Consolidating in tacoma washington
The exemption from environmental review applies to environmental checklists, threshold determinations, and draft EISs as well as to final EISs. 156, 612 P.2d 430 1980) The SEPA Guidelines' categorical exemptions are only presumptively applicable. 136, 600 P.2d 628 (1979) The County Commissioners could retain "responsible official" duties with themselves, and reject a planning commission recommendation not to require an EIS for a preliminary plat. A mitigated DNS will be upheld under the clearly erroneous standard if (1) environmental factors were adequately considered in a manner sufficient to establish prima facie compliance with SEPA, (2) it is based on information sufficient to evaluate the development's probable environmental impacts, and (3) the mitigation measures are reasonable and capable of being accomplished. App 430, 886 P.2d 209 (1994) A proposal to expand a shopping center and proposals to install underground fuel tanks and a car wash in the center were, in effect, a single course of action., 98 Wn.2d 375, 655 P.2d 245 (1982) Footnote 2 of this opinion supports the notion that the categorical exemptions in the SEPA Guidelines are only presumptively applicable, and that the courts may require an EIS for an action with significant environmental impacts even though it is exempt under the SEPA Guidelines. Agencies should consider likely environmental effects before applying exemptions. 778, 896 P.2d 1292 (1995) State Department of Fisheries was not required to assume lead agency status after city issued DNS despite the department's statutory mandate to preserve and protect fish life in state waters. They should have been evaluated in the same environmental document and their cumulative impacts considered. For purposes of review under SEPA, economic competition, in and of itself, is not an element of the environment.Strong language on fundamental and inalienable rights., 89 Wn.2d 78, 569 P.2d 712 (1977) Record of a negative threshold determination (DNS) by local government must demonstrate that environmental factors were considered.., 90 Wn.2d 856, 586 P.2d 470 (1978) Annexations are actions under SEPA.The burden is upon an agency subject to SEPA to show that it actually considered environmental matters in a threshold determination.
SEPA applies to issuance of permits which did not become final until after enactment of SEPA.
Anyone interested in these cases to the full text of the court decision.
Also, subsequent amendments to SEPA and the SEPA Rules may affect the holdings of any given case.
Strong language suggests that agencies must consider (and perhaps act upon) all potential impacts of projects before them for licensing, including impacts normally within the jurisdiction of other agencies.
(A water resource agency is directed to consider septic tanks associated with homes for which a water right is sought.) return to top , 131 Wn.2d 345, 932 P.2d 158 (1997) Actions that fit within categorical exemptions promulgated by the Department of Ecology pursuant to RCW 43.21C.110(1)(a) may not be reviewed on a case by case basis to determine whether they have probable significant adverse environmental impacts.