1
On the implementation of requirements of the
PRTR Protocol to the Aarhus Convention
Michael Stanley-Jones Environmental Information
Management Officer Environment, Housing and Land
Management Division United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe WORKSHOP ON ENVIRONMENTAL
MONITORING AND REPORTING BY ENTERPRISES 4-6
September 2006, Warsaw, Poland
2
From the Aarhus Conventionto the Protocol on
PRTRs

• UNECE Convention on Access to Information,
  Public Participation in Decision-making and
  Access to Justice in Environmental Matters
• 25 June 1998 - Adoption of the Convention at the
  4th Ministerial Environment for Europe
  Conference, Aarhus, Denmark. Signed by 39
  countries and the European Community
• 30 Oct 2001- Entry into force of the Convention
• 21 May 2003 - Adoption of the Protocol on PRTRs
  at extra-ordinary meeting of the Parties,
  within the framework of the 5th Ministerial
  Environment for Europe Conference (Kiev,
  Ukraine)

3
Status of Convention Ratifications
Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta
Moldova, Rep. of Netherlands Norway
Poland Portugal Romania Slovakia Slovenia Spain S
weden Tajikistan Turkmenistan Ukraine United
Kingdom European Community
Albania Armenia Austria Azerbaijan Belarus
Belgium Bulgaria Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark
Estonia Finland Former Yugoslav Rep. of
Macedonia France Georgia Greece Hungary Italy Ka
zakhstan
Convention total 39 Parties (PRTR Protocol 37
Signatories, including Germany, Iceland, Ireland,
Serbia Montenegro. Protocol Parties as 1 Sep
2006 indicated by )
4
Access to information provisions

• Selected features of Convention article 5 Active
  Dissemination
• Transparency and accessibility of information
  systems
• Immediate dissemination of information in cases
  of imminent threat to health or environment
• Sufficient product information to ensure informed
  environmental choices
• Pollutant release and transfer registers
• Increased access to information through Internet
• Article 5, paragraph 3
• each Party to ensure that environmental
  Information progressively becomes available In
  electronic databases which are easily accessible
  to the public through public telecommunication
  networks

5
Legal basis of PRTR Protocol in Aarhus Convention

• Legal basis article 5, para. 9 and article 10,
  para. 2 (e) and (i) of the Aarhus Convention,
  requiring each Party
• to take steps to establish progressively ... a
  coherent, nationwide system of pollution
  inventories or registers on a structured,
  computerized and publicly accessible database
  compiled through standardized reporting. (art.
  5, para. 9)
• taking into account international processes
  and developments, including the elaboration of an
  appropriate instrument concerning pollution
  release and transfer registers or inventories .
  (art. 10, para. 2(i) )

6
Requirements of Protocol on PRTRs

• Facilities and pollutants covered
• General obligations placed on Parties
• Obligations placed on owners / operators
• Elements of reporting
• Quality assessment and validation
• Future steps
• and
• Possible applications (not required)

7
Facilities covered

• Facilities covered (annex I) include
• Thermal power stations and refineries
• Mining and metallurgical industries
• Chemical plants
• Waste and waste-water management plants
• Paper and timber industries
• Intensive livestock production and aquaculture
• Food and beverage production
• Textiles, Tanneries, Shipbuilding

8
Pollutants covered

• Pollutants covered (annex II) include
• Greenhouse gases
• Acid rain pollutants
• Ozone-depleting substances
• Heavy metals
• Certain carcinogens, such as dioxins
• TOTAL 86 pollutants
• N.B. National registers may include additional
  facilities and substances, e.g. European Union
  includes 91 individual substances or groups of
  substances

9
Government

• Chooses among various technical options for
  the design of a central, publicly accessibly
  register to determine the institutional framework
  required for ensuring a coordinated system of
  information flow to it
• Sets forth the rights and responsibilities of
• various key players, e.g.
• the obligation of pollutant-emitting facilities
  to report, and
• the right of the general public to participate
  in decisions concerning PRTRs

10
Elements explicitly set forth in the Protocol or
implicit in its requirements
1. Institution to manage the national PRTR
system (art. 2, para. 5) 2. Structure for
inter-agency coordination 3. Appropriate systems
for enforcement (art. 3, para. 1) Collection,
validation and management of data 4. Collection
of data submitted by owners or operators of
reporting facilities (art. 7, paras. 2 and
5) 5. Assessment of the quality of the data
collected in terms of completeness,
consistency and credibility (art. 10, para. 2) 6.
Collection of information on releases from
diffuse sources (art. 7, para. 4) 8.
Development and management of a register
comprising a structured, computerized
database able to maintain data for 10
reporting years (art. 4, para. (j) and art. 5,
para. 3) 9. Dissemination of information and
training (arts. 8, 11 and 15).
11
Basic obligation of operators
To submit the information specified with
respect to those pollutants and waste for which
thresholds were exceeded Each Party decides
with respect to a particular pollutant to apply
either a release threshold or a manufacture,
process or use (MPU) threshold will be
used Facility operators do not choose under
which requirement (pollutant threshold or MPU) to
report

12

• Reporting requirements of
  operators
• (Article 7 -
  continued)
• Each Party shall require owners or operators of
  facilities specified
• in annex I who
• Release any pollutant specified in annex II in
  quantities exceeding
• applicable thresholds,
• Transfer off-site any pollutant in annex II in
  quantities exceeding
• applicable thresholds,
• Transfer off-site hazardous waste exceeding 2
  tons per year
• or other waste exceeding 2,000 tons per year,
  where the Party has
• opted for waste-specific reporting (as in the
  European Union)
• Transfer off-site any pollutant specified in
  annex II in waste water
• destined for waste-water treatment in
  quantities exceeding the applicable
• threshold

13
Specific reporting elements

• Name, street address, geographical location and
  activities
• of the reporting facility
• Name of the owner or operator and, as
  appropriate, company
• Name and numerical identifier of each specified
  pollutant
• Amount of each specified pollutant released to
  the environment,
• both in aggregate and according to whether
  release is to air, to
• water, or to land, including underground
  injection
• either
• amount of each pollutant transferred off-site
  in the reporting
• year, distinguishing between amounts for
  disposal and for recovery,
• and
• name and address of facility receiving the
  transfer,
• or
• amount of waste transferred off-site,
  distinguishing between
• hazardous waste and other waste, for any
  operations, indicating
• whether waste is destined for recovery or
  disposal
• and for transboundary movements of hazardous
  waste,
• name and address of the recoverer or disposer
  and
• actual site receiving the transfer

14
Reporting elements(continued)

• Amount of each specified pollutant in waste
  water transferred off-site
• Type of methodology used to derive information
  on amounts,
• indicating whether based on measurement,
  calculation or estimation
• (M, C, E)
• Information to include releases and transfers
  from routine and from
• extraordinary events
• Owners or operators to be required to collect
  releases and transfers
• data needed with appropriate frequency, and
  to
• Records of the data from which the reported
  information was derived
• must be kept available for the competent
  authorities for 5 years,
• including description of M, C or E.

15
Quality assessment (Article 10)

• Owners or operators are to assure the quality of
  the information
• they report
• Quality assessment of data duty of the Parties,
  in particular as to
• completeness consistency
  credibility
• taking into account guidelines developed by
  the MOP
• Draft Guidance to implementation of the Protocol
  on PRTRs
• Penultimate version released 31 July 2006
  available on
• web sites of UNECE Working Group on PRTRs and
  WGEMA

16
Best Available Information (BAI)
standard(article 9, para. 2)

• Owners or operators of facilities required to
  ensure the quality
• of information they report and to use best
  available information
• Best available information may include
• monitoring data
• emission factors
• mass balance
• equations
• indirect monitoring or other calculations
• engineering judgments, and
• other methods
• Nb. EU adopting more stringent guidance on BAI

17
Quality assurance and control

• Calibration and maintenance of the monitoring
  system
• Use of recognized quality management systems
• Periodic checks by an external accredited
  laboratory
• Certification of instruments and personnel under
  
• recognized certification schemes
• Elements for guidelines on strengthening
  environmental
• monitoring and reporting by enterprises,
  para 36 (i)
• (ECE/CEP/AC.10/2006/4)

18
Validation

• Where appropriate, validation should be done in
  accord
• with internationally approved methodologies
• e.g. ISO, European Committee for
  Standardization (CEN)
• However, in some cases, national or sector
  methodologies
• may be superior to Internationally-approved
  ones,
• or such approval may be pending (HOT ISSUE)
• Validation of data may be more easily achievable
  if
• responsibility is delegated to local or
  regional authorities
• or to the regional or local offices of national
  authorities,
• since they will be closer to the operators and
  are more likely
• to have an overview of their activities
• Guidance on validation is evolving

19
Next steps for Protocols future implementation

• Setting up the Protocols institutional
  architecture
• rules of procedure and compliance review
  mechanism
• financial arrangements
• technical assistance mechanism,
• international cooperation and reporting
• International PRTR Coordinating Group
• SAICM / ICCM etc
• Completion of technical guidance on
  implementation
• Further guidance on dissemination of PRTR
  information
• or data users guide suggested

20
Possible future applications

• Pan-European Environment and Health Information
  System (Environment-for-Europe Ministerial
  Conference / WHO Europe)
• Commercial property management information
  systems (due diligence research, e.g.
  Environment Agency of England and Wales)
• Integration into Global Reporting Initiative,
  Socially Responsible Investment (SRI), and
  evolving ISO standards and OECD guidelines
• SAICM national performance tracking under ICCM
• Convergence of regional PRTR systems (North
  American Taking Stock, European PRTR, East Asia?)

21
PRTR success story

• For the 10-year period from 1988 to 1997,
  atmospheric emissions of some 260 known
  carcinogens and reproductive toxins from the
  United States Toxics Release Inventory reporting
  facilities have been reduced by approximately 85
  in the State of California, and by some 42 in
  the rest of the country (i.e., for all chemicals
  listed in California as known to cause either
  cancer or reproductive toxicity and reported as
  air emissions under TRI ).
• From P. Sand (2002)

22
MORE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THE AARHUS
CONVENTION WEBSITE http//www.unece.org/env/pp/p
rtr Aarhus Clearinghouse http//aarhusclearinghou
se.unece.org