Consultation hub

For your views on proposed standard conditions for regulating registration-level activities under the Environmental Authorisations (Scotland) Regulations 2018 (EASR). We explained the conditions for each activity and, where needed, why they were considered necessary.

We received 24 responses. Most respondents responded positively, and most supported most of the proposals. When respondents disagreed with the proposals, we asked them to provide a rationale explaining why.

We considered your feedback carefully and revised or clarified certain conditions. We scaled requirements to risk, simplified terminology, improved transparency, added flexibility, and updated or confirmed relevant codes. Where proposals were supported, we are proceeding as planned.

Our Consultation Digest summarises what you told us and the actions we’ve taken. The Consultation Response provides more detail on the proposals, responses, and next steps

For your views on proposed changes to our charging scheme for waste, water, and industrial activities regulated through our Integrated Authorisation Framework (IAF). We also sought feedback on calculating the charges, revising the charging descriptions, and making other changes.

You broadly supported the proposed changes to charges for water and industrial activities, with nearly all respondents in agreement. Most of you also supported the proposed changes to waste activity charges, though a few raised concerns or disagreed. We received 28 responses in total, mostly from businesses.

Take your comments and feedback into account, making changes to our proposals as a result. Full details of what you told us and our responses are available in our Consultation Digest.

As part of our review of Potentially Vulnerable Areas (PVAs) for flood risk management in Scotland, we asked for your views on:

• Moving to community-scale PVAs.
• Designating specific communities as PVAs.
• Improving SEPA’s flood preparedness tools and resources.

• 64% of you agreed with our approach, describing it as sensible and fair. However, 10% of you disagreed, raising concerns about gaps in addressing surface water flooding and the accuracy of our flood data.
•  71% of you supported the move to community-scale PVAs, saying it made the designations clearer and more relevant locally. Some of you, however, expressed concerns about how this change might shift responsibilities for flood management.
• 52% of you agreed with the proposed designations for your local areas, but 33% disagreed, citing concerns about flood data accuracy, potential impacts on property sales, and insurance premiums.
• You told us that our flood preparedness resources need to be more user-friendly and accessible.

We discussed your feedback with local authorities and made several changes to community designations. We added Finavon and Kinbuck as new PVAs based on evidence received from the consultation. We expanded the boundaries for Bannockburn and Oban to better match their community boundaries. For Golspie, we updated the PVA description to clarify the flood risks. Additionally, we will use your feedback to improve SEPA’s flood tools, making them easier to understand and use. These changes will help us refine our flood risk management plans to meet community needs.