SEFA
Improving EPA's Performance
with Program Evaluation
Evaluation of Implementation Experiences with Innovative Air Permits:
Results of the U.S. EPA Flexible Permit Implementation Review
Series No. 7
By continuously evaluating its programs, EPA is able to capitalize on lessons learned and incorporate that
experience into other programs. This enables the Agency to streamline and modernize its operations while promoting
continuous improvement and supporting innovation. This series of short sheets on program evaluation is intended
to share both the results and benefits of evaluations conducted across the Agency, and share lessons learned
about evaluation methodologies in this evolving discipline. For more information contact EPA's Evaluation Support
Division at www.epa.gov/evaluate.
At a Glance
Evaluation Purpose
To evaluate implementation experience with
flexible permits.
Evaluation Type
Performance/Outcome Evaluation
Publication Date
November 2002
Partners
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation,
Office of Policy Analysis and Review,
Office of General Counsel,
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance
Contacts
Mike Trutna, OAQPS (919) 541-5345
Dave Dellarco, OPEI (206) 553-4978
Background: Why was an evaluation
performed?
Over the last several years, EPA and several State and local
permitting authorities have worked with several companies to
develop innovative approaches to air permitting. EPA and the
States launched flexible permitting pilots to increase operational
flexibility while ensuring environmental protection. Permit
developers sought to encourage and facilitate emissions reductions
and pollution prevention with the flexible permits. The permits
were also designed to reduce the administrative "friction"—costs,
time, delay, uncertainty, and risk—associated with making certain
types of operational and equipment changes. Additionally,
permitting authorities desired to reduce the resources needed for
case-by-case applicability determinations and for the approval
process of minor and major New Source Review (NSR) permit
applications and other permitting amendments. Permitting
authorities designed these "flexible permits" within the existing
regulatory framework (i.e., approaches were not precluded under
any relevant Federal or State regulation) to address all applicable
air requirements.
NCEI
NATIONAL CENTER FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATION
-------
As interest in flexible air permitting increased, so did
concerns, both internal and external, as to whether the
permits actually worked, achieved environmental
reductions, and were enforceable. In response to these
critical questions and concerns, EPA saw the need to
evaluate its implementation experience with flexible
permits developed under such pilot efforts as EPAs
Pollution Prevention in Permitting Program (P4) and
State innovation activities. Particular interest has
focused on flexible permitting techniques such as plant-
wide emissions limits (e.g., plant-wide applicability
limits, or PALs; potential-to-emit caps). In response
to this need, EPA launched the Flexible Permit
Implementation Review to conduct in-depth reviews
of six flexible permits developed since 1993.
Basic Evaluation Approach: How
did they do it?
The evaluation process comprised five steps, outlined
below.
Step I: Develop the Flexible Permit Review
Framework, which includes specific
evaluation questions grouped into eight
areas of inquiry, to structure the six permit
reviews.
Step II: Develop evaluation criteria to select six
permit pilot programs that would be the
subject of this review.
Step III: Collect data by conducting off-site research
and pre-site visit conference calls.
Step IV: Conduct on-site visits to the permitted
source and the permitting authority to
obtain data necessary to complete the
Flexible Permit Review Framework;
conduct a quality assurance review of data
to ensure the accuracy of information
catalogued in the Flexible Permit Review
Frameworks.
Step V: Prepare Permit Review Reports (findings
and recommendations).
Evaluation Results: What was
learned?
• The flexible permits facilitated and
encouraged emissions reductions and
pollution prevention. The companies with flexible
permits significantly reduced actual plant-wide
emissions and/or emissions per unit of production
(e.g., those sources with at least five years of
implementation experience under the flexible
permits achieved a 35 percent to 85 percent
reduction in annual emissions of volatile organic
compounds, which contribute to the formation of
ground-level ozone). In addition, provisions
allowing advance approval for certain changes
reduced the administrative costs associated with
pollution prevention, making pollution prevention
more attractive for companies to undertake. The
terms of several flexible permits encouraged
pollution prevention through explicit pollution
prevention program, reporting, and performance
requirements.
• The flexible permits worked as intended, assuring
appropriate environmental protection under all
applicable requirements. EPA found that the
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
approaches established in the permits were
sufficient to assure compliance with all applicable
requirements, including those associated with the
advance-approved changes. EPA independently
Approach for this Evaluation
Step I
Develop Flexible Permit Review Framework
Step II
Select Flexible Permit Pilots for Review
Step III
Collect Data
Step IV
Conduct Interviews/On-site Visits and QA of Monitory
Data
StepV
Prepare/Compile Report Findings & Recommendations
-------
verified the ability to determine compliance with
the permits using actual emissions and monitoring
data and procedures required by the permits. In
addition, most of the flexible permits provided
equivalent or greater information available to the
public when compared to conventional permits,
although the flexible permits shifted the timing,
type, and format of information. The flexible
permits typically required more comprehensive and
frequent emissions monitoring, reporting, and
recordkeeping.
• Companies and permitting authorities experienced
significant benefits from the flexible permits.
Companies with flexible permits experienced
significant financial benefits. In most cases, the
flexible permits enabled the companies to respond
to new market opportunities and to save several
hundred hours in staff time needed to negotiate and
prepare individual construction permit applications.
The flexible permits saved State and local
permitting authorities staff time associated with
processing case-by-case construction permit
applications, enabling them to reduce permitting
backlogs and focus resources on higher
environmental priorities. All of the permitting
authorities reported that they "would do it again"
with the particular sources and that they hope to
use flexible permitting approaches with other
appropriate sources again in the future.
Evaluation Outcome: What
happened as a result?
Begun in March 2001, and published in November
2002, the report and its findings are being used: (1) to
inform the NSR Improvement Rulemaking—the final
evaluation report was included as part of the official
docket and was used in confirming that the PALs
emissions caps are workable; (2) to inform an internal
dialogue about the development of the Agency's P4
policy; (3) as guidance for how the Agency should
operate and improve existing and future flexible
permitting pilots; and (4) as a teaching tool for
permitting authorities about flexible permits.
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Policy,
Economics and Innovation
(1807T)
June 2003
EPA-100-F-03-011
------- |