1 / 23

Introduction to SEPA State Environmental Policy Act

Introduction to SEPA State Environmental Policy Act. By Whatcom County Planning and Development Services Director Hal Hart AICP October 2004. Current Whatcom County Land Use Division 2004. Land Use Div. Manager. Div. Adm. Senior Planner SEPA Official. Subdivision Senior Planner.

boyd
Télécharger la présentation

Introduction to SEPA State Environmental Policy Act

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Introduction to SEPAState Environmental Policy Act By Whatcom County Planning and Development Services Director Hal Hart AICP October 2004

  2. Current Whatcom County Land UseDivision 2004 Land Use Div. Manager Div. Adm. Senior Planner SEPA Official Subdivision Senior Planner County Geologist Senior Planner Wetlands Specialist Planner II Zoning Senior Planner Enforcement Subdivision Planner II Shoreline Adm Planner II Wetland Specialist Planner I Zoning Planner II (.5FTE) Enforcement Subdivision Planner II Shoreline Planner I (.5 FTE) Wetland Specialist Planner I (Seasonal) Zoning Tech Enforcement Planner I Floater Fill and Grade Clerk Interns

  3. SEPA State Environmental Policy Act RCW 43.21C WAC 197-11 Whatcom County Washington November 2004

  4. SEPA Enacted in 1971 • Resembles NEPA (1969) • NEPA Required for all Federal Non Categorically Excluded “Actions” • First NEPA EIS was for the Alyeska Trans-Alaskan Oil Pipeline • 8 pages to more than Paperwork.

  5. SEPA Requires All State Agencies and Local Governments To: • Utilize a systemic and interdisciplinary approach to insure the integrated use of natural and social sciences for all “actions” • Ensure that environmental values are given appropriate consideration in decision making

  6. Proposed Actions (197-11-704) • Project Actions • New construction (BLD, LSS, PUD, BSP, etc.) • Landfills and excavations • Timber harvests (Forest Practice Permits or Hydraulic Permit Applications) • demolition

  7. Non Project Actions • Comprehensive Plans (maps and text) • Zoning ordinances (maps and text) • Development regulations (e.g. moratoriums) • Plans (e.g. WRIA 1, Land Use, etc…,)

  8. Categorical Exemptions(197-11-800) • Minor New Construction • Repair and Maintenance • Nonconforming developments • Water Rights • Business or Budgetary Activities of Agencies • Some Utilities Projects

  9. SEPA Review Process • Application or Agency Proposal Initiated • Review for Categorical Exemption • Determine SEPA Lead Agency • (197-11-922 to 948) • State or Local Responsibility for Determination • Evaluate the Environmental Checklist and Application Materials • 197-11-960

  10. Review Process Continued… • Consult with Staff and Other Agencies • Washington State Department of Wildlife • Washington State Department of Natural Res. • Washington State Department of Ecology • Make the Threshold Determination • (197-11-300)

  11. SEPA Threshold Determinations • Determination of Non Significance (DNS) • Mitigated Determination of Non Significance (MDNS) • Determination of Significance (DS)

  12. DNS • May Require a 14 – day Public Comment Period • MDNS, another agency with jurisdiction, GMA action, excavation, etc. • Published in Local Legal Notices • Appealable Determination • Evaluate Comments • May be Withdrawn Prior to Decision

  13. MDNS • Requires a 14-day Public Comment Period • Mitigating Measure(s) Become Permit Conditions • Appealable Determination • Evaluate Comments • May be Withdrawn or Modified Prior to Decision

  14. The DS • Issued when there is a likelihood of significant environmental impacts • EIS is Required • 21-day EIS Scoping Period for Public and Agency Input to Develop the Scope of the EIS • Final Scoping • Appealable Determination • EIS Preparations

  15. The EIS • Documentation of Technical and Scientific Studies to Inform the “Decision Maker” • Evaluate Alternatives • Identify Mitigation Measures • Intended to Narrow the Scope to Only the Significant Impact • Enables Substantive Authority • Enables Public Participation • DEIS (Draft) – FEIS- (Final) SEIS (Supplemental)

  16. EIS Preparation • Prepared Under Contract Between Parties • Includes: • Lead Agency • EIS Consultant (Selected by the lead agency) • Proponent • Prepared for the Lead Agency • Paid for by the Proponent • Managed by the Lead Agency • May be Prepared by the Lead Agency

  17. Decision Makers • Staff (Administrative applications) • Managers and Directors • Hearing Examiner • County Council (Plans, Ordinances and Resolutions) • Governor

  18. SEPA Substantive Authority • A Proposed Action may be Conditioned or Denied Based on Environmental Impacts Described in an EIS • EIS Required

  19. DEIS • Prepared by the Primary EIS Consultant and Discipline-Specific Sub Consultants • No Cost or Time Limitations • 30 to 45-day Comment Period Following Publication of DEIS • Public Meeting is Optional • Not Appealable

  20. FEIS • Includes Responses to DEIS Comments and Testimony • No Cost or Time Limitations • Becomes Part of the Original Application of Proposed Action • 7 Day Waiting Period Required • Utilized by the Decision Maker

  21. SEIS • Supplemental Information to DEIS and FEIS • Project Changes • Elements Missed During Scoping • New Information • Can take the form of an: • Addendum or • Memorandum

  22. Other SEPA Provisions • Cooperation and Coordination with Other Agencies • Local • State • Federal • SEPA/NEPA Joint Efforts • GMA Actions and Exemptions • Adoption of Existing Documents • GMA Integration and the ODNS

  23. Case Studies • Case Study #1 BP Cogeneration Project • Case Study #2 Typical Subdivision Process

More Related