UK EXPERIENCE IN ESTABLISHING AN INSPECTORATE FOR INTEGRATED POLLUTION

REGULATION

 

I. HANDYSIDE

 

Head of East Division, HMIP, Howard House, 40-64 St Johns Street, Bedford, England MK42 0DL

 

 

SUMMARY

 

Her Majesty's inspectorate of Pollution (HMIP) was formed in 1987 by bringing together separate pollution inspectorates covering air, water, waste and radioactive substances into a fully integrated environmental protection inspectorate.  HMIP is responsible for implementing integrated pollution regulation of industrial processes under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 90)1 and also discharging responsibilities under the Radioactive Substances Act 1960,2 the Water Act 19903 and the Health & Safety at Work Act 19744. HMIP also has responsibility for overseeing waste regulation and ensuring greater public involvement in the regulatory process.

When formed in 1987, HMIP had a staff of 177 which is now 301 and is planned to rise to 458 in the next few years.

This paper describes some aspects of development of HMIP, its current mission and experience to date in implementing integrated pollution regulation.

 

 

 

1                 INTRODUCTION

 

One of the most significant changes in the UK in the past decade has been the dramatic

Increase in public concern about the environment.

Central to the strategy for environmental protection is the principle of stewardship which arises from the acknowledgement that we do not inherit the earth from our parents, we borrow it from our children.  We must pass on our environment to future generations in a state which allows them to meet their own needs.  This lies at the heart of a second principle of sustainable development which is widely accepted by governments around the world as a foundation for living with our environment.  This does not mean zero growth or an end to consumption.  Economic growth is essential if we are to maintain and improve living standards around the world and to afford the care for the environment that sustainable development demands. Industry's role is to provide the technological innovation and advances needed to meet the goal of sustainable development.  But this must be done with full public knowledge and an openness that gains the full confidence of the public.

 

 

 

2          ENVIRONMENTAL PARTNERSHIP

 

It is important to emphasize the roles to be played by industry, the public, as citizens or as

members of environmental pressure groups and of regulators such as HMIP in protecting and preserving our environment for future generations.  There exists an inter-relationship between Government, industry and the public, with HMIP sitting in the middle with important two way relationships with each one.

The UK Government formulates policy on environmental protection and issues regulations and sets standards which HMIP must administer in regulating industry.

Industry in its turn must operate efficiently and effectively using clean technologies to ensure that no harm is done to the environment.  This has not always been the case in the past.  Indeed the first major piece of environmental legislation in the UK, the Alkali Act5, came into force in 1864 to control discharges of hydrochloric acid because they had turned once verdant countryside in North-West England into an industrial wilderness.  There can be few more important areas in which industry and the business community need to raise, and to be seen to be raising, standards than the environment.  For this to happen however, far more companies will need to pay rigorous attention to the quality of their environmental management.  This will be particularly important as environmental pressures continue to rise in the years ahead.  The business community will need to pay heed to three dynamics: setting standards, understanding markets and managing environmental performance.  Those who get these right will find environmental pressures enhancing rather than hindering their competitiveness.  Those who get them wrong will be losers.  The message to industry is clear.  Good pollution control goes hand in hand with technical excellence and business, rather than being an obstacle and a drain on resources.

The public for its part is increasingly playing the role of "green watchdogs".  When a member of the public, either as an individual or as a member of a pressure group, suspects that a problem is occurring in the environment, HMIP welcomes being alerted to suspected pollution.

We are developing a much closer and responsive relationship with the citizens of England and Wales.

 

3          HMIP'S MISSION FOR THE 1990s

 

            HMIP's mission is to protect the environment by regulating industry to prevent pollution.

To do this HMIP carries out the following activities:

i)                    authorizes, enforces, inspects and monitors under the relevant legislation;

ii)                   consults openly and widely and reports on its performance;

iii)                 provides expert advice to Government;

iv)                 initiates research and development and disseminates results;

v)                  works cost effectively and to the highest professional standards.

 

HMIP has set itself the following objectives:

i)                    Integrated Pollution Regulation (IPR) and Integrated Pollution Control (IPC) implementation;

ii)                   preventive approach;

iii)                 high profile regulation;

iv)                 demonstrable effectiveness; and

vi)                 proactive research.

 

            None of this is completely new.  HMIP and its predecessor inspectorates have done a

good job and the benefits can be found in any industrial town in the UK.  The current challenge is to do all of this even better and in doing so, show that HMIP is at the leading edge of

environmental regulation.

 

3.1       Integrated Pollution Regulation

            With the bringing into force of Part 1 of the Environmental Protection Act in April 1991,

HMIP's regulatory framework became based on a truly cross-media philosophy.  IPC and HMIP's other main regulatory functions are being carried out in accordance with the philosophy of integrated pollution regulation.

First it involves a systematic approach to regulation, which means developing the appropriate systems to ensure that HMIP's responsibilities are discharged efficiently, effectively and consistently in a consistent manner across all of the lnspectorate.  Second, to implement these systems needs adequate guidance to inspectors and third, comprehensive training.  Training helps maintain the level of professional expertise that is so vital to the effective functioning of the Inspectorate.

With a range of different, but integrated regulatory functions to perform, it is essential for HMIP to have the necessary range of expertise available.  For this reason we have developed a team approach to field regulation.  This is the fourth strand of the IPR approach.  Teams are made up of "professionals" each with their own specialist background and experience such as waste management, air pollution control, radioactive substances, administration etc.  Each member will have the same basic training but will continue to develop his specialism and make this expertise available to colleagues.  In this way, HMIP is able to take an expert and balanced view of pollution as it affects all media.

HMIP's field operation is divided into 7 geographic Regions as shown in Annex 1. Each Region has 5 to 6 inspection teams who are responsible for ensuring that all HMIP's regulatory functions are discharged in that Region.

 

3.2       The Preventive Approach

 

            From an environmental standpoint, prevention is better than cure.  For operators it is cost-effective to reduce the creation of waste at source and much less disruptive to design effective controls and operating procedures into a plant, rather than face later remedial action.  Any remaining wastes which are necessarily produced should be disposed of in the most environmentally acceptable way.

            The three elements of the Inspectorate's approach are:

i)                    guidance on process design and operation, in particular, through Chief Inspector's Guidance [IPR] Notes;

ii)                   avoidance of pollution risk by rigorous scrutiny and process design and operating arrangements, and reduction of waste creation at source, through the authorization process; and

iii)                 deterrence, by using authorizations to set up monitoring regimes which will bring lapses in performance quickly and reliably to the attention of the operator.  HMIP and the public; and by effective monitoring, inspection and enforcement regimes.

 

3.3    High profile Regulation

 

            The history of the Inspectorate can be traced back to 1864 when the first Alkali Act was introduced.  Since that time the lnspectorate has grown in size and in the areas of responsibility it covers.  Regulation has been carried out effectively in the past, but the current public concern about environmental issues means that HMIP must demonstrate explicitly that it is doing its job effectively and be fully responsive to public concerns.  HMIP will be seen to be active in inspections, audits, securing improvements and also prosecutions where appropriate.  HMIP will also show a rapid and flexible approach, particularly to concerns raised by the public which will be dealt with in a systematic manner and with the minimum of delay.

But what does this mean in practice?  The Environmental Protection Act provides for much greater public involvement in the regulatory process.  For example, by requiring the Inspectorate to keep public registers available at our regional offices.  We now have public registers available for Integrated Pollution Control, radioactive substances, atmospheric and water pollution regulation.  But HMIP must go much further than simply meet legal obligations, by being pro­active in making the public more aware of our day to day activities.  HMIP must present a human face to members of the public, we must be credible and above all, accountable.

We have taken steps recently to ensure that the regulatory systems we operate yield information that is available to and comprehensible by the public.  For example, in future, the Inspectorate's annual report will be used to review our activities and our findings, to review our self-auditing procedures, our enforcement activities and the results of out monitoring strategy.

 

3.4       Demonstrable Effectiveness

 

            It is not good enough that HMIP simply discharges its regulatory responsibilities, we must also seek ways of verifying our effectiveness by using appropriate performance indicators.  Monitoring of the environment will play a key role here.  Proposals are already in hand to carry out national monitoring of key parameters so that trends in levels of contaminants in the environment can be ascertained.  Certain parts of UK industry are also planning to develop and use their own environmental performance figures.  This is just one way in which we can check the effectiveness of our work.

To aid work planning, HMIP has developed a comprehensive system of "norms" for the time to be spend on inspecting and overseeing each sector of industry so as to ensure fully effective regulation.  These norms can be varied upwards or downwards, depending on the pollution potential of individual factories in the light of the size and frequency of operation or the competence of the operator.  HMIP is also currently testing systematic procedures for Operator Competence Assessment (OCA) and the Pollution Risk Potential (PRP) of their processes.

In assessing the competence of operators, HMIP inspectors will be examining their performance against set criteria which include compliance with authorized limits, plant maintenance, records, plant instrumentation, managerial competence and commitment to environmental matters.  Pollution Risk Potential will depend inter alia on an assessment of the toxicity of substances being handled, the scale of operation, incident history, complexity of operation and the potential for non-routine releases.

These assessments are currently the subject of field trials and results should be available towards the end of this year.

HMIP will also carry out internal checks on the quality of our operations and procedures.  The introduction of quality assurance systems is vital to demonstrate the high and improving quality of the Inspectorate's activities.  To this end we have recently adopted a Quality Assurance Programme which has the aim of achieving accreditation under British Standard 5750.

 

3.5       Pro-active Research and Development Programme

 

            There is not only a need for short-term technical answers to today's pollution problems,

but also for strategic forward planning in the long term.  This particularly applies to HMIP's research programme.  The main objective of the research is to provide necessary support for our regulatory activities.  Research needs to be pro-active and have definite long-term goals which fit in with regulatory requirements.  For example, HMIP is developing assessment methodologies necessary for making judgments on the impact of harm caused by releases to each environmental medium and for ensuring that authorizations are fully consistent with the concept of Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO).  We shall be looking increasingly at how risk assessments can play a role here.  There is also an important need to keep abreast of developments in process technologies and techniques so that the guidance to inspectors can have the benefit of thorough reviews of available techniques.

 

4          INTEGRATED POLLUTION CONTROL

 

            As most of the industries HMIP regulates are aware by now, the statutory basis for IPC is provided in Part 1 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.  IPC requires that no prescribed process can be operated without a prior authorization from HMIP.  The prescribed processes to be controlled under IPC and the timetable for their introduction into the new systems as well as the prescribed substances are set out in detail in the Environmental Protection (Prescribed Processes and Substances) Regulations 19916 and are summarized in Annexes 2 and 3.

The Environmental Protection (Applications, Appeals and Registers) Regulations 19917 outline the procedures for applying to HMIP for authorization, the information required by HMIP, the bodies which HMIP must consult and requirements for advertising the applications and for placing relevant information on a public register.

The requirements for involving the public in the authorization procedure are a key aspect of IPC.  They reflect our philosophy that the public has a right to know about pollution issues (subject to safeguards where essential, for confidentiality).  HMIP is required either to grant an authorization, subject to any conditions which the Act requires or empowers it to impose, or to refuse it.  HMIP must refuse it unless we consider that the applicant will be able to carry on with the process in compliance with the conditions in the authorization.

In setting the conditions, the Act places HMIP under a duty to ensure that:

·         The Best Available Techniques (both technology and operating practices) Not Entailing Excessive Cost (BATNEEC) are used to prevent or, if that is not practicable, to minimize the release of prescribed substances into the medium for which they are prescribed; and to render harmless both any prescribed substances which are released and any other substances which might cause harm.

·         Releases do not cause, or contribute to, the breach of any direction given by the Secretary of State to implement European Community or international obligations relating to environmental protection, or any statutory environmental quality standards or objectives, or other statutory limits or requirements.

·         When a process is likely to involve releases into more than one environmental medium (which will probably be the case in many processes prescribed for IPC), the Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO) is achieved, i.e. the releases from the process are controlled through the use of BATNEEC to give the least overall effect on the environment as a whole.

 

The concept of BATNEEC contains an inbuilt dynamic towards higher standards because as available techniques improve, environmental protection standards be raised.

Process operators, and indeed the public, will require an assurance that BATNEEC is applied in a rational and consistent way.  BATNEEC standards for each class of IPC process will be set out in published guidance notes which will be issued to inspectors.  In preparing the notes HMIP will review available techniques internationally as well as tapping industry's own expertise and experience.  Right at the outset, industry, through its various representative bodies, will have an opportunity to offer views on the factors that will need to be covered in each note.  And before a note is finalized it will be issued in draft for comment and discussion by all interested parties.

 

5          CHIEF INSPECTOR'S GUIDANCE NOTES

 

            The aim of the Notes is to provide guidance to inspectors on the main emission standards for prescribed substances arising from each process.  They also outline the minimum standards that are expected to be attained by existing plant, and what constitutes BATNEEC for new plant and processes.

In preparing the Guidance Notes8 HMIP takes into consideration the results of BAT research reviews that we have commissioned.  Over thirty reviews of BAT have so far been commissioned.

This procedure will continue until around 180 Guidance Notes are issued and plans are already in place for the revision of the first Guidance Note on Large Combustion Plant.  As more up-to date information, proven technology and standards come to light, others will also be updated.

 

6          IPC IMPLEMENTATION - EXPERIENCE TO DATE

 

            IPC came into force on 1 April last year with the first tranche of processes being introduced.  These included all new or substantially changed processes and all existing large boilers and furnaces.  As with all innovatory and complex new systems, the implementation of IPC has involved tackling a number of difficult issues.  Although HMIP has considerable experience of dealing with applications under other statutes, a considerable amount of preparation was required in advance of the April start date.  This included an extensive training programme for all HMIP inspectors and key administrative staff.  We also carried out a series of six trials involving key sectors of industry to test the proposed application and determination procedures.

To coincide with the introduction of integrated pollution control (IPC), the Department of the Environment published: "IPC - A Practical Guide"9 to assist both ourselves and industry in meeting the requirements of the legislation.  In addition, HMIP has published five Industrial Sector Guidance Notes.  In conjunction with the issuing of an extensive range of guidance documentation, each Region of the lnspectorate has invested a considerable amount of time in publicizing the regulation procedures by attending numerous technical conferences and by holding a series of regional seminars on IPC which representatives from industry were invited to attend.

Even with the extensive preparations carried out by HMIP and industry, there have been a number of hiccups in the early stages of IPC implementation.  First we were very disappointed at the quality of the majority of IPC applications, although some were more than adequate, requiring only minor additional pieces of information, the majority fell below what was necessary, some well below.  In particular, some applications did not provide sufficient information to enable HMIP to carry out the environmental assessments necessary to determine IPC authorizations.  As a consequence, HMIP had to write formally to many applicants specifying extra information that was required and this has, in turn, caused some delay in determining authorizations.  However, processing of the first tranche of applications is now more than 90% complete, except for those where the applicant has appealed against HMIP's decision not to allow the applicant's claim for confidentiality.

In the light of our experience with the first tranche of IPC applications, HMIP inspectors have visited most operators who are due to apply for authorization of the second tranche of processes (due 30 June 1992) to encourage operators to improve the quality of their applications.

 

7          CONCLUSIONS

 

            The introduction of IPC has brought about a more structured relationship between UK

industry and HMIP.  Industry must be the provider of comprehensive information on which HMIP determines authorizations - a point emphasized by our going back to industry to request more information.  Industry must also demonstrate compliance with authorizations by carrying out its own monitoring, instituting quality assurance procedures and generally providing information that assures the Inspectorate that the conditions in an authorization are complied with.

HMIP will, of course, carry out inspections and conduct independent monitoring surveys.  In future HMIP's inspections will be more intensive than in the past and we will be looking not only for compliance with authorizations but also to ensure that the industrial techniques used are of the required standard, i.e. that they are consistent with BATNEEC.  This includes quality assurance, training and related aspects.

But HMIP will not squeeze British industry to death by generating paper mountains and seeking infinite detail about processes.  There is a balance to be struck here so that industry can operate efficiently and effectively, using clean technologies to ensure that no harm is done to the environment.  However, HMIP will take a very serious view if potentially polluting plant is operating without complying with the pollution control legislation.  We are committed to ensuring a safe and clean environment and enforcing the legislation.  If necessary, we will demonstrate our determination to tackle polluters by using the sanctions available in the legislation including, where appropriate, prosecution.

HMIP must be efficient in determining applications and enforcing authorizations.  We will ensure that our systems are publicly accountable and will not be any hindrance to companies who can demonstrate that they are environmentally responsible.

 

 

REFERENCES

 

1.       Environmental Protection Act 1990, chapter 43, London, HMSO

 

2.       Radioactive Substances Act 1960, chapter 34, London, HMSO.

 

3.       Water Act 1989, chapter 15, London, HMSO.

 

4.       Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, chapter 37, London, HMSO.

 

5.       Alkali Act 1863, London, HMSO.

 

6.       Environmental Protection (Prescribed Processes and Substances) Regulations 1991, Statutory Instrument No. 472, London, HMSO.

 

7.       Environmental Protection (Applications, Appeals and Registers) Regulations 1991, Statutory Instrument No. 507, London, HMSO.

 

8.       Chief Inspector's Guidance to Inspectors, Process Guidance Notes, IPR series, London, HMSO.

 

9.       Integrated Pollution Control - A Practical Guide, Department of the Environment and the Welsh Office, London, 1991.