For private sector businesses operating under environmental permits, the regulatory landscape is changing. Understanding the current system, its challenges and the direction of reform is essential to managing risk and protecting commercial opportunity.

The environmental permitting regime governs a vast range of industrial and commercial activities in England and Wales, including: waste management, water discharge, industrial emissions, mining and quarrying, energy from waste, radioactive substances. For many private sector businesses, holding an environmental permit is not optional - it is a legal requirement for operation, and compliance should be an essential part of day-to-day operations. 

The regime is governed primarily by the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016 (the EPR). The Environment Agency (EA) is the principal regulator for most permitted activities in England, although local authorities also have a key role to play in regulating certain types of facilities. 

The permitting regime has played a vital role in protecting public health and the environment, and the public sector regulators operate it under considerable and growing demand. That pressure - driven by an expanding workload and an increasingly complex pipeline of applications - has prompted both the government and the EA in particular to identify the need for structural reform, and for businesses that rely on environmental permits, understanding the direction of travel is now a live commercial and regulatory issue.

What is an environmental permit and who needs one?

An environmental permit is a legal authorisation to carry out an activity that has the potential to pollute or otherwise harm the environment. Activities requiring a permit include: 

• Industrial installations and combustion plants.
• Waste operations.
• Water discharge and groundwater activities.
• Mining waste operations.
• Radioactive substances activities.
• Solvent emission activities. 

Many of these activities also require compliance with Best Available Techniques (BAT) standards, which are central to how permit conditions are set.

The sectors most heavily affected include cement works, quarries, and mineral extraction (subject to complex multi-media permits); foundries and metal processing; chemical manufacturing; waste operations from landfill through to advanced recycling; energy from waste and biomass; water and sewerage; and logistics and storage operations involving hazardous substances. For all of these, the permit not only needs to be applied for and granted - it requires ongoing compliance, monitoring, and reporting through any changes to operations, ownership, or closure.

Why the current system is under strain

The EPR regime has played an important role in improving environmental standards over the past two decades. The EA itself has acknowledged that its permitting service has been under considerable capacity pressure, and both the government and the EA have identified the need for structural reform.

Delays and complexity

Permit timelines have been a persistent challenge, and one the EA has been working hard to address. During a period of acute resource pressure, determinations have been taking far longer than intended - many applicants experienced total wait times exceeding a year for complex or novel activities, and we are seeing applications for variations and transfers also take significant time to be assessed and determined. 

The EA has made sustained progress since 2022, expanding its permitting workforce by more than 150 staff, introducing early validation of applications, and achieving a reported 20% improvement in throughput, with backlogs halved. The EA's 2025-2026 business plan sets an ambitious target of processing 95% of permits within agreed timescales. The pipeline of net zero infrastructure and novel technology applications continues to grow, however, and sustained structural reform will be needed to keep pace with demand.

Proportionality and the planning interface

The regime's procedural requirements do not always reflect the risk posed by the activity in question. Some operators report that standard rules permits are too narrow or outdated for their specific activities, meaning relatively straightforward operations require bespoke permits with the full burden of documentation and engagement - something the reform agenda is directly intended to address. 

Separately, planning permission and an environmental permit are separate legal authorisations granted by different bodies under different statutory frameworks. This is a structural feature of the regulatory and legislative landscape, and one the government is considering how to streamline - particularly for major infrastructure projects. We repeatedly see difficulties arising for businesses trying hard to comply with all requirements - but finding it a challenge to manage two wholly separate regimes, for example when a variation in a planning permission may also require a change in the environmental permit.

The reform agenda

An independent review by economist Dan Corry, published in 2025, concluded that environmental regulations - including permitting - were "outdated, inconsistent and highly complex".

The review called for smart reforms to simplify, digitise, and rationalise the system. The government is now actively considering a wide range of reforms, including:

• Faster and more integrated standard-setting, with a view to reducing the time and cost of updating requirements across sectors. 
• Expanded EA responsibility for BAT, giving the EA a more direct domestic role in setting standards post-Brexit.
• More proportionate routes for lower-risk activities, expanding exemptions and standard rules permits.
• Regulatory sandboxes for new technology, allowing innovators to trial novel processes under close EA supervision with modified permit conditions. 
• Closer integration of air, water and land controls, moving towards a more coherent site-level permitting framework. 

The EA has already responded to the Corry review. In 2025 it launched the Accelerated Permitting Transformation (APT) Programme, working with Defra to modernise the permitting system. 

The EA has also introduced a Priority Tracked Service for complex applications - already supporting hydrogen and carbon capture schemes - and published new Guidance for Emerging Techniques through its dedicated HCCUS Programme. These are substantive improvements, and operators in those sectors should be aware of them and make use of them.

What reform means for permit holders

Opportunities

A reformed regime could deliver faster permit determination times, greater certainty and predictability, and a more proportionate process for lower-risk activities. For capital-intensive projects, permit delay is a cost of capital issue and a risk to investor confidence - any material reduction in timescales will have a direct commercial impact. 

A reformed regime could also improve the prospects for permitting the technologies that the net zero transition demands - advanced recycling, carbon capture, energy storage, hydrogen production - many of which do not fit neatly into the existing framework.

Risks

Reform carries risk alongside opportunity, and businesses that are not prepared may be caught out by the pace of change and the specific changes that may be introduced. Several points warrant particular attention for operators in capital-intensive, permit-dependent sectors:

• Permit reviews: Any revision to BAT standards may trigger a review of existing permit conditions, and the EA has power to vary a permit where it considers this necessary. A change in BAT expectations in sectors such as cement, foundries, chemical manufacturing, or waste operations could require significant investment in plant or process modification. Operators cannot assume that a permit held today reflects the conditions that will apply in five years' time.

• Increased monitoring obligations: Integration of air, water and land controls, and closer oversight of novel activities, are likely to bring increased monitoring, reporting, and information disclosure requirements - even where the procedural route to obtaining a permit becomes simpler. The direction of travel on environmental transparency is clearly towards more, not less.

• Regulatory sandboxes: The sandbox concept is genuinely innovative, but it introduces legal uncertainty. The government has published guidance on what it means by ‘Regulatory sandboxes’. A core principle is that if harm occurs during a trial, the allocation of legal liability is untested. The framework governing sandbox participation will need to be developed carefully, and operators should take advice before engaging – but this is something that may be explored in the context of environmental permitting.

• Maintaining environmental standards: The EA must retain clear powers to intervene rapidly if an exempt activity causes or threatens harm. The government has committed to maintaining environmental safeguards throughout the reform process, and the design of any expanded exemptions regime will be critical to ensuring that commitment is delivered in practice.

Updated EA guidance: A practical note

Alongside the reform agenda, the EA consulted in late 2025 on revised H5 Site Condition Report (SCR) guidance, which would replace the 2013 SCR guidance and Regulatory Guidance Note 9 on Surrender. 

The proposed changes clarify what operators must demonstrate on application, during operation, and on surrender, to evidence the ‘no deterioration’ requirement under the EPR. Mandatory SCRs would be extended to standard rules waste operations and A1 installations. These changes have direct cost and timing implications for any operator approaching permit surrender, and early legal advice is recommended. We are still awaiting the government’s formal response to the consultation and specific details on changes.

Practical recommendations for environmental permitting

• Audit your current permit position: Understand exactly what your permit conditions require, which BAT standards apply, and where your current performance sits relative to those standards. Don’t wait for a review to be triggered.
• Monitor the reform agenda actively: The government's consultation and the EA's APT Programme are live processes. Operators in high-impact sectors - cement, quarries, foundries, chemical processes, waste operations - need to be engaged with them, directly or through sector bodies.
• Engage with the EA early on any planned changes: Early pre-application engagement - and use of the Priority Tracked Service where relevant - remains the most effective way to manage timing and cost. Where novel technologies are involved, explore the EA's existing pathways for emerging techniques.
• Take advice on the interface with planning: If you are developing new or expanded facilities, the interaction between the planning and permitting regimes should be addressed at the outset. Parallel engagement with both reduces the risk of permitting issues arising after significant planning investment has been made.
• Review your SCR position and permit surrender strategy: If you hold permits for A1 installations or standard rules waste operations, or if sites are approaching the end of their operational life, review your position against the proposed H5 guidance changes now. The EA's expectations on exit are demanding, and the costs of orderly surrender are almost always lower than the consequences of an unmanaged exit.
• Take advice on director and officer exposure: The consequences of permit non-compliance are not limited to the corporate entity. As the pace of change in permit obligations increases, the risk of inadvertent non-compliance increases with it. Directors and officers should ensure their internal compliance governance reflects both the current and anticipated permit position. 

Conclusion

The environmental permitting regime plays a vital role in England and Wales, but both the government and the EA recognise that it must change - to become faster, more proportionate, and better suited to supporting the net zero transition and industrial innovation. The EA is already making progress through the APT Programme and targeted service improvements, and structural reform is now actively in train.

For businesses that rely on permits to operate, the reform process brings genuine opportunity alongside real risk. Permit reviews, revised BAT expectations, new monitoring obligations, and an uncertain transitional timetable are all live considerations. The businesses best placed to navigate this transition will be those that understand their current permit position, engage with the reform agenda now, and take early advice on the implications for their operations.

We advise private sector clients across the full range of environmental permitting matters, including permit applications, variations and surrender, BAT compliance, EA engagement, enforcement defence, and director-level advice on personal liability risk.

Browne Jacobson at the ESS Expo 2026

Browne Jacobson is hosting the ESS Environmental Law Theatre at the ESS Expo 2026, taking place at the NEC Birmingham on 16 and 17 September 2026. The two-day programme includes dedicated sessions on environmental permitting, regulatory reform and broader environmental law issues facing businesses today. Attendance is free of charge. If you would like to attend or to speak with one of our environmental lawyers at the event, please contact us.

This article is intended as general information and does not constitute legal advice. Specific advice should be sought in relation to particular circumstances.