual is meant to facilitate the use of the guidelines and will to this end contain practical examples, case studies, checklists and other concrete assistance. IMPEL members were invited to provide examples e.g. such as the Dutch compliance strategy which was considered as a very useful input and/or feedback on the usefulness of the manual in general. Comments could be sent to UNEP (carl.bruch@rona.unep.org) until end of January IMPEL members will receive an electronic copy of the guidance and manual. Session 2 Work Programme and Organisational Issues Reports on progress with current IMPEL projects The meeting took note of progress of the following IMPEL projects: TFS Cluster (NL) The annual TFS Conference took place on 7-9 June 2004 in Malta. As concerns the TFS network in the accession countries (NL), no progress was reported. In the framework of the Threat assessment TFS waste (UK) project work started on the analysis of the returned questionnaires. Problems of data gaps and interpretation 2

3 appeared. The project lead considers hiring a contractor for further data analysis. There are delays compared to the original timetable, the draft reported will not be ready before March The timescale of the project is extended until June The final report of the first TFS - Seaport projects project was presented to the TFS Conference in Malta as well as at the September meeting of the waste management committee in Brusssels. On September 2004, a kick-off meeting for the second project took place in Riga (LV). Inspections started in the participating seaports. Further meetings are planned for April 2005 and March The final report of the second project is expected to be ready in June Under TFS - Verification of waste destinations (NL) project, inspections and a mid-term evaluation have been carried out. This evaluation was discussed at the annual TFS Conference in Malta (June 2004). A copy of the final report was handed out during the Plenary meeting and it was agreed to adopt it through a written procedure. Cluster 1 (SE/FI) A cluster meeting took place on 30 September/1 October 2004 in Warszawa (PL). It reviewed the projects covered by the cluster (REMAS, INSPECTAN, Management and IRI) and assigned Cluster members as contact persons to those projects where the Cluster has according to the ToR to perform a role.. It also discussed a number of new project ideas, mainly in the field of comparison programmes for inspectors. The next cluster meeting is scheduled for 7/8 April in Rome (IT). The meeting congratulated Sweden, and in particular Mrs Inga Birgitta Larsson, on the excellent work that has been carried out during the term of Cluster 1 chairmanship. The meeting thanked Finland for having volunteered to take over the chair and wished Mr Erkki Kantola every success in his future role. AC-Cluster This cluster groups various tasks, performed under the responsibility of a consultant, under the heading of Developing capacity in implementation and enforcement. Since the Dublin Plenary, the following activities took place: workshops on key Directives (SEA, Landfill, Access to information), training in inspectorate management in eight countries, institutional analysis in the Czech Republic and a peer review in Hungary. Activities are planned to continue in 2005 ( an extension of the contract until June 2005 is under discussion) and will cover a peer review in Poland, institutional analysis in Romania and training in Estonia and Hungary. Informal resolution of environmental conflicts through dialogue (DE) The seminar took place on November 2004 in Hannover. 30 participants from 17 countries were present and 24 answers from 17 countries to the first project questionnaire were received. The second phase of the project will focus on collecting information about legislation and administrative practice and their potential to promote the use of dialogue as improvement of existing systems Two ( ) working groups were established to prepare the second meeting, which is scheduled for 30 May 1 June Use of BREFs (FR) The workshop took place on November 2004 in Noisy-Le-Grand. 27 countries participated in the workshop, which was prepared by a questionnaire. The Plenary Meeting agreed that the conclusions of the Use of BREFs workshop will be presented at the forthcoming IEF meeting in Brussels, December France will forward the workshop summary and conclusions for comments to the workshop participants on 6 December

4 INSPECTAN (IT) A first workshop was held in Venezia (Mestre) on 23/24 September It allowed for an information exchange and the discussion of a draft questionnaire. The finalised questionnaire was sent out to the participants by end of October 2004, returns are expected by end of December. Further workshops (for the discussion and finalisation of the report) are scheduled for 31 January/1 st February and May The final report should be ready for adoption at the December 2005 Plenary. IRI Review (SE) The project follows the standard IRI format. A pre-meeting took place on 9/10 November 2004 in Stockholm. The review will be carried out in two inspectorates - at the regional level (Stockholm) and at the municipal level (Sodertalje). Good regulatory practice in relation to the EU emissions trading scheme (UK) The project team hired a contractor to assist with the project. A workshop was held in London on 12/13 October 2004 in order to discuss a draft questionnaire. The revised questionnaire was sent out to participating states, with a deadline for replies 15 December A second workshop, aimed at discussing the outcome of the questionnaire round and a draft report, will be held in London on 15/16 March Adoption of the final report is scheduled for the December 2005 Plenary. Consideration of human health through IPPC (UK) A first workshop was held on 23/24 September 2004 in London. A questionnaire was developed and sent out, returns are expected until January A second workshop is planned for 21/22 April 2005, the final report is expected to be ready by June For 2006, after adoption of the report by the December 2005 IMPEL Plenary, a dissemination seminar is planned. Waste permitting and enforcement project (NL) This project is still in an early stage. So far, 20 participants from 14 countries showed interest. The substantive work is expected to be carried out during spring REMAS (UK) The main project is progressing well. About 480 sites registered in 16 Member States and. About 230 have completed the questionnaire. As concerns quality assurance of the data usually some contact with the local inspector responsible for the site is required. Since sites often do not have the contact details of the inspectors IMPEL members were asked for continued support on this work. Furthermore, the UK called upon IMPEL to engage further in the future project work, i.e. participate in online discussions etc. Parallel Workshops Better Legislation The workshop aimed at developing ideas on how to follow-up and put the recommendations of the IMPEL report Effective enforcement needs a good legal base into practice. The workshop resulted in a proposal to set up a new Cluster on Better Legislation. This cluster should identify areas for legislation (both new and existing) which IMPEL should comment on as well as areas where IMPEL could provide guidance on implementation of legislation and ECJ judgements. Furthermore, it was suggested that representatives of IMPEL should give a presentation on the IMPEL Better Legislation report to the EP ENVI Cttee. 4

5 The meeting decided to adopt the idea of forming a new cluster on better legislation and welcomed the initiative of the UK to chair a first meeting. This first meeting should further work out the scope and objectives of the cluster and prepare a proposal for adoption at the forthcoming IMPEL Plenary Meeting. Interest to participate in this group was announced by: NL, FR, BE, ES, DE, DK, SK, CZ, CY, PL, FI, IT, AT and IE. The meeting agreed that a delegation of IMPEL representatives, composed of the enlarged IMPEL Troika and experts of the Better Legislation project group, should meet with the EP ENVI Ctte to present the report and findings of this Plenary workshop. ENAP The workshop had three main objectives: - to inform participants about results and recommendations of the three ENAP workshops, - to invite participants to give their views on the issues raised during the ENAP workshops and - to explore areas/issues for further work, in particular for IMPEL. A more general part of the discussions was linked to the scope and role of self-regulation for industry. Main observations were: - A questioning whether there is a willingness to change, - the question what gurantees are required to allow industry more flexibility trust from the general public is considered as essential and - there are strong links between permitting, EMS and ETS. With regard to the specific topics of the three ENAP workshops, the participants concluded: 1) IPPC permitting/alternative approaches - IPPC and key terms allow different approaches to permitting. - Balance to be struck between flexibility, regulatory certainty and complexity. - IMPEL should organise an exchange of best practice in cooperation with industry. 2) EMS and regulation Urgent need to continue sharing best practice on the use of EMS in the context of regulation. Look at concrete areas like EMS as an element of BAT and role of EMS related to the RMCEI. Seek opportunities to improve quality of ceritification and verification. 3) Emissions Trading NO x and SO 2 Tool for achieving ambitious reduction targets. Vital elements: Monitoring, verification, inspection and enforcement. Learn from each other in these areas. Session 3 New ToRs and IMPEL work programme 2005 IMPEL and Nature The Commission recalled the sent by Mr Georges Kremlis on 9 November 2004 and reiterated that the Commission on its side would not take any decision towards an 5

6 involvement of IMPEL in nature conservation issues before it had thoroughly assessed the final results of the evaluation of IMPEL. The meeting noted the presentations from the Czech Republic and Sweden. The meeting also noted the idea raised by the Czech Republic for possible future IMPEL work on crosscompliance in agriculture, supported in principle by France regarding intensive livestock farming. The discussion on a possible general extension of IMPEL s work to nature and on the possible establishment of a nature cluster was left to the next IMPEL Plenary Meeting in Luxembourg. New ToRs The meeting took the following decisions: - Comparison programme for inspetors in nature conservation (CZ) Although there were various opinions on an engagement of IMPEL in enforcement of nature conservation issues, the meeting recognised the importance of work in this field. However, as there was no clear decision on broadening IMPEL s scope to nature, it proved difficult to deceide on an engagement in a single project. Also, the ToR of the project should be revisited with a view to limit the scope of the comparison programme. The Czech Republic agreed to redraft the ToR, which would be submitted to the IMPEL Plenary Meeting in Luxembourg. - Comparison Programme in the Netherlands The meeting deceided to ask the project manager to narrow down the project scope and to re-submit the ToR to Cluster 1. - VOC Workshop (Austria) The meeting adopted the ToR. There was strong support for this project and 17 IMPEL member countries announced interest to participate in the project (SE, BE, FR, IE, ES, DK, CZ, IT, SI, FI, NL, UK, PL, CY, SK, EL, NO) - Cluster 1 (FI) The meeting deceided that a re-drafted ToR should be presented at the next IMPEL Plenary Meeting. In particular, the link to and the role of the cluster in relation to IMPEL s MAWP should be further developed. Also, it should be considered whether the name of the cluster could be changed in order to reflect the headings of the MAWP on which Cluster 1 had already agreed to focus on. - Comparison Programme in Finland The meeting adopted the ToR. There was support and interest to participate in the project from 13 IMPEL member countries (SE, AT, BE, BG, CZ, DK, FR, IT, NL, ES, NO, UK, IE, LT). As the ToR foresees participation of experts from only 6 8 countries, the Plenary invited Finland to present as soon as possible information on how experts would de selected for this project. - TFS management meeting (NL) The meeting adopted the ToR and took note of the request to help to identify the right participants for this meeting. 6

7 - Follow-up Verification of the destination of notified waste (NL) The meeting adopted the ToR. IMPEL work programme 2005 As concerns the options how the Commission could provide financial support to IMPEL projects the meeting favoured the presented option of using an existing framework contract of DG ADMIN. This framework contract could cover costs for travel (train and plane) and accommodation of the participants. The contractor could possibly also be asked to take care about venue and coffee/lunch (the latter in combination with a venue), however, for these two services the Commission has not negotiated any service prices. For the use of the framework contract all information re the meeting (exact date, start/end time, place, number, names and addresses of participants) needs to be available in good time before the meeting (~ 8 weeks before the date). The Commission announced that probably a budget of would be available for IMPEL projects. This amount would allow a financial contribution to the four newly adopted projects and the four projects (TFS Seaport, Informal resolution of environmental conflicts through dialogue, Dutch waste project, Lessons learnt from accidents) already adopted at earlier Plenary Meetings (and ongoing). Session 4 Commission Activities Update on Commission activities General overview The meeting noted the report. As concerns the new financial instrument for the environment, LIFE+, IMPEL members will receive an updated version of the proposal, including a summary of items relevant for IMPEL in order to enable them to brief the colleagues in charge of this dossier with a view to make IMPEL more visible in the programme. Recommendation on Minimum Criteria for Environmental Inspections The Commission informed the meeting on the state of play as regards the assessment of the country reports on point VIII RMCEI. Draft assessments were finalised for some countries; the Commission would like to give the countries the opportunity to comment already on these drafts and would therefore forward a copy to the national IMPEL coordinators. The final report is expected end of April The meeting agreed that a meeting with the chairman of the EP ENVI Cttee should be organised to discuss IMPEL s role both in general and as regards the RMCEI. IMPEL members were reminded to identify candidate inspectorates and possible dates for an IRI in their countries in order to include them in IMPEL s MAWP. Commission work programme 2005 and IMPEL s advisory role The Commission proposed to convene a meeting of representatives of IMPEL and the Commissioner for the environment, Mr Dimas. IMPEL members will receive a copy of the Commission s work programme 2005 once it is adopted. The Commission called upon IMPEL members to provide any information available which could be of support for the development of a Compliance assistance programme for SME. 7

8 Evaluation of the IMPEL network state of play The Commission informed the meeting that the contract for the evaluation of the IMPEL network had been signed in July. In the meantime, the contractor had carried out desk studies and a questionnaire-based survey among IMPEL members. The return rate was ~50%. As a next step within the evaluation project case studies, including interviews will be carried out in 10 selected countries (FI, NL, EL, FR, DE, UK, CZ, PL, CY, BG). The final evaluation report is expected in February Best project on Streamlining and simplification of environment-related regulatory requirements for companies Ms Caroline Hager, DG Enterprise, informed the meeting on the Best project on streamlining and simplifying environment-related requirements. This project will examine both national and, where relevant regional, initiatives to streamline environmentrelated regulatory requirements and to improve their cost-effectiveness. A first BEST expert meeting took place in Brussels, 18 November A final report and conference is scheduled for the beginning of IMPEL members were encouraged to contact their country representatives of the BEST project in order to be informed on the state of play of the project and/or to provide input for the discussions Session 5 IMPEL Conference, Miscellaneous and Close of Meeting IMPEL Conference 2006 The meeting welcomed and supported the proposal from Latvia to host the next IMPEL Conference. Poland offered to closely cooperate with Latvia in the preparation of the Conference. It was suggested that Latvia sends a formal letter of commitment to the Commission. NL, PL, UK, HU, CZ, NO, DK, FR, AU and the IMPEL Secretariat volunteered to participate in the preparatory cttee of the conference. Update on INECE The meeting was updated on INECE activities, in particular on process regarding the 7 th INECE Conference in Morocco. The Commission had secured a budget of to support participants of the MEDA countries. Currently, INECE is soliciting papers for the inclusion in the proceedings of the Morocco Conference. Deadline for submission of documents is 17 January Update on BERCEN The meeting took note of the report from Mr Mihail Dimovski, co-ordinator of the BERCEN network, on recent achievements of the BERCEN countries in improving enforcement and compliance as regards environmental legislation. The results of the discussions regarding the restructuring of the BERCEN network will be presented to the IMPEL Plenary Meeting in Luxembourg (see also Session 1). Next IMPEL Plenary Meetings The next IMPEL Plenary Meeting will take place from 8 10 June 2005 in Luxembourg City. The meeting of the enlarged Troika is tentatively planned on 10 March However, it will be explored whether there is a possibilty to hold the meeting after the 8

9 Cluster 1 meeting in Spring 2005 in order to match the ideal cycle for the development of new projects as laid down in the IMPEL rules. The 26 th IMPEL Plenary Meeting will be held in Cardiff, UK, 30 November to 2 December The first IMPEL Plenary Meeting of 2006, is scheduled on 31 May 2 June in Pörtschach, Austria. Summary conclusions Draft summary conclusions were circulated and a few amendments were proposed. The final conclusions will be adopted following a written procedure. Closure of the meeting On behalf of IMPEL and the Commission, Georges Kremlis thanked the Presidency for the hospitality and first rate organisation of the Plenary Meeting, which had been very efficient, and had been held in a very friendly and welcoming atmosphere. On behalf of the Dutch Presidency Mr Gerard Wolters closed the meeting. He thanked all the participants for their contribution to the successful outcome of the meeting. This IMPEL Plenary Meeting had again shown that IMPEL s solid basis for cooperation and collaboration was a pre-condition for the meeting s success. 9

10 To-do-list: Item Comments & Action 1.2 Send final IMPEL rules to NC 1.3 Explore possibilities to support BERCEN activities/provision of expertise 1.4 Introduce comments from Germany into final report. 1.4 Publish report on IMPEL website; inform colleagues concerned at DG ENV 1.6 Provide practical examples/feedback 2.1 Written procedure waste verification project 2.5 Comments on Use of BREFs summary report and workshop conclusions 2.12 Organise first working group meeting Better Legislation Cluster ; Prepare proposal for next IMPEL Plenary Meeting Organise a meeting with EP ENVI Cttee Delegation When Secretariat Within the next week. IMPEL member Ongoing/dates of countries peer reviews etc to be announced by BERCEN Finland Asap when comments received IMPEL Secretariat Commission IMPEL member countries NC to provide comments Workshop particpants UK UK Secretariat/enlarged Troika/project experts ASAP when final report available Until end of January 2005 Within the next three weeks. Before 21 December Within the next weeks. At the latest 4 weeks before the Plenary Meeting 1. half /3.3 Redraft ToR Czech Republic At the latest 4 weeks before the Plenary Meeting 3.4 Reconsider scope of the project; submit new version to Cluster 1 NL Before the next Cluster meeting in April Redraft ToR Finland/Cluster 1 At the latest 4 weeks before the Plenary Meeting 3.7 Present criteria on how the project participants will be selected Finland ASAP 10

11 Session 3 Work Confirm IMPEL programme budget 4.1 Send proposal of LIFE+ to NC 4.3 Send Commission s WP to NC Provide information on compliance assistance for SMEs Commission Secretariat Secretariat IMPEL members ASAP ASAP ASAP 11