PROTECTFP PROTECT Questionnaire Responses Jo Hingston

PROTECTFP The Questionnaire Two questionnaires were generated –one for regulators & advisory bodies –one for industry Circulated to approximately 70 organisations in total so far

PROTECTFP The Regulatory Questionnaire Ten sections to capture information –Regulatory role –Why and how regulators regulate –Protection goals –Methodology –Compliance –Criteria –Flexibility –Does it work –Future regulation –Radioactive substances vs chemicals

PROTECTFP The Industry Questionnaire Nine sections to capture information –Nature of business –Why and how regulated –Protection goals –Methodology –Compliance –Criteria –Does it work –Future regulation –Radioactive substances vs chemicals

PROTECTFP Nature of Business

PROTECTFP Questionnaire Respondents

PROTECTFP Why & how you regulate/are regulated

PROTECTFP Regulation Legislation Guidance Background to policy decisions Key documents Other regulators involved

PROTECTFP Do the regulators regulate to protect the environment?

PROTECTFP Protection Goals

PROTECTFP Protection Goals Wide ranging response from global –Protection of ecosystems –Maintenance of habitats with reasonable populations of species –Pollution prevention –Sustainable development to specific –Protection of sites with rare species of low population

PROTECTFP Methodology & Compliance

PROTECTFP Methodology & Compliance Methods used to achieve protection goals Formally described approaches Models used Environmental factors taken into account Stakeholder involvement Demonstration of compliance with protection goals –monitoring –ensuring discharge limits are not exceeded

PROTECTFP Criteria

PROTECTFP Criteria Use of numerical limits Use of non-numeric criteria Derivation Conservatism

PROTECTFP Is the Criteria Conservative Enough?

PROTECTFP Criteria Use of numerical limits Use of non-numeric criteria Derivation Conservatism Revision

PROTECTFP New Work & Revision of Criteria 93% of regulators said they be willing to revise new criteria in light of new work (The remaining 7% did not state either way) 25% of industry said they undertake research related to standards in order to challenge the regulators

PROTECTFP Criteria Use of numerical limits Use of non-numeric criteria Derivation Conservatism Revision Cost benefit Stakeholder involvement

PROTECTFP Should Stakeholders be Included in Criteria Setting? 87% of regulators said yes (13% did not answer the question) 75% of industry said yes

PROTECTFP Flexibility & Does it Work?

PROTECTFP Flexibility & Does it Work? What works well What areas could be improved How these areas could be improved

PROTECTFP Future Regulation

PROTECTFP Future Regulation Responses included –No change envisaged –Specific consideration of non-human species –Lowering of current protection criteria –Influence of REACH regulations (chemicals) –Increase in the number and use of environmental quality standards

PROTECTFP Radionuclide v Chemicals

PROTECTFP Radionuclides v Chemicals Similarities & Differences Environmental Protection Endpoints Criteria Setting & Extrapolation Where one area of regulation can learn from another

PROTECTFP What Next?

PROTECTFP Additional Questionnaires Incorporate questionnaires in draft –Canada, Sweden, Norway, UK, Republic of Ireland –SKEP Continue to liase with current respondents Accept new questionnaires until 1 August 2007