Insights
Publications

Changing Climate, Changing Laws: Addressing CEQA’s New Wildfire Risk Requirements in Project Development

September 12, 2019 Articles

Wildfires pose an increasingly serious threat to the public and environment in California. So it should be no surprise that the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) amended Appendix G of California Environmental Quality Act’s (CEQA) regulations (or “Guidelines”) to help public agencies identify and evaluate such risks. http://opr.ca.gov/ceqa/updates/guidelines/. These amendments along with a host of other updates to the Guidelines became effective December 28, 2018.

What does this mean for project developers engaged in large-scale projects such as renewable energy, transportation, housing and infrastructure projects in California? Assuming the project is not exempt from CEQA, before the lead agency can issue a permit for the project, it must evaluate the project’s impacts on the environment. These impacts may include “any potentially significant direct, indirect, or cumulative environmental impacts of locating development in areas susceptible to hazardous conditions (e.g., floodplains, coastlines, wildfire risk areas) . . . .” See CEQA Guidelines, § 15126.2(a) (explaining the types of significant impacts that should be discussed in an Environmental Impact Report).

The new amendments now guide agencies in how to evaluate wildfire risks as they begin preparing environmental review documents. This is a significant change from how agencies dealt with this issue before. Prior to these amendments, there were no specific wildfire-related questions that prompted agencies to think about how new projects will create or exacerbate wildfire risks. Now the Environmental Checklist Form, found in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, includes new questions asking whether the relevant project is “located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones.” (State responsibility areas are areas where the state has a financial responsibility to prevent and suppress fires.) 

A map of these areas can be found at: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/wildfire-prevention-planning-engineering/wildland-hazards-building-codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps/. Although the map is helpful in assessing whether a project is located within these areas, it is not always clear when a project is located “near” one. For those decisions, OPR stated in its Final Statement of Reasons that public agencies “will be best placed to determine precisely where such analysis is needed outside of the specified zone.”
https://www.opr.ca.gov/ceqa/updates/guidelines/. In other words, when it is not obvious, the agency will use its judgment to decide if the project is “near” these areas.

What if the project is located in or “near” these areas? In that situation, the agency may rely on the checklist’s wildfire-related questions to assess whether, among other things, the project will impair an emergency evacuation plan, exacerbate wildfire risks, require the installation of power lines that may exacerbate fire risk or expose people or structures to significant risks from post-fire landslides.

In other words, if a project developer is building a renewable energy project in or near a high wildfire-risk area, these new questions will prompt the agency to ask whether the project will exacerbate wildfire conditions. For example, will the project have transmission lines that can spark in high winds? If yes, then the project could make existing conditions worse and the agency will need to thoroughly analyze this issue. What about the project’s location? Can it be built in a way to avoid a steep slope or prevailing wind patterns, which can exacerbate wildfire impacts? If it will make conditions worse, are there mitigation measures that can be adopted to maintain or improve roads, fuel breaks, and emergency water sources? These could reduce how much the project contributes to wildfire risk. Finally, if the goal is to avoid a high risk area altogether, the developer should check with the relevant public agency to make sure the agency will not consider the project to be sufficiently “near” one.

The new wildfire amendments will impact California’s future renewable energy, transportation, housing and infrastructure projects. A project developer should check the high fire hazard map first, and then reach out to counsel or consultants to navigate these new CEQA amendments in these ever changing environmental and legal landscapes.

Firm Highlights

Publication

New Screening Levels for Key PFAS Chemicals Will Spur Regulatory Action at Contaminated Sites

In support of the State Water Resources Control Board’s (State Board) efforts to investigate and evaluate the public health effects of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board...

Read More
Publication

Supreme Court Ruling Expands Reach of Clean Water Act NPDES Permitting

Read the article on California Ag Net , here . In April, the United States Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling clarifying the reach of the federal Clean Water Act. The Court decided that a...

Read More
Publication

The Winding Trail Home: Marin County Secures Key Multi-Use Trail Access Decision

With Marin County’s Mt. Tamalpais often considered the birthplace of mountain biking, it should not be surprising that the County finds itself at the forefront of California’s battle over multi-use trail access and consequently...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Attorneys, Practices Recognized by Chambers USA 2020

SAN FRANCISCO, April 23, 2020: Farella Braun + Martel announces that Chambers USA has recognized 12 lawyers and five practice areas in the legal directory’s 2020 edition. Individual Rankings: Tyler Gerking – Insurance: Policyholders...

Read More
News

EPA Narrows States’ Veto Power Over Infrastructure Projects

Environmental Law Partner Sarah Bell spoke to Bloomberg Law about EPA rule (RIN: 2040-AF86 ), which aims to discourage coastal states from relying on part of the Clean Water Act to block fossil fuel...

Read More
News

Lawyers See Maui Opinion as Grounds to Challenge Trump Water Rule

Environmental law partner Sarah Bell was quoted in the Bloomberg Law article, "Lawyers See Maui Opinion as Grounds to Challenge Trump Water Rule." In the article, Sarah said the Maui holding will be used...

Read More
Event

Reexamining Indirect Discharges and the Clean Water Act After County of Maui, Hawaii v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund

Sarah Bell will be speaking on this Strafford live webinar, "Reexamining Indirect Discharges and the Clean Water Act After County of Maui, Hawaii v. Hawaii Wildlife Fund ." This CLE webinar will discuss the...

Read More
Publication

New EPA Clean Water Act Rule Attempts to Streamline Permitting Process

Earlier this week, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized the “Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification Rule” (Rule). The Rule comes with significant procedural and substantive changes to the certification process for infrastructure projects. Under...

Read More
Publication

Key PFAS Regulatory Standards Set in California

In support of California’s efforts to investigate and evaluate the presence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the environment, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) has released interim...

Read More
News

SCOTUS Clean Water Act Test ‘Devastating’ for Industry

Sarah Bell commented on the U.S. Supreme Court ruling saying that the Clean Water Act can be used to regulate pollution that travels through groundwater. Read full article, here . The case is  County...

Read More