Chapter VIII: Summary Verbatim Analysis

Table of Contents

Respondents were asked a series of open-ended questions to help determine what issues were being faced by Transportation and Resource Reviewers and how to best resolve those issues. The first open ended question asked respondents to briefly summarize the problem or problems listed in the previous question. Respondents were then asked to elaborate on issues concerning timeliness, missing pieces during the process, the overall relationship between Transportation and Resource agency Reviewers, and possible solutions to these issues. 

 

 

Transportation Reviewers

Resource Reviewers

Poor Communication

7

20

Impact Assessments

5

5

Poor Coordination

12

6

Problems with Alternative Analysis

8

35

Given Wrong/Incomplete Information

11

25

Problems with Process

36

28

Lack of Timely Response

59

8

Problems with Mitigation

25

15

Turnover of Staff/Unavailable/Understaffed

18

1

Disagreements/Differences of Opinion

24

34

Environmental/Biological Issues

28

34

Poor/Inexperienced/Unknowlegeable Staff

16

0

Changing Regulation/Jurisdictions/Decisions

4

0

 

Summary: Overall, Resource Reviewers indicated more problems with poor communication, alternative analysis, being given wrong/incomplete information, disagreements/differences of opinion, and environmental/biological issues than with other categories of problem occurrence. Transportation Reviewers indicated substantially more problems with lack of timely response. The most divergent problem occurrence areas were: poor communication, where 7 Transportation Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem while 20 Resource Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem; problems with alternative analysis, where 8 Transportation Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem while 35 Resource Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem; given wrong/incomplete information, where 11 Transportation Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem while 25 Resource Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem; lack of timely response, where 59 Transportation Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem while 8 Resource Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem; problems with mitigation, where 25 Transportation Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem while 15 Resource Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem; turnover of staff/unavailable/understaffed, where 18 Transportation Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem while 1 Resource Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem; disagreements/differences of opinion, where 24 Transportation Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem while 34 Resource Reviewers indicated the existence of a problem. Problems with poor/inexperienced/unknowledgeable staff and changing regulations/jurisdiction/decisions were only noted by Transportation Reviewers with frequency counts of 16 and 4, respectively.

 

Timeliness

The Entire Process Took a Reasonable Amount of Time: Resource

 

2006 Somewhat Agree

2006 Strongly Agree

Region 1

13%

4%

Region 2

4%

9%

Region 3

13%

17%

Region 4

12%

13%

Region 5

12%

8%

Region 6

12%

16%

Region 7

7%

9%

Region 8

7%

10%

Region 9

8%

7%

Region 10

12%

8%

The Entire Process Took a Reasonable Amount of Time: Transportation

 

2006 Somewhat Agree

2006 Strongly Agree

Region 1

8%

8%

Region 2

8%

6%

Region 3

10%

10%

Region 4

11%

15%

Region 5

12%

15%

Region 6

13%

16%

Region 7

4%

5%

Region 8

10%

12%

Region 9

10%

9%

Region 10

10%

9%

Summary: Neither Resource Reviewers or Transportation Reviewers had a large percentage of people who agreed with the statement that: The entire process took a reasonable amount of time.

 

The Process Was the Shortest It Could Have Been Without Compromising NEPA: Resource

 

2006 Somewhat Agree

2006 Strongly Agree

Region 1

9%

13%

Region 2

3%

8%

Region 3

17%

18%

Region 4

15%

12%

Region 5

10%

7%

Region 6

12%

15%

Region 7

6%

9%

Region 8

9%

7%

Region 9

7%

5%

Region 10

12%

8%

 

The Process Was the Shortest It Could Have Been Without Compromising NEPA: Resource

 

2006 Somewhat Agree

2006 Strongly Agree

Region 1

6%

10%

Region 2

7%

7%

Region 3

9%

11%

Region 4

11%

12%

Region 5

14%

14%

Region 6

13%

20%

Region 7

2%

4%

Region 8

10%

12%

Region 9

13%

5%

Region 10

9%

10%

Summary:  Neither Resource Reviewers or Transportation Reviewers had a large percentage of people who agreed with the statement that: The process was the shortest it could have been without compromising NEPA.

 

Suggested Solutions Regarding Timeliness

 

Transportation Reviewers

Resource Reviewers

Nothing

4

4

Better Communication/Direction

27

14

More Timely Responses

61

8

More Staffing/Less Turnover

25

4

Earlier Involvement & Coordination

14

7

Compromise Earlier/Better Problem Solving

15

6

Consistency/Not Changing Their Minds About Things

9

3

Streamline Process/Procedures

34

19

More Involvement & Coordination

20

3

Better Provision/Access To Information

13

9

Better Preparation/Pre-Project Planning

3

18

Better Cooperation

13

2

Summary: Overall, Resource Reviewers indicated timeliness issues could best be resolved by streamlining the process and procedures involved in dealing with projects; while Transportation Reviewers indicated timeliness issues could best be resolved by providing more timely responses when dealing with projects. The most divergent suggested solutions regarding timeliness issues were: better communication/direction, where 27 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 14 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution; more timely responses, where 61 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 8 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution;. More staffing/less turnover, where 25 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 4 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution; streamline process/procedures, where 34 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 19 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution; more involvement and coordination, where 20 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 3 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution; better preparation/pre-project planning, where 3 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 18 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution; better cooperation, where 13 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 2 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution. 

 

Relationship

Overall Relationship Rating Between Agencies: Resource

 

2006 Good

2006 Excellent

Region 1

9%

10%

Region 2

7%

4%

Region 3

11%

14%

Region 4

11%

16%

Region 5

11%

14%

Region 6

12%

12%

Region 7

5%

11%

Region 8

8%

12%

Region 9

12%

5%

Region 10

13%

4%

Overall Relationship Rating Between Agencies: Transportation

 

2006 Good

2006 Excellent

Region 1

9%

10%

Region 2

9%

5%

Region 3

8%

11%

Region 4

13%

11%

Region 5

13%

13%

Region 6

13%

13%

Region 7

8%

3%

Region 8

11%

17%

Region 9

8%

11%

Region 10

9%

5%

Summary: Neither Resource Reviewers or Transportation Reviewers had a large percentage of people who rated the relationship between agencies as being either excellent or good.

 

What Specifically Were You Missing?

 

Transportation Reviewers

Resource Reviewers

Nothing

6

0

Adequate Mitigation

7

6

Supply Accurate Data/Information/Plans

45

22

More Staffing/Less Turnover

4

11

Summary: Those Reviewers who did not think that their agency was provided with the materials, information, or documentation that was needed were asked specifically what it was that they were missing. The majority of both Transportation and Resource Reviewers surveyed agreed that what they were missing most often had to do with being supplied with accurate data/information/plans with 45 Transportation and 22 Resource Reviewers indicating that they were missing, or were not provided with, accurate data/information/plans from their sister agency.

 

Suggested Solutions Regarding Relationship

 

Transportation Reviewers

Resource Reviewers

Nothing

22

15

More Staff/Staff for Specific Role

141

43

More Training/Better Training/More Knowledgeable Staff

41

38

Increased Flexibility/Compromise/Consider Alternatives

74

30

Improve Communication/Responsiveness

92

110

Improve Internal Processes/Procedures/Efficiency

114

71

Earlier Involvement of Other Agencies

79

67

Increased Environmaental Awareness

11

81

Follow Through on Mitigation

11

28

Funding/Resource Issues

21

30

Improve Inter-Agency Relationship

91

77

Comply With NEPA

4

31

Follow Rules

15

24

Provide Adequate Information

24

25

Clear Mission/Goals/Objectives

35

6

Satisfied With Relationship

11

8

Summary: Overall, Resource Reviewers indicated that relationship issues could best be resolved by improving communication and responsiveness involved in dealing with projects; while Transportation Reviewers indicated that relationship issues could best be resolved by providing more staff/staff for specific roles when dealing with projects. The most divergent suggested solutions regarding relationship issues were: more staff/staff for specific roles, where 141 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 43 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution; increased flexibility, where 74 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 30 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution; improve internal processes, where 114 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 71 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution; increased environmental awareness, where 11 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 81 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution; comply with NEPA, where 4 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 31 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution; and clear mission/goals/objectives, where 35 Transportation Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution while 6 Resource Reviewers suggested it as a possible solution.

 

Overall Summary: Overall, Resource Reviewers indicated more problems with alternative analysis, disagreements/differences of opinion, and environmental/biological issues than with any other categories asked. Most of these issues deal with the relationship between agencies as well as the environment. Transportation Reviewers indicated more problems with lack of timely response. Resource Reviewers indicated that relationship issues could best be resolved by improving communication and responsiveness involved in dealing with projects; while Transportation Reviewers indicated that relationship issues could best be resolved by providing more staff/staff for specific roles when dealing with projects. To put it bluntly, Transportation Reviewers indicated timeliness issues could best be resolved by providing more timely responses when dealing with projects.

 

The issues expressed by both Resource and Transportation Reviewers are concerns with how smoothly (relationship issues) and efficiently (timeliness issues) the interaction between Resource and Transportation agencies runs. An efficiency index was calculated using timeliness, relationship between agencies, and solutions to these issues given by both Resource and Transportation Reviewers.

 

Four themes or types of solutions were suggested by both Resource and Transportation Reviewers with respect to timeliness and efficiency emerged: better communication, compromising earlier, more timely responses, and streamlining the project process. The pairing of these solutions is interesting in that having more open communication would allow for both better communication and the possibility of compromise earlier in the project process; also each agency being diligent to provide more timely responses is related to the project process becoming more streamlined. Other improvements needing to be made by Transportation Reviewers, according to Resource Reviewers, is to be more consistent and better prepared when interacting with Resource agencies. Additional improvements needing to be made by Resource Reviewers, according to Transportation Reviewers, is to be more involved when interacting with Transportation agencies.

 

An additional four themes or types of solutions were proposed by both Resource and Transportation Reviewers with respect to relationship and efficiency: more training, improve internal process, improved communication, and improving the inter-agency relationship during the project process. The pairing of these solutions is interesting in that having more open communication would allow for both better communication and help to improve inter-agency relationships during the project process; also each agency providing more training is related to improving the internal process of each agency while at the same time improving the inter-agency relationship and improving streamlining to the process which is related to solutions for timeliness issues as well. Other improvements needing to be made by Transportation Reviewers, according to Resource Reviewers, are to increase environmental awareness, provide better funding, and to become better at complying with rules and regulations when interacting with Resource agencies. Additional improvements needing to be made by Resource Reviewers, according to Transportation Reviewers, are to dedicate more staff to the process and increase flexibility when interacting with Transportation agencies.

 

Finally, with respect to relationships the following themes were given as possible improvements: providing more staff, more training for staff, improve internal processes, and improve the inter-agency relationship during the project process. The pairing of these solutions is interesting in that both agency Reviewers want more and better trained staff, also related to streamlining the process; also each agency improving their internal processes by providing more personnel who are better trained is related to improving the inter-agency relationship. Other improvements needing to be made by Transportation Reviewers, according to Resource Reviewers, is to increase early involvement when interacting with Resource agencies. An additional improvement needing to be made by Resource Reviewers, according to Transportation Reviewers, is to increase flexibility when interacting with Transportation agencies.

 

Themes running throughout open ended responses provided by respondents deal with better communication to improve inter-agency relationships and better trained personnel to help streamline and improve internal processes. These solutions and themes are agreed upon by both Resource and Transportation Reviewers.