NICOLE Regulatory Working Group 7 June 2017 Milan, Italy
1. Welcome, 2. Keynote Presentation 1. Welcome, Minutes November 2016, Agenda 2. Presentation: Revision of the Indicator "Progress in the Management of Contaminated Sites in Europe" Ana Paya Perez, Project Officer on Soil Contamination, European Commission, Joint Research Centre
3. Environmental Liability Directive A. Update of the environmental liability website B. Multi-Annual Work Programme 'Making the Environmental Liability Directive more fit for Purpose' C. ELD government experts meeting of 28th February 2017 D. IMPEL project on financial provision, final year 1 report, year 2 work program overview E. NL Project on financial provisions
3A. Update of the environmental liability website • Update of the environmental liability website • ELD Multi-Annual Work Programme 2017 – 2020 explained • More information on the ELD Government expert group • Links to ELD national websites and guidance • Opinion of Advocate General on Austrian ELD case – permit defence upheld.
3B. Multi-Annual Work Programme (MAWP) • MAWP - 'Making the Environmental Liability Directive more fit for Purpose‘; • Endorsed by government experts in February 2017; – Improving the evidence base for evaluation and decision- making; – Supporting the implementation through tools and measures; – Ensuring sufficient availability of financial security.
3B. Multi-Annual Work Programme (MAWP) • The implementation of the MAWP is supported by an external service contract: 'Support in the implementation of the REFIT actions for the Environmental Liability Directive (ELD) - phase 1' . • In 2017 the main tasks are: – build the foundation for an assessment framework and an ELD registry – work towards a common understanding of ELD key terms and concepts – revise the existing ELD training programme and develop an integrative capacity building concept
3C. ELD government experts meeting • ELD government experts meeting of 28th February 2017. Dealt with – Draft ELD MAWP 2017 – 2020 – Extract ToR ELD Contract – Financial Provision Report – Draft Rules of Procedure – Information note
3D. IMPEL project on financial provision • Link to year 1 report: http://www.impel.eu/wp- content/uploads/2016/12/FR-2016-20-Financial- Provision-2016.pdf • Year 2 report being drafted - Financial Security (FS) for Environmental Liabilities – a Practical Guide • A decision making tool supported by good practice case studies and approaches so that regulators and operators will have a better understanding of the availability of FS that is secure, sufficient and available
3E. NL Project on financial provisions • NL Project on financial provisions • Driven by outcome of Chemie-pack disaster • Any further knowledge of this work in the room?
4. Soil Thematic Strategy A. Status (Directive) B. Updated Inventory and Assessment of Soil Protection Policy Instruments in EU Member States C. Stakeholder group meeting December 5th 2016, Brussel: feedback (report online) D. Land Recycling project: Final report and Communication: Conclusions presented by Jordi Boronat (Mediterra).
4B. Inventory Soil Policies • Relatively strong EU policies are in place that help mitigate, manage and prevent local contamination events within the scope of policies such as the Industrial Emissions Directive and the Environmental Liability Directive and also a push from water protection rules to address diffuse contamination and erosion • A soil function or threat is addressed implicitly when the policy document does not explicitly state or make reference to the threat or function nor are these listed as a goal of the policy 11
4B. Inventory Soil Policies • That soil protection is an outcome mostly derived from protecting other environmental resources, addressing other environmental threats or delivering other goals or targets • Key policies that offer some strategic vision are non-binding. As such they cannot be used as a clear basis for integrating and reinforcing the protection of soil within existing EU laws in the way that, for example, water protection laws such as the Water Framework Directive can be cross referenced within IED or under Statutory Management Requirements set out in CAP cross-compliance • Land protection may not equate to soil protection. Thus, land is not protected against soil sealing at the EU level and insufficiently at MS level. In some key EU policies protection from contamination is focused on land protection and not explicitly on soil protection. Land can be protected but important soil functionality can be lost 12
4B. Inventory Soil Policies • Historic contamination that persisted before the introduction of key EU policies, such as IED (and prior to IED IPPC) and the Environmental Liability Directive is not addressed by EU laws and there are no binding rules in place for detecting or defining contaminated sites • There is limited elaboration in EU law of soil functions, what these consist of and the actions that their protection implies. Moreover, a question has also emerged during the study regarding the elaboration of the role of ecosystem services provided by soils and the limited representation of these in legal texts • The Soil Wiki – not public available 13
4C. Stakeholder soil meeting 5 dec. 2016 • Claudia Olázabal (DG ENV): EU Soil Policy is being redesigned, but developments in Climate Change Agenda are going faster • Olivier de Schutter (Université de Louvain-la-Neuve): supports plea for transition in agriculture from uniformity to diversity (Agro Ecology), by using nature’s characteristics more. It is imperative that this change happens, but at present it is not, due to eight lock-ins, aimed at high production and export (concentration of power). The transition entails a tremendous holistic effort, involving DG’s AGRI, ENVI, SANTE as well 14
4C. Stakeholder soil meeting 5 dec. 2016 • Luca Montanarella (DG JRC): many initiatives for soil restoration, like FAO Global Soil Status Reports. The latest report (2015) has led to Revised World Soil Charter (2015) and the Voluntary Guidelines for SSM (2016), aimed at ten target issues • Josianne Masson (DG ENV): the figures on the status of the soil in Europe (e.g. € 38 billion/year in costs due to soil degradation) indicate that the legal framework aimed at soil protection is insufficient. There is a lot of monitoring, but lack of systematic monitoring and harmonisation. EU Expert Group is reflecting on how to address inventory and gap analysis 15
4C. Stakeholder Soil meeting 5 dec. 2016 • Ana Frelih Larsen (Eco Logic Institute): results of “Inventory and Assessment of Soil Protection Policy Instruments in EU Member States”. The Soil Wiki is not publicly available (!) It discusses 35 relevant EU instruments and 671 national instruments, of which 61% are regulatory binding, 12% regulatory non binding, and 27% not regulatory; • Josianne Masson, in reaction to these results: – There are no common definitions for “Soil” and “Contaminated Soils” – CAP (Communal Agricultural Policy) offers a lot of flexibility, e.g. a wide range of measures and targets – A lot of historic contamination is not covered, even though there is a wide range of instruments available – Lack of information on impacts of soil diversity in real conditions 16
4D. Land recycling in Europe • EEA report published 8 December 2016 • Presents approaches to measuring the extent and impacts of redevelopment and densification of previously developed land, either with direct economic aim, such as building housing, or with the aim of upgrading its ecological status, such as creating green urban areas or cleaning up soil pollution 17
5. Water Framework Directive • EU Watch list: Compounds which need further monitoring before possible listing in the Environmental Quality Standards Directive as a priority substance or a priority hazardous substance 18
Watch List under WFD • List of 10 (groups of) substances for which Union- wide monitoring data are to be gathered • The selected substances pose a significant risk at Union level to/via the aquatic environment, but monitoring data are insufficient for assessing the actual risk 19
Watch List under WFD • 3 substances selected initially: diclofenac, 17-beta- estradiol (E2), and 17-alpha-ethinylestradiol (EE2) • 7 further substances were selected based on research, last review of priority substances, and suggestions by Member States and stakeholders • Availability of reliable, up-to-date data for at least 4 Member States was considered sufficient for not including substances in the Watch List 20
Watch List for Union-wide monitoring • Watch List (not yet listed as priority substances in the WFD/EQS): 21
Watch List under WFD • The Watch list will be updated every 2 years (next update 2017) • One substance can be added every time the list is updated, up to 14 (groups of) substances • Duration of a continuous watch list monitoring period for any individual substance shall not exceed 4 years 22
Review of TGD-EQS • Review Technical Guidance for Deriving EQS – doc 27 • Most important update: decision to be made on “deriving standards based on toxicology data or on food safety (consumption of water) data” ? – Not clear what outcome will be.. • Expected final report December 2017 23
Recommend
More recommend
