Many Alaskans want to know what the loss of the Alaska Coastal Management Program (ACMP) means. Many wonder whether Alaska will continue to have a voice in oil and gas leasing and other activities off our coast. Unfortunately, the truth has been clouded with misstatements.
We need to consider both the provisions of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, which governs and authorizes the ACMP, and numerous other federal, state and local laws that may apply to projects in coastal Alaska.
The authorizing language of the Coastal Zone Management Act requires notice and public hearings on federal actions.
So does the federal Administrative Procedures Act (APA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and a number of other federal and state permitting statutes. All these statutes remain in place and guarantee Alaskans will get notice of federal actions and retain the ability to comment.
In fact, a federal agency performing a NEPA analysis to determine whether a project will move forward is directed to do so "in cooperation with state and local governments" (42 U.S.C. 4331, 4332). Cooperating agency status allows state and local governments to get in on the ground floor of federal review of the project and provide information, expertise, and the ability to resolve disputes at the earliest stages of project development. This is the process often used by the 20 non-coastal states that do not have coastal zone management programs.
The Parnell administration has actively sought opportunities to increase the state's participation in federal agency processes affecting resource development. Recently, the state sought and was granted "cooperating agency" status under NEPA on proposed federal actions on several projects. This helps assure the state will be at the table for decisions affecting our communities.
In terms of general jurisdiction or authority, "Nothing in the (CZMA) shall be construed to diminish ... state jurisdiction, responsibility, or rights in the field of planning, development, or control of water resources, submerged lands, or navigable waters ..." (16 U.S.C. 1456(e)).
Similarly, state authority and control in areas such as air and water permitting are unaffected by the CZMA or the ACMP (16 U.S.C. 1456(f) ). The state can set air and water permitting standards that allow or disallow certain types of development without an ACMP program.
For coordination of multiple federal and state permits required to move a project ahead, state personnel remain free to communicate with project applicants, identify which permits and approvals are needed for a project and provide a timeline for agency actions.
In fact, the state already coordinates permit development for large mining projects through the DNR Office of Project Management and Permitting.
Some have also said the state is prohibited from developing a deepwater port under federal law. This is inaccurate. Federal law defines a deepwater port as a man-made structure located outside (beyond the three-mile limit) of state waters where oil or liquefied natural gas is transferred from a vessel to a pipeline.
Out of thousands of ports built since this law was passed, only 18 applications have ever been submitted for this type of deepwater port. Of those, only seven have ever been issued by the Maritime Administration. The state is free to continue reconnaissance work for an Arctic port.
With the sunset of the ACMP, state agencies and communities will lose the ability to adopt "enforceable policies" and thereby apply more stringent state or local standards on projects outside of state jurisdiction, such as oil and gas activities on the Arctic Outer Continental Shelf.
In light of this, the state has stepped up its tracking of proposed federal rule-makings, standards, designations, and plans that might affect our communities. Doing so better enables state agencies to coordinate with each other and with communities and organizations in responding to proposed federal actions.
The end of the ACMP program is a loss and a challenge for Alaska but it is manageable. We will manage with the resources and authority granted the executive branch with the constitutional principle of encouraging development of Alaska's natural resources to the maximum extent reasonably possible.
John Burns is attorney general of Alaska.
By JOHN BURNS