Articles

Results 1 to 5 of 8
Most popular |Most recent


“Reverse CEQA” Reversed- California Supreme Court Rejects CEQA Analysis of Impacts of the Environment on the Project

USA - December 21 2015 In California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (December 17, 2015) (Case No. S213478) (CBIA v. BAAQMD)…

Emily M. Burkett, Marne S. Sussman, Norman F. Carlin.

Risky “Business as Usual”

USA - December 4 2015 In Center for Biological Diversity v. Dept. Of Fish and Wildlife,1 the California Supreme Court upheld the "Business as Usual" (BAU) approach for…

Emily Burkett, Marne S. Sussman, Norman F. Carlin.

The U.S. Supreme Court holds EPA must consider costs in deciding to regulate power plants

USA - July 2 2015 The U.S. Supreme Court's June 29th decision in Michigan v. EPA, taken together with another significant CAA opinion from last term, Utility Air…

Alina J. Fortson.

Proposed CEQA guidelines seek to expedite infill development reviews

USA - August 9 2012 Last year, the state Legislature enacted Senate Bill 226 to streamline review of infill development projects under the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA.

Marne S. Sussman, Norman F. Carlin, Stacey C. Wright.

Proposed S.B. 226 CEQA guidelines seek to expedite environmental review for infill development

USA - July 30 2012 Senate Bill 226 was enacted in 2011 to streamline review of infill development projects under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), directing the Natural Resources Agency to adopt standards for eligible projects by January 1, 2013.

Marne S. Sussman, Norman F. Carlin, Stacey C. Wright.