62-807.530. Alternate Corridors, Criteria for Rejection

(1) In accordance with Section 403.9412, F.S., alternate corridors to those proposed by the applicant may be filed by parties to the proceedings, initiating a special review process. In comparison, the application may contain primary and secondary corridors which are distinct from the alternate corridors described herein; these corridors are to be addressed as part of the original application review procedures.

(2) There is no requirement that an agency file an alternate corridor proposal, if it intends to recommend denial of the applicant's proposed corridor.

(3) The filing of an alternate corridor does not reopen for additional review other parts of the corridor for which an alternate has not been proposed.

(4) The Department shall reject a proposed alternate corridor if one or more of the following criteria is met:

(a) The alternate does not have appropriate end points which connect to the remainder of the natural gas transmission pipeline;

(b) The quality of the documents presented in support of a proposed alternate corridor render all or part of the material illegible; or

(c) The information required by Section 403.9412(1)(a), F.S. has not been submitted; however, this will be without prejudice to refile within the deadlines set forth in Section 403.9412, F.S.

(5) Acceptance by the Department of an alternate corridor proposed for consideration pursuant to Section 403.9412(1), F.S., above shall not require the Department to support or oppose certification of such alternate corridor.

(6) Acceptance by the applicant of an alternate corridor proposed for certification shall not require the applicant to support or oppose certification of such alternate corridor.

(7) The alternate corridor proponent’s information submittals pursuant to Section 403.9412(1)(d), F.S., must address the same issues as the original application which are applicable, although such submittals can cross-reference to the original application in regards to data which is basically identical. The level of detail of the alternate corridor proponent’s information submittals pursuant to Section 403.9412(1)(d), F.S., must be commensurate with the scale of change in comparison to the applicant’s original application. For example, if an alternate corridor would shift the corridor several hundred feet from the original proposal, for a distance of a thousand feet, and overlaps slightly with the original corridor, much of the original application information may address the requisite information for the proposed alternate corridor in that area. Cross-referencing to the application in such scenarios will be adequate in most instances. On the other hand, an alternate that shifts the corridor several miles from where originally proposed that is not joined with the other parts of the corridor not in dispute, would require substantially new, detailed information.

(8) Within seven days after determining that the data submitted is sufficient and thus the review of the alternate must continue, the department must prepare a schedule of significant dates to be followed during the rescheduled certification proceedings including dates for filing notices of appearances to be a party pursuant to Section 403.9411(4), F.S.

(9) Local government informational meetings pursuant to Section 403.9424, F.S., may be held no later than 60 days after the notice of filing of an alternate.

Rulemaking Authority 403.9404(1), (2) FS. Law Implemented 403.9412 FS. History–New 8-12-93, Formerly 17-807.530, Amended 3-3-15.