The Process
I propose that the Commission adopt a streamlined environmental review process for all telecommunications carriers. This process will be called the CEQA Expedited Treatment Process (ETP) for telecommunications. This process is designed to accommodate only construction projects that are exempt from CEQA review. Carriers should submit a proposal to Commission staff under the ETP for all construction activities they believe are exempt from CEQA. Any carrier who wishes to perform construction activity that is not exempt from CEQA must seek a permit to construct.20
Carriers can determine the scope of what they wish to include in their proposals under the ETP; one proposal may include more than one project, or a project that extends over a period of time.21
Before submitting a proposal to the Commission staff under the ETP, all carriers should perform a rigorous self-assessment to ensure that the process is appropriate for their proposed construction activity. The first step in that process is for carriers to consider whether any of the following conditions are present:
a. there is reasonable possibility that the activity may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies; or
b. the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time, is significant; or
c. there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. (CEQA Guideline 15300.2)
If any of these conditions are present, the ETP process is not appropriate, and a proposal for a permit to construct should be filed instead. If a proposal is submitted to staff under the ETP, and it is found that these conditions are present, the proposal will be rejected.
After that initial self-assessment, carriers shall submit an ETP proposal to the Commission's Energy Division22. Carriers are urged to prepare a thorough, clear, complete, and accurate proposal. Given the short review time for the proposals, a high-quality proposal is more likely to be approved than one that is sloppy or incomplete.
A complete copy of the ETP proposal must be posted to the carrier's web site, in an easily findable location, no later than the day that the carrier submits its ETP proposal to the Energy Division.
The proposal shall contain the following:
o A detailed description of the proposed project, including:
_ The precise location of the proposed construction project
_ Regional and local site maps
_ Physical location of the customer(s) to be served, including street addresses.
o A description of the environmental setting, to include at a minimum:
_ General terrain and significant features
_ Cultural, historical, and paleontologic resources
_ Biological resources
_ Current land use and zoning
o A construction workplan, to include:
_ Pre-Construction Survey Checklist23 - Archaeological Resources
_ Pre-Construction Survey Checklist - Biological Resources
_ A detailed schedule of construction activities, including site restoration activities
_ A description of construction/installation techniques, including equipment to be used
_ A list of other agencies contacted with respect to siting, land use planning, and environmental resource issues, including contact information
_ A list of permits required for the proposed project
o A statement of the CEQA exemption(s) applicable to the proposed project, including citations to the CEQA Guidelines
o Documentation and factual evidence sufficient to support a finding that the claimed exemption(s) is (are) applicable
o Descriptions of all environmental research performed, and who that research was performed by, including contact information
o Contact information for the carrier
o A working link to the location on the carrier's web site of the complete copy of the proposal.
o Proof of service of the following notices: service by e-mail (w/delivery receipt) or direct mail to the planning agency of the city and county where each activity is located; service by e-mail (w/delivery receipt) or direct mail to the land owner, if other than the carrier, on whose land the activity will occur; and publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the activity will be located, no later than the date the proposal is tendered to the Energy Division. All such notices shall provide a clear description of the project, and shall include contact information for the carrier and for the Energy Division, and shall state the deadline for protesting the proposal.
o Signature, under penalty of perjury, of an officer of the carrier
· Energy Division will review the proposal for the proposed project(s) to confirm that the claimed exemption(s) from CEQA are applicable, and will arrange for the link to the proposal to be posted to the Commission's web site
· Within 7 days of receipt of an ETP proposal, Energy Division will provide "early bad news" if, upon initial review of proposal, there are obvious reasons why the proposal is not appropriate for the ETP process.
Within 21 days from the date of Carrier's submittal Energy Division will issue either:
o A Notice to Proceed, and file a Notice of Exemption with the State Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and Research; or
o A Letter of Denial stating the specific reasons why the project cannot be approved under the ETP, including an explanation of why any claimed CEQA exemption(s) are not applicable
o Carrier shall not engage in any construction activity prior to receiving a Notice to Proceed.
· Protests must be submitted to Energy Division within 10 days of the date the link to the proposal appears on the Commission's web site. If a protest is submitted, at the end of the 21-day review period the Energy Division may approve the proposal, deny the proposal, or request one or more parties to provide additional information. If additional information is requested, Energy Division has 21 days from the date Energy Division receives all requested information to approve or deny the proposal.
· The carrier may remove the proposal from its web site, and the Commission may remove the link to the proposal from its web site, no sooner than 30 days after a Notice to Proceed and Notice of Exemption is issued by Energy Division, and no sooner than 10 days after a Notice of Denial is issued by Energy Division.
As described above, I intend to place a draft decision and General Order before my colleagues that incorporate this type of streamlined environmental review process for all telecommunications carriers. Detailed comments will be helpful in assessing both the policy approach and the implementation details.
IT IS RULED that:
1. Respondents shall file and serve comments on the proposal described in this ruling no later than May 12, 2006.
2. Interested parties may file and serve comments on the proposal described in this ruling no later than May 12, 2006.
3. Respondents and interested parties may file and serve replies to the comments on the proposal described in this ruling no later than May 19, 2006.
4. Anyone not currently on the service list for this proceeding who wishes to be added to the service list shall send a request via e-mail, no later than May 8, 2006, to the Commission's Process Office (ALJ Process@cpuc.ca.gov) and the assigned ALJ (pva@cpuc.ca.gov).
5. All parties should follow the electronic service protocols set forth in Rule 2.3.1.
Dated April 26, 2006, at San Francisco, California.
/s/ GEOFFREY F. BROWN | ||
Geoffrey F. Brown Assigned Commissioner |
20 Similar to GO 131-D for electric projects, the permit to construct process would consist primarily of the necessary review under CEQA. The Commission does not need to reexamine the financial or technical qualifications of the carrier, nor make a finding of need for the proposed project. Parties should comment on how they envision the process of obtaining a permit to construct.
21 Carriers should not seek overly long-term approvals, as environmental conditions may change over time, rendering use of an exemption no longer appropriate. Similarly, proposals including too many different projects increase the risk of having the proposal rejected.
22 The Commission's CEQA review functions have been consolidated in Energy Division for all industries regulated by the Commission.
23 Both Archeological and Biological Resource Checklists are attached as Appendix A.
