Chapter 18.02 ENVIRONMENTAL

The city adopts the ordinance codified in this chapter under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, and the SEPA rules, Chapter 197-11 WAC. This chapter contains the city’s SEPA procedures and policies. The SEPA rules contained in Chapter 197-11 WAC must be used in conjunction with this chapter. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.015 Codes adopted by reference.

Unless otherwise specifically stated herein, all statutes, ordinances, regulations and codes which are adopted or referenced in this chapter shall be as such codes now exist or are hereafter amended. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.020 Definitions – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or as hereafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-700 Definitions.

197-11-702 Act.

197-11-704 Action.

197-11-706 Addendum.

197-11-708 Adoption.

197-11-710 Affected tribe.

197-11-712 Affecting.

197-11-714 Agency.

197-11-716 Applicant.

197-11-718 Built environment.

197-11-720 Categorical exemption.

197-11-721 Closed record appeal.

197-11-722 Consolidated appeal.

197-11-724 Consulted agency.

197-11-726 Cost-benefit analysis.

197-11-728 County/city.

197-11-730 Decision maker.

197-11-732 Department.

197-11-734 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).

197-11-736 Determination of significance (DS).

197-11-738 EIS.

197-11-740 Environment.

197-11-742 Environmental checklist.

197-11-744 Environmental document.

197-11-746 Environmental review.

197-11-750 Expanded scoping.

197-11-752 Impacts.

197-11-754 Incorporation by reference.

197-11-756 Lands covered by water.

197-11-758 Lead agency.

197-11-760 License.

197-11-762 Local agency.

197-11-764 Major action.

197-11-766 Mitigated DNS.

197-11-768 Mitigation.

197-11-770 Natural environment.

197-11-772 NEPA.

197-11-774 Nonproject.

197-11-775 Open record hearing.

197-11-776 Phased review.

197-11-778 Preparation.

197-11-780 Private project.

197-11-782 Probable.

197-11-784 Proposal.

197-11-786 Reasonable alternative.

197-11-788 Responsible official.

197-11-790 SEPA.

197-11-792 Scope.

197-11-793 Scoping.

197-11-794 Significant.

197-11-796 State agency.

197-11-797 Threshold determination.

197-11-799 Underlying governmental action.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.030 Additional definitions.

In addition to those definitions contained within WAC 197-11-700 through 197-11-799, when used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings, unless the content indicates otherwise:

A. “City” means the city of Rock Island, Washington.

B. “Department” means any division, subdivision, or organizational unit of the city established by ordinance, rule, or order.

C. “SEPA rules” means Chapter 197-11 WAC adopted by the Department of Ecology.

D. “Early notice” means the city’s response to an applicant stating whether it considers issuance of the determination of significance likely for the applicant’s proposal. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.040 General requirements – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference:

WAC

197-11-040 Definitions.

197-11-050 Lead agency.

197-11-055 Timing of the SEPA process.

197-11-060 Content of environmental review.

197-11-070 Limitations on actions during SEPA process.

197-11-080 Incomplete or unavailable information.

197-11-090 Supporting documents.

197-11-100 Information required of applicants.

197-11-158 GMA project review – Reliance on existing plans, laws and regulations.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.050 Designation of responsible official.

A. For all proposals, projects and applications involving SEPA review, the responsible official shall be the code compliance officer or such other person as the mayor may designate in writing.

B. For all proposals for which the city is lead agency, the responsible official shall make the threshold determination, supervise scoping and preparation of any required environmental documents, including an EIS, and perform any other functions assigned to the lead agency or responsible official by those sections of the SEPA rules that have been adopted by reference. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.060 Lead agency determination and responsibilities.

A. The responsible official shall determine whether the city will be the lead agency for all projects, applications, and proposals involving SEPA review.

B. When the city is not the lead agency, all departments of the city shall use and consider, as appropriate, the DNS or the final EIS of the lead agency in making decisions on the proposal. No city department shall prepare or require preparation of a DNS or EIS in addition to that prepared by the lead agency unless the city determines a supplemental environmental review is necessary under WAC 197-11-600.

C. If the responsible official receives a lead agency determination made by another agency that appears inconsistent with the criteria of WAC 197-11-253 or 197-11-922 through 197-11-940, he or she may object to the determination with the agency which made the determination. If the objection is not resolved within 14 days of receipt of the determination, the responsible official shall petition the Department of Ecology for a lead agency determination under WAC 197-11-946.

D. The responsible official is authorized to make agreements, under WAC 197-11-942 and 197-11-944, as to lead agency status or shared lead agency status for any proposal or project.

E. If a project or proposal includes exempt and nonexempt actions, the responsible official shall make a lead agency determination, even if the application that triggers the consideration is exempt.

F. When the city is lead agency for a MTCA remedial action, the Department of Ecology shall be provided an opportunity under WAC 197-11-253(5) to review the environmental documents prior to public notice being provided. If the SEPA and MTCA documents are issued together with one public comment period under WAC 197-11-253(6), the city shall decide jointly with the Department of Ecology which agency receives the comment letters and how copies of the comment letters will be distributed to the other agency.

G. For any proposal for a private project where the city would be the lead agency and for which one or more state agencies have jurisdiction, the city’s responsible official may elect to transfer the lead agency duties to a state agency. A state agency with jurisdiction appearing first on the priority list in WAC 197-11-936 shall be the lead agency and the city shall be an agency with jurisdiction. To transfer lead agency duties, the city’s responsible official must transmit a notice of the transfer together with any relevant information available on the proposal to the appropriate state agency with jurisdiction. The responsible official of the city shall also give notice of the transfer to the private applicant and any other agencies with jurisdiction over the proposal.

H. The responsible official shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify other agencies with jurisdiction. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.062 SEPA/project permit integration.

A. Under state law, the procedure for review of project permits shall be combined with the environmental review process, both procedural and substantive. The process under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and this chapter shall integrate the following procedures, insofar as possible, with any applicable process for decision-making on permit and land use applications:

1. Staff review of the application under city codes and regulations, and the environmental review and determination thereon.

2. The staff report on the application, and the report or documentation concerning environmental review.

3. Hearings and other public processes, including required public notices, required by city codes or regulations, and hearings and other public processes, including public notices, required or conducted under SEPA.

4. Such other review processes as the responsible official shall determine.

5. The responsible official shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify other agencies with jurisdiction. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.064 SEPA/GMA integration.

The city adopts by reference the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC relating to integration of SEPA with Growth Management Act processes, analysis, and documents. These sections are adopted as now exist, or as hereafter amended, and as supplemented in this chapter.

WAC

197-11-210 SEPA/GMA integration.

197-11-220 SEPA/GMA definitions.

197-11-228 Overall SEPA/GMA integration procedures.

197-11-230 Timing of an integrated GMA/SEPA process.

197-11-232 SEPA/GMA integration procedures for preliminary planning, environmental analysis, and expanded scoping.

197-11-235 Documents.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.066 SEPA/MTCA integration.

The city adopts by reference the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC relating to integration of SEPA with the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA). These sections are adopted as now exist, or as hereafter amended, and as supplemented in this chapter.

WAC

197-11-250 SEPA/Model Toxics Control Act integration.

197-11-253 SEPA lead agency for MTCA actions.

197-11-256 Preliminary evaluation.

197-11-259 Determination of nonsignificance for MTCA remedial action.

197-11-262 Determination of significance and EIS for MTCA remedial action.

197-11-265 Early scoping for MTCA remedial actions.

197-11-268 MTCA interim actions.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.070 Categorical exemptions and threshold determinations – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or as hereafter amended, by reference, and as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-300 Purpose of this part.

197-11-305 Categorical exemptions.

197-11-310 Threshold determination required.

197-11-315 Environmental checklist.

197-11-330 Threshold determination process.

197-11-335 Additional information.

197-11-340 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).

197-11-350 Mitigated DNS.

197-11-355 Optional DNS process.

197-11-360 Determination of significance (DS)/initiation of scoping.

197-11-390 Effect of threshold determination.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.090 Complete application certification.

A. Complete Application. A complete application for a threshold determination consists of the information required by RIMC 14.02.020 and the following:

1. A narrative description of the proposed action.

2. Site information, including site plans, drawings, vicinity maps, other information required for a land use certification or other development/land use permit application.

3. A completed environmental checklist.

B. Additional Information/Environmental Checklist (WAC 197-11-335). If after review of the environmental checklist, it is determined that there is insufficient information to make a threshold determination, the responsible official may require one or more of the following actions:

1. The applicant will provide more information on subjects in the checklist.

2. The city may do its own further study and investigations.

3. The city will consult with other agencies requesting information on the proposal’s potential impacts which lie within other agencies’ jurisdiction or expertise.

4. The city may decide that all or part of the proposal or its impacts are not sufficiently definite to allow environmental analysis and commit to timely subsequent environmental analysis, consistent with WAC 197-11-055 through 197-11-070.

C. Complete Application Certification. The responsible official shall certify when an application is complete as set forth in RIMC 14.06.050. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.100 Categorical exemptions – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, relating to categorical exemptions, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-800 Categorical exemptions.

197-11-880 Emergencies.

197-11-890 Petitioning DOE to change exemptions.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.105 Flexible thresholds for categorical exemptions.

A. The city establishes the following exempt levels for minor new construction based on local conditions:

1. For residential dwelling units in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(i): Up to four dwelling units.

2. For agricultural structures in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(ii): Up to 10,000 square feet.

3. For office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(iii): Up to 4,000 square feet and up to twenty parking spaces.

4. For parking lots in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(iv): Up to 20 parking spaces.

5. For landfills and excavations in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(v): Up to 100 cubic yards.

B. Whenever the city establishes new exempt levels under this section, the responsible official shall send copies of all adopted flexible thresholds to the Department of Ecology, Headquarters Office, Olympia, Washington, 98504. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.110 Categorical exemptions – Determination.

A. When the city receives an application for a project or proposal or, in the case of city proposals, a department initiates a project or proposal, the responsible official shall determine whether the project or the proposal is exempt. The determination that a project or proposal is exempt shall be final and not subject to administrative review. If a proposal is exempt, none of the procedural requirements of this chapter shall apply to the proposal. The city shall not require completion of an environmental checklist for an exempt proposal.

B. In determining whether a project or proposal is exempt, the responsible official shall make certain the proposal is properly defined and shall identify the specific permits and approvals required.

C. If a proposal includes both exempt and nonexempt actions, the city may authorize exempt actions prior to compliance with the procedural requirements of this chapter, except that:

1. The city shall not give authorization for:

a. Any nonexempt action.

b. Any action that would have an adverse environmental impact.

c. Any action that would limit the choice of reasonable alternatives.

2. The city may withhold approval of an exempt action that would lead to modification of the physical environment, when such modification would serve no purpose if the nonexempt actions were not approved.

3. The city may withhold approval of exempt actions that would lead to substantial financial expenditures by a private applicant when the expenditures would serve no purpose if the nonexempt actions were not approved. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.130 Threshold determination – Environmental checklist.

A. Filing Environmental Checklist. Except as provided in subsections B and G of this section, a completed environmental checklist shall be filed at the same time as an application for any permit or other approval not exempted by this chapter. The checklist shall be in the form of WAC 197-11-960 with such additions that may be required by the responsible official in accordance with WAC 197-11-906(4).

B. Environmental Checklist Not Needed. A checklist is not needed if the city and the applicant agree that an EIS is required, SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency.

C. Environmental Checklist to Determine Lead Agency. The responsible official shall use the environmental checklist to determine the lead agency for making the threshold determination.

D. Completing Environmental Checklist. For private proposals, the applicant is required to complete the environmental checklist. The city may provide assistance as may be reasonably necessary. For city proposals, the department initiating the proposal shall complete the environmental checklist for that proposal.

E. City to Complete Environmental Checklist. The city may decide to complete all or part of the environmental checklist for a private proposal if either of the following occurs:

1. The city has technical information on a question or questions that is unavailable to the private applicant; or

2. The applicant has provided inaccurate information on previous proposals or on proposals currently under consideration.

In the event the city completes the environmental checklist, the applicant shall pay the city all costs involved in completion, including but not limited to, administrative time and consultant’s fees.

F. The responsible official shall use the environmental checklist substantially in the form found in WAC 197-11-960 to assist in making threshold determinations for proposals, except for:

1. Public proposals on which the lead agency has decided to prepare its own EIS;

2. Proposals on which the lead agency and applicant agree an EIS will be prepared; and

3. Projects which are proposed as planned actions, which shall be governed by the requirements of WAC 197-11-315(2).

G. For projects submitted as planned actions under WAC 197-11-164, the city shall use its existing environmental checklist form or may modify the environmental checklist form as provided in WAC 197-11-315. The modified environmental checklist form may be prepared and adopted along with or as part of a planned action ordinance, or developed after the ordinance is adopted. In either case, a proposed modified environmental checklist form must be sent to the Department of Ecology to allow at least a 30-day review prior to use. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.140 Threshold determination – Reliance on plans, laws and regulations.

A. The responsible official, in reviewing the environmental impacts of a project and making the threshold determination, shall determine that the requirements for environmental analysis, protection and mitigation measures in the city’s comprehensive plan and development regulations adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW, and in other applicable local, state or federal laws or rules, provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for some or all of the specific adverse environmental impacts of the project. In conducting this review the responsible official shall:

1. Determine whether applicable regulations require studies that adequately analyze all of the project application’s specific probable adverse environmental impacts;

2. Determine whether applicable regulations require measures that adequately address such environmental impacts;

3. Determine whether additional studies are required and/or whether the project permit application should be conditioned with additional mitigation measures;

4. Provide prompt and coordinated review by government agencies and the public on compliance with applicable environmental laws and plans, including mitigation for specific project impacts that have not been considered and addressed at the plan or development regulation level;

5. Review and document consistency with the comprehensive plan and development regulations; and

6. Consult the procedures set forth in WAC 197-11-158.

B. In its review of a project permit application, the city may determine, pursuant to the criteria of RCW 43.21C.240(1) and (2), the requirements for environmental analysis, protection and mitigation measures in the applicable development regulations, comprehensive plan and/or in other applicable local, state or federal laws provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse environmental impacts of the application.

C. If the city’s comprehensive plan and development regulations adequately address a project’s probable specific adverse environmental impacts, as determined under subsection (D)(1) of this section, or RCW 43.21C.240(1) and (2), the city shall not impose additional mitigation under SEPA during project review.

D. A comprehensive plan, development regulation or other applicable local, state or federal law provides adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse environmental impacts of an application when:

1. The impacts have been avoided or otherwise mitigated; and

2. The city has designated as acceptable certain levels of service, land use designations, development standards or other land use planning required or allowed by Chapter 36.70A RCW.

E. In its decision whether a specific adverse environmental impact has been addressed by an existing rule or law of another agency with jurisdiction with environmental expertise with regard to a specific environmental impact, the city shall consult orally or in writing with that agency and may expressly defer to that agency. In making this deferral, the city shall base or condition its project approval on compliance with these other existing rules or laws.

F. Nothing in this section limits the authority of the city in its review or mitigation of a project to adopt or otherwise rely on environmental analyses and requirements under other laws, as provided in Chapter 43.21C RCW. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.150 Threshold determination – Mitigated DNS.

A. As provided in this section and WAC 197-11-350, the responsible official may issue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) based on conditions attached to the proposal by the responsible official, or on changes to, or clarifications of, the proposal made by the applicant.

B. An applicant may request in writing early notice of whether a DS is likely under WAC 197-11-350. The request must:

1. Follow submission of a permit application and environmental checklist for a nonexempt proposal for which the city is lead agency.

2. Precede the city’s actual threshold determination for the proposal.

C. The responsible official’s written response to the request for early notice shall:

1. State whether the city currently considers issuance of a DS likely and, if so, indicate the general or specific areas of concern that are leading the city to consider a DS.

2. State that the applicant may change or clarify the proposal to mitigate the indicated impacts, and may revise the environmental checklist and/or permit application as necessary to reflect the changes or clarifications.

D. When an applicant submits a changed or clarified proposal, along with a revised environmental checklist, the city shall base its threshold determination on the changed or clarified proposal:

1. If the city indicated specific mitigation measures in its response to the request for early notice, and the applicant changed or clarified the proposal to include those specific mitigation measures, the city shall issue and circulate a DNS if the city determines that no additional information or mitigation measures are required.

2. If the city indicated areas of concern, but did not indicate specific mitigation measures that would allow it to issue a DNS, the city shall make the threshold determination, issuing a DNS or DS as appropriate.

3. The applicant’s proposed mitigation measures, clarifications, changes, or conditions must be in writing and must be specific.

4. Mitigation measures which justify issuance of a mitigated DNS may be incorporated in the DNS by reference to agency staff reports, studies, or other documents.

E. A mitigated DNS is issued under either WAC 197-11-340(2), requiring a 14-day comment period and public notice, or WAC 197-11-355, which may require no additional comment period beyond the comment period on the notice of application. If the mitigated DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2), the city shall not act upon a proposal for which a mitigated DNS has been issued for 14 days after the date of issuance.

F. Mitigation measures incorporated in the mitigated DNS shall be deemed conditions of approval of the permit decision and may be enforced in the same manner as any term or condition of the permit, or enforced in any matter specifically prescribed by the city. Failure to comply with the designated mitigation measures shall be grounds for suspension and/or revocation of any permit issued.

G. If the city’s tentative decision on a permit or approval does not include mitigation measures that were incorporated in a mitigated DNS for the proposal, the city should evaluate the threshold determination to assure consistency with WAC 19711-340(3)(a) relating to the withdrawal of a DNS.

H. The city’s response under subsection C of this section shall not be construed as a determination of significance. In addition, preliminary discussion of clarifications or changes to a proposal, as opposed to a written request for early notice, shall not bind the city to consider the clarifications or changes in its threshold determination. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.160 Optional DNS process.

A. If the responsible official has a reasonable basis for determining that significant adverse environmental impacts are unlikely, the responsible official may elect to use the single integrated comment period to obtain comments on the notice of application and the likely threshold determination for the proposal as set forth in this section. If this process is used, a second comment period will typically not be required when the DNS is issued.

B. If the optional process set forth in this section is used, the responsible official shall:

1. State on the first page of the notice of application that it expects to issue a DNS for the proposal, and that:

a. The optional DNS process is being used;

b. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal;

c. The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared; and

d. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request (in addition, the city may choose to maintain a general mailing list for threshold determination distribution).

2. List in the notice of application the conditions being considered to mitigate environmental impacts, if a mitigated DNS is expected.

3. Comply with the requirements for a notice of application and public notice in RCW 36.70B.110, as set forth in RIMC Title 14.

4. Send the notice of application and environmental checklist to:

a. Agencies with jurisdiction, the Department of Ecology, affected tribes, and each local agency or political subdivision whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal; and

b. Anyone requesting a copy of the environmental checklist for the specific proposal (in addition, the city may choose to maintain a general mailing list for checklist distribution).

C. If the responsible official indicates on the notice of application that a DNS is likely, an agency with jurisdiction may assume lead agency status during the comment period on the notice of application in accordance with RIMC 18.02.060 and WAC 197-11-948.

D. The responsible official shall consider timely comments on the notice of application and either:

1. Issue a DNS or mitigated DNS with no comment period using the procedures in subsection E of this section;

2. Issue a DNS or mitigated DNS with a comment period using the procedures in subsection E of this section, if the responsible official determines a comment period is necessary;

3. Issue a DS; or

4. Require additional information or studies prior to making a threshold determination.

E. If a DNS or mitigated DNS is issued under subsection (D)(1) or (D)(2) above, the responsible official shall send a copy of the DNS or mitigated DNS to the Department of Ecology, agencies with jurisdiction, those who commented, and anyone requesting a copy. A copy of the environmental checklist need not be recirculated. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.170 Planned actions – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts by reference the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC relating to planned actions, as now exist or as hereafter amended, and as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-164 Planned actions – Definition and criteria.

197-11-168 Ordinances or resolutions designating planned actions – Procedures for adoption.

197-11-172 Planned actions – Project review.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.175 Planned actions – Definition and criteria.

A. A “planned action” means one or more types of project action that:

1. Are designated planned actions by an ordinance or resolution adopted by the city pursuant to the requirements of WAC 197-11-168;

2. Have had significant environmental impacts adequately addressed in an environmental impact statement prepared in conjunction with:

a. A comprehensive plan or subarea plan adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW;

b. A fully contained community, a master planned resort, a master planned development or a phased project;

3. Are subsequent to or implement projects for the proposals listed in subsection (A)(2) of this section;

4. Are located within an urban growth area, as defined in RCW 36.70A.030, or are located within a master planned resort;

5. Are not essential public facilities, as defined in RCW 36.70A.200; and

6. Are consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW.

B. The city shall limit planned actions to certain types of development or to specific geographical areas that are less extensive than the jurisdictional boundaries of the city.

C. The city may limit a planned action to a time period identified in the EIS or the designating ordinance or resolution adopted under WAC 197-11-168.

D. Planned actions do not require a threshold determination or the preparation of an environmental impact statement under SEPA, but are subject to environmental review and mitigation under SEPA. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.180 Environmental impact statement (EIS) – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference, as supplemented by this chapter:

WAC

197-11-400 Purpose of EIS.

197-11-402 General requirements.

197-11-405 EIS types.

197-11-406 EIS timing.

197-11-408 Scoping.

197-11-410 Expanded scoping.

197-11-420 EIS preparation.

197-11-425 Style and size.

197-11-430 Format.

197-11-435 Cover letter or memo.

197-11-440 EIS contents.

197-11-442 Contents of EIS on nonproject proposals.

197-11-443 EIS contents when prior nonproject EIS.

197-11-444 Elements of the environment.

197-11-448 Relationship of EIS to other considerations.

197-11-450 Cost-benefit analysis.

197-11-455 Issuance of DEIS.

197-11-460 Issuance of FEIS.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.190 EIS – Preparation.

A. Preparation of draft and final EISs (DEIS and FEIS) and draft and final SEISs (supplemental environmental impact statement) shall be under the direction of the responsible official. Before the city issues an EIS, the responsible official shall be satisfied that it complies with this chapter and Chapter 197-11 WAC.

B. The draft and final EIS or SEIS shall be prepared at the city’s option by the city staff, the applicant, or by a consultant approved by the city. 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 draft and final EIS prior to distribution.

C. 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; provided, however, this does not apply to information the city may request under another ordinance or statute. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.200 EIS – Additional elements.

The following additional elements are part of the environment for the purpose of EIS content, but do not add to the criteria for threshold determination or perform any other function or purpose under this chapter:

A. Economy.

B. Social policy analysis.

C. Cost-benefit analysis.

D. Any element or impact relevant to the decision. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.210 EIS – Commenting – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-500 Purpose of this part.

197-11-502 Inviting comment.

197-11-504 Availability and cost of environmental documents.

197-11-510 Public notice.

197-11-535 Public hearings and meetings.

197-11-545 Effect of no comment.

197-11-550 Specificity of comments.

197-11-560 FEIS response to comments.

197-11-570 Consulted agency costs to assist lead agency.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.220 Public notice.

A. Whenever possible, the city shall integrate the public notice required under this section with existing notice procedures for the city’s nonexempt permits or approvals required for the proposal.

B. Whenever the city issues a DNS under WAC 197-11-340(2) or a DS under WAC 197-11-360(3), the city shall give public notice as follows:

1. If public notice is required for a nonexempt permit, the notice shall state whether a DS or DNS has been issued and when comments are due.

2. If an environmental document is issued concurrently with the notice of application, public notice is required as set forth pursuant to RIMC 14.07.010(A), and such notice will suffice to meet the SEPA public notice requirements in WAC 197-11-510(1)(b).

3. If no public notice is otherwise required for the permit or approval, the city shall provide public notice of the DNS or DS by:

a. Publishing notice in the city’s official newspaper as set forth in RIMC 14.07.010(A)(2).

C. Whenever the city issues a DS under WAC 197-11-360(3), the city shall state the scoping procedure for the proposal in the DS as required in WAC 197-11-408 and in the public notice.

D. If a DNS is issued using the optional DNS process set forth in WAC 197-11-355, the public notice requirements for a notice of application, as set forth in RIMC 14.07.010, as supplemented by the requirements in RIMC 18.02.160, shall be required.

E. Whenever the city issues a DEIS under WAC 197-11-455(5) or a SEIS under WAC 197-11-620, notice of the availability of those documents shall be given by:

1. Indicating the availability of the DEIS and any public notice required for a nonexempt permit; and

a. Publishing notice in the city’s official newspaper as set forth in RIMC 14.07.010 (A)(2).

F. Public notice for projects that qualify as planned actions shall be tied to the underlying permit as specified in WAC 197-11-172(3).

G. The city shall require an applicant to compensate the city for the costs of compliance with public notice requirements as determined by the city for the applicant’s proposal. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.230 Designation of official to perform consulted agency responsibilities.

A. The responsible official shall prepare written comments for the city in response to consultation requests prior to a threshold determination, participation in scoping, and requests for review and comment upon draft environmental impact statements.

B. The responsible official shall be responsible for the city’s compliance with WAC 197-11-550 whenever the city is a consulted agency. The responsible official is also authorized to develop operating procedures that will ensure that responses to consultation requests are prepared in a timely fashion and include data from all appropriate departments of the city. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.240 Using existing environmental documents – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-600 When to use existing environmental documents.

197-11-610 Use of NEPA documents.

197-11-620 Supplemental environmental impact statements.

197-11-625 Addenda – Procedures.

197-11-630 Adoption – Procedures.

197-11-635 Incorporation by reference – Procedures.

197-11-640 Combining documents.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.250 SEPA decisions – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-650 Purpose of this part.

197-11-655 Implementation.

197-11-660 Substantive authority and mitigation.

197-11-680 Appeals.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.260 SEPA decisions.

The DNS or final EIS for the proposal shall accompany the responsible official’s recommendation on the proposal to all advisory and decision-making bodies, such as the planning commission and the city council. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.270 SEPA decisions – Substantive authority.

A. The city may attach conditions to a permit or project approval only when:

1. Such conditions are necessary to mitigate specific adverse environmental impacts clearly identified in an environmental document prepared pursuant to this chapter;

2. Such conditions are in writing;

3. Such conditions are reasonable and capable of being accomplished;

4. The city has considered whether other local, state, or federal mitigation measures applied to the proposal are sufficient to mitigate the identified impacts; and

5. Such conditions are based on one or more SEPA policies as set forth in RIMC 18.02.280 and cited in the permit, approval or other decision document.

B. The city may deny a permit or approval for a proposal on the basis of SEPA only when:

1. A finding is made that the proposal will result in significant adverse environmental impacts that are identified in a final EIS or final supplemental EIS;

2. A finding is made that mitigation measures are insufficient to mitigate the identified impact; and

3. The denial is based on one or more of the city’s SEPA policies as set forth in RIMC 18.02.280 and identified in writing in the decision document. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.280 SEPA – Policies.

A. The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to those in the existing authorization of the city.

B. The city adopts by reference the policies in the following city codes, ordinances, resolutions, and plans as now exist and as may hereafter be amended:

1. Chapter 43.21C RCW, State Environmental Policy Act.

2. RIMC Title 5, Business Taxes, Licenses and Regulations.

3. RIMC Title 6, Animals.

4. RIMC Title 8, Health and Safety.

5. RIMC Title 10, Vehicles and Traffic.

6. RIMC Title 12, Streets, Sidewalks and Public Places.

7. RIMC Title 14, Development Permit Procedures and Administration.

8. RIMC Title 15, Buildings and Construction.

9. RIMC Title 16, Plats and Subdivisions.

10. RIMC Title 17, Zoning.

11. Chapter 18.04 RIMC, Resource Lands and Critical Areas Protection.

12. Comprehensive Land Use Plan, city of Rock Island, adopted February 8, 1996, Ordinance No. 96-001.

13. Interim Water System Capital Facilities Plan, adopted March 27, 1997, Resolution No. 97-002.

14. Current Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan, adopted by the Rock Island city council.

15. Current Solid Waste Management Plan for Chelan and Douglas Counties adopted by Rock Island city council.

16. Current Douglas County Regional Policy Plan adopted by the Rock Island city council.

17. Rock Island Shoreline Master Program adopted February 20, 1975.

18. Other federal, state, county or city environmental or development laws or regulations which the city may be mandated to adopt or which are subsequently adopted by the city council. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.290 Appeals.

A. Pursuant to RCW 43.21C.060, appeals of environmental decisions conditioning or denying a proposal made by the responsible official, a nonelected official of the city, are hereby eliminated.

B. There shall be no administrative appeals of environmental determinations under this chapter. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.300 Notice/statute of limitations.

A. The city, or in the discretion of the responsible official, the project applicant or proponent, shall publish a notice of action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.080 for any action.

B. The form of the notice shall be substantially in the form provided in WAC 197-11-990. The notice shall be published by the city clerk, applicant or proponent pursuant to 43.21C.050. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.310 Compliance with SEPA – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-908 Critical areas.

197-11-916 Application to ongoing actions.

197-11-920 Agencies with environmental expertise.

197-11-922 Lead agency rules.

197-11-924 Determining the lead agency.

197-11-926 Lead agency for government proposals.

197-11-928 Lead agency for public and private proposals.

197-11-930 Lead agency for private projects with one agency with jurisdiction.

197-11-932 Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from more than one agency, when one of the agencies is a county/city.

197-11-938 Lead agencies for specific proposals.

197-11-940 Transfer of lead agency status to a state agency.

197-11-942 Agreements on lead agency status.

197-11-944 Agreements on division of lead agency duties.

197-11-946 DOE resolution of lead agency disputes.

197-11-948 Assumption of lead agency status.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.320 Critical areas.

A. The maps filed pursuant to Chapter 18.04 RIMC, as now exist or as may be hereafter amended, designating environmentally sensitive areas within the city pursuant to the standards of WAC 197-11-980 are hereby adopted by this reference.

B. The city shall treat proposals located wholly or partially within an environmentally sensitive area no differently than other proposals under this chapter, making a threshold determination for all such proposals. The city shall not automatically require an EIS for a proposal merely because it is proposed for a location in an environmentally sensitive area.

C. Certain exemptions do not apply on lands covered by water and this remains true regardless of whether or not lands covered by water are mapped. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.330 Fees.

The city shall require the following fees for its activities in accordance with the provisions of this chapter:

A. Threshold Determination. For every environmental checklist and revised environmental checklist the city will review as lead agency, the city shall collect a fee which shall be established by city council resolution from the applicant prior to undertaking the threshold determination. When the city assists the applicant or completes the environmental checklist at the applicant’s request or under RIMC 18.02.130(E)(2), an additional fee equal to the estimated actual cost of providing the assistance shall be collected.

B. Environmental Impact Statement.

1. When the city is the lead agency for a proposal requiring an EIS and the responsible official determines that the EIS shall be prepared by employees of the city, the city may charge and collect a reasonable fee from any applicant to cover costs incurred, including overhead, by the city in preparing the EIS. The responsible official shall advise the applicant of the projected costs for the EIS prior to actual preparation.

2. The responsible official may determine the city will contract directly with a consultant for preparation of an EIS, or a portion of the EIS, for a project applicant or entity other than the city, and may bill such costs and expenses directly to the applicant. Consultants shall be selected by the responsible official. Applicants may be required to post a bond or otherwise insure payment of costs for the preparation of the EIS.

3. The applicant shall pay the projected amount to the city. The city will refund the excess, if any, at the completion of the EIS. If the city’s costs exceed the projected costs, the applicant shall immediately pay the excess. If a proposal is modified so that an EIS is no longer required, the responsible official shall refund any fees collected under subsection (B)(1) or (2) of this section which remain after incurred costs, including overhead, are paid.

C. The city may collect a reasonable fee from an applicant to cover the costs of meeting the public notice requirements of this chapter relating to the applicant’s proposal.

D. The city may charge any person for copies of any document prepared under this chapter, and for mailing the document in a manner provided by Chapter 42.17 RCW.

E. If review of the application involves scientific, technical or specialized knowledge beyond the capabilities of city staff, the city may hire experts to review the application and shall charge the applicant for such expense.

F. A project applicant required to pay an impact fee for system improvements under RCW 82.02.050 through 82.02.090 shall not be required to pay a fee under this chapter for the same system improvements. (Ord. 99-027 § 2).

18.02.340 Forms – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following forms and sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now exist or hereafter amended, by reference:

WAC

197-11-960 Environmental checklist.

197-11-965 Adoption notice.

197-11-970 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).

197-11-980 Determination of significance and scoping notice (DS).

197-11-985 Notice of assumption of lead agency status.

197-11-990 Notice of action.

(Ord. 99-027 § 2).