NICOLE Regulatory Working Group 7 June 2017 Milan, Italy 1. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

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

• perators 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
• f 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

• ut 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
• f 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

• f 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

• 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

• 5. Water Framework Directive

• 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

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

Review Priority Substances list

• Selection of new priority substances also based on the new

TGD-EQS – could also mean deselection

• In the modelling step presence of substance is need – what

about not yet detected substances?

• Many substances on the list now originates from 76/464

directive (old list)

• Include Effect-based trigger values
• Include monitoring costs
• Decision expected beginning 2018

24

Pharmaceuticals in the environment (PIE)

• Roadmap published (April 2017)
• The main objectives of the initiative will be to
• Identify remaining knowledge gaps and uncertainties, and present possible solutions for

filling them;

• Explore how to address the challenge to protect the environment (and human health via the

environment) and at the same time safeguard access to effective and appropriate pharmaceutical treatments for human patients and animals, considering inter alia the

• pportunities for innovation;
• The strategic approach will aim to address pharmaceuticals in the environment generally,

meaning largely but not only the water environment, in order to cover the requirements in the water and pharmacovigilance legislation, noting that the latter refers also to soils.

• Public Consultation expected soon (1 half 2017)
• http://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/initiatives/ares-2017-2210

630_en

25

River Basin Management Plan

• EEA is looking at different ways to present the

Chemical status of the ground waterbodies in EU

• MS do not want any ranking of MS (good or bad)
• Focus should be on the substances that are

exceeding targets and substances that most MS have difficulties with

26

Plastics in freshwater environments

• Information exchange between the different MS –

studies on micro- and nanoplastics, types of industry etc.

• New legislation?

27

EU Groundwater Watch List

• Voluntary, to get more insight in the substances with

a potential risk

• 19 medicines > 0,1 ug/l are on this list now

28

Water ReUse

“Public consultation on policy options to set minimum quality requirements for reused water in the European Union”, which is part of the series of actions that the COM is taking – in the context of the Circular Economy action plan - to promote reuse

• f treated wastewater, specifically:

Proposed legislation setting minimum quality requirements for reused water for irrigation and groundwater recharge (subject to a positive impact assessment) Promotion of safe and cost-effective water reuse, including:

– guidance on the integration of water reuse in water planning and management; – inclusion of best practices in relevant BREFs (this action on BREFs is to be taken forward in the existing Comitology processes under the IED); – support to innovation (through the European Innovation Partnership and Horizon 2020), and – support to investments

NICOLE did not give feedback, EUROMETAUX/ Lucia will follow this up.

29

• 6. Common Forum, developments
• Common Forum

– Recent developments Common Forum (Lucia) – NICOLE position on handling of spills (Phil) – ICCL – NICOLE Workshop in October 2017 (Chair Lucia,OC: Dominique Darmendrail, Neal Durant, Arthur de Groof, Carlos Panchon, Dietmar, Rick Parkman, Christian Andersen)

30

• 7. ISO Standards
• Sustainable Remediation
• Site Conceptual Models
• Determination Background Levels (19258, draft

international standard)

• Excavated soil material
• Soil description fieldwork
• Guidance on monitoring

31

• 8. H2020 and EU Projects
• Remediate

– Presentation Diogo Santos (16.00 pm): LCA of remediation technologies

• Inspiration, NICOLE SPG input (Paul van Riet)

– Scope Strategic Research Agenda, Matchmaking May 2017, Final Conference 4-6 December 2017

• Interreg project: ReSites

– Preliminary analysis and transnational training focusing on sustainability measures for brownfield regeneration May 2017 Poland – Well attended (60 p) – Focus on effective remediation technologies – Presence of NICOLE very well appreciated

32

• 9. Sustainable Remediation feedback Surf’s
• Status and feedback
• SUSTREM 2018 – Brazil (cooperation Ekros)

33

10-11 New Items, inactive items

• 10. New Items:

SIKB project corrosive biofuels, current situation:

– Case file inventory (desk study) confirms increase of corrosive damage to subsurface tanks; – Field trial is performed to test whether use of biodiesel is the cause, but is delayed due to lack of suitable tanks.

• 11. Inactive Items (temporarily inactive, tracking):

– IED (baseline and brefs) – Legislation on unconventional contaminants – Environmental Impact Assessment

34

12 Roundtable

• National Developments: what developments are

taking place in your country?

– Brexit – point of view UK (environmental legislation)

• Tracking: information from overseas
• Tracking: Court of Justice Rulings (any recent cases?)

35

Brexit crystal ball

36

• What does Brexit mean for UK environmental

legislation?

• Overall, there are:
• 111 Regulations;
• 256 Directives; and
• 136 Decisions;
• …..in place which affect environment.
• Is change a threat or opportunity for industry?

Brexit - Things that must happen

37

• Great Repeal Bill – now in place;
• Changes to specific areas of legislation:
• 65% of legislation may need only technical changes;
• 35% of legislation will need more detailed and substantial

work;

• Not clear where priorities might lie;
• How high a priority is environment?
• And how does this look from a trade standpoint?

Brexit - Some over-riding thoughts

38

• Environment doesn’t respect national boundaries;
• Air quality, species conservation, climate change are Europe-

wide examples;

• 29,000 early deaths per year in UK due to PM2.5 in air;
• 50% of these particles originate in UK, rest from mainland

Europe;

• But, we send more to Europe than they send to us, as

prevailing winds from west;

• So IED and our control of industrial emissions is important for

France/Benelux countries as much as it is for UK;

• Fair trade requires equivalent standards of environmental

protection

Brexit -what might we change?

39

• BREXIT presents opportunity to change legislation for

the better;

• Better may not look the same for everyone, and

could look worse for some;

• Better should be the chance to remove unworkable
• r technically flawed elements of the legislation;
• Must not to lower the level of environmental

protection - perception of unfair trade advantage;

• Red tape challenge – UK PPC and EPR came before

the EU Directives – and we clearly recognised we needed them. Why would we throw them away?

Any other business?

• Shale gas
• 3iPET China – network
• Fuel Fossil Plants Decommissioning conference

40

14 .Goodbye

• Thank you for your input and for your attention

41