news-record.com

RALEIGH (AP) — The speed of the state's environmental permitting process is hard to calculate because the department in charge lacks data or its information is inaccurate, but even so, regulators appear to be missing their completion goals, according to an audit released today.

Department of Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Dee Freeman criticized the performance review by State Auditor Beth Wood's office, saying in an official response that the auditors fail to understand how permitting processes differ and that the miscalculated permit processing time under state law.

The Department of Environment and Natural Resources oversees processing applications for more than 130 types of permits. The agency also has offered express permitting since 2005. In those, applicants agree to pay higher fees for projects that could create private-sector jobs and can have reviews fast-tracked in six categories, including for storm water and coastal development.

Under the auditor's calculations, four of the six permit types processed under both the standard and express options failed to meet established completion times at least 80 percent of the time. With DENR's calculations, only one of the six types missed the target at least 80 percent of the time under standard permitting and two of the six types under express permitting, the audit said.

The fees pay for the express permit process separate from the standard permitting. Woods' auditors reviewed six express categories and a sampling of applications said it was difficult to make conclusions about the pace because they contained errors and that procedures were lacking to ensure electronic processing data was accurate.

"We cannot provide reasonable assurance about the timeliness of permits processed under the express or standard options," the audit read. Processing times calculated by DENR and the auditors were different because the department doesn't account for delays caused by regulators seeking additional information before performing their review, the audit said.

The target completion date to review permits under the standard procedure range can be as high as 150 days, depending on the permit. Express permit targets are mostly 30 days, although some are as quick as three days.

Freeman said the department is following state law, which directs the agency to "track time required to process each complete environmental application." That time frame shouldn't include the time waiting for additional information before a comprehensive review can be performed, he said.

The audit fails to clearly state that the express permitting program is meeting the Legislature's mandated objectives to complete the process more quickly than the standard process, Freeman said.

Wood's audit recommended DENR establish procedures to ensure information is properly recorded and permit processing times are calculated uniformly.

While improvements can be made, "I regret that the countless hours of limited DENR staff resources, expended over more than a year to provide information for this report, did not lead to well-grounded conclusions that we could use to improve our programs," Freeman wrote.

Wood's office took the unusual step of responding in writing to Freeman's response, saying the inaccurate and incomplete permit tracking data still provides some indication of the speed in which regulators are reviewing applications.