15 C.F.R. § 930.43

State agency objection

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In the event the State agency objects to the Federal agency's consistency determination, the State agency shall accompany its response to the Federal agency with its reasons for the objection and supporting information. The State agency response shall describe:

(1) How the proposed activity will be inconsistent with specific enforceable policies of the management program; and

(2) The specific enforceable policies (including citations).

(3) The State agency should also describe alternative measures (if they exist) which, if adopted by the Federal agency, would allow the activity to proceed in a manner consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of the management program. Failure to describe alternatives does not affect the validity of the State agency's objection.

(b) If the State agency's objection is based upon a finding that the Federal agency has failed to supply sufficient information, the State agency's response must describe the nature of the information requested and the necessity of having such information to determine the consistency of the Federal agency activity with the enforceable policies of the management program.

(d) In the event of an objection, Federal and State agencies should use the remaining portion of the 90-day notice period (see § 930.36(b)) to attempt to resolve their differences. If resolution has not been reached at the end of the 90-day period, Federal agencies should consider using the dispute resolution mechanisms of this part and postponing final federal action until the problems have been resolved. At the end of the 90-day period the Federal agency shall not proceed with the activity over a State agency's objection unless:

(1) the Federal agency has concluded that under the “consistent to the maximum extent practicable” standard described in section 930.32 consistency with the enforceable policies of the management program is prohibited by existing law applicable to the Federal agency and the Federal agency has clearly described, in writing, to the State agency the legal impediments to full consistency (See §§ 930.32(a) and 930.39(a)), or

(2) the Federal agency has concluded that its proposed action is fully consistent with the enforceable policies of the management program, though the State agency objects.

(e) If a Federal agency decides to proceed with a Federal agency activity that is objected to by a State agency, or to follow an alternative suggested by the State agency, the Federal agency shall notify the State agency of its decision to proceed before the project commences.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2022 · leading case: Serrano-Lopez v. Cooper, 193 F. Supp. 2d 424 (D.P.R. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Serrano-Lopez v. Cooper, 193 F. Supp. 2d 424 (D.P.R. 2002). · cites it 2× “15 C.F.R. § 930.43 Note (2001). In objecting to the federal agency’s consistency determination report, the state must identify the enforceable policies it believes the agency’s activities are incon *429 sistent with, and also explain how the proposed activity is inconsistent…”

Town of Southold v. Wheeler, 48 F.4th 67 (2d Cir. 2022). “15 C.F.R. § 930.43 (d) (emphasis added). If the federal agency ultimately decides to proceed with the activity to which the state objects, the federal agency “shall notify the State agency of its decision to proceed before the project commences.”

State of Delaware Dep't of Nat. Resources & Env't Control v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 681 F. Supp. 2d 546 (D. Del. 2010). · cites it 2× “” 15 C.F.R. § 930.43 (d)(2). 4. The Administrative Procedure Act The Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) provides for the judicial review, subject to several requirements and limitations, of certain federal administrative agency actions.”

SLPR, L.L.C. v. San Diego Unified Port Dist. (Cal. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “( 15 C.F.R. § 930.43 (a)(3).) However, if the state and federal agency cannot resolve their differences, the federal agency can nevertheless proceed with its proposed activity over the state's objection if it concludes its proposed activity is fully consistent with the…”

— 15 C.F.R. § 930.43(d)(2) — 1 case

State of Delaware Dep't of Nat. Resources & Env't Control v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 681 F. Supp. 2d 546 (D. Del. 2010). “” 15 C.F.R. § 930.43 (d)(2). 4. The Administrative Procedure Act The Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) provides for the judicial review, subject to several requirements and limitations, of certain federal administrative agency actions.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.