1. INSPIRE and EU- reporting The long and winding road to map your reporting obligations INSPIRE and EU-reporting | 26 November 2015

2. Contents 1.INSPIRE in the Netherlands 2.EU reporting obligations 3.Mapping activities 4.Way foward INSPIRE and EU-reporting | 26 November 2015

3. INSPIRE in the Netherlands ●GEONOVUM as a temporarily project organization ●Many Annex 1 by law to be used by the authorities ●New legislation for permitting refers to basis data sets and INSPIRE+ as technical solution for state organizations to use the same dataset(s) ●RIVM responsible for 9 dataflows (Annex 3) ●One in the INSPIRE data model, the other 8 still as is INSPIRE and EU-reporting | 26 November 2015 3

4. EU reporting obligations (MiW) ●Definitions, categorisations -Annex 1, Facility versus installation, SOx - SO2, fuel sold – fuel used, CRF versus NFR ●Double reporting -Waste (E-PRTR and ), NEC/LRTAP, facilities: E-PRTR, ETS, UWWTP and LPS -Information available at other EU institutions, EU as reporter (Kyoto, EU MM) ●Information needed -Information asked that is already known (long-latitude and NUTS3 and ZIP and …) -Needed to do QA/QC? Responsibility? INSPIRE and EU-reporting | 26 November 2015 4

5. EU reporting obligations (MiW) ●Non mandatory items -Useful to get the bigger picture -Useless because always incomplete, extra burden in the tooling ●Centralised reporting structure in the MS versus decentralised -Consistent but complex -Integrated reporting from the operators -Back to back EU expert meetings (nobody has the whole picture) -Integration of deliverables of comparable obligations (NEC/LRTAP with UNFCCC) -Works well for E-PRTR, LCP, IED and its tooling INSPIRE and EU-reporting | 26 November 2015 5

6. EU reporting obligations (MiW) ●Tooling -Variation (Webforms, XML, XLS, DOC, CRF-reporter) -EIONET works well, state of the art? -Report once, multiple usage, by law! -Collecting versus submitting ●Timing -On facility level versus national total (you need facilities to calculate the national total) -Data consistency, one date (snapshot) INSPIRE and EU-reporting | 26 November 2015 6

7. Mapping of data to the new datamodel Bad example ●UNFCCC CRF-reporter: 10 dimensional cube ●Every country resource intensive, including the EEA ●All Kyoto, EU-MM reporting postponed for more than 7 months Lessons learned example ●Life feed for the AQ-directive ●We just managed, also EU central tooling ●Despite help form the EEA a big effort. ●Only a marginal part of the INSPIRE data model is used Good example? ●E-PRTR, LCP, IED – only the administrative part of the facilities ●To low ambition level INSPIRE and EU-reporting | 26 November 2015 7 

8. Way forward ●INSPIRE ICT community and reporting community: two worlds ●They meet each other in the data (144 pages to describe a farm …) ●Worst scenario: every country does its own mapping ●Tooling of the EEA is a possibility to bring the two worlds together ●Map in the format (and in the XML) all the data to the INSPIRE model and harmonize the categorizations ●This result can be easily implemented in the MS ●Have always INPIRE on he agenda in the technical committees ●Have more back to back meetings with the different EU obligations (E-PRTR / UWWTP) (Waste EU/EUROSTAT) (EU-MM and NEC) INSPIRE and EU-reporting | 26 November 2015 8

9. Thank you for the attention INSPIRE and EU-reporting | 26 November 2015 9 Wim.van.der.Maas@rivm.nl