Business Process Business Process Review of Environmental Review of Environmental

Permitting for Permitting for Transportation ProjectsTransportation Projects

Preliminary ReportPreliminary Report

Keenan Konopaski, JLARC AnalystKeenan Konopaski, JLARC Analyst

Gary Walvatne, TechLaw, Inc.Gary Walvatne, TechLaw, Inc.

August 5, 2005August 5, 2005

22August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Complex Environmental Work, Complex Environmental Work, But on Small Portion of ProjectsBut on Small Portion of Projects

42 Months1%

26 Months2%

15 Hours97%

Environmental Documentation Permitting on Transportation Projects

33August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Scope of ReviewScope of Review

Two elements to this review:Two elements to this review:

1.1. Analyze the environmental documentation and Analyze the environmental documentation and permitting processes to identify contributors to permitting processes to identify contributors to delays and prioritize streamlining efforts.delays and prioritize streamlining efforts.

2.2. Assess recent changes in the regulation of Assess recent changes in the regulation of drainage ditches and stormwater runoff. drainage ditches and stormwater runoff.

44August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Objectives of ReviewObjectives of Review

1.1. Evaluate the regulatory requirements for a set Evaluate the regulatory requirements for a set of major projects to clarify the regulatory of major projects to clarify the regulatory business processbusiness process

2.2. Assess the applicability of successful Assess the applicability of successful streamlining efforts to various environmental streamlining efforts to various environmental requirements for major transportation projects requirements for major transportation projects

55August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Objectives of Review Objectives of Review (cont)(cont)

3.3. Analyze recent project histories to identify the Analyze recent project histories to identify the root causes of schedule delayroot causes of schedule delay

4.4. Determine the extent to which the regulatory Determine the extent to which the regulatory goals concerning drainage ditches and goals concerning drainage ditches and stormwater runoff have changed over time, and stormwater runoff have changed over time, and identify the impacts of changesidentify the impacts of changes

66August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Focus of ReviewFocus 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

AdvertisePS&Ecompleted

Finalize design work

Permits approved

Settlement/ adjudication

reached

Agreement/ plans secured

Project definition complete

Begin design

77August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

42 Months1%

26 Months2%

15 Hours97%

Environmental Documentation Permitting on Transportation Projects

Which Projects did We Review?Which Projects did We Review?

88August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Ten Sample ProjectsTen Sample Projects

1.1. I-90, Spokane, Build Lanes from Argonne Road to Sullivan RoadI-90, Spokane, Build Lanes from Argonne Road to Sullivan Road

2.2. SR31, Metaline Falls to International BorderSR31, Metaline Falls to International Border

3.3. SR 16, Tacoma, HOV Improvements, Union Avenue to Jackson SR 16, Tacoma, HOV Improvements, Union Avenue to Jackson AvenueAvenue

4.4. SR161, Milton to Federal Way, Jovita Blvd. To S 360th WideningSR161, Milton to Federal Way, Jovita Blvd. To S 360th Widening

5.5. SR 522, Woodinville to Monroe, Fales Road – Echo Lake Road SR 522, Woodinville to Monroe, Fales Road – Echo Lake Road InterchangeInterchange

6.6. SR 240, Richland, I-182 to Columbia Center BoulevardSR 240, Richland, I-182 to Columbia Center Boulevard

7.7. US 12, Southeast of Pasco, McNary Pool to AttaliaUS 12, Southeast of Pasco, McNary Pool to Attalia

8.8. I-5, Chehalis, Rush Road to 13th StreetI-5, Chehalis, Rush Road to 13th Street

9.9. SR 509/I-5 Freight and Congestion Relief Project, City of SeaTacSR 509/I-5 Freight and Congestion Relief Project, City of SeaTac

10.10. I-405, Kirkland Nickel Project, from SR 529 to 522I-405, Kirkland Nickel Project, from SR 529 to 522

99August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

General Relationship between General Relationship between Documentation and Permitting Documentation and Permitting

Environmental Documentation

ESA Consultation

Environmental Permitting

Time

Wor

k

1010August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Process-Based Flow Diagram: Process-Based Flow Diagram: NEPA Flow DiagramNEPA Flow Diagram

Applicant Public or Other Interested PartyAgency

Start

Version 1.0, 04/13/2005

A

National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA)

EnvironmentalPermitting Services

Legend: =Hyperlink =Progression =Revision =OptionalFor more information on this or any permitting process visit http://www.ora.wa.gov or call the Washington State Office of Regulatory Assistance at (800) 917-0043.

Applicant reviews activitiesrequiring NEPA review

(triggering mechanisms)

Applicant submits application orAgency proposes action

Agency reviews activities andconsiders whether activity is listed

as a Categorical Exclusion

Listed asCategoricalExclusion

Not listed asCategoricalExclusion

Determine NEPA LeadAgency, Council on

Environmental Quality(CEQ) designates if needed

Lead Agency issues Finding of NoSignificant Impact (FONSI)

Possible Public commentperiod

If FONSI comment period, LeadAgency evaluates comments.

Proceed withFONSI

W ithdraw FONSI

AgencyAction

Lead Agency issues Noticeof Intent (NOI)

Lead Agency proceeds withscoping process

Lead Agency issues DraftEnvironmental Impact

Statement (EIS)

Public may comment onDraft EIS

45 days

Lead Agency reviewscomments and issues

Final EIS

Lead Agency issues Record ofDecision (ROD)

No likelysignificant

impacts

Likelysignificant

impacts

Possible Public commentperiod

Varies

30 days

A

B

D

E

F

G

Lead Agency analyzesproject to verify that

Categorical Exclusion applies

Applies Does not apply

30 days

Ap

pli

ca

tio

n P

ha

se

Re

vie

w a

nd

De

cis

ion

Ph

as

e

Likelysignificantimpacts

Possible Public commentperiod

Applicant or Lead Agencyproduces an Environmental

Assessment (EA)

Applicant or Lead Agencyproduces an Environmental

Assessment (EA)

Varies

No likelysignificantimpacts

C

Lead Agency evaluates EA andmakes determination whether theproposal has any likely significant

impacts to the environment

1111August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Process-Based Flow Diagram:Process-Based Flow Diagram:ESA Informal ConsultationESA Informal Consultation

1212August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Successful Streamlining ActivitiesSuccessful Streamlining Activities

Report Page 22

1313August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Root Causes (X) and Effects (E) of DelaysRoot Causes (X) and Effects (E) of Delays

Report Page 32

1414August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Causes (X) & Effects (E) of Environ. DelaysCauses (X) & Effects (E) of Environ. Delays

Report Page 34

1515August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Drainage DitchesDrainage Ditches

99thth Circuit Court of Appeals issued Circuit Court of Appeals issued TalentTalent decision in 2001 regarding irrigation ditches.decision in 2001 regarding irrigation ditches.

COE districts have interpreted COE districts have interpreted TalentTalent decision decision differently. Seattle District requires assessment differently. Seattle District requires assessment of drainage ditches, including WSDOT ditches.of drainage ditches, including WSDOT ditches.

WSDOT coordinated with the Seattle District to WSDOT coordinated with the Seattle District to develop the develop the TalentTalent package format in 2004. package format in 2004.

Seattle District has provided minimal formal Seattle District has provided minimal formal guidance regarding Section 404 applicability.guidance regarding Section 404 applicability.

1616August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

StormwaterStormwaterWSDOT Highway Runoff Manual (HRM) must WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual (HRM) must correspond to Ecology Stormwater Management correspond to Ecology Stormwater Management Manuals (SMMs)Manuals (SMMs)

Main difference between 2004 HRM and Main difference between 2004 HRM and 2004/2005 SMMs:2004/2005 SMMs: Flow Control – pre-development (SMM) vs. pre-Flow Control – pre-development (SMM) vs. pre-

existing site conditions in highly urbanized areas existing site conditions in highly urbanized areas (HRM)(HRM)

1717August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

ConclusionsConclusionsProcesses supporting environmental activities on complex projects Processes supporting environmental activities on complex projects can vary widely and are not uniform or routinecan vary widely and are not uniform or routine

Environmental permit streamlining is not fully mature, and additional Environmental permit streamlining is not fully mature, and additional efficiencies are possibleefficiencies are possible

Staff will have the greatest impact on improving schedule timelines by Staff will have the greatest impact on improving schedule timelines by focusing on processes (using existing practical examples) that:focusing on processes (using existing practical examples) that:

improve or sustain strong communicationimprove or sustain strong communication support clear and complete applicationssupport clear and complete applications assist with timely regulatory reviewsassist with timely regulatory reviews enhance technologyenhance technology

While environmental activities can be root causes of delays, they are While environmental activities can be root causes of delays, they are often accompanied by other items that impact a project’s overall often accompanied by other items that impact a project’s overall schedule attainmentschedule attainment

1818August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Conclusions Conclusions (cont)(cont)Excess time spent on environmental activities is often a result of Excess time spent on environmental activities is often a result of delays from other factors (right-of-way, lawsuits, funding interruptions)delays from other factors (right-of-way, lawsuits, funding interruptions)

Funding interruptions were the most common cause of schedule Funding interruptions were the most common cause of schedule delays, often resulting in further updates or revisions to environmental delays, often resulting in further updates or revisions to environmental documentation and permitsdocumentation and permits

There is a lack of formal federal guidance on how a recent court There is a lack of formal federal guidance on how a recent court decision will impact regulation and permitting in the long term related decision will impact regulation and permitting in the long term related to drainage ditchesto drainage ditches

There are some recent updates to stormwater runoff management There are some recent updates to stormwater runoff management requirements, but pending the outcomes of other evaluations, these requirements, but pending the outcomes of other evaluations, these changes may have minimal impact in highly urbanized locationschanges may have minimal impact in highly urbanized locations

1919August 5, 2005August 5, 2005 JLARC Business Process Review of Environmental PermittingJLARC Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting

Recommendation Themes forRecommendation Themes forFinal ReportFinal Report

Improvements in scheduling and costs for environmental Improvements in scheduling and costs for environmental taskstasks

Coordination with regulatory agencies on target timelines for Coordination with regulatory agencies on target timelines for permitspermits

Delegation of federal regulatory authority to Dept of Ecology, Delegation of federal regulatory authority to Dept of Ecology, to streamline with existing Ecology permit processesto streamline with existing Ecology permit processes

Clarification of Talent authority, for applicability to ditches Clarification of Talent authority, for applicability to ditches intended in original court decisionintended in original court decision

Clarification of definition and location of “highly urbanized” Clarification of definition and location of “highly urbanized” areas for stormwater managementareas for stormwater management

Extend e-permitting to other projects and regulatory areas Extend e-permitting to other projects and regulatory areas (e.g., Forest Practices Act Permit)(e.g., Forest Practices Act Permit)