TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 centralised review, Country feedback, France perspective Chang Jean-Pierre, Gueguen Céline

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 1- Introduction A first and voluntary implementation of stage 3 review process (centralised review on 6-11 Oct in Copenhagen, EEA), France has volunteered to be reviewed and also to contribute as a reviewer. One ERT of 7 experts / four countries reviewed stage 3 in-depth review of emission inventories submitted in 2008 under UNECE CLRTAP/NECD :

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 2- Resource issues Resources for producing national emission inventories have been increased in recent years to comply with the increasing requirements on quality and reporting of NEI. Additional resources are now dedicated to funding international emission inventory reviews. In-depth reviews are time- and resource-consuming (as a reviewed country and even more as a reviewer). Under international requirements and objectives to improve the quality of national emission inventories (NEI) relating to GHGs and air pollutants :

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 3- Feedback as a reviewing country 4 reviewed countries : Norway, Sweden, Portugal and France Pollutants : SO 2, NO x, NMVOC, NH 3 and PM 10 & PM 2,5 (current priority for EMEP) Time series : ERT composition : 1 review coordinator and 7 experts 1 generalist (leader) [EC] 2 for energy (included transport) [Austria and Denmark] 1 for agriculture and nature [Ireland] 1 for solvents and other products' use [Denmark] 1 for industry [Czech Republic] 1 waste [France]

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna5 Objectives of the level 3 review : Assist the parties to improve their emission inventory (report and methodologies) through an in-depth assessment of the reported inventory information in terms of : Transparency Completeness Consistency (included recalculations and time-series) Comparability Accuracy and uncertainties estimates QA/QC 2008 stage 3 review - FR feedback 3- Feedback as a reviewing country

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 3- Feedback as a reviewing country Working documents (all information are transmitted through the EMEP Centre): Technical documents relative to each party : Results from the levels 1 and 2 reviews (recalculation, key sources, inventory comparisons, trends, time series, IEF) IIR and emissions data for each party Other information transmitted by the parties during the review progress Support documents : Guidance documents for reviewer Guidelines for estimating and reporting emissions under the CLR- TAP

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 3- Feedback as a reviewing country The progress of the review (1/2): Detailed analysis of the working documents and redaction of a first set of questions for each party ; ~5 working days for the FR expert Centralized Review Analysis of the parties' answers; Complementary exchange of question/answers with parties (through the EMEP Centre) ; Daily sharing of opinion with the others members of the ERT concerning the reviewed inventories; Redaction of a preliminary individual review report; 5 working days

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 3- Feedback as a reviewing country The progress of the review (2/2) : Redaction of the individual report document : Compilation of individual reports by the leader of the ERT in a draft report transmitted to the parties; Redaction of the final reports by taking into account the comments of the parties – if necessary; ~3 working days for the FR expert The issues of the review : A stage 3 report for each reviewed party Key review findings Recommendations for improvements Recommendations to the EMEP Centre to improve the reviewing process

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 3- Feedback as a reviewing country Benefits for the reviewer : Opportunity to contribute to the improvement of the review process ; Useful and interesting experiences : Analysis of comparison of national emissions/EF with other countries – assessments of national situations ; Detailed analysis of methodologies used by other countries ; Recommendations for improvements of national inventories, for instance concerning completeness and methodology ; Contacts with other sectoral experts.

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 4- Perspective as a reviewed country A vailability of all the different national experts during the review period, for as quick as possible answers to questions. Stage 3 review in October : not the best period (it is a very busy period for inventory compilation). possible misunderstanding between expert reviewers and national experts (but for FR no misunderstandings remain within the final review report). Possible difficulties encountered :

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 4- Perspective as a reviewed country Possible improvements on completeness of NEI (e.g. PM/HM... sources for which methodological references are not yet well developed, and/or for which activity data are difficult to obtain). Possible improvements on following reporting Guidelines (e.g. better use of some notation keys). Benefits of the process (1/2) The stage 3 in-depth review enables to point out issues for further improvements of the quality of the National Emission Inventory :

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 4- Perspective as a reviewed country Possible improvements on the NEI documentation : possible more detailed explanations for some sectors; in next IIR (2009) some general section will be translated into English, as the executive summary... Areas for further investigations at national level : e.g. possible detailed investigations in case of use of national plant data with particular time series fluctuations. Areas for further investigations at international level (e.g. sources and/or pollutants pointed out as missing but linked to methodological references that need further developments at international level). Benefits of the process (2/2)

TFEIP/EIONET meeting, May 2009, Vienna stage 3 review - FR feedback 4- Perspective as a reviewed country The different possible issues pointed out by the review cannot generally be all addressed for the following year inventory. There is a need to set priorities between : -reporting issues, -possible corrections (data or methods) -required improvements (especially on key sources) -recommended improvements, etc. Inclusion as much as possible of review issues within the national inventory improvement plan (identifying actions to be implemented in one year and other ones in two or more years). Impacts of the review on inventory improvement plan