U.S. Code » Title 48 » Chapter CHAPTER 18— MICRONESIA, MARSHALL ISLANDS, AND PALAU › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— PALAU › Part Part A— Approval of Compact and Supplemental Provisions

48 U.S.C. § 221

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 48 CasesGoogle Scholar
“(a) The Government of the United States shall make available to Palau, in accordance with and to the extent provided in the separate agreement referred to in Section 232, without compensation and at the levels equivalent to those available to the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands during the year prior to the effective date of this Compact, the services and related programs:“(1) of the United States Weather Service;“(2) provided pursuant to the Postal Reorganization Act, 39 U.S.C. 101 et seq.;“(3) of the United States Federal Aviation Administration; and“(4) of the United States Civil Aeronautics Board or its successor agencies which has the authority to implement the provisions of paragraph 5 of Article IX of such separate agreements, the language of which is incorporated into this Compact.“(b) The Government of the United States, recognizing the special needs of the Palau [sic] particularly in the fields of education and health care, shall make available, as provided by the laws of the United States,“(1) the annual amount of $2 million which shall be allocated in accordance with the provisions of the separate agreement referred to in Section 232; and“(2) the sums of $4.3 million, $2.9 million and $1.5 million, respectively, during the first, second and third years after the effective date of this Compact, which sums shall be used by the Government of Palau as current account funds to finance programs similar to those programs of the United States that applied to Palau prior to the effective date of this Compact and that provided financial assistance for education to any institution, agency, organization or permanent resident of Palau or to the College of Micronesia.“(c) The Government of the United States shall make available to Palau such alternate energy development projects, studies and conservation measures as are applicable to the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands on the day preceding the effective date of this Compact, for the purposes and duration provided in the laws of the United States.“(d) The Government of the United States shall have and exercise such authority as is necessary for the purposes of this Article and as is set forth in the related agreements referred to in Section 232, which shall also set forth the extent to which services and programs shall be provided to Palau.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases, 1924–1984 · leading case: Metlakatla Indian Com., Annette Island Res. v. Egan, 362 P.2d 901 (Alaska 1961).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Metlakatla Indian Com., Annette Island Res. v. Egan, 362 P.2d 901 (Alaska 1961). · cites it 3× “464 , 48 U.S.C.A. § 221 (1952). 9 . 1939 Reorganization Plan No.”
People v. McCovey, 685 P.2d 687 (Cal. 1984). “) The Secretary of the Interior (hereafter Secretary) had issued regulations—purportedly under authority of the White Act ( 48 U.S.C. §§221 - *534 228), and the Alaska Statehood Act ( 72 Stat.”
Hotch v. United States, 208 F.2d 244 (9th Cir. 1954). · cites it 2× “3a) pursuant to Title 48 U.S.C.A. § 221 , extended the weekend closed period to begin at six p.”
Hotch v. United States, 212 F.2d 280 (9th Cir. 1954). “Regulatory Announcement 85, Announcement No. 2, announced by the Regional Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Juneau, Alaska, under authority delegated to him by the Secretary of the Interior.”
Organized Vill. of Kake v. Egan, 174 F. Supp. 500 (D. Alaska 1959). · cites it 2× “Their authority to operate a fishery at all came from the Secretary of the Interior under the provisions of the White Act, 48 U.S. C.A. § 221 et seq. The state regulates and controls wildlife resources and fisheries in the marginal sea.”
Anderson v. Mullaney, Comm'r of Taxation of Territory of Alaska, 191 F.2d 123 (9th Cir. 1951). “, known as the White Act, which delegated to the Secretary of Commerce the power to set apart and reserve fishing areas in the waters of Alaska, to establish rules regulating the taking of fish therein, and providing “That every such regulation made by the Secretary of Commerce…”
Metlakatla Indian Cmty. v. Egan, 363 U.S. 555 (1960). “464 , as amended, 48U.S.C. §§ 221,222. A question not free from doubt, to put it at its lowest, thus raised under the Supremacy Clause, is however entangled with questions of construction of Alaskan state statutes as well as of the Alaska Statehood Act, supra.”
Johnson v. United States, 206 F.2d 806 (9th Cir. 1953). “By the heading of the complaint, as drawn, a violation of Title 48 U.S.C.A. § 221 , and Commercial Fishing Regulations promulgated thereunder, appears to be charged.”
United States v. Libby, McNeil & Libby, 107 F. Supp. 697 (D. Alaska 1952). “464 , as amended, 48 U.S.C.A. § 221 et seq. (8) The Order cannot be upheld under the power conferred upon the President under the Act of June 25, 1910, 36 Stat.”
Hynes v. Grimes Packing Co., 165 F.2d 323 (9th Cir. 1947). “The primary question for our determination is whether the Secretary of the Interior was authorized by Congress to create an Indian reservation in these waters below low tide for, if they are waters not so reserved, monopoly fishing rights therein are prohibited by Section 1 of…”
Ketchikan Packing Co. v. Fred A. Seaton, Sec'y of the Interior, 267 F.2d 660 (D.C. Cir. 1959). “752 (1926), 48 U.S.C.A. § 221 : “For the purpose of protecting and conserving the fisheries of the United States in .”
Martinsen v. Mullaney, 85 F. Supp. 76 (D. Alaska 1949). “The present law regulating the salmon fisheries may be found in 48 U.S. C.A. § 221 et seq., and that regulating the halibut fisheries in 16 U.”
Show all 24 citing cases →
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.