Opinion ID: 2391818
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Equally Effective Requirement

Text: [¶ 43] CLF and the Gagnebins also contend that Rule 13 is invalid because the equally effective requirement of 5 M.R.S.A. § 8062 (2002) has not been met. [10] Section 8062 requires that performance standards adopted by an agency to implement a statute must be equally effective in meeting applicable statutory criteria. The BEP considers Rule 13 to contain performance and use standards adopted pursuant to 38 M.R.S.A. § 480-H (2001). [¶ 44] The petitioners claim that the standards of Rule 13 are ineffective in meeting NRPA requirements. We defer, however, to the BEP's determination that the Rule 13 standards for the permits by rule for wharf construction are equally effective in meeting the statutory standards. Furthermore Rule 1 allows the DEP to deny a permit in the event the notice and accompanying documents demonstrate noncompliance. In fact, as we have noted, because the Rule 13 standards put specific limitations on docks they may be more effective than the less precise statutory standard of no unreasonable interference with existing scenic, aesthetic, recreational or navigational uses. [¶ 45] Because we conclude that Rule 13 is valid, and because neither CLF nor the Gagnebins have challenged Johnson's permit on any basis other than the invalidity of Rule 13, we do not reach the remaining issues raised by the parties. The entry is: Judgment vacated. Remanded for entry of judgment affirming the decisions of the BEP and DEP.