BILL REQ. #: H-2105.4
State of Washington | 63rd Legislature | 2013 Regular Session |
READ FIRST TIME 04/09/13.
AN ACT Relating to department of transportation project delivery; amending RCW 47.01.300; adding a new section to chapter 47.04 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 47.01 RCW; and providing a contingent expiration date.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
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 2013-1, as
developed March 2013, as funded by new revenues provided in
chapter . . . (House Bill No. 1954), Laws of 2013, 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 . . . (House Bill
No. 1954), Laws of 2013, 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.