IV. Environmental Review

Because of the need to lease state-owned lands for the cable route, the SLC was one of the first agencies applicants approached to discuss permitting issues. In accordance with CEQA, SLC acted as Lead Agency to prepare an EIR for this project. SLC consulted with the Commission as a responsible agency during its preparation of the EIR. The final EIR, attached to the application as Exhibit 2, analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the Project on air quality, marine and terrestrial biology, commercial and recreational fishing, cultural resources, geology, water quality, land and water use, transportation, utilities, paleontology, and noise. On April 20, 2000, SLC certified that the EIR had been prepared in accordance with CEQA, certified that it had reviewed and considered the information in the EIR, adopted a mitigation monitoring program, and determined, amongst other things, that "the project, as approved, will not have a significant effect on the environment."⁵

According to the applicants, no entity has challenged the SLC's certification of the EIR, the accuracy of its findings, or its approval of the Project within the thirty-day period established for such challenges under CEQA.⁶ We have reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR prepared by SLC. Consistent with the requirements of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (the "CEQA guidelines"), we will adopt the findings as set forth by SLC in its April 20, 2000 order granting a permit for telephone right of way. The findings of the SLC and the mitigation monitoring program adopted by SLC are appended to this decision as Attachment A.⁷ We conclude that the Project, as approved by the SLC, and in consideration of the adopted EIR, will not have a significant effect on the environment.

Applicants have stated in an amendment to their application that they are working diligently to obtain the permits and authorizations required by other state and federal agencies, including permits from the Sanctuary. The Sanctuary has indicated to applicants that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act may be required. We note this ongoing permitting and review process by the Sanctuary. This order does not change the requirement for applicants to obtain necessary construction permits from other agencies. If in the process of obtaining permits and authorizations for this Project the route or construction activities indicated in the EIR certified by SLC change, we will require applicants to file a petition to modify this decision to alert us to these potential changes and obtain this Commission's approval.

Applicants assert that SLC provided participating agencies and the public with opportunity to scope the issues to be analyzed and provide input and comment on the draft EIR in accordance with the CEQA guidelines. Commission Rule 17.1(f) requires that notice of draft and final EIRs be given by direct mail to certain public agencies, interested persons, and owners of land on which the project may be located, and owners of land adjacent thereto. Commission Rules also require the applicant to give notice to the general public by advertisement in newspapers of general circulation. In an amendment to the application, applicants assert that this rule only applies when the Commission acts as lead agency in the preparation of the draft and final EIR, which was not the case here. Despite this assertion, applicants provided information indicating which entities and individuals received notice of the draft and final EIR and provided information on the public notice of the preparation of the draft and final EIRs through newspaper publications. We find that the information provided indicates that applicants have sufficiently fulfilled the notice requirements in Rule 17.1(f).