Implementing the EU CO2 Storage Directive Challenges and Opportunities University College London

1. Jerzy JendrośkaImplementing the CCS Directive in Poland: key findings from the transposition process Implementing the EU CO2 Storage Directive Challenges and Opportunities University College London 7 November 2011 Opole University

2. Content • Legal process and context • Administrative and procedural arrangements • Financial security, transfer of responsibility and sanctions • Conclusions Opole University

3. Legal process – current status • Principles for CCS Bill („Principles for the draft law to transpose the CCS Directive”) • severalversionsprepared by Environment Ministrysince 2009 • final version of Februaryadopted by Council of Ministers on 15 March 2011 • Draft law (CCS Bill) not yetprepared by the GovernmentalLegislative Center ! Opole University

4. Legal process – transposition method • Amendment to existing laws plus a number of new regulations • Bulk of transposing provisions to be included in the Geological and Mining Law • Changes in several other laws Opole University

5. Context – policy • No clear Climate Change official strategy • „Climate Policy of Poland” of 2003 – outdated • new policy documents – under preparation • current actual policy – mostly lobby groups driven • No official CCS Roadmap • Several not coordinated programmes and measures in various official documents Opole University

6. Context – public debate • No real public debate! • Draft Principles for CCS Bill subject to consultations – mostly interested business and research institutions • Public comments (mostly NIMBY) • Few environmental NGOs involved Opole University

7. Administrative arrangements • Key players in CCS policy: Environment and EconomyMinisters • Prospective competent authority for permitting: Environment Minister • New agency: National CCS Administrator • responsible for „transfer of responsibility” tasks • to be created in 2015 • delegated to Polish Geological Institute Opole University

8. Regulatory process • Separate procedures for • exploration • storage • Both procedures two-tier • EIA decision (local authorities?) • Permit (Environment Minister) Opole University

9. Permits - procedure • Exploration permit • non-binding opinion of relevant local authorities • Storage permit – approval needed • Economy Minister • relevant local authorities Opole University

10. Permit – reasons for refusal • Environmental protection requirements • Interference with legitimate use of property as reflected in local land use plan or land use studium (outline plan) • National security or public safety Opole University

11. Financial issues • Financial security instruments • monetary deposits in National Environmental Fund • bank quarantees, • insurance instruments • Financial mechanism for transfer of responsibility – special fees and other instruments Opole University

12. Transfer of responsibility • Main role of National CCS Administrator • Major issues: • ownership of installation • intelectual property rights to geological information Opole University

13. Sanctions • Based on existing sanctions in geological and mining law • Criminal sanctions – for example abuse of permit conditions causing significant damage to environment or property – imprisonment up to 3 years • Petty offences - fines Opole University

14. Conclusions • Most details to be set in the CCS Bill (CO2 stream acceptance criteria, role of local authorities in EIA Decision etc) • General approach – harmonise CCS with existing legislation, legal institutions and instruments (pros and cons) • Most of CCS Directive ambiguities – not resolved (relation to EIA and Aarhus) Opole University