Committee on Petitions NOTICE TO MEMBERS

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN PARLIAMT Committee on Petitions NOTICE TO MEMBERS Subject: Petition 1377/2010 by M.P. (Polish), on behalf of the citizens pressure group Terra, bearing 2413 signatures, on industrial pollution in the town of Szczecinek, north-west Poland 1. Summary of petition The petitioner complains about the serious air, soil and water pollution in the town of Szczecinek, north-west Poland, caused by the firm of Kronospan, a major producer of woodbased panel board products. The petitioner states that this pollution comprises particular emissions of highly toxic substances such as nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, formaldehyde, isobutanol, isopropanol, glycol, hydrocarbons and particulates, and that the groundwater and soil are polluted with ammonia and nickel. The petitioner also points out that the firm in question is located very close to two Natura 2000 areas, Jeziora Szczecineckie (PLH320009) and Dorzecze Parsęty (PLH320007). Since the competent Polish authorities have still not taken effective action, the petitioner calls on the European Parliament to take the matter up with a view to halting pollution by this firm. 2. Admissibility Declared admissible on 14 February Information requested from Commission under Rule 202(6). 3. Commission reply, received on 10 June Combustion installations with a rated thermal input exceeding 50 MW as well as installations for the incineration of municipal waste (household waste and similar commercial, industrial and institutional wastes) with a capacity exceeding 3 tonnes per hour fall within the scope of Directive 2008/1/EC concerning integrated pollution prevention and control (hereinafter: the CM\ doc PE v10-00 United in diversity

2 IPPC Directive see point 5.2 of Annex I) 1. The IPPC Directive requires installations falling within its scope to operate in accordance with permits including emission limit values based on best available techniques (BAT), designed to prevent and, where that is not practicable, generally to reduce emissions and the impact to the environment as a whole. The prevention or reduction of emissions to air, water and soil should, therefore, be dealt with in the environmental permits issued in accordance with the IPPC Directive. The Commission has adopted a number of BAT reference documents (BREFs) covering the activities that fall within the scope of the IPPC Directive, that are to be taken into account by the competent authorities when establishing BAT-based emission limit values, equivalent parameters or technical measures for such installations. A BREF on large combustion plants was adopted in July and on waste incineration in August Moreover, such installations have to comply with the emission limit values and other requirements of Directive 2001/80/EC on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants 4 (hereinafter: the LCP Directive) and Directive 2000/76/EC on the incineration of waste 5 (hereinafter: the WI Directive), respectively. The Commission has also checked compliance with the air quality limit values set by Directive 2008/50/EC on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe. The zone 'Powiat szczecinecki' was exceeding the daily PM 10 limit value in Consequently, the Commission initiated an infringement procedure against Poland for the failure to apply this limit value over several years in several zones and agglomerations. Given that compliance has still not yet been reached inter alia in that zone, a reasoned opinion was sent to Poland in September 2010 and the response to that is currently being analysed. The Commission will request information from the Polish authorities to assess how the provisions of the IPPC, LCP and WI Directives are implemented with regard to the specific installation concerned. It will also seek information with regard to the possible link to the health of the citizens in the area. The Commission will continue to follow up the air quality infringement case. 4. Commission reply (REV), received on 17 February The Commission contacted the Polish authorities and received a reply on 11 July The Polish authorities inform the Commission of the following:- - Ongoing activities : Three companies are operating on the premises at ul. Waryńskiego 1, Szczecinek: 1 OJ L 24, , p OJ L 309, , p OJ L 332, , p. 91. PE v /8 CM\ doc

3 - Kronospan Chemical Szczecinek Spółka z o.o.: a manufacturer of basic chemicals, falling within the scope of point 4.1 of Annex I to the IPPC Directive. It holds an integrated permit granted on 30 October 2007, last amended on 24 February 2011; - Kronospan Polska Spółka z o.o.: a manufacturer of particle board, which does not perform any activities referred to in Annex I to the IPPC Directive, but holds permits under administrative decisions; - Kronospan Szczecinek Spółka z o.o.: a manufacturer of wood-based boards, wood panels, lamination paper, water-soluble paints and lacquers. According to the reply from the Polish authorities, the capacity thresholds for the activities referred to in points 1.1, 5.2 and 6.7 of Annex I to the IPCC Directive have not been exceeded in connection with the operation of fuel combustion installations, waste incineration plants and the use of organic solvents in surface treatment. However, the Commission is of the view that all combustion processes should be added together for the purpose of calculating the capacity thresholds and will ask for clarification from the Polish authorities. One of the plants on this site meets the definition of a waste co-incineration plant as set out in Directive 2000/76/EC on waste incineration and it holds the required permits for the discharge of gases and dusts into the air and a permit for waste recovery (R1). Since the Commission has not received clear information on monitoring, it will ask for information on emission limit values, on monitoring requirements and, if available, on the monitoring results. The Commission has not received clear information on "installations with a total thermal input from technological sources amounting to MW" and "combustion plants (steam generators, dry rooms) with a total energy input of 32 MW" which are located on the premises of this company. It will, therefore, ask for clarification from the Polish authorities, in particular concerning the possible distinction between "normal" and "other" (from technological sources) combustion. The fuel combustion process in the company does not fall within the scope of Directive 2001/80/EC, (IPPC Directive) because combustion products from the fuel combustion installations are directly used in manufacturing processes, particularly for heating, drying or other treatment of objects or materials. The company holds the required permit for the discharge of gases and dusts into the air, but no requirements exist in relation to NH 3 (ammonia) emissions. - Inspections : During the last two years, the Provincial Inspectorate for Environmental Protection in Szczecin conducted 16 inspections, including comprehensive inspections with measurements at the site of all companies operating there. As a result of the inspections conducted in 2010 concerning the integrated permit for Kronospan Chemical Szczecinek Spółka z o.o., the following infringements were found: 1. measurements of emissions into the air of some pollutants were not performed; 2. measurements of noise emission in the environment were not performed. An administrative sanction in the form of a penalty notice was imposed on a person in charge, and an order was issued for the irregularities found to be remedied within specified deadlines. CM\ doc 3/8 PE v10-00

4 - Court proceedings : There have been two court actions against the Kronospan companies. The proceedings in the Criminal Division concerned a refusal to accept a penalty notice for a failure to notify the competent authority about the occurrence of an incident (a chimney fire) on 12 September 2010 on the emitter of the drying room of Kronospan Polska Spółka z o.o., and of measures taken to limit its negative environmental impact. These proceedings ended on 24 May 2011 with the acquittal of the defendants. Moreover, an action brought by residents of Szczecinek against Kronospan Szczecinek Spółka z o.o. for the cessation of emissions is pending in the District Court in Szczecinek, 1st Civil Division. - Air quality : In November 2010, the competent authority opened a third measurement station in Szczecinek - an automatic air pollution measurement station at ul. Przemysłowa, which is located within the impact zone of the Kronospan installation. At this station, ongoing measurements of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter (PM 10 ) and ammonia are performed. Additionally, manual measurements of formaldehyde are conducted at this station. Besides, records of meteorological parameters (air temperature, wind direction and speed, atmospheric pressure and air humidity) are also kept, making possible a detailed analysis of the reasons for the occurrence, in particular, of periods of high concentrations of the substances registered at this station. The results are made available every hour at the following website: The first annual air quality assessment at the station at ul. Przemysłowa will be made for the year 2011 (i.e. in the first quarter of 2012). Based on the official data sent by Poland for 2010, the zone 'Powiat szczecinecki' was exceeding the daily PM 10 limit value also in As concerns the bad application of Directive 2008/50/EC on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe, there is an ongoing infringement case against Poland. According to the additional information received from the petitioner, the competent regional authority (the Marshal) issued a revised permit for the Kronospan Concern in early 2011, which grants higher emission ceilings for certain pollutants. In particular, a higher ceiling for particulate matter has been granted. Conclusion As it stands, the Commission is unable to assess fully the situation. Therefore, the Polish authorities will be contacted again to obtain more details about the revised permits and the reasons for the increased emission ceilings. The Commission is currently analysing the reply from the Polish authorities to the Reasoned Opinion regarding the ongoing infringement case. PE v /8 CM\ doc

5 5. Commission reply (REV II), received on 30 August The Commission has contacted the Polish authorities for a second time to ask for further clarification on the information received on 11 July In their reply of 30 March 2012, the Polish authorities said the following. Unlike Kronospan Chemical Szczecinek Company Ltd., an integrated permit has not been issued for Kronospan Szczecinek Company Ltd. since with a capacity of 32.4 MW it does not reach the threshold laid down in point 1.1 of Annex 1 to the IPPC Directive 2008/1/EC 1. Other combustion plants on the site of Kronospan Szczecinek with a total capacity of MW, as their combustion products are used directly in manufacturing processes, are excluded from the LCP directive based on Article. 2(7) of this Directive 2. Although the three plants have different operators, the following technical connection exists between them: 1. Hot fumes from installations Borman I belonging to Kronospan Szczecinek are used to dry chip boards manufactured by Kronospan Polska Company Ltd; 2. There is common rain water drainage network (operated by Kronospan Szczecinek); 3) Kronospan Szczecinek provides water, electricity and gas for Kronospan Polska. The reply of the Polish authorities also provides information on the procedure to establish emission limit values (ELVs) for air pollutants. According to the Polish Environmental Law, there is no need to include in the permit ELVs for air polluting substances if the amounts of such substances emitted from all plants requiring an integrated permit do not exceed 10% of the reference value of the concentration of such substances in ambient air. Based on this rule, no ELV has been set for carbon monoxide in the permits of the Kronospan companies. The letter provides data on air monitoring in 2011 from the measuring stations in the vicinity of Kronospan companies, showing exceedence of the air quality standard for 24-hour concentration of PM10 3. Annual average concentration of SO2, NO2, NH3 are below the respective reference values. In view of the above, the Commission's special concern is the interpretation of the term "installation" for the purposes of the IPPC directive. The argument for the non-application of the LCP Directive to Kronospan Szczecinek is shared by the Commission. However, it should not lead to exclusion from the activity description in point 1.1 of Annex I of the IPPC Directive ("Combustion installation with a rated thermal input exceeding 50 MW") the incineration of biomass and waste for the purpose of producing technological heat from Bormann I and II units in Kronospan Szczecinek. Point 2, Annex I chapeau stipulates that "The threshold values given below generally refer to production capacities or outputs. Where one operator carries out several activities falling under the same subheading in the same installation or on the same site, the capacities of such activities are added together." In accordance with this rule, for the purposes of establishing the applicable legislation and of complying with the conditions thereof, the capacities of the Bormann I and II units should be considered together. 1 OJ L 24, , p.8. 2 OJ L 309, , p Non-compliance with PM10 limit values is addressed by the on-going infringement procedure 2008/2199. CM\ doc 5/8 PE v10-00

6 According to Article 2(3) of the IPPC Directive, installation means a stationary technical unit where one or more activities listed in Annex I are carried out, and any other directly associated activities which have a technical connection with the activities carried out on that site and which could have an effect on emissions and pollution' It is recognised by the Polish authorities that there is a technical connection between the Kronospan Polska and Kronospan Szczecinek, having common water, energy and gas supplies, common rain water drainage and the shared use of technological heat used for drying chipboards. Therefore, the Commission is of the view that, irrespective of the fact that they are operated by different operators, Kronospan Polska and Kronospan Szczecinek should be considered as one installation and should hold an IPPC permit. In the light of the above, the Commission will communicate its position to the Polish authorities, inviting them to reconsider the situation in terms of integrated permits and to ensure compliance with EU law. This shall be done also with regard to the provisions of Directive 2010/75/EU on industrial emissions 1 (in particular to its Article 4(2) and 4(3)), which will apply to existing installations already subject to the IPPC Directive from 7 January Commission reply (REV III), received on 30 April 2013 The Commission's observations In their latest response submitted through the EU-Pilot investigation system on 26 November 2012, the Polish authorities informed the Commission that on 19 November 2012 the Minister for the Environment issued a decision annulling the permit to release gases and dust into the atmosphere from the installations operated by Kronospan Szczecinek Sp. z o.o. 2 That decision by the Minister was not yet final as the parties concerned could submit an appeal within 14 days of the date of receipt of the decision, and could also lodge a complaint with the provincial administrative court. Since the Polish authorities have not informed the Commission on the developments of the above-mentioned permitting procedure, the Commission submitted to the EU-Pilot system a new request for additional information. In the meantime, the Commission received new information from the petitioner, according to which the Mayor of Szczecinek issued a decision on environmental requirements for a project of a Krono Group facility (by Kronotex Sp. z o.o.) involving the construction of two production and warehouse buildings and the associated infrastructure, without the requirement to perform an environmental impact assessment. This project qualifies for a substantial change within the meaning of Article 2(11) of Directive 2008/1/EC on integrated pollution prevention and control, and the requirements laid down in Article 12(2) of that Directive should be met. Therefore, the Commission also investigated this aspect with the Polish authorities. In addition, the characteristics/classification of the material (sawdust and shavings) to be incinerated in a heating boiler as fuel is not clear. While the Mayor's decision on 1 OJ L 334, , p Decision K-SR-Ś /9-2/06 of 10 October 2006 of the Governor of Zachodniopomorskie Province, as amended by Decision WRiOŚ-II-BKow-7720/2-12/10 of 12 April 2011 of the President of Zachodniopomorskie Province Executive Board. PE v /8 CM\ doc

7 environmental requirements accepts it as biomass, according to the petitioner it is hazardous waste. Detailed information on the content of the material used at the installation for production of wood-based panels (with regard to the classification of wastes, and to the relevant C standards applicable to wood-based panels) has been requested from the Polish authorities. This information will also be relevant to assess whether or not the lack of the environmental impact assessment is in compliance with the applicable EU law. Conclusion The Commission is awaiting the response from the Polish authorities to the additional information requests. In the light thereof the Commission will decide on the need of any further action. 7. Commission reply (REV IV), received on 29 November 2013 By a letter dated 10 May 2013, the Polish authorities submitted answers to the Commission's questions asked on 4 and 5 April 2013, through the EU-Pilot investigation tool. In their reply, the Polish authorities state that Kronospan Szczecinek Sp. z o.o. has challenged before the Warsaw provincial administrative court the decision the Minister for the Environment for the annulment of Kronospan s permit to release gases and dust into the atmosphere. Therefore, the installation still does not have an integrated permit issued in accordance with Directive 2008/1/EC on integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC), and continues to operate under sectoral permits. Given the ongoing administrative procedure, the Polish authorities were unable to answer the Commission's questions regarding the construction of two production and warehouse buildings, and the applicability of the IPPC Directive to that project. However, confirmation has been received from the Polish authorities that the fuel burned in the new boiler is biomass and it does not contain any hazardous volatile organic compound. Therefore, the project does not include incineration of hazardous waste and does not fall under Annex I point 9 of the EIA Directive, as claimed by the petitioner, but it falls under the Annex II point 3 a) of the EIA Directive. According to the information provided by the petitioner, the project has been subject to a screening procedure during which the competent Polish authorities determined that the project is not been likely to have significant negative effects on environment. The Polish authorities have issued an environmental decision confirming their opinion on 12 October Given the above, the Commission has not detected the alleged infringement of the EIA Directive. In the meantime, the Commission has analysed additional information submitted on a DVD by the petitioner. This information is namely the environmental impact report of the above mentioned construction works. However, the documentation, as also admitted by the petitioner, is not complete, as several parts have been removed for commercial confidentiality reasons. Conclusion Based on the available information, the Commission cannot identify any breach of the applicable EU law. As regards the issue of the IPPC-permit, the national authorities are addressing the situation. Therefore, there is no need for the Commission to intervene. CM\ doc 7/8 PE v10-00

8 In the meantime, the Commission has received additional information from the petitioner and it is currently assessing that information. The conclusions in that regard will be set out in an additional communication from the Commission. 8. Commission reply (REV V), received on 30 April 2014 It follows from the previous Communication of 29/11/2013 that the national authorities are addressing the issue of the lacking integrated IPPC-permit for what concerns Kronospan Szczecinek and Kronospan Polska, which should be considered as one installation for the purpose of calculating the thresholds triggering the application of Directive 2008/1/EC on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) (replaced as from 7 January 2014 by the Industrial Emissions Directive 2010/75/EU (IED)). To allow the two operators to submit a joint application, the Polish Environmental Protection Act and certain other relevant laws are in the process of being amended. The Commission has not identified a breach of EU law concerning a new boiler which would burn hazardous waste without complying with the relevant requirements of the EU legislation. According to Article 2(11) of Directive 2001/80/EC on large combustion plants and the corresponding Article 3(31)(v) of the IED, "biomass" covers "wood waste with the exception of wood waste which may contain halogenated organic compounds or heavy metals as a result of treatment with wood preservatives or coating, and which includes in particular such wood waste originating from construction and demolition waste". Plants firing such biomass and not any other waste do not have to comply with the requirements for waste incineration plants under the EU legislation. Therefore, dust and other residues originating from wood based panels production may qualify as "biomass" when they meet the criteria set out in the aforementioned definition. According to the Polish authorities, Kronospan produces wood-based panels from wood fibres glued with urea-formaldehyde or melamine-formaldehyde resins. The additional information submitted by the petitioner on 2 May 2013 and 14 October 2013 does not allow to conclude that the dusts from polishing the wood based panels would be hazardous. Conclusion The issue of the missing IPPC-permit is being addressed by the national authorities, and therefore there is no need for the Commission to intervene. Based on the available information, the Commission cannot identify any other breach of the applicable EU law. PE v /8 CM\ doc