1

Copyright © 2013, the Environmental Council of the States. Permission is granted for our members to copy for state government purposes. 

2013 STATE INNOVATIONS:

AGENCIES ENHANCE OPERATIONS AND OUTREACH

December 2013

By Lia Parisien, Executive Project Manager, Layne Piper, Staff and Research Assistant, 

and Becca Merrifield, Research Intern, Environmental Council of the States 

INTRODUCTION

For more than a decade, ECOS has asked its members to share information on innovative 

programs so that other states might learn from their colleagues’ example. State-developed 

initiatives are solving pressing challenges, both in protecting human health and the environment 

and in enhancing operations within agencies themselves. From incorporating new technologies in 

data tracking and permitting to enhancing communication with the public to promoting 

sustainability, states truly are at the cutting edge. 

ECOS launched the State Program Innovations Awards six years ago to recognize innovations of 

interest to other members. This year ECOS was pleased to receive a dozen impressive 

nominations. In September, the association provided special recognition at its Annual Meeting in 

Crystal City, Virginia to the three winners selected by the ECOS Executive Committee.

Through its ePermitting System, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources has streamlined 

the application process for stormwater construction permits, yielding significant time savings for 

applicants and staff alike and freeing up staff to pursue other environmental protection activities.

Meanwhile, a new public hearing model implemented by the Oregon Department of 

Environmental Quality has bolstered participation and transparency for high-stakes public 

hearings. In another public outreach advance, the Indiana Department of Environmental 

Management has implemented the Institutional Controls Registry using a website of data and 

mapping tools to better protect human health by providing timely data about remediation sites.

These innovation awardees and several other nominees are profiled below. ECOS hopes that the 

information in this report will encourage its members to adopt, adapt, or collaborate on these 

initiatives. The association looks forward to continuing the tradition of forward-thinking 

innovation in 2014. 
2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Winner’s Circle .............................................................................................................................3

Missouri’s ePermitting System – Stormwater Construction Permits ..............................................3

Oregon’s Public Hearing Communications Model..........................................................................4

Indiana’s Institutional Controls Registry.........................................................................................5

Agency Improvement Innovations .............................................................................................7

Maine’s New Sustainability Division ..............................................................................................7

Air Innovations...............................................................................................................................8

Oregon’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory...............................................................................................8

Information Management Innovations......................................................................................10

Indiana’s Combined Sewer Overflow Tracking Project................................................................10

Permitting Innovations................................................................................................................17

South Carolina’s Permit Central ....................................................................................................17

Pennsylvania’s Permit Review Process and Permit Decision Guarantee ......................................18

Waste Innovations........................................................................................................................19

Wisconsin’s Initiative for Sustainable Remediation and Redevelopment.....................................19

Massachusetts’ Diversion of Organic Material from Disposal to Clean Energy and Other 

Beneficial Uses ..............................................................................................................................21

Water Innovations .......................................................................................................................23

Iowa’s Point Source Nutrient Reduction Strategy.........................................................................23

Virginia’s Wetland Condition Assessment Tool ...........................................................................24
3

WINNER’S CIRCLE

Missouri’s ePermitting System – Stormwater Construction Permits

Description of Initiative: 

EPermitting is Missouri’s customized online web application that allows citizens to apply, pay

for, and receive general stormwater construction permits from the Missouri Department of 

Natural Resources (MDNR). General stormwater construction permits are the most common 

permit issued by the MDNR; in some years more than 1,500 have been issued. Applications for 

these permits were formerly sent to five regional MDNR offices where they were processed 

manually using procedures unique to each office. Manual processing included verifying 

application completeness, processing the application fee, data entry into multiple databases, and 

manually typing each permit. Permit processing also included the crucial step of identifying the 

watersheds and water bodies potentially impacted by the construction activity. This manual 

process typically took several days to a few weeks. Because this is the most common permit 

issued by the MDNR, and because applicants had to wait to commence construction until the 

permit was completed, the MDNR sought more efficient ways to issue these permits.

The new ePermitting system allows citizens to obtain a valid stormwater construction general 

permit from the comfort of their home or office in a matter of minutes. It guides users through 

the application process, including an interactive GIS tool that allows applicants to draw a 

polygon representing the construction area on a customized map. The system processes the 

application fee and issues the final permit. Users can immediately print their permit and 

supporting materials, including a map of their construction area. ePermitting also directly 

interfaces with the MDNR’s fees and NPDES databases, eliminating the need for manual and 

duplicative data entry.

The most unique feature of ePermitting is its interactive GIS component. User-friendly tools 

enable applicants to draw the area of land disturbance on a map. The built-in GIS application 

calculates the acreage that will be disturbed, determines the receiving stream and classified 

waterbodies downstream of the construction activity, and identifies the beneficial uses of those 

waterbodies. All of this occurs within a matter of minutes. 

Results to Date:

After a two month phase-in beginning in June 2012, the MDNR now requires all applicants to 

use ePermitting to obtain general stormwater construction permits. Between June 2012 and May

2013, 854 permits were issued through ePermitting. Based on feedback from applicants, the 

average time from initial log on to the system to printing a permit was less than one hour. Based 

on an average of 6 days per application under the old process, this translates to a significant time 

savings for MDNR’s applicants. MDNR staff time savings is also significant, allowing the 

MDNR to direct staff to activities more beneficial to human health and the environment. 

Redirection of staff away from paper processing to more field work, inspections, and compliance 

assistance has yielded beneficial environmental results.
4

Contact:

Kimberly Hoke

IT Policy Director

Missouri Department of Natural Resources

kimberly.hoke@dnr.mo.gov

(573) 751-6621

Oregon’s Public Hearing Communications Model

Description of Initiative: 

Public involvement and transparency are key elements of government. Creating opportunities for 

meaningful involvement in controversial permits or rulemakings can be challenging. With public 

hearings for a controversial coal export facility on the horizon, the Oregon Department of 

Environmental Quality (DEQ) determined that the agency needed a new model for public 

hearings with high public interest. 

Business, citizens, local governments, and environmental groups are deeply invested in the 

outcome of this permitting process. Late last year DEQ held three four-hour evening information 

meetings attended by crowds up to 800. They noted participants’ frustration over waiting all 

evening and not having the opportunity to speak. DEQ decided to take a different approach for 

upcoming public hearings on the permits, determined to provide better opportunities for people 

to participate. The result was a model with multiple ways for citizens and stakeholders to 

participate during DEQ’s public hearing process and a new level of real-time transparency.

DEQ designed a new public hearing model and leveraged existing software, databases, and free 

third-party services to create a cost-effective integrated, online public hearing experience.

Elements of this communication model:

 Online public informational meeting—This gave people the opportunity to review 

information at their own pace, 24/7. Online slideshows that clearly outlined the permits 

that were open for public comment using PowerPoint web apps and Microsoft SkyDrive

provide a smooth and efficient user experience. 

 Web based comment form—DEQ gives the same weight to written and verbal comment. 

The goal was to make it easy for citizens to comment online and attach additional 

documents if desired. The agency created an online comment form and added the extra 

functionality of displaying comments in real-time on the web page. This created a new 

level of transparency and gives citizens the ability to see what other comments have been 

made in real-time. 

 Online registration to give public comment in person—Normally citizens may have to 

spend hours waiting to give comment at high-profile public hearings. For example, 

during three informational meetings for permits related to the Coyote Island Terminal—a 
5

coal export facility—144 comments were received during three separate meetings with a 

combined attendance of over 1,200 people. Attendees waited for hours, and due to time 

constraints only a small number were able to give comment. Various advocates disrupted 

the proceedings and interrupted speakers, many of whom confided that they felt 

intimidated. 

By comparison, public comment hearings used a third-party registration system. The meeting 

structure filled one day, starting at 8 a.m. and ending at 8 p.m. Sessions were broken into twohour time periods with 30 available registration slots plus a limited number of walk-ins. These 

sessions were set up in two locations using three rooms. In one day, this provided 540 open slots 

for public comment. In addition, citizens were assigned a two-hour window to give their 

comment. This structure created more opportunity for DEQ to receive comments and respect 

commenters’ time, and provided a more orderly and less intimidating environment for 

commenters. 

Results to Date:

More than 500 people attended the hearings, and 350 provided in-person comment. The 

proceedings were calm and orderly, and many individuals thanked DEQ staff for the new 

approach. Based on a public engagement survey distributed at the meetings, 65 percent of 

hearing participants agreed that DEQ provided opportunities for them to weigh in on issues, 

compared with about 45 percent for the informational meetings.

While groups rallied outside the facility, there were no disruptions in the hearing rooms even 

though many people brought a great deal of passion to their testimony. News releases directed 

more than 3,000 visitors to the website, and to date, 259 people have commented online. 

Contact:

Joanie Stevens-Schwenger

Outreach and Communications Manager

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

(503) 229-6585 (office)

(971) 563-6662 (cell)

Indiana’s Institutional Controls Registry

Description of Initiative:

The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) Institutional Controls (IC) 

Registry is a management system used to track sites with land use controls due to the presence of 

residual contamination, and to provide notice to local government units, the regulated 

community, developers, and other interested stakeholders of important site information in order 

to protect human health. The registry includes sites in all of the Indiana remediation programs 

including voluntary remediation, leaking underground storage tanks, brownfields, state cleanup, 
6

federal programs, RCRA corrective action, and certain solid waste disposal sites. The IC 

Registry is a publicly accessible, web-based site that uses three interface tools to provide 

information about sites subject to ICs.

A Microsoft Access database provides the foundation of the registry, with fields to track related 

information (address, site-specific restrictions, contaminant type, etc.) A subset of this 

information is provided publically via a PDF format file entitled the “IC Registry Remediation 

Sites Report” on the IDEM website (http://www.in.gov/idem/5959.htm ). A separate summary

report listing solid waste sites with deed notices is available at the same web address. 

The second interface tool, a comprehensive statewide GIS mapping platform called the 

IndianaMAP (http://indianamap.org), contains an IC GIS layer. This layer is viewable by going 

directly to the IndianaMAP website or by using the “view” hyperlink on the “IC Registry

Remediation Sites Report”. The IC GIS data layer shows the location of each IC property either 

through a single point feature or a GIS polygon (created with ArcInfo coordinate geometry 

[COGO] software). Indiana is one of the first states to use polygons to portray the actual areal 

extent of restricted areas.

Finally, the IC Registry is integrated with records residing in the Virtual File Cabinet (VFC), 

Indiana’s web-based document repository. Hyperlinks on the “IC Registry Remediation Sites 

Report” allow users to open and view each original IC for the site (e.g. restrictive covenant, deed 

notice).

IDEM staff continue to improve IC Registry functionality with ongoing initiatives including:

1) replacement of original single point GIS features with newly created COGO GIS polygons as 

staff resources allow; 2) input of solid waste sites with deed notices (with depiction of waste 

boundaries), and 3) co-development of a standard IC flow schema for the Exchange Network 

that may be used for future data sharing initiatives at: (http://www.exchangenetwork.net/dataexchange/ic/) . 

Results to Date:

 More than 1,160 remediation sites, and over 40 solid waste sites, entered in the IC 

registry

 Integration with VFC and state-based GIS map for public accessibility

 Creation of GIS polygons for over 300 sites using COGO software

 Improvement in geospatial accuracy for ICs; prior to initiating COGO quality assurance 

checks there was an approximate 10 percent error rate in submitted geospatial data or 

legal descriptions

Contact:

Nancy Dollar

Technical Environmental Specialist

Indiana Department of Environmental Management

ndollar@idem.IN.gov

(317) 234-4814
7

AGENCY IMPROVEMENT INNOVATIONS

Maine’s New Sustainability Division

Description of Initiative:

In August 2012, the Maine Department of Environmental Protection created a new division to 

undertake a cross-media and multi-program approach to material management. Including 

merging disparate recycling programs and management responsibilities, the goal of this 

innovative new division is to create a team which oversees the implementation of a 

comprehensive, coordinated, and holistic approach to materials management.

Specifically, the Sustainability Division has responsibility for:

 Administering the various product stewardship programs overseen by the department. 

These programs include: electronic wastes; cell phones; mercury thermostats; mercuryadded (fluorescent) lamps; mercury auto switches; dry cell mercuric oxide and 

rechargeable batteries; and unwanted paint (effective 2015);

 Furnishing technical assistance to residents, municipalities, institutions and businesses on 

waste reduction, reuse, recycling and composting opportunities. Currently, a major 

emphasis is being placed on diverting unwanted organics from disposal, with those 

organics sent for use as animal feed or to composting operations or for anaerobic 

digestion;

 Directing the chemical management programs which include the priority chemicals in 

products program and the toxic chemical reduction program; 

 Encouraging the restaurant, lodging, and grocery sectors to participate in and become 

recognized for their sustainability activities through the recently rebranded 

Environmental Leader Program; and 

 Being the department’s resource for greenhouse gas and climate change/climate 

adaptation issues, with a focus on Maine’s strategy for addressing potential impacts.

Results to Date:

A number of the highlights of the recently created Sustainability Division include:

 Aiding several municipalities and institutions, including medical facilities, in designing 

and implementing organic waste composting programs;

 Implementing revisions to the priority chemical law, including the creation of the list of 

chemicals of high concern, and the sales prohibition on infant formula and baby food 

packaging containing intentionally added- Biphenyl A, effective March 1, 2014; 

 Assisting the state’s largest anaerobic digestion operation in identifying and securing 

organic waste; 

 Outreach on adaptation and related challenges and opportunities surrounding severe 

weather incidents;

 Expanding outreach to municipalities and businesses on recovery and recycling of 

fluorescent bulbs, mercury thermostats, and other Universal Waste;
8

 Preparing the 2011 Waste Generation and Disposal Capacity Report and presenting it to 

the Governor and the Legislature in early 2013;

 Beginning work on the update to the state’s five-year Waste Management & Recycling 

Plan;

 Certifying or recertifying more than 35 businesses in the Environmental Leader program; 

and 

 Initiating the toxic use reduction reporting requirements and outreach to regulated 

entities. 

Contact: 

George M. MacDonald

Director of Sustainability Division

Maine Department of Environmental Protection

george.macdonald@maine.gov

(207) 287-2870 (desk)

AIR INNOVATIONS

Oregon’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory

Description of Initiative:

Oregon has pioneered a new and more comprehensive approach to assessing greenhouse gas 

emissions in order to better identify opportunities for, and track progress toward, reducing the 

state’s contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions. This new approach addresses gaps in 

traditional methods of state emissions accounting to help inform policy decisions. In 2007, 

Oregon’s Legislature adopted greenhouse gas reduction goals: to arrest growth and begin to 

reduce emissions by 2010, and to reach a 10 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2020 and a 

75 percent reduction from 1990 levels by 2050. To assess whether the state had met this first 

goal, Oregon agencies (Environmental Quality, Energy and Transportation) collaborated to 

prepare a comprehensive and multi-faceted inventory of emissions that expands upon traditional 

approaches to include worldwide emissions associated with Oregonians’ consumption, and a 

broad estimate of emissions associated with travel by Oregonians and freight serving Oregon’s 

economy. 

Results to Date:

Key findings from Oregon’s greenhouse gas inventory report, Oregon’s Greenhouse Gas 

Emissions Through 2010: In-Boundary, Consumption-Based and Expanded Transportation 

Sector Inventories, include:

 Though emissions from the transportation sector remain the largest source of in-state 

emissions, the residential/commercial sector has become a nearly equal part of the 

traditional inventory.
9

 More than half of the emissions in the consumption-based inventory occur in other states 

and countries in order to make goods and services that Oregon imports for consumption. 

 Freight and air travel are a growing part of Oregonians’ transportation emissions, as 

emissions from these travel segment have increased while emissions from passenger 

vehicles have recently begun to decline. 

The recently published1inventory of Oregon’s greenhouse gas emissions represents the next step 

in the evolution of greenhouse gas accounting in Oregon by including two important changes to 

inventories performed in previous years.

First, the accuracy of the traditional inventory of emissions within Oregon was improved by 

transitioning from an entirely "top down" modeling estimate to a primarily "bottom up" 

aggregation of data reported by the emission sources themselves. These reported emissions are 

derived from actual fuel volumes and electricity supplied in Oregon reported by the state’s fuel 

suppliers and electric utilities, and emissions calculated by the state’s largest industrial emitters.

Second, the report evaluates emissions through three different lenses: 1) the aforementioned 

inventory of emissions from in-state sources and electricity usage, 2) worldwide emissions 

associated with satisfying Oregonians’ consumption, and 3) an expanded examination of 

emissions from the transportation sector. To our knowledge, Oregon is the first state to include in 

its emissions inventory an estimate of global emissions resulting from local consumption, and to 

publish a greenhouse gas inventory report using more than one accounting approach. This 

innovation is important because no single inventory tells the full story of how Oregon contributes 

to global greenhouse gas emissions, and none is necessarily the "right" method for all contexts. 

Ultimately, greenhouse gas inventories are intended to inform actions to reduce our contribution 

to greenhouse gas emissions. All three inventories help identify emission reduction opportunities 

for Oregon residents, businesses, government agencies, and policymakers. Multiple perspectives 

provide a more comprehensive understanding of how Oregon contributes to emissions, which 

gives us a broader range of ideas for how we can reduce these emissions. 

Including out-of-state emissions alongside emissions from in-state sources has helped address 

criticism that state environmental policies may unfairly penalize in-state businesses by counting 

their emissions while ignoring the impacts of foreign competition. The greater breadth of sources 

and activities evaluated by the multiple inventories has been used to inform a variety of recent 

state climate planning, including the Oregon Global Warming Commission’s Interim Roadmap 

to 2020, the Governor’s 10 year Energy Action Plan, the Oregon Transportation Commission’s 

Statewide Transportation Strategy, and the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission’s 

Materials Management 2050 Vision and Framework for Action.

 

1

The report is available online here: http://www.oregon.gov/DEQ/AQ/Pages/Greenhouse-Gas-InventoryReport.aspx
10

Contact:

Andy Ginsburg

Air Quality Administrator

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

(503) 229-5397 (office)

(503) 572-7195 (mobile)

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT INNOVATIONS

Indiana’s Combined Sewer Overflow Tracking Project

Description of Initiative: 

The Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) group of the Indiana Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM)/Office of Water Quality (OWQ)/Permits Branch developed a database 

module to track Long Term Control Plan (LTCP) milestones, internal IDEM milestones, 

compliance reviews, information related to CSO outfalls, and general information related to each 

CSO community. 

This database is in “TEMPO” – Tools for Environmental Management and Protection 

Organizations. TEMPO is a software application created by CGI Technology and Solutions Inc.,

which has been customized by IDEM to meet the needs of the CSO group. 

Information logged in the CSO TEMPO Database follows:

 LTCP CSO tasks that must be completed by each community to meet the requirements of 

the LTCP are entered into the database and can be tracked. These “tasks” include the 

LTCP implementation tasks, LTCP approval/completion dates, and various other 

milestone dates. Each task has a description of what activity must be completed by the 

permittee as well as the required start date and due date. The completion date for the 

tasks will be entered by IDEM staff when the communities provide notification that each 

task is finished. 

 General information related to each CSO community that frequently needs to be 

searched, such as the type of enforceable document through which the LTCP schedule is 

enforced (i.e., agreed order, state judicial agreement, or federal consent decree), NPDES 

permit number, associated Virtual File Cabinet (VFC) document number, LTCP design 

goals, and major/minor facility designation.

 CSO outfall information for each CSO community, including receiving stream, basin, 

sub-basin, watershed, county, latitude/longitude, active/inactive status, treated/untreated 

status, etc. 

 Compliance reviews completed by the CSO staff. These reviews include audits and

compliance reviews of fully implemented LTCPs to ensure they achieve their design 

goals. 
11

Results to Date:

Various reports can be generated using the information that has been entered into the database.

The current reports include:

 Compliance Status Report: This report can be used to report the Compliance Status for 

CSO communities. The report can account for both types of compliance reviews and can 

be manipulated to provide data for various date ranges and other screening criteria. The 

report example below is a Compliance Status Report for all compliance reviews 

completed in 2012.

 Document Attributes Report: This report can retrieve a list of facilities by enforceable 

document (agreed order, state judicial agreement, federal consent decree), or can search 

LTCP design goals, associated VFC document numbers, or NPDES permit numbers. 

This report has the ability to accommodate other general information as the program 

moves forward. The example report below shows all agreed orders related to LTCPs.
12

 Metrics Report: Generates a report which lists the total CSO communities, total approved 

LTCPs, total LTCPs remaining to be approved, and total LTCPs fully implemented.

Frequently, upper management is asked to provide status reports on CSO related topics.

The Metrics Report provides information that is readily obtainable without the need to 

query staff. 
13

 Outfalls Report: Filters on this report can be set to provide a wide range of information 

regarding CSO outfalls. Based on the data logged in TEMPO (as indicated above), this 

report can generate location, waterbody information, active status, treatment status, etc. 

by community, county, receiving stream, or watershed. This report is particularly useful 

for public information requests. 

The example report below shows all CSOs and related CSO statuses in Madison County.
14

 WAL (Work Activity Log) Tasks Reports: This report is the most used for CSO program 

activities. The filters on this report provide a limitless range of information. For 

example, this report can provide overdue tasks for each community, can provide 

completed tasks for each community, can search a common task among all communities, 

can give “universe” of tasks for the whole CSO program, etc. This report is being used 

monthly to keep track of which communities may be behind in their LTCP 

implementation. This report also is used to track completion of internal tasks, such as 

audits and LOC reviews, for staff scheduling purposes. Another useful way to use the 

report is to search a specific type of project. 

Below is a typical report generated at the end of each month by each project manager to

determine which facilities are behind schedule.
15

Possible Future Capabilities:

Various future enhancements to the IDEM CSO Tracking database are possible. The TEMPO 

software application is Oracle-based and can be interfaced with the EPA Integrated Compliance 

Information System (ICIS) system. This would enable future data exchange between TEMPO 

and ICIS. 

Also, the outfall information in TEMPO contains geographic coordinates that allows integration 

with ArcGIS to display maps containing CSO related information. This part of the program is 

currently under development. 
16

This example corresponds to the Outfall Report above, showing the CSOs in Madison County

with their related status. 

Contact:

Holly Zurcher

Indiana Department of Environmental Management

hzurcher@idem.in.gov

(317) 234-2122

PERMITTING INNOVATIONS
17

South Carolina’s Permit Central

Description of Initiative:

Many customers wonder which permits they will need to open or expand their business, as well 

as how long the process will take. The South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental 

Control (DHEC) now offers new customer service tools to aid the permitting journey.

Customers can see the full picture up front using the DHEC Permit Central website 

(http://www.scdhec.gov/PermitCentral). The website’s interactive questionnaire uses customer 

answers to determine which permits they will likely need. The questionnaire poses questions 

based on the customer’s business interest. Permit Central also includes timeframe estimates, tips 

for speeding the permitting process, application forms, and a database that allows customers to 

check the status of their application. It also links customers with the DHEC Permit Central 

Team. The multi-media Permit Central Team helps customers draw a reliable roadmap for their 

permitting processes. For citizens, the Permit Central website provides valuable information such 

as public notice opportunities or how to apply for permits to build your own pond.

Permit Central was tested with businesses, consultants, and economic development 

representatives before going live. The new tools were launched by the DHEC Director and South 

Carolina Governor at a press conference in March 2013. Customers can get online information 

on their own timetable and also meet with the Permit Team to receive tailored information 

specific to their business plans. These tools help make the environmental and health permitting 

processes as smooth as possible. 

Results to Date:

Permit Central has served many customers since the March 2013 launch. Examples of Permit 

Central successes include the following:

 In three months, Permit Central has hosted 14 meetings and responded to 30 phone calls 

and 17 emails. Each response usually includes input from several DHEC employees, 

delivered in one comprehensive response.

 In three months, the Permit Central website has been viewed over 21,700 times.

 DHEC employees have expressed that Permit Central makes their job easier. The 

employee answers the direct customer question and then offers the Permit Central service 

for related, comprehensive media issues. 

 Customer feedback to date includes: 

"I appreciate how quickly you responded to my question. I wish all customer service was 

as responsive as you."

“I am writing today to thank you for the impressive and responsive meeting that was held 

today to help my company determine our path forward with exciting growth opportunities 

in the Charleston area and the Upstate.”
18

“I am extremely impressed with your team and the way they opened their doors for us 

today. Their ‘customer service’ attitude will go a long way in bringing new business to 

our great state of South Carolina.”

Contact:

Shelly Wilson

Federal Facilities Liaison

South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control

wilsonmd@dhec.sc.gov

(803) 898-3138

Pennsylvania’s Permit Review Process and Permit Decision Guarantee

Description of Initiative:

By signing Executive Order 2012-11 last July, Gov. Tom Corbett charged the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) with developing and implementing a policy that 

results in more timely permitting decisions, provides clear expectations for applicants to improve 

the quality of applications, establishes performance measures for DEP’s permit review staff, and 

implements electronic permitting tools to enhance internal operations. 

To implement the directive of Executive Order 2012-11, DEP issued the “Policy for 

Implementing the [DEP] Permit Review Process and Permit Decision Guarantee” which: 

 Established a standardized review process for permit applications;

 Provided certain and predictable review times for applicants who submit complete, 

technically adequate applications that address all regulatory and statutory requirements;

 Articulated clearly and concisely expectations for applicants that result in complete, 

technically adequate applications that address all regulatory and statutory requirements;

 Established expectations of DEP staff aimed at achieving greater efficiency, clarity, and 

consistency across regions and programs;

 Improved the DEP’s internal tracking and coordination of permit applications 

To create a robust and effective policy, DEP conducted extensive outreach with members of the 

regulated community, local governments, and the public. In all, the department held 14 different 

webinars focusing on different types of permits, reaching more than 1,650 people.

Results to Date:

Just six months of implementation indicates success of the new policy as DEP is becoming more 

efficient in issuing protective and timely permits. 

Increased Predictability (measured in the percentage of permits meeting target and/or guarantee):

 Permit Review Process – 97 percent 

 Permit Decision Guarantee – 96 percent 
19

Specifically, when compared to the previous permitting structure, the following increases in 

efficiency have been measured for those permits included in the Permit Decision Guarantee: 

Improved Efficiency (measured in fewer average days to process):

 Mining—56 percent 

 Oil and Gas—10 percent 

 Waste, Air, Radiation and Remediation (WARR)—35 percent

 Water —45 percent 

During this time, 11,096 permit applications were processed under the Permit Review Process,

and 6,243 permit applications were processed under the Permit Decision Guarantee.

To learn more about the Permit Decision Guarantee and DEP's revised permitting process, visit 

www.depweb.state.pa.us and click on the Permit Decision Guarantee link. 

Contact:

Hayley L. Book

Policy Director

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

hbook@pa.gov

(717) 772-3612

WASTE INNOVATIONS

Wisconsin’s Initiative for Sustainable Remediation and Redevelopment 

Description of Initiative:

Building upon the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Remediation and 

Redevelopment Program’s history of applying innovation to a strong foundation of protecting 

public health and the environment as well as promoting economic vitality, the Wisconsin 

Initiative for Sustainable Remediation & Redevelopment (WISRR) Team was created. This 

team, led by a dedicated Sustainability Team Leader, meets monthly and is charged with 

promoting environmentally and socioeconomically responsible practices. 

Since its inception in 2009, WISRR has changed the way cleanup sites are viewed by promoting 

the applicability of sustainable technologies in site remediation and encouraging the use of green 

concepts throughout the various stages of site cleanup and redevelopment. Saving energy, 

reducing greenhouse gases, and minimizing waste through reuse and recycling are all aspects of 

WISRR. 

To assist WISRR in meeting its charge, the team created the Green and Sustainable Remediation 

Manual. The manual provides a framework for project managers, consultants, responsible 
20

parties, and others to incorporate green and sustainable concepts into the cleanup of 

contaminated sites.

Results to Date:

 In 2010, The WISRR Team’s showcase project became reality with the installation of 44 

solar panels on a former 23-acre Superfund site in Middleton, WI (called Refuse 

Hideaway Landfill). The solar array, which is capable of generating 12,000 kilowatt 

hours per year, is offsetting 46% of the energy used to power the remediation systems. If 

this trend continues, the DNR’s return of investment will be 23 years, which is 7 years 

earlier than initial 30 year projections. Project results have served as a national model that 

EPA shares with other states promoting renewable energy on contaminated lands.

 Green and Sustainable Remediation requirements have been incorporated into revised 

state cleanup rules that were expected to be published in late 2013.

 As mentioned above, the WISRR Team created the Green and Sustainable Remediation 

Manual: A Practical Guide to Green and Sustainable Remediation in the State of 

Wisconsin, to help stakeholders evaluate and implement green and sustainable 

remediation practices during site cleanup. 

 In the spring of 2012 the WISRR Team and EPA Greener Cleanups staff trained DNR 

staff on the use of the GSR manual and other green and sustainable practices. The team 

plans to host external training once the state cleanup rule revisions are published. 

 The WISRR Teams Site Specific Sustainability Analyses document evaluates potential 

Green and Sustainable Remediation practices at four Wisconsin sites and provides 

recommendations that could be incorporated at other sites throughout the country.

 The WISRR Team created the following quick reference guides to provide specific offthe-shelf examples of Green and Sustainable practices: 

o Greener Remediation Optimization Techniques

o Greener Site Investigation Techniques

The guides have been extremely helpful during Project Manager and Responsible Party

discussions. 

 Participation in External Workgroups: WISRR Team members share lessons learned and 

Best Management Practices with a variety of workgroups in which they are active 

members:

o Sustainable Remediation Forum (SURF)

o ASTM Greener Cleanups Workgroup

o EPA/States Region 5 Greener Cleanup Workgroup

For more information, please visit http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/brownfields/rrprogram.html (Greener 

Cleanups tab).

Contact:

Tom Coogan

WISRR Team Leader

Thomas.Coogan@wi.gov

(608) 267-7560
21

Massachusetts’ Diversion of Organic Material from Disposal to Clean Energy and Other 

Beneficial Uses

Description of Initiative:

Massachusetts is implementing a nation-leading program to convert a solid waste problem into a 

clean energy solution. Through a combination of regulatory mandates, financial assistance, and 

the state leading by example, Massachusetts is poised to divert 450,000 tons/year of organic 

waste that would otherwise be burned in incinerators or buried in landfills. Instead, this material 

will go to composting facilities, or even better to anaerobic digestion facilities which create a 

clean biogas that can be used for electricity and heat. This initiative will lower greenhouse gases, 

boost the state’s renewable energy production, and create jobs in a new sustainable industry.

Massachusetts’ Solid Waste Master Plan sets a goal to quadruple the diversion of organic 

material from disposal in landfills and incinerators from the current level (100,000 tons per year 

diverted) to 450,000 tons per year by 2020. Once diverted from the trash, much of this organic 

material will go to anaerobic digesters, an emerging technology that generates renewable biogas 

and creates beneficial byproducts (for animal bedding, compost, and fertilizer) while reducing 

the potential of nuisance odors. The Commonwealth also has a goal to have three anaerobic 

digestion facilities on state land and multiple private facilities either operating in active 

permitting in 2014, and to increase energy production from aerobic and anaerobic digestion to 50 

megawatts (375 GWh/y) by 2020. To achieve these goals, the Massachusetts Department of 

Environmental Protection (MassDEP) has developed and is implementing a multi-pronged 

strategic Organics Action Plan.

The Organics Action Plan includes initiatives that are collecting and analyzing data, building a 

robust and efficient collection and diversion infrastructure, establishing increased processing 

capacity and markets, and improving the Commonwealth’s regulatory framework for managing 

organic materials that have been diverted from waste and for harvesting clean power and other 

beneficial uses from this material. Key components of this effort include: established regulations 

designed to foster safe siting of facilities that beneficially reuse source-separated organics 

including anaerobic digestion; proposing a ban on disposal of organic material in waste by large 

commercial generators that will preserve dwindling landfill capacity as well as create a valuable 

feedstock for anaerobic digestion; proactively siting three anaerobic digestion (AD) facilities on 

state lands (including using food waste generated at a university and two prisons to create lowercost clean energy that can be used onsite); providing technical and financial assistance for waste 

management and diversion to large commercial generators of organic waste; and making lowinterest loan funds available to construct AD operations, building a strong market for this 

technology in Massachusetts.

A central component of this strategy is the proposed waste ban, which would apply to any 

business or institution that disposes more than one ton of organic material per week. MassDEP 

expects this ban to increase recycling by 350,000 tons of organic waste each year, capturing 

valuable materials for renewable energy generation and soil enrichment, generating jobs and 

economic development in Massachusetts, and supporting improved materials management at 
22

farms and wastewater treatment plants. A draft waste ban regulation was out for public comment 

as of mid-2013, and MassDEP has proposed to have the ban take effect in summer 2014. 

Results to Date:

 Revised solid waste regulations for safely siting organics processing facilities have been 

promulgated (2012)

 100,000 tons per year of organic material is currently being diverted from disposal to 

beneficial uses

 More than 300 supermarkets have established food waste diversion programs

 Two farm-based AD facilities are operating, and proponents are developing plans for 10-

12 additional facilities

 Identified three sites on state land to be suitable for new AD facilities, and completed 

feasibility studies for two of the three, and planned to issue a request for proposals 

seeking private developers to run these 

 An increased number of haulers are offering organics collection services to generators

 Nearly 30 compost sites are currently approved to take commercial-scale food waste

 Developed robust data on commercial food waste generation and management

 Created the “RecyclingWorks in Massachusetts” program to provide information and 

direct technical assistance to businesses and institutions

 Established broad support for the proposed ban and developed guidance and assistance 

materials to help businesses comply, including more than a dozen case studies on 

successful programs

Actions Completed and Ongoing:

 Issued draft waste ban regulations in July 2013; to be effective July 2014

 Providing more than $6 million in funding to support the growth of AD (in concert with 

the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources and Massachusetts Clean Energy

Center)

 Providing municipal grants to support the growth of food waste composting and 

municipal collection systems

 Developing guidance for local health officials on managing food waste collection

Contact:

John Fischer

Business Recycling Branch Chief, Bureau of Waste Prevention

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP)

John.Fischer@state.ma.us

(617) 292-5632
23

WATER INNOVATIONS

Iowa’s Point Source Nutrient Reduction Strategy

Description of Initiative:

The Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy is a pragmatic approach for reducing nutrient discharges

from the state’s largest wastewater treatment plants together with targeted best management 

practices designed to reduce contributions from nonpoint sources.

The point source portion of the nutrient reduction strategy established a process to achieve 

significant reductions in the amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus discharged to Iowa’s rivers and 

streams by the largest industrial and municipal wastewater treatment plants. Major point sources

will be required to assess the feasibility and reasonableness of reducing the amounts of nitrogen 

and phosphorus discharged to Iowa surface waters. Practices determined to be feasible and 

affordable will be required to be implemented.

A total of 102 major municipal facilities serve the wastewater treatment needs of 55-60 percent

of Iowa’s population and treat more than 80 percent of the volume of all wastewater handled by 

Iowa cities. Twenty-nine major and seventeen minor industries also have the potential to

discharge significant amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus into Iowa waters.

For the first time, discharge permits issued to these 148 facilities will require implementation of 

technically and economically feasible process changes, primarily additional biological treatment 

to remove nutrients. These changes are designed to achieve at least a two-thirds reduction in the 

amount of nitrogen and a three-fourths reduction in the amount of phosphorus from levels 

currently discharged by these facilities.

The process is unique and innovative. In the traditional approach limits are established in a 

permit and treatment facilities are constructed to meet those limits. In this approach, nutrient 

reduction facilities are constructed, sampling is performed and technology-based limits are 

developed using actual treatment plant performance data.

This strategy has the potential to reduce by at least 11,000 tons per year the amount of nitrogen 

and 2,170 tons per year the amount of phosphorus discharged by municipal facilities alone. 

These figures represent a 4% reduction in nitrogen and a 16% reduction in phosphorus from the 

estimated statewide amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus entering Iowa waters from both point 

and nonpoint sources.

This approach is estimated to have a total present worth cost (includes capital costs and operation 

and maintenance cost over a 20-year period) of approximately $1.5 billion with an annual cost of

$114 million. 
24

Results to Date:

Iowa’s Nutrient Reduction Strategy was recently finalized in May 2013 after nearly two years of 

development. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits are already being 

developed with requirements to implement the strategy. Several treatment plants that were 

already under construction while the strategy was being developed voluntarily included nutrient 

removal processes in their design. 

Contact:

Adam Schnieders

NPDES Program Supervisor

Iowa Department of Natural Resources 

adam.schnieders@dnr.iowa.gov

(515) 281-7409

Virginia’s Wetland Condition Assessment Tool

Description of Initiative:

Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Office of Wetland and Stream 

Protection, in collaboration with the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, has developed a 

wetland monitoring and assessment protocol to provide an ongoing assessment of the status of 

the Commonwealth’s wetland resources and the success of both wetland regulatory and 

voluntary programs. 

The assessment protocol consists of a three-tiered approach using comprehensive coverage of all 

mapped non-tidal wetlands to achieve a GIS based analysis of remotely sensed information 

(Level I). Level I scores wetland types based on the habitat and water quality stressors 

associated with surrounding land use types. Levels II and III are intended to calibrate and 

validate the model that is used for Level I analysis. By having a statistically validated tool that 

measures wetland quality as a function of habitat and water quality parameters, DEQ permit staff 

will be able to make better permit decisions. Further, DEQ will be able to measure how well we 

are protecting the function of our more vulnerable wetlands (i.e., isolated wetlands), by

comparing the condition of wetland habitat and water quality parameters as a function of the 

assessment scoring over time. 

Results to Date: 

The data collected from the assessment have been compiled into an online GIS-based wetland 

data viewer identified as the Wetland Condition Assessment Tool (WetCAT). One unique aspect 

of WetCAT is its online interactive user interface, which allows users to overlay data such as 

previously permitted impacts and impaired waters and run various geoprocessing tools to 

visualize cumulative impacts, downstream flow, and upgradient drainage areas. 

The goal of WetCAT is to support DEQ’s regulatory decision-making, allow reporting of 

wetland condition, and provide information for policy development. In particular, information 

derived from monitoring will be used to:
25

 Report ambient wetland conditions in Virginia's Clean Water Act Integrated 

305(b)/303(d) report; 

 Evaluate wetland impacts from proposed projects within a watershed context during 

permit review as part of Virginia's regulatory program; 

 Evaluate the performance of wetland restoration and other compensatory wetland 

mitigation in replacing wetland acreage and function, including changes in wetland 

condition over time based upon surrounding landscape changes and maturity of the 

mitigation site; and

 Evaluate the cumulative impacts of wetland loss and restoration in watersheds relative to 

ambient ecological conditions and water quality management needs.

One of the advantages of the Virginia protocol is a comprehensive assessment of secondary

impacts to wetland resources arising from activities that do not directly impact wetlands. This 

information can guide policy discussions on general land use management, stormwater, and land 

use planning. Linking decisions in these areas to wetland policy will be essential to achieving our 

statutory requirement of no net loss of wetland acreage and function, and aid local governments 

with planning tools at a watershed level.

Additional data sets and GIS layers will allow Virginia to continue to develop a wetland data 

viewer for use by regulatory agencies and the general public. Our success will be measured by an 

increasing trend in the statistically-reliable Level I protocol and a decreasing trend in cumulative 

wetland impacts over time. 

Contacts:

David L. Davis, CPWD, PWS

Director, Office of Wetlands & Stream Protection

dave.davis@deq.virginia.gov

(804) 698-4105

Michelle M. Henicheck, PWS

Senior Wetland Ecologist

michelle.henicheck@deq.virginia.gov

(804) 698-4007