937 



51 



governments within such state. The Coastal Zone Management Act of 

 1972 directed the Secretary of Commerce to find that a state had de- 

 veloped its management program with an opportunity for full par- 

 ticipation by local governments prior to granting final approval of 

 such management program. Tlie intent of the original Act is clearly 

 expressed in se<?tion 306 (c) (1) ; 306(c) (2) ; and in section 303. 



This amendment to section 306(c) (2) (B) would make that intent 

 more specific by providing a mechanism by which certain local gov- 

 ernments are allowed the option of contesting state decisions which 

 affect them. No state could receive federal approval of its proposed 

 coastal zone management program unless such program contained 

 specific provisions. 



The designated state coastal zone management agency would be 

 required to inform any local government of any decision to be made 

 by the state agency prior to the implementation of such a decision. 

 The types of decisions referred to in this subsection would be those 

 decisions made by a state agency to carry out the state's management 

 program. When sucli decision would have direct application to a par- 

 ticular area within the coastal zone, then the state agency must notify 

 the local governments which have land use or water use control powers 

 within the area to which such decision may apply. This provision is 

 intended to assure that local government will be kept fully informed 

 of plans and ongohig policies of their respective state coastal zone 

 agencies when such policies would have a direct effect upon such 

 local governments. For the purpose of this subsection, the definition 

 of local government in section 304(1) is further restricted in section 

 306(c) (2) (B)(i). 



Section 306(c) (2) (B) (i) would require that the local government 

 be permitted to request that the state agency hold a public hearing 

 regarding such dcK^ision. The local government receiving such notice 

 of decision would have to request the public hearing within thirty 

 days after the date on which notice is received. If the local govern- 

 ment requests a public hearing, the state management agency could 

 not conduct the hearing sooner than ninety days after the date on 

 which the notice of decision was received by the local government. 

 This provision was intended to give the local government sufficient 

 time to prepare for such hearing. 



Section 306(c) (2) (B) (iv) would not permit the state agency to 

 implement the decision referred to in 306(c) (2) (B) (i) until after the 

 public hearing on such decision had been concluded. If a local govern- 

 ment is properly notified of a pending decision, and does not request 

 a public hearing within thirty days after receipt of such notification, 

 the state agency would be permitted to implement the decision without 

 further delay. Any funds allocated by a state to a local government 

 under the provisions of section 306(f) could be used by such local gov- 

 ernment to defray expenses incurred in preparing for the public hear- 

 ing referred to in this subsection. 



C onsid'eration of interstate energy plans 



(12) This section recognizes that the interstate cooperation pro- 

 gram authorized among state programs in section 300 may well pro- 

 duce interstate approaches to energy planning. 



Therefore, to subsection 306(c) (8) which now directs a state to give 

 consideration to the national interest in dealing with the siting of 



