Enhanced Environmental Regulation - Essay Example

? "Regulatory bodies are best placed to secure environmental protection" Discuss Questions What is regulation? Enhanced environmental regulation is presumed to minimise regulatory encumbrances through enhancement of the requirements themselves and the manner they are managed and implemented but without compromising the objective of environmental protection. Wide range of options has been utilised to improve the environmental regulations which include removal of outmoded regulations, coalescing existing regulations into a more administrable form and to find solutions to inconsistency or overlapping regulations between or within regulations. The compliance assurance features of better regulation include initiating time limits for regulatory decision making, minimising the onus of paperwork by substituting to self-reporting and enhanced overseeing of compliance monitoring activities so that business assigns minimum resources and time to inspection by government authorities. The UK government so as to overhaul its industrial pollution control system has introduced a new Integrated Pollution Control system (IPC) as early as 1990 through the Environmental Protection Act. The Environmental Act 1995 established the Environmental Agency. (Bohne: 435). Further, the UK government had combined the additional policy objective with its regulatory reform with an aim to regain more influence on European Environmental Regulations. In UK, the Hampton Principles was adopted which outline a regulatory system perused in tune with the requirements of the 21st century where risk assessment will be the foundation for all environmental programmes. Further, the UK government has made public a regulatory code of practice to compel both the local and national regulators to adhere the Hampton Principles. In April 2008, the Regulators’ Compliance Code came into force. Further, UK has also adopted a common framework for evaluating administrative burdens namely the Standard Cost Model. Moreover, the Impact Assessment Guidance issued by the UK Better Regulations Executive needs an evaluation of the “aggregate annual cost of enforcement of the regulatory proposal. Further, UK government is contemplating to introduce a system of regulatory budgets to minimise the aggregate costs of its new regulations’ adherence cost on the economy. (OECD2009:45). 2. What are the main characteristics of the British system of regulation? What processes are involved? What are its strengths and weaknesses? The UK government so as to overhaul its industrial pollution control system has introduced a new Integrated Pollution Control system (IPC) as early as 1990 through the Environmental Protection Act. UK can be said to be the leader of an integrated pollution control system not only in the Europe but in the whole world. Section 7 (4) & (7) was successfully exported to Europe from UK. As per Emmot and Haigh (1996:305), the IPC concept of “Best Available Techniques Not Entailing Excessive Cost” (BATNEEC) which was employed to evaluate the emission limit values which reappeared in the BAT specification of the IPPC directive. As per farthing et al (2003:75), the holistic IPC doctrine of “Best Practicable Environment Option” (BPEO), though not overtly emphasised in the IPPC directive, is mirrored in the regulations of the IPPC directive to accomplish a greater level of safeguard for environment as a whole, and not to shift the pollution from one medium to another i.e. air, water and land through the Art. 9(1) and (3) of the IPPC directive. (Bohne2006:435). UK assumed the leadership role in EU industrial pollution control legislation by exporting the IPC system to Europe. As per Bell and McGillivray (2006:770), UK kept the administrative and legislative upheaval for the transposition of the IPPC directive to a bare minimum. (Bohne 2006:435). EIA – Environment Impact Assessment It is a technique to make us to understand the probable environmental impacts of major projects both the existing and in the development stages also. The regulations and provisions for EIA is drawn from circulars, guidance and regulations and is intended to assist individuals to comprehend what an EIA is and in what scenario it should be applicable. In short , we can explain the EIA is an information gathering exercise done by a developer of a project to facilitate a Local Planning Authority to comprehend the environmental impacts of a project and to decide whether permit or approval for such a project is to be given or not. There are many pieces of legislations available for each type of project development, which includes power stations, highways, land drainage, water resources, pipelines, forestry, harbor works and so on. Disadvantages UK environmental regulations like EIA have been vehemently knocked as not fully adhering to the letter and spirit of the EU’s EIA directive. There are many individual cases, which represented over major development proposals, which have resulted in the contentious disputes about the quality of the EIA directive. Further, some third parties have made the complaints against UK in the European Commission about the breakdown of the UK government to introduce wholly the EC directives of EIA. (Friends of Earth 2005:5). 3. Do you consider it necessary to identify and establish what is forbidden with regard to water pollution and the scope of what is permitted or entitled? Consider the merits of prevention or integration (flexibility). The Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR) 2010 has been introduced mainly to limit or prevent the needs of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and GWDD which are on the safeguard of groundwater against deterioration and pollution. The UK government agency has recognised pollution as a grave challenge to water quality and a poignant purpose why water bodies in UK are not presently meeting the European standards. Further, the department has projected the aggregate cost of water pollution in UK to be in between ? 700 million and about ? 1.3 billion per year. It is to be observed that pollution can be emerged from single identifiable sources like sewage treatment or from factories and diffuse sources is represented by roads and agricultural lands. Since 2000, the ratio of river lengths with disappointingly higher quantum of phosphates and nitrates has fallen significantly. Though, the water pollution from point sources has fallen dramatically, the overall effect of diffuse pollution is becoming more apparent. (UK National Audit Office 2010:12). In UK, if anyone wishes to discharge to facade water like a stream, river, the sea or the estuary or to groundwater, one has to apply for an environmental permission to allow for such discharge. Permissible activities- These contain any materials or substance, which are competent of creating water pollution and, which has not been termed as a hazardous substance. For instance, nitrate is now regarded as being non-hazardous. Hazardous or forbidden activities- The Water Framework Directive defines this as “substance that is persistent, toxic and is prone to bio-accumulate and other groups of substances, which result in analogues level of pollution. These contain sheep dip, pesticides, hydrocarbons, solvents, cadmium, mercury, radionuclide and cyanide. Section 3 (3) (a) of EPR 2010 permits pollution due to traffic accidents or train or plane crash, pollution due to extreme weather conditions Section 3 (3) (b) of EPR 2010 permits pollution due to About 10 litres of non-hazardous pollutants for the scientific purpose into the ground water. Small quantities of lubrication from screw threads when drilling boreholes etc. Section 3 (3) (c) of EPR 2010 permits pollution due to Burial of carcass up to 2 tonnes which is made as per best practice etc. (www.environment-agency.gov.uk) 4. What are the consequences of failure to implement Directives? In UK, there are numerous laws, which prevent air, water and land pollutions. If anyone fails to comply with these provisions may lead to prosecution and enforcement. “Under section 111 of the Water Industry Act of 1991”, it is a criminal offence to discharge polluted materials into the public sewers. Under “Environmental Protection Act 1990” and “EPA (Duty of Care) Regulations of 1991”- the producer of waste should engage waste couriers to dispose of the waste and if not such companies are liable to prosecution and fines. “Environmental Protection Act 1990”- Statutory Nuisance- This is concerned with effluents, smells, any premise in such a condition as a nuisance or to the detrimental to health. Under “Section 80 of the Act,” the local authority can serve an “abatement notice “and any non-compliance will result in prosecution and damages. “Building Act 1984”- A local authority can under Section 59 of the “Building Act 1984 “can require a satisfactory provision for safe drainage for an existing premise, and this may involve the installation of a grease trap. “Animal By-Products Regulations EC 1774/2002 (ABPR)”- Under this, waste cooking oil can no longer be used in animal feed, and it should be removed through a licensed waste carrier and there is a prohibition to dispose any liquid waste at the landfill. “Food Safety Act 1990”- This regulates issues arising out of oil, fat and grease on drains and failure to adhere with the Food Hygiene Regulation may end in prosecution. (www.greasemanagement.co.uk). 5. Have the courts reached an economically sensible view of ‘cause or knowingly permit’? Why is it so heavily litigated? Why do the courts find the definition so difficult? “Section 33 (1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990” forbids to dump controlled waste on any land either causing or knowingly permitting it. As per “section 59(1) of the Environmental Act 1990 “, an occupier of land where hazardous waste has been deposited can appeal to Magistrate’s Court and may avert from accountability if he can demonstrate that he has neither “ caused or knowingly permitted” nor deposited the hazardous waste. As per Sections 161 A to 161 D of the Environment Act 1995, EA can demand the persons who cause or knowingly permit threat or pollution to the controlled waters to perform remediation or preventive works. “Section 85 of the Water Resources Act 1991” imposes a criminal liability on the person who causes or knowingly permitting “polluting substances to mix with controlled waters. “Knowingly permitting or causing “have significances to both the administrative and criminal liability. “ Knowingly permitting” refers to failure to avert pollution when it is under a one's authority to avert it and demands an awareness that the incidence would be ending in the pollution. “Causing” refers to a need to control or exert a positive act over a process instead of remaining as a silent spectator. (ec.europa.eu). Under Environment regulations, directors of a company can be held liable for any omissions or acts of their company. The Courts in UK have construed the word “causing “very liberally and if a director has an awareness of an issue, then they may be held as “knowingly permitting” as they have the authority and a reasonable opportunity to exercise something about it. Thus, any director who knowingly allows or causes pollution to happen, then he will be held liable for its happenings. It is not an easy task for EA to prove that a director instead of the company has been really responsible for the pollution and however, this is still possible. (www.inhouselawyer.co.uk). 6. What amounts to ‘successful’ enforcement? Who is prosecuted? UK government announced during 2003 about introduction of Operating and Financial Review [OFR] as a regulation instead of legislation that would be combined into the wide-ranging UK Company law Review. The new regulation warrants that the largest 1000 UK companies will be mandated to issue an OFR as part of their annual accounts and report. Currently, about 100 UK companies publish environmental reports .No doubt, OFR regulation will certainly pose a challenge to those companies that has not understood both in terms of establishing suitable processes to examine with it. Usually, any individuals, companies and directors who infringe the environmental regulations either knowingly permitting or causing will be penalised for the lapses as regards to environmental safeguards. [Trucost, 2003]. 7. What is ‘regulatory capture’? Is it inevitable? The capture of the regulatory body happens when the prolonged contact of regulators with those companies being controlled, which ends in the regulator becoming more compassionate towards the regulated companies and this may sidetrack the regulator from their goals. A best illustration of regulatory capture is when a regulator leaves the regulation industry and joining with regulated industry. (Markandya 2001:159). Now targets have been fixed by the UK governments to monitor and prosecute those companies that violate environmental regulations. Since, there exist a close supervision and monitoring from the UK government, it may not be considered to be inevitable. 8. Is an economy ever ‘free’ (unregulated) or is some level of command necessary? According to report released by Environment Agency, there was a considerable reduction in the number o pollution incidents from UK business from 43% in 2001 to that of 12% in 2003. In 2003 alone, the Environment agency has prosecuted about 266 companies, which netted a total fine amounting to ?2.2 million. It is to be noted that in 2003 alone, about 60 businesses were fined more than ?10,000 and about seven businesses were fined more than ? 50,000. Hence, stricter environmental regulations are the need of the hour in UK to save the environment by following the concept “the polluters must pay.” List of References Bohne, Eberhard. (2006). The Quest for Environmental Regulatory Integration in the European Union. New York: Kluwer Law International. ec.europa.eu. (December 1995).Study of Civil Liability System for Remedying the Environmental Damage. [online] available from [11 May 2011]. Environment Agency. (2010).Interpreting Groundwater Activity Exclusions. [online] available from Read More