Office of the Legislative AuditorState of Minnesota
Office of the Legislative AuditorState of Minnesota
Environmental Review and Permitting
September 28, 2011
Environmental Review and Permitting
September 28, 2011
OLA in State Government OLA in State Government
Executive Branch
Legislative Branch
Judicial Branch
OLA
State Agencies
Governor House of Representatives
Senate
Courts
Constitu-tional
Officers
Office of the Legislative AuditorOffice of the Legislative Auditor
• Nonpartisan
• Financial Audit Division
• Program Evaluation Division
Purpose of the EvaluationPurpose of the Evaluation
• What are key elements in the environmental review and permitting processes?
• How timely are the processes for undergoing environmental review and obtaining permits?
• How well does the environmental review process meet its objectives?
Overview of Key FindingsOverview of Key Findings
• Not all environmental reviews fully meet all objectives
• Expertise and experience vary widely
• State agencies lack adequate data to measure timeliness
• Time taken varied greatly and for different reasons
Environmental Review and PermitsEnvironmental Review and Permits
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)EAW determines need for environmental
impact statement (EIS); EAW 31 questionsEIS analyses impacts, discusses alternatives,
explores mitigationPublic review periods
• Environmental review and permitting are separate processes; they sometimes intersect
• Purpose: To understand the impact that a project will have on the environment
Numbers of Private Sector Environmental Reviews and PermitsNumbers of Private Sector Environmental Reviews and Permits
EAW
EIS
Total
FY 2010
22
1
23
FY 2009
38
2
40
FY 2008
70
2
72
Total
229
7
236
PCA
DNR
l
1,949
243
1,608
356
1,457
310
1,492
224
6,506
1,133
Environmental Reviews
Environmental Permits
FY 2007
99
2
101
• State rules lay out objectives
• Not all environmental reviews fully meet all objectives
• Provide usable information on primary environmental effects of proposed projects
• Provide access to decision makers to encourage accountability in decision making
Objectives for Environmental ReviewsObjectives for Environmental Reviews
• The structure for access to decision makers to maintain public awareness of environmental concerns has flawsNotification process has limitationsLack of meaningful participation
• Process does not consistently allow public agencies to reduce delay and uncertainty or eliminate duplication
Unmet Objectives for Environmental ReviewsUnmet Objectives for Environmental Reviews
Varying Levels of Expertise, ExperienceVarying Levels of Expertise, Experience
Some work only sporadically on environmental review
Inexperience and lack of expertise can lead to problems
City33%
County34%
PCA21%
Township 6%
DNR4%
Other Local Gov-ernment 2%
RecommendationsRecommendations
• To strengthen environmental review process:Develop a continuous improvement process
• To strengthen local governments’ ability to conduct environmental reviews:Cooperative arrangementsOn-demand training
• To change the EAW process:Allow certain low-risk projects to bypass EAW
on a trial basis
• PCA and DNR lack adequate data to measure timeliness
• PCA and DNR do not record dates for all phases of environmental review or permitting
• Problematic formats
• Prevents the agencies from monitoring compliance and identifying areas for improvement
Measuring TimelinessMeasuring Timeliness
• Timelines varied greatly and reflected individual circumstances
Environmental Review TimelinessEnvironmental Review Timeliness
PCA
DNR
Local Case Studies
EAWs
52
4
8
MaximumMedian
181
334
120
Minimum
76
70
39
Days to Complete
785
406
195
Days for PCA to Complete EAWsDays for PCA to Complete EAWs
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Days to prepare EAW up to publication in EQB Monitor
Days for comment period
Days to decide on need for an EIS
Days
Days for Local Government Case Studies to Complete EAWsDays for Local Government Case Studies to Complete EAWs
Days
University of St. Thomas
Gengler Quarry
Saukinac Campground
Kohl's Parking
Winjum's at Izatys
Wireless Communica-tion Tower
Hutchinson Senior Housing
Canby Inn & Suites
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Days for preapplication
Days to prepare EAW up to publication in EQB Monitor
Days to decide on need for EIS
Days for comment period
PCA Days to Issue Select Private Sector PermitsPCA Days to Issue Select Private Sector Permits
1. Construction storm water
2. Air quality general new
3. Air quality general reissue
4. Air quality individual high priority
5. Air quality individual low priority
Permits MaximumMedianMinimum
Days to Complete
5,304
94
12
53
174
0
14
337
48
47
7
126
789
193
306
366
484
1,481
912
1,680
PCA Overall Timeliness Issuing Permits for Private Sector Applications PCA Overall Timeliness Issuing Permits for Private Sector Applications
All Applications
New or Modified Permit Applications
150 Days180 Days
Days to Complete
Permit Applications
9,510
7,628
85%
93%
83%
92%
RecommendationsRecommendations
• PCA and DNR should improve their data’s value by routinely compiling timeliness information
• PCA and DNR should set explicit timeliness standards
• PCA and DNR should consistently inform proposers of: What is needed to complete EAWs Timeliness standardsAgency expectations of proposers
Environmental Review and Permitting
is available at:
www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us