CA High Speed Rail Puts Focus on Environmental Impact Study Process

Madera County in California's Central Valley is ground zero for the 65 mile first leg of the California high speed rail project from Fresno to Merced.  The May 2013 issue of California Lawyer magazine takes a close look at how a group of farmers from Madera County and others have highlighted the ongoing need for smart California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) reform.  The article, Collision Course,  is well worth reading for anyone with an interest in how environmental review processes affect large infrastructure projects.

In California there have been several unsuccessful efforts to revamp CEQA in order to streamline the environmental review process and make it a little more predictable.  So far to no avail. 

The central charge leveled against CEQA by its diverse critics is that it has succumbed to mission creep. Though they disagree about proposed changes, they share a belief that the statute has expanded well beyond its purview of reviewing projects, and proposing either mitigation or alternatives to environmental impacts. Now, they say, CEQA too often is used to stop development - solar and wind farms, for example, along with new freeways and strip malls. 

...

"In the years since CEQA, we've passed a great many laws that have been very effective in protecting the environment," [former Democratic Senator Michael] Rubio says. "Think of the federal and California Clean Water Acts, the federal Clean Air Act, the federal and state Endangered Species Act, AB 32 [stipulating dramatically reduced atmospheric carbon emissions], and SB 375 [requiring regional land use and transportation plans to meet AB 32's goals]. The problem is that a project - including truly green projects like high-speed rail, solar, and wind farms - must satisfy these statutes, and then they're still subject to CEQA litigation."

How to avoid endless litigation?  One of the  options being considered for CEQA reform is to move from a mitigation model, to a standards model.  By establishing firmer standards project design can take account of safe harbors, and projects may be able to gain certainty as to what is achievable, and how projects can be kept out of court. 

The last lawsuit for Phase of the CA High speed rail project settled last month.  But there are many segments to go, and lots of reason to carry CEQA reform forward.