—Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from a judgment dismissing its petition challenging the issuance of a positive declaration (6 NYCRR 617.2 [ac]) by respondent. Supreme Court properly held that “the issuance of a positive declaration is not final agency action subject to CPLR article 78 review” (Matter of Rochester Tel. Mobile Communications v Ober, 251 AD2d 1053, 1054). A positive declaration requiring the preparation of a draft environmental impact statement is merely a preliminary step in the decision-making process under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (ECL art 8) and therefore not ripe for judicial review (see, Matter of Rochester Tel. Mobile Communications v Ober, supra, at 1054, citing Matter of Town of Coeymans v City of Albany, 237 AD2d 856, 857, lv denied 90 NY2d 803). Moreover, petitioner did not sustain an actual, concrete injury by the issuance of a positive declaration. Further agency proceedings may render the disputed issue moot or academic, and therefore the agency action being challenged does not constitute a definitive position (see, Matter of Essex County v Zagata, 91 NY2d 447, 454). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Scorners, J. — CPLR art 78.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Wisner, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.
In the Matter of PVS Chemicals, Inc. (New York), Appellant, v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Respondent
256 A.D.2d 1241682 N.Y.S.2d 787
Authorities cited
No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.