Chapter 14.04 ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

A. The city recognizes the interdependence of the human race and its environment and the profound impact of man’s activity on the interrelations of all components of the environment, particularly the profound influence of population growth, high density urbanization, industrial expansion and resource utilization. It further recognizes the critical importance of restoring and maintaining environmental quality while at the same time providing the widest possible range of beneficial uses of the environment. Thus the substantive authority under the environmental review process shall be as broad as permitted by state law in order to assure that the city, as a trustee of the environment for succeeding generations, minimizes the adverse environmental impact of any and all actions within the city. In order to carry out this broad policy, and as an elaboration upon said substantive policy and not as a limitation thereof, the following general guidelines are established for the city’s exercise of substantive authority pursuant to the city’s environmental protection ordinance (Ordinance 622), and the State Environmental Policy Act:

1. Foster and promote the general welfare;

2. Create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony;

3. Assure for all people of the city, and the surrounding area, to the extent possible, a safe, healthful, productive and aesthetically and cultural pleasing surrounding;

4. Preserve the scenic views of surrounding foothills, mountains and valleys from within the city limits;

5. Maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice;

6. Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life’s amenities;

7. Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum obtainable recycling of depletable resource while preserving the quality of all aspects of the environment;

8. Obtain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences;

9. Maintain, and improve where possible the environmental quality to the overall welfare and development of the city’s citizens;

10. Encourage voluntary agreements allowing the city to accept payments from the proponents of a project for the purpose of mitigating what the city has identified as a direct impact on public services and/or facilities as a consequence of the proposed development.

B. To the extent possible, and to the extent not inconsistent with above-stated goals, the policies and purposes set forth in other city ordinances, resolutions and administrative regulations, as now existing or as hereinafter amended or adopted are established as substantive policies to guide the exercise of substantive authority given to the decision maker in the environmental review process. The policies and purposes so adopted include, but are not limited to:

1. The city’s subdivision codes as codified in North Bend Municipal Code Title 17;

2. The city’s zoning codes as codified in North Bend Municipal Code Title 18;

3. The city’s development standards as codified in North Bend Municipal Code Title 19;

4. The city’s health and safety standards as codified in North Bend Municipal Code Title 8;

5. The city’s building and construction codes as codified in North Bend Municipal Code Title 15;

6. The city’s shoreline master plan;

7. The city’s community land use plan;

8. The city comprehensive water plan;

9. The city comprehensive transportation master plan;

10. The city’s comprehensive sanitary sewer plan;

11. Council policies adopted by motion, resolution or otherwise; and

12. All written regulations and written policies adopted by the city staff to implement the above codes, plans and policies. (Ord. 743 § 1, 1988: Ord. 622 § 2, 1984).

14.04.020 Definitions.

All words herein shall be given their common meaning unless the context indicates otherwise. The definitions of the words set forth below shall be utilized in interpreting this chapter.

1. Action.

a. “Actions” include, as further specified below:

i. New and continuing activities (including projects and programs) entirely or partly financed, assisted, conducted, regulated, licensed, or approved by agencies;

ii. New or revised agency rules, regulations, plans, policies, or procedures; and

iii. Legislative proposals.

b. Actions fall within one of two categories:

i. Project Actions. A “project action” involves a decision on a specific project, such as a construction or management activity located in a defined geographic area. Projects include and are limited to agency decisions to:

(A) License, fund, or undertake any activity that will directly modify the environment, whether the activity will be conducted by the agency, an applicant, or under contract;

(B) Purchase, sell, lease, transfer, or exchange natural resources, including publicly owned land, whether or not the environment is directly modified.

ii. Nonproject Actions. “Nonproject actions” involve decisions on policies, plans, or programs:

(A) The adoption or amendment of legislation, ordinances, rules, or regulations that contain standards controlling use or modification of the environment;

(B) The adoption or amendment of comprehensive land use plans or zoning ordinances;

(C) The adoption of any policy, plan, or program that will govern the development of a series of connected actions, but not including any policy, plan, or program for which approval must be obtained from any federal agency prior to implementation;

(D) The creation of a district or annexation to the city;

(E) Capital budgets; and

(F) Road, street, and highway plans.

c. Actions do not include the activities listed above when an agency is not involved. Actions do not include bringing judicial or administrative civil or criminal enforcement actions. Actions further do not include activities for which a categorical exemption is granted elsewhere in this chapter.

2. Addendum. “Addendum” means an environmental document used to provide additional information or analysis that does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The term does not include supplemental EISs. An addendum may be used at any time during the SEPA process.

3. Adoption. “Adoption” means an agency’s use of all or part of an existing environmental document to meet all or part of the agency’s responsibilities under SEPA to prepare an EIS or other environmental document.

4. Affecting. “Affecting” means having, or may be having, an effect on. For purposes of deciding whether an EIS is required and what the EIS must cover, affecting refers to having probable, significant adverse environmental impacts.

5. Agency. “Agency” means the city council, the planning commission, the board of adjustment, or any other department, officer, board or commission within the city that is authorized to make law, hear contested cases, or otherwise take action as defined herein, except the municipal court.

a. “Agency with jurisdiction” means an agency with authority to approve, veto, or finance all or part of a nonexempt proposal (or part of a proposal). The term does not include an agency authorized to adopt rules or standards of general applicability that could apply to a proposal, when no license or approval is required from the agency for the specific proposal. The term also does not include a local, state, or federal agency involved in approving a grant or loan, that serves only as a conduit between the primary administering agency and the recipient of the grant or loan. Federal agencies with jurisdiction are those from which a license or funding is sought or required.

b. For any proposal requiring a Washington State Hydraulics Permit, the State Department of Game and the State Department of Fisheries shall be considered agencies with jurisdiction.

6. Applicant. “Applicant” means any person or entity, including an agency, applying to an agency for a license, permit, or other authority to take action within the city.

7. Categorical Exemption. “Categorical exemption” means a type of action, specified in this chapter, which does not significantly affect the environment. Neither a threshold determination nor any environmental document, including an environmental checklist or environmental impact statement, is required for any categorically exempt action.

8. Consolidated Appeal. “Consolidated appeal” means the procedure requiring a person to file an agency appeal challenging both procedural and substantive compliance with SEPA at the same time, as provided herein. The requirement for a consolidated appeal does not preclude the agencies from bifurcating the appeal proceedings and allowing different agency officials to hear different aspects of the appeal.

9. Consulted Agency. “Consulted agency” means any agency with jurisdiction or expertise that is requested by the lead agency to provide information during the SEPA process.

10. Cost-benefit Analysis. “Cost-benefit analysis” means a quantified comparison of costs and benefits generally expressed in monetary or numerical terms. It is not synonymous with the weighing or balancing of environmental and other impacts or benefits of a proposal.

11. Decisionmaker. “Decisionmaker” means the agency official or officials who make the agency’s decision on a proposal. The decisionmaker and responsible official are not necessarily synonymous, depending on the agency and its SEPA procedures.

12. Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS). “Determination of nonsignificance” (DNS) means the written decision by the responsible official of the lead agency that a proposal is not likely to have a significant adverse impact, and therefore an EIS is not required.

13. Determination of Significance (DS). “Determination of significance” (DS) means the written decision by the responsible official of the lead agency that a proposal is likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact, and therefore an EIS is required.

14. Early Notice. “Early notice” means the city’s response to an applicant stating whether it considers issuance of a determination of significance likely for the applicant’s proposal.

15. EIS. “EIS” means environmental impact statement. The term “EIS” refers to draft, final, or supplemental EISs.

16. Environment. “Environment” means, and is limited to, the following elements:

a. Natural Environment.

i. Earth:

(A) Geology,

(B) Soils,

(D) Unique physical features,

(E) Erosion/enlargement of land area (accretion);

ii. Air:

(A) Air quality,

(B) Odor,

iii. Water:

(A) Surface water movement/quantity/quality,

(B) Runoff/absorption,

(D) Groundwater movement/quantity/quality,

(E) Public water supplies;

iv. Plants and animals:

(A) Habitat for and numbers or diversity of species of plants, fish, or other wildlife,

(B) Unique species,

v. Energy and natural resources:

(A) Amount required/rate of use/efficiency,

(B) Source/availability,

(D) Conservation and renewable resources,

(E) Scenic resources.

b. Built Environment.

i. Environmental health:

(A) Noise,

(B) Risk of explosion,

ii. Land and shoreline use:

(A) Relationship to existing land use plans and to estimated population,

(B) Housing,

(D) Aesthetics,

(E) Recreation,

(F) Historic and cultural preservation,

(G) Agricultural crops;

iii. Transportation:

(A) Transportation systems,

(B) Vehicular traffic,

(D) Parking,

(E) Movement/circulation of people or goods,

(F) Traffic hazards;

iv. Public services and utilities:

(A) Fire,

(B) Police,

(D) Parks or other recreational facilities,

(E) Maintenance,

(F) Communications,

(G) Water/stormwater,

(H) Sewer/solid waste,

(I) Other governmental services or utilities.

Environment and environmental quality refer to the state of the environment and are synonymous as used herein and refer basically to physical environmental quality.

17. Environmental Document. “Environmental document” means any written public document prepared under this chapter. Under SEPA, the terms environmental analysis, environmental study, environmental report, and environmental assessment do not have specialized meanings and do not refer to particular environmental documents.

18. Environmental Review. “Environmental review” means the consideration of environmental factors as required by SEPA. The “environmental review process” is the procedure used by agencies and others under SEPA for giving appropriate consideration to the environment in agency decision-making.

19. Environmentally Sensitive Area. “Environmentally sensitive area” means an area designated and mapped by the city as such an area.

20. Expanded Scoping. “Expanded scoping” is an optional process that may be used by agencies to go beyond minimum scoping requirements.

21. Impacts. “Impacts” are the effects or consequences of actions. Environmental impacts are effects upon the elements of the environment as the same are listed under the definition of environment contained herein.

22. Incorporation by Reference. “Incorporation by reference” means the inclusion of all or part of any existing document in an agency’s environmental documentation by reference.

23. Lands Covered by Water. “Lands covered by water” means lands underlying the water areas of the city below the ordinary high water marks, including natural watercourses, lakes, ponds, artificially impounded waters, marshes and swamps. Categorical exemptions do not apply to lands covered by water.

24. Lead Agency. “Lead agency” means the agency with the main responsibility for complying with SEPA’s procedural requirements. Lead agency may be read as “responsible official” unless the context clearly requires otherwise.

25. License. “License” means any form of written permission given to any person, organization, or agency to engage in any activity, as required by law or agency rule. A license includes all or part of an agency permit, certificate, approval, registration, charter, or plat approvals or rezones to facilitate a particular proposal. The term does not include a license required solely for revenue purposes.

26. Local Agency. “Local agency” or “local government” means any political subdivision, regional governmental unit, district, municipal or public corporation, including cities, towns, and counties and their legislative bodies. The term encompasses but does not refer specifically to the departments within a city.

27. Major Action. “Major action” means an action that is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts. “Major” reinforces but does not have a meaning independent of “significantly.”

28. Mitigated DNS. “Mitigated DNS” means a DNS that includes mitigation measures and is issued as a result of the mitigation process set forth in this chapter.

29. Mitigation. “Mitigation” means:

a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;

b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts;

c. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment;

d. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action;

e. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and/or

f. Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures.

30. NEPA. “NEPA” means the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 USCA 4321 et seq.; P.L. 91-190), that is like SEPA at the federal level. The federal NEPA regulations are located at 40 CFR 1500 et seq.

31. Nonproject. “Nonproject” means actions which are different or broader than a single site-specific project, such as plans, policies, and programs.

32. Phased Review. “Phased review” means the coverage of general matters in broader environmental documents, with subsequent narrower documents concentrating solely on the issues specific to the later analysis. Phased review may be used for a single proposal or EIS.

33. Preparation. “Preparation” of an environmental document means preparing or supervising the preparation of documents, including issuing, filing, printing, circulating, and related requirements.

34. Private Project. “Private project” means any proposal primarily initiated or sponsored by an individual or entity other than an agency.

35. Probable. “Probable” means likely or reasonably likely to occur, as in “a reasonable probability of more than a moderate effect on the quality of the environment.” Probable is used to distinguish likely impacts from those that merely have a possibility of occurring, but are remote or speculative. This is not meant as a strict statistical probability test.

36. Proposal. “Proposal” means a proposed action. A proposal includes both actions and regulatory decisions of agencies as well as any actions proposed by applicants. A proposal exists at that stage in the development of an action when an agency is presented with an application, or has a goal and is actively preparing to make a decision on one or more alternative means of accomplishing that goal, and the environmental effects can be meaningfully evaluated. A proposal may therefore be a particular or preferred course of action or several alternatives. For this reason, these rules use the phrase “alternatives including the proposed action.” The term “proposal” may therefore include “other reasonable courses of action,” if there is no preferred alternative and if it is appropriate to do so in the particular context.

37. Reasonable Alternative. “Reasonable alternative” means an action that could feasibly attain or approximate a proposal’s objectives, but at a lower environmental cost or decreased level of environmental degradation. Reasonable alternatives may be those over which an agency with jurisdiction has authority to control impacts, either directly, or indirectly through requirement of mitigation measures.

38. Responsible Official. “Responsible official” means that officer or officers, committee, department, or section of the lead agency designated by agency SEPA procedures to undertake its procedural responsibilities as lead agency.

39. SEPA. “SEPA” means the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 which is also referred to as the act. The “SEPA process” means all measures necessary for compliance with the act’s requirements.

40. Scope.

a. “Scope” means the range of proposed actions, alternatives, and impacts to be analyzed in an environmental document.

b. To determine the scope of environmental impact statements, agencies consider three types of actions, three types of impacts, and three types of alternatives:

i. “Actions” may be:

(A) Single;

(B) Connected; or

ii. “Alternatives” may be:

(A) No action;

(B) Other reasonable courses of action; or

iii. “Impacts” may be:

(A) Direct;

(B) Indirect; or

c. The scope of an individual statement may depend on its relationship with other EISs or on phased review.

41. Scoping. “Scoping” means determining the range of proposed actions, alternatives, and impacts to be discussed in an EIS. Because an EIS is required to analyze significant environmental impacts only, scoping is intended to identify and narrow the EIS to the significant issues. The required scoping process provides interagency and public notice of a DS, or equivalent notification, and opportunity to comment. The lead agency has the option of expanding the scoping process, but shall not be required to do so. Scoping is used to encourage cooperation and early resolution of potential conflicts, to improve decisions, and to reduce paperwork and delay.

42. Significant.

a. “Significant” as used in SEPA means a reasonable likelihood of more than a moderate adverse impact on environmental quality.

b. Significance involves context and intensity and does not lend itself to a formula or quantifiable test. The context may vary with the physical setting. Intensity depends on the magnitude and duration of an impact.

c. The severity of an impact should be weighed along with the likelihood of its occurrence. An impact may be significant if its chance of occurrence is not great, but the resulting environmental impact would be severe if it occurred.

43. State Agency. “State agency” means any state board, commission, department, or officer, including state universities, colleges, and community colleges, that is authorized by law to make rules, hear contested cases, or otherwise take the actions stated in subsection 1 of this section, except the judiciary and state legislature.

44. Threshold Determination. “Threshold determination” means the decision by the responsible official of the lead agency whether or not an EIS is required for a proposal that is not categorically exempt.

45. Underlying Governmental Action. “Underlying governmental action” means the governmental action, such as zoning or permit approvals, that is the subject of SEPA compliance. (Ord. 1464 § 1 (Exh. A (part)), 2012; Ord. 622 § 3, 1984).

14.04.030 Designation of responsible official.

A. For those proposals for which the city is the lead agency, the responsible official shall be the community and economic development (CED) director. The CED director may delegate to department staff such tasks required of the responsible official as he deems appropriate, except for the issuance of a DNS, MDNS, DS, Scoping Notice, and the selection of the environmental consultants.

B. For all proposals for which the city is the lead agency, the responsible official shall make the threshold determination, supervise scoping and preparation of any required environmental impact statement (EIS) and perform any other functions assigned to the lead agency or responsible official.

C. The city shall retain all documents required by the SEPA rules and make them available.

D. The city shall be the lead agency for all projects requiring a license from the city unless a state or federal agency is required to be the lead agency under state or federal law or the proposed project is one that is principally located within another jurisdiction and only a minor portion of said project requires a license from the city.

E. The CED director shall notify adjacent communities and the Department of Ecology prior to any alteration or relocation of a watercourse, and submit evidence of such notification to the Federal Emergency Management Agency. (Ord. 1464 § 1 (Exh. A (part)), 2012: Ord. 918 § 1, 1993; Ord. 622 § 4, 1984).

14.04.040 Additional timing considerations.

A. For nonexempt proposals, the DNS or draft EIS for the proposal shall accompany the city’s staff recommendation to any appropriate advisory body, such as the planning commission or board of adjustment.

B. If the city’s only action on a proposal is a decision on a building permit or other license that requires detailed project plans and specifications, the applicant may request in writing that the city conduct environmental review prior to submission of the detailed plans and specifications. Said request shall contain the location and nature of the proposed action. The applicant shall be required to pay the city’s actual cost of evaluating said request. The responsible official shall prepare an estimate of the proposed cost of review and that amount shall be paid prior to the commencement of the review process. (Ord. 918 § 2, 1993; Ord. 622 § 5, 1984).

14.04.050 Categorical exemptions.

A. The city adopts by reference the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC regarding categorical exemptions:

1. WAC 197-11-800, Categorical exemptions (except as otherwise established below);

2. WAC 197-11-880, Emergencies; and

3. WAC 197-11-890, Petitioning Department of Ecology to change exemptions.

B. Flexible Thresholds for Minor New Construction Categorical Exemption. The city establishes the following exempt levels for minor new construction as allowed under WAC 197-11-800(1)(c) and (d), based upon local conditions:

1. For single-family residential projects, up to 12 dwelling units;

2. For multifamily residential projects, up to 12 dwelling units;

3. For agricultural structures, up to 20,000 square feet;

4. For office, school, commercial, recreational, service, or storage buildings, up to 20,000 square feet;

5. For parking facilities, up to 25 parking spaces;

6. For fills or excavations, up to 500 cubic yards. All fill or excavation, of any quantity, necessary for an exempt project in subsections (B)(1) through (5) of this section shall be exempt.

C. The exemptions in this section apply except when the project:

1. Is undertaken wholly or partly on lands covered by water;

2. Requires a license governing discharge to water that is not exempt under RCW 43.21C.0383;

3. Requires a license governing emission to air that is not exempt under RCW 43.21C.0381 or WAC 197-11-800(7) or (8); or

4. Requires a land use decision that is not exempt under WAC 197-11-800(6).

D. Whenever the city establishes new exempt levels under this section, it shall send them to the Department of Ecology, Headquarters Office, Olympia, Washington, 98504 under WAC 197-11-800(1)(c). (Ord. 1791 § 2 (Exh. C), 2023).

14.04.060 Threshold determination required.

A. A completed environmental checklist shall be filed at the same time as an application for a permit, license, certificate or other approval not specifically exempted in this chapter; except a checklist is not needed if the city and applicant agree an EIS is required,

SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency. A threshold determination is required for any proposal which meets the definition of action and is not categorically exempt.

B. 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.

C. In most cases, the time to complete a threshold determination should not exceed fifteen (15) days. Complex proposals, those where additional information is needed, and/or those accompanied by an inaccurate checklist may require additional time. Upon request by an applicant, the responsible official shall select a date for making the threshold determination and notify the applicant of such date in writing.

D. All threshold determinations shall be documented in:

1. A determination of nonsignificance (DNS); or

2. A determination of significance (DS). (Ord. 622 § 7, 1984).

14.04.070 Environmental checklist.

A completed environmental checklist shall be filed at the same time as an application for a permit, license, certificate or other approval not specifically exempted in this chapter; except a checklist is not needed if the city and applicant agree an EIS is required, SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency. When an environmental checklist is required, the city may require that it, and not the private applicant, will complete all or part of the environmental checklist for a private proposal if either the city has technical information on a question or questions that is unavailable to the private applicant, or the applicant has provided inaccurate information on previous proposals or have proposals currently under consideration. The checklist shall be prepared on a checklist form that may be obtained, upon request, from the responsible official. The items in the environmental checklist are not weighted. The mention of one or many adverse environmental impacts does not necessarily mean that the impacts are significant. Conversely, a probable significant adverse impact on the environment may result in the need for an EIS. (Ord. 918 § 3, 1993: Ord. 622 § 8, 1984).

14.04.080 Threshold determination process.

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:

A. In making a threshold determination, the responsible official shall:

1. Review the environmental checklist, if used:

a. Independently evaluate the responses of any applicant and indicating the result of its evaluation in the DS, in the DNS, or on the checklist, and

b. Conduct its initial review of the environmental checklist and any supporting documents without requiring additional information from the applicant;

2. Determine if the proposal is likely to have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, based on the proposed action, the information in the checklist, and any additional information as requested by the responsible official or as may be required for purposes of a mitigated DNS; and

3. Consider mitigation measures which an agency or the applicant will implement as part of the proposal.

B. In making a threshold determination, the responsible official shall determine whether:

1. All or part of the proposal, alternative, or impacts have been analyzed in a previously prepared environmental document, which can be adopted or incorporated by reference;

2. Environmental analysis would be more useful or appropriate in the future, in which case the agency shall commit to timely, subsequent environmental review, consistent with other provisions of this chapter.

C. In determining an impact’s significance, the responsible official shall take into account the following, that:

1. The same proposal may have a significant adverse impact in one location but not in another location;

2. The absolute quantitative effects of a proposal are also important, and may result in a significant adverse impact regardless of the nature of the existing environment;

3. Several marginal impacts when considered together may result in a significant adverse impact;

4. For some proposals, it may be impossible to forecast the environmental impacts with precision, often because some variables cannot be predicted or values cannot be quantified;

5. A proposal may to a significant degree:

a. Adversely affect environmentally sensitive or special areas, such as loss or destruction of historic, scientific, and cultural resources, parks, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or wilderness,

b. Adversely affect endangered or threatened species or their habitat,

c. Conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment, and

d. Establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects, involve unique and unknown risks to the environment, or may affect public health or safety.

D. If after the responsible official has received information that is reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal and he reasonably believes that a proposal may have a significant adverse impact, then an EIS is required.

E. A threshold determination shall not balance whether the beneficial aspects of a proposal outweigh its adverse impacts, but rather shall consider whether a proposal has any probable significant adverse environmental impacts under the rules stated in this section. For example, proposals designed to improve the environment, such as sewage treatment plants or pollution control requirements, may also have significant adverse environmental impacts. (Ord. 918 §§ 4, 5, 6, 1993; Ord. 622 § 9, 1984).

14.04.090 Threshold determination – Additional information.

The responsible official shall make his threshold determination based upon information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal. The responsible official may take one or more of the following actions if, after reviewing the checklist, he concludes that there is insufficient information to make his threshold determination:

A. Require an applicant to submit more information on subjects in the checklist;

B. Make his own further study, including physical investigations on a proposed site;

C. Consult with other agencies, requesting information on the proposal’s potential impacts which lie within the other agencies’ jurisdiction or expertise; or

D. 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. (Ord. 918 § 7, 1993: Ord. 622 § 10, 1984).

14.04.100 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).

A. If the responsible official determines there will be no probable significant adverse environmental impacts from a proposal, then he shall prepare and issue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS).

B. When a DNS is issued for any of the proposals listed as follows, the requirements in this subsection shall be met:

1. The responsible official shall not act upon a proposal for fifteen (15) days after the date of issuance of a DNS if the proposal involves:

a. Another agency with jurisdiction;

b. Demolition of any structure or facility not categorically exempt;

c. Issuance of a clearing or grading permit not categorically exempt; or

d. The DNS is issued based upon a mitigated checklist prepared after an applicant requests from the responsible official information as to whether or not he is considering issuing a DS, or if no early notice is requested by the applicant and the lead agency still specifies mitigation measures that would allow the issuance of a DNS, then the proposal is subsequently changed in order to incorporate those measures or where a DS has been issued and the proposal is subsequently changed so that it appears there is no probable significant adverse environmental impact, and thus a DNS is issued.

2. The responsible official shall send the DNS and environmental checklist to agencies with jurisdiction, the Department of Ecology, and affected tribes, and each local agency or political subdivision whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal, and shall give notice under NBMC 14.04.250.

3. Any person, affected tribe, or agency may submit comments to the lead agency within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance of the DNS.

4. The date of issue for the DNS is the date the DNS is sent to the Department of Ecology and agencies with jurisdiction and is made publicly available.

5. An agency with jurisdiction may assume lead agency status only within this fifteen (15) day period.

6. The responsible official shall reconsider the DNS based on timely comments and may retain or modify the DNS or, if the responsible official determines that significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the DNS or supporting documents. When a DNS is modified, the lead agency shall send the modified DNS to agencies with jurisdiction.

C.1. The responsible official shall withdraw a DNS if:

a. There are substantial changes to a proposal so that the proposal is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts;

b. There is significant new information indicating, or on, a proposal’s probable significant adverse environmental impacts; or

c. The DNS was procured by misrepresentation or lack of material disclosure; if such DNS resulted from the actions of an applicant, any subsequent environmental checklist on the proposal shall be prepared directly by the lead agency or its consultant at the expense of the applicant.

2. Subdivision 1b of this subsection shall not apply when a nonexempt license has been issued on a private project.

3. If the responsible official withdraws a DNS, the agency shall make a new threshold determination and notify other agencies with jurisdiction of the withdrawal and new threshold determination. If a DS is issued, each agency with jurisdiction shall commence action to suspend, modify, or revoke any approvals until the necessary environmental review has occurred. (Ord. 918 § 8, 1993: Ord. 622 § 11, 1984).

14.04.110 Mitigated DNS.

The purpose of this section is to allow clarifications or changes to a proposal prior to making the threshold determination.

A. In making threshold determinations, an agency may consider mitigation measures that the agency or applicant will implement.

B. 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.

C. Whether or not an applicant requests early notice under subsection B, if the lead agency specified 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.

D. 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.

E. 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.

F. 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 or clarifications or changes to a proposal shall not bind the lead agency to a mitigated DNS.

G. Agencies may specify procedures for enforcement of mitigation measures in their agency SEPA procedures. (Ord. 622 § 12, 1984).

14.04.120 Determination of significance (DS) – Initiation of scoping.

A. 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). 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.

B. The responsible official shall put the DS in the lead agency’s file and shall commence scoping 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 NBMC 14.04.250. 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.

C. 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. (Ord. 918 §§ 9, 10, 1993; Ord. 622 § 13, 1984).

14.04.130 Effect of threshold determination.

A. When the responsible official makes a threshold determination, it is final and binding on all agencies, subject to the other provisions of this chapter.

B. The responsible official’s threshold determination:

1. For proposals listed in NBMC 14.04.100B, shall not be final until fifteen (15) days after issuance;

2. Shall not apply if another agency with jurisdiction assumes lead agency status;

3. Shall not apply when withdrawn by the responsible official under Sections 14.04.100 or 14.04.120;

C. Regardless of any appeals, a DS or DNS issued by the responsible official may be considered final for purposes of other agencies’ planning and decision-making unless subsequently changed, reversed, or withdrawn. (Ord. 918 § 11, 1993: Ord. 622 § 14, 1984).

14.04.140 Purpose of EIS.

A. The primary purpose of an EIS is to ensure that SEPA’s policies are an integral part of the ongoing programs and actions of the city.

B. An EIS shall provide impartial discussion of significant environmental impacts and shall inform decision-makers and the public of reasonable alternatives, including mitigation measures, that would avoid or minimize adverse impacts or enhance environmental quality.

C. Environmental impact statements shall be concise, clear, and to the point, and shall be supported by the necessary environmental analysis. The purpose of an EIS is best served by short documents containing summaries of, or reference to, technical data and by avoiding excessively detailed and overly technical information. The volume of an EIS does not bear on its adequacy. Large documents may even hinder the decision-making process.

D. The EIS process enables government agencies and interested citizens to review and comment on proposed government actions, including government approval of private projects and their environmental effects. This process is intended to assist the agencies and applicants to improve their plans and decisions, and to encourage the resolution of potential concerns or problems prior to issuing a final statement. An environmental impact statement is more than a disclosure document. It shall be used by agency officials in conjunction with other relevant materials and considerations to plan actions and make decisions. (Ord. 622 § 15, 1984).

14.04.150 Preparation of EIS.

Environmental impact statements shall be prepared as follows:

A. Environmental impact statements shall be readable reports, which allow the reader to understand the most significant and vital information concerning the proposed action, alternatives, and impacts, without turning to other documents.

B. EISs need analyze only the reasonable alternatives and probable adverse environmental impacts that are significant. Beneficial environmental impacts or other impacts may be discussed.

C. The level of detail shall be commensurate with the importance of the impact, with less important material summarized, consolidated, or referenced.

D. Discussion of insignificant impacts is not required; if included, such discussion shall be brief and limited to summarizing impacts or noting why more study is not warranted.

E. Description of the existing environment and the nature of environmental impacts shall be limited to the affected environment and shall be no longer than is necessary to understand the environmental consequences of the alternatives, including the proposal.

F. EISs shall be no longer than necessary to comply with this chapter. Length should relate first to potential environmental problems and then to the size or complexity of the alternatives, including the proposal.

G. The basic features and analysis of the proposal, alternatives, and impacts shall be discussed in the EIS and shall be generally understood without turning to other documents; however, an EIS is not required to include all information conceivably relevant to a proposal, and may be supplemented by appendices, reports, or other documents in the agency’s record.

H. Agencies shall prepare EISs concurrently with and coordinated with environmental studies and related surveys that may be required for the proposal under other laws, when feasible.

I. The range of alternative courses of action discussed in EISs shall encompass those to be considered by the decisionmaker.

J. EISs shall serve as the means of assessing the environmental impact of proposed agency action, rather than justifying decisions already made. (Ord. 622 § 16, 1984).

14.04.160 EIS types.

A. Draft and final environmental impact statements (EISs) shall be prepared; draft and final supplemental EISs may be prepared.

B. A draft EIS (DEIS) allows the lead agency to consult with members of the public, affected tribes, and agencies with jurisdiction and with expertise. The lead agency shall issue a DEIS and consider comments received thereon.

C. A final EIS (FEIS) shall revise the DEIS as appropriate and respond to comments received thereon. An FEIS shall respond to opposing views in significant adverse environmental impacts and reasonable alternatives which the head agency determines were not adequately discussed in the DEIS.

D. A supplemental EIS (SEIS) shall be prepared as an addition to either a draft or final statement if:

1. There are substantial changes to a proposal so that the proposal is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts; or

2. There is significant new information indicating, or on, a proposal’s probably significant adverse environmental impacts. (Ord. 622 § 17, 1984).

14.04.170 EIS timing.

The lead agency shall commence preparation of the environmental impact statement as close as possible to the time the agency is developing or is presented with a proposal, so that preparation can be completed in time for the final statement to be included in appropriate recommendations or reports on the proposal. The statement shall be prepared early enough so it can serve practically as an important contribution to the decision-making process and will not be used to rationalize or justify decisions already made. EISs may be phased in appropriate situations. (Ord. 622 § 18, 1984).

14.04.180 Scoping.

A. The lead agency shall narrow the scope of every EIS to the probable significant adverse impacts and reasonable alternatives, including mitigation measures. For example, if there are only two or three significant impacts or alternatives, the EIS shall be focused on those.

B. To ensure that every EIS is concise and addresses the significant environmental issues, the lead agency shall:

1. Invite agency, affected tribes, and public comment of the DS. If the agency requires written comments, agencies, affected tribes and the public shall be allowed twenty-one (21) days from the date of issuance of the DS in which to comment, unless expanded scoping is used. The date of issuance for a DS is the date it is sent to the Department of Ecology and other agencies with jurisdiction, and is publicly available;

2. Identify reasonable alternatives and probable significant adverse environmental impacts;

3. Eliminate from detailed study those impacts that are not significant;

4. Work with other agencies to identify and integrate environmental studies required for other government approvals with the EIS, where feasible.

C. Agencies, affected tribes, and the public should comment promptly and as specifically as permitted by the details available on the proposal.

D. Meetings or scoping documents, including notices that the scope has been revised, may be used but are not required. The lead agency shall integrate the scoping process with its existing planning and decision-making process in order to avoid duplication and delay.

E. The lead agency shall revise the scope of an EIS if substantial changes are made later in the proposal, or if significant new circumstances or information arise that bear on the proposal and its significant impacts.

F. DEIS shall be prepared according to the scope decided upon by the lead agency in its scoping process.

G. EIS preparation may begin during scoping.

H. The lead agency may, on a proposal by proposal basis use such other methods as it finds helpful. (Ord. 622 § 19, 1984).

14.04.190 EIS preparation.

A. Preparation of the EIS is the responsibility of the city, by or under the direction of its responsible official. No matter who participates in the preparation of the EIS, it is the EIS of the city. The responsible official, prior to distributing an EIS, shall be satisfied that it complies with this chapter.

B. The DEIS and FEIS or draft and final SEIS shall be prepared by the city staff, the applicant, or by a consultant selected by the city or the applicant. If the responsible official requires an EIS for a proposal and determines that someone other than the city will prepare the EIS, the responsible official shall notify the applicant immediately after completion of the threshold determination. The responsible official shall also notify the applicant of the city’s procedure for EIS preparation, including approval of the DEIS and FEIS prior to distribution. The responsible official shall direct areas of research and examination to be undertaken as a result of the scoping process, as well as the organization of the resulting document.

C. If a person other than the lead agency is preparing the EIS, the lead agency shall:

1. Coordinate any scoping procedures so that the individual preparing the EIS receives all substantive information submitted by any agency or person;

2. Assist in obtaining any information on file with another agency that is needed by the person preparing the EIS;

3. Allow any party preparing an EIS access to all public records of the lead agency that relate to the subject of the EIS, under RCW Chapter 42.16 (Public Disclosure and Public Records Law).

D. The city may require an applicant to provide information the city does not possess, including specific investigations. However, the applicant is not required to supply information that is not required under this chapter or that is being requested from another agency, unless the same is information that the city may lawfully request under another ordinance or statute. (Ord. 918 §§ 12, 13, 1993; Ord. 622 § 20, 1984).

14.04.200 EIS contents.

An EIS shall contain the following:

A. A cover letter shall precede every EIS but shall not be considered part of the EIS for adequacy purposes. The cover letter shall highlight the key environmental issues and options facing decision-makers and shall include beneficial as well as adverse environmental impacts and shall identify, for SEIS, the EIS being supplemented.

B. Fact Sheet. The fact sheet shall include the following information in this order:

1. A title and brief description (a few sentences) of the nature and location (by street address, if applicable) of the proposal, including principal alternatives;

2. The name of the person or entity making the proposal(s) and the proposed or tentative date for implementation;

3. The name and address of the lead agency, the responsible official, and the person to contact for questions, comments, and information;

4. A list of all licenses which the proposal is known to require. The licenses shall be listed by name and agency; the list shall be as complete and specific as possible;

5. Authors and principal contributors to the EIS and the nature or subject area of their contributions;

6. The date of issue of the EIS;

7. The date comments are due (for DEISs);

8. The time and place of public hearings or meetings, if any and if known;

9. The date final action is planned or scheduled by the lead agency, if known. Agencies may indicate that the date is subject to change. The nature or type of final agency action should be stated unless covered in subsection A of this section;

10. The type and timing of any subsequent environmental review to which the lead agency or other agencies have made commitments, if any;

11. The location of a prior EIS on the proposal, EIS technical reports, background data, adopted documents, and materials incorporated by reference for this EIS, if any;

12. The cost to the public for a copy of the EIS.

C. Table of Contents.

1. The table of contents should list, if possible, any documents which are appended, adopted, or serve as technical reports for this EIS, but need not list each comment letter.

2. The table of contents may include the list of elements of the environment, indicating those elements or portions of elements which do not involve significant impacts.

D. Summary. The EIS shall summarize the contents of the statement and shall not merely be an expanded table of contents. The summary shall briefly state the proposal’s objectives, specifying the purpose and need to which the proposal is responding, the major conclusions, significant areas of controversy and uncertainty, if any, and the issues to be resolved, including the environmental choices to be made among alternative courses of action and the effectiveness of mitigation measures. The summary need not mention every subject discussed in the EIS, but shall include a summary of the proposal, impacts, alternatives, mitigation measures, and significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated. The summary shall state when the EIS is part of a phased review, if known, or the lead agency is relying on prior or future environmental review (which should be generally identified). The lead agency shall make the summary sufficiently broad to be useful to the other agencies with jurisdiction.

E. Alternatives Including the Proposed Action.

1. This section of the EIS describes and presents the proposal (or preferred alternative, if one or more exists) and alternative courses of action.

2. Reasonable alternatives shall include actions that could feasibly attain or approximate a proposal’s objectives, but at a lower environmental cost or decreased level of environmental degradation.

a. The word “reasonable” is intended to limit the number and range of alternatives, as well as the amount of detailed analysis for each alternative.

b. The “no-action” alternative shall be evaluated and compared to other alternatives.

c. Reasonable alternatives may be those over which an agency with jurisdiction has authority to control impacts either directly, or indirectly through requirement of mitigation measures.

3. This section of the EIS shall:

a. Describe the objective(s), proponent(s), and principal features of reasonable alternatives. Include the proposed action, including mitigation measures that are part of the proposal;

b. Describe the location of the alternatives including the proposed action, so that a lay person can understand it. Include a map, street address, if any, and legal description (unless long or in metes and bounds);

c. Identify any phases of the proposal, their timing, and previous or future environmental analysis on this or related proposals, if known;

d. Tailor the level of detail of descriptions to the significance of environmental impacts. The lead agency should retain any detailed engineering drawings and technical data, that have been submitted, in agency files and make them available on request;

e. Devote sufficiently detailed analysis to each reasonable alternative to permit a comparative evaluation of the alternatives including the proposed action. The amount of space devoted to each alternative may vary. One alternative (including the proposed action) may be used as a benchmark for comparing alternatives. The EIS may indicate the main reasons for eliminating alternatives from detailed study.

f. Present a comparison of the environmental impacts of the reasonable alternatives, and include the no action alternative. Although graphics may be helpful, a matrix or chart is not required. A range of alternatives or a few representative alternatives, rather than every possible reasonable variation, may be discussed.

g. Discuss the benefits and disadvantages of reserving for some future time the implementation of the proposal, as compared with possible approval at this time. The agency perspective should be that each generation is, in effect, a trustee of the environment for succeeding generations. Particular attention should be given to the possibility of foreclosing future options by implementing the proposal.

4. When a proposal is for a private project on a specific site, the lead agency shall be required to evaluate only the no action alternative plus other reasonable alternatives for achieving the proposal’s objective on the same site. This subsection shall not apply when the proposal includes a rezone, unless the rezone is for a use allowed in an existing comprehensive plan that was adopted after review under SEPA. Further, alternative sites may be evaluated if other locations for the type of proposed use have not been included or considered in existing planning or zoning documents.

F. Affected Environment, Significant Impacts, and Mitigation Measures.

1. This section of the EIS shall describe the existing environment that will be affected by the proposal, analyze significant impacts of alternatives including the proposed action, and discuss reasonable mitigation measures that would significantly mitigate these impacts. Elements of the environment that are not significantly affected need not be discussed. Separate sections are not required for each subject.

2. General requirements for this section of the EIS:

a. This section shall be written in a nontechnical manner which is easily understandable to lay persons whenever possible, with the discussion commensurate with the importance of the impacts. Only significant impacts must be discussed; other impacts may be discussed.

b. Although the lead agency should discuss the affected environment, environmental impacts, and other mitigation measures together for each element of the environment where there is a significant impact, the responsible official shall have the flexibility to organize this section in any manner useful to decision-makers and the public.

c. This subsection is not intended to duplicate the analysis in subsection E of this section and shall avoid doing so to the fullest extent possible.

3. This section of the EIS shall:

a. Succinctly describe the principal features of the environment that would be affected, or created, by the alternatives including the proposal under consideration. Inventories of species should be avoided, although rare, threatened, or endangered species should be indicated;

b. Describe and discuss significant impacts that will narrow the range or degree of beneficial uses of the environment or pose long-term risks to human health or the environment, such as storage, handling, or disposal of toxic or hazardous material;

c. Clearly indicate those mitigation measures (not described in the previous section as part of the proposal or alternatives), if any, that could be implemented or might be required, as well as those, if any, that agencies or applicants are committed to implement;

d. Indicate what the intended environmental benefits of mitigation measures are for significant impacts, and may discuss their technical feasibility and economic practicability, if there is concern about whether a mitigation measure is capable of being accomplished. The EIS need not analyze mitigation measures in detail unless they involve substantial changes to the proposal causing significant adverse impacts, or new information regarding impacts, and those measures will not be subsequently analyzed under SEPA. An EIS may briefly mention nonsignificant impacts or mitigation measures to satisfy other environmental review laws or requirements covered in the same documents.

e. Summarize significant adverse impacts that cannot or will not be mitigated.

4. This section shall incorporate, when appropriate:

a. A summary of existing plans (for example: land use and shoreline plans) and zoning regulations applicable to the proposal, and how the proposal is consistent and inconsistent with them;

b. Energy requirements and conservation potential of various alternatives and mitigation measures, including more efficient use of energy, such as insulating, as well as the use of alternate and renewable energy resources;

c. Natural or depletable resource requirements and conservation potential of various alternatives and mitigation measures;

d. Urban quality, historic and cultural resources, and the design of the built environment, including the reuse and conservation potential of various alternatives and mitigation measures.

5. Significant impacts on both the natural environment and the built environment must be analyzed, if relevant. This involves impacts upon and the quality of the physical surroundings, whether they are in wild, rural, or urban areas. Discussion of significant impacts shall include the cost of and effects on public services, such as utilities, roads, fire, and police protection, that may result from a proposal. EISs shall also discuss significant environmental impacts upon land and shoreline use, which includes housing, physical blight, and significant impacts of projected population on environmental resources, as specified by RCW 43.21C.110(1) (d) and (f) as listed in NBMC 14.04.020.

G. Appendices. Comment letters and responses shall be circulated with the FEIS. Technical reports and supporting documents need not be circulated with an EIS, but shall be readily available to agencies and the public during the comment period.

H. The lead agency may include, in an EIS or appendix, the analysis of any impact relevant to the agency’s decision, whether or not environmental. The inclusion of such analysis may be based upon comments received during the scoping process. The provision for combining documents may be used. The EIS shall comply with the format requirements of this part. The decision whether to include such information and the adequacy of any such additional analysis shall not be used in determining whether an EIS meets the requirements of SEPA. (Ord. 622 § 21, 1984).

14.04.210 Contents of EIS on nonproject proposals.

A. The lead agency shall have more flexibility in preparing EISs on nonproject proposals, because there is normally less detailed information available on their environmental impacts and on any subsequent project proposals. The EIS may be combined with other planning documents.

B. The lead agency shall discuss impacts and alternatives in the level of detail appropriate to the scope of the nonproject proposal and to the level of planning for the proposal. Alternatives should be emphasized. In particular, agencies are encouraged to describe the proposal in terms of alternative means of accomplishing a stated objective. Alternatives including the proposed action should be analyzed at a roughly comparable level of detail, sufficient to evaluate their comparative merits (this does not require devoting the same number of pages in an EIS to each alternative).

C. If the nonproject proposal concerns a specific geographic area, site-specific analyses are not required, but may be included for areas of specific concern. The EIS should identify subsequent actions that would be undertaken by other agencies as a result of the nonproject proposal, such as transportation and utility systems.

D. The EIS’s discussion of alternatives for a comprehensive plan, community plan, or other area-wide zoning or for shoreline or land use plans shall be limited to a general discussion of the impacts of alternate proposals for policies contained in such plans, for land use or shoreline designations, and for implementation measures. The lead agency is not required under SEPA to examine all conceivable policies, designations, or implementation measures but should cover a range of such topics. The EIS content may be limited to a discussion of alternatives which have been formally proposed or which are, while not formally proposed, reasonably related to the proposed action. (Ord. 622 § 22, 1984).

14.04.220 EIS contents when prior nonproject EIS.

A. The provisions for phased review and use of existing environmental documents apply to EISs on nonproject proposals.

B. A nonproject proposal may be approved based on an EIS assessing its broad impacts. When a project is then proposed that is consistent with the approved nonproject action, the EIS on such a project shall focus on the impacts and alternatives including mitigation measures specific to the subsequent project and not analyzed in the nonproject EIS. The scope shall be limited accordingly. Procedures for use of existing documents shall be used as appropriate.

C. When preparing a project EIS under the preceding subsection, the lead agency shall review the nonproject EIS to ensure that the analysis is valid when applied to the current proposal, knowledge, and technology. If it is not valid, the analysis shall be reanalyzed in the project EIS. (Ord. 622 § 23, 1984).

14.04.230 Issuance of DEIS.

A. A draft EIS shall be issued by the responsible official and sent to the following:

1. The Department of Ecology (two copies);

2. Each federal agency with jurisdiction over the proposal;

3. Each agency with jurisdiction over or environmental expertise on the proposal;

4. Each city in which adverse environmental impacts identified in the EIS may occur, if the proposal were implemented;

5. Each local agency or political subdivision whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal;

6. The applicable local, area-wide, or regional agency, if any, that has been designated under federal law to conduct intergovernmental review and coordinate federal activities with state or local planning;

7. Any person requesting a copy of the EIS from the lead agency;

8. Any affected tribe.

B. The date of issue is the date the DEIS is publicly available and sent to the Department of Ecology and other agencies with jurisdiction.

C. Any person or agency shall have thirty (30) days from the date of issue in which to review and comment upon the DEIS.

D. Upon request, the lead agency may grant an extension of up to fifteen (15) days to the comment period. Agencies and the public must request any extension before the end of the comment period. (Ord. 622 § 24, 1984).

14.04.240 Issuance of FEIS.

A. A final EIS (FEIS) shall be issued by the responsible official and sent to the Department of Ecology (two copies), to all agencies with jurisdiction, to all agencies who commented on the DEIS, and to anyone requesting a copy of the FEIS.

B. The responsible official shall send the FEIS, or a notice that the FEIS is available, to anyone who commented on the DEIS and to those who received but did not comment on the DEIS. If the agency receives petitions from a specific group or organization, a notice or EIS may be sent to the group and not to each petitioner. Failure to notify any individual under this subsection shall not affect the legal validity of any agency’s SEPA compliance.

C. The lead agency should make additional copies available in its offices for review.

D. The date of issue is the date the FEIS, or notice of availability, is sent to the persons and agencies specified in the preceding subsections and the FEIS is publicly available. Copies sent to the Department of Ecology shall satisfy the statutory requirement of availability to the Governor and to the ecological commission.

E. Agencies shall not act on a proposal for which an EIS has been required prior to seven (7) days after issuance of the FEIS.

F. The lead agency shall issue the FEIS within sixty (60) days of the end of the comment period for the DEIS, unless the proposal is unusually large in scope, the environmental impact associated with the proposal is unusually complex, or extensive modifications are required to respond to public comments. (Ord. 622 § 25, 1984).

14.04.250 Public notice.

A. Whenever the city issues a DNS or DS, the city shall give notice as follows:

1. Posting the property, for site-specific proposals;

2. Notifying public or private groups which have expressed interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered;

3. Notifying the news media; and

4. Posting the declaration on the official posting places for the city.

B. When the city issues a DS, the city shall state the scoping procedure for the proposal in the DS and in the public notice.

C. When the city issues a DEIS, or a SEIS, notice of the availability of those documents shall be given by:

1. Indicating the availability of the DEIS in any public notice required for a nonexempt license;

2. Posting the property for site-specific proposals;

3. Notifying the news media;

4. Notifying public or private groups which have expressed interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered; and

5. By posting the notice on the city’s official posting places.

D. The city may require an applicant to complete the public notice requirements for the applicant’s proposal at his or her expense. The responsible official may require additional methods to be used in order to assure adequate public notice on a proposal by proposal basis. (Ord. 918 § 14, 1993; Ord. 622 § 26, 1984).

14.04.260 Public hearings.

A. A public hearing shall be held no earlier than fifteen (15) days from the date a draft EIS is issued, nor later than fifty (50) days from its issuance. Notice of said hearing shall be given as required under the public notice section of this chapter.

B. A public hearing may be required for any aspect of the environmental consideration process if, in the discretion of the city administrator, in his sole discretion, determines that a public hearing would assist in meeting his responsibility to implement the purposes and policies of this chapter.

C. Informal public meetings or workshops may be held. Such gatherings may be more flexible than public hearings. (Ord. 622 § 27, 1984).

14.04.270 Effect of no comment.

A. Consulted Agencies. If a consulted agency does not respond with written comments within the time periods for commenting on environmental documents, the lead agency may assume that the consulted agency has no information relating to the potential impact of the proposal as it relates to the consulted agency’s jurisdiction or special expertise. Any consulted agency that fails to submit substantive information to the lead agency in response to a draft EIS is thereafter barred from alleging any defects in the lead agency’s compliance with the requirements relating to the preparation of a DEIS/EIS.

B. Other Agencies and the Public. Lack of comment by other agencies or members of the public on environmental documents, within the time periods specified by these rules, shall be construed as lack of objection to the environmental analysis, if the requirements of NBMC 14.04.250 are met. (Ord. 622 § 28, 1984).

14.04.280 Specificity of comments.

A. Comments on an EIS, DNS, scoping notice or proposal shall be as specific as possible and may address either the adequacy of the environmental document or the merits of the alternatives discussed or both.

B. Commenters shall briefly describe the nature of any documents referenced in their comments, indicating the material’s relevance, and should indicate where the material can be reviewed or obtained.

C. Methodology. When an agency criticizes a lead agency’s predictive methodology, the commenting agency should describe, when possible, the alternative methodology which it prefers and why.

D. Additional Information. A consulted agency shall specify in its comments whether it needs additional information to fulfill other applicable environmental reviews or consultation requirements and what information it needs, to the extent permitted by the details available on the proposal.

E. Mitigation Measures. When an agency with jurisdiction objects to or expresses concerns about a proposal, it shall specify the mitigation measures, if any are possible, it considers necessary to allow an agency to grant or approve applicable licenses.

F. Comments by Other Agencies. Commenting agencies that are not consulted agencies shall specify any additional information or mitigation measures the commenting agency believes are necessary or desirable to satisfy its concerns.

G. Citizen Comments. Recognizing their generally more limited resources, members of the public shall make their comments as specific as possible and are encouraged to comment on methodology needed, additional information, and mitigation measures in the manner indicated in this section.

H. An agency shall consider and may respond to comments as the agency deems appropriate; the requirements for responding in a FEIS shall be met. (Ord. 622 § 29, 1984).

14.04.290 FEIS response to comments.

A. The lead agency shall prepare a final environmental impact statement whenever a DEIS has been prepared, unless the proposal is withdrawn or indefinitely postponed. The lead agency shall respond by one or more of the means listed below, including its response in the final statement. Possible responses are to:

1. Modify alternatives including the proposed action;

2. Develop and evaluate alternatives not previously given detailed consideration by the agency;

3. Supplement, improve, or modify the analysis;

4. Make factual corrections;

5. Explain why the comments do not warrant further agency response, citing the sources, authorities, or reasons that support the agency’s response and, if appropriate, indicate those circumstances that would trigger agency reappraisal or further response.

B. All substantive comments received on the draft statement shall be appended to the final statement or summarized where comments are repetitive or voluminous, and the summary appended. If a summary of the comments is used, the names of the commenters shall be included (except for petitions).

C. In carrying out subsection A of this section, the lead agency may respond to each comment individually, respond to a group of comments, cross-reference comments and corresponding changes in the EIS, or use other reasonable means to indicate an appropriate response to comments.

D. If the lead agency does not receive any comments critical of the scope or content of the DEIS, the lead agency may so state in an updated fact sheet which shall be circulated as required for the issuance of a DEIS. The FEIS shall consist of the DEIS and updated fact sheet.

E. If changes in response to comments are minor and are largely confined to the responses described in subsection A 4 and 5 of this section, agencies may prepare and attach an addendum, which shall consist of the comments, the responses, the changes, and an updated fact sheet. The FEIS, consisting of the DEIS and the addendum, shall be issued in the same manner as an FEIS, except only the addendum need be sent to anyone who received the DEIS. (Ord. 622 § 30, 1984).

14.04.300 Preparation of written comments in response to consultation.

The city administrator shall be responsible for preparation of written comments for the city in response to a consultation request prior to a threshold determination, participation in scoping, and reviewing a DEIS. (Ord. 622 § 31, 1984).

14.04.310 Existing environmental documents – Use.

A. An agency may use environmental documents that have previously been prepared in order to evaluate proposed actions, alternatives, or environmental impacts. The proposals may be the same as, or different than, those analyzed in the existing documents.

B. Other agencies acting on the same proposal shall use an environmental document unchanged, except in the following cases:

1. For DNSs, an agency with jurisdiction is dissatisfied with the DNS, in which case it may assure lead agency status;

2. For DNSs and EISs, preparation of a new threshold determination or supplemental EIS is required if there are:

a. Substantial changes to a proposal so that the proposal is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts, or lack of significant adverse impacts, if a DS is being withdrawn, or

b. New information indicating a proposal’s probable significant adverse environmental impacts. This includes discovery of misrepresentation or lack of material disclosure. A new threshold determination or SEIS is not required if probable significant adverse environmental impacts are covered by the range of alternatives and impacts analyzed in the existing environmental documents;

3. For EISs, the agency concludes that its written comments on the DEIS warrant additional discussion for purposes of its action than that found in the lead agency’s FEIS (in which case the agency may prepare a supplemental EIS at its own expense).

C. Existing documents may be used for a proposal by employing one or more of the following methods:

1. “Adoption,” where an agency may use all or part of an existing environmental document to meet its responsibilities under SEPA. Agencies acting on the same proposal for which an environmental document was prepared are not required to adopt the document; or

2. “Incorporation by reference,” where an agency preparing an environmental document includes all or part of an existing document by reference;

3. An addendum, that adds analyses or information about a proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document;

4. Preparation of a SEIS if there are:

a. Substantial changes so that the proposal is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts, or

b. New information indicating a proposal’s probable significant adverse environmental impacts;

5. If a proposal is substantially similar to one covered in an existing EIS, that EIS may be adopted; additional information may be provided in an addendum or SEIS. (Ord. 622 § 32, 1984).

14.04.320 Existing environmental documents – Adoption.

A. The agency adopting an existing environmental document must independently review the content of the document and determine that it meets the adopting agency’s environmental review standards and needs for the proposal. However a document is not required to meet the adopting agency’s own procedures for the preparation of environmental documents (such as circulation, commenting, and hearing requirements) to be adopted.

B. An agency shall adopt an environmental document by identifying the document and stating why it is being adopted, using the adoption form supplied by the city. The adopting agency shall ensure that the adopted document is readily available to agencies and the public by:

1. Sending a copy to agencies with jurisdiction that have not received the document, as shown by the distribution list for the adopted document; and

2. Placing copies in libraries and other public offices, or by distributing copies to those who request one.

C. When an existing EIS is adopted and:

1. A supplemental environmental impact statement or addendum is not being prepared, the agency shall circulate its statement of adoption as follows:

a. The agency shall send copies of the adoption notice to the Department of Ecology, to agencies with jurisdiction, to cities in which the proposal will be implemented, and to local agencies or political subdivisions whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal.

b. The agency is encouraged to send the adoption notice to persons or organizations that have expressed an interest in the proposal or are known by the agency to have an interest in the type of proposal being considered, or the lead agency should announce the adoption in agency newsletters or through other means.

c. No action shall be taken on the proposal until seven (7) days after the statement of adoption has been issued. The date of issuance shall be the date the statement of adoption has been sent to the Department of Ecology and other agencies and is publicly available;

2. A SEIS is being prepared, the agency shall include the statement of adoption in the SEIS; or

3. An addendum is being prepared, the agency shall include the statement of adoption with the addendum and circulate both as in subsection C1 of this section.

D. A copy of the adopted document must accompany the current proposal to the decisionmaker; the statement of adoption may be included.

E. If known, the adopting agency shall disclose in its adoption notice when the adopted document or proposal it addresses is the subject of a pending appeal or has been found inadequate on appeal. (Ord. 622 § 33, 1984).

14.04.330 Substantive authority and mitigation.

A. Any governmental action on public or private proposals that are not exempt may be conditioned or denied under SEPA to mitigate the environmental impact subject to the following limitations:

1. Mitigation measures or denials shall be based on policies, plans, rules, or regulations formally designated by the agency (or appropriate legislative body, in the case of local government) as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when the DNS or DEIS is issued.

2. Mitigation measures shall be related to specific, adverse environmental impacts clearly identified in an environmental document on the proposal and shall be stated in writing by the decisionmaker. The decisionmaker shall cite the agency SEPA policy that is the basis for any condition or denial under this chapter (for proposals of applicants). After its decision, each agency shall make available to the public a document that states the decision. The document shall state the mitigation measures, if any, that will be implemented as part of the decision, including any monitoring of environmental impacts. Such a document may be the license itself, or may be combined with other agency documents, or may reference relevant portions of environmental documents.

3. Mitigation measures shall be reasonable and capable of being accomplished.

4. Responsibility for implementing mitigation measures may be imposed upon an applicant only to the extent attributable to the identified adverse impacts of its proposal. Voluntary additional mitigation may occur.

5. Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies shall consider whether local, state, or federal requirements and enforcements would mitigate an identified significant impact.

6. To deny a proposal under SEPA, an agency must find that:

a. The proposal would be likely to result in significant adverse environmental impacts identified in a final or supplemental environmental impact statement prepared under this chapter; and

b. Reasonable mitigation measures are insufficient to mitigate the identified impact.

B. Decisionmakers should judge whether possible mitigation measures are likely to protect or enhance environmental quality. EISs should briefly indicate the intended environmental benefits of mitigation measures for significant impacts. EISs are not required to analyze in detail the environmental impacts of mitigation measures, unless the mitigation measures:

1. Represent substantial changes in the proposal so that the proposal is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts, or involve significant new information indicating, or on, a proposal’s probable significant adverse environmental impacts; and

2. Will not be analyzed in a subsequent environmental document prior to their implementation. (Ord. 622 § 34, 1984).

14.04.340 Appeals.

As set forth in RCW 43.21C.075, when any proposal or action is conditioned or denied on the basis of an environmental determination by the city under SEPA, the environmental determination shall be appealable to superior court as part of an appeal of the underlying proposal or action. The appeal fee shall be as established by the taxes, rates and fees schedule adopted by ordinance. (Ord. 1237 § 10 (part), 2005: Ord. 1134 § 1, 2001: Ord. 918 § 15, 1993; Ord. 622 § 35, 1984).

14.04.350 Fees.

The city shall require fees as established by the taxes, rates and fees schedule adopted by ordinance for its activities in accordance with the provisions of this chapter:

A. Threshold Determination. For every environmental checklist the city will review when it is lead agency, the city shall collect the fee from the proponent of the proposal prior to undertaking the threshold determination. The time periods provided by this chapter for making a threshold determination shall not begin to run until payment of the fee. The fee shall be a minimum and the applicant shall be responsible for the payment of the actual costs incurred by the city in making the threshold determination, including, but not limited to, secretarial, engineering, legal, planning, structural and other professional services that may be needed. This amount shall be paid at the time the checklist is completed. If the actual costs exceed the initial fee, the balance shall be paid before the determination is issued. The time periods for making a determination shall be tolled until costs are paid.

B. Mitigated Declaration of Nonsignificance. If an applicant requests that pursuant to NBMC 14.04.110 the city consider the issuance of an MDNS, then the applicant shall pay an additional initial review fee at the time the request is made. The city shall then review the checklist with proposed mitigation measures, in order to determine if an MDNS would be appropriate. The fee shall be a minimum and the applicant shall be responsible for the payment of the actual costs incurred by the city in reviewing the proposed mitigation measures, including, but not limited to, secretarial, engineering, legal, planning, structural and other professional services that may be needed. If the actual costs exceed the initial fee, the balance shall be paid before the determination is issued. The time periods for making a determination shall be tolled until the costs are paid.

C. Environmental Impact Statement.

1. When the city is the lead agency for a proposal requiring an EIS, the city may charge and collect supplemental fees to compensate for additional review, processing and publication costs associated with the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS). Supplemental fees shall be based on an hourly charge for time spent by city employees in the review, preparation, supervision of preparation and/or distribution of an EIS. The supplemental EIS review fee for city employees is established by the taxes, rates and fees schedule referenced above. The supplemental EIS review fee for engineering and legal shall be the actual hourly rate charged by the city consultants. Supplemental fees shall also include all costs, if any, for experts not employed by the city, including engineering and legal, and for texts, printing or other actual costs required for the preparation and distribution of the EIS. In no case shall supplemental fees be charged for review of the completed EIS by city officials’ part of the decision-making process or for existing studies or general information already in city files. Supplemental fees shall be collected at regular intervals as the preparation of the EIS proceeds, provided a deposit shall be collected prior to commencement of EIS preparation to cover initial costs. Any unexpended balance shall be refunded. There shall be a supplemental deposit as established by the taxes, rates and fees schedule adopted by ordinance prior to commencement of EIS preparation or review.

2. The responsible official may determine that the city will contract directly with a consultant for preparation of an EIS, or a portion of the EIS, for activities initiated by some persons or entity other than the city and may bill such costs and expenses directly to the applicant. The city may require the applicant to post bond or otherwise ensure payment of such costs in a manner satisfactory to the city, prior to any work being commenced upon the EIS.

3. If a proposal is modified so that an EIS is no longer required, the responsible official shall refund any fees collected under subsection (C)(1) or (2) of this section which remain after incurred costs are paid; provided, however, the MDNS fee may still be charged and deducted from said deposit.

D. The city shall not collect a fee for performing its duties as a consulted agency.

E. The city may charge any person for copies of any document prepared under this chapter, and for mailing the document, based upon the city’s actual cost incurred therein. (Ord. 1237 § 10 (part), 2005: Ord. 918 §§ 15, 16, 1993; Ord. 768 § 11, 1988: Ord. 622 § 36, 1984).

14.04.370 Shorelines protection.

In order to protect the shorelines within the city, all developments within the city shall comply with the city’s shoreline master program and Chapter 14.20 NBMC. (Ord. 823 § 3, 1990).