California Environmental Quality Act

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is a California law (California Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.) passed in 1970, shortly after the Federal Government passed the National Environmental Policy Act. CEQA does not directly regulate land uses, but instead requires development projects submit documentation of their potential environmental impact.

CEQA Jurisdiction

CEQA has originally applied to only public projects, but California Supreme Court interpretation of the law, as well as later revisions to the wording have expanded the CEQA's jurisdiction to nearly all projects within California. § 21002.1: "Each public agency shall mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment of projects that it carries out or approves whenever it is feasible to do so." For private projects, CEQA applies when a government permit of other entitlement for use is necessary.

Determining if CEQA Applies

In general CEQA applies to any land use activity, but there are many details in determining if a project falls under CEQA or not. General rule of thumb has been that CEQA applies to any discretionary project, that is a project that requires approval by a local government body. This includes building projects as well as planning documents such as general plans and zoning ordinances. In general, CEQA does not apply when only ministerial approval is necessary, such as a building permit application. It is assumed that CEQA would have already been applied to such projects during discretionary approval process. There are however both times when CEQA does not apply to discretionary decisions and times with CEQA does apply to ministerial decisions.

CEQA Process

To comply with CEQA an agency must first prepare an initial study, assessing whether a project may have significant environmental impacts. If so, the agency must prepare an environmental impact report. In general the agency hires an outside consultant, paid for by entity that proposed the project. If no EIR is necessary, the agency must prepare a Negative Declaration. If the project would have significant environmental impacts, but those impacts may be mitigated to a level of less than significant, then the agency must prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration.

CEQA's Influence

As of 2005, 14 states as well as the District of Columbia have CEQA-style laws requiring impacts be reported for development. Many of these laws were patterned after CEQA and New York state's law actually used CEQA as a foundation. The various state laws are not entirely similar to CEQA, as most only apply to public projects and few have as rigorous review standards.

CEQA and Litigation

CEQA's lack of clear definitions often lead to litigation, both by groups that support development and those against such development. CEQA provided no threshold for what constitutes a significant environmental impact although the state does include definitions of possible significant impacts. Often challenges are made to projects with negative declarations, on the grounds that EIRs should have been carried out. Litigation also occurs on the grounds that EIRs are too brief or overlooked possible impacts, as there are no guidelines for the length or content of the EIRs.

CEQA vs. NEPA

The environmental impact report (EIR) required under CEQA and the environmental impact statement (EIS) under NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) are similar documents, yet have some crucial differences: for example, CEQA requires the best alternative to be followed unless the lead agency identifies specific policy reasons justifying a less environmentally protective alternative, whereas NEPA simply requires the impacts of each alternative be listed. Under NEPA, an agency can list all reasonable alternatives and choose the worst one for the environment. Under CEQA the lead agency is required to analyze the environmental impact of the project, but also must look to the impacts of reasonable alternatives, including a "no project alternative." The lead agency must identify the environmentally superior alternative, which in many cases will be the "no project alternative," when this is the case the lead agency must also identify the next best environmentally superior alternative. The lead agency is free to choose whichever alternative it wants including projects with greater environmental impact, but when doing so must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations which states that although adverse impacts may result, specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations outweigh the project's significant, unmitigated impacts. If a major project is seeking approval in California, it must do both an EIR and an EIS, but both can be combined into one document (since the EIR and EIS have the same elements for the most part).

References

* Fulton, W; Shigley, P "Guide to California Planning Third Edition", (2005) Point Arena, California ISBN 0-923956-45-X
* [http://ceres.ca.gov/topic/env_law/ceqa/stat/ CEQA:Statute]
* [http://www.ceres.ca.gov/ceqa/cases/1972/f_o_mammoth_092172.html "Friends of Mammoth v. Board of Supervisors of Mammoth County"]