California Code of Regulations › Title 14 - Natural Resources › Division 6 - Resources Agency › Chapter 3 - Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act › Appendix G

Current through Register 2024 Notice Reg. No. 28, July 12, 2024
Environmental Checklist Form
NOTE: The following is a sample form that may be tailored to
				  satisfy individual agencies' needs and project circumstances. It may be used to
				  meet the requirements for an initial study when the criteria set forth in CEQA
				  Guidelines have been met. Substantial evidence of potential impacts that are
				  not listed on this form must also be considered. The sample questions in this
				  form are intended to encourage thoughtful assessment of impacts, and do not
				  necessarily represent thresholds of significance.
1. Project title: ____________________
2. Lead agency name and address:
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
3. Contact person and phone number:
___________________________
4. Project location:
5. Project sponsor's name and address:
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
6. General plan designation:
___________________________
7. Zoning:
8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action
				  involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any
				  secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation.
				  Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the
				  project's surroundings:
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g.,
				  permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.)
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and
				  culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to
				  Public Resources Code section
				  21080.3.1?
				  If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the
				  determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources,
				  procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
NOTE: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process
				  allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the
				  level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts
				  to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict
				  in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section
				  21080.3.2.)
				  Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage
				  Commission's Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section
				  5097.96
				  and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the
				  California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public
				  Resources Code section
				  21082.3(c)
				  contains provisions specific to confidentiality.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially
				  affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially
				  Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following
				  pages.
[] Aesthetics
[] Agriculture and Forestry
						  Resources
[] Air Quality
[] Biological Resources
[] Cultural
						  Resources
[] Energy
[] Geology /Soils
[] Greenhouse Gas
						  Emissions
[] Hazards & Hazardous Materials
[] Hydrology / Water Quality
[] Land Use /
						  Planning
[] Mineral Resources
[] Noise
[] Population / Housing
[]
						  Public Services
[] Recreation
[] Transportation
[]
						  Tribal Cultural Resources
[] Utilities/Service Systems
[]
						  Wildfire
[] Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
[] I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a
				  significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
				  prepared.
[] I find that although the proposed project could have a
				  significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
				  in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by
				  the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
				  prepared.
[] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant
				  effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
				  required.
[] I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially
				  significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the
				  environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an
				  earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
				  addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on
				  attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
				  analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
[] I find that although the proposed project could have a
				  significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant
				  effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
				  DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
				  mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including
				  revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,
				  nothing further is required.
___________________________
___________________________
Signature
Date
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No
				  Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead
				  agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer
				  is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the
				  impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the
				  project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be
				  explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general
				  standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,
				  based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action
				  involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as
				  project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
				  operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular
				  physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the
				  impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or
				  less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there
				  is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or
				  more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made,
				  an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With
				  Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures
				  has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than
				  Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and
				  briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level
				  (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be
				  cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the
				  tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately
				  analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
				  15063(c)(3)(D).
				  In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are
				  available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from
				  the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an
				  earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such
				  effects were addressed by mitigation based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than
				  Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation
				  measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
				  extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the
				  checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g.,
				  general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
				  outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or
				  pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be
				  attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in
				  the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free
				  to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the
				  questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental
				  effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to
				  evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the
				  impact to less than significance.
SAMPLE QUESTIONS
Issues:
Potentially Significant
						  Impact
Less Than Significant with
						  Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
						  Significant Impact
No
						  Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources
						  Code Section
						  21099,
						  would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
						  vista?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
						  but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
						  state scenic highway?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
						  existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its
						  surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly
						  accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the
						  project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic
						  quality?
[]
[]
[]
[]
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
						  which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
[]
[]
[]
[]
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. In determining
						  whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental
						  effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation
						  and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of
						  Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture
						  and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including
						  timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to
						  information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire
						  Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest
						  and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and
						  forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by
						  the California Air Resources Board. Would the
						  project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
						  of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to
						  the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
						  to non-agricultural use?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
						  or a Williamson Act contract?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning
						  of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section
						  12220(g)),
						  timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section
						  4526),
						  or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code
						  section
						  51104(g))?
[]
[]
[]
[]
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
						  forest land to non-forest use?
[]
[]
[]
[]
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
						  which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
						  to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest
						  use?
[]
[]
[]
[]
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance
						  criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air
						  pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
						  determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
						  applicable air quality plan?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
						  of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under
						  an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
						  concentrations?
[]
[]
[]
[]
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
						  odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
[]
[]
[]
[]
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the
						  project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
						  or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate,
						  sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
						  regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
						  Wildlife Service?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
						  habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional
						  plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game
						  or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
						  federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
						  pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
						  interruption, or other means?
[]
[]
[]
[]
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
						  native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established
						  native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
						  wildlife nursery sites?
[]
[]
[]
[]
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
						  protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
						  ordinance?
[]
[]
[]
[]
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
						  Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
						  local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
[]
[]
[]
[]
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
						  project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
						  significance of a historical resource pursuant to in §
												15064.5 ?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
						  significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §
												15064.5 ?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
						  outside of dedicated cemeteries?
[]
[]
[]
[]
VI. ENERGY. Would the
						  project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
						  impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
						  resources, during project construction or operation?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
						  renewable energy or energy efficiency?
[]
[]
[]
[]
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the
						  project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
						  adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
						  involving:
[]
[]
[]
[]
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
						  on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
						  State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known
						  fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication
						  42.
[]
[]
[]
[]
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
[]
[]
[]
[]
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
						  liquefaction?
[]
[]
[]
[]
iv) Landslides?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
						  topsoil?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
						  unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
						  potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
						  liquefaction or collapse?
[]
[]
[]
[]
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
						  18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or
						  indirect risks to life or property?
[]
[]
[]
[]
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
						  use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers
						  are not available for the disposal of waste water?
[]
[]
[]
[]
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
						  paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
[]
[]
[]
[]
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the
						  project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
						  or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
						  environment?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
						  regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse
						  gases?
[]
[]
[]
[]
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the
						  project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
						  environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
						  materials?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
						  environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
						  involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
						  acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an
						  existing or proposed school?
[]
[]
[]
[]
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
						  hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
						  65962.5
						  and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
						  environment?
[]
[]
[]
[]
e) For a project located within an airport land use
						  plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
						  airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or
						  excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
[]
[]
[]
[]
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
						  with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
[]
[]
[]
[]
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
						  indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland
						  fires?
[]
[]
[]
[]
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the
						  project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
						  discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground
						  water quality?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
						  interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may
						  impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
						  the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or
						  river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which
						  would:
[]
[]
[]
[]
(i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
						  off-site;
[]
[]
[]
[]
(ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
						  surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or
						  offsite;
[]
[]
[]
[]
(iii) create or contribute runoff water which would
						  exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or
						  provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
[]
[]
[]
[]
(iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
[]
[]
[]
[]
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
						  release of pollutants due to project inundation?
[]
[]
[]
[]
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
						  quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
[]
[]
[]
[]
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
						  project:
a) Physically divide an established
						  community?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
						  conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose
						  of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
[]
[]
[]
[]
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
						  project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
						  mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the
						  state?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
						  locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general
						  plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
[]
[]
[]
[]
XIII. NOISE -- Would the project result
						  in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
						  increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of
						  standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
						  applicable standards of other agencies?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
						  groundborne noise levels?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) For a project located within-the vicinity of a
						  private airstrip or-an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
						  adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
						  project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive
						  noise levels?
[]
[]
[]
[]
XIV . POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
						  project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an
						  area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or
						  indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
						  infrastructure)?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
						  housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
						  elsewhere?
[]
[]
[]
[]
XV. PUBLIC
						  SERVICES.
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
						  physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
						  governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental
						  facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
						  impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
						  other performance objectives for any of the public
						  services:
Fire protection?
[]
[]
[]
[]
Police protection?
[]
[]
[]
[]
Schools?
[]
[]
[]
[]
Parks?
[]
[]
[]
[]
Other public facilities?
[]
[]
[]
[]
XVI.
						  RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
						  neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
						  substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be
						  accelerated?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
						  require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might
						  have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
[]
[]
[]
[]
XVII.
						  TRANSPORTATION.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
						  addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and
						  pedestrian facilities?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with
						  CEQA Guidelines section
						  15064.3, subdivision (b)?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
						  design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
						  uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
[]
[]
[]
[]
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL
						  RESOURCES
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change
						  in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
						  Code section
						  21074
						  as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically
						  defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or
						  object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that
						  is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
						  Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical
						  resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
						  5020.1(k),
						  or
[]
[]
[]
[]
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
						  discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to
						  criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
						  5024.1.
						  In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code
						  Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
						  consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American
						  tribe.
[]
[]
[]
[]
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE
						  SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction
						  of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,
						  electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction
						  or relocation of which could cause significant environmental
						  effects?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
						  the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry
						  and multiple dry years?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
						  treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate
						  capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's
						  existing commitments?
[]
[]
[]
[]
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
						  standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
						  impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
[]
[]
[]
[]
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and
						  reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
[]
[]
[]
[]
XX. WILDFIRE -- If located in or near state
						  responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
						  zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
						  plan or emergency evacuation plan?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
						  exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant
						  concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
						  wildfire?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
						  associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
						  power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may
						  result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
[]
[]
[]
[]
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
						  including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of
						  runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
[]
[]
[]
[]
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
						  SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially
						  degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
						  fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
						  self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
						  substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
						  plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
						  California history or prehistory?
[]
[]
[]
[]
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
						  limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that
						  the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection
						  with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and
						  the effects of probable future projects)?
[]
[]
[]
[]
c) Does the project have environmental effects which
						  will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
						  indirectly?
[]
[]
[]
[]
1. New
				  Appendix G filed 10-8-76; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 76, No
				  41). NOTE: Order designated that compliance with this appendix is authorized
				  but not mandatory before 1-1-77.
2. Amendment of subsections (n) and
				  (o) filed 2-2-78; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 78, No.
				  5).
3. Amendment of subsections (j) and (v) and new subsections (y)
				  and (z) filed 5-8-80; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 80, No.
				  19).
4. Amendment of first paragraph and subsection (c) filed
				  5-27-97; operative 5-27-97 pursuant to Government Code section
				  11343.4(d)
				  (Register 97, No. 22).
5. Repealer of former Appendix G and
				  relettering and amendment of former Appendix I to new Appendix G filed
				  10-26-98; operative 10-26-98 pursuant to Public Resources Code section
				  21087
				  (Register 98, No. 44).
6. Change without regulatory effect amending
				  Appendix G filed 2-1-2001 pursuant to section
				  100, title 1, California Code of
				  Regulations (Register 2001, No. 5).
7. Amendment of Appendix G
				  andNOTE filed 2-16-2010; operative 3-18-2010 (Register 2010, No.
				  8).
8. Addition of item 11 to sample checklist form, addition of
				  "Tribal Cultural Resources" to "Environmental Factors Potentially Affected,"
				  amendment of item V. "Cultural Resources" -- d), new item XVII and renumbering
				  of following items filed 9-27-2016; operative 9-27-2016 pursuant to Government
				  Code section
				  11343.4(b)(3)
				  (Register 2016, No. 40).
9. Amendment filed 12-28-2018; operative
				  12-28-2018 pursuant to Government Code section
				  11343.4(b)(3)
				  (Register 2018, No. 52).
Note: Authority cited: Sections
					 21083
					 and
					 21083.05,
					 Public Resources Code. Reference: Section
					 65088.4,
					 Government Code; Sections
					 21080(c),
					 21080.1,
					 21080.3,
					 21082.1,
					 21083,
					 21083.05,
					 21083.3,
					 21093,
					 21094,
					 21095
					 and
					 21151,
					 Public Resources Code; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d
					 296; Leonoff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337;
					 Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th
					 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116
					 Cal.App.4th at 1109; and San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City
					 and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th
					 656.