DRAFT VERSION 1 MARCH 2016

Transcription

1 GUIDANCE FOR LAND-USE PLANNING, SITING AND RELATED SAFETY ASPECTS OF HAZARDOUS ACTIVITIES ECE/MP.EIA/WG.2/2016/5/INF.11 ECE/CP.TEIA/WG.1/2016/INF.2 Table of contents // introductory sections A GUIDANCE FOR PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND PRACTITIONERS DRAFT VERSION 1 MARCH 2016 P AGE 1 OF 375

2

3 TABLE OF CONTENT I Introduction Background Goal and objectives Methodology Land-use planning and the siting and modification of hazardous activities Structure of the Guidance II Interlinkages, synergies and complementarities between legal instruments III Application of strategic environmental assessment for land-use plans and programmes - experiences and good practices of ECE Member States based on findings survey IV Existing guidance and recommendations Guidance under the Industrial Accidents Convention Working areas under the Convention Location criteria for the identification of hazardous activities Guidance under the Protocol on SEA Principles and guidelines on spatial planning under the Committee on Housing and Land Management Recommendations of the joint seminar on land-use planning around hazardous industrial sites European Union guidance Seveso Directive guidance Land-use planning accident scenarios handbook (2016) Guidance on land use planning as required by Council Directive 96/82/EC (Seveso II) (1999) Implementing Art.12 of the Seveso II Directive: overview of roadmaps for land-use planning in selected Member States (2008) Land use planning guidelines in the context of article 12 of the Seveso II directive 96/82/EC as amended by Directive 105/2003/EC (2006) EIA Directive guidance Guidelines on the Assessment of Indirect and Cumulative Impacts as well as Impact interactions Guidance on the Application of the Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure for Large-scale Transboundary Projects Guidance on Integrating Climate Change and Biodiversity into Environmental Impact Assessment Non-paper Guidelines for Project Managers: Making vulnerable investments climate resilient 61 P AGE 3 OF 375

4 4.5.3 SEA Directive guidance Guidance developed by ECE Member States Guidance on public information and participation V Guidance on legal, procedural and administrative aspects A Annex Part A: Legal and policy guidance A.1 Survey responses by country A.1.1 Survey questions A Please indicate whether your country is A Please indicate the main legal act (or acts) regulating in your country the following points: A Please indicate the competent authority/authorities or institution(s) in your country: A system 110 Please indicate (and briefly describe) whether your country has a national land-use planning A Please indicate whether and how the obligations under the Industrial Accidents Convention related to the minimization of the risk to the population and the environment through siting decisions (Art. 7) in order to prevent industrial accidents (Art. 3, para 1) and ensure emergency preparedness (Art. 8) are formally included into the decision-making regarding land use: A Please indicate how the matters indicated in Annex V (Analysis and evaluation) and Annex VI (Decision-making on siting) to the Industrial Accidents Convention are formally required to be considered in the decision-making regarding land use policies A For countries that integrate industrial accidents safety considerations into the land use planning via SEA, please indicate if and how they are included into the following stages of the assessment procedure (set out in the Protocol on SEA ): A For countries that integrate accidents safety considerations into the land use planning decisionmaking via EIA please indicate if and how they are included into the following stages of the assessment procedure (where applicable taking into the account the industrial Accidents Convention article 4 para 4): A For countries that integrate industrial accidents safety consideration into the land use planning via a separate assessment of industrial accident safety, please describe it in particular indicating: A For countries that integrate industrial accidents safety considerations into the land use planning via other means please briefly describe them, in particular indicating: A Please indicate if and how the industrial accidents safety considerations are addressed within the respective procedures referred to in the above question no. 5: A Please indicate if the legal framework in your country envisages the establishment of safety areas (zones) around hazardous activities. If yes please describe A Please indicate (and describe) how the environmental and health hazards posed by industrial accidents and their potential transboundary effects are included into your national land-use planning system A Please indicate what type of method is used to define distances from the hazardous activity and the related use of the land: A Please indicate if and how the contingency plans (both on- and off-site) referred to in Art.8, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the Industrial Accidents Convention are coordinated with decision-making regarding land use 245 A Please indicate the mechanism to ensure that in the decision-making regarding land use in your country due account is taken of the analysis and evaluation pursuant to Annex V as well as of the comments P AGE 4 OF 375

5 received pursuant to paragraph 9 of Annex III and of the outcome of the consultations referred to in paragraph 10 of Annex III of the Industrial Accidents Convention A Please indicate if your country has any mechanisms: A Is there any form of guidance available in your country for considering risks of accidents within the decision-making regarding land use through (Question c6) A Please explain which authorities in your country are consulted within the following processes under the land-use planning and siting procedures: (Question c2) A Please explain what the requirements are in your country (if any) for informing the public and relevant authorities about the final decisions made within the land-use planning and siting of either new hazardous activities or new developments in the vicinity of existing hazardous activities) based on the outcomes of: (Question c3) A Please explain what the key difficulties are in your country (if any) in performing the following processes during the land-use planning and siting of either new hazardous activities or new developments in the vicinity of existing hazardous activities: (Question c4) A Please provide practical examples that demonstrate good practice, or challenges and lessons learned (if any) in your country of the following processes related with land-use planning and siting of either new hazardous activities, modifications to such activities or new developments in areas which could be affected by the transboundary effect of industrial accidents: (Question c5) A Does your country consider risks arising from extreme weather conditions (e.g. floods, droughts, heat waves) within the following processes related with land-use planning and siting of either new hazardous activities or new developments in the vicinity of existing hazardous activities? Please explain (Question c6) A.2 Legal requirements A.2.1 ECE legal instruments A Convention on Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents (Industrial Accidents Convention) A Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment A Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention) A Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters A.2.2 EU legislation A EU Seveso III Directive A EU Directive on Environmental Impact Assessment A EU Directive on Strategic Environmental Assessment I Technical aspects on safety and land-use planning with regard to the siting and modification of hazardous activities Land use planning approaches Deterministic based approach Consequence (-effects) based approach Risk based approach Semi-quantitative approach Land use planning and control For new hazardous industrial activities

6 1.2.2 For existing hazardous industrial activities For transport corridors Areas that could be affected by the transboundary effects of an industrial accident Typical approaches in the context to LUP in ECE Member States French approach Italian approach Dutch approach United Kingdom approach Swiss approach Russian approach II Guidance on technical aspects B Annex Part B: Technical guidance B.1 Technical aspects, definitions and basic concepts of risk analysis of industrial hazardous activities in the context land-use planning B.1.1 Main definitions and basic concepts B.1.2 Risk acceptability B.1.3 Consequences and effects of industrial accidents B On human beings B On environmental receptors B On other elements of sensitivity or interest B.1.4 Stakeholders involved B Authorities B Industry B General public B Non-governmental organizations B.1.5 Elements and criteria to support decision-making on land use and safety B Consequences B Fire B Explosion B Toxic release B Effects B Thermal radiation B Blast overpressure B Toxicity P AGE 6 OF 375

7 B Harm to population B Property damage or total or partial loss of value B Damage to the economy (impacts on business, infrastructure, etc.) B Criteria for risk assessment (and health effects) B Individual risk B Individual risk for classified protected persons B Societal risk B Area risk assessment B Data used in area risk quantification B The analysis of single risk sources B The re-composition of all single risk sources into the area risk

8 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Overview of the study methodology and the related tasks Table 2 Available guidance reported in the survey Table 3 Overview of relevant provisions of the Protocol on SEA and the Industrial Accidents Convention on landuse planning, siting and modification of hazardous activities and their linkages Table 4 Examples of damage thresholds values for determining distances Table 5 Examples of changes that could have significant repercussions (from UK HSE) Table 6 Intensity of the effects on population Table 7 Gravity levels expressed in relation to the proportion of people exposed Table 8 Five probability classes based upon qualitative assessment and their equivalence with the quantitative frequency Table 9 French national risk acceptability matrix for land use planning evaluations and restrictions in relation to the presence of hazardous activities Table 10 Zoning criteria set out in the national technological risk prevention plans guide (PPRT) Table 11 General rules for land compatibility for the zones around the hazardous installation Table 12 Construction criteria for new buildings (thermal and toxic effects) Table 13 Construction criteria for new buildings (overpressure effects) Table 14 Construction criteria for existing buildings (expropriation) Table 15 Construction criteria for existing buildings (relinquishment) Table 16 National and local responsibilities in land-use planning Table 17 Six classes of land categorisation Table 18 Threshold values adopted in the Italian regulation Table 19 Compatibility matrix introduced by the Decree (M.D. 09/05/2001) Table 20 Compatibility matrix during the transition period of the Decree implementation (M.D. 09/05/2001) Table 21 Dutch individual and societal risk threshold values Table 22 Criteria for the definition of consultation zones around the installation Table 23 HSE consultation matrix for developments around a hazardous facility Table 24 Risk definition as a set of triplets Table 25 Use of models and their results in risk analysis Table 26 Time to pain threshold for varying levels of radiation Table 27 Physiological damage due to overpressure Table 28 Damage data of explosions P AGE 8 OF 375

9 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Safety distances for hazardous substances according to the German legislation (graph taken from Guidance SFK/TAA-GS-1 ) Figure 2 Example of Chlorine continuous release by ADAM 1.0 (MAHB) (graph courtesy DG JRC MAHB) Figure 3 Example of Chlorine continuous release by ADAM 1.0 (MAHB) represented in google Earth (graph courtesy DG JRC MAHB) Figure 4 Process for calculating the risk in a generic point of the area and verifying whether it is compatible with the proposed land-use (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 5 Semi-quantitative process for verifying that the calculated compatibility in a point of the area is compatible with the proposed land-use (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 6 Seveso establishments located less than 5 km from the EU/EAA Countries borders obtained from EC SPIRS system (courtesy DG JRC MAHB) Figure 7 approaches used in different EU Member States (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 8 Example of aléa mapping for toxic release and thermal radiation and overpressure effects identifying areas subject to expropriation and relinquishment (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 9 Example of aléa mapping for thermal radiation and toxic release obtained with ADAM 1.0 (courtesy DG JRC MAHB) Figure 10 Example of aléa mapping for overpressure obtained with ADAM 1.0 (courtesy DG JRC MAHB) Figure 11 Example of land-use compatibility obtained with ADAM 1.0 (courtesy DG JRC MAHB) Figure 12 Three consultation zones and their individual risk consultation zones around hazard facility for toxic releases (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 13 Four consultation zones and their distances defined by HSE around Large Scale Petrol Storage Sites (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 14 Example of consultation distances obtained with ADAM 1.0 (courtesy DG JRC MAHB) Figure 15 Examples of databases and models used in the different risk management elements (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 16 Illustration of transboundary effect of an accident occurred in a hazardous facility located in country A which may have effects on country B (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 17 Illustration of transboundary effects due to the presence of hazardous facilities located each in countries and B and which may have effects on each other country (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 18 Risk reduction (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 19 Main QRA phases and related data (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk) Figure 20 Example of illustration risk in UK (graph courtesy Lorenzo van Wijk adapted from HSE) Figure 21 Damage curves for human being due to fire Figure 22 Some Probit curves for Ammonia (with courtesy of DG JRC MAHB) Figure 23 Illustration local risk contours around a hazardous facility where fires, explosions and releases of toxic substances may occur (with courtesy DG JRC MAHB) Figure 24 Illustration of a F-N curve Figure 25 Illustration of an I-N histogram P AGE 9 OF 375

10 P AGE 10 OF 375

11 LIST OF BOXES Box 1 Overview of SEA Provisions in Central and Eastern Europe and Newly Independent States (NIS) in the 1990ies (source: Sofia EIA Initiative) Box 2 Regulatory arrangements for strategic environmental assessment and analyses and evaluations related to industrial accidents safety in land-use planning by contracting parties to the Protocol on SEA and the Industrial Accidents Convention (source: UNECE survey, 2016) Box 3 Example of possible integration of industrial accidents safety considerations into the land use planning via the SEA process: case of Bulgaria Box 4 Example of possible integration of industrial accidents safety considerations into the land use planning via the SEA process: case of Bulgaria (continue from above) Box 5 Example of possible integration of industrial accidents safety considerations into the land use planning via the SEA process: case of Belgium, region of Flanders Box 6 Example of possible integration of industrial accidents safety considerations into the land use planning via the SEA process: case of Portugal Box 7 Priorities and interests for the different stakeholders groups in the area of safety and land use planning as identified during the Joint 2010 The Hague seminar Box 8 National and international level recommendations arising from the Joint The Hague 2010 seminar Box 9 Inclusion of safety considerations into the stages of EIA/SEA procedures Box 10 Consultation with the competent safety authorities during siting of proposed developments in the vicinity of hazardous activities in the United Kingdom Box 11 Role of competent safety authorities in the decision-making regarding land use in Estonia Box 12 Safety considerations as criteria for screening land-use plans determining the use of small areas at local level in Bulgaria Box 13 Issues to be addressed under the Industrial Accidents Convention on policies on siting decision-making, emergency preparedness and information to the public Box 14 Espoo Convention informal guidance on issues to consider when identifying adverse transboundary impact P AGE 11 OF 375

12

13 GENERAL DISCLAIMER P AGE 13 OF 375

14

15 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY P AGE 15 OF 375

16

17 GLOSSARY AND ACRONYMS EIA Convention Protocol on SEA Competent safety authorities Planning authorities Environmental and health authorities UNECE Environmental Impact Assessment UNECE strategic environmental assessment Public authorities responsible for implementing the obligations related to prevention and emergency preparedness regarding industrial accidents designated in accordance with article 17 para 1 of the Industrial Accidents Convention Public authorities responsible for the decision-making regarding land use and siting Public authorities which, by reason of their specific environmental or health responsibilities, are designated to be consulted in the respective national SEA or EIA procedures DEFINITIONS Term Acceptable level of risk Buffer or transition zones Hazard Hazardous substance Hazardous activity Individual risk Minimum separation distances Risk Risk assessment Risk contour Explanation The determination by public authorities through a process involving industry and the public of levels of risk which are considered acceptable if all reasonably practical measures have been taken to reduce risks. Acceptability depends on the trade-offs between risks, costs, and benefits and may vary from one community to another. An area of land established around an industrial activity to separate other adjacent land uses, particularly residential areas, from the potential effects of an industrial accident. Buffer or transition zones are established through the determination of minimum separation distances between various land uses and through the determination of "buffer" land uses within these areas. A condition with the potential for causing an undesirable consequence. Any substance that has one or more intrinsic hazardous properties such as flammability, explosiveness, oxidising ability, human toxicity (acute or chronic), corrosiveness, ecotoxicity, capacity to develop one or more of the above properties on contact with air or water. An activity where hazardous substances are used, stored, or produced. Such activities may be "point sources" of risk (e.g. an industry) or linear sources of risk (e.g. a pipeline or transportation corridor). The annual frequency at which an individual may be expected to sustain a given level of harm (e.g., death) from the realization of specified hazards. A distance to be maintained between different land uses or constructions. The separation distance determines the width of a buffer zone. A measure of the probability of occurrence of an undesired event due to a hazard and the possible extent/severity of that event's effects adverse effect due to the consequences. The characterization of the likelihood and importance of risks. A contour around a hazardous site connecting locations with equal probability of risk. P AGE 17 OF 375

18 Risk management Societal risk Mitigation Prevention The contours usually represent powers of 10, i.e., 1 chance in 1,000 per year or (10-3) that an individual may die, 1 chance in 10,000 per year or (10-4), 1 chance in 100,000 per year or (10-5). The optimization of exposure to known and assessed risks. The relationship between annual frequency and the number of people suffering from a specific level of harm in a given population from the realization of a specified hazard. This is the number of people that might be harmed in the event of a release. Societal risk is estimated from all possible events. Limiting any negative consequence of a particular event Any action taken to reduce a potential hazard or risk P AGE 18 OF 375