Opinion ID: 1191743
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The conclusive consistency determination's reliance on the preliminary best interest finding

Text: NTC contends that the September 9, 1993, CCD is invalid, because it relies on the consistency analysis contained in the Preliminary Best Interest Finding (PBIF) issued July 15, 1993, and does not analyze the Sale as finalized under the final BIF issued October 19, 1993. The PBIF includes a list of mitigation measures prescribed by DNR which the lessees must comply with in order for Sale 78 to be consistent with the ACMP. NTC argues that this analysis is insufficient, because the regulations require that the consistency analysis be conducted after imposition of all stipulations, conditions, and modifications designed to ensure a project's consistency with the ACMP. [2] The State maintains that a CCD need not be concurrent with the final BIF, because the BIF includes a determination that a project is consistent with the ACMP. The State argues that it is appropriate for DNR to make a consistency determination before proceeding to its final BIF, because it is not practical for DNR to expend significant resources in making a BIF only to find later that the disposal was not consistent with the ACMP. The issue is one of timing. The regulations implementing the ACMP define a CCD as a document issued by the coordinating agency containing a brief description of the project, and the findings of the consistency review together with any stipulations, conditions, or modifications to the project which must be attached to the applicable permits, and a brief justification for those necessary modifications, conditions, or stipulations. 6 AAC 50.190(9)(A) (1995). The modifications, conditions, and stipulations prescribed within the CCD are intended to achieve and maintain a project's consistency with the ACMP. When DNR adopts and subsequently amends operation permit terms prescribing mitigation measures to ensure a project's consistency with the ACMP, the agency should not have to review the project again for consistency following compliance with those measures. The September 9, 1993, CCD expressly makes its finding of consistency subject to the stipulations and plan of operations permit terms outlined in the mitigation measures proposed in the July 15, 1993 [PBIF] and [the] ACMP Consistency Analysis as amended. [3] Therefore, because the finding of consistency was directly subject to these measures, we conclude that DNR could rely on the PBIF in issuing its CCD and that the CCD need not be concurrent with the final BIF in order to be valid.