A recent appellate case addressed the issue of minor problems and deficiencies in an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) and whether they were prejudicial errors that amounted to defects in the approval process required for a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). [Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology Center v. County of Siskiyou , 3rd District Court of Appeal (9/26/12, published 10/18/12)]

Specifically, the case involved a private party who bought a wood products manufacturing facility, converted it, then sought approval for a biomass-fueled cogeneration power plant so that heat generated in the facility’s boiler could be used for both manufacturing and the generation of electricity for resale.