Handling of environmental complaints, comparing experiences in Poland and Norway

1

• Handling of environmental complaints, comparing
  experiences in Poland and Norway
• Joanna Huczko
• chief specialist in the Inspection and
  Administrative Ruling Department
• Chief Inspectorate for Environmental Protection
  in Poland
• Sibiu, 24 September 2009

2

• Project PL0100
• Improving the efficiency of Polish Environmental
• Inspection, based on Norwegian experiences
• Beneficiary The Chief Inspectorate for
  Environmental Protection
• Partner The Norwegian Pollution Control
  Authority (SFT)
• Time 2007 2010
• Financed with Norwegian Financial Mechanism

3

• Result 1 Implementation of effective system for
  handling data on inspections
• Result 2 Methodological inspection strengthening
• Result 3 Providing equipment for inspectors
• Result 4 Development of a system for
  dissemination of information to the general public

4

• Aim of the presentation
• To present similarities and differences of
  Norwegian and Polish system for handling
  complaints.

5

• Regions in Poland 16 VIEP
• Population 38 135 000
• Area 312 679 km2
• Density 122 inhabitants/km2

6

• Regions in Norway 20 Counties
• Population 4 769 000
• Area 324 220 km2
• Density 15 inhabitants/km2

7

• Sources of complaints
• lack of information to the society fear of the
  unknown
• lack of society knowledge about the regulation
  and its background
• lack of facilities compliance with the
  regulations

8

• Complaints from WHOM?
• Directly from citizen
• Directly from entities
• Through higher/other authorities
• Controls in answer to the motion from
• voluntary organizations (NGOs)
• Problem of joint inspections

9
Authorities to which environmental
complaints are addressed

• POLAND
• Voivodship Inspectorate for Env. Protection
• Chief Inspectorate for Env. Protection
• Ministry of Environment
• village/town/city mayor
• Sanitary Inspection

• NORWAY
• installation
• county governors environmental office
• Norwegian Pollution Control Authority
• municipalitys health service office

10

• Types of complaints
• complaints before the installation starts
  operating (location, getting a permit)
• complaints after the installation started
  operating

11
Subject of complaints
12
Type of inspections in 2008
(11 126)
13
Complaint proceedings

• POLAND
• Checking correctness
• Time for answer
• Inspections in reaction to most complaints
• Exceptions

• NORWAY
• Complaints addressed to installations
• Activities of inspection authorities (role of
  case handler)

14
Post-control activity

• POLAND
• issuance of enforcement notices
• orders to pay a fine
• motion to court
• application to prosecuting authority
• penal-administrative procedure
• decision imposing non-cash obligations
• application to administration authorities

• NORWAY
• post-control report
• written requirement to comply and report
• issuing coercive fines
• police notice (criminal investigation)

15
Attitude to complaints

• POLAND decrease the number of complaints
• by for e.g.
• Informing the public at every stage of locating,
  building and operating of the installation
• Facilitating contact of citizen with inspectors
  responsible for given installation
• Quick reaction/response to the complaint

• NORWAY welcome
• Valuable source of information on
• non-compliance as most complaints justified

16

• Factors that have impact on the number of
  complaints
• Location of installations
• Compliance level of installation
• Financial sanctions for non-comformity
• Inspectors role
• Public trust in industry and authorities
• Access to information by general public

17

• Different background
• gives different types and levels of complaints,
• which has to be treated differently.

18

• Thank you for your attention!
• E-mail address
• project.nmf_at_gios.gov.pl