SIIF pilot support group meeting 17 Apr 2013 SIIF – pilot countries European Commission Directorate General for the Environment unit D.2 - Marine Environment & Water Industry

DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry 21.09.2018 SIIF phases in the pilot Phase 0: Expression of interest Phase 1: Taking stock of national information (systems) –> workplan for component 1 and 2 Phase 2: Implementation of work plan for components 1 and 2 (precondition for 3/4) Phase 3: Explore potential for PIA Phase 4: Negotiate and finalise PIA

Overview on action taken by D.2 so far Contractor: UBA – OIE (signed Dec 2012) - Part 1: support for pilot MS - Part 2: develop concept Up to 6 Pilot Member States planned (status 16 April 2013) CY and LT have already confirmed participation SL, IE, LV; PL show high interest, meetings planned, participation tbc GR, SP interested HU refused invitation

Overview on CY regarding 7th reporting exercise Meeting in Nikosia/CY on the 30 Nov 2012 (back to back with WD-meeting during Council-Presidency) For reference date 31 December 2009 Cyprus reported 57 agglomerations ≥ 2,000 p.e., generated load of 883,800 p.e.. 12 agglomerations are discharging into a “normal area”, 3 agglomerations are discharging into a sensitive area for 42 agglomerations Cyprus reported no collecting system for the entire waste water load. National compliance rate (7th report)

Lesson learned from CY National implementation Plan available, but unknown by COM (colourful Excel-table) Estimation on investments needed available Available data at COM and current status not coherent (gap of 2 – 3 years) No transparent information online available Internal consultations in the MoE, with Mo Finance, Mo Economy and the Cabinet Question CY: What does COM offer ? (no infringement, funding) PIA on high level

Overview on LT regarding 7th reporting exercise Meeting in Vilnius/LT: 30 Jan 2013 Interested also in a workshop in autumn 2013 (Presidency) For reference date 31 December 2009 Lithuania reported 68 agglomerations ≥ 2,000 p.e., generated load of 2,656,500 p.e. Baltic Sea as a sensitive area Lithuania applies Article 5(8) and 5(2,3). Criteria subject to more stringent treatment are nitrogen and phosphorus. National compliance rate (7th report) Member State Collection compliance rate (%) Secondary treatment compliance rate (%) More stringent treatment compliance rate (%) Lithuania 100 98 85   EU 15 97 88 90 EU-12 72 39 14 EU 27 94 82 77

Lesson learned from LT High standard already achieved, work on IAS to be done No transparent information online available, but LT currently works on a national GIS-based information system (work finished in 2013) Available data at COM and current status not coherent (gap 2–3 years, LT is more advanced, latest status available: 2011) Decision on SIFF-participation in the MoE Question CY: money to adapt national system to EU-needs ? What does COM offer ? (funding) PIA not necessarily relevant

Overview on SL regarding 7th reporting exercise Letter of interest in 6 Feb 2013, Phone conference 16 Apr 2013 Agreed on a meeting in Ljubljana/SL: 30 Jan 2013 For reference date 31 December 2009 Slovenia reported 156 aggl. ≥ 2,000 p.e., generated load of 1,531,749 p.e. Slovenia applies Article 5(8) and 5(2,3). 58 sensitive areas / CSA, designated 2007 due to criteria a (nitrogen and/or phosporus) and/or criteria c (Bathing Water Directive) National compliance rate (7th report) Member State Collection compliance rate (%) Secondary treatment compliance rate (%) More stringent treatment compliance rate (%) Slovenia 32 23   EU 15 97 88 90 EU-12 72 39 14 EU 27 94 82 77

Expectations from/by SL Not a high standard on UWWTD achieved yet Information online available (2012) at the EnvAgency, but not GIS http://vode.arso.gov.si/dist_javna/kcn/iskalnik_cn.jsp Available data at COM and current status not coherent (gap 4 years, SL latest status available: 2012) SL: want to discuss legislation in SIIF-workshop Question SL: money to adapt data system to EU-needs ?

Overview on IE regarding 7th reporting exercise Interest shown by e-mail 8 Mar 2013, Video conf 12 Apr 2013 Agreed on a meeting in IE: date to be fixed in May 2013 COM will send an official request (e-mail) for participation For reference date 31 December 2010 Ireland reported 183 aggl. ≥ 2,000 p.e., generated load of 5,223,153 p.e. 81 aggl. discharge into a “normal area”, 102 into SA/CSA. National compliance rate (7th report)

Expectations from/by IE Deadline expired in 2005, investments still necessary Data available, but not online at the Environment Prot. Agency (only detailed pdf-documents 2008-2011) Overview on compliance rate on national/regional/local level New system driven by WFD, necessary investments to become compliant for different Directive need an impact assessment For UWWTD: model for other MS Question IE: can COM drive the process (need for data system) ?

Overview on LV regarding 7th reporting exercise Participated in LT-workshop, COM asked for interest in Feb. 2013 Meeting in Riga/LV: 7 May 2013 For reference date 31 December 2009 Latvia reported 84 aggl. ≥ 2,000 p.e., generated load of 1,776,473 p.e. Latvia applies Article 5(8) + 5(2,3) = more stringent treatment (nitrogen and phosphorus) National compliance rate (7th report) Member State Collection compliance rate (%) Secondary treatment compliance rate (%) More stringent treatment compliance rate (%) Latvia   EU 15 97 88 90 EU-12 72 39 14 EU 27 94 82 77

Expectations from/by LV Deadline will expire in 2015, with some delays Overview on investments + timetable (Art. 16 report from 2010) Overview on data available (only pdf-doc) Update on compliance rate

Overview on PL regarding 7th reporting exercise COM asked for interest in Jan + Feb. 2013 Meeting in Warsaw/PL planned for Apr/May 2013 For reference date 31 December 2009 Poland reported wrong data PL wanted to apply Art. 5(4), whereas under Accession Treaty PL has to follow Art. 5(2) – COM could not assess compliance more stringent treatment necessary (Baltic Sea) National compliance rate (7th report) Member State Collection compliance rate (%) Secondary treatment compliance rate (%) More stringent treatment compliance rate (%) Poland 71 24 10   EU 15 97 88 90 EU-12 72 39 14 EU 27 94 82 77

Expectations from/by PL Deadline will expire in 2015, obviously huge delays Overview on investments + timetable promised in July 2012, but not delivered Overview on data available Update on compliance rate Infringement ? Handling of huge data-set

Overview on SP regarding 7th reporting exercise SP showed interest in March 2013, no further contact so far 1400 aggl. in breach ? For reference date 31 December 2010 Spain reported 2,266 aggl. ≥ 2,000 p.e., generated load of 69,590,612 p.e. 1,347 agglomerations discharge into a “normal area”, 873 agglomerations discharge into a SA/CSA and 46 agglomerations with no collection into a “normal area” National compliance rate (7th report) Member State Collection compliance rate (%) Secondary treatment compliance rate (%) More stringent treatment compliance rate (%) Spain 98 86 54   EU 15 97 88 90

Expectations from/by SP Deadline has expired in 2005 Homepage with lower information level in comparison to FR No frequent update on compliance rate (2009/2010 data) Infringement problem ? Handling of huge data-set  As 6 pilot MS have been chosen already, SP could participate in the follow-up exercise ?

Overview on GR regarding 7th reporting exercise (to be finished) GR showed interest by letter 30 Jan2013, no further contact so far For reference date 31 December 2010 Greece reported 478 aggl. ≥ 2,000 p.e., generated load of 12,353,280 p.e. 173 agglomerations discharge into a “normal area”, 26 agglomerations discharge into a SA/CSA 60 agglomerations were reported with the entire generated waste water load not collected discharging into “normal areas”, 11 agglomerations were not collected in sensitive areas. 208 agglomerations were not collected without specification National compliance rate (7th report)

Expectations from/by GR (to be finished) Deadline has expired in 2005 Frequent update on data provided (reference year 2012) Database at an 'early stage' without human and technical support at Agency (no technician or web-tool developer) Check on compliance rate necessary At the moment GR is not sure if they can meet the requirements of the SIIF-project.  As 6 pilot MS have been chosen already, SP could participate in the follow-up exercise ?

Follow-up workshop autumn 2013 1) Present an example, at least for one National Information Systems 2) Link of national Systems to EU (WISE; SEIS-INSPIRE) and discuss reporting obligations for pilot MS 3) Develop Partnership Implementation Agreements “PIA”

Thank you for your attention.