ShareThis Page

Speedier environmental reviews to be required

| Wednesday, July 25, 2012, 7:23 a.m.

State environmental regulators soon will have new deadlines to review permit applications because Gov. Tom Corbett signed an order on Tuesday to guarantee timely decisions.

The governor is seeking to address complaints he's received about how long it takes to get a permit for projects with environmental implications through state review, he said in a news release.

The order demands an update to permit-review deadlines set in 1994. It also wants the Department of Environmental Protection to set clearer standards for applicants and dismisses any incomplete and deficient applications.

“Particularly now when the agency is down 500 or 600 employees from where it was before, that's an issue,” said David E. Hess, the department secretary under former Gov. Tom Ridge. “And while it puts a bigger burden on the applicants and their consultants, I think that's only fair. Why should the public pay for helping a private applicant complete incomplete work?”

The department will be working under the old deadlines in the interim, but Corbett nixed an executive order from Ridge to refund permit fees to applicants whose reviews were delayed. The agency now relies more on its permit fees — some of which are higher — as its state funding has shrunk, but the administration didn't have a financial motive in eliminating fee refunds, department spokesman Kevin Sunday said.

Ensuring reviews are completed on time — not punishing the department for failing behind — is the priority for both state leaders and the groups DEP regulates, Sunday said. To install Corbett's order and set new rules for permit timeliness, the previous order had to be rescinded for procedural reasons, he said.

The department plans to propose the new permit review deadlines for a 45-day public comment this fall, Sunday said.

Timothy Puko is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7991 or

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.