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 3
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.
France
Overview of the answers
The table below presents the detailed analysis of France’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.
29
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: France – 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? / no
Remarks / -
Reference to legislation (2003-2005) / - / no answer
Level at which legislation apply / no answer
Please describe the changes in 2006-2008 / -
Please describe the reasons for these changes / -
Reference to new legislation or legislative framework / - / no answer
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 / Since 1976 France has had a law entitled 'law on installations classified for environmental protection purposes', which is based on the integrated approach, which provides for a prior authorisation procedure for those installations where the environmental issues are particularly important. All installations governed by the IPPC Directive are subject to this permit procedure.
There is a specific procedure created within the framework of the transposition of the Directive known as the 'operational report', established by the order of 29 June 2004 (which replaced an order of 17 July 2000). This governs the review of conditions for permits granted before 30 October 1999, and possible updates to them. It provides that the operators involved must submit to the competent authority an operational report for their installations covering the past ten years, which should include:
a) an analysis of the installation's operation over the previous ten years
b) elements to supplement and amend the analysis of the effects of the installation on the environment
c) an analysis of the performance of the pollution prevention and reduction procedures, as compared with the effectiveness of the available techniques,
d) measures planned by the operator on the basis of the BAT to prevent, restrict and compensate for the problems caused by the installation as well as an estimate of the corresponding expenditure.
The order sets out in detail the timetable for the submission of the first report on existing installations, depending on the initial date of issue of the permit. This timetable ended on 30 June 2007. Detailed instructions for the implementation of the order's provisions were given to the relevant authorities in the circulars dated 6 December 2004, for all installations except for farms, and dated 14 February 2005, for farms. Two new circulars were issued to add to these instructions, on 25 July 2006 (not applicable to farms) and on 12 September 2006 (for farms). These focused specifically on the implementation of the BAT.
1.4 / Have operators been obliged to submit, or could competent authorities request from operators the submission of, permit applications for this purpose? / no
Remarks / The procedure known as the 'operational report' is not a permit application. It requires the operator to submit a number of documents which enable the competent authority to have the information it needs in order to review the permit conditions and to formulate any updates that should be made to them.
1.4.1 / If Yes, please explain:
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? / no changes
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? / no
Remarks / It has not been necessary to carry out any coordination, since there is just one authority responsible for issuing permits.
1.6.1 / If Yes, please explain: / -
1.7 / Are there any legislation or guidance documents produced on this issue? / no
Remarks / There is no need to have any such arrangements (only one competent authority)
1.7.1 / If Yes, please explain: / -
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? / The Environment Code stipulates that an operating permit may only be issued if the dangers or problems resulting from the operation can be prevented by measures specified by the prefectural permit order. In addition, the draft permit order is submitted to an administrative committee with an advisory role, made up of representatives of the various parties involved (the state, local authorities, industrial firms, consumer and environmental protection associations, experts and appropriate public figures, including at least one doctor) which issues an opinion on the relevance of the planned measures. In general, the competent authority follows the line of the opinion issued by the committee.
1.9 / Have permits been refused so far? / yes
Remarks / The French authorities do not have any figures on the specific proportion made up by installations governed by the IPPC Directive within the total number of permits refused (in the region of 150). In addition, it is very often the case that the operator withdraws his application when he sees that the investigation is likely to result in a refusal.
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 / - / no answer
1.9.2 / Circumstances in which permits have been refused / - / no answer
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? / yes
Remarks / -
1.2.1 / If yes, Describe these difficulties, for instance illustrated as appropriate by data on current resources. / The main difficulties encountered in implementing the directive are of two kinds:
· ensuring that existing installations comply. Although the principles of French legislation and the IPPC Directive are very close, the procedure for ensuring compliance under Art. 5 of the Directive took more time than originally had been estimated and required a very high level of involvement by the inspection bodies.
· implementation of the BREF documents. This posed some difficulties in connection both with the innovative nature of the Directive's approach with regard to the BAT, with which the inspectors were unfamiliar, and with understanding these very hefty documents, which were available only in English. To mitigate these difficulties, a number of steps were taken, such as the creation of specific training courses for inspectors on the implementation of the Directive and the use of BREF documents, the translation of all these documents and the production of technical summaries of each BREF.
1.2.2 / If yes, Describe any plans to address these difficulties. / see 1.2.1
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). / The rules for the permit procedure are set by the Environment Code. Under this procedure, the operator submits a single permit application file to the competent authority, including an impact assessment and a risk assessment. The code stipulate what the file must contain, including the information required by Art. 6 of Directive 2008/1/EC.
· Transposition of Art. 6.1.a of the Directive: the applicant must describe in his permit application file the nature and volume of the activities that he proposes to carry out.
· Transposition of art 6.1.b: the applicant must describe the 'manufacturing processes that he will implement, the materials that he will use and the products that he will manufacture, in such a way that the risks or problems caused by the installation may be assessed'. The 'manufacturing processes' include all the installation's manufacturing stages. 'Materials' means raw materials, substances and energy.
· Transposition of art. 6.1.c, d and e: the impact assessment must contain 'an analysis of the direct and indirect, temporary and permanent effects of the installation on the environment and in particular on natural sites and landscapes, fauna and flora, natural environments and biological balances, on the possible disturbances to the neighbourhood (sounds, vibrations, smells, light emissions) or on agriculture, public hygiene, health, sanitary conditions or safety, on the protection of physical assets and the cultural heritage; this analysis must detail, as necessary, the origin, nature and severity of air pollution (i.e. the quantity of pollution), water and soil pollution, the volume and polluting nature of waste, the noise level of the machines that will be used and the vibrations that they may cause, the method and conditions for water supply and water use'. The analysis relates to the environment as a whole. If the impact assessment is incomplete, the permit application will be rejected. The impact assessment also includes an analysis of the initial state of the site and its environment.
· Transposition of art. 6.1.f: the impact assessment must contain 'the measures planned by the applicant to prevent, restrict and if possible compensate for the difficulties caused by the installation and an assessment of the corresponding costs. Detailed descriptions must be given of these measures, setting out the planned arrangements for organisation and operation and their detailed characteristics'.
· Transposition of art. 6.1.g and h: the impact assessment also includes documents indicating expected performance, particularly with regard to protection of underground water, treatment and removal of waste water and gas emissions, and monitoring, the removal of waste and operational residue, the conditions for supply to the installation of the material to be handled there, the transporting of the products manufactured and efficient energy use. Waste management is governed by the Environment Code. The measures taken for classified installations must take into account the objectives mentioned concerning, in particular, waste prevention, reduction and recovery.
· Transposition of art. 6.1.i: The permit order sets out the analysis methods and measures necessary for the supervision of the installation and the monitoring of its effects on the environment.
· Transposition of art. 6.1.j: A non-technical summary of the impact assessment has to be produced in order to make it easier for the public to be aware of the information contained in the assessment.
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 / The conditions imposed on the operator in the prefectural permit order are governed by the provisions of the sectoral ministerial orders setting the minimum provisions applicable (general binding conditions) covering all types of pollution (water, air, soil, waste, noise, vibration, site rehabilitation, etc.). These minimum conditions may be made more stringent by the competent authority depending on the circumstances in the facilities at which they are aimed, the characteristics of the installation and the BAT applicable to it. In addition, usually these orders are accompanied by an instruction addressed to the competent authorities permitting them to facilitate implementation. The list of sectoral ministerial orders is given in the reply to question 2.13.