Reporting according to pollution registers Experiences in Austria

2. Reporting according to pollution registersExperiences in Austria Mag. Daniela Wappel

3. Overview • What is EPER? • Implementation in Austria • Difficulties and lessons learnd • Future goals

4. What is EPER? • EPER is the European Pollutant Emission Register - the first European-wide register of industrial emissions into air and water • Legal basis: EPER Decision on the implementation of a European pollutant emission register (EPER) (2000/479/EC)

5. What is EPER? Reporting Requirements: • Releases to air and water • 50 Pollutants • 58 Activities • Reporting every three years • First reporting year:2000 • Second reporting year: 2004

6. What is EPER? Most important goals of EPER • enhance the awareness for environmental pollution • compare emissions from individual facilities • trigger industry in improving environmental performance • enable the Commission and national governments to monitor the trends in annual emissions of large and medium sized industrial facilities • provide scientists, local authorities and policy makers with a solid Europe wide emission database.

7. Implementation in Austria http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/eper

8. Implementation in Austria EPER-Regulation EPER Reporting of pollutant emission loads for the development of a European Pollutant Emission Register Federal Gazette: BGBl. II Nr. 300/2002

9. Implementation in Austria Data flow EPER Facility Competent Authority Governor European Commission / EEA Ministry of Environment Ministry of Economic Affairs Umweltbundesamt Public www.umweltbundesamt.at

10. Involved Institutions ~ 440 facilities ~125 local authorities EPER data flow 9 regional authorities 9 governors Ministry for Environment / Economic Affairs Umweltbundesamt

11. UmweltbundesamtTasks = federal environment agency = environmental expert authority • consistency and completeness check • technical implementation and maintainance of electronic EPER System • submit EPER data to European Commission • make EPER data publicly available

12. Technical Implementation Electronic EPER System • web forms • accounts for operators and authorities • different access rights + helpdesk + information workshops + internet interface

13. Lessons learnedmain difficulties of the facilities • identify / define EPER facility respectively reporting unit • identify and distinguish between Main Annex I activity and other Annex I activities • calculate or estimate the annual emissions • differences between reporting obligations

14. Lessons learned Main difficulties of the authorities • unusual and strange way of interaction • Plausibility check • Without standardised guidelines • reports did not contain any information about the methodologies the operators used to calculate the annual emissions • time frame • additional burden for the experts to their usual work

15. Further developmentEPER  PRTR UN-ECE Protocol on Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (PRTR) under the Aarhus Convention signed by EU + 15 MS in Kiev at the Ministerial Conference „Environment for Europe“ on 21 May 2003

16. EPER Releases to air and water 50 Pollutants 58 Activities Reporting every three years PRTR Releases to air, water and land 90 Pollutants 65 Activities annual reporting Off-site transfers of waste Diffuse sources Public participation in decision making Further development EPER  PRTR

17. Further development EPER  PRTR EPER has to be upgraded to a comprehensive European PRTR EPER will be replaced by the PRTR

18. Benefits of e-Reporting • better transparency • less mistakes • clearer understanding and communications between respondents and regulatory authorities • more timeliness • increase costs

19. Future Goals • substitute paper based systems for reporting and administration with modern innovative electronic structures • harmonise the reporting obligations on environmental information on national and international level • minimize the burden for operators and authorities

20. Future Goals • Consider technical requirements of electronic reporting systems in new national environmental laws. • Data Management System • links several reporting obligations (waste, water, air) • use synergies • minimize the amount of data operators have to report • Recorde data once

21. International Solution EUDIN • Crossborder Waste Transport • EC Shipment Regulation (EEC) No 259/93: • Notifiy Transport • Notify Waste Receipt • Notify Waste Recovery/Disposal • Actors: • Consigner (Exporter) • Consignee (Importer) • Competent Authority of Export • Competent Authority of Import • Competent Authority of Transit • Paper based process: • Time-consuming • Error-prone

22. Data recorded only once, Data is electronically distributed to other actors – no human intervention Increase Speed Increase Accuracy Decrease Errors Decrease Cost MessageBroker

23. International Solution • Seamless integration requires • Agreed-upon Document Standards • Agreed-upon Business Choreography • Proprietary solutions are ineligible • International accepted standards are required • UN/CEFACT offers solutions • Reuse of document building blocks:Core Components • Methodology to develop consistent business processes:UN/CEFACT‘s Modeling Methodology (UMM)

24. Thank you for your attention! daniela.wappel@umweltbundesamt.at

25. EPER questionnaireRegistration

26. EPER questionnaireFacility

27. EPER questionnaireReporting Unit

28. EPER questionnaireReporting Unit

29. EPER questionnaireActivities

30. EPER questionnaireEmissions into Air

31. EPER questionnaireEmissions into Water