43 C.F.R. § 2310.5

Special action on emergency withdrawals

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) When the Secretary makes an emergency withdrawal under Section 204(e) of the Act (43 U.S.C. 1714(e)), the withdrawal will be made immediately and will be limited in scope and duration to the emergency. An emergency withdrawal will be effective when signed, will not exceed 3 years in duration, and may not be extended by the Secretary. If it is determined that the lands involved in an emergency withdrawal should continue to be withdrawn, a withdrawal application should be submitted to the Bureau of Land Management in keeping with the normal procedures for processing a withdrawal as provided for in this subpart. Such applications will be subject to the provisions of Section 204(c) of the Act (43 U.S.C. 1714(c)), or Section 204(d) of the Act (43 U.S.C. 1714(d)), whichever is applicable, as well as Section 204(b)(1) of the Act (43 U.S.C. 1714(b)(1)).

(b) When an emergency withdrawal is signed, the Secretary must, on the same day, send a notice of the withdrawal to the two Committees of the Congress that are specified for that purpose in Section 204(e) of the Act (43 U.S.C. 1714(e)).

(c) The Secretary must forward a report to each of the aforementioned committees within 90 days after filing with them the notice of Secretarial emergency withdrawal. Reports for all such withdrawals, regardless of the amount of acreage withdrawn, will contain the information specified in Section 204(c)(2) of the Act (43 U.S.C. 1714(c)(2)).

[73 FR 74047, Dec. 5, 2008]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1982–1984 · leading case: Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Watt, 571 F. Supp. 1145 (D.D.C. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Watt, 571 F. Supp. 1145 (D.D.C. 1983). · cites it 5× “43 C.F.R. § 2310.5 . Both section 204(e) and the regulation require the Secretary temporarily to withhold public lands from sale or lease when requested to do so by the House Committee.”

Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Clark, 577 F. Supp. 825 (D.D.C. 1984). · cites it 3× “Defendant persists in his predecessor’s claim that he was not required to conduct a rulemaking before deciding whether the Chadha 4 decision invalidated section 204(e) and the parallel regulation adopted to implement that statute, 43 C.”

Pac. Legal Found. v. Watt, 539 F. Supp. 1194 (D. Mont. 1982). “5794, 5804 (1981) (emphasis supplied) (new regulation to be codified at 43 C.F.R. § 2310.5 (a)). As set forth in the memorandum decision, the court’s interpretation is also supported by the manner in which the House Committee has previously exercised its authority under section…”

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.