Hallenbeck v. Onondaga County Resource Recovery Agency

Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition seeking to compel respondent, Onondaga County Resource Recovery Agency (OCRRA), to prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS). OCRRA is the “lead agency” for the purposes of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) in the development of a County landfill site (see, 6 NYCRR 617.6 [b]). In determining the sufficiency of a SEQRA review, the court’s role is limited to whether “the agency has identified the relevant areas of environmental concern, taken a ’hard look’ at them, and made a reasoned elaboration of the basis for its determination” (Matter of Neville v Koch, 79 NY2d 416 , 424-425; see, e.g., H.O.M.E.S. v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 69 AD2d 222 , 232). If the agency has reached its determination in some reasonable fashion, “the court is not permitted to second-guess the agency’s choice” (Matter of Schiff v Board of Estimate, 122 AD2d 57 , 59, lv denied 69 NY2d 604 ; see, Matter of Jackson v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 67 NY2d 400 , 417). We conclude that OCRRA “took the requisite ’hard look’ at the possible and probable environmental effects of the proposed landfill” (Residents of Bergen Believe in Envt. & Democracy v County of Monroe, 159 AD2d 81 , 84, appeal dismissed 76 NY2d