PROCEEDINGS
               VOLUME II
      INTERNATIONAL
     ONFERENCE ON
    ENVIRONMENTAL
      ENFORCEMENT
          September 22-25,1992
            Budapest, Hungary
I
55
o
\
J&.
UJ
CD
    COMMISSION
    OF THE EUROPEAN
    COMMUNITIES
Ministry of Housing,
Physical Planning,
and Environment (VROM)
The Netherlands

-------
            INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON

             ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


               CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

                         VOLUME II
                   September 22 - 25, 1992

                      Budapest,  Hungary
Editors:

Mr. Jo Gerardu
Ms. Cheryl Wasserman
Executive Planning Committee:

Mrs. Jacqueline Alois! de Larderel, UNEP-IE/PAC
Mr. Laurens Jan Brinkhorst, EEC
Dr. Kalman Gyorgyi, Hungary
Dr. Peter Hardi, REC
Dr. Jan Mikolas, CSFR
Dr. Karoly Misley, Hungary
Dr. Maciej Nowicki, Poland
Mr. Herbert Tate Jr., USA
Mr. Pieter Verkerk, the Netherlands
Sponsors:

Environmental Protection Agency, United States
European Economic Community, Brussels
Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment, the Netherlands

-------
These Proceedings, Volume II, contain materials presented at the
 second International Conference on Environmental Enforcement,
September 22-25, 1992 in Budapest, Hungary. It includes opening
     and closing speeches, additional papers, summaries of
discussions, the Conference evaluations and a list of participants.
    Volume  I of these  Proceedings was distributed during the
Conference  and contains papers prepared by speakers, panelists
                   and several participants.

 Copyright 1992 by the Conference sponsors: the United States
  Environmental Protection Agency, the Netherlands' Ministry of
 Housing,  Physical Planning and Environment, and the European
Economic Community, No part of this book may be reproduced in
  any form or by any means without the prior permission of the
    author(s) and attribution to the Proceedings of the second
   International Conference on Environmental Enforcement, Jo
    Gerardu, VROM and Cheryl Wasserman US EPA, editors,
  September 22-25,1992  in Budapest, Hungary. Use of these
     materials is strongly encouraged for training  and further
                       dissemination.
    Opinions expressed are those of the authors, and do not
      necessarily represent the views of  their organizations.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      CONTENTS: VOLUME II



PREFACE 	 7

CONFERENCE PURPOSE AND GOALS	9

CONFERENCE THEMES  	11

OPENING SPEECHES	13

1.    Mr. S. Keresztes, Minister of Environment, Hungary	13
2.    Mr. G. Demszky, Mayor of the City of Budapest	17
3.    Mr. H. Alders, Minister of Environment, Netherlands	21
4.    Mr. H. Tate Jr., Assistant Administrator, US EPA  	25
5.    Mr. L Brinkhorst, Director General for Environment,  Nuclear Safety and
      Civil Protection, Commission of the European Communities 	29

ADDITIONAL CONFERENCE PAPERS	31

Theme #1:  Context for Enforcement
      Moderator: H. Kesse/aar

6.    Upgrading of Environmental Laws in France as Part of the Requirements by
      the EEC, P. Kromarek  	31
7.    Some Factors influencing Environmental Enforcement in the CSFR, £. Kruzikova  .... 37
 Theme #2:  Designing Enforceable Environmental Requirements
      Moderator: S, Fulton

 6.    Designing Enforceable Environmental Requirements, T. Smith 	39
 Theme #3: Developing an Effective Compliance Monitoring Capability (e.g. Inspection Capability)
      Moderator: M. Bierman - Beukema toe Water

      No additional papers

-------
                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
Theme #4:  Developing Authorities and Legal Enforcement Capabilities to Respond to Violations
      Moderator: L Kramer

9.     Combatting Environmental Crime in an International Context, Y. van der Meer	59
10.    The Development of the Police's Enforcement Position in the Field of
      Environment, M. Horstman 	63
11.    Environmental Enforcement by Municipalities in The Netherlands, P. Dordregter 	67
Theme #5:  Economic Development and Ownership Issues
      Moderator: I. Tb'kes

7.     Environmental Enforcement in Greece, M. Vassilopoulos  	73
8.     The Role of Industry: Empowerment and Environmental Protection, J. Plaut  	77
9.     Environmental Problems in the Hungarian Privatization, /. Mandoki	89
10.    NGO's Role in Environmental Enforcement in  Ownership Transformations
      in Poland 1990 - 1992, Opportunities and Problems,  W. Stodulski	91
Theme #6:  Applications to a Particular Environmental Problem: Solid and Hazardous Waste
      Moderator: O. Caisou

4.     The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous
      Wastes and Their Disposal, I. Rummel-Bulska	99
5.     Transition and implementation of Waste Management Policies in Central and
      Eastern Europe, S.  Wassersug	  107
6.     The Enforcement Experience in  Catalunya on Industrial Waste, F.  Relea and
      C. Martin	127
7.     Specific Details Regarding Hazardous Waste Transport and Disposal, L Mara 	145
8.     The Role of Interpol in Environmental  Enforcement, S,  Klem	149
Theme #7:  Public Disclosure and Citizens' Role in Enforcement
      Moderator: P. Keough

7.    Citizens' Role of Enforcement of Environmental Law in Europe, M. Fuhr	151
8.    Public Disclosure and Its Impact on Compliance, N. Blackburn 	  159
9.    Public Disclosure and Citizens' Role in Enforcement, E. Popov	  163
10.   Enforcement of EEC Environmental Legislation: the Role of Citizens and Citizens'
      Groups, E, Klatte  	169
11,   The Role of the Russian Public in Environmental Enforcement, M. Brinchuk  	  197
12.   The New Ecological Legislation of Russia, R. Bogolepov 	  199

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
SUMMARIES OF THEME DISCUSSIONS  	201

1.     Context for Enforcement, Summary of Theme #1 Discussion, F. Lifting	201
2.     Designing Enforceable Environmental Requirements, Summary of Theme #2 Discussion,
      M. Mulkey  	207
3.     Developing an Effective Compliance Monitoring Capability (e.g. Inspection Capability),
      Summary of Theme #3 Discussion, M. ten Hove  	213
4.     Developing Authorities and Legal Enforcement Capabilities to Respond to Violations,
      Summary of Theme #4 Discussion, A. DeLong	 .  217
5.     Economic Development and Ownership Issues, Summary of Theme #5 Discussion,
      G. BAndi  	221
6.     Applications to a Particular Environmental Problem: Solid and Hazardous Waste, Summary
      of Theme #6 Discussion, F. Uijting  	227
7.     Public Disclosure and Citizens' role in Enforcement, Summary of Theme #7 Discussion,
      A.  DeLong	231
CLOSING REMARKS	235

CONFERENCE EVALUATION	247

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS  	255

MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE PLANNING COMMITTEE	269

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  	271

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      PREFACE

      These Proceedings, Volume II, contain additional materials developed following the second
International Conference on Environmental Enforcement held September 22-25, 1992 in
Budapest, Hungary. Volume II of the Conference Proceedings contains papers that were not
available at the time Volume I was printed. In addition, the full text of the opening and closing
speeches, summaries of the discussions on the Conference themes, results of the participant
evaluations and a list of all actual participants. Volume I of these Proceedings contains papers
presented at the Conference by speakers, panelists and participants and was distributed during
the Conference. Both Volumes of the Proceedings will be widely disseminated to country
environmental officials and NGO's throughout the world.

      The Budapest Conference is part of an ongoing effort to develop effective approaches in
different settings to achieve widespread compliance with our very important environmental
program requirements. Speakers with substantial experience in different aspects of compliance
with and enforcement of environmental laws were selected.

      On behalf of the Executive Planning Committee, we look back on a successful
Conference.
       The Conference Staff
       15 December 1992

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      CONFERENCE PURPOSE AND GOALS

      The International Conference on Environmental Enforcement held September 22-25, 1992
in Budapest, Hungary responded to the growing recognition ol the importance of environmental
concerns both domestically and on a global scale. The heightened interest in environmental
enforcement -- broadly defined as the range of actions governments and others may take to
encourage and compel compliance with environmental requirements -- stems from a desire to
ensure that environmental requirements, expressed in policies, laws and permits, lead to real
improvements in environmental quality. Efforts to achieve widespread compliance and
enforcement of requirements also provide an element of fairness to the regulatory process, instill
credibility to government institutions, and prevent short term economic competition among regions
and between facilities from undermining longer term economic and environmental goals.

      The Conference focused on the development and enhancement of domestic environmental
enforcement approaches1  in Central and East European countries. The public and governmental
leaders in these countries have strongly expressed the need for economic growth in harmony with
concerns for public health and a quality environment. As the exchange should be broadly useful
to other nations, representatives from other regions around the globe were also participating in
the Conference. Planning  of the Conference was guided by an Executive Planning Committee.
The Committee included the three sponsors as well as the Environmental Ministries of Poland,
the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, and Hungary, the Regional Environmental Center in
Budapest, the United Nations Environment Programme IE/PAC, and Hungary's  Public Prosecutor.

      Sharing experiences and strategies among nations for developing sound domestic
compliance and enforcement  approaches has already proven valuable as attested by responses
to the first International Enforcement Workshop held in Utrecht, the Netherlands, in May 1990.
Despite differences in culture and legal systems, the  experience of participants  at both the 1990
Workshop and the 1992 Conference has been that environmental enforcement  theory and
practice has basic elements which seem to transcend these differences among  nations and
peoples.  It is not only possible but essential that nations seek to  learn from each other what
works and does not work to achieve widespread compliance with environmental requirements  in
different settings.  Gaining compliance  is an evolutionary process, and no nation has developed an
approach which cannot benefit from continuing improvement. The Conference explored different
approaches, sharing experiences within a general framework, but did not promote any single
model for achieving compliance with environmental requirements. Conference participants
considered the least resource-intensive approaches to achieving  compliance success and
explored integrated as well as single program focused compliance and enforcement activities.
             1 Consideration of issues related to enforcement of requirements and agreements
          that are global and transboundary in nature will be limited to a discussion of
          commitments of individual countries as they are adopted as domestic laws or
          requirements.

-------
10                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      The structure and content of the Conference was designed to provide a pragmatic
exchange with open appraisals of advantages and disadvantages of different approaches,
opportunities for practical follow-up and ongoing resource materials for those interested in
enhancing environmental compliance and enforcement. The Conference seeked to build
institutional relationships to establish responsibility, provide opportunities for leadership, and
support networks of experts among governmental, public, and private entities necessary to
effectively achieve environmental compliance. The Conference served policy-makers from both
within government and outside of government. Within government, the Conference had
representation from national, regional and local governmental units, as appropriate to
environmental enforcement and implementation responsibilities in each country, as well as current
and potential leaders in both legal and technical aspects of environmental programs at the mid to
senior management levels. It also involved selected non-governmental organizations (NGO's) and
industry representatives.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              11
      CONFERENCE THEMES

      The Conference addressed the following themes over a four day period:

      Theme #1:    Context for Enforcement.

      An introduction to the importance of compliance and enforcement concerns, a general
framework for designing effective environmental compliance and enforcement approaches and
alternative approaches within that framework including designing enforceable requirements,
setting priorities, compliance promotion, compliance monitoring, enforcement response to
violations, establishing clear roles and responsibilities, and evaluation of and accountability for
success.

      Also addressed were the implications of membership in the European Economic
Community and community of nations for environmental compliance and enforcement and the
current status of enforcement in Centra! and Eastern Europe.

      Theme #2:   Designing Enforceable Environmental Requirements.

      An assessment of the importance of ensuring the enforceability of environmental laws and
requirements as they are developed with examples of problems that have been encountered
because of poorly designed requirements, and alternative approaches to enhance the likelihood
that requirements will be enforceable when established.

      Theme #3:    Developing an Effective Compliance  Monitoring Capability (e.g. Inspection
                   Capability).

      An exploration of different organizational approaches and strategies for monitoring
compliance, focusing on inspection capabilities, including whether and how to develop an
inspectorate and whether to inspect on  a single or multi-program basis.

      Theme #4:   Developing Authorities and Legal Enforcement Capabilities to Respond to
                   Violations,

      An exploration of different authorities and approaches to legal enforcement within different
legal settings and what is necessary to  employ and develop those authorities effectively.

      Theme #5:    Economic Development and Ownership issues.

      An exploration of the economics and realities of enforcement in three settings:
    1) different approaches towards enforcement at government owned and operated
      installations;
    2) approaches to enforcement when faced with economic hardship, and

-------
12                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
   3) how to address the new opportunities for enhanced compliance presented by privatization
      of industry and changes in ownership.

      Theme #6:    Applications to a Particular Environmental Problem: Solid and Hazardous
                    Waste.

      An integrating session that combined all elements of the compliance and enforcement
framework, exploring different approaches to compliance and enforcement in different countries
and settings. This theme explored more fully the potential of pollution prevention as a tool to
enhance compliance and as an enforcement response. This discussion covered the total problem
of controlling waste including controlling domestically, the transport of hazardous waste from other
nations.

      Theme #7:    Public Disclosure and Citizens' Role in Enforcement.

      An exploration of the role of public disclosure, citizens and others in the enforcement
process and their implications for achieving more widespread compliance.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              13
      OPENING SPEECHES
MR. SANDOR K. KERESZTES, Minister of Environment and Regional Policy, Hungary
Ladies and Gentlemen,

       It is my special honor to welcome you on behalf of the  Hungarian  Government to this
Conference aimed at a useful and important exchange of views  on environmental enforcement.
The  fact  that governmental  and other experts  involved in this particular matter as  well as
representatives of industry, NGO's, international organizations and other institutions are attending
from about 30 countries of the world clearly demonstrates that in  our changing life environmental
protection is given a high priority.

       This Conference  will  usefully contribute  to  the efforts  of  the developed  countries  in
assisting others, especially those of the Central  and East European Region, as a  result of the
professional and financial support given generously by the  US and the Dutch Government and
the  Commission  of the  European  Communities.  All  important implications  of environmental
enforcement will be discussed here, in an open, fair and hopefully  fruitful manner.

       As  for my  country, the  traditional Hungarian  law and the various recent debates on a
renewal of environmental law does  show certain contradictions. Public hearings for example, as
important tools of  legal  practice  are not in use in  the Hungarian  law in general  and  even in
environmental protection fields they have been practised to a relatively limited extent in the case
of ElA's. The latter should however significantly be  broadened thereby fulfilling our obligations
undertaken by having signed various international conventions.

       I would also emphasize that  Hungary is to  adopt and enact the relevant Directives and
other environmental provisions  of the European Communities within the next few years. This is
our main direction in environmental legislation whilst we remain open to any useful information on
the legal and administrative practice followed in other countries.

       We are recently  preparing a new Act on  the protection of the environment  hopefully
coming into force in 1993. That Act will be based on the concept  of prevention and the principles
of sustainable development.  Its drafting has  been assisted  by a detailed proposal of scientific
value prepared by  an  independent team of the Central European University, Budapest. We also
have been and are taking into account the opinion  of the local government and NGO's and
groups concerned about the environment when drafting the Act.

       It is clearly  reflected in  that draft Act that the establishment and operation of a market
economy is only possible in a manner not failing to improve the state of the environment as well.

-------
 14                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
This is in harmony with the Hungarian Constitution in which the rights for a health of highest level
and for a healthy environment have been stipulated as well as the assertion of those rights.

       All these are meant as state  obligations and preferences to be  realized by integrating
environmental priorities in the tax, credit, price and customs  system  as well as by improving our
capabilities to monitor environmental compliance  and by further developing  our related insti-
tutions.

Ladies and gentlemen,

       Having a look at  the recently  existing  Hungarian law,  theoretically  enforceable environ-
mental requirements in themselves do not seem to be enough to achieve  compliance. The social
and economic interests in the period of the previous political  regime  did not prefer environmental
protection and the recent desires to achieve a better living standard in a new, market economy
have been appearing as a strong one that again does not show a  preference towards environ-
mental interests.

       On the other hand, the  enforcement of environmental  interests has not become a juridical
practice under the Hungarian Civil Code although  various legal instruments still  in force on the
protection of the environment would provide such a possibility.

       The same can be mentioned in relation to environmental enforcement under the Criminal
Code where  the uncertainties concerning responsibility for  compensation and damage can be
regarded as the  main sources of failures.

       Consequently, administrative tools  have been  used  in a vast  majority  of cases  where
environmental pollution appears  as a problem to be settled.  This will hopefully  undergo changes
as a result of the transition process for two basic reasons. First, according to the  new law on the
local governments those  bodies have the responsibility  for  the  protection  of the built and the
natural environment as well. Statutory responsibility of the local authorities that were operating in
the previous  regime almost completely under a central conduct has significantly been changed:
although  two-thirds of the 130  kinds  of  first  instance sphere of authority has remained with
authorities  of central subordination, one-third have relied upon the  local governments. Second,
since the reconsideration  of the administrative decisions will be  made in the future not by
authorities of higher level  but in a judicial way it can be predicted that the environment approach
will be much stronger in the judiciary practice and as  a result of that the  positions  of environ-
mental protection will also become stronger in the hierarchy of social interests. A  responsibility of
the State however in environmental matters has to be given first priority. A legal framework of the
tasks should  be established  by the  State  in  a way  integrating  environmental concerns  in
economic and social planning  and decision-making at all  levels. To that end the  new Hungarian
environmental protection  Act will not only place an emphasis  on environmental  impact assess-
ment as  a tool of prevention,  but also, my  Government  does and  will  create  as favorable
conditions as possible for  investments that can  contribute to an  economic growth and an improve-
ment of the environment as well. I presume, all these are  and will be in  harmony with  the various
deliberations on  this Conference.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                               15
      I  am  especially  pleased  to see that also  citizens' role and public disclosure are on the
agenda since in this respect we  have taken the initial steps by now. Another similarly crucial point
is privatization and its environmental implications, a well-known problem. I am convinced that this
Conference can help the countries in transition in such respects also.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

      With these ideas in mind I welcome again the sponsors, participants and organizers of this
important Conference and allow me to wish you a fruitful, really successful work.

Thank you.

-------
16                           INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              17
MR. GABOR DEMSZKY, Mayor of the City of Budapest
Ladies and gentlemen,

      I  would like to welcome the participants of the Conference. As Mayor of Budapest it is a
great pleasure to me that our city is the host of such an internationally renowned event, especially
if the topic  of  discussion  bears as crucial  significance to all of us  as in  the case of this
Conference.

      Environmental protection  is not only an  issue of utmost importance, it is a  field where
problem solving depends on an ongoing international exchange of information and the provision
of assistance.

      The democratic reforms  in Central-Eastern Europe  changed the political map of Europe
with unexpected speed. The restructuring of the economic systems in the countries of the region
has also begun, resulting in large-scale openness towards Western markets. While the socialist
economy  was worshipping quantitative  data  on production, no expected quality of  life  was a
principal. The present half-way-house to a true market economy is dominated by certain attributes
of infant capitalism together with certain left - overs of the communist hangover. Neither one is
sensitive  to environmental hazards. While in Western  countries  environmentalists  have been
taking a stand for decades now, in Eastern Europe environmental protection were dispersed and
not able to foster environment prone thinking because of the general anti-democratic nature of the
state  and communism busy preventing the consolidation of a civil society. Therefore, environ-
mental protection movements have yet to be organized at a national level  to achieve their goals.
With a relatively weak environmentalist movement and government officials inexperienced in the
field there is always danger that Western investments bring  technologies to  the area that  are
extremely destructive to the environment, even though it is a basic human right of the residents to
live in a healthy, clean environment.

      It is our wish and common interest that the development of the former  Socialist countries
bring with it  change for the better in environmental conditions.  This requires strict legal measures
for the  protection  of the environment  and  the  consistent  enforcement of regulations on local,
national and international levels at well. As phrased by the Congress on Environmental Protection
in Rio, cities and  local governments must play  a key role in  most urgent problems of environ-
mental protection. This is especially true because cities have access to accurate information. This
is where the needs of society for economic development and a cleaner environment are felt. This
level has the means to solve problems closest to where they arise and when they arise with the
cooperation of society.

      This problem solving process using  a  prevention-oriented approach  is a part  of the  so-
called Third  Generation of  Local  Environmental  Management,  under which  both  natural and
human conditions and processes are understood, planned and  managed in  an integrated way.

-------
18                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       In the third  generation approach  decisions would  factor the carrying capacities  of  the
ecosystem  to prevent severe damage that may cause a break down in the system. The efficient
use of resources would be supported and the  methods of recycling the waste by-products of the
system would be developed.  A flexible  and  more adaptable infrastructure is  required that is
designed to reduce resource demands and to develop recycling.

       The democratically elected Municipality of  Budapest will be celebrating its second birthday
in the next  few days. By now the legal framework of our operation is more or less structured and
we became aware of our obligations. We now also have some experience about the difficulties
caused by the  unreasonable  distribution of competencies and  responsibilities in dealing  with
environmental problems.  Please allow me to  say a  few words about the special situation and
difficulties of Budapest.

       At the turn of the  century Budapest was one of the most dynamically developing cities of
the continent. Today the  city is impoverished and run down, we must face problems that  should
have been dealt with decades ago. Still now  we have to  set down our priorities and ways to
protect our environment.

       The condition of Budapest's  environment  is now  nearing a critical stage  in spite of some
recent  developments in  certain areas.  Air and noise pollution in the city has reached unprece-
dented figures.  The dumping  of communal  waste after 1995 is  unresolved. The protection of
existing and potential green areas  is a daily  struggle  as  housing construction, investment and
enterprises try to expand over the  still untouched areas. In the inside districts the aged public
utility works are nearly incapable of serving rising  demands, these districts concentrate one-fifth of
the  city's population and one-fourth of the industry.  Intra-Hungarian and trans-European  transit
traffic crosses the center of the city of  Budapest and  the transportation  network of the entire
country causes large-scale pollution  in the capital  city.

       In principal it is only natural that  all  members of healthy democratic society should fee!
responsible for their environment. In such an ideal situation all people would force themselves to
refrain from damaging the environment. Unfortunately, this is only an ideal.  Modern society itself
performs certain  activities that by  nature cause ham to the environment.  On the other hand
environmental awareness is not at  a high enough  level. Developing an  awareness is a process
that will take may generations  to complete, using  all powers and resources of education. The role
of self-organizing social movements is quite significant in that the actions of their volunteers draw
attention  to environmental problems  and thus aid  the development of a so-called eco-morality.

       An important question in  Central-Eastern  Europe today is building civil initiatives into the
formal  power structure in a way so  that they retain their independence and active capabilities in
spite of the centralizing  efforts of the ruling  powers.  The large-scale independence of Budapest
district governments is aimed at raising the level  of autonomy  - which is a laudable goal from the
point  of  view of democracy.  This  independence, however,  is that  which  hinders the  healthy
working mechanisms of the capital  city. There are always certain responsibilities in the life of a
metropolis where the decentralization of authorities impedes the normal operation of the city.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                               19
      The municipal system of Budapest is a two-level system. The relationship between the city
and the individual districts is such that  Municipality of Budapest is only considered the "twenty-
third local government" of the city.  Most of the environmental problems in the  city cannot be
solved at the district level, at the  same time  the  municipality does not  have  the necessary
authority. This two-level  municipal system creates a special situation, neither the districts with
their shrinking range of authority nor  the city with her non-existent authority are able to develop or
protect a healthy, human environment.  At the same time the central government  organs do not
have access to the specifications necessary to assume responsibility in this field.

      The city of Budapest has plenty  of duties in order to create a healthy environment tor the
citizens but law  does not provide  all authorities promised enabling the Municipality to serve the
demands of the  city. The laws on  local  governments proclaimed has the protection of the built-in
and  natural environment is  the responsibility of the Municipality of Budapest, delegating by the
same taken the authority necessary to do the job to the districts.

       The environment  inspectorates operated by the central government and the definition of
the local governments' rights was aimed at regulating  activities threatening local environmental
protection. Although the  district focal governments have the right  to define higher air cleanness
and noise reduction  standards  in the protected areas they do not have  the power to enforce
these. Local governments may only take action  in the case of service-originated environmental
damage, even though it is clear that the  population suffers mostly not from these, but from the
damage resulting of transportation  and industrial activities, for which the central government
organs are responsible.

       The  protection of green areas which do  much to improve the quality of life in the city is
also divided. The municipality has authority over larger parks, avenues and cemeteries while the
districts  have  authority  over other parks  and public  squares.  Green  areas  with  significant
conditioning  effect, however are  not regulated  by local authorities as tfiese are registered  as
national defence areas  or  are connected to transportation  areas. The situation  is made even
worse by the fact that licences 1or establishments on larger green areas and public squares are
given by the local authorities in the area and the Municipality has no say in the matter. In addition
to this limited budget of  the districts makes it necessary that the districts  try to finance develop-
ment by "selling" existing and potential green areas. The most "fashionable" trade agreement is
that the investor promises development in exchange for the chosen green area that the district
would be unable to accomplish (such as parking garages).

       Protection against rodents is  also a district responsibility even  though this would require a
city-wide coordinated efforts as any actions on the part  of  individual districts at  different times
would be ineffective.

       The  municipality has no say  in the licensing of  construction that may cause problems in
the  entire  city's environment, this is the authority of the  district.  In an  industrial area  even  a
nuclear reactor can be built upon the district's decision. At the  same time  investments that would
serve the whole city might be torpedoed or impeded by the district, such as construction of  a
waste-burning plant, waste-water cleaning works or new waste-holding areas.

-------
20                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       The city is in no  better position with  the possibility of planning and preventive  environ-
mental protection. The general settlement plan of the city is approved by the Municipal Congress
while the detailed plan by  the  district representative  bodies.  In principal the detailed  plan  is
developed  from the  general one but in actuality there are many differences.  The districts, as
individual local governments may work out their own plans according to their own conception  of
the district.

       The setting-up of enterprises or  firms is licensed by the districts or the inspectorates and it
may happen that the possible environmental damage is caused in another district, in which case
the Municipality has no way  to take action,  having no second-degree authority to revise decisions
of the district or the inspectorates.

       The problems listed illustrate the difficulties the  local governments face when taking care
of responsibilities described  by law, which  cause friction between the municipal governments and
the central  government organs. It is the duty of state government to describe the responsibilities
of the municipal system  and to provide  the conditions  of operation.  It is  our hope  that the
environmental  protection law no being prepared will clarify the duties of the local government,
give special authority to the  Municipality of  Budapest and give the  local governments a change to
ensure a healthy human environment for the inhabitants of Budapest.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              21
MR. HANS ALDERS, Minister tor Housing, Physical Planning and Environment, the Netherlands
Ladies and Gentlemen,

      First of ali,  I want to thank the Hungarian minister for the Environment for hosting this
Conference. He and his staff did a great job in making it possible to organize this important event.

      It is a  great pleasure and honor for me, as the Netherlands Minister for the Environment
and  one  of  the three  co-organizers,  to welcome  all  of  you  to this  Second International
Enforcement  Conference. The first one took  place in  May 1990 in the Netherlands, and it is my
belief that it  was a great  success. I hope and believe that  Budapest 1992 will be even more
successful.

      Environmental  policy in  the nineteen-eighties  got a higher  priority in most  countries.
Especially  in the  United  States  and the  Netherlands,  and  now  also  within  the  European
Community. Last weekend the EEC-ministers 1or the Environment met in Glasgow, Scotland, and
Enforcement  was  one of the themes that  were dealt with. In  the Netherlands enforcement
became  a real  theme with the implementation  of  the  National  Environmental Policy Plan in
1989/1990.

       We are  all together here because we  think  enforcement is important,  it even is
indispensable for a good environmental  policy. But why is enforcement that important? Because
the quality of the environment as a whole depends substantially upon an effective enforcement-
policy. Uneven implementation of the environmental policy undermines the credibility of legislation
and  of  government, and  adversely  affects the  environmental situation.  Compliance  and
enforcement  need to  be taken into account  in the earliest possible stage of the development of
environmental legislation. That is what we are working for in the Netherlands and, as I hope, soon
also in the EEC.

       Let me tell  you something about the  enforcement  policy  in the Netherlands. You will get
more detailed information from Mrs. Bierman  tomorrow, but let me show you the headlines.
Enforcement  in the Netherlands is not only implemented by the  central government, but also by
provincial and local governments.  We have  various  instruments to implement  and carry out the
policy plans.  Information, taxes and levies, subsidies, legislation and other regulations.
But  regulation by itself is  not enough. If  they are  not complied  with,  all  the  government's
conservation  efforts are in vain. Environmental policy and regulations would be paper tigers, the
governments  environmental policy  will lose  its credibility and,  worst of all,  the  environmental
pollution will  absolutely not diminish. It is therefore essential that 1he government, at all levels, will
monitor  compliance  and,  where  necessary, take  timely  and  appropriate  steps  to enforce
environmental regulations.

       Who in the  Netherlands have enforcements jobs? In the first place, the police (local forces
and general police branches) do a competent job of detecting environmental violations.  The public

-------
22                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
Prosecutor is  the  exclusive authority to bring these  cases to court. On the other hand, the
administrative  authorities are responsible for compliance monitoring  and administrative and civil
enforcement. Sn the Netherlands, this authority is not only responsible for monitoring, but is also
entitled to enforce that law. The municipalities are responsible for the enforcement of nearly all of
the 400.000 business in the country. The provinces deal with  about 3.000 big plants, including
landfills.

      We stimulate close and  structural cooperation among the municipalities and the provinces.
To realise this, we are building an enforcement structure with  all participants, that has been laid
down in a letter to Parliament. Main features are:
-   all participants marching together;
-   realizing  an integrated, multi-media approach;
-   administration and police/Public Prosecutors marching together,  not two separate  circuits;
•   municipal cooperatives.

      Information  and sharing the know-how play  an  important role in the enforcement area  in
the Netherlands. They have proven to produce results,  it really works! If you want to be convinced
of that, please have a look at our stands in these conference rooms.

      Enforcement not only is a matter of national interest. On the contrary, most enforcement
problems we have in the Netherlands are caused by the fact that  there are so many differences
between the environmental policies in the European countries. Enforcement  of waste transports
for example is only possible if we have one definition of waste. At this moment, real waste still
can be defined as "Wirtschaftsgut".

      For this reason, we in the Netherlands, not only the  Environmental  Inspectorate of my
Ministry, but also other enforcement agencies, have a  lot of contacts with similar organisations in
other countries. In this way  we  want to stimulate an international cooperation in the field  of
enforcement. These contacts are growing now that more  and more statutes are adopted about
internationally marketing substances, the international  transports of waste etc. All these  statutes
have to be  enforced! Contacts are increasing between neighboring countries, but also within the
EEC and with some Central- and Eastern European countries, the United States, Interpol etc.

      Within the framework of the European Community, the Netherlands' government stimulates
the  attention  of the European  Community  members for  giving  higher priority to compliance
monitoring and enforcement.  In the EEC-Environmental Council Meeting of  last December, the
need for further  development  of  compliance and  enforcement was  stressed.  The  Council
acknowledged the need for enforceability of environmental legislation. It agreed that it would be
desirable as a first step to establish a network of representatives of national authorities and the
EEC commission in the field of enforcement. In 1992 the establishment of such a network has
been started.

       Enforcement is also one of  the themes in the Memorandum of Understanding,  we have
with  different Central  and   eastern   European  countries.   The  development  of integrated
environmental control has priority for most of  these countries and support from the Netherlands is
often requested. We therefore decided that one of  trie criteria for  environmental cooperation with

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              23
these countries  is  the  strengthening of the  environmental  management  activities, including
enforcement.

      International enforcement is important for the Netherlands, not only because we have so
many contacts and our country  is so vulnerable for global environmental  pollution. It is also
important because the acceptance of environmental regulations for both the citizens and the
companies will be higher when they know they will be in every country regulated and  enforced  in
the same way. And it will also mean  that trade distortions between countries can be prevented,
for every plant or business the same rules are applying. Many kinds of pollution can only be dealt
with if we have  international cooperation in the  field of environment, 1  already mentioned the
waste transports.

      And last but not  least, international cooperation is very useful because we can all learn
from each other. We can exchange experiences and knowledge. This conference's goal is not  to
produce an enforcement blue print for all countries involved. It's goal  to identify some principles
every participating country or organization agrees with.

      We had a good conference in  Rio de Janeiro about the relation between environment and
development, about sustainable development. But now, we have to put these results  in practice.
In my view, this  cannot only mean new  ideas,  it will also mean good enforcement of everything
we have to do. We  need  a good and strong  enforcement structure if we  want to make the
UNCED conference a real success. Therefore, we need good agreements, identical principles.

Ladies and gentlemen,

       I hope this Conference will have that result. We paved the way two years  ago in the
Netherlands. Budapest will  give us the possibility to further  that work. Undoubtedly, many ideas
will be presented these days. It is my hope that the good  ones will be really put into practice. The
Netherlands will  go on,  by  taking initiatives. But we do not  want to lose the contacts with all  of
you. We will give you the support you need, and help you where ever it is possible. I  wish you a
very successful Conference and a good time in this beautiful  city of  Budapest.

-------
24                           INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              25
MR. HERBERT  H.  TATE  Jr,    Assistant  Administrator for  Enforcement,  United  States
Environmental Protection Agency
Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for your gracious Introduction.

      I would like to offer a special note of  appreciation to Minister Keresztes and to Mayor
Demszky for their warm  and  gracious hospitality.  I would also like to thank my fellow sponsors
Minister Alders and Mr. Brinkhorst, represented today by Mr. Beck. I want to reserve particular
thanks to my co-chair from the Netherlands, Pieter Verkerk. Pieter as co-chair for the  first two
International  Enforcement Conferences epitomizes his  country's  long tradition  of environmental
leadership.

      Today we have come  together at this Second International Conference on Environmental
Enforcement to continue the  work begun  two years ago in Utrecht, the Netherlands. Despite the
diversity of  our  national  origins,  we have  come together with one common resolve: a shared
commitment  to establishing  environmental protection and the recognition  of the importance of
enforcement towards that commitment. Understanding  the growing convergence of international
trade with environmental  protection has presented us with a significant opportunity for bridging the
divide between  economic  development  and  environmental values.  In  1992,  there were two
particular international agreements which underscore this point. Through Agenda 21  of the United
Nations's Conference in the Environment and Development held in  Rio, this past June, the world
community recognized the importance of developing compliance and enforcement programs with
environmental program implementation and institution building. Second, the North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA), called by Administrator William Reilly "the greenest Trade Agreement
ever ...", explicitly called for economic  development  to  take  place  in an environmentally
sustainable  manner recognizing that enforcement  of environmental  laws and regulations was the
guarantor for this development.

       Strong enforcement  while  deterring non-compliant  behavior also  has the  effect of
encouraging active management for environmental protection.  Our experience in the United
States  is illustrative of this point.  President Bush  at the beginning of his Administration  in  1989
promised to make "polluters  pay ..." and  pay they have. The President's  enforcement  program
has achieved in the areas of penalties, criminal case referrals and  successful prosecutions  more
than all the other previous Administrations combined in the preceding 18 years.  In the past  three
years alone, under the direction of Administrator Reilly,  EPA has collected more  civil and criminal
fines and penalties,  an amount exceeding $200 million dollars, than the Agency had ever
collected in the  past eighteen years. This past year alone we anticipate an additional 100 million
in civil and  criminal fines and penalties to be issued against environmental polluters. Also,  EPA,
along with  the  Department  of Justice,  in  the past three years has referred  and  successfully
prosecuted  over 50% of  all criminal cases ever prosecuted in the  Agency's entire 21 year history,
with  a  significant number of individual offenders, including company presidents and other high
level corporate officials, receiving  jail sentences.

-------
26                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      In addition to criminal  prosecutions,  fines and penalties, enforcement has been  used to
require industry to correct its  own non-compliance through enforcement settlements. Preliminary
reports for this past year alone indicate that regulated industries in the United States have spent
or will spend over 200 million dollars  to correct environmental violations or engage in pollution
prevention projects as a direct result of enforcement settlements.

      Finally, in  the area of cleaning  up  old and long-standing hazardous waste  sites, EPA's
"enforcement first"  program, under the Superfund Hazardous Waste Cleanup  Statute  has
recovered from private companies and individuals over $1 billion dollars per year, for each of the
past four years  to clean up old  long-standing hazardous waste  sites which  are now being
completed at the rate of one site per week.

      The result  of this aggressive and vigorous enforcement program is industry's recognition of
the great potential economic liability as well as individual personal liability for poor environmental
practices. These  direct  costs resulting from civil  or criminal  penalties, the costs necessary to
remediate a  site  or a plant  or  facility, as well as the indirect costs associated  with  lengthy
litigation, all  are causing industries to develop new and improved ways to manage their methods
of operation and  handling  their waste.   Industry  is  becoming  "encouraged"  toward  active
management for  environmental  protection and waste  minimization.  The  concept that "good
business" and "good  environment"  are compatible is beginning to  take hold with our business
community.  Although  in  the  past our  program of enforcement was  strictly a "Command  and
Control"  regulatory-deterrent  approach, we  are now  moving  toward an approach of  comple-
menting our enforcement program with more market-based incentives  and voluntary approaches
to provide  industry with incentives to go  beyond  mere  compliance so they may engage in
pollution prevention and waste minimization programs to a greater degree. These approaches are
finding acceptance  with industry  without compromising our vigorous  enforcement efforts. But we
must remember that incentives are not meaningful incentives without deterrence through  effective
enforcement.

      Given the  current worldwide decline in many country's economies, the challenge facing all
nations is striking an effective balance between deterrence and incentives in their environmental
protection programs. Our goal should  be to develop a strategy which clearly will "make  polluters
pay" but one that will  also reward good corporate citizenship and enlist the substantial resources
of private industry  to help leverage the staggering costs associated  with providing meaningful
environmental protection.

      There is no  single ideal enforcement mode. Rather, enforcement will generally reflect the
economic conditions  and culture  of a society. Indeed,  environmental enforcement may pose
unique challenges for nations which are in the  process of transforming their economic systems.
Whatever the specific circumstances, enforcement will be an essential component.

       I think you will find that  the themes we have  struck for continuing  to improve  the  U.S.
program have applicability to countries both which are  developing  environmental enforcement
programs as well as for those countries with mature programs.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              27
      Nations with limited financial and technological resources will discover that the adoption of
clearer and more  "enforceable" regulations and permits will reduce enforcement  costs  and
increase their effectiveness toward regulation. Investigatory techniques such  as strategic targeting
through inspections and enforcement response as well as multi-media approaches to enforcement
will  help  countries  to  leverage  limited  environmental  resources  for  maximum,  efficient
environmental results, risk reduction and deterrence. Creative enforcement settlements calling for
corrective technology changes, cleanup and remedial action, or pollution prevention and reduction
projects can reach beyond the deterrence created by  fines and penalties  to require industry and
companies to invest in sustainable development for their nation's future.

      The  U.S. is committed  to  sharing  our  own  experiences, and also to  respecting  and
exploring the many approaches each nation may take to achieve compliance. During the  next
several  days, we  will  mutually work  to  develop effective environmental enforcement  and
environmental assessment capabilities, and in the process, to improve our own programs.

      We have a lot to do ... now let's get to work.

-------
28                           INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             29
MR. LAURENS JAN BRINKHORST, Director General for Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil
Protection, Commission of the European Communities

This speech was presented by Mr. Hans Beck, EEC-representative in Budapest
Mr. Chairman, Ministers, ladies and gentlemen,

      It is an  honour and a pleasure for me to conclude the list of distinguished speakers and
welcome you to this conference. You might imagine that the last weeks have not been easy and
smooth for EEC institutions and for their political agents.
      Therefore,  we  from  the EEC  Commission are all  glad on the outcome of France's
referendum which hopefully will bring the EEC closer to European union and allow us to set up
systems  on this European  continent  which are  adapted  to the political,  economic  and  social
constraints of  the 21st century. The  European economic community has  successfully started,
some 35  years ago, to replace national egotism by constructive, progressive cooperation and
integration. This undertaking has never limited itself to free trade and  economic joint venture.
From its beginnings, it rather tried to go beyond nationalism and create a community of states,
regions and citizens. The success which the EEC had, made other states apply for membership
doubling the number  of member states. Among  the  new members were  not only prosperous
countries; as regards some of them the EEC was told that they would soon become  communist
and should therefore better be kept outside than integrated. As you know, the EEC did not follow
that advice. Today all signals indicate that their integration  is on a good way.

       Since the EEC is more than a free trade area it does not satisfy itself with the promotion of
economic objectives.  One  of the areas,  where the EEC has  been active and which  do not
concern free trade, has been the environment, where policy was developed during the  last 20
years. The EEC and all its  member states reached the conclusion that environmental measures
were necessary at community  level in order to protect, preserve and improve  the quality of the
environment, and while in  the beginning of the EEC environmental policy implementation and
enforcement were left almost entirely to member states, it soon  turned and that compliance with
community environmental standards required EEC monitoring.
       This  explains  why  the EEC  Commission  decided to  actively  support  this  present
conference. We firmly believe  that environmental rules need adequate enforcement. We firmly
believe that an economic community  which is on its way towards a more  political union needs
environmental  standards to  make economic growth sustainable. We firmly believe that where the
EEC enters into economic relation with other states, care  must be taken that economic activities
do not destroy or adversely  affect the environment in these states.

       A French poet, La Fontaine, told us some time  ago that a hungry stomach has no ears. If
we look around, we often find that individuals, economic agents or even governments  sometimes
believe that economic development  should rank  first   and  that  one  should  forget  about
environmental  standards and their enforcement. Until a decent economic development has been
reached, the EEC commission is not  of this opinion. It has just suggested a fifth environmental

-------
30                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
action programme which makes the  integration of environmental  requirements into other policies
a top priority for the years to come. The commission, indeed, is of the opinion that sustainable
economic growth may only be reached by such an integration of environmental requirements into
economic considerations. And the difficult state of the environment in parts of central and eastern
Europe is less due to the fact that there were no environmental rules and standards, but rather to
insufficient integration into economic requirements and to insufficient enforcement.

      I hope that this conference promotes mutual understanding, leads to better enforcement of
environmental rules and thus to a better state of the environment.  Good luck to all participants.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              31


UPGRADING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS IN FRANCE ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS
OF THE EEC

P. KROMAREK

Director of Environment, Elf Aquitaine, Tour Elf Cedex 45, 92078 Paris, France


1.    INTRODUCTION

      The EC  directives  set forth obligations to the member States to  be met  through their
governments. These governments must enact regulations for their citizens in order to provide, for
example, the protection  of bird species  within  a designated  area, or to  guarantee  that waste
disposal will not cause harm to the environment, or to ensure that waste producers will observe
the applicable environmental requirements. Governments must also establish mandatory limits on
maximum concentrations  of pollutants emitted into the  water or  the  air.  They  must  appoint
qualified  authorities to oversee  the practical  application of the  rules.  They  must establish
administrative procedures,  measurements, analysis methods, etc...

      The enforcement  of EC measures takes place through German, English,  French, Dutch
and the other countries' regulations. These national regulations must be followed by the people to
whom they apply. The means of enforcement are therefore different from country to country, with
some similar characteristics.


2     EFFECT OF EC LEGISLATION ON NATIONAL REGULATIONS

       From  a legal point  of view,  it is quite obvious that EC legislation  has had an important
effect on national regulations:

1.     When  no national legislation  is applicable - when an EC directive regulates an issue which
       is not  regulated internally by a member State - the relevant regulations must be created. In
       France, for example, it was  necessary to establish rules  about  the  prevention  of major
       industrial accidents  in  order to  implement the strict EC directive on accident  prevention.
       Also many countries such as Greece, Spain,  Portugal, and even Germany and Britain had
       to establish a procedure for environmental impact statements.
       When  a directive is  passed and member States already have relevant legislation, the case
       is more complicated. It has been pointed out several times that it is much more difficult to
       change existing legislation and practices than to introduce new  EC legislation where no
       national laws have been adopted.

2.     The implementation of the directive on environmental impact assessments illustrates this
       situation very well. When  the EC decided to propose to the Council a directive on
       environmental impact  assessment, France  already had  a decree on this subject.  The
       French system  obviously served as a model for the community directive. The final version
       of the directive was adopted  in 1985 and the general opinion was that it corresponded in
       many  ways to the French regulations. However, some elements of the directive were not
       fully transcribed  into the French  decree, such as the  requirement  for a trans-border
       consultation when projects submitted to an impact study could have an impact on another
       country.   The requirement  of submitting a written non-technical  summary of  each study
       was not  applied in France. Other small differences appeared after an in-depth examination
       and comparison of the two regulations.

3.     Another  example  of a problem  with  compliance is  the  directive  on free  access to
       environmental information,  which  was adopted in June  1990. The French law  on  free

-------
32                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


       access to administrative documents passed in 1977 contains many points which are in line
       with  the requirements  of the  EC  directive,  it makes  information  from  government
       authorities - including environmental  information - available to the public. But the French
       meaning of "free  access"  to  information  depends  on  the  nature  of  "administrative
       documents". The Courts and a specific legal body called  the "Commission of Access to
       Administrative  Documents" interpret  the meaning of  "documents".  If information held by
       government authorities  is not  recognized as having the  required  characteristics of  a
       document,  it is  not  covered by the free access regulation.  On  the other  hand, the
       directives give  a wide  margin  for  the administrative authorities  to refuse  information
       requests on the grounds of  confidentiality for business reasons. The French meaning of
       confidentiality is  not  clearly  defined  and  is  often subjected to legal interpretation. This
       ambiguity makes the  implementation of the directive uncertain and difficult.

4.     1 would  like to  emphasize  this problem  of  wording in the EC environmental regulations. It
       often causes problems in  implementation  because the member states  often  do not have
       the corresponding tool - the appropriate legal institution - or do not know the concepts.
       One of the  more glaring examples is the problem  of liability. The concept of responsibility
       varies from  state to state. Liability based on fault is of course established in every country.
       Liability  for  risk, or even objective  liability, is recognized  in certain states. The proposed
       directive  on  liability related to waste  introduced a concept of liability without  fault. Facing
       opposition  from the  industries, ranging from  waste  producers  to  waste-elimination
       industries and insurance companies,  and also responding to objections from the European
       Parliament,  the Commission  has established numerous exceptions to this proposal. Even
       with these  exceptions, if the directive were  to be adopted, the inclusion of this form of
       liability will  pose  serious problems to most of the  states. One can imagine that the same
       difficulties will arise in applying the directive  on  liability for defective  products, because of
       the differences between  liability and substantiating  facts.

5.     The same problems  of  interpretation occur for  the "best available  technologies" (B.A.T.)
       mentioned  in several directives but left  undefined.  Does the  word  "available"  include
       economic aspects? Does it refer to  specific legal procedures, such as patents? What does
       "best" mean? In relation to  what is  it evaluated? A  certain  consensus has  existed until
       now, but in  fact the interpretation of these concepts varies from state to state.

       Since the B.A.T. is a  condition imposed  by the directive on the granting of authorizations, it
       is the administrations responsible for these  authorizations which, de facto, define these
       technologies. There  are many more  examples.  Only through the coordination among the
       administrations  can   there be  a common concept, if the ministries  concerned  do not
       themselves  decide on the  best available technology. But it is clear that a definition of the
       concept  interferes  with adaptation to technological  progress. If  the best  available
       technologies are defined for each industry, the companies will make it their goal to acquire
       these prescribed technologies and make the  best use of  them, but they have no incentive
       to seek superior technologies or to use new technologies which might be more efficient.

6.     All these problems of interpretation  are difficult to solve especially with 12 states having
       different legal,  technical and economic  practices. However, help can be given before the
       legislative process, during the drafting of the regulations. This point  will be discussed in
       later  sessions  of this  conference. Still,  I must emphasize now the  importance  of  an
       exchange between the Commission officials, especially the General Directorate XI, and the
       economic and  industrial parties concerned. Such  an  exchange  has already  taken  place,
       but - without going into too much detail - it needs a great deal of improvement. It needs to
       be more extensive and take  place on a more regular basis. For example, the problems of
       practical  implementation must be discussed,  also the  difficulties  of interpretation of  terms,
       and thus the legal transposition once  the regulations are drafted.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              33


7.     Another enforcement difficulty arises when a state is  reluctant to comply  with a Court
       decision. Some member states  like  Belgium have been found guilty twice before  they
       obeyed a court decision. It happened once in France  with the directive on bird protection.
       The Court handed down its  decision in 1988 (Case 252185), but  some of the corrective
       measures have not yet been  carried out. The lack of  EC policy governing  the compliance
       with Court decisions is obviously an obstacle to the proper execution of these  decisions.
       Only the legal and political  conscience of the individual governments  compels them to
       comply with  the courts and take the necessary measures. But  in some cases,  there is a
       psychological effect which must  be mentioned, although it is not an excuse for breaking
       the  law. The directive on the protection of wild birds requires  governments to designate
       protected areas for bird habitats and  ban certain  activities which can endanger the life or
       reproduction of the birds. Certain forms of hunting are completely banned.  The concept of
       "traditional hunting", meaning an ancestral way of hunting involving only certain  categories
       of birds in  specified regions, is not included in the directive. On one of  the points of
       criticism of the Court,  hunters in France consider that this concept justifies the practice in
       the  southern region of capturing certain birds,  and that this type of hunting is so  limited
       that it does not jeopardize the survival of the species. No solution  has yet been found for
       this conflict.  This is a good example of  how national or  regional culture and mentality play
       a role in the  successful enforcement of European Community environmental legislation.

8,     The environmental legislation of the European Community has had  considerable impact on
       the  French legislation  on environmental protection, especially from a strictly  legal point of
       view.  It  is  quite  obvious in the  light of  three  recent Court of Justice  decisions in
       Luxembourg. A brief summary  of the legal  framework in  France is  needed in order to
       understand  the case.  Following  the standard European model, a  law is  adopted  by the
       Parliament.  It becomes more  precisely defined  through a  series of  implementation
       measures taken by the government and the  administrative branch. "Decrees" are passed
       by the government, and "orders" are given by one or several ministries or by  a prefect (the
       head  of the local or regional  government). Both decrees and orders specify the  rights and
       duties of the citizens or the  parties involved. Memos are issued by the ministries or the
       prefects to advise their administration how to implement the decrees and orders. They are
       not  usually legally binding for third parties.
       In the matter of environmental  protection, the  main  legal  framework is provided by  five
       major acts concerning:

       (1) Industrial installations which can cause environmental damage, 19 July 1976,
       (2) Water management, 16 December 1964, modified 3 January 1992,
       (3) Prevention and treatment of waste, 15 July 1976, modified 13 July 1992,
       (4) the Nature Protection Act, 16 July 1976 and
       (5) the Chemical Law, 12 July 1977.

       There are specific decrees for the application of each of these laws, and memos advising
       the  administrative bodies how to apply them.
       When the air quality directives were adopted, in  1979 for SO2, 1982 for NO, and 1983 for
       lead , these directives had  to  be  transcribed into  French law.  The  Act  on industrial
       installations  provided the necessary legal and administrative framework to comply with the
       regulations,  but it established no limits for  SO2 or lead in the air.  This oversight  was
       perpetuated  through the memos. The Commission issued infringement procedures against
       France  - as  it also did against Germany for  the same reason  - arguing  that ministry
       memos are not legally  binding and should not be used. The Court  decided in favor of the
       Commission. The obligation of member states to set maximum limits of emissions into the
       air "is established in order to protect the public health". The directives "aim  to  define the
       rights and obligations  of individual citizens".  In order  to exercise their rights, the citizens
       must  have  knowledge of them. The steps taken on  the national level  must therefore
       create precise, clear and transparent situations". Since  a ministry memo does not have a

-------
34                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      legally binding  effect, the legaf  situation it creates does  not  meet the defined criteria
      (Cases C13/90, C14/90, C64/90, 1 October 1991).
      France was  therefore  made to replace the contested ministry  memos with decrees.
      Germany faced the same problem after being found guilty on 30 May 1991  (Cases 54/89
      and 361/88),

9.    So far we  have discussed cases in  which  a member state is faced with EC legislation
      more  strict than its own national legislation.  But what about the opposite? Can a member
      state  be forced to  give up a high protection level if the Community standard is  less
      stringent? The EC is a common, single interior market without borders among 12 states,
      and no  trade  restriction  is  admitted.  Therefore,  there must not be  any  product
      specifications or requirements which might hinder the free movement of goods within the
      EC. When France  decided  on environmental grounds to  oblige waste oil producers to
      recycle the oil or burn it only in very specific cases,  this was not considered to be contrary
      to the  waste oii directive that made no distinction between  the treatments of waste oil. At
      the same time France forbade the exporting  of waste oil, arguing that oil burning might not
      be done elsewhere in an environmentally-friendly way. The Luxembourg court considered
      this ban to be a violation  of the principle of free movement of goods  (Case  240/83, AD
      BHU, 7 July 1985, p531).
      Environmental requirements have priority over the  principle of free  movement of goods
      under  certain circumstances. This was shown in the Danish case on beverage packaging
      (Case  302/86, commission of Denmark, 20  September 1988, p4607). The court decision
      had officially  recognized that environmental protection  is a matter of genera!  interest, an
      "imperative requirement", and must be considered as having the same priority as freedom
      of movement.
      The European Single Act  confirmed this opinion by introducing the principle that member
      states may adopt more protective measures than required by the EC but that they must
      respect the Treaty. This refers to the general principles of the  Treaty of Rome and the
      Single Act. Consequently,  stronger regulations  in  the  member states  must  not be
      discriminatory against any  other member state or disproportionate to their goal.
      For rules concerning industrial installations and  not products, there is no known Court
      case. The  same principles must obviously apply, but the free movement of goods would
      be less affected  by stronger environmental  rules  than  the  free competition among
      companies, which  is also  a basic  principle of the  EC. Demonstrating a violation of this
      principle is much more difficult than proving an obstacle  to commerce, which  probably
      explains why there is no  litigation on record. The  French legislation on major industrial
      accidents is very strict and goes beyond the EC directive's requirements, but if remains
      uncertain whether the situation  leads to an imbalance of competition.

10.    Let us now take a look at the practical impact of the EC regulations on  the environment. It
      is clear that the consequences  have been felt in terms of actions and policies.
      The directives have not changed the French administrative framework, nor have they led
      to the creation of new  authorities, unlike what happened  in  countries which did not yet
      have  advanced environmental regulations. But the directives  have led  to  changes of
      administrative procedures  in relation to impact  studies, hazard studies,  and freedom of
      information. These  changes have been  more or less far-reaching depending on whether
      the French regulations already  complied with the corresponding EC requirements.
      The EC directives  have had a greater effect on the extent of  the controls required of
      administrative authorities and industrial users. These  requirements involve the monitoring
      of emissions and the analysis  of environmental  quality. It goes without saying that these
      obligations have led to better information on the immediate environment by requiring that
      more parameters be analyzed than  before, more  frequently than before. The quality of
      bathing water has  become better known,  and  subsequently  improved,  due  to directive
      76/160 on bathing water quality.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              35


      Similarly,  by obliging the states to draft quality improvement plans for air and water, by
      reducing emissions of dangerous substances into water or air,  through plans to eliminate
      wastes, by determining  reinforced protection areas for  certain wildlife  species, or for
      regions with more  heavily-polluted air than  elsewhere, the various directives have  also
      contributed to an awareness of the necessity of global environmental management in  time
      and in space, on a longer term basis.


3     CONCLUSION

      In conclusion, it must be stressed that enforcement of EC environmental  laws is not an
exercise  for its own sake.  It goes beyond complying with limit values, staying within maximum
concentrations and so on - it is a  means to protect  the environment as a common interest, while
protecting individual rights.

-------
36                            (NTERNATfONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             37


SOME FACTORS INFLUENCING ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT IN THE CSFR

E. KRUZlKOVA

Executive director, Institute of Environmental Policy, U dvou srpu 2, 150 00 Prague, CSFR


1     ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION AND ITS QUALITY

      The  quality of environmental legislation significantly influence's environmental legislation,
particularly from the  point of view of its realistic character, respectively its enforceability. From this
perspective it is important to take into account:
         the  way  how the  legislation  sets down  rights  and  obligations  in this field and
         environmental standards (limits), quality  objectives,  etc., which instruments and
         mechanisms of environmental enforcement the legislation provides.

      1. Since changes in November 1989 and since establishment of environmental authorities
         in 1990 Czechoslovakia has prepared and approved  a new environmental legislation in
         all fields except for water management.
         New  act on the environment setting main principles  of environmental protection, basic
         rights and obligation was approved.
         From one point of view the solution to enact new environmental legislation gave js an
         advantage to take into account new trends in economic, social and political life of trie
         country. It also allowed us to  make an effort to incorporate as much as possible EC
         environmental requirements into new acts  and regulations, from another point  of view
         the  legislation was prepared  in  hurry and in some  aspect,  especially in  emission
         standards and dead-lines for their accomplishment, it is too  ambitious and non realistic.
      2. New environmental  legislation provides all  instruments  and  mechanism  of
         environmental enforcement that are known in modern systems:
         a.  polluter  pays principle  expressed  mainly  in the  system of charges and fees for
             pollution and for use of natural resources;
         b.  some  environmental aspects were incorporated into new taxes system that will be
             in force from January 1,  1993;
         c.  new  legislation  empowers  environmental authorities  to impose fines and other
             sanction for violation of environmental legislation;
         d.  it is  possible to  sue  for  environmental damage in  civil  and  criminal  judicial
             procedure;
         e.  as one of the first Central  and East European countries Czechoslovakia approved
             legislation for environmental impact assessment (Act on the Environment - federal,
             Czech National Council's Act on EIA).
         f.  environmentalists  succeeded to include environmental aspects into privatisation act
             during amendment procedure  - how the Act on  the  large - scale privatisation
             contains one new section ( 6a ) requiring environmental audits to be carried out as
             a part of privatisation  process;

      In the form of Czech government resolution the Czech  republic also basically solved the
issue of environmental liability ior past damage and their  cleaning-up. Regarding  the new
Czechoslovak environmental legislation h is necessary  to say  that Czechoslovakia made a big
step towards better environmental  protection system.  As  the only  country  of CEE countries
Czechoslovakia succeeded to  create new and  relatively  well  coordinated  and  clear  set  of
environmental acts and  regulation. We also created a new structure of environmental authorities
on ail levels of State Administration, including quite powerful Inspection (Czech and Slovak).
      As mentioned under 1.1. we did not manage to accomplish enforceability of this legislation
sometimes.  Not only in the sphere  of limits and dead-lines there are lacks. Also charged and
fines should be higher to properly stimulate ecological behaviour of polluters.

-------
38                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      There are some problems with environmental damage and ecological damage (defined as
the Foss of ecologfcal  functions of ecosystems in 1he Act on the Environment).  It is not easy to
express what is an environmental damage, to distinguish different extent of the damage (mainly in
criminal procedure) and to express and "count" ecological damage. The experience of  other
countries and of the EC would be highly helpful in this field.
      On the  lower level (mainly districts and communities) professional skills are  not sufficient
for powers that were given to environmental authorities at these levels.
      These shortly described problems show that the environmental enforcement  is not always
easy. The main reason of this  situation is  that before and during drafting the now  legislation
practically no environmental enforcement system  and policy existed.
      New  acts  were  being prepared  often  without even  proper  economic  analysis  and
assessment of  economic consequences of new legislation.
      PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

      1.  Prerequisite  for public  participation  environmental  awareness  based  on access  to
          information  about the  slate  of  the  environment,  its reasons and  consequences.
          Information makes people aware of the current situation and enables general public to
          be a partner  of state bodies, to support or to push, challenge state actions.
      2.  Czechoslovak legislation gives citizens right to in time, true, objective information about
          environment  (Fundamental list of Rights and  Duties. Act  on the Environment, Act on
          Air. Act on Nature Conversation).
          Unfortunately no mechanism  and exact way how to implement  this right, how  to
          provide information, when and whom, were set dow by the legislation.
      3.  Acts on E!A  are the  first Czechoslovak acts giving general public the right to take part
          in environmental decision-making.
          We will  see after one  year at  least how this  instruments works  and what are  the
          probfems.
      4.  It is not easy now to involve the general public into environmental decision-making.
          Environmental protection does not belong among priorities of citizens, today. Since the
          beginning  of 1990  the  importance  of this  issue  in  the awareness  of  people has
          significantly decreased.
      5.  In  comparison  wfth pre-revolution" time environmental NGO's are not well organized,
          they are scattered and not very willing to cooperate with each other.  However, new
          environmental non-governmental institution are being created. Hopefully they will  begin
          to  play some role in environmentai policy. Especially those that are oriented towards
          transition of the society to sustainability.
      CONCLUSIONS

      1.  It is necessary to examine the efficiency of new environmental legislation, problems of
          its enforcement; to find  lacks,  insufficiencies laying inside and also  outside
          environmental legislation.
      2.  On the basis of results we must establish an efficient enforcement system and policy,
          realistic and enforceable,  based on  broad participation of  state authorities, judicial
          institutions, business and general public.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              39


DESIGNING ENFORCEABLE ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS - EEC

TURNER T. SMITH, JR., Hunton & Williams, 106 Ave. Louise, 1050 Brussels, Belgium


      SUMMARY

      This paper distinguishes two issues - first, the problem of designing EEC  requirements
that member  states can properly  implement, and ensuring that they  do so (ie., the question of
enforceability  against member states), and second, the problem of designing provisions directly
applicable to  the  regulated community (ie.,  the question of enforceability  against the regulated
community). It notes the commonly held view that  an implementation and enforcement deficit
exists with EC environmental regulation in each case.
      After a brief discussion of European regulatory style and the European  debate over
binding  legal  requirements in  a  field  regarded as  involving  scientific and technical policy, the
paper turns to the two issues noted  above.  In discussing the first,  it sets out the institutional
reasons for difficulty in achieving full implementation by member states, as well as some solutions
being considered. It then illustrates the principles and elements of enforceable regulation as set
out in the main speaker's paper in the context of each question.


1     INTRODUCTION

      Over the last 20 years, the  EEC has developed a considerable body of environmental
regulation.(1)  Yet  that corpus has been widely criticized -- by the EC Commission,(2) by former
members of the  Commission,(3)  by  the  EC Parliament,(4)  and  by  commentators<5)  --
because it has not been, and in some cases cannot be, effectively  implemented and  enforced.
      It is important at the outset to distinguish two separate, but interrelated, questions. The
first is the enforceability of EC law vis-a-vis EC member states.  The second is  its  enforceability
vis-a-vis the regulated community.
      Much  of EC environmental law is promulgated  as "directives" -- a  form of Community
legislation that in  general  must be implemented at the member  state  level before  it  can apply
directly  to the regulated  community(6). Without adequate implementing provisions in member
state  law to fill out the regulatory framework,  and to translate it into detailed rules, standards,
permits  and  other requirements  directly  applicable to the  regulated  community,  effective
enforcement  against that  community  cannot normally be ensured.  Of course,  some member
states themselves face analogous issues due to their own governmental structure,  and in these
cases the directly applicable provisions must be promulgated, in  turn, by  Lander,  provinces, or
other  regional entities, or by local governments such as municipalities.
      In short, designing enforceable  environmental  requirements in a hierarchial system like the
EC, requires  (a) designing clear and unambiguous primary requirements (here EC requirements)
the proper implementation of which  can be  assured  at  lower  governmental levels, and  (b)
designing enforceable secondary requirements directly applicable to  the  regulated community,
whatever level they  emanate  from. These  issues  are  related, since each involves  the art of
drafting  binding legal requirements addressed to third parties, involving emotionally laden matters
and public risk decisions, resting on complex scientific and technical premises, and costing many
millions  to carry out. Yet they are fundamentally different as well. The first involves chiefly issues
of institutional design and  structure at the governmental level that go to the heart of the political
system  involved. The second, at  least as to  EC environment law that  is mainly applied directly to
the regulated community by member state  enforcement agencies (the design and practices of
which are beyond the scope of this paper), chiefly involves regulatory draftsmanship.

-------
40                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
2      SOME IMPORTANT CONTEXTUAL MATTERS

       Environmental  requirements  are  always set in  a particular  cultural, political and  legal
context.  Before proceeding  further,  and  especially because the principle  speaker's  paper
proceeds from the American regulatory context, it may be useful to take note of the EC regulatory
context, and how it differs from the American.

2.1    Regulatory Style in the EC

       Regulation in Europe is generally regarded as a  "technical" or "political," and not a "legal"
issue, though this attitude appears to be changing slowly. European government and industry, on
the whole, have not  in the past looked to legal  counsel  to assist in  handling  environmental
matters. They have relied, instead, primarily on  technical staff.
       The Community regulatory process, furthermore,  is largely nonadversarial and is the result
of a slow, non-public, complex law-making structure designed to achieve political consensus
among the member states. There is  a  close  industry-government  relationship. Industry,  in the
form of its national  and  European-wide trade associations,  operates through  contacts  with
national authorities, through  "expert" advisory  committees at the Commission,  and through
lobbying of the Commission, Parliament and COREPER. Proposed directives  are  made publicly
available and  are commented on by  Parliamentary committees, but there  is no  free-wheeling,
open political process  similar to that found in the U.S. Congress. Nor is there a structured,  open
administrative  process for  promulgating directives or  implementing regulations,  such as the
American notice and comment rulemaking process.
       The rise of  the "green"  movement in  Europe and the  manner  in  which  it affects
environmental  regulation is also of  importance.  The  European "green" movement  has  had
success in organizing  political parties, but it otherwise remains  largely a local, grass-roots effort.
Neither it nor environmental groups generally in Europe  have, on the whole,  organized effectively
yet at the  EC or, in many cases, at national levels. To date, environmental groups do not have as
sophisticated a grasp  of the technical, scientific, and economic factors that pfay a crucial role in
the details of environmental regulation as do their  U.S. counterparts, and they have not lobbied
nor litigated nearly as  broadly or effectively.
       By  way of contrast,  one can note that in the United States, law  and lawyers have been
central to the development of environmental policy,  and coordinated efforts at the national, federal
JeveJ have led the  way. American regulation  relies heavily on generic, federal  administrative
"notice  and comment"  rulemaking to  achieve  specificity  and uniformity,  and  to gather the
technical,  scientific  and  economic  data that  form the premises  for  continental-scope  public
decision  making. Those administrative  rulemaking proceedings provide  public, formal,  and
structured opportunities for citizens and industry to participate  in the development of  regulation
through comments,  public hearings and sometimes judicial challenges  to rules. Federal judicial
review has played an important role,  at the behest of  both citizens and industry, in forcing the
executive branch to implement federal environmental statutes promptly and properly, and to justify
its discretionary policy choices.
       The "political" aspects  of the American environmental regulatory process take the form of
lobbying directed at the Congress, as  well as less formal efforts to  lobby  the  administrative
agencies that  establish, implement and enforce regulations. In the U.S., there are no "green"
political parties as such; the struggle goes on within the confines of the existing party structures,
but both  parties endorse environmental goals.  Strong,  sophisticated,  and well-funded
environmental groups  at the national level have prodded both industry and government, and have
lobbied and litigated with great effect.
       In short,  in the United States, contending  interests use  legal processes  in the judicial
arena  and before administrative agencies to influence  the formulation  and execution of policy.
This is particularly true of citizen environmental groups who, with some frequency,  use citizen suit
provisions in federal environmental legislation as a means of influencing  environmental policy and
ensuring its implementation and enforcement.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              41
2.2   The Question of Binding Legal Requirements

      The premise for this panel seems to be that binding legal requirements should exist -- the
main issue examined is how to draft and implement those requirements so that they can be easily
obeyed and effectively enforced.
      In Europe, however, the premise itself is likely to be challenged. First, as to enforcement
against member states, the discussion below will show that the present system of EC governance
is  in many regards structured to enable member states to limit the scope and depth of EC legal
requirements that are enacted, and thus that become tegaNy binding on them.
      Second, and  perhaps  more  fundamentally,  much  of  industry  and  some  government
officials  (e.g..  in the U.K.  and the  Netherlands)  remain  wedded to "voluntary" action  and
consensual "contract" or  "covenant" approaches. Any 1orm  o1 legislation  is stronger if it solicits
input from and the support of the public and the regulated community, and these  techniques
accomplish both in the case of industry. The stakes in the  environmental area (and the incentives
to avoid control costs or  to engage in "free riding" while others bear those costs) are now  high
enough, however, that if  environmental regulation is to do the job that needs doing, voluntary
efforts  or  covenants alone are  unlikely to  sutfice(7).  Further, the private sector needs,  and
generally prefers, legal certainty in the rules applicable to it and to its investments.(8)
      Finally,  there is  a  tradition  in some quarters in Europe that environmental regulation is a
matter  of  policy,  and as  noted above,  scientific and technical policy to boot.(9)  Lawyers and
law are thought not to be required, or at best are to be suffered only at the point where matters
must go  to court,  a  point to be avoided at  all costs if possible. On this view, it is the expert
government administrators - sometimes given great discretion by the European  legislation - who
should apply policy case-by-case,  frequently guided by informal administrative "rules of thumb" or
"guidelines" as opposed  to formal, detailed,  legally binding rules.(10)  It  is  interesting  to  note
that this same tradition held strong sway at the state level in the United States in the 1960's and
is still alive in  many states  today.  But for the same reasons that voluntary efforts and covenants
alone will not suffice,  "policy"  alone is inadequate. Written,  legally binding,  and enforceable
requirements are essential. And if enforceable legal requirements are to be  had. lawyers, ano1 an
efficient legal enforcement process manned by knowledgeable judges, are essential.
3      PROPER IMPLEMENTATION OF EC LEGISLATION
       AT THE MEMBER STATE LEVEL - THE INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES

3.1    The Problem

       Much  EC legislation,  as noted  above, takes  the  form  of directives  and  must be
implemented  at the  member state level. Even EC regulations, which are  directly applicable to the
regulated  community, frequently depend  on further implementation  by  the  member states.(11)
In either case, where such "secondary" level implementation is required, its proper adoption and
implementation is a  prerequisite to  effective enforcement  against the regulated community.
(12)
       By tne Commission's own account, there are deficiencies in even trie simplest aspects of
formal  compliance  by  member states.(13) The  deficiencies  multiply  when the more subtle
aspects of compliance [e.g., involving the  effectiveness of  implementation) are considered.
(14)
       The most  fundamental reason for the implementation deficit is obvious, and cuts to the
institutional heart  of the  Community. The Community has  not developed the institutional powers in
the Community institutions to ensure vigorous implementation of what is enacted, nor has  their
been the  political will by  member states, acting  in the Council, to enact  sufficiently precise
legislation that member  states can be easily held accountable for its effective implementation. The
current debate over Maastricht and subsidiarity, and the cloud created by the Danish vote and the
French vote,  indicate that  this situation may well not soon change.(15) This  section  discusses

-------
 42                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVJRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


 the  institutional problems;  the  next  section discusses the  precision of the drafting  of the EC
 legislation itself.
       The  structural deficiencies  in  EC  institutional  arrangements are legion.  First, the EC's
 legislative body -- the Council -- as presently structured in the Treaty of Rome is not sufficiently
 independent of the member states that it has the political will to draft legislation that will insure full
 member state implementation,{16) Indeed, the legislative process in the Council frequently
 tends  toward  the "lowest  common  denominator,"(17)  and has  in the  past  resulted in  subtle
 loopholes such as that described  below pertaining to  the Fresh  Water Fish Directive.(18) The
 problem seems mainly to be a lack of will, not a lack of power.
       Second, there is no  formal, rigorous or systematic process for gathering public input on the
 scientific,  technical  and  economic  information necessary to  underpin sound and enforceable
 environmental regulation, nor any requirement that the legal and factual basis for the legislation
 as finally adopted be formally set out and justified,  so that these bases can be easily  tested and
 challenged. Thus,  while  public  awareness,  concern  and  indignation  over  environmental
 degradation and  inadequate implementation and enforcement of  environmental laws is growing,
 public  participation in the law-making, law-applying and law-enforcing effort is weak  in Europe.
 There  is,  in general, a  lack of formal procedural rights that  enable the public to participate  in
 these  processes and that  enable  it to  hold member stale executive  and legislative branches
 accountable before the courts for adequate implementation and enforcement of the laws.
       Third, the EC's judiciary -- the European Court  of Justice -- is not presently structured so
 as to facilitate implementation of EC law  by member states.  The Treaty does not grant broad
 public  access  to initiate litigation to force member state  compliance, and the Court does not have
 adequate  remedial  powers  to  compel  full and  faithfut compliance once its  jurisdiction  is
 invoked.(19) Further, "standing" rules in the member  state courts do not,  on the whole, allow
 a  broad spectrum of interested persons to initiate litigation to  challenge member  state legislative
 or executive branch inaction or inadequate  implementation or enforcement.(20)
       Fourth,  the EC lacks an adequate  Executive  Branch. The Commission  itself is  small
 compared to the size of the implementation and enforcement task,  has no offices or resident
 officers in all  the member states, and  has inadequate investigative and  enforcement powers.
 Directorate General XI does not have the staff, the  funding, or the powers to investigate member
 state implementation and  enforcement systematically  and  comprehensivefy.(21)  It  must rely
 largely on a complaint process In which it reacts to issues  brought before it by  others,(22) and
 then can  enforce only through the  lengthy  and  cumbersome  Article 169 process.(23)  The
 Commission has the power to propose legislation directly applicable in member states by using a
 regulation rather than  a directive, but in the past it  has  seldom proposed legislation in this
 manner.(24) The  Commission itself also has  no power to directly  enforce  member  state
 legislative requirements  on  the regulated community when the member state fails to do so. The
 Council can delegate to it the power to promulgate regulations  without further Council action (as it
 has  done  in the food area), but has not generally done so (except in the case of provisions for
 "adaptation to  technical and scientific progress" in existing directives) in the environmental area.
       Beyond these structural governmental  issues,  other institutional factors contribute.  The
 Parliament is  of  the view  that member states actively seek to  use Community laws to favor
 national producers  and to prefer economic or social  development  over  environmental
 constderation.(25)
       Public interest environmental groups, which  seldom litigate for the reasons noted earlier,
 tend not even  to  make good use of the publicity tools  that are available to them,  because those
groups are politically (and  frequently locally)  oriented,  and are  usually technically  and  legally
 unsophisticated. Further,  they frequently lack key information,  since in most European countries
 executive branches and industry make a cult of secrecy and  there are few effective legal rights of
public access to government or industry information.(26)
       Many industries and government entities are  not yet imbued with a compliance ethic in the
area of environmental protection, and this lack can be particularly pronounced in certain countries
and  in the case  of government-owned businesses or governmental facilities (which  remain, of
course, prevalent in Europe).

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              43
      Finally, there is a significant problem involved in ensuring adequate implementation where
the member state itself is a federation, or for other reasons has inadequate control or power to
ensure that its constituent parts live up to its EC treaty obligations.(27)

3.2   Solutions

      The problems  outlined  above (that is,  the problems  of a higher level of government
instructing a lower,  and making it stick) are endemic to any hierarchical system of government,
although they  are most pronounced in a confederal or federal  system. Their resolution is central
to the development of effective and enforceable environmental regulation. Before turning to how
best to ensure that legislation by a higher level of government is in fact properly implemented and
enforced by a lower, it is useful to reflect on which sorts of things are  best done at  the higher
level and which  at the lower.(28)  To  the  extent that  this  question  can be answered, the
conclusions may offer guidance in the current "subsidiarity" debate within  the EC.

3.2.1  Who Should  Do What -- The American Federal Experience

      There  is experience to be brought to bear on this question  in the specific  context of
environmental regulation. Americans have struggled since the days of the founding fathers with
the relationship between levels of government.  As Woodrow Wilson once said: "The question of
the relation of the states to the Federal Government cannot indeed be  settled by the opinion of
any one generation, because  it is a question  of  growth, and  every successive stage of our
political and economic development gives it a new aspect, makes it a new question."(29)
       Further, federal/state issues have been central to American environmental law  since its
inception. And environmental law has  been an important proving ground  for new ideas  in the field
of federal/state relations. When the U.S. Clean  Air and Water  Acts were  first  enacted,  for
example, they  contained  a  complex  balancing  of  functions  between state  and federal
governments, a cooperative relationship  that was then referred  to as a "new federalism."(30)
       Over the years a consensus has  developed in the U.S.  on certain aspects of federalism in
environmental regulation. First, if situations can  be  found where both the costs and benefits  of an
issue are national (i.e., federal) in scope, there  is little question that federal decision-making is in
order. Likewise, if situations exist where the costs  and the benefits are both  local or statewide in
scope  and fall within  the same geographic area,  again, there is little question. It is  where the
costs are all borne,  or are largely borne, by a small group of people in one area while the benefits
are nationwide or accrue to people in another area, or vice versa, that  the  real problems lie. In
such cases - which  are the majority of cases -- the problem is to determine which level of
government should decide, why, and using  what  principles.  Beyond the question of matching
costs and benefits with the proper decisional body, there are also considerations of decisional or
implementation efficiency, market-place  efficiency,  avoidance  of forum shopping, and  assuring a
level economic playing field.
       It is generally thought in the U.S. that the federal government should handle (a) interstate
pollution (where, for example, it is argued that the  benefits of "acid rain" control accrue to people
in the Northeast while the costs are borne by people in the Mid-West), (b) areas with economies
of scale, such as training and research and development, and (c) cases where national uniformity
or preemption is needed for various reasons, as  in the following cases: first, so as  to  avoid
burdens on commerce (for example,  in  regulating  widely distributed products such as chemicals
or automobiles); second,  so as to strive for uniform health standards  (to ensure that  a citizen
breathing air in Omaha will be protected to the same extent  as one  breathing  air in Boston or
Seattle(31),  (with states retaining the right to  profit  from the natural assimilative capacities of
their  individual geographic position  for discharge  levels below  these levels  and relating to
environmental  (e.g.,  aquatic  life) rather than  public  health matters); third,  so  as to   avoid
competition for new industry among states by lowered environmental standards (normally attained
through use of uniform, minimum technology-based requirements); and  finally, so as to preempt
parochial vetoes of projects where important national (i.e., federal) interests  are  involved but the
costs are locally borne, as with hazardous waste disposal and nuclear power facilities.

-------
 44                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


       There is also consensus about many aspects of the proper state role. First, obviously, that
 it is a residual role under the U.S. Constitution (the states technically remain sovereign except to
 the extent of powers surrendered in  the U.S. Constitution), that occupies whatever ground  the
 federal government does not.(32) Second, that for  efficiency reasons  and because they  are
 closer to the messy details of the real world, the states should be the primary implementers and
 enforcers in most of the regulatory schemes (such  as  the Clean Air and Water Acts, although  not
 in areas  of  product regulation like  the  regulatory   scheme  for  production and marketing  of
 chemicals in TSCA). Third, that the states are important laboratories for experimentation. Fourth,
 that decision-making should, in  general,  be decentralized  in  the  interests  of efficiency and
 increased pofitical accountability. Finally, tnat the states should - and in fact do under most of  the
 environmental statutes  -- always have  the right to  regulate more stringently, except  where
 preempted by an overriding federal interest of the sort  noted above.(33)
       It may be useful to compare trie American  consensus with the developing EC debate on
 subsidiarity. The EC began by attempting to "harmonize" member state provisions. It then shifted,
 with the advent of the single internal market, to  reliance on "essential EC requirements" coupled
 with mutual recognition of member state  actions.  The Danish vote  has  now prompted a  much
 more  direct debate on the justification for EC level action, as part of the debate on  the role of
 "subsidiarity." The Single European Act, of course,  is quite explicit on the question of subsidiarity,
 providing the following language in Article 130r, para. 4. of the Treaty:
       The Community shall take action relating  to the environment to the extent to which
       the objectives referred to in paragraph 1  can be attained better at Community level
       than at the level of the individual Member  States.
 It added in Article 130t:
       The protection measures adopted in common pursuant  to Article 130s  shall  not
       prevent any Member  State from maintaining or  introducing more stringent protective
       measures compatible with this Treaty.

       Other relevant provisions  are Article 100(a),  para. 3, which calls for  a "high level of
protection" for Article lOOa  measures "concerning health,  safety, environmental protection and
consumer protection," and Article  100a, para. 4, which allows for more  stringent member state
environmental measures, after notice  to the Commission, if these measures do not constitute "a
means of arbitrary  discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade."
       The current D.G. XI Commissioner, Van Miert, recently identified three key justifications for
EC level environmental regulation -- first,  the  transfrontier and  even global character of most
environmental phenomena;  second,  the  need  to avoid barriers  to  trade  and  distortions  of
competition; and third, that the Treaty of Rome calls for the improvement in the quality of life of
EC citizens, which  "implies a  minimum  level  of  environmental protection  throughout  the
Community  and applies, in  [his] opinion, to drinking water,  to bathing  water and also  to  the
conservation of nature."(34)
       Van Miert's three principles are found in  the American consensus, but the latter includes
other  areas as well. Further, the U.S. principle  on a  minimum level of protection is strongest as
applied  to  public  health  driven standards and to  the scientific premises behind  other
environmental standards (e.o... the water quality  criteria necessary to  protect  aquatic  life  are
federally set, at least initially),  but  the vaiue judgements as  to  resource  use and levels of
protection (e.g.,  the uses to which water bodies  are to be put  and the aquatic species to be
protected) are to a large extent left to the states (which, e.g., set water quality standards based
on their choice of water body uses and federal water quality criteria for those uses).
       Dealing  with these   matters  requires struggling  with  generic  structural  and  functional
problems. The particular constitutional,  historical and cultural context is,  of course, crucial.  But
many of the analytical insights involving »he proper  division of authority and responsibility between
higher and lower levels of government derived from one context -- for example, the American or
the EC -- may be useful to those who are debating these or similar choices in other political and
legal systems.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              45
3.2.2  Ensuring implementation and Enforcement -- The American Experience

      Moving beyond the basic policy issues of who should be doing what, one can also look to
the American  example for insights into mechanisms for  assuring implementation by the lower
level of  government. Many of  these mechanisms are of statutory, not Constitutional,  origin, but
the Constitutional power of the U.S. federal government and its ,de facto ascendancy has enabled
their adoption.
      In the  United  States,  the  implementation of  federal  legislation  at  the  state  level is
encouraged through a series of  institutional  and legislative  devices  lacking  in Community
legislation.  First, there is a well staffed, trained and funded environmental agency at the federal
level in the United  States  (the  Environmental Protection Agency or "EPA"). There  is also a great
deal of publicly available monitoring data and  other information, as well as effective freedom of
information legislation at the federal and state levels.
      Second, EPA must normally approve a  state's implementing program in detail  before the
state  can qualify to implement the applicable  federal  legislation. It  reviews  not just the state
agency's formal powers and  implementing rules, but also the adequacy  of its organization,
staffing and funding, and such matters  as the adequacy of the enforcement process and penalty
and fine levels provided under state law. EPA may withdraw a state's right to implement many of
the federal  regulatory programs if it judges the actual implementation to be inadequate.  EPA
normally has direct prior  approval authority over specific state implementing actions,  such  as
issuance of state-implemented regulations,  standards  and individual  permits,  before those
measures can go  into  effect under federal law (although they sometimes can and do  go  into
effect under state law without regard to EPA approval  at the federal  level). In the absence of an
EPA-approved state implementing  program, or of EPA-approved state regulations, standards or
permits,  EPA is normally required itself  to promulgate  directly  applicable  federal  provisions.
Should EPA fail to  act in supervising (or superseding) state implementation where it has a duty to
do so, it may be sued in  federal court by citizens and environmental groups  and forced to act.
Lastly, EPA frequently threatens to withhold federal funding (on which many state environmental
programs depend)  if state  implementation is deemed inadequate.
      Enforcement in America is vigorous, and takes a number of forms.  Nearly all of the major
American environmental regulatory  statutes require some form of publicly available self-monitoring
and reporting.  This system  automatically  highlights  lapses  in compliance  and  the need  for
enforcement. EPA  has  broad powers to inspect, sample and investigate, which it can use against
both the states and their subordinate entities and against the regulated community. These can be
invoked anywhere  within the territorial limits of  the United  States, by  federal officials, and can be
enforced in independent federal courts throughout the country.
      When EPA deems state enforcement to  be inadequate, it normally  has the authority to
override  the state's failure  to  enforce.  In so  doing,  it  has the  power to  itself  issue  an
administrative order against  the violator or, in some cases, to  assess civil penalties on  an
administrative basis and to enforce its  action in either  case in federal court. Alternatively, it may
take a violation  directly into  federal court  for  injunctive  relief, and  civil and  criminal penalties.
Should  EPA fail to enforce  (or to  do so  diligently),  citizens and  environmental groups  can
themselves normally prosecute the regulated party in a civil action in federal court to correct the
violations or have civil penalties assessed.

3.2.3  Ensuring Implementation and Enforcement -- Community Solutions

      The Community institutions  have at their disposal virtually none of the mechanisms noted
above.  As noted  earlier, DG XI has  inadequate  resources  and  investigative powers for
enforcement of  EC legislative duties  against  member states, and its enforcement remedies
against  member states are cumbersome and, in the end, toothless. At the level of enforcement of
specific standards,  requirements or permit conditions against an individual regulated facility, the
Community can play virtually no role. Such enforcement is  left up to the member states.
      The Commission has used  a number of techniques  to enhance  member state
implementation and enforcement, many of  which have been mentioned above. It  has begun to

-------
46                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
propose more specific  and precise legislation, to  propose more  implementing "daughter"
directives,  to  use  directly applicable regulations more often, and to consider use of rules for
"industry categories"  and specific "priority wastestreams."  It has  encouraged complaints and
increased  its  filing of Article 169 proceedings.  It  has developed  the  Freedom  of Information
Directive to put more  information in the hands of citizens.  It has nurtured the development of the
"direct effect"  doctrine to provide  better judicial remedies.  It has begun  to include interest group
"standing"  provisions  in draft legislation (e,.g., the  draft Directive on Civil Liability for Damage
Caused By Waste}. It  has attempted to enter into a dialogue with member state bureaucracies on
impfementation, and to promote new legislation requiring  more effective member  state reporting
on  implementation and  establishing  a decentralized  member-state  level  public  "complaints"
mechanism, with the Commission  intervening only if proper or timely resolution is not achieved by
the  member  state.(35)  It  has   seen  the  creation  of  the  European Environment Agency,
although that  body has  no enforcement powers and as yet has  neither home nor head.(36)
One recent Commissioner has even proposed the creation of a "Green" police force. Finally, the
Commission has seen the development of the Maastricht provisions set out in note (15) that,  if
adopted as Treaty  amendments, may help the situation.
       Recently, the Commission  has begun to speak  out bluntly. Its Eight Annual Report to the
Parliament on implementation  of EC  law  is  a clear departure  from  prior practice  in this
regard.(37) That Report's new Annex C details  the Commission's efforts and frustrations, and
has  led to the commentary in the two  Parliamentary  Reports previously mentioned. Thus, the
issue is now very much on the public agenda.
       Having  encountered such great difficulties in  trying  to develop an effective "command and
control" regulatory  system in the directives issued to date, however, the Commission is now also
engaged in a series  of moves  to bypass  these  problems  (and  the national legislation and
bureaucracies  causing them). It is considering the use of fiscal and economic measures in lieu of
administratively driven control requirements, tt is designing an Eco-Audit Regulation to provide, in
effect, a comprehensive,  universal substitute for the  self-monitoring  and reporting provisions that
are  lacking in many  existing  directives  (as well, perhaps,  as cte  facto new  standards  of
environ men ta!  performance beyond current legal  requirements). These  eco-audits would have to
be verified by independent outside  auditors and there would be public disclosure of  certain
information. It  is also  drafting a highly significant directive  on  Integrated Pollution Control  that, in
addition to  providing a uniform and comprehensive EC-level permit requirement and process, will
require  public  notice  and  input  during  that process,  new  standards  of environmental  control
(beyond those adopted  in  existing directives)  to  be  imposed case-by-case, and  compliance
monitoring  with the results being publically available.
       The Parliament has been active in analysis of the reasons for the implementation deficit in
EC  environmental  law, and the  two  Parliamentary  Reports  noted  earlier  (note  (4))  contain
extensive views on this subject and suggestions for a multitude of actions in response.
       For  all  the  reasons  noted  above,  however,  the problems  with implementation and
enforcement of EC environmental law at the member state level are deep seated. They  are not
likely to be solved  with a magic wand that creates an "EPA" of Europe  or a "Green" police force.
Their existence, like  the existence of  U.S.  federal/state  problems, teaches many  lessons for
others striving  for effective implementation and enforcement of environmental laws.
4     PROPER IMPLEMENTATION OF EC LEGISLATION AT THE MEMBER STATE LEVEL -
      - DESIGNING ENFORCEABLE REQUIREMENTS

      In addition to the institutional  difficulties noted above, and to a considerable extent as a
result of  them, the way  in which  EC  environmental legislation  itself is drafted  frequently
contributes to  inadequate  member  state  implement^-ic  ,38)  These  drafting  difficulties
illustrate many of the points made in the main speaker's paper.
      The comprehensibility of EC environmental  regulation  (ignoring the special translation
difficulties frequently introduced  by, e.g.. the "Euro-English" used  in translations) is one of its
strong points. Perhaps because it is drafted by the technical staff at  the Commission and deals in

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              47


"statutory" generality as  to many issues, it tends to be  simpler and  less confusing then the
complex, detailed and  frequently overlapping and contradictory U.S. legislation drafted by U.S.
Congressional staff. Where political  compromises  introduce ambiguity or confusion,  as they
inevitably do, the result is normally less disastrous than with U.S.  legislation. This being said,
however, there are many problems.
      Many directives, particularly earlier ones, use only vague,  general language to  impose
duties on member states, and  lack the clear and specific criteria necessary for judging adequacy
of implementation.(39)  The  Parliament's  Report  on  Implementation  contains  a good
discussion of this point  at 8-9, and supplies many examples.
      Important examples exist  that go to the heart of the Community's water and air regulatory
programs. In the water program, the  Dangerous  Substances  Directive(40)  required  member
states to  "establish programmes" to  regulate List  II (Grey  List)  substances,  required "prior
authorization" provisions and "quality objectives for water," with "emission  standards  ... based on
the quality objectives."(41) The  quality objectives in turn  were  "to be  laid down in accordance
with  Council Directives, where  they exist."(42) The programs "shall set deadlines for their
implementation," "[summaries  ... and the results of their implementation" were  to be submitted to
the Commission, and the Commission, together with the Member  States, was  to  "arrange  for
regular  comparisons  of  the  programs in  order  to ensure  sufficient coordination  in their
implementation."(43)
      This  language could have been  usefully supplemented by  details on the major policy
issues that  must inevitably be  dealt  with  in designing  the complex  water quality regulatory
program called for (e.g., what basis to use to set quality objectives where they had not been  set
in Community legislation; what  mathematical modelling  techniques to use to  determine total
allowable loads for each pollutant, to allocate those loads to individual dischargers, and to set  the
resulting permit limits; whether and on what conceptual basis mixing zones were to be used; and
how the available assimilative capacity was to be allocated as between  (i) existing users, and (ii)
existing and future  users).(44)  Nonetheless, the  basic  objective  was quite clear, has been
since 1976,  and could have been implemented.(45) Had  it been, it would have constituted  the
bedrock of the EC water quality  program, since it would have  covered virtually all discharges and
would have  required some form of permit program with water quality based permit limits. It was
especially important that it be  implemented,  since all List I (Black List)  substances remain List II
substances  until the  EC has  gotten around  to  establishing  specific "best technical  means
available" (BTMA) limit values and quality objectives  for them,  which  it has been exceedingly slow
in doing.
      It was not,  however,  properly implemented.(46)  Indeed,  the Commission has now
moved  against alt 12  member states under Article  169 for failing  to implement it.(47) Further,
there has been  a general failure to develop the implementing plans and the necessary water
quality objectives required by  various of the other water quality directives and by the daughter
directives.(48)
      While implementation has failed for a number of reasons (among them  probably being  the
early split, as to the preferred  basis for regulation, between U.K. preference for quality standards
and  Continental preference for  technology-based limits(49)), several things can be said about
the drafting of the  provisions themselves, beyond  their general vagueness which  has  already
been noted. There  are  no deadlines for  member  state  development of quality  standards  or
implementing plans, for  the issuance of "prior authorization" permits, and for the prohibition of
discharges not in compliance with such authorizations (this being only implicit in any case), or for
submission of the required plan  summaries and results of  implementation. Further, there was no
review and approval required  by the  Commission of the  adequacy  of the quality standards,  the
implementing plans or the individual "prior authorizations."
       In short,  the "guts" of the program, and the "guts" of the tools  necessary for the EC to
check on and control it, were omitted from the legislation. The  result was a foregone conclusion.
       The same general story exists for the necessary implementing programs for nonattainment
areas under the air quality legislation. Similar problems have persisted,  to a large extent brought
on by the Commission's own  slowness in following up with daughter directives,  with limit value
and  quality objective regulation of List I (Black List) water pollutants, with BATNEEC  regulation of

-------
48                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


industrial plants(50), and with detailed technical regulation  of specific on-site  or off-site  waste
treatment, storage and disposal facilities(51).
      Turning now to the specific prerequisites for enforceable environmental regulation set out
in the main speaker's paper, there are a number of examples where Community environmental
legislation is so unclear that it would be difficult for a member state to know how to implement it
when it tried to do so. For example, the Dangerous  Substances Directive, the backbone of the EC
water pollution legislation, provides for "limit values"  for the  most dangerous List I ("Black List")
polluting substances. The basis on which the standards are to be set, however, lists both ambient
quality and technology  based criteria, with no intelligible indication  as to  relative weight to  be
given to each, or how to resolve the conceptual incompatibility between the two. It says that the
limit values are  to  be set "mainly"  on the  basis  of the  ambient types  of factors,  "taking into
account" the  technology-based  standard of  "best  technical  means  available"  (BTMA).(52)
Another example of clarity  difficulties is the "non-deterioration" provision  of that same  Directive,
which says:
      The application of the measures taken pursuant to this Directive may on no account
      lead, either directly or indirectly, to increased  pollution of the waters referred to in
      Article 1.(53)
But the Directive's definition of "pollution" is quite subjective,  and  the Directive clearly provides for
authorization of  discharges from new sources.(54)  Similar  problems exist with  the analogous
"standstill principle"  in the air quality directives.(55)
      In other cases,  the EC Directives have failed in  implementation  because  they did not
precisely define their scope of  application. The best example  may be the  Fresh Water Fish
Directive, which "applies to those waters designated by the Member States  as needing protection
or  improvement  in  order  to support fish  life."(56)  This  Directive, as  well  as the  Shellfish
Directive(57),  appear  to  provide Member  States great latitude  in determining  which  water
bodies to designate and thus which  water  bodies  and polluting  sources must be regulated. The
Bathing Water and  Abstraction of  Drinking Water Directives, while somewhat more specific, also
allow great  latitude.(58)  The  result  has  been  significant  under-designation  by  Member
States(59),  and  it  is  only  in 1988 that the  European Court  of  Justice  has  stepped  in  to
condemn Italy for failing to designate a sufficient number of  waters under the French Water Fish
Directive(60).
      Other issues of scope  arise,  for example, in the Dangerous Substances Directive,  where
nothing  is  said  as to  whether  the "discharges" to  be covered by the "prior  authorization"
requirement are limited to point  sources only, or include rainfall  runoff or non-point sources, nor
whether "owners," "operators," or some other category of discharger is to be regulated.(61)
      Examples of failure to state the required standard of  conduct also exist. The contradictory
instructions in the Dangerous Substances Directive for the substantive test for setting List I limit
values was mentioned  earlier. Another example that goes  to the  heart of the EC  air pollution
control program  is the provision, in the  Framework Directive on Air Pollution From industrial
Plants, that new  and modified Annex I facilities are  to be issued the required  authorization only
where, inter alia, "the  use of the plant will  not  cause significant  air pollution."(62)  The term
"significant" is not  defined. The  remainder  of the substantive tests spelled out in article 4 are
equally non-specific and arguably overlapping,(63)
       Many EC environmental  directives, particularly those on air and  water pollution, specify
such technical aspects  for  monitoring compliance as analytical methodology and averaging times
(although,  as is  generally true with U.S. environmental law,  they give inadequate attention to the
legal effect of the  precision and  bias of the  methods  in setting  numerical standards or  permit
conditions  and  in  enforcement of  such  numerical  limits).  Failure  to specify other necessary
aspects, however,  such as the  number of  required air quality monitoring stations and how
geographic representativeness of air quality modelling is to  be assured, has lead to  difficulties in
ensuring adequate member state implementation.(64) Further,  in some cases (e.g..  under the
Framework Directive  on Air  Pollution  from  Industrial Plants), compliance monitoring
methodologies have been  left  up  to  the  member  states altogether.(65)  Finally,  the 1975
Framework Directive on Waste,  applicable  until  the  recent amendments take  effect in  1993,
contains no monitoring  requirements.(66)

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             49


      Implementation problems  caused by the lack of deadlines for member state compliance
with  the List  II water  quality  objectives  implementation  program requirements  have been
discussed above. It is interesting to note, however, that there has also been non-compliance with
the analogous implementation  plan  requirements for air  emission sources  in  defined  non-
attainment areas, despite the existence there  of explicit member state deadlines  and reporting
requirements.
      To date, the EC  has had no comprehensive permitting  requirement through which self-
monitoring and reporting requirements were required to be placed in all permits. The spotty permit
and  prior authorization  requirements lhat  have been adopted have  generally not contained
specific requirements that permits  contain such  self-monitoring  and reporting  requirements.
Member state  legislation and practice, while imposing such  requirements in some cases, does not
do so in all member  states and the level of self-monitoring and  reporting in Europe in general  is
not high. The Commission has had no legal tools available  to it to force member states to include
such provisions in permits.
      The criteria of adoption  in accord with correct procedure  is much  less important in the
context  of EC environmental regulation  than it is in the U.S., since few if any formal procedural
requirements exist (other than those determining who can act, in what order, and on what basis  in
promulgating EC legislation), and there are highly restrictive  standing requirements that limit
judicial  challenges by the public  in  any case. Notwithstanding, however,  there  is one  clear
illustration of this point in EC regulation, and  that  pertains to the choice of  legislative basis  for
promulgation of a directive, wilh the resulting consequences in terms of legislative path and voting
basis in the Council. Here, there has been recent litigation by the Commission as to both the
Titanium Dioxide Directive and  the  1991 Amendments to the  Framework Directive for Waste,
where in each case the Council changed the legal  basts chosen by the Commission from Article
100a of the Treaty to Article 130s. The  European Court of Justice annulled the Titanium  Dioxide
Directive and the  challenge  to  the Waste  Framework Directive Amendments  is  still pending.
(67)
       Standing behind these specific deficiencies in the way EC legislation is drafted may lurk a
more fundamental and  systemic problem. The European  penchant tor regarding  environmental
regulation as a matter of scientific and technical policy, rather than a legal matter, has been noted
earlier.  EC environmental legislation appears in the past to  have been developed chiefly by the
programmatic offices at DG XI, and  it  is not  clear that they have  always obtained the kind  of
early, continuous,  and "hands-on"  drafting assistance from their legal staff that  yields  sharply
chiseled, easily enforceable  legislation. Technical  1oik  write  legislation  designed mainly  to
communicate  with  other technical folk of good will. Thus, they tend to see little need for careful
and precise  definitions  of  scope; clear and precise standards and criteria; specific "approval",
permit,  or other implementing mechanisms; or detailed self-monitoring and remedial provisions.
       Lawyers, on the other hand, are trained to consider all the problems and  "worst cases"
that may arise in a situation, and to write documents,  whether they be contracts or legislation, to
anticipate and clearly resolve them.  Further,  enforcement lawyers will always assume that the
person to whom the legislation  is addressed will do everything in his power to avoid compliance if
 it suits  him. They will thus attempt  to phrase the legislation  so  that there is no alternative but to
 comply, and to comply exactly as the drafter desires.
       Sadly, human nature proves  the lawyer right more often  than not. While  unnecessary
 legalisms should be avoided  in drafting legislation,  there is no substitute for  a  close  working
 relationship between lawyer and technical person  at  every stage of the drafting process  if
 enforceable legislation is to result.


 5      ENFORCEMENT OF EC LEGISLATION AGAINST THE  REGULATED COMMUNITY

        Turning now  to enforcement against the regulated community, the first thing to note is the
 gaps  in the  Community's environmental  legislative scheme.  Where there is  no law,  there
 obviously can be no enforcement.

-------
50                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      There are important substantive gaps in the basic EC legislation. There is, for example, no
legislation dealing directly with wetlands, volatile organic compounds (efforts are now underway
here), underground storage tanks, and until recently, municipal sewage. Further, as noted above,
where the EC has enacted framework legislation, it has frequently not promulgated many of the
subsequent  implementing ("daughter")  directives contemplated by the framework  directive and
essential to  its adequate  implementation. Thus, limit values for List 1 (Black List) water pollutants,
BATNEEC  air emission  standards  for  industrial plants, and  technical  requirements for waste
storage  and treatment facilities like landfills, incinerators, surface impoundments, and  waste piles
have either  been slowly and  sparsely  enacted  (ejj..,  List I  limit values),  are only  now being
developed (e.g., landfill and hazardous waste  incinerator requirements and  BATNEEC limits), or
have not yet been addressed at all (e.g., surface impoundment requirements).
      Turning now again to the specific elements of enforceable regulation  outlined by the main
speaker, examples illustrating the operation of each can be found.  Many of the  examples cited
above in the context  of member state implementation apply equally in the case of compliance by
and enforcement against the regulated community. Likewise,  some  of the examples  cited below
hinder enforceability against  member states as  well.
      Lack  of clarity can cause  real difficulties for regulated community compliance, and thus for
the  enforceability  of the provisions.  For example, the  Framework  Directive  on  Waste, as
amended, excludes from  the scope  of the directive "waste  waters, with the exception  of waste in
liquid form."(68) The meaning is not obvious. Further,  in  a  number of ways noted  below, the
core concepts of "waste" and  "hazardous waste" in  the European Community waste directives,
while more  straight-forward  than those  employed in U.S.  regulation,  create severe  compliance
difficulties.
      The precise definition of the scope of EC environmental legislation  is one area in which
considerable improvement could be made. For example, EC legislation typically relies on lists of
substances  and facilities  for determining its applicability. It is commonly thought that the use of
lists provides the regulated  community  with certainty, but  this is  by no  means always true.  For
example, in  the "Sevaso" directive, the regulatory scheme is applicable to facilities listed in Annex
I.(69)  But Annex II  extends coverage, notwithstanding the  Annex I list,  to installations other
than those in Annex I. The  language used is confusing, both in  the title and the  text. The  title
says "Storage  Other Than  of Substances Listed  in Annex  III Associated  With an  Installation
Referred To in  Annex I."  It is  not clear on  the  face  of  this language whether  all Annex III
substances  stored  at  non-Annex  I facilities  are  covered  (i.e.,  because   they are Annex III
substances  not associated with an installation referred to in Annex I), or whether the scope is the
storage  of all substances except Annex III substances  at Annex I facilities.  The language in the
text is equally opaque, although an analysis of the logic of the relationship between Annex I and
Annex II indicates that the first meaning rather than the  second must have been  intended. Thus,
while application of the Sevaso directive appears to turn on the use of a rather small  list of types
of major industrial facilities,  in  fact it reaches the storage,  in the relevant quantities,  of Annex III
substances  "at any place,  installation,  premises, building  or  area of land,  isolated or within an
establishment, being  a site used for the purpose of storage."(70)
      A major area  of difficulty for  the regulated community in determining  the scope of sources
covered by  EC environmental  legislation concerns the  still developing definitions of "waste" and
"hazardous  waste"  in  EC  waste legislation .(71) These core concepts lie  at the threshold of
compliance  with a|l of the various pieces of EC Waste legislation. Quick,  easy classification under
them is  thus crucial, but does not look likely as things now stand.
      First,  the definition  of  "waste"  turns  essentially on the  term  "discard", which is  itself
undefined. Second, while the  Commission is  to  base the  regulatory definition of both terms on
lists that it  is now developing (the  European  Waste Catalogue),  the precision of this  approach
may be more  apparent than  real.(72)  Some of the categories being considered in  current
drafts of the European Waste Catalogue are clearly not  self-defining - virtually every specific
industry category  has residual categories such  as "manufacturing not  otherwise specified."
Further, some of the categories themselves are quite open-ended - e.g., draft Category 16.10.1
("small  amounts of  hazardous waste  (separate  collected fractions)  from trade, commercial,
manufacturing and institutions"), which is a subcategory of 16.10 ("mixed bulky wastes from trade,

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON  ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              51


commercial, manufacturing and installations"), itself a subcategory of  16 (Municipal wastes and
similar commercial, industrial and institutional wastes).
      Third, the tests to be used to determine when a waste is "hazardous" have been borrowed
from the directives for the classification, packaging and  labeling  of dangerous substances and
preparations. The elaborate  testing procedures used for determining the hazardousness of new
chemicals before they are put on the market, however, are ill suited at best for the repetitive use
and  rapid resolution necessary when  testing the multitude of various  mixtures  that constitute
commerciat and industrial wastes. Further, it is not at all clear that the Commission will in fact use
{or  has  the time to  use under the schedule set  out in the relevant directives)  these tests to
determine which of the listed wastes should be classified as "hazardous wastes" in its European
Waste Catalogue. Nor is it clear whether the regulated community will  itself have to use  these
tests  to classify its own  wastes if the lists are not sufficiently clear and precise to govern  all
cases, as they almost certainly  will not be.  If the regulated community must use these tests, they
will have  to be  greatly simplified  and specific rules  for their application in the  waste context
carefully elaborated.
      Fourth, when  the Commission publishes its list, it will in any case have to  clarify whether
thresholds for contaminants apply to the waste categories, and what those thresholds are for the
various  relevant contaminants, how mixtures are to  be treated,  and a number  of other very
practical, but absolutely essential, details.
      Other areas of  definitional difficulty  in the waste program include the scope of such  key
terms in Annex  II A  of the Framework Directive on Waste as discharge to a "water body" and
"temporary storage, pending collection"; the difference in Annexes II A  and B between disposal
category D-10, "Incineration on land,"  and recovery category  R-9, "Use principally as a fuel or
other means to generate energy"(73); and  the  technical  distinction between the concepts of
"liquid" and "solid" in the draft Landfill Directive.
      There are a number of cases where the failure of EC environmental legislation causes the
regulated community to lack  a  clear  standard of conduct.  The term "BTMA" in  the  water
legislation has never been defined adequately in practice and few daughter directives have been
adopted for specific List I pollutants setting BTMA. The same is true for BATNEEC under the air
legislation. Thus, there have been few, if any, effective  guidelines at the EC level as to which
types of technologies qualify as BTMA or BATNEEC for various industry categories (at least, as
to BATNEEC, until recently), why they do so,  how relevant technical and economic feasibility is to
be  considered,  how these concepts  are defined,  what specific  pollutant emissions  can  be
achieved  by the relevant technology,  and thus what permit  limits are appropriate. Further, such
details as how startup/shutdown and malfunctions are to be dealt with are nowhere stated.
      The same sort of difficulty has  existed with the  Framework Directive on  Waste,  which
established some limited  procedural requirements, but which  did  not spell  out any substantive
standards at all for  various methods of  waste treatment, storage or disposal. Only now  is the
Commission  drafting landfill  and  hazardous  waste  incineration directives  that set substantive
standards.
       Finally, the Commission's draft Eco-Auditing Regulation, in Annex l.B,  requires many areas
to be audited, such  as "energy management, savings  and choice," "raw materials management,
savings, choice and transportation; water management and savings,"  "selection of production
processes," and "product planning {design,  packaging,  transportation,  use and disposal),"  for
which no substantive legal standards now  exist or are set out in the proposed directive, and for
most of which (e.g., "selection of production processes") no commonly agreed  environmental
standards of any sort, legal or otherwise, exist.(74) And such techniques as product  life cycle
analysis,  that  might  be  thought  relevant to  categories like  "product  planning," are  highly
developmental, subjective, value-laden, and thus problematic.
      Questions regarding measuring compliance, deadlines for compliance, and self-monitoring
and reporting are sometimes  covered in permits issued under member state law.  Because EC
environmental legislation frequently ignores them  {except as to analytical methods and averaging
times),  the enforceability of EC law in these regards turns on the happenstance of member state
implementation.

-------
52                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      The impact of incorrect procedural adoption on  the enforceability of EC  environmental
requirements on the regulated community may be most apparent, other than in the cases of the
Titanium Dioxide judgement and the shadow it casts over the crucial Waste Amendments, where
a  member state has incorrectly implemented  EC law  and  the  "direct  effect" doctrine or the
principle of the Frankovitch judgement can be successfully invoked by a regulated entity or a
member of the public. For a discussion  of these  matters and references to other sources  on
them, see Deskbook at 7-8.


6     CONCLUSION

      EC environmental  legislation offers ample  illustrations  of the propositions in  the  main
speaker's paper. !t also illustrates  the critical role  played by institutional capability in  design of
enforceable regulation. Solutions, especially on the institutional front, are likely to  prove difficult,
but lessons can be learned, in any case, by all.


      REFERENCES

1  For a discussion of  the EC's governmental institutions and of the environmental regulatory
   system, as  well as a compilation of the main pieces of legislation,  see European Community
   En\/ironrnental Law Deskbook, Environmental Law Institute, 1992, T. Smith, Jr. & R. Hunter.
2  Eighth Annual Report to the  European  Parliament on Commission Monitoring of the
   Application  of Community Law  - 1990, Annex  C,  Monitoring  of the Application  by Member
   States of Environmental Directives, O.J.C.  33811  (Dec. 31, 1991)  [hereinafter Commission's
   Environmental Implementation Report].
3  Clinton Davis  Hits Lack of Enforcement as Contributing to  "Democratic Deficit" [Current
   Report] 12  Int'l Envt.  Rep.  (BNA)  579 (Dec. 13,  1989) (Mr.  Clinton Davis is a former EC
   environmental commissioner).
4  Report of the Committee on the Environment, Public  Health and Consumer Protection on the
   Implementation of  European Community  Environmental  Legislation, PE  152.  144/fin.  (J.
   Vernier, rapporteur, Jan. 6, 1992) [hereinafter Parliament's Report on Implementation].
   Report of the Committee on  Legal Affairs and Citizens' Rights on the  Eighth Annual Report to
   the European Parliament on Commission Monitoring  of the Application of Community Law -
   1990, PE 155. 131/fin. (J.M.  Bandres Molet, rapporteur, Mar. 27,  1992) [hereinafter
   Parliament's Report on The Commission's Environmental Implementation Report].
5  J.  Reitzes,  The Inconsistent Implementation of the Environmental Laws  of the European
   Community, 22 Envtl. L. Rep. 10523-28 (1992).  Several  important  studies have been
   compiled on member state implementation of EC environmental legislation. N. Haigh,  Manual
   of  Environmental Policy; the EC and  Britain, Longman, 1992 (hereinafter Haigh);  European
   Community Environment  Policy in Practice, Graham & Trotman, 1986 (comprised of, in
   separate volumes and  by separate  authors, a comparative study, and national reports on the
   Netherlands, France and the Federal Republic of Germany).
6  For a general discussion of the nature of,  and enactment procedure  for, directives, see
   Deskbook  at 5-6.   For a view that the  process leads to  enforcement problems, see
   Parliament's Report on Implementation at 11, para. A.  Under the  "direct effect" doctrine
   directives can sometimes  have  important implications for private parties, even if not
   implemented, or not implemented properly, at the member state level.  See Deskbook at 6-9.
7  For a discussion of  voluntary action, and its limits, see ENDS  Report 211, 21 (Aug. 1992)
   (Voluntary action on the environment:  Environmental care in the Netherlands).  It should  be
   noted that it is the position of  the Dutch government that it will use covenants in place of
   regulations only where  in its view, covenants are a more effective tool.  See also, Parliament's
   Report on Implementation at 16, para. C 2.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             53


8  For a discussion of how an environmental regulatory system can be made compatible with the
   needs of private investors, see The Point of View of the Private Investor - The Impact of
   Environmental Laws on Privatization Transactions: Due Diligence and Other Means of Coping
   with Environmental Risks, Conference on  "Privatization, Foreign Direct Investment, and
   Environmental Liability in Central and Eastern Europe", Warsaw. (May 19-21,  1992).  It must
   be noted, of course, that the regulated community, particularly in Europe, may acquiesce in
   regulatory ambiguity if  it believes that later clarification will yield a better result, or at least that
   present clarification would yiefd a bad result.  Further, it can be argued that foreign investors
   may prefer more clarity and certainty then domestic investors, since the former may feel that
   they are at a disadvantage  vis a vis the latter in securing  favorable decisions  under an
   ambiguous regulatory provision.
9  See Commission's Environmental Implementation Report, Annex C at 220, para. 91.
10 Several  of the Commission's Article 169 enforcement proceedings against member states
   have turned on the need for implementing  EC  environmental legislation by legally binding
   rules, not administrative guidelines.  Commission's Environmental Implementation  Report,
   Annex C at 207, paras. 21-23.  See also,  Parliament's Report on Implementation at 16, para.
   C 1.
11 For example,  the proposed EC Eco-Audit regulation will require member state accreditation of
   the external auditors, and the proposed Shipment  of Waste  Regulation will require  case-by-
   case shipment approval by member state  competent authorities.
12 Commission's Environmental  Implementation Report, Annex C  at 208, para. 26, and 221, para
   95.
13 jd. at 206-7.
14 Jd. at 207-9.
15 The Treaty on Political Union, agreed to by the EC member states at the December 9 and 10,
   1991 Maastricht Summit, is now going through the ratification process.  If approved, it would
   substantially expand the EC's  legislative competence  in  the  areas of social, consumer and
   environmental protection, and would give important new powers to the Parliament and the
   Court of Justice.  Changes immediately relevant to environmental law include:
   •   Legislation removing  non-tariff barriers to trade:  Presently, the  EC uses its
       "harmonization" power extensively for environmental measures that may affect trade in the
       internal  market. These environmental measures are adopted  by majority voting in the
       Council, and the Parliament's role is largely advisory.  The Treaty on Political Union, with
       its new "conciliation procedure" for the adoption of legislation, would give the  Parliament a
       greater ability to force amendments to proposed legislation on the  Council and
       Commission.
       Environmental protection legislation:   Voting in the Council on environmental  measures
       (which are not harmonization measures) is currently required to be unanimous.  The
       Treaty would reduce that requirement to majority voting, after  two  readings in the
       Parliament,  thereby making it easier for more stringent  environmental  measures to be
       adopted.
       In addition, EC environmental powers would be expanded  to include the express authority
       to adopt environmental legislation (a)  of "a fiscal nature," (b) affecting land use planning
       and  water resource management, and (c) "significantly affecting" a member state's energy
       policy.  This purports to be a significant expansion  in  practice of  EC competence into
       areas previously thought to be the exclusive domain  oi  member states.   However, these
       particular  measures would have to be adopted unanimously in the Council.
   •   Judiciary: The Court of Justice,  at present, has no power to penalize member states for
       failing to implement EC directives.  The  Treaty will give the Court of Justice the power to
       fine  member states  that, after being condemned for not implementing EC taw, fail to
       correct the situation.
   These changes to  the legislative powers  and process, by giving the Parliament  a greater role
   and by  reducing the voting requirements in the  Council, could result in a greater  volume of
   more extensive environmental legislation.  By giving  the Court of Justice the authority to
   penalize member states, the Treaty would increase the importance  of the expanding body of

-------
54                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
   EC environmental law.  Member states would be compelled, under pain of fine for the first
   time, to implement EC law.
16 It can be argued, of course, that the member states acting in Council are simply implementing
   the public will, but where the issue involves legislation to force them to act, or to act in specific
   ways, there seems to be  an  inherent conflict of interest with their  natural desire  to retain
   discretion for their national bureaucracies.  Likewise, they have little incentive to  legislate
   systems that show up their own inadequate implementation or enforcement.
17 The Single European Act  has, by giving Parliament a larger  role, resulted in a situation in
   which the  Parliament and the Commission, when aligned together on matters  being
   considered under Article tOOa,  can sometimes outmaneuver  laggard member states  in  the
   Council.
18 Directive  78/659 on the quality of fresh waters needing protection or improvement in order to
   support fish life, OJ.L 222/1 (Aug. 14,  1978) [hereinafter Fresh Water Fish Directive].
19 In a recent case, however, the European Court of Justice has created a new right of action by
   private parties to sue member states  for damages suffered as a result of  a member  state's
   failure to  properly implement EC law where that law bestows rights upon such parties.  Joined
   Cases C-6/90 and C-9/10, Francovich v. Republique italienne and Bonifaci v. Republique
   italienne  (Nov. 19, 1991}.  The Francovich judgement could create significant new pressure on
   member states for proper implementation.  And if the Maastricht Treaty takes effect, the Court
   will have  the power to fine member states for non-compliance.
20 There may be other disincentives to public interest group litigation, such as the UK rule that
   the losing party bears the winner's litigation costs  and counsel fees.
21 Cf., Commission's  Environmental Implementation Report, Annex  C at 205-9 (documenting
   these  problems in some detail); Parliament's Report on Implementation at 11-12.
22 jd. at  208, para. 32.
23 See the  Commission's Environmental Implementation Report, Annex C  at 221, para.  94;
   Parliament's Report on  Implementation at 11, para. 8.  For a description of this process, see
   Deskbook at 10-11; Commission's Environmental Implementation Report, Annex C at  205-6,
   paras. 7-13.
24 The Commission is now turning to use of regulations more frequently, as the recently adopted
   Eco-label Regulation,  and its  proposed Eco-Audit and  Shipment of Waste Regulations
   indicate.  As  noted  earlier, however, even regulations frequently  require some form of
   implementation at member state  level
25 Parliament's Report on Implementation at 13.
26 The EC  has recently adopted a Directive on the Freedom of Access to Information  on  the
   Environment, but this legislation  contains numerous  loopholes.  Directives 90/313 on freedom
   of access to information on the environment, OJ.L 158/56 (June 23,  1990) [hereinafter  the
   FOI Directive]. See Deskbook at 15.
27 E.g.. Commission's Environmental Implementation Report, Annex C at 207, para. 20 (the case
   of Belgium) and 210, para. 40 (the case of Germany);  Parliament's Report on Implementation
   at 15, para. A.
28 The discussion below focusses  chiefly on which subject matters are best dealt with at each
   level,  and why. These  questions frequently turn  on  whether one is dealing with the question
   of legislating (or legislating further, or adopting implementing administrative regulations or
   other  legally binding measures), the  question of case-by-case implementation (as through
   permits or other forms of approval), or the questions  of enforcing or adjudicating.
29 Woodrow Wilson, Constitutional Government In The United States 173(1908).
30 The basic  framework,  involving legislation addressed in  many respects to the  states and
   requiring state implementation, is remarkably similar to that of an  EC directive.  The  normal
   U.S. federal legislation is applicable  nationwide, is directly effective  against the regulated
   community, and resembles an EC regulation.  The  two acts in question creatively combined
   both methods of legislating, depending on the parts of the program in question.
31 There are difficulties here.  The U.S.  has decided  that citizens should be equally protected
   even  though the costs  of  doing  so will vary geographically.  Third world nations, and even
   some European ones, may see the economic/environmental risk calculus differently than  the

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              55


   U.S., or be  prepared to see different levels of protection at different geographic areas within
   their borders.  Further, it is not necessarily true that the same ambient standards will protect
   individuals in different geographic locations to the same  extent, when  sources of risk from
   other routes of exposure to the pollutant in question, or other catalyzing or contributing risk
   factors, are  considered. Taking these matters into account, however, gets complicated.
32 Thus,  there  are important  constitutional limits to federal action.  In short, states cannot be
   forced to legislate or to regulate -- such direct coercion is  prohibited.  But indirect coercion is
   allowed -- e.g^, the threat of direct federal regulation where state response is inadequate, and
   the threat of withholding federal funds.
33 Several other aspects of the federal/state issue may be worth noting.  First, the mechanics of
   funding have proven to have a decisive impact on the balance of federal/state power.  Federal
   funds  have  facilitated much of what state environmental agencies have  been able to do,  but
   potential withdrawal of funds has also been effectively used as  a club by EPA. Second, as
   implementation of federal environmental law has been delegated to the states, pressure is put
   on state  administrative law.  Federal administrative law,  whatever its  problems, is a fairly
   coherent and well-developed body  of law. The same cannot be said, however, for much of
   state administrative law.   State administrative law may provide no right of intervention, of
   judicial review, or  of other  fundamental procedural protections taken for granted under federal
   law.   When one  considers that environmental  licensing  allocates rights to  use the  limited
   assimilative capacity of valuable air and water resources, without which  many forms of highly
   profitable economic activity cannot proceed, the possibilities for abuse and arbitrary decision-
   making at the state level are apparent.  Third, many Americans  say they view federalism as a
   question of  principle, particularly when they wrap themselves in  a states* rights mantle.  Note,
   however, that they tend to  change sides on the federalism  issue, depending upon where their
   individual interests lie.  Industry is normally in favor of state-level regulation (which it believes
   will generally be more lax than federal regulation, for a host of reasons),  except - for example
   - where a uniform manifest system wouid avoid the need to deal with fifty different manifests
   as hazardous waste is shipped interstate. And environmental groups normally favor strong
   federal power.  But in siting nuclear power plants or hazardous waste facilities, they support
   local or state veto rights.
34 Europe Environment, No. 392 at 19 (July 28,  1992).  The Commission and the COREPER are
   to prepare a report on the subsidiarity doctrine by October.  Jd. at 7.
35 Commission's Environmental Implementation Report,  Annex  C at 221-22, paras.  96-100;
   Deskbookat 15.
36 On  the other hand, the Agency will have information gathering powers that may prove useful
   to the Commission, given the documented lack of cooperation by member states in this regard
   to date. See Commission's Environmental Implementation Report, Annex C at 221, para. 93.
37 See supra note (2).
38 E.g.. The Commission's Environmental Implementation  Report, Annex C at 217, para.  77;
   Parliament's Report on  Implementation at 6, 8-9; c.t., Parliament's  Report on  the
   Commission's Environmental Implementation Report at 16-17.
39 Ambiguity in EC legislative language is particularly difficult, since no legislative  history exists.
   The closest thing  may be the  Commission's Explanatory Memoranda, which the Council is not
   bound by, and the minutes of the Council Meetings, which may be hard to obtain and which
   have no standing  in court.

40 Directive 76/464  on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the
   aquatic environment of the Community, OJ.L 129/23 (May 18,  1976) [hereinafter Dangerous
   Substances Directive].
41 kl art. 7, paras. 1 -3.
42 Jd art. 7, para. 3.
43 Jd art. 7, paras. 5-7.
44 One simple solution, of course, would be for the Council to routinely give the Commission the
   authority to itself adopt the more detailed  implementing legislation  that broad  statutory
   language, usually all one can usefully get out of a legislative body in any case, needs in order

-------
56                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
   to be effectively implemented and enforced, whether with  regard  to subordinate levels of
   government or the regulated community.  The U.S. EPA has this power in virtually all cases.
   The Community has  used a similar legislative technique  in the area of food regulation,
   delegating to the  Commission, acting through a Technical  Committee of member state
   experts, the ability to enact further implementing legislation without intervention by the Council
   except in case of deadlock. It has not used this technique widely in environmental legislation.
   In the U.S., formal administrative procedures for public input during the EPA rulemaking
   process and the easy availability of rigorous judicial  review  provide safeguards to substitute
   for the lack of political control in this form of  subordinate  administrative "lawmaking."  Absent
   such safeguards in the EC context, use of this technique, while perhaps efficient, would be
   problematic, although the use of the Technical Committee (with resort to the Council) retains
   some semblance of political control.
45 The U.S.  statutory language establishing  the basic federal water quality  regulatory program
   has more detail than the  Dangerous Substances Directive, but still lacks explicit treatment of
   many of these key  matters, it has also had a checkered history of implementation.
46 See the pointed  comments by the Commission  in the  Commission's Environmental
   Implementation Report, Annex C at 217-18, paras. 77, 78, 80.
47 Deskbook at 22.
48 See The Commission's Environmental Implementation Report, Annex C at 217-18, para. 80.
49 See Haigh at 3.8 to 3.10 and his subsequent discussion in the context of specific directives.
50 For the history of EC efforts here, see Deskbook at 18-19.
51 See Deskbook at 18-19, 21-22,  24-26; The Commission's Environmental Implementation
   Report, Annex C at 216, para. 73,  219, para. 85.
52 Dangerous Substances  Directive, art. 6, para 1(b).  A similar problem exists with the
   substantive test for BATNEEC under the air pollution directives.  Deskbook at 18.
53 Dangerous Substances Directive, art. 9.
54 Jd. art. 1, para, c, art. 3, para. 3.
55 See Deskbook at 17, n. 134.
56 Fresh Water Fish Directive, art. 1,  para. 1.
57 Directive 79/923 on the  quality required  for shellfish waters,  O.J.L 281/47 (Nov. 10, 1979)
   [hereinafter Shellfish Directive].
58 Directive 76/160 concerning the  quality of bathing water, O.J.L 31/1  {Feb. 5,  1976) [hereinafter
   Bathing Water Directive]; Directive 75/440 concerning the quality  required of surface water
   intended for the abstraction of  drinking water in the Member  States,  O.J.L 194/26 (July 25,
   1975)  [hereinafter Abstraction of Drinking Water Directive], as  amended by Directive  79/869,
   O.J.L 271/44 (Oct. 29, 1979).
59 Parliament's Report on Implementation at 8; Haigh at 4.10-1 to 4.10-3.
60 Commission v. Italy, Case 322/86, 1988 E.C.R. 3995.
61 Deskbook at 21, n. 194.
62 Directive 84/360 on the combating of air pollution from industrial plants, O.J.L 188/20 (July 16,
   1984) [hereinafter the  Framework Directive  on Air  Pollution From  Industrial Plants], art. 4,
   para. 2.
63 See Deskbook at 18, n's. 145-47.
64 Commission's Environmenta! Implementation  Report,  Annex C at 216, para. 73.
65 Deskbook at 18, n. 145.
66 ]d at 24.
67 See Deskbook at 5, n. 12, and  5-14,  passim, for a discussion of the two methods of enacting
   legislation, their consequences,  and the litigation.
68 Directive 75/442 on Waste, O.J.L  194/26  (July 25, 1975), as  amended  by Directive  91/156,
   O.J.L 78/32  (Mar. 26,  1991) [hereinafter Framework Directive on Waste  and Waste
   Amendments respectively], art. 2, para. 1(b)(iv).
69 Directive  82/501 on the  major  accident hazards of certain industrial activities,  O.J.L 230/1
   (Aug.  5, 1982} [hereinafter Sevaso Directive], as amended  by Directive 87/216, O.J.L 85/36
   (Mar. 28, 1987), and Directive 88/610, O.J.L 336/14 (Dec. 7,  1988).
70 Id. Annex il.  See also, Parliament's Report on Implementation at 8.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             57


71 E.g., Waste Amendments, art. 1, para, (a); Directive 91/689 on hazardous waste, O.J.L 337/10
   (Dec. 12, 1991) [hereinafter  Hazardous Waste Directive], art.  1, para. 4.  The fact  that the
   Framework  Directive on Waste has used a definition of waste that turns on national definitions
   has made easy, pan-European compliance difficult for industry.  See Deskbook at 24, n. 240;
   c.f.,  Parliament's Report on Implementation at 8.  While the Waste Amendments were
   intended to cure these problems, the older legislation continues in effect until the Waste
   Amendments are promulgated, those Amendments are under challenge in the European Court
   of Justice on "Titanium Dioxide" grounds, and the new  definitions have the probiems laid out
   in the text in any case.
72 See, e.g., Parliament's Report on Implementation at 8.
73 Not  to mention the distinction between  "incineratable  packaging" which  constitutes
   "recoverable" packaging {a "good thing"), and packaging that is  classified as "non-recoverable"
   (a "bad  thing") because its incineration constitutes "final disposal" (i.e^ insufficient heat being
   recovered).  While  technical distinctions are set out between the two in Annex  II to the
   Commission's proposed Packaging Waste  Directive, real difficulties remain when  something
   as simple and obvious as the varying heat value of residues in the packaging is considered.
74 Further, even  if clear, developed environmental standards did exist on matters like selection of
   a plant's basic production  process (separate  from  the already existing environmental
   legislation that must be complied with in any case), there would likely be little consensus on
   their relationship to the mandates of consumer choice  (dictated by the principle  of consumer
   sovereignty) and of economic efficiency in production and distribution (dictated by the  use of  a
   free  market).

-------
58                           INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              59


COMBATTING ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME IN AN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT

Y.A. VAN DER MEER

National Criminal Intelligence Service, P.O. Box 20304, 2500 EH  The Hague, The Netherlands


1     THE DEVELOPMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME

      The  phenomenon of environmental crime has  been assuming greater proportions since
1985.  One of  the reasons for this is 1he  growing  "waste mountain" within  Europe.  Europe
produces too much waste material  and there are too  few  possibilities for  processing it.  In most
cases the NIMBY (not in my backyard) principle applies when incinerators  and waste dumps are
being  established. Because governments are introducing stricter regulations with regard to the
processing  of waste,  it is also becoming more  expensive  to have this waste processed. In the
Netherlands, for  example, dumping fees have trebled in  recent years. (To  give an idea of the
extent ol the waste problem, an annex  has been  attached containing figures on the import into,
export from and transit of chemical waste through the Netherlands).
      Criminal studies conducted in the Netherlands reveal that the pressing waste problem is a
breeding ground for  the sharp growth in environmental crime.  "Environmental crime"  can  be
defined  as  "a type of  crime involving a conscious violation of  the environmental standards laid
down in environmental law". Environmental offenses are usually committed  for economic reasons,
with  an excess  of  waste that nobody wants, finding its way onto the  illegal circuit for a
considerable sum of money.


2     INTERNATtONALISATfON OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRfME

      Legal inquiries in recent years have often focused on international types  of environmental
crime.  Recent  studies by the  National Criminal Intelligence Service reveal that environmental
crime is assuming an increasingly international character.
      Types of international environmental crime include:

            "Waste tourism". This involves the  illegal transportation of  waste material across
            borders  within Europe. These  waste transport routes are often part of large-scale
            international environmental crime.  Such transport lines are difficult  to detect.

      When the internal  borders  fall  away in 1993, the external  borders will become very
important for the illegal transport of waste. Once a shipment of waste has  crossed an  external
border, it is of course also inside Europe. There  is then the risk that such illegal shipments can be
dispersed,  without  being  checked,  throughout  Europe  and  other countries and  ultimately
disappear somewhere illegally or be dumped.
      This then  gives rise to  a second derived form of environmental crime (also existing as an
independent phenomenon), namely:

          The illegal dumping of waste at random sites in Europe and  other  countries. Dutch
          studies have revealed that waste material from the  Netherlands is already finding its
          way to dumping sites in  Belgium,  France, the United  Kingdom,  Yugoslavia,  the Soviet
          Union, Poland, and Rumania.

       For the environmental  criminal operating at an international level it is profitable to collect
waste  material  in  one country and dump  it Illegally in  another,  whether or  not under false
pretences.
       One problem  when dealing with this type  of  illegal operation is  that  it is  not  easy to
exchange information internationally.  The tackling of this crime is hampered  by differences in

-------
60                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


legislation and enforcement practices. The risk of  being caught  for illegal dumping is therefore
slight, and the economic advantage for the suspect is considerable.
       It has been shown that environmental crime  conducted on an international scale is most
profitable, and also that the combatting of such crime gives  rise to problems.
Illegal  operations  carried  out in different countries are  less conspicuous than  if  they were
conducted in a restricted (national) area.  It is for this reason that there is such a slight risk of
getting caught. The inevitable  consequence  is that  professional environmental  criminals  will
increasingly  do  their best to look within  Europe for illegal dumping sites where  unwanted waste
can be deposited. This means that almost all  European countries will face the  risk of having to
contend with this type of crime.
       It  therefore seems essential to coordinate  the  fight against  international environmental
crime.


3     THE  CURRENT SITUATION

      The  combatting of international environmental crime makes use  of ad-hoc cooperation
structures and treaties. This type of international cooperation is sufficient for simple  offenses, but
becomes  much  more  difficult  if  we  are dealing  with  professional criminals  who  operate
internationally.
       In 1989 the  National Criminal Intelligence Service conducted a study examining  whether
and to what  extent illegally operating dealers and transporters were also involved in other types of
crime.  The   study  investigated  116  businesses  and  examined  the  criminal   records  of  the
management of these firms. It was found  that  of the 263 managerial  personnel  (directors,
managers, board members)  one quarter  had committed other  offenses. Their  criminal records
included the following types of crime: fraud, theft,  breaches of the firearms  regulations, and illicit
drug trafficking.
Recent studies of environmental crime also  reveal that persons  involved in more "traditional"
types of crime, such as illicit drug trafficking, also turn to environmental crime.
       The above warrants yet again the conclusion that we are dealing here with a serious type
of crime which the  more  professional  criminal has taken control of. Analyses show  that the
involvement of  professional criminals in  environmental  crime requires  a  thorough legal
investigation.
       In order to be able to tackle this type of environmental  crime, an  extensive  preliminary
investigation in an international context is often  required. Experience shows  that, in  particular, the
gathering of relevant information gives rise to problems because:

       -   The information is often spread over different sources;
          A central contact point is not usually available;
       -   There is no uniform international definition of the term "environmental crime";
          Professional (environmental)  criminals usually arrange a legal facade for their illegal
          activities.

       In addition to information from judicial bodies, information from other government bodies is
also relevant to the tackling of the environmental crime problem, nationally and internationally.
There  needs to be, for instance, a continuing examination of the extent to which permits  and
exemptions  are issued.
       Almost every European country has a government apparatus charged with monitoring the
observance  of environmental regulations. Nevertheless,  the exchange  of information
encounters problems here too because of the complexity of the systems in question, ignorance of
these systems, as well as a lack of contact points.
       After  a preliminary  (pro-active)  investigation is  completed, a decision may be made to
proceed to a criminal investigation. Here the cooperation of legal authorities in other countries is
essential. An often long and difficult course has to be  followed before such agreements can be
reached.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             61
4     DESIRED SITUATION

      As  outlined above, the  already  present  internationalisation of environmental crime is
expected to continue. The  waste issue is  a growing problem, and for this reason there will
continue to be a market for illegal practices.
      There seems to be an increasing need within Europe and other counties for harmonisation
and coordination in the fight against international types of environmental crime.
      It would seem desirable for the cooperation and harmonisation to occur at two levels:

          Firstly, it is important  to gather coordinated information about and for the purposes of
          investigation operations;
          Secondly, it  is also  important to collect information from government  bodies  in  a
          coordinated fashion.  As mentioned above,  almost  every  (European)  country has  a
          supervisory  apparatus that is  responsible  for  monitoring  the observance of
          environmental regulations.  In order to  combat international environmental  crime, this
          information needs to be combined at an international level.
      ANNEX

      Information from  the  Ministry  of  Housing,  Physical Planning and Environment  (Source:
 General Directorate for the Environment, annual figures on chemical and toxic waste 1990, June
 1991), shows  that 195,000  tonnes of  chemical  or  other  toxic  waste were exported from the
 Netherlands in 1990  and 200,000  tonnes of waste were  imported. The quantity of toxic waste
 which passed through the Netherlands amounted to 38,000 tonnes.
 The number of shipments of waste increased by 55% in  comparison with  1989.  This is three
 times greater than in  1987.
      The large-scale transporting of  waste gives  rise  to monitoring problems and  provides
 criminals with opportunities to engage in illegal activities.

-------
62                           INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             63


DEVELOPMENT OF THE   POLICE'S  ENFORCEMENT POSITION  IN THE FIELD  OF
ENVIRONMENT

M.J. HORSTMAN

Environmental Police Duties, P.O. Box 117, 3970 AC Driebergen, The Netherlands


1     HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

      Various  environmental  laws were passed in a short period of time in the  seventies. The
way in which the  legislation should be enforced was regulated, but very little attention was paid to
this matter in the early years. This had certain consequences,  of course. A number of scandals
involving chemical waste revealed the shortcomings of the control  mechanisms. In addition, the
ways in which the laws were  enforced, were very complicated.  Every government body {national,
provincial and  municipal) had its  own responsibility in the chain  and this led to coordination
difficulties.
2     DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE POLICE'S ENFORCEMENT POSITION  IN THE FIELD OF
      ENVIRONMENT

      The regular police, as well as special detective services and civil servants, play a. role in
the enforcement of penal provisions o1 environmental legislation.
      Enforcement  of criminal  law in the Netherlands has traditionally been an  area for the
regular police. An increase of legislation and the workload, caused the  police to give priority to
relatively serious crimes.
      Most offenses against environmental legislation were given a low priority, on the one  hand
through  a lack of knowledge with the police and on the other hand, through the low degree of
social moral indignation.
      Especially  because of this, a number of ministries  and other administrative bodies at
various levels felt the strong need  for their own enforcement departments with an  emphasis on
administrative rather than criminal enforcement.
      In past few years social  environmental awareness  had grown strongly. Offenses against
environmental values have come to be regarded more and more as infringements of an essential
code of behaviour and therefore  as criminal behaviour. At the same  time, a growing importance of
penal enforcement has been observed.  These developments  have influenced the  police in the
serve that they have started a  strong reorientation on task, role  and position  of  the police in
relation to environmental enforcement.
      In 1987 the minister of the environment took the standpoint that: the enforcement, in the
sense of detecting  offenses against environmental  legislation, belongs with the police.  This
general  enforcement duty should not  be diminished any further through the founding of new
special detective services for environmental affairs.
      Arguments for the role of  the police
      -  the police are available and on patrol 24 hours a day;
      -  the police are specialists in conducting investigations;
      -  the police work falls under the  authority of the public  prosecutor;
      -  the police are objective and independent; and
      -  the  police are familiar  with  their  locations and have  access  to a great deal of
         information.

-------
64                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
3     ACTUAL DEVELOPMENTS

      In 1990 the Coordinating Police Council - an umbrella organization of all police services -
drew up a policy plan for the police environmental duties and called this "to enforce or to lose". In
this report, the police environmental duties were described as follows:

      -  detective duties, which are divided according to  the following forms  of environmental
         crime;
         minor environmental offenses, such as littering, noise nuisance, tinkering in the street;
         lesser  environmental  crimes: for example incidental  discharges,  illegal  dumping of
         crude  waste,  illegal  spreading  of  manure on the  land,  illegal  car  demolishing
         businesses;
         severe, organized environmental  crime: for example  illegal commercial processing of
          (chemical) waste, or crimes which cause severe damage to the environment;
         supporting the administration:  assisting the administrative  bodies, detection (eye  and
         ear function),  advising  on  permits (enforceability),  registering  and  passing  on
          environmental complaints;
          internal environmental care: from the exemplary function of  the police  itself to a change
          in  the  culture and mentality of policemen, the environmental aspect will  have to be
          integrated.
      This policy plan is not only directed at the development of the enforcement duties, but  also
at:
          demarcation of  duties in this field in relation to other organizations which  are involved
          in the enforcement;
          attunement  - and cooperation -  with other organizations  (administration,  Ministry of
          Justice, special  detective services, monitoring officials);
          the consequences for the Dutch police  manpower  with  regard to, equipment  and
          financing, including training;
          the development of activity plans.
      This all will be needed to substantiate the necessary conditions for the implementation of
the environmental duties  within  the  police.  Following this,  a re-structuring of  the environmental
care takes  place. In this way regional environmental bureaus within the police organization have
been founded in most police regions with financial support from the  ministries  of Internal  Affairs
and Justice.  From these  bureaus activities are planned to stimulate  broad acceptance  of the
environmental duties within the police.
      The concrete effort of the police in this field of lesser and severe environmental crimes has
lead to a considerable  number of criminal investigations that have been  solved.
       Apart  from the  above the police  is also  actively  involved in  monitoring projects in close
cooperation with the administrative  authorities.  These projects  may  vary from checking  certain
businesses  to dealing with  environmentally  unsound situations (problems  with  manure,  car
wrecks, discharges  onto water).  Evaluations of these monitoring  projects  have brought  to  light
that it is most effective to involve the police in compliance monitoring visits to businesses.
       In cooperation with the Ministries of  Internal Affairs and Justice,  mayor developments have
been put in motion with respect to the conditions under which the police environmental duties are
to be shaped, especially  where training, information and automation and internal environmental
care are concerned.
       In  1990  the "Task Field  Environmental Crime"  was founded  by the  National Criminal
Intelligence Service (CRI), at the Forensic  Laboratory the  main department of Environment was
founded which,  in  close cooperation with the Environmental Assistance team  of the Ministry of
Housing, Physical Planning and Environment, professionally support the police in tackling severe,
environmental crime cases in particular.
       The Task Field Environmental Crime intelligence Service (CRI) focuses on  the following
activities:
          investigative expertise;
       -   crime analysis;

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                               65


         environmental accountancy;
         international mediating function;
      -  joining information flows at a national level;
         understanding developments in environmental crime; and
         recognition of the relationships with other types of crime.
      One of the activities which calls for priority as well is the application of means of detection
which are being used for other  types of professional  crime. This has led to pilot  projects  now
being in force with the Regional Criminal Intelligence Services.
      In relation  to the often international character of environmental crime - just think of the
illegal cross border shipping of waste - the Netherlands have asked for more attention on tackling
international environmental crime  at the TREVI-III conference (this is the  EEC conference on
police matters).
      At  the 8th  Symposium  on  International  Fraud  held in  Lyons in  June  1992, a
recommendation was accepted in  which a working party was established to identify the various
problems that arise in connection with environmental crime.
       In developing the police environmental duties, the  police run  into  a number of obstacles.
The  sheer size, the quality and the inaccessibility of the legislation form  barriers against forceful
enforcement by the  police. The administrative  context - just think of the problems that are related
to administrative permissiveness and the enforceability of permits  -  also greatly influences the
enforcement possibilities of the police.
       Summing up it  may  be concluded  that infrastructurally a fair number of activities have
been started. The intention behind these activities is, of course, the improvement of the quality of
environmental enforcement and the priority it gets.
       The regional chiefs of  police held an environmental conference on December 2nd and 3rd
1991. In the conclusive statement of this conference,  the chiefs of police articulated a number of
policy intentions to ensure that the effort of the police on a strategic as well as
operational level, will be intensified.
          It is intended that,  in relation to social effects on environmental enforcement, which will
          have to be further  worded, the efforts will be doubled in 1995.  In  effect this means 4%
          of the police budget.
          In  1996 almost all police officers will have had environmental training.
       -   In  1995 internal  environmental  care  systems  will be operational  in  all police
          organizations.
       -   The police will offer its  expertise more emphatically to other organizations in  order to
          contribute to the enforceability of legislation and the resulting permits.
       -   The activities that  have been put in motion  in the field of  information and coordination
          and attunement with  other  parties involved  in enforcement, will be developed in an
          accelerated manner.
       At  this very moment we are charting the information which will be necessary for the
execution of the police  environmental duties.  We are  also  investigating  in what way police
information may  be given to other partners in  the  enforcement network. In accordance  with
privacy legislation, the police are  ruled by the Police  Register Act  as well. This means that the
exchange of information is bound by strict rules.
       -   The police want to give more content  to its director's function in  the area of detection
          as far as special detectives and their services are concerned.  I have stated earlier that
          for several special laws, separate special detective services have been founded. Since
          the police  have a general investigative  competence,  attunement will  have to take
          place,
       In  order to realize   these  and  other policy  intentions, the CPB founded a  special
deliberation structure.  The  heads  of  the  regional environmental bureaus meet  periodically to
exchange information and to learn from one  another's experiences. The  CPB also participates in
many external national committees.

-------
66                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


4      INFORMATION ON THE ROLE OF THE COORDINATING POLICE COUNCIL AND THE
       POLICE IN RELATION TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION

       The police organization in general and the police environmental duties.
       The Dutch police is currently working on a unique reorganization.  148 autonomous units of
the municipal police and the national police will merge to form 25 regional bodies and a unit for
nationwide services. The operation is meant to take place within a period of about 2 years. In
April 1993 the new police organization is  to be operational.
       The regional organization is governed by the regional council, which consists of the  police
manager (the mayor of the largest municipality), the chief public prosecutor and the other mayors
of the  region. This body determines the  allocation of personnel, the budget, the annual account
and the policy plan. The daily control and management of the regional police  force lie with the
regional chief of police.
       The authority over the police has  been arranged as follows. Where  the enforcement of the
public  order is  concerned, the  authority  lies with the mayor;  with  regard to  criminal  law
enforcement of the legal order, the public prosecutor is the competent authority.
       The mayor, the public prosecutor and the chief of police of  the municipality in which the
police  unit is stationed, confer at  so-called "triangular deliberations", which are to be held on  a
regular basis. This will automatically mean setting priorities for the police.
       The  organization consists  of  geographical units and functional  units  such  as criminal
investigation, executive support, facilities  and policy support units.
       The employees who work at the geographical units are entrusted with the so-called basic
police  duties with general job  specifications. Enforcement of environmental legislation is part of
this  job  specification. At the  criminal  investigation and executive support  units,  there  are
specializations (in the field  of environment) for fighting complex environmental crimes and for
supporting the basic police units.
       The  future police unit  of  national services  will  comprise   the  national duties such  as
compliance  monitoring and detection  on the motorways and through waterways and supportive
services  (technology,  environmental  flights in relation  to  environmental  duties,  criminal
investigation expertise, logistics).
       The chiefs of the 25 regional services and the chief of the police unit of national services
together make up the  Coordinating Police Council (CPB).
       The CPB has the following  goals:
       -   developing  and propagating the views on all matters that are relevant for the police
          acting as point of  address for all matters that concern the  police
          promoting the own professionality and up-to-date picture of the police
       -   advising authorities and controlling services regarding the police
       Each chief of police serves a certain port-folio. One of these is  the police environmental
duty, which  is now held by the  chief-commissioner of the Rotterdam  Police  Region.
       For information about the organization and the activities  of the police in the Netherlands
please contact:

       Marja J. Horstman LL.M.           Robin Linthorst
       Environmental  Police  Duties        European Relations
       P.O. Box 117. 3970 AC Driebergen P.O. Box  219
       The Netherlands,                  2501 CE  The Hague, The Netherlands
       Phone :  (31 34 38) 358 30          Phone : (31 70) 310 34 6
       Fax  : (31 34 38) 215 90           Fax  : (31 70) 310 34 72

                    Yvonne van der Meer LL.M.
                    National Criminal intelligence Service (CRI)
                    P.O. Box 20304
                    2500 EH The Hague, The Netherlands
                    Phone : {31 70) 376 93 40
                    Fax  : (31 70) 376 87 54

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              67


ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT BY MUNICIPALITIES IN THE NETHERLANDS

P. DORDREGTER

Director of the Association of Netherlands Municipalities, VNG, P.O. Box 30435,
2500 GK  The Hague, The Netherlands.


      ENFORCEMENT: Collaboration and persistence


1     GENERAL REVIEW OF THE ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM IN THE NETHERLANDS

      Enforcement is the ultimate test of environmental policy - in  fact, of every area of policy.
Enforcement involves forcing the regulated society to conform to the rules. The fact that there are
various means for doing this will be discussed a little later. Above all, enforcement is the final link in
the policy cycle, and thereby the prelude to the first policy-making link.
      Confronted with the regulated society, and thus the practical situation, the new policy-making
requirements imposed  by everyday  practice  become clear.  I should mention now that the
effectiveness of the instruments used certainly forms part of this feedback, which has the character
of an evaluation. Enforceability and public acceptance are important assessment criteria in this test.
      In the Netherlands, municipal authorities bear primary responsibility for environmental policy.
These authorities are responsible for  supervising the  vast majority of the country's  companies;
400,000 in all. This enormous number of companies includes  many organisations which place  a
limited burden on the environment.  As an example, I can cite the combined residential and office
buildings,  or which 50,000  are subject  to licensing  requirements. Provincial  authorities  are
responsible for about another  3,000 companies,  either  because of the complexity of the industrial
processes used or because of their high  external impact.
      The Netherlands covers an area of some 35,000 kmz, has a population  of 15 million, and  is
divided into  12 provinces  and 649 municipalities.  The provincial authorities, and the municipal
authorities in particular, have an open administration in which a large number of tasks are carried out
within an integrated policy framework.  The municipal tasks may be strictly autonomous  duties, such
as responsibility for drains and sewers, or duties imposed by national legislation, which can  allow
municipalities a greater or lesser margin  for independent policy-making.
      The entire territory of the Netherlands is also divided into water authorities. These are directly
 elected, functional regional organisations, which bear responsibility for water management and
purification of waste water.
      Naturally, the municipalities  not only concern themselves with the companies within their
 boundaries,  but also ensure that everyone in their territory complies with the relevant environmental
 regulations.  They supervise moped noise levels, for instance, and discharges of chemical wastes
 into sewers  (cleaning agents, paint remains, medicines etc.) or the street (from lubricants when
 engine oil is changed,  to  dog dirt  etc.); they also monitor the  composition and  presentation  of
 domestic refuse (compulsory separation of organic wastes, building and demolition wastes, domestic
 chemical wastes etc.).
       in view of the enormous number of potential polluters and  actual transgressions, formal
 enforcement can never cover the  entire population in full. Priorities  must be set, and a mix  of
 instruments  must be applied.
       Municipal authorities are not the only enforcers: a multitude of different organisations may
 concern themselves with the  same company. In addition  to the general environmental licenses
 issued by local authorities under the Nuisance Act, many of the 400,000 companies are required  to
 hold special licenses under other legislation. The water quality inspector may,  for instance, call on
 certain  companies to  conduct checks of water quality  control.  In addition to   the general
 administrative bodies, the police and the public prosecutor have their own powers of investigation for
 the  enforcement of criminal  law  and  could,  in principle, operate  independently  of municipal
 administrative enforcement activities.

-------
68                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      Environmental policy is made at different levels. Legislation and the relevant standards and
directives provide the framework within which other tiers of government must operate. The aim is
allow the greatest possible amount of local policy-making freedom, in order to ensure a customised
approach. Naturally, the margins of freedom vary from one area of policy to another.
      Unlike many other countries, central government in the Netherlands does not,  barring a
handful  of exceptions (e.g. for  nuclear power), perform first-line supervision  of compliance  with
legislation. Central government  inspectors supervise  the ways in which other tiers of government
perform their duties. Controls  aimed at certain branches of industry can  cut across  municipal
priorities in  extremely  aggravating  ways.  Coordination of the actions  of  different government
agencies is urgently needed. For a company, it is incomprehensible and exceedingly annoying to
have a succession of different enforcers moving in.
2     POSITION OF MUNICIPAL AUTHORITIES IN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY IS NOT SELF-
      EVIDENT

      The fact that municipal authorities have an important environmental task has not always been
self-evident. Despite  their statutory duties, municipal authorities have allowed many companies to
operate  without licenses and have certainly not conducted  enough  inspections. For more than a
century, these authorities have been able to avail themselves of the Nuisance Act, which affords
them responsibility for controlling local disturbances by companies.
When real environmental policy was developed, the government did not opt to extend the Nuisance
Act, but introduced new legislation, with stringent rules, for each new approach laboriously agreed
in Parliament. Consequently, each compartment was regulated separately in law and, moreover, the
provinces were made responsible for the majority of the new tasks, rather than the municipalities.
Responsibility for purification of  waste water and the  relevant installations was actually withdrawn
from the municipalities by law.
      With each new piece of  legislation, new financial resources were generated to fund its
implementation.  In  an era  of  stringent austerity measures,  this  became  increasingly  difficult
(municipal authorities receive about 75% of  their income from central government).  Licensing also
became increasingly expensive, due to the tighter requirements imposed in response to increasingly
complex processes and the use of more hazardous substances.
      For a time, municipal authorities were unpopular with  the environmental movement and with
many politicians, as they were felt to be too close to local industry to be able to take an independent
view in the field of tension between economic and  environmental interests.  Gradually, the idea
gained ground that environmental policy needs to be as close to the public as possible, and must be
formulated  in direct  correlation  with other areas of  policy. In fact,  it was precisely the political
approach, rather than the technocratic one, which proved to be the most effective.
      Relationships between municipal and  central government,  originally  confrontational and
marked by  scepticism, has now  changed into a partnership:  tasks are undertaken jointly, using the
strengths of both partners. Research established the number of officials required at each level for the
different municipal environmental tasks, and the costs.  The studies showed that a population of
70,000 is the minimum needed to carry a proper official apparatus. Collaboration between municipal
authorities  is therefore essential. Central government made financial resources available  on a
structural  basis,  issuing instructions  that  within five  years, all  companies falling  under the
responsibility of  the municipalities should be properly licensed and  should be inspected with the
proper frequency. To encourage collaboration, a 25% bonus was offered over and above the  basic
amount in case of collaboration. At national level, the operation was led by a steering group in which
the Environment Department, the inspectorate and the  Association  of  Netherlands Municipalities
(VNG) worked together.
      The National Environmental Policy  Plan Plus (NEPP-Plus) has since  been  published,
operationalising national policy in a large number of action programmes. To clarify what is expected
of municipal authorities in the execution of this plan, all the objectives have been translated to the
municipal level, assigning priorities and the  relevant official action. This document is known as the
Framework Plan  of Approach and  is the pride of the  Department and my own organisation. All

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              69


municipal authorities use the Framework Plan to define their own situation and to prioritise action.
With the help of the Framework Plan, they have all prepared their own environmental policy plans,
interpreting the points for action in terms of their own situation. This document serves as a basis for
discussions with industry and environmental organisations and is included in the regional talks of the
municipal authorities working in partnership. Local communities now know what they can expect of
their municipal authorities.


3     REGULATION SYSTEM

      Before continuing  with  the  theme  of  enforcement,  I  must first  explain the  regulations
themselves.  In a large number of branches of industry, licenses are no longer required. Instead,
these branches are subject to General Terms and Conditions. Individual companies themselves must
ensure that they comply with the requirements. Plans to form, expand or change a business must
be reported to the local authority. The municipal  authorities do still conduct inspections  to check
compliance with the General Terms and Conditions.
      The repeal of licensing requirements was a result of central government deregulation efforts.
The branches concerned consist of small, fairly uncomplicated businesses of a homogenous nature:
butchers, bakeries, LPG stations, etc.
      The NEPP-Plus laid down a  large number  of target reductions in emissions, which must be
realised within a specific period. The plan also  names the branches of industry which must make a
particular contribution to the  reductions, known as the policy target groups.  Target reductions are
agreed with industry for individual substances and are laid down in a declaration of intent, which is
then elaborated in a covenant. The three tiers of government hold joint talks with representatives of
the branch of industry concerned,  and each sign the  covenants.  A covenant has already been
concluded with the basic metals industry and one with the graphical industry is almost complete.
      Covenants are a national 'bubble': they  show  total national volumes of pollution levels
considered admissible for emissions of a specific substance. This makes clear what is expected of
a branch of industry. The municipal authority is given some indication of the standards which can be
imposed in a license. The distribution of pollution control measures will have to be considered within
the branch of industry itself. Clearly,  this will demand a considerable amount of consultation. Industry
feels that covenants should, in fact, serve as a package of standard conditions and that therefore,
there should  be  no scope for further  development by a municipal authority. The municipal authorities
adhere to the target group policy, because this means that environmental policy is internalised in a
branch of industry and is developed in a corporate environmental plan by the individual companies.
This plan serves as the basis for negotiations with the local authority. However, municipal authorities
explicitly want a considerable margin of policy freedom in order to tailor final licenses to the situation
required locally. In the enforcement situation, that could lead to problems in future.
      The licensing and enforcement situation is complex, as I have already shown. There is every
reason for concerted action. Different parties in  society must help to create a desired situation
through coordinated action: a system of countervailing  power. Strictly formal enforcement,  on the
basis  of administrative  and criminal  law, is only one  option within a wide spectrum  of different
instruments.  An orchestra does not  always want to use only its heaviest instruments, like the
kettledrums and tubas: the same applies in government.
4     CONDITIONS FOR ENFORCEMENT

      A  number of conditions  must be met  in  order  to  realise  effective  implementation  of
environmental policy, and thereby, its enforcement. Firstly, a municipal authority must clearly define
what it wants and must make this visible in  a  proper document. Secondly, the policy must be
discussed as far as possible with the different target groups, in an open procedure.
      The partners must be told what has and  has not happened to  their contribution, and why.
Where possible, the partners' requirements must be satisfied. This can mean adaptation of the policy
itself, or changes in the phases of execution. Standards and figures often seem extremely hard and

-------
70                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
fast, with a scientific basis, but on closer inspection, are ultimately a political compromise.

       Operating  in this way can sharply increase  public support for policy. General  public
information must complete the process. The public, too, must be able to see how any compromises
are reached and must be shown that high environmental returns have, nevertheless, always taken
priority. In the negotiations with industry, the creation of a basis for sound control must be agreed:
this could be a corporate environmental plan, but also a certain method of supplying information,
together with the appropriate monitoring system.
       I have depicted support for policy as a fairly harmonious process: in reality, of course, this is
not always the case.  A government organisation needs partners  in order to pursue its policy,
certainly in industry, where economic gain  can quickly gain the upper hand. It can be made clear to
banks and insurance companies that the government will not only bring licenses up to date, but that
enforcement action will follow. Experience shows that the  RABO Bank is by far the best enforcer if
a guarantee is needed for a company loan. Trade unions have an interest in ensuring high standards
of environmental hygiene in companies, both for the health of their members and for the continuity
of the company. Finally,  the public can be asked to keep a watch and to inform local authorities or
the police if environmental transgressions are suspected, or to institute civil proceedings themselves.
       Publicity is needed to let the public know the municipality's environmental  plans. It can also
be used to promote desirable environmental conduct. Some directors of municipal environmental
services use publicity as a weapon to make reluctant companies conform more quickly to licensing
requirements. Press announcements of targeted campaigns in a certain area or branch of industry
markedly improve collaboration from the companies concerned.  In any action against a company,
the presence of the press, tipped off in advance, can make it clear to other potential transgressors
in the same branch that  the steps are being taken in earnest.
5      PRIORITIES ARE UNAVOIDABLE

       I have already mentioned the enormous number of potential enforcement situations and the
fact that it  is impossible to pay the same  level of attention to all of them, everywhere. A set of
priorities will have to be drawn up for inspections, based on the potential burden which different
companies can place on the environment. In other companies, unannounced random checks must
be introduced. The enormous amount of work involved makes it obvious that butchers and bakers
could mostly be left to their own devices and that one should rely on external tip-offs in these cases.
Self-regulation should be encouraged as far as possible. I have already described how this could be
done.
       It must in any event be made clear to everyone that action  will be  taken if violations are
discovered. An obvious step would be to require restoration of the former situation, for instance in
the case of discharges into the soil by compulsory cleaning, or compulsory replanting, in the case
of unlawful felling of trees. If no appropriate response is made to the detection of a violation, action
must  be systematically pursued,  in escalating stages. Ultimately, criminal proceedings  may  be
necessary. Naturally, these will be  required where criminal activities are involved, and the closure of
the company will be the obvious step.  But Dutch law does not make matters easy for enforcers. If
a municipal authority announces a company closure, the company  concerned can appeal to the
Council of State. If the company has been operating for a long time without a license, or in violation
of license terms, the Council will tend  to overturn the closure decision.  Tolerance of a violation is
then interpreted in the transgressor's  favour: which  is a rather remarkable situation. After all, a
company should comply with the law, but it is not the  company, but the supervisory authority which
is held liable for such compliance. These roles urgently need reversal. A company which operates
without a license, or in contravention of license terms, should be charged for the economic benefits
it has illegally enjoyed. This would have a considerable effect as a preventive measure.
       Enforcement is a difficult task, and it requires training. It is  certainly not  always an easy
matter to identify the regulation which  has  been contravened from among the multitude of central
government, provincial, municipal  and water board regulations  which simultaneously apply to one
and the same company. The method of action and of gathering evidence also requires precision. It

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              71


can cost officials a fair amount of difficulty to act in a company which confronts them with large
amounts of  counter-knowledge. The  right attitude  also  has to be taught.  To assist  municipal
authorities in this area, the Association of Netherlands Municipalities (VNG) has published a Guide
for Supervision and Action on Environmental Legislation, describing the successive phases.


6     COLLABORATION IS ESSENTIAL

      Inter-municipal  collaboration  is  essential in  order to  formulate  and implement  effective
environmental policies. The whole of the Netherlands is,  by now, covered by partnership areas. In
the first  instance, these involve joint use of sufficient official capacity. In time, collaboration grows
towards a  regional environmental service and a policy-making body. Ultimately, the absorption of
these regions by genuine regional administrative bodies,  which are directly elected, is inevitable.
      Enforcement involves a variety of different administrative organisations: municipal authorities,
provincial authoffties, inspectorates, the police force and the  public prosecutor. The Environment
Department  encourages the formation  of enforcement regions.
      We already have tripartite consultation between Mayors, in their capacity as heads of the
police force, their local  Chiefs of Police and the public prosecutors for the districts concerned, in
which public order and investigation are discussed in genera!  terms. In some cases, the municipal
Alderman  responsible for Environmental  Affairs will take part in the talks, in order to coordinate
enforcement of environmental policy.
      A major reorganisation of the police force is currently on its way in the Netherlands. The
country  is  divided  into  23 police regions, which are  far larger than  the environmental regions.
Separate enforcement regions, corresponding to the environmental regions, will now operate within
the police regions. The enforcement regions will reach agreements on priorities, methods of action,
where more than one local authority  is  involved, publicity and  coordination  of the action  to be
pursued. In many cases, persuasion is tried first when violations are discovered, followed by official
action, with criminal proceedings as a last resort, or as additional action. However, where existing
organisations are involved, the inspectorates and environmental organisations do tend take the view
that matters  have gone beyond the information and persuasion stage!
If necessary, the different stages of the enforcement process must be organised and followed in
ways which  ensure that procedural errors or  inaccuracies in one phase cannot jeopardise  the
success of a later one. The use of standard procedures wherever possible, and the creation of a
joint computerised data base, can be a great heip here.
      Environmental offenses do not always involve malicious intent.  This is why information is so
important.  Many contraventions are inadvertent. Here again, information or a different organisation
of the process should be used reduce the margin of error as far as possible. Where there is lack of
interest, information will not be enough  and corrective action will be needed, with or without a degree
of publicity. In the case of criminal offenses, a mix of instruments should be used, including criminal
proceedings. Sometimes the possibilities for official and criminal enforcement overlap. For instance,
the judiciary can  require significant improvements in  environmental quality as part of a settlement.
      Generally speaking, criminal law  is not yet adequately  geared to  handle  environmental
offenses. The penalties are usually exceptionally light and as a result, limitation periods are short.
In the Netherlands, many environmental offenses are still not covered by the Economic Offenses Act
and  even  when  they are, do not  rank very  high. Consequently, the  instruments  for  tackling
environmental offenses and the accompanying  penalties are equally weak.

-------
72                           INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              73


ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT IN GREECE

M. VASS1LOPOULOS

Greek  Permanent  Representative  with  the European  Economic  Community,  Avenue  de
Cortenberg 71, 1040  Brussels, Belgium


      PLATO' S LAWS H 845

      Water is easily polluted by the use of any  kind of drug. It therefore needs the protection of
a law, as follows: Whoever willingly (or: purposely) pollutes water shall de  obliged, in addition to
paying  an  indemnity, to  purify the  spring or  receptacle  of  the  water  whatever  method  of
purification is prescribed by ordinance, at all times and to everyone.


      The country is located in the northeastern part of the Mediterranean Sea. The coastline of
continental Greece is 7,078 purring, including  Peloponnese, while that of the islands is 7,942 km.
This makes  a total of 15,020.9 km (National Statistical  Service, 1970). Greece has an area of
132,000 sq.km and population of 9.7 million (population density of 73 inhabitants/sq.km). Although
the average population is relatively  low, 58%  of the people, the greater part of those involved in
economic activities are concentrated in urban areas.
      The largest urban centers are located near gulfs (e.g. Athens, Thessaloniki, Patras, Volos,
Iraklion).  Due to the  high urban/industrial waste load  in  those  areas the  pollution  of  the
environment has become a major problem.
      Due to the mountainous nature of  Greece there  is a strong  competition among industry,
agriculture and tourism for land  in coastal areas.  Those pressures have resulted in environmental
degradation  such as  water and pollution.
      Because  of lack of adequate space  in  Greece, there is a strong  competition  among
industry, agriculture,  and tourism for  land in flat areas especially near the coasts.  The above
antagonism  leads to an irreversible environmental deterioration, which, also  affects the  natural
resources  and represents  a serious problem for the future development  of the country.  Only a
limited degree of planning and resource management has taken place in the last two decades.
      Tourism has become a major economic activity.
      Between  1962 and  1982 the number of foreign tourist arrivals in Greece increased  by
890% to more than 5 million. Internal  tourism has also increased significantly. 90% of all tourism
activities occur in the coastal areas, resulting in additional environmental degradation.
      Industrial  activities have  also increased with high  rates. Almost 80% of the  Greek industry
is located in the coastal zone  (all  4 existing refineries, 3 out of 4 fertilizer plants  and all the
metallurgical industries), especially in the Greater Athens and Thessaloniki areas.
      Agriculture also contributes  to the  pollution of  the coastal  areas  though fertilizers and
pesticides. In 1985  2188 x  1000 tons of  fertilizers and 2800 tons  of  pesticides were added to
agriculture soil. Solid waste especially in tourist areas is another problem.
      It must be noted that Greece is one  of  the  few countries which  have included in their
constitution  an article on environmental protection. In article 24 it is stated that protection of the
natural and  cultural environment constitutes an obligation of the state and the state is responsible
for taking special preventative or enforcement measures towards its  conversation.  Articles 21, 22
and 106 deal with the  protection ow workers,  public  health,  urban development and physical
planning.
      The application of these constitutional orders was made possible by the introduction and
adoption by the Parliament of  law 360/1976 on environmental and  physical planning. Certain
articles of this law have been subsequently revised by law 1032/1980.
      According to the law 360/1976 the  policy for physical planning and environment is shaped
and monitored by a  National Council  (NCPPE) chaired by the  Prime Minister and composed by

-------
74                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


the  Ministers of National  Economy, Finance,  Agriculture, Sciences and Cultures, industry and
Energy, Social Affairs, Public Works, Physical Planning and Environment and Mercantile Marine.
       In order to strengthen the implementation and control procedures, a new Ministry for the
Environment, Physical Planning and Public Works  was created by law  1032 in 1980.  From  a
small number of administrators  in 1972 the new Ministry has now more than 250 employees and
regional representation in  all prefectures of the country. This Ministry is the main executive body
carrying out the environmental policy and general enforcement of the Government.
       In  addition  there are administrative units  in  almost every  Ministry  which have been
assigned responsibility on environmental protection, such as the  Ministry of  Agriculture  (forest,
wild  life,  pesticides), the Ministry of  Mercantile  Marine (pollution by  oil  and  other  harmful
substances  from ships and  land based  sources), the  Ministry  of the Interior  (solid  wastes,
municipal  waste water). Also the  Ministry  of transport has established  throughout  the  country,
Technical  Inspection Centers for conducting periodical mechanical and emission tests on all types
of vehicles  and the  Ministry of  National  Economy formulates and coordinates the  finances
concerning environmental  policy at national and regional levels-as it does for individual  sectoral
policy finances.
       In sum, the institutional and legislative provisions for environmental management are being
gradually  strengthened. The  intent is  for  increased capacity  to  develop and  implement more
consistent policies and programmes for environmental protection.
       The use  of  those  administrative agencies that  already existed within various Ministries
resulted to  a  significant facilitation of prompt  law  enforcement implementation  and  additional
reduction of costs  since we  were  able to  use the existing infrastructure  all over the country as
well as the experienced and skilled personnel.
       Law 1650 of 1986 determines the overall framework.
       The law distinguishes 3  industrial  categories, in relation to their level of pollution. The
standards to be  respected  are defined at a  regional level  (prefecture). They are  variables,
depending on the receptors and the nature  of the industry involved. Normally, prefectural  decrees
should conform to EC directives on water use.
       Law  1069 of 1980 has  compelled  each municipality  of more than 10.000 inhabitants to
create a municipal enterprise for water supply, waste water collection and treatment.
       An  important  legislative act is the law 743/1977 about the  "Protection of  marine
environment from pollution caused by vessels and coastal industrial activities". This law provides,
among others,  for the organization of a marine pollution abatement service in the Ministry of
Mercantile Marine and for fines imposed on violators of this law.
       Certain provisions of this law were  later harmonized with those of the  Convention for the
Protection  of the  Mediterranean Sea  Against Pollution (Barcelona Convention  )  and  its two
protocols on the Prevention of Pollution in  the  Mediterranean Sea  from Dumping by  Vessels and
Aircrafts,  and  on  Cooperation for  Preventing Pollution in the  Mediterranean Sea from
Hydrocarbons  and  Other  Harmful Substances  in Cases of  Emergency,  which  were ratified by
Greece on 1978.
       Two other protocols, for the protection of the  marine environment from land based sources
and  for special protected marine  areas  been  ratified  in  1986.  Greece has  also ratified  the
MARPOL, STW and Civil liability Conventions.
       Oil pollution  is the biggest pollution problem in the  Mediterranean Sea it represents  a
danger of national dimension for the Greek coast. That is the reason why Greece has developed
a contingency plan. Since the early seventies  she has created regional  oi! combating units, she
has eleven  skimmers and multipurpose ships, two airplanes and has installed oil  antipollution
equipment in 40 ports all over the  country.  Moreover, the fines which were imposed on violations
by ships or land sources were 2.2 m US$ for the period 1987-1982.
       According to the latest plan reception facilities  will be  created at the main  ports of the
Country. This project will be partly financed by the EC.
       Another  important  development is  the  introduction of prefecturat regulations on effluent
standards per coastal area for Land Based Sources of Pollution of  the Marine environmental and
of other surface water bodies.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              75


      To promote regional development in  Greece in the early 80's, the establishment  of any
industry in the area of Attica around Athens was prohibited.  Establishing industries outside this
area was encouraged by tax and customs exemptions. Since  1982 a serious of laws have come
into force dividing the country into 4 development areas with different incentives.
      Law  1892/90 supports industry's anti-pollution investments by giving incentives to:
      a. Enterprises making productive investments which  contribute  inter  alia  to  energy
         conservation, reduction of environmental pollution and the quality of life.
      b. Enterprises which are related to the repair, restoration  and conversion  of houses  or
         buildings (focusing on creating hotels and enterprises  carrying  out investments (for
         business settlements)under the preceding section in other areas which are entitled to a
         further 5% investment  grant, provided that said traditional houses  or  buildings are
         located in significant traditional settlements.
      c. Enterprises relocating  industries from large urban  areas (e.g. Athens) to  other rural
         settlements with respect to decentralization.

      The given incentives vary from 40% (in Athens) to 50% (near the borders) of the cost.
      The prefectorial services are charged  with the control of the proper application of laws and
permits.
      By the fundamental law  1650/86 the installation of environmental quality control units
(KEPE)  in any prefecture has  been regulated. The prefect can nominate functionaries from  the
prefecture  personnel including  representatives from the  Ministry of the  Environment.
Representatives of the local authorities can also participate. The  units have  all the  necessary
rights for proper supervision by entering premises, sampling, suggesting measures or sanctions.
      Administration fines after prefectorial decision can be imposed up to  10  mil.  Greek drs. or
44.000 ECU. In  severe cases (e.g.  accidental spill  with  victims)  the  Minister has the right  to
increase the  fines  up to  6 mill.  ECU. Also  temporary or permanent withdrawal of a  permit is
possible together with fines  up to 6.000 ECU  per day of illegal work.
      The  penal code is applied for violations of environmental legislation. Complaints  can  de
made by those who are affected by actions that cause  environmental damage.
      For violation of the environmental legislation, imprisonment for up to 2 years  and penalties
can be applied.
      The Administrative tools for enforcement are:
      -  Administrative penalty payments (for each) violation or for each day the company does
         not comply after issuance of administrative order);
         Partial or complete closure of a plant;
      -  Administrative coercion;
         Revoking the permit.

      Criminal tools  are:
         Imprisonment;
         Fine;
         Closing of  the factory/company for at most one year.

      Air pollution problems, especially the srnog formation ("Nephos"), are severe in Athens,
where 70%, of the economic activity and almost 40% of the population is concentrated.
      The  main pollution  source  are the vehicles which are responsible for  75%  or  the  air
pollution in the City.
      Industry contributes about 20% and domestic sources 5%.
      During recent years, severe  air pollution episodes  have  taken place (there  were  ten
episodes during 1987).
During the  air pollution episodes  measures  for strict  reduction of  industrial activities and traffic
have been taken in accordance with the existing emergency plan.
      Photochemical smoke episodes that take place  are  comparable  to  the  Los Angeles
situation.

-------
76                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      Sulphur Dioxide air pollution in Athens is under control due to the restriction of fuel oil use
in central heating in the Greater Athens area and the reduction (to 0.2%) of the Sulphur content
in Diesel for traffic and central heating.
      The reduction of lead content in petrol from 0.84 to 0,15 gr/l. has resulted  in decrease in
lead concentration in the air. The ambient lead concentration of 0.8 ug per cubed meter of  air, is
within the guideline annual mean of 0.5-1.0 mg/cubed meters, set by the WHO.
      Because  of high taxation, the majority  of the cars were old and small. According to L.
Patas private communication, one third of the imported cars, registered  in Athens in 1986, were
second  hand. The EC derived  regulations with stricter car emission  standards and lower  taxes
stimulated  massive car purchases and resulted  in  lower emissions.Additional incentives were
given for the replacement of aged petrol vehicles with new  "clean" ones with 3 way catalytic
converters. These incentives which  are in the  form  of  a  50% to  60%  discount on the special
Consumption tax were put into effect as of January 1991. The rate of scrappage of aged cars and
replacement with new clean ones has increased dramatically.
      In order  to  improve further  the  industrial development, industrial estates have  been
established as a mean of decongesting  the capital and major cities.
      Industrial estates and  for small  and  medium  enterprises  industrial  parks, are  areas
especially organized for the establishment  and operation  of modern manufacturing plants.
      Today 21 industrial estates and 2 industrial parks are in operation.
      Legislation provides for the setting  up of industrial estates in all  the 52  prefectures  of the
country.
      The main interest for setting  up a unit in  an  industrial estate is likely  to come from the
following:
          all kinds of manufacturing  and small craft industry units,
          ship building and repair units
          units processing, storing and trading agricultural products,
      -   common waste water treatment units.

      Law 1982/90 includes incentives for enterprises willing to be established in the area  of the
industrial estates and industrial  parks.
      In the EEC context the progress in implementing directives applicable to the environment,
has an  average of 85% success  (dated 31-12-91) which is quite good, though  the delays in Italy
and Greece (with 59% & 76% respectively) continue to give cause for concern.
      Substantial improvement has to be expected after the  establishment of the network on
environmental.  Enforcement authorities from the EEC member countries,  based on a  Ministerial
decision during the informal Ministers meeting in October 1991.
      The latest development towards the improvement of  environmental law enforcement in
Greece  is the decision of the  highest Administrative  Court of Justice to create a  special section
dealing  with environmental violations from the administration  or the general public. Last but not
least the Attorney of Athens announced a  campaign in which he, with experts from the  Ministry of
the  Environment,  will check enterprises  operating  in the Greater Athens area,  whether they
comply  to the of waste disposal and atmospheric pollution as  well as investigate the existence of
the mandatory environmental permits issued by the relevant Greek administration.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             77


THE ROLE OF INDUSTRY: EMPOWERMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

JONATHAN PLAUT

Director, Worldwide Environmental Programs, AUied-Signal Inc., P.O. Box 1013,
Morristown, NJ 07962, United States of America.


1     SUMMARY

The focus  of  this paper  is  industrial environmental management  and the  ownership  or
empowerment which leads to good environmental management.


2     BASIC COMPONENTS

      The basic components of managing for environmental assurance are all of the following:
      •   A policy that states the values  of the institution, clearly and forthrightly as well  as
         assuring that the  operations  of the  institution  will  be in  compliance  with  all
         environmental regulations,  and  that  all environmental  risks will  be managed
         appropriately;
      •   A  risk  management  philosophy that emphasizes  the importance  of  managing for
         environmental assurance;
         A plan that sets forth environmental objectives for the future and delineates the manner
         in which implementation will be achieved;
         An  organization design and  management process  that reinforces and facilitates the
         implementation of the plans for environmental risk management;
         Procedures and practices that guide the organization  on how to  operate so that the
         standards established in the objectives will be met;
      •   A  communication  and  reporting  system  that (1) provides timely  information  to
         management on the institution's  performance in  managing its environmental risks and
         complying  with environmental laws,  regulations,  and (2) effectively communicates the
         philosophy, needs and aims of management to all members of the organization;
      •   A control system  that monitors and audits performance of the organization against the
         standards and objectives established for environmental assurance;  and
      •   A system of  review that provides for a fresh look at all activities of the institution and
         encourages revision and up-dates to reflect changing conditions in their operations or
         in the environment, as well as changes in the institution's understanding of their risks.

      These components when carried into an environmental management process will lead to
an effective environmental  management system in which these basic elements are covered:
Policy, Program, Standards, Professional  Expertise, Disclosure, Training and  Inspections in  an
integrated program of environmental, health and safety.


3     STAKEHOLDERS

      Companies  serve many interest. It is useful to think of those  interests  as stakeholders-
literally those  who  hold a  stake in  the company's activities  and  future.  Environmental
Management works best when the stakeholders feel ownership and empowerment to protect Jong
range  interest and good environmental  management of the company, including the interests of
the communities in which the companies operate.

      Stockholders: The stockholders represented by the  Board of Directors are the owners of
      the company.  Through shares publicly or privately traded  they invest their funds in trade

-------
78                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      for dividends (income) and the hope for growth in the value of the shares  (investment).
      Thus, the shareholders have a stake in the profitability and long term good  health of the
      company, including its good name engendered by its environmental conduct. They are due
      regular reports and the fidelity of the management to pursue their interests, since they are
      in fact the holders of the private property right in the company.

      Employees: Employees require training  and  supervision.  Their performance should be
      measured to assure safe operations and quality product or service, and competitive profit
      on a continuing basis. It is the obligation of the company to provide the information as  to
      hazards and protective work processes and equipment to keep  the employees safe. But it
      is the obligation of the employees to watch out for their own safety  and the safety of their
      work mates. Employees have an interest in the stability and weil  being of the  company,
      including a  vested stake in  the future  of the organization. !n many ways the employees
      and the stockholders have similar interests as stakeholders. Indeed, in many companies
      the  employees  are  an important part of  the  stockholder  family,  and management
      encourages that stakeholding by employees to encourage a feeling of responsibility for the
      company.

      Management:  Of course, management  is  composed of employees at the top  of the
      organization. But management - the chief  executive and  officers of a company  - have
      great stake  in the affairs of the company. While they are paid the most, their pay and even
      their careers are usually most at risk if the business does not go well or the reputation  of
      the  concern falters.  Environmental liability  and  care for  safety  of the employees  or
      community is a great responsibility of top management. It has generally been found to be
      useful  to include oversight  at top  management and  the  Board level of environmental,
      health and safety activities to assure responsible action.

      The  Government:  In  the United  States, environmental, health and  safety regulations
      appear at every level.  Laws and regulations must be obeyed and leadership companies try
      to do that in a manner that will give it competitive advantage  (e.g. in product  design,  in
      packaging, in plant safety, in disposal,  in quality product, in  cost abatement).  Government
      regulates and  controls actions which  are  not in the public  interest and  endanger  it.
      Leadership  companies learn  not to be  in conflict with  the government, but in partnership
      with its aims, to its (the company's) advantage.

      The Community: Perhaps the  interest group whose stake in company affairs became most
      obvious in the  last few decades of the  twentieth century is the community. Simply put, the
      community neighbouring or harbouring  the factory or industrial plant has as obvious stake
      in the unit. This first became  obvious,  of course, because the work force {the employees
      and, to a lesser  extent, the management) in the plant comes from the community. Thus,
      economic reality  dictates an interest in  the plant's well being. But reality also increasingly
      dictates that the  community also be interested  in the surrounding environment. As  wastes
      are transported greater distances or products carry with  them health or environmental
      concerns, the  definition of community  has broadened  to include local, regional  and even
      international interests. Rene  duBois  said,  "think globally,  act locally," and  a  cogent
      argument can be made that the community of interest is best viewed from both a local and
      an international perspective.

      Non-Governmental Organizations: Many assessors of the  environmental degradation  in
      Eastern Europe feel that the greatest shortcoming in those Communist countries was not
      be form of government, but the absence of free press and effective forms of environmental
      conservation. NGO's advocate environmental positions. This idea of public  advocacy for
      the environment  reached its zenith,  perhaps in the 1980's,  when the  United Nations
      adopted an  advocacy stance  in  its world report,  Our Common Future, and the  United
      States when the  head of a leading environmental organization  (William Reilly) became the

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             79


      EPA  Administrator, Companies  recognize  the  strength of the  responsible NGO and
      encouraged dialogue as a part of empowerment. There are strong dissenters who say that
      the most vocal and radial environmental NGO's are irresponsible and playing at an elitist
      game  oi encouraging minimal  economic activity to the great  disadvantage  of the large
      majority of the world's people  who need  economic growth  and prosperity, but to  many
      others that is simply an extreme.

      The media:  Perhaps  the most influential  outside  force on the  industrial organization,
      whether  stakeholder  or  not,  is the  media  -  television  and newspapers  particulary.
      Environment issues are  played out in a fish bowl,  with daily events  often overtaking
      reasoned  and deliberate decision  making. While  industry and  academia  call for  the
      application of good science, including analytic assessment of exposure and harm,  the
      media's need for a daily story will overcome the ability for scientific certainty to evolve, or
      the patience  of  the  community or government to be  very  deliberate. Thus, industry
      management will often have to act under the glare of the public spotlight to show prudence
      and protect its good name and  shareholders,  before sufficient  evidence is in. Whether or
      not the media is a stakeholder  in the environmental concern itself,  it does represent the
      public interest and must be taken very seriously by the industrial organization.

      The Academic and Professional Community: Perhaps  one more stakeholder group should
      be mentioned. Universities  and colleges  do  environmental and  health  research,  teach
      environmental, health  and safety management, and join with professional societies  to set
      standards of professional conduct. They are the propagators and the beneficiaries  of the
      development of environmental  science and  technology,  and investigation into the vexing
      problems we place under the rubric of environmental concerns  is often their role. They are
      also propagators of environmental literacy,  as in the programs at Tufts University which my
      company supported as a sponsor.

      What makes this system of  multiple stakeholders work in my judgment - that was missing
in Central and Eastern Europe - is a sense of ownership or empowerment refative to the problem.
The rights and  obligations  of  property encourage in  investors that sense of ownership  and
obligation, as long as they are properly monitored and regulated by the other stakeholders.
4     PRINCIPLES

      Companies have their own internal principles  of conduct  for environmental, health  and
safety standards  of behaviour.  Here is one from my  company which  has been in evolution for
twenty years.
      The key elements in carrying out this code of conduct or policy in Allied Signal are:
         obeying the law and having our higher standards of conduct, worldwide (one policy);
      -   promoting disclosure  of problems so they can be fixed (open communication);
         adopting proactive programs,  like safety management, waste  reduction and formal
         review, that is environmental auditing (preventative action); and
         adopting a system to bind every employee  to the  policy and measure performance to
         assure the policy is being carried out (quality assurance).

      While there  still  is  much to  be accomplished,  such proactive environmental, health  and
safety programs  have  become the ethic of  management of many of the largest multinational
companies. The  chemical  industries  of  the  U.S., Canada,  Europe, Australia  and Japan have
joined together in association to sponsor and live by  a code of conduct they  call  "Responsible
Care". As a matter of continuity, it is interesting to note that  my company,  Allied-Signal  (with the
policy presented  above), is  a Responsible Care company. The overall Responsible Care Code
says:

-------
80                        INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
     Signal
             Health,  Safety and
         Environmental  Policy
  It is the worldwide oolicy of Allied-Signal Inc. to design, manufacture ana attribute ail is,
  products ana to handle and dispose of all materials without creating unacceotaole health.
  safety or environmental risks. The corporation will:

      Estaoii'sn and maintain programs to assure that laws and regulations aooiicabie to its
      products and operations are Known and coeyec;

   •   Adoot its own standards wnere laws or regulations may not exist or ce adecuateiy
      protective:

   •   Conserve resources ana energy, minimize the use of hazardous materials and
      reduce wastes: and

   •   Stoo the manufacture or distribution of any product or cease any  operation if the
      health, safety or environmental risks or costs are unacceptable.

 To carry out this policy, the corporation will:

   1.  Identify ana controi  any health, safety  or environmental hazards related to  its
      operations and products:

   2.  Safeguard employees,  customers and the  public from injuries or health hazards.
      protect  the corporation's assets and continuity of operations, ana protect  the
      environment  by conducting  programs for safety and loss prevention, product
      safety and integrity, occupational health,  and pollution prevention ana control, and
      by formally reviewing the effectiveness of such programs:

   3.  Conduct and support scientific research  on the health, safety and environmental
      effects of materials and products handled and sold by the corporation; and

   4.  Share promptly with employees,  the pubtic. suppliers, customers,  government
      agencies, thescientific community and others significant health, safety or environmen-
      tal hazards of its products and operations.
 Every empfoyee is expected to adhere to the spirit as well as trie letter of this policy.
 Managers have a special obligation to keep informed about health, safety and environmen-
 tal risks and standards, so that they can operate safe and environmentally sound facilities,
 produce quality products and advise higher management promptly of any adverse situation
 which comes to their attention.
                                           L
                                  OL/UU-*
                                     —d
Alan Belzer       """""             Larry Bossidy
Presiaent                         Chairman of the Board
   Chief Operating Officer             ana Chief Executive Officer

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                        81
                           Guiding Principles for


                    RESPONSIBLE

                               CARE

                    A Public Commitment

                    As a member of the Chemical Manufacturers
                     Association, this company is committed to
                      support a continuing effort to improve the
                      industry'3 responsible management  of
                       chemicals. We pledge to manage our
                      business according to these principles:

           • To recognize and respond to community concerns about chemical*
           aTirf OUT ^TPfiraTltTTM i

           • To develop and produce chemical* that can be manufactured.
           transported, uaed and disposed of safety.

           • To make health, safety and environmental consideration* a pri-
           ority in our planning for all existing and new products and
           • To report promptly to officials, employee*, customer* and the
           public, information on chemical-related health or environmental
           • To counsel customers on the safe use, transportation and disposal
           j~tf j^hssamiJ*^! raw4iw*^v_


           • To operate our plants and facilities in a manner that protects the
           environment and. the health and safety of our employee* and the

           public.

                           ttvironmental effects of our product*, p
            and disposal of h
            • To participate with government and <
            laws, regulations and standards to safeguard the community,
            workplace and environment.


            • To promote the principle* and practices of Responsible Care by
            sharing experiences and offering assistance to others who produce,
            handle, use, transport or dispose of chemirala.

-------
82                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       Responsible Care is not only a code of general conduct, but a specific series of specific
prescribed guidelines on subjects  like waste  reduction, emergency preparedness and response,
process safety and product safety  to which the companies pledge processes of improvement and
against which they measure performance.
       Further in example, the International  Chamber of Commerce  (ICC) has  promulgated  a
universally respected code on  environmental auditing. All of these point to need for developing
and embracing global standards of environmental conduct, which can be tailored and adapted to
local needs and conditions to meet the interests of all the stakeholders.
       Perhaps  one final example of such  a  code  -- the  ICC  Charter for  Sustainable
Development, subtitled  the Principles for Environmental Management - is  exemplary of industry
self  empowerment.  About 1,000  of the  most important  international companies  have  now
embraced it.  It  is the most alt encompassing industry action to meet stakeholders' needs and
environmental concerns in a free  market,  and reflects the optimism and empowerment for good
environmental management one cannot help but sense exists for continued progress.
5  ACQUISITIONS

       When investing in a  new  project,  a  company  responsible  for  its  workers and  the
environment will investigate a number of factors, including:
       •   type of operation(s)/employees/location
          history
       •   process and materials
       •   plant site details
       •   past and present chemicals
       •   storage
       •   wastes and where discharged/spills/air emissions
       •   PCBs
       •   permits
          on and off-site waste sites utilized
       •   soil, groundwater, surface water studies
       •   employee safety and health data
          medical support/workers compensation cases
          boiler/facility inspection reports
       *   identification of environment agency
       •   litigation before environmental agency
       •   visitation

       Detailed  questionnaires  utilized  by companies  in acquisitions demonstrate the care  and
diligence that potential ownership and responsibility for assets and problems will generate.
6     TECHNOLOGY COOPERATION

      It is fair to say that the co-issues of technology transfer as a means of meeting local needs
and  sustainable development and safety requirements instituted and maintained at the local
workplace are well understood. While they do not need to be, they are often competing priorities.
At least neither should be advocated and advanced without due regard to be other.
      Without  proper safety, health  and environmental programs and safeguards,  properly
maintained at  the local  level, technology transfers can  and probably wiil become  dangerous
where hazardous materials or conditions are present, as evidence at Bhopal. The responsibility
for such safety lies with  the transferor and the receiver of the technology, and the governments
of the  host country. Adequate  and continued  training,  maintenance  and inspection  may  be
required.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                         83
      Without movement of new technology to  lesser developed regions, however, the world
picture will remain that of the "haves" (the rich North) and the "havenots"(the poorer South).
      The multinational  national companies and their environmental management often bridge
this gap.  After  all. many MNC's have an ethic or practice  taking  their standards with them
wherever they go. it is a clear responsibility of the transferor  organization to assure that in the
transfer of technology appropriate safety precautions have been assessed and are in place, it is
an important responsibility that  in many cases  may require continued auditing and perhaps
retraining, as well as financial support.
7     MEASUREMENT

      Where a company or organization is empowered with the responsibility for its short and
long  term  wilt being,  it  will  measure tts  environmental status  and  progress to  continuously
improve, if  it is to remain commercially competitive and viable.
      There are many useful indicators of the level and, more importantly, trend of health, safety
and environmental performance. Measurement is indispensable to risk assessment  and hazard
control.  Furthermore,  measuring  performance  not  only tells the  organization the status  of
operations  and identifies deficiencies to correct, but gives the  positive signal to the employees
that  management cares  and they should care  about  such performance.  Ownership  or
empowerment requires protection of the asset.  Measurement and response to indicators is the
good environmental practice of the empowered. Here are a few of  the indicators for illustrative
purposes, and how they can be most effectively used.
      Total case incident rates (TC1R) using one of a number of standard formulas  (e.g. No.  of
cases X Total Hours WorXed/200,000) allows the organization to show  trends in overall accidents
and occupational illness  on the job and to compare similar operations and  operators against
peers or even best in class.  Charting lost work day case  incident rates (LWCIR) will similarly
allow analysis of performance  and trends.  The U.S. National Safety  Council estimated 20,000  of
cost tor the average lost workday case, so considerable cost avoidance is possible by lessening
the rate of those more serious cases.  Of course, analysis and investigation of each accident  or
occupational  illness will  identify  systemic  problems and  result in  better safety  and health
performance and a safer and more productive workplace.

Workers Compensation or Social Costs
                Workers'  Compensation
                         Cases and $Case
                 1CCOQ  -,
                         1M7  1tM
                                                1M1
          Healthy Workforce
          Rise in Case Costs
       Challenge
Continued Improvement of
 Case Management

-------
84
               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                  SLOUL

                            i LOW WEYWTIWI KIFOMANCC

                            MOUTH  or
                             Wttl
                              I  TO  I
              DIVISION A
                              3.M  i 3.35
              DIVISIONS K2.4flu.irl4.73
DIVISION C    3-M <<•
              DIVISION D
              DIVISION E
              DIVISION F
                TOTAL
                                   J.S4
                         2.3t
                         1.15
                                   3.01
                     3.M
                                   io*» IQUUT ue
                                 umxcrm son :U.M
                                   .••cianei utt*
                                                  •n
                                                  am
                                       1,34  i 1.31
                                            3.M
                                            1.60
                                   0.43  0.43
                                        0.49
                                            2.89
                                            1.9S
                Global Safety Performance
         "IS
                      1t*7   1tM
Worker Protection
Cost Avoidance
Quality/Productivity
                                                        o
                                    RMCK for "Bast in Class"

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                            85
      Annual workers compensation in the U.S. or social costs elsewhere are in the millions of
dollars for many concerns. They result from injury or occupational illness, or other causes such as
labor unrest or plant  closings, or even fraud. Reduction in accidents will improve safety and at
least partially decrease these costs.
Hazardous Waste Reduction
                                        Toxic Emissions
                           Pound*
                           (UMHOftt)
                                        19M   1919
                                                     1990   1991    1992
                                                                  (OMI)
                                  Driver*
                             Right to Know
                             Voluntary Reduction
                             Freedom from Regulation
      Challenge
World-wide Reduction
                              -05-
      One of the  most productive monitoring programs management can pursue in improving
environmental performance is reviewing facility and then in the aggregate reduction in hazardous
emissions and toxic  waste.  Not only  will the reduction of toxic materials probably  result in a
diminution of  control procedures required in costs, because the transportation of hazardous waste
is very expensive and there may be future potential liability problems connected with  its disposal
no matter what the  safeguards, since state of the art changes.

      By requiring the operations  to  establish targets of reduction (similar to targets  of safety
improvement) and identifying projects and action  steps to accomplish the targeted reductions, the
management  assures progress will be made (and communications its interest in such progress by
measuring and requiring  reporting  through such a measurement system).  The waste and  toxic
reduction prescriptions in  legislation, such as in SARA or the clean  Air Act, and as carried  out in
the EPA 33-50 program build on and stimulate these internal industrial programs.
Loss Prevention
                     10000
                                                                    PROPERTY LOSS
                                                               (OOOOMTTH))

-------
86
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       Losses at facilities from fire, explosion, machinery breakdown, storms, power failures, etc.
are extremely expensive for operations, because not only do they result in costly damage and in
lost  productivity,  but down time to the operations and  thus expensive  business interruption. In
some  cases the reputation of  the company as a  reliable supplier  or  as  the  operation of the
company as a reliable  supplier  or as  the operator of safe facilities may be at risk. Again, the
monitoring of performance by capturing all losses facility by facility and then  aggregating them will
provide the basis for improvement. That improvement should include standardizing around good
practice  and training for good operation,  as well as  working with outside insurance inspectors so
they  can  reinforce  the company procedures  and  programs.  An exception  analysis of  ail
deficiencies identified and not corrected as a result of internal or external inspections should be
monitored and diligently followed, to assure safe operations, lessening of losses and reduction of
future  liability.
 Life Cycle Analysis
                                   Product Life Cycle
                              (Competition
                        Regulatory Pressure
                        Customer Focus
               Strategic Evaluation by
               Business Units to Create
               a Competitive Edge
       Analyses of new and existing products or processes for identification of risk and potential
liabilities, and resultant modification  or institution of greater control is more difficult to measure. A
three tier system  of  review,from product design  inception to  pre-marketing  and bench scale
production to final production, with  each step being more detailed as full  production  and sales
eventuate will result in that greater control.  To be effective, analysis  should  include detailed,
check-off of environmental, health and safety factors including hazard identification and control, in
design, manufacture, transportation,  sale and disposal, across the life cycle as some would say.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                                           87
Environmental Auditing
                                      HS&E Audit Ratings
Grad*
"B"0»
                             too

                              •0

                              eo

                              40

                              20

                               0
                                          O
                                               G
-------
88                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      This last  chart depicts, a  causation to the lessons of this paper. While the tools  of
measurement  shown, an  others  that can  be devised,  will  provide  a lot  of  information  for
management and the employees to improve the quality of the health,  safety  and environmental
process,  without proactive programs beyond what  regulations require, the  organization will find
itself running hard just to keep up with regulatory requirements and liability  issues. To get ahead
of the  curve,  or to put it another way  to be a "B" to  "A"  performer with full environmental
assurance, the  organization must  design and  implement  its  own programs  of  proactive
environmental  management,  beyond  what the  law  requires. Environmental  auditing was such a
program  for the companies  that adopted it in the 1970's an 80's. Voluntary waste reduction
initiatives are such programs  in the 90's. Other such programs are described,  for example, in the
World Resources Institute publication about company practices entitled, "Beyond  Compliance",
and  the  ICC  book, "The  greening of Enterprise: From  ideas To Action,"  detailing company
programs under the ICC Charter. The point is that with such proactive  programming engendered
by ownership  and responsibility, the  organization's return  on good environmental, health and
safety management will be better managed and more productive processes,  people and products,
as well  as avoidance  of compliance issues  and  cost  avoidance. Ownership and  economic
competitiveness  provide  the incentive for good environmental  management  and sustainable
development. This is the increasingly understood message in the global marketplace.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             89


ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS IN THE HUNGARIAN PRIVATIZATION

ISTVAN MANDOK)

Officer-in-Charge, State Property Agency, P.O. Box 708, 1399 Budapest, Hungary


      The Hungarian  State  Property  Agency is responsible for  Privatization  in  Hungary.  In
addition  to  the  procedure of selling companies we have to decide  what  to  do about
environmental damages.
      Solving  environmental problems  is one of the main objects of the State Property  Agency.
this decision is  not absolutely voluntary as  it was partly forced upon us by foreign investors, but
now we can claim that the SPA is very eager to solve environmental problems in the process of
privatizing state-owned companies.

      There are disclosed and undisclosed problems, and the second is the more significant.

      In the case of known problems, there can be an environmental audit, the  question then is
only whether the  audit is  accurate or not.  This situation causes a smaller problem, as both the
seller  and the purchaser know what they want to sell or buy. they can agree on a purchase  price
that includes the  price of the  cleaning,  or they can agree on a warranty structure that achieves
the same goal.

      If the pollution  is on the surface, it  is fairly easy  to conduct a good audit of it.  It is the
same  if the company  causes noise  or water pollution. Everybody knows what the   pollution
activity is and what its effect is.

      Real problems start when  nobody  knows what is  the  nature or the dimension of the
environmental  problem.  In this case  the environmental problem can jeopardise even the  most
promising  transaction, as the investor is not willing to undertake burdens resulting from  the time
before its activity.

      It is not easy to make  a contract and to  agree  who will pay the cost when neither the
buyer nor the seller knows what the cost of the clean up will be. In most cases the SPA is ready
to do  its best to solve environmental problems partly or sometimes totally at the cost of the  seller
but the SPA can not  undertake unlimited liability. The SPA's primary duty is to sell  companies
and to generate income for the state and not to solve all the environmental problems.

      Aid is needed if we want to solve al! the environmental problems: The help of the domestic
government and the help of international organizations. Today the SPA can handle the problems
of environmental  pollution only if the  company still has a positive value after taking the  poliution
into account.

      Which are the areas where  domestic governments can help?
          to give preferences for investors  in areas of environmental disabilities.
          to give preferences for investors  undertaking fixing of damages.
          to give preferences for investors introducing technologies that do  not harm   the
          environment or manufacturing such goods.

      Which are the areas where  international assistance is needed?
          to give financial support to    discover the problems
                                     to conduct an audit
                                     to clean up
          to coordinate efforts across borders

-------
90                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      There is a  third  worry  for foreign investors in connection with their deals. This is the
question of future environmental legislation. As it is more strict throughout Europe they have fears
that the same will happen fn Hungary. Even a different way of applying the same law can be very
confusing.

       If  the environmental law  changes or if the standards of the environmental regulations
change it could affect the profitability of an investment very considerably. This is an area where
the SPA can not give any guarantee, we can only suggest making new laws as soon as possible
to reduce uncertainly in Hungarian privatization.

      The first  step was taken  by a new Act on  Privatisation which  states that  if a State
Company  wants to  be transformed  into a  commercial company  it must  to  include  in  its
transformation plan a program for solving its environmental problems.

      To summarize our experiences, I  can say that the  SPA tries to do its best  in solving the
environmental problems of its  companies.  Where help is needed  is in environmental auditing,
which is often not  sufficiently  accurate. The other area where help is  needed is the problem of
companies with negative value (whether or not the reason is environmental pollution) where is
SPA's only answer may be liquidation.

       I apologize  for not providing you with interesting case  studies,  but the details of our
transactions are confidential.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              91
NGO'S ROLE IN ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT IN OWNERSHIP TRANSFORMATIONS
IN POLAND 1990 - 1992, OPPORTUNITIES AND PROBLEMS

WOJCIECH STODULSKI

Institute for Sustainable Development, ul. Kryzwickiego 9, 02078 Warsaw, Poland


      SUMMARY

      This  paper presents conclusions  from the surveys  on the environmental  context  of
ownership transformations carried out in Institute for Sustainable Development in 1992.


1     INTRODUCTION

      The environment in  Poland  and in other East and Central  European countries is highly
polluted.  Economies  of that countries  are being transformed into market  oriented base. That
means deep changes in ownership  changes, creation of property rights for many people, freedom
for policy-making  and business  doing  individuals;  simultaneously  this  means  growing  up
responsibilities of new owners for the economic and environmental status of former state-owned
enterprises.
      Restructuring  and  privatisation are extremely strong  tools of market-oriented transfor-
mations - they give  into  hands of policy-makers and  representatives  of  administration great
opportunities to stop environmental degradation and  to perform the environmental recovery of
high contaminated sites and areas.
      In introducing the  economic reforms and  privatisation  processes have been engaged
institutions.organizations and  individuals followed  by their own interest. They  are also under
pressure  of current situations and economic and social conditions. Ecological aims are very often
postponed and treated as second-rate.


2     PRIVATIZATION IN POLAND

      The persons involved  in privatisation procedures perpetually solve the  same dilemma:
"Which way should be divided scanty funds among different aims?, What is more  important:
economic short-term effectiveness or ecological healthy sustainable long-term devefopment?".
      They represent different point of view on aims and methods of restructuring of economy;
there are  also distinctions in their  political standpoints and in professional  skills or experiences
themselves. It is quite difficult to focus  all these people on the single  target:  proecological
recovery  of  the economy performed through restructuring,  privatisation and liquidations
non-effective state enterprises. It is  needed for that:
          foreign financial and organizational support,
          highly qualified people,
          new technologies and management,
          clear internal industrial policy,
          transparent environmental policy principles,
      -   flexible and educated administration,
      -   fair business-doing investors,
          active  self-governments,  non-governmental ecological organizations, public opinion,
          mass media.

       Poland has two years  experience  in introducing and performing  of privatisation  and
liquidations into economy.  We assume that it is higher time to try to make first assessment of the
environ- mental results of  ownership transformation undertakings. Our goal  was also to estimate

-------
92                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


effectiveness of  current legal  and  economic system as  a tool lor  enforcing  environmental
restructuring of Polish economy.
       It was  interested for us  to fix  level of environmental consciousness of policy-makers,
representatives of administration, investors, representatives of self-governments,  NGO-s,  mass
media and the way and the extent articulation of its  in practical  undertakings in the  course  of
ownership transformation processes.
       We have tried in the paper to identify :
       -   placement  of  non-governmental ecological organizations  in  concentration  of public
          opinion on reaching ecological recovery aims in the privatisation processes,
       -   main targets to be achieved by the organizations,
       -   necessary conditions to be met so as the activities could finish with success.

       Our considerations have been performed on a base of experiences that we have gathered
in the course of surveying real situations and conditions of ownership transformation processes in
Poland in 1991  - 1992.
       Institute  for  Sustainable  Development  is the  one  and  only of  167 non-governmental
ecological organizations in Poland which has started regular monitoring of environmental context
of privatisation and liquidation of former state-owned enterprises.
       We  have not only allowed for catching  spectacular  ecological positive or  negative cases
but first of all for  disclosure  of weak  points of the organizational,  institutional  and  legal
environment for privatisation processes which  have  badly resulted in ecological recovery of the
economy.
       The financial and economic  concerns of privatized  or  liquidated  former state-owned
enterprises have been  included in  our  scope of interest.  Nobody  can  imagine  successful
ecological recovery of the  enterprises  without financial sources.  One  of the strategic  aims  of
privatisation is  appealing of external  financial sources to improve  effectiveness of production by
using advanced technologies and higher organizational methods.  But that means introducing  of
clean technologies and energy or natural sources saving methods.
       It is assumed that foreign investors would be able to come  up to expectations of  the Polish
government in  the field of  pure economic development as well to contribute to environmental
improvement within new and old sources of pollution.
       We want to focus on methodological and organizational context of our surveys rather than
on the results of the research. We try to describe the sources of information used and to
assess them from point of view of work of non-governmental ecological organisations.

       In the course  of our surveys on  the  environmental  impact of  privatisation we try by
occasion to answer some additional questions :
       -   what is the  role of  non-governmental  ecological organizations in  supporting  of
          ownership changes ?
       -   to what extent the non-governmental ecological organizations are  ready to be engaged
          into supervising of environmental impact of ownership changes ?
          are   there  in  reality conditions that the  opinion  of  non-governmental  ecological
          organizations may be  taken  into consideration by decision-makers and policy-makers
          in privatisation and liquidation processes ?
       -   what kind of conditions should  be  met so as  representatives  of non-governmental
          ecological organizations could take part in  policy-, decision- or opinion-making bodies ?
          is it possible that any  information on single privatisation or liquidation cases might be
          revealed to representatives of non-governmental ecological organization to prepare and
          present opinion on the environmental impact to administration?
          is there any cooperation between self-governments, NGO-s and a public to  prevent
          negative ecological results of ownership transformations  ?

       Those and many other question were  discussed in the course  of  our surveys. Not  all
questions have  been answered; some were only partly  cleared up.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                               93
3      ROLE OF NGO'S IN THE PRIVATIZATION PROCESS

       There are some restrictions for activities of non-governmental ecological organizations  in
the field of monitoring  of  restructuring,  privatisation  and liquidation  processes in  Poland. The
restriction have resulted from external:
          disturbances  in access  to information on environmental status of  single  privatized or
          liquidated former state-owned enterprises
       -   documentation on either economic or environmental issues is confidential  in the course
          of negotiations  and  afterwards,  -  lack  of up-to-dated  information about  current
          environmental status  of enterprises  either on  new sources  of emissions or on old
          contaminations, resulted from passed economic activities,
       -   difficulties  in  gathering information on  current ecological  status of  transformed
          enterprises resulted from very speed  and complicated splitting real assets  and changes
          in property rights take-overs; administration is  not able to catch up with transfers  of
          environmental liabilities from former state-owned enterprises to  new owners,
       -   inflexibility of administration in passing over information needed to make right decisions
          in adequate time to privatize or liquidate state-owned enterprise, - using  lower priority
          for ecological criteria in decision on privatisation or liquidation, and internal reasons :
       -   the surveys are very time-consuming and expensive,
          the surveys require highly experienced specialists with deep professional  knowledge  in
          economy, legal system, consciousness of environmental effects of business activities,
          legal and technology context of the environmental protection,
       -   the surveys require long and very  intensive engagement of people  involved (that is not
          always the case within non-profitable ecological organizations),
          the surveys require public relations  skills, particularly in contacts with representatives
          of administration and world of business,
          it is  difficult  to  set up  an interdisciplinary  team  of professionals to be able to get
          adequate information  on  ecological  concerns  in restructuring,  privatisation  or
          liquidations and to assess them objectively.

       The  external and internal restrictions  create  serious obstacles for non-governmental,
non-profit ecological  organizations  to  be  involved  in  opinion-making  processes in  advisory
capacity on administrative  decisions.  Some of the  restrictions  are objective ones -  lack  of
up-to-dated information  and obstacles to get those  information from  primary sources,  other
restrictions  are subjective ones  - unwillingness of administration  to admit the representatives  of
non-governmental ecological organizations to take part in decision-making processes.
       However,  there is a field of interest which is  available to activities of  non-governmental
ecological organizations : assessment of adequacy of current economic and environmental law
provisions to the needs of effective execution  of environmental commitments and environmental
liabilities in transition period to market economy.
       Now we try to present and  explain our point of view  on the topic, it has resulted from our
experiences gathered in the course of surveys on the environmental  context of privatisation and
liquidation processes in Poland in 1990-1992.
       POSSIBILITIES FOR NGO'S IN POLAND

       Scope of interest has been tailored to the current possibilities and requirements :

       Compliance with  fair ecological behaviour of  new  owners of former state-owned
       enterprises :
          rational using of natural resources,
          compliance with current emission standards,
          conducting of  identifications  of  sources  of  emissions  and  measurement of their
          intensity,

-------
94                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


       -   keeping in proper status the facilities of environmental infrastructure,
          using of clean technologies,
          maintaining of protection zone around enterprises,
       -   environmental recovery of degraded sites and industrial areas,
       -   improvement the environmental security of products.

 2.     Addressing of ecological criteria in privatisation and liquidation decision-making :
       -   preparatory phase of privatisation/liquidation procedure,
       -   negotiation phase - environmental part of contract/agreement provisions,
       -   transition phase after signature of contract/agreement,
       -   follow up phase when the new owner has started his business activity.

 3.     Environmental liabilities transfer  in the course of restructuring (splitting, acquisitions and
       mergers) and privatisation or liquidations of enterprises :
          collections of outstanding and ongoing environmental fees and fines,
       -   compliance with current environmental standards,
       -   environmental recovery and environmental clean-up of old contaminations.

 4.     Involvement of  central and  regional (voivodship) environmental  administration  in priva-
       tisation and liquidation decision making :
       -   cooperation  of  the  Ministry  of Ownership  Transformations with the  Ministry  of
          Environmental Protection,  Natural Resources and Forestry  and the State Inspectorate
          of Environmental Protection,
       -   cooperation  of regional level administration in preparing and conducting of privatisation
          and liquidation decisions.

 5.     Economic and financial development of privatized or liquidated enterprises in the course of
       transformation processes,

 6.     Legal base of conducted transformation procedures.

 7.     Procedures used in  reality in the course of restructuring and  ownership transformations  by
       founding  bodies and  the representatives of State Treasury  with special emphasis  on
       environmental concerns.

 8.     Compliance of the procedures used with environmental guidelines presented in :
       -   the National Environmental Policy by the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Natural
          Resources and Forestry,
       -   the State Industrial Policy by the Ministry of Industry and Trade.


 9.     Environmental context in the sector restructuring programmes prepared mutually  by the
       Ministry of Ownership Transformations and the Ministry of  Industry and Trade.

 10.    Environmental context of contracts  signed by the Ministry of Ownership Transformations
       and the foreign investors.

 11.    Role of non-governmental ecological organizations in opinion making  on privatisation and
       liquidation issues.

 12.    Opportunities  and threatens resulted  from   ownership  transformations  of former
       state-owned enterprises to the  environment in Poland.
       Directly after beginning of the surveys we  have understood that  primarily fixed  scope of
       work has to be shortened because of problems with getting up  proper information. The
       preliminary recommendations were as follow :

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                               95


      -   get knowledge  on legal framework of  privatisation  and liquidation of enterprises and
          corporate restructuring,
          survey legal base of procedures used by administration,
          research  the  organizational and  institutional  environment of  privatisation  and
          liquidation,
          realize that environmental context of privatization and liquidation  is hardly  recognized
          because  the environmental  criteria are  of second priority  for  majority  of people
          involved,
          understand that the access to environmental information in single cases is  limited and
          depends on current local situation there is a psychological barrier  by the administration
          not to reveal any information in the course of transformation procedure,
      -   there  are  objective causes for not to get the environmental information on voivodship
          level - lack of fund to collect information and to maintain computer information system,
          fix substitute sources of information on environmental status of enterprises transformed
          - direct contact  with enterprises,
          research  single  cases only  as  illustrations of  broader  problems of environmental
          context of transformations - not  as spectacular  environmentally positive or negative
          undertakings,
      -   use rather personally direct contacts with the representatives of administration or with
          managers in  enterprises; it gives you occasion to explain  aims of the  research and to
          limit doubts not to reveal information,
          prepare short  lecture  on transferring  environmental liabilities  and the environmental
          impact of  ownership transformation  to be ready to  explanation and discussion on the
          topic.

       Our  opinion  on  information  sources  accessible  to  non-govern-    mental  ecological
organisations is  as follow  :
1.     It is possible  to get reliable information on environmental status of transformed enterprises
       from local environmental administration  or in enterprises themselves. The closest possible
       cooperation is condition for that.
2.     The very valuable  source  of information on legal and procedural transformation framework
       are the Ministry of  Ownership Transformations and other central and regional (voivodships)
       founding  bodies. But it is only  general  information referred to common principles used in
       single paths of privatisation or liquidation.
3.     The  best source of information  available to a public  are newspapers  referred to legal,
       economic and common issues.
       In a  press were  discussed  general  conceptions  and conditions of ownership transfor-
       mationsjegal and  organizational procedural principles, spectacular  cases of  privatisation
       and liquidation, economic  and legal obstacles and results of transformations.

       In newspapers  were published privatisation  prospectus on economic, technical  and
organizational status of  enterprises referred  to capital  privatisation; there  have been     also
published announcements on bidding procedures for sales or  lending of real estates or land using
of former state-owned enterprises.
4.     Some difficulties arose with getting  contact with consulting  firms which generally were
       unwilling to reveal any information referred to started  or finished privatisation  procedures.
       Our intention was  to assess to  what extent the environmental criteria have been taken into
       consideration by advisory teams.
5.     Another  problem deserving our attention was to specify role of banks and other financial
       institutions in supporting  (if any) of proecological restructuring undertakings of privatized
       former state-owned enterprises.  The problem  is open to  further surveys because it has
       passed short time  since the majority of privatisation procedures have been finished.
6.     All legal acts and laws referred  to regulations of privatisation, liquidation or  restructuring
       procedures were  scrutinized by  us to  identify weak points in enforcement environmental
       compliance with procedures used in practice.

-------
96                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
7.     We tried to get into the work other non-governmental ecological organizations.  General!/
       our intention felt not because of lack of interest, but lack of time and financial support. The
       organizations were not helpful to us as a source of information.  Also the question:  "How
       should the  environmentally accepted pattern  of  privatised contract look  like?" was not
       answered by them.

       The sine qua non condition to be involved into opinion-making processes on environmental
issues of privatisation and liquidation of former state-owned enterprises is acquiring of reliable,
complete and up-to-dated information, generally speaking on :
       -   planned privatisation liquidation undertakings,
       -   environmental status of enterprises before, in the course and after finishing procedure.

       What a  role  can  play  non-governmental  ecological  organizations  in ownership
transformation processes in Central and Eastern Europe :
       -   they can assess projects of  regulations for privatisation/liquidation procedures from
          point of view of compliance with law on environmental protection,
       -   they can monitor  activities  of  privatized  companies in  the field  of  environmental
          protection,  for  example  they  can  track performing  of  environmental  restructuring
          programmes prepared  and accepted in the course of negotiations between the Ministry
          of Ownership Transformation or other founding bodies  and investors.
       -   they can advise how  to  avoid negative (if  any)  ecological impact of  privatisation or
          liquidation undertakings,
       -   they can co-operate with self-governments on local or regional level :
          a) in execution of environmental law,
          b) in balancing of social and environmental context of privatisation and liquidation,
          c) in tracking environmentalJy undesirable undertakings,
          d) in enforcement  of principle of sustainable devefopment in business activity of new
             private companies.
       -   they may serve as linking bodies  between administration, world  of business  and a
          public in animation of people and institution around  the environmental context of
          ownership transformations.

       We can  propose  some organisation measures to  make  possible involving of
non-governmental  ecological  organizations  in  opinionmaking  processes  of  privatisation or
liquidation :
       -   admit  the representatives of the NGO-s to  take part in meetings  and discussions of
          advisory bodies for ownership transformations,
       -   reveal environmental information to representatives of NGO-s  for example environ-
          mental clauses of contracts with investors or environmental part of sector restructuring
          programmes,
       -   provide projects of acts and  law  provisions to  make possible to assess them from
          environmental point of  view,
          make possible to present opinion to decision-making  bodies on  environmental impact
          of ownership transformation processes.
       -   set up on the central, regional or local level official bodies to make possible to change
          opinion between administration, world of business, self-governments,  mass-media, a
          public and  NGO-s  on social, economic  and environmental impacts  of  ownership
          changes,
          organize briefings for newspaper on environmental impact of ownership changes and
          on environmental profile of polish and foreign investors.

       The NGO-s should be more active in  the field of monitoring of  environmental  impact of
ownership transformation of former state-owned enterprises. They should focus their efforts
on tracking of activities of administration and  investors in the field of compliance with  principles
presented in the National Environmental Policy (prepared by  the Ministry of Environmental

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             97


Protection,  Natural Resources and Forestry in 1991) and the State Industrial Policy (prepared by
the Ministry of Industry and Trade in June 1992). We suggest besides that in the field of interest
of professionally experienced environmentalists should be :
         compliance with environmental law,
         environmental clean-up of old contaminations,
         fair environmental behaviour from part of investors, new owners of former state-owned
         enterprises.  Indispensable  for  that  is  close co-operation  with  administration,
         businessmen, self-governments, individuals: lawyers, economists, engineers and s.o.  It
         is also  necessary to co-operate with foreign NGO-s in other countries of the region and
         the NGO-s in high developed countries in Western Europe and the United States to get
         information on environmental profile of active investors in Central and Eastern Europe.
          In  situation of great  financial,  technological,  organizational  prevailing  of  western
          investing firms, the environmental impact of investment undertakings depends more on
         their fair  attitude  towards  the  environment,  than on  our  legal  environmental or
          administrative regulations and execution measures.


5      REQUIREMENTS FOR COOPERATION

       In the course of our research programme we have expressed some requirements towards
administration; that may  have been significant for NGO-s  in  other countries to make their work
more effective in transition period to market economy.
       Firstly, we  hope the  restructuring, privatisation  and liquidation processes could be
performed  in more decentralized manner.  But  decreasing  in central administration  involvement
simultaneously means increasing responsibility  of local authorities, self-governments and a  local
societies in managing of ownership transformation  in compliance with principles  of sustainable
development. Broader involvement of a public into  supervising and  monitoring of ownership
transformation processes may  create  sustainable assurance against violation of  environmental
law or fair  behaviour towards the environment. We do not  expect that it can be executed without
any obstacles  caused by  distrust from part  of administration.  The  NGO-s should prepare
themselves to be reliable partner irresponsible co-operation with  administration, self-governments
and businessmen.
       Secondly,  the administration should be more open to take  into consideration opinion of the
representatives of NGO-s on environmental impact of ownership transformations. Independent
individuals  scientists, professionals and experienced environmentalists can be in any cases more
objective and more sensitive for local or regional environmental problems than administration. The
mutual contacts should have to be more systematic. They have to  be  preceded by changing  of
adequate information to make possible working out independent opinion  on the topic.
       Thirdly, the administration should enforce the least possible requirements in the ownership
transformations procedures :
           any privatisation or liquidation process could not have finished until  the environmental
           liabilities had been satisfied,
           it  can  be impossible to  start any  privatisation or liquidation processes  of  former
           state-owned  enterprises that rated  to the  greatest  polluters without  performing  of
           ecological review,
       -   all legal successors of former state-owned enterprises under ownership transformation
           should be precisely fixed to make possible execution of environmental liabilities,
       -   introducing in the  environmental law and in other legal regulations any provisions to
           make  ownership transformation  processes harmless to the environment,  Fourthly,
           administration should reveal any information  on environmental status of  privatized  or
           liquidated former state-owned enterprises to a public  and to NGO-s to  make possible
           to work out an independent opinion.

       It seems to be to much,  but our requirements create safety system for the  environment in
the transition period to market economy. It is minimum to  make effective control by a public over

-------
98                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


transformation processes and to prevent possible negative (if any) impact on the environment in
the future.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             99


THE BASEL CONVENTION ON THE CONTROL OF  TRANSBOUNDARY MOVEMENTS OF
HAZARDOUS WASTES AND THEIR DISPOSAL

IWONA RUMMEL-BULSKA AND PIERRE PORT AS

UNEP/ISBC, Case Postale 59, 1292 Chambesy-Geneva, Switserland


      SUMMARY

      The  Basel  Convention  comprises realistic measures  to reduce  and strictly  control the
movement of hazardous wastes, reduce their generation, ensure that such wastes are disposed
of in an environmentally sound  manner, and protect the  global environment from the possible
harmful effects of movements and disposal of hazardous wastes.
      The  generation and movements  of hazardous wastes originate in activities in individual
countries.   National  capability  to  reduce the quantity and  manage  hazardous wastes in an
environmentally  sound manner should be developed as a priority.  The development of national
technical and legal  infrastructure,  including legislation  and regulation,  also needs  to be
undertaken. Training,  education and public awareness are important elements in the development
of countries' capability.  Where there is a lack of resources and expertise, technical assistance
should be provided through bilateral and  multilateral funding.
      The  arena  of  international  environmental law is dynamic, and the Basel Convention is
designed to keep pace with change and to allow for future amendments  and strengthening of its
provisions. The Basel Convention is still evolving.  The elements of a Protocol to the  Convention
on Liability  and Compensation  were identified by a UNEP working group during 1990-91, and
mechanism for the implementation  of the Convention will be considered by the Conference of the
Parties to the  Basel  Convention.   Draft technical  guidelines  for the environmentally  sound
management  of  hazardous wastes  will be submitted to the Conference for adoption.  Draft model
national legislation on hazardous waste  management and disposal has been developed and will
be also presented to the Contracting Parties meeting.


1      INTRODUCTION

       The generation, storage, treatment, transport, recovery and disposal of hazardous wastes
pose a real  problem  to society  and represent a serious danger for man  and the environment.
There is great concern for the future if this issue is not  properly  addressed; it will  necessitate
vigorous actions by governments, business  and  industry, by people  and  international
organizations for decades to come.
       No one knows the true sum of man's toxic throwaways.  In the last 30 years, billions of
tons of hazardous wastes have been dumped or land-filled in or on the land, some in the sea and
vast amounts still move across frontiers unregistered.
       Uncontrolled  or  inefficient  surveillance  of  transboundary  movements and disposal  of
hazardous wastes result too often in long term exposure of the population to their hazards. Illegal
traffic of these wastes can and often had  adverse effects, both acute and long term, on human
health and the environment with related detrimental consequences on the quality of life.
       The potential damaging effects of hazardous wastes has led the world community to take
measures  to  manage these wastes in  an environmentally sound manner and to aim towards
minimizing  their production  and  preventing  their  generation.   In  this context,  health  and
environmental factors have started to play a major part  in  the selection of appropriate hazardous
wastes management practices.
       In response to the growing recognition of the health and environ-mental  risks associated
with hazardous  wastes,  governments have  brought into  force a series of  laws to  control the
generation, handling,  storage, treatment, transport, disposal and recovery of these wastes.

-------
100                            INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENV!RONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


2     BASEL CONVENTION

      The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes
and their Disposal was adopted unanimously on 22 March 1989 by the 116 States participating in
the Conference of Plenipotentiaries, which was convened by the Executive Director of the United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and held in Basel at the invitation of the Government of
Switzerland. The  Finaf Act of the Basel Conference was signed by 105 States and the European
Economic Community (EEC).
      The  Basel Convention  is  the  result of six  sessions  of the  Ad Hoc Working Group
(Budapest, 27-29 October 1987, (organizational meeting)); Geneva 1-5 February 1988; Caracas,
6-10 June 1988; Geneva, 7-16 November 1988;  Luxembourg, 30 January - 3 January  1989; and
Basel, 13-17  March 1989),  in which experts from 96  States and  representatives of over 50
organizations  participated.   Informal negotiations  conducted  by the  Executive  Director  with
governments,  organizations and  industry  also played an important  part in  the success of the
preparatory process.  53 States and the European Economic Community have  signed the Basei
Convention and as of July 1992, 25 countries ratified or acceded to the Convention which entered
into force on  5  May 1992.  The following are  the  countries which ratified or acceded to the
Convention:
      Argentina        Australia         China           Czech & Slovak F.R.
      El Salvador      Estonia          Finland          France
      Hungary         India            Jordan          Latvia
      Liechtenstein     Maldives        Mexico          Nigeria
      Norway         Panama         Poland          Romania
      Saudi Arabia     Sweden         Switzerland      Syria
      Uruguay
      THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONVENTION

      a. The generation of hazardous wastes as well as their trans-boundary movements shall
         be reduced to  a minimum.  The wastes should be disposed of as close as possible to
         their source of  generation.

      b. Every State has the sovereign right to ban  the import of  hazardous wastes.  The
         parties to the Convention shall not allow any transboundary  movement of hazardous
         wastes to a State  that has prohibited their import.   Transboundary movements shall
         also be  prohibited if the exporting State  has reason to believe that the wastes in
         question  shall not be managed in an environmentally sound manner.

      c. A party shall not  permit hazardous wastes to  be  exported  to a non-party  or to be
         imported from  a non-Party, unless it is in accordance with a bilateral, multilateral or
         regional agreement, the provisions of which are no less environ-mentally sound than
         those  of the Base! Convention.

      d. The State of export shall not allow a transboundary move-ment of hazardous wastes to
         commence until it has  received the written consent,  based on  prior detailed information
         of the State of  import, as well as of any State of transit.

      e. When  a  transboundary movement  of  hazardous  wastes  which ts carried  out in
         accordance with the Convention  cannot  be completed in an environmentally sound
         manner, the State  of export has the duty to ensure the re-importation of the wastes.

      f.  Transboundary movements  of  hazardous  wastes which  do  not  conform  to  the
         provisions of the Convention are deemed to be illegal traffic.  The Convention states
         that "illegal traffic in hazardous wastes is criminal".  The State responsible for an illegal

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             101


         movement of hazardous wastes  has the  obligation to ensure their environmentally
         sound disposal, by re-importing the wastes or otherwise.  Every party shall introduce
         national legislation to prevent and punish illegal traffic in hazardous wastes.

      The wastes covered by the Convention are defined in its Annexes which include a list of
categories of wastes to be controlled (47 categories) and a  list of hazardous characteristics.
Hazardous  wastes  subject to transboundary  movement must be  packaged, labelled  and
transported in conformity with generally recognized international rules and standards.  Since  the
authorities of many  countries, especially  developing ones, frequently do not have the trained
specialists and  technical  know-how to assess  information concerning hazardous wastes  and
handle it efficiently,  the Convention calls for international co-operation involving, among other
things, the training of technicians, the exchange of information, and the transfer of technology.
      The  Convention provides for the  establishment of a Secretariat, the main functions of
which shall be to process and disseminate information provided to it by the parlies, to ensure  co-
operation between parties,  and to provide assistance to them in  implementing the Convention.


4     IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESOLUTION ADOPTED IN BASEL (1989)

      The Interim Secretariat for the  Basel Convention (ISBC) which was established by UNEP
in November 1989 in Geneva finalized in 1992 the implementation of the Resolutions included in
the Final Act of the Conference of Plenipotentiaries which adopted the Basel Convention.
      The Ad hoc Working Group which was established by the Executive Director of UNEP in
order to implement  Resolution 1 to consider the necessity of  establishing mechanisms for  the
implementation of the Basel Convention, recommended the establishment and terms of reference
of an open-ended Ad hoc Committee to meet between the meetings of the Contracting Parties.
      In pursuance of Resolutions  2,  5 and  7, UNEP  has taken  requisite action  for  the
harmonization of procedures provided  for in the Basel Convention and other relevant international
instruments.  As  a result of the cooperation with  other organizations, the General Conference of
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) adopted by its resolutions GC (XXXIV) Res. 530
(1990) a code of practice  on the International Transboundary  Movement of Radioactive Waste.
Also,  several resolutions  were  adopted  within  the  framework of the International  Maritime
Organization regarding  the control and prevention of  dumping of hazardous and other wastes at
sea as well as in respect to the rules and regulations related to the transport of hazardous wastes
by sea.
      As lor the implementation of  Resolution  3 on Liability  and Compensation,  the  Ad  hoc
Working Group of Legal and Technical Experts which had two meetings was able to finalize its
work in  March 1992 by developing elements which might be included in a  Protocol  on Liability
and  Compensation  for damage resulting from  the  transboundary movement  and  disposai of
hazardous wastes and other wastes.
      In accordance  with  Resolution 8  of the Basel  Convention,  the   Executive Director
established  a  Technical  Working  Group  to  prepare  draft  technical  guidelines  for  the
environmentally  sound  management of wastes subject to the Basel Convention. The Technical
Working Group met  twice in Geneva (in February and May  1992). A third meeting is scheduled
to take place in Geneva in September 1992.  The work undertaken, and recommendations made
by the Group will be  submitted for considerations by the parties  at their first meeting and eventual
adoption.
      The main purpose of the technical guidelines is to:
      a. provide information on  the controls  expected to be exercised  at national level by
         governments  of countries which  are  parties  to  the Basel Convention over  the
         management of wastes, and in particular hazardous wastes,  produced within  national
         territories;
      b. provide guidance to  Competent Authorities designated by the parties to  the Basel
         Convention  in  making  a decision  whether to  consent or reject a  proposed

-------
102                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVJRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


         transboundary movement of wastes subject to the Basel Convention into or out of their
         country,


5     ENFORCEMENT IN THE CONVENTION

      The  Convention obligates parties to manage hazardous  wastes in  an environmentally
sound way.  This means that the States party to the Convention shall aim towards  activities for
the reduction and minimization of all risks of harm caused by hazardous wastes to health and the
environment.  Such activities should include, inter alia:
      •  steps to reduce or avoid the generation of hazardous wastes;
      •  steps to ensure proper recovery of such wastes;
      •  steps to  reduce to a minimum  or eliminate  the export/import of hazardous wastes.
         This entails the planning of environmentally sound  disposal facilities, located as dose
         as practicable to the source of generation, and the identification of the generators;
      •  identification of the type of wastes subject to the Basel Convention and the total  annual
         volumes  by type  acceptable for import, if any, and the  corresponding environmentally
         sound disposal facilities to be used;
         identification of all conditions required for granting  of consent to exporters/importers
         desiring to move hazardous wastes through the territory of a transit country;
      •  identification of the adequate and most  effective  process by which to optimize the
         environmentally sound disposal of wastes;
         elaboration  of contingency  plans  including risks analysis and emergency responses in
         case of accidents;
      •  steps  required  to  rehabilitate  polluted  landfilled  areas or  to  redress ecological
         deterioration due to improper disposal of wastes;
      •  steps  needed to comply  with recognized international  transport  rules,  regulations,
         standards or code of practice;
      •  steps to monitor pre-and-post disposal operations and effects;
      •  steps  to  develop liability and compensation  measures for  damages  resulting from
         transboundary movements and/or disposal of hazardous wastes;
      •  timetable  for implementation of the various and interrelated elements of a strategy for
         waste  management.


6     ENFORCEMENT MEASURES

      The  importance of enforcement measures is particularly evident in the case of the Basel
Convention.
      A number of  articles in the  Convention  obligate  Parties to  take  appropriate legal,
administrative and other measures to  implement and enforce its provisions, including measures to
prevent  and punish conduct in contravention of the Convention as well as monitoring of measures
taken.  Examples are given below:
      Article  4  (General Obligations), paragraph 13 requests Parties to review  periodically the
      possibilities for the  reduction of the amount  and/or the pollution  potential of hazardous
      wap'es which are subject to transboundary movements.

      Article  10 (International co-operation) obligates  Parties to  co-operate In monitoring the
      effects of the management of hazardous wastes on human health and the environment.

      Article  13  (Transmission of information) states that Parties shall inform each other, through
      the Secretariat, of:
      a. changes regarding the designation of competent authorities and/or focal points;
      b. changes in their national definition of hazardous wastes;

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             103


      c.  decisions made by them  not to consent totally or partially to the  import of hazardous
          wastes or other wastes for disposal within the area under their national jurisdiction;
      d.  decisions taken  by them to limit or ban  the  export of hazardous wastes or other
          wastes.
      The Parties shall also submit an annual report, through the  Secretariat, to the Conference
      of the  Parties.  The report shall contain information on:
      •   The  amount of hazardous wastes  and other wastes  exported,  their category,
          characteristics, destination, any transit country  and  disposal method as stated on the
          response to notification.
      •   The  amount of hazardous wastes  and other wastes  imported,  their category,
          characteristics, origin, and disposal methods.
          Disposals which did not proceed as intended.
          Efforts to achieve  a reduction of the amount  of hazardous wastes or other  wastes
          subject to transboundary movements.
      •   Measures adopted by them in implementation of this Convention.
      •   Available qualified  statistics which have been compiled by them  on  the  effects  on
          human health and  the environment of the generation,  transportation and disposal of
          hazardous wastes or other wastes.
          Bilateral, multilateral and regional agreements and arrangements entered into pursuant
          to  Article 11 to this Convention.
      •   Accidents occurring during the transboundary  movement and  disposal of  hazardous
          wastes and other wastes and on the measures undertaken to deal with them.
          Disposal options operated within the area of their national jurisdiction.
          Measures undertaken for the  development of technologies for the reduction and/or
          elimination  of production of hazardous wastes and other  wastes.

      Article 15 (Conference of  the Parties) states that the  Conference of the Parties shall keep
      under continuous  review  and evaluation the effective implementation of the Convention.
      Also, this article obligates  the Conference of Parties to undertake three years after its entry
      into force, and at least every six years thereafter, an evaluation of  its effectiveness and, if
      deemed necessary, to  consider the adoption of a complete  or partial ban of transboundary
      movements of hazardous wastes  in light of the latest scientific, environmental, technical
      and economic information.

      At the  international  level  the Convention contains  various  provisions related to
enforcement.   A  number  of  these outline  the  procedures  in   some detail, spelling out  the
responsibilities of the Party States towards each other (i.e. duty to re-import).  The Convention
Secretariat has the function  of  co-ordinating  these  efforts and  checking performance through
annual reporting by parties and other information provided to it.
      At the  national  level  some provisions of the  Convention  provide  a  framework  for
enforcement  and delegate the elaboration of concrete measures to Party States.  Measures also
have to be adopted which are not explicitly spelled out in the Convention,  in both cases relevant
measures have to be adopted by  national  legislation, and government  authorities have to be
established to  assume  the responsibility  of carrying out enforcement measures.  The role of
industry in this context also needs to be examined.
      The Basel Convention has entered into force in a limping way as the majority of the main
generators have  not  yet ratified or acceded to the Convention.   Although, these countries  are
adamant  to  become party to the  Convention  as  soon  as practicable,  enforcement of  the
provisions of the treaty remains a difficult task without their presence and full participation.
However, practical achievements in  this field  can be accounted for.
      In  order to  provide assistance to the  States to comply  with obligations of the Basel
Convention,  which requests the parties to take appropriate  legal, administrative  and  other
measures to  implement and enforce the provisions of the Convention, the Interim  Secretariat for
the Basel Convention has prepared a Model Law on the Control of Transboundary Movements of
Hazardous Wastes and other Wastes and their Disposal.

-------
104                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      Such model  law focuses  on both  control  of transboundary  movements and the
management  of  hazardous wastes.   This model law  which is  being used  by a  number of
countries, provides for elements to be included in national legislations in order to implement and
enforce the Convention provisions, including measures to punish offenders.
      The  work undertaken by the  Basel Convention Secretariat, and funded  in great  part by
UNEP, in addition to voluntary contributions received from States,  has greatly helped providing a
frame for enforcement  of  the Convention  in  particular  through  the implementation  of the
Resolutions of the Final Act.
      As mentioned earlier, the implementation of the  Resolutions provides a  foundation  upon
which parties can effectively comply with the provisions of the Convention.
      In this  regard, the  following Resolutions  are of  importance  for the  development of
enforcement mechanisms:

Resolution 1 - Mechanism for the implementation of the Convention

      The Ad hoc Working Group of legal and technical experts set up  by the Executive  Director
of UNEP recommended the establishment of  an open-ended Ad  hoc Committee to meet as
necessary in order to present to the Conference of Parties proposals and recommendations.  The
proposed functions of the Ad hoc Committee are to:
      a. Collect,  through the Secretariat, information  from  parties and other sources on the
         operation of trie Convention to provide the basis for the evaluation of its effectiveness.
      b. Identify factors which might inhibit countries  from becoming parties to the Convention.
      c. Examine the practical implementation of the Convention.
      d. Identify  the  specific  needs of different regions  and sub-regions   for training and
         technology transfers regarding the sound  management of hazardous waste  and the
         minimization and the elimination where possible of their generation including  clean
         production techniques.  Taking  into account existing structures, particularly UNEP, to
         consider the establishment,  as a model in  a region where the need  is greatest, of a
         centre for the training and transfer of technology; such a centre of excellence should
         take into account the work on cleaner production and also draw on the work of existing
         institutions, particularly the Basel Convention Secretariat.
      e. Review the technical guidelines for the environmentally sound management of wastes
         subject to this Convention,  prepared by the technical working  group established by
         Resolution 8 of the Basel Final Act, which  might be required to continue its task after
         the first meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties.
      f.  Harmonize non-technical  and administrative aspects such as  notification, movement
         documents and corresponding procedures for transboundary movement, as a matter of
         priority.
      g. Co-ordinate assistance to parties which may be in breach to enable them to comply
         with their obligations under the Convention.
      h.  Examine reports received from  global, regional, sub-regional and  other sources  to
         monitor and assess a!l forms of illegal traffic of hazardous wastes, as well as the report
         of the Secretariat  of the Basel Convention on  the  implementation  of  Article  16,
         paragraph 1(i) to assist parties upon  request on their identification of cases of  illegal
         traffic.
      This Ad hoc Committee shall  have the  power to establish any other sub-groups to  facilitate
the performance of its functions.

Resolution 3 - Liability and Compensation

      The set of elements developed by the Ad .hoc Working Group will be recommended by the
Executive Director of  UNEP  to  the  first meeting   of  the  Contracting Parties to the  Basel
Convention lor consideration with  a  view to  adopting, in accordance with Article  12 of  the
Convention, a protocol setting  out  appropriate  rules  and procedures on the field of  liability and
compensation for damage resulting from transboundary movement of hazardous wastes.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             105


      These elements provide  for a  comprehensive regime to ensure adequate  and prompt
compensation  from damage  from  the transboun-dary  movement and  disposal oi hazardous
wastes and other wastes,  promote  the protection of human health and the environment, and  to
enable the restoration of the environment.
      At the request of the Ad hoc  Working Group the ISBC  elaborated draft articles  oi a
Protocol on  the  financing, operation and management  of an International Fund for immediate
response and for compensation which will be considered by the first meeting of the Conference of
Parties.

Resolution 8 - Technical Guidelines

      The Secretariat  for the Basel Convention prepared a draft Framework  document at the
request of ihe  Technical  Working  Group  set up by the Executive  Director.  The Framework
document provides principles and elements for  consideration by the parties  to comply with the
obligations of the Convention to  manage wastes subject to this Convention in an environmentally
sound way.
       Although  the Basel  Convention  provides for very stringent control mechanisms, dubious or
illegal  traffic in  hazardous wastes continue.  Developing  countries,  Eastem/Centrai European
countries and the Russian  Federation are particularly vulnerable to such abuses.  There are many
recorded  cases  of hazardous  wastes  destined  for recovery  which  end up being  dumped.
Shortcomings in controls on the transport  of wastes or discrepancies in the definition of wastes
lead to many suspicious  movements.  Customs documents do  not  always correspond to the
"product" transported.  Illegal storage  of hazardous wastes is often reported as  interim storage
which  becomes  later  on a disposal operation.   In addition,  criminal acts  still  occur when
hazardous wastes are illegally shipped into another country without the consent of that country.
 7     CONCLUDING REMARKS

       With the  Basel Convention, the world community has the opportunity, for the first time, to
 implement a truly global legal instrument dealing with trie control of transboundary movements of
 hazardous wastes and their disposal.
       The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates  that in
 1984, on  average,  a consignment of hazardous  wastes crossed an OECD  frontier every 5
 minutes all year round.  Over two million tonnes of those wastes are estimated to cross national
 frontiers of OECD European countries annually on the way to legal disposal sites.  This figure
 represents 8 to  10% of all such wastes generated in these countries.
       Other movements,  which  are illegal, are motivated by the  possibility of important gains in
 transferring the  problem to where controls or standards are less strict or because the vastness of
 the territory and the scant resources at the disposal of the importing country makes any attempt
 at serious surveillance impossible.
       Such criminal acts prompted strong reactions by governments,  international organizations
 and non-governmented groups.
       In addition, faced  with the increasingly higher costs  of  safely treating  or disposing of
 hazardous wastes in countries where they are produced, many companies prefer to get rid of the
 problem at a lower cost by transporting them to another State.
       Taking into account the fact that the quantity of wastes of al! kinds is increasing, that the
 rapid pace of industrialization will necessitate careful attention to hazardous wastes  prevention
 and management for decades to come, and that with the development of new chemical products,
 new sources of hazardous wastes are created, much remains  to be done to properly address this
 complex challenge.
        In exceptional cases and until  the  appropriate technology  and  adequate infrastructure are
 available,  or if adequate storage or treatment is not possible in the generating country, it may be
 safer tor human health and the  environment to export hazardous wastes to a country  capable of
 eliminating them in an environmentally sound manner.

-------
106                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      Increased international co-operation is necessary to assist developing countries to manage
and treat the wastes they generate in an environmentally sound way.
      The Basel Convention will contribute substantially to  improving the situation world-wide by
reducing transboundary  movements and by  promoting  environmentally sound  management  of
hazardous wastes.  The parties to the Convention will  co-operate actively with  each other  to
implement the  Convention and,  in particular, will assist developing countries in the development
of sound management practices  and adoption  of cleaner production methods.
      It is therefore  of great  importance that the  provisions  of  the Basel  Convention be
implemented as soon as possible, effectively and efficiently,  and in a spirit of solidarity, to be able
to truly  contribute  to  solving  problems world-wide and to render accessible,  practicable and
environmentally acceptable options to deal with hazardous wastes.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                           107


TRANSITION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT POLICIES IN CENTRAL
AND EASTERN EUROPE

STEPHEN R. WASSERSUG

Program Manager, Regional Environmental Center, Miklos ter 1, 1035 Budapest, Hungary


      SUMMARY1

      Significant economic and environmental transition is  taking  place in the former Socialist
Countries  of Central  and Eastern  Europe.  Environmental  consequences are  evident,  but
remedies are complex. This paper focuses on the problems of improper waste management and
provides information on developing and implementing a successful waste management strategy
for those countries in transition. While the problems  are somewhat unique to the region because
of recent past history, many policy and technical remedies experienced by Western countries may
be appropriate  and are discussed.  In particular, significant  attention is given to developing
strategies  which  emphasize  implementation.  Implementation measures include compliance,
enforcement, legislation, broad public participation and  education measures.  Pressure exists to
act quickly on various waste problems. Although available information is limited, inaction is not an
option. Waste management decisions have a significant impact upon the vilal economic transition
of that  Region, and  must be  considered jointly,  Expectations should be  reasonable,  yet
comprehensive. Programs  lor each  Nation must consider current and  future needs.  Various
options are presented.


1     INTRODUCTION TO THE REGION

      This meeting provides an excellent opportunity to share experiences since new  WASTE
MANAGEMENT policies are quickly evolving in  Eastern Europe.  Enforcement requirements will
play  a vital role in successful environmental  transition. Implementing waste management policies
and  programs is  impossible  without considering compliance and enforcement provisions. On
paper, Governments can adopt many environmental waste management initiatives.  But to  be
successful,  waste management  programs  MUST  be  embraced with  practical and
comprehensive  approaches, and must  receive  Government and community wide
endorsement, and  financial  support.  Regional  countries  have  already  experienced
disappointment  in  meeting sound waste management objectives; not necessarily because of a
lack  of laws, but partly because the proper elements to implement and  enforce the laws were
lacking. Further, in the Regional countries,  industrialization focused  almost entirely on  output -
number of products, often without regard to  quality or environment. Waste generation per unit of
GDP resulted in high waste volume. For example, the  U.S. volume based on GDP2 was about
20%  of Hungary's; Germany's (former West)  about 10% of Hungary's; and  Austria's less than
10%  of Hungary's waste/GDP. Industry  was inefficient,  and most remain inefficient. Significant
restructuring is necessary to solve the problem and must be an available option in development
of an enforcement policy for waste management. However, the countries in the region are also
quite different. For example, in trie former Yugoslavia, waste problems are unique and priorities
are naturally different because ot trie war and other changes. Some areas face the need to deal
with   wastes from  war reconstruction.  Other emerging  countries ol Yugoslavia  (e.g.  Croatia,
Slovenia], are laced with building an entire environmental infrastructure, and contending with new
             1  The views expressed are  solely those of the author, and do not necessarily
          express the views of the Regional Environmental Center.

             2 World Resources Institute, P. 325

-------
108                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


borders that suddenly restrict wastes and allow for almost no disposal options. This presentation
provides options and experiences for implementing effective waste management programs, while
recognizing that the former Socialist countries face a variety of problems, and require a variety of
options.


2     POLICY CONSIDERATIONS DURING TRANSITION

      Waste  management  is  increasingly at  the  heart of environmental-economic  policy
discussions. Three important goals are integral fn policy discussions.

      1. a successful transition to a market economy;
      2, cost-effective environmental Improvement; and
      3. prevention of new and costly environmental problems

      To  meet the three  goals, here are five waste management objectives that should be met
by the Regional countries.

      1.   the  need to deal with problems from improper historic waste  practices, and the
          related past liabilities that remain - who will absorb these costs?
      2.   !he  need Jo plan for environmentally sound and  cost-effective options for currently
          produced wastes;
      3.   the  need to develop legislative certainty to successfully manage new wastes  and to
          define future costs;
      4.   the  need to encourage state-of-the-art waste management facilities;
      5.   the  need to encourage waste prevention or recycling  alternatives in conjunction with
          promoting the necessary Legislative and Economic tools, and discouraging alternatives
          which undermine those practices.

      At this  time, waste management  issues are controversial and sometimes confrontational.
Should this facility  or technology be approved, and on this site? Do we need  it? Why? What
effective  alternatives  do  we  have? What  alternatives meet short term  objectives, yet are
compatible with long term needs? Can we assure the safety and health of people affected by our
decisions? Is the information adequate to decide these questions? If not, do we wait to make the
decision? If I enforce against this violator, what impact or consequences will occur? What is really
known about a particular waste, and its effects? Extreme pressure either now, or soon will exist,
to  make important waste management decisions, to answer these  and other questions. Often,
those decisions  will  have economic and  compliance consequences. Unfortunately,  required
information is  limited,  data  is  often unreliable, and  the pressures for achieving  economic
development and environmental results overwhelming.


3     EARLY WESTERN EXPERIENCES

      Waste problems  of the Region are not so different from those of Western countries. Only
in  the past 15 years have Western governments begun to systematically address the waste
problems.  Early  environmental  remedies included end-of-trie-pipe  technology. Such remedies
often discouraged facilities from developing non-waste producing technologies. Examples include:
waste streams were often collected and concentrated, only lo return to the environment at other
locations, and transferred to other medium (e.g. air to water to soil);  recycling was sometimes a
sham, designed  to find inexpensive  remedies for  the facility;  poor recycling and treatment
practices,  improper handling and storage of  wastes, and faulty landfills and incinerators resulted
in  significant risks. The impact  of poor waste management practices became widespread and
many people lost faith in  the regulatory process designed to protect them. The industrial sector
was blamed both for causing the problem, and for failing  to develop prompt reliable solutions. It

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            109


would be too simple to say the problem was merely lax enforcement. It was also the case where
adequate policy considerations,  adequate  information, and technological understanding were
lacking. With limited  resources in regulatory agencies to  adequately investigate  problems, and
with a  lack  of adequate information, cost ineffective options were chosen.  The full cost of these
mistakes has been  extremely high in terms of health, environment, and  financial remediation.
Past experiences provide a valuable  learning opportunity,  and effort must be made  to
share this information quickly.


4      INFORMATION IS CRITICAL

       Today, we have information which enables better decision-making by managers.  Science
and technology allow us to discover pollutants at very low leveis in soil  and  groundwater; often,
below  our ability to explain the effects. Research has given us a better understanding of  health
and  environmental  impact.  Today,  there are far more  technological  options to  solve
problems.  However, new technology  may embrace  significant problems  as well.  It  Is
necessary  that we carefully evaluate the apparent environmental solutions to determine if
there are hidden future waste problems.

       Compliance  and  enforcement require a  comprehensive information  process;  from
generation  of waste to ultimate disposal;  from  cradle to grave. While information  in the Regional
countries may  be lacking, decisions must be made. Information on waste quantities, qualities,
sources, etc.  must  be gathered  to   develop  an effective  waste  management strategy.
Recognition of data problems exists, but severe  understating of Ministries  in the Regional
countries does not provide the timely opportunity to gather, and assimilate the information needed
to develop a strategy. Adequate trained  staff are vital for effective implementation.


5      WHY ENFORCEMENT?

5.1    Introduction of Guiding Principles

       -  Solutions to waste  problems are  often costly, and therefore  do  not lead  to voluntary
       compliance.  This  means  that good  strategic  planning  and implementation  principles
       become even more important. The Integrity of Government Is enhanced where there is
       successful implementation. Unsuccessful  implementation leads to loss  of credibility for
       everyone,  especially, government  and industry. To be successful, compliance programs
       must be based on sound principles and benefits. Compliance  in  waste management
       can often have hidden benefits which result in unforeseen economic savings to the facility.
       When the  enforcement  pressure becomes significant, the facility  seeks  alternatives.
       Process changes are sometimes chosen as a compliance method, resulting  in waste
       stream   elimination and  beneficial  product  loss  reduction. This  choice can  enhance
       company competitiveness and profits.

       All Regional countries are developing some forms of waste management legislation. Some
 are further along than others. Many countries an receiving direct legal assistance in development
 of this legislation. In one country, a new waste  law has emerged, but it  may be difficult to
 implement  for the following reasons:  massive recycling requirements without an existing  private
 sector to process materials and develop  markets may impede progress;  industry in the country is
 still  very much  government owned,  thereby insulated  from  market  pressures  and  possibly
 compliance and enforcement; experience with environmental implementation is  limited, and  the
 Government  commitment  is  questionable  given economic  pressures. These factors may
 undermine emerging citizen trust in new Governments if implementation is not effective. But it is
 an example of  one country which  has  forged  ahead  and established an important waste
 management  effort.  It is clear  that what  is critical to this  effort,  is an  education  program for

-------
110                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


citizens and facilities, and  resources  and programs  to  encourage development of safe waste
disposal facilities. Indeed, predictability and enforceability of waste management laws may be as
important as the content. Again, it is necessary that the information learned from these  efforts be
shared quickly. Success can breed success in the Regional countries,  and it  is in everyone's
interest to identify problems and solutions early.

       Current economic conditions will make enforcement of waste laws  difficult. However, there
are thirteen  enforcement related areas which are identified for consideration. Addressing these
areas and recognizing their potential impact early on in the  process, should make implementation
of waste management strategies more effective.

5.2    Penalties

       The current  limited  penalty  and fine  structure available to enforcers  in the Regional
countries needs to  be changed.  However, even then,  fines and shutdowns may conflict with
sensitive national priorities such as market reform. Therefore, regulations for waste  management
must be fair and practical. Penalties must have impact containing clear financial disincentives for
non-compliance, and punitive measures for wilful violations.  There is no greater disincentive than
jail terms for wilful violators; especially when top  management is responsible and is punished. At
the same time, economic incentives to  comply, and strict but flexible standards are necessary.

5.3    Enforcement Fairness

       Any  enforcement program must  treat  both domestic  and  foreign  investors  equally.
Effective options are  important, and fair competition  will  encourage new investors.  Necessary
adjustments can be defined as discussed under 5.3 Compliance Schedules.

5.4    Compliance Schedules

       One  helpful  tool  used by the West, especially for  economically  strapped facilities,  is to
establish compliance schedules. These schedules consider:
       a.  that practical  barriers be taken into consideration to achieve environmental objectives,
          and an agreed upon plan of action, with interim milestones, be developed.
       b.  that when developing a schedule, considerations include: facilities unique problems
          and priorities  be  evaluated; risks of further non-compliance be weighed; low cost or low
          technology  methods  be  applied  in the interim  to  the highest risk  areas; a
          comprehensive  plan  and  reporting  schedule with both self-audits  and inspections be
          developed; and schedules consider controls which eliminate or reduce waste streams.
          Longer term  environmental  and cost-effective options are important  if waste  streams
          can be eliminated or reduced.
       c.  that communities affected be involved early and often in this decision, with information
          provided freely.
       d.  that measurement of success  - what  constitutes  compliance from non-compliance-be
          carefully  identified in the schedule. This should include specific standards of reduction,
          minimization of waste, effluent standards, schedules for equipment installation, etc with
          penalties for unexcused failure.
       e.  that for  the  regulator, it  is  resource  intensive to periodically  review  progress.
          Nevertheless, compliance, or at least major environmental improvements are often the
          result if  reviews are adequate. When  the information is  routinely provided to the
          community, an important trust begins to build between diverse interest groups.  After all,
          everyone has something at stake.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             111


5.5   Harmonization of Laws and Enforcement

      In this developing period, those countries in the Region  behind in implementation  will be
vulnerable to improper waste disposal practices. Many facilities needing to dispose of wastes will
seek out opportunists wishing to make fast money.  This  serious situation  can have increasing
long term devastating effects for countries that lag behind as regulations in Western countries,
and in the Region tighten-up. Actually, unimplementabte or non-comprehensive laws and policies
in  the Countries of the Region  provides an opportunity for harmonization  of  laws  and policies
which result in the implementation of regional cost effective solutions to waste management; both
between and within the countries.

5.6   Privatization

      Only  a small  percentage of  the  waste generating  manufacturing  sector has been
privatized. The privatizing difficulty is confronted with several enforcement waste related  issues.
Without sufficient environmental  information and appropriate laws, how can the potential investor
define  its liability? How can  the  investor be  offered waste  disposal  options if  there  are  no
available options or strategies demonstrating that one will  soon  exist? How can the States define
their national waste strategy, when  many  active  waste generating facilities might close due to
market  forces? How  does one  adequately calculate the  current waste stream  disposal needs
when the problem is  so dynamic?  If new facilities  lor disposal are constructed  (e.g. landfills,
incinerators), how can  they encourage prevention  and minimization in this era of uncertainty,
instead  of excess capacity for importing waste? The  questions are difficult, but the Environmental
Ministries with Western assistance are attempting to confront them, develop interim solutions, and
secure  necessary implementation and compliance.  Of course, international lending institutions
also have a responsibility when providing loans to confront these questions; not only to  provide
for the  economic  development, but also  the  long term environmental  interests as well. Those
interests play an  important role in the long  term health  of the economy. As these issues are
resolved, the enforcement process for waste management  will become more clear.

5.7    Permit Process Approach

      An effective Permit Process is critical to monitor performance of operating waste disposal
and other  facilities  having  significant  waste  streams.  Public  involvement,  environmental
assessment review, and excellent technological skills are required by the responsible  regulatory
agency. States must consider that high salaries may be necessary to retain this type of staff. The
assessment should review  all  aspects including  those relating to the facility, off-sight potential
impacts,  and waste  transportation related  issues.  Modern  hazardous waste operations  are
complex  engineering  and  scientific facilities. Reviews  of the facility plans,  process, safety
systems, report procedures, adequacy of trained operators, analytical facilities, waste controls, etc
are critical. Experienced people with specific skills and qualifications are required by government
to  ensure that the process is  permitted correctly,  audits and inspections are conducted, and
expertise is available  for compliance-enforcement issues. If this part of the waste management
scheme is not addressed in facility planning,  failure to implement effective options might result.
These  requirements  must  be  met regardless  of  whether one considers waste  treatment  or
storage, incinerators,  landfills, site remediation, or redesign of existing facilities. When developing
appropriate permit requirements, consider that permit fees  could be  levied upon the investor to
support Ihe  regulatory  process. A strong  enforcement agency  is also a good investment for the
waste facility. The broader the environmental enforcement nation-wide, the more potential lor both
pollution prevention and disposal at the well permitted facility.

5.8    Private Sector Involvement

        in the West, some of the  success for hazardous  waste management depends upon the
 existence  of a private sector that makes its  profits from handling and managing wastes. They

-------
112
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
have an economic incentive to dispose of wastes as economically and practically as possible.
Often, as enforcement of these  regulations grows, so do the respectable businesses; important
options in the waste management strategy. The  bad actors drop out of  the  business; either
through enforcement, or loss of business. They cannot compete legitimately. In the countries of
the Region, the State probably manages over 90% of the hazardous wastes because industry is
not yet privatized. Companies were, and generally still are insulated from market pressures. They
may receive state subsidies and are therefore insulated from real environmental enforcement that
serves as a disincentive  NOT to pollute. Further, communication between facility management
and  environmental personnel regarding compliance has been quite weak. These two important
elements, privatization and communication, are necessary for compliance success. This issue has
also been difficult in the United States when  dealing with Federal Facilities, which are owned by
the Government. But waste laws cannot shield these major facilities from compliance. Figure 1
depicts the importance that  four pressures  (market, consumer,  political, legislation)  have upon
business. The benefits of compliance are  extremely positive, non-compliance is quite  negative to
business. Successful regulatory implementation is required to make this process happen.
  Figure 1.2
   Consumer
   Pressure
   Political
   Pressure
    Legislation
              Market Pressures
    Compliance Plus
     Proactive Response
     Legal Compliance
     Passive Response
                 Issues
     Non-Compliance
     Hostile Response
 Competitive Advantage
 New Opportunities
 Increased Efficiency
                                    Motivation
 Status Quo or
' Lost Position

 Lost Market Share
 Negative Image
 Fines
                                                              Lost Competitive Position
 5.9    Achieving Voluntary Compliance

       Voluntary compliance  makes up  a significant part of achieving  environmental  goals.
 Voluntary action is rare when compliance costs are high, benefits of compliance are not known,
 incentives to comply are lacking, and when a strong regulatory program is absent. Facilities in
 the  Region  will soon compete with others for delivering  products at competitive  prices. Why
 should one  industry add costs  if the competitor does not? Clearly, Ministries cannot enforce
 against all facilities not in  compliance. By carefully selecting targets and educating, voluntary
 compliance can be significantly enhanced. Economic incentives and recognition  to facilities doing
 a good job will also enhance the voluntary process. Currently, in the absence of laws or with the
 impracticality of enforcing outmoded laws of the former Socialist countries, there is the hope that
 EC, US, or  other advanced standards might become self-promoting or voluntary by responsible
 facilities privatizing.

 5.10  Pressure from the Private  Sector

       Private interests  have  identified waste disposal market potential  in  the  Region. Western
 needs have created a desire to construct  landfills and incinerators in the  Regional countries. This
               PA Consulting Group Brochure p 3

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              113


may be both good and bad news.  This could help solve existing and historical waste problems
using best  available  technologies.  However, the need for  hard  currency and  jobs are obvious
and subtle  pressures exist upon decision-makers to allow  facilities. These facilities would often
include excess capacity provisions  for disposal of waste from outside the region and to provide
for growing needs for the new developers. Co-generation  of energy is sometimes offered as a
way  to improve  the financial opportunity for the investor.  The  excess  capacity provided by a
state-of-the-art facility may be  especially  important to potential Western investors  wishing to
reduce potential liabilities caused  by  future mishandling,  the accompanying negative publicity
that it might cause, and  reduce  insurance costs. Existing  outdated waste facilities that are  not
viable, and cannot be  upgraded justifiably in a cost-effective manner will close more quickly;
especially when  compliance is required enhancing market system forces. However, it is not that
simple. There  is a dilemma.  What options to select, and  what is the process for making that
choice? Will  the new facilities  solve  problems in the short  term, but merely  delay  waste
prevention  alternatives  from  facilities? Carefully  planned approaches,  citizen  input,   and a
nationwide  strategic plan with broad regional considerations, will provide the necessary steps for
implementing a process of decision-making.

5.11   Personnel Requirements

      The  regulatory implementor  in the waste management field must be  technologically and
legally astute to  understand all the subtle environmental  relationships. As a matter of education
in waste management, working terms for reduce, reuse, recycle,  reclamation, recovery, etc. must
be understood before one  can consider the  proper implementation  option. A good  regulatory
program  is synonymous with good people.  Training and  educating does not end at the staff
level. All players in the process need to be educated,  including  Lawmakers, Judges, the  Press,
etc. Solving the  air pollution problem by capturing a waste which will then contaminate soil and
groundwater is not a solution.  This  requires that  staff from different Ministries  work together
under a common strategy, or set of principles.

5.12  Integrated Regulatory Principles

      A waste management strategy is designed to improve safety and environmental quality; to
meet both short and long term  goals. The strategy  must incorporate all related complementary
programs for pesticides  policy; toxic chemicals control; hazard materials transport; water and air
pollution control; solid waste management; and accident prevention and response. The more one
tightens any one policy, the more impact on waste and ultimately on problems at disposal sites
with  complications in the enforcement process. Strategies in  each  country should reflect  the
differences of infrastructure,  timing,  and priorities.  While  strict enforcement  requirements  are
important, flexibility to select  the optimal environmental option  is necessary to promote  holistic
(integrated) waste management approaches best for the  whole environment.  Decisionmakers
from different  Ministries and  Local Governments must work together to address  issues which
may undermine a national waste management strategy.

5,13  Critical Public Involvement

      Unfortunately,  there  is no  easy  answer to implementing  sound  waste  management
practices. Different people have quite different views of the  issues. Public opposition to most  any
facility can  be  anticipated, as some of you already  know. The public generally trusts neither the
government, nor the  facility or its owner. While the Regional countries wish to solve  their waste
problems, the problems are  often not well defined. Citizens  do not believe  that there is an
existing program to  ensure compliance  and availability of public information is  limited, even
today. Access to environmental information has become an important element in the West over
time. Passage of the Environmental Protection and Community  Right to Know Act in the  United
States, has revealed to the  public all facility waste streams, and resulted in substantial voluntary
reductions. These reduction amounts may total amounts  as significant as  those that resulted

-------
114
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
from many other U.S. pieces of environmental legislation. Government regulators who failed to
provide  information sometimes learned the hard way why  it was necessary. Many regulators
exhibit scars from not addressing public involvement and information access in creating waste
management strategies. To repeat:  building trust with the citizenry and all Government levels
requires creation of a proper short and long term  strategy focusing on waste prevention, that has
early and frequent citizen  input in the design and recommendations. Providing excess capacity
where there may be no  need for  such capacity only further alarms citizens, and may encourage
waste production and not prevention, if not carefully addressed. Therefore, the strategy must be
supported with  excellent  waste  generation documentation  (present and future). Information
gathered by facilities and  Governments to define  environmental impact, should be  routinely
required and freely available to the public.  Informed citizenry would result in pressure upon
facilities to  act where reliable data warrants such  action. Informed  citizenry will  serve to
fortify the Environmental Ministries, increased resources for all levels of Government agencies to
implement the  necessary  compliance,  and a much improved strategy  overall.   Lastly,
communications between  all the diverse  interest  groups  should take  place frequently  and
informally in  developing the plan and individual compliance strategies, not wait until it reaches
the stage of last resort - often the courtroom. Figure  2 demonstrates the importance and aspects
affecting environmental awareness, impact upon business, legislation,  and enforcement.
Figure 2.3
Social/Culture
Economy/Industry /
Political/ •- 	 £
Legal ~~ — *• NATIONAL
	 ^ ATTITUDES
Geography ^ \
S \
Education/ ^
Understanding ENVIRC
AWAR
Media CONG
Exposure's. NMENTAL [
EN ESS/ Consumer ^ • 	 L-.^
ERN Pressure ^{BUSINESS ^
Wai ^^ 1 I
essure ^^ i j ^— i
^ ^s^ I . Formal
i 	 1 J I tnrorcei
[LEGISLATION |< 	 ' |
~~~^ 1
	 1

-)
nent
5.14 Direct Citizen Impact

    An excellent example of citizen involvement in enforcement in Eastern Europe  is best
summed up in the article from The Wall Street Journal of April 8, 1992.

    The headline:   ENVIRONMENTAL  GROUPS IN EASTERN  EUROPE  FLEX  THEIR
    MUSCLES - THREAT OF  A CLASS-ACTION SUIT  IN HUNGARY SHOWS THE RISE
    OF A NEW SORT OF POLITICS.
         PA Consulting Group Brochure, P.12

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            115
     In this example, which is common in the West, some environmentalists are learning how
to apply pressure through lawyers and scientists against neglected environmental  problems;
to recover  damages from past contamination of lead  and other heavy metals in soil, and
groundwater affecting nearby residents. Although the current laws and costs to litigate in the
region will probably not support many such actions, only a few well publicized activities like
this will send concern to those who might be less scrupulous. This action by a well informed
and involved environmental organization will not  discourage Jhe responsible investor.  In fact,
as mentioned the responsible investor is waiting for appropriate  enforceable regulations and
an  aware  citizenry.  Moreover, strong  regulations  open markets for pollution  control
manufacturers and the talented technicians of the region. Most  importantly,  such  suits from
citizens  or Government,  involving  old waste sites, will  make  present  company  managing
directors  and investors take notice of their responsibility. For the  manager, he does not want
to be cited for neglect nor be a cause for health and environmental impact in his community,
upon his neighbour. For  the investor, he must  consider the future. Failure to eliminate the
waste stream or prevent pollution  to the  maximum  extent practicable, only  subjects the
company  to  future  liability  situations.  Obtaining development investments, and buying
environmental impairment liability insurance has become a nightmare worldwide. Perhaps,
even more significant is  the fact that responsible international companies  pay a  significant
amount of  money for good public  relations and advertising. They do not wish to see their
product, or company reputation undermined by lack of attention to requirements.

     In summary, there  is no single waste management blueprint for the  region or for
any one  country. In  that context,  any  environmental policy,  especially waste and
enforcement, must focus  on  manageable, high priority,  cost-effective approaches. Thirteen
issues have been identified for your consideration. Figures 3 and 3a provide a comprehensive
summary  or checklist of other short  and long-term factors  that potentially impact the
development and implementation a successful waste management strategy in this transitional
period. This does not imply that all must be addressed immediately for success. Merely, that
they be recognized, and that each Country consider those most  important at the time of their
strategic planning process.
 6   CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES

 6.1  Import Pressures

     Waste management strategies of the  Regional Countries must  consider international
 implications. Waste fears in the region mount when reports in the press reveal that waste
 shipments from the West are arriving in the Region. Strong enforcement measures in one part
 of Europe must be matched with similar measures in the Region. Recent new waste laws and
 their implementation  in the West will cause increases in Western disposal costs. Boundaries
 are  now  more  accessible  here,  and the  necessary legislative  structure  to protect the
 environment is either not in place, too difficult to enforce, or too few resources are available
 for implementation. It is feared that some of the Western waste shipments may be designed
 to take advantage of  the  economic situation here creating opportunities for needed hard
 currency.  If the Illegal risk taking reveal minima! chance for prosecution, or penalties well
 below profit potential, the opportunity  for unscrupulous waste handlers is obvious. Pressure
 will continue to mount  to transport waste to  the Region as:   Western waste disposal options
 are  reduced;  markets for recyclable  materials  are diminished;  public opposition  mounts
 against disposal options  in the West; fewer options mean more  cost  for disposal; the most
 concentrated and toxic wastes remain because of limited disposal alternatives; and, rigorous
 time consuming permit procedures slow development of new important options in the West.
 Without laws or programs to adequately prevent, or effectively  deal with  such waste imports,
 there is little wonder why the Region is attractive. Regional Local Governments are also under

-------
116                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


pressure to  make  decisions which  may undermine  national  policies,  and could  cause
international  problems.  Therefore,  harmonizing waste management laws  and  procedures
within and between countries, and at ali Government levels, is crucial.
  Figure 3. Framework for Waste Management

  COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS
     effective waste programs depends on a variety of actions and measures, not a single
     regulatory or technical approach
  -   successful programs must be both cooperative and coercive and rely on the regulator, waste
     generator,  disposal company and others for information and support
     implementation and enforcement must be practical and educational, within current or
     prospective limits of government capability
  -   compliance of waste management laws is only effective if the Company Management takes
     notice; especially if their personal liability or reputation  is at stake
  -   enforcement approaches, priorities, monitoring, and infrastructure development requires a
     cradle to grave approach from the generation to ultimate disposal
  -   where it makes sense take immediate and appropriate actions to move forward the waste
     management strategy; consider interim facilities to provide temporary solutions
  -   commence a comprehensive training process to include investigative/enforcement techniques
     (field citations, administrative, and judicial action)
  -   combine the carrot and stick; while legislating and enforcing, support viable treatment or
     storage alternatives, waste exchanges, information transfer, and programs that enhance waste
     minimization
     correspondingly place minimization controls and incentives to minimize waste under air and
     Water Pollution laws as a way to impact waste reduction
     establish an award scheme for waste abatement, clean technologies, and products to those
     waste generators who lead by example and advertise the success stories
  -   apply interim measures to  include  a real reduction in risk, measure the success and make
     information freely available
     establish a practical  implementation procedure for National border disputes
     assure that interim waste management approaches consider firm deadlines, allow for later
     recovery of segregated wastes, does not eliminate further site use, and has appropriate
     record-keeping and strict operational controls
  -   develop mechanisms for imaginative implementation of laws; (e.g. can current EC policies for
     environment and economic competitive advantage, affecting Associate Member States be
     used to further environmental objectives

  RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS
  -   build measures gradually as capabilities and resources increase, with  more progressive
     strategies developed and implementation

  ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
  -   find economic incentives to encourage preventers, discourage polluters and influence
     competitiveness
  -   promote Best Available Technology without excessive  cost
  -   establish a co-operative waste exchange with a suitable industry or association; someone's
     waste may be another's raw material; monitor the option closely
     provide an incentive system where retrofit of older equipment attracts  a subsidy
     require separation of potentially hazardous wastes to avoid incineration and land disposal; in
     conjunction, consider imposition of costs/fees (deposit refund system)  for the packaging (e.g.
     cans, batteries, vehicles
  -   exchange  experiences in the region; it will lead to a more coherent implementation of
     programs; establish  a scientific/policy exchange that will meet and exchange
     views/experiences
  -   obtain all appropriate quality assured information, and environmental data to set cost-effective
     priorities for legal and enforcement options

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              117


     Recent  experiences  in  Bulgaria  and  Rumania,  and  previous  ones  in  Poland  are
examples of  the  pressures to  import waste  into the Regional countries. The countries are
attempting to respond. For example, this past June the Government of Rumania proclaimed in
a policy  decision document a  number  of prescriptive requirements  relating to waste import
requirements. Whether or  not  the Governments have the necessary  resources to routinely
monitor and enforce all the provisions is critical.
 Figure 3a  Framework for Waste Management

 INFORMATION CONSIDERATIONS
 -  learn about the local situation; past damages, exchange all available data, understand
    industrial processes, and obtain inventories of chemicals used, manufactured, or imported
 -  survey generators and disposal outlets; quantify and identify wastes
    prepare (training) parliamentarians and the court to face the waste management challenges

 PUBLIC AWARENESS CONSIDERATIONS
    public support is critical; invest in  awareness raising and training
 -  promptly respond to complaints by citizens and provide follow-up; trust enhances the
    opportunity to implement plans
 -  develop fact sheets for involved constituencies  about wastes, technology, issues,
    requirements, minimization, import/export, etc
    develop model curbside pick-up programs for limited marketable solid wastes to create
    recycling markets
    Inform the public early and ensure its participation in the decision making process to
    encourage implementation of appropriate waste management decisions

 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
 -  encourage and promote treatment of communal waste for regional areas; leads to results
    that are easier to enforce and manage and are more cost effective
    build waste management and existing prevention considerations into development planning
    understand regional and global interdependence of waste issues leading to a holistic and
    integrated environmental (air, water, waste) approach towards solutions
 -  define potential/actual high risk facilities; develop specific strategies

 TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS
 -  begin to eliminate co-disposal of non-solid wastes
 -  consider solidification of selected  wastes prior to landfill disposal
 -  consider off-site treatment of some chemical wastes (e.g. electroplating, textiles)
    limit co-incineration of combustible oily wastes, pesticides or similar materials in cement
    kilns and only under controlled conditions
 -  export special wastes (e.g. Polychlorinated Biphenyls) to specially designed incinerators
    following all requirements and monitor results
    consider entombment of non-treatabte toxics
    secure storage of special materials currently not readily disposable which have high risk
    potential (e.g. batteries)
    provide and allow for alternative solutions
 -  give adequate attention to small business facilities who may have acute problems with
    potential high risk impact;  includes storage of chemicals
6.2  Support from Outside the Region

     Western industrialized countries recognize that there is a burden on them to provide the
legal structure  to  prevent exploitation  of waste  shipments  to the  region. The European
Community's Waste Directive  promotes  the  principles  of  self-sufficiency and  proximity in
waste disposal, requiring management of the wastes near the point  of generation. This EC
effort is also supported by a hazardous waste Transport Directive to deal with requirements of

-------
118                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


international transport and associated risks. Much international focus has come from  The
Basel Convention  on  the  Control  of  Transboundary  Movements of  Hazardous  Wastes.
Disposal requires prior informed consent before waste can be shipped to a receiving country.
If countries can  provide  proper treatment,  transport is restricted.  However,  monitoring
compliance and  enforcement by  both  the  sender and recipient  countries is  crucial. This
process is  only a  first step;  more  needs to  be done, including  extending the scope  and
application  of agreements to  achieve more comprehensive actions to control waste. Some
countries, like Bulgaria, used the Basel Convention as the basis to draft its Waste Law.

6.3   International Assistance

     Western Governments are supportive in determining the extent of the  waste  problem in
this region, and providing solutions.  Recent  strategies from the European Community include
studies  on waste  management in  Poland, Hungary,  and the CSFR. Application of  the
proximity principle,  and clean  technology options are also part of the  overall strategy. When
these efforts are completed, important information relative to developing waste  management
strategies  for the  region will  be  available. USEPA has  provided direct  support to review
specific soil contamination problems  caused by past waste management practices.  Risk
assessment reports have been  completed which will serve as model  approaches for similar
problems.  Similarly,  visits to  cities  experiencing waste management problems have  been
made and  guidance  given to  establish  appropriate  cost-effective manageable  strategies.
Lastly, through the efforts of  the  Regional  Environmental Center in Budapest,  a number of
grants have been awarded to  support waste management project initiatives.  Other activities of
the  Center include: support in the development of both framework and waste  management
legislation  through  a  legislative task force:  support for  relative  workshops  on waste
management bringing together the diverse constituency groups,  and undertaking projects for
different constituency groups  to serve as  models for  solutions.  The  Center's information
network and  resources serve as an important  clearinghouse to provide support within the
region, and identifies available resources  where solutions and contacts may be appropriate.
Another important initiative that  may  affect  waste management and enforcement efforts
includes an extensive program  by  the EBRD  to  review  all  legislation  in the Region and
determine areas and problems related to harmonization.

     Sixty-seven Contracting  Parties to the  London Dumping Convention supported  a Global
Waste Survey.  Although primarily dealing  with eliminating the disposal of wastes at  sea,
information was gathered  in a broader  context to  eliminate and  minimize waste. Goals
included: manual  of  sound  waste  management practices and clean  technologies; waste
profiles by  country; development of several management plans; and promotion of international
cooperation on  waste. While  the  U.N.  International Maritime  Organization  is responsible for
this effort, other international  organizations and States are supporting  this and similar efforts.
A compendium providing  a clearinghouse  of aii these opportunities  will soon  be available.
Other institutes have compiled excellent industrial waste minimization  or training manuals as
noted in the  references. One new  draft  waste assessment procedure  is  also found in the
Reference  List.

     One very useful output  of the Global  Waste  Survey is  the graphical summary from  a
questionnaire to  153 countries.  Results  from  80 questionnaires reveal some interesting
findings about the waste  problem  in  the Regional countries compared to others.  Findings
included: existence of waste management regulations but lack of enforcement; the perceived
seriousness of the problem; exports  from the region are not a problem but imports are; lack of
effective recycling facilities  is  apparent;  and  inadequate  Information to  quantify waste
production  exists.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             119


7   SOLID WASTE RESPONSIBILITIES

7.1  Observations

    Most  of  the  previous  issues and  policies discussed refer to the broad  solid and
hazardous  waste management questions. Some issues may apply more to the hazardous
waste situation; e.g. transport, uncertainty of quantities, and risk. However, given the fact that
waste definitions are still not completely clarified, and waste disposal in landfills is often co-
mingled (hazardous and solid),  it is difficult to separate issues by definition alone. However,
household  and office waste problems, sometimes defined as  solid waste, are significant.
Landfills in  most communities are at or near capacity. They are generally unlined, waste is co-
disposed as mentioned, and groundwater contamination is frequent. Major recycling facilities
are virtually non-existent, and waste streams are increasing. Personal  experiences over two
years reveal  new  packaging changes in the Regional countries,  large increases  of plastics
and other  heretofore non-existent waste. Discussions  with soft drink manufacturers confirm
that the demand for such packaging of 2 liter plastics is overwhelming supportive, if judged by
purchase demand. Since Western markets are generally saturated for new packaging, and
reductions are  planned  resulting from  public pressure, new  paper,  can, and  plastic
opportunities are contemplated  for this Region. Good habits ingrained in the culture, such as
returning glass or paper are  being lost to lightweight non-returnable plastics.

     Specific observations over the past two years include:

     -   soft  drinks are now more often sold in cans and plastic containers,  with costs for
        such products  continuously decreasing  as packaging  plants  are successfully
        established here
     -   fewer returnable bottles for water, beer etc.  are evident, fewer places to return them,
        and fewer people returning bottles evidenced by shorter lines
     -   evolution  of fast food restaurants and their resulting packaging wastes
     -   frequent new packaging displays in  markets
     -   more plastic shopping bags available at check-out counters

     Are these  indicators of success or failure? Westernization has  occurred, but with an
 accompanying environmental downside. To  the  consumer of the Region, attractive consumer
 goods  are  important,  and  convenience  becomes increasingly  important.  Designing
 environmental programs  must  consider these values.  Recycling was  part  of  the  culture
 because of resource limitations. Problems  of waste management cannot be  solved outside
 the context of society, culture, and experience of the people.
     As one  sott drink plastic supplier said to me: "it is far easier to carry shopping bags long
 distances up many stairs  with lightweight plastic. It is  much more difficult and costly here to
 design collection programs  for  separables (separate curbside collection), and apartment size
 does not  leave  much room for separation and storage."  Financial resources  are limited for
 separate collection systems. However, without such recycling efforts imposed by Government,
 the necessary private  recycling facilities will  not  be built and  markets for  recyclable by-
 products will not materialize. Investors are not now guaranteed source and quantity necessary
 to satisfy the investment for recycling  facilities.

 7.2  Serious Effects from Improper Waste Disposal

     Solid waste problems  of today in the Regional countries  may lead to more serious and
 costly consequences. Battery disposal is but one example that continues to concern many  in
 the region. Without options or obvious solutions, disposal is haphazard. Few safe  recycling
 disposal options exist in the Region, and some,  like Metallochemia in Hungary, proved  to be a
 major environmental hazard. However, interim implementable and enforceable solutions must
 be found.  Even designating a secure site for containment, with a financial incentive for people
 to bring their batteries to the location, would allow for a simple viable option. However, interim
 options require education to insure that people do not feel cheated because final solutions are

-------
120                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


not provided. Not only will the interim option help save the environment in the long term, but
the people will learn about the value of recycling potentially hazardous wastes and their
potential impact if no! handled properly. With storage of  batteries concentrated at a place by
regulatory requirement, properly monitored and permitted, future ultimate solutions become
more cost-effective to a potential investor. The investor is guaranteed both a source of supply
to recycle and a predictable quantity. This equation is important for those  recycling  any
materials,  and for  both  the recycler  and  source of  the final  recycled  materials.  Legal
requirements with effective efforts, balanced by early education, insures that the equation will
be implemented.


8    HISTORICALLY CONTAMINATED SITES

8.1  Background

     Many of us  are aware of  the  experiences in the West  dealing with  abandoned waste
sites. Contamination over many years resulted in massive environmental impact.  Major costly
programs  like Superfund in the United States evolved  to identify, evaluate,  and implement
solutions to eliminate the wastes, and reduce the environmental impact and risk.  What began
as  a limited effort, expecting  to  solve the problems in  a  short time, resulted  in  an
underestimating of the problem, cost,  solutions, and time required for remediation. Countries
of this region are now  awakening to a similar discovery. Problems caused by old abandoned
facilities, mining, former military bases, municipal landfills are  some of the thousands coming
to public attention.  While some countries have preliminary estimates of site  numbers, it is too
soon to  evaluate the full extent of the magnitude of this waste problem.

8.2  Information Availability

     There are differing reasons why sites are now drawing public attention. These include:
information  revealing contamination of water supplies; re-privatization of  land to  original
owners  as restitution with accompanying  knowledge of environmental  problems and required
clean-up;  information from environmental impact assessments  required by privatization and by
investors; and old  audit or other information now  becoming  available  from  facilities  or
individuals. Data  is  more freely available.  Regional countries have an important  interest in
taking action, for  environmental, health,  and economic reasons. Further,  it is critical  that in
developing strategies for the historically created problems, we do not neglect the potential for
new sites developing  from existing poorly operating facilities.  This  includes facilities  and
iandfills, the  potential  random  dumping from lack of  properly operating disposal  sites, and
improper storage  of wastes or products.

8.3  Enforcement

     Where does enforcement and compliance fit into this  process?  With regard  to  the
historical  abandoned sites, determining  liability is a difficult issue.   These  facilities were
generally  owned by the Countries of the Region, or Government  agencies, creating insulation
from a oeneral enforcement process. However, as these sites are privatized, liabilities will be
established  for both the old waste and potential new waste  problems.  To establish  the
liabilities,  it  is extremely important that evaluations of the environmental problems be made
both on the  site  of the facility, as well as effects caused off-site (e.g. groundwater).  In this
way, any  additional contamination caused by the new owner is clearly defined, liability can be
assessed, and necessary compliance and enforcement remedies undertaken. Sometimes  it
may be in the interest of the States to have the  investor assume liability for remediation for
past historical waste problems,  with a reduction in  cost for the asset sale as an incentive. This
is being done in some countries, tn this  case, an opportunity is provided for the  Ministries to
obtain  resources for the clean-up  when resources are otherwise unavailable.  However, to
assure  that proper  clean-up is attained, a compliance schedule (as mentioned previously)
should be developed and carefully  monitored. Of  course, even where there is no agreement

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             121


to clean-up past problems, intensive monitoring and comprehensive permitting of the facility
will prevent future waste problems.

8.4  Experiences

     In developing strategies for identification, assessment, containment and remediation, a
great deal  can be learned from Western  experiences. Costiy mistakes were made in both
policy and technical areas in the West. But there are many successes as well in reduction of
risks. Developing successful compliance agreements,  appropriate technology, and adequate
risk levels are some of the important areas  ripe for technology.  However, it is not a simple
matter to transfer information or technology.  Demands for  clean-up, sociological/historical
conditions, cultural values, and resource availability are quite different in countries worldwide.
The waste  sites are also different, although many fall into similar categories. Therefore, while
fully understanding the procedures used by  different countries, carefully tailored approaches
are important. It is important to establish a program  that: carefully identities the problems;
defines the risks; assigns National priorities;  implements efforts to  reduce immediate and
major risks first; defines resource needs; establishes a legal/policy process;  and continuously
evaluates efforts making necessary programmatic modifications.  As stated  previously, Local
Governments, citizen groups (NGOs)* and  residents  impacted by sites MUST be involved
continuously  in  the  process to receive  Government support, and  to reach  a successful
outcome. Site reclamation may have a significant cost, but for some sites the highest cost is
to do nothing.  Financial costs are often recoverable when formerly unusable property can be
sold,  groundwater is fit to drink reducing risks to health, or surface  water is  restored to
industrial process water quality or recreation  use.
The Waste site  clean-up program can  be incorporated into a  major legislative  effort,  or
individual cases can be handled. There are merits to a combination of approaches, especially
in the beginning where gathering experience  and the need for flexibility  are important.
However, in  any case a comprehensive  Nationwide strategy is  important to ensure  that all
relative Ministries are working  together,  Local Governments and  citizens are involved and
informed,  investors  understand their requirements,  and  to  measure  successes, define
problems, and incorporate modifications. At the Regional Environmental Center, we have had
the opportunity to provide some support  for limited site evaluation, and outline a model  site
and National approach.
9    HUNGARY - PROBLEMS AND PROGRAMS

     Background information on the Hungarian Waste program is provided to show  relative
problems, and initiatives to affect waste  management strategies.  Problems appear typical to
those  experienced  by other countries of the  region.  The  list5 provides  an orientation for
priority setting for compliance purposes.

     -    For municipal waste, a complete database does not exist.
         Current databases are  based on incomplete  information,  and  necessary
         improvements are under way.
         About 2600 waste dumps  exist in Hungary with  58 percent failing to conform with
         public health and environmental  regulations.
     -    Only 52 percent of households  is linked to systematic waste collection,  with figures
         varying between areas of the country.
     -    The quantity of wastes produced  compared to international levels  is  high whiie
         utilization (recycling ratio) is low.
     -    The introduction of low waste producing technologies is just beginning
     -    Only 3 % of total material use is recycled.

            4 NGOs = Non-Governmental Organizations

            5 Ministry of the Environment, State of the Environment pp 11, 12

-------
122                            INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


    -   3.2 million of the total 5 million tons of hazardous wastes produced annually are
        stored on-site.
    -   Of the remaining hazardous wastes, 2/3 are disposed of in lagoons or landfills.
        Disposal for the other 1/3 is  unknown except that only 10 % is treated to  accepted
        standards.
        Municipal waste dumping is common, but capacity is being exhausted, and 60  % of
        the dump sites do not satisfy  environmental  protection specifications.
        Recent  calculations demonstrate that  a  significant portion  of  the  hazardous
        (dangerous) wastes are probably generated from untreated waste water; a significant
        portion going into public sewers; 146 million cubic meters  is produced.

    On site historical contamination of wastes is not fully understood. This is similar to some
situations  in the West. For some cases,  like BVK,  in Kazincbarcika or Metaliochemia in
Budapest  as  mentioned, contaminated soil  and  groundwater  is  evident and  significant
amounts of wastes and products are  unaccounted for. Studies are under way for  some sites,
with priorities set for state owned companies under privatization, and former Soviet Bases.
    New  environmental waste  management  laws  are  in  draft to  "modernize  waste
management policy", but have been delayed in passage and therefore implementation. Older
and less effective laws are in force. Many  view this period as  an opportunity to avoid some
major mistakes of the West A holistic environmental approach is being considered to avoid
transference of environmental problems between media. If done properly, the result will be a
more cost-effective approach for both the long and  short term  for Government and industry.
The laws may be designed to force pollution prevention and cleaner technologies, as opposed
to end-of-pipe control in this reconstruction period. However, a market economy must develop
quickly  and economic  incentives are vital.  As in  many countries of the region, a  iegal
restructuring  may  be necessary  in  Hungary to  insure successful  implementation;  that
compliance and  enforcement measures will result.  How does  one build a system from the
ground  up to  assure  success?  Some of  the Western countries would  love to have this
opportunity considering the  often incredible complex environmental laws and implementing
process. However, in the countries of  the Region, the process is complicated by the  economic
conditions, urgent demands to resolve and prevent new problems, and  outright conflicting
values.

9.1   Hungarian Environmental Strategy (Waste Management Priorities)

     In December 1991, the Ministry  for Environment and Regional Policy in Hungary issued
a  strategic plan outline entitled: THE  SHORT   AND  MEDIUM TERM ENVIRONMENT
PROTECTION PLAN OF THE GOVERNMENT. The objectives  and tasks of this plan provide
a needed  and ambitious effort to  address many of the issues presented in this paper.
     Those principles related to waste and enforcement include:
     -   PRINCIPLE OF ENFORCEMENT - prioritized the use of resources by risk;
     -   PRINCIPLE OF THE PREVENTION - reduce pollution at  the source;
     -   PRINCIPLE OF PARTNERSHIP - governments and market participants;
     -   PRINCIPLE OF "THE POLLUTER  PAYS"-  all  polluters  bear  the  responsibility  for
                                               damage
     To achieve the elements of the action program, some enforcement planned related steps
include:
        modifying present fines with system for use and load on the environment
     -   implementing  cost-effective system for  both development and environmental
        improvement
        strong enforcement
     -   economic incentives for waste reduction and recycling

     Some other observations regarding the Hungarian plan would include considerations for:
compliance  schedules;  taxes  on packaging for  environmental  reinvestment; immediate
dissuasive penalties; strict  monitoring  and some elimination  of untreatable waste imports;
training and implementation of  an investigative environmental team; holistic environmental

-------
Flc/ur-e  4 .
                                               Hazardous Waste  Management  Concept
              Role of  the State


   Formulate  boundary conditions and enforce
   rules
   Reduce Intervention in economy but promote
   regional + private initiative
   Harmonize  application of economic
   incentives
             STRATEGY ELEMENTS

    Avoid >  Reduce > Treat > Dispose
    First priority: Prevention
    Encourage private initiative and new
    technologies
    Polluter Pays
    Time / Priorit ies
                Economic  and
           Legal  Instruments
                Enforcement
               Conpliance and
               the authorities
              General Activities
      -  Implement regional planning
        responsibililies
      -  Implement Control Concept
      -  Improve Database
      -  Declare Official Concept
     STRATEGIC  ACTION  AREAS
         Role of the Industry
-  Assume responsibility within  legal
  frame
-  Initiate task  forces and voluntary
  commitments
-  Provide for Waste Management  Systems
  and Facilities
-  Initiate and participate in Training
  and Communication
     Organizational and\
        Communication       \
          Instruments        I
          Enforcement      J

              =*=^.*L..
               PUBLIC*
O
O
Tl
m
O
                                                                                                                                                           m
                                                                                                                                                           m
          Avoid, Reduce, Recycle

          - Apply "instruments" in all areas
          - Implement separate collection for
           drycells
          - Implement galvanic industry project
          - Implement solvent collection and reuse
          - Resolve lead battery Issue
          - Avoid asbestos
Treatment, Incineration and final deposit/landfill

-  Conclude projects already initiated:
  Rudabanya,  Hidas/Gare, Vertesacsa, extension Aszod
-  Initiate incinerator Retrofit and improvement Program
•  Initiate survey and regional planning for  treatment
  and disposal
-  Declare incineration vs. landfill priority
•  Promote industry-owned treatment, Incinerators and
  landfill
-  Initiate leather Industry waste management concept
-  Prepare medical waste concept and initiate pilot project
-  Separate asbestos from other wastes (also  on landfills)
-  Investigate PCS disposal paths (high  temp, incinewration)
-  Review cement factories and power station  boilers
               Temporary  storages
                and improper landfills

               - Permit and provide for
                sufficient and adequate
                storage volume for
                future years
               - Inventory,  action plan
                fund creation and
                rehabilitation of sites
               - Technology development
                and toolkit
               - Followup on redmud
>
m
O
D
O
m
          Introduce Market Economy
               Dynamics of  the Process
               Involve  Foreign Capital
                                                                                                              Proceed towards the European Conrnunity
             * Authors Amendments 	 — — —
               KMPG  FIDES,  p.  17
                                                                                                                                                           ro
                                                                                                                                                           CO

-------
124                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


assessments and application in privatization; low-waste Sow-cost technology implementation to
reduce immediate risks; privatization agreements including low waste incentives; a complete
national waste profile for priority setting and public awareness; waste disposal storage options
for  potentially high  risk wastes  with  strong compliance  incentives; public  participation
opportunities  and  free open  access  to  information;  opportunity for direct  citizen  suit;
appropriate criminal actions against responsible officials; publicizing waste  violators (toxicity
and volume); performance goals and accountability cf  government officials to  monitor and
enforce when  appropriate; establish labs with  strong quality control procedures; training of
local officials of environmental objectives and responsibilities; regular and frequent information
transfer for clearinghouse and assessment/audit purposes; demonstrate  success  with strategy
selection. Overall the plan is ambitious. It is a good start, and needs to be followed closeiy
and evaluated frequently.  Implementation through appropriate legislation and a compliance
process is necessary. What is  critical,  is  that some  early  successes are  necessary in
developing  case  studies which wouid have model application. Past history reveals that in the
late 70s and 80s, recycling companies and some local NGOs designed initiatives for selective
collection of wastes, but the program had major setbacks because of lack of citizen interest.
Those experiences must be analyzed, and new  methods  employed.

9.2   Hungary WASTE Management Planning

     In May 1992, a report was completed  on Hazardous Waste Management  in Hungary6.
For the hazardous waste management issues, are exposed, recommendations are made, and
a proposed strategy is  developed. Enforcement is a continuous theme in the study, identified
as a requirement for successful implementation.  The concept of integrated environmental
approaches and  industrial restructuring  is emphasized.  Figure 4  which was taken from the
study is a diagram depicting many of the concepts required for successful waste  management
implementation. While enforcement was mentioned in this diagram, minor changes as noted
were made to denote some additional enforcement mechanisms.
10   CONCLUSION

     In conclusion, options and potential problems have been presented for consideration to
make a successful transition  to a waste management program. While there may be problems
with  any  option,  this does not mean that inaction  is acceptable or excusable with regard to
waste management and enforcement. But we must be realistic about our goals, as we learn
more.  Expectations should  be  reasonable,  but  provide some elements  requiring  a high
degree of challenge  and effort. Pick targets  of opportunity carefully, where  we can achieve
success and reduce or prevent risks; sometimes called the worst-first approach. Work closely
with  facilities to educate  and train  about  environmental  laws,  and environmental
responsibilities. Use compliance schedules and adjustment periods,  but continuously monitor
the facilities with trained staff, and consistently apply standards in practice.  Most importantly,
inform and work  with the communities and groups  of citizens; those potentially impacted, and
those interested. Include them in  the process early, and continuously to gain their insight and
support. Select facility role models who have achieved success and publicize their efforts, just
as you  target violators and  publicize  prosecutions.   Review your efforts continuously to
determine  whether they contributed  to the  extent intended to  improve the environment.
Convince political leaders that environmental  costs are consistent with the Nation's priorities,
especially economic development. Local data can be quite convincing, especially if the  Waste
Strategy is carefully constructed to meet the most  critical  environmental and  economic  needs
           6 KMPG Fides

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            125


of that Nation. Further, obtain information showing that environment is a growth sector which
can be stimulated through corftpliance and enforcement, or recycling incentives.  Convince
local leaders that worsening environmental conditions are clearly economic liabilities.


     REFERENCES

     Government of Rumania - Decision  - Concerning the Import Regime for Wastes  and
Residues of any Kind as well as other Hazardous Materials for the Population  Health and 1or
the  Environment, June 20, 1992.
     International Maritime Organization, Global Waste Survey, IMO Headquarters 4 Albert
Embankment London, SE1 7SR..
     KMPG Fides, Hazardous Waste Management in Hungary, Summary, Study prepared for
the  Republic of Hungary, May, 1992.
     Ministry for Environment and  Regional Policy, Republic  of Hungary, The  Short  and
Medium Term Environment Protection Plan of The environment, 1991- Budapest, December
1991.
     Ministry  for Environment  and  Regional  Policy,  Republic of  Hungary,  State  of the
Environment, January 1992.
     PA Consulting  Group,  Gaining  a Clean  Advantage Creating Business Opportunity by
Addressing Environmental Issues, Royston, England.
     World  Resources  Institute,  World  Resources 1990-1991, A Report  by  the World
Resources Institute, New York, Oxford 1990.


     OTHER INFORMATION

     Bell,  R., USEPA,  Waste and  Enforcement Activities  in Central and Eastern  Europe,
unpublished comments.
     Bernstorff,  A.,  Puckett, J.,  Poland:  The  Waste Invasion, Greenpeace International,
November 1990.
     Center for  Hazardous  Materials Research,  (Industrial  Waste Minimization  Manual
University  of Pittsburgh Applied Research Center,  Includes fact sheets for  many types  of
waste disposal problems and requirements), September, 1991.
     Commission of the European Communities; Call for Tenders for Contracts  Relating  to
the Environment (Waste Management) - Waste  92, May 20, 1992.
     Waste Management  and Research Journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public
Cleaning  Association, ISWA ISSN 0734-242X,  Adapting Hazardous Waste Management  to
the Needs of Developing Countries, September 10-13, 1989 Vol 8, No 2, 1990, Academic
Press p89-90.
     United Nations  Environmental Program, Hazardous Waste Policies and Strategies,  A
Training Manual, Technical Report Series  No. 10, 1991

-------
126                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            127


THE ENFORCEMENT EXPERIENCE IN CATALUNYA ON INDUSTRIAL WASTES

FERRAN Q. RELEA1 and CARLES G. MARTIN2

1 Director Junta de Residus, Generalitat de Catalunya
2 Data Base Manager, Junta de Residue, Generalitat de Catalunya

Passeig de Gracia 94, 08008  Barcelona, Spain


      SUMMARY

      A general view of the industrial waste situation in Catalunya is given. Some statistical data
on generation and management of waste, as well as how is organised the control system are also
provided. The enforcement organization, namely inspection, analysis, penalty application are also
illustrated with some statistical data.


1     INDUSTRIAL WASTE SITUATION IN CATALUNYA

1.1   Administrative framework

      Catalunya is the Northeastern Region of Spain,  having 32000 Km2 and 6000000 people,
being also the most industrialized of the country. Environmental concern and industrial pollution
have moved the Regional Government  (Generalitat de Catalunya} to create a Cabinet Department
only on environment (the single case in Spain).
       Industrial waste  concern moved the Catalan  Parliament to approve an Industrial Wastes
Act in 1983, creating a specific autonomous administrative body, Junta de Residus. The Spanish
countrywide Act came in  1986. New modifications on the Catalan  law were enacted by the
Parliament in  1991.  Junta de  Residus, nowadays attached  to the Department of  Environment,
whose President is the Cabinet Minister on Environment, has the overall responsibility  to enforce
the Industrial Waste Act.
       The  Junta de Rasidus has a Council  of member that dictates  its policy. Those members
ares representatives of the  Regional  Government (8), of the Catalan municipalities (6),  of the
trade unions (2) and of industries (2).
       The Junta de Residus objectives are:
       -  Control all industrial wastes flows occurring in Catalunya.
       -  Let the permits for transportation agents.
       -  Verify the yearly declaration on waste  made by generators.
       -   Keep alive all data bases on industrial waste managed in Catalunya.
           Prevent wild dumping of wastes.
       -   Promote incentives for waste  reduction,  process  modifications  and waste  quality
           improvements through technical and economical instruments.
       -   Promote direct or indirectly waste  management facilities through waste management
           planning.
       -   Clean and enforce to clean old dirty  sites. Generally speaking, Junta de Residus,  by
           law, has the double objective of promotion and prevention.

 1.2   Sizing the problem

 1.2.1  Definition and classification of waste

       Industrial wastes are classified in two basic categories,  according to  Catalan  regulations
 (4.10.84 Regulation). In Spain the situation is very similar.

-------
128                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      a)     Inert industrial wastes and domestic type wastes (included in the same group). A
             specific list is included in the regulation.
      b)     Special industrial wastes.
      EEC  Directive on industrial wastes is  adopted to identify  hazardous wastes.  Notwith-
standing a battery of tests is used to classify a waste as non special, even if a substance of EEC
list is present.
      Basic features of those tests are:
      a)     Flash point over 23oC.
      b)     Corrosivity.
      c)     Reactivity.
      d)     Explosive.
      e}     Non  carcinogenic (content less than 0,1% of IARC lists).
      f)      Toxicity.
      g)     Leacheability and toxicity of leachates.

1.2,2  Some statistical data

      Through the yearly self-report system, Junta de Residus  has a fair  knowledge of what is
produced  in Catalunya.  This  declaration  includes  waste production, raw materials used  and
products made by each industrial activity.
      Since 1984, the strategy in waste generation self-reporting has been  to request directly the
document to an increasing number of industries, as seen in figure  1 and  2. Every  request has
been selected according to the following criteria.
      a)     Industrial sectors potentially producers of special wastes, with bigger  members of
             employees.
      b)     Progressively include  smaller  companies  of  those sectors and new sectors
             apparently non-producers of special wastes.
      c)     Final target will be all industrial activities.

      The wastes declared, according to the present regulated classification, are shown in fig. 3.
The waste generation  ratios (tonnes waste/year per worker) have been during those years, the
following as showed in fig. 4a, 4b and 4c.
      According to those  figures,  and by industrial  sectors, the  results  have been the  ones
displayed  in fig. 5. The distribution of final destinations has been the one  showed in fig. 6a, 6b
and Be. Data on treatment facilities show a great shortage of capacity, specially related to thermal
treatments.  Figure  7 gives the general  numbers.  Taking into  account the generation figures,
shortage is evident.


2     THE FRAMEWORK FOR ENFORCEMENT

2.1    Basic features of the control system in Catalunya.

2.1.1  Waste flow control

      Waste generators have to declare every year the waste produced, the way how they  have
managed them as well as their  final destinations.
       A trip-ticket system has been implemented for waste  flows  in Catalunya. An agreement
sheet between  generator and the treatment facility is also  established.
       All  participants  in  the  waste  cycle  have to be  registered  officially.  All  documents
(trip-tickets, agreement sheets, transportation  permits)  are  only delivered to  those registered,
each  document is preceded and Junta  de Residus  knows to  whom  it has been  delivered.  A
cross-checking system  of  trip-tickets  and   generators  declarations   has  been computer-
implemented.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             129


      The inspection team  has to  let the  permit for a waste towards its destination or treating
system.
      A sampling and analysis  procedure  through  its  own control laboratory is being used and
some agreed laboratories are  being used as cooperative teams too. Moreover, mobile analytical
labs are used by the inspectors.  Quick tests and special samplers, some of them designed by our
own team, are usually performed.
      The Inspection  team works often with  the  cooperation  of a specialized Brigade  of the
Regional Police (Mossos d'Esquadra) or National Police (Guardia Civil) for specific investigations.
(For example following  up of  truck,  illegal  operation of  treatment  facilities, controlling  wild
dumping, following up of illegal importation of wastes, etc.)

2.1.2 Waste treatment facilities

      The permitting procedure includes a technical  evaluation by Junta de  Residus technical
experts, a public communication  through the official  Gazette and a final decision through Junta
de Residus Council.
       The permits for waste treatment facilities contain a caution to be delivered by the promoter
to the Public Administration, and civil responsibility insurance to cover third-part  harms.
       A  manual  of Reference is also  established  through  the  permit. It  includes  running
procedures, identification systems,  self record-keeping conditions and  features  to be checked  by
inspectors during their visits.
       Some regulations are being  periodically implemented  and/or revised, that relates to waste
acceptability in the facilities (e.g.  wastes  banned in  landfills}, analytical identification tests  on
procedural conditions.
       For facilities specifically  promoted  by  Public  Administration  the permitting  procedure
requires an independent environmental impact statement (reference  to the modification of the
2/91  Law and its  working  out)  whose conclusions are  compulsory  for the  Junta de  Residus
Council in order to  avoid non-defense to those affected.

2.2    Violations

       Present status in industrial waste  management  enforcement is based in  two  sets of
penalties for law violations: administrative penalties and criminal judicial enforcement.

2.2.1  Administrative penalties

       The  administrative penalties include a wide  range of monetary penalties and the obligation
of soil and landscape  reclamation if needed. Penalties until 200 million pesetas (2 million dollars)
are foreseen.
       The  law allows the temporal or final closure of  the industrial activity or plant as well as  the
removal of the licences for an activity.
       It is  also established the possibility of  a enforcement penalty for  those cases in which a
enforcement time  is dictated. Those  enforcement penalties cannot  be  bigger than 1/3 of  the
maximum penalty for the violation.

2.2.2  Criminal judicial enforcement

       The Spanish Constitution,  in  its  article  45,  sets  that environmental  violations  can be
 prosecuted criminally.
       The Penal  Law,  in developing  this  article,  sets monetary penalties and the possibility of
 imprisonment if the violation is judicially considered as "environmental violation".
       That way is a parallel instrument of the administrative one. It is the  judge's  privilege to
 decide it the facts are a criminal or administrative violation.
       The Penai  Law  is being revised actually  and in the  future the  monetary and  personal
 penalties against violations will  be  increased.

-------
130                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


3     THE PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF ENFORCEMENT

3.1    Public resources

      Junta de Residus has 50 people, normally divided in promotion and enforcement activities.
Twelve  people are involved in  the  trip-ticket  system,  self reporting control  and data base
maintenance. Six full time and two part time high technical staff are devoted to inspection. Ten
analysts  (6 of them, chemists) work on  waste analysis and testing in  our own  labs. Mobile
sampling and  quick testing  are  routinely used. The 1991  Junta de  Residus1  budget was  60
millions dollars, 12% of which is directiy spent on enforcement.

3.2   Control of activities.

      An overall amount of 750.000 tones of industrial wastes has been  controlled by the
trip-tickets system during 1991 in  Catalunya, showing a 22% increase in relation to 1990 data.
      Our data base has registered 11000 agreement sheets between generators and treatment
plants.
      The number of trip-tickets  used during the last three years, 1989-91. which are included in
our data base  are:

NUMBER OF TRIP TICKETS
YEAR
1989
40.000
1990
95.000
1991
115.000
3.3    Enforcement activity

       More than 300  cases have been revised  by the technical  services in  1991. Technical
services have performed 600 visits to waste generators, lo treatment plants and to wild dumps.
More than 18000 analytical  tests have been  performed by  our  laboratories. Some agreements
with external laboratories are established for more sophisticated analysis (dioxines, etc.).

3.4    Administrative procedures against violators

       Junta de  Residus enforcement  activities  are either directly promoted  or  induced by
request. The number of procedures has increased steadily since  1985. In figure 8 it is shown the
number of requested actions, administrative procedures, penalties as well as the economic
size of monetary penalties.
       It should be  pointed that the size of sanctions until the 2/1991 Act were much lower than
those showed in 2.2.1.
 4     FUTURE PROSPECTS

       The experience during the last 8 years gives us the feeling that although a lot has been
 done, it is only since 2 years ago that industry and waste agents have realised the need of a real
 change of attitude.
       The enforcement system that we have designed is rather involving and hard to have it fully
 implemented.
       It is highly important the availability of the  computer data base  to be able to have a real
 cross checking of the information reported.
       We think that the trip-ticket system based on a public administration delivery is a powerful
 tool to make wastes appear.
       High technical level inspection is of great importance although is  quite expensive.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             131


      A better coordination with other inspectorates is highly desirable. This is a project that our
Department of Environment has decided already to promote.
      A new  and growing  difficulty for a  better  waste  management  enforcement is  the
classification and definition of wastes,  as well as the dicotony waste-by-product.
      In the Catalan regulations, by-products and wastes are included (no exemption is legally
accepted},  and only the sophistication  or complexity of administrative procedures are different.
      The legal difference between domestic  waste and industrial waste (and the  different
authorities  that rule their management) give opportunities  to potential violators to "hide" some
special wastes in the municipally ruled  domestic wastes. And, for this reason, a unique control
authority is highly desirable.
      How to deal with packaging wastes is also a challenge. Our regulations shall be revised to
establish clean responsibilities.
      Irrespective to  all that  has been said above, a clear  conclusion can be extracted  from our
experience.
      Some  success is only  possible  if the technical and professional qualifications of the
inspectorate are high enough, meaning by that a good knowledge of the  problems  of  industry,
technical and organizational, as well as a big dose of environmental "common sense".
      It is not a question of  the compliance of a figure (a  concentration level, a % of efficiency,
etc.) but a  real understanding of the overall process industry waste-neighbourhood-environment.
      How to  incentivate  those professionals and how  to  involve them in  the overall
environmental strategy are the clue of an efficient work.

-------

U£^J*a«.QiLC^^
INDUSTRIAL
3RUP CODE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32


ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
OIL REFINING
IRON WORKS
METALLURGICAL
NON METALLIC MINERAL PRODUCTS
CHEMICAL AND PETROCHEMICAL COMMOD
INORGANIC CHEMICAL COMMODITIES
RAW PLASTICS
FERTILIZERS
PEST CONTROL CHEMICALS
PHARMACEUTICAL COMMODITIES
OTHER CHEMICALS
METAL FOUNDRIES
NON FERRIC FOUNDRIES
METALWORKING
METAL SURFACE TREATMENT
CABLE AND WIRING
BATTERY MANUFACTURING
ELECTRONIC COMPOUNDS
OTHER METALLIC INDUSTRIES
FOOD
TEXTILE AND CLOTHING
TEXTILE FINISHING
LEATHER AND TANNING INDUSTRY
WOOD AND CORK
PAPER PULP INDUSTRY
PAPER AND CARDBOARD MANUFACTURING
PAPER AND CARDBOARD TRANSFORMATIO,
PRINTING AND EDITING
RUBBER-PLASTIC TRANSFORMATION
OTHER INDUSTRIES
OTHER PHARMACEUTICAL SPECIALITIES
PRODUCT RECOVERY
TOTAL NUMBER OF FACTORIES
NUMBER OF FACTORIES
YEAR 85
2
2
3
12
23
15
25
3
5
23
148
4
3
4
63
5
1
3
52
49
20
7
5
0
5
5
9
1
12
44
70
2
625
YEAR 86
3
7
9
11
28
20
35
6
6
29
168
5
4
8
91
7
1
4
77
44
54
59
38
1
6
33
63
4
86
36
68
4
1015
YEAR 87
4
13
15
19
33
23
37
6
7
30
212
25
6
37
115
18
3
5
451
155
67
81
47
3
6
46
85
9
115
30
73
6
1782
YEAR 88
4
15
19
115
31
25
36
7
9
32
241
33
16
62
138
25
2
19
802
246
316
106
71
148
6
50
112
50
247
146
82
19
3230
YEAR 89
5
15
22
180
38
24
37
8
9
41
310
41
27
74
164
31
3
23
1088
345
441
132
109
289
6
50
149
114
406
452
101
78
4812
YEAR 90
5
16
22
197
40
23
40
9
10
45
352
41
34
88
194
32
4
25
1200
386
464
130
111
339
6
53
153
140
462
526
101
99
5347
FIGURE-1
CO
rvj
>
O
o
m
u
m

o
m

O


m
z

33
o
m
o
m

-------
1
\^^^^^^^^^^A^Kii^j^-i,Afjiif^^^jSy^^.f(^f^tA^^ ?« «.i±&^-X^J-'K4^^^^^

INDUSTRIAL
3RUP CODE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32




ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
OIL REFINING
IRON WORKS
METALLURGICAL
NON METALLIC MINERAL PRODUCTS
CHEMICAL AND PETROCHEMICAL COMMOC
INORGANIC CHEMICAL COMMODITIES
RAW PLASTICS
FERTILIZERS
PEST CONTROL CHEMICALS
PHARMACEUTICAL COMMODITIES
OTHER CHEMICALS
METAL FOUNDRIES
NON FERRIC FOUNDRIES
METALWORKING
METALBURFACE TREATMENT
CABLE AND WIRING
BATTERY MANUFACTURING
ELECTRONIC COMPOUNDS
OTHER METALLIC INDUSTRIES
FOOD
TEXTILE AND CLOTHING
TEXTILE FINISHING
LEATHER AND TANNING INDUSTRY
WOOD AND CORK
PAPER PULP INDUSTRY
PAPER AND CARDBOARD MANUFACTURING
PAPER AND CARDBOARD TRANSFORMATIO
PRINTING AND EDITING
RUBBER-PLASTIC TRANSFORMATION
OTHER INDUSTRIES
OTHER PHARMACEUTICAL SPECIALITIES
PRODUCT RECOVERY

TOTAL NUMBER OF WORKERS
I NUMBER OF WORKERS
YEAR 85
1065
523
280
6897
2033
3278
5777
128
249
1618
13406
1267
585
486
2541
2138
227
908
26986
10113
5936
1373
1181
0
1384
522
1534
398
4069
3490
10759
43

111194
YEAR 86
1113
928
563
6444
2298
3491
8449
217
267
1949
14723
1287
598
573
3114
2961
227
1288
29648
9737
7262
5239
2526
68
1498
2029
3963
497
9545
4440
10547
71

137560
YEAR 87
1160
1190
1187
7024
2355
3767
8439
217
491
2029
17067
2501
711
2409
3972
4102
320
1334
83112
21161
9828
7391
2891
319
1498
3191
4529
681
11383
5279
11153
83

222774
YEAR 88
1132
1697
1338
12280
1963
3812
8462
181
341
2044
17683
2993
1070
3688
5001
4774
93
2266
98074
27248
27463
8132
4007
5110
1498
3331
6269
3624
19390
16915
11524
252

303655
YEAR 89
1179
1696
1624
14903
2202
3532
8398
248
324
2487
19253
2590
1105
3979
5137
4924
320
2050
1 09662
30807
34591
8896
4462
7770
1498
3196
7421
7079
23273
32615
12308
839

360368
YEAR 90
1179
1724
1572
14933
2341
1543
8150
250
360
2509
20077
2554
1178
3935
5565
4982
338
2071
1 1 2657
32171
33795
8603
4456
8342
1498
3247
7436
8151
24038
32381
12185
1036

365257
^i/^ I irtcr o
m
XI
O
o

Tl
m
O
m
m
z

I


1
jn
z
~n
O

O
co

-------




TYPE
10
12
14
16
17
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
80
90







WASTE DESCRIPTION
SURFACE TREATMENT WASTES
WASTES CONTAINING SOLVENTS
LIQUID OILY WASTES
PAINT AND VARNISH WASTES
SLUDGE FROM METALWORKING
S. WASTES FROM MEC. AND THER. TREATMENTS
INCINERATION, FUSION AND SLAG WASTES
ORGANIC SYNTHESIS WASTES
CHEMICAL TREATMENT SLUDGES
SOLID MINERAL WASTES
WASTES FROM TREATMENT SLUDGES
DIRTY MATERIALS
SPILLS, LOSSES AND OUT OF SPEC PRODUCTS
PACKAGING INERT WASTES
DOMESTIC WASTES

TOTAL OF REPORTER TONS


{^44*ft«ulrmtl?pN


YEAR 85
63000
10000
4000
4000
1000
31000
242000
31000
1 97000
31000
123000
6000
27000
166000
44000

980000


>pr^(i|>


YEAR 86
67000
24000
7000
19000
1000
38000
223000
71000
132000
30000
119000
9000
32000
270000
38000

1080000
FIGURE-3

W$f$£^

QUANTITY
YEAR 87
80000
29000
15000
20000
2000
68000
1 47000
75000
114000
27000
100000
13000
22000
426000
77000

1215000


'^f^W^i

f Ton/vear
YERA 88
123000
58000
36100
32500
6900
83000
229000
101600
139000
39300
205000
21600
23000
636000
116000

r 1850000





YEAR 89
95500
41200
31300
6400
2500
95800
250000
75400
163900
37300
184400
37500
35200
946200
180400

2185000





YEAR 90
100000
52800
23000
19000
3000
90000
271900
87500
168500
38400
215800
33800
35200
904300
206800

2250000

CO
m
30
H
o
O

§
Tl
m
33
m

O
m
m
S


I
m


3
n
o
m

m

-------
WASTE GENERATION RATIOS (TONS/YEAR/WORKERl
WASTE TYPE
SPECIAL
DOMESTIC WASTE TYPE
NERT
         YEAR 85
               4.2
                                            3.2
               1.4
 YEAR 86
       3.1
                         2.9
       1.9
YEAR 87
                                                                1 M
      1.6
                                                                    YEAR 88
                                                                          1 '
                                                                          2.3
1.7
    YEAR 89
                                                                                    1.9
                                                                                    2.0
                                                       2.0
YEAR 90
                                                                 1.8
                                                                 2.0
                                                                 2.3
            YEAR 85
YEAR 86
YEAR 87
            YEAR 88
YEAR 89
YEAR 90
     II SPECIAL


     • INERT


     D DOMESTIC WASTE TYPE
                                               FIGURE-4A
                                                                                                                o
                                                                                                               a
                                                     in
                                                     •ii
                                                     in

                                                     n
                                                     in

                                                     g

                                                     m
                                                     z

                                                     ji
                                                     O

                                                     S
                                                     m
                                                                                                                in
                                                                                                                O
                                                                                                                33
                                                                                                                O
                                                                                                                m
                                                                                                                to

-------
Lul
e
LU

I
UJ
O
cr
111
o
2
JJJ
DC
LU
O
£T

2:
                                 SPECIAL
cr

>•
                                        (T
                                        2
cc
s
                                                       cc
                                                       a
                                                                                                        INERT
                                                                                400
                          — DOMESTIC W, TYPE
               3.00 ' q
               200	'_—,
                     5
                     ni
  I
                                                19

                                                SE
                                                UJ
        or
        5
                                                                                 10.00
                                                                                  5.00 —
                                                                                  0.00
                                                            FIGURE-4B

-------
WASTE TYPE
SPECIAL
DOMESTIC TYPE
 NERT
                   YEAR 85
                         4.2
                         3.2
                          1.4
                   YEAR 86
                          3.1
                          2.9
                          1.9
YEAR 87
       1.8
      2.1
       1.6
YEAR 88
              YEAR 85
YEAR 86
YEAR 87    YEAR 88    YEAR 89    YEAR 90
                                          FIGURE-4C
       1.9
      2.3
                                                            1.7
                                                                                         YEAR 89
                                                                                                1.9
2.0
                  2.0
     YEAR 90
                                                                                  1.8
                                                                                                           2.0
                                                                                                           2.3
                                                                                     1 SPECIAL


                                                                                    • INERT


                                                                                    D DOMESTIC TYPE
                                                                                                                               in
                                                                                                                               3
                               O

                               >

                               o
                                                                                                                               m

                                                                                                                               O
                                                                                                                               m
                                                                                                                               m
                                                                                                       ^
                                                                                                       $
                                                                                                       m
                                                                                                       i)
                                                                                                       u
                                                                                                       < i
                                                                                                       rn
                                                                                                                               CO
                                                                                                                               -  i

-------

' WASTES SBLF*R£PORTED CtASStFIED 8Y INDUSTRIAL ACTIVITY- OROMF '
.1.JJ..J.....J.1..,:,mm.,fl.,.l 	 MjJ,,J.,^,,;^.,,rf.r,,J.^.-.v,.v.,.,..v.,r.v,,.,._rr.,^r,ra 	 .,mm.frrmrm,,m,-,,™, 	 - '.. 	 > 	 	 '-..•'

INDUSTRIAL
iROUP CODI
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32



ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
OIL REFINING
IRON WORKS
METALLURGICAL
NON METALLIC MINERAL PRODUCTS
CHEMICAL AND PETROCHEMICAL COMMOD
INORGANIC CHEMICAL COMMODITIES
RAW PLASTICS
FERTILIZERS
PEST CONTROL CHEMICALS
PHARMACEUTICAL COMMODITIES
OTHER CHEMICALS
METAL FOUNDRIES
NON FERRIC FOUNDRIES
METALWORKING
METAL SURFACE TREATMENT
CABLE AND WIRING
BATTERY MANUFACTURING
ELECTRONIC COMPOUNDS
OTHER METALLIC INDUSTRIES
FOOD
TEXTILE AND CLOTHING
TEXTILE FINISHING
LEATHER AND TANNING INDUSTRY
WOOD AND CORK
PAPER PULP INDUSTRY
PAPER AND CARDBOARD MANUFACTURING
PAPER AND CARDBOARD TRANSFORMATIO
PRINTING AND EDITING
RUBBER-PLASTIC TRANSFORMATION
OTHER INDUSTRIES
OTHER PHARMACEUTICAL SPECIALITIES
PRODUCT RECOVERY
TOTAL OF REPORTER TONS


YEAR 85
11400
102800
4000
83000
34700
70300
19300
700
400
14400
39300
118000
9000
6000
38300
2800
200
800
85500
52600
30800
9500
4000
0
1 54600
21000
28000
3500
7700
2600
10800
14000
980000

YEAR 86
10800
98500
9900
43100
29800
69300
26700
600
400
56600
57300
89300
12200
5700
41500
4100
200
600
1 06000
60700
33500
45600
14100
1600
66800
59800
54700
3000
54000
1300
13100
9200
1080000
FIGURE-5
QUANTITY Ton/vear
YEAR 87
7300
6800
9400
51800
27700
71100
29900
600
600
59100
57400
1 1 5900
9000
16200
51500
6500
200
800
293500
151000
31200
19100
17000
1300
62500
34800
40600
3500
16800
1100
11200
9700
1215000

YEAR 88
16600
133700
9400
1 43200
26100
95700
42300
300
900
70600
65200
79700
13400
24300
52200
7500
100
4500
346500
199200
58800
25000
32600
53200
1 32000
36600
47800
9800
32100
42900
10800
37000
1850000

YEAR 89
7000
1 1 0400
9200
182000
20700
89400
39600
200
1700
52900
77500
31700
11300
22300
31000
7300
100
1700
348500
242700
68800
61700
41700
65300
1 46500
26900
47100
29000
54900
233100
24600
98200
2185000
YEAR 90
9500
103200
7900
213000
18200
82400
46800
200
1000
69800
88100
44200
11000
17200
30600
8600
100
2100
295400
255200
57000
32800
54800
52600
140500
29600
50200
30900
40900
319000
23600
113600
2250000

CO
oo
m
37
o
m
3J
m

o
m
m
I

m
m


3
3D
O
m

-------
FINAL  SELF-REPORTED  WASTE TREATMENT  SYSTEM (IN %)
TREATMENT SYSTEM
RECYCLING
TO SOIL OR UNKNOWN DESTINATION
LANDFILLING
WASTE WATER AND LIQUID TREATMENT PLANTS
 NCINERATION
OTHER
                     YEAR 85
                         18.71
                         26.26
                         6.96
                         0.48
                         15.85
                        22.88
                 YEAR 86
                     19.75
                     21.20
                     6.76
                      1.36
                     14.79
                     24.92
YEAR 87
    25.45
    14.84
     7.06
     1.52
    13.83
    23.22
YEAR 88
    24.06
    15.10
     4.19
     1.11
    14.30
    25.48
YEAR 89
    19.08
                                                                13.02
     4.65
                                                                 2.47
    27.32
    21.66
YEAR 90
                                           TREATMENT SYSTEM
           YEAR 85
YEAR 86
YEAR 87
           YEAR 88
YEAR 89
YEAR 90
                                                        RECYCLING
                                                       TO SOIL OR UNKNOWN DESTINATION
                                                     D WASTE WATER AND LIQUID TREATMENT PLANTS
                                                        INCINERATION
                                                        LANDFILLING
                                                       OTHER
                                           FIGURE-6A
    21.65
                                                            10.71
     4.90
                                                                                                   I 'I')
    32.39
    21.05
                                                                                               z


                                                                                               n
0
2

i

O
I !
in
n
m

o
ni
                                                                                                                       rn
                                                                                                                       z

                                                                                                                       ji
                                                                                                                       0
                                                                                                                       m
                                                                                               <)
                                                                                               x
                                                                                               n
                                                                                               m
                                                                                                                       to

-------
 UJ
LU

<
 o
 cc
111
UJ
o

LU
DC
LU
LL

O
o
DC
LU
FINAL
SELF-REPORTED WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM (IN %)

j
i



20 -:
10 _



"• RECYCLING






c
YEAR 85 —
^


— — «


*-X


DO (O CO
DC CC CC
UJ LU LU




CD O
CO 0)
CC K.
$ a



3.00 "
2.00
1.00 -
o.oo -



I
-

;


*" INCINERATION



J

YEAR 85 —


/— "

YEAR 86 —

•—^

YEAR 87 —





J
/

YEAR 88 —

^



YEAR 89 —
YEAR 90 — '









— TO SOIL OR UNKNOWN DESTINATION



30.00 _
20.00
10.00 _' "•

^-~ — ^

0 00
1/5 (£» h- CO O)
CC CC CC CC CC
UJ LU LU LU LU
>->->->->-


YEA.R90 — '


"• LANDFILLING


40.00
20,00
_
.--
^r



0.00
in 10 I-- to O) o
CO CO flO CO CO O)
CC OZ OC CC DC DC
LU LU LU LU LU LU

FIGURE-SB



— WASTES WATER AND LIQUID TREATMENT PLANTS


10.00
-
5.00




0.00
in
->->->->•


— OTHER



—— '


0.00
in
CO

•*•' -.


^---


	 •=»«,


u> r- co o> o
CO CO CO CO O>
CC QC CC OT QC
1U LU LU UJ Ui
>->->->->-




-------
FINAL SELF-REPORTED WASTE DESTINATION
TREATMENT SYSTEM
AUTHORIZED PLANTS
IN SITU TREATMENT
RECYCLERS
STORAGE
SEWERAGE
OTHER
MUNICIPAL SERVICES
DELIVERY TO SERVICE COMPANIES
DESTINATION NON SPECIFIED
TOTAL OF TONS
 YEAR 90
TON/YEAR
   601000
   565000
   255000
   114000
    32000
    65000
   385000
    46000
   187000
  2250000



1
mmmmmm
•

m
1


',.,. :v ;- :,:,:.. -j

_j











I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 200000 400000 600000 800000



9 AUTHORIZED PLANTS
• IN SITU TREATMENT
D RECYCLERS
H MUNICIPAL SERVICES
• STORAGE
H SEWERAGE
H3 DELIVERY TO SERVICE COMPANIES
• DESTINATION NON SPECIFIED
• OTHER


                                                      FIGURE-6C
o
f
O
g
n
m
Z
-
Jl
( <
                                                                                                      I '
                                                                                                      Jl
                                                                                                      < >
                                                                                                      in

-------
142
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
             FIGURE 7. AVAIABLE INDUSTRIAL WASTE TREATMENT
                       CAPACITIES IN CATALDNYA.
               TREATMENT SYSTEM
                  CAPACITY TON/YEAR
            PHYSICOCHEMICAL (LIQUIDS)

            PHISICOCHEMICAL (SOLID)

            SOLVENT RECOVERY

            INCINERATION

            LANDFILLING  (VOLUME IN m3)
                        MONO LANDFILLS

                        MULTI PURPOSE
                      20.000

                      16.000

                      30.000

                         500*


                   1.000.000 m3

                   3.000.000 m3
           * ROGHLY 3000  TON/YEAR LEFT IN FACILITIES ON
             GENERATORS.

-------
ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES AND SANCTIONS TO VIOLATORS
                                                                               YEARS
                                                                                                                                                                           m
                                                                                                                                                                           3D

NUMBER OF REQUESTED ACTIONS
NUMBER OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
NUMBER OF PENALTIES
SIZE OF MONETARY PENALTIES (IN PESETAS)
1985

4
5
810.000
1986

7
10
2.380.000
19B7
47
13
42
4.950.000
1988
58
28
95
10.900.000
1989
101
33
182
18.550.000
1990
155
37
2*2
39.850.000
1991
244
55
212
85.440.000
                                                                                                                                                                           o
                                                                                                                                                                           o
                                                                                                                                                                           o

                                                                                                                                                                           -n
                                                                                                                                                                           m
                                                                                                                                                                           33
                                                                                                                                                                           m

                                                                                                                                                                           O
                                                                                                                                                                           m
                                                                                                                                                                           m
                                                                                                                                                                           D

                                                                                                                                                                           O


                                                                                                                                                                           I
                                                                                                                                                                           m
                                                                                                                                                                          m
                                                                                                                                                                          o
                                                                                                                                                                          m

                                                                                                                                                                          m
                                                                          FIGURE   8

-------
144                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            145


SPECIFIC DETAILS REGARDING HAZARDOUS WASTE TRANSPORT AND DISPOSAL

LILIANA MARA

Director,  Strategy and Water Policies  Directorate, Ministry of  Environment, 12 B-dul Libertatii,
Bucharest, Rumania.


1     INTRODUCTION

      The human activity is directly generating pollutants having different degrees of toxiousness
for environment and for society implicitly.
      For economic  and technological reasons, the ideal  to achieve a closed revaluation cycle
and reintegration into the circuit of the pollutants is still far from obtaining a real finality, although
in the future, this will be the only way out of the present ecological deadlock.
2      ELEMENTS OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND
       ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

       For  the  purpose of  ensuring  the  compatibility  between the economic activity and the
environment protection in  Rumania, the legal and institutional system was created before 1989 for
protecting and improving the quality of the environment, including the ecosystems and the whole
natural biologic resource.
       The principal Romanian environmental law dates from 1973 (Law no. 9), It provides a
conceptual framework  for  environmental  regulation,  including  principles  and duties  for the
protection and improvement of all environmental media. These principles were developed through
special laws, such as:
             The Law on Water no.8/1974;
             The Law on the disposal of wastes and  recovery of materials, made in 1975 and
             up-dated in 1988;
             The Law on the protection of forest, 1987;
             The Law on the installations for the protection of the environment, 1986.

       The inventory covers also the following  areas:  hunting and fishing, pesticides, nuclear
activities, hygiene and health standards, air, water and soil quality, levels for noise, construction,
permits and authorizations  for the environmental protection and water management. Neverthe-
less, despite the intentions set out in the law, structural inadequate, including particulary political
and soft  budget constraints, rendered the laws largely ineffective.
       A government decision  in  1991 began the  process of organizing an  overall system  of
environmental management by establishing the present Ministry of Environment (no.264/1991).
The ministry  has began the process of drafting a new general environmental law and new law
management.  In the future,  the Moe should be involved on reviewing all legislation which may
have an  impact on the environment.


3     HAZARDOUS WASTES TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL

       The effect of the  hazardous  wastes may be insidious, of wide spectrum  and persistent.
Rumania as a country of  considerable industrial potential; that operated at full capacity until 1990,
has annually produced important quantities of wastes and industrial residues, to which there are
added municipal wastes, those wastes derived from livestock farms, as  well as untreated waste
wasters discharged from industrial enterprises or towns.
       It is estimated  that  annually, over 75 mill, tons of various residues or wastes were
deposited on the soil, out of which a great amount (about 22 mill.t} is represented by the ashes

-------
146                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


from coal-using thermal stations, sludge deriving from waste water treatment plants (about 15
mill.t/year), municipal wastes (over 2 mill.t/year) and so on.
       Until now, from the point of view  of the collection-separation-transport-disposal-revaluation
process, the problem of wastes and  residues has not been approached in a unitary way, showing
great shortcomings, although there was,  ever since 1979, a Decree of the State Council regarding
collection, handing in, management  and revaluation  of wastes and other raw material resources,
more often than not it was not observed.
       The collection and  transport  stage shown and still shows great shortcomings, due to the
shortage of adequate equipment and technologies. This generates a diffused pollution, difficult to
trace or, if it is noticeable,  hard to control and eliminate.
       The separation stage was nearly lacking, therefore, the town stockpiles, for  instance, are
mostly mixed ones, including at the  same time both  street domestic wastes and treatment sludge
and industrial sludges.
       As far as the disposal stage,  the  existing data bring into relief over 1900 areas with waste
deposits, out of which 696 belong to the communal  administration, 660 to  agriculture, 315 to the
mining and oil production, 44 to  the chemical industry, 33 to the metallurgical industry, 12 to the
building materials industry and the other  sectors.
       The surface affected by wastes and residues is about 18 thousand ha., out of which 11,9
thousand ha. arable land. Out of these, about 2700 ha. agricultural lands are covered with  ash
from electric and thermal stations and about 2000 ha. are occupied by sterile deriving from  metal
treatment.
       Besides the great occupied surface, the deposition lands were not always  correctly
selected,  taking  into  account the  waste characteristics  and  the  risks they  may generate.
Moreover, the deposits are some times only scarcely developed, not ensuring protection  of all
environmental factors.
       It should be mentioned that disposal of industrial wastes in stockpiles, pits, ponds lagoons
is not  always arranged and controlled,  certain enterprises not giving importance to the noxious
generated  into environment. Therefore,  nearby  these deposits the underground waters, surface
waters, soil and air are frequently polluted, and the landscape is modified.
       The town  dumps  are  generally  located in  areas which  offer  only  a relatively natural
protection as to the effects of the deposited materials; they are  not equipped with the necessary
developments as  well as  with bottom  waterproofing, enclosing,  infiltration  and exfiltration
drainage.
       In  the view of reducing waste  quantities that  would  need unpolluted  and controlled
disposal some technologies have been promoted and they are at present available for the turning
to good account the energy and the useful compounds of wastes, Thus, municipal waste and pig
and  cow slurry digesting  has become  a  current practice which  allows to obtain  a quantity of
digestion has equivalent to over 530.000 t.c.c. annually.
       But the waste and  residue reserves that  can  be  evaluated  are   much  higher.  The
calculations carried out for the industrial area of the city of Bucharest together with  its outskirts
have indicated that the  metallic compounds  recovery  from waste  waters and  galvanization
sludges may lead  to the annually recycling of the following quantities of metals: 32 t copper, 23 t
zinc, 8 t cadmium, 8 t nickel, 50 t  chromium. Moreover the quantity of heavy metals recovered
annually from waste waters  and galvanization sludges  in the  industrial area  of Brasov city
amounts to: 11 t copper, 5 t cadmium, 9 t zinc, 3 t nickel, 10 t chromium.
       The phosphogypsum, slag and ash deposits as well as  untreated waste waters from the
manufacture  of pulp and  paper  also represent  important secondary raw material sources  which
are waiting to be  put in value. For  this  purpose rather reduces financial efforts are needed, but
which  Rumania cannot undertake in this transition period.
       The ministry of Environment of  Rumania, in its  present  structure, has been founded in
1991.  One of its main lines of  actions  in the field  of waste  management was that of correctly
estimating what has been produced up to now  and of assessing  the  ways of doing away or
evaluating the existing waste quantities.  Until the end of this action, Rumania  could not accept the
idea of waste imports, especially those belonging to the  category of highly dangerous wastes,
whose  elimination requires great  financial efforts.  However the paradox  took place. Taking

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             147


advantage of the fact that there are no strict regulations in the field and under the mask of certain
unusable products but whose guarantee term was not specified, great quantities of toxic wastes
were  brought  into  the  country  by  fraudulent means  and then  deposited  under precarious
conditions in densely populated areas.
      Rumania is at present making  efforts in solving this problem. But personally I think that we
shall be able only to apply an old Romanian proverb saying "catch the blind pluck his eyes" while
our country will be left with severe damages both at internal and at external level.
      Recently,  in  order to avoid  such situations,  the Governmental  Decision  no.340/1992
regarding  the importing  regime any  kind of wastes and residues as well as  other health and
environmental hazardous goods, has been passed.

      The structural changes taken  place in  the Romanian society call for structural  changes
also in the outlook regarding the organization of the environmental protection activity and  implicitly
of the wastes  management as  part  and  parcel  of this  activity. Therefore,  the  ministry  of
environment and the environmental monitoring and protection territorial agencies were organized,
while with the support of the World Bank the Strategy on  Environmental Protection was drawn up;
this Strategy has a  chapter concerning waste  management. We are far from attaining our aims,
sometimes due to financial means, sometimes due to a poor ecological consciousness, but there
is something that we know for sure: we live in an  Europe in which ecology has no boundary and
we must unite our efforts lest we should be faced with an ecological disaster.

-------
148                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             149


THE ROLE OF INTERPOL IN ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

S0REN KLEM, transcript oi a contribution to the Conference.

I.C.P.O. Interpol, General Secretariat, 50, Quay Achille Lignon, 69006, Lyon, France


      My name is Seren Klem,  I'm working in the I.C.P.O. Interpol General Secretariat in Lyon
France,  in the Economic Crime Group. Apart from a large number of different kinds of fraud I also
deal with the field of environmental crime.
      The illegal transboundery movements of hazardous wastes is of special interest to Interpol
for many reasons:
      First and foremost  because  the  crime is international  and this is, as  you know, what
Interpol  is dealing with.  Another  reason is that traffic in hazardous waste is normally organized
crime and associated with violations in other fields of law, such as fraud, breach of trust, bribery,
document forgery etc. Furthermore, the  criminals are very often experienced and previously
known to the  police for other offenses such as for instant trafficking in drugs and different kinds of
frauds.

      So far, only a  few  number of cases on environmental  crime have  been reported to the
General Secretariat from the  Interpol member countries. However, all of these  cases are in fact
dealing  with  traffic  in hazardous waste  and dangerous  substances.  Now, to get some more
information and  a more global picture about this  specific kind crime, we recently sent out  a
questionnaire  to all the  158  member  countries and the result of  this  study was published  last
week.
      It is obvious, that if this problem is  to be dealt with effectively, the enforcement agencies in
the  involved   countries  will  have to  collect,  process  and exchange  as  much  information  as
possible. In this  connection Interpol  can play  an important role as the central point and platform
for this information exchange  and case coordination.

      Let me briefly give some reasons for this:
       •   All the countries represented at this conference are  either members  of Interpol or will
          be members in the near future.
      •   The service Interpol can offer in the fight  against international  environmental crime is:
          -   Firstly, rapid and safe exchange of information through our independent and world-
              wide telecommunication network.
          -   Secondly, a highly  performing Criminal Information System,
          -   Thirdly,  legal   and police  and translation  expertise and excellent  meeting  and
              conference facilities.

       When we receive information on for instant  traffic in hazardous waste we will immediately
 respond to the  involved countries  if  elements in  the  message are known to the files of  The
 General Secretariat and of course  if this information is not already known to the countries. This
 response is sent out immediately and  as a rule at least within 24 hours. Furthermore, If we see a
 pattern  or a  trend of criminality we will  send out  a diffusion  to inform and warn  the countries
 against f.g. a group of criminals  or  a special  kind of MODUS OPERANDI.  This message can be
 diffused all over the world within  seconds.
       We can also invite investigators for member countries to join together in  working groups in
 the  auspices  of Interpol - either  on a case to case basis or on a permanent basis. We already
 have a number  of these working groups  going on  in other field of crime. Apart from the working
 groups  our department  hosts each  year  a conference on International fraud and the  subject of
 environmental crime was in fact the main topic on the agenda on our  latest conference in June
 this year.

-------
150                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


       Recognizing the seriousness of environmental crime, Interpol will in the future give priority
to this subject and especially the hazardous waste traffic. It is our intention to include the subject
of environmental crime in our future fraud conferences.
       Finally, I  think you  should know that Interpol  can in fact,  through  the  national central
bureaus, cooperate with any government agency concerned with combating criminal offenses,
including environmental enforcement agencies.
       So  I hope that  Interpol  in the  future will  play an important  role  in  the fight  against
international environmental  crime and I am looking forward to cooperating with you in this respect.
Just promise me, that you will go through your local national Interpol bureau.
       If you  have any questions you  are  welcome to  contact me at any  time  during this
conference.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             151


CITIZENS' ROLE IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAW IN EUROPE

MARTIN FUHR

Oko-Institute, Bunsenstrasse 14, 6100 Darmstadt, Germany


      SUMMARY

      Given the interrelationships of social  forces equally manifest  in  both  East and  West,
environmental protection goals can only then  be realized if not only the authorities and industry
are involved  in  their implementation,  but  also citizen  action  groups  and  environmental
associations. The paper describes the preconditions requisite to successful citizen participation,
and compares  these  with  existing practices  in  EC  Member States.  From  the  thus  identified
deficits, concrete demands for an extension of  participation and litigation rights are  derived.


1     INTRODUCTION

      Contrary to the widely held conviction,  public approval procedures are not  an invention of
modern environmental law but an achievement of the French Revolution dating back almost two
hundred years1.  Napoleon introduced this procedure in the occupied european territories2.  In (he
national industrial codes the procedure survived as legislation 10 the present lime. In the last thirty
years, however, various laws  have developed from ihe industrial code5,  all  of which  include a
(slightly modified) version of the public ('formal') approval procedure.
      Public participation with its inherent democratic elements can therefore be  described as a
relic of the French Revolution  and can  be regarded as an intruder in a stale and administrative
structure  dominated  by  authoritarian principles.  The  practice  of  secrecy  within government
authorities has changed very little to the present day\
      In order to illustrate  the  importance of public participation,  I would  like  to preface my
comments with two quotations. The first was made by the Prussian king Frederick William  III in a
cabinet order of 4 February 18045:
      "If one were to completely deny (access by) a specific and respectable type of public, one
      would have no means  of exposing the negligence or disloyalty of civil  servants; on the
      contrary,  the  public is  the surest counter both for the  government itself and for the
      community to  carelessness or dishonest Intentions on the part of authorities, and for this
      reason deserves to be heard."

      The second quotation is from a leading article in the business section of the conservative
Frankfurter AJJgemeine Zeitung  on Jegal status under  the German Bundes-lmmissionsschutz-
geseiz (Federal Emission Control Act)6:
      "The law also makes provision for local residents to file objections, basically because the
      past has  shown that authorities concerned with the 'economic power'  of trteir district tend
      where possible to connive with profit-seeking companies."

      Here we have the main reason for public participation in a nutshell, namely as a check on
the work of the authorities. Their legally defined task is to protect the environment and the  health
of the population. Experience has shown, however, that whenever authorities deal  with industry in
private, these interests are put aside7.
      The participation of the public in  the implementation environmental  law not only  serves
improved environmental protection; ft also realizes elementary principles of  the Rule of Law, i.e.:
      -   access to justice for affected third parties;
      -   the separation and balancing of powers (Executive, Legislative, Judiciary);
      -   the principle of democracy.

-------
152                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
2     POINT OF DEPARTURE

2.1    In the foreseeable future, economic reasons will make it impossible to place a cost on the
       utilization of natural resources that corresponds to the real social costs. Regulatory powers
       exercising the sovereign powers of the State are therefore indispensable.

2.2    To statutorily enshrine environmental protection obligations will not by itself  lead  to  any
       effective  progress if this  is not  also accompanied by  the creation of  the framework
       conditions  for  their  implementation.  This means  not only the  establishment of
       administrations, but the administration must also receive instruments that empower them
       to really enforce these obligations.

2.3    This implies that government  authorities must not be  burdened  with  tasks  that  are
       impossible for  them  to  fulfil  for  structural  reasons.  Thus  it cannot  be the  task of
       government authorities to detect  "clean  technologies"  in  order to bring industry to  an
       "integrated pollution control"8. These are tasks for development laboratories and  not  for
       administrative officials.

2.4    The absence of public participation leads to a disequilibrium in the triangular relationship
       polluter - state  - affected party. This  disequilibrium is ultimately always at the cost of the
       environmental and affected third parties. If it is left alone, no administrative body has the
       clout to hold sway over industry and the associated.
                                      State Authority


                            Polluter               Third parties
          Figure 1. Enforcement Triangle

2.5    Therefore  those who are  affected by environmentally  harmful activities must also be
       allowed an active role  in the implementation  of environmental law. These include both
       individual citizens in their role as consumers, employees and as users of natural  goods,
       and the corresponding representative bodies (consumer and environmental  associations,
       trade unions, local and regional "grassroot'-groups, but also municipalities).

2.6    Timely and comprehensive public participation is ultimately also in the interests of industry
       and administration. Uncomfortable facts are sooner or later usually uncovered, regardless
       of attempts to  conceal them. This then creates a particular "finding-out" effect, which can
       cause sustained damage to public confidence. And industrial firms are often  particularly
       dependent on a good public reputation.


3      ELEMENTS OF EFFECTIVE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

       Effective public participation in  the implementation  of environmental law requires three
preconditions:

       1.     Transparency of all environmentally relevant information;
       2.     Participation in  decision-making procedures;
       3.     Effective legal remedies against environmentally harmful activities.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              153


3.1    Transparency: Disclosure  of all environmentally relevant information

      Comprehensive  knowledge  and information is  essential for the individual's ability to  play
his  or her full potential  role in practice. This requires the disclosure  of positive information, but
aiso a clear statement of informational deficits, so-called "negative information"9.
      The EC-Council  has  adopted on  7 June 1990 a Directive on the freedom of access to
information  on the  environment10.  This  Directive  awards  an  individual  right  of  access  to
information  held  by  the authorities11.  This right exists in a number  of  EC  and non-EC
countries12.
      The freedom of access to information is an important step, but there are still a number of
deficits:
          It is limited  to the information  held by the  authority; there is  no obligation for the
          authority to coliect the relevant information.
      -   There is no right of access to  information kept by the  industry itself comparable to the
          US "Rigtit-to-know Act"; as a result it is only an indirect right of information - the direct
          fine between  citizens and the polluter/producer is not opened.
          It remains unclear what information can be  held  back as industrial  and commercial
          secrets13; here a  negative definition of data that may in  no event enjoy the  status of
          secrets would be necessary14.
          The practical conditions of access to information are  unclear, e.g. whether there is a
          right to obtain copies of documents.
      -   A  further  point is  that  it would be worth considering whether, in the age of  data
          processing,  other forms of  data transfer,  e.g.  results  of  ambient air quality
          measurements on  diskette, should be made a part of the lega! claim to information.

3.2    Participation: Comprehensive participation of citizens, associations and municipalities

       Besides trie informational basis, a further precondition is that of equal opportunities in the
decision-making procedure. From the legal point of view, this demand follows  from the principles
of non-discrimination and fair trial.
       Here the participation  o1 Hie public must fulfil the following criteria:
       1.      Timeliness
       2.      Comprehensiveness and equal weight
       3.      Participation must also extend to the post-licence control of environmentally harmful
              activities.

       These points must be enshrined in corresponding procedural codes.

3.2,1  Timeliness

       Participation must set in a procedural stage in  which no central preliminary decisions  have
already been taken, because otherwise the participation is degraded to a  mere "alibi event".
       The EIA Directive does  contain the principle  of timeliness. However, it is unclear  what
consequences arise from a violation of this principle.

3.2.2  Comprehensiveness and  equal weight

       The participation procedure must  allow all ecological and social effects to be a subject of
discussion between the involved  parties. The procedure is  degraded  if  certain questions are
excluded for formal reasons, such as the question of  alternative  solutions or the societal need for
a project.
       Affected parties must be allowed to  present  their position in  a well-founded  manner by
means of bringing in experts. This necessitates a suitable regulation of how the associated  costs
are to be covered.
       In most European countries, neither of these points have been  realized.

-------
154                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
3.2.3  Participation in the control phase

       Under the law as it currently stands,  public participation ends as soon as the project has
been licensed. This leads to  mistrust on the part of trie third parties, who - often quite rightly  -
fear that environmental regulations will be violated during the later operations.
       Public participation must therefore  include the "post-licence" control phase, thereby also
closing the circle to a timely participation in  new decisions. This requires the establishment of a
sustained communication procedure between the involved actors15.

3.2.4  Participation in product control

       In the EC countries citizen participation is limited to licensing and planning procedures for
industrial and infrastructure  projects (e.g.  industrial  plants,  highways, urban  planning). The
environmental impacts  caused by products and substances are not subject to a participation
procedure.  Even  in  the cases where  products are subject to governmental  authorization  and
control procedures (e.g. new  chemicals, pesticides), there are no participation or litigation rights
for third parties (e.g. environmental or  consumer organisations)  such as contained in  the  US-
American "Federal Insecticides, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act" (FIFRA).

3.2.5  Participation in sub-statutory legislation

       Important prior decisions  for  the implementation of environmental regulations are taken
through the issuance of decrees, ordinances, orders, bye-laws or other sub-statutory norms.
       The  public is  only involved in the drawing  up of these regulations in a few very limited
cases. None of the EC countries provide for the possibility of judicial review.

3.3    Access to justice

       Without the possibility of judicial review of breaches  of environmental law, participation
rights remain a paper tiger. The interrelationship of forces in the enforcement triangle will only be
significantly shifted if  third parties can also enforce their claims in the courts.
       In the EC Member States exist a variety  of mixtures of administrative and judicial review in
relation to environmentally relevant decisions  of administrative  authorities. All  Member States
nowadays - at least since the statutory changes  in the Netherlands following the  "Benthem"
case - have some system of administrative  and judicial review of decisions.  However,  the form
and the importance  of  each may  be  quite different; e.g. concerning  the  access of  common
interest  groups and members  of  the general  public  to  these institutions for   purposes  of
environmental  protection,  and in some  States also  concerning the effectiveness of existing
procedures and remedies and the rules of apportioning the costs.
       To provide  for a right of action against administrative authorities alone would, however, be
insufficient in view of the fact that the environment is often adversely affected not so much by the
positive decisions  of  an  authority but rather  by  its failure  to act against infringements of the law.
Therefore citizens should be enabled to also bring an action  directly against  polluters and  other
persons  who cause harm to the  environment.  In order to  avoid the confusing effect of parallel
proceedings against  administration  and  polluter, and respect national priority  rules as far as
possible, this direct way of action should be limited to cases  where the authority has refused or
failed to act.
       Effective interim  relief is often crucial  to the successful defence of environmental  interests
in  court. Therefore, Member States1 legislation  should  ensure that a plaintiff in these cases can
attain  quickly and   without  great  difficulty  a  court ruling which  suspends the  effect  of
environmentally relevant  administrative decisions or an injunction  which effectively  stops
environmentally harmful  activities. Deficits can be observed in a number of EC  Member States,
especially in France and Betgium.
       For actions in  the interest of the environment, the problem of costs is a decisive factor. In
principle,  costs,  including lawyers'  and experts'  fees,  should  not  provide  a barrier tor  the

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             155
commencement or continuation,  of such  proceedings. Therefore  it should  be ensured that the
plaintiff, if he succeeds, will recover all costs reasonably incurred, hereby removing any discretion
that the complaints authority or the court may have under national law, and providing for the case
that the losing party is unable to pay. At present, this has not been realized in any Member State.
       Furthermore the reduction  of the plaintiff's cost risk is warranted by the consideration that
there  is an overriding  public interest in  the  correct implementation  of  environmental  law.
Therefore,  any  initiative which aims  in this direction  should be  encouraged  and public funds
should not be spared in limiting the financial risk for private persons, which may be excessive e.g.
in cases where a company as party to the proceedings makes full  use of the available legal and
technical expertise. Thus it is necessary to exempt the plaintiff from court fees  and other parties'
costs as long as the action was brought in good faith and on the basis of an arguable case.
4      PRACTICAL CONDITIONS: NETWORKING BETWEEN NGO'S

       This short overview had shown that the public already has - if only to a limited extent -
possibilities of influencing environmentally relevant decisions. These possibilities should be made
use of, and at the same time claim should made to further improvements.
       For the practical  work,  a well-functioning  infrastructure on the side of the affected third
parties is of high importance. Experience  shows that the intervention of the public influences  the
results of the administrative procedures,  especially  in those cases where well  organized local
groups or associations use their participation rights. In quite a number of cases it was possible to
achieve stricter  air pollution limit values,  improved  safety measures or even the reduction of
hazardous waste streams.
       A prerequirement to such success is the existence of a struclure of communication and
flow  of information. In order to exert influence successfully it is decisive for the environmental
organizations to  elaborate well-founded proposals aiming at implementation and present them to
the protagonists  mentioned above. This requires a multidisciplinary argumentation referring to  the
problem  in question and  showing practical possibilities  of action, both  being  presented in a
conveyable form.
       In the field of licensing procedures for industrial plants the German "National Coordination
Bureau for   Licensing Procedures" could serve  as  a   model16. Moreover, a  Europe-wide
information exchange in  the field of waste policy was agreed at the conference "Environmentally
sound waste management? -  Current legal  situation  and  practical experience in Europe"17.
C.E.P.A., a non-governmental research institute from Barcelona, has taken the responsibility for
this Jurther cooperation18.
       Founded  in 1990, the "Environmental Law Network International" (ELNI) has  the task of
organizing  the  exchange between environmental lawyers  siding with  environmental
associations19. The network further also aims  to facilitate concerted  juristic action regarding
specific problems.
Beside  the  "European  Environmental  Bureau"  (EEB)  further  networks have  been set up in
Brussels as well; the "Climate Action Network" and the "Biotechnology Clearinghouse" of "Friends
of the Earth" have been established.  And  the ecologically minded transport associations have
delegated a  common representative  to  Brussels who will  be in charge  of  coordinating  the
activities from there.
       To secure that participation rights can be used effectively in the struggle for environmental
concerns further development or those  networks is crucial both on the national and  international
levels.
5      EFFECTIVE INSTRUMENTS: MAKING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DYNAMIC

       The broad participation of the public in a fair procedure is the conditio sine qua non in
environmental law. But that is not the end of the matter by a long way: public participation is - to
use mathematical terminology - a "necessary'  but not "sufficient" condition for this field of law. A

-------
156                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


high level of protection is  also indispensable  as a prior aim which must be defined in directly
enforceable basis obligations on the part of the operator.
       It cannot be the function of public  participation merely to  "fill in the loopholes".  In fact in
many procedures it has taken over this role, but this is not a satisfactory long-term solution,  not
only because it is asking too much but also because it blurs the  real responsibilities. It is for  the
operator to identify the problems and hazards involved; if he does not do so to a sufficient extent,
the authorities must coerce him.
       In addition, the conditions must be provided for effective implementation of the  law. This
means in particular that the legal structures of the relevant provisions must be designed such that
they necessitate a minimum of enforcement effort for the authorities.
Self-executing statutes (e.g. in the form of decrees) are preferable rather  than complicated
individual decisions (i.e. in the form of supplementary orders).
       It is of central importance that licences  permitting environmental pollution are only issued
lor a limited period. The temporal limitation opens the possibility of taking a new decision on  the
basis  of up-to-date  technological  and toxicological  developments.  The main  advantage  as
compared to the instrument of the supplementary order is that the burden of justification lies with
the polluter. He must - if he wants to receive a new licence - determine the relevant current data
(including the state of the art).  The work of the authority is limited to checking these documents
and taking a decision in the course of a new public procedure.
       Finally the  sub-legal definitions  in decrees  and administrative regulations  are of  great
importance. If,  as is  the case  with the German TA-Luft (Technical Instruction -  Air),  risks and
hazards  are simply "defined out of existence", there is a danger thai the protective aim of the  law
will only  be applicable in theory.
       REFERENCES
1.     Ci. here and later Fiihr, Sanierung von industrieanlagen, DilsseJdorf 1989, P. 14 et seq.

2.     In the later German Reich, where it was incorporated in the Preussische  Allgemeine
       Gewerbeordnung (Prussian  General Industrial Code) of  1845 and the Reichsgewerbe-
       ordnung (Imperial Industrial Code) of 1869.

3.     E.g. the Atomgesetz {Nuclear Act),  Abfallgesetz (Waste Act) and Bundes-lmmissions-
       schutzgesetz (Federal Emission Control Act).

4.     Cf. Guriit, Verwaltungsoffentlichkeit im Umweltrecht, Dusseldorf 1989, and Fiihr,  op cit., p.
       76 et seq.

5.     Cabinet orders had the character of laws, quoted from Schwan, Aktenoffentlichkeit, p. 1.

S.     Frankfurter Allgemeine  Zeiturtg, 6 December t989, op. 283,  p. 17, Fernando  Wassner:
       Wenn die Furchtzur Gelahrwird.

7.     For the  way in  which authorities circumvent  the  legally  prescribed right  of  public
       participation cf. Fuhr, op.cit,, p. 82 et seq.

8.     In Germany the obligation  in the Bundes-lmmissionsschutzgesetz  (Federal  Emission
       Control Act) to minimize industrial waste is in fact implemented - or better: not implemen-
       ted - in that way.

9.     This is, for instance, stipulated in Annex  III  No.  7 of the  EC  EIA Directive, according to
       which "technical gaps and missing knowledge" must also be declared.

10.    OJ No L 158/56, 23.6.1990 (90/313/EEC).

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            157


11.    And entitles every person who considers that his  request for information has been
      unreasonably  refused, ignored, or inadequately  answered by a public authority, to seed
      judicial or administrative  review of the  decision  in accordance with  the relevant national
      legal system.

12.    Cf.  the country reports in:  Winter,  Offentlichkeit von Umweltinformation, Baden-Baden
      1990.

13.    Art. 3 para 2 of the Access to Information Directive (90/313/EEC).

14.    Such provisions are part of the Directives on the use of genetically modified organisms, cf.
      Art. 19 para 4 of the Directives 90/219EEC and 90/220/EEC.

15.    The public participation model "OKOM-Park" developed by the OKO-lnstitute for the
      District Council  of Birkenfeld (Rhineland-Palatinate/Germany) contains such a procedure
      (Sailer, M./Fuhr, M., Modell der Burgerbeteiligung bei Ansiedlung von Gewerbebetrieben
      im Rahmen des OKOM-Park-Konzeptes, Darmstadt 1992).

16.    Cf. Wollny,  ELNI-Newsletter 1/91,  p. 21 et seq.; part  of the  coordination work  is a
      Newsletter (in  German)  obtainable from the above mentioned address of the OKO-
      lnstitute.

17.    31  May - 1 June 1991 in Frankfurt/Main;  the proceedings of the  conference are  available
      from the  ELNI Coordination Bureau.

18.    CEPA, carrer Jacint Verdaguer, 48, SP 48.08750  Molins de  Rei, Spain,  Fax +34-3-
      6800773.

19.    Cf. ELNI-Newsletter 1/91, p. 4 and ELNI-Newsletter 2/92,  p. 36; the Newsletter is available
      from the ELNI Coordination Bureau, c/o Oko-lnstitute, Bunsenstr. 14, D-6100 Darmstadt,
      Germany.

-------
158                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            159


PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND ITS IMPACT ON COMPLIANCE

NIGEL BLACKBURN

Director of the International Chamber of Commerce, 38 Cours Albert 1er, 75008, Paris, France
      As a representative of world-wide organization at an international Conference, I will first try
to set the Question of public information on environment in a world-level perspective.
      At Government  level,  world-wide  action can be  said to  have begun with  the  1972
Stockholm Conference.  This  gave rise to the creation  of  UNEP and  numerous  international
programmes on  a plethora of subjects. The Stockholm declaration only contained some fairly
general  Phraseology on information, none of which was  specifically addressed to the business
community.
      The  next  milestone is  usually said to be the 1987 report of the World Commission on
Environment and Development ("Brundtland Commission"). This led to a series of regional follow-
up conferences, the one generally regarded as the most valuable took place in Bergen,  Norway,
in May   1990  -  curiously enough, at exactly the  same  time as the first  conference in  this
enforcement series. The Bergen  Conference, which covered the UNECE area (Western and
Eastern Europe,  plus the USA and Canada)  concluded with two  notable elements of  "soft law".
One was the traditional ministerial declaration to which only 35 the governments involved were
party. The other  was  the  historically unique "Joint  Agenda for Action"  approved  both by
governments and the five non-governmental interests which had negotiating rights for the first part
of the  conference,  i.e.  business,  environmental  groups,  labour, science  and  youth. Both
documents contain extensive references to public disclosure of environmental information.
      Shortly  after Bergen, the European Community adopted a  Directive on freedom of access
to information on the environment, which will come  into force in the 12 Member States  at the  end
of 1992.
      Bergen  led  directly to  the United Nations Conference on  Environment and Development
(UNCED) in Rio in June 1992. For the purposes of  this Conference, note simply that UNCED  has
produced much more soft law on disclosure  of environmental information  - and this soft law is
subscribed  to  by virtually every country and at the level of the  head of  state or government.
Principle 10 of the  keynote Rio declaration for example reads as follows:

      "Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all  concerned
      citizens, at the  relevant level. At the national level, each individual shall have
      appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public
      authorities,  including  information  on  hazardous  materials  and activities  in their
      communities,  and the  opportunity  to  participate  in decision-making  processes.
      States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making
      information widely  available.  Effective  access  to judicial  and  administrative
      proceedings, including  redress and remedy, shall be provided."

       Many references to information appear in  the 500-page  "Agenda  21". They  cannot be
detailed today but they all help to  set the  scene - for business and other non-governmental
interests - in approaching the  specifics of the  Budapest Conference. The ICC has taken a positive
view  of  the  Brundtland Report, Bergen, and UNCED. Accordingly we  aim  to be circulating  a
positive view  on  provision  of information around our  network -  7,500  corporations  and
associations in over 100 countries - and to the business world at large. It has in fact been doing
so  since 1974,  when  it first issued its "Environmental  Guidelines for World Industry".  Three
current  initiatives should specifically be noted  by this audience:

       1. The Business Charter for Sustainable Development Although  launched only 18
          months  ago, the  business charter has  become the  benchmark  code for  corporate
          environmental management. Over 1,000  corporations and  business organizations in

-------
160                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


          some 50 countries have already expressed their support for it in writing, including for
          example  around  60 out of the top 100  in the fortune 500  list of leading industrial
          companies. The  charter is  endorsed by  over 40  international  organizations and
          numerous government leaders, including  Prime Minister Lubbers  of the Netherlands,
          William Reifly of  the U.S. EPA, and Laurens-Jan Brinkhorst of the EC's DG  XI. The
          Charter  comprises  16  principles,  of  which  the final one covering  compliance and
          reporting reads as follows:

          "Compliance and reporting
          To measure environmental performance;  to  conduct regular environmental
          audits and assessments of compliance with  company  requirements,  legal
          requirements  and these principles; and periodically  to provide appropriate
          information to the  Board of Directors, shareholders,  employees,  the
          authorities and the public."

          The Charter is incidently published in 24 languages, including German,  Hungarian,
          Polish and Russian;

       2.  Position Paper on Environmental Auditing The expression "Environmental Auditing"
          has been widely  but loosely used  for  a decade or more.  In 1988 the ICC decided to
          define the term,  and to encourage use  of  this definition and a  concise supporting
          elaboration and model  methodology. One firm principle is that audits are  an internal
          management tool, and audit reports should be used accordingly and not regarded as a
          vehicle  of public  information. The  position  paper,  which  drew extensively  on
          experience, has also become  an international benchmark  and  was a key reference in
          the EC's recent eco-audit initiative.

       3.  Position Paper  on  Environmental  Labelling  Schemes/Code  on  Environmental
          Advertising The power of the consumer in leading  or encouraging  the  business
          community  to apply high environmental  standards is very considerable,  but is also
          dependent on satisfactory information. As guidance in this  area, in 1990 we issued the
          first (and apparently the  only) international position paper  on  how environmental
          labelling schemes could be organized and operated, assuming that the government
          and public opinion  want  such a scheme.  We  followed this up with a  code  on
          environmental advertising (i.e.  advertising  using environmental claims) at end 1991.

       Our positive  attitude  on information is also seen, albeit less directly, in the series of nine
position  papers or "business  briefs"  prepared for  UNCED, covering economics   and  the
environment, toxic  chemicals,  hazardous wastes, energy and  the atmosphere,  biodiversity,
forests, technology transfer, biotechnology, and education.
       Right now we are assessing our  priorities in the light of UNCED's outcome. One priority
will however be preparation  of  a position  paper  on  what we  tentatively call "Environmental
Performance Reports" which are precisely corporate information to be put in the public domain.
The  phraseology   is still being  worked out, and  will benefit from input  from  this  valuable
conference. In will certainly encourage corporations to  report regularly  - for example in annual
reports - and in an objective and  quantified manner on  exactly what they are doing  to  minimize
the adverse environmental consequences on their activities processes and products. It  will very
likely take a view on the value of  external consultants in this regard. Note that parties within the
business community - for  example  banks,  investment or holding companies, the insurance
community,  maybe a company's  clients  and  sub-contractors - can have a keen interest in such
information. Moreover, there is  now  much discussion,  and some  consensus,  on placing more
reliance on  economic instruments for improved environmental management rather  than  undue
reliance on traditional "command and control". Tradeable pollution permits are one example which
can presumably only work with sound disclosure procedures. A subject for your third conference.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              161


      Perhaps it is  necessary to stale that the  Business Charter, the environmental auditing
paper and our  other existing  and  planned initiatives  in  this area  all  take compliance  with
regulations for granted. A key point is to engage the competitive forces within business, including
"peer group pressure", to show by  how much the company is managing  to exceed the legal
requirements.

Reasonable use of disclosure - drawing for example on the experience of the U.S. and Sweden -
is dearly going to be a necessary aspect of compfiance with environmental regulations throughout
the world. This perhaps applies to:
             The mass of medium and smaller enterprises without extensive in-house expertise
             and usually without a prestigious external image to maintain;
             Countries in Eastern  Europe and  elsewhere with socialist  planned economy
             systems, which meant of course that the government functioned as both regulator
             and operator/vested interest with results that are well known.

      The ICC would incidentally stress that the  same  conditions of disclosure should apply to
state-owned facilities as to private  corporations.  To conclude, we believe that the  effective
protection of the environment is best achieved by  an appropriate combination of legislation/regu-
lations and of  policies  established voluntarily  by  business.  The self-regulatory instruments
mentioned earlier are partly intended to help regulators prioritize their efforts. UNCED has spelt
out the  necessity of  co-operation,  dialogue,  and  trust  on  the  basis  of  sound  information
disclosure. The  business community  represented  by the ICC is willing  to  carry  forward  its
responsibilities in this spirit.

-------
162                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            163


PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND CITIZENS' ROLE IN ENFORCEMENT: RESULTS AND MISTAKES
IN BULGARIA

EVGUENI POPOV

Institute of Ecology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 2 Yuri Gagarin Street, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria


      SUMMARY

      The creation and strengthening of democratic traditions in Central and Eastern Europe
countries is a  complicated and continuous process, considering all the spheres of public life, as
well as the field of environmental protection.
      One of  the most manifested forms of social discontent against the former regime was the
environmental  protest. Both the direct danger for mental health in a number of cases and the fact
it was one of the little possible legal and organized forms of protest account for this protest.
      To understand  the present behaviour of people  and their rights according to the existing
legislation including the ones in the  field of environment, it is  necessary to know the history  of
environmental  movement in Bulgaria.


1     SITUATION IN BULGARIA

      Establishment of the first Society for  protection of nature in 189 an its activity resulted in
the formation  of the  first preserve - "Parangalitsa" in  1933, as well as the first National  park
"Vitosha" in 1934. These facts just confirm the existence of certain traditions and once again point
out that the  processes in Central  and  Eastern Europe to a great  extent are brought  to a
reestablishment of these traditions.
      The primary  non-governmental  organization in  Bulgaria during  communist rule  was
Ecoglasnost.  This organization  was started in 1989 mainly by intellectuals. The  group  gives
attention to a broad  range of issues including environmental  issues and human rights. It also
contributed to the overthrow of the  communist regime. Ecoglasnost was  one of the key forces
which founded the present ruling organization, the Union of Democratic Forces (UDF).
      The role  and  significance of  ECOGLASNOST in  the society in 1989 and 1990 created
such a phenomena that people wanted to join this organization  instead of establishing new ones.
This is one of the most characteristic features of the environmental movement in Bulgaria - an
existence of a strong environmental NGO. It might be said, that  the development of environmental
NGO's in Central and Eastern Europe is in broad scope: the one pole is held by Bulgaria and the
other one - by Hungary with approximately 500 NGO's. The presence  of a strong environmental
NGO enables an  easier  formation  of public opinion towards  a number of  problems. This,  of
course, presumes a  continuous period of internal  discussion within the NGO for working  out a
final decision. When  there  are a great number of environmental NGO's, the coordination  in
forming a common public opinion becomes  considerably difficult. Anyway the coordination among
the NGO's in Central and  East European countries is a tangible problem,  this often  hampers the
citizens' participation in the enforcement process.
       Most of Centra! and East European environmental NGO's passed  the romantic period  of
their development, when  all the activities were  based  on the  enthusiasm of the organization's
members, this was  connected with the beginning  of the  first crisis in the  organization.  Its
overcoming required transition from destructive approach (protests, human chains, polluters' shut-
down actions, etc.) to a constructive one (a participation in expert groups, working out of own
statements and  analyses, etc.).  This is certainly not  an  easy process because it  requires
professional skills in  the management of the organization's affairs. This is the only possible way
to survive.
       A growing number of Bulgarian NGO's are demonstrating interest in expanding the existing
system of protected areas  and lending their support to the enhanced management of the system.

-------
164                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      The public  in Bulgaria is  very  sensitive  towards the  problem  of  the former  damages
caused  to  the environment  and man as a result of pollution. It is considered as one of the
greatest crimes of the  former regime. Some suites  are brought at the moment against former
party leaders on different charges. An interesting fact is that the first case which was finished was
against the culprits for the damages caused by Chernobyl accident in Bulgaria. The Government
delayed deliberately the information  for the accident  from the population. The motivation was to
prevent confusion and  chaos.  Because nobody took action against  the damages,  the  Bulgarian
population was exposed to one of the biggest portions of radiation in Europe. Grigor Stoichkov  -
former member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party and chairman of the Commission
natural calamity and big industrial accidents at that time and prof. Shindarov - chief  toxicologist of
the state were condemned on this case. This is a good example for public disclosure in Bulgaria.
2      ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION

       Before  the analysis  of environmental legislation and the  citizens'  rights  and obligations,
public  participation and citizens' role in enforcement process according to this legislation, it is
important to emphasize on one specific characteristic of Bulgarian legal reform compared to other
Central and East European countries. This  reform started in Bulgaria with the enforcement of a
new Constitution. After that Environmental Law, Local Administration and  Local  Self-government
Law and Law  on Statistics and Public Information were adopted.  What is important for the public
disclosure and citizens' role in enforcement is  the fact that these laws were passed before the
enforcement of the basic economic laws.
       In October 1991, the Bulgarian  Parliament passed a new, comprehensive environmental
law, the Law  of Environmental  Protection. This act supplanted the  Law of Nature  Protection in
1967 and replaced the  Law of  Protection of Air, Waters and  Soils  from  Pollution in 1963. The
1991 law introduced  pollution charges within permissible limits and  made  Environmental Impact
Assessments  an  obligatory procedure. The  new  law incorporates  International  Union  of
Conservation of Nature (IUCN) criteria for designation of  protected areas and specifies minimum
staffing requirements for protected areas based on their size.
       Finally, the legislative reform for the  environment in Bulgaria also includes changes in the
new Constitution, as  well as in the Land-Use Law, the Law on Statistics and Public Information,
and in  the Accounting Law. There are proposed amendments to the Environmental Law that were
proposed in January 1992 on behalf of the Council of the  Ministers presently awaiting action in
the Parliament.
       There  in no doubt that 1991  Environmental Law necessitates amendments  and addenda,
specifically as  regards the chapters on information, assessment of the impact on  the environment,
responsibility.  Our contemporary  reality requires at least to  allot greater attention also to the roie
and place in environmental protection activity of non-governmental organization  and movements,
including that  of every citizen whose rights in this field are guaranteed by the Constitution of
Republic of Bulgaria proper (1).
       Active  involvement  of the citizens in working out of the new  iaws is not yet a regular
process. This  is absolutely valid  also for the environmental  legislation. Work on  the amendments
of  the  Environmental law  when  public participation  was symbolic illustrates that  fact.  Citizens'
involvement in development of regulations to implement the  law do not exist yet as practice.
       Procedure of  public  participation in  the discussion of Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) is treated by the  law very generally. In  section 20 is just mentioned that "all concerned
physical and juridical persons shall have the right to participate in the consideration  of the results
of  EIA,...".  Neither the law  nor the expected amendments  do not provide for the existing three
ways of public participation in EIA procedure (3):
       -   when the company that is proposing  the project first determines that it must conduct an
          EIA, it must conduct public hearings  to determine what types of  environmental impacts
          of the project are of public concern and should be reviewed;

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              165
          when the company has prepared a draft of its EIA, the company must allow the public
          to  submit written comments on the report and  must also  conduct  public Hearings  to
          receive oral comments on the draft report;
          after the final  EIA has  been written and before the  government  agency must take
          action based on the assessment, the public has an  opportunity to have one final input
          into the decision-making process.
3      INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

       Another important point for  public participation in enforcement process  is that for the
people  from  Western countries is  important to see  how democratic structures  similar  to the
Western ones are built to continue their support (financial and moral) for the changes in Central
and  Eastern  Europe, One  of these Western  democratic mechanisms is interrelation  between
governmental agencies and private consulting companies, NGO, etc. Unfortunately this is not the
situation in Bulgaria and in my view in other central and East European countries. Our ministries
are trying to  do as much as possible of the professional work on their own, instead mainly  to
coordinate and control the activities.  This  is fully valid also for the field of environment.  This
tendency is reflected mainly in the international projects while the bureaucrats are trying to keep
their positions and staff and finally the old  structures. This type of  officers are very far from the
understanding that their  basic functions  are planning,  allotting, coordination and  control, i.e.  to
manage the budget money provided for the given activity. They think that they must complete the
whole  work on  their own. This  leads  the particular  ministry  to  isolation and  minimizing the
participation  of  independent  experts,   private consulting  companies,  NtGO's  and  citizens.
Contracting of private consulting  companies is  a  very  important element  of  development of the
private  sector. Very  often the governmental declarations for  support of the  democratic process
and private sector contradict with the real practice.
       Unfortunately  official  agencies  of the western countries support  sometimes these
tendencies unintentionally,  because  it is  rather easier  to collaborate  with  the  existing
governmental  institutions in  Central and Eastern  Europe. Creation of new private independent
institutions is an extremely  important element for the enforcement process in our countries.  This
is rather difficult but number of international projects require that.
       Another problem  dealing  with public participation is the  fact that in Central  an  East
European countries do not exist tradition of private citizen's  initiative official support.  Usually the
state officials  are asking what organization stands behind the initiative.  They feel much more
comfortable when they  have relations with organizations. But mechanism for citizen's initiative
support do not exist yet.
 4     ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

       A system of environmental management demands not only technical and administrative
 competence, but an acceptance by the people ot the legitimacy of the process by which decisions
 are reached. The Ministry of Environment appears to  be restricted in its outreach by the current
 organizational structure (there are only two people working in the public  relations department),
 limited funding and, perhaps most important, by the lack of real traditions of public involvement in
 environmental decisionmaking through regular dissemination of information. In spite of its explicit
 inclusion  in  the draft  environmental  legislation,  the  issue  of increased  public participation in
 environmental policymaking is still a new and, understandably, somewhat foreign concept.
       Of course some good experience exists  also.  For example, Environment Strategy  Study
 for Bulgaria,  a joint report of the Government of  Bulgaria, the United States Government and the
 World Bank was completed on November 26, 1991. The Strategy was discussed in January 1992
 with  big participation  of the public.  Similar  but not  so successful was  the discussion  of  the
 Bulgarian National Report for UN  Conference  in Rio de Janeiro.

-------
166                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


      Another  example  of public involvement in  enforcement process is  an  18-month long
community-based demonstration project  in Troyan, Bulgaria  beginning  in January  1992  and
funded  by U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency.  Guided  by the Institute  for Sustainable
Communities (ISC), citizen committees are identifying, analyzing and ranking  the environmental
problems facing their community and developing appropriate clean-up strategies (2).
      Shift  from national to local  control offers an  opportunity  to  institutionalize  a national
program to assist communities in addressing their environmental. Citizens can identify the most
serious  problems facing the community, select clean-up strategies which are the most appropriate
to meet their  local needs,  and financed these  projects tailored  to  their specific  financial
capabilities.  These  solutions should be based upon  meeting  national environmental standards
while implementing unique community or regional level solutions.
      The following six  principles should be  considered  in designing  an effective  nationwide
program to assist Abshtinas address their environmental problems:

      PRINCIPLE # 1: A municipal-based environmental assistance program should be founded
      upon broad public participation in environmental decision-making. Citizen participation is a
      fundamental  tenant of a  democratic society and is critical to build consensus  and obtain
      support  for environmental solutions. In addition,  public participation encourages public
      commitment  to environmental enforcement and the  economic implications of responsible
      environmental decision-making.  While  effective  environmental  management demands
      technical and administrative competence, it  can  only  be accomplished  through a
      fundamental  acceptance by people of the legitimacy of the process by with (environmental)
      decisions are reached.
      Public involvement should  be  solicited during the following  phases of a  community
      program:  problem identification,  problem prioritization, proposed environmental solutions,
      prior to seeking public approval  for financing  and monitoring  performance of  clean-up
      strategies.  A community-based environmental  action  program  should also  provide
      opportunities for NGO's and  industries  to constructively participate in the development of
      environmental policy formulation and implementation. Citizen advisory committees  offer a
      viable model for soliciting and incorporating active public participation.
      Effective public participation  means effective public education on the  present threats to
      health,  ecology  and  well-being. Further,  citizens need to  be  educated that  effective
      solutions are contingent upon both individual responsibility and collective action.

      PRINCIPLE # 2: Communities and  citizens should have access to information  about their
      environmental problems.

      PRINCIPLE  # 3:  Environmental priority setting should be  a fundamental first step in
      developing long-term environmental solutions.

      PRINCIPLE # 4: NGO's should play a critical role in educating and involving the public to
      help to  raise the public's environmental  awareness.  NGO's can also provide independent
      information  on problems and  solutions and  serve as  watchdog for compliance with
      environmental laws.

      PRINCIPLE # 5: Environmental clean-up strategies should emphasize the implementation
      of low-cost and cost-effective  solutions for improved environmental protection.

      PRINCIPLE  # 6: Municipalities need adequate funding to implement  cost-effective
      environmental solutions.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            167
      REFERENCES

      1. Bojanov,  S.,  Bulgarian  Nature Protection  Legislation,  Paper prepared for  the
         International Workshop Institutional  Design for Environmental  Protection in Bulgaria,
         Shtarkelovo Gnezdo, Bulgaria, September 5-7, 1992.

      2. Markowitz, P., Environmental Protection  and Sustainable Development at  the Local
         Level: Empowering  Bulgarian  Abshtinas,  Paper  prepared for the International
         Workshop Institutional Design for Environmental Protection in Bulgaria, Shtarkelovo
         Gnezdo, Bulgaria, September 5-7, 1992.

      3. Bowman,  M.,  Law as a tool  for  citizen involvement  in  Environmental  Protection,
         Working paper of Environmental Law Institute, 1991.

-------
168                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             169


ENFORCEMENT OF EC ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION: THE ROLE OF  CITIZENS AND
CITIZENS' GROUPS

ERNST R. KLATTE

Directorate-General  Environment, Nuclear  Safety  and Civil  Protection,  Commission of the
European Communities, Rue de la Loi 200, B-1049 Brussels, Belgium.
      SUMMARY

      EC environmental policy dates back to the early 70s. Despite the lack of an explicit legal
basis for environment policy in the Treaty of Rome (1957), about 200 legal instruments (Direc-
tives, Regulations and Decisions) in the field of the  environment have since been adopted by the
Council  of Ministers. A clear success story one would say.  However, this formal record contrasts
sharply with the marked lack of implementation and enforcement of EC environmental legislation
by the Twelve Member States.
      This paper will examine the importance of the role of citizens and citizens' groups in the
enforcement of EC  environmental legislation. In this context, particular attention will be paid to the
right of complaint to the Commission, the right to petition the European Parliament, as well  as  to
Directive 90/313/EEC on the freedom of access to  information on the environment. Finally,  it will
look at the  possibility for NGO's to participate in EC decision-making on environmental protection,
as well as at the  (im)possibility to have standing in the European Court of Justice.
1      ENFORCEMENT OF EC ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION

1.1    Scope of the problem

       The Ninth Annual Report on Commission monitoring  of the application of Community law
(1991) (1) states, that:
       "The conclusions to be drawn from monitoring the application of Community environmental
law in  1991 do not differ substantially from those set forth in the Eight Report.(2)
       Whereas the  body of Community  law is growing larger  and more elaborate,  (...), the
Member States' application of the existing law is still unsatisfactory on the whole.
       Admittedly,  several  Member States are making a great effort, despite real difficulties,  to
make  up the ground lost over a number of years. There is  also a clear tendency away from
legally questionable methods of transposal such as circulars.
       Even so, a number of Member  States continue  to see the deadlines for transposal as
optional or indicative. It is not unusual for implementing measures to provide for derogations
which  have no basis  in the Directive transposed or  for  derogations strictly defined by the
Community rules to be written into national  law in the most flexible terms. Certain provisions  of
Directives adopted more than ten years ago are still a dead letter. Measures to implement Court
rulings are by no means taken in  every case, even after a second judgment based on Article 171
of the  EEC Treaty.
       It is the exception rather than the rule for the Commission  to receive the reports provided
for in many Directives, although this requirement has been met in the case of the  Directive on
bathing water.(3)
       In this context, the Commission hopes that the new Directive on reports adopted towards
the end of 1991  (4) will bring about  a significant  quantitative  and qualitative increase  in the
environmental information available at Community level in the medium term.
Since  most of the  new-style  reports will not be available until 1996-97 at the  earliest,  however,
Member States will have to continue for the time being to supply the Commission with information
under  the  arrangements currently  in force, as stipulated in Article 7(2) of the Directive on reports:"

-------
170                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


       In  the medium  term the  Commission also expects  a  positive contribution  from  the
measures which  it is likely  to adopt as a result of its research  into the question of liability for
environmental damage (5) and its discussions on the availability of legal remedies (6).
       To improve  efficiency in the application of Community law, possibilities for strengthening
cooperation between the Commission and the Member States and for streamlining the Commis-
sion's monitoring activities will be explored.
       Lastly, the Commission would  stress that  developments  relating to  environmental  law,
unlike other branches of Community law, are of considerable and ever-increasing interest to the
public at large."

1.2    Enforcement of EC environmental Directives

1.2.1  Introduction

       Most  EC environmental  legislation  consists  of  "Directives".(7)  Compared with  the
"Regulation", which has only been used  a few times in  EC  environmental legislation  (8), the
Directive has inherent weaknesses, A Directive has to be transposed into national law in  order to
become effective; a Regulation is directly applicable in all Member States. Moreover, a Regulation
has  "direct effect",  i.e. directly confers  rights to citizens which the national courts have a duty to
protect, while a Directive - generally speaking - has no "direct effect" (9).
       Why then, has the Community  not made more use of Regulations in the environmental
field?  The  answer is simple, in principle: before the entry  into force of the Single European Act
(SEA) in 1987 (10), EC environmental legislation was mostly based on  Article 100 EEC, Article
235  EEC, or a combination  of the  two. Article 100  EEC only speaks about "Directives" and does
not offer the Commission the possibility to use a Regulation as a legal  instrument under the
circumstances.
       Although  the Regulation has marked advantages compared with the Directive, in particular
as far as uniformity of application and enforcement are concerned, there  are also "drawbacks". A
Regulation is binding in  its entirety and  directly applicable, a Directive is binding as to the  result to
be achieved, but leaves to the national authorities the choice  of form and  methods.  Member
States tend to prefer Directives to Regulations in the environmental  field, because the former
leave  them more "flexibility" than  the  latter.  Moreover, as  the Regulation is directly applicable,
Member States  tend to have an even closer look at the text of a Commission-proposal for a
Regulation than  they do in the case of a proposal for a Directive. Negotiations in the Council of
Ministers about Regulations  therefore risk to be even longer than about proposals for Directives.
Although, since the entry into force of the Single European Act in  1987, neither Article 100a EEC
nor Article  130s  EEC restrains the  Commission to the use of Directives in the environmental  field,
the Commission continues to show a preference for the use of these  instruments rather than of
Regulations (11).

1.2.2  Implementation  and  enforcement  of EC environmental Directives: the  role of  Member
       States

       Article  189  EEC provides, that: "A  Directive  shall be binding,  as to the result to be
achieved, upon  each Member State  to which it  is addressed  but shall  leave  to  the  national
authorities  the choice of form and methods". Moreover, Article 5 EEC stipulates, that: "Member
States shall take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of
the obligations arising out of this  Treaty or resulting from  action taken by the institutions of the
Community. They shall  facilitate the achievement  of the Community's tasks.  They shall abstain
from any measure which could jeopardize the attainment of the objectives of this Treaty".
       This  implies, that: a) Member  States have a  duty to transpose  a Directive into  their
national laws, after which the Directive becomes part of the national legislation of that  Member
State (formal implementation), and also that: b)  Member States have to ensure that the objectives
of the Directive are met in practice (practical implementation). It can therefore be concluded, that

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                              171


not only the formal implementation  of Directives is incumbent on Member States,  but also the
(primary) enforcement of EC environmental Directives.

1.2.3  Enforcement of EC environmental Directives: the role of the Commission

      According to Article 155 EEC, it is part of the tasks of the Commission "to ensure that the
provisions of the Treaty and the measures taken by the institutions pursuant thereto are applied".
      The control  of  the  implementation,  in  due time  and correctly,  of  EC environmental
Directives by the Member States forms part of this activity. The attribution of  this competence to
the Commission is an exclusive  one:  the Treaty gave a comparable mandate neither to the
Council  of Ministers nor to the European  Parliament.(12) Moreover,  this  task is indivisible: the
Commission  is not  allowed to delegate this power  partially or totally,  be  it to  another EC
institution, or be it to any new authority which might be created.(13)
      The Commission  takes its  task of  monitoring  the  implementation  of  Directives very
seriously.  It controls whether the deadline  for implementation  (which is mentioned at the end of
the text of each Directive, and  which - normally - is 18 months after the date of notification of the
Directive to the Member States) is respected, and whether the  measures adopted comply with the
terms of the  Directive. Moreover, it verifies  whether the national provisions are a correct and
complete implementation of each Directive (formal  compliance).
      As the  Commission  lacks an environment inspectorate, it has to rely on information from
citizens and citizens' groups (14)  as well as  on assistance from third  parlies  (15), in order to be
able to assess, if in practice, Member States have taken all the necessary measures "as to the
result to be achieved" (16) (practical compliance).
      Increasingly, the Commission  receives relevant information pertaining to not correct/a lack
of implementation  of EC  environmental Directives  through complaints of citizens' or citizens'
groups,  or via Parliamentary  questions (17).  This  information is extremely valuable to the
Commission, as it  often  provides the  Commission,  and specifically  its Directorate-General for
Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil  Protection, with new information not previously gathered
through the Community monitoring system which relies mainly on information from governments.
It also forces the Commission to take action. Submitting a complaint to the  Commission, may lead
the Commission to open  "infringement  proceedings", which implies,  that the Commission  may
eventually decide to take the offending Member State to the EC's Court of Justice in  Luxembourg.
       Infringement proceedings may be instituted in any of the following cases:
(a)    If a Member State  has not notified  the  Commission of the  measures it has taken  at
       national level to put EC  environmental legislation into effect;
(b)    If the  national legislation of  a Member State has been improperly harmonised with the
      provisions of EC environmental fegislation;
(c)    If the  national  legislation  of  a  Member State has  been properly harmonised  with the
      provisions of EC environmental legislation but is not being properly appiied.(18)

       According to Article 169 EEC, infringement proceedings are instituted in three steps:
       First, the Commission sends a  "letter of formal notice",  requesting the Member State in
question  to submit  its comments  on  the presumed  infringement of EC  legislation,  within a
specified time limit (normally two months).
       It the  Member  State fails to  respond and persists in the infringement, the Commission
sends a second letter, called  a  "reasoned opinion", setting a time limit for compliance with the
Directive in question.
       Finally, if the second step also fails to produce the desired  results, the Commission may
decide to take the  case to the Court of Justice.

1.2.4  Enforcement of EC environmental Directives: the role of the Court of Justice

       According to  Article 173,  paragraph 1  EEC, the role of the  Court of Justice is "to review
the legality of acts of the Council and the Commission other than recommendations or opinions. It
shall  for this purpose have jurisdiction in actions brought by a Member State  (19), the Council or

-------
 172                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
 the  Commission  on grounds  of lack of competence, infringement of an essential procedural
 requirement, infringement of this Treaty or of any rule of law relating to its application, or misuse
 of powers".
       Member States are obliged to take measures to comply with the judgments of the Court of
 Justice (Article 171  EEC). Until recently, there were no sanctions. The Treaty on European Union
 (Maastricht, 1992), however, provides in Article 171 (new) the possibility for the Court to impose a
 lump sum or penalty payment  on a  Member State which fails to take the necessary measures to
 comply with the Court's  judgment within the  time-limit laid down by the Commission, after  the
 latter has  brought the case  before the Court  again.  It is hoped, that this possibility will impress
 Member States more than the negative  publicity due to a Court verdict in  an infringement case
 (the only "sanction" in the past), and thereby improve Member  States'  record of implementation
 and enforcement of EC environmental legislation.
 2     ENFORCEMENT OF EC ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION:  THE  ROLE OF CITIZENS
       AND CITIZENS' GROUPS

 2.1    Introduction

       EC legislation does not recognise an individual right to the environment.(20) However, only
 recentfy, the EC's Heads of State or Government declared: "The development of higher levels of
 knowledge and understanding of environmental issues will facilitate more effective action by the
 Community and its Member States to protect the environment. The objective of such  action must
 be to guarantee citizens the right to a clean and healthy environment, (...)".(21)
       Although the EC is not yet able to guarantee its citizens  the right to a clean environment,
 there are, on the other hand, two rights accorded to every citizen of the  Community, enabling
 her/him to contribute to the implementation and enforcement of  EC legislation in general, and of
 EC environmental legislation in particular. These rights are:
       (1) the right of complaint  to the Commission;(22)
       (2) the right to petition the European Pariiament.(23)
       These two rights will be  presented in more detail below.  Apart from these two rights,  this
 chapter will deal with:
       the right to have access  to environmental  information, the right to participate  in decision-
       making regarding environmental protection, as well as the right to  be a  party to  actions
       before the Court of Justice.

 2.2    The right of complaint to the Commission

 2.2.1   The concept of the right and its legal basis

       Any EC citizen has the right to lay a written complaint before the Commission concerning
 the adoption by any  Member  State of measures  or practices contrary  to  the environmental
 legislation of the Community. The complaint is addressed to the  Commission, because according
to Article  155 EEC,  the Commission  is the "Guardian of the  Treaty", i.e.  the Commission is
 responsible for ensuring that the measures adopted by Community institutions  are  applied. As
most  EC environmental  legislation consists of Directives, the exceptions being Regulations  and
 Decisions  (24), citizens1 complaints refer to  the  non-implementation of existing  Directives or  -
exceptionally - Regulations. It should  be noted,  that  complaints may only be laid before the
Commission,  and  not before national authorities  (25); moreover,  the  right  of complaint  applies
only to the implementation  of existing legislation, not to the participation of citizens in  the process
of enacting legislation.(26)

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             173
2.2.2  Method of exercising the right of complaint

      The right of complaint is exercised by sending a simple letter to the Commission. For the
convenience of EC citizens who wish to exercise their right, the Commission has had complaint
forms printed in all nine official languages of the Community (27), which are distributed free. The
complaint form lists all the particulars that must be filled  in and the documents that must  be
submitted (such as the complainant's personal particulars and evidence supporting the complaint
of non-implementation of Community legislation), as well as the citizen's right to be kept informed
after the complaint has been laid. The forms are distributed by the Commission's Directorate-
General  Environment, Nuclear  Safety and Civil Protection  in  Brussels,  and  through the
Commission's Information Offices  in the  Member States. A specimen of the form is attached as
Annex 1. A  particularly important characteristic  of this right is,  that  its exercise  involves  no
expense  to the complainant (except from buying a stamp), so that it is accessible to everybody.
      A special characteristic of the right of complaint  is its "Community" nature. That is to say,
that any  EC  citizen may  make a  complaint  to the Commission about non-compliance with EC
environmental legislation not only  by her/his own country,  but also  by any other Member State
(28). For instance, Greece's failure to comply with the Directive on the conservation of wild birds
(29) by permitting  the hunting of turtle-doves in spring (30) has been  repeatedly denounced to the
Commission by environmental organisations and citizens of other Member States.(31)

2.2.3  Results of exercising the right of complaint

      The laying of a complaint  before  the Commission  concerning the adoption by Member
States of measures or practices contrary to the provisions of EC environmental legislation, may
provide the Commission with data  that had not previously been gathered through the Commission
monitoring system, which  relies mainly on  information given by the governments of Member
States. Thus the  laying of  a  complaint may lead to the institution  of infringement proceedings
under Article 169  EEC. (32) If the Commission refers the  case to the European Court and the
Court finds that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaty, the State shall
be required to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court.(33)
      According  to the Ninth Annual Report  on Commission  monitoring of the application  of
Community law (1991)(34), the number of complaints on environment laid per year per country,
which led to the initiation by the Commission of infringement proceedings under Article 169 EEC,
was as follows:

Table 1.    Number of complaints on  non-compliance  with  EC environmental legislation per
Member  State/per year, having led to the opening of infringement procedures by the Commission
Member State
Belgium
Denmark
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Portugal
Spain
United Kingdom
Total:
1985
_
1
3
3
14
-
2
-
3


11
37
1986
7
1
44
6
53
-
13
-
2
2
5
32
165
1987
4
4
16
14
17
n
16
-
4
7
29
30
150
1988
6
5
36
35
13
12
15
1
2
9
51
31
216
1989
18
-
43
36
24
24
22
-
5
10
91
192
465
1990
17
3
47
56
40
19
33
3
7
19
111
125
480
1991
7
15
44
61
38
29
20
-
6
13
65
55
353

-------
 174                            INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


       The Commission is also  detecting more and  more infringements of  EC  environmental
 legislation through its  own services. The following table shows the  number of infringements
 detected by the Commission's own inquiries (35):

 Table  2.  Number of infringements  of EC environmental legislation per Member State/per year,
 detected by the Commission

  Member State         1985      1986     1987      1988     1989      1990      1991
Belgium
Denmark
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Portugal
Spain
United Kingdom
1
1
2
1
-
1
-
-
1


3
3
2
5
6
3
5
3
2
3
-
-
-
3
3
1
6
3
1
6
5
1
2
4
3
3
1
2
3
2
2
3
1
5
-
4
7
3
1
6
8
11
6
7
3
2
2
10
9
5
-
2
2
4
-
9
-
-
2
16
2
5
2
7
5
21
3
19
2
2
12
18
17
 2.2.4  Conclusions

       The number of complaints brought before the Commission is high and steadily increasing.
 Spectacular increases in the number  of complaints on environmental issues took place in the
 years 1986: 165 complaints (compared with 37 during 1985) and 1989: 465 (compared with 216
 during 1988).  There  is no clear explanation for this. At  least not for the increase in 1986.  A
 possible explanation  for the increase  in complaints  during 1989  might be, that  the  European
 Environmental Bureau (EEB) launched quite a campaign on implementation and enforcement  of
 EC environmental legislation during the European Year of the Environment (1987-88), involving
 its member-organisations in all EC Member States.{36)
       There is  considerable variation  from one Member State to another  in the  number  of
 complaints.  In view  of the  "Community" nature of the right  of complaint, this  right offers  a
 challenge to citizens and citizens' groups  in the Community  to co-operate with each other,  to
 exchange information and experiences, especially in view of the vast  number and experience  of
 non-governmental organisations (NGO's) in some Member States, compared to others.
       As far as the  Commission is concerned, it considers complaints a resource rather than a
 nuisance.(37)

2.3    The right to petition the European Parliament (38)

2.3.1   The concept o^the right and its legal basis

       The second right, by which any  EC citizen can play  an  active  part in  monitoring the
implementation of EC environmental legislation, is the right to petition the European Parliament.
This right is conferred upon all EC  citizens  by Rule 128 of the Rules of Procedure of the
European Parliament. Rule 128,  paragraph 1 (39) reads:
       "Every citizen  of the European Community shall have  the right, individually or jointly with
others, to address written requests or complaints (petition--', k  ..ie European Parliament".

2.3.2  Method of exercising the jight to petition

      The right to petition is exercised  by simply sending a letter to the European Parliament.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             175
       Petitions  should include  personal particulars of each  of the  signatories,  i.e.  name,
occupation, nationality and permanent address. Like complaints, petitions are registered (40). Like
the exercise of the  right to petition, the exercise of the  right of complaint entails no  cost to the
petitioner(s). There are more similarities: the right to petition has also a "Community" nature.
       The Parliament has not made petition forms  available so far, but some Member States
have  introduced measures to assist citizens in exercising their  right.  In Britain,  for instance,
posters have been printed giving the address of a centre of access to the European  Parliament,
where any British citizen with a problem  may write a letter to  any  (British) Member of the
European Parliament (MEP).{41)

2.3.3   Results ot exercising the right to  petition

       Petitions are  first  examined  by the  Parliamentary Committee  on Petitions  ("the
Committee"), to see whether they are admissible, i.e. "whether the petitions registered fall within
the sphere of activities of the Communities".(42)
       In the case  of  admissible petitions, the  Committee  may decide to draw up  a report or
otherwise express its opinion on petitions it has  declared admissible.(43) When  considering petiti-
ons, the Committee may organize  hearings or  dispatch  members to ascertain the facts of the
situation in situ.(44)
       With  a view  to preparing  its opinions, the  Committee  may request the Commission to
submit documents, to  supply information and to  grant it access to its facilities.(45) The Committee
may submit motions  for resolutions to Parliament on  petitions which  it  has considered.  The
Committee may also request that its opinions be forwarded by the President of the  Parliament to
the European Commission or the Council of Ministers.(46)
       Every six months, the Committee informs Parliament of the outcome of its deliberations, as
well as of the measures taken by the Council or the Commission on petitions referred  to them by
Parliament.(47) The President o1 the European Parliament informs petitioners of  the decisions
taken and the underlying reasons.(48)
       The number of petitions submitted by EC citizens to the  European Parliament is rising
steadily (49):

       1983-84:  100 petitions

       1984-85:346 petitions.

       The following environmental issues were - inter  alia - covered  by petitions submitted to
Parliament during its  1984-85  session:  inclusion of environmental  provisions  in the EC Treaties;
sabotage of the Greenpeace  ship in New Zealand;  European legislation on the management of
marine resources; trapping of songbirds; protection of the  countryside; hunting of birds; sound
levels of aircraft.(SO)

2.3.4   Prospects for improvement

       In view of the  fact, that the citizen's right to petition the European Parliament  used to be
based on the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament only, Parliament felt handicapped in its efforts
to investigate citizens' petitions properly and to offer solutions. Therefore, Parliament has tried, on
several occasions, to strengthen its position in this area. (51)
       Recently, the Treaty on European Union (Maastricht,  1992) provided a  legal basis in the
Treaty for EC citizens wishing to  petition the  European Parliament  (Article  138d). Although there
is now a legal basis for the right to petition the European Parliament in the Treaty, Article  138d
restricts this right to matters which affect the petttioner(s) directly.(52)
The Treaty on European Union also added Articles on a temporary Committee of Inquiry (Article
138c), and on an Ombudsman (Article 138e) to the Treaty.
       Article 138c provides, that the European  Parliament may, at the request of a quarter  of its
members, set up  a temporary  Committee  of  Inquiry  to investigate alleged  contraventions or

-------
176                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


maladministrations in the implementation of Community law, except where the  alleged facts are
being examined before a court and while the  case is still subject to  legal proceedings. The
temporary Committee of Inquiry ceases to exist on the submission of Its report.
      Article 138e stipulates,  that the Parliament shall appoint an Ombudsman empowered to
receive  complaints from any citizen of the Union, or any natural or legal person residing or having
his registered office in a member State, concerning instances of maladministration in the activities
o1 the Community  institutions or bodies, with the exception of the Court of Justice and the Court
of First  Instance acting  in their judicial role.
      The Ombudsman will have as his task to conduct inquiries,  either on  his own initiative or
on the  basis  of complaints submitted to him  direct  or through  a member  of the  European
Parliament,  except where the  alleged facts are  or have been the  subject of legal  proceedings.
Where  he establishes  an instance of maladministration, he  will have to refer the matter to the
institution concerned, which shall have a period  of three months to inform him  of its views. The
Ombudsman wit) then forward a report to the European Parliament and the institution concerned.
The person  lodging the complaint will be informed of the outcome of such inquiries.
The Ombudsman has to submit an annual report to the European Parliament on the outcome of
his inquiries. He will be appointed after each election of the Parliament, for the duration of its term
of office. He is eligible for reappointment.
      The Ombudsman may be dismissed by the Court of Justice at the  request of the European
Parliament, if he no longer fulfils the conditions required for the performance of his duties or if he
is guilty of serious  misconduct.
      The Ombudsman shall  be completely  independent in the performance  of his duties. He
may not seek nor take instructions from anybody. Also, he may not, during his term of office,
engage  in any other occupation, whether gainful or not.

2.3.5 Conclusions

      Both  the right of complaint to the  Commission and the right to petition the  European
Parliament give  EC citizens the possibility to play an active role in the effective protection of the
European environment. The provision of assistance to citizens wishing to exercise these rights -
be it by printing  and distributing complaint forms  or by showing them the way how to petition the
Parliament - is vital.(53) Not only for the citizens  in order to be able to exercise their rights to the
full extent, but also  for the Community,  as it will  help the  EC institutions to strengthen their
monitoring capacity of  the implementation and enforcement of EC legislation in generaJ and EC
environmental legislation in particular.
      As far  as  the  Parliament is concerned, it  is hoped, that the new Treaty  provisions
regarding the temporary Committee of  Inquiry, the  right of complaint and the Ombudsman will
reinforce its position vis-a-vis the other Community institutions and through  a more effective
parliamentary control will !ead to a more democratic Community.

2.4   The right to have access to environmental information

2.4.1  Introduction and historical background

      As of December 31, 1992  any natural or legal  person  is entitled to have free access  to
environmental information held by public authorities in EC Member States. The legal basis for this
right is Council Directive 90/313/EEC, of 7 June 1990, on the freedom of  access to information on
the environment.{54)
      The basis for Directive 90/313/EEC was laid in 1985, by a draft-resolution of the European
Parliament,  tabled by  MEPs  Ken CoHins (UK)  and  Beate Weber (FRG).{55)  In this draft, the
Commission was invited to prepare a proposal for legislation concerning  the right of the public to
have freedom of access to environmental information.(56)
      Parliament  also  asked  its  Committee on Environment, Public Health and  Consumer
Protection to prepare a report and a draft-resolution on the matter. Bram van  der Lek (NL) was
appointed rapporteur. Although the Committee  on  Environment,  Public Health and  Consumer

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             177


Protection accepted the Van der Lek-report, many proposals in it were rejected by the plenary as
being "too radical". FinaKy, the rapporteur advised the plenary to vote against what was left of his
proposals, as  so  many essential parts of his report had already been  rejected.(57) This  was
accepted.
      The European Parliament also  decided, in  1985,  to prepare an own initiative report on
information concerning the activities of the EC. Pol Marck (B) was appointed rapporteur on this
issue. He submitted his report to Parliament in  1987 (58). Parliament adopted  his report by a
Resolution, in  which  it asked that the public be given access to  information held  by  the EC
institutions (59).
      As far as the  Commission  is concerned, it presented  a draft for a  Fourth Environment
Action Programme of the European Communities (1987-1992) to the Council and Parliament on
15 October 1986.  In the draft-Programme, it proposed, that "The Commission will study the need
for, and desirability of, a Community "Freedom of Environmental Information  Act" and will make
appropriate proposals". (60)
      Parliament  stressed, in its Opinion on the Commission proposal  for a Fourth  Action
Programme, that "access to information for all must be made possible by a specific  Community
programme".(61) The  Council, when adopting the Fourth Environment Action Programme, as-
signed priority - inter alia - to "improved access to information on the environment".(62)

2.4.2 The legal situation in the Member States

      One of  the important reasons 1or the Commission to present a proposal for  a  Community
legal  instrument on freedom  of access to  information on the environment to the Council and
Parliament was, that only a minority of EC Member States (Denmark, France, ItaJy, Luxembourg
and  The Netherlands)  had specific  legislation on this subject.  Further, three  Member States
(Greece, Portugal and Spain) had general provisions  in their Constitutions governing citizens'
tight to  have access to information. Finally, Belgium, Germany,  Ireland and  the United Kingdom
had no specific legislation governing public access to information.(63)

2.4.3 The form of the Community legal instrument

      As on the  one  hand, the situation in the various Member States was so  diverse, and on
the other hand political pressure was building up  calling for action  on this  issue (64), the
Commission decided to present a proposal  for a Community  legal  instrument on  freedom  of
access to information on the environment to the Council and Parliament.(65)
      As Article 130s EEC was chosen as a legal basis (66), there were two possibilities for the
Commission: a Regulation or a Directive. The  Commission chose the !atter.(67)(68)

2.4.4 A general legal instrument or a specific one?

      Before answering the question which type of Community legal instrument the Commission
was going to propose, it also had to decide whether its proposal would be of a general nature, as
Parliament had asked for in its Resolution of 22 January 1988 (69), or whether it would be limited
to environmental information alone.
      The Commission  chose to restrict its  proposal  to environmental  information,  for the
following reasons: first, there was no clear Community competence to propose an instrument of a
general  nature; secondly,  Article 235  EEC  as a legal basis for such  an instrument was less
justified   than  Article   130s; thirdly,  a  Community legal  instrument on  freedom  of  access  to
information in general has more to do with human rights, a field in which the Community operates
with great caution; fourthly, there was  a clear political demand for a Community  legal instrument
regarding freedom of access to information on the environment, the need for a Community legal
instrument of a general nature was less obvious. Moreover, there was  fear, that a Commission
proposal of a general nature was likely to meet more criticism in the Council, than a proposal of a
more restricted nature.

-------
178                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


       As neither the European Parliament, nor the Economic and Social Committee, nor  the
Council objected to the more limited scope of the Commission proposal, the Commission  felt
reassured in  having opted  for  a  Community legal instrument on  freedom  of  access  to
environmental information alone.(70)

2.4.5  Addressed only to the Member States or also to the EC institutions?

       Although the  text of Article  1 of Directive 90/313/EEC on the freedom  of access  to
information on the environment leaves open the possibility for a wide interpretation, Article 2 and
following of the Directive make clear that it is addressed to the Member States only.
During the preparation of the  Commission-proposal,  the prevailing view within the Commission
was, that an obligation laid down  in an EC Directive  could not  address  the EC institutions, as a
Directive was addressed to the Member States.(71)  That's why the Commission announced in  the
explanatory memorandum to the proposal for a Directive, that it would undertake other initiatives
in order to apply the same principle to the EC institutions.(72}
       Article  214 EEC stipulates, that Community officials are  required  not  to  disclose
information of the kind covered by professional secrecy,  ft follows from Article 3, paragraph 2 of
Directive  90/313/EEC, which enumerates in an exhaustive way  the reasons for  refusal of a
request for environmental information, that professional secrecy as such is not a valid reason for
refusal (73); the right to have access to environmental information  held by public authorities
applies, notwithstanding  the fact that the principle  of professional secrecy exists in  all Member
States. Thus, the conclusion  is, that environmental information  held by national administrations
does not  fall under the general principle of professional  secrecy, provided it  does not fall under
one of the  categories  listed  in  Article 3, paragraph 2 of Directive  90/313/EEC.  The same
reasoning is  applicable to the interpretation of Article 214 EEC, which, thus, does not oppose  the
application of the  provisions of the Directive to the EC institutions.(74}

2.4.6  The text of Directive 90/313/EEC

       According to Article 1, the object of Directive 90/313/EEC is to ensure freedom of access
to, and dissemination of, information on the environment  held by public authorities and to set  out
the basic terms and  conditions on which such  information  should  be made  available. Not only
does Directive 90/313/EEC create a citizens' right  to  have  access to environmental  information
held by public  authorities, but the  authorities also have to ensure the "freedom" to have  access
to this information. Thereby the Directive puts this fight in  the context of a human right.(75)
       "Information relating to the  environment" (76) means  "any available information in written,
visua), aural or data-base form on the state of water, air,  soil, fauna, flora, land and natural sites,
and  on activities  (including  those which give rise to nuisances  such  as noise) or measures
adversely affecting, or likely so to  affect these, and on activities or measures  designed to protect
these, including administrative measures and environmental management programmes".(77)
It is  interesting to  note, that the definition of "information relating to the  environment", the notion
that  is used throughout Directive 90/313/EEC, is not limited to the state of the environment of  the
Community. Information about exports of dangerous products or installations fall within the scope
of this definition, as well as,  for instance, data concerning the state of the  ozone  layer,  world
climate or tropical forests.(78)
       "Public authorities" are defined as any public  administration at national, regional or local
level  with  responsibilities,  and possessing  information, relating  to the  environment  with  the
exception  of bodies acting in a judicial or  legislative capacity.(79)
       The text of Article 3  of the  Directive makes  it even more  clear,  that the right to have
freedom of access to information on  the  environment held by public authorities is a fundamental
right, and  not just a possibifity.(SO) It reads as follows:
       "Save as provided in  this Article,  Member States shall ensure that public authorities  are
required to make available  information relating to the  environment  to any natural or legal person
at his request and without his having to prove an interest".

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             179


      The reference to  "any  natural  or  legal person"  does  not  contain  any  geographical
limitation.  This implies,  that also people living  in another Member State, or even outside the
Community can invoke  this right.(81) Moreover, it is not  necessary to prove an  interest.  The
character of a fundamental right is enhanced by the limited, exhaustive list of reasons for refusal
in Article 3, paragraph 2 (82), and the possibility tor appeal laid down in Article 4 of the Directive.
      A public authority has to respond to a person  requesting information  as soon as possible
and  at  the  latest within  two  months.  The reasons  for a  refusal to provide the information
requested must be given.(83) A person who considers that his request for information has been
unreasonably  refused/ignored/inadequately answered by a public authority,  can seek judicial or
administrative review of the decision in accordance with the relevant national  legal system.(84)
      Member States  may charge the person who has  made  a  request  for environmental
information for supplying  her/him with this information,  but  such a charge may not  exceed a
reasonable cost(85}
      Bodies with public responsibilities for the environment and under the control  of public
authorities have to make available information relating to the environment on the same terms and
conditions as public authorities.(86)
      Member States will have  to  provide general information to the  public on the state of the
environment through  - inter alia - the periodic publication of state of the environment reports. {87)
      Finally, Member States have  1o report to the Commission by the end of 1996 at the latest,
on the experience gained with  the  application of Directive 90/313/EEC  In this  light,  the Com-
mission will make a report to the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers together with
any proposal for revision, which it deems appropriate.(68)

2.4.7 Conclusion

      Directive 90/313/EEC has created a third citizens'  right relating to the environment: the
right  to have  freedom  of access  to  information  regaling  to ttie environment  held  by public
authorities in the Community. In fact, this  is not just  another right for  EC citizens alone: it is an
universal  human right in  the sense that any natural  or legal person,  irrespective of the place
where he/she lives,  and  without having to prove an interest, can invoke this  right in order to
obtain information relating to the environment from public authorities within the Community,  This
information is not confined to information relating to the environment within the Community.  It
might very well be  information  relating to the  state of the environment in Eastern Europe or
concerning the state  of the ozone layer.(89)

2.5   The  right ot  citizens to  participate  in EC  decision-making  relating  to environmental
       protection

2.5.1  Introduction

       There  is no right for EC  citizens or citizens'  groups to participate in EC decision-making
relating to the protection of the environment.
       The Commission has the  exclusive right to make proposals to the Council of Ministers and
the  European  Parliament, and  decisions at EC level are generally taken  by the Council. The
Council of  Ministers,  which consists of  one  representative per Member State, and  whose
composition  changes depending on the subjects being  discussed, always meets behind closed
do^rs and its minutes are  confidential.
       Although the  Commission has set up an important number of committees to assist it  in its
tasks and/or to take decisions which need the  involvement o1 Member  States, there  does not
seem to  be  any representative  of  any national,  European  or international environmental
organisation  in any advisory committee existing with the Commission.(90)
       Plenary sessions of the  European  Parliament, which are normaiiy  held each  month in
Strasbourg, are open to the public, and so are the sessions of its Committee on the Environment,
Public Health and Consumer Protection, which are held in  Brussels. The Environment Committee

-------
180                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


of the  European Parliament sometimes organises public hearings on environmental matters, to
which environmental organisations are regularly invited.
       Despite a reinforcement by  the Single  European Act (1987) and the Treaty on European
Union  (Maastricht, 1992} of its role  in the EC's legislative process, the  European  Parliament,
contrary  to national parliaments in the Member States, still has largely  only an  advisory  role
regarding draft-EC legislation, except where  the co-decision  procedure  of  Article  189b of the
Treaty on European Union applies.

2.5.2  Recent developments and future prospects

       Although the present situation as far as citizens' participation in EC decision-making on the
environment leaves much to be desired, an improvement of the situation is imminent.
       Recently, the Commission presented to the Council and Parliament a proposal for a Fifth
Environment  Action Programme of the European Communities (1993-2000),  entitled "Towards
Sustainability".(91) The approach adopted in drawing up this new policy programme  differs from
that which applied in previous EC environmental  action programmes:
       •   It focuses on the agents and activities which deplete natural resources and otherwise
          damage the environment, rather than wait for problems to emerge;
       •   It endeavours to initiate  changes  in current trends and practices which are detrimental
          to  the environment, so as  to provide optimal conditions for socio-economic wellbeing
          and growth for the present  and future  generations;
       •   It  aims  to  achieve such  changes in  society's  patterns  of  behaviour  through the
          optimum  involvement  of all sectors  of  society in  a spirit of shared  responsibility,
          including public administration, public  and private enterprise, and the general public (as
          both individual citizens and consumers);
       •   Responsibility will be  shared through  a  significant broadening  of the range of
          instruments to be applied contemporaneously to the resolution oi particular issues or
          problems.

       Keywords of the Fifth Action Programme  are "subsidiarity" (92) and "shared responsibility".
In Chapter 9 (Implementation and Enforcement) of its proposal for a Fifth  Environment Action
Programme, the Commission notes, that:
       "Satisfactory implementation and enforcement of the policy, strategy and measures set out
in this Programme at all levels of society  will  be imperative  if the  objectives of environmental
protection, sustainability  of socio-economic activity and  development and  the  integrity of the
Internal Market  are  to be  achieved.  Ultimately, measures designed  to facilitate  sustainable
development  and  involving  all  economic actors through the application of a  broad range of
instruments should be self-enforcing.  For the foreseeable future, however, the likelihood is that
the effectiveness of  implementation  will be closely  related  to the quality  of the measures
themselves and of the arrangements for their enforcement

       In the  past, a number of factors has contributed  to problems of implementation, including
       •   a  lack of overall policy coherence,  partly due to an  evolving,  sometimes shifting,
          agenda  as  the  scope of environmental policy grew, and  partly because much of the
          environmental legislation was developed in an ad hoc manner;
       •   the narrow  choice of instalments, whereby perhaps too great a reliance was placed on
          legislation of the "command and control" type;
       •   the need for unanimous  agreement  within  the  Council of Ministers, frequently
          necessitating political compromise, has resulted in some cases in  measures which are
          difficult to put into practical operation;
       •   the preponderant recourse  to Directives as the form  of legal instrument has often given
          rise to difficulties in  their  incorporation  into quite  widely differing national statutory
          codes and administrative procedures  with consequential problems of interpretation and
          practical implementation;

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             181


      •   management inadequacies at all administrative levels, from Community down to local
          authorities."(93)

      According to the Commission, it is important to learn  from these past experiences and to
take appropriate steps to improve this particular aspect of policy. Among the reforms which  are
required are better preparation of measures, including improved consultation arrangements, more
effective  integration with complementary  measures,  better  practical  follow-up to  legislative
measures, both administrative and operative, and stricter compliance checking and enforcement.
      In order to institute these reforms, the Commission intends to set up the following ad hoc
dialogue  groups: (a)  a Consultative Forum, (b)  an Implementation Network (94),  and (c) an
Environment Policy Review Group (95).
      The Consultative Forum  will be  established to  provide for consultation and  information
exchange between the industrial/ production sectors,   the  business  world, regional and local
authorities, professional associations, trade unions, environmental and  consumer organisations
and relevant Directorates-General of the Commission. It is envisaged, that this Forum will act as
an  umbrella organisation, with specialist subgroups set up as necessary  to  deal with specific
topics or issues. The common interest in moving towards sustainability and the need to increase
levels of  awareness and consensus in the application of shared responsibility underline the impor-
tance of this Forum.
      Citizens' groups representing environmental interests  at EC level, e.g. the European Envi-
ronmental Bureau (EEB), World Wide Fund for Nature-EC  office, Friends of the Earth-EC coor-
dination  office and Greenpeace's  EC-Unit  will  be invited to sit on the  Consultative  Forum  and
participate actively in it.
      The Consultative Forum,  the Implementation Network and the Environment Policy Review
Group are meant to serve,  in a special way, the promotion of a greater sense of responsibility
among the principal actors in the partenariat (public authorities, public and private enterprise, the
general public), and to ensure effective and transparent application of measures.

2.5.3  Conclusion

       There is no citizens' right to participate in EC  decision-making relating to environmental
protection. However, it is hoped that citizens' groups representing  environmental interests at EC
level, will participate actively in the Consultative Forum on the environment, which is  about to be
set up  and whose task it  will be to advise  the Commission  on the future course of EC
environmental policy.

2.6   The  right of citizens or citizens'  groups to initiate proceedings on environmental matters
       before the European Court of Justice

2.6.1  Introduction

       According to Article 173, paragraph 2  of the  Treaty, any natural  or  legal  person  may
institute  proceedings against an act of the Commission or the Council which is  of direct and
individual concern  to  htm. However, according to the jurisprudence of the  European  Court  of
Justice (ECJ), and  except in those cases in which a decision addressed to an individual has been
wrongly  adopted in the form of a  Regulation,  Directives and Regulations are Community legal
 instruments which do not affect  persons directly or individually, but only indirectly and collectively.
 In  principle therefore, private persons  cannot institute  proceedings  against  Directives  or
 Regulations. Moreover, Article 173, paragraph  1, second sentence, limits the  right for natural  or
 legal persons  to  initiate  proceedings  to the lack of competence, infringement of an  essential
 procedural  requirement, infringement of the Treaty or  secondary  Community law, or misuse of
 power. These limitations, together with the narrow interpretation by the Court of "direct and
 individual" concern has resulted in the past in the dismissal of atl actions brought by citizens on
 the basis of Article 173 EEC. Citizens' groups are in no better position, since they  are also not
 "directly" affected by Directives or Regulations.(96)

-------
182                            INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


       According to Article 175  EEC, any natural or legal person may complain to the  European
Court of Justice that an institution of the Community has failed to address to that  person any act
other than  a Recommendation or  an  Opinion. However,  EC Directives or Regulations are
addressed to the Member States or the general public collectively, and never  to citizens' groups
or citizens individually. Therefore they cannot - in practice - initiate proceedings for  failure to act
either. (97)
       ft can be concluded, therefore, that neither Article 173  EEC nor Article 175  EEC provide
practicable  grounds for citizens or  citizens' groups to institute proceedings  on environmental
matters before the European Court of Justice.(98)

2.6.2  Third party intervention on environmental issues

       According to  Article 37,  paragraph 2 of  the Statutes of the European Court of Justice,
persons establishing "an interest" in the result of  any case submitted to the Court can intervene in
the case to support the submissions of one of the parties. Further details are regulated by  Article
93  of the  Rules of Procedure of  the ECJ.
       Until now, no third party  intervention has taken place in  an environmental case, neither by
an  individual citizen nor by an environmental organisation, though a number of cases might have
been appropriate for such intervention. Therefore it is hard to say whether such a request would
stand a chance.(99)
       There are, however, precedents in the field  of consumer protection.  On  June 1, 1984,
BEUC (100) applied to the Registrar of the ECJ for  leave to intervene in two cases brought by
Ford Motor Company against the Commission concerning the  application of Articles 85,86 EEC
(rules on  competition), in order to support the submissions of the defendant. The Court, in its
decision of  July 4,  1984 gave  leave  to BEUC to intervene in  the proceedings, on  the following
grounds:
       -   BEUC is a member  of the EC's Consumers' Consultative  Committee  established by
          Commission Decision 73/306 of September 25, 1973. In view of its objectives, BEUC is
          deemed to have a legitimate interest in intervening in these proceedings;
       •   The  Commission, as defendant, takes the view that BEUC  should  be allowed  to
          intervene.

       Moreover, in  answer to  earlier applications by BEUC  for leave to intervene  in Joined
Cases 228 and 229/82 involving the same litigants (i.e. Ford v. the Commission), the Court had
granted leave to intervene by its Decisions of September 21, 1982 (164446) and of  December 1,
1982 (168845), on the grounds  that BEUC had  sufficient interest for it to be  allowed to interve-
ne.(101)
      The European Environmental Bureau  (EEB)(102),  engages in similar activities as BEUC,
but in the field of nature conservation and environmental protection. In view of the similarities
between the EEB and BEUC in their aims,  their mode of operation and their links with the EEC, it
seems reasonable that in cases relating to nature conservation or environmental protection, the
EEB should be allowed to appear before  the European Court of Justice on  similar grounds as
BEUC.(102)
      The  European  Parliament,  too,  has declared to  be   in favour  of  the right of non-
governmental organisations  (NGO's)  to  bring   cases  before  the  European  Court of Justice.
According to Parliament, consumers'  associations and environmental organisations should be
granted the  right to freely pursue the achievement of  their aims; therefore, they should be able to
apply to the Court  or to initiate administrative proceedings whenever the collective interest  of
consumers or the environment is affected  or in danger of being affected.  Parliament has asked
the  Commission to submit proposals to this effect to the Council of Ministers.(103)

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             183


2.6.3   Legal aid to citizens' groups for actions in the ECJ

       According to Article 76 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Court of Justice, any
party who is wholly or in part unable to  meet the costs of proceedings, may at any time apply for
legal aid. The application for legal aid need not  be made through a lawyer. The application must
be accompanied by evidence of the applicant's  need of assistance, in particular by a document
from the competent authority certifying the lack of financial means of the applicant.
       The Chamber of the Court to which the Rapporteur belongs has to decide, after conside-
ring  the written observations of  the opposite  party and after hearing  the Advocate-General,
whether legal  aid should be  granted in  full or in part, or whether it should be refused. Next, the
Chamber will make an order, against which no appeal is possible.
       The Chamber may, at any time, either on its own initiative or on application, withdraw legal
aid if the circumstances which led  to its  being granted alter during the proceedings.
Where legal aid is granted, the cashier of the Court shall advance the funds necessary to meet
the expenses.
       The fore-mentioned Rules  of  Procedure  of the European Court of Justice  may prove of
invaluable help to  environmental organisations that wish to intervene as a party in a case  before
the Court relating to nature conservation or environmental protection, but  lack the  necessary
financial resources to do so. Legal aid may be granted by the Court to European NGO's, such as
the EEB, as well as to national NGO's.(104)

2.6.4  Conclusion

       Although Article 173  EEC  and Article 175 EEC  provide in  principle a right  for citizens or
citizens' groups to initiate proceedings  against an act of the Commission or the Council which is
of direct and individual concern  to them, in practice al! actions  brought by individuals  on the
grounds of  either Article 173 EEC  or  Article 175 EEC have been dismissed by  the European
Court of Justice.
       Although environmental NGO's have never in  the  past intervened as a third party in  a case
before the European Court of Justice, precedents involving BEUC, make it more likely that  such a
request, made on the basts  of Article 37, paragraph  2 of the Statutes of the Court  of Justice, will
be accepted by the Court. Such action can be facilitated  by applying for legal aid.
 3     FINAL CONCLUSIONS

       Within the Community, there  is a right for citizens  and citizens' groups to send a written
 complaint  to  the Commission,  if  a Member State  adopts measures or practices contrary  to
 Community legislation in general, and Community environmental legislation in particular. This may
 lead to "infringement proceedings"  by the Commission against the offending Member State, which
 could eventually result in the situation that the offending Member State is taken to the European
 Court of Justice.
       There is also an  EC citizens' right to petition the European Parliament.
       As  from December 31, 1992, there will be a right for every natural or legal  person at his
 request and without his having to  prove an interest, to have freedom of access to environmental
 information held by public authorities in the Community. This right is neither limited to EC citizens,
 nor geographically limited.
       Although,  there is currently no citizens' right to participate in EC decision-making relating
 to nature  conservation  or  environmental protection, the Commission  is  about  to  set up  a
 Consultative Forum on  the  environment,  involving representatives from  industry,  trade-unions,
 regional- and local authorities, as  well as from consumer- and environmental organisations. The
 Consultative Forum will advise the Commission about the future course of  EC environmental
 policy.(105)
       There is no citizens' right to  have standing in  the  European Court of Justice,  despite the
 theoretical possibilities  mentioned in Articles  173 EEC and  175 EEC. However, there  is a fair

-------
 184                            INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


 chance that environmental  NGO's might be granted the right to  intervene as a third-party in a
 case in the result of which they have an interest, considering the precedents involving BEUC.
       The overall conclusion is, that citizens and  citizens' groups can play, and  are in effect
 playing, an  important role in the enforcement of EC environmental  legislation, particularly in a
 situation where there is no EC inspectorate on the environment.


        REFERENCES

 (1)     Ninth  Annual Report on Commission monitoring  of the application  of Community  law
        (1991), COM (92) 136 final of 12 May 1992, pp.245-246.
       The CommissJon has published reports on the monitoring of the application of Community
        law ever since 1984:
        -  First Annual  Report COM (84) 181 final, 20.4.1984;
       -  Second Annual Report COM (85) 149 final, 23.4.1985;
       -  Third Annual Report COM  (86)  204 final,  3.6.1986,  published  in OJ No C 220,
          1.9.1986;
       -  Fourth Annual Report COM (87) 250 final,  24.8.1987, published in OJ No C 338,
          16.12.1987;
       -  Fifth Annual  Report  COM  (88) 425  final, 13.9.1988, published  in OJ No C 310,
          5.12.1988;
       -  Sixth Annual Report  COM  (89) 411  final, 22.12.1989, published in OJ No C 330,
          30.12.1989;
       -  Seventh Annual  Report COM (90) 288 final, 22.5.1990, published in OJ No C 232,
          17.9.1990;
       -  Eight Annual Report COM (91) 231  final, 31.7.1991, published  in  OJ No C 338,
          31.12.1991.

 (2)    The Eight Annual Report on Commission  monitoring of the application of Community law
       (1990), COM (91) 231 final of 31.7.1991, concludes - inter alia - on page 305:
       "It must be noted that Community directives are seldom  transposed in the national  law of
       the Member States within the  period  they describe. The situation  is made  worse by Ihe
       fact ttial in most Member States management of the environment law is considered to be
       an adminstrative question and that numerous circulars, administrative rules  and other
       instruments obscure the transparency of this area of the law.(...)
       Cases of non-conformity of national provisions with  Community environment measures are
       relatively numerous. (...)
       The most pressing problem concerns the practical application of environmental provisions
       by the Member States and the Commission's obligation to ensure that it happens".

(3)    Council Directive 76/160/EEC of 8 December  1975 concerning  the quality of bathing water
       (OJ L31  of 05.02.76, p.1).

(4)    Council  Directive  91/692/EEC  of  23 December   1991  concerning  standardizing  and
       rationalizing reports on trie implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment
       (OJ L377of31.12.91,p.48).

(5)    On 15 September 1989, the Commission sent a proposal to the Council of Ministers  and
       the European Parliament, lor  a Council Directive on civil liability for damage caused by
       waste, COM (89) 282 final - SYN 217 (OJ C251 of 4.10.89).
       The Commission intends  to present a Communication to the Council and Parliament on
       environmental liability, in the near future.

(6)    The Commission proposal for a Fifth Environment Action Programme, "Towards Sus-
       tainability", COM  (92) 23 final - VOL.11, of 27 March 1992, states on this issue:

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             185


      "Individuals and public interest groups should have practicable access to the courts in
      order to ensure that  their  legitimate  interests are  protected and  that  prescribed envi-
      ronmental  measures  are effectively enforced  and illegal  practices stopped" ("Towards
      Sustainability", pp.76-77).
      The Commission  is  currently preparing a  proposal for  a  Directive  harmonizing  the
      conditions for  standing  of  citizens  and citizens'  groups  in  the national courts on
      environmental issues. The Commission proposal will be sent to the Council and Parliament
      before the end of this year.

(7)    EC legislation knows three legally binding  instruments: the regulation, the directive and the
      decision.
      According  to Article 189 EEC:
      A regulation shall  have general application. It shall be binding in its entirety and directly
      applicable in all Member States.
      A directive shall be binding,  as to the  result to be achieved, upon each  Member State to
      which  it is addressed, but shall leave to  the  national  authorities the choice  of form and
      methods.
      A decision shall be binding in its entirety upon those to whom it is addressed.
      Recommendations and opinions shall have no  binding force.

(8)    EC environmental regulations are the exception, rather than the rule. They  have mostly
      been used to implement international conventions within the Community (see  for instance:
      Regulation 88/3322  on  CFC's,  OJ  1988, n°  L297, p.1; Regulation 88/1734 concerning
      export from and import into  the Community of certain  dangerous chemicals,  OJ 1988, n°
      L155,  p.2  and Regulation  82/3626 on  the  implementation  in the  Community  of the
      Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora, OJ 1982,
      n° L384,  p.1), or  in the  case of the proposal  for a Regulation on existing  chemicals (OJ
       1990,  n° C276, p.1) or in the case of the proposal for a Regulation on the supervision and
      control of  shipments of waste within, into and out of the European  Community (OJ 1990,
      n°C189, p.9).

(9)    "Direct effect"  of  a  provision of Community  law means that the provision  is directly
      applicable in Member States without  the adoption of any other national legislation thus
      directly conferring  to citizens rights which the national courts have a  duty to protect.
       Regulations have "direct  effect"  according  to  Article   189  EEC,  which  states  that
       Regulations are directly  applicable  in all Member States.  Directives have "direct effect"
      only in some cases arising  from the  case law of the EC's Court  of Justice. They  have
       "direct effect" only if:
       a) The Member State's  obligation is unconditional and sufficiently clear and precise;
       b) The provisions do not  leave any substantial  latitude or discretion to  the  national
          authorities;
       c) The provisions are capable of being enforced as a rule of law by the courts.

(10)   The Single European  Act (1987) provided EC environmental policy for the first time  in its
       history since 1973 with a solid legal basis in its Title VII (Environment),  the Articles  130r-
       1301.  The environment provisions in the Treaty  have been  reinforced by the Treaty on
       European Union (Maastricht, 1992), notably by its Articles B, 2, 3k and  130r-130t (new).

(11)   Since the  entry into force of the Single European Act in 1987, the Commission made only
       use three times of a Regulation, i.e. in the case of the proposal for a Regulation on the
       establishment  of  the European Environment Agency and  the European  Environment
       Monitoring and Information Network (OJ 1989, n° C217, p.7), in the case of  the proposal
       for a Regulation on the supervision  and control of shipments of waste  within, into and out
       of the European  Community (OJ 1990, n° C189, p.9), and regarding the proposal  for a
       Regulation on existing chemicals (OJ 1990, n° C276, p.1). See also: note (8) supra.

-------
186                            INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


(12)   See  also:  Rolf  Wagenbauer, "European  Community's  prospects for enforcement  of
      Directives", in: Proceedings (Volumes i and II) of the International Enforcement Workshop
      (May 8-10,1990; Utrecht, The Netherlands), p.180.

(13)   In its Report on  the  Proposal from  the Commission for a Council  Regulation on  the
      establishment  of  the  European  Environment  Agency and the  European Environment
      Monitoring and  Information  Network (Document A  3-0027/90 of 5 February  1990;
      rapporteur: Mrs.Beate Weber) the Committee  on the Environment,  Public Health and
      Consumer Protection of the European Parliament tabled an amendment (No.18) to Article
      2 of the draft-Regulation, suggesting the addi-tion of a monitoring and inspection task to
      the proposed data-collection task of the Agency. The Commission and the Council rejected
      this amendment,  with the argument that the  enforcement task of trie  Commission is
      indivisible. It cannot be delegated to  any  other institution, be  it within-  or outside  the
      Community framework. A compromise was finally found in Article 20  of Council Regulation
      (EEC) No 1210/90 of 7  May 1990 on the  establishment of the European Environment
      Agency and the European environment information and  observation  network  (OJ  1990,
      L120, p.1), which specifies - inter alia:
      "No later than two years  after the entry into force of this Regulation, and after  having
      consulted  the European  Parliament,  the  Council  shall, on the  same  basis  as  this
      Regulation and on the basis of a report from the Commission with appropriate proposals,
      decide on further tasks for the Agency in particular in the following areas:
      -  associating  in  the  monitoring  of  the  implementation  of  Community  environmental
      legislation, in  cooperation with  the Commission  and  existing  competent bodies in  the
      Member States; (...)",
      It has to be noted, that the terminology has been very carefully chosen: "associating in the
      monitoring of... (etc.)", and not "monitoring of...".

(14)   See for details about the  role of citizens and  citizens' groups in the  enforcement  of EC
      environmental legislation: Chapter II below.

(15)   E.g.: N.Haigh with G.Bennett,  P.Kromarek   and  Th.Lavoux:  "European Community
      Environmental Policy in  Practice". Vol I Comparative  Report: Water and  Waste in Four
      Countries (A Study of the Implementation  of the EEC Directives  in  France, Germany,
      Netherlands and United Kingdom), 1986, Graham and Trotman.

(16)   Article 189 EEC.

(17)   Statistics on compfaints  about infringements (C) and  infringements of EC environmental
      legislation detected by the Commission's own inquiries  (I):

                       Total
1985:
1986:
1987:
1988:
1989:
1990:
1991:
37
165
150
216
465
480
353
10
32
38
33
60
42
113
       (Source: Ninth Annual Report on Commission monitoring of the application of Community
       law (1991), COM(92) 136 final of 12 May 1992, p.120).

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             187
(18)   See:  A. Kallia  Antoniou: "Your  Rights under European  Community  Environment
      Legislation", (1987), booklet prepared for the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), p.11.

(19)   According to Article 170 EEC,  a Member State which considers that another Member State
      has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaty, may bring the matter before the Court of
      Justice. However, it cannot directly go to the Court. First, it has to bring the  matter before
      the Commission. Then, the Commission has to deliver a "reasoned opinion" after each of
      the States concerned has been given the opportunity to  submit its  own  case and  its
      observations on the other party's case, both orally and  in writing. If the Commission has
      not delivered an opinion within three months of the date on  which the matter was brought
      before it, the absence of such opinion shall not prevent the  matter from being  brought
      before the Court of Justice.

(20)   Ludwig Kramer, "Le droit & I'environnement et le droit communautaire", in: Proceedings of
      the International Conference  Guaranteeing the Right  to the Environment (Lisbon, 4-6
      February 1988), Fundagao Calouste Gulben kian, p. 125.

(21)   "The Environmental Imperative", Declaration on the Environment by the European Council
      (Dublin, 25-26 June 1990), p.9.

(22)   The right of complaint to  the Commission  of the European Communities has been derived
      from the founding  treaty of  the European Economic  Community,  the Treaty of Rome
      (1957), and the practice adopted in its application.

(23)   The right to petition the European Parliament is derived from Chapter XIV (Petitions), Rule
      128 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament.

(24)   See: note (8) supra.

(25)   However,  the Commission proposal for a  Fifth  Environment Action Programme, "Towards
      Sustainability", COM(92) 23 final - VOL.II of 27 March 1992,  proposes on page 76 that:
      "An accessible and efficient complaints facility should be developed at local, regional and
      national level to  improve confidence between  public, competent  authorities  and industrial
      or  business establishments.  In this  context,  complaints should be  considered  less  a
      nuisance than  a resource. They are an indication to enforcement agencies of  something
      amiss  and  can keep the competent authorities in touch with the realities of situations from
      which they may be geographically remote  or which they are  not in a position to monitor on
      a continuing basis".

(26)   A.  Kallia-Antoniou:  "The  Rights of Citizens and Non-Governmental  Organizations arising
      from  Community  Environmental  Legislation", overview  prepared  for the  European
      Environmental  Bureau (EEB),  June 1987, p.15.

(27)   Danish, Dutch, English, French, German, Greek, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish.

(28)   See: A.Kallia-Antoniou, note (26) supra, p  16.

(29)   Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979  on  the conservation  of wild birds,  as
      amended.

(30)   Minister of Agriculture, ministerial  order 161377/1247/1985,  Govt.Gazette No.214  Part II,
      and earlier orders on the  same subject. See also: A.Kallia-Antoniou, note (26) supra, p.16.

(31)   E.g. the Royal Society for the  Protection of Birds (RSPB) in the United Kingdom.

-------
188                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


(32)   See: section I.2.3 supra.

(33)   Article 171 EEC; see also section I.2.4 supra.

(34)   See: note (1) supra, p.120.

(35)   See: note (1) supra, p.120.

(36)   During  the European Year  of the Environment (1987-88), the  EEB  launched quite  an
      extensive campaign among its member-organisations to make them aware of the problems
      of  implementation  an  enforcement of  EC environmental legislation.  This  campaign
      consisted - inter alia - of:
      the publication and distribution of a booklet on the right of complaint, called "Your rights
      under  EC environmental legislation"  (in French and English); the publication  of a more
      extensive paper  entitled: "The  rights of citizens  and non-governmental  organizations
      arising from Community environmental legislation" (in French and English); the preparation
      of  a  paper  on  "Enforcement  and  compliance  with  EC environmental law" and  the
      organisation - with help from the Commission - of a conference on this theme  in  London;
      and, last but not least, the organisation of an enforcement  campaign in the Twelve
      Member States concerning  three environmental Directives: the  Bathing Water Directive,
      the Birds Directive and the Seveso Directive.
      For each Directive, a manual was prepared in all nine official languages of the Community,
      and selected non-governmental organisations (NGO's)  worked with this manual for about
      nine months  in order to get an idea and an overview  of the problems of implementation
      and enforcement of these  three  Directives in  all  Member States. All in all 36  different
      NGO's were involved in this campaign in the twelve EC Member States.
      The results of the campaign were mixed, which is no surprise as it  was the first time for
      most NGO's that  they got involved in such a campaign. However, the campaign created a
      clear awareness  on the side of the  NGO's about the serious problems of implementation
      and enforcement  of EC environmental legislation and about the role citizens and citizens'
      groups can play to improve the situation.

(37)   See: note (25) supra.

(38)   Petitions to the European Parliament are governed by Chapter XIV (Petitions),  Rules 128-
      130, of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament. Rule 128  deals with  "submis-
      sion and referral  of petitions"; Rule 129 concerns "examination of petitions", and Rule 130
      regards "notice of petitions".

(39)   European Parliament, Rules of Procedure (5th edition),  July 1989, p.91.

(40)   "Petitions shall be entered in a register in the order  in which they are received if they
      comply with the conditions laid down in paragraph 2 (name, occupation,...,etc.); those that
      do  not  shall  be filed without further action, and the petitioner  shall  be informed  of  the
      reasons therefor"  (Rule 128, paragraph 3).

(41)   See: A.Kallia-Antoniou, note (26) supra, p.19.

(42)   Rule 128, paragraph 4.

(43)   Rule 129, paragraph 1.

(44)   Rule 129, paragraph 2.

(45)   Rule 129, paragraph 3.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             189


(46)   Rule 129, paragraph 4.

(47)   Rule 129, paragraph 5.

(48)   Rule 129, paragraph 6.

(49)   According to the summary minutes of the sitting of the European Parliament on 3.1.1986,
      PE 102.901, PE 50, Appendix I; see: A.Kallia-Antoniou, note (26) supra, p.20.

(50)   See: A.Kallia-Antoniou, note (26) supra, p.21.

(51)   See: A.Kallia-Antoniou, note (26) supra, pp.21-22 for examples of this.

(52)   Rule 128, paragraph 4 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, on the other
      hand, does not make this restriction. It only stipulates, that petitions have to "fall within the
      sphere  of activities of the Communities" in order to be admissible.

(53)   Starting from  the  premise, that "everybody should  know the  law",  the  European
      Commission's Directorate-General Environment, Nuclear Safety  and Civil Protection has
      just published a collection of texts of all EC environmental legislation up to 1  September
      1991, in seven volumes, in English. It is the intention to publish this collection of texts in all
      other official Community languages by the end of 1992 in order to facilitate access of EC
      citizens to the texts of EC environmental legislation.

(54)   OJ L158/56 of 23.6.90.

(55)   European Parliament, document B2-736/85 of 16.07.1985.

(56)   See: L.Kramer,  "La Directive  90/313/CEE sur  I'acces a ('information  en  matiere
      d'environnement: genese et perspectives d'application" dans:  "L'economie et  le social
      dans le marche commun", p.866.

(57)   See: Bram van  der Lek,  "Democracy and the right to know", in:  Proceedings of the
       International Conference Guaranteeing the Right to the Environment, (Lisbon, 4-6 Februa-
       ry, 1988), Fundacao Calouste Gulbenkian, p. 173.

(58)   European Parliament, document  A2-208/87 of 10.11.1987; see also:  LKramer,  note (56)
       supra,  p.867.

(59)   European Parliament, Resolution of  22.01.1988,  OJ  1988, n° C49,  p.175; see  also:
       L.Kramer, note (56) supra, p.867.

(60)   OJ 1987, n° C70/1, paragraph 2.6.2; see also: L.Kramer, note (56) supra, p.867.

(61)   OJ No  C156 of 15.6.1987, p.138.

(62)   OJ C328/1 of 7.12.1987, p.4, item (u).

(63)   See: L.Kramer: note (56) supra, p.867.

(64)   It was  the aftermath  of the accident with  the nuclear reactor  in Tchemobyl, and the public
       at large throughout  Europe was calling for more openness  regarding  data on  envi-
       ronmental pollution held by public authorities; see also: L.Kramer, note (56) supra, p.867.

-------
 190                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


 (65)   Originally, there was some discussion  within  the Commission about a  "White Paper"  on
       the issue, but this idea was  almost  immediately discarded, as the Commission felt very
       strongly that the time for lengthy studies and debate was over, and the time to act was
       there. Equally, the possibility  of a Resolution was dismissed, as it is not a legally binding
       instrument. The Commission  feared, that a Resolution would  not change anything  in the
       actual situation  in the Member States. (See: LKramer: note (56) supra, p.868.)
 (66)   According to L.Kramer  (see: note (56) supra, p.868),  the  Commission proposal  should
       have been based on Article  100, Article 100a or Article 235 EEC, when looking at the
       objective and the contents of the proposal.

 (67)   See for  the  preference of the Commission for Directives in the environmental field:
       paragraph 1.2.1  and notes (7)  and [11) supra.

 (68)   A  Regulation would have been preferable to  a Directive, as  it would  have had  the
       advantage  of being able to guarantee the same right  of freedom  of access to environ-
       mental information  to all  EC citizens, in a uniform way, and  (contrary to a Directive)
       directly applicable in all EC Member States. See in the same sense: L.Kramer, note (56)
       supra, p.868.

 (69)   See: note (59) supra.

 (70)   See: L.Kramer,  note (56) supra, p.869.

 (71)   L.Kramer, (note (56) supra, p.869), however, points out quite rightly, that very often EC
       environmental Directives put obligations on EC institutions as welt. The obligation on EC
       institutions that occurs most  often, is the one requiring the Commission to prepare and
       publish a report on the  implementation  of the  Directive.(See, for instance: Article 8 of
       Directive  90/313/EEC.)

 (72)   Commission, COM (88) final of 28 November 1988, n°  1b; see also: L.Kramer, note (56)
       supra, p.869, note (20).

 (73)   Article 3,  paragraph 2 of Directive 90/313/EEC lists in an exhaustive way the reasons  for
       refusal  of a request for environmental  information held by public authorities.  These rea-
       sons are, when  the request affects:
       -   the  confidentiality of the proceedings of public autho- rities, international relations and
          national defence,
       -   public security,
          matters which are,  or have  been, sub judice, or under enquiry (including disciplinary
          enquiries), or which are the subject of preliminary investigation procee- dings,
       -   commercial and industrial confidentiality, including intellectual property,
       -   the confidentiality of personal data and/or files,
       -   material supplied by a third party without that party being under a legal obligation to do
          so,
       -   material,  the disclosure of which would make it more likely  that the environment to
          which such material related would be damaged.
       Information  held by public  authorities  shall be  supplied  in part where it is  possible to
       separate out information on items concerning the interests referred to above.

(74)   See: L.Kramer, note (56) supra,  p.869.

(75)   See: LKramer, note (56) supra,  p.871..

(76)   Article 1 refers to "information on the  environment", while throughout Directive 90/313/EEC
       the notion "information relating to trie environment" is used.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            191


(77)   Article 2(a) of Directive 90/313/EEC.

(78)   See: LKramer, note (56) supra, p.872.

(79)   Article 2(b) of Directive 90/313/EEC.

(80)   See: note (75) supra.

(81)   See: LKramer, note (56) supra, p.872.

(82)   See:  note (73)  supra.  Article 3, paragraph  3 adds  two more  formal  reasons to  the
      exhaustive list of reasons for  refusal in  Article 3, paragraph 2, i.e. where a request for
      information would  involve the  supply  of unfinished  documents or data  or internal
      communications,  or where the request is manifestly unreasonable or formulated in  too
      general a manner.

(83)   Article 3, paragraph 4 of Directive 90/313/EEC.

(84)   Article 4 of Directive 90/313/EEC.

(85)   Article 5 of Directive 90/313/EEC.

(86)   Article 6 of Directive 90/313/EEC.

(87)   Article 7 of Directive 90/313/EEC.

(88)   Article 8 of Directive 90/313/EEC.
      As far as the Commission is concerned, it has committed itself to publish a "State of the
      Environment in the European Communityn-report once every three years. The latest report
      in this series (COM  (92) 23  final - VOL.III of 27  March 1992)  was presented by the
      Commission to the Council and  Parliament earlier this year. Moreover, EUROSTAT, the
      Community's office of statistics, is regularly publishing statistics on  the environment.
      The Community has also taken other initiatives to improve the gathering and dessimination
       of information relating to the environment. To this end, the Council  adopted on 7 May 1990
       Regulation (EEC) No 1210/90 on the establishment of the European Environment Agency
       and the European environment information and observation network (OJ  1990, L120/1  of
       11.5.1990). The  object of the European  Environment Agency (EEA)  and the monitoring
       and information  network  associated with  it, is to provide both the Community and the
       Member States  with objective, reliable and comparable information at European level on
       the  basis of research and comparative  studies to enable them  to take the  necessary
       measures to protect the environment, as well as to assess the results of such measures,
       and to ensure that the public is properly informed about the state  of the environment. The
       monitoring and information network will involve as participants:
       •  a national focal point nominated by each Member State;
       •  elements from various national information networks; and
       •  institutions which will be charged with cooperating with the Agency in specific topics of
          particular inte rest - these will be centres of excellence and are often referred to as the
          "thematic centres".
       The European Environment Agency will be open also to countries outside the Community,
       which share the objectives of the Community and its Member States in relation to the
       environment. Already, there has  been  a very  encouraging   display of  interest  in
       participation on  the part of a  number of EFTA and Eastern and  Central  European coun-
       tries.

-------
192                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


(89)   As a matter of fact, the Task Force European Environment Agency is currently preparing a
      state  of the  environment  report  regarding  the  "greater Europe",  i.e.  including the
      environment of Central and  Eastern European countries, as part of the follow-up of the
      Dobris process.

(90)   L.Kramer: "Participation of  environmental organisations in the activities of the EC", in:
      "Participation Rights in European Perspective",  Fuhr/Roller (Ed.), 1991, p.74.

(91)   "Towards Sustainability", A  European Community Programme  of  Policy and  Action  in
      relation to the Environment and Sustainable Development, COM  (92) 23 final - VOL. 11  of
      27 March 1992.

(92)   "Subsidiarity" derives from Article 3b of the Treaty on European Union {Maastricht, 1992),
      which states:
      "The Community shaft act within the limits of the powers conferred  upon it by this Treaty
      and of the objectives assigned to it therein.
      In areas which do  not tall  within  its exclusive competence, the Community  shall take
      action,  in accordance  with  the principle of subsidiarity, only if and in so far as the
      objectives of the proposed  action  cannot be sufficiently achieved by  the Member States
      and can therefore,  by  reason  of the scale or effects of the  proposed action,  be better
      achieved by the Community.
      Any  action by the  Community shall not go beyond what  is necessary  to  achieve the
      objectives of this Treaty".

(93)   See: note (91) supra, p.75.

(94)   The Implementation Network comprises representatives  of relevant national authorities and
      of the  Commission in the field  of practical implementation of Community measures; it will
      be aimed primarily at exchange of information  and experience and  at the development of
      common approaches at practical level, under the supervision of the Commission.

(95)   The Environment Policy Review Group comprises representatives of the Commission and
      the Member States at  Director-General level,  and will  be established to develop mutual
      understanding and exchange of views on environmental  policies and measures.

(96)   See: LKramer, note (90) supra, p.77.

(97)   See also: L.Kramer, note (90) supra, p.77.

(98)   See also: L.Kramer, note (90) supra, p.77.

(99)   See: LKramer, note (90) supra, p.77.

(100)  BEUC: "Bureau Europeen des Unions des Consommateurs11, was established in  1962. It is
      a European non-profit organisation representing some  twenty consumers' associations in
      the EC Member States. Membership of BEUC  is restricted to associations whose sole aim
      is to protect the interests of consumers  and which are independent of governments, trade
      and industry. BEUC represents the interests of about 320 million consumers, its objectives
      are to  contribute to the proper observance of consumer legislation and to  "hear and  be
      heard" by the EC institutions.

(101)  See: A.KalHa-Antoniou,  note (26) supra, p.26.

(102)  The  European Environmental  Bureau (EEB)  was  established  in  1974.  The  EEB is a
      European non-profit organisation,  regrouping at the  EC  level  more than  120  non-

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             193


      governmental organisations working in the field of nature conservation and environmental
      protection from the twelve Member States of the Community, as well as from most EFTA
      countries. It thus represents about 30 million European citizens.

(103) Committee on Legal Affairs and Citizens' Rights, draft report on the  award of damages to
      consumers, introduced  by  Mrs.Boot, Part II, Statement of Grounds,  Appendix II,  draft
      resolution tabled by Mrs.Dury, PE 104 304/B, 20.3.86.  See also: A.Kallia-Antcniou, note
      (26) supra, p.27, note 44.

(104) See: A.Kallia-Antoniou,  note (26) supra, pp.28-29.

(105) The creation by the Commission  of the Consultative Forum, in order to implement the Fifth
      Environment Action Programme "Towards Sustainability", is completely in line with Chapter
      27 (Strengthening  the  role  of non-governmental organisations: partners for development)
      of Agenda 21, adopted last June in Rio de Janeiro, by about 160 countries in the world, as
      well as the European Community. Paragraph  27.5 of Agenda 21  reads as follows:
      "Society, Governments and international bodies should develop mechanisms to allow non-
      governmental organisations to play their partnership role responsibly and effectively in the
      process of environmentaily sound and sustainable development".

-------
 194                           INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


                                                                             Annex 1



          COMPLAINT TO THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

                       against failure to comply with Community law




 Name of complainant: *


 Nationality:


 Address or registered office:


 Field  of activity:


 Member State, organization or firm which has not complied with Community law:


 Alleged infringement and loss incurred (if any):
Approaches or representations made to national or Community authorities:

- Administrative action:


- Legal action (if any):


Documents and evidence substantiating trie complaint:
* The complainant may, if he wishes, remain anonymous.  But the author of  an anonymous
complaint will not enjoy the procedural advantages or follow-up described overleaf.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            195
                             (Note to appear on back of form)
Under the Treaties the Commission of the European Communities is responsible for ensuring that
the provisions of the  Treaties themselves and the other measures taken by  the  Community
institutions are correctly applied.
Any person may file a complaint with the Commission in respect of a practice or measure which
he or she considers to be in breach of a provision of Community law.
The  complaint may be filed by means of this form.  It may  be addressed direct to Brussels
(Commission of the European Communities, rue de la Loi 200, B-1049 Bruxelles), or be lodged
with  one of the Commission's Information Offices.
The complainant enjoys the following procedural advantages:


    an acknowledgement of receipt will be sent immediately upon receipt of the complaint;
   the complainant will be kept informed of action taken, and particularly of representations made
   to the national autho- rities and business firms concerned;
   the  complainant  will  be informed  of  any infringement proceedings commenced  by  the
   Commission against a Member State and of any proceedings  against a business firm. The
   complainant  will  also be  informed of any  proceedings that may already  have been
   commenced if they have a bearing on the subject of the complaint.

-------
196                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             197


ROLE OF THE RUSSIAN PUBLIC IN ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

MIKHAIL M. BRINCHUK

Director Center for Environmental  Legal Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences, Znamenka 10,
119841  Moskou, CIS
      The role and potentialities of the public in the enforcement of the environmental legislation
in  Russia depend on different factors. Interests of citizens  and public organizations in providing
environmental protection, completeness of legal regulation of ecological rights of citizens, real
possibilities for their realization are the main such factors.
      The choice of interests and directions of public activity is predetermined by the influence of
social and political conditions of life in the country. Thus, on  the second half of the 80th,  in the
conditioned of openness and perestroika of public relations there was a  remarkable  increase of
peoples'  activity in Russia in solution of environmental protection  problems.  At this period many
new ecological  nongovernmental organizations have appeared along with the existing  public
nature protection structures. Then, and at present, in the course of worthening conditions of lite,
rising of  costs, activity of the people was more directed towards  the solution of other problems
(food, housing, making their livelihood, etc.). The change of priorities has occurred in Russia in
spite of the wide realizing the seriousness of ecological situation in the country.
      Then,  ft is  significant for Russia  that for  a long time the law demonstrated indifferent
relation towards  a man, his  rights  and  interests.  A  person, in spite of the wide  political
declarations  during  decades,  remained  rightsless.  \r\  the  conditions  of  the administrative-
command system a man couldn't have an influence on public processes in any sphere of life,
including environmental protection. More than  70  years  priority of public relations over personal
and factually  state of a person of possessing no civil reigned in the country.
      The environmental legislation itself was and still remains insufficiently developed and didn't
meet  public ecological  requirements. Before enforcing the legislation it should be created.  But in
Russia till and now there  is  no a number of fundamental  environmental  laws -  such  as on
ecological expertise, on nuclear, safety,  on toxic substances control,  on  waste disposal, on
agrochemicals, etc.
      A number of draft laws is being prepared in Russia now, prepared taking into account the
experience of foreign environmenta! legislation, but still not adopted by the Parliament.
       As for today a new Law on protection of the natural environment  (december 1991), Land
Code (aprit 1991), Law on mineral resources (march 1992) are approved in  Russia. Positions of
these  laws,  especially  positions  of the  comprehensive  Law  on protection  of  the  natural
environment enable us to speak about changing the state policy concerning ecological rights and
interests of the people.
       Priority  of protection  of life  and  health  of  a man,  creation  of favourable  ecological
conditions for life, labour and recreation for the population are declared by the Law as one of the
main  principle of the environmental protection (art.3). The law establishes a number of rights and
authorities of citizens  and  public organizations  in  the  field of environmental protection  and
enforcement  of environmental  legislation, as well as guarantees for their realization. In particular,
it establishes the right  of citizens to protection of health from unfavourable impact of the natural
environment (art.11).
       For increasing the role and potentialities of the public in enforcement  of the environmental
legislation the following authorities of citizens and public ecological organizations are  the most
significant:
       -   to  organize and  take part in  meetings,  pickets,  demonstrations,  referendums  on
          environmental protection issues,  to  address  letters, petitions, make  complaints and
          statements and demand their consideration;
          to  demand rendering in proper time, complete and reliable information on state of the
          natural environment and measures for its protection from the appropriate bodies:

-------
198                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT


          to  recommend  their  representatives for participation in the  state  environmental
          expertise  on  the  issues of  location  and  drafting of objects and to make  public
          environmental expertise;
       -   to  demand a disaffirmation of decisions on  location, construction and  exploitation
          ecologically not sound objects, limitation and stoppage of their activities;
       -   to demand to make the state environmental expertise, appear in mass media with their
          ecological platform;
       -   to bring up a question for making guilty officials answerable, bring a suit in the court for
          compensation of damage to  health and property of  a citizen caused  by ecological
          offence (art. 12,13).
       One cannot say that public activities in enforcement of the  environmental legislation in the
previous  decade  was efficient. But  some results are very  significant.  In particular,  public
succeeded  in preventing realization of a number  of ecologically harmful projects, for  example
projects concerning northern rivers' flow change, construction of channels  Volga - Chogray, Volga
- Don. Due to the public actions it became possible to prevent location and construction of some
industrial  enterprises in highly polluted areas as well.
       We can hope  that one the base  of the modern environmental legislation public  activities
towards  its  enforcement will be more  sufficient.  That  in  particular will be  promoted due  to
guarantees for realization of ecological rights of citizens  and public organizations proclaimed by
the  state. Sovjets of peoples'  deputies, their executive bodies, state  bodies in the  field  of
environmental protection, their  officials are obliged  to render every kind  of assistance to public
organizations and citizens in realization of their ecological rights  and obligations, take necessary
measures for implementation of their proposals and demands  concerning the organization  of
nature protection activities.
       According to the  Law nobody  can prevent  the people to  realise  his lawful rights. When
officials   and citizens  prevent realization of  ecological  rights  and  obligations  by  public
organizations and citizens, they are to  be answerable.
       To increase efficiency of public activities for enforcement of  the environmental protection
legislation it is very important to provide wide ecological education  of the population. It is  also
essential  that the people should know the legislation itself. For today not  only the Russian public
has a very low level of knowledge of the legislation  but officials of state bodies and enterprises as
well.
       Thus, some legal  conditions have been created lately in Russia to  increase the public role
in the environmental legislation  enforcement. But still the public is far from using all its potential
possibilities in this field.  On the other hand the  state bodies  are not ready to perform  all their
functions to fulfil all the demands of public.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            199


NEW ECOLOGICAL  LEGISLATION  OF RUSSIA - IMPORTANT  STAGE  OF NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY ENFORCEMENT AND IN DEVELOPMENT OF THE RIGHT OF AN
INDIVIDUAL FOR FAVORABLE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.

RUSLAN BOGOLEPOV

Professor, Zhitnaya 16, Moscow, Russia, CIS

      According to the new Russian ecological legislation the right of  an individual for favorable
natural environment, which is closely connected with the  national ecological safety situation, is
materialized in specific legal norms being the right ot an individual for health protection against
negative  environmental effects. This right should be  considered as one of the most important
indications of the quality of human  life,  as a measure of the democracy of the  contemporary
society.
       It  is well known that in the former USSR the importance of environmental enforcement was
often underestimated.  Unfortunately the  government  and public  opinion had not  payed proper
attention   to ecological  problems,  and  as  a  result of that  shortsighted policy the  national
environmental situation  was  constantly  deteriorating and  sometimes we  had to face serious
ecological disasters in some regions (Chernobyl,  the Aral and Caspian Seas, the Volga river,
etc.). The right of an individual for favorable natural environment was not reliably ensured by the
State and the Law.
       After the victory of democratic forces and the restoration of the Russian State last year we
can say that the situation is rapidly improving.
       Last November the Russian Parliament approved the Declaration of Rights and Freedom
of an individual and a Citizen, Article 25 of which  foresees the governmental support of  'every
activities  having  as  its  objective environmental  enforcement  and  care for  human health'.
Ecological rights and duties of the Russian citizens are also regulated by Art. 67/6 and Art. 67/7
of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
       We hope that the national  ecological safety will be considerably strengthened  due  to the
'Act on Environmental Enforcement', which was adopted by the  Parliament last December This
important document is unprecedented historical  innovation and practical significance.
The Act  directly mentions that every citizen  has  the  right on health protection against  negative
environmental influences due to economic or other activities, accidents  and various disasters.
For the first time the legislation determines specific ways and procedures to ensure this right. We
can pick out  three main spheres where the  citizens  would  be able to implement this legal
possibility:
          right to use the natural environment favorable for normal life;
       -   right to demand from the government, business  circles and other  citizens strict
          fulfilment of their ecological responsibilities;
       -   right to use  all  legal means of state  and public  protection whenever this right  is
          violated.
       It seems very important that the proper text of the Act gives state guarantees of ecological
rights of  the citizens and their public organizations.
       With the  progress of market  economy  principals  in Russia the problems of ecological
safety of an individual and the society in general should be directly connected with the tasks  of
creating  an effective economic mechanism of environmental enforcement.  The above mentioned
Act  also regulates  such  important  matters  as ecological examinations,  ecological  monitoring,
ecological emergency situations, etc.
       Of course it will take some more time  to  make these legal standards to  come into  full
force, i.e. to become  an  every day legal practice. This process can be accelerated thanks to the
consistency of the legislative, executive and judicial representatives in  their fight for the priority of
ecological values above any economic,  political  benefits, due to active social positioning of all
groups of the population.

-------
200                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       The future Federal Ecological Code, which is under elaboration now, will contribute greatly
to further national environmental enforcement. Being  approved by the Parliament, the Code will
give a set of important legal institutions necessary to ensure national ecological safety.
       Nowadays  the solution  of  serious environmental problems goes  beyond  the  national
borders and  needs an active international cooperation. In this  regard  I would like to wish the
conference every success and  express  my confidence that the Russian lawyers  and ecologists
are ready to cooperate fruitfully with their foreign colleagues.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             201
      SUMMARY OF THEME DISCUSSIONS



THEME 1:       CONTEXT FOR ENVIRONMENT

Reporter:       Frank Uijting


1     Goals

      Introduction of a general framework for designing effective environmental compliance and
enforcement approaches  and alternative approaches within that framework.  It also provided a
context for enforcement within the European Community and within Central and Eastern Europe.


2     Presentations

      Ms.  Wasserman, Chief, Compliance  Policy and  Planning of Enforcement, U.S. E.P.A.,
presented a general  framework for  compliance  and enforcement,  "Principles of  Environmental
Enforcement" as a  basis for international exchange. There  is  an increasing recognition that
enforcement is a crucial element in achieving the goals that are stated in environmental policies
and  requirements. With  the  "Principles  of Environmental Enforcement" a general framework is
given which gives a  bases for individual states to  built up their own enforcement program. It
provides definitions,  a general framework, a  set of principles and a range of  options to facilitate
the development and implementation of environmental enforcement programs and compliance
strategies in different international  settings. The "Principles" should  not be seen as a model, but
are a point of departure from which  an  individual state can build and improve their own unique
enforcement program. A course, based on the "Principles" has been  developed to assist states by
improving  their  environmental  programs. The course has  now  been  delivered in Poland and
Hungary and is planned  for delivery in Turkey,  the  Ukraine and Mexico. The response of the
participants has been very positive.

      Mr. R. Macrory,  Denton Hall  Professor of Environmental Law, Imperial College, London,
discussed the issue of "Membership  of the EEC: What it Means for  Environmental Requirements
and  Enforcement." Developing  EEC  law is a very complex  process, it is not a top-down system.
Community legislation is  supreme over national law. Yet  it is clear that the  implementation in
member states is far  from being perfect. He  stated that one of the difficulties associated with the
implementation  and  enforcement  of Community environmental  law is  the  differing structural
character  of  much   of  the  legislation  that  has been  agreed. The  CEC  is responsible for
enforcement.  They should not only look  at the formal stage (the implementation of EEC law), but
also to the practical  implementation  (enforcement of environmental  legislation). There  should be
Community  environmental  inspectors  to  enforce   the  member  states.  Another   interesting

-------
202                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
 development would be the setup of a complaint system for citizens, so they can bypass their own
 government.
       Furthermore he concluded that it requires a political will by all Member States to ensure
 that Community policies are implemented within their countries.

       Mr. L. Kramer, Commission of the European  Communities, DG Environment, Nuclear
 Safety  and  Civil  Protection, discussed "The  Implementation  of  Environmental  Laws  by the
 European Economic Communities". He stated that the EEC should  not be compared with a state
 or a international institution. Enforcement should be issued in the context of the national states.
 The EEC has some very progressive Member States, but also less progressive ones. That makes
 implementation difficult.  EEC law is a  bases for enforcement. The sovereign states do decide by
 themselves.  He  stated  that  there  should be more  priority  for  non-compliance  and  non-
 enforcement.  Therefore  more  information  is  needed.  To  provide  more information,  new
 Community laws will be developed on  publishing, auditing and information. Another point is that if
 there is no compliance in existence, this should be discussed. Furthermore, if projects are carried
 out (e.g. economic), they must comply with the environmental legislation. Finally it should be clear
 that the environment is not a  property of  the administration. Citizens must be brought into the
 process of developing environmental policy and enforcement.

       Ms. P. Kromarek (ELF  Aquitaine)  attributes "The Upgrading of Environmental  Laws  in
 France  as Part of the Requirements  by the EEC". EEC-legislation  has an  important effect on
 national regulations.  Ms. Kromarek highlights some problems that occur with the implementation
 of EEC-directives.  When an EEC directive  regulates an issue which is not regulated internally by
 a  Member State,  the relevant  regulations must be created.  A problem arises when  Member
 States  already have  relevant  legislation.  It  is  more  difficult to change existing  legislation.  In
 France  there are several examples of such problems. One main problem is the interpretation  of
 some elements in  the EEC directives. The  French meaning of some  words is not always the
 same as defined  by the  EEC.  Sometimes words are  mentioned in directives  but are left
 undefined, e.g. "best available technologies". All these problems of interpretation are difficult  to
 solve, especially with 12 states having different legal,  technical and economic practices. This
 problem should be  tackled during the drafting of legislation.
 It must be stressed that enforcement of EEC environmental law is not just a matter of formalities
 and  procedures. It goes beyond  strict standards, it is  a way to protect the environment as a
 common interest, and has come to be integrated with protecting individual rights.

      Mr.  W. Beblo,  Director Ecological Department, presented "Environmental Enforcement  in
 Central  and  Eastern  Europe in Transition",  especially  in Hungary,  Poland and CSFR.  In the
 communistic  period some very  strict  laws  were developed.  The purpose of these laws was  to
 show the Western  Countries that they  protected the environment, but there was no  enforcement.
 After the democracy revival in  all Central and Eastern  European countries environmental issues
 became one of the most important political issues. The policy-makers where forced  to make new
 environmental legislation. The way of  rebuilding the legislation  is different in  each  country. It is
done by a creating  a general  framework (CSFR) or by synthesizing  a  general  system from
detailed  laws (Hungary,  Poland). Environmental policy  in  the Central  and Eastern  Europe
 countries require modern laws derived from their national constitutions.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             203
      Mr. G. Bandi, Scientific Director, Copernicus Environmental Law Program of the Danube
Region, presented  "Environmental Enforcement in Hungary - Today and Tomorrow" and what is
needed to improve  the current situation. He stated that enforcement is far from being satisfactory.
He  discussed some items to which attention should  be  paid. First of  all there is  a lack  of
environmental policy in Hungary. A great burden for enforcement is that new laws are developed,
without  knowing how to use  them.  Secondly,  at the moment privatization happens a lot.  One
should know  how to deal with responsibilities, the price for pollution and what  kind of  standards
should be used. Thirdly,  a  new philosophy is  needed. A key element is cooperation instead of as
one sided approach. In the fourth  place, more public pressure is needed. An important condition
to public participation is  access to information. This is still  missing in general legal rules.  Fifthly,
all participants involved in  environmental issues should have environmental ethics. Finally, where
do we have to begin?
      We should be aware that there is not much difference  between states,  so cooperation is
very important.  He  made a link with the  presentation of ms. Kromarek,  it is easier to create new
legislation instead of reviewing old laws. This gives Hungary a good opportunity.

       Ms. E. Kruzikova, Executive Director,  Institute of Environmental Policy, Prague,  presented
some factors which are influencing "The Current Status of Environmental  Enforcement in the
CSFR". One  factor is the environmental legislation and  its quality. All acts in the CSFR  are brand
new. The fact that the regulations where prepared in a big hurry, they where constructed because
of the future  membership  of the EEC and that there was  a lack of environmental policy some
disadvantages appeared. Environmental enforcement is  not so easy because  professional skills
are not sufficient and it  is hard to express what environmental damage is. Furthermore it is too
ambitious and  non-realistic. On the other  hand the advantages are that  we  could  take into
account new  trends in economic,  social  and  political life. It also allowed us to  make an effort to
incorporate as much as possible EEC environmental requirements. One success is that  the CSFR
is the first country in Central and Eastern Europe  that approved this year an amendment on
environmental audits for privatization.
       Another  aspect is public participation. This  aspect is also important like law making. It is
not easy to involve  the public into environmental decision-making. Environmental protection is not
a priority for citizens today. NGO's are not well organized and not always willing to cooperate with
each other.  However,  new   NGO's  are  being  created  and will  hopefully  play  a  role  in
environmental policy.
3      Open discussion

       Mr. Philippi, Brazil, has  a question  about the  behaviour of  large  industries regarding
environmental concerns towards the  EEC. Are industries anticipating environmental measures in
order  to  be  the  "first" companies  to  achieve  environmental  requirements  of  the  EEC  ?
Furthermore, are these industries using this for marketing?
       Mr. Kramer, EEC, thinks that big  companies see  a competitive advantage in applying
measures, but it differs from company to company. They use this for their marketing. Mr. Macrory
adds to this that companies realize that the major changes  are taking place at EEC level. That's
where they have to got to look to.

-------
204                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       According  to  Ms.  Wasserman,  USA-EPA,  in  the  USA  companies  are  using  their
environmental record for promotion.

       Furthermore Mr. Philippi, Brazil, is interested in the role of NGO's in the evaluation step of
the Environmental  Management Cycle.
       Ms. Wasserman, EPA,  points  out  that the citizens  are involved by  having access to
information  and   through  the  legislation  passed   by Congress  citizens  are  involved  in
implementation and enforcement of environmental law. Besides this,  EPA  supports citizens by
helping them dealing with the problems they are facing, e.g. giving information, giving support for
taking legal steps by citizens.
Citizens do also have an  "ear  and eye function" that is important for enforcement. So  citizens
have an important role in the evaluation step.

       Mr. J. Plaut, USA, thinks that the issue of enforcement is just one part of a larger general
plan. This comes at the end of the plan, not at the beginning. We need to  understand this as a
group.
       Ms. Wasserman, USA-EPA, states that the definition of enforcement includes both those
things necessary to encourage and compel compliance. We do recognize that to get compliance
you need both. One  could think that  enforcement might wait while compliance is encouraged.
This  might be true  only  for  the  period  between  when  requirements  are established  and
compliance is required. While balance is always needed, you  need to start enforcement actions
as soon as possible when compliance is required or you will send the wrong  message.

       Ms. Maslarova from Bulgaria wants to know if there is a possibility that her country can get
support in the process of developing environmental regulation and policy.
       Mr. L.  Kramer, EEC, points  out that the EEC is not able to  protect the environment of
member states if  there is not a will to protect the environment. If there is no  request from a
association state,  and they  have  not ranked  environmental  aspects high in priorities,  it will  not
come into that.
       Environmental  issues play a growing role but not a priority role. It is one of the aspects of
the EEC. So  if the country itself does not protect the environment, do not expect that the EEC wilt
do this.
       According to Mr. R. Macrory, UK, there is a difficulty with developing environmental policy
and regulations. One has to deal with agreements that are made in EFTA context.
Ms. Wasserman, US  EPA, is impressed by the contrast that was described between  trade and
environment in Europe. In the USA there is an integration of trade and environment.

       Mr. R. Macrory,  UK,  brings up a question  about privatization in  relation to enforcement.
State enterprises in Eastern Europe raise  peculiar problems for enforcement, because the  laws
may apply to  them, but there are other tensions like economic goals. He is wondering  how the
Central  and   Eastern  European  countries feel  about the possibility  that privatization offers
improved opportunities for enforcement?
       Ms. Kruzikova states that  there are large enterprises in the state property. There is no
substantial change in  approach  to environmental enforcement.  They still feel that the government
is responsible for them  and  they suppose  they even  will be excluded from new legislation. This
situation might slightly change after privatization. Some measures are taken to stimulate them.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             205
      Mr.  Bandi,  Hungary,  points  out  that  privatization solves  nothing  for  this  moment.
Privatization is  a massive process, but not  so massive to change the  situation as  has been
mentioned before. There is also the situation of introducing a market economy and on the other
hand dealing with enforcement. Developing a  market economy has priority.

      Mr. Nagy,  Hungary,  notes that when  you are starting with enforcement, one thing is not
included, namely how to enforce authorities to enforce the law.
      Mr. Bandi, Hungary,  explains the situation in Hungary. There  are  6 political  parties in
Hungary. None of them has developed environmental policy. So there is  a  long way to go. One
should have first of all a policy and  then there is a basis for enforcement. We should get rid of the
current  standards that  were set up in the 80's by the communist government. They  cannot be
applied  and enforcement is not realistic.

      Ms.  Kruzikova, CSFR, points out that  in the CSFR there are also a lot of political parties.
They do have  an environmental program, but these programs are all the same. It look  like a duty
to have it in their program.  In the CSFR politicians are not  interested  in  enforcement. That's
because of the splitting between Czecho and  Slovakia.  It might become an item again next year.

      According to Mr. Beblo, Poland, there are ways to enforce governments. First of all there
is parliament that controls the government. Secondly,  the  media do have power to enforce the
authorities to a certain extend.

       Mr. Syryczinski tram Poland is asking  what the influence is of advisors, the Worldbank, the
EEC and consultants on the implementation of environmental policy,
       Ms. Kruzikova,  CSFR, thinks this depends  on what  kind  of  ministry is involved.  Ms.
Kruzikova  worked with two  consultants from the  USA  on environmental matters concerning
privatization. It worked  excellent.
       Mr.  Beblo, Poland,  also has good experience with support from the EEC or the Worldbank,
Our problem is that we don't  have  the knowledge or the experience  and the skills how the handle
implementation/enforcement.
       Mr.  Bandi, Hungary, thinks there  is a positive  influence of the  Worldbank support.  They
want an environmental assessment lor the project that are carried out. The World Bank also gives
loans for industry. There  are only a few requests. The reason for  this is that they should  meet
some standards.

        Ms.  Duncan, Canada, is wondering  how the Central and Eastern  Europe countries are
dealing with costs for cleaning up during privatization projects.
        Mr. Bandi, Hungary, points  out that it  depends on the legislation. The costs for cleaning up
are for the privatizers.  There are no requirements taken up in the law. There is also no fund. This
problem has to be solved  somehow.
        Ms. Kruzikova,  CSFR, explains that her country has no regulation about cleaning up, but
there is a  resolution about how to deal with cleaning  up sites. There  are two relevant points  in
this resolution. The first one is, who is liable:  new purchasers are  liable  for old enterprises. The
 second point  is, who will pay: the purchaser will clean  up the site, and afterwards he receives
 50% of the costs back.

-------
206                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      Ms. Bowman, USA, notes that public participation is mentioned as a very important part of
environmental  enforcement and  that privatization is  a fundamental place where changes  in
environmental issues are going to happen, But, what is the practical role of the public ?
Ms. Kruzikova, CSFR, thinks that the public  can play a role. She explains  that information about
risk assessment  and  environmental audits should be published, so that citizens know what the
situation is. Besides that they also should be informed about what measures a company should
take to comply.

      Mr. S, Madonna, USA, is wondering if there has been any thought about how to deal with
environmental audits in such way that they wilt not turn against the company.
      According  to Mr.  Beblo,  Poland,  audits  are primary for getting  the  permits  needed.
Environmental auditing in Eastern Europe is just in a beginning stage.

      Ms.  Popescu,  Romania,  is curious  about how to  deai with  standardization  and
harmonization with the EEC law during the process of development of  environmental legislation,
policy and enforcement.  Mr. Syryczynski, Poland, states that it would be very useful to  make in
future one European directive on environmental policy. Everybody speaks  another language and
everybody speaks about environmental rules.
      Mr. Bandi, Hungary, states that all the actions taken are in line with the EEC legislation. It
is  difficult to  meet the  requirements  of the  EEC at  this  moment. There  should   also be
harmonization between Central and East European states, but that would take a long time.
4     Conclusions

      There is a long way to go for the Central and East European countries. One should have
first of all an  environmental policy and  then  there is  a basis  for enforcement.  Because CEE
countries  lack knowledge,  experience  and  the  skills  how to  handle  implementation  and
enforcement,  support (from  f.e. the World  Bank, the EEC and  environmental  agencies  or
ministries of western countries) can have a positive  influence.

      Privatization doesn't offer improved opportunities for enforcement at this moment, because
enforcement hasn't got priority. On the one hand one has to  deal with the  introduction of a market
economy and on the other hand one has to deal with enforcement.
The  public  can  play  a  role. However they  should be  informed  about  risk  assessment,
environmental  audits and what measures a company should  take.

      Ways to enforce  against the  government are first of all  the  parliament that controls the
government. Secondly, the media do have the power to  enforce the authorities to a certain extent

      In the future it would be very useful to make one European directive on environmental
policy. Also harmonization between CEE countries will be useful.

      Mr.  Kesselaar closes the discussion session with the conclusion that we do  speak the
same language, regarding to enforcement. Now it is a question of how to bring this in practise.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             207
THEME 2:    DESIGNING ENFORCEABLE ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS

Reporter:    Marcia E. Mulkey


1     Goals

      Enforceable requirements form the building block for all enforcement. Without success in
making  laws,  regulations and permits enforceable, we cannot have compliance and enforcement
success regardless of what structures, personnel, skills, legal tools, or resources we bring to the
task.


2     Presentations

      The lead paper for this theme, presented  by Mr. Fulton, Deputy Assistant Administrator in
the Office of Enforcement of the United States and authored jointly by Mr. Fulton and Mr. Gilberg,
identifies and discusses  seven criteria for developing enforceable environmental regulations and
permits. These seven criteria  represent the first  set of lessons learned from this theme and are
summarized here  as numbered lessons,

       Lesson #1. Enforceable requirements must be understandable. Understandability is
      developed  through use of clear definitions, simplicity, and avoidance of ambiguity.

       Lesson #2. Enforceable requirements must  precisely  define  the  coverage of the
       requirement.  This  includes  precise   delineation  of the  regulated  industry,  the
       regulated activities,  and the  regulated substances; The specific pollution  sources
       and process as well as  the specific actors, such as owners or operators, should be
       described.  Put  simply, the requirement should answer the question "to whom and to
       what activities do requirements apply?".

       Lesson #3. Enforceable requirements must establish a clear standard of conduct.
       Clear  standards  include both measurable,  non-subjective standards and precise,
       narrowly drawn exemptions or  exceptions (with the burden of proving qualification
       for exemption placed on those who claim itj.

       Lesson #4. Compliance must be easily  measured or determined. The standards
       should include precise  statements of  how compliance is to be measured {including
       appropriate test methods). Compliance measurement/demonstrations  by both the
       regulated industry and by the enforcing government should be addressed.

       Lesson #5. Requirements should include  clear  deadlines  for  compliance.  The
      requirements should include a date certain tor compliance, not contingent on any

-------
208                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       event  or,  if  contingent,  with  a  clearly  specified,  unambiguous  contingency.
       Enforceable interim deadlines are also recommended.

       Lesson #6. Enforcement is enhanced by self-monitoring, mandatory recordkeeping
       and reporting. Frequent  monitoring intervals,  specified periods for record  retention
       and defined content for records and reports are important as are separate and
       significant sanctions for false or nonreporting.

       Lesson #7. Proper adoption procedures assure that the requirements become and remain
       effective.

       Following  this lead paper, and  the lessons  it presented, additional major papers were
 presented by panelists and from other  key participants in the conference. Each of these papers
 and their principal lessons are identified below.

       Ms. Victor, Head  of  the Environmental Law and  Economics Section of the Swedish
 Environmental Protection Agency presented a paper authored by Mr.  Sverndal entitled "Swedish
 System of Integrated Permitting - Whether it Enhances Compliance and Enforceability". This
 paper  described  tiia Swedish system  of multimedia, integrated permits,  where  both  permitting
 authorities  and  enforcement/permit  supervision authorities focus  on permits  in  an  integrated,
 cross-media manner.  Permits are designed to detail the covered  activities and the  conditions
 applied to those activities. The Swedish experience provided lesson #8 for this theme.

       Lesson  #8. When  a  single  permit governs all  the activities at  a  facility,  the
       enforcement authorities  can  much more  easily  conduct  multimedia, integrated
       enforcement.

       Mr. Angst, State  Secretary of  the Saxon Ministry for  Environment and Physical Planning,
 Germany presented his paper  on  "Environmental Protection arid Environmental Policy in East
 Germany - Example: Saxony."  This paper explains  that  environmental problems in Saxony are
 unusually  severe, involving near-dead  rivers, extremely hazardous air quality and  major waste
 problems, including nuclear waste. In  Saxony, recent dramatic governmental change  (the reversal
 of German division)  presented  the opportunity to choose a new environmental structure. The
 result in the state of Saxony is an interdisciplinary, multimedia ministry with enforcement authority
 assigned to counties and towns, with specialized  state-wide agencies for technical support and
 oversight. The Saxony experience offered a further iesson for this theme.

       Lesson #9. When  a new structure chooses  an  Integrated,  multimedia approach,
       such structure also enhances enforcement.

       Mr. de Vrtes, Regional Inspector for the  Environment in the province of North-Brabant, the
 Netherlands presented  his paper  "A  Clear Approach Gives Full  Compliance" which details the
 Dutch experience with efforts Jo improve both licensing and enforcement. This two-pronged effort
has included a major attempt to  conclude the licensing process for a large backlog of unpermitted
facilities. This effort has focused on developing  adequate requirements and moving toward stricter
provisions.  Funding and personnel  were  targeted toward this  effort. On a parallel  track, the

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             209
Netherlands enforcement authorities  have targeted  specific  industries,  revealing a  number of
permit terms "of low quality", such as  failure to  define types of  waste  covered by the permit.
Based on this combination of permitting  and enforcement, this theme derives its lesson #10.

       Lesson #10. Completion of permitting and quality of permitting are key efements for
       a successful enforcement  program. Major enforcement efforts can reveal  problems
       with permits and with the clarity of requirements.

       As part of this  theme, Ms. van der Meer, project leader  Environmental Crime  of the
National Criminal of  National Criminal  Intelligence Service  of  the  Netherlands offered  an oral
presentation on the nature  and role of the  police in the Netherlands  enforcement system. This
very  interesting  presentation illustrated that  the  police presence  throughout  the society and
around the ciock brings valuable  assets to environmental enforcement, and that  difficulties in use
of the police can be addressed  through training and coordination with  "expert"  environmental
agencies. In the context of the enforceability theme,  the conference learned that the police have
found  it difficult  to  work with  complex legislation and with  the ambiguities  often found  in
environmental requirements.  As   a result, this presentation  provided a  further lesson  for this
theme.

       Lesson #11.  Police involvement  in environmental enforcement can be  made much
       more  effective where requirements  are more  easily understandable and easily
       identified.

       Mr.  Smith, a private attorney based in Belgium  working  closely with the  EEC on both US
and EEC laws presented his paper on "Designing Enforceable Environmental Requirements for
the  European Economic Community  (EEC)."  This  paper addressed both the design  of EEC
directives for purposes of subsequent implementation by member states and  the design of EEC
directives and member-state  laws  as they relate  to  regulated activities  and industries. The
problem areas identified in this paper included the following:

       (1)  The use  of general  and  conceptual  language has  created  implementation
       problems;

       (2)  The  dominance  of  policy  and  technical  considerations  and  the  limited
       involvement  of  lawyers has resulted in less attention  to precision  of  language,
       inclusion of recordkeeping and reporting, and the like; and

       (3) The absence of strong public and non-governmental organization  involvement in
       requirement  development and accountability for implementation  has  affected the
        nature of the  EEC requirements.

        Based on this analysis of  EEC experience, a specific lesson emerged.

        Lesson #12.  Design problems of EEC directives have slowed and even  prevented
        effective   implementation in   member  states  and   application  to  regulated

-------
210                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       communities.  Attention  to  specificity,  language,  and  enforceability could  be
       enhanced through more use of lawyers' skills and improved public involvement.
3      Open Discussion

       Following the presentations by panelists,  this theme provoked  a broad dialogue  among
participants, including  representatives from  Denmark, the United Kingdom, the EEC, France,
Spain, the Netherlands and  the United States. Specific points amplified and refined the lessons
developed by the panelists, adding a richness of texture to the theme. Several examples of these
additions to the lessons are described here.

       Lesson #1. Understandability of Requirements. Simplification  of requirements  may
       result  in  harsher, less equitable  standards  than  more  complex provisions  may
       permit. There  are also trade-offs between  greater  precision  (lesson  #2)  and
       simplicity: sometimes precision adds complexity.

       Lesson #3. Clear,  measurable Standards of Conduct. Although numerical standards
       are preferred for  enforceability, there was  recognition  that work practice  -  type
       standards  may be  the  only approach available  or the  best  approach  in  the
       circumstances.

       Lesson #6. Value of self-monitoring, mandatory recordkeeping, and reporting.
       There was  recognition  that  requirements  for self-monitoring, recordkeeping,  and
       reporting  may impose significant burdens  on regulated parties,  particulary small
       businesses.  On  the other  hand, participants  with  experience implementing such
       requirements reported less than expected  burdens  and the possibility of imposing  less
       burden on small businesses. In addition, the additional value to the public of monitoring
       and reporting was  emphasized.

       Lesson #10.  Completion of  Permitting Activities. Participants were interested in the
       use of "interim status" for facilities awaiting permitting.

       The key advantage to this kind of process is its ability to  identify and define membership in
the regulated community. The primary disadvantage may be the relief of pressure to complete
permitting, and the  resulting  loss  of the enforcement advantage that comes  from well-written,
enforceable permits.
4      Conclusions

       In sum, the full development of the theme of enforceability of environmental requirements
early in the conference served to establish a foundation for the discussion of other enforcement
issues. Inspection  capacity  (theme #3)  and legal authorities (theme  #4)  depend for their
effectiveness  on  the  existence  of  clear,  enforceable  requirements.  Similarly,   economic
development (theme  #5)  proceeds best in  the  context of  clear  requirements  and  public

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             211
participation  in  enforcement  (theme  #7)  and  is particularly  sensitive  to  the  clarity  and
enforceability of the requirements. Therefore, the  contributors to the enforceability theme helped
assure the value of all aspects of the conference.
       Introduction to Theme #3 and Theme #4

       Mr. W.  Eichbaum, Vice President, International Environmental Quality of the World Wildlife
Fund talked "About Alternative  Organizational  Structures for  a Compliance  and Enforcement
Program." He  discussed the problem of organizing government institutions to carry out effective
enforcement and compliance  programs. The  ideas  are  meant  to suggest  broad answers to
several organizational  questions  as  the problem of organizing  for  enforcement is  considered
within the context of particular governance  systems. Environmental management agencies need
to have the responsibility to integrate the various media in their jurisdiction.

-------
212                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             213
THEME #3:  DEVELOPING AN EFFECTIVE COMPLIANCE MONITORING  CAPABILITY (E.G.
             INSPECTION CAPABILITY)

Reporter:    Marlies ten Hove
1     Goals

      An exploration of different organizational  approaches  and strategies for enforcement
generally and in particular for monitoring compliance, focusing on inspection capabilities, including
whether and how to  develop an Inspectorate  and whether to inspect on  a  single or multimedia
approach.
2      Presentations

       Ms. M.E. Bierman,  Regional  Inspector of South Holland spoke  about "Developing  an
Effective Compliance Monitoring Capability in the Netherlands".
       She discussed the advantages and disadvantages of multi media enforcement. There is a
need for an integrated approach. Never the less the multi media approach can be difficult when
you have to deal with a lot of acts  and, regional and provincial rules based on those acts like in
the Netherlands. The complexity of large  industries touching on a multitude of environmental
issues is another stumbling bloc.
       She  emphasized  the  merits  of  having  an  overall  policy  plan  such as the  National
Environmental Policy Plan, so  that the  priorities  for enforcement  are clear for the industries.
Further it is important that the national objectives are broken down to activities on the local level.
The  building of networks  forms a broader base  for enforcement.  In  the Netherlands network
building benefits from the magazine about enforcement called "Handhaving".

       Ms. J. Aloisi de Larderel, Director Industry and  Environment Programme Activity Centre
from the UNEP  presented her paper:  "Integrated Licensing,  Implementing and  Compliance
Monitoring."
       She stressed the need for an integrated approach because it encourages for  example at-
source, cleaner production measures  and  it avoids  bureaucracy  and  confusion for a company
because of different officials inspecting the same plant.
       Secondly a  permitting  scheme should  be  based on  environmental impact and  risk
assessment studies. Clear  priorities should be set. Lack of resources  often forces authorities to
set priorities based on clear criteria.  For example on the  base of the site  of  an industry
(environmentally sensitive) or the chemicals that are used.
       As Ms. Aloisi de Larderel argued: the focus should be on the industrial process itself and
the - not so experienced - officers should be trained to monitor specific industries and "specialise"
at that whole industry. The task of  an  inspector goes far beyond inspection. An inspector should
not only  monitor  compliance but  also inform and  advise industries.  Subsequently he should
secure compliance and inform the public. The inspector should be independent (also from political

-------
214                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
influence).  In the end she discussed the monitoring of compliance. It is  better to  have lower
standards which can be complied with than tough standards that can't be complied with.

       Ms. G.  Rodland, Head of Department,  State Pollution Control Authority spoke about
"Compliance Monitoring in Norway".  Because  it is not necessary to inspect industries  with the
same frequency in  Norway a  classification is used. The classification is based  on the  potential
emissions from the enterprise, their toxicity and also the environmental sensitivity (air and water
quality) of the surroundings are taken into account. Industries with a high priority (control class 1
enterprises) are inspected with a higher frequency than the industries with a low priority (class 4).
Norway uses a system in which the  polluter pays for monitoring visits and  environmental audits.
The inspectorate in Norway uses a price-list with standard fees for this purpose.

       Mr.  C.G.  Wills, Deputy Director  of the  National  Enforcement  Investigations Center
presented his paper: "USA Experience  and Differences between Civil and Criminal Investigations
and Use of Central  Elite Force to Supplement Local inspectors.".
       The multi-media approach  has been strongly emphasized by training. In the USA special
training institutes have been set up. A centralized investigative team has been founded which can
provide the personnel and resources  for quick responses and detailed case preparation activities.
Such a team would be useful not only to Regional inspectors but to all levels of environmental
enforcement.

       Mr.  I.  Handyside,  Head of  East Division  in Her  Majesty's  Inspectorate  of  Pollution
discussed the "UK Experience in Establishing an Inspectorate for Integrated Pollution Regulation".
The inspectorate uses teams which are made up of "professionals" each with their own specialist
background and experience. The team is responsible for a geographical region. Each  member will
have the same basic training but will continue to develop his specialism.
       Training in the UK consists of  classroom training in combination with training on the job.
The public should be taken along and as much information as possible should be made available.

       Mr.  J. Jendroska spoke about  "Compliance Monitoring  in Poland  :  Current status and
development. At this moment  the Polish  Inspectorate is badly equipped, badly trained and does
not have enough staff. To  further improve monitoring compliance this situation should  be changed
significantly. Lack of funding for inspections  need not to  be a problem in monitoring  compliance.
In Poland a company pays for inspections when it results in finding non-compliance.

       Because one of the Panelists' presentations had been cancelled, there was an opportunity
for the following people to  speak for a few minutes:

       Mr. R. Glaser gave a real example how to help a country start up an  Inspectorate.

       Mr.  M. Kotaska presented a summary  of  the  paper which  has been printed  in the
Proceedings volume I  as  an  additional paper: "The Enforcement of the Environmental  Policy in
the Field of the Montreal Protocol in the CSFR".

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             215
      Ms.  M. van der Voet discussed the benefit from information campaigns to enforcement of
environmental laws. The paper  has been printed in  the Proceedings volume 1  as an  additional
paper.
3     Open Discussion

      Mr.  Kramer,  EEC wondered  why the Norwegian Inspection only used inspectors  since
1984/1985, while the inspection system was already started up in the beginning of the eighties.
Ms.  Rodland explained  that they have  gone through a process  from  using  others to do the
inspections to doing the  inspections themselves. The Norwegian Inspection had inspectors before
too. Apart from the inspection these  people did the  licensing and gave permits. Later consultants
did the work, and after that they had  their own inspectors.

      Mr. Adegoroye, Nigeria wondered how it is possible  that industrialists accept the fact that
the Norwegian government charges industries for doing inspections  and audits (the polluter pays).
Ms. Rodland: Industry pays for the job the government does, otherwise  they would pay for it by
the taxes.  The big  companies (class 1-3) do not  complain, only  the small ones do  (class 4).
Because the industries  pay for  the inspections  and  audits the  government  is forced to give
quality. The government had success with their audits.
      Ms. Aloisi  de Larderel  added that yearly fees, based  on  the number of employees is
another possibility, and audits they have to pay for themselves.
      Mr.  Wills  points  out  that the  EPA doesn't  charge  industries  for doing  inspections.
Sometimes through negotiated settlements or court orders the government is reimbursed for the
costs of major investigations. The funds go to the  General Treasury and not to the EPA.
      Mr.  Adegoroye notes that in  Nigeria the agency is set up like the US EPA. One  regional
EPA charged industrialists.  The national EPA didn't agree because the paying can be seen as a
sort of license to pollute.

       Mr.  Popescu, Romania had a question concerning the characteristics of  an enforcement
program to act rapidly.
       Mr.  Eichbaum noted that the reason why the need to act rapidly was  mentioned was
because governments  tend to  be not very swift.  Swiftness  of action  is  enhanced by careful
planning, training and enough resources.

       Mr.  Popescu, Romania wondered how many industries are only allowed - by law - to work
on the base of a permit, while only 50 % of the industries work on the base of a permit.
       Ms. Bierman  answered that some of the facilities may work on the basis of a notification.
Holland  is dealing with  a historical backlog. Non-compliance is not as  a rule solved  by  penal
actions or  administrative fines etc. Holland tends to  have  a more soft  approach and  convinces
industries to comply  with the laws by a system of  "push and pull" up to a  certain point.

       Mr. Popescu, Romania likes  to know  what would be a proper guide to countries with less
experience  to train their  inspectors.  Inspectors  should  have  credibility. In  some  countries
inspectors are  maybe even not allowed to  enter enterprises. Also the inspectors are not very well
trained.

-------
216                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMEMT
       Mr. Handyside points out that Inspectors should have credibility in connection with:
          Industry: inspectors should be technically  competent and  understand the problems of
          industry;
       -   public: the public has to  know that  inspectors do their job fairly and firmly. Inspectors
          have to be sensitive to public needs and concerns.
4      Conclusions

       The integrated multi media approach is the best option to use. Practical difficulties should
be solved by using either/or:
       -   team approach: combination of single-media specialists;
       -   support by centra! "elite"-team of regional officers;
       -   officers specialised in specific industries;
          extensive  training or  coaching.

       Informing the public is  a factor of  importance. Greater involvement of citizens results in
necessary  monitoring   by  democratic  means  of  authorities  responsible  for  permitting  and
enforcement.
       The public needs tools to enable  it  to  p!ay  a  "watchdog" role. We must raise  public
awareness by reporting  systematically about the results of monitoring and enforcement activities.
       Inspectors must be accountable and act with  integrity.
       There is a long  way to  go: it is impossibie to "leap  from the floor to the ceiling in one
jump". However,  much progress  has been  made. This is true  as much  for the performing
standards of industry as for the  development of high quality inspection capabilities. The  most
important thing is  to get started  and to learn with  experience.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             217
THEME #4:  DEVELOPING AUTHORITIES AND LEGAL ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITIES TO
             RESPOND TO VIOLATIONS

Reporter:    Ann E. DeLong
1     Goals

      An exploration of different authorities and approaches to legal enforcement within different
legal settings and what is necessary to employ and develop those authorities effectively.
2      Presentations

      Ms.   V.   O'Meara,   Assistant  Attorney  General  Designate,   Department  of Justice,
Environment and Natural  Resources  Division  (USA) spoke  about  "Developing Authorities and
Legal Enforcement Capabilities". She emphasized the importance of having both strong laws and
an effective enforcement system  in  order to achieve compliance,  deter violators and address
environmental damage. The authorities of the different U.S. environmental statutes and a range of
enforcement tools,  including  administrative,  civil judicial and  criminal  sanctions, are used  to
achieve compliance. Civil judicial authorities  are  used to  sue  tor  damages and  to  provide
injunctive relief. Penalties are calculated based on the seriousness of  the violation, the length of
the violation, the economic benefit received by the company and other factors. In the last  ten
years,  criminal  sanctions  have begun to  be used for environmental crimes in  the  US. Both
individuals and corporations can be prosecuted for environmental crimes when actual knowledge,
inferred knowledge  or wilful ignorance can be established. The Responsible Corporate Doctrine
has allowed Chief Executive Officers to be prosecuted for crimes committed by others within their
company, however,  this is an area of heavy debate within the  US.

      Mr. S. Fiilop, Environmental Public Prosecutor, Chief Public Prosecutor's Office (Hungary)
presented his paper: The Public Prosecutor's Office of Hungary and its Development".
He described the current legal authorities for the environment available  in  Hungary. Civil judicial
and criminal authorities did not exist  and the current administrative  authorities are contradictory.
Penalties  calculated under the current schedule are too low to have a deterrent  effect.  An
environmental public prosecutor was appointed and  civil and criminal law policies were authorized
against polluters. An initial water pollution survey was performed to assess the appropriateness of
violations for civil or criminal prosecution.

-------
218                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       Mr. L. Paddock, Minnesota Assistant Attorney General (USA) discussed the "Developing of
Effective Enforcement Programs at  the  State  Level".  He offered suggestions for  addressing
environmental violations  within the constraints of limited  resources.  Expanding the range  of
enforcement responses   available  to  governments,  emphasizing  deterrence,  focusing  on
coordination among federal, regional and local levels of government, using enforcement revenue
to fund enforcement programs,  promoting voluntary compliance and increasing the  number of
regulators responsible for enforcement are six suggestions  he offered  as low-cost ways  to
enhance an existing enforcement program for greater environmental results.

       Dr.  M. Ptitz, Ministerium fur  Umwelt,  Raumordnung  und  Landwirtschaft des  Landes
Nordrhein-Westfalen (Germany) described a "System to Supervise Environmental Duties  and to
Pursue Infringements Taking Clean Air Management as  Example". He discussed the  Federal
Emission Control Act which is designed to protect humans,  plants, animals and waters from
environmental harm. The Act  contains requirements for industries,  allows authorities to enter,
inspect, sample  and  review records,  permits the government to  close down  or  dismantle an
operation and  provides  for punishment  of wilful or  negligent  acts,  including  administrative
penalties of  up to 100,000 DM.

       Mr.  P. Dordregter, Director, Vereniging Nederlandse  Gemeenten  (Netherlands) spoke
about  Environmental  Enforcement by  Municipalities in the  Netherlands.  He  emphasized  the
important rote municipalities play in the enforcement of state and local environmental  ordinances
in the  Netherlands.  He cited  several  important  reasons   to  involve  the  municipalities  in
environmental enforcement efforts including that environmental violations have a  greater impact of
the municipalities in which they occur,  it is more practical to enforce at a local level, and that the
municipality  can  play an  important role in coordinating the enforcement efforts of other levels of
government. Mr. Dordregter also pointed  out the need to  integrate environmental concerns with
town  planning and zoning plans. Municipalities  may  have   more leeway to  be flexible and
innovative in their enforcement responses.
3     Open Discussion

      Several  participants raised  questions  about the expense,  both  in  terms of time and
resources, that environmental lawsuits require. Ms. O'Meara responded that most environmental
lawsuits in the United States are settled outside of the courts, through mediation, negotiation and
arbitration. This discussion continued with particular reference to the  United States' hazardous
waste law, also known as Superfund. In addition it was noted that  greatest use is made of
administrative  authorities  which are less costly  and can  in  many cases  be as  effective  if
coordinated with a civil judicial program.

      Further detail was  requested of Mr, Dordregter and Mr.  Paddock, concerning the role of
municipalities and States in enforcement actions. Several ideas  for  cooperative efforts, including
addressing  enforcement issues on  a regional  level  and  using  particularly good municipal
programs as examples for other municipalities were suggested.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             219
      A discussion ensued about  the most  effective  type of  enforcement authorities  for
environmental violations and all  of the panelists agreed that an integrated approach utilizing civil,
criminal and  administrative actions  is the most  effective, with an emphasis  on administrative
actions due to their increased speed and lower costs.

      NGO's requested that they be included more in the process.
4     Conclusions

      Both  strong  environmental laws  and a strong enforcement  program are necessary  to
achieve compliance and environmental benefits.

      Having a  range of authorities  (administrative,  civil judicial  and  criminal)  available  is
necessary to address the range of environmental violations.

      Penalties and sanctions must be commensurate with the violation but also must be strong
enough  to have a deterrent effect. The importance of administrative sanctions was emphasized.

      Promoting  voluntary compliance  helps  industry comply with the law  and reduces the
amount  of resources the government must spend on enforcement.

      All levels of government, federal,  regional and  local must cooperate to effectively enforce
against the regulated community and to avoid duplication of effort.

-------
220                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             221
THEME #5:   ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND OWNERSHIP ISSUES

Reporter:    Dr. Gyula Band!


1     Goals

      This topic covers among  others the approaches of enforcing requirements at government
owned  and  operated  installations,  the approaches to enforcement  when  facing  economic
hardships and also the questions of how to address compliance issues in a privatization situation.
Some especially important and difficult environmental enforcement problems of the Central and
Eastern  European  countries  were  selected  for presentation  and discussion.  Among  these
problems probably the  most comprehensive is the question of how to harmonize environmental
protection with economic development in a  sustainable way in  a situation where the economic
structure itself is constantly  changing and the ownership situation also has not  yet been clarified.
The same problems also arise in market economies and developing countries,  but in both  cases
in a bit  different way:  everywhere, the basic support for a better enforcement situation  is the
harmonization of environmental and economic interests into one coherent and unified structure.


2     Presentations

       M. Vassilopoulos, working as the Permanent  Representation of  Greece to the European
Communities  spoke about  "Environmental  Enforcement in  Greece". He began his presentation
with a reference to one ancient legislative  piece of Greece in the year 845 B.C. underlying the
importance  of  the polluter  pay  principle: The  main  reason for environmental problems  is the
contradiction of environmental policy on the one side and socio-economic policy on the other
side. The two  should  be balanced  with  a set of  institutions that  anticipate  and facilitate
compliance. Among others, designing environmental requirements which take into account  socio-
economic factors to facilitate enforcement, use of economic incentives and market measures can
be used effectively to give priority to environmental requirements.

       Mr. P.  Cuillerier, The Director  of  the  Office  of  Enforcement,  Environment Canada,
discussed the "Enforcement of Canadian Laws of Environmental Protection as  Applied to Federal
Facilities". He focused  on the necessity to apply environmental  enforcement programs to federal
and government facilities in Canada. The  compliance with environmental regulations is always
and everywhere mandatory with an emphasis on prevention. According  to the speaker  sound
environmental management involves the prevention of violations before they occur, the reporting
 of violations  and last but not  least the reducing of the harm and correcting any damage caused
 by violations. In the last years, he  underlined,  the Government of Canada is serious in going
green.

-------
222                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       Dr. A. Homonnay, Director of ENVIMARK  Ltd.  Hungary presented his  paper: "Enforcing
the  Law  at  Government Owned  or Operated  Facilities".  He  expressed his view  that  the
environmental  legislation  in  Hungary  is  more  or less  acceptable,  but  enforcement  is  not
satisfactory.  One  of the  present  problems  is  the  necessity  of an  appropriate  economic
environment, which imposes a number of questions, among others the quantity of state  property,
the privatization movement, the conflicting interests of  different economic sectors, the conflicting
interests of economic development  or  unemployment and  environmental protection,  the  very
vague specifications  of  state - community - and individual  responsibilities  in  environmental
protection.

       Mr. B.M. Diamond, the Director of the Office of  Waste Programs Enforcement, U.S. EPA,
discussed the "U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Integrated Management Compliance by
the Federal  Government". He spoke about the enforcement problems concerning the activities of
federal agencies and their relationship with the EPA. Among others the  EPA  may comment on
the budget submissions of other agencies if the budget is for environmental purposes, comment
on major actions taken by agencies  in  environmental issues. When these agencies fail to meet
the environmental requirements  or affect  the environmental  interests, states  and citizens  may
bring enforcement action against them.

       Mr. C. J. Goetz, Enforcement Division Administrator of  the Allegheny County Bureau of Air
Pollution Control spoke  about  "Enforcing Air Pollution  Control Laws  in Economically Depressed
Areas/ Circumstances. He presented  a case study of enforcement in an economically depressed
area, concerning a heavy polluting industry of the steel industry. The  most effective solution in
that field proved to be to use the method of making enforcement agreements with industry on
issues like research studies, designing and testing new technologies and ways of improving the
pollution   control  techniques,  setting  up  inexpensive  interim   control  measures,   stressing
environmental reports etc. All these measures  led to a phased approach in solving environmental
pollution problems, where the local NGO's did play an important role as a partner.

       Mr.  Braams,  a lawyer  representing the  Ministry of  Housing, Physical  Planning  and
Environment,  The  Netherlands  talked  about  "Civil Enforcement:  Paying  for the  Past".  He
presented the issues of civil enforcement, as an answer how to make  polluters pay for the  past
damages and the need to clean  up soil  contamination. Here  the soil pollution  focus has a large
impact on groundwater  quality.  The essence  of  government  policy reflects  the  polluter pays
principle, meaning a cost-recovery policy  in cases where government action  is necessary for
clean up. The first case is dated back to  1983 and since then more and more cases are  filed
against the polluters on the basis of an Interim Act on Soil Clean-Up. The possible next stage of
legal development would end up in strict liability.

       Dr. P.  Syryczynski, State Inspectorate of Environmental Protection,  Poland discussed "The
Ecological Semaphores" for  Fourteen Paths of  Ownership Changes in Poland. He analyzed in
detail the different  types of ownership change.  The major difficulty of this kind of change is that
not all the traditional enforcement tools can be applied in the process of economic transition. The
ownership changes may occur in fourteen different ways and therefore the obstacles begin with
the point  of  how  to  identify the present economic entity.  There  are  a number of possible
enforcement tools in the case of privatization, like charges and taxation, administrative interaction,

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            223
environmental  auditing, compliance schedules and some indirect methods, which may have the
form of economic measures.

      Mr. J. Plaut, the Director of  the Worldwide  Environmental  Programs,  Allied  Signal Inc.,
pointed  out "The  Importance of Ownership or Control and  Local Decision Making in  the
Identification and Solution of Environmental Concerns". As an answer to the previous presentation
he emphasized the importance of ownership  or control, identifying environmental concerns when
addressing changes  in the  case of privatization,  some  companies  of  the  Central and  East
European (CEE) countries can be improved in terms of compliance but some are not improvable
from environmental point of view. In making business decisions on an ownership change it is in
the interest of the buyer to assess environmental and health problems. This kind of auditing can
also serve  as an incentive  for  existing  companies to  improve  environmental  management.
Another type  of incentive is  to  set aside a  fund  from the purchase prices of companies  for
environmental purposes. When  formulating  a view of  further compliance, the EEC standards
represent the most reliable model.

       Dr.  S.  Wajda,  an expert from Poland  spoke  about  "Privatization  and Environmental
Compliance in Poland". He presented his views upon the importance of environmental auditing in
a situation where no  one has a clear picture on the environmental situation. Although compliance
with the environmental requirements,  like  auditing, would be essential,  less  has been done in
respect to ensuring environmental priorities are  met. Beyond auditing, the presentation did
mention the problems of cleaning up contaminated  areas, where the  setting up of a fund from a
part of the purchase price may serve as a source of financing.

       Dr. I. Mandoki,  representing the State Property Agency as an  officer in charge, discussed
the  "Environmental Problems  in the Hungarian Privatization". He  underlined the importance of
connecting  the privatization  process  with  compliance  with  environmental  requirements.  In
Hungary, where 40 % of state  property is under privatization process, this issue represents a
special sphere of interests from environmental point of  view.  Environmental auditing is not a
requirement today, but sometimes the foreign investor requires it. Under the privatization process
there is a good chance to  give preferences to  environmentally friendly technologies.  In  the
present legislative process at least auditing and  the  liability issues should be regulated,  the
sooner the better.
 3     Open discussion

       The great number of presentations and the long discussion in theme #5 do not allow a full
 recounting of all the remarks and discussion points in detail. Summarized below are those ideas
 and views which  also  represent a kind of majority opinion. The  main topics  covered by the
 Conference discussion were:
           enforcement  in the case of state facilities;
       -   ownership changes in  general  and  the opportunities  they present for  enhanced
           compliance;
       -   privatization as a major means of ownership changes;
           enforcement  in economically depressed areas;

-------
224                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
          civil enforcement of past contamination;
       -   methodology of treating with businesses.

       The basic idea of enforcement in the case of state owned facilities is that environmental
 laws  are obligatory for everybody, so for government and agencies also. In that respect it may
 help  to authorize  the environmental  ministry  or a  national  council to harmonize the efforts of
 environment with those of other government agencies. State agencies and facilities may receive
 support from environmental organs in training, technical assistance and in many other ways. In
 most cases the environmental  government body may not  directly interfere in  other  agencies
 activities, but there are certain possibilities,  like a control over  budgetary movements. Also,
 assigning enforcement to a different level of government can ensure independence. The role of
 public participation here is very important,  but effective information is a pre-condition  for this to
 work.

       In the sphere of ownership changes there are a number of conflicting interests, where
 some  harmonization  should  be done. One possible method is to use  a  kind of ability to  pay
 principle in order to avoid major handicaps.  There is a possibility to use two approaches for timing
 - a strict liability standard  for new businesses and a  gradual compliance schedule for existing
 businesses to meet the same standards in  a relatively longer period. In standardization a general
 acceptable goal is to reach EEC standards. From among  ownership changes bankruptcy is
 particularly important  in determining  who  pays  for environmental obligations and  what is the
 ranking of environmental interests. In systems where state ownership still represents a majority,
 the situation is much more difficult.

       Privatization  as characterized above  is  a massive process,  which will  change  the
 playground  for  environmental  requirements.  Here  a  mandatory  environmental  auditing  and
 sometimes an overall assessment  should be established. This is the interest of the investor also
 in order to  avoid further disputes and to  learn  whether the company is improvable or not. These
 investors need  a level of certainty. As the liability for past environmental damages  is particularly
 important, among  the solutions one possible way is  to create  funds from purchase prices.
 However, privatization presents a  unique opportunity  to leverage foreign capital and  know-how
 towards ensuring future operations  in compliance with environmental concerns.

       The past contamination  is not only  a  problem  of privatization, but here it is  even more
 important to regulate who is liable for past damages.  Polluter pays principle should  serve as a
 basis of liability but  it has a  different meaning in the case of old state  owned businesses.
 Therefore the situation in former socialist countries is even more difficult. One version is to judge
 the past contamination on  the  basis  of strict  liability.  A different version is  to provide statutory
 protection for the  new owner from liability, but a financial  contribution for  cleaning-up is also
 acceptable.

       In economic or pollution  point of view depressed areas special arrangements are needed
to achieve compliance. This covers the gradual compliance, so to provide sufficient time, meaning
 a phased-in approach. Industry should provide reports on compliance. Special care must be taken
for employment issues, which among  other  means retraining. The best is to  reach an agreement
with industry and with the other  interested parties.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             225
      The harmonization of economic and environmental requirements need to find the ways of
managing conflict situations, which begins with a dialogue  between government and polluters.
The  public should be  involved in  these  dialogues. There  must also  be a better  coordination
among  government  agencies.  In  the  following the original philosophy of  enforcement  and
administration must be changed, first of atl in CEE  countries with a special care on cooperation
between the different parties.  For  negotiations  the best is  to have negotiations within  a legal
framework with legal authorization, but without this there is also a chance for negotiations.
4     Conclusions

      In respect to the basic idea of enforcement that  environmental laws are obligatory for
everybody, so for government and  agencies also, it may help to  authorize the  environmental
ministry or a national council  to  harmonize the  efforts of environment  with those  of  other
government agencies.

      In the sphere of ownership  changes  there are a number  of  conflicting  interests  (e.g.
opportunities  they present for enhanced compliance), where some harmonization should  be done.
Different methods for harmonization are possible.

      A major way of ownership changes is  privatization, which will change the  playground for
environmental requirements. Here a mandatory environmental auditing and sometimes an overall
assessment should be established. The past contamination is not only a problem of privatization,
but here it is even more  important to regulate who is liable for past damages. Polluter pays
principle should serve as a  basis of liability but it has a different meaning in the case of old state
owned businesses. Therefore the situation in former socialist countries is even more difficult.

      To  achieve  compliance  in economically depressed  areas, special  arrangements  are
needed. The  best is to reach an agreement with industry and with the other interested parties.

      The harmonization of economic and environmental requirements needs to find the ways of
managing  conflict situations, which  begins with a dialogue between government and  polluters.
The  public should be involved in  these dialogues. There must also  be a  better coordination
among government agencies.

-------
226                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            227
THEME #6:   APPLICATIONS TO A PARTICULAR ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEM: SOLID AND
             HAZARDOUS WASTE

Reporter:    Frank Uijting
1     Goals

      The theme  has tried to  depict concrete enforcement experiences  and prospects from
several perspectives, LJNEP, one western country and in several former communist countries, the
particular problem of international transhipment of waste being addressed in  the light of the Basel
Convention.
2      Presentations

       Dr. Rummel-Bulska, Chief of UNEP's Environmental Law Unit gave an overall presentation
about "The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes
and  their  Disposal",  highlighting key provisions  requiring enforcement measures. Dr. Rummel-
Bulska stressed the necessity to accelerate the ratification process in most OECD countries.

       Mr.  W. Radecki, Professor of Law at the institute  of Law  of the  Polish Academy of
Sciences, Warsaw, spoke  about "The Polish  Prohibition of Waste Import. He indicated that the
absolute prohibition  of any waste  imports into Poland decided  in  1989 turned out to  have
unexpected detrimental effects for  the protection of Poland's environment.  As a consequence, the
Polish authorities are considering new legislation which will depart somewhat from the total import
ban  approach.

       Mr.  S. Wassersug, programme Manager at the Regional Environmental Center,  Budapest,
gave a presentation concerning "Transition and Implementation of Waste Management Policies in
Central and Eastern  Europe (GEE)". Mr. Wassersug set out a clear  methodology for designing
waste management strategies in CEE countries, stressing the necessity to build on realistic goals
and  enforceable  legislation in order to achieve voluntary compliance.

       Mr.  F. Relea,  Director of the  Junta de  Residus of the  Regional Government of  Catalonia,
gave a general  presentation  of "The Enforcement Experience in  Cataluny Towards Industrial
Wastes". The waste  management  system of Cataiuny is a flourishing highly industrialized region
enjoying extensive  autonomy in  a rather  less developed  EEC  Member State.  Mr.  Relea
underlined especially the need   for skilled  environmental  inspectors  with a  good technical
background.

       Mr. K. Velek,  of the Ministry of the Environment of the Czech Republic, described in detail
the "Enforcement Concerning Solid and Hazardous Waste Disposal in  Czechoslovakia". Mr. Velek
highlighted the persistent gap between the texts and reality, given in particular the limited financial

-------
228                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
resources and  the  lack of quaiified  staff. He illustrated  notably how an excessively dogmatic
implementation of the principle of proximity can prevent efficient large-scale solutions.

       Mrs.  L. Mara, Director of the Strategy and Policy Department of the Romanian Ministry of
the Environment, presented an overall picture of "Hazardous  Waste Transport and Disposal" in
Romania. Mrs. Mara  emphasized that  her country is increasingly having to contend with illegal
toxic waste imports.
3      Open discussion

       Mr. S.  Klem, Interpol, gave a short presentation about the role  Interpol  might  play  in
enforcement of transboundary shipments of hazardous waste. Because of  the fact that they have
a large international network and a lot of experience with international crime, Interpol can  play an
important role  as the central point and platform for information exchange and case coordination.

       Mr. H. Kesselaar, Environmental Inspectorate of the Netherlands, presented some remarks
on  behalf of a fast ratification of the Basel Convention.  The experience in the Netherlands with
transboundary  shipments  of hazardous  waste  so far  is  that besides  controlling notification
documents it is necessary to have active physical inspections. Furthermore one should look to the
total waste chain. Another important point is that there should be consistency between monitoring
systems. Among others this means that cooperation is a must. As far as the Base! Convention is
concerned he  concluded  that the problems with the definition of waste have to be  solved,  there
should  be a quick ratification of the Basel Convention within  the  EEC  and  a worldwide fast
notification.

       Mr. J.  Plaut,  USA, stated that the USA did not ratify  the  Basel Convention yet. The
industry testified twice on  behalf of ratification. Yet, there does not seem to be political pressure.
So  ratification  is not seen as  an important  thing to do. Therefore it  is  necessary to  put  more
pressure on politicians. He asks if anyone  can give advice as to how to built a strong consensus
outside the environmental  community.

       Mr. N. Blackburn of the International  Chambers of Commerce (ICC) adds to this  that the
ICC supports the Basel Convention, but they do have some concerns.
       Mr. Wassersug, REC Budapest, said  that  the media  plays an important role in increasing
pressure. The media is  interested  in public  reaction.  Besides  that  reports  like  those  of
Greenpeace give concern. In this way publicity can be elevated up to a public policy standpoint.

       Mr. L Kramer,  EEC, raises the question that lawyers  should not perhaps consider whether
the  separation of the notion of waste from  the notion of products is an error by lawyers. From an
environmental   point of view  it is  completely  irrelevant  if the  environment is affected by
substances, products or waste. So is not all  of the difficulties due to the fact that we opened this
huge loop-hole of allowing secondary raw  materials  not to consider as waste.  Is not under  these
auspices perhaps the approach of making the convention on waste just a legal error.
       Mr. H. Kesselaar agrees with Mr. Kramer.  We should call everything waste. Afterwards we
always can see how to deal with it.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             229
      Mr.  Relea,  Spain, explains that secondary raw materials  are  also seen as waste. He
stresses that one should not only look to waste as a result from a production process, but look at
the whole chain. There should be international agreements on this subject.

      Mr.  Diamond, USA-EPA, stated that attention should paid to regulations on recycling. On
one hand recycling is an important solution for the waste problem. On  the other hand it appears
that of the most contaminated sites about 10% is caused by recycling facilities. It is therefore that
there  must  be good regulations for recycling facilities.

      Mr.  M.  Fuhr, Oko-institut Germany, points out that the  appearance of waste  is now  a
criterium for special control,  because the  owner has no interest in waste. If new agreements are
made, there should be new criteria for control. One should  be aware that if control focuses on all
hazardous  materials, there will  be the  problem that some products can be seen  as  hazardous
waste, but because one can sell them, they are not ciassified as waste.
      There should be a new approach in the regulations of materials. More or less a cradle to
grave approach in  the whole life cycle of materials. A new regulatory screen should be developed
within the EEC that brings together all the different parts in the life  of materials and combine the
different legal systems that are now splitted up.

      Mr.  H. de Vries, the Netherlands, stated that  in  some cases  the  appearance of hazardous
waste is the price of a product. For instance the zinc-industry in the Netherlands  is dealing with a
waste stream. There is a technical solution for the treatment/recycling  of this waste, but it is too
expensive.  There is too much competition with other European industries.

      A representative of the  Hungarian  industry  points  out that one should not regard the
industry as criminals. The problem is that  it is  always easier to be on the other side.
      According to Mr. Madonna, USA, industry is not criminal, but there is always a party that's
making  profit of something,  also with waste.  We should encourage the idea that recycling is an
important way of continuing the existence of resources.

      Ms. M.  Mulkey, USA-EPA, explains that  economic instruments, like  taxes  and fees, are
important for reducing the waste streams.
      Mr.  Relea, Spain, explains that in the Spanish waste program some economic instruments
are taken  up.  Besides that the taxation  scheme on water will  be expanded  to waste. But Mr.
Relea is concerned about finding the right ways where to address for perfect control.  If we don't
find the right way we add more difficulties for people who want to do things properly. One  should
be careful not to get the opposite results.
       Mr.  Velek explains that in the CSFR  a  difference  is made in fees  for disposal between
hazardous and normal waste. If recycling takes  place,  no fee has to be paid by the waste  owner.
By this way recycling becomes attractive.

       Ms.  J.  Aloisi  de Larderel,  UNEP, notes  that during the Rio  conference issues like
minimization, cleaner technologies, reuse and the use of less energy  were  on the agenda. The
UNEP has launched a program about these items. In  October there will be a ministerial meeting
in which these  issues will be discussed.

-------
230                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       Mr. S. Fulton, EPA, gives a summary of the experience with transboundary shipments of
waste  between  Canada,  USA  and Mexico. It appears that  these activities look like criminal
activities. It  is important to attend to reconcile waste tracking procedures between countries so
the disappearance of waste can be checked. Furthermore we need procedures for informing each
other when  shipments are taking place and  also procedures  for  sharing  information for law
enforcement purposes associated with these kind of shipments. An area of consideration and
cooperation  is making sure that  we have procedures in place that allows us to relay effectively on
each other and developing cases in this area.
4      Conclusions

       Resuming, the following ideas emerged during the discussion.

       Information and communication between the  different actors have a key  role to play.
Manufacturers should not feel that impossible targets have been set and that they are subjects to
a presumption of guilt whatever they do.

       Coordination should be deepened, especially at international level. The participants agreed
that the definition and classification of waste should be  the same all over the world, it was also
suggested that the separation os waste law from product law turned out to be detrimental but the
opinions remained  divided on this, nevertheless, everybody  agreed that  regulations  on waste
management should not focus on waste disposal only  should take a cradle-to-grave approach.

       While  most participants agreed on  the  need to  speed up the ratification process of the
Basel  Convention  (which  it was felt would  be  a  first  step  towards a  better  international
management of waste transhipment),  some raised doubts about its future enforcement pointing to
the disappointing results of the EEC Directive which inspired it.
       It was  also stressed  that an existing international structure,  Interpol, is  willing to  play a
more active role in the fight against illegal international transhipment of waste.

       Waste  management  strategies need to be designed  in  accordance with the  economic
possibilities and with the social and cultural conditions of the country.
       There  is  a  little hope  for  efficient  enforcement where  the necessary  infrastructure is
lacking, not only technology and appropriate equipment, but also education and training.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             231
THEME #7:  PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND CITIZEN'S ROLE IN ENFORCEMENT

Reporter:    Ann E. DeLong


1     Goals

      An exploration  oi  the role of public disclosure,  citizen's  and others in the enforcement
process and their implications for achieving more widespread compliance.


2     Presentations

      Ms. M. Bowman,  Director,  Environmental  Program, Environmental Law  Institute (USA)
spoke about "The Role of Citizen's in Environmental Enforcement". She presented an overview of
the ways citizens can  influence and  enhance the ability of governments to  enforce environmental
laws. Among the suggestions she outlined were included publicizing legal requirements to citizens
and industry, monitoring and reporting environmental violations, commenting on draft laws and
regulations, suing government to  perform the duties required by statutes, suing industry to comply
with laws  and leveraging nuisance  and trespassing laws for environmental benefits. In  order for
citizen suits to be effective, environmental standards need to be clear, the judicial  system must be
amenable to citizen suits, adequate training in enforcement procedures  must be provided and
citizens  need access to information. Citizens are the greatest natural resource for environmental
laws because they have a personal stake in the environmental problems which directly  affect
them.

      Mr.  R.  Hallo, Coordinator for  International Affairs,  Netherlands Society  for Nature and
Environment presented his paper "Citizen Role in Enforcement: A Spur, a Supplement and a
Substitute".  He  emphasized four  important roles  citizens (or  citizen   groups)  can  play  in
environmental enforcement: 1) to spur governments to act in a timely and effective manner, 2) to
supplement governments  efforts in environmental enforcement, 3)  to act as a substitute for
governments and act in cases where  the government chooses not to (i.e. in low priority cases).
To  be effective in these ares, Mr.  Halle emphasized the  importance of access to information,
clear, enforceable laws and a sympathetic judicial system. He also warned against the danger of
losing a citizen's suit and the subsequent difficulties that  would pose for other citizen suits.

      Mr.  R.  van Heuvelen, Acting Director, Office of  Civil Enforcement, U.S.  EPA presented
"Citizen  Participation in U.S. Environmental Enforcement". He discussed the utility of citizen suits
to  enhance government  activities  in environmental enforcement.  He  listed the  benefits  to
government  of  citizen  involvement  including,   identification  of  violations,   participation  in
settlements, initiation of citizen suits and review of regulations. Activities governments can initiate
to encourage  citizen participation include public education  on laws  and  procedures, access to
information, institutionalizing statutory reward authorities and paid informant programs.

-------
232                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       Mr.  M. Ftihr,  ELNI (Germany)  discussed the "Citizen's  Role in the  Enforcement of
Environmental Law  in Europe". He described the importance  of citizen participation in decision-
making procedures. He stressed the importance of easy access to information and also the need
for good data. Citizens currently have access to government information but not to industry data.
Citizens,  governments and polluters need to work together for the most effective  enforcement
programs.

       Ms. F. Irwin, Director, Pollution  Prevention, World  Wildlife Fund. (USA) presented  her
paper: "From Public Disclosure to Public Accountability: What Impact will it have on Compliance?"
She described three  tools governments and  industry can use to communicate environmental
information to the public and how that information can  be used to encourage public accountability
by industry. The  United States has enacted  a community right-to-know regulation which requires
industry to provide  information to  the government on  annual  emissions, recycling of  chemicals,
accidental  releases and source reduction measures taken by the industry.  This information is
available to the public through the government and has been used by NGO's  to push pollution
prevention  measures by industry. Industries are also encouraged to prepare environmental audits
and to make this  information available publicly. Lastly, in the EEC, companies are using product
labelling to make environmental claims.

       Mr. N. Blackburn, Director, International Chamber of Commerce (France) described "Public
Disclosure  and its  Impact  on Compliance". He addressed the impact of public disclosure on
compliance. He stressed that many businesses have voluntarily agreed to establish environmental
policies, that UNCED promoted public  disclosure of  environmental information  and  that many
businesses are preparing environmental audits and environmental  performance reports designed
for  public consumption. He suggested  that economic instruments, such as tradeable permits,
were favoured to promote environmentally sound  business practices.

       R.  De Baere,  Bond Beter  Leefmilieu (Belgium) discussed  "Disclosure of Environmental
Information  and  Enforcement of Environmental  Law  in  Flanders:  The Complementary Role of
Governmental Authorities and NGO's". He described the complementary roles of the government
and NGO's  in environmental enforcement in  Belgium.  Citizens can participate  in  licensing
procedures, for example, however,  access to the information leading up to the licensing decision
is  not available  to  the public.  This was a general  problem with access  to  information-that
information is only  available upon demand  (the government  does not take a proactive role in
publishing environmental data) and that the secrecy of  duty code for public servants was a barrier
to  accessing environmental information.  Mr.  De  Baere  called on the  EEC  to set minimum
standards for licensing procedures, accessibility of information  and  public participation.

       Dr. E.R. Klatte, DG Environment,  Nuclear Safety  and Civil  Protection, Commission of the
European Communities presented  his paper: "Enforcement of  EEC Environmental Legislation; the
role of Citizens and Citizens' Groups". He provided practical information regarding the role of the
EEC in supporting citizen participation, providing  access to information  and regulating compliance
by  member states.  He reviewed the three types of EEC legislation-directives, regulations  and
decisions-that are legally binding on member states. He also  stated that implementation of EEC
directives by member states is very poor but that the member states do not want the EEC to
monitor their compliance.  Citizens,  therefore, play  a key  role  in  ensuring compliance through

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             233
citizen complaints. Citizens have the right to complain, the  right to petition the EEC Parliament,
the right to obtain information, the right to participate in the legislative process and standing in the
European Court of Justice. When a citizen complains, the Commission sends  a letter  to the
appropriate agency in the member state requesting  clarification. This procedure is effectively used
by NGO's to  access  information otherwise difficult to obtain. Any citizen (even from non-member
stales) can request information.

       Mr.  E. Popov,  Ecoglasnost  (Bulgaria)  discussed  "Public  Disclosure  and  its  Impact on
Compliance:  Results  and Mistakes  (the  Case  of  Bulgaria)".   He  described  the   difficulties
experienced  by a Bulgarian  NGO in increasing the  environmental awareness of citizens and
government officials and influencing changes in environmental  legislation. Problems encountered
include the  fact that  government officials are not  aware of  citizen's  rights,  individual citizen's
initiatives are  not seen  as  credible by the government and   that  no  provisions   for  public
participation are included in current legislation. New EIA legislation is addressing this problem by
incorporating provisions for public comment on draft and final  rules and for public hearings. With
the movement towards privatization of  industry,  citizens  need   to be  even more involved  in
decision-making and policy-making roies.

       Mr.  P. Keough, Deputy Regional  Administrator, US EPA, Region  I discussed the "Use  of
Public Disclosure  in Environmentai Protection Programs to Enhance Compliance and Change
Behaviour in  the United States." 'Because almost all of the data submitted to the EPA by industry
is public, disclosure of this information can  have a profound effect  on  how  a  company does
business. EPA trains journalists how to  obtain and interpret  environmental data and  views the
disclosure  of this information as an important  tool  for  enforcement. Also,  the  publication  of
enforcement  actions taken by EPA in the press  has a deterrent effect on other members of the
regulated community. Currently,  EPA is trying to design  a program to recognize  environmental
excellence on the part of industry  and to publish that information as well.
3      Open discussion

       Civil suits  brought  against  government  agencies for a failure to enforce provide an
incentive for the government to get serious about their own enforcement efforts.

       Several of  the  speakers  and participants emphasized that  citizen  participation does not
necessarily mean that  the government is not doing its job-citizen participation should be seen as
a supplement to government action.

       When  developing legislation governing citizen participation, it is important to provide for
access to  information  and  to the courts. Also, a mechanism  needs to  be  provided  to overcome
the cost impediments to citizen suits. In the U.S., technical assistance grants  can be provided to
citizens groups active  at Superfund sites.  In England,  in court cases, the loser pays all of the
court fees.

       Representatives from  the EEC  and Central and  East European countries  stressed  that
citizens should work within the mechanisms currently available to them  to stimulate  governmental

-------
234                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
action on environmental issues. For example, some countries do not currently have a provision
for citizen suits. However, citizens and NGO's can work within  the existing  system, using the
media and other means to make their concerns heard.  This can be just as effective as  citizen
suits and is much less costly and time-consuming.

      The importance of  citizen participation in monitoring efforts was discussed. Citizens know
their environment, have a  vested interest it the quality of that environment, and can play a  central
role in monitoring, setting  permit limits and keeping an eye on the company's and government's
actions. Citizens can continue to be involved after permits are issued.

      The issue  of data  quality and  reliability was raised, particularly in  the context of  citizen
suits and monitoring. While data to be used in court typically has to meet certain quality criteria,
other measurements can be used to stimulate citizens to become involved in the problem.

      It was  generally  agreed that citizens need to become more  active in requesting data,
educating themselves on  the meaning of  that  data, and getting  involved.  An active citizenry is
necessary to have an impact on the government and on the environment.
4     Conclusions

      Citizens need to be involved in enforcement programs to fill in where governments fail to
act, to spur governments to act more swiftly or forcefully and to enhance government efforts in
enforcement.

      Citizen's participation  can take many forms: providing  input on draft legislation, monitoring
and reporting environmental  violations, publicizing legal requirements and violations and initiating
citizen suits.

      For  citizen involvement to be effective,  it is necessary to have clear environmental  laws
and standards, access to information, a judicial system that is receptive to citizen suits, and
adequate  training  for  citizens  to  enable  them to  interpret the  information  and initiate  the
procedures.

      Governments need to support NGO participation in the enforcement process and involve
NGO's in the current legislative and administrative framework.

      Examples  of effective  information  and  educational  tools that  could  be  used  by
governments to enhance voluntary compliance and pollution prevention were suggested, including
publishing  chemical emission  data,  requiring  environmental  audits  and regulating  product
labelling.

      Business  can play an active role  in environmental protection through voluntary source
reductions, environmental audits, and environmental  labelling. Governments can assist in  these
efforts by providing technical assistance and information on waste minimization technologies.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                            235
CLOSING  REMARKS   FOR  THE   SECOND   INTERNATIONAL   CONFERENCE   ON
ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT, Budapest September 25, 1992
      On behalf of the Executive Planning Committee for the second International conference on
Environmental  Enforcement, we want to thank the  speakers,  panelists,  moderators, and, of
course,  participants  for your contributions which made this Conference a  success. We look
forward  to your formal evaluations of  the  Conference, but from all the  comments we  have
received, the very active participation and lively discussions, we can comfortably say that the
purposes of the Conference were achieved.

      The  Conference sponsors,  the  United States  Environmental  Protection Agency, the
Netherlands Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment, and the Commission of the
European Communities, assisted by the Executive Planning Committee, (including the sponsors
as well as the  Environmental Ministries of Poland, Hungary, Czech and Slovak Federal Republic
as well  as  the Regional Environmental Center in Budapest, the United Nations Environment
Programme IE/PAC and Hungary's Public Prosecutor), prepared this Conference  as a response
to the growing awareness  of the importance of environmental  concerns and the necessity of
enforcement to achieve the goals of environmental requirements which are designed to address
environmental problems.

      The Conference focused  on the development and enhancement of domestic environmental
enforcement approaches, particularly in Central and Eastern European countries. However, our
participants from almost 40  nations and organizations all  around the globe  have found there is
more  common ground  than  differences  in  the  fundamental  principles of  environmental
enforcement, broadly defined to  include actions to  compel and encourage compliance. The
challenges we  all face may  require different solutions from one nation to another, but the  basic
issues and range of approaches from which to choose are quite similar.

      The Conference addressed the following seven themes over a four day period:

         Theme # 1:   Context for Enforcement.

         Theme # 2:   Designing  Enforceable  Environmental Requirements.

         Theme # 3:   Developing  an   Effective  Compliance   Monitoring   Capability
                      (e.g.Inspection  Capability).

         Theme # 4:   Developing Authorities and  Legal  Enforcement Capabilities to Respond
                      to Violations.

         Theme # 5:   Economic  Development And Ownership Issues.

-------
236                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
          Theme # 6:   Applications to a Particular Environment problem: Solid and Hazardous
                       Waste.

          Theme # 7:   Public Disclosure and Citizens' Role in Enforcement.

      The final  published volumes  of the Proceedings will include summaries of each of the
seven themes, key papers and discussions.  We  do not propose  to summarize them  here, but
rather, would like to offer some highlights of the past four days on which we think we can build for
what  we  can all  look forward to  as  the  third International Conference  on  Environmental
Enforcement.
      First, this  Conference has been part of an ongoing process  and commitment to work on a
global scale to build strong, creative,  effective domestic enforcement programs worldwide.

      The goal  of this Conference is compliance with environmental requirements. Compliance
cannot be expected  to happen voluntarily. Without active efforts to enforce, that is to both
encourage and compel compliance, environmental  policies and requirements  are  paper tigers,
ineffective  and  unimplemented. However,  the  reasons  we  are focusing  on  environmental
enforcement are  many. Without enforcement environmental laws are not credible, and there is no
respect for institutions responsible for environmental protection. Without enforcement there  is no
level playing field  in  the free market-place and those  that choose to comply are  economically
disadvantaged, creating incentives to violate  the  law. And  finally,  without effective enforcement
and implementation of environmental requirements, our societies bear more costs for cleaning up
problems  caused by  unaddressed environmental pollution, there is  little  incentive to prevent
pollution.

      We have  progressed since the first Internationa! Enforcement  Workshop in Utrecht, the
Netherlands, in May 1990 and we have several new frameworks on which to build:

          The Principles of Environmental Enforcement, presented in Theme # 1, was developed
          initially as  an international  training  course in response to a request for  assistance by
          the  Government  of  Poland.  It provides  a general  set  of  definitions,  principles,
          framework, and options for designing effective compliance strategies and enforcement
          programs in  any cultural or legal setting.  Following this  Conference, it will continue to
          be used as a general frame of reference for exchange  of experiences internationally.
          Agenda 21 calls for further institution-building in enforcement and compliance and this
          can serve as its foundation.

      •   Within this  framework,  we have  a general recognition  that  enforcement must be
          defined broadly,  recognizing that compliance  with environmental  requirements, and
          achievement of environmental results and behavior change require both promotion of
          compliance and  more traditional  enforcement  approaches to  compel compliance.
          Together they can create an  atmosphere of deterrence  in  which most  choose to
          comply rather than to violate  requirements,  in which efforts to overcome barriers to
          compliance such as  ignorance of  requirements and lack of technical  know-how or
          financing ability,  and efforts to provide  disincentives  to violate the law  are made
          effective

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             237
          Enforceability:  All Conference  participants  stressed  the  importance of developing
          enforceable requirements,  during Theme  #2 and  other discussions.  We now  have
          established criteria for defining  what makes  a requirement enforceable. In developing
          enforceable environmental regulations and  permits there are seven criteria that have to
          be met:
          understandability,  precise  definition  of   coverage,   clear  standard  of  product,
          measurement of compliance (preferably quantifiable and measurable),  clear deadlines
          for  compliance,  seli-monitoring,  recordkeeping  and  reporting  requirements, and a
          proper adoption procedure. We heard many examples  of  how poorly designed and
          drafted requirements have rendered them  unenforceable  and  ineffective. We  also
          discussed without conclusion, the merits of establishing  requirements which are  more
          or less stringent or difficult to achieve. We also heard examples of national laws which
          were designed to make  compliance easy.  Ultimately,  to  ensure enforceable  rules,
          those that  are responsible for enforcement must play  a role  in their design.  Also,
          involvement of the public helps to ensure support for implementation.

       •   Organization: We also have  a framework  for  evaluating  organizational options for
          environmental  enforcement based upon the purpose  of an enforcement  program, its
          capabilities and qualities along with  a range  of options for  such organizations.  We
          recognized that any enforcement organization requires substantial coordination across
          levels of government and  among  government  agencies. Cooperation is needed in
          enforcement,  both nationally and internationally, for exchange of information and the
          effectiveness  of implementation of  enforcement authorities. Among participants there
          was the  feeling that  enforcement bodies  should benefit from a certain independence
          from general administrative authorities.

       Second we established some common  ingredients for making enforcement programs more
 successful:

       Compliance Monitoring, Theme #3:

          Multi-media inspections  are  preferred to ensure an integrated  approach. However,
          there are  practical  difficulties  such  as  the  complexity  of several  laws and  the
          complexity of large industrial sources which raise a multitude of issues. They may be
          addressed by several actions:
              a team approach, combining single-media specialists;
              support from a central elite team;
              extensive training or coaching, and
          -   inspectors might best be trained in specific industries.

          Source self-monitoring, reporting and record-keeping needs to be required more  as the
          basis for compliance monitoring as inspection resources are too limited to provide the
          necessary coverage  and  it  shirts some of  the cost burden  from  government to
          regulated  entities who  must  do  much  of  this monitoring   anyway  to maintain
          compliance. There are concerns however,  with the economic  burden placed on the
          regulated community, particularly medium and small sized facilities. Such impacts must

-------
238                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
          be considered in  designing requirements,  and required  reporting  is best tailored to
          focus more reporting from facilities with a greater potential environmental impact.

          All programs lack resources for extensive inspection activity so priorities must be set
          for inspections  at  a  higher frequency  for those  facilities which  are most polluting.
          Inspection resources  may be  increased by funding them through fees which can be
          based upon the potential pollution or environmental impact,  number of employees or
          other factors. This is an approach  that Norway uses  as an  alternative to  funding
          through  general  revenues.  The  fee schedule,  while   providing  program funding,
          essentially dictates how  and where inspections can be made. One  advantage is that
          because the inspections are  funded by the regulated community,  the government is
          pushed to ensure a quality inspection.

       Enforcement Authorities, Theme #4:

          A range of authorities, including administrative, civil judicial and criminal enforcement
          authorities are needed to address the range of environmental violations. Administrative
          enforcement will be most widely used in most instances because of its lower cost and
          quicker response time.

       •   Penalties and other sanctions should be set at appropriate levels to  change behavior
          and not just lead  to payments to  pollute. They  should be  commensurate with  the
          violation but also strong enough to have a deterrent effect.

       •   Voluntary  compliance should  be promoted  to avoid the  costs  of having  to  use
          enforcement authorities.

          Enforcement by local authorities having expertise  related  to environmental  control  can
          effectively leverage limited regional and national resources, this includes enforcement
          authority for municipalities, police and regional governmental units.

       Citizen Involvement and Public Disclosure,  Theme #7

          We all  agreed that citizens  play  a critical role  in making  enforcement  effective in
          achieving compliance.

       •   Public support  and an educated citizenry are  essential to support enforcement. This
          can be accomplished through  disclosure to the public of information on releases.

       Third, we discussed ways of addressing some very difficult enforcement problems, facing
General and Eastern Europe, in particular, but not exclusively:

       •   In theme #5, the problem of  enforcement against government owned entities was
          discussed.  All  agreed  that  environmental requirements  should  be  obligatory for
          everybody,  for government and non-governmental entities  alike.  It was generally
          acknowledged  that enforcement against  government entities is  difficult. Technical

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             239
          assistance  and training can  play  an important  role. The  organization housing the
          enforcement function must have the necessary authority to  be able to harmonize the
          efforts of environmental compliance of other government agencies. The public can play
          a particularly important  role if information  is made  available  about  violations. Also,
          assigning enforcement  to a different level of government can ensure independence.
          Despite  its difficulty, nations such as the U.S. and Canada have had success in taking
          enforcement against their own government agencies.

          Enforcement is not easy, particularly in areas experiencing  economic difficulties. This
          can be experienced in  any nation, but  will  be almost a universal condition  in Central
          and Eastern Europe and developing nations. Speakers with experience in enforcement
          identified several approaches to  use  to enforce  and achieve compliance at such
          facilities through creative enforcement responses. The U.S. experience with  steel mills
          in the 1970's employed many creative approaches  to work with that industry to come
          into  compliance.  Enforcement  agreements were  negotiated  involving  all  levels  of
          government, using approaches such  as pilot projects and then trying it out in  one  or
          two parts of the plant  (if the violator argues that  control equipment is too costly  or
          technically  infeasible),  using  a  phased-in  approach to  lower the  cost burden by
          spreading out the cost,  asking for research studies as part of agreements to enable the
          facility to develop  new designs, requiring reports on progress, using less  expensive
          interim controls for a limited time or using  alternative reduction programs to achieve
          same reductions with a different mix of controls within a plant. Ability to pay can be a
          factor  in  assessing  a  penalty.  These   agreements  need  the  commitment and
          perseverance  of government  officials,  cooperation from  industry,  and  innovative
          approaches to recognize economic conditions and address them.

          Privatization is happening at  a very rapid  rate in  Central and Eastern Europe. It is
          complicated by  at  least 14  paths of  new ownership arrangements.  Environmental
          agencies, even if properly involved in the  process, could not hope  to  be involved in
          each  negotiation.  However, privatization presents a unique  opportunity to leverage
          foreign  capital  and technological and  environmental management know-how  toward
          ensuring future  operations  in  compliance  with  environmental  concerns.  Foreign
          investors are also in need of some certainty as to the standards that will apply and that
          the proposed  schedule and actions  to  correct  existing problems is  acceptable. The
          following elements were discussed regarding privatization:

          1.  environmental  factors  should  be  introduced   by  law  and  practice   into  the
              privatization process ... if not by law then in practice by ensuring the involvement of
              environmental officials in transactions and negotiations.
          2.  environmental  audits,  a key  part  of  the  process for  governments and  private
              parties, should be required for all paths of privatization.
          3.  institutional relationships must be established  between Ministries of Privatization
              and Environment and local governments.
          4.  environmental requirements  and standards must be clear... e.g. for soil clean up ...
              if costs are to be assessed, and clear-cut decisions are needed on the problem of
              who bears the coat for past damages.

-------
240                              INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
          5.  to gain full benefits  of  privatization  it is desirable  to  set  aside some  of  the
             privatization purchase price monies to provide clean up funds to ensure funds go
             toward improvement of environmental conditions.

       •   Given the difficulties of enforcement in Central and Eastern Europe it was suggested
          that  the countries  might join  together to  enforce  requirements related to a  common
          environmental priority such as cleaning up the  Danube River in a coordinated way.

       Fourth when applied to a particular environmental problem, illegal shipment of hazardous
waste, Theme #6, we discovered that all elements of environmental enforcement are needed.

       •   The  overwhelming  feeling in theme  #6  is  that strategies for   handling solid and
          hazardous waste need dramatic improvements. Three main priorities emerge from the
          discussions:

          1.  More communication.  Better communication will ensure  that  the  targets to be
             reached will not  be unrealistic or that there is no contact between the regulated
             community and the enforcing bodies.
          2.  More coordination will result at the  international level in  a  clear definition and
             classification of  waste.  The  importance of  the Basel  Convention  has  been
             underlined. Its ratification  is strongly encouraged by participants from industrial as
             well as governmental  origin. More pressure  is  needed for  a quick  ratification.
             Nevertheless ratification is recognized as  only a  first  step, after which  many are
             needed to fulfil its goals.
          3.  More pragmatism is needed in  designing waste management strategies so that
             they are in accordance with the economic capacities and social and cultural context
             of the country.

       It is felt  that the transport of hazardous waste has to get more attention from international
enforcement organizations like Interpol.  Interpol offered such support.

       Fifth, despite  the fact that we all agreed  that environmental  enforcement is essential  if
environmental programs are to be  implemented, there is  still a fundamental lack of political
support and commitment  to environmental enforcement in many regions of the world, leaving
environmental  requirements  ineffective. Developing this  awareness requires  several  actions:
Publicizing and educating the general public about environmental concerns is critical. An informed
electorate ensures that  political leadership is  also sensitive  to environmental matters. Providing
for citizen involvement in enforcement can ensure that their interests are protected, indeed, the
greatest  natural resource for  enforcing our laws are our  citizens,  as they  are  closest to the
problems and most affected  by irresponsible actions. For citizen involvement to be effective, it is
necessary  to have clear  environmental laws  and  standards,  access to information, a  judicial
system that is  receptive to  citizen suits, and  adequate training for  citizens  to enable them to
interpret  the information  and initiate the procedures.

       Governments  need to  support NGO participation  in the  enforcement process and  involve
NGO's in the current legislative and  administrative framework.  Examples  of effective information

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             241
and educational tools that could be used  by governments to enhance voluntary compliance and
pollution  prevention were suggested, including  publishing  chemical emission  data,  requiring
environmental audits and  regulating product labelling.

      Business  can  play an active  role  in environmental protection through voluntary source
reductions, environmental  audits, and environmental labelling.  Governments can assist in these
efforts by providing technical assistance and information on waste minimization technologies. For
citizen  involvement to be effective, it  is  necessary to have  clear environmental  laws  and
standards, access to information, a judicial system that is receptive to citizen suits, and adequate
training  for  citizens to enable  them to  interpret the information and  initiate  the  procedures.
Governments need to  support NGO participation  in the enforcement process and involve NGO's
in  the current legislative  and administrative framework.  Examples of effective information and
educational  tools that  could be used by governments  to enhance voluntary  compliance and
pollution  prevention were suggested, including  publishing chemical emission  data,  requiring
environmental  audits  and regulating product  labelling.  Business can  play an active role  in
environmental  protection  through  voluntary  source reductions,  environmental  audits,  and
environmental labelling. Governments can assist in these  efforts by providing technical assistance
and information on waste  minimization technologies.

      Further we must  develop  and provide for creative ways to  harmonize economic and
environmental interests, both within the process for enhancing  economic development and within
the context of enforcement. We must publicize successful approaches to make those who think
that economics  and enforcement are  competing interests  aware of the opportunities for achieving
both.

      Finally, the major  milestones being achieved in  the  area of free  trade and increased
international cooperation  are putting  new pressures on each government at all levels to ensure
that their obligations are  met in regard to environmental  standards and pollution. Membership in
the European  Economic  Community has already spurred commitments of each of its member
states to meet the growing body  of  EC environmental regulations. While  compliance has been
uneven, the pressures within the Community are increasing substantially and will likewise  affect
those nations in Central and  Eastern  Europe wishing to join the community. These pressures also
are evident in the "green" North American  Free  Trade Agreement, recently negotiated between
the U.S., Mexico and Canada.

      Given the intensity of the program over the past four days, in one sense we are ready to
go home  and reflect upon what has been discussed here. But more has  occurred than can be
measured  by the  points  raised in  presentations or discussions. We will all go home with  a
renewed commitment  to continue to  improve environmental enforcement, to continue to develop
the new friendships and  professional relationships we have made, and to continue to exchange
useful  experiences on the most effective ways to achieve compliance with environmental
requirements.

      In  Utrecht, we  began  with  representatives  from  13  nations  and  two  international
organizations, focusing  on  the  U.S.,  Netherlands  and  Western  Europe. In Budapest,  the
Commission on the European Communities joined sponsorship and we have representatives from

-------
242                            INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
almost 40 nations and organizations, focusing on Centra! and Eastern Europe. We are pleased to
be able  to announce that the government of Mexico has offered to host the third International
Conference  on Environmental  Enforcement.  While we plan  to  focus  on  the  problems of
developing nations, and  a  regional emphasis  on South and Central  America, we also  plan to
continue to build upon the first two Conferences  which  focused  on developed  industrialized
nations.  Central and Eastern Europe and other regions of the world. The sponsorship will expand,
to include the  United Nations Environment Programme. We hope to  have representatives from
many more nations  in this exchange.

      Thank you everyone, and please keep the momentum going.
      H. Tate Jr.                                          P. Verkerk
      Assistant Administrator                               Inspector General
      US EPA                                            VROM

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             243
MR. LUDWIG KRAMER European Economic Community
Ladies and Gentlemen,

       I have to say some words for the EEC Commission to rap up this Conference.
First of all of course to deliver our warm thanks to the  Hungarian  government which hosted this
Conference so successfully and allowing us to enjoy quite a number of very  pleasant moments,
like last yesterday night where we went out to see some really good dancing, horse riding, getting
some food and  so. On my turn I  have  to thank all the people behind this screen  and it is
impossible  to  innumerate  them all, all the more since  the  EEC Commission,  while  officially
cosponsoring this event, has been relatively little involved in the actual administrative day to day
preparation. The Commission  is a small body compared to the EPA and this might be the reason
for  this relative  discretion, believe  me  ladies and  gentlemen,  all  the more do we know  to
appreciate  the  tremendous effort the Dutch  Department of the Environment and EPA have
invested into the preparation  of this Conference. That was a tough time these  three  years for
these two  bodies and they had difficulties and they overcame them with a lot of courage and a lot
of enthusiasm  to bring us all  here together. I  would also like to say something in substance to
perhaps this part of the continent and these are five points which I would like to make.

       The first point is that I  would like to take up  a word which  my friend Miltos  Vassilopoulos
had mentioned two days ago.  Colleagues from Eastern and Central Europe. We are on your side.
If you look into  the state of  enforcement inside the EEC, and I have  no authority  to talk for
anybody else, we still  have to do these things which we all have been  discussing these last four
days. You have heard relatively little  I would say about failures of enforcement in Western Europe
but there are.  It  is sometimes horrible  and it is sometimes deploring what kind of waste of effort
there is done in  not protecting the environment by not enforcing the rules which have been set by
parliaments, by governments and by authorities.
       A number of Western  countries inside  the EEC have  a  tendency towards  environmental
problems which  might also be found back in this region,  that pollution is an act of god that it is
not something which  you  can go against, which you can fight, where you can try to start the
citizen action, ask for  information for transparency and  so on. It comes  somewhere from the sky
and you just suffer from it and this is part of the  EEC reality today 1992. We try to change these
things but it goes  very gradually,  very slowly  and there is no  hope even  with such  brilliant
conferences. There is  no hope of making a switch and all change to the better.

       My  second point is, and it was already Mr. de Vries  who mentioned it a moment ago, it
has been raised on a number of remarks during the  Conference but I believe  it needs to  be
stressed because I also think it is of paramount importance. We have talked a lot of enforcement
and we have talked much less of the  environment.  This is clear because enforcement is part of
the whole undertaking and this  Conference  concentrated  on the environment.  But  where we
should be  aware of problems is  the problems of nature. Of  nature  conservation and protection
considering licenses,  issuing  good licensing permits certificates authorization is  very good but

-------
244                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
where there is a conflict between a project and construction  of an installation, construction of a
road, motorway or an airport or an industrial plant and nature the EEC experience  is that in  99
cases out of 100 nature is on the losing side. We have not managed these last 20 years despite
al! our legislation  and despite  all  our  efforts  to bring  the slow and  gradual and progressive
downgrading of nature, the disappearance  of fauna and flora to hold, to reverse  the tendency in
Western  Europe and be careful in this part  of the continent which has maintained a great number
of natural beauties, be careful that you do not believe it is a fatal way that  nature must disappear
by human activity expense. There are possibilities to go against it and I  submit to you that neither
in the west nor in the centre or in the east of this continent we do enough to protect the  nature,
fauna and flora.
      All these words  of sustainable development the Commission has issued a green book  on
sustainable transport but sustainable is written in letters  which you can not read  and transport is
written in capital letters and that is the problem of economic development. The conflict between
ecology and economy is the economy which prevails and if do not manage with our enforcement
procedures to  change this tendency if we  then look ahead 25-30  or more years ahead there is
not much which we  can  give our children or grandchildren or can leave  them.  This I  find the
biggest  challenge  for  any enforcement body,  for any  enforcement  authority  indeed  for any
environmental  authority because  we have a  tendency  since we talk and communicate with
polluters,  actual  or  potential,  industrial   developers  and  so  on.  We  have  a  tendency  of
overemphasising this aspect of  arranging with polluters.  In her book "The  Silent  Spring"  Rachel
Carson told us, and again I take up this point, that nature dies away in silence, that nature does
not have voice, and if we  do not manage to give a voice to this disappearing  nature.  All our
efforts in economic and industrial development they are not that successful  I would say.

      The third point was touched already upon. I  do not believe that either in Western  Europe
nor in  Central and Eastern Europe we will have  the  capacity of drafting legislation which is
revolutionary. Societies are not made like that. Progress arrives by inches  of millimetres, if at  all.
The  lesson for Central and Eastern Europe, if there is any, can only  be  tried to base  on your
indigenous potential of law making of structures and to improve that step by step  gradually. If you
can go quicker OK but be careful  because imports of systems  sometimes have reverse  effect.
Greater transparency,  increase of standing for NGO's, increase of  participation  are  all very
important but these are to developed step by step otherwise the  machinery, the administration,
the bureaucracy if you so wish  which has  the power in the west of Europe and  perhaps in this
part of Europe too will hit back and the achievements are abroad to nothing.

      This is another aspect and this is my fourth point that we must be careful, certainly on this
continent I can not say anything about the United States or  North America. We must be careful of
avoiding  that we come into a situation of legalized  pollution,  that public authorities, enforcement
agencies arrange with  polluters in  order to set  environmental legislation which finds  agreement
and  acceptance among public authorities  and among  polluters  but  which might not be that
acceptable for the  environment. This, certainly  on this continent or in Western Europe if you so
wish,  demonstrates  the  overwhelming need to have  somebody to  criticise and  to  put into
challenge the  authorities.  During these days   you  have  heard relatively  little  on criticism of
enforcement agencies, on public authorities.  If democracy is to be taken seriously then we need
criticism challenging of law makers and law enforcers by media, by NGO's, by citizens because
power tends to corrupt we learn at school. And absolute  power tends to corrupt absolutely. In

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             245
Western Europe we have given most of the protection of the environment and the enforcement of
the protection legislation to the administration.
      The power is there and already sharing the knowledge about pollution  meets this kind of
objection because  sharing the knowledge means sharing power and therefore it goes ahead so
slowly and raises so many difficulties. The legalised pollution is a thing which we must be very
careful of. Inside the EEC we find very nice words that environment impact assessments have to
be made for any motorway which is built, but I quote this example just  to inform you that there is
an enormous effort of the whole  transport sector all over Western Europe to get out of this rule
and  not to make environmental  impact assessments  or first get a governmental  decision or a
decision by parliament or by whomever to have this and that built and then make the assessment
and keep the decision, the option open. This is a risk which probably enforcement agencies alone
cannot solve.

      This brings  me to my last point, and than  I would not longer bother you.  I do believe that
the biggest problem  for enforcement agencies is the  problem that enforcement agencies which
are set up in our countries do  not  enforce. For one  reason or the  other, either they cannot
enforce or they will not enforce. We might have to address much more in detail the point what do
we  do  in  order  to  make  enforcement  agencies  actually enforce.  In  Western  Europe  no
enforcement  administrations, to my  knowledge,  has ever been brought  to court. These kind of
court suits in theory do exist. In practice they do not exist. If that is correct that the failure is with
the non-enforcement by those bodies which  are set up than we have to think of remedies and
means to counter, attack or tackle this failure in  our society. Ail this to show that one should not
take back from this Conference that  inside the EEC or  in Western Europe, again I do not, cannot
and  will not talk about the United States, that things are alright. They are not. The environment is
not in a good shape in Western Europe.
       The Dutch example, with the greatest respect and admiration to the Dutch system, is not a
model which is generally existing in Western Europe. We  all know that and  the  Dutch know it
themselves quite well.  Do not think  that there is  a gap between the West and the East in these
things, they are different degrees in problems.  This is the whole of the of criticise what I was
trying to say. Let us try to go away from  this Conference and see what we  can do  in order to get
environmental legislation better enforced. We have some very negative experiences in the West.
Perhaps one day we could share those  negative experiences also with you because we all can
learn from the past.

       I  have to thank you  for your patient  attendance. The program organizers have made a
very heavy program, Sometimes it was tough to sit in more than 15 speakers a day.  I am  sure
now that the end is closed and the final reception too all this is forgotten. I do hope that this is a
beginning of a fruitful discussion and cooperation in this area of environmental enforcement.
Thank you very much. Good luck.

-------
246                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                                                              247
      CONFERENCE EVALUATION

      To enable the Conference Staff to evaluate the Conference and apply lessons and
suggestions to future Conferences, each participant was requested to complete an evaluation
form. The Conference Staff received 80 percent of the evaluation forms that were distributed
(approximately 130). Therefore, this evaluation fairly represents the views of the participants. Of
those responding, 45 % have expertise in the legal aspects of enforcement, 25 % have technical
expertise and 53 % are involved in policy and management. Some respondents indicated they
have expertise in more than one field.
1
CONFERENCE PURPOSE, GOALS AND PARTICIPANTS
      The vast majority of participants were very enthusiastic about the second International
Conference on Environmental Enforcement. The initiative to organize a Conference with a focus
on the development of domestic enforcement approaches was considered an excellent idea or
very useful by 82 % of the respondents. Only 11 % found it moderately useful (7 % no reply). No
one thought it was not useful. The focus on Central and Eastern Europe was appreciated even
more. Ninety-two percent  found it an excellent idea or very useful. The remaining respondents
(6 %) found this focus useful (2 % no reply).
   70%
              Exch. of Experience  Exch. of Experts
              very useful
        I    |  hardly useful
                              useful
                              inappropriate
Raise Interest    Intern. Cooperation

     IB moderately useful
       Figure 1 Appropriateness of the purpose and goals.

-------
248
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       In response to a question about opinions on the appropriateness of the Conference
purpose and goals and its success in achieving these, 80 % of the respondents found the
purpose and goals of great value or very useful to the participants. Only 9 % found it moderately
useful. No one found the purpose  and goals not useful (11 % no reply).

       Figure 1 represents responses regarding the appropriateness of the purpose and goals.
This question is divided  into four subquestions. 86 % of the respondents found useful or very
useful the exchange of experiences (Figure 1, Exch. of Experiences) and experts (Exch. of
Experts), the increase in the level  of interest in enforcement (Raise Interest) and the
enhancement of possibilities for international cooperation (Intern. Cooperation). Only 12 % found
these to be moderately useful to not useful (2 % no reply).

       Figure 2 represents responses regarding the success in achieving the Conference
purposes: over 71 % of  the respondents thought that the Conference was successful or very
successful in achieving its purposes. 24 % found the Conference to be moderately to not
successful (4 % no reply).
              Exch. of Experience   Exch. of Experts     Raise Interest    Intern. Cooperation

              very successful        successful        ^H moderately succ.
              hardly successful H^H not successful
       Figure 2 Succes in achieving the Conference purpose.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                                                       249
      Figure 3 represents responses regarding the participants attending the Conference: the
number, the level and the mix of expertise of the participants (respectively No. of Indiv., Level of
Indiv., and Mix of Expertise) was considered successful to very successful by 80 % of the
respondents. 19 % found these to be moderately successful (2 % no reply). There were no
scores lower than moderately successful.
      The number of countries and organizations (respectively No. of Countries and Organiza-
tions) represented at the Conference was considered very successful or successful by 74 % of
the respondents. 25 % found this to be moderately successful  to not successful (1 respondent did
not reply).
   70%
   60%- -
   50%- -
   40%
   30%- —
   20%- —
   10%'
                No. of indiv.    Level of indiv.   Mix of Epertise No. of countries Organisations

                                                     HI moderately succ.
very successful
hardly successful
successful
not successful
       Figure 3 Participants attending the Conference.
2      CONFERENCE THEMES

2.1    Responses from the Evaluation Forms

       For each theme the evaluation contained a question regarding the usefulness of the theme
contents and the mix of topics addressed. From Figure 4 it can be concluded that over 79 % of
the respondents thought the theme contents were useful or very useful. 14 % found it moderately
or hardly useful. One person found a theme not useful (7 % no reply).

-------
250
                   INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
       If we look at the separate themes it can be seen that the themes Context for Enforcement
(see Figure 4, "Theme #1, Context") and Public Disclosure and Citizens' Role in Enforcement
("Theme #7, Public Disc.") score highest, with respectively 88 % and 79 % successful or very
successful responses and with more very successful than successful responses. Designing
Enforceable Environmental Requirements ("Theme #2, Designing") and Developing an Effective
Compliance Monitoring Capability ("Theme #3, Compliance") score also very  high with
respectively 89 % and 85 % successful or very successful responses. The other themes,
Developing Authorities and Legal Enforcement Capabilities ("Theme #4, Capabilities"), Economic
Development and Ownership Issues ("Theme #5, Economic"), and Solid and  Hazardous Waste
(Theme #6, Waste") score a little less with respectively 78 %,  68 %, and  69  % successful or very
successful, but with relatively more responses being  moderately or hardly  successful.
        Context    Designing  Compliance Capabilities  Economic    Waste    Public Disc.
Themes #1        #2       #3       #4        #5      #6      #7
                             successful        I
very successful
hardly successful
                                                          moderately succ.
                                   not successful
       Figure 4 Usefulness of theme contents.
      A similar response was obtained for the mix of topics addressed (Figure 5, same
indications for theme titles); in general over 65 % found the mix of topics (very) useful. 23 %
found it  moderately to not useful (2 persons found a particular theme not useful) (12 % no reply
for this question). The pattern of the last question is also visible: themes 1 and 7 have high
scores (respectively 74 % and 66 % successful or very successful) and more responses being
very successful than successful. Themes 2 and 3 also score very high with respectively 69 % and
68 % successful and very successful. Themes 4, 5, and 6 again score a little less with 64 %,

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                                            251
53 %, and 63 % successful or very successful, and with relatively more responses being
moderately to not successful.
               Context
       Themes #1
Designing   Compliance  Capabilities  Economic    Waste
  #2  '     #3       #4       #5       #6
Public Disc.
  #7
             very successful         successful
             hardly successful       not successful
                                  moderately succ.
       Figure 5 Mix of topics addressed.
       It is noted that the scores for the contents are generally higher than the score for the mix
of topics by an average of 14 %. The scores for the Context of Enforcement are best. The theme
on Economic Development and Ownership Issues scores least, but even then only 5 % thought
the theme contents to be less than moderately useful.

2.2    Additional Remarks

       Specific remarks were made by a large number of respondents. The Conference Staff has
tried to give an overview of these remarks by categorizing the type of remark and by selecting the
most representative suggestions. In the following paragraph these are presented per theme.

       Theme #1: Context for Enforcement
          Setting the context for the Conference was essential was mentioned three times.
          The economic (cost/benefit)  aspects given in the context of enforcement could  have
          gotten more attention according to two repondents.

-------
252                            INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      -   It was felt by one participant that more consideration should be given to matters unique
          to the region (Central and Eastern Europe).

      Theme #2: Designing Enforceable Environmental Requirements
      -   The theme was felt to be somewhat too general and theoretical by four respondents. A
          more practical approach with real examples for developing countries is needed.
          The problem of achieving full environmental compliance with EEC-standards by Central
          and Eastern European countries is  left open.
      -   The key ideas for this topic were very well underlined.

      Theme #3: Developing an Effective Compliance Monitoring Capability
      -   Some remarks (5 respondents) were concerned that the theme did not have sufficient
          variation with duplications of speakers on theme #1 and duplicate of each other). A
          Japanese presentation and presentations on Central European countries would have
          been interesting.
      -   One participant thought this theme  could also be somewhat less theoretical.

      Theme #4: Developing Authorities and Legal Enforcement Capabilities
      -   The evaluation of this theme also resulted in some (6) comments that the content was
          considered too theoretical. More specific country scenario's would have heightened the
          interest.
      -   However this was described by some other respondents (2) as being the most
          successful theme, since it got people in the region thinking  about practical solutions.

      Theme #5: Economic Development and Ownership Issues
      -   The iheme contained a good mixture of methodology and experiences of Central and
          Eastern European countries according to four respondents.
      -   Twice a remark was made that the differences between countries were too great to
          make a comparison,
          One participant considered it to be  a good idea to compare environmental enforcement
          in different countries with the emphasis on the differences in enforcement between
          state  owned and private  enterprises.

      Theme #6: Solid and Hazardous Waste
      -   Remarks on this theme differed between the belief that such specific topics would
          belong to  a separate Conference and that this was among the best sessions because
          of the concreteness and practicality.
      -   The problems addressed in this theme are very important to Central and East
          European countries because of weaknesses in the environmental law system and the
          execution  of it (3 repondents).

      Theme #7: Public Disclosure and Citizens' Role in Enforcement
      -   Although this was considered by some to be a very important issue  to address at the
          Conference, some others thought this to be a rather alien concept in the region. Many
          of the matters discussed do not bear on the situation in Central and Eastern European
          countries.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
253
          One respondent thought that there was too much focus on citizen suits. Perhaps it
          would have been better to deal with broader citizen's roles first.

      Most participants think that the Conference should be held annually (28 % of the
respondents)  or biannually (53 % of the respondents).
3     CONFERENCE ORGANIZATION

      The last set of questions regarded the organization of the Conference (Figure 6). In
general the respondents found the different organizational items good to excellent. Over 74 %
thought the accommodation, location, schedule, information, service desk, displays, and trans-
portation  of the Conference to be very good to excellent. 21 % thought these to be good,
moderate or poor (5 % no reply).
   60%-
   50%--
   40%- -
   30%-
   20%-
   10%-
                                                      :	
             Accommodation  Location   Schedule   Information Service Desk  Displays Transportation

        B9 exellent        very good |B 9ood
        7IU moderate !l7:'i poor


       Figure 6 Information on Conference Organization
       Especially the Information on the Conference and the Service Desk were highly
appreciated. The Conference Schedule and Transportation were less appreciated by comparison,
but were still considered "good".

-------
254                             INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
      The choice for having two hote!s at such distance that bus transportation needed to be
provided, led to the remark that when possible hotels need to be in walking distance of the
Conference centre and need to be in different price ranges.
4     GENERAL REMARKS

      Apart from the comments referring to a specific theme, general comments were given on
the Conference. These have been categorized as follows:

      -   Many respondents expressed the need for more working group sessions to ensure a
          better  exchange/discussion regarding experiences in managing environmental
          enforcement programs. This would also result in more time for informal discussions.
      -   The Conference Staff might consider selecting topics that are still emerging ideas or
          cutting edge issues and use a session to generate creative and real thinking.
      -   In general, severai respondents asked for fewer themes, fewer speakers, more depth,
          more examples, more free time and more time for panelists (at least 15 minutes).
      -   Some  respondents felt that there was not enough attention for the situation in Central
          and Eastern Europe. They missed the idea of having a dialogue.  Some respondents
          disagreed with the basic offset that environmental enforcement as practised in the
          West is a specific method that can be taught (management techniques) and transferred
          to the  East. However, countries differ a lot from  each other and these differences in
          national character will affect the success of the transfer of various forms of
          enforcement techniques.
      -   The result of the next Conference should be a "Conference Declaration" subscribed to
          by participants and authorities.
      -   Respondents strongly support a broad international distribution of the Proceedings.
          One suggestion was to have translations made of a Summary of  the Proceedings in
          languages of the Central and East European countries.
      -   The establishment of a newsletter would make it possible to exchange experiences
          during the period between Conferences.
      -   Another suggestion was to organize workshops  (in "off years") on specific topics like
          the link between policy making and enforcement.
      -   Many  thanks to the Staff and EPC-members for their excellent work before and during
          the Conference.

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                         255
       LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

 Adegoroye, Dr. A.
   Head of Enforcement and Inspectorate
   Department
   Federal EPA
   PMB 12620
   Lagos
   Nigeria
   lei: (2341) 680308
   fax: (2341) 611531

 Alcocer, Lie. A.
   Subprocurador Federal
   Procuraduria Federal de Proteccion al
   Ambiente
   Blvd. Pipila no. 1, Tecamachalco
   Naucalpan, Edo. De Mexico
   Mexico
   tel: (525) 5898559
   fax: (525) 5897983

 Alders, Mr. J.G.H.
   Minister of Environment (code 100)
   P.O. Box 20951
   2500 EZ Den Haag
   Netherlands
   tel: (3170)3393404
   fax:(3170)3391350

 Alois! de Larderel, Mrs. J.
   Director UNEP IE/PAC
   39-43 Quai Andre Citroen
   75739  Paris Cedex 15
   France
   tel: (331)40588850
   fax: (331) 40588874

 Andreescu, Mr. T.I.E.
   Department Manager
   Ministry of Environment, the International
   Department
   Libertatii Boulevard 12
   5 Bucharest
   Romania
   te): (400) 815386
   fax: (400) 120403
Angst, Mr. D.
  Sachsisches Staatsministerium fur Umwelt
  und Landesentwicklung
  Ostra Aliee 23
  Dresden
  Germany
  tel: (49351)4862208
  fax: (49351) 4862209

Bakalov, Mr. V.
  Ministry of Environment
  67, Gladstone street
  1000 Sofia
  Bulgaria
  tel: (3592) 876151
  fax: (3592) 521634

Bandi,  Prof. G.
  Secretary General, Professor of Law
  Hungarian Lawyers' Association
  Szemere u. 10
  1054 Budapest
  Hungary
  tel: (361) 1314574
  fax:  (361) 1114013

Beblo,  Dr. W.S.
  Director Ecological Department
  Voivodship Katowice
  ul. Jagiellonska 25
  PL-40-032 Katowice
  Poland
  tel: (483) 1561134
  fax:  (483) 1561134

Beck, Mr. H.
  Official Representative of the  EEC
  Berc u.
  1016 Budapest
  Hungary
  tel: (361) 1664487/1664587
  fax:  (361) 1664221

-------
256
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
 Bendo, Mr. V.
   Council of Ministers
   Committee Environmental Protection and
   Preservation
   Pr. Kongresi I Permitit
   Tirana
   Albania
   tel: (35542) 27907
   fax: (35542) 27888

 Bierman-Beukema toe Water, Ms. M.E.
   Regional Inspectorate, Zuki-Holland
   Huis te Landelaan 492
   2280 HH Rijswijk
   Netherlands
   tel: (3170) 3985826
   fax:(3170)3985850

 Blackburn, Mr. N.
   Director
   ICC
   38, Cours Albert 1er
   75008 Paris
   France
   tel: {331} 49532808
   fax: (331) 49532859

 Bosnjakovic, Mr. B,
   The Regional Environmental Center for
   Central and Eastern Europe
   for Central and Eastern  Europe
   Miklds ter 1
   1035 Budapest
   Hungary
   tel: (361) 1686284
   fax; (361) 1687851

 Bowman, Ms. M.
   Director Environmental Program
   Environmental Law Institute
   1616 P. Street NW
   Washington DC 20036
   USA
   lel:< 1202) 9393811
   fax: (1202) 3285002
              Braams, Mr. W.
                Government Prosecutor
                P.O. Box 11756
                2502 AT Den Haag
                Netherlands
                tel: (3170)3488700
                fax:(3170)3856412

              Brajovic, Ms. J.
                Ministry of the Environment of the Republic of
                Montenegro
                Stanka Dragojevica 2
                Podgorica
                Montenegro
                tel: (3881) 42066 ext. 332
                fax: (3881) 42762

              Brinchuk, Dr. M.
                Director  Center of Environmental Legal
                Studies
                Institute  of Stale and Law
                Znamenka 10
                119841 Moskou
                CIS
                tei: (7095) 007095/2918721
                fax: (7095) 2918574

              Caisou, Mr. O.
                Directorate-General Environment
                Nuclear  Safety and Civil Protection
                Wetstraat 200
                B 1049 Brussels
                Belgium
                tel: (322) 2990319
                tax: (322)  2990307

              Cassini, Mr. 3.
                Diplomatic Counsellor
                Ministry  of Environment
                Piazza Venezia 11
                00187 Home
                Italy
                tel: (396) 67593209
                fax: (396)  67593203

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                              257
 Ciobota, Mr. O.
   President
   Ecological Foundation of Romania
   sos Oltenitei nr. 35-37
   Bucarest, sector 4
   Romania
   tel: (400) 346340
   fax: (400) 120929
 Cuillerier, Mr. P.
   Director, Office of Enforcement
   Environment Canada
   351 St. Joseph Blvd.,  18th Floor
   Hull, Quebec K1AOH3
   Canada
   tei: (1819) 9531173
   fax: (1819) 9533459
 Danicic, Ms. J.
    Department of Watermanagement
    Ministry of Building/Construction and Env.
    Protection
    Avenija Vukovar 78
    41000 Zagreb
    Croatia
    tel: (3841)610522/510935
    fax: (3841) 510137
 David Gidi, Mr. A.
    Chief, Programming and Technical Assistance Unit
    SEDUSOL
    Tecamachalco
    Mexico City
    Mexico
    tel: (525) 5894398
 de Baere, Mr. R.
    Beleidsmedewerker
    Bond Beter Leefmilieu
    Overwinningsstraat 26 (bus 11)
    B-1060 Brussels
    Belgium
    tel: (322) 5392217
    fax: (322) 5390921
de Vries, Dr. H.A.M.A.
   RIMH Noord-Brabant
   Postbus 90134
   5200 MA Den Bosch
   Netherlands
   tel: (3173) 158364/370
   fax: (3173) 145035
DeLong, Ms. A.
   Program Analyst
   U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement
   401 M. Street, S.W. (LE-133)
   Washington, DC 20460
   USA
   tel: (1202) 260 8870
   fax: (1202) 260 7553
Demszky, Dr. G.
   Mayor
   Office of the Mayor of Budapest
   Varoshaz ul  9-11
   1052 Budapest
   Hungary
   tel: (361) 1176079
   fax: (361) 1176079
 Devaney, Mr. E.
   Director, Office of Criminal Enforcement
   U.S. EPA
   LE 134 X, 401 M. Street, S.W.
   Washington, DC  20460
   USA
   tel: (1202) 2604539
   fax: (1202)2606848
 Diamond, Mr. B.M.
   Director, Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
   U.S. EPA
   401 M. Street, S.W. (OS-500)
   Washington, DC  20460
   USA
   tel: (1202) 2604814
   fax:(1202)2603106

-------
258
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
 Oordregter, Mr. P.Ph,
   Direct eur
   Vereniging Nederlandse Gemeenien
   P.O. Box 30435
   2500 GK Den Haag
   Netherlands
   tel: (3170) 3738455
   fax: (3170) 3635682

 Duncan, Ms. Prof. L.F.
   Assistant Deputy Minister
   Department of Renewable Resources,
   Government of Yukon
   P.O. Box 2703
   Whitehorse, Yukon Y1A 2C6
   Canada B3H 4H9
   tel: (1403)6675811
   fax: (1403) 6672438

 Eichbaum, Mr. W.M.
   Vice President Int. Environmental Quality
   World Wildlife Fund
   1250 Twenty-Fourth St., N.W.
   Washington DC 20037
   USA
   tel: (1202) 7789645
   fax: (1202)2939211

 Everaarts, Mr. F.W.
   Internationale Milieuzaken (code 670)
   VROM/DGM
   P.O. Box 30945
   2500 GX Den Haag
   Netherlands
   tel: (3170) 3394706
   fax:(3170)3391306

 Filrpov, Mr. I.
   Secretary General
   Ministry of Environment
   67, Gladstone street
   1000 Sofia
   Bulgaria
   tei: (3592) 876151
   fax:(3592)521634
              FOhr, Dr. M.
                Oko-lnstitut e.V.
                ELNI
                Bunsenstrasse 14
                6100 Darmstadt
                Germany
                tel: (496151) 819130
                fax: (496151)819133

              Fulop, Dr. S.
                Public Prosecutor
                Chief Public Prosecutor's Office
                Marko u. 16
                1055 Budapest
                Hungary
                tel: (361) 1316150
                fax: (361) 1120667

              Fulton, Mr. S.
                Deputy Assistant Administrator
                Office of Enforcement, U.S. EPA
                401 M. Street, S.W. (LE-133)
                Washington, DC 20460
                USA
                tel: (1202)2604137
                fax: (1202) 260 0500

              Garcia, Mr.  P.R.
                Director General SADA-AMAZONAS
                Direccion de Parques Nacionales
                Av. Romulo Gallegos, Parque Miranda
                Caracas
                Venezuela
                tel: (582) 4081822/1826
                fax: (582) 2853337/2853070

              Gerardu, Mr. J.J.A.
                HIMH/HM (code 681)
                VROM/DGM
                P.O. Box 30945
                2500 GX Den Haag
                Netherlands
                tel: (3170) 3172621
                fax: (3170) 3172645

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                          259
 Geysels, Mr. F.
   Generale Staf van de Rijkswacht
   Hogere Directie van de Operaties
   Fritz Toussaintstraat 47
   1050 Brussels
   Belgium
   tel: (322) 6426307
   fax: (322) 6464940

 Glaser, Mr.  R.
   RIMH/VROM
   P.O. Box 7073
   4330 GB Middelburg
   Netherlands
   tel: (311180) 33792
   fax:(311180)38245

 Goetz, Mr. C.J.
   Enforcement Division Administrator
   Allegheny County Bureau of Air Pollution
   Control
   301 39th Street, Building #7
   Pittsburgh, PA 15201-1891
   USA
   tel: (1412)5788107
   fax:(1412)5788058

 Gombas, Mr. I.
   Chief, Section for Environment Protection
   Tisza Chemical Works (TVM)
   P.O. Box 1
   5007 Szolnok
   Hungary
   tel: (3656)36111
   fax: (3656) 36732

 Grodzicka-Kozak, Ms.  D.
    Director
   Gdansk  Department of Environmental
    Protection
    ul. Okopowa 21/27
    80-938 Gdansk
    Poland
   tel: (4858) 377369
    fax: (4858) 317833
Gyulai, Dr. I.
  Vice President
  Green Action
  Miskolc, Kossuth 13
  3525 Miskolc
  Hungary
  tel: (3646) 326436

Hallo, Mr. R.E.
  Netherlands Society for Nature &
  Environment
  Donkerstraat 17
  3511 KB Utrecht
  Netherlands
  tel: (3130) 331328
  fax: (3130) 331311

Handyside, Mr. I.
  East Division Head
  Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Pollution
  Howard House, 40-64 St.  John's Street
  Bedford MK42 DDL
  United Kingdom
  tel: (44234) 273919
  fax: (44234) 213032

Hanmer, Ms. R.
  Head of Division Pollution Prevention and
  Control Div.
  OECD
  2, Rue Andre-Pascal
  75016 Paris
   France
  tel: (331) 45249871
  fax: (331) 45247876

Haraida, Mr. M.
   Ministry of Environment of Ukraine
  vul Krestchatik 5
   252001 Kiev 1
   Ukraine
  tel: (7044) 2287065
  fax: (7044) 2298383

-------
260
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
 Hardi, Dr. P.
   Executive Director
   The Regional Environmental Center tor
   Central and Eastern Europe
   Miklos ter 1
   1035 Budapest
   Hungary
   tel: (361) 1686284
   tax: (361) 1687851

 Hegedus, Dr. A.
   Chief, Public Prosecutor's Office of Buda
   Surroundings
   Executive Secretary of the Hungarian Public
   Prosecutor's Association
   SzabadsSgu. 164
   2040 Budaors
   Hungary
   tel: (361) 1668755
   fax: (361) 1668755

 Homonnay, Dr. A.
   Director
   ENVIMARK Ltd.
   P.O. Box 27
   1453 Budapest
   Hungary
   tel: (361)1143648
   fax: (361) 1341514

 Irwin, Ms. F.
   Director Pollution Prevention
   World Wildlife Fund
   1250 Twenty-Fourth St., N.W.
   Washington DC 20037
   USA
   tel: (1202) 7789646
   fax: (1202) 2939345

 Janota-Bzowski, Ms. J.
   Air Component Manager, Env. Co-ordination
   and Management Unit
   Min. of Env.  Protection, Natural Resources
   and Forestry
   ul. Wawelska 52/54
   00-922 Warszawa
   Poland
   tel: (4822) 258829
   fax:(4822)254141
              Jendroska, Dr. J.
                Member Research Group on Environmental
                Law
                Polish Academy of Sciences
                ul. Kuznicza 46/47
                50-138 Wroclaw
                Poland
                tel: (4871) 444747
                fax:(4871)444747

              Kamienski, Mr. Z,
                Director of Supervision Department
                State Inspectorate for Environmental
                Protection
                ul. Wawelska 52-54
                00-922 Warshaw
                Poland
                tel: (4822) 251524
                fax:(4822)251104

              Keougn, Mr. P.
                Deputy Regional Administrator
                U.S. EPA Region 1-New England
                JFK Federal Building, room 2203
                One Congress St., Boston, MA 02203
                USA
                tel: (1617) 5653402
                fax: (1617) 5653415

              Keresztes, Mr. S.
                Minister for Environment and Regional Policy
                P.O. Box 351
                1394 Budapest
                Hungary
                tel: (361) 2014133/2243
                fax:(361)2012846

              Kesselaar, Dr. F.H.
                HIMH/HM (code 681)
                VROM/DGM
                P.O. Box 30945
                2500 GX Den Haag
                Netherlands
                tel: (3170) 3172624
                fax:(3170)3172645

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                          261
 Klatte, Dr. E.R.
   DG Environment, Nuclear Satety and Civil
   Protection
   Commission of the European Communities
   Ruedeia Loi  200, B34 1-27
   B 1049 Brussels
   Belgium
   tel: (322)  2968769
   fax: (322) 2969560

 Klem, Mr. S.H.
   Specialized Officer
   I.C.P.O. Interpol,  General Secretariat
   50, Quay Achille  Lignon
   69006 Lyon
   France
   tel: (33) 72447190
   fax: (33) 72447163

 Klos, Dr.
   Gdansk Department of Environmental
   Protection
   ul. Okopowa 21/27
   80-938 Gdansk
   Poland
   tel: (4858) 377369
   fax: (4858)  317833

 Kolowietz, Mr. I.
   Ministry of Environment of Ukraine
   Lviv, Morshiuska 11
   Lviv
   Ukraine
   tel: (7044) 353467

 Komsa, Mr.  J.
   'Biro Lajos' Ecofogical Society
   Zorilor Street 45/A
   RO 3900 Satu-Mare
   Romania
   tel: (4097) 38627
Kostytsky, Mr. V.
  Vice Minister
  Ministry of Environment of Ukraine
  vul Krestchatik  5
  252001 Kiev 1, Ukraine
  Ukraine
  tel: (7044) 2262430
  fax: (7044) 2298343

Kotaska, Mr. M.
  Department of  International Relations
  Federal Committee for the Environment
  Siezska 9
  120 29 Praha 2
  CSFR
  tel: (422)  2152195
  fax: (422) 256938

Kramer, Dr. L
  Commission of the European Communities
  DG Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil
  Protection
  34,  Rue Belliard
  1049 Brussels
  Belgium
  tel:  (322)  2992265
  fax: (322) 2991070

Kromarek, Ms. P.
  Director Environment
  EH Aquintaine
  Tour Elf CEDEX 45
  92078  Paris La Defense
  France
  tel:  (331) 47447862
  fax: (331) 47446918

Kruzikova, Dr.  E.
  Executive Director
  Institute for Environmental Policy
  U dvou srpu 2
  150 00 Praha 5
  CSFR
  tel: (422)  533090/534833
  fax: (422) 527808

-------
252
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
 Kundrotas, Mr. A.
   Principal Economic Advisor
   Department of Environmental Protection
   Juozapaviciaus 9
   2600 Vilnius
   Lithuania
   tel: {70122} 356627
   fax: (70122) 358020

 Levedag, Mr. P.
   Chief Investigations
   Environment Canada
   25 St. Clair Avenue E,
   Toronto, Ontario M4T 1M2
   Canada
   tel: {1416) 9731073
   1ax: (1416)9731160

 Linde, Ms. t.
   Legal Adviser
   Environmental Protection Committee
   25 PeWu Street
   226282 Riga
   Latvia
   tel: (70132} 226472
   fax: (0132} 228159

 Linn Locher,  Ms. M.
   Bundesamt fur Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft
   Hallwylstrasse 4
   3003 Bern
   Switzerland
   tel: (4131)  619091
   fax: (4131} 433187

 Macarol-Hili,  Dr. M.
   Sanitary Inspector
   Ministry of Health
   Parmova 33
   61000 Ljubljana
   Slovenia
   tel: (3861} 320743
   fax: (3861) 322284
              Macrory, Prof. R.
                Head Environmental Law Department
                Imperial College Centre for Environmental
                Technology
                48 Princes Gardens
                London SW7 2PE
                United Kingdom
                tel: (4471)589511 ext. 8945
                fax: (4471) S237892

              Madonna, Mr. S.J.
                State Environmental Prosecutor
                New Jersey Department of Law & Public
                Safety
                25 Market Street {CN 118)
                Trenton, NJ 08625
                USA
                teJ: (1609) 2923924
                fax: (1609) 7774054

              Mandoki, Dr. I.
                Officer-in-charge
                State Property Agency
                P.O. Box 708
                1399 Budapest
                Hungary
                tel: (361) 1294800/1359
                fax: (361) 1179825

              Mara, L.
                Director
                Ministry of Environment
                12Bd. Libertatii
                Bucharest 5
                Romania
                tel: (400) 814460
                fax: (400) 120403

              Maslany, Mr. TJ.
                Division Director, Air and Toxics
                U.S. EPA Region 3
                728 Raynham Road
                Collegeville Pennsylvania 19426
                USA
                tel: (1215) 5979390
                fax:(1215)5802011

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                         263
 Maslarova, Ms. L.
   Legal Department
   Ministry of Environment
   67, Gladstone street
   1000 Sofia
   Bulgaria
   tel: (3592) 876151/205
   fax: (3592) 521634

 Matua,  Mr. A.
   Committee Environmental Protection and
   Preservation
   Pr. Kongresi I Permitit
   Tirana
   Albania
   tel: (35542) 22439/32481
   fax: (35542)  27888

 McCalla,  Dr. W.
   Natural Resources Conservaton Authority
   40 East Street
   Kingston
   Jamaica
   tel: (1809) 9221217
   fax: (1809) 9225202

 Moe, Mr. M.
   Head of Division
   Ministry of the Environment
   Strandgade  29
   1401 Copenhagen
   Denmark
   tel: (45) 31578310
   fax:  (45) 31572449

 Mulkey, Ms. M.
   Regional Counsel Region 3
   U.S. EPA
   841  Chestnut Building
   Philadelphia, PA 19107
   USA
   tel: (1215) 5979821
   fax: (1215) 5973235
Nagy, Prof. B.
  Associate Professor
  Faculty of Law, ELTE University
  P.O. Box109
  1364 Budapest
  Hungary
  tel: (361)2668055
  fax:(361)2668055

O'Meara, Ms. V.A.
  Assistant Attorney General-Designate
  Department of Justice, Environment and
  Natural Resources Division
  9th and Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Room
  2143
  Washinghton, DC 20530
  USA
  tel: (1202) 5142701
  fax:(1202)5140557

Paddock, Mr. L.
  Minnesota Assistant Attorney General
  102 State Capitol
  St. Paul, MN 55155
  USA
  tel: (1612) 2966597
  fax: (1612) 2974193

Philippi, Mr. A.
  Head of Department
  CETESB-Cia Technologia de Saneamento
  Ambiental
  Av Prof. Frederico Herman Jr, 345
  05489 Sao Paulo
  Brazil
  tel: (5511) 2107623
  fax:(5511)81302271

 Piaut, Mr. J.
   Director Worldwide Environmental Programs
  Allied-Signal Inc.
   P.O. Box1013
   Morristown,  NJ 07962
   USA
  tel: (1201) 4556570
  fax:(1201)4554835

-------
264
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
 Popescu, Ms. Dr. D,
   Legal Advisor
   Institute for Legal Research
   3-dul M. Kogalviceana Nr. 33
   70602 Bucharest
   Romania
   tel: (400) 151198
   lax: (400)  120403

 Popov, Mr. E.
   Ecoglasnost
   Institute of Ecology, Bulgarian Academy of
   Sciences
   2 Yuri Gagarin Street 1113
   1113 Solia
   Bulgaria
   tel: (3592) 705379/882665
   fax: (3592) 705498/882665

 Piitz,  Prof. Dr. M.
   Ministeriumtur Umwelt, flaumordnung und
   Landwirtschaft
   des Landes Nordrhein-Westfaten
   Postfach 30625
   400 Dusseldorf 30
   Germany
   te): (49211)4566550
   fax: (49211) 4566388

 Puka, Mr. V.
   Instituti Hidrometeorogjik
   Environment Protection Department
   Pr. Kongresi I Permitit
   Tirana
   Albania
   tel: (35542) 22169/33413
   fax: (35542) 27900
              Radecki, Dr. W.
                Member Research Group on Environmental
                Law
                Polish Academy of Sciences
                ul. Kuznicza 46/47
                50-138 Wroclaw
                Poland
                161: (4871) 444747
                fax: (4871) 444747
              Rehacek, Mr. V.
                Incom
                Milheimova str.  611
                CS 530 82 Pardubice
                CSFR
                tel: (4240) 36885
                fax: (4240) 30566

              Reiniger, Mr. R.
                Deputy Director
                National Agency for  Environment
                Alkotmany u. 29
                1054 Budapest
                Hungary
                tei: (361) 1322787
                fax: (361) 1327196

              Relea, Mr. F.G.
                Director De Junta Residus
                Departament de Medi Ambient, Generalitat de
                Catalunya
                Passeig de Gracia, 94
                08008 Barcelona
                Spain
                tel: (343) 4873778
                fax: (343) 4873307

              Rummel-Bulska. Dr. I.
                Coordinator
                UNEP/ISBC
                Case Postale 59
                1292 Chambesy-Geneva
                Switzerland
                tel: (4122) 7582510
                fax:(4122)7581189

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                          265
 Rzewuska, Dr. E.
   Local Government Parliament
   Biuro Sejmiku Wojewodzkiego
   pi. Powstancow Warszawy 1
   53 Wroclaw
   Poland
   tel: (4871) 35524
   fax: {4871) 35524

 Roland, Mrs. G.
   Stale Pollution Control Authority
   P.O. Box 8100 DEP
   0032 Oslo 1
   Norway
   tel: (472) 573621
   fax: (472) 676706

 Schober,  Dr. W.
   Deputy Director General Section II
   Ministry for Environment, Youth and Family
   Urttere Donaustrasse 11
   1020 Vienna
   Austria
   tel: <431) 0222/211-32/2039
   fax: (431) 0222/211-32/2008

 Selfo, Mr. L.
   Chairman Project Bureau of Public Works
   Parliamentary Committee of Environment and
   Public Health
   Pr. Kongresi I Permitit
   Tirana
   Albania
   tel: (35542) 33515

 Sheehan, Mr. C.
   Environmental and Natural Resources
   Division
   Department of Justice
   9th and Pennsylvania Avenue
   Washinghton. DC 20530
   USA
   tel: (1202) 5144361
   tax:  (1202) 5144231
Silina, Ms. M.
  FOE-East and Greenway
  P.O. Box 163
  81499 Bratislava 1
  CSFR
  tel: (427) 495264
  fax: (427) 495264

Smeets, Mr. J.H.P.
  First Secretary, Embassy for Environmental
  Affairs
  Royal Netherlands Embassy
  Nostitz Palace, Maltezske nam. 1
  11000 Praha 1
  CSFR
  tel: (422)531378/531368
  fax:(422)531368

Smith, Mr. T.T.
  Hunton & Williams
  Avenue Louise 106
  B-1050 Brussels
  Belgium
  tel: (322) 6460010
  lax: (322)  6460246

Stec, Mr. S.
  Liaison of the Central and East European
  Law Initiative American Bar Association
  Andrassy  lit 117, 1/7
  Budapest
   1062 Hungary
  tel: (361) 1316150/808
  fax: (361) 1120667

 Stodulski, Mr. M.A.
   Institute for Sustainable Development
   ul. Kryzwtckiego 9
   02078 Warshaw
   Poland
  tel: (4822) 252558/250378
  fax: (4822) 253461

-------
266
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
 Syryczynski, Dr. P.
   Stale Inspectorate for Environmemal
   Protection
   Wawelska Str. 52-54
   00-922 Warshaw
   Poland
   tel: (4822) 251524
   fax: (4822)251104

 Tate, Mr. H.H,
   Assistant Administrator
   U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement
   401 M. Street, S.W.  (LE-133)
   Washington, DC 20460
   USA
   tel: (1202) 2605145
   tax: (1202) 2600500

 Tersetic, Mr. V.
   Green Action Zagreb
   Radnicki Cesta 22
   41000 Zagreb
   Croatia
   tel: (3841) 610951
   fax:(3841)610951

 Tokes, Mr. I.
   Director ot Dep. for Int. Cooperation and
   Information
   Ministry of Environment and Regional Policy
   P.O. Box 351
   1394 Budapest
   Hungary
   tel: (361)  2013843
   fax: (361) 2012846

 van der Meer, Ms. Y.A.
   National Criminal  Intelligence Service
   P.O. Box 20304
   2500 EH Den Haag
   Netherlands
   te!: (3170)3769340
   fax:(3170)3768754
             van der Voet, Ms. M.
                Directie Vooriichting en Externe Betrekkingen
                (code 120)
                Ministerie van VROM
                Postbus 20951
                2500 EZ Den Haag
                Netherlands
                tel: (3170) 3393670
                fax: (3170) 3391351

             van Dijk. Mr. J.
                Gedepuleerde Provincie Groningen
                P.O. Box 610
                9700 AP Groningen
                Netherlands
                tel: (3150) 164127
                fax: (3150) 185615

             Van Heuvelen, Mr. R.
                Acting Director
                Office of Civil Enforcement, U.S. EPA
                401 M. Street, S.W. (LE-133)
                Washington, DC 20460
                USA
                tel: (1202) 2604540
                fax: (1202)2600500

             van Schouwenburg, Mr. H.
                Internationale Milieuzaken (code 670)
                VROM/DGM
                P.O. Box 30945
                2500 GX Den Haag
                Netherlands
                tel: (3170)3394714
                fax: (3170) 3394722

             Varga, Dr. P.
                Head of Section
                National Authority for Environment Protection
                Afkotmany u. 29
                1054 Budapest
                Hungary
                tel: (361) 1322787
                fax: (361)  1327196

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
                                         267
 Vassilopoulos, Mr. M.
   Permanent Representation of Greece to the
   European Communities
   Avenue de Cortenberg 71
   1040 Brussels
   Belgium
   tel: (322) 7395679
   fax: (322) 7355979

 Velek, Mr. K.
   Chairman Section for Wastes
   Czechoslovak Society for Environment
   Slezska 136
   13000 PrahaS
   CSFR
   tel: (422) 733113
   fax: (422) 731 357

 Verkerk, Mr. P.J.
   Inspector General (code 680)
   DGM/VROM
   P.O. Box 30945
   2500 GX Den Haag
   Netherlands
   tel: (3170) 3394620
   fax: (3170)  3394624

 Victor, Ms. K.
   Head of Environmental Law and Economics
   Section
   Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
   Englundavagen 13
   171 85 Solna
   Sweden
   tel: (468) 7991000
   fax: (468) 989902

 Wajda, Dr. S.
   ul. Wilsona 48/4
   45-329 Opole
   Poland
   tel: (4877) 30880
   fax: (4877) 30880
Wasserman, Ms. C.
  Chief, Compliance, Policy & Planning Branch
  U.S. EPA, Office of Enforcement
  401 M, Street, S.W. (LE-133)
  Washington, DC 20460
  USA
  tel: (1202) 2604486
  fax: (1202) 2607553

Wassersug, Mr. S.
  The Regional Environmental Center for
  Central and Eastern Europe
  for Central and Eastern Europe
  Miklos ter 1
  1035 Budapest
  Hungary
  tel: (361) 1686284
  fax: (361) 1687851

Weber, Mr. P.
  Chairman of Romanian Parliamentary
  Commision for Ecological Equilibrium and
  Environmental  Protection
  Str. Kogalniceanu 19
  3125 Medies
  Romania
  tel: (400) 141074/92814036

Wills, Mr. C.G.
  Deputy Director
  NEIC, U.S. EPA
  Building 53, Box 25227
  Denver, CO 80225
  USA
  tel: (1303) 2365120
  fax: (1303) 2365116

Wubben, Mr. J.J.J.
  Parket Procureur-Generaal
  Openbaar Ministerie Den Bosch
  P.O. Box90155
  5200 MG Den Bosch
  Netherlands
  tel: (3173) 816220
  fax:(3173)816499

-------
268                               INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
 Zerjav, Mr. J.
   Advisor
   Ministry of Environment, Slovenia
   Vojkova 1A
   61000 Ljubljana
   Slovenia
   tel: (3861) 327461
   fax: (3861) 322694

 Zirm, Dr. K.L.
   Head I/A
   Ministry lor Environment, Youth and Family
   Radetzkystrasse 2
   1030 Vienna
   Austria
   let: (431)711584102
   fax:(431)711584221

 Zlinszky, Dr. J.
   Deputy Director-General
   Institute for Environmental Management
   Alkotm£ny u. 29
   1054 Budapest
   Hungary
   tel: (361) 1328270
   fax: (361) 1115826

 Zoltai, Dr. N.
   Ministry of Environment and Regional Policy
   P.O. Box 351
   1394 Budapest
   Hungary
   tel: (361) 2014133/2243
   fax: (361) 2012846

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                           269
      MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE PLANNING COMMITTEE

Mrs. Jacqueline Alois) de Larderel                           PHONE:  (331)40588850
United Nations Environment Programme                     FAX:     (331)40588874
Director, Industry and Environment Programme Activity Centre
Tour Mirabeau
39-43 Quai Andre Citroen
75739 Paris CEDEX 15, France
Contact:  Ms. Clare Delbridge                              PHONE:  (331)40588869
                                                       FAX:     (331)40588874
Mr. Laurens Jan Brinkhorst
Director-General
Commission of the European Communities
Directorate-General Environment, Nuclear Safety
      and Civil Protection
34 Rue Belliard
1049 Brussels, Belgium
Contact:  Dr. Ludwig Kramer                              PHONE:  (322) 299 2265
                                                       FAX:     (322) 299 1070

Dr. Kalman Gyorgyi                                       PHONE:  (361)1181452
Chief Public Prosecutor of the Republic of Hungary            FAX:     (361) 132 3969
Chief Public Prosecutors Office
P.O. Box 438
1372 Budapest, Hungary
Contact:   Dr. Istvan Szabo                                PHONE:  (361)312173

Dr. Peter Hardi                                          PHONE:  (361) 168 6284
Executive Director                                        FAX:     (361)1687851
The Regional Environmental Center
      for Central and Eastern  Europe
Miklos ter 1
1035 Budapest, Hungary
Contact:   Dr. Branko Bosnjakovic                          PHONE:  (361)1686284
          Mr. Steven Wassersug                           PHONE:  (361)1686284
                                                       FAX:     (361)1687851

Dr. Jan Mikolas
Chairman                                               PHONE:  (422) 252539
Federal Committee for the Environment                     FAX:     (422)257211
Slezka 9
12029 Prague
Czech and Slovak Federal Republic
Contact:  Mr. Veclev Dobes                               PHONE:  (422) 25 2539
                                                       FAX:     (422) 257211

Dr. Karoly Misley                                        PHONE:  (361)2011582
Permanent State Secretary                               FAX:     (361)2012846
Ministry of Environment and Regional Policy
P.O. Box 351
1394 Budapest, Hungary
Contact:  Dr. Nandor Zoltai                               PHONE:  (361)2014133
                                                       FAX:     (361)2012846

-------
270
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
Dr. Maciej Nowicki
Minister
Ministry of Environmental Protection,
      Natural Resources and Forestry
Wawelska 52/54
00-922 Warsaw, Poland
Contact:  Prof. Jerzy Sommer

         Mr. Marek Nowakowski

Mr. Herbert H. Tate Jr.
Assistant Administrator for Enforcement
Office of Enforcement
United States Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW LE-133
Washington, DC 20460, USA
Contact:  Ms. Cheryl Wasserman

         Ms. Ann DeLong
Mr. Pieter Verkerk
Inspector General, Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning
      and Environment (code 680)
P.O. Box 30945
2500 GX Den Haag, the Netherlands
Contact:  Mr. Jo Gerardu

         Mr. Huub Kesselaar
CONFERENCE STAFF

Ms. Cheryl Wasserman
Office of Enforcement
United States Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW LE-133
Washington, DC 20460, USA

Mr. Jo Gerardu
Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment
Inspectorate for the Environment (code 681)
P.O. Box 30945
2500 GX Den Haag, the Netherlands

Logistics Contractor

Mr. Jeroen Bartels
ERL Nederland
P.O. Box 710
2700 AS  Zoetermeer, the Netherlands
                         PHONE:  (4871)444747
                         FAX:     (4871)444747
                         PHONE:  (4822)251133
                         FAX:     (4822) 25 39 72
                         PHONE:  (1202)2604486
                         FAX:     (1202) 260 7553
                         PHONE:  (1202)2608870
                         FAX:     (1202) 260 7553
                         PHONE:
                         FAX:
(3170)33 94620
(3170) 33 94624
                         PHONE:  (3170)3392621
                         FAX:     (3170) 31 72645
                         PHONE:  (3170) 33 92 624
                         FAX:     (3170)3172645
                         PHONE:
                         FAX:
                         PHONE:
                         FAX:
(1202) 260 4486
(1202) 260 7553
(3170) 3392621
(3170)31 72645
                         PHONE:
                         FAX:
(3179) 522 777
(3179) 512 127

-------
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT                             271
      ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

      The second International Conference on Environmental Enforcement held September 22-
25, 1992 in Budapest, Hungary was made possible by the personal and financial contributions of
many organizations and individuals. Funding of the Conference and participants was provided by
the United States Environmental  Protection Agency (EPA), the Netherlands' Ministry of Housing,
Physical Planning  and Environment (VROM), and the European Economic Community (EEC),
supplemented by funds from the  Netherlands' Directorate Generals Office of International
Environmental Affairs.

      An Executive Planning Committee whose membership is listed in these  Proceedings, was
created to provide leadership and direction in the design of the program, selection of the
speakers and panelists, and identification of individuals from a range of nations who would be in
the best positions to share practical experience in environmental enforcement and to improve or
develop domestic programs. In keeping with its focus on Central and Eastern Europe, the
Executive Planning Committee included the representatives of the Environment Ministries of
Poland,  Hungary, and the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic as well as Hungary's Public
Prosecutor and the Regional  Environmental Center in  Budapest. The United Nations Environment
Programme (IE-PAC) was also a key member of the Executive Planning Committee, in an effort
to further expand the exchanges that began with the first International Enforcement Workshop,
sponsored by the Netherlands Ministry of VROM and U.S. EPA, in May 1990 in Utrecht, the
Netherlands.

      Members and staff of the Executive Planning Committee, listed within these Proceedings,
spent much effort discussing  and reviewing staff proposals for the Conference  structure and
content and in identifying experts from government at  all levels, NGO's and industry that would
ultimately determine the success of the Conference.

      Given the Conference location in Budapest, we wish to particularly acknowledge the
hospitality and special efforts of Dr. Karoly Misley and Dr. Nandor Zoltai to make this exchange
not only productive but enjoyable.

      Primary staff and coordinators of the Conference were Mr. Jo Gerardu of VROM and Ms.
Cheryl Wasserman of US EPA who were  responsible  for drafting the Conference program and
materials. The Conference logistics, preparation of the Proceedings, and  handling of Conference
communications was directed by Mr. Jeroen  Bartels from Environmental Resources Limited
Nederland.

-------
272                          INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT

-------