U.S. Code » Title 23 » Chapter CHAPTER 3— GENERAL PROVISIONS

23 U.S.C. § 317

Appropriation for highway purposes of lands or interests in lands owned by the United States

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 23 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) If the Secretary determines that any part of the lands or interests in lands owned by the United States is reasonably necessary for the right-of-way of any highway, or as a source of materials for the construction or maintenance of any such highway adjacent to such lands or interests in lands, the Secretary shall file with the Secretary of the Department supervising the administration of such lands or interests in lands a map showing the portion of such lands or interests in lands which it is desired to appropriate.(b) If within a period of four months after such filing, the Secretary of such Department shall not have certified to the Secretary that the proposed appropriation of such land or material is contrary to the public interest or inconsistent with the purposes for which such land or materials have been reserved, or shall have agreed to the appropriation and transfer under conditions which he deems necessary for the adequate protection and utilization of the reserve, then such land and materials may be appropriated and transferred to the State transportation department, or its nominee, for such purposes and subject to the conditions so specified.(c) If at any time the need for any such lands or materials for such purposes shall no longer exist, notice of the fact shall be given by the State transportation department to the Secretary and such lands or materials shall immediately revert to the control of the Secretary of the Department from which they had been appropriated.(d) The provisions of this section shall apply only to projects constructed on a Federal-aid highway or under the provisions of chapter 2 of this title.(Pub. L. 85–767, Aug. 27, 1958, 72 Stat. 916; Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1212(a)(2)(A)(i), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 193; Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1104(c)(6), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 427.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2012—Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 112–141 substituted “highway” for “system”.

1998—Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 105–178 substituted “State transportation department” for “State highway department”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2012 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 112–141 effective Oct. 1, 2012, see section 3(a) of Pub. L. 112–141, set out as an Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment note under section 101 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1965–2016 · leading case: Ahtna, Inc. v. State, Dep't of Transp. & Pub. Facilities, 296 P.3d 3 (Alaska 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ahtna, Inc. v. State, Dep't of Transp. & Pub. Facilities, 296 P.3d 3 (Alaska 2013). · cites it 7× “13 Further, 23 U.S.C. § 317 (c) states: If at any time the need for any such lands or materials for such purposes shall no *7 longer exist, notice of the fact shall be given by the State highway department to the Secretary [of Transportation] and such lands or materials shall…”
Organized Vill. of Kake v. United States Dep't of Agric., 746 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “See 23 U.S.C. § 317 (b). 6 The agency’s Supplemental Information Report (“SIR”) for the Tongass Exemption specifically stated that “no new information has come to light that would alter the expectations of major roads or transportation corridors or associated economic impacts…”
Alaska Dep't of Nat. Resources v. United States, 816 F.3d 580 (9th Cir. 2016). “23 U.S.C. § 317 (a). As a legal, matter, then, the land was simply not available for allotment when Bryant began'occupying it in 1964, and .”
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida v. United States, 619 F.3d 1286 (11th Cir. 2010). · cites it 3× “DOT exceeded its authority under 23 U.S.C. § 317 , which authorizes the use of federal land that is “reasonably necessary for the right-of-way of any highway,” because the HED transfer was not for “highway purposes.”
S. Idaho Conf. Ass'n of Seventh Day Adventists, a Corp. v. United States, 418 F.2d 411 (7th Cir. 1969). · cites it 5× “2-4 dealing specifically with 23 U.S.C. § 317 (formerly section 107, and as noted supra, originally 23' U.”
Tetlin Native Corp. v. State, 759 P.2d 528 (Alaska 1988). · cites it 2× “However § 17 of the 1921 Act was replaced with a near verbatim provision in the 1958 Act, 23 U.S.C. § 317 (1982). Section 317 provides: (a) If the Secretary [of Commerce] determines that any part of the lands or interests in lands owned by the United States is reasonably…”
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida v. United States, 571 F. Supp. 2d 1280 (S.D. Fla. 2008). “) NPS made such HED request pursuant to 23 U.S.C. § 317 , explaining that the transfer would help “to implement the beneficial aspects of relocation and modification of the road in order to promote the increased flow of water into the [Park].”
State of Alaska v. Bruce E. Babbitt, Sec'y of the Interior United States of Am., William T. Bryant, 182 F.3d 672 (9th Cir. 1999). “23 U.S.C. § 317 (b). 33 . State of Alaska v.”
D.C. Fed'n of Civic Associations, Inc. v. John A. Volpe, 434 F.2d 436 (D.C. Cir. 1970). “Under Title 23 U.S.C. § 317 , the Department of the Interior was fully informed of the use of park land for the bridge project and concurred in its use in the District of Columbia.”
Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. Jacoby, 9 F. Supp. 2d 1216 (D. Or. 1998). “§ 402 ; (5) Transfer of Federal lands pursuant to 23 U.S.C. § 317 when the subsequent action is not an FHWA action; (6) The installation of noise barriers or alterations to existing publicly owned buildings to provide for noise reduction; (7) Landscaping; (8) Installation of…”
Alaska v. Norton, 168 F. Supp. 2d 1102 (D. Alaska 2001). · cites it 4× “The grant was pursuant to the Federal Highway Act, 23 U.S.C. § 317 , and part of a larger scheme to grant a right-of-way for construction of the George Parks Highway from the Matanuska Valley outside Palmer to Fairbanks.”
Alaska v. Babbitt, 38 F.3d 1068 (9th Cir. 1994). “The State applied for a highway right-of-way on November 2,1965, which was granted by the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) on December' 9, 1965, pursuant to *1071 the Federal Highway Act, 23 U.S.C. § 317 . On August 15, 1966, the State applied for another right-of-way, which…”
Show all 18 citing cases →
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.