Protectia Mediului

2001 REGULAR REPORT ON ROMANIA'S PROGRESS TOWARDS ACCESSION

Chapter 22: Environment
Since the last Regular Report, Romania has made progress with ratification of international conventions, elaboration of action  plans for alignment, and  adoption of some elements of the acquis.
With regard to the integration of the environment with other policies, no significant  progress has been achieved. The Ministry of Water and Environment Protection has experienced difficulties assuming its co-ordination role and the inter-ministerial committee, established two years ago, has not met since the end of 1999.
In the field of horizontal legislation, Romania ratified the Convention on environmental impact assessment in trans-boundary contexts (the Espoo Convention). Ratification of the Agreement on the participation in the European Network for Information and Observation is in the final stage. Romania has also ratified the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. While these are positive developments, Romania is still some way from complying with EC requirements in other key areas - in particular with the legislation on environmental impact assessments.
Substantial legislation aiming at transposing the acquis on air quality has been adopted: an emergency ordinance on air protection was promulgated, guidelines for air polluting emissions inventories were established and a governmental decision on the reduction of the sulphur content of diesel fuel was taken.
On waste management, limited progress has been achieved in the legislative field, with three emergency ordinances adopted on waste arrangements, on the management of recycled industrial waste, and on the procurement of metal and non-ferrous waste.
In the field of water quality, a National Plan for the prevention of water pollution by nitrates from agriculture has been drawn up and adopted. Romania is also in the process of identifying and selecting areas to be classified as sensitive areas as regards urban wastewater. This process is of great importance given the costs that will be involved in proper implementation. Romania has also adopted a regulation for the organisation and functioning of water basin committees in line with the requirements of the recent water framework directive.
On nature protection, in order to transpose the directives on the conservation of natural habitats, of wild fauna and flora, and on the conservation of wild birds, an emergency ordinance has been adopted and published. In addition, an Order of the Ministry now establishes the permitting procedures for the harvest, capture, purchase and commercialisation of wild flora and fauna. Efforts are needed to prepare for the NATURA 2000 network.
As regards industrial pollution control and risk management, no progress has been made, only an inventory of the enterprises that will be concerned by this legislation is under preparation. The importance of legislation in this area is demonstrated by the numerous industrial pollution accidents that occurred during the reference period.
With regard to chemicals and genetically modified organisms, an emergency ordinance on classification, labelling, packing, and packaging of hazardous chemical substances has been adopted. Romania also adopted the provisions of several Amendments to the Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer.
As far as noise is concerned, only a Government Decision intended to transpose the Directive on airborne noise emitted by households appliances has  been adopted.
No progress has been recorded in the field of radiation protection, (see also chapter 14 - Energy), where the level of alignment is quite limited.
As regards administrative capacity, the Ministry of Water and Environmental Protection is responsible for drawing up of environmental policy. The Ministry has been reorganised once again but there has been no improvement at the level of staffing, who still number 170. Implementation of environmental policy lies with the 42 local authorities (counties). Since the last report, the Environmental Protection Inspectorates in the counties have had their staff cut by over 20% (there are now 1680 employees working for the Environmental Protection Inspectorates plus around 200 additional staff in the environmental radioactivity surveillance network).
The budget allocated for environment has been slightly increased, but remains extremely low: it reached around ?73 million in 2001, which represents less than 0.4% of GDP (the average figure for EU Member States is approximately 1.5%).
Overall assessment
Romania still has a long way to go before being in line with the acquis in the field of environment policy: the overall level of transposition and implementation of the environmental acquis still remains low. Whereas transposition has advanced, the development of the administrative capacity in 2001 has led to increased uncertainty about Romania's enforcement capacities in this sector.
On the one hand, the determination exists in the Ministry of Water and Environment to harmonise Romanian practices with the environmental acquis. In this respect, progress has been achieved and several pieces of legislation transposing the acquis were adopted in 2001, or are now before Parliament for final approval. The top priorities for the next year should be the transposition of legislation on environmental impact assessment and industrial pollution control and risk management. Particular emphasis needs to be put on the development of implementation plans, including financing strategies and institutional strengthening.
On the other hand, there have been no improvements in creating the administrative capacity to enforce the newly adopted legislation.
Furthermore, the resources allocated to environment in Romania are insufficient to address the environmental problems the country faces. The situation is made worse by the fact that domestic institutions have a relatively short experience in the field of environmental protection, especially as regards transposition of legislation and application of economic instruments.
At the local level, the staff allocations for policy implementation have been reduced and the self-financing mechanism set up last year has only generated one quarter of the expected revenues. Co-ordination at regional level is non-existent.  At the national level, the budget devoted to environmental protection is insufficient, and the Environmental Fund is unlikely to be operational in the short term.
Romania should make the environment one of its priorities.