Seòmar agus comataidhean

Again, that is operational stuff for SEPA, convener. [Interruption.] Oh, I do have that information.

I have a couple of things to say in response to that. I will deal first with the questions around the on-going discussions between the whisky industry and SEPA.

Effectively, in order to create a level playing field, we are bringing AD plants that use non-waste feedstocks into the scope of existing regulations on those that use waste feedstocks. Operators who use waste feedstocks are used to the existing regulations. SEPA is in discussion with non-waste AD operators—it is communicating and engaging with them. As I said, that communication is important. Due to the simplification of the regime and the digital interface for applications, there will be heightened communication with the sectors that will be covered by the regulations.

Regardless of whether feedstocks are classified as waste or non-waste, there is always a risk in the operation of an AD plant that contaminants could get into the environment, which is why the regulations are being tightened to level the playing field. The Government has not reclassified AD feedstocks; it has used the definitions from the Pollution Prevention and Control (Scotland) Regulations 2012 and waste management licensing.

You are right that there have been stakeholder concerns. There is anxiety about having to do something new, and anything that stakeholders have not had to deal with before will present an administrative challenge that they would rather not have to manage. SEPA will phase in the changes in recognition of the fact that some operators have not had to comply with the regulations before—obviously, that is an operational aspect that SEPA can discuss—and there will also be flexibility about the appropriate level of authorisation. For example, a waste AD plant in which the activity threshold is more than 100 tonnes would have to apply the best available techniques standard. Everything will be proportionate to the size of the plant. SEPA is mindful of the concerns and is engaging specifically with the whisky industry, because a lot of anaerobic digestion is associated with its stock.

Under the regulations, non-waste and waste feedstocks that are used in anaerobic digestion will have the same rules, so there will be no risk of contamination—or the risk of contamination will be monitored, identified and regulated.

Thank you very much, convener, for the invitation to attend today’s session. I will take the next couple of minutes to put on record the context for this large and quite complex instrument.

The aim of the instrument is to amend the Environmental Authorisations (Scotland) Regulations 2018 to bring three existing environmental regulatory regimes—industrial emissions, waste, and water—into the framework provided by the 2018 regulations. That will provide an integrated regime for the four main environmental regimes regulated by SEPA in Scotland. At the same time, the instrument will revoke various secondary pieces of legislation relating to environmental permitting in their entirety, greatly simplifying the statute book.

In 2017, the Scottish Government consulted on a single integrated authorisation framework for environmental regulation. Stakeholders were widely supportive of the basis of the proposal. The regulations then set up the framework and brought radioactive substances activities within its scope. The intention, at that time, was to bring other environmental regulatory regimes within scope in the future. At the start of 2024, the Scottish Government consulted on fulfilling that intention. Again, it had wide support. At the same time as adding those three activities to the framework, the instrument will change or introduce regulation for some sectors that were not covered previously.

Based on the recommendations in the “Review of the storage and spreading of sewage sludge on land in Scotland” in 2016, the instrument also amends the regulation of the sewage sludge to land regime.

The instrument will also bring three new activities within scope: non-waste anaerobic digestion; carbon capture, utilisation and storage; and smaller generators of electricity that are not currently regulated. The introduction of those three new activities will provide a level playing field in those sectors and ensure that environmental risks are appropriately managed.

The instrument also makes limited policy changes to the current regulation of environmental activities to improve the functioning of regulation. At this time, I am not extending that to cover other activities in which I know that the committee has an interest. Work is on-going to better understand emissions of ammonia from livestock farms and battery energy storage systems, the impact of any potential regulation and the best way to regulate those particular sectors.

The overriding purpose of the instrument is to simplify SEPA’s environmental regulatory regime. The changes that I have highlighted will maintain alignment with European Union legislation and ensure compatibility, and will improve the 2018 regulations. By streamlining SEPA’s regulatory regime, the instrument will contribute to the improvement and efficiency of Scotland’s public services.

We are not saying that these activities are highly risky, but we are bringing them into scope so that they are regulated, that there are no issues and that there are guidelines. Obviously, the structure that exists for other sectors applies to them as well.

It is a long-held objective of the Government and SEPA to have an integrated authorisation. We are making the process and the regime simpler for people to follow when they apply for particular permits or notify SEPA of their activities. That will provide greater environmental protection and simplify and streamline SEPA’s regulatory functions.

SEPA will be able to take a more targeted and risk-based approach to regulation, focusing on the operators and activities that present the greatest risk. Having a tightly regulated landscape for all those sectors, so that operators understand the guidelines, frees up SEPA to interrogate some of the riskier activities to prevent environmental harm. I hope that the committee would agree that SEPA is largely there to prevent harm and limit the consequences of accidents, and that it should use its resources for that.

The fact that we are bringing some new activities into scope means that there will be the same environmental protections in relation to any risk that is associated with those new or currently unregulated activities.

On the whole, it is a case of making SEPA more efficient, giving it the space to be more proactive in taking targeted action and simplifying the regulations so that they cover more sectors. The result of all that will be that we will protect the environment.

Yes. As you said, the initial target date for implementation of the sludge to land regulations is 1 November this year. We have set up a governance group with SEPA for exactly the reasons that you have set out: we need to check that the milestones are met and that preparations are made. The governance group includes key SEPA personnel to ensure that SEPA is on track to deliver all the changes by those dates, to implement the regulations effectively and to communicate them effectively to various stakeholders.

The group is meeting monthly, and its first meeting was a few weeks ago, so a meeting has already taken place. If the committee wants to see the group’s terms of reference, we can provide them.

As I understand it, the delivery of digital services will be phased over the next year. The governance group will be looking at that aspect to ensure that the website pages are up to date, that the rules, advice and codes of practice are easily accessible, that the new conditions with which people will need to comply are available and that the new service manages the volume of applications as a result of the instrument. The target date for implementation of the first set of regulations—the sludge to land ones—is 1 November.

Yes, because it will be in touch with them.

My understanding is that, ahead of the regulations for non-waste anaerobic digesters being put in place, we will put them out for consultation, but SEPA is in touch with those whom the regulations will affect. If you want detail on that, I can certainly get it from SEPA, and I can write to the committee with it. I am happy to do so, even though I do not have the exact figure in front of me right now.

I hope that that clarifies the matter, Mr Ruskell.

As I have indicated, we are not waiting for the EU to decide something and then saying, “How do we figure out the alignment bit?” The SRUC is doing work on good practice, and it has a route into working with land managers in order to evidence what is happening at the moment, the acceptance of mitigation measures and how widespread that good practice is. That will inform what we would do, if the EU were to decide to bring in regulations on that. Obviously, we will assess that at the time.

I will just move it, convener.

Motion moved,

That the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee recommends that the Environmental Authorisations (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved.—[Gillian Martin]

Motion agreed to.