Abandonment of a right-of-way or noncompliance with any provision of this subchapter condition of the right-of-way, or applicable rule or regulation of the Secretary concerned may be grounds for suspension or termination of the right-of-way if, after due notice to the holder of the right-of-way and, and 11 So in original. with respect to easements, an appropriate administrative proceeding pursuant to section 554 of title 5, the Secretary concerned determines that any such ground exists and that suspension or termination is justified. No administrative proceeding shall be required where the right-of-way by its terms provides that it terminates on the occurrence of a fixed or agreed-upon condition, event, or time. If the Secretary concerned determines that an immediate temporary suspension of activities within a right-of-way for violation of its terms and conditions is necessary to protect public health or safety or the environment, he may abate such activities prior to an administrative proceeding. Prior to commencing any proceeding to suspend or terminate a right-of-way the Secretary concerned shall give written notice to the holder of the grounds for such action and shall give the holder a reasonable time to resume use of the right-of-way or to comply with this subchapter condition, rule, or regulation as the case may be. Failure of the holder of the right-of-way to use the right-of-way for the purpose for which it was granted, issued, or renewed, for any continuous five-year period, shall constitute a rebuttable presumption of abandonment of the right-of-way except that where the failure of the holder to use the right-of-way for the purpose for which it was granted, issued, or renewed for any continuous five-year period is due to circumstances not within the holder’s control, the Secretary concerned is not required to commence proceedings to suspend or terminate the right-of-way.
Notes of Decisions
Lodge Tower Condo. Ass'n v. Lodge Props., Inc., 880 F. Supp. 1370 (D. Colo. 1995).
“Plaintiffs allege that the termination of the Vail special use permit on the lodge parcel, the terms of the patent reservation relating to this permit, and the provisions of the easement offered to Vail violate 43 U.S.C.A. § 1766 (1986), which requires due notice for the…”
City & Cnty. of Denver, Etc. v. Bergland, 517 F. Supp. 155 (D. Colo. 1981).
“I note as well that under the FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. § 1766 , rights-of-way granted under the Act may be terminated for non-use, non-compliance, or abandonment after notice and administrative proceedings pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.”
Star Lake R.R. v. Lujan, 737 F. Supp. 103 (D.D.C. 1990).
“, Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. § 1766 (1982); Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, 30 U.”
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.