MARVIN MANDEL, Governor                                      1075

REQUIRED, ANY FINAL DECISION OF THE COMMISSION
APPROVING OR REFUSING TO APPROVE A PROJECT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 3.08, AND ANY OTHER ORDER, DECISION OR ACTION
WHICH THIS COMPACT PROVIDES SHALL BE SUBJECT TO
JUDICIAL REVIEW, MAY BE REVIEWED IN ANY COURT OF
COMPETENT JURISDICTION. THE PETITION FOR REVIEW
SHALL BE FILED IN THE COURT WITHIN THE TIME LIMITED BY
THIS COMPACT OR, IF NOT SO LIMITED, BY LAW OF THE
SIGNATORY, OR AS MAY BE FIXED BY RULE OF THE COURT.
UPON THE FILING OF THE PETITION THE CLERK OF COURT OR
COMPARABLE OFFICIAL SHALL FORTHWITH, BY MAIL, SERVE A
COPY THEREOF UPON THE COMMISSION WHICH SHALL THEREUPON
FILE IN THE COURT A CERTIFIED LIST OF THE MATERIALS
COMPRISING THE RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND HOLD FOR
THE COURT ALL SUCH MATERIALS AND TRANSMIT THE ORIGINAL
OR CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE SAME OR ANY PART THEREOF TO
THE COURT, WHEN AND AS REQUIRED BY IT, AT ANY TIME
PRIOR TO THE FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE REVIEW.

(B)   THE FILING OF A PETITION FOR REVIEW SHALL
NOT OPERATE AS A STAY OF THE OPERATION OF SUCH ORDER
OR DECISION UNLESS SO ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION OR BY
THE COURT FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN. FOR GOOD CAUSE
SHOWN, AND UPON SUCH CONDITIONS AS MAY BE REQUIRED AND
TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY TO PREVENT IRREPARABLE INJURY,
THE COURT MAY TAKE APPROPRIATE AND NECESSARY ACTION TO
PRESERVE THE STATUS QUO OR RIGHTS OF ANY OF THE
PARTIES, OR OTHERS, PENDING CONCLUSION OF THE REVIEW
PROCEEDINGS.

(C)   THE COURT SHALL HEAR AND DECIDE THE REVIEW
ON THE RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION,
AND MAY AFFIRM THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSION OR
REMAND THE CASE FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS; OR IT MAY
REVERSE OR MODIFY THE DECISION IF SUBSTANTIAL RIGHTS
OF THE PETITIONED HAVE BEEN PREJUDICED BECAUSE THE
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS OR DECISIONS, ARE (1) IN
VIOLATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL OR STATUTORY PROVISIONS,
OR (2) IN EXCESS OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE COMMISSION,
OR (3) MADE UPON UNLAWFUL PROCEDURE, OR (4) AFFECTED
BY OTHER ERROR OF LAW, OR (5) UNSUPPORTED BY
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE ON THE RECORD CONSIDERED AS A
WHOLE, OR (6) ARBITRARY, CAPRICIOUS, OR AN ABUSE OF
DISCRETION. THE COURT MAY APPOINT A SPECIAL MASTER
TO TAKE EVIDENCE AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COURT
WITH RESPECT TO ANY QUESTION RAISED IN A PETITION FOR
REVIEW IF THE COURT IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE
QUESTION CANNOT BE ADEQUATELY DETERMINED FROM THE
RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION AND
THAT THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE SO REQUIRES.