Analysis of the reports submitted by Member States on the implementation of directive 2008/1/EC, Directive 2000/76/EC, Directive 1999/13/EC and further development of the web platform to publish the information
Draft report on subtask 3: Analysis of Member States implementation of IPPC and WI Directives – Annex A: Member States IPPC factsheets
Unrestricted Analysis of the reports submitted by the Member States
Framework contract No. ENV/C.4/FRA/2007/0011 Draft Report
Title / Analysis of the reports submitted by the Member States and the further development of the web platform to publish the informationCustomer / European Commission
Customer reference / ANV.C.4/FRA/2007/0011
Confidentiality, copyright and reproduction / Unrestricted
File reference
Reference number
Marie Leverton
AEA
Gemini Building
Harwell IBC
Didcot OX110QR
UK
t: 0870 190 2817
f: 0870 190 5545
AEA is a business name of AEA Technology plc
AEA is certificated to ISO9001 and ISO14001
Author / Name / Liesbet Goovaerts (VITO)Katrijn Alaerts (VITO
Ive Vanderreydt (VITO)
Approved by / Name
Signature
Date
Table of contents
Annex A 5
AEA Energy & Environment iii
Unrestricted Analysis of the reports submitted by the Member States
Framework contract No. ENV/C.4/FRA/2007/0011 Draft Report
Annex A
Annex A sets out the detailed overviews of the Member States responses to the questionnaire.
For each Member State a individual fact sheet is drafted containing:
- The main text given in the response to each qualitative question by means of a short summary. This short summary presents the most relevant information provided by the MS in relation to each question. The responses of the Member States are compared with the data given in the previous reporting exercise, to see whether important changes have been made during this reporting period. The questions are structured using the 5 main categories, used in the reporting tool. The qualitative questions are further split into subcategories providing an overview of specific practical approach and experiences of the Member States for each of the main categories.
- Presentation of the Member States quantitative data in tables;
- The completeness table, which indicates the degree to which the answers comply with the requirements of the questionnaire. The method described in the main report is used.
These fact sheets were presented to the Member States for approval. All comments, clarifications and additional information provided by the Member States were taken into account.
These fact sheets are used as the basis for the analysis made in previous chapters.
Belgium
Overview of the answers
The table below presents the detailed analysis of Belgium's responses to each question of the questionnaire, by means of a short summary or standardised answer where appropriate. Comments regarding the adequacy of the answers in relation to the requirements of the questionnaire are added where necessary.
31
AEA Group
Unrestricted Analysis of the reports submitted by the Member States
Framework contract No. ENV/C.4/FRA/2007/0011 Draft Report
Table 1: Belgium – overview of the answers
Question number – sub question reporting tool / Main categorySubcategory: approach or experiences
Question (Q) / Summary of MS response / Comments /
1 / Category: general description
Subcategory: National legislation and legal provisions
1.1 / Have any significant changes been made since the last reporting period (2003-2005) to national or sub-national legislation and to the permitting system(s) that implement Directive 2008/1/EC? / Brussels: Yes
Flanders: No
Wallonia: Yes / Brussels: Since previous reporting period, Brussels Now has completed the transposition.
Remarks / Brussels: Following the Commission's remarks on the incomplete transposition of the Directive, the Government of the Brussels Capital Region adopted a decree on 11 October 2007 laying down the conditions for the operation of certain classified industrial installations (Moniteur Belge of 31/10/2007).
Flanders: An integrated permitting system already existed since 1991, and already covered all Annex I activities, being wider in scope. Regional legislation was amended in 1999 to be fully in line with the IPPC Directive and ensure compliance.
Reference to legislation (2003-2005)
Level at which legislation apply / Regional
Please describe the changes in 2006-2008 / Brussels: New legislation
Wallonia: Amendment to existing legislation
Please describe the reasons for these changes / Brussels: The legislation did not yet fully comply with the IPPCD requirements
Wallonia: The legislation did not yet fully comply with the IPPCD requirements
Reference to new legislation or legislative framework / Brussels: Decree of the Government of the Brussels Capital Region (AGRBC) of 11 October 2007 laying down the conditions for the operation of certain classified industrial installations (Moniteur Belge of 31/10/2007). The Decree was adopted under the Environmental Permit Order of 5 June 1997.
Wallonia: The Decree of 11 March 1999 on environment permits has been amended by the Decree of 7 July 2006, which amended Art. 65 of the Decree of 11 March 1999 and the Decree of 22 November 2007, which introduces Art. 1(19), which defines BAT and amends Art. 64 on periodicity.
1.3 / Describe any legally binding measures or administrative plans established to ensure compliance with the requirements referred to in Article 5(1) by 30 October 2007 / Brussels: All the existing installations were already covered by an integrated permit. However, these permits were upgraded (in 2008) in order to comply with all points of the obligations under the Directive.
Flanders: These requirements have already long been applied to existing installations. Following amendment of existing legislation in 1999 to bring full compliance with IPPC Directive, if installations were required to grant a permit, the latest date was set at 1 November 1999. All installations are subject to continuous evaluation as the permit period is limited.
Wallonia: An administrative plan was already implemented to ensure that all installations are in compliance with the IPPC requirements. This administrative practice of bringing IPPC into compliance was reinforced by the adoption of the Walloon Government Decree of 8 February 2007 amending the Decree of 4 July 2002 on the procedure and various measures to implement the Decree of 11 March 1999.
1.4 / Have operators been obliged to submit, or could competent authorities request from operators the submission of, permit applications for this purpose? / Brussels: No
Flanders: Yes
Wallonia: No
Remarks / Brussels: Upgrade was initiated by the competent authority.
Wallonia: The Government is entirely responsible for the initiative.
1.4.1 / If Yes, please explain: / Flanders: The implementation has not lead to additional environmental licensing requests; all companies covered by IPPC were already licensed.
1.5 / Describe any changes made since the last reporting period in the organizational structure of the permitting procedures (levels of authorities, distribution of competencies, etc.):
Are there changes considering the involved competent authorities? / Brussels: No changes haven been made.
Flanders: No changes have been made.
Wallonia: No changes have been made.
Remarks / -
1.5.1 / If Yes, please explain: / -
1.6 / Are there any particular difficulties in ensuring full co-ordination of the permitting procedure and conditions, especially where more than one competent authority is involved, as required by Article 7? / Brussels: No
Flanders: No
Wallonia: No
Remarks / Wallonia: If an installation is likely to have an environmental impact in another region of Belgium, than the permit application is forwarded to the competent authorities in that region.
1.6.1 / If Yes, please explain: / -
1.7 / Are there any legislation or guidance documents produced on this issue? / Brussels: No
Flanders: Yes
Wallonia: No
Remarks / -
1.7.1 / If Yes, please explain: / Flanders: General and sector conditions applicable to all installations or sectors of installations: discussion in working groups of all concerned government departments; proposals are sent to the Flemish Minister for the Environment.
First instance permitting procedure and special conditions: the opinions of the various authorities are discussed in the Provincial Environmental Permits Committee, which makes an integrated proposal for a decision by the Provincial Executive.
In the second instance, the proposal is given for a decision to the Flemish Minister for the Environment.
In practice a consensus is usually found for a proposal for a decision.
1.8 / What legal provisions, procedures or guidance are used to ensure that competent authorities refuse to grant a permit in cases where an installation does not comply with the requirements of Directive 2008/1/EC? / Brussels: Regional legislation (Art. 55 of Environmental Permit order of 5 June 1997 (EPO) and Art. 5 of the decree of the Government of the Brussels Capital Region (AGRBC) of 11 October 2007) requires competent permitting authorities to take into account a number of elements in any decision, which cover the general principles set out in Art. 3.
Flanders: Art. 30bis§1 of Title I of VLAREM states that a licence may be granted where it contains conditions guaranteeing that the installation meets the requirements set for this Directive and Title II of VLAREM. Licences will be rejected if this is not the case. The requirements of Directive 2008/1/EC were integrated into Art. 30bis§2 and Art 43ter of Title I of VLAREM, so that a licence must be rejected if it does not meet the requirements of Directive 2008/1/EC.
Wallonia: The decree of 11 March 1999 on environment permits and the decisions taken to implement it.
1.9 / Have permits been refused so far? / Brussels: No
Flanders: Yes
Wallonia: Yes
Remarks / Brussels: Permits have been upgraded.
If available, give information on the numbers and circumstances in which permits have been refused (optional): / -
1.9.1 / Total numbers of permits that have been refused within the reporting period / Flanders: -
Wallonia: 1 / Flanders: No answer.
1.9.2 / Circumstances in which permits have been refused / Flanders: a number of rejections because:
- Expansion would result in unacceptable risk
- Lack of EIA (incorrect application procedure)
- Expansion would result in unacceptable odour for local residents.
Wallonia: IPPC requirements could not be met (BAT based permit conditions)
Subcategory: Specific Member States approach
Subcategory: Experiences of Member States
1.2 / Have Member States experienced any difficulties in implementing the Directive 2008/1/EC associated with the availability and capacity of staff resources? / Brussels: Yes
Flanders: No
Wallonia: Yes
Remarks / -
1.2.1 / If yes, Describe these difficulties, for instance illustrated as appropriate by data on current resources. / Brussels: Only one person is assigned to this task, involving about ten undertakings.
Wallonia: A systematic examination of all the authorisations for every facility requires expertise that is both wide-ranging and highly specialised.
1.2.2 / If yes, Describe any plans to address these difficulties. / Brussels: No measures are planned given the small number of undertakings involved.
Wallonia: Raise staff capacity and streamline implementing procedure.
2 / Category: Permit application and determination process
Subcategory: National legislation and legal provisions
2.1 / Describe any general binding rules, guidance documents or application forms produced to ensure that applications contain all the information required by Article 6, either generally or in relation to specific issues (e.g. methodology for the assessment of significant emissions from installations). / Brussels: Regional legislation specifies the information required (Art. 5 and 10 of EPO, and Art. 3 of AGRBC).
Flanders: Flanders Regional legislation contains verbatim the requirements of Art. 6 (Vlarem I, Art. 5(7)).
Wallonia: Regional legislation (Government Order 2002, Annex I) contains all the information required in Art. 6. / Brussels: More details on the precise content of these articles can be found in the original report.
2.2 / Describe any general binding rules or specific guidelines for competent authorities that have been issued on the following issues:
2.2.1 / the procedures and criteria for setting emission limit values and other permit conditions / Brussels: According to regional legislation any permit conditions must be based on BAT and the local environmental conditions of the facility (Art. 55 en 56 of EPO and AGRBC).
Flanders: Regional legislation contains quality objectives (ELVs), quality standards for each medium and policy tasks corresponding to BAT. Permits may contain specific conditions (more stringent if required), taking into account local circumstances and environmental quality standards.
Wallonia: Art. 4 of the Decree of 11 March 1999 regarding environment permits stipulates that the competent authorities set the permit conditions necessary to ensure a high level of protection for the environment, taking into account the use of BAT.
2.2.2 / the general principles for the determination of best available techniques / Brussels: There is no legal guidance to determine BAT. Due to the very limited number of IPPC undertakings (generally 0, sometimes 1 undertaking per category), a tailored approach is applied. Also, Art. 2(10°) of the AGRBC of 11/10/2007 defines what a BAT is and how it is to be determined.
Flanders: Guidance to BAT determination is provided by a BAT knowledge centre, which disseminates information about BAT, makes recommendations to the government about BAT selection etc. Additionally, an online BAT database has been created which integrates all existing regional and international BAT studies as well as a selection system for environmental techniques which provides data on the purification techniques for waste water, air or soil and for the processing of waste and formulation of checklists as an aid to implementation of the BREF consultations through permit providers and companies. Guidance provided is non-binding, and it is widely used.
Wallonia: Art. 8 of the Decree on environment permits stipulates that the conditions in the permits must be based on the use of BAT. / Wallonia refers to BAT based permits instead of determination of BAT
2.2.3 / the implementation of Article 9(4) / Brussels: The factors which must be taken into account when drawing up any decision are described in Art. 55 of the Environmental Permit Order of 5 June 1997. Furthermore, these provisions are supplemented by those contained in the Decree of the Government of the Brussels Capital Region (AGRBC) of 11/10/2007.
Flanders: The conditions in Title II of VLAREM concern ELVs and the similar parameters and technical measures that match the BAT. Deviation from these conditions, in terms of technical requirements, is possible. In which case the same level of protection for humans and the living environment will be worked towards. Consideration will be given to geographical location and local circumstances by means of the case by case approach.