Industrial Emissions Directive and BAT Conclusions
New Emissions Directive - IED
In December 2011 the EU’s Directive on Industrial Emissions (IED) came into force. The IED regulates the standards that apply to airborne emissions as well as discharges to land and water resulting from industrial operations. A substantial change compared with the former emissions directive for large industrial plants (IPPC) is that the emission limit values that can be achieved through using the Best Available Techniques (BAT) become binding values, i.e. necessary conditions, in every steel company’s permit to carry out operations. 
On 7 January 2014, the IED starts to apply to those existing operations in Sweden subject to mandatory authorisation.
This entails major consequences for the Swedish steel industry which mainly competes in the global market.
A glossary of terms:
|
IPPC |
Integrated Prevention and Pollution Control. The EU’s emissions directive for large industrial plants. |
|
IED |
Industrial Emissions Directive |
|
BAT |
Best Available Techniques |
|
BREF |
BAT reference document. Describes what are considered to be the best available techniques in an industry or sector thereof. |
|
TWG |
Technical Working Group |
|
BAT conclusions |
Chapter in BREF. Describes BAT and which binding emission limit values shall apply to the industry. |
BREF documents and (premature) BAT conclusions
Within the framework of IED legislation, so-called BREF documents (BAT Reference Documents) are produced. These describe what are considered to be the Best Available Techniques at the different process stages. Under the direction of the IPPC Office in Seville, BREF documents are produced within technical working groups (TWG) with the participation of industry, EU member states and relevant organisations. The work on a BREF frequently takes many years and results in a comprehensive document with detailed descriptions of technical benchmarks for all parts of an industrial process. A BREF is revised roughly every eighth year.
After a revision process taking several years there existed a prepared draft in 2010 for the BREF document for iron and steel production. This draft was developed under the old IPPC legislation where the BREF document’s status was only for guidance purposes (non-binding).
After completion of the BREF for iron and steel production by the technical working group in Seville, the EU Commission decided that it would be supplemented with so-called BAT conclusions. According to the rules – that were adopted first in November 2011 – the BAT conclusions shall be developed by the technical working group that developed the BREF document itself. But this was not in fact the case. The steel industry’s representatives only received the text circulated for consultation for a few months, despite the fact that the Commission initially did not think this was necessary.
Important dates
21 November 2011, the EU Commission (Article 75 Committee) decided on BAT conclusions for iron and steel production. Parallel with this decision, the general guide was adopted concerning the drawing up of a BREF and a BAT conclusion.
8 March 2012, the documents were translated and published in the Official Journal of the European Commission (opens in new window).
The BAT conclusions start to apply with immediate effect after publication in the Official Journal. Consequently, the BAT conclusions apply already before the IED legislation has come into effect (earliest 2014). This unfortunate fact has been the subject of a complaint by Sweden made directly to the Commission together with Germany and Spain, but also via Eurofer, the European steel industry’s co-operation organisation as well as through Business Europe. However, the EU Commission is fixed in its view on this subject.
Four years after a BAT conclusion is translated and published – in this case
8 March 2016 – it shall be incorporated in the permits for the relevant companies and any possible new investment required to achieve the conditions of the permit must be implemented.
Plan for implementation of IED in Sweden
For Sweden’s base industry, however, the investment cycles are very considerably longer than four years. This fact combined with a relatively slow permit process will put at risk Sweden’s possibilities of succeeding in meeting the requirements of EU legislation.
An official public enquiry has examined how the IED should be implemented in Swedish law. The head of this enquiry proposes the constitutional amendments that are deemed necessary as well as other measures that the directive gives rise to. Jernkontoret (Swedish Steel Producers’ Association) has informed the enquiry of the practical consequences for the industry of the directive in combination with the BAT conclusions. It has also arranged a study visit to the SSAB plant in Oxelösund.
During 2012, the IED enquiry’s report (Better environment – reduced emissions, SOU 2011:86 (a publication in Swedish)) is circulated to the relevant bodies for consultation. Where BAT conclusions for steel are concerned, however, it is not possible to wait for the range of consultations and the legislative process since this would imply that at least one of the four years available to the industry is lost. There is, however, legal scope in Sweden’s Environmental Code which should be utilised at the earliest opportunity. This enables the government to issue ordinances/regulations in order to fulfil Sweden’s obligations within the framework of EU and international organisations. Jernkontoret considers that this is the only possibility for the BAT conclusions which have already been decided. A government ordinance, to be kept as simple as possible, is worked out during the second quarter of 2012. It needs to contain information on which installations are affected, what is applicable and how exceptions or alternative formulations can be employed.
Industry and authorities in intensive collaboration
Jernkontoret has worked intensively on influencing the framing of the BAT conclusions in order to maximise clarity and create understanding as to how they affect the Swedish permit process. Jernkontoret has actively participated in working groups within Eurofer, Business Europe and Svenskt Näringsliv (Confederation of Swedish Enterprise) and has also collaborated closely with the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (Naturvårdsverket). Together with the companies concerned, the BAT conclusions have been analysed in order to assess how these may affect production operations. An intensive work has now commenced in order to ensure that the ten or so companies affected by the BAT conclusions meet these emission limit values within four years.
The steel industry is affected by several BREF documents where BAT conclusions shall be drawn up and Sweden’s steel industry will be more active than previously. So that these shall more closely resemble the Swedish approach to formulating permit conditions, it is necessary for both Jernkontoret and the steel industry to be actively involved in Eurofer’s working groups. The industry also needs an active presence in Seville where the documents are produced. Technical knowledge is required in this work but also an understanding of environmental legislation. The work concerning BREF and BAT conclusions for steel processing, (FMP, ferrous metal processing) is being taken up again in the autumn of 2012. The BREF for large combustion plants (LCP) has been initiated and is at the data collection stage.
To stimulate discussion with the authorities concerning the setting of permit conditions for the industry, Jernkontoret arranged a special theme day on the formulation of such conditions. Representatives of the Swedish Environmental Court of Appeal, steel companies, the county administrative boards, the municipalities and the Environmental Protection Agency all took part. Jernkontoret also arranged a theme day on the BAT conclusions for iron and steel production.
The Environmental Protection Agency and the steel industry have also formed a Seville working group to provide a strategic forum to discuss the work in Seville and how we, from the Swedish side, can allocate resources and influence the work within the technical working groups so that the approach to the formulation of the permit conditions acquires more of a Swedish character.
