The federal consistency provisions embodied in §§307(c) and 307(d) of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA),¹ have, for almost a decade, been a lurking presence in the federal coastal zone management program. These provisions were designed to ensure that actions for which the federal government has responsibility conform to state coastal zone management objectives. Although the interaction in the consistency process among federal agencies such as the Department of the Interior, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Environmental Protection Agency, state coastal management authorities, and private developers has been characterized as on the "frontiers of governmental processes,"² the potential of these provisions for effectuating state management objectives has been largely untapped, and analysis of the implications of §307 has fallen mainly in the realm of speculation.

In the last eighteen months, a dramatic change has occurred. First, many more state programs have been approved under §306 of the CZMA by the responsible federal agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).³ Through the end of 1978, only 13 programs had been approved by NOAA.⁴ In 1979, six states had programs approved,⁵ and in 1980 six more were added to the federally approved list.⁶ Second, as states have become experienced in managing operational programs, they have begun to realize how the consistency provisions—always a "hypothetical" benefit of the program—can be used. Significant controversies have arisen over such diverse issues as offshore oil and gas leasing, the disposal of a surplus Air Force base, the relocation of Cuban and Haitian refugees, the siting of oil pipelines, and the grant of waivers by the Environmental Protection Agency of the requirements for secondary treatment of wastewater. In each case, the state has been asserting requirements for projects which it determined to be more consonant with its management program than those acceptable to or adopted by the federal government.