reglab/statecodes huggingface dataset:
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-100 - Information required of applicants

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
Further information may be required if the responsible official
				  determines that the information initially supplied is not reasonably adequate to
				  fulfill the purposes for which it is required. An applicant may, at any time,
				  voluntarily submit information beyond that required under these rules. An agency
				  is allowed to require information from an applicant in the following
				  areas:
(1)
Environmental
				checklist.
An applicant may be required to complete the environmental
				checklist in WAC
				197-11-960 in connection with
				filing an application (see WAC
				197-11-315). Additional
				information may be required at an applicant's expense, but not until after
				initial agency review of the checklist (WAC
				197-11-315 and
				197-11-335).
(2)
Threshold determination.
Any
				additional information required by an agency after its initial review of the
				checklist shall be limited to those elements on the checklist for which the lead
				agency has determined that information accessible to the agency is not reasonably
				sufficient to evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposal. The lead agency
				may require field investigations or research by the applicant reasonably related
				to determining a proposal's environmental impacts (WAC
				197-11-335). An applicant may
				clarify or revise the checklist at any time prior to a threshold determination.
				Revision of a checklist after a threshold determination is issued shall be made
				under WAC 197-11-340 or
				197-11-360.
(3)
Environmental impact
				statements.
The responsible official may require an applicant to provide
				relevant information that is not in the possession of the lead agency. Although
				an agency may include additional analysis not required under SEPA in an EIS (WAC
				197-11-440(8),
				197-11-448(4) and
				197-11-640), the agency shall not
				require the applicant to furnish such information, under these rules. An
				applicant shall not be required to provide information requested of a consulted
				agency until the agency has responded or the time allowed for the consulted
				agency's response has elapsed, whichever is earlier. Preparation of an EIS by the
				applicant is in WAC
				197-11-420.
Statutory Authority:
					 RCW
					 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), §
											197-11-100, filed 2/10/84,
					 effective 4/4/84.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-158 - SEPA/GMA project review - Reliance on existing plans, laws, and regulations

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) In reviewing
				the environmental impacts of a project and making a threshold determination, a
				GMA county/city may, at its option, determine that the requirements for
				environmental analysis, protection, and mitigation measures in the GMA
				county/city's development regulations and comprehensive plan adopted under
				chapter
				36.70A RCW, and in other
				applicable local, state, or federal laws or rules, provide adequate analysis of
				and mitigation for some or all of the specific adverse environmental impacts of
				the project.
(2) In making the
				determination under subsection (1) of this section, the GMA county/city shall:
(a) Review the environmental checklist and
				other information about the project;
(b) Identify the specific probable adverse
				environmental impacts of the project and determine whether the impacts have been:
(i) Identified in the comprehensive plan,
				subarea plan, or applicable development regulations through the planning and
				environmental review process under
				chapter
				36.70A RCW or this chapter,
				or in other local, state, or federal rules or laws; and
(ii) Adequately addressed in the comprehensive
				plan, subarea plan, applicable development regulations, or other local, state, or
				federal rules or laws by:
(A) Avoiding or
				otherwise mitigating the impacts; or
(B) The legislative body of the GMA county/city
				designating as acceptable the impacts associated with certain levels of service,
				land use designations, development standards, or other land use planning required
				or allowed by
				chapter
				36.70A RCW;
(c) Base or condition
				approval of the project on compliance with the requirements or mitigation
				measures in the comprehensive plan, subarea plan, applicable development
				regulations, or other local, state, or federal rules or laws; and
(d) Place the following statement in the
				threshold determination if all of a project's impacts are addressed by other
				applicable laws and no conditions will be required under SEPA: "The lead agency
				has determined that the requirements for environmental analysis, protection, and
				mitigation measures have been adequately addressed in the development regulations
				and comprehensive plan adopted under
				chapter
				36.70A RCW, and in other
				applicable local, state, or federal laws or rules, as provided by
				RCW
				   43.21C.240 and WAC
				197-11-158. Our agency will not
				require any additional mitigation measures under SEPA."
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-164 - Planned actions-Definition and criteria

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1)
				Under RCW     43.21C.440, GMA counties/cities may designate a planned action. A
				planned action means one or more types of project action that:
(a) Are designated planned actions by an
				ordinance or resolution adopted by a GMA county/city;
(b) In conjunction with, or to implement, a
				comprehensive plan or subarea plan adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW, or a fully
				contained community, a master planned resort, a master planned development, or
				a phased project, have had the significant impacts adequately addressed:
(i) In an environmental impact statement
				under the requirements of this chapter; or
(ii) In a threshold determination or, where
				one is appropriate, in an environmental impact statement under the requirements
				of this chapter, if the planned action contains mixed use or residential
				development and encompasses an area that:
(A)
				Is within one-half mile of a major transit stop; or
(B) Will be within one-half mile of a major
				transit stop no later than five years from the date of the designation of the
				planned action;
(c) Are subsequent or implementing projects
				for the proposals listed in (b) of this subsection;
(d) Are located within an urban growth area,
				as defined in RCW     36.70A.030, or are located within a master planned
				resort;
(e) Are not essential
				public facilities, as defined in RCW     36.70A.200; and
(f) Are consistent with a comprehensive plan
				adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-168 - Ordinances or resolutions designating planned actions - Procedures for adoption

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) If a GMA county/city chooses to designate a
				planned action, the planned action must be designated by ordinance or resolution.
				Public notice and opportunity for public comment shall be provided as part of the
				agency's process for adopting the ordinance or resolution.
(2) The ordinance or resolution:
(a) Shall describe the type(s) of project
				action being designated as a planned action;
(b) Shall describe how the planned action meets
				the criteria in WAC
				197-11-164 (including specific
				reference to the EIS that addresses any significant environmental impacts of the
				planned action);
(c) Shall include a
				finding that the environmental impacts of the planned action have been identified
				and adequately addressed in the EIS, subject to project review under WAC
				197-11-172; and
(d) Should identify any specific mitigation
				measures other than applicable development regulations that must be applied to a
				project for it to qualify as the planned action.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-172 - Planned actions-Project review

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1)
				Review of a project proposed as a planned action is intended to be simpler and
				more focused than for other projects. A project proposed as a planned action
				must qualify as the planned action designated in the planned action ordinance
				or resolution, and must meet the statutory criteria for a planned action in RCW
				    43.21C.440. Planned action project review shall include:
(a) Verification that the project meets the
				description in, and will implement any applicable conditions or mitigation
				measures identified in, the designating ordinance or resolution; and
(b) Verification that the probable
				significant adverse environmental impacts of the project have been adequately
				addressed in the EIS or threshold determination prepared under WAC 197-11-164(1)(b) through review of an environmental checklist or other project review
				form as specified in WAC 197-11-315, filed with the project
				application.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-210 - SEPA/GMA integration

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) The purpose of
				WAC 197-11-210 through
				197-11-235 is to authorize GMA
				counties/cities to integrate the requirements of SEPA and the Growth Management
				Act (GMA) to ensure that environmental analyses under SEPA can occur concurrently
				with and as an integral part of the planning and decision making under GMA.
				Nothing in these sections is intended to jeopardize the adequacy or require the
				revision of any SEPA or GMA processes, analyses or document deadlines specified
				in GMA.
(2) GMA counties/cities may
				use the procedures of these rules to satisfy the requirements of SEPA for GMA
				actions. Other jurisdictions planning under GMA may also use these integration
				procedures.
(3) Environmental
				analysis at each stage of the GMA planning process should, at a minimum, address
				the environmental impacts associated with planning decisions at that stage of the
				planning process. Impacts associated with later planning stages may also be
				addressed. Environmental analysis that analyzes environmental impacts in the GMA
				planning process can:
(a) Result in
				better-informed GMA planning decisions;
(b) Avoid delays, duplication and paperwork in
				project-level environmental analysis; and
(c) Narrow the scope of environmental review
				and mitigation under SEPA at the project level.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-220 - SEPA/GMA definitions

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
For purposes of SEPA:
(1) "Formal SEPA documents" mean:
(a) A nonproject environmental
				checklist/DNS;
(b) A notice of
				adoption with or without an addendum;
(c) An addendum;
(d) An EIS; or
(e) An integrated GMA document.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-228 - Overall SEPA/GMA integration procedures

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) "Joint process." GMA jurisdictions are
				authorized to combine SEPA and GMA processes and analyses and to issue combined
				documents.
(2) "Phasing and level of
				detail." To integrate SEPA and GMA:
(a) The
				appropriate scope and level of detail of environmental review should be tailored
				to the GMA action being developed or considered for adoption.
(b) Jurisdictions may modify SEPA phased review
				as necessary to track the phasing of GMA actions, as provided in GMA and the
				procedural criteria in chapter 365-195 WAC. (For example, actions of narrower
				scope, such as interim urban growth boundaries or interim development
				regulations, subarea plans, and plan elements may be adopted prior to GMA actions
				of broader scope, such as an overall comprehensive plan revision.)
(c) The process of integrating SEPA and GMA
				should begin at the early stages of plan development. One purpose of an
				integrated GMA document (see WAC
				197-11-235)  is to ensure that
				studies conducted early in the planning and environmental analysis process are
				available and useful throughout the planning and analysis process (see WAC
				197-11-230(2) and
				197-11-235). Although early
				planning documents and environmental analyses such as documents on concepts or
				plan elements, may serve specific purposes and are not each required to be
				comprehensive in scope, they should explain their relationship to the overall
				GMA/SEPA process that is underway and identify how cumulative impacts are being
				considered.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-230 - Timing of an integrated GMA/SEPA process

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) A formal SEPA document (which may be a
				draft integrated GMA document under WAC
				197-11-235) :
(a) Shall be prepared and issued no later than
				the time that a proposed GMA action is issued for public and interagency review.
				For comprehensive plans and development regulations, the date of issue shall be
				at least sixty days prior to final adoption under
				RCW
				   36.70A.106;
(b) Shall be provided:
(i) To the legislative body that will consider
				issuing a GMA action; and
(ii) To any
				advisory body designated by the local legislative body or chief executive of the
				city or county to make a formal recommendation to the local legislative body on
				whether to propose a GMA action. The draft document shall also be circulated as
				otherwise required by WAC
				197-11-455 or
				197-11-340 as
				appropriate.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-232 - SEPA/GMA integration procedures for preliminary planning, environmental analysis, and expanded scoping

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1)
				"Preliminary environmental analyses." GMA jurisdictions may prepare environmental
				analyses for use by decision makers and the public to assist in developing and
				reviewing preliminary drafts of GMA documents. Environmental analyses prepared
				for use in such preliminary GMA planning:
(a) Do
				not require a threshold determination;
(b) May be separate from, or woven into, issue
				papers or other agency planning materials or presentations;
(c) May use the format of SEPA documents,
				including a nonproject environmental checklist (Part D of WAC
				197-11-960)  or addendum (WAC
				197-11-706,
				197-11-625).
(d) May include evaluation of issues and
				concerns that are not required in SEPA documents, such as economic or other
				factors identified in GMA, SEPA, and WAC
				197-11-448.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-235 - SEPA/GMA integration documents

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1)
				"Integrating documents." Formal SEPA documents may be prepared as companion
				documents to accompany proposed GMA actions or may be integrated into the
				documentation of GMA actions. This section clarifies how WAC
				197-11-640 (all SEPA documents) and
				WAC 197-11-425 through
				197-11-442 (EISs) apply to
				integrated SEPA/ GMA documents. The overriding consideration is the quality of
				information and analysis at the appropriate scope and level of detail for the
				particular GMA document, and not the format, length or bulk of the
				document.
(2) "Document format."
(a) There is no standard format for an
				integrated GMA document. For example an integrated comprehensive plan may look
				more like a plan preceded by an environmental summary (see WAC
				197-11-235 (5, in contrast to a
				format described in WAC
				197-11-430. Any separately bound
				supporting documents shall be clearly identified in the integrated
				document.
(b) An integrated GMA
				document is not required to contain a separate section on affected environment,
				significant impacts, and mitigation measures under WAC
				197-11-440(6), as
				long as this information is summarized as required by this section, and the basis
				for this information can be readily found in the document and the supporting
				record.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-238 - SEPA/GMA integration monitoring

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
Monitoring information is important to maintain the usefulness
				  of the environmental analysis in plans and development regulations for
				  project-level review and to update plans under
				  chapter
				  36.70A RCW. GMA
				  counties/cities are encouraged to establish a process for monitoring the
				  cumulative impacts of permit decisions and conditions, and to use that data to
				  update the information about existing conditions for the built and natural
				  environment. If a monitoring process is developed, it should be established at
				  the time information on existing conditions is developed. Annual or periodic
				  reports summarizing the data and documenting trends are
				  encouraged.
Statutory Authority: 1995 c 347 (ESHB 1724) and
					 RCW
					    43.21C.110. 97-21-030 (Order 95-16), §
											197-11-238, filed 10/10/97,
					 effective 11/10/97.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-250 - SEPA/Model Toxics Control Act integration

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) WAC
				197-11-253 through
				197-11-268 integrate the procedural
				requirements and documents of this chapter with those required under the Model
				Toxics Control Act (MTCA),
				chapter
				70.105D RCW, and chapter
				173-340 WAC.
(2) Both MTCA and SEPA
				provide opportunities for early public review of a proposal. The following
				sections contain procedures to combine the MTCA and SEPA processes to reduce
				duplication and improve public participation. These sections supplement the other
				requirements of this chapter. To the extent there is a conflict, these sections
				supersede any conflicting provisions of this chapter.
(3) WAC
				197-11-253 through
				197-11-268 apply to remedial
				actions as defined in
				RCW
				   70.105D.020(12) and conducted
				by ecology or by a potentially liable person (PLP) under an order, agreed order,
				or consent decree under MTCA. These sections do not apply to independent remedial
				actions; rather, the remainder of this chapter applies to independent remedial
				actions that are subject to SEPA.
(4)
				When the remedial action is part of a development proposal, the procedures in WAC
				197-11-256 through
				197-11-268 shall be used to combine
				the procedural requirements of SEPA and MTCA, to the extent
				practicable.
(5) To effectively
				integrate the procedural requirements of SEPA and MTCA, the SEPA elements of the
				environment that could be impacted need to be identified as early in the MTCA
				process as possible. Early consideration of SEPA facilitates identification of
				study areas prior to conducting the remedial investigation/feasibility study
				(RI/FS) and effective, timely integration of SEPA and MTCA documents. The
				threshold determination may be delayed until later in the MTCA process.
(6) WAC
				197-11-256 through
				197-11-268 do not change the
				categorical exemption for information collection in WAC
				197-11-800(17) or
				the emergency exemption in WAC
				197-11-880.
(7) Interim actions (WAC
				173-340-430)  conducted as part of
				a remedial action conducted by ecology, or by a potentially liable person under
				an order, agreed order, or consent decree under MTCA are governed by WAC
				197-11-268.
Statutory Authority:
					 RCW
					 43.21A.090,
					 chapter
					 43.21C RCW,
					 RCW
					 43.21C.035,
					 43.21C.037,
					 43.21C.038,
					 43.21C.0381,
					 43.21C.0382,
					 43.21C.0383,
					 43.21C.110,
					 43.21C.222. 03-16-067 (Order 02-12),
					 §
											197-11-250, filed 8/1/03, effective
					 9/1/03. Statutory Authority:
					 RCW
					    43.21C.110. 95-08-041 (Order 94-22), §
											197-11-250, filed 3/31/95,
					 effective 5/1/95.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-253 - SEPA lead agency for MTCA actions

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1)
				The lead agency should be determined as soon as possible after ecology has
				identified the PLPs for a facility and must be identified prior to issuing an
				order, agreed order, or consent decree, or prior to issuing the scope of work for
				an ecology conducted remedial action.
(2) Ecology will be lead agency for any
				remedial action conducted by ecology, or by a PLP under an order, agreed order,
				or consent decree, except for the situations described in subsections (3) and (4)
				of this section.
(3) Except as
				provided in subsection (4) of this section, an agency that will be conducting a
				remedial action under a MTCA order, agreed order, or consent decree will be lead
				agency provided there is no objection by another agency determined by ecology to
				be a PLP for the facility.
(a) If there are
				multiple agency PLPs, the agencies shall by agreement determine which agency will
				be lead agency. If the agencies cannot reach agreement, the agency that owns the
				largest acreage within the facility shall be lead agency. In any other instance
				where the agencies cannot agree, ecology will be lead agency.
(b) Prior to making a threshold determination,
				the lead agency may:
(i) Transfer lead agency
				status to ecology;
(ii) Invite
				ecology to share lead agency status; or
(iii) Retain lead agency status.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-256 - Preliminary evaluation

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) Prior to
				conducting a RI/FS under MTCA (WAC
				173-340-350), the lead agency
				shall evaluate the available information on the hazardous substances at the
				facility and take one of the following steps:
(a) Make a preliminary decision that the
				remedial action is unlikely to have a probable significant adverse environmental
				impact and proceed according to WAC
				197-11-259.
(b) Decide that all or part of the remedial
				action or its impacts are not sufficiently definite to make a preliminary
				determination and proceed with early scoping prior to making a threshold
				determination, following the procedures in WAC
				197-11-265.
(c) Decide the remedial action will have a
				probable significant adverse environmental impact and issue a determination of
				significance following the procedures in WAC
				197-11-262.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-259 - Determination of nonsignificance for MTCA remedial action

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) If the remedial action will not have a
				probable significant adverse environmental impact, a DNS shall be issued no
				earlier than the RI/FS and no later than the draft cleanup action plan. If the
				lead agency made a preliminary decision under WAC
				197-11-256(1)(a) that a DS was unlikely, prior to issuing a DNS the responsible official shall
				consider any additional information about adverse environmental impacts generated
				during the RI/FS process.
(2) The
				public comment period on the DNS shall be the same as the comment period on the
				MTCA document, provided that for proposals listed in WAC
				197-11-340(2)(a) the comment period is no less than fourteen days prior to the effective date of
				the MTCA document. One public notice shall be used to announce the availability
				of both the DNS and MTCA document, consistent with the requirements of WAC
				173-340-600 and
				197-11-340.
Statutory Authority: 1995 c 347 (ESHB 1724) and
					 RCW
					 43.21C.110. 97-21-030 (Order 95-16), §
											197-11-259, filed 10/10/97,
					 effective 11/10/97. Statutory Authority:
					 RCW
					 43.21C.110. 95-08-041 (Order 94-22), §
											197-11-259, filed 3/31/95,
					 effective 5/1/95.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-262 - Determination of significance and EIS for MTCA remedial actions

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) The following applies to remedial actions
				that will have a probable significant adverse environmental impact.
(2) If the preliminary evaluation in WAC
				197-11-256 results in a
				determination of significance, the scoping notice may be combined with either the
				MTCA public review process for the scope of work for an ecology conducted RI/FS
				(WAC 173-340-600(12)(a)), or with the public review process for the
				order, consent decree or agreed order covering an RI/FS.
(3) If a determination of significance is
				issued later in the MTCA process and early scoping has been done under WAC
				197-11-265, no additional SEPA
				scoping is required. If early scoping has not been done, scoping shall be
				completed consistent with WAC
				197-11-408 or
				197-11-410.
(4) The EIS may be integrated with the RI/FS.
				The format of the document shall be flexible as allowed by WAC
				197-11-640, provided:
(a) The fact sheet shall be the first section
				(WAC 197-11-430(1));
(b) A summary shall be included
				which meets the requirements in WAC
				197-11-440(4);
				and
(c) Reasonable alternatives as
				defined in WAC
				197-11-786 and
				197-11-440(5) (including the no action alternative), significant adverse impacts, mitigation
				measures and any unavoidable impacts are clearly identified.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-265 - Early scoping for MTCA remedial actions

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1)
				The purpose of early scoping is to identify possible environmental issues prior
				to making a threshold determination. If early scoping is used and a determination
				of significance is issued later in the process, no additional SEPA scoping is
				required.
(2) If, after the
				preliminary evaluation provided in WAC
				197-11-256, the lead agency decides
				there is insufficient information to make a preliminary determination, pursuant
				to WAC 197-11-256(1)(b),
				the lead agency shall invite the public to comment on the proposed study areas.
				This early scoping will typically be combined with either the MTCA public review
				process for the scope of work for an ecology conducted RI/FS (WAC
				173-340-600(12)(a)), or the public review process for the order,
				consent decree, or agreed order for a RI/FS.
(3) The lead agency shall evaluate the comments
				received during the early scoping process and take one of the following actions:
(a) Determine the project will have a probable
				significant adverse environmental impact, issue a determination of significance
				and begin preparation of the EIS pursuant to WAC
				197-11-262.
(b) Make a preliminary decision that there will
				be no probable significant adverse environmental impacts, and proceed as
				described in WAC
				197-11-259.
(c) Determine there is still insufficient
				information to evaluate the environmental impacts of the remedial action, and
				proceed with the RI/FS. A threshold determination shall be made pursuant to WAC
				197-11-259 or
				197-11-262 as
				appropriate.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part TWO - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS › Section 197-11-268 - MTCA interim actions

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
The following shall apply when an interim action (WAC
				  173-340-430)  is conducted as part
				  of a remedial action conducted by ecology, or by a potentially liable person
				  under an order, agreed order, or consent decree under MTCA.
(1) If the interim action will not have a
				probable significant adverse environmental impact, the lead agency shall issue a
				DNS which may be combined with the public notice of the interim action, provided
				that for proposals listed in WAC
				197-11-340(2)(a) the comment period is no less than fifteen days prior to the effective date of
				the MTCA document.
(2) If the interim
				action will have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, the lead
				agency shall issue a determination of significance. If early scoping has already
				been performed for the facility under WAC
				197-11-265, no additional scoping
				is required. If early scoping has not been performed, the lead agency shall issue
				a DS and scoping notice, allowing at least a twenty-one day advance comment
				period (WAC
				197-11-408).
(3) The final EIS shall be issued no later than
				the issuance of the interim action report or the issuance of an order, agreed
				order, or decree.
Statutory Authority:
					 RCW
					 43.21C.110. 95-08-041 (Order 94-22), §
											197-11-268, filed 3/31/95,
					 effective 5/1/95.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-300 - Purpose of this part

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
This part provides rules for:
(1) Administering categorical exemptions for
				proposals that would not have probable significant adverse impacts;
(2) Deciding whether a proposal has a probable
				significant adverse impact and thus requires an EIS (the threshold
				determination);
(3) Providing a way
				to review and mitigate nonexempt proposals through the threshold
				determination;
(4) Integrating the
				environmental analysis required by SEPA into early planning to ensure appropriate
				consideration of SEPA's policies and to eliminate duplication and delay;
				and
(5) Integrating the environmental
				analysis required by SEPA into the project review process.
Statutory Authority: 1995 c 347 (ESHB 1724) and
					 RCW
					 43.21C.110. 97-21-030 (Order 95-16), §
											197-11-300, filed 10/10/97,
					 effective 11/10/97. Statutory Authority:
					 RCW
					 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), §
											197-11-300, filed 2/10/84,
					 effective 4/4/84.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-305 - Categorical exemptions

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) If a proposal
				fits within any of the provisions in Part Nine of these rules, the proposal shall
				be categorically exempt from threshold determination requirements (WAC
				197-11-720)
except
as follows:
(a) The
				proposal is not exempt under WAC
				197-11-908, critical
				areas.
(b) The proposal is a segment
				of a proposal that includes:
(i) A series of
				actions, physically or functionally related to each other, some of which are
				categorically exempt and some of which are not; or
(ii) A series of exempt actions that are
				physically or functionally related to each other, and that together may have a
				probable significant adverse environmental impact in the judgment of an agency
				with jurisdiction. If so, that agency shall be the lead agency, unless the
				agencies with jurisdiction agree that another agency should be the lead agency.
				Agencies may petition the department of ecology to resolve disputes (WAC
				197-11-946).
For such proposals, the agency or applicant may proceed with
				  the exempt aspects of the proposals, prior to conducting environmental review, if
				  the requirements of WAC
				  197-11-070 are met.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-310 - Threshold determination required

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) A
				threshold determination is required for any proposal which meets the definition
				of action and is not categorically exempt, subject to the limitations in WAC
				197-11-600(3) concerning proposals for which a threshold determination has already been issued,
				or statutorily exempt as provided in
				chapter
				43.21C RCW. A threshold
				determination is not required for a planned action (refer to WAC
				197-11-164 through
				197-11-172).
(2) The responsible official of the lead agency
				shall make the threshold determination, which shall be made as close as possible
				to the time an agency has developed or is presented with a proposal (WAC
				197-11-784). If the lead agency is
				a GMA county/city, that agency must meet the timing requirements in subsection
				(6) of this section.
(3) The
				responsible official shall make a threshold determination no later than ninety
				days after the application and supporting documentation are determined to be
				complete. The applicant may request an additional thirty days for the threshold
				determination (RCW    43.21C.033).
(4) The time limit in subsection (3) of this
				section shall not apply to a county/city that:
(a) By ordinance adopted prior to April 1,
				1992, has adopted procedures to integrate permit and land use decisions with SEPA
				requirements; or
(b) Is planning
				under RCW
				   36.70A.040(GMA) and is subject
				to the requirements of subsection (6) of this section.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-315 - Environmental checklist

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) Agencies shall use
				the environmental checklist substantially in the form found in WAC
				197-11-960 to assist in making
				threshold determinations for proposals, except for:
(a) Public proposals on which the lead agency
				has decided to prepare its own EIS; or
(b) Proposals on which the lead agency and
				applicant agree an EIS will be prepared; or
(c) Projects which are proposed as planned
				actions (see subsection (2) of this section); or
(d) Projects where questions on the checklist
				are adequately covered by existing legal authorities (see subsection (6) of this
				section); or
(e) Nonproject proposals
				where the lead agency determines that questions in Part B do not contribute
				meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. In such cases, Parts A, C, and D at
				a minimum shall be completed.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-330 - Threshold determination process

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
An EIS is required for proposals for legislation and other
				  major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The lead
				  agency decides whether an EIS is required in the threshold determination process,
				  as described below.
(1) In making a
				threshold determination, the responsible official shall:
(a) Review the environmental checklist, if
				used:
(i) Independently evaluating the responses
				of any applicant and indicating the result of its evaluation in the DS, in the
				DNS, or on the checklist; and
(ii)
				Conducting its initial review of the environmental checklist and any supporting
				documents without requiring additional information from the applicant.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-335 - Additional information

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based
				  upon information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a
				  proposal (WAC
				  197-11-055(2) and
				  197-11-060(3)).
				  The lead agency may take one or more of the following actions if, after reviewing
				  the checklist, the agency concludes that there is insufficient information to
				  make its threshold determination:
(1)
				Require an applicant to submit more information on subjects in the
				checklist;
(2) Make its own further
				study, including physical investigations on a proposed site;
(3) Consult with other agencies, requesting
				information on the proposal's potential impacts which lie within the other
				agencies' jurisdiction or expertise (agencies shall respond in accordance with
				WAC 197-11-550); or
(4) Decide that all or part of the action or
				its impacts are not sufficiently definite to allow environmental analysis and
				commit to timely, subsequent environmental analysis, consistent with WAC
				197-11-055 through
				197-11-070.
Statutory Authority:
					 RCW
					 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), §
											197-11-335, filed 2/10/84,
					 effective 4/4/84.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-340 - Determination of nonsignificance (DNS)

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) If
				the responsible official determines there will be no probable significant adverse
				environmental impacts from a proposal, the lead agency shall prepare and issue a
				determination of nonsignificance (DNS) substantially in the form provided in WAC
				197-11-970. If an agency adopts
				another environmental document in support of a threshold determination (Part
				Six), the notice of adoption (WAC
				197-11-965)  and the DNS shall be
				combined or attached to each other.
(2) When a DNS is issued for any of the
				proposals listed in (2)(a), the requirements in this subsection shall be met. The
				requirements of this subsection do not apply to a DNS issued when the optional
				DNS process in WAC
				197-11-355 is used.
(a) An agency shall not act upon a proposal for
				fourteen days after the date of issuance of a DNS if the proposal involves:
(i) Another agency with jurisdiction;
(ii) Demolition of any structure or facility
				not exempted by WAC
				197-11-800(2)(f) or 197-11-880;
(iii) Issuance of clearing or grading permits
				not exempted in Part Nine of these rules;
(iv) A DNS under WAC
				197-11-350(2), (3)   
				or 197-11-360(4);
				or
(v) A GMA action.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-350 - Mitigated DNS

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
The purpose of this section is to allow clarifications or
				  changes to a proposal prior to making the threshold determination.
(1) In making threshold determinations, an
				agency may consider mitigation measures that the agency or applicant will
				implement.
(2) After submission of an
				environmental checklist and prior to the lead agency's threshold determination on
				a proposal, an applicant may ask the lead agency to indicate whether it is
				considering a DS. If the lead agency indicates a DS is likely, the applicant may
				clarify or change features of the proposal to mitigate the impacts which led the
				agency to consider a DS likely. The applicant shall revise the environmental
				checklist as may be necessary to describe the clarifications or changes. The lead
				agency shall make its threshold determination based upon the changed or clarified
				proposal. If a proposal continues to have a probable significant adverse
				environmental impact, even with mitigation measures, an EIS shall be
				prepared.
(3) Whether or not an
				applicant requests early notice under subsection (2), if the lead agency
				specifies mitigation measures on an applicant's proposal that would allow it to
				issue a DNS, and the proposal is clarified, changed, or conditioned to include
				those measures, the lead agency shall issue a DNS.
(4) Environmental documents need not be revised
				and resubmitted if the clarifications or changes are stated in writing in
				documents that are attachments to, or incorporate by reference, the documents
				previously submitted. An addendum may be used, see Part Six.
(5) Agencies may clarify or change features of
				their own proposal, and may specify mitigation measures in their DNSs, as a
				result of comments by other agencies or the public or as a result of additional
				agency planning.
(6) An agency's
				indication under this section that a DS appears likely shall not be construed as
				a determination of significance. Likewise, the preliminary discussion of
				clarifications or changes to a proposal shall not bind the lead agency to a
				mitigated DNS.
(7) Agencies may
				specify procedures for enforcement of mitigation measures in their agency SEPA
				procedures.
Statutory Authority:
					 RCW
					 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), §
											197-11-350, filed 2/10/84,
					 effective 4/4/84.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-355 - Optional DNS process

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) If a GMA
				county/city with an integrated project review process (RCW
				   36.70B.060)  is lead agency for a proposal and
				has a reasonable basis for determining significant adverse environmental impacts
				are unlikely, it may use a single integrated comment period to obtain comments on
				the notice of application and the likely threshold determination for the
				proposal. If this process is used, a second comment period will typically not be
				required when the DNS is issued (refer to subsection (4) of this
				section).
(2) If the lead agency uses
				the optional process specified in subsection (1) of this section, the lead agency
				shall:
(a) State on the first page of the notice
				of application that it expects to issue a DNS for the proposal, and that:
(i) The optional DNS process is being
				used;
(ii) This may be the only
				opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal;
(iii) The proposal may include mitigation
				measures under applicable codes, and the project review process may incorporate
				or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared;
				and
(iv) A copy of the subsequent
				threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request
				(in addition, the lead agency may choose to maintain a general mailing list for
				threshold determination distribution).
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-360 - Determination of significance (DS)/initiation of scoping

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1) If the responsible official determines that
				a proposal may have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, the
				responsible official shall prepare and issue a determination of significance (DS)
				substantially in the form provided in WAC
				197-11-980. The DS shall describe
				the main elements of the proposal, the location of the site, if a site-specific
				proposal, and the main areas the lead agency has identified for discussion in the
				EIS. A copy of the environmental checklist may be attached.
(2) If an agency adopts another environmental
				document in support of a threshold determination (Part Six), the notice of
				adoption (WAC
				197-11-965)  and the DS shall be
				combined or attached to each other.
(3) The responsible official shall put the DS
				in the lead agency's file and shall commence scoping (WAC
				197-11-408)  by circulating copies
				of the DS to the applicant, agencies with jurisdiction and expertise, if any,
				affected tribes, and to the public. Notice shall be given under WAC
				197-11-510. The lead agency is not
				required to scope if the agency is adopting another environmental document for
				the EIS or is preparing a supplemental EIS.
(4) If at any time after the issuance of a DS a
				proposal is changed so, in the judgment of the lead agency, there are no probable
				significant adverse environmental impacts, the DS shall be withdrawn and a DNS
				issued instead. The DNS shall be sent to all who commented on the DS. A proposal
				shall not be considered changed until all license applications for the proposal
				are revised to conform to the changes or other binding commitments made by
				agencies or by applicants.
Statutory Authority:
					 RCW
					 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), §
											197-11-360, filed 2/10/84,
					 effective 4/4/84.
Washington Administrative Code › Title 197 - Ecology, Department of (Environmental Policy, Council on) › Chapter 197-11 - SEPA rules › Part THREE - CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATION › Section 197-11-390 - Effect of threshold determination

Current through Register Vol. 24-14, July 15, 2024
(1)
				When the responsible official makes a threshold determination, it is final and
				binding on all agencies, subject to the provisions of this section and WAC
				197-11-340,
				197-11-360, and Part Six.
(2) The responsible official's threshold
				determination:
(a) For proposals listed in WAC
				197-11-340(2),
				shall not be final until fourteen days after issuance.
(b) Shall not apply if another agency with
				jurisdiction assumes lead agency status under WAC
				197-11-948.
(c) Shall not apply when withdrawn by the
				responsible official under WAC
				197-11-340 or
				197-11-360.
(d) Shall not apply when reversed on
				appeal.