1 LINKING THE WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE AND IPPC DIRECTIVE Main achievements Session 8 - Nature and water Malta, 03/10/2013

2 Content 1. Presentation of the IMPEL project “linking WFD and IED (ex IPPC)” 2. Methodology and Results of Phase 1 and 2 3. Range of activities for co-operation between IPPC, water authorities and environmental inspectorates 4. Promotion of workshop 2013 for guidance paper

3 Presentation of the IMPEL project Project members:  H.M. (Henri) Emond (coord.); Christof Planitzer (coord.); Filipe Vitorino; Conor Clenaghan; Valeria Marchesi; Rune Brandt  2011 – Arno Van Breemen(coord.); Christof Planitzer (coord.); Filipe Vitorino; Conor Clenaghan; Valeria Marchesi; Rune Brandt  Christof Planitzer (coord.); Filipe Vitorino (coord.); Valeria Marchesi; Anabela Rebelo Countries: Netherlands; Austria; Italy; Sweden; Portugal; Irland Consultant: Andrew Farmer

4 Presentation of the IMPEL project (Cont.) IMPEL report on the inter-relationship of the IPPC Directve with other Directives (2006) stated the risk of the need for multiple permits at installations, differente regulatory envolvment, discrepancies between the Directives. How to ensure that licencing and enforcement are both WFD and IPPC proof? How can permits attribute to achieving both IPPC and WFD goals?

5 Methodology Phase 1 (2010): study on the relationship between the IPPC directive, the WFD and other adjacent legislation Phase 2 (2011): Identifying best practices through the use of a questionnaire and holding a workshop; Recommendation on the implementation of WFD and IPPC Directives Phase 3 (2013): To develop a guidance tool (to deal with multiple pollution sources from both IPPC and non-IPPC plants and non- industrial (diffuse) emissions); Includes a way how inspectors can assess environmental impacts of installations

6 Results of Phase 1 and 2: How to?

7 It is important for IPPC to have accurate information on the objectives of the WFD in order to make robust (operational and regulatory) decisions (Coordination and cooperation are key factors for success); WFD objectives lead to IPPC permit conditions that may require going ‘beyond’ BAT - disporpotionate costs issue; EQS and mixing zones – (Coordination and guidance development (ex.: BREF); clear rules); Different scales for implementation (spatial – installation vs. river basement and time – timetable for good ecological status); Results (cont.)

8 There is significant complexity with multiple sources of pollutants to water (IPPC and/or non-IPPC) (Importance of good RBMP and good definition of mixing zones where applicable); There are extensive monitoring requirements for all of the Directives addressed which are different (Coordination on dissemination of data/results; build user friendly results); IMPEL: Examination on best practice in Member-States and develop tools for Environmental Impact Assessment (required by IED) Results (cont.)

9 A workshop, on 24th and 25th of October of 2013, will be held in Bruxelles at IMPEL office, with 15 participants to test the guidance. All contributions are important! Join us! For contacts, the 2013 core team. Phase 3: develop a guidance tool

10 Thank you for your attention Contacts: Christof Planitzer; Filipe Vitorino; Valeria Marchesi; Anabela Rebelo;