CEQA

Subscribe to CEQA

On February 22, 2018, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra announced that the Department of Justice is opening an environmental justice office within the Environment Section: the Bureau of Environmental Justice (“Bureau”).  “The Bureau’s mission will be to protect people and communities that endure a disproportionate share of environmental pollution and public health hazards.”  Using existing federal and state statutes, the Bureau will accomplish its mission through targeted oversight, investigation, and enforcement actions.

According to the press release, the Bureau’s oversight and enforcement work will focus on:

  • Ensuring compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and land use planning laws;
  • Remediating contaminated drinking water;
  • Eliminating or reducing exposure to lead and other toxins in the environment and consumer products;
  • Challenging the federal government’s actions that repeal or reduce public health and environmental protections; and
  • Penalizing and preventing illegal discharges to air and water from facilities located in communities already burdened disproportionately with pollution.

Continue Reading At the Intersection of Pollution and Poverty, California Attorney General Establishes Bureau of Environmental Justice, and Industry Should Get Prepared

With Senate Bill 1262 (“SB 1262”), California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (“SGMA”) has become firmly rooted into the State’s water supply planning laws. Specifically, SB 1262 amends the Water Supply Assessment statute (commonly referred to as “SB 610”) and the Written Verification statute (commonly referred to as “SB 221”).

Background – SB 610 & SB 221

As way of background, SB 610 and SB 221 operate to help cities and counties make informed land use decisions by providing the local governments with information on water supply availability. SB 610 and SB 221 are companion laws that promote more collaborative planning between local water suppliers and cities and counties.  Both statutes require detailed information regarding water availability to be provided to the city and county decision-makers prior to approval of specified large development projects.

Under SB 610, Water Supply Assessments must be provided to local governments for certain projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Water Supply Assessment must analyze whether projected water supplies are sufficient to meet the projected water demand of the proposed development project.  Similarly, under SB 221, approval by a city or county of certain subdivisions requires an affirmative Written Verification of sufficient water supply.
Continue Reading With SB 1262, SGMA Becomes Further Entrenched in California’s Water Supply Planning Laws

On Thursday, December 10, environmental organizations filed a complaint against Kern County in California Superior Court alleging that the County violated the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) by preparing a “grossly inadequate” Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for its new oil and gas rules.  The Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, and the Natural Resources Defense Council (jointly “the Sierra Club”), along with several other local organizations, take issue with the programmatic approach of the EIR, and urge a well-by-well environmental analysis.  This lawsuit comes as no surprise to the County.  Environmental groups have a long history of opposing oil and gas development in Kern County, which produces over 70% of all the oil in California.

This lawsuit comes in reaction to a Kern County zoning ordinance amendment which harnessed broad local support.  On November 9, 2015, the Kern County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved amendments to Title 19 of the Kern County Zoning Ordinance which provides a streamline permitting process for oil and gas operations.  Notably, the new ordinance encourages oil and gas producers to work with surface owners to agree on a development plan, promoting cooperation and transparency.  The amendments also required the County to conduct an extensive environmental analysis pursuant to CEQA.  The Board of Supervisors certified the Final EIR after holding multiple public Scoping Meetings and reviewing various mitigation measures.Continue Reading Environmental Challenge Blasts Kern County Oil and Gas Rules

On Friday, November 6, three environmental organizations filed suit against the City of Los Angeles in California Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles. The three groups, Youth for Environmental Justice, the Center for Biological Diversity and the South Central Youth Leadership Coalition, allege that the “City of Los Angeles has for years employed a pattern or practice of rubber stamping oil-drilling applications in violation of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).” Verified Complaint and Petition for Writ of Mandate, at 2. By categorically exempting oil-drilling projects from CEQA, the Complaint states that L.A. has permitted a disproportionately high number of drilling operations in low-income communities and neighborhoods where people of color reside. According to the environmental groups, this is a racially discriminatory practice because the City of L.A. exhibits a pattern of “developing and approving weaker conditions for drill sites in communities where a vast majority of the residents identify as Latino and black.” Id. at 26.

The Complaint focuses especially on the risks of drilling operations on children. “Because  they breathe at a higher rate, and drink more water and consume more food in proportion to their body size, children receive higher doses of toxins and contaminants than adults.” Id. at 12-13. Further, in contrast to the public outcry over fracking, the environmental groups note that the emissions from oil and gas development in L.A. are associated with “traditional drilling,” not necessarily hydraulic fracturing. The Complaint also addresses the alleged risks of acidizing and gravel packing techniques, though.
Continue Reading Environmental Justice Lawsuit Accuses L.A. of Discriminatory Oil Permitting

Today, July 30, the Center for Biological Diversity (“CBD”) filed a complaint in Sacramento County Superior Court against the Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources (“DOGGR”). CBD claims, among other things, that DOGGR failed to comply with Senate Bill 4 (“SB 4”) by releasing its Final EIR regarding oil and gas well stimulation treatment prior to the release of a state-mandated Independent Study.

This lawsuit strikes us as more of a shout out to the Legislature and the Governor to highlight CBD’s ongoing disappointment with SB 4, more than anything else. CBD mistakenly construes SB 4 to require DOGGR to analyze and incorporate the Independent Study’s findings into its Final EIR, when no such requirement is found in the law. Indeed, by its terms, SB 4 only requires DOGGR to comply with the following requirements relating to the EIR:

  • The EIR shall be certified by the division as the lead agency, no later than July 1, 2015.
  • The EIR shall address the issue of activities that may be conducted as defined in Section 3157 and that may occur at oil wells in the state existing prior to, and after, the effective date of this section.
  • The EIR shall not conflict with an EIR conducted by a local lead agency that is certified on or before July 1, 2015.

(Pub. Resources Code, § 3161.) The Legislature, not the Sacramento County Superior Court, is the proper body to which this additional request should be made, as there is currently no law mandating it.
Continue Reading Activists ask Court to Scrap EIR and Stop Fracking

Today saw two significant developments for oil and gas operators utilizing well stimulation treatments in California.

Pursuant to SB 4, the Department of Conservation’s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources released a statewide programmatic Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) analyzing the potential environmental impacts associated with well stimulation treatments, including hydraulic fracturing (aka “fracking”).…

James Andrew, Assistant Chief Counsel for the California High-Speed Rail Authority (“CHSRA”), spoke Tuesday, October 14, at the Sacramento County Bar Association, Environmental Law Section Luncheon.  He stated that High-Speed Rail (“HSR”) is a “transformative project” in that it will be the largest infrastructure project ever built as one single project.  However, the “regulatory scheme has not caught up with the project.”  Andrew compares HSR to the federal highway system construction in the 1950s, with countless opponents and regulatory hurdles.  Similarly, HSR is being constructed in California in the same manner as the federal highway system:  in the center and branching outward.

To show that HSR can be a success, Andrew explained that HSR is comparable to the Northeast Corridor, a high speed rail system that runs from Washington, D.C. to Boston.  The two regions are similar in terms of distance of rail, population, and complexity of issues.  According to reports, over 11 million people rode the Northeast Corridor during 2012.Continue Reading Update on the California High Speed Rail System

Governor Brown has signed two new bills amending the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).  AB 52 establishes new consultation procedures with California Native American tribes, and provides that an adverse change to a tribal cultural resource is a significant impact under CEQA.  AB 1104 extends an existing CEQA exemption for certain pipeline projects to biogas…

In Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (Cal. Ct. App. 5th Dist. May 27, 2014), the Fifth Appellate District found fault with the County of Fresno’s (County)  review of the Friant Ranch Project (Project) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The appellate court concluded that the County’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) did not sufficiently correlate the Project’s air quality impacts with impacts on human health, and did not sufficiently define mitigation measures designed to address air quality impacts. With respect to correlating air emissions to human health impacts, it is worth noting that the court did not address the extent to which this is possible. Initial reactions from air consultants who have reviewed this decision is that it is not technically possible to calculate this correlation with such specificity, leaving open the question of how lead agencies will respond to this decision in future CEQA documents.
Continue Reading What’s a ROG and Can It Hurt Me? EIR Overturned For Failure to Explain Air Quality Impacts to Human Health

On June 13, 2014, the Department of Conservation (“Department”)  issued a public notice and posted the latest version of the proposed regulations for the use of well stimulation in oil and gas production (“Revised Proposed Regulations”).  These are revisions to the permanent regulations that will go into effect on January 1, 2015.  The Revised Proposed Regulations include the following, significant changes:Continue Reading Department of Conservation Issues Revised, Proposed Well Stimulation Treatment Regulations

About Stoel Rives Environmental Law

Learn More

Few firms view their Environment, Land Use, and Natural Resources practices as core legal services. Stoel Rives is one of them. The firm ranks #8 in the United States according to Law360’s list of the largest practices of its kind. Our sophisticated compliance counseling, permitting, regulatory development, and litigation practices continue a long tradition of specialization and deep experience. Our environment, land use, and natural resource attorneys incorporate prior agency experience, technical acumen, and industry knowledge into their legal advice. They also build strong relationships with agency officials and industry associations. Our litigation successes include landmark decisions. More than 60 attorneys, paralegals, and compliance analysts comprise Stoel Rives’ nationwide Environment, Land Use & Natural Resources practice.