HOUSE BILL REPORT
SHB 1183
This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a statement of legislative intent. |
As Passed House:
February 25, 2013
Title: An act relating to wireless communications structures.
Brief Description: Regarding wireless communications structures.
Sponsors: House Committee on Technology & Economic Development (originally sponsored by Representatives Morris, Smith, Habib, Crouse, Morrell, Magendanz, Freeman, Kochmar, Walsh, Tarleton, Dahlquist, Vick, Zeiger, Maxwell, Hudgins, Upthegrove, Ryu and Bergquist).
Brief History:
Committee Activity:
Technology & Economic Development: 1/22/13, 1/31/13 [DPS].
Floor Activity:
Passed House: 2/25/13, 92-0.
Brief Summary of Substitute Bill |
|
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT |
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 14 members: Representatives Morris, Chair; Habib, Vice Chair; Smith, Ranking Minority Member; Dahlquist, Hudgins, Kochmar, Maxwell, Morrell, Stonier, Tarleton, Vick, Walsh, Wylie and Zeiger.
Staff: Jennifer Thornton (786-7147).
Background:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) establishes a review process for state agencies and local governments to identify possible environmental impacts that may result from governmental decisions, including the issuance of permits or the adoption of or amendment to land use plans and regulations. The information collected through the SEPA review process may be used to change a proposal to mitigate likely impacts, or to condition or deny a proposal when adverse environmental impacts are identified.
Provisions in the SEPA generally require a project applicant to complete an environmental checklist that includes questions about the potential environmental impacts of the proposal. This checklist is then reviewed by a designated lead agency to determine whether the proposal is likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact. If the lead agency determines that a proposed project is likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment, it must prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.
For some projects, including the types of projects that have been "categorically exempt" from the SEPA review process, no environmental review under the SEPA is required. Categorical exemptions to the SEPA review are identified in both state statute and rule. The siting of wireless service facilities that meet specific conditions is categorically exempt in statute from the SEPA review process. The Department of Ecology (DOE) is also required to adopt rules for this categorical exemption.
Among other provisions, Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 6406 from 2012, required the DOE to update the rule-based categorical exemptions to the SEPA, as well as update the environmental checklist.
Summary of Substitute Bill:
The conditions under which siting wireless service facilities are exempt from the SEPA review process are changed. The requirement for the facility to meet one of the following two exemption requirements is removed: (1) a microcell attached to an existing structure that does not contain a residence or school; or (2) wireless service antennas attached to an existing structure that does not contain a residence or a school, and is located in a commercial, industrial, manufacturing, forest, or agricultural zone. The exemption requirement that the project does not consist of a series of actions, some of which are not categorically exempt, or that together may have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, is also removed.
The exemption instead applies to mounting, installing, removing, or replacing transmission equipment that does not:
increase the height of the structure by more than 10 percent or 20 feet;
add a component to the structure that protrudes more than 20 feet from the edge, or more than the width of the structure at the level it is placed;
expand the boundaries of the existing equipment compound by more than 30 linear feet; or
mount an antenna or equipment involving the addition of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets, not to exceed four, or add more than one new equipment shelter.
Additionally, no more than two categorical exemptions related to structure height, width, or boundaries for a specific wireless facility may be granted within a six-year time period.
Wireless service providers granted a SEPA exemption must to report to the Legislature by January 1, 2020, on the number of permits issued, the number of SEPA exemptions granted, and the total dollar investment in wireless service facilities.
Definitions are added and clarified.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Available.
Effective Date: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of the session in which the bill is passed.
Staff Summary of Public Testimony:
(In support) Washington hasn't done a lot of work in telecommunications in a decade. It is time to take a look at what needs to be updated, to make sure the infrastructure is in place in order to have the amount of wireless service needed. This bill resulted from legislation last year asking the DOE to update the SEPA guidelines. Local governments and the DOE asked for help from telecommunications companies to clean this statute up. This is also an economic development issue, as it is important to get that investment here.
(Opposed) None.
Persons Testifying: Representative Morris, prime sponsor; Steve Gano, AT&T; and Ken Lyons, AT&T and Busch Law Firm.
Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying: None.