(a) Proposed decisions shall be served on any affected applicant, permittee or lessee, and any agent and lien holder of record, who is affected by the proposed actions, terms or conditions, or modifications relating to applications, permits and agreements (including range improvement permits) or leases, by certified mail or personal delivery. Copies of proposed decisions shall also be sent to the interested public.
(b) Proposed decisions shall state the reasons for the action and shall reference the pertinent terms, conditions and the provisions of applicable regulations. As appropriate, decisions shall state the alleged violations of specific terms and conditions and provisions of these regulations alleged to have been violated, and shall state the amount due under §§ 4130.8 and 4150.3 and the action to be taken under § 4170.1.
(c) The authorized officer may elect not to issue a proposed decision prior to a final decision where the authorized officer has made a determination in accordance with §§ 4110.3-3(b), 4130.6-2(b), 4150.2(d), or 4190.1(a).
(d) A biological assessment or biological evaluation prepared by BLM for purposes of an ESA consultation or conference is not a proposed or final decision for purposes of protest or appeal.
[60 FR 9968, Feb. 22, 1995, as amended at 71 FR 39508, July 12, 2006]
Notes of Decisions
Robbins v. United States Bureau of Land Mgmt., 438 F.3d 1074 (10th Cir. 2006).
“The Deputy State Director then issued a written decision indicating that Robbins continued to refuse to settle the noticed trespasses and directing the field office to issue a proposed decision in accordance with 43 C.F.R. § 4160.1 . Accordingly, on January 28, 2004, the field…”
W. Watersheds Proj. v. Interior Bd. of Land Appeals, 624 F.3d 983 (9th Cir. 2010).
· cites it 2× “43 C.F.R. § 4160.1 . To determine the necessary terms, BLM considers the permit against the standards and guidelines for the relevant geographical area, which in turn requires consideration of issues such as water quality and habitat for endangered or threatened species.”
W. Watersheds Proj. v. Kraayenbrink, 538 F. Supp. 2d 1302 (D. Idaho 2008).
· cites it 2× “See 43 C.F.R. §§ 4160.1 , 4160.2. Under the new regulations, the TNR permits will go into effect immediately without notice or consultation with members of the public.”
Smithsfork Grazing Ass'n v. Salazar, 564 F.3d 1210 (10th Cir. 2009).
“See 43 C.F.R. § 4160.1 (a). Thereafter, any permittee or interested member of the public may protest the proposed decision to an authorized officer.”
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.