(a) Operating a motor vehicle is prohibited except on park roads, in parking areas and on routes and areas designated for off-road motor vehicle use.
(b) Routes and areas designated for off-road motor vehicle use shall be promulgated as special regulations. The designation of routes and areas shall comply with § 1.5 of this chapter and Executive Order 11644 (3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp., p. 666). Routes and areas may be designated only in national recreation areas, national seashores, national lakeshores and national preserves.
(c) The following are prohibited:
(1) Operating a motor vehicle not equipped with pneumatic tires, except that a track-laying motor vehicle or a motor vehicle equipped with a similar traction device may be operated on a route designated for these vehicles by the superintendent.
(2) Operating a motor vehicle in a manner that causes unreasonable damage to the surface of a park road or route.
(3) Operating a motor vehicle on a route or area designated for off-road motor vehicle use, from
1/2 hour after sunset to
1/2 hour before sunrise, without activated headlights and taillights that meet the requirements of State law for operation on a State highway.
[52 FR 10683, Apr. 2, 1987, as amended at 80 FR 36476, June 25, 2015]
Notes of Decisions
Wilderness Soc'y v. Kane Cnty., 581 F.3d 1198 (10th Cir. 2009).
· cites it 3× “See 36 C.F.R. § 4.10 (b) (establishing closure to OHV travel absent a special regulation permit *1225 ting such use); § 3(a), 86 Stat.”
Nat'l Parks Conservation Ass'n v. United States Dep't of Interior, 46 F. Supp. 3d 1254 (M.D. Fla. 2014).
· cites it 7× “2:ll-ev~578 alleges that the Department of the Interior and the NPS violated the APA because the ORV plan for the Addition lands violated 36 C.F.R. § 4.10 (NPS Rule 4.10), and hence violated the APA requirement that agency action, findings, and conclusions be “in accordance with…”
Wilderness Soc'y v. Kane Cnty., Utah, 560 F. Supp. 2d 1147 (D. Utah 2008).
· cites it 3× “36 C.F.R. § 4.10 (a). Any routes 21 “designated for off-road motor vehicle use” must be established through *1165 “special regulations.”
John Reetz v. United States, 224 F.3d 794 (6th Cir. 2000).
· cites it 2× “The authorities he cites are: 1) 36 C.F.R. § 4.10 ; 2) 36 C.F.R. § 295 ; and 3) Executive Order 11644.”
Friends of the Earth v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 236 F.R.D. 39 (D.D.C. 2006).
“Among the actions challenged in the Complaint is the NPS refusal to repeal existing OHV authorizations unless and until required steps are taken to safeguard those Parks from the adverse effects of such use, as mandated by 36 C.F.R. § 4.10 and Executive Order 11644.”
The Wilderness Soc. v. Kane Cnty., Utah, 632 F.3d 1162 (10th Cir. 2009).
· cites it 3× “See 36 C.F.R. § 4.10 (b) (establishing closure to OHV travel absent a special regulation permitting *1225 such use); § 3(a), 86 Stat.”
Cape Hatteras Access Pres. All. v. S.M.R. Jewell, 28 F. Supp. 3d 537 (E.D.N.C. 2014).
· cites it 4× “The realities facing NPS and the Seashore at the time of the development of the FEIS were that either management would continue under the consent decree, or, failing continuation of the consent decree or the adoption of a final rule, ORV use on the Seashore would be prohibited…”
United States v. Carstens, 982 F. Supp. 2d 874 (N.D. Ind. 2013).
· cites it 2× “36 C.F.R. § 4.10 prohibits the operation of a vehicle off road within the Park’s boundaries except in designated off-road areas.”
Town of Beverly Shores v. Lujan, 736 F. Supp. 934 (N.D. Ind. 1989).
“See also, 36 C.F.R. § 4.10 (a). It is apparent that the State parking ordinances conflict with federal use of the property pursuant to the Secretary’s decision, the management plan, and studies of the lakeshore development for the Lake View facility.”
— 36 C.F.R. § 4.10(b) — 1 case
Cape Hatteras Access Pres. All. v. S.M.R. Jewell, 28 F. Supp. 3d 537 (E.D.N.C. 2014).
“The realities facing NPS and the Seashore at the time of the development of the FEIS were that either management would continue under the consent decree, or, failing continuation of the consent decree or the adoption of a final rule, ORV use on the Seashore would be prohibited…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.