Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
The government agency or other entity with the greatest anticipated role in
the activity must be determined and designated as the lead agency. If it is a
direct agency action or only one state approval is required, the designation of
the lead agency is automatic. However, if multiple approvals by several agen-
cies are required, a determination of the approval with the greatest potential
impact must be made and the agency responsible for the approval assigned
as lead agency. Alternatively, an agency with a lesser approval responsibility
but expertise with the environmental resource at greatest risk could be des-
ignated as lead. Occasionally there is not overall consensus as to the appro-
priate lead, but the regulations specify a mechanism for resolution. The lead
agency manages the CEQA process through all steps, up to and including
project approval, similar to the lead federal agency preparing the EIS and
issuing the ROD under NEPA.
The agencies with lesser authority or approval implications for the action
are assigned the role of “responsible agency.” These agencies have a vested
interest in full and complete compliance with CEQA because they must ulti-
mately issue a permit for the proposed action and demonstrate compliance
with the Act if they are challenged. Thus, they must determine what approv-
als they must render and the information needed to make the decisions for
their approval. They then weigh in during all steps in the process, as sum-
marized immediately below, to ensure that the lead agency's compliance
with CEQA meets these needs so that they can issue the permits under their
jurisdiction.
The lead agency's first task is to prepare an “Initial Study” with the pri-
mary objective of determining whether a full EIR is necessary. The study
is conducted with the information available by comparison with a check-
list or matrix to determine whether there are sensitive environmental
resources present or components of the proposed action have historically
been associated with potentially significant impacts (this is a perfect oppor-
tunity to develop an Impact Prediction Conceptual Model, as described in
Section 5.3.1). The lead agency does have the option of bypassing the Initial
Study if it is obvious based on the magnitude of the action or the historical
record that the action will ultimately require a full EIR. However, an oppor-
tunity to begin scoping and focusing the environmental impact analysis
on the critical issues is not realized if the Initial Study is not prepared and
reviewed. If the checklist approach identifies potential for impact, but there
are accepted techniques to mitigate the impacts, they can be identified in
the Initial Study. The Initial Study under CEQA is similar to the EA under
NEPA in that it is used to determine the next step in the process (i.e., full
analysis or authorization to proceed) but the limited level of analysis and
preparation time for an Initial Study differs from the more comprehensive
scope of a NEPA EA.
Completion of the Initial Study leaves the lead agency with one of two
decisions: issue a negative determination if there is no significant environ-
mental impact or prepare a full EIR. The negative determination reaches
Search WWH ::
Custom Search