U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 38— PUBLIC WORKS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

42 U.S.C. § 304

DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
“(a)Work Plan.—“(1)In general.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act [Oct. 21, 1998] and annually thereafter, the Commission shall develop a proposed work plan for Alaska that meets the requirements of paragraph (2) and submit that plan to the Federal Cochairperson for review in accordance with the requirements of subsection (b).“(2)Work plan.—In developing the work plan, the Commission shall—“(A) solicit project proposals from local governments and other entities and organizations; and“(B) provide for a comprehensive work plan for rural and infrastructure development and necessary job training in the area covered under the work plan.“(3)Report.—Upon completion of a work plan under this subsection, the Commission shall prepare, and submit to the Secretary, the Federal Cochairperson, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, a report that outlines the work plan and contains recommendations for funding priorities.“(b)Review by Federal Cochairperson.—“(1)In general.—Upon receiving a work plan under this section, the Secretary, acting through the Federal Cochairperson, shall publish the work plan in the Federal Register, with notice and an opportunity for public comment. The period for public review and comment shall be the 30-day period beginning on the date of publication of that notice.“(2)Criteria for review.—In conducting a review under paragraph (1), the Secretary, acting through the Federal Cochairperson, shall—“(A) take into consideration the information, views, and comments received from interested parties through the public review and comment process specified in paragraph (1); and“(B) consult with appropriate Federal officials in Alaska including but not limited to Bureau of Indian Affairs, Economic Development Administration, and Rural Development Administration.“(3)Approval.—Not later than 30 days after the end of the period specified in paragraph (1), the Secretary acting through the Federal Cochairperson, shall—“(A) approve, disapprove, or partially approve the work plan that is the subject of the review; and“(B) issue to the Commission a notice of the approval, disapproval, or partial approval that—“(i) specifies the reasons for disapproving any portion of the work plan; and“(ii) if applicable, includes recommendations for revisions to the work plan to make the plan subject to approval.“(4)Review of disapproval or partial approval.—If the Secretary, acting through the Federal Cochairperson, disapproves or partially approves a work plan, the Federal Cochairperson shall submit that work plan to the Commission for review and revision.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1960–1983 · leading case: Snell v. Wyman, 281 F. Supp. 853 (S.D.N.Y. 1968).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Snell v. Wyman, 281 F. Supp. 853 (S.D.N.Y. 1968). · cites it 2× “Concluding the thin subject of plaintiffs' Supremacy argument, we recall the wide prevalence among the States of statutes like those in question; the duty of HEW's Secretary to disapprove, and withhold federal funds from, unlawful state programs, 42 U.”
State Dept. of Pub. Welf. of St. of Tex. v. Weinberger, 388 F. Supp. 1304 (W.D. Tex. 1975). · cites it 8× “This Court has previously dismissed for want of jurisdiction all claims by Plaintiffs except their claim relating to the alleged failure of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare to give notice and the opportunity for a hearing pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§304 , 604,1204 and…”
State Dep't of Pub. Welfare v. Califano, 556 F.2d 326 (5th Cir. 1977). · cites it 5× “42 U.S.C. §§ 304 , 604, 1204, 1354. 5 When it appears to the *330 Secretary that the state plan is being operated in noncompliance with these regulations, he must give the state agency “reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing” to evaluate the operation of the plan.”
Pearson v. State Soc. Welfare Bd., 353 P.2d 33 (Cal. 1960). “This provides that “In the case of any State plan for old-age assistance which has been approved by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, if the Secretary, after reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the State agency administering or supervising the…”
Connecticut State Dep't of Pub. Welfare v. Dep't of Health, Educ., & Welfare, Soc. & Rehab. Serv., 448 F.2d 209 (2d Cir. 1971). “42 U.S.C. §§ 304 , 604, 1204, 1316, 1354, *212 1396c.”
Rita Bourgeois v. Jerald L. Stevens, 532 F.2d 799 (1st Cir. 1976). “The procedural vehicle for eliminating any nonconformity with HEW regulations is normally for HEW to hold a conformity hearing pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 304 , 604, 1204, 1316, 1354, 1396c.”
Norton v. Blaylock, 285 F. Supp. 659 (W.D. Ark. 1968). “42 U.S.C.A. §§ 304 , 605, 715, 1204, and 1384.”
King v. Martin, 21 Cal. App. 3d 791 (Cal. Ct. App. 1971). “( 42 U.S.C. §§ 304 , 604, 1204, 1354, 1384.”
Arizona State Dep't of Pub. Welfare v. Dep't of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 449 F.2d 456 (9th Cir. 1971). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. §§ 304 , 604(a), 1204, 1354. Should the Secretary call into question the continuing conformity of the plan or of its administration to federal requirements, he must provide reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the state agency administering the plan.”
Massachusetts v. Departmental Grant Appeals Bd. of the United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 698 F.2d 22 (1st Cir. 1983). “, 42 U.S.C. §§ 304 (Medicare), 604 (AFDC). .”
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.