ESD Review Tool (RT) for the Union expert review of GHG emission inventories Kick-off meeting EEA, Copenhagen 10 December 2013 Melanie Sporer, Marie Jaegly, EEA

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Outline I/ A glance at the technical review 2012 II/ ESD review team and ESD Review Tool user 2015 III/ Review steps and communication flow IV/ User and use cases

I/ A GLANCE AT THE TECHNICAL REVIEW 2012

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Review reports to Commission and MS (17 Aug) Summary - technical review 2012 Extended initial checks 15 Jan-15 Mar EU- MMD submission MS take note of findings Draft review report Bilateral discussions: Commission and MS Desk review – initial questions to MS from TERT (1-21 May) 15 Apr UNFCCC submission MS replies Centralised review – additional questions from TERT (4-21 June) 15 Apr UNFCCC data incl. re-submissions to 15 May MS take note of findings and can provide comments on report Country visits (BG,CY,HR,RO) Stage 3 Stage 1,2

Consultation with Member States 2012 Initial questions -> Response to Questions -> Teleconference -> Technical Correction/MS Revision -> Response to Technical Corrections/MS revisions -> Country Visit -> Review Report Number of contact rounds between TERT and MS Minimum = 5 Maximum = 11 4 MS visited

Q&A 2012 Over 900 questions and answers with countries from the desk and centralised reviews

II/ ESD REVIEW TEAM AND ESD REVIEW TOOL USER 2015

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision EEA Review secretariat ESD review team 2014 / 2015 Step 1: European Topic Centre (ETC/ACM) Step 2: Technical expert review team (TERT) Project manager Review coordinator Member States DG CLIMA Review team ETC/ACM planning support, initial checks, data provision DG CLIMA service contract: ESD Review Tool EEA Inventory team EEA IT team

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Users of the ESD Review Tool Sector review experts (SE) Lead reviewer(s) (LR) Member State experts (MS-SE) Member State authority (designated contact point) EEA review secretariat EEA inventory team EEA system administrator Review team IT team

III/ REVIEW STEPS AND COMMUNICATION FLOW

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Review reports to Commission and MS (30 June) Summary – annual review steps 2015 and 2017 to 2021 Extended initial checks 15 Jan EU-MMD submission MS replies Draft review report Bilateral discussions: Commission and MS MS replies Annual review - questions from TERT 15 Apr UNFCCC submission MS comments Unresolved significant issues from EEA to MS qualified for step 2 review MS replies Additional initial checks 15 Mar EU-MMD submission Step 1 Step 2 Potential technical corrections from EEA to MSMS replies

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Review reports to Commission and MS (25 Aug) Summary – comprehensive review steps 2016 and 2022 Extended initial checks 15 Jan EU-MMD submission MS replies Draft review report Bilateral discussions: Commission and MS MS replies 15 Apr UNFCCC submission MS comments MS replies Additional initial checks 15 Mar EU-MMD submission Step 1 Step 2 Potential technical corrections from EEA to MSMS replies Desk review – initial questions to MS from TERT MS replies Centralised review – additional questions from TERT Country visits

Approval (Lead reviewe) Approval (Lead reviewe) New question (reviewer) New question (reviewer) Yes No Distributing (country coordinator) Distributing (country coordinator) Drafting answer (country expert) Drafting answer (country expert) Approval (country coordinator) Approval (country coordinator) Yes No Pending reply (reviewer) Pending reply (reviewer) Approval of closure (Lead reviewer) Approval of closure (Lead reviewer) Question closed Similar workflow for replies and follow-up questions Marked as closed (reviewer) Yes No

IV/ USER AND USE CASES

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Sector review expert I Create new draft review finding – Create new question from draft review finding – Close draft review finding without further action or after comments received from reviewer counterpart Fill meta-data to the question Flag question as open, Attach electronic files/docs to the question View list and status (open/pending/closed, meta-data) of my category of questions and answers Edit previously created question

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Sector review expert II Send questions to potential reviewer counterpart for consideration/quality check Edit or comment questions received from reviewer counterpart Send question to lead reviewer for approval Prompted by a notification , access and read answer to my question Access electronic files/docs accompanied to the answer from MS sector experts Draft reply Send reply to lead reviewer for approval Propose closure of question

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Lead reviewer See overview of all questions, with those that need action from me highlighted or on top Prompted by notification, new review question to quality check – Send approved question to MS authority – Make edits to the question (visible in track changes) and send question back to reviewer. – Append comments to the question – Make minor/editorial edits and send question directly to MS authority – Send (e.g. insignificant) question back to reviewer without editing Receives notification for information, when reply is sent to the reviewer Confirms closure of question

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Member State sector expert Receive notification that new or pending question needs answer Access electronic files attached to the question Draft reply to question Attach an electronic file to the answer Flag and lock confidential data attached to the reply Sends reply for approval to MS authority

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Member State authority Upon reception of notification , direct new question to the relevant MS expert May answer question View overview and status of all questions sent to my country Upon notification by , approve MS sector expert’s reply and submit reply to Sector review expert Upon notification by when a relevant question was closed by the Sector review expert, inform MS sector expert

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision EEA review secretariat View question overview, status, meta-data Generate custom reports, by countries, reviewer, lead reviewer, categories, question and answer status etc Export spreadsheets and generate graphs Receive notification when new questions and answers are sent Can unsubscribe (or be unsubscribed) from info notifications if needed Start progress statistics queries to monitor progress of review: how many questions and answers are open, pending closed and when, b whom in which MS and which category, how many flagged as potential significant issues, how many flagged as potential technical corrections Export data and query results and produce Review report per country Manage access/authorisation levels of all users

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Entry fields in the review finding profile Year Gas GHG source sector/category Comments Review finding description Question Answer Status flag (open/pending/closed) Tickboxes, dropdown lists, numerical and textfields…

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Non-functional requirements I Open standards Storage of information in a database Manage files Browser-based interaction Management of permissions: –Use Eionet LDAP, with Plone authentication functionality –Set permissions up so that country experts can only see what is relevant for their own country. That must also apply to attachments. Compatible with all main platforms and browsers Look: EEA graphical identity Handled by Plone

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Non-functional requirements II Usability: as simple as possible! Functions that will help users: –Spell checking –Track changes, keeping track of the different versions of questions and answers –Notification service, (action and information s including link to relevant question) API allowing an external script to create questions automatically Extensibility: as flexible as possible, so it can be adapted to other review processes Reliability: must be able to handle the expected number of contributors at a given time

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision Entry fields in the review finding profile Year Gas GHG source sector/category Comments Review finding description Question Answer Status flag (open/pending/closed) Tickboxes, dropdown lists, numerical and textfields…

ADDITIONAL SLIDES

Development of IT tools and functionalities for the annual inventory review under the EU Effort Sharing Decision EEA Review secretariat ESD review roles and links Technical expert review team (TERT) Project manager Review coordinator Secretary Member States DG CLIMA Review team DG CLIMA contractor Additional EEA staff and IT/data support ETC/ACM initial checks, data provision

Feedback and possible improvements: Efficiency of communication process Feedback: is quickly and easy to archive especially if supplemented by phone calls and web-based platform to exchange large documents Efficient and timely communication with coordinators Possible improvement ideas from countries : Calculation sheets could be sent to all MS and not only upon request Web-based tool could help streamline communications Better to take into account UNFCCC review

Feedback and possible improvements: Communication tools and templates MS feedback: Would have been preferred getting some feedback to responses, especially those which were later on addressed in the review report as recommendations In principle the [question and answer sheet] is fine, but at the end of the process there were still questions indicated as ‘partly resolved’ although they seemed solved. Possible improvement ideas from countries : Include feedback on recommendations/revised estimates at especially whether resolved/unresolved or approved/disapproved in the communication template The format for forwarding follow-up questions could be improved (more clearly highlighted, e.g. in colour) and should be used consistently throughout the sectors Faster feedback if the answers provided by MS resolved questions Web-based tool could be taken into consideration

Feedback and possible improvements: Timing of the communication process MS feedback: The review weeks were most demanding (availability of all MS experts, planning of summer holidays) Would have been good to get the recommendations earlier in the process Possible improvement ideas: Timestamp of question: date when sent to MS than date when TERT started to work on draft finding Set dates for the review a long time in advance to ensure availability of MS experts Provision of feedback on recommendations/revised estimates at an earlier stage (before draft review report was sent)

Communication process: ‘desk review’ and ‘centralised review’ SE (18) LR (4) EEA Review Secretariat MS (27+1) TL DG CLIMA Q&A Master file 27+1 Q&A Country sheets 252 Transcripts: 9 categories 27+1 countries Identify relevant questions Quality-control questions Quality- control and number questions Archive Q&A s Quality-control questions Maintain Q&A master file Compile questions for countries Compile replies for TERTs Document Q&A progress Communicate indications for technical corrections or irregularities to MS (DG CLIMA) Provide answers