Oregon § 824.252 Procedure when disagreement as to apportionment exists

Oregon Statutes

§ 824.252 — Procedure when disagreement as to apportionment exists

Oregon § 824.252

Vol.19

Title 59Oregon Vehicle Code

Ch. 824Railroads

This text of Oregon § 824.252 (Procedure when disagreement as to apportionment exists) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Or. Rev. Stat. § 824.252 (2026).

Text

(1)In any proceeding under ORS 824.206 or 824.226, where the application to the Department of Transportation states that the parties are not in agreement as to apportionment of costs, but the applicant is willing to advance the amount of money reasonably necessary to enable the respondent to complete the work which must be done by it or the amount reasonably necessary is available and can be advanced from the Grade Crossing Protection Account, the department shall set the application for hearing as soon as the calendar of the department permits on the questions of:

(a)The necessity for the project;

(b)The approval of the location and the engineering plans, including provisions for handling traffic during construction and the work to be performed by each party; and

(c)The sum to be adva

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(1) In any proceeding under ORS 824.206 or 824.226, where the application to the Department of Transportation states that the parties are not in agreement as to apportionment of costs, but the applicant is willing to advance the amount of money reasonably necessary to enable the respondent to complete the work which must be done by it or the amount reasonably necessary is available and can be advanced from the Grade Crossing Protection Account, the department shall set the application for hearing as soon as the calendar of the department permits on the questions of:
(a) The necessity for the project;
(b) The approval of the location and the engineering plans, including provisions for handling traffic during construction and the work to be performed by each party; and
(c) The sum to be advanced by the applicant or the account for the work to be done by the respondent.
(2) The Department of Transportation shall render as promptly as possible an interim order, effective within 20 days on such questions, reserving for later hearing and decision the question of the apportionment of costs. The interim order shall also direct the respondent to proceed upon receipt of the sum to be advanced by the applicant or the account without delay to perform the work to be done by respondent, integrating the work with that of the applicant or its contractor in such manner that neither will unreasonably obstruct or delay the work of the other, to the end that the people of the state may have the use of the project at the earliest possible date.
(3) In the final order apportioning costs, the sum advanced by the applicant or the account shall be credited against its share of the costs. In the final order there shall also be credited against applicant’s share of the costs any increase in the costs found by the Department of Transportation to be directly attributable to respondent’s willful failure or refusal, after the effective date of the interim order, to proceed with its own work or to integrate the work with that of applicant or its contractor.