Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 43.21C.150 (2026)

RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) inapplicable when statement previously prepared pursuant to national environmental policy act

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The requirements of RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) pertaining to the preparation of a detailed statement by branches of government shall not apply when an adequate detailed statement has been previously prepared pursuant to the national environmental policy act of 1969, in which event said prepared statement may be utilized in lieu of a separately prepared statement under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c).

[ 1975 1st ex.s. c 206 s 1; 1974 ex.s. c 179 s 12.]

Notes:

Purpose—1974 ex.s. c 179: See note following RCW 43.21C.080.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 2002–2018 · leading case: Kettle Range Conservation Grp. v. Dep't of Nat. Resources, 85 P.3d 894 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kettle Range Conservation Grp. v. Dep't of Nat. Resources, 85 P.3d 894 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “” RCW 43.21C.150. Kettle Range argued on summary judgment that the Conservation Agreement and EIS are inadequate to address the issues on all of Stimson’s land because they were limited to land in the LeClerc BMU, which is only a portion of Stimson land.”

Boss v. Dep't of Transp., 54 P.3d 207 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 6× “NEPA & SEPA — Simultaneously Prepared EIS Boss argues that because the NEPA/SEPA EIS was a single, simultaneously prepared and published document, it was not a “previously prepared” NEPA document and, thus, DOT was not exempt under RCW 43.21C.150 from satisfying all of SEPA’s…”

Coalition for a Sustainable 520 v. United States Dep't of Transp., 881 F. Supp. 2d 1243 (W.D. Wash. 2012). “3d 207 (2002); RCW 43.21C.150. The Court accordingly finds that the FEIS is sufficiently detailed to meet the requirements of SEPA.”

State Of Washington v. Montlake, Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “135 allows an agency that prepares an "adequate detailed statement" that satisfies NEPA to use it in lieu of the EIS that SEPA requires anC,1 exempts the agency from satisfying SEPA's requirements.26 This means that a project does not need a SEPA EIS when it has an EIS that…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.