33 U.S.C. § 525

Construction and operation of bridges

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 33 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Consent of Congress

The consent of Congress is granted for the construction, maintenance, and operation of bridges and approaches thereto over the navigable waters of the United States, in accordance with the provisions of this subchapter.

(b) Approval of plans

The location and plans for such bridges shall be approved by the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating before construction is commenced, and, in approving the location and plans of any bridge, the Secretary may impose any specific conditions relating to the maintenance and operation of the structure which the Secretary may deem necessary in the interest of public navigation, and the conditions so imposed shall have the force of law. This subsection shall not apply to any bridge over waters which are not subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and which are not used and are not susceptible to use in their natural condition or by reasonable improvement as a means to transport interstate or foreign commerce.

Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a) and (b), it shall be unlawful to construct or commence the construction of any privately owned highway toll bridge until the location and plans thereof shall also have been submitted to and approved by the highway department or departments of the State or States in which the bridge and its approaches are situated; and where such bridge shall be between two or more States and the highway departments thereof shall be unable to agree upon the location and plans therefor, or if they, or either of them, shall fail or refuse to act upon the location and plans submitted, such location and plans then shall be submitted to the Secretary of Transportation and, if approved by the Secretary of Transportation, approval by the highway departments shall not be required.

(Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 753, title V, § 502, 60 Stat. 847; June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title I, § 103(a), 63 Stat. 380; 1949 Reorg. Plan No. 7, § 1, eff. Aug. 19, 1949, 14 F.R. 5288, 63 Stat. 1070; Pub. L. 97–322, title I, § 107(a), Oct. 15, 1982, 96 Stat. 1582; Pub. L. 97–449, § 2(d)(1), (3), Jan. 12, 1983, 96 Stat. 2440; Pub. L. 98–557, § 17(g)(2), Oct. 30, 1984, 98 Stat. 2869; Pub. L. 114–120, title III, § 306(b)(5)(A), Feb. 8, 2016, 130 Stat. 55.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2016—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 114–120 substituted “Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating” for “Secretary of Transportation”.

1984—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 98–557 struck out “the Chief of Engineers and” before “the Secretary of Transportation” and substituted “the Secretary” for “they” wherever appearing.

1983—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 97–449, § 2(d)(1), substituted “Secretary of Transportation” for “Secretary of War”. See Transfer of Functions note below.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 97–449, § 2(d)(3), substituted “Secretary of Transportation” for “Public Roads Administration” wherever appearing. See Transfer of Functions note below.

1982—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 97–322 inserted exemption provision at end.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesShort Title

Section 501 of title V of act Aug. 2, 1946, provided that: “This title [enacting this subchapter] may be cited as the ‘General Bridge Act of 1946’.”

Reservation of Right To Alter, Amend, or Repeal

Section 511 of title V of act Aug. 2, 1946, provided that: “The right to alter, amend, or repeal this title [this subchapter] is hereby expressly reserved as to any and all bridges which may be built under authority hereof.”

Transfer of Functions

Functions, powers, and duties of Secretary of the Army [formerly War] and other offices and officers of Department of the Army [formerly War] under this section to extent that they relate generally to location and clearances of bridges and causeways in navigable waters of United States transferred to and vested in Secretary of Transportation by section 6(g)(6)(C) of Pub. L. 89–670. Pub. L. 97–449 amended this section to reflect transfer made by section 6(g)(6)(C) of Pub. L. 89–670, and repealed section 6(g)(6)(C).

Functions of Public Roads Administration transferred to Bureau of Public Roads within General Services Administration by section 103(a) of act June 30, 1949. See Historical and Revision Notes under section 303(b) of Title 40, Public Buildings, Property, and Works. Section 303(b) of Title 40 was amended generally by Pub. L. 109–313, § 2(a)(1), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1734, and, as so amended, no longer relates to the Federal Works Agency and Commissioner of Public Buildings. See 2006 Amendment note under section 303 of Title 40.

Functions, powers, and duties of Secretary of Commerce and other offices and officers of Department of Commerce under subsec. (c) of this section relating generally to highways transferred to and vested in Secretary of Transportation by section 6(g)(6)(C) of Pub. L. 89–670. Pub. L. 97–449 amended this section to reflect transfer made by section 6(g)(6)(C) of Pub. L. 89–670, and repealed section 6(g)(6)(C).

Executive DocumentsTransfer of Functions

Bureau of Public Roads within General Services Administration transferred to Department of Commerce by section 1 of Reorg. Plan No. 7 of 1949.

For transfer of functions of other officers, employees, and agencies of Department of Commerce, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of Commerce, with power to delegate, see Reorg. Plan No. 5 of 1950, §§ 1, 2, eff. May 24, 1950, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1263, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 35 cases, 1956–2016 · leading case: Detroit Int'l Bridge Co. v. Gov't of Canada, 189 F. Supp. 3d 85 (D.D.C. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Detroit Int'l Bridge Co. v. Gov't of Canada, 189 F. Supp. 3d 85 (D.D.C. 2016). · cites it 2× “) (“The philosophy of the bill, which will relieve the Congress of what has become a routine burden, follows that of the General Bridge Act of 1946 [ 33 U.S.C. § 525 ], from which so-called international bridges were exempted.”

Petty v. Tennessee-Missouri Bridge Comm'n, 359 U.S. 275 (1959). · cites it 2× “Respondent is a "body corporate and politic" created by Missouri (13 Vernon's Ann. Stat., Tit. 14, § 234.360) and Tennessee (P.”

Sierra Club v. Sec'y of the Army, Sierra Club v. Sec'y of the Army, Sierra Club v. Sec'y of Transp., 820 F.2d 513 (1st Cir. 1987). “In the second suit, the district court held that yet another federal agency, the Coast Guard (an arm of the federal Department of Transportation), had violated the General Bridge Act of 1946, 33 U.S.C. § 525 (b), by issuing a permit for the construction (as part of the same…”

Pennsylvania Env't Council, Inc. v. Bartlett, 315 F. Supp. 238 (M.D. Penn. 1970). · cites it 2× “; the General Bridge Act of 1946, 33 U.S.C. § 525 , and the Ninth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

Becker v. Litty, 566 A.2d 1101 (Md. 1990). · cites it 2× “With respect to any bridge over navigable waters of the United States, the current federal provision is the General Bridge Act of 1946, 33 U.S.C. § 525 , et seq. Congress has granted bridge approval authority under this act to the Secretary of Transportation.”

DeLong Corp. v. Oregon State High. Com'n, 233 F. Supp. 7 (D. Or. 1964). · cites it 2× “There, the United States Supreme Court held that Missouri and Tennessee had waived their immunity by acting under an interstate compact which had been presented to Congress and expressly approved by it. The Bridge Commission in the Petty case was created by legislation enacted…”

Pac. Inter-Club Yacht Ass'n v. Morris, 197 F. Supp. 218 (N.D. Cal. 1960). · cites it 4× “This action was brought under the purported authority of Title 33 U.S.C.A. § 525 to prevent the building of a bridge across Montezuma Slough (a navigable waterway) in such a manner as to obstruct navigation unreasonably.”

State of Delaware v. Bender, 370 F. Supp. 1193 (D. Del. 1974). · cites it 3× “2 In 1946, by the enactment of the General Bridge Authority Act of 1946, 33 U.S.C. § 525 et seq., Congress gave its consent generally to the construction, maintenance and operation of bridges and approaches thereto over the navigable waterways of the United States.”

Detroit Int'l Bridge Co. v. Gov't of Canada, 53 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2014). “See 33 U.S.C. § 525 (b). The Court disagrees.”

Libby Rod & Gun Club v. Poteat, 457 F. Supp. 1177 (D. Mont. 1978). · cites it 2× “There is no mention of a reregulating dam in the language of the Act itself.”

Colberg, Inc. v. State of California Ex Rel. Dept. Pub. Wks., 432 P.2d 3 (Cal. 1967). “(See 33 U.S.C.A. § 525 , subd. (b).) After a public hearing, consideration of the views of various interested persons including these plaintiffs, and an extensive economic survey, approval of the location and plans of the bridges was granted by federal authorities in February…”

Citizens' Comm. for Env't Prot. v. United States Coast Guard, 456 F. Supp. 101 (D.N.J. 1978). “Section 502 of the General Bridge Act of 1946, 33 U.S.C. § 525 , granted the consent of Congress for the construction of any bridge over navigable waters if the bridge was approved by the Chief of the Army Corps of Engineers and the Secretary of the Army.”

Show all 35 citing cases →

— 33 U.S.C. § 525(a) — 1 case

Molinari v. New York Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Auth., 838 F. Supp. 718 (E.D.N.Y 1993).

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.