HomeMy WebLinkAboutUpdate Documents - BOCCDEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
264 West Division Ave.* PO Box 37
Ephrata, WA 98823
/GRANT COHNTY`
WASHINGTON
Executive Briefing: Required SEPA Determination
PLANNING DIVISION
(5O8)754-2O11Ext. 25O1
Prepared For:
Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation([AHP)
YakamaNation Cultural Resources Program (YNCRP) Executive Leadership
Bureau ofReclamation (ReoLsmaton)
Fnonn;
Jim Anderson-Cook,Director Grant County Development Services
Date:
June 17.2O26.Revised June 22'2O2G
Project:
Royal Slope Solar Facility ''2GOMVVSolar +28OMVVBES8
Applicant:
Royal Slope Solar LLC(CieomwayEnergy Group)
Location:
Sections 1-4'12.14.T18N'R23E'Grant County, VVA
Permit Type:
Conditional Use Permit (Type III Review)
Source:
Compliance Review ofSecond Addendum (June 17.2O2G).Parts 6&7
Purpose of This Briefing
This briefing outlines a required SEPA threshold determination that Grant County must make on a statutory timeLine
under RCVV38.7OB.O8O'ooamended by2SSB528O(Ch.338'Laws of2O23).The Applicant's submittal ofaddendum
materials to the original application has substantively resolved every outstanding biological, code, and process item
identified by the County, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), and the Yakama Nation Cultural
Resources Program (YNCRp)for the privately held portion ofthe project area, with one exception: the mignif|memtvisual
impact to a Traditional Cultural Place (TCP) at Key Observation Point (KOP) 38A attributable tmthe solar facility,
which is being addressed through the Bureau of Reoiamotion-ied NHPASeotion 106 process and o resolution of
adverse effects through o NHPA Section 108 agreement document (Memorandum of Agreement or Project Specific
Programmatic Agreement) pathway requested by YNCRP under 36 CFR § 800.6. The County is sharing this briefing in
advance of issuing a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) so that DAHP and YNCRP Leadership have a
clear understanding of how the County's SEPA action under state Law will be sequenced with, and deferential to, the
ongoing federal Section 1O6consultation under Reclamation's Lead.
A. Statutory Timeline —RCW 36,70B4O80 (2SSB 5290)
Under RCVV36.7OB.O8O eaamended by2BSB528O(Ch.338 Laws of2O23'Grant County must issue ufinal decision
on a Type III project permit application within 170 calendar days of the determination of completeness. A Conditional
Use Permit subject to public notice and a public hearing is a Type III permit. The statute applies topermits filed onor
after January 1, 2025. If the County fails to meet the statutory deadline, the statute requires a partial refund of permit
fees and exposes the County toadministrative appeal and potential Litigation challenging the Count/aprocessing of
the application.
Key Statutory Mechanics
° Clock starts atdetermination ofcompleteness under RCVV387OB.O7U.
• Clock pauses while the Applicant is responding to a written request for additional information.
"'To foster athriving, resilient, and safe community through innovative planning, efficient building processes, and robust fire prevention measures. I.?
• Clock pauses if the Applicant requests, in writing, a temporary suspension of review.
• Clock pauses while an administrative appeal is pending.
• Extensions beyond the 170-day deadline require mutual written agreement of the Applicant and the County;
the County may not require an extension as a condition of submittal.
Application to P 25-0178 / P 25-0179
• Original CUP application submitted June 24, 2025.
• First Addendum January 30, 2026; Second Addendum April 22, 2026 (addressing TCP concerns).
• Second Addendum responds directly to consultation feedback received from YNCRP on April 21, 2026.
• The County's SEPA threshold determination under WAC 197-11-340 is the next required action and is on the
critical path to meeting the 170-day statutory deadline for the underlying CUP.
Finding: Grant County must act on the SEPA threshold determination on a statutory timeline. Inaction is not a lawful
option. The pathway analyzed in Part 7 of the June 17, 2026, Compliance Review is the County's vehicle for actingtimely
without prejudicing ongoing Section 106 consultation or the development of the YNCRP NHPA Section 106 agreement
document.
The Applicant has substantively responded to every code, biological, and procedural compliance item identified in the
original staff compliance review. The table below summarizes the County's findings, as detailed in Parts 1-4 of the
Compliance Review.
April 10, 2026, Director Habitat quantification, 2:1 PHS ratio, west/north
compliance letter (5 TCP avoidance, Alt 2 selection, Final
benchmarks B-1 to B-5) HMP/Decom/Visual.
April 10, 2026, original Slope analysis, WDFW HMP approval, conservation
staff compliance review agreement, Table 5 ratio, HCA buffer mapping,
(8 issues) Section 106, SEPA 13.5 species, WDFW fencing
BM Ps.
WDFW Region 2 (Nov W-1 through W-6 deficiencies; 2:1 PHS ratio;
31 2025; M a r 6, 2026; revegetation; fencing; monitor windows.
Apr 24, 2026)
YNCRP - west/north TCP sensitivities along west and north margins of
TCP locations (Apr 21 & private -land project area.
Jun 16, 2026)
4 MET; 1 PARTIAL (Visual - see
Part C)
7 MET; 1 PARTIAL (executed
conservation agreement -
conditioned)
Substantively Met - verbal &
email concurrence
MET - resolved by 40-m
exclusion -zone KMZ
YNCRP - KOP 36A TCP Significant visual impact to TCP attributable to the OPEN - addressed via the NHPA
visual impact (Apr 21 & solar facility (not transmission); NHPA Section 106 Section 106 agreement
Jun 16, 2026) agreement document requested under 36 CFR § document pathway (Part C)
800.6).
Royal Slope Solar LLC CUP & SEPA-DAHP,YNCRP, Reclamation SEPA Executive Briefing
File #P 25-0178 & P-25-0179
-2-
Draft IVIDNS Conditions Fourteen conditions covering biology, 9 MET; 3 PARTIAL (instrument
M-1 to M-14 decommissioning, security, cultural resources. execution); 2 OPEN (M-13/M-
14 - KOP 36A)
Finding: The Applicant has done what was required to bring the application into substantive compliance with County
code (GCC 23.08.357, GCC Chapter 24.08, GCC Chapter 24.04), WDFW Priority Habitats & Species guidance, and
Tribal -identified avoidance of west/north TCP Locations. No outright disqualifying deficiencies remain. The remaining
item is the KOP 36A visual impact, which by its nature is being processed under Section 106 rather than under SEPA.
C. KOP 36A Visual Impact — Addressed Under Section 106, Not SEPA
CA What YNCRP Has Identified
On April 21, 2026, YNCRP Director Casey Barney transmitted a Letter to the Bureau of Reclamation identifying that KOP
36A produces a significant visual impact to a Traditional. CuLtural. Place. The letter attributes that impact specifically to
the solar facility itself, not the transmission line, and requests that Reclamation and the County enter into a NHPA
Section 106 agreement document under 36 CFR § 800.6 addressing avoidance, minimization, and mitigation for the
KOP 36A TCP. Grant County was not copied on the April 21 letter and Learned of it on June 16, 2026, and in a follow-up
email from Jessica Lally (YNCRP) to Grant County, which is the County's first direct in -record communication from
YNCRP on this matter. The Applicant submitted revised materials addressing the KOP 36A concerns and measures to
avoid impacts to TCPs on private lands. The County subsequently issued a consultation request to YNCRP on April 22,
2026, including the revised materials for review.
C.2 What the Applicant Has Already Done
• April 22, 2026, exclusion -zone KMZ (40-m buffer) integrated into the March 2026 Site Layout, resolving west
and north TCP sensitivities (confirmed in YNCRP June 16, 2026, email).
• Transmission Alternative 2 selected (1.7 mi on private Land, parallels Beverly Burke Road), avoiding inland
dune, whipsnake corridor, and Alt-1 cultural resource exposures.
0 April. 2026 Visual. Impact Memorandum prepared, including treatment of KOP 36A (triggered by the April. 21
YNCRP letter that the County did not initially receive).
C.3 What Remains —and Why It Is Section 106, Not SEPA
The KOP 36A visual impact involves potential adverse effects to a Traditional Cultural Place on federal. Lands managed
by the Bureau of Reclamation. Resolution of those effects is the subject matter of NHPA Section 106 consultation
under 36 CFR Part 800, with Reclamation as the federal. Lead and DAHP as the State Historic Preservation Officer.
YNCRP has specifically requested an NHPA Section 106 agreement document under 36 CFR § 800-6. The County, as
SEPA lead agency for the underlying private -land CUP, has no independent authority to negotiate or execute that NHPA
Section 106 agreement document. Washington SEPA rules expressly accommodate this circumstance through WAC
197-11-158(4) (deferraLto another agency with jurisdiction), WAC 197-11-610 (use of NEPAdocuments), and WAC 197-
11-350(3) (mitigation as conditions on a DNS).
D. The Required SEPA Determination — Conditioned IVIDNS Pathway
Royal Slope SotarLLC CUP& SEPA-DAHP,YNCRP, Reclamation SEPA Executive Briefing
Fite #P 25-0178 & P-25-0179 - 3 -
Based on the Second Addendum record and the legal analysis in Part 7 of the Compliance Review, the County has
identified a single lawful pathway that allows it to meet the 170-day statutory deadline while preserving the integrity of
the federal Section 106 process and the YNCRP NHPA Section 106 agreement document request. The County intends
to issue a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) with cultural -resources conditions pursuant to
WAC 197-11-350(3), WAC 197-11-158(4), RCW 43.21 C.240, WAC 197-11-610, and WAC 197-11-660. The MDNS will
defer the KOP 36A TCP matter to the Reclamation -led Section 106 process and the YNCRP-requested NHPA Section
106 agreement document and will condition issuance of any grading, mechanical, or building permits on completion
of that process.
Sequence of County Action
1. Formal consultation with YNCRP and Reclamation. Grant County will formally consult YNCRP and
Reclamation to confirm whether the KOP 36A TCP visual impact is most appropriately addressed through (a)
project -level design avoidance, (b) a NHPA Section 106 agreement document under 36 CFR § 800.6, (c) site -
specific CUP mitigation conditions, (d) deferral under WAC 197-11-158(4), or (e) a combination thereof.
2. Adoption of the Reclamation Final EA. Grant County will adopt the Bureau of Reclamation's Final NEPA
Environmental Assessment (CPN-EA-2024-01, June 2025) under WAC 197-11-610(2) in support of its SEPA
threshold determination.
3. Issuance of a Conditioned MDNS. Grant CountywiLL issue a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance under
WAC 197-11-350(3), with cultural -resources conditions covering both (i) the Reclamation -led Section 106
process on federal Lands and (ii) any NHPA Section 106 agreement document or CUP mitigation arising from
YNCRP consultation on the KOP 36A TCP.
4. Hearing Examiner review with parallel Section 106. The CUP will proceed through the County's Hearing
Examiner process with the conditioned MDNS. Section 106 consultation will continue in parallel under
Reclamation's Lead. Any NHPA Section 106 agreement document arising from County-YNCRP-Reclamation
consultation will be recorded against the CUP file.
5. Section 106 close-out before ground disturbance. No grading, mechanical, or building permits will issue until
(a) Section 106 consultation is complete and any NHPA Section 106 agreement document executed, or (b) site -
specific mitigation conditions are satisfied, or (c) the WAC 197-11-158(4) deferral condition is satisfied.
Finding: A legal pathway exists for the County to issue a Conditioned MDNS prior to completion of Section 106 and
prior to execution of any NHPA Section 106 agreement document, provided the County has documented good -faith
consultation with YNCRP and Reclamation on the KOP 36A TCP NHPA Section 106 agreement document request and
has incorporated either (a) the executed NHPA Section 106 agreement document, (b) site -specific mitigation
conditions, or (c) an enforceable condition deferringthe matterto the Reclamation -led Section 106 process under WAC
197-11-158(4).
E. Cultural Resources Conditions to Be Carried Into the CUP
Independent of the SEPA threshold determination, the Compliance Review recommends the following partial
conditions of CUP approval that the County intends to carry forward to the Hearing Examiner. Conditions C-3 and C-4
are the operative cultural -resources conditions that integrate the federal Section 106 process and the YNCRP NHPA
Section 106 agreement document request into the County's land use approval.
C-3 Applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with Grant Operationalizes the YNCRP
County memorializing decommissioning obligations, Security, 5- NHPA Section 106 agreement
Royal Slope Solar LLC CUP& SEPA—DAHP,YNCRP, Reclamation SEPA Executive Briefing
File #P 25-0178 & P-25-0179 - 4 -
� year re+eva|uation'and e+masuedisposal outside Grant County per document pathway within
|
| GCC 23.08.357(i); the Development Agreement shall also theCourty's CUP framework.
'memorialize the Applicant's good -faith consultation obligations
C-4 Noground-disturbing activities shall commence until the
Reclamation -led NHPASection 2O6consultation process is
complete and any required cultural resource mitigation measures
are incorporated into the Project design.
Open Item YNCRP requests enNHPA Section 106 agreement document under
#4 36 CFR§800.6 addressing significant visual impact to TCP at KOP
36A attributable to solar facility. Action required: Engage YNCRP
and Reclamation onNHPASection 106 agreement document
pathway; see Part 7for SEPAmechanism.
� i 1 111111141
Conditions any County -issued
grading/mechanical/building
permit oncompletion ofthe
federal Section lOGprocess
and any executed mHpA
Section 1O6agreement
document.
Acknowledges the open item
and identifies the Countys
responsive action.
Grant County iopresenting this brief ingin advance of issuing the Conditioned M DNS toe nsure that DAHP,YNCRP, and
Reclamation Leadership understand the County's statutory position, the substance of what the Applicant has resolved,
and the deliberate sequencing the County intends to apply. The County respectfully asks the following:
� Acknowledge that the 8EPA Conditioned MON8 pathway is the Countyo response to a statutory obligation
under RCW 36.7013.080 and is not a substitute for, or shortcut around, the RecLamation-ted Section 106
process or the YNCRP-requested NHPA Section 106 agreement document.
° ConfirmYNCRPe preference among the four mechanisms identified in Step 1 of the Countyo sequence
design avoidance, NHPA Section 106 agreement document, site -specific CUP mitigation, deferral under WAC
197-11-158(4), or a combination - for resolving the KOP 36A TCP visual impact.
0 Provide DAHP guidance on the County I s intended use of WAC 197-11-610(2) to adopt the RecLamation Final
EA in support of the County's SEPA threshold determination.
m Identify any additional documentation or consuLtation steps DAHP, YNCRP, or Reclamation would require to
consider the Countys good -faith consultation obligation satisfied for purposes of the County's CUP conditions
Jim Anderson-Cook,Director
Grant County Development Services
Royal Slope Solar LLC CUP &SEPA-��YNCRP,Reclamation SEPA Executive Briefing
This briefing is a non -binding executive summary of Parts 6 and 7 of the Grant County Development Services Compliance Review of Second
Addendum dated June 17, 2026. It is intended solely to support government -to -government and inter -agency coordination among Grant County, the
Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, the Yakama Nation Cultural Resources Program, and the Bureau of Reclamation
in connection with Royal Slope Solar LLC project applications P 25-0178 and P 25-0179. It does not constitute a SEPA threshold determination, a
CUP decision, or a recommendation for approval or denial. The Grant County Hearing Examiner retains full authority to evaluate the application
against all applicable code provisions. The Part 7 pathway is subject to review by County legal counsel prior to implementation.
Royal Slope Solar LLCCUP &SEPA- DAHP,YNCRP, Reclamation SEPA Executive Briefing
File #P 25-0178 & P-25-0179 - 6 -
a' •'low-
i
f.
1
-,
s
u
1
i
i
j 16' INTERIOR -- INVERTER SKID `
ROADS (TYP) ,.
SECURITY FENCE
�p
(TYP)
r—
Fm
,�
i
SHEET NOTES:
1. LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE FOR GENERAL GUIDANCE ONLY. SLOPES
OF THE SITE ARE NOT DEPICTED AND LOCATIONS MUST BEREVAMP
VERIFIED ON SITE BEFORE INSTALLATION.
'.,
2. FINAL STRING SIZING TO BE CONFIRMED BY ENGINEER -OF -RECORD.
3. CROSSING LOCATIONS INDICATE APPROXIMATE ROAD AND DC
R N • 1 N ! t R 1 M •, N C.
CROSSINGS AT EXISTING FEATURES_ MV COLLECTION CROSSINGS
{ :'
ARE TBD AFTER MV COLLECTION LAYOUT. ALL CROSSINGS TO BE
FINALIZED BY ENGINEER OF RECORD.
428 13th St.
3rd Floor
}
Oakland, CA 94612
www.revamp-eng_com
THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF
SYSTEM SPECIFICATION TABLE
REVAMP ENGINEERING. INC., AND
�}--* ALTERNATE
BESS 2
`�— ALTERNATE
08M 2
``'-- ALTERNATE
SUBSTATION 2
\-- 20' ROADS
ul _ d
2 -� � ; ) ,• - �--- POWER POLES
, . W —
t
i O 00
- •�,
n'
I
r4 �.
LA •
2
S89"33'22"E 2647.17 N89'54'46"E 2661.82----------. �._--------- ---------_-------__
' 1 OVERALL SITE LAYOUT
/ 1"-1100'
i
v sw 1100' 2200'
A
SYSTEM STC DC RATING (MW)
364.66
SYSTEM AC RATING AT INVERTERS (MVA)
270.23
SYSTEM AC RATING AT Pal (MW)
DC/AC RATIO AT POI
AVERAGE DC/AC RATIO AT INVERTER
260.00
1.40
1.35
MODULE MODEL
FS 6+ FS-6480-P-B
MODULE STC DC RATING (W)
480
MODULE COUNT
759708
MODULES PER .STRING
6
STRING COUNT
126618
18-STR TRACKERS
16-STR TRACKERS
14-STR TRACKERS
6486
336
321
INVERTER MODEL
TMEIC SOLAR WARE 840
INVERTER RATING (MVA)
0,840
INVERTER RATING (MW @ 0,95 PF & 375T)
0.761
QUANTITY OF INVERTERS
355
QUANTITY OF SKIDS
71
INVERTERS PER SKID
S
TRANSFORMER RATING (MVA)
QUANTITY OF TRANSFORMERS
4,20
71
DC SYSTEM VOLTAGE (V)
1500
INTERCONNECTION VOLTAGE (KV)
230
GEN-TIE LINE LENGTH (MILES) Option 2
5.5
RACKING SYSTEM
NEXTRACKER 1P
MODULE TILT
+/- 60'
AZIMUTH
180'
GC R
0.32
PITCH J ROW -TO -ROW SPACING (LF)
20.75
CLEARANCE BETWEEN ROWS (LF)
14,11
MAX DESIGN TEMPERATURE SOURCE
CLIENT PROVIDED
MAX DESIGN TEMPERATURE ('C)
MIN DESIGN TEMPERATURE SOURCE
37.9'
CLIENT PROVIDED
MIN DESIGN TEMP FOR STRING SIZING ('C)
-16'
BUILDABLE AREA (ACRES)
2596
FENCED AREA (ACRES)
186-4
FENCING LENGTH (L.F.)
ROADS (L. R)
101693
95918
AREA
SYSTEM STC
DC RATING
(MW)
SYSTEM AC
RATING AT
INVERTERS
(MW @ M95 PF
& 37.9'°t
MODULESfC
DC RATING
INV
QTY
DC/AC
RATIO AT
INVERTER
AREA 1
5.18
3.81
480
5
1.361
AREA 2
135,56
9&96
480
130
1-370
AREA 3
30.91
22.94
4W
30
1,353
AREA
10090
76-12
480
100
L326
AREA 5
24.19
19.03
480
25
1.271
AREA 6
15.59
IL42
480
15
1365
AREA 7
10.30
7.61
480
10
L353
AREA 9
10.29
T61
480
10
L352
AREA 9
31,74
22.94
1 480
30
1.39(D
LEGEND
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PROPERTY SETBACK
FENCE LINE
PROPOSED ROAD
LAYDOWN
ACTIVE MITIGATION AREA
.....................................
PASSIVE MITIGATION AREA
EXISTING ROAD
— — — —
EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL
-- °°----��---
OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL
-_._.._____-
SETBACK
RIGHT OF WAY (ROW)
EXCLUSION AREA
+ +
WETLANDS
STREAMS
�Q
GATE
EMERGENCY EXIT
SITE ACCESS
X
CROSSING LOCATION (SEE NOTE 3)
TRANSMISSION STRUCTURE SHADE
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.
ITS RECEIPT OR POSSESSION DOES NOT
CONVEY ANY RIGHTS TO REPRODUCE,
MANUFACTURE, USE, OR SELL ANYTHING IT
MAY DESCRIBE. NO PART IS TO BE
DISCLOSED WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION
FROM REVAMP ENGINEERING, INC.
'0
Q�
�O
CLIENT
0 Clearway
O
p �N
U) > 0)
cr)
Q 0
z ,Q � �—
(I o O
UO j( Q
o w
141)
a r �'°" �
< OR
O
DRAWING ISSUE
1 02108/2023
PRELIMINARY
14 11/1312024
MITIGATION AREA
15 11 /18/2024
MITIGATION AREA UPDATE
16 11 /26/2024
BOUNDARY UPDATE
DRAWN BY: DB CHECKED BY:NN
PROJECT NO.: 22090
DRAWING TITLE
OVERALL SITE
LAYOUT
E200
- ROYAL SLOPE - E200 - LAYOUTS - 260MW.DWG
11/27/2024 4:39 PM
KOP 36A: Sentinel Mountain
IExisting View
Image [,data Date of Photograph: March 26, 2026
Time of Photograph: 3:47PM
Weather Conditions: Sunny
Latitude: 46.8183180 N
Longitude:-119.8622620 W
Viewing Direction: North -Northwest
Distance to Project 3.5 miles
Simulation
Locator Map
• Clearway ROYAL SLOPE SOLAR PROJECT WASHINGTON APRIL"^^'