This article summarizes the Initial Findings and Draft Recommendations released on December 21, 2005, which endorsed NEPA’s fundamental objectives and contained relatively even-handed recommendations for legislative change.
This 2006 Impact Report article, written by ICF California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) experts Ron Bass and Terry Rivasplata, defines “deferred mitigation,” explains the circumstances under which it is permissible, and provides examples of what the courts have allowed and disallowed.
This article summarizes the 2005 CEQA cases, including more than 25 CEQA case decisions by the Court of Appeals and one decision by the California Supreme Courts.
The President's Council on Environmental Quality, the agency responsible for oversight of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), has released a "Deliberative Draft" of proposed guidance to federal agencies on how to establish, revise, and apply Categorical Exclusions under NEPA.
This is the second year of the Legislature's 2005-2006 session. Here are the CEQA-related bills that are active as of June 2, 2006.
A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit leaves little doubt that the risk of a terrorist attack and any foreseeable environmental impacts of such an event must be considered in preparing environmental documents under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
Since the late 1970s, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has been requiring mitigation for impacts to wetlands and other waters of the United States through its permitting program.
In recent years, environmental managers, regulators, and consultants alike have increasingly been developing and following a more holistic watershed approach to resource planning.
The rumors of massive changes to CEQA, and the discussions over flood control and CEQA did not result in any legislation that reached the Governor’s desk. Although the Legislature passed more CEQA bills in 2006 than in recent years, they do not seem to have made any significant changes.
This article, written by ICF experts and published in the Impact Report, summarizes four California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) court cases from 2006 on subjects ranging from mitigation, timber harvest plans and CEQA, and defining “infeasible.”
The United States House of Representatives, Committee on Resources Task Force on Improving/Updating the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) has released its final recommendations relating to NEPA.
On September 26, 2006 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) began seeking public comment for its proposal to reissue its Nationwide Permits.
The California Department of Fish and Game (Department) issued a new Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) notification form on July 28, 2006, "to accelerate the agreement process for projects by ensuring the Department receives complete information in LSAA notifications for evaluating and developing draft agreements" (Gary Hobgood, DFG).
In November, California voters will have the opportunity to consider 13 initiatives on the statewide ballot. Hidden among the bond proposals and the telegenic oil company tax is Proposition 90, the selfstyled "Protect Our Homes Act."
This Impact Report article is designed to provide some background information about the decision, and its potential ramifications.