streamline wa steering committee: environmental …...1b. interagency pathways 7. streamline...

Streamline WA Steering Committee:

Environmental approvals in mining

Nous Group

September 2019

2

Table of Contents

1

2

3

4

Executive summary

Our approach and methodology

Project summaries

Implementation roadmap

5 Case study

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

4

Methodology: The double diamond approach was used to lead workshop attendees through a structured

process to understand the current experience and future needs of government, industry and the community

throughout the environmental approvals process. Attendees identified and prioritised the solvable problems

and generated a set of proposals.

Key insights: Submission to the Streamline portal and feedback from industry and community identified six

key insights. There is a lack of visibility and transparency in the approvals process, there is unnecessary

duplication in effort, approvals timeframes are not met, regulation is inconsistently applied, application of a

risk-based approach is not evident, and I.T. systems and processes are not meeting user demands.

Recommendations: Nine proposals were developed covering visibility of the user journey through the

approvals process, risk-based triage, and streamlining reporting requirements, regulatory policy and regulatory

process and practice. An indicative approach was created for each proposal and a three year roadmap was

developed to guide implementation. Multiple deliveries are suggested for short, medium and long term using

accelerated design methodologies.

Streamline WA is a whole of government approach to regulatory reform to make it easier to do business in

Western Australia (WA) by improving regulation and regulatory practice. A priority focus of Streamline WA is

environmental approvals in mining. A series of workshops, facilitated by Nous Group, were held with

representatives from state and local government, industry, business, and environmental conservation to

develop a set of practical and implementable recommendations for consideration by the Streamline WA

Steering Committee.

5

Streamline WA is a whole of government approach to make it easier to do

business in Western Australia

In 2017, the government announced an independent review into the WA public sector’s functions, operations and

culture. The purpose of the review was to drive lasting reform of service delivery, accountability and efficiency in

the public sector. A key area of focus was regulation. The review highlighted environmental regulation as a

significant regulatory delivery for the WA economy, noting that approvals reform remains a priority, there is a lack

of alignment between regulatory approval processes at all levels of government, reporting requirements are

burdensome, and outcomes based regulation and regular reviews are needed. In response to the findings of the

review Streamline WA was one of 20 initiatives commenced.

Streamline WA is a whole of government approach, led by a Steering Committee, to make it easier to do business

in WA by improving regulation and regulatory practice. Streamline WA has received numerous submissions with

one of the initial key themes relating to mining environmental approvals and the challenges industry faced when

trying to navigate related processes.

Workshops were held on 23 and 30 August to explore ideas and priorities for regulatory reform for improving the

environmental approvals process in mining. Attendees considered all aspects of reform; legislative, culture,

practice, process and systems. The primary legislation considered included the Environmental Protection Act 1986,

Mining Act 1978, and the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

Workshop attendees developed a set of practical and implementable reform proposals for consideration by the

Steering Committee.

2. OUR APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY

7

We have used an abbreviated form of the human centred design double

diamond methodology

Builds an understanding of

the current experience,

and future needs and

wants of businesses

throughout the approvals

process, without

exhausting the stakeholder

environment.

Synthesis of findings of

the discovery phase to

identify patterns and

insights which are then

translated into a specific

area of focus for

problem solving and

design.

Generate a broad range

of ideas and

prototypes to address

this problem, that can

be refined, tested and

developed further.

Further refine a narrower

set of ideas and deliver

solutions which address the

needs of users.

8

To develop this plan we worked with stakeholders using five steps

Validate key

insights

Identify positive

outcomes for

successful

reform

Generate

initial

solutions

Prioritise

solvable

problems

Define

solvable

problems

9

There is a lack of transparency limiting ability

to manage user expectations1

There are instances of duplication in effort

involved in the approvals process due to lack

of accountability from agencies

2

Inconsistent interpretation of regulation

requires greater user effort3

Approval timeframes are not being met

resulting in delays in user progress4

I.T. systems and processes are not capable of

consistently meeting user demands5

The application of a risk-based approach to

regulatory practice is not evident to users6

Workshop attendees agreed to six key insights to guide problem statement

and solution development

The insights were developed using data provided to Nous through online submissions to the WA Government/Streamline WA portal. Nous gathered

further data by receiving feedback from key players in the mining industry. Collation and prioritisation of all data lead to six key findings which were

then further amended by the attendees of the workshop, forming the above six insights.

10

• Lack of visibility

• Expectations

THEME FEEDBACK

• “Very difficult to know where you are in the process, there is no

visibility.”

• “Need for open and consistent communications regarding

expectations and requirements.”

• “Lack of clearly defined and well understood procedures for

referring assessments to other agencies for advice.”

• “It would be better if timeframes are longer and are being met

rather than short timeframes that are not being met.”

1. There is a lack of transparency limiting ability to manage user

expectations

11

• Duplication

• Lack of accountability

• “Multiple agencies assessing the same topic. You receive

primary approval but still need secondary.”

• “With so much duplication you get into the situation that no

department takes responsibility.”

• “You get all these departments looking at it but no one owns

the process.”

• “We aren’t looking for a free ride, just a single ride.”

• “Instances of duplication exist across various assessment

processes and statutory reporting obligations.”

2. There are instances of duplication in effort involved in the

approvals process due to lack of accountability from agencies

THEME FEEDBACK

12

• Inconsistent interpretation

of regulation

• “No standardised policy framework used by officers across

different agencies to inform risk-based assessments.”

• “There are some particular assessment officers that are so

pedantic, that they can add months on to the process.”

• “FY18 AERs (Annual Environmental Reporting) were submitted

consistent with previously approved AER but DMIRS found ‘AER

does not meet the requirements of regulation 16’ of the

regulations.”

• “Inconsistency of formal protocols has contributed to ‘referrals

within referrals’ and enabling agencies to ‘stop the clock’ and

draw out timeframes.”

3. Inconsistent interpretation of regulation requires greater user

effort

THEME FEEDBACK

13

• Timeframes • “Approvals timeframes is the biggest problem.”

• “Timeframes, people plan their projects around that.”

• “’Stop the clock’, don’t get me started.”

• “Huge delays in getting post-approval approvals (can take up to

two years)

• “Mining operations have been suspended due to awaiting post-

approval approvals.”

• “Excessive timeframe for exploration licences to be granted.”

4. Approval timeframes are not being met resulting in delays in user

progress

THEME FEEDBACK

14

• System and process

efficiency

• “Resolution of issues can take quite a while so there needs to be

a process to solve issues.”

• “DMIRS online system (PGR) is the only means to lodge a

pipeline license application which is consistently unreliable.”

• “Format of requested files can’t be uploaded into PGR causing

further delays.”

• “Although pipeline licenses were eventually granted, this matter

still remains unresolved.”

5. I.T. systems and processes are not capable of consistently meeting

user demands

THEME FEEDBACK

15

• Capability

• Culture

• “Culture of risk-aversion favours a practice of disproportionate

overregulation.”

• “We need to be clear about what we mean by risk-based.”

• “Addressing agency’s ability to respond to industry demands.”

• “The lack of performance data about the department. I’ve raised

it before and have been told it’s not a priority.”

• “Need for improved staff culture.”

6. The application of a risk-based approach to regulatory

practice is not evident to users

THEME FEEDBACK

3. Proposal summaries

17

Summary of proposals

Proposal 1: Improve experience and visibility of user journey

• 1A: Provide visibility for applicants in the approval

process with a clear user journey map

• 1B: Interagency pathways parallel processing

• 1C: Integrate internal workflows of individual agencies to

increase visibility and real time status

• 1D: Integrate systems across government to create

seamless approvals process

Proposal 2 : Develop policy to establish a risk-based,

outcomes-focused regulatory stance

Proposal 3: Automate low-risk exploration approvals

Proposal 4: Define consistent environmental standards and

frameworks

Proposal 5: Define secondary approvals and amendments

to primary approvals instruments

Proposal 6: Triage process and mechanisms for various risk

levels

• 6A: Early screening (triage) of all applications to ensure

any issues are addressed early in the process

• 6B. Establish cross-agency ‘sandbox’ mechanism for

managing complex planning issues

• 6C: Automate low-risk approval applications

Proposal 7: Streamline and automate regulatory reporting

requirements

Proposal 8: Consolidate and simplify approvals application

guidelines

Proposal 9: Establish inclusive cross-agency training

We have prioritised solutions by assessing the extent of positive user impact vs the implementation effort

P7. Reporting

requirements

P1. Visibility of

user journey

Regulatory policy

and process

PROJECT TYPE

P6. Risk-based

triage

MEDIUM

PRIORITY

HIGH

PRIORITY

Prioritisation framework

EFFORT

US

ER

IM

PA

CT

LessMore

Hig

hLo

w

5. Secondary

approvals

1B. Interagency

pathways

7. Streamline

reporting

3. Exploration

approvals4. Environ.

standards1C. Integrated

workflows

1D. Integrated

systems

8. Guidelines

9. Training

1A. User

journey map

6B. Sandbox

for complex

6A. Cross-

agency triage

6C. Low-risk

approvals

2. Regulatory

stance

18

1 2 3 4User journey mapInteragency pathways

parallel processing

Develop live

tracker capabilities

and integrate

internal workflows

Integrate cross-agency

workflows

Proposal 1B Proposal 1C Proposal 1DProposal 1A

Proposal 1: Improve experience and visibility of user journey

19

Problem statement:

How might we improve understanding of the approvals process and increase availability

of application status forecasts in real time for users so that the next steps are clear,

timeframes are well understood and the approvals process is transparent?Timeframe:

• Short-term

Type:

• Process

• Systems

• Practice

No dependencies

Proposal 1A: Provide visibility for applicants in the approval process with a clear user journey map

PROPOSAL PLAN

DISCOVER DEFINE DESIGN DELIVER

Work with industry to

understand complete

approvals application

process across all agencies

Map out approvals

application journey and

identify timeframes at each

stage

Using design sprints with

industry, prototype map of

whole approval journey

using online tool

Build and release user

journey map

20

Problem statement:

How might we make interagency pathways transparent and seamless for mining

companies so that companies can prepare upfront for information requirements and

submit information in the most efficient way (submitting it once and concurrently)?

Timeframe:

• Medium-term

• Long term for any

legislative changes

Type:

• Process

• Systems

• Culture

• Practice

• Legislative

Dependencies:

• 1A - User journey

map

Proposal 1B: Interagency pathways parallel processing

PROPOSAL PLAN


Conduct review of referral

pathways including Part 4

into Part 5 to assess

whether there is legislative

overlap or

misunderstanding of roles

Review MOUs between

agencies to check for areas

of duplication, unclear

responsibilities and lack of

transparency for referrals

Identify opportunities to

reduce duplication

Select pain points and

opportunities for solutions

including opportunities for

parallel processing

Determine which items

need to be referred and

when

Define each agency’s role

Identify legislative changes

required

Using design sprints,

redesign process with

industry to remove any

instances of duplication

Design parallel processing

where possible (inter and

intra departmental)

Revise MOUs between

agencies

Undertake legislative

drafting for selected

changes as required

Implement new processes

including guidelines and

training


change process

21

Problem statement:

How might we increase availability of application status forecasts in real time for users

so that users are clear about next steps and can avoid irreversible investment decisions?

Timeframe:

• Long-term

Type:

• Process

• Systems

• Practice

Dependencies:

• 1A – User journey

map

Proposal 1C: Integrate internal workflows of individual agencies to increase visibility and real time status

PROPOSAL PLAN


Review the user experience

of the journey map

Identify relevant workflows

within each relevant

agency

Using user feedback on the

experience of the user

journey map

Identify priority areas to

accelerate live-status

tracking

Identify and prioritise the

problems to solve within

each workflow, and the

workflow steps to

integrate.

Design sprint with industry

to prototype real time

tracking tool


industry, each agency

designs integrated

workflow steps for selected

streamlined workflows

Deliver live tracking

capabilities

Establish integrated

workflow processes into a

single portal

Include guidelines and

training

This may include practice

and legislative change

22

Problem statement:

How might we improve understanding of the approvals process so that the requirements

and possibility of success is clear before an investment is made into starting a new

project?

Timeframe:

• Long-term

Type:

• Process

• Systems

• Practice

Dependencies:


map

• 1B - Interagency

pathways

• 1C - Integrated

workflows

• 2 - Regulatory

stance

• 4 - Environmental

standards

• 5 - Secondary

approvals

Proposal 1D: Integrate systems across government to create seamless approvals process

PROPOSAL PLAN


Review user experience of

whole system for a specific

topic


improve whole system

process

Take the lessons learnt

from 1A, 1B and 1C into

account as guidance in

defining the problems to

solve

Define the target operating

model for systems

Design workflow to align

with the target operating

model

Prototype components of

the new system

Release system changes in

a phased approach to

integrate systems across

government for a seamless

approvals process

23

Problem statement:

How might we determine an integrated regulatory approach (or stance) so that the

requirements and needs of regulators, proponents and the community are met?

Timeframe:

• Medium-term

Type:

• Systems

• Process

• Culture

• Practice

• Legislative

Dependencies:

• DMIRS to prioritise the

progression of the

Mining Legislation

Amendment Bill to

implement a risk-based

outcomes-focused

regulatory stance

Proposal 2: Develop policy to establish a risk-based, outcomes-focused regulatory stance

PROPOSAL PLAN

Define regulatory

outcomes

Information

collection

and collation

Prioritise

regulatory

activities

Engage with

stakeholders

Measure

performance

Understand the

purpose of

regulation

Develop a

comprehensive

evidence-base

Develop

risk profiles

Systematically

engage

stakeholders

Monitor and

report

performance of

regulatory

activities

By identifying

outcomes that

regulation should

seek to achieve that

are tied to a

regulator’s legislative

mandate

To understand the

costs, benefits and

burdens of

regulatory activities

By identifying risks,

assessing their impact

and likelihood, and

prioritising activities to

treat the most

significant risks

To understand how

regulated entities

are affected and

the broader

legislative and

policy context

To embed a focus on

continuous

improvement and

improve the

evidence base for

future initiatives

24

Problem statement:

How might we streamline low-risk exploration approvals for mining companies so that

departments can deal with them more efficiently (including automatically) and focus on

higher risk projects and issues?

Timeframe:

• Discover and Define

are short-term

• Design and Deliver

are medium-term

Type:

• Process

• Systems

Dependencies:

• DMIRS to prioritise

the progression of

the Mining

Legislation

Amendment Bill to

implement a risk-

based outcomes-

focused regulatory

stance.

Proposal 3: Automate low-risk exploration approvals

PROPOSAL PLAN


Review existing exploration

approvals scope and

opportunities for

automation and the

establishment of ‘default’

timelines

Define what is deemed as

‘low-risk’

Define risk-based criteria

and default timelines

Agree on selected

opportunities for

automation using a risk-

based approach within

current legislative

framework


prototype improved

exploration approvals

process and online solution

Build and release a

technical solution including

guidelines and training

25

Problem statement:

How might we define clear environmental decision making criteria that are well

understood by industry, the community and government to ensure consistent decision

making and outcomes across government?

Timeframe:

• Discover and Define

are short-term

• Design and Deliver

are long-term

Type:

• Legislative

• Culture

• Practice

No dependencies

Proposal 4: Define consistent environmental standards and frameworks

PROPOSAL PLAN


Review environmental

standards that are relevant

to the industry to see what

agencies currently have in

place

Identify gaps and overlaps

Prioritise and set objectives

for environmental

standards

Identify consistency that

can be achieved easily

Identify legislative changes

required


prototype new/changed

environmental standards

derived from objectives

Define regulation strategies

approach


drafting for selected

changes as required

Implement new/changed

environmental standards

that will ensure consistency

of standards across

agencies

Include guidelines and

training with industry


change process

26

Problem statement:

How might we avoid a secondary authorisation, be it post-assessment, or further

regulatory requirement, which stop or duplicate the process so that mining companies

can ensure productivity and remain cost-effective?

Timeframe:

• Short-term

• Long-term for any

legislative

amendments

Type:

• Process

• Culture

• System

• Legislative

No dependencies

Proposal 5: Define *secondary approvals and amendments to primary approvals instruments

PROPOSAL PLAN


Review the current

secondary approvals

process and primary

approvals instruments

Identify primary

instruments that are

causing duplication

Define risk assessment

criteria to determine what

is a primary and secondary

approval

Define pain points and

opportunities to streamline

for process improvement


industry, prototype the

optimal secondary

approvals process and

identify any required

amendments

Draft amendments as

required

Deliver defined secondary

approval process without

amendments, including


Undertake process for

regulatory amendments to

primary approvals

instruments

*Definitions:

Secondary approvals – approvals needed as a result of conditions set on your primary approval (e.g. management plan

conditions on Ministerial Statements).

Amendments – amendments to approvals required because the mining operation is being modified in some form.

27

1 2 3Cross-agency triage

mechanism

‘Sandbox’ for managing

complex issues

Automate low-risk approval

applications

Proposal 6B Proposal 6CProposal 6A

Proposal 6 - Triage process and mechanisms for various risk levels

28

Problem statement:

How might we implement a process for early issue identification and resolution so that

delays experienced in the approvals process are minimised?

Timeframe:

• Discover, Define and

Design are short-

term

• Deliver is medium-

term

Type:

• Systems

• Process

• Culture

• Practice

No dependencies

Proposal 6A: Early screening (triage) of all applications to ensure any issues are addressed early in the process

PROPOSAL PLAN


Review the current risk-

based processes for issue

resolution and approval

pathways for projects of

different risk profiles

Segment activities based

on recent trends according

to risk

Define criteria for

segmenting activities by

risk to low, medium or

complex levels


develop and prototype a

triage operating model (i.e.

changes to process, tools,

people, practice)

Establish triage process for

each entry point used by

proponents, including

process changes,


29

Problem statement:

How might we establish a cross-agency mechanism for resolving complex planning

issues so that proponents can efficiently progress projects?

Timeframe:

• Medium-term

Type:

• Systems

• Process

• Culture

• Practice

Dependencies:

• 6A - Cross-agency

triage

Proposal 6B: Establish cross-agency “sandbox” mechanism for managing complex planning issues

PROPOSAL PLAN


See project ‘6A’ See project ‘6A’

Once planning issue has

been identified as ‘complex’,

involve third-party

stakeholder in issues

investigation

Using a cross-agency

design sprint, develop the

operating model (i.e.

process, system, people,

authorising environment)

for a ‘sandbox’ mechanism

for handling high

complexity matters such as

new types of projects or

complex issues

Establish and trial ‘sandbox’

for resolving matters of

high complexity

30

Problem statement:

How might we reduce effort in processing low-risk cross-agency approval applications so

that proponents can efficiently progress projects?

Timeframe:

• Long-term

Type:

• Systems

• Process

• Culture

• Practice

Dependencies:

• 6A - Cross-agency

triage

• 3 - Exploration

approvals

• DMIRS to prioritise

the progression of

the Mining

Legislation

Amendment Bill to

implement a risk-

based outcomes-

focused regulatory

stance

Proposal 6C: Automate low-risk approval applications

PROPOSAL PLAN


Review exploration

approvals project and

develop lessons learned

Identify all applicable low-

risk cross-agency approval

pathways

Use lessons learned from

exploration approvals

project to prioritise

approval pathways based

on risk and ease of

implementation


industry, prototype the

simplification and

automation of one

pathway using an online

approach

Establish online auto-

approvals for matters of

low risk and complexity

that can be resolved

quickly with no / little

consultation

31

Problem statement:

How might we make annual compliance reporting (e.g. AERs) less burdensome for the

industry and enable departments to focus on higher risk projects and issues?

Timeframe:

• Medium-term

Type:

• Process

• Practice

• Systems

No dependencies

Proposal 7: Streamline and automate regulatory reporting requirements

PROPOSAL PLAN


Review all compliance

reporting arrangements for

one pathway

Discover opportunities to

streamline (e.g. simplify

processes, digitize forms,

etc.) or remove reporting

requirements working

within the existing

legislative framework

Explore opportunities to

further progress field

automation in compliance

reporting

Select opportunities for

streamlining or removing

reporting requirements

working within the

legislative framework


industry, prototype change

reporting processes

Release new streamlined

processes for regulatory

reporting, including

guideline development and

training

Repeat for further

pathways

32

Problem statement:

How might we simplify the approvals application guidelines for proponents so that

regulators are able to efficiently and consistently assess applications?

Timeframe:

• Short-term

Type:

• Process

• Culture

• Practice

Dependencies:


map

Note:

• Information

requirements

guideline already

has momentum

Proposal 8: Consolidate and simplify approvals application guidelines

PROPOSAL PLAN


Identify current approvals

application guidelines and

pain points in one area

Identify opportunities for

improvement taking a user

and cross-agency

experience perspective

Prioritise and assess

selected approvals

applications guidelines

based on criteria

developed in the Discover

phase

Modify selected guidelines

taking into account user

feedback

Publish clear, consolidated

guidelines and train

regulators and industry

Repeat process for other

areas (this is an ongoing

delivery for other projects)

33

Problem statement:

How might we reduce duplication and inconsistency in the assessment process for

approvals for mining companies so that miners can increase their efficiency and

continue to progress?

Timeframe:

• Short-term

Type:

• Process

• Culture

• Practice

No dependencies

Note:

• Revising training is

also a Deliver

component of

many of the

regulatory review

projects in the

program

Proposal 9: Establish inclusive cross-agency training

PROPOSAL PLAN


Review current programs

and practices for training

of staff in environmental

approval processes for

mining across all relevant

agencies


improve training and

involve government,

industry and other

stakeholders

Refresh programs and

practices for training staff

Establish departmental KPIs

and performance

management

Expand refreshed training

program and include the

industry, government and

other stakeholders in order

to align assessment

practices within agencies

and help all stakeholders to

develop a clear

understanding of

expectations

Training is an ongoing

delivery for other projects

4. Implementation

35

Solutions can be delivered progressively over a three year period, 2019-2022

6 months 12-19 months 3 years

Short Medium Long

1A. User journey Discover Define Design Deliver

9. Training Discover Define Design Deliver

8. Guidelines Discover Define Design Deliver

5. Secondary approvals Discover Define Design Deliver

6A. Cross-agency triage Discover Define Design Deliver

4. Environmental

standardsDiscover Define Design Deliver

3. Exploration approvals Discover Define Design Deliver

1B. Interagency pathways Discover Define Design Deliver Legislative changes

2. Regulatory stance Pre-work Discover Define Design Deliver Legislative changes

6B. Sandbox for complex Discover Define Design Deliver

7. Streamline reporting Discover Define Design Deliver

1C. Integrate workflows Discover Define Design Deliver

6C. Low-risk approvals Discover Define Design Deliver

1D. Integrate systems Discover Define Design Deliver

Ongoing development/ delivery for other projects

Ongoing development/ delivery for other projects

Ongoing real-time tracking development

Legislative changes if needed

5. Case study

37

Background

In 2010, the Queensland Government undertook a

reform to streamline regulation. The government

produced a public report outlining 23

recommendations called ‘Supporting Resource

Sector Growth’.

In response to this review, a Government-Industry

Implementation Group (GIIG) was formed

consisting of members from both government

and the resources industry. The GIIG developed

the ‘Govt and Industry Implementation Report’

which solved specific problems raised in the

‘Supporting Resource Sector Growth’ report. The

Queensland Government and industry were very

successful in working together and were able to

develop many recommendations that were acted

upon.

Some key recommendations made by GIIG:

• Parallel processing rather than sequential

approvals processes.

• Improving accountability for timeframes by

providing targets at each stage of the

approvals process.

• Improving transparency of QLD’s approval

process by publishing a scorecard that tracks

average time to make a decision for each

category of application.

• Virtual model of a one-stop shop, through the

confirmation of DEEDI (Department of

Employment, Economic Development and

Innovation) as lead agency responsible for

managing overall project approval processes

from end to end.

Example of streamlining in another jurisdiction: mining and petroleum approvals processes in QLD

Key changes/outcomes

• Exploration permit approvals granted in half the time (the time taken to process an exploration permit application was reduced from 22 months to 12 months.

Permits not subject to native title can be determined in 6 months).

• Established the Mines Legislation (Streamlining) Amendment Bill 2012 which aimed to improve the efficiency of the regulatory framework for the resource sector in

QLD.

• Implemented single, streamlined assessment process for all environmentally relevant activities, including resource activities under the Greentape Reduction Act.

• Established different levels of assessment proportionate to the risk under the Greentape Reduction Act.

• Agreement to set target and milestones and report against milestones to ensure accountability for timeframes.

• Case managers appointed and funds allocated for electronic workflow and data-management system for the virtual one-stop shop.

Nous is the largest Australian-founded management consulting

firm with over 400 staff across Australia and the UK.

About Nous

We partner with leaders to

shape world-class businesses,

effective government and

empowered communities. PEOPLE PRINCIPALS COUNTRIESLOCATIONS

400 50 9 2

streamline wa steering committee: environmental …...1b. interagency pathways 7. streamline...

Documents