Washington State, like every other in the nation, is
faced with significant environmental and transportation challenges. The
state’s amazing array of breathtaking landscapes provides residents with
inspiring natural beauty, abundant resources, exceptional recreational
opportunities, and vital ecological services. At the same time, the
effective movement of people and goods across the state is central to
Washington’s economic health and to the well-being of its citizens.
Balancing environmental protection with the necessity to maintain and
improve transportation systems is neither a new nor easy task.
Washington’s long history of efforts to define and achieve environmental
and transportation goals sets the stage for the creation of the
Transportation Permit Efficiency and Accountability Committee, a
multi-stakeholder group charged with striking this balance.
Washington's Environmental and Transportation Interests
Washington’s environmental and transportation interests are
intrinsically connected as pieces of a larger commitment to promoting
the health, safety, and quality of life of its citizens. An impressive
body of legislation aimed at mitigating human impacts to air and water
quality, sensitive species and ecological systems, and the environment
in general stands as a testament to the value Washingtonians place on
their natural heritage. Over the past four decades, the state has
developed a regulatory system consisting of overarching laws (such as
the State Environmental Policy Act [SEPA] and Growth Management Act [GMA]); rules,
standards, and policies developed by resource agencies to implement
specific aspects of these laws; and permits for certain activities to
ensure regulatory compliance. The operation and improvement of
Washington’s roads, bridges, and highways involves multiple activities
regulated by the state to avoid, minimize, and otherwise mitigate
adverse environmental impacts. The linear, multi-jurisdictional nature
of transportation systems also demands consideration of numerous federal
and local environmental requirements, as well as treaty obligations to
Native American tribes.
Reforming the System
The evolution of
Washington’s regulatory system over the past forty years was marked by
successive efforts to refine and build upon prior regulations. This
somewhat uncoordinated permitting resulted in some overlapping and
conflicting regulations. Beginning in the early 1990s, several efforts
to integrate and revise environmental regulations were made. The passage
of the Growth Management Act in part spurred Governor Mike Lowry to
establish the Task Force on Regulatory Reform in 1993 to explore the
improvement and coordination of environmental and land-use regulations.
Many of the Task Force’s final recommendations were incorporated into
ESHB 1724, a 1995 bill aiming to integrate and streamline the GMA, SEPA,
and the Shoreline Management Act. ESHB 1724 also created the Land Use
Study Commission to further explore combining Washington’s land use and
environmental laws into a single, manageable statute. The Commission’s
final report, released in 1998, emphasized the need for a streamlined,
coordinated environmental permitting system.
Calls for regulatory
reform in the 1990s were paralleled by a growing concern over the
condition of Washington’s roads, bridges, and highways. Population and
economic growth had overburdened the state’s transportation systems,
resulting in severe traffic congestion along key corridors and
surrounding major economic centers and a crumbling infrastructure in
need of repair and improvement. Despite these concerns, voters dealt a
blow to state transportation funding by reducing and subsequently
eliminating the motor vehicle excise tax with the passage of Referendum
51 in 1998 and Initiative 695 the following year. Governor Gary Locke
and the Legislature created the Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation
in 1998 to conduct a comprehensive analysis of statewide transportation
needs and priorities. In its November 2000 final report, the Commission
found that the complexity of environmental permitting requirements
strained permitting agency resources and lead to increased costs and
delays for transportation projects. It recommended building upon past
efforts (Governor’s Task Force, Legislative Transportation Committee’s
Environmental Cost Savings and Permit Coordination Study, and Land Use
Study Commission) to conduct more thorough permit reform.
TPEAC's Charge
Facing increasing demands
for transportation improvements and serious budget shortfalls, the 2001
Legislature sought to implement the Blue Ribbon Commission’s
recommendations through a series of bills. Of the nearly 30 bills, the
Environmental Permit Streamlining Act was one of the few that passed
that session. The purpose of the legislation was two-fold: to facilitate
meaningful reform of the environmental permitting and compliance process
for transportation projects; and to demonstrate accountability as part
of a broader effort to garner support for a much-needed transportation
revenue package. With the creation of TPEAC, the Legislature brought
together state regulatory and natural resource agencies, public and
private sector interests, Native American Tribes, and the Department of
Transportation and charged them with coordinating and streamlining the
environmental permitting process for transportation projects in
Washington.
