This article explores potentially troublesome legal issues
that derive from the nature of the Coastal Zone Management Act as a grant-in-aid measure. The first part looks at the tension between the federal and state perceptions of the coastal realities and the different levels of their concern, which may result in nonutilization or underutilization of the Act. Several agency strategies are hypothesized and evaluated as a means for bridging the gap. The first part also surveys the much larger complex of questions associated with
grant awards, program approval and termination of assistance. While the mutuality of interests of the granting agency and the recipient states would probably keep agency action as drastic as grant denial or termination or program disapproval to a minimum, occasional conflicts are likely and may reach a litigation stage, especially because of the intervention by politically aroused third parties. To help understand the legal dimensions of the more serious conflicts, this portion of the article analyzes the legal nature of grants, procedural guarantees, judicial review, and standing of third parties. The principles of general administrative law are applied to specific situations
envisioned by the Act and its implementing regulations. The second part of the article, which will appear in a subsequent issue of the Journal, deals with the two remaining settings of conflict: compliance with grant conditions; and participation in the development of coastal zone management programs. The two-part article
