Environmental permitting: the most common mistakes businesses make
For most businesses, environmental permitting is something that was “done” once the decision was issued. In practice, however, the permit lives alongside the business: it has conditions that must be met, expiry dates and obligations that change when the activity changes. Most problems in inspections, financing and transfers are not caused by bad intent, but by mistakes that could easily have been avoided.
We have gathered the most common ones, as we see them in practice.
In brief: how the system works
Every activity is classified into a category, depending on its potential environmental impact:
Category A (A1, A2): activities with significant impacts. An Environmental Impact Assessment and a Decision Approving Environmental Terms (AEPO) are required.
Category B: activities with local, non-significant impacts. They fall under Standard Environmental Commitments (PPD).
The procedure is carried out online, through the Electronic Environmental Register. Separately from permitting, most businesses also have obligations for their waste in the Electronic Waste Register (HMA).
The 7 most common mistakes
1. Wrong classification of the activity
Classification is based on the ministerial classification decision and the capacity thresholds for each activity. A wrong estimate, e.g. of power, capacity or type of production, can lead to the wrong procedure. The mistake usually comes to light later, in an inspection or an expansion, when the cost of correcting it is much higher.
2. Changes to the facility without updating the permit
A new production line, higher capacity, new equipment, different raw materials. Any such change may require an amendment or update of the environmental terms. It is perhaps the most common finding in inspections: the facility has evolved, but the permit has stayed in the past.
3. Expiry without timely renewal
Environmental terms have a specific period of validity. If renewal does not start in time, the business may find itself operating without valid environmental terms, with consequences for inspections, loans and grants.
4. Conditions that exist only on paper
Decisions contain specific conditions: emission and noise measurements, record-keeping, wastewater management, planting, operating limits. Often nobody in the business has read them since the decision was issued. In an inspection, the inspector checks exactly these conditions, one by one.
5. Gaps in waste management
No registration or incomplete entries in the HMA.
An annual report that was not submitted or does not match the actual figures.
Waste handed over to collectors without the required permits.
Wrong European Waste Catalogue (EWC) codes or missing documents for the waste’s journey.
6. Confusion between permits
Environmental permitting is not the same as an installation or operating licence, a building permit or fire safety approval. Many businesses assume that, since they have an operating licence, they are “fine” environmentally too. Each permit has its own requirements and its own deadlines.
7. The file has no “owner”
The consultant who prepared the file has left, the documents are in different places and nobody tracks deadlines. When an inspection, financing or the sale of the business comes along, the file has to be put back together in a hurry.
Summary
Mistake What it can cause How to avoid it
Wrong classification Wrong procedure, repeat permitting Classification check by an expert before submission
Changes without update Operating outside the terms Environmental review before every investment
Expiry Problems in inspections and financing Deadline calendar with early reminders
Conditions only on paper Findings and penalties in inspections List of conditions with an owner and evidence
Gaps in the HMA Discrepancies and penalties Annual check of documents and collectors
Confusion between permits False sense of compliance A single map of all permits
File without an owner Lost time, delays in transactions Organised file and a designated owner
Quick self-check in 5 questions
Do you know when your environmental terms expire?
Is the facility today the same as the one described in the decision?
Do you have a list of all conditions and evidence that they are met?
Does your annual HMA report match the actual documents?
Is there one person responsible for the environmental file?
If you answered “no” or “I don’t know” to even one question, a review is worthwhile.
Compliance as a tool, not a burden
A well-kept environmental file does not only protect against penalties. It speeds up financing and grants, makes transfers easier and forms the basis of an ISO 14001 environmental management system, where conditions and deadlines are tracked automatically, every year. It is also the first step towards credibly demonstrating your environmental performance, for example by measuring circularity under ISO 59020.
Would you like us to review your environmental file?
We carry out a short review of your permitting status and give you a clear list of everything that needs to be put in order.
Book a meeting
See also: Environmental Permitting & Compliance · ISO Standards & Management Systems · Business bio-waste
This article is for information only and does not replace a review of your specific case. The obligations of each facility depend on its classification, its terms and the legislation in force.
