In accordance with notice to members of the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council’s Planning and Procedures subcommittee, a meeting of the subcommittee was held on Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 8:30am at the offices of the CRMC, Stedman Government Center, 4808 Tower Hill Road, Wakefield, RI.

MEMBERS PRESENT
Anne Livingston, Chair
Paul E. Lemont, Vice Chair
Donald Gomez
Joy Montanaro
Tony Affigne

STAFF PRESENT
Grover Fugate, Executive Director
Jeff Willis, Deputy Director
Brian Goldman, Legal Counsel

Call to Order. Ms. Livingston called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m.

Ms. Livingston called for a motion to approve the minutes of the May 19, 2015 subcommittee meeting.

Item 5.A – Save the Bay Request re: CZMA Section 312 OCM Evaluation. Mr. Lemont explained that this item was on the Agenda at his request regarding STB’s letter to NOAA that among additional issues primarily sought that CRMC be again evaluated due to NOAA requirements that STB purports have not been adequately addressed, namely that of the council as hearing officer role and legal counsel representation. Mr. Lemont stated his significant displeasure in the STB position and also stated that the agency had addressed all of NOAAs concerns from the last evaluation and that these issues have been more than satisfactorily addressed and further are working quite well. Chair Livingston and Mr. Gomez made similar remarks and each subcommittee member fully agreed. G. Fugate offered the NOAA response letter noting that NOAA will not be scheduling such an evaluation any time soon.

Members discussed how the current process works. Mr. Affigne noted that public involvement, public workshops, public notices are all significant mechanisms to engage the public and that that should never be taken lightly; the council itself is a well informed and experienced lay board of public members, advised by a professional legal and technical staff upholding the mission of the agency; by definition it provides for public input. B. Goldman stated that applicants do not get a fair hearing unless held at a Hearing Officer. He explained how an administrative process would work – using the RIDEM process as advocated by STB – and how that would actually remove the public. B. Goldman explained the 1990s statute on RIDEM Hearing Officers and believes that STB is misreading the statute.

Chair Livingston stated that she and staff had recently met with STB to discuss issues of common concern such as access to the shore opportunities and an increased fine capability and that that relationship will still need to be maintained.
No action was needed on this item.

Item 5.B – Application Fee Schedule – Section 320 Reviews. G. Fugate and J. Willis explained that there is no fee category for filings on a waiver of jurisdiction for section 320 activities.

Item 5.C – RICRMP Section 320 Jurisdictional Issues. G. Fugate explained that section 320 contains activities that may have an impact to the state’s coastal resources even though they may be located anywhere in the state and therefore be miles inland from the coast. The agency has an obligation to assert jurisdiction when it so determines that these activities have a reasonable probability of impacting the states coastal resources. However, at times applicants for these activities believe that their activity does not pose any such threat and seek to have the agency waive its jurisdiction.

Mr. Affigne and Mr. Gomez noted that should such requests be made the agency should expect to see evidence supporting the request not just a narrative. Mr. Affigne additionally stated that the agency should ask for necessary data and information as part and parcel of any waiver. He also noted that the section 320 review allows for the public to be involved, for people to be educated, for issues to be raised and be informed. Mr. Gomez agreed but cautioned that information begets information and that could lead to delays and lengthy deliberations. Mr. Affigne added that information is important to get for such deliberations and review; it would be in the agency’s best interest to not just sign-off but to ask questions and hold a public review. Chair Livingston asked how the Energy Facility Siting Board fits into the agency’s review of section 320 activities. B. Goldman and G. Fugate explained the role of the EFSB and its jurisdiction relative to that of the Council’s. B. Goldman offered to brief the subcommittee on the EFSB in more detail at its next meeting. The Chair agreed to such.

G. Fugate offered that staff could bring these types of requests to the council in a two-step approach: when a waiver of jurisdiction is received staff would prepare a report that the council would evaluate. G. Fugate however noted that this report would be based on information received to-date; the council at its deliberations of the waiver request could decide to seek additional information.
The subcommittee agreed to such an approach.

ADJOURNMENT. Mr. Lemont, seconded by Mr. Gomez, moved to adjourn the subcommittee meeting. All voted in favor of the motion and the meeting was adjourned at 9:57 a.m.

Respectfully submitted by

Jeffrey M Willis, Deputy Director

CALENDAR INDEX