Opinion ID: 1314438
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: DNR's Findings under 6 AAC 80.130(d)

Text: As part of its consistency determination, ACMP also requires DNR to determine whether the proposed development would maintain and enhance the coastal habitat. 6 AAC 80.130(b), (c). If the proposed development would not maintain and enhance the coastal habitat, then it must satisfy the standards of 6 AAC 80.130(d). 6 AAC 80.130(d) provides: Uses and activities in the coastal area which will not [maintain and enhance the coastal habitat] may be allowed ... if the following are established: (1) there is a significant public need for the proposed use or activity; (2) there is no feasible prudent alternative to meet the public need for the proposed use or activity which would [maintain and enhance the coastal habitat]; and (3) all feasible and prudent steps to maximize conformance with [this section's goal of maintaining and enhancing the coastal habitat] will be taken. DNR analyzed the criteria of 6 AAC 80.130(d) and concluded that Sale 50 satisfied them. Trustees argue that DNR's analysis is inadequate. Our review is limited to ensuring that DNR's decision was not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable. Hammond, 645 P.2d at 758-59. DNR's analysis of 6 AAC 80.130(d) satisfies this standard. It is clear that DNR has taken a hard look at this issue. DNR identified twenty lease stipulations expressly designed to achieve maximum compliance with the goals of maintaining and enhancing the coastal habitat. Even though the Sale 50 area is entirely composed of offshore areas, DNR recognized and sought to compensate for possible impact on such adjacent habitats as estuaries, wetlands and tideflats, barrier islands and lagoons, rivers, streams and lakes, and important upland habitats. To this end, the lease terms range from general requirements of consistency with the ACMP to specific provisions aimed at particular problems. [11] DNR also acknowledged that despite these precautions, development would to some extent degrade the environment and thus could not satisfy the standards contained in 6 AAC 80.130(b) and (c). It therefore set out and discussed each part of the tripartite 6 AAC 80.130(d) test. For each part of the test DNR articulated its reasoning and concluded that Sale 50 met that part of the test. It specifically concluded that there is a significant public need to conduct the sale; that there is no feasible and prudent alternative; and that the lease terms and stipulations complied with ACMP standards and minimized the sale's impact on the environment. In short, DNR's analysis demonstrates a reasonable basis for its conclusion. Therefore we reject Trustees argument.