Consistency Review Process Packet Complete Pre-Review Assistance Resolve Issues Day 24/44 Proposed Determination Day 29/49 Deadline to Elevate Day 30/50 Final Determination Determine Applicability Applicant Considers Options Determine Scope Day 1 Start Review Distribute & Consider Comments Draft a Proposed Determination Prepare Public Notice Day 13/25 Request for Additional Information Day 17/30 Deadline for Comments

Project must be described in sufficient specificity to determine the –purpose of the activity, and –potential impact(s) to any coastal use or resource. Complete Project Description Review Packet Complete Project Description

Evaluation The applicant shall submit…an evaluation of how the proposed project is consistent with the state standards and with any applicable district enforceable policies, sufficient to support the consistency certification. 11 AAC

15 CFR requires applicant to provide: A detailed description of project and associated facilities Information required by the ACMP (e.g., complete application packet) Evaluation of the coastal effects Comprehensive data to support the applicants consistency certification Necessary Data and Information

How to use the ABC List Scope of Review – How to use the ABC List No review is necessary if all activities are listed on the A or B List. Scope shall exclude activities covered under a general or nationwide permit. Parts of a project that are categorically or generally consistent (A & B list of state authorizations) may be excluded if resource agencies and affected district agree that the A or B List activity has a de minimis impact.

Whats the Process 11 AAC Article 2 RFAI process Whats the Process 11 AAC CA sends RFAI to applicant 7 days for requestor to determine adequacy YesNoInfo Request by Day 13/25 Applicant provide info to requestor & CA (CA may terminate the review if applicant does not respond within 30 days Coordinating Agency (CA) may stop the clock for 3 days to evaluate and determine necessity of information if its outside requestors expertise Resume ReviewExplain inadequacies based on original request & Identify information needed

State objection –Identify specific enforceable policies and applicable statewide standards and reasons for inconsistency –Explain how the proposed project is inconsistent –Identify and explain alternative measures that would achieve consistency Comments Review Participants Review ParticipantsComments

a modification to a project that, if adopted by the applicant, would achieve consistency with the enforceable policies of the program 11 AAC (a)(3) Alternative Measure

must be addressed directly to the coordinating agency must identify the enforceable policies with which the project is inconsistent and explain how the project is inconsistent must be in writing unless presented orally at a public hearing held by the coordinating agency Comments Review Participants Review Participants 11 AAC

The coordinating agency shall provide copies of comments to the applicant, each resource agency, any potentially affected coastal resource district, and other persons interested in the project. Comments Distribution of Comments Distribution of Comments 11 AAC (c), 330(c), 435(c), 510(d)

Due Deference –The deference that is appropriate in the context of the commentors expertise or area of responsibility, and –All the evidence available to support any factual assertions. 11 AAC (a)(25)

Coordinating agency works with applicant and review participants to build consensus and resolve conflict Due deference is afforded to affected coastal districts and resource agencies in their expertise and area of responsibility Resolve Issues Consider Comments Proposed & Final Consistency Determinations Crafting a Determination

Who can elevate a decision? A resource agency The applicant An affected coastal resource district 11 AAC (a)

Subject of an elevation is limited to: The proposed consistency determination regarding whether the project is consistent with the enforceable policies of the program; Any alternative measure or other project modification that would achieve consistency with the enforceable policies of the program. 11 AAC (b)

Review Schedule Modification Reasons for Modifying Schedule Coordinate state agency review process ( (a)(1)) Evaluate the RFAI ( (a)(2)) RFAI ( (a)(3)) Public Hearing or Meeting ( (a)(4)) Adjudication under AS 29 if district comments are pending the outcome of the adjudication ( (a)(5)) Applicant Request ( (a)(6)) Address Question of Law ( (a)(7))

Consider Public Comments ( (a)(8)) For project within a CRSA ( (a)(9)) Field review ( (a)(10)) Revised proposed consistency, allowance for submission of a request for elevation ( (a)(11)) Request for Elevation ( (a)(12)) Review Schedule Modification Reasons for Modifying Schedule

Project Modifications Modifications During Review A coordinating agency may terminate a review and start over if modifications substantially change a project or new authorizations are required. -11 AAC

After a Review Project Modifications After a Review Applicant prepares CPQ with detailed description Applicant prepares CPQ with detailed description Applicant submits CPQ to agency that originally coordinated the initial consistency review Applicant submits CPQ to agency that originally coordinated the initial consistency review Original coordinating agency distributes CPQ to review participants Original coordinating agency distributes CPQ to review participants

Within 7 days, determine if modification: 1. Requires new or changed resource agency authorization, and 2. May cause additional impacts Within 7 days, determine if modification: 1. Requires new or changed resource agency authorization, and 2. May cause additional impacts Review Participants Respond on Both Points Review Participants Respond on Both Points Agency begins review of Modification Only. If either point is NO no review occurs Yes to both No After a Review

Change in ownership Change in contractor or subcontractor Decrease in impact of the project with no change in purpose Modifications of authorizations are within the scope of the original project reviewed Modifications of authorizations are allowed under original authorization conditions Modifications of authorizations that are meant to clarify requirements of previously issued authorization Project Modifications No further review 11 AAC (k)

Review Termination Review Termination 11 AAC A coordinating agency may terminate a review if the applicant: –Fails, within 30 days,to respond to the request for additional information; or –Submits a written request to withdraw the project from review.

Qualifying Situations Emergency Expedited Reviews Qualifying Situations Disaster Emergency per AS Disasters AS Catastrophic Oil Spills Immediate Preservation of Public Health, Safety or General Welfare DEC Determines: Oil spill or Hazardous Substance Release Poses an Imminent Threat to Public Health, Safety, or the Environment

DECISION BASED UPON: Clear & Convincing Evidence of the Need to Expedite DOES NOT INCLUDE: Poor Planning Emergency Expedited Reviews

Review Includes: Written Decision to Expedite Public Notice - per (not 11 AAC ) Proposed Consistency Determination Final Consistency Determination Elevation (if necessary - process also expedited as appropriate) Emergency Expedited Reviews