Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting for Transportation Projects Preliminary Report Keenan Konopaski, JLARC Analyst Gary Walvatne, TechLaw, Inc. August 5, 2005

1 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Complex Environmental Work, But on Small Portion of Projects 42 Months 1% 26 Months 2% 15 Hours 97% Environmental DocumentationPermitting on Transportation Projects

2August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Scope of Review Two elements to this review: 1.Analyze the environmental documentation and permitting processes to identify contributors to delays and prioritize streamlining efforts. 2.Assess recent changes in the regulation of drainage ditches and stormwater runoff.

3August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Objectives of Review 1.Evaluate the regulatory requirements for a set of major projects to clarify the regulatory business process 2.Assess the applicability of successful streamlining efforts to various environmental requirements for major transportation projects

4August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Objectives of Review (cont) 3.Analyze recent project histories to identify the root causes of schedule delay 4.Determine the extent to which the regulatory goals concerning drainage ditches and stormwater runoff have changed over time, and identify the impacts of changes

5August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Focus of Review Prepare environmental documentation and submit applications Begin coordination with utilities/local government Determine right of way requirements and make offers Construction Open to traffic/user Advertise PS&E completed Finalize design work Permits approved Settlement/ adjudication reached Agreement/ plans secured Project definition complete Begin design

6August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting 42 Months 1% 26 Months 2% 15 Hours 97% Environmental DocumentationPermitting on Transportation Projects Which Projects did We Review?

7August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Ten Sample Projects 1.I-90, Spokane, Build Lanes from Argonne Road to Sullivan Road 2.SR31, Metaline Falls to International Border 3.SR 16, Tacoma, HOV Improvements, Union Avenue to Jackson Avenue 4.SR161, Milton to Federal Way, Jovita Blvd. To S 360th Widening 5.SR 522, Woodinville to Monroe, Fales Road – Echo Lake Road Interchange 6.SR 240, Richland, I-182 to Columbia Center Boulevard 7.US 12, Southeast of Pasco, McNary Pool to Attalia 8.I-5, Chehalis, Rush Road to 13th Street 9.SR 509/I-5 Freight and Congestion Relief Project, City of SeaTac 10.I-405, Kirkland Nickel Project, from SR 529 to 522

8August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting General Relationship between Documentation and Permitting Environmental Documentation ESA Consultation Environmental Permitting Time Work

9August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Process-Based Flow Diagram: NEPA Flow Diagram

10August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Process-Based Flow Diagram: ESA Informal Consultation

11August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Successful Streamlining Activities Report Page 22

12August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Root Causes (X) and Effects (E) of Delays Report Page 32

13August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Causes (X) & Effects (E) of Environ. Delays Report Page 34

14August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Drainage Ditches 9 th Circuit Court of Appeals issued Talent decision in 2001 regarding irrigation ditches. COE districts have interpreted Talent decision differently. Seattle District requires assessment of drainage ditches, including WSDOT ditches. WSDOT coordinated with the Seattle District to develop the Talent package format in Seattle District has provided minimal formal guidance regarding Section 404 applicability.

15August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Stormwater WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual (HRM) must correspond to Ecology Stormwater Management Manuals (SMMs) Main difference between 2004 HRM and 2004/2005 SMMs: Flow Control – pre-development (SMM) vs. pre- existing site conditions in highly urbanized areas (HRM) Flow Control – pre-development (SMM) vs. pre- existing site conditions in highly urbanized areas (HRM)

16August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Conclusions Processes supporting environmental activities on complex projects can vary widely and are not uniform or routine Environmental permit streamlining is not fully mature, and additional efficiencies are possible Staff will have the greatest impact on improving schedule timelines by focusing on processes (using existing practical examples) that: improve or sustain strong communication improve or sustain strong communication support clear and complete applications support clear and complete applications assist with timely regulatory reviews assist with timely regulatory reviews enhance technology enhance technology While environmental activities can be root causes of delays, they are often accompanied by other items that impact a project’s overall schedule attainment

17August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Conclusions (cont) Excess time spent on environmental activities is often a result of delays from other factors (right-of-way, lawsuits, funding interruptions) Funding interruptions were the most common cause of schedule delays, often resulting in further updates or revisions to environmental documentation and permits There is a lack of formal federal guidance on how a recent court decision will impact regulation and permitting in the long term related to drainage ditches There are some recent updates to stormwater runoff management requirements, but pending the outcomes of other evaluations, these changes may have minimal impact in highly urbanized locations

18August 5, 2005JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting Recommendation Themes for Final Report Improvements in scheduling and costs for environmental tasks Coordination with regulatory agencies on target timelines for permits Delegation of federal regulatory authority to Dept of Ecology, to streamline with existing Ecology permit processes Clarification of Talent authority, for applicability to ditches intended in original court decision Clarification of definition and location of “highly urbanized” areas for stormwater management Extend e-permitting to other projects and regulatory areas (e.g., Forest Practices Act Permit)