Transcript スライド 1 - International Association for Impact

CS23.1.3 #533
1/17
Growth Management and SEA
The Non-Project Review (NPR) system of Washington State ,USA,
focusing on the legislative background
1. Tokyo Institute of Technology Interdisciplinary Graduate School
of Science and Engineering
2. Osaka University Research Institute for Sustainable Science
Sachihiko HARASHINA1, Yuki SHIBATA1, Terukazu KUMAZAWA2
IAIA’07
6 June
Outline
2/17
Introduction －Growth Management and SEA
Background
Viewpoint & Objectives of this Research
State Environmental Policy Act. (SEPA)
in Washington State (WA.).
Integration of GMA and NPR
Public Participation in New NPR System
Discussion
Conclusion
i. Information Disclosure,
ii. Public Participation, iii. Appeal
3/17
Introduction－Growth Management and SEA
Land Use of the Central Business Districts (CBD)
[Photo by Harashina,2004]
Tokyo
New York
4/17
Introduction－Growth Management and SEA
Land Use， 10km from the CBDs
Tokyo
[Photo by Harashina,2004]
New York
5/17
Introduction－Growth Management and SEA
Land Use， 20ｋｍ from the CBDs
Tokyo
Long-term
&
Wide-area
[Photo by Harashina,2004]
New York
solutions are needed !!
6/17
Background
Need to control the
urbanization by
strategically-designed policy
Need to give environmental
consideration by
adequate public participation
Growth Management Policy
SEA system
The systems in Washington State (WA.) has been
characterized as most advanced in terms of the level of
integration of SEA and Growth Management Policy※
[※ American Planning Association (1998), Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook, Chapter 12]
7/17
Viewpoints & Objectives of the Research
Viewpoints (1)Information Disclosure,
(2)Public Participation
(narrowly defined ; i.e. opportunity to comment),
(3)Appeal
systems should be fundamental elements
in the process of SEA.
Objectives Identify
* the process of the SEA in WA.
* the provisions related to public participation
in the SEA process
About Interview
8/17
Interviewee
-the core members of each bureau
Date of
interview
Ms. Teri North (WA. Department of Ecology)
2006.11.30
Ms. Linda Healy (WA. Department of Transportation)
2006.12.01
Mr. Tim Trohimovich (NGO, futur wise in Seattle)
2006.12.04
Mr. Rick Olson (Puget Sound Regional Council)
2006.12.06
Washington State
Capital
Largest city
Area
Population
: Olympia
: Seattle
: 1.8 billion Km2
: 6.3 million
[Washington State
Office of Washington State (2006)]
Olympia
Seattle
SEPA ( State Environmental Policy Act. ) in WA.
9/17
1971 – WA. enacted SEPA modeled on NEPA (1969)
1976 – SEPA Guideline was legislated.
(adopted specific procedural requirements
to enhance efficiency, to promote public participation)
1984 - SEPA Rules were adopted.
(streamlined the screening process and clarified the
appeal procedures. )
10/17
SEPA ( State Environmental Policy Act. ) in WA.
Proposal Initiated
SEPA process as shown
had been applied for both
Project Action
Review
of
Exemptio
n
Environmental
Checklist
(decisions on specific
construction project)
&
Non-Project Action.
Issue
DS/Scoping
Notice
(Determination
of significance )
(decisions on policies, plans,
and programs, including
adoption or amendment of
ordinance, regulation)
Exemption
Issue DNS
(Determination of
nonsignificance )
PublicNotice
CP-14
Appeal
PublicNotice
[CP14/30] : prepared comment
period at least 14/30days.
CP-14
Draft EIS
Appeal
PublicNotice
Final EIS
[Appeal] : public and agencies
can challenge lead agency. It
called “Administrative Appeal”
CP-30
PublicNotice
Appeal
Agency Decision
Integration and NPR system
11/17
1990 - GMA (Growth Management Act.) was enacted
(cites & counties adopt policies, plans, and regulation
to manage land use, environmental resources… )
1995 - SEPA Rules were amended
Added provisions for integration of SEPA into planning
process under the GMA
2001 – New NPR (Non-Project Review) system
including new document form was introduced
12/17
Integration and New NPR system
for Policy, Plan, Program
Proposal Initiated
Review
of
Exemptio
n
SEPA requires proponents
to use integrated
approach to include
environmental factor in
both planning & decisionmaking.
The NPR Form is intended
to be used concurrently
with the development of a
nonproject proposal.
(i.e. upon identification
that a plan, policy or rule
is likely to be needed.)
NPR Form
& checklist
Issue
DS/Scoping
Notice
(Determination
of significance )
Exemption
Issue DNS
(Determination of
nonsignificance )
PublicNotice
CP-14
Appeal
PublicNotice
CP-14
Draft EIS
PublicNotice
Appeal
Final EIS
CP-30
PublicNotice
Appeal
Agency Decision
Public Participation in New NPR System
13/17
Example of integration process.
[ NPR ]
Proposal Initiated [ Planning ]
NPR Form
& Checklist
Development of
the proposal
Issue
DS/Scoping Combined
Issue
Notice
Document Notice of
(Determination
Application
of significance )
PublicNotice
CP-14
Appeal
Draft EIS
PublicNotice
CP-30
Final EIS
PublicNotice
Combined
Document
Draft plan
including
alternatives
Combined More concrete
Document Plan document
Appeal
Agency Decision
- NPR processes are built into
whole planning process.
- Environmental analysis starts
concurrently with preliminary
planning considerations.
- Public Participations including
Public Notice, Comment Period,
Appeal also are built into early
or whole planning stage.
Discussion on the
Public Participation
- Information Disclosure
- Public Participation
- Appeal
Discussion - Information Disclosure
14/17
- Combined SEPA documents disclose environmental
information and planning information at the same time.
- NPR Form provides information including adverse effect
to the public in the early stage of planning.
discussion
formulation
search/alternatives
analysis
evaluation
interpretation
adoption
NPR Form
NPR Form seems to be
enhancing the discussion
Draft EIS
and information necessary
for not only environmental
Final EIS review, but also
development of plan &
good decision.
15/17
Discussion - Public Participation
- SEPA stipulates
Comment Periods on SEPA documents.
Types of
Public Participation
Respond to all the comments received.
- SEPA doesn’t stipulate Hearings
and meetings, it just encourages.
Meeting
Type
Document
Type
discussion
discretion
Comments Periods are required
as minimum opportunities.
Synthesizing both types is better.
stipulated
16/17
Discussion - Appeal
SEPA provides opportunities for public
citizens and agencies to challenge the
decisions made in the SEPA process.
opportunities to appeal at
each stage is considered to be
effective for immediately
collecting inappropriate
decision.
Mature ness of the Plan
discussion
：decision-making stages
： opportunities to appeal at
each stage
Decision-making stages
Final decision
Conclusion
17/17
- As a result of integration, Public Participations are built
onto early and whole planning processes.
- Information regarding Policy, Plan, or Program is
disclosed in the preliminary planning consideration stage.
-SEPA requires Document Type Public Participation. On
the other hand, SEPA doesn’t stipulate Public Hearings
and meetings, it just encourages.
- SEPA prepares appeal processes at each stage in SEA.
Thank you.
Appendix
Contents of NPR Form
- Background ; Name of proposal, Legal authority, Time line
- Need and Objective ; Identify the problems, Needs, objectives
- Environmental Overview
- Regulatory Framework
- Public Involvement ; Processes expected to be used
- Affected Environment (environmental elements likely to be affected)
- Key Issue Assessment ; List of issues and the reasons
- Proposed Action and Alternative Actions
- Consistency of the proposal with other plans, policies
- Monitoring and Follow-up
The consent-related model
Strategic-decision
making
SEA stages
The integrated model
Strategic-decision
making
SEA stages
[ Micheal Schmidt, Elsa Joao, Eike Albrecht (2004), Implementing Strategic
Environmental Assessment, Springer, p9.]
International Comparison of
Population Density
（inter-city district）
Area
(km2)
Population
(million)
Density
(person/ha)
Tokyo (33)
６１７
８.１４
１３２
New York (17)
６８２
７.５６
１１１
London (11)
５８８
４.１０
７０
Paris (11)
７６１
６.１６
８１
Berlin (4)
８６２
３.４０
３９
●Tokyo (23 wards):2002 ●New York (New York City excluding Staten Island):2000
●London (Inner London and outer 6 wards):2001 ● Paris (Paris city and outer 3 prefectures):1999
● Berlin(12 wards):2004
Proposed Agency Action
Categorical Exclusion
(CEQ1501.4(a))
Exclusion Applies
(CEQ1501.4(a)2)
EA (CEQ1501.3)
FONSI
(CEQ1501.4(e)1)
Scoping Process
(CEQ1501.7)
Draft EIS
(CEQ1502.9(a))
Final EIS
(CEQ1502.9(b))
Record of Decision
(CEQ1505.2)
Implementation of Agency Action
Proposed Agency Action
Feasible PI
(CEQ1501.4(b))
Notice of Intent
Federal Register
Categorical Exclusion
(CEQ1501.4(a))
(CEQ1501.4(a)2)
EA (CEQ1501.3)
FONSI
(CEQ1501.7)
PI (CEQ1501.7(a))
(CEQ1501.4(e)1)
Scoping Process
(CEQ1501.7)
Federal Register
(CEQ1506.10(a))
CP (min.45days)
Draft EIS
(CEQ1502.9(a))
(CEQ1503.1(a))
Final EIS
Federal Register
(CEQ1502.9(b))
(CEQ1506.10(a))
CP (min.30days)
Exclusion Applies
Record of Decision
Public Review
(30days)
(CEQ1501.4(e)2)
Referrals and
Response
(CEQ1504.3)
(CEQ1505.2)
(CEQ1503.1(b))
CP : Comment Period
Implementation of Agency Action
Permit Application Received
or
Agency Proposal Initiated
Review of Exemption
Determine SEPA Lead Agency
Evaluation Environmental Checklist
Issue DS/Scoping Notice
(Determination of significance )
14 day review
7 day wait
Draft EIS
Final EIS
Agency Decision
Issue DNS
(Determination of nonsignificance )
30 day review
Public
Comment
14 day review
Public
Comment
Agency Decision
(Unless DNS withdraw)