16 U.S.C. § 3161

Congressional declaration of findings

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 16 CasesGoogle Scholar

Congress finds that—(a) Alaska’s transportation and utility network is largely undeveloped and the future needs for transportation and utility systems in Alaska would best be identified and provided for through an orderly, continuous decisionmaking process involving the State and Federal Governments and the public;(b) the existing authorities to approve or disapprove applications for transportation and utility systems through public lands in Alaska are diverse, dissimilar, and, in some cases, absent; and(c) to minimize the adverse impacts of siting transportation and utility systems within units established or expanded by this Act and to insure the effectiveness of the decisionmaking process, a single comprehensive statutory authority for the approval or disapproval of applications for such systems must be provided in this Act.(Pub. L. 96–487, title XI, § 1101, Dec. 2, 1980, 94 Stat. 2457.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This Act, referred to in subsec. (c), is Pub. L 96–487, Dec. 2, 1980, 94 Stat. 2371, known as the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 3101 of this title and Tables.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2019–2022 · leading case: Friends of Alaska Nat'l Wildlife Refuges v. Bernhardt, 381 F. Supp. 3d 1127 (D. Alaska 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Friends of Alaska Nat'l Wildlife Refuges v. Bernhardt, 381 F. Supp. 3d 1127 (D. Alaska 2019). “§ 3192 ; (2) Title IX of ANILCA, 16 U.S.C. §§ 3161 - 3173 ; (3) the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.”

Friends of Alaska Nat'l v. Debra Haaland, 29 F.4th 432 (9th Cir. 2022). · cites it 3× “See 16 U.S.C. §§ 3161 (c), 3164(a). Plaintiffs had also asserted claims under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.”

Friends of Alaska Nat'l Wildlife Refuges v. Bernhardt (D. Alaska 2020). · cites it 3× “”84 19 The court agrees with Plaintiffs’ position that the Exchange Agreement is in fact 20 an approval of a transportation system that falls within the ambit of Title XI.”

Nat'l Wildlife Refuge Ass'n v. Rural Utils. Serv. (W.D. Wis. 2022). “(citing 16 USC § 3161 ). The Refuge Act mirrors much of ANICLA, and it makes sense that the policy goals of the Refuge Act should not be subordinate to an individual manager’s general authority to exchange lands, however complicit he or she may be in thwarting its goals.”

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.