Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
8 The project team distributed a questionnaire to state DOTs, SHPOs, THPOs, FHWA Division Office staff, key staff at the ACHP, preservation officers at the National Park Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Federal Transit Authority (FTA), and several tribal liaisons at state DOTs to collect information on experiences with project-level PAs concerning their experiences in the development and implementation of project-level PAs. The project team conducted interviews with selected respondents based on the questions in the survey. Questionnaire respondents, interviewees, and NCHRP study panel members provided examples of project-level PAs. The team reviewed the PAs in a systematic manner noting items that might help differentiate them and identify deficiencies, strengths, and the various approaches to developing project- level PAs across the country. The team analyzed 85 examples of project-level PAs executed between 1998 and 2020. Input received from questionnaires and interviews and the PA analysis provided important insights into current practices for developing and consulting on project-level PAs, their content, and execution. Figure 3 shows the data points the project team used to systematically analyze the collected project-level PAs. Figure 3. Data points used for PA analysis. Fourteen lead agencies were represented across the 85 project-level PAs reviewed by the project team. Figure 4 shows the number of project-level PAs reviewed from each lead agency. Lead agencies are typically federal agencies responsible for leading and coordinating Section 106 consultation. Federal agencies can delegate some of the Section 106 responsibilities for developing agreements to state agencies, and state agencies or project sponsors often help develop project-level PAs in partnership with the lead agency.
9 Figure 4. Illustration of the lead federal agencies (or NEPA Assignment state) represented across the executed project-level PAs reviewed by the project team. Fifty-four percent (46) of the PAs had FHWA as the lead federal agency. Note: States marked with an asterisk are full NEPA Assignment State. FHWA was the lead agency for 46 PAs that were reviewed. Of these, 15 were signed by FHWA and/or the ACHP. The remainder were signed by the DOT and SHPO and other signatories without FHWA/ACHP involvement indicting their acceptance and endorsement by the agencies that signed the PAs. FHWA is a signatory to a PA when the ACHP agrees to participate and sign the PA. It should be noted that the ACHP may still support a PA even if they decide not to become a signatory. The decision of the ACHP to participate in a PA differs among federal agencies because agencies have different approaches to project-level PAs. Another factor specific to project-level PAs developed for transportation and transit projects is compliance with Section 4(f) of the U.S. DOT Act, which applies a different set of constraints on a Section 106 PA than non-U.S. DOT agencies. 2 FHWA has also given full legal responsibility for Section 106 compliance to the state DOTs in Alaska, California, Florida, Ohio, Utah, and Texas. In these six states, the DOT becomes the lead federal agency under the NEPA Assignment Program (23 USC 327 MOU). For this report, the project team analyzed PAs from four states with a NEPA Assignment Memorandum of Understanding (MOU): Alaska, California, Ohio, and Texas. FHWA remained the lead federal agency for the PAs from Alaska and Ohio, as both PAs predated the NEPA Assignment Program and the executed MOU. The PAs from Texas and 2 Referred to as Section 4(f) because that was the original section of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C. §303 and 23 U.S.C. §138), this regulation applies only to the U.S. DOT and is implemented by the FHWA and the FTA through the regulation 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 774. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Bureau of Ocean Energy Management⦠*Caltrans (California) Department of Energy (DOE) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Natural Resources Conservation Service⦠*Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Department of Navy (DoN) Federal Energy Regulatory Commission⦠Naval District Washington (NDW) National Park Service (NPS) USDA Forest Service (USDA FS) Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)