16 U.S.C. § 1466 — Appeals relating to offshore mineral development
submitted 21 years ago by Pub. L. 109-58 to r/title-16-CONSERVATION · 118 words · no verdicts yet
This section addresses Appeals relating to offshore mineral development. It states the duties, permissions, limits, definitions, and procedures set out in the section.
For any Federal administrative agency proceeding that is an appeal or review under section 319 of the Coastal Zone* Management Act of 1972 ( 16 U.S.C. 1465 ) related to any Federal authorization for the permitting, approval, or other authorization of an energy project, the lead Federal permitting agency for the project must, with the cooperation of Federal and State administrative agencies, maintain a consolidated record of all decisions made or actions taken by the lead agency or by another Federal or State administrative agency or officer. Such record must be the initial record for appeals or reviews under that Act, but only if the record may be supplemented as expressly provided under section 319 of that Act.
For any Federal administrative agency proceeding that is an appeal or review under section 319 of the Coastal Zone* Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1465) related to any Federal authorization for the permitting, approval, or other authorization of an energy project, the lead Federal permitting agency for the project shall, with the cooperation of Federal and State administrative agencies, maintain a consolidated record of all decisions made or actions taken by the lead agency or by another Federal or State administrative agency or officer. Such record shall be the initial record for appeals or reviews under that Act, provided that the record may be supplemented as expressly provided pursuant to section 319 of that Act.
Source credit: (Pub. L. 109–58, title III, § 382, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 738.)
- 2005Enacted · Pub. L. 109-58 · 119 Stat. 738
A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 109-58 on 2005-08-08.
all 0 arguments · sorted by: best
no arguments yet — make the first case