Position of Sierra Club

Sierra Club argues that Valencia's application for approval of its WMP is a "project" under CEQA because its approval is, by this Commission's own order, an essential step in the expansion of its service area and ensuing rapid urban development proposed by Valencia. Sierra Club contends that Valencia's WMP is not categorically exempt as a "planning study," because: (1) approval of the Program would foreclose water supply challenges to Valencia's advice letters that are based on the water supply claimed in the water management plan, (2) the WMP proposes dramatically increased pumping from the Alluvial Aquifer and the Saugus Formation, actions that could deplete ground and surface water supplies, harming vegetation and wildlife dependent on those supplies, and spread ammonium perchlorate contamination; and (3), Valencia's application is not exempt from CEQA on the grounds this is a "rate setting" proceeding, since this proceeding involves far more than merely the setting of rates. According to Sierra Club, rate setting may be subject to CEQA where, as here, the proposed rate structure could itself trigger environmental harm (e.g., by prompting additional groundwater pumping). ⁸

Sierra Club argues that with regard to projects proposed by private entities such as Valencia (as distinct from public agencies), "approval occurs upon the earliest commitment to issue or the issuance by the public agency of a discretionary ... permit ... or other entitlement for use of the project." (CEQA Guidelines § 15352(b).) Sierra Club contends that under this criterion, Commission approval of Valencia's application would constitute an "approval" subject to CEQA requirements, because Valencia requests the Commission to permit the use and implementation of its proposed 1999 WMP.

Further, Sierra Club contends, Valencia's application constitutes a "discretionary project" subject to CEQA, and that this Commission is, at least at this juncture, the appropriate lead agency obliged to conduct the environmental review required by CEQA and Rule 17.1 before approving Valencia's application. Sierra Club agrees that to the extent that Valencia's application proposes the extraction of groundwater that is hydrologically integrated with the surface flow of the Santa Clara River (and for which a water appropriation permit would thus be required from the State Board under Water Code §§ 1200 et seq.), the State Board may be the more appropriate lead agency, in which case the Commission would review this project as a "responsible agency" still subject to certain CEQA duties. Sierra Club requests the Commission to determine (1) the applicability of CEQA to this proceeding, and (2) whether the Commission is properly a "lead agency" or a "responsible agency" subject to the CEQA duties corresponding to those respective designations.