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