To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to establish a conclusive presumption that a State concurs to certain activities, and for other purposes.
This bill would amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to create a new “conclusive presumption of concurrence” for certain federally related activities in a coastal state’s jurisdiction. If an activity is deemed a “covered activity” (such as national security actions, critical infrastructure projects, disaster recovery/mitigation, or activities with significant national or regional economic impact), the state is conclusively presumed to concur with federal determinations related to that activity. This presumption would apply to consistency determinations by federal agencies, determinations or findings by federal agencies about a project’s consistency with the state’s enforceable policies, certifications by applicants, and state/local government determinations on federal assistance. An objection by the state could not delay the activity. The Secretary would have up to 30 days to issue a written determination that the activity is not a covered activity to nullify the presumption; if the Secretary fails to act within that window, the presumption becomes final and binding. The bill also defines key terms (e.g., “covered activity,” “critical infrastructure,” “disaster recovery,” “national security activity,” and related sectoral definitions) and specifies how “areas with high unemployment” or “low per capita income” are determined for purposes of identifying covered activities with significant economic impact. The sponsor and status indicate introduction in the House in March 2025, with referral to the Committee on Natural Resources.
Key Points
- 1Establishes a new subsection (j) to Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act to create a conclusive presumption of state concurrence for certain activities.
- 2Covered activities subject to the presumption include: national security activities, critical infrastructure projects, disaster recovery or mitigation activities, and activities with a significant national or regional economic impact.
- 3The presumption applies to multiple triggers: a federal consistency determination to the state, a federal determination/finding about project consistency with state policies, certifications by applicants, and state/local determinations on federal assistance.
- 4An objection by the state cannot delay or block the activity; the activity proceeds despite objections.
- 5The Secretary has 30 days to review and may issue a written determination to nullify the presumption if the activity is not a covered activity; if no action is issued in time, the presumption is final.
- 6Defines important terms and thresholds, including how to determine areas with high unemployment or low per capita income, and what counts as a “covered activity,” “critical infrastructure,” and related sectors.