1. Survey on the implementation of Directive 2008/50/EC
Dick van den Hout, TNO
Jürgen Schneider, UBA Austria
AQSG meeting, 6/7 June 2011

2. Review of 2008/50/EC and 2004/107EC
Review of AQ Directive 2008/50/EC (Art. 32) and Fourth Daughter Directive (Art. 8)
Collect views and ideas on strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats regarding these directives
This is one of the first steps in the review of the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution
Service contract with Commission

3. Work to be done by TNO and UBA
Support the Commission in the preparation of the review of the AQ Directive, in particular:
Collect and analyse experience, views and ideas of practitioners and stakeholders
Main tools:
Obtain targeted information via questionnaires
Use this information for SWOT analysis of AQ Directive and 4th Daughter Directive
Give recommendations on possible areas for revision

4. Previous questionnaires in CAFE
Previous experience in the framework of CAFE in 2003/2004:
Public consultation on air pollution
online questionnaire (using “IPM tool”*)
responses (highest ever at that time)
38 multiple choice questions, one open question
Questionnaire to Member States
11 open questions
*: IPM: interactive policy making,

5. Three target groups for this consultation
The consultation is aimed at three target groups:
Interested public
Professionals in the field of air quality
Members of the Air Quality Stakeholder Group
For each target group a questionnaire has been designed, with the same thematic structure, but differences in nature and level of detail.

6. Themes addressed by questionnaires
PART 1 The big picture (Thematic Strategy context)
PART 2 Elements of AQD/DD4
Approach of the directive
Standards
Assessment
Management
Public information
PART 3 Governance
Performance of the different governance levels
Important scientific/technological advances to consider
Most important issues for the review
PART 4 Your involvement

7. Differences in questionnaire structure
Type of questions
Questionnaire structure
Interested public
AQ professionals
Members of SEG
. Multiple
choice
Almost all questions
Most questions
None
. Open
(free text
replies)
1 question
A few questions
All questions
Submission of replies
Online
Optional:
Online or offfline in text document

8. Online questionnaire for the interested public (Target Group 1)

9. Online questionnaire for AQ professionals (Target Group 2)

10. Example of question for members of SEG (Target Group 3)
The air quality standards
The air quality directives set a number of limit and target values (standards) to trigger action with the aim to protect human health and the environment. These standards were based on latest scientific evidence at the time (e.g. WHO guidelines) and considerations on the attainability. For PM2.5 an Exposure Concentration Obligation and National Exposure Reduction Target was provided for as complementary objectives to the standards. To assess compliance with the standards, additional elements were included such as the margin of tolerance, the possibility for time extensions and the possibility to discount for certain sources such as natural sources and winter sanding.
You are kindly requested to present your views on the individual objectives and standards as well as the other elements to assess compliance. Please also provide any additional information that you consider helpful for the review or for substantiating your views. You may consider addressing in your reply in particular (note you do not have to reply to every issue):
the differences of setting limit values, target values or other objectives (and whether to apply these individually or in combination as for PM2.5);
the effectiveness of the derogations and flexibility provided in the directives;
the limit values for PM10 and the objectives for PM2.5 and how they could be reviewed in order to make them more effective;
the effectiveness of the target values for heavy metals (including the provisions for mercury) and PAHs and its potential link to PM;
the effectiveness of the limit values for NO2;
the effectiveness of the target values for ozone;
the effectiveness of the limit values set to protect the environment;
any other issue.
Please give your reply here…
Please provide any additional information (e.g. links or references to internet pages, reports, studies): …

11. Example of question for members of SEG (Target Group 3)
The Air Quality Directives constitute a common policy framework for EU Member States to reduce harmful effects of air pollution. It aims to establish a level playing field by setting uniform air quality standards while leaving flexibility at the national level in choosing appropriate measures where needed.
You are kindly requested to present your views on the provisions on governance related issues in the directives. Please also provide any additional information that you consider helpful for the review or for substantiating your views. You may consider addressing in your reply in particular (note you do not have to reply to every issue):
any barriers to fully implement effective measures;
the role of the public in setting up air quality plans;
the administrative burden within Member States in relation to the protection provided by the directives:
for air quality assessment and reporting,
for air quality management;
the distribution of obligations under EU legislation and national responsibilities (subsidiarity);
any other issue.
Please give your reply here…
Please provide any additional information (e.g. links or references to internet pages, reports, studies): …

12. Analysis of the questionnaire: SWOT analysis
Strengths: in which respects are the provisions achieving their intended purpose(s)?
Weaknesses: in which respects are the provisions not achieving their intended purpose(s) – and why?
Opportunities: what are possibilities to improve the provisions?
Threats: which upcoming external influences (other policies, technologies, scientific results) may negatively affect the effectiveness of the provisions?

13. Timetable online consultation
Action
Ready by
Launch all three Qs
(TG 1&2 online, TG3 via )
June
Closure Q for public and professionals (TG 1&2)
12 weeks after launch
Closure Q for TG 3 (SEG)
15 September
Analysis and further evaluation of revision options
October – December 2011
Presentation of results
2nd SEG Meeting
Final report
15 February 2012