Goldendale Energy Storage Project

We requested more information on the following topics:

• Delineation of wetlands in the project area including those around the former aluminum smelter, artificially developed livestock ponds, along access roads, and at seeps and springs.
• Mitigation and/or restoration plans for impacted wetlands and streams.
• Impacts to groundwater at the cleanup site, including details about excavating into the groundwater in an area of known groundwater contamination.
• Groundwater survey and/or studies, including a hydrology report on how groundwater moves.
• Cleanup plans including plans for soil testing and removal at the former smelter area.
• Information and analyses necessary to understand, evaluate, and condition wastewater and stormwater discharges for the project’s construction and operation.

Washington aspires to grow communities in balance with natural resources. SEPA is Washington’s State Environmental Policy Act that has helped achieve this balance for over 50 years. It helps manage the balance between the economy and protecting natural resources and quality of life. 

SEPA outlines a process for identifying and analyzing potential environmental impacts associated with governmental decisions. These decisions may be related to issuing permits for private projects, constructing public or private facilities, or regulations, policies, and plans.

The SEPA review process helps agency decision-makers, applicants, and the public understand how the entire proposal will affect the environment. SEPA requires government — including Ecology — to take environmental factors into consideration before making decisions on proposed projects.

Local and state governments use science and objective data to evaluate thousands of projects every year. The process is straightforward. A lead agency evaluates the proposal and determines the level of impact it will have on the environment. This helps establish the level of environmental review. The lead agency then makes a formal decision called a threshold determination for the project in one of three categories:

• Determination of Nonsignificance — The project is not likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts.
• Determination of Mitigated Nonsignificance — The project could have significant adverse environmental impacts, but measures (mitigation) can be taken to avoid, reduce, or eliminate those impacts.
• Determination of Significance — The project will likely result in significant adverse impacts. The lead agency is responsible for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process. An EIS provides the public, the lead agency and other agency decision makers a more thorough review of the project than what’s typically submitted in the SEPA checklist.

The time necessary to complete an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) review varies greatly between proposals and depends on the complexity of the proposal and the scope of the review. The average EIS takes about 18-24 months to complete.

Washington Administrative Code (WAC) recommends the completion of an EIS in 24 months, but every proposal is different and each is reviewed independently so the EIS is comprehensive, objective, transparent, and defensible. Generally, the more complicated projects take longer.

The environmental review process helps agencies and the public identify potential impacts to people and the environment that might result from a project that requires a permit or other agency decision. It also helps agencies identify actions that can be taken to help protect people and the environment from project impacts.

The SEPA review process looks at a wide range of potential impacts, including natural resources (plants, animals, water, etc.) and the built environment (traffic, noise, etc.). The SEPA process also identifies possible options for reducing those impacts. Agencies and local governments will use information from the SEPA review when making permit decisions.

Scoping is the first step in the process of developing an environmental impact statement, or EIS. After a lead agency (or co-lead agency) issues a determination of significance, they will decide what impacts should be studied, how they should be studied, what alternatives should be considered, and what mitigation should be required to lessen or eliminate the impacts. This analysis is summarized in an EIS. 

A 21-day public comment period is required for the scoping process. The lead agency asks tribes, members of the public, and other agencies to assist in identifying what should be studied and how. We are also interested to hear ideas for mitigation and project alternatives. This information collected is used to help develop the scope of the EIS.

The purpose of an Environmental Impact Statement or EIS under SEPA is to fully understand the project’s probable, significant, and adverse environmental impacts, and then determine if these probable impacts can be reduced or eliminated. The EIS document provides a comprehensive and objective evaluation of those impacts, reasonable alternatives, and mitigation measures that would avoid or minimize impacts.

The EIS is not a decision. It’s not a permit and it’s not an approval for the project to move forward. An EIS provides decision-makers important information to consider in making project decisions.

Concerns identified during the scoping process can be further evaluated when a draft EIS is being prepared. It's usually easier and more effective to comment early, during the scoping process than wait until the draft EIS.is available for comment.

Comments can address:

• If the proposal is clearly described.
• Which elements of the environment should be studied, such as air quality, water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, transportation systems, etc.
• Reasonable range of alternatives (identification of an alternative site or approach that achieves the proposal objective).
• Extent of study and analyses that are needed to understand impacts.
• Measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate or offset effects of the proposal.

Several opportunities for public involvement are built into the EIS process. The first is scoping, where the public can weigh in on what the lead agency should study in the EIS. We will hold two online public meetings as part of this process. A second public comment period will be held for the draft EIS. We will consider all public input before finalizing the scope of the EIS and the EIS itself.

A preliminary list of the anticipated permits and decisions was provided by the project proponent and is included in the table below. After the SEPA environmental review is completed, permit decision-makers will use the information to help them decide if permits should be granted, conditioned or declined.

Most permit decisions are made after SEPA process is completed and a final EIS is published. SEPA documents are considered by agencies when making permit decisions.