Updating IPR "Guidance" April 2017 European Commission DG ENV C.3

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ex-ante conditionality – General guidance Workshop on strategic programming, monitoring and evaluation Ilse De Mecheleer, DG EMPL Madrid, 22 February 2013.
Advertisements

Existing EU Regulations concerning pesticide statistics and Latvia experience in pesticide statistics Guna Karlsone, CSB of Latvia.
European Conference on Quality in Official statistics, Rome 8-11 July 2008 Quality framework in European Trade Statistics Anne Berthomieu International.
Ozone Regulation under the Clean Air Act Darcy J. Anderson AZ Dept. of Environmental Quality.
1 Interoperability of Spatial Data Sets and Services Data quality and Metadata: what is needed, what is feasible, next steps Interoperability of Spatial.
New Directive 2008/50/EC on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe Aiga Kāla, Valts Vilnītis SIA Estonian, Latvian & Lithuanian Environment February.
Environment 1 The current work on Air Quality Indicators Best needed “ Population exposure” vs. Best available “Population weighted concentrations” Ute.
Intercalibration Guidance: update Sandra Poikane Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability.
Reporting and compliance checking on RBMP in 2010 WFD Reporting Working Group D on Reporting Brussels, 17/18 October 2006.
Regional Policy Guidance on monitoring TÓTH Gábor DG EMPL – Impact Assessment, Evaluation Unit ESF Evaluation Partnership meeting, Rome, 26 November 2014.
1 AMPS 4 22/ Brussels Discussion Paper As of , Bullet 4 Analytical Methods for Operational and Surveillance Monitoring Of WFD PS.
June 2009 Regulation on pesticide statistics Pierre NADIN ESTAT E1- Farms, agro-environment and rural development
1 Air quality reporting in Europe Introduction Legal framework of AQ reporting Guiding documents Reporting to the Commission Information/reporting to the.
Integration of Demand Side Management, Distributed Generation, Renewable Energy Sources and Energy Storages Task status report, Task XVII EXCO meeting.
process and procedures for assessments
SOUTH BALTIC CROSS-BORDER CO-OPERATION PROGRAMME
Gas default price-quality path reset 2017
Proposed Bay TMDL Schedule
Head Statistics and Data Unit
Ex-ante conditionality – General guidance
Overview of the FEPAC Accreditation Process
WG C Meeting Towards a Guidance on Groundwater Chemical Status and Threshold Values 10:30 – 10:40 22 April 2008 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Point 5 Revising the Natura 2000 Standard Data Form
JRC’s Follow-up work to improve GES assessment
MIWP MIWP actions follow-up
Quarterly GDP at t+30 days for EU and euro area
ISCED 2011 joint operational manual: Update
Review of Decision 2010/477/EU and MSFD Annex III
D1 BIODIVERSITY REVIEW PROCESS
Review plan of the nature reporting – update 7
Amending the Performance Framework
WGC-2 Status Compliance and Trends
Implementation of quality indicators in STS
Revised Art 12 reporting format
Passenger Mobility Statistics 21 May 2015
European Commission DG Environment
Draft examples of possible GES Decision criteria Descriptor 9
15th Meeting of the Working Group on Programme of Measures, Economic and Social Analysis (WG POMESA) Action Points 30 January 2017.
WFD Article 8 Schemas Yvonne Gordon-Walker.
LAMAS Working Group June 2017
Questionnaire on progress in preparing reports under Nature Directives
Development of guidance Meeting of the IED Article 13 Forum subgroup
Summary and Action Points
WG Environmental Accounts
Implementing 8-Hour Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze Standards
WGC-2 DG Meeting Towards a Guidance on Groundwater Chemical Status and Threshold Values 14:00 – 16:00 21 April 2008 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Item 7.1 Implementation of the 2016 Adult Education Survey
IMPROVING PUBLIC INFORMATION
NOTIFICATIONS OF TIME EXTENSIONS
ESS.VIP ADMIN EssNet on Quality in Multi-source Statistics, progress report 19TH WORKING GROUP ON QUALITY IN STATISTICS, 6 December 2016 Fabrice Gras,
Project 2.7 Guidance on Monitoring
MIG-P orientation debate
Legal and implementation issues update
Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC
Strategic Coordination Group 2007 Reporting Guidance on Monitoring
Streamlining of monitoring and reporting under WFD, Nitrates Directive and EEA's SoE –concept paper DG Environment.
Education and Training Statistics Working Group, May 2011
BPR AS Review Programme
Item 1 – WFD Implementation Report 2007
Annual Quantity (AQ) 45.
The New Biogeographic Process General info – December 2011
Scene setter European Commission DG Environment
Strategic Co-ordination Group May 2009
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Summer Ozone Data Exchange
Projections expert panel agenda
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
… Two-step approach Conceptual Framework Annex I Annex II Annex III
Draft implementing act on Monthly Unemployment Rate (MUR) Item 3
The new EU Waste Legislation: Implementing and Delegated Acts
Presentation transcript:

Updating IPR "Guidance" April 2017 European Commission DG ENV C.3 Clean Air

Planning – Process so far IPR Meeting April 2016: Decision for update, informal working group to make first proposal June 2016: First draft by informal working group Fall 2016: First version by Commission for bilateral discussion with members of informal working group IPR Meeting November 2016: Presentation by informal working group (DE) on main changes February 2017: Revised version by Commission sent to Member States and notification in AQ expert group Spring 2017: Comments by Member States

Planning – Timeline When What IPR meeting April 2017 Discuss key issues 1st update Early May COM/EEA send new version to MSs AQ expert meeting June 2017 Agree 1st update (or decide further work is needed) August 2017 If 1st update has been agreed, start on 2nd update.

Planning - Priorities When What First update Time coverage/ data capture Data submission process Issues for future updates Structure/ editing Reporting of modelling data Reporting of objective estimation Reporting dataset H-K Calculating local/regional dispersion/ spatial representativeness Calculating source apportionments (H) Classification stations (Dataset C) Any additional issues? Which most important?

Data submission process April 2017

Main comments (1) Continuous updating of Dataset D: Necessary for UTD data Option to update asap if there are changes, but latest on 30 Sept. YY+1 No justification of changes needed if updated before 30 Sept. YY+1 Which stations to include in UTD data: Public information (AAQD Art. 26): exceeding stations at a minimum Corresponding to Dataset E1a

Main comments (2) Resubmissions Detailed justification in separate document: "…shall describe the differences between the updated and original information and the reasons for the update… ", esp. if compliance changes (Impl. Dec. Art. 5(5)) During QA (before 15 Jan): Implicit acceptance. After QA (after 15 Jan): COM acknowledgement needed, i.e. "The Commission shall acknowledge the receipt of the updated information. After that acknowledgement, the updated information shall be considered as the official information." (Impl. Dec. Art. 5(5)) Description of changes between preliminary Dataset C and final Dataset C: Not necessary.

Time coverage, data capture, proportion of valid data April 2017

Time coverage Time coverage (%) = 100 * Nmeas/ Nyear where  Nmeas is the number of days/hours on which measurements have taken place; Nyear is the total number of days/hours in the calendar year. To be reported as TRUE or FALSE (boolean).

Example: Required minimum number of days Data capture Data capture (%) = 100 * Nvalid/NminTimeCov where Nvalid is the number of valid hourly/daily measurements in the measurement period; NminTimeCov is the minimum required number of days/hours on which measurements have to take place; Example: Required minimum number of days = 85% * 100% * 365 days

Example – Fixed measurements NO2 (hourly values) Minimum time coverage requirement = 100% (NminTimeCov = 8760 hours) Minimum data capture requirement = 85% (including 5% loss for calibration)   Nmeas = 8760 hours Actual time coverage = Nmeas/ Nyear = 8760/8760*100 = 100% Actual time coverage (100%) = Minimum time coverage (100%) √ Nvalid = 8199 hours Actual data capture = Nvalid/NminTimeCov = 8199 / 8760*100 = 93.6% (rounded to 94%) Actual data capture (94%) > Minimum data capture (85%) √ Meeting the data quality objectives in Annex I implies fulfilling the percentage of valid data required by Annex XI: → Data quality objectives achieved → Sufficient valid data

Annex I vs. Annex VII/Annex XI Logically, data capture/time coverage requirement (Annex I) must be at least as strict as or stricter than the minimum required proportion of valid data (Annex VII/XI), because data that has not been measured cannot be used for calculations. Annex I Annex VII/Annex XI Requirement Time coverage * data capture Proportion of valid data Domain Monitoring network Calculation of statistics

Proportion of valid data (Annex XI) Metric Requirement Annual mean 90% SO2 hourly means (350 µg/m³, 24 hours allowed) daily means (125 µg/m³, 3 days allowed) NO2 hourly mean (200 µg/m³, 18 hours allowed) PM10 daily mean (50 µg/m³, 35 days allowed) CO highest daily 8-hour mean (10 mg/m3) 75%

Proportion of valid data (Annex XI) Annual mean Required proportion of valid data = minimum data capture = 90% Definition required proportion of valid data: "90 % of the one-hour values or (if not available) 24-hour values over the year") "Year" to be defined by minimum required time coverage

Proportion of valid data (Annex XI) Other than annual mean Required proportion of valid data < minimum data capture Required proportion of valid data = 75% Minimum data capture = 90%

Proportion of valid data (except O3) Annex I Annex XI Data capture >= 90% Prop. of valid data > 75% Report result of LV compliance check, incl. annual mean Check data capture Report result of LV compliance check , excl. annual mean Data capture < 90% Prop. of valid data >= 75% Treat annual mean as missing* Prop. of valid data < 75% Report LV non-compliance, excl. annual mean Exceed. TRUE Check for LV exceedance Check proportion of valid data Exceed. FALSE Treat as missing for all parameters

Proportion of valid data (OZONE) Minimum data capture > Required proportion of valid data Data capture (Annex I) Proportion of valid data (Annex VII) Summer (AOT40) 90% Winter 75% - Whole year (max. daily 8-hr mean) (implicitly > 75%)

Proportion of valid data (OZONE) AOT40 Annex I Annex VII Data capture summer >= 90% Prop. of valid data >= 90% Report result of TV/LTO compliance check Check data capture summer Data capture summer < 90% Prop. of valid data < 90% Treat as missing

Proportion of valid data (OZONE) Maximum daily 8-hr mean, >120 µg/m3 Annex I Annex VII Data capture Summer >= 90% AND Winter >=75% Target value > 0 days: report non-compliance = 0 days: report compliance Prop. of valid data >= 75% Long-term objective > 25 days: report non-compliance <= 25 days: report compliance Data capture Summer >= 75% AND Winter >=75% Check data capture Target value > 0 days: report non-compliance = 0 days: treat as missing Data capture Summer < 75% OR Winter < 75% Prop. of valid data < 75% Long-term objective > 25 days: report non-compliance <= 25 days: treat as missing

Other comments All comments that are legally coherent with Directives and Implementing Decision > Accept All comments that are legally problematic > Reject Comments on which there is no agreement > Further discussion Larger additional issues > Plan in for future updates

Questions?

X x > 90% < 90% > 75% < 75% > 75% < 75% Compliance or non-compliance If no exceedance, report as missing Treat annual means as missing Treat annual mean as missing

Same, but changed the arrows

Example - Fixed measurements of Benzo(a)pyrene (daily values)   Minimum time coverage requirement = 33% (NminTimeCov = 120 days) Minimum data capture requirement = 85% (including 5% loss for calibration) Nmeas = 119 days Actual time coverage = Nmeas/ Nyear = 119/365*100 = 32.6% (rounded to 33%) Actual time coverage (33%) = Minimum time coverage (33%) √ Nvalid = 112 days Actual data capture = Nvalid/NminTimeCov = 112 / 120*100 = 93.3% (rounded to 93%) Actual data capture (93%) > Minimum data capture (85%) √ → Data quality objectives achieved → Sufficient valid data Note that the samples must also be spread evenly over the weekdays and the year.

Example - Indicative measurement of PM10 (daily values) [1] Minimum time coverage requirement = 14% (NminTimeCov = 51 days) Minimum data capture requirement = 90% (5% loss for calibration cannot be deducted) Nmeas = 50 days Actual time coverage = Nmeas/ Nyear = 50/365*100 = 13.7% (rounded to 14%) Actual time coverage (14%) = Minimum time coverage (14%) √ Nvalid = 40 days Actual data capture = Nvalid/ NminTimeCov = 40 / 51*100 = 78.4% (rounded to 79%) Actual data capture (79%) < Minimum data capture (90%) X → Data quality objectives NOT achieved → INsufficient valid data to calculate the annual mean

Example - Indicative measurement of PM10 (daily values) [2] Actual data capture (79%) > Required percentage of valid data for hourly and daily means (75%) √ → INsufficient valid data to calculate the annual mean, but sufficient valid data to calculate statistical parameters related to short-term health effects