"NEW SECTION.  Sec. 1   A new section is added to chapter 47.04 RCW to read as follows:
     (1) The legislature intends the department to deliver the projects and activities listed in LEAP Transportation Document 2013-L1, as developed June 23, 2013, as funded by new revenues provided in chapter . . . (Substitute House Bill No. 1954), Laws of 2013 2nd sp. sess. or chapter . . . (Senate Bill No. 5920), Laws of 2013 2nd sp. sess., and for which appropriations of such funds are provided every two years in the omnibus transportation appropriations act, in a manner that exemplifies the stewardship goal in RCW 47.04.280.      
     (2) To allow the department the flexibility to deliver the projects in the most expeditious and efficient manner, while at the same time honoring the intent of the legislature under chapter . . . (Substitute House Bill No. 1955), Laws of 2013 2nd sp. sess. or chapter . . . (Senate Bill No. 5921), Laws of 2013 2nd sp. sess., the department's stewardship in delivering the projects and activities under this section is subject to the following limitations:
     (a) The department must allocate funding to projects in a manner that optimizes efficient management of project spending and delivery. If the most recent engineer's estimate of a project cost differs from the most recent project budget approved by the legislature by ten percent or two hundred fifty thousand dollars, whichever is greater, the department must seek approval before proceeding as provided in this subsection (2).
     (b) The legislative scope of a project may not be changed to a material degree except:
     (i) By the legislature; or
     (ii) When a more efficient, less expensive, or more expeditious scope would provide an equivalent functional outcome. If such an alternative scope is identified, the department must seek approval before proceeding as provided in this subsection (2).
     (c)(i) To the extent possible within budgetary and financial planning constraints, the department must adhere to the capital delivery plan schedule adopted by the legislature and as referenced in the LEAP transportation document identified in subsection (1) of this section.
     (ii) If adherence to the original capital delivery plan schedule would result in failure to substantively meet the stewardship, efficiency, and expediency objectives of this section, the department may seek approval of reasonable changes in project scheduling so as to meet the objectives as provided in this subsection (2).
     (d) To seek approval of project changes under this subsection (2), the department must submit a request to the office of financial management. At the time the department submits a request to transfer funds under this section, a copy of the request must be submitted to the transportation committees of the legislature. The office of financial management must work with legislative staff of the house of representatives and senate transportation committees to review the requested transfers in a timely manner.
     (e) The department must develop by the end of each calendar quarter a report with updates of any changes under (a), (b), or (c) of this subsection. The report must be submitted to the office of financial management and the transportation committees of the legislature.
     (3) The legislature intends for the department to utilize a design-build or similar alternative public works contracting procedure whenever appropriate in highway construction, ferry vessel, or ferry terminal construction contracts on projects and activities under this section.
     (4) For the delivery of projects and activities under this section, the legislature intends for the department to develop a management approach that minimizes the need to add additional permanent engineering staff and other permanent professional staff in the highway construction and ferry vessel and terminal construction programs. The baseline for staffing levels should be:
     (a) For highway construction, the full-time equivalent level for such positions outlined by the secretary in the business plan for the department at the end of fiscal year 2015; and
     (b) For the ferry vessel and terminal construction program, the full-time equivalent level for such positions at the end of fiscal year 2012.
     (5)(a) In January of each year that precedes the next fiscal biennium, beginning January 1, 2015, the department must submit a report to the governor and to the transportation committees of the legislature on progress made toward the delivery of all projects and activities subject to this section.
     (b) The secretary must certify to the governor and the legislature the completion of the project package identified in the LEAP transportation document identified in subsection (1) of this section, or the most recent version approved by the legislature or the office of financial management under subsection (2)(d) of this section, on the date that the delivery of the projects and activities subject to this section is substantively complete.
     (6) The changes for which the department may seek approval under subsection (2)(a), (b), or (c) of this section are changes to the cost, scope, or schedule of a project relative to the cost, scope, or schedule of the project in the LEAP transportation document identified in subsection (1) of this section or the most recent version approved by the legislature or the office of financial management under subsection (2)(d) of this section.
     (7) This section expires June 30, 2023, or the date the secretary certifies that the delivery of the projects and activities listed in the LEAP transportation document identified in subsection (1) of this section, or the most recent version approved by the legislature or the office of financial management under subsection (2)(d) of this section, is substantively complete, whichever is later.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 2   A new section is added to chapter 47.01 RCW to read as follows:
     (1) The department must convene three expert review panels of no more than three members to provide independent financial and technical review for the development of a finance plan and project implementation plan for the Columbia river crossing project, the state route number 520 bridge replacement and HOV project, and the Alaskan Way viaduct replacement project.
     (2) The expert review panels must be selected cooperatively by the chairs of the senate and house of representatives transportation committees, the secretary of transportation, and the governor.
     (3) The expert review panels must, with respect to completion of the project alternatives as described in the draft environmental impact statement of each project:
     (a) Review the finance plan for the project to ensure that it clearly identifies secured and anticipated funding sources and is feasible and sufficient; and
     (b) Review the project implementation plan covering all state and local permitting and mitigation approvals that ensure the most expeditious and cost-effective delivery of the project.
     (4) The expert review panels must report their findings and recommendations on the items described under subsection (3) of this section to the transportation committees of the legislature by October 2013, and annually thereafter, until the projects are operationally complete.
     (5) When convening the expert review panels, the department must be attentive to cost and consider ways to minimize expert review panel expenditures. Anticipated expenditures related to the expert review panels must be included in the panel's findings and recommendation reports.

Sec. 3   RCW 47.01.300 and 2012 c 62 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
     The department shall, in cooperation with environmental regulatory authorities:
     (1) Identify and document environmental resources in the development of the statewide multimodal plan under RCW 47.06.040;
     (2) Allow for public comment regarding changes to the criteria used for prioritizing projects under chapter 47.05 RCW before final adoption of the changes by the commission;
     (3) Use an environmental review as part of the project prospectus identifying potential environmental impacts, mitigation, the utilization of the mitigation option available in RCW 90.74.040, and costs during the early project identification and selection phase, submit the prospectus to the relevant environmental regulatory authorities, and maintain a record of comments and proposed revisions received from the authorities;
     (4) Actively work with the relevant environmental regulatory authorities during the design alternative analysis process and seek written concurrence from the authorities that they agree with the preferred design alternative selected;
     (5) Develop a uniform methodology, in consultation with relevant environmental regulatory authorities, for submitting plans and specifications detailing project elements that impact environmental resources, and proposed mitigation measures including the mitigation option available in RCW 90.74.040, to the relevant environmental regulatory authorities during the preliminary specifications and engineering phase of project development;
     (6) Use available technologies to minimize permit delays for, inform and interact with interested parties including relevant environmental regulatory authorities regarding, and optimize the effectiveness of proposed compensatory mitigation projects;
     (7)(a) In addition to the mitigation programs specified in RCW 90.74.040(1)(a), the correction of fish passage barriers on city streets and county roads located within the same watershed as the proposed project must be considered for compensatory mitigation. The department shall consult with the department of fish and wildlife, the appropriate local government, and interested tribes to identify the existing fish passage barriers that, upon removal, will result in the greatest habitat benefit.
     (b) The department shall submit a report to the transportation committees of the legislature by December 1, 2014, regarding the use and effectiveness of the mitigation option created in this subsection as well as recommendations for improvements;
     (8) Screen construction projects to determine which projects will require complex or multiple permits. The permitting authorities shall develop methods for initiating review of the permit applications for the projects before the final design of the projects;
     (((7))) (9) Conduct special prebid meetings for those projects that are environmentally complex; and
     (((8))) (10) Review environmental considerations related to particular projects during the preconstruction meeting held with the contractor who is awarded the bid.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 4   This act takes effect if chapter . . . (Substitute House Bill No. 1954), Laws of 2013 2nd sp. sess. or chapter . . . (Senate Bill No. 5920), Laws of 2013 2nd sp. sess. is enacted by July 31, 2013."