UK Ratification of the 1998 Protocol to the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution on Heavy Metals - Consultation

SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO THE PUBLIC CONSULTATION EXERCISE

March 2002

UK STEEL

1. UK Steel is concerned that if the limit values were to be interpreted as mandatory, then there would be a conflict with the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (IPPC)
2. They expressed doubt on the ability of the technology to achieve a limit value of 50mg/m³ for sinter plants.
3. UK Steel views the assumption that Emission Limit Values (ELV's) will be met through the application of the UK BAT (best available techniques) and BATNEEC (best available techniques not entailing excessive costs) is not valid.
4. UK Steel expressed that we cannot conclude that there is no compliance cost to business. They gave the example that for the sinter plan to meet the protocol ELV values would result in an additional cost between £30 to £45M.
5. Given the considerable cost impact, the steel sector would like reassurance the IPC/IPPC procedures will apply to the derivation of the ELVs.

SEPA (Scottish Environment Protection Agency)

1. SEPA refer to throughput thresholds for incineration of hazardous and medical water and incineration of municipal waste and feel the PPC (Scotland) Regulation (2002) and Waste Incineration Directive (WID) covers this.
2. They noted that performance indicators for dust and mercury are not the same as the BAT minimum performance values which are more lax.
3. Page 48, paragraph 66 suggests. SEPA believe that the suggestion that it is better to compost or landfill than incinerate waste is somewhat misleading and does not consider the wider implication of the Landfill Directive.

ZINC - Zinc Information Centre

1. ZINC disagrees with the term "heavy metal" to describe ZINC.
2. ZINC has stressed the importance of zinc in the human diet.
3. ZINC draws attention to the fact that zinc and five compounds related to zinc, are currently undergoing a risk assessment under Council Regulation 1488 for existing substances.

UKPIA - Petroleum Industry Association Limited

1. UKPIA believes that the UK should ratify the Aarhus Protocol in order to ensure that HMG can play a full part in any negations to extend the protocol to other heavy metals.
2. UKPIA wants consistency between UK Legislation, EU Directives and UN/ECE Protocol so that the UK industry is not placed at a commercial disadvantage to other developed countries.
3. The oil industry does not expect any significant impact on its operation in the UK from the control of emissions of cadmium, lead and mercury via the protocol.

EA - Electricity Association

1. EA broadly accepts the ratification of the Protocol as they consider that it would enable more active participation in any future reviews of species covered, emissions limits, recommended BAT or national emission targets by the UK.
2. EA feels that the Government should not propose to apply standards that are in excess of those proposed in the Protocol.

CORUS

1. CORUS disagrees with the conclusion because they think that the implications for the UK in implementing the Protocol are not minimal.
2. CORUS has serious doubts whether two of the suggested techniques to meet a limit of 50 mg/m³ for sinter plants are either the best overall environmental option or are established for the large, high productivity, high waste gas temperature sinter plants that are in use in the UK.
3. They think the regulatory impact assessment is incorrect, as there would be significant compliance costs from ratification of the Protocol as proposed.
4. CORUS expressed that the objectives of the Heavy Metal Protocol either have been or will be met through the implication of the IPPC and other means without the imposition of mandatory emissions limit values.
5. CORUS has the overall opinion that the benefits of ratifying the Protocol as proposed do not exceed the costs, for which the iron and steel sector would be significant. Therefore, proposals for the ratification should be reconsidered.

THE EIC - Environmental Industries Commission

1. The EIC concerns focused on emissions of mercury especially from crematoria.

EA - Environment Agency

1. The EA agrees with the Government's assessment that the requirements for the Protocol have either been met or can largely be met through existing regulatory measures. However, there are a number of detailed implementation issues that need to be considered.
2. EA is of the view that the content and nature of the Direction implementing the Protocol should be discussed with the Regulators as soon as possible after the Protocol is ratified.
3. Directions implementing the requirements of the Protocol should be provided to the Regulators as soon as possible to ensure their costs are minimised.
4. EA thinks that the Direction ought to include consideration of technical and economic feasibility in meeting emission limit values for existing plants.
5. EA feels that more detailed consideration should be given to alternative emission regulation strategies for some industry sectors to improve compatibility with the Large Combustion Plant Directive.
6. Once the date and nature of the Direction and the compliance date of the Protocol are known, further work needs to be undertaken to assess the Regulator's costs for implementing the protocol.