Final Report
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91
Synthesis of Transportation Exclusions to
Section 106 Review
Requested by:
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Prepared by:
ICF International, Inc.
and
The SRI Foundation
April 3, 2015
The information contained in this report was prepared as part of NCHRP Project 25-25/ Task 91, National
Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was requested by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO), and conducted as part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP)
Project 25-25. The NCHRP is supported by annual voluntary contributions from the state departments of
transportation. Project 25-25 provides funding for quick response studies on behalf of the AASHTO
Standing Committee on the Environment. The report was prepared by ICF International and the SRI
Foundation. The work was guided by a task group chaired by Antony Opperman and included Anne
Bruder, Craig Casper, Paul Graham, Robert Hadlow, Lisa Hart, Carole Legard, Anmarie Medin, Jeanine
Russell-Pinkham, and MaryAnn Naber. The NCHRP Project Manager was Crawford Jenks. The report
authors were Terry Klein, Principal Investigator, of the SRI Foundation, David Cushman of the SRI
Foundation, and Meg Scantlebury and Monte Kim of ICF International.
DISCLAIMER
The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that
performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board or its
sponsors. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of
the authors. This document is not a report of the Transportation Research Board or of the
National Research Council.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) 25-25/ Task 91 examines how
federal and state transportation agencies are able to exclude projects from review under Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The Section 106 regulation in 36 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) 800 provides for exclusions from further Section 106 review through findings
of “no potential to cause effects” on historic properties (36 CFR 800.3(a)(1)), and through two
types of program alternatives described under 36 CFR 800.14. The latter include programmatic
agreements that exclude classes of actions from further review (36 CFR 800.14(b)) and
exempted categories (36 CFR 800.14(c)).
The first element of this NCHRP study involved the collection and review of state Department of
Transportation (DOT) programmatic agreements (PAs) and other documents and authorities that
include these exclusions from further Section 106 review. The parties to these PAs include the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the state DOT and State Historic Preservation
Offices (SHPOs), and, in most cases, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP).
The second element of this NCHRP study involved the development of an easy-to-use format
presenting information on the exclusions included in these PAs and other documents.
Specifically, the project team was tasked to develop a series of spreadsheets that organize these
agreements and documents in terms of (1) types of action, and (2) types of
historic/archaeological resource excluded from further Section 106 review. After collecting and
reviewing the state DOT programmatic agreements and other documents, the project team
interviewed a sample of the DOTs. The focus of these interviews was to obtain information on
the DOTs’ applied experiences in streamlining Section 106 compliance by excluding classes of
actions from further Section 106 review.
The review of the PAs and other documents and the state DOT responses to the interview
questionnaire clearly demonstrated the value of including lists of excluded actions in their
statewide PAs. As noted in Ohio’s response to the questionnaire, having these excluded actions
“allow cultural resources staff and SHPO staff to focus their efforts on more complex
projects/impacts.” Similarly, Oregon DOT stated that the use of these excluded actions:
allows us to quickly reduce the amount of projects that are innocuous to historic
resources, and focus our limited personnel and time on projects that will have effects on
historic resources. What’s more, we can permit projects that have a short fuse, and
relatively simple actions (i.e. paving, striping) without hassling the SHPO, extensive and
expensive time of our staff, and in our minds, makes us feel like the spirit of Section 106
is being upheld.
Most of the DOTs said the actions listed in their PAs were screened by a historic preservation
specialist on staff at the DOT in order to ensure that a project conforms to the description of a
listed excluded action and that all of the conditions associated with an excluded action are met.
These conditions may relate to the physical limits of the action, the types of transportation
structures involved, and the presence or absence of historic properties. Some states, however, do
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
i
April 3, 2015
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Executive Summary
permit a non-specialist to exclude certain classes of actions from further Section 106 review. To
make sure that the decisions made by these staff are appropriate and correct, some states
implement a training program for these staff, have periodic reviews of the decisions made by
these individuals, or establish a process whereby staff can consult with the DOT’s historic
preservation specialists prior to making a decision to exclude an action from further Section 106
review.
Some states excluded classes of actions without being screened by either a cultural resource
management (CRM) specialist or non-CRM specialist. These classes of actions had been
reviewed during the preparation of the state’s PAs or other documents, and the parties to the PAs
and other documents agreed that these actions could be excluded from further Section 106
review without any additional considerations and analyses.
The results of this NCHRP study, in addition to the PAs and other documents collected by the
project team, can serve as a foundation for state DOTs interested in developing a new statewide
PA that includes lists of excluded actions. This NCHRP study can also assist states interested in
revising, updating, or expanding their current PAs.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
ii
April 3, 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... i
1.0
Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1
2.0
Collection, Review, and Analysis of Programmatic Agreements and Other
Documents ...................................................................................................................................... 4
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 4
Creation of Spreadsheets Presenting the Results of the PA and Other
Document Review............................................................................................................... 4
Conditions for Use of Unscreened and Screened Actions .................................................. 6
Patterns Observed in Use of Unscreened and Screened Actions ........................................ 7
Patterns in Delegation of Section 106 Decisions and Findings .......................................... 9
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
3.0
Applied Experiences in Streamlining Section 106 Compliance ............................................... 10
3.1
Interviewing State DOTS .................................................................................................. 10
3.2
Interview Results .............................................................................................................. 11
4.0
Lessons Learned ........................................................................................................................... 17
Attachments
Tables
Figures
Appendices
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
i
April 3, 2015
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and state transportation agencies are working to
deliver projects more quickly, efficiently, and with reduced costs. These efforts reflect the
objectives and goals of FHWA’s “Every Day Counts” initiative, which promotes the use of
programmatic approaches to environmental compliance and decision making. One of the tools
that can be used to achieve these goals and objectives is to define programs and actions that are
excluded from environmental reviews, including Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA), thus streamlining reviews and allowing transportation and resource
agencies to focus on those undertakings that have the potential to adversely affect significant
elements of the environment. These elements include properties listed in and eligible for listing
in the National Register of Historic Places.
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) 25-25/Task 91 examines how
federal and state transportation agencies use exclusions from Section 106 review. Under the
Section 106 regulation (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 800(a)(1)), a federal agency has
no further obligations under Section 106 if their action is a type of activity that has “no potential
to cause effects” on historic properties. Exclusions from further review under Section 106 can
also be accomplished through stipulations in programmatic agreements (36 CFR 800.14(b)). The
regulation also establishes a process for exempting categories of actions from Section 106 review
(36 CFR 800.14(c)). As described on the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s (ACHP)
website, the use of exempted categories:
allows agencies to propose a program or category of agency undertaking that is exempt
from further review under Section 106. The ACHP may also propose an exemption on its
own initiative. Exempted categories must be actions that would otherwise qualify as
undertakings as defined in § 800.16 and the potential effects from the undertakings must
be foreseeable and likely to be minimal or not adverse. Exempted categories must also be
consistent with the purposes of the National Historic Preservation Act.
There is currently one exempted category, pursuant to 36 CFR 800.14(c), that directly applies to
transportation projects. This is the ACHP’s March 2005 exemption of the Eisenhower Interstate
System from Section 106 requirements. Under this exemption, only those sections of the
Interstate Highway System that are nationally significant or are of exceptional historical
significance, or have already been listed in or determined eligible for listing in the National
Register, are subject to Section 106 review. All other elements of the Interstate Highway System
are exempt from Section 106 review. There is also an ACHP program comment, pursuant to 36
CFR 800.14(e), that eliminates individual review requirements for common post-1945 concrete
and steel bridges and culverts. This ACHP comment, published in the November 16, 2012
Federal Register, does not waive Section 106 reviews of undertakings that may affect these types
of properties. However, as noted in FHWA’s Historic Preservation website:
Much like the 2005 exemption from review for the Interstate Highway System, the
Program Comment for common Post-1945 bridges relieves Federal agencies from the
need, under Section 106, to individually evaluate and consider the effects of undertakings
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
1
April 3, 2015
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
1.0 Introduction
on bridges described in Section V of the Program Comment (Common Bridges), with the
considerations noted in Section IV.
There are several statewide transportation-related programmatic agreements (PAs) that include
lists of classes of actions that are excluded from further Section 106 review. Some of these
statewide agreements stipulate that a qualified specialist within the state Departments of
Transportation (DOTs) makes the decision as to whether or not an action is excluded from
further review. In addition, some of these agreements also stipulate that these actions must be
classified as Categorical Exclusions under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in
order to be considered excluded from further review. Some states also have letter agreements and
Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) between the DOT and State Historic Preservation Offices
(SHPOs) that list classes of actions that are excluded from review. It should be noted that these
latter types of agreements are consistent with the Section 106 regulations only when they include
actions with no potential to cause effects on historic properties.
The first element of this NCHRP study is to collect and review state DOT-related PAs and other
documents and authorities that include these exclusions.1 The parties to these PAs include
FHWA, state DOTs and SHPOs, and, in most cases, the ACHP. The project team conducted a
comprehensive online search of state DOT PAs to make sure the team had the most up-to-date
versions of these PAs, and to obtain any additional PAs that were not in the project team’s files.
Online sources included the ACHP’s web page on FHWA PAs (http://www.achp.gov/fhwastatewidepas.html), the “Programmatic Agreement Library” posted on the American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials’ Environmental Excellence web site
(http://environment.transportation.org/pal_database/), and state DOT websites. Next, the project
team compiled a master list of all of the collected PAs, with dates of execution, and sent the list
to FHWA’s liaison on staff at the ACHP, who at the time of this study was Ms. Carol Legard.
The team asked Ms. Legard if the PAs on the list were the most current versions of the PAs, and
if the team was missing any of the statewide PAs. With Ms. Legard’s assistance, the team
updated and completed the collection of statewide PAs.
The project team also contacted, via email, all of the cultural resource management (CRM) staff
of the state DOTs, asking for copies of any letter agreements, MOUs, or other non-PA
documents that included descriptions and/or lists of actions excluded from further Section 106
review. The team was able to obtain a number of these documents from the DOTs.
The project team also collected and reviewed non-FHWA and non-transportation agency PAs
and other documents that include exclusions that might be applied to FHWA and state DOT
projects. These PAs and other documents are from agencies such as the Federal Railroad
Administration, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, and
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). These documents were obtained through an
Internet search and consultation with ACHP staff.
1
This study does not include a review of the Interstate Highway System exemption or the program comment for
common post-1945 bridges.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
2
April 3, 2015
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
1.0 Introduction
The second element of this NCHRP study is to develop an easy-to-use format presenting
information on the exclusions included in these PAs and other documents. Specifically, the
project team was tasked to develop a series of spreadsheets that organize these agreements and
documents in terms of (1) types of action, and (2) types of historic/archaeological resource
excluded from further Section 106 review. The project team also created spreadsheets
highlighting steps in the Section 106 process that are conducted by state DOT staff, without
SHPO or ACHP consultation. Section 2.0 below discusses the process used in creating these
spreadsheets, presents the spreadsheets, and summarizes the patterns observed in the exclusions
included in the reviewed PAs and other documents.
Note to Reader: To view a table, figure or appendix, place cursor over the table, figure, or
appendix number and left click. This will take you to the table, figure, or appendix. To return to
the text, right click anywhere on the table, figure or appendix, and then select “Previous view.”
This will take you back to the text.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
3
April 3, 2015
2.0 COLLECTION, REVIEW, AND ANALYSIS OF PROGRAMMATIC
AGREEMENTS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS
2.1
INTRODUCTION
The project team collected and reviewed a total of 40 state DOT programmatic agreements and
other documents. Of these 40 documents, 31 contain lists of actions excluded from further
Section 106 review. In addition, of the 40 documents, 21 include stipulations that establish
procedures whereby the state DOT implements steps in the Section 106 process without SHPO
or ACHP consultation. Table 1 provides a list of the state DOT documents, mostly PAs, which
include lists of excluded actions. The PAs that establish procedures whereby the state DOT
would implement decisions and steps in the Section 106 process without SHPO or ACHP
consultation are shown in Table 2.
The project team also collected and reviewed non-FHWA and non-transportation agency PAs
and related documents that include exclusions that might be applied to FHWA and state DOT
projects. A total of 23 documents were obtained through an Internet search and consultation with
ACHP staff. Table 3 lists these non-FHWA and non-transportation related documents.
The project team did not include in this research and analysis state DOT PAs that addressed
specific property types, such as historic bridges, historic railroads, and historic roads. For the
most part, these PAs do not include lists of excluded actions. Rather, they focus on programmatic
procedures and protocols on how these properties will be managed in terms of Section 106
compliance.
2.2
CREATION OF SPREADSHEETS PRESENTING THE RESULTS OF THE PA AND
OTHER DOCUMENT REVIEW
In reviewing the PAs and other documents, the project team observed that several of the PAs
required the screening of actions by a qualified CRM specialist within the state DOT before the
action could be excluded from further Section 106 review. Some state PAs allowed for a nonCRM professional, under certain circumstances, to make the decision as to whether or not an
action could be excluded from further review. The project team also noticed that some of the
state PAs and other documents excluded classes of actions without being screened by either a
CRM specialist or non-CRM specialist. These classes of actions had been reviewed during the
preparation of the PAs or other documents, and the parties to the PAs and other documents
agreed that these actions could be excluded from further Section 106 review without any
additional considerations and analyses. Given these observations, the project team created two
initial spreadsheets of every single excluded action listed in the state DOT PAs and other
documents: one for actions that required screening by either a CRM specialist or non-specialist,
and one for actions that required no additional analysis/screening beyond what had already been
done in the preparation of the PA or other agreement document. For ease of reference, we refer
to the former category of actions as “screened” and the latter category of actions as
“unscreened.”
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
4
April 3, 2015
2.0 Collection, Review and Analysis of
Programmatic Agreements and Other Documents
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
The actions included in these two initial spreadsheets were organized by overarching categories
and subcategories. For example, under the overarching category Roadways, there is a
subcategory Shoulders. Within this subcategory there may be lists of individual actions such as
“adding new shoulders” and “paving or widening of existing shoulders.” These overarching
categories and subcategories, and the individual actions associated with these subcategories, are
listed in the rows on the left side of the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet columns provide
information from each state DOT PA or document. The columns show whether or not an
overarching category, subcategory, and/or individual action is included in a given PA or
document.
The initial spreadsheets were extremely large, with 195 different actions listed in the unscreened
spreadsheet and 269 actions listed in the screened spreadsheet. The project team, therefore,
condensed the initial spreadsheets by grouping similar and duplicative individual actions into a
single action description. Though these individual actions were grouped into one action
description, the number of individual actions placed into this action description was still retained
for each PA or document included in the spreadsheet. In addition, where an individual action was
found in only one or two of the 31 PAs and other documents, these actions were treated as
unique occurrences and were eliminated from the modified spreadsheets. These two modified
spreadsheets for unscreened and screened actions are presented in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2,
respectively. These two spreadsheets serve as a synthesis of virtually all unscreened and screened
actions used by state DOTs around the country.
Tables 4, 5, and 6 list all of the excluded actions shown in the left-hand column of Appendix 1.
These tables serve as an easy reference on the types of actions state DOTs excluded from further
Section 106 review. The organization and categories shown in these tables are purely for
heuristic purposes. Table 4 lists actions associated with roadways. Table 5 lists actions
associated with bridges, culverts, and railroads. Table 6 includes miscellaneous actions. The term
“miscellaneous” is used to capture actions that do not fit neatly under the other categories in
Tables 4 and 5. The Miscellaneous category includes a wide variety of actions such as
construction of noise barriers; construction and replacement of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks;
maintenance of DOT-owned properties; and non-construction related activities such as
purchasing equipment. Table 7 (roadways), Table 8 (bridges, culverts, and railroads), and
Table 9 (miscellaneous actions) list all of the screened actions shown in the left-hand column of
Appendix 2.
Figures 1 and 2 show how many different types of unscreened and screened actions are listed in
each state DOT PA and other documents. As can be seen in these figures, there is a wide
variation in the number of actions listed in these PAs and other documents. In addition, the two
figures reveal differences among the states in terms of the number of different actions that are
unscreened versus those that require screening. We will examine these differences in more detail
later in this report.
Table 10 highlights the most common actions listed in the PAs and other documents, and is
based on the counts in Appendix 1. This table lists actions with counts greater than 10. Table 11
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
5
April 3, 2015
2.0 Collection, Review and Analysis of
Programmatic Agreements and Other Documents
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
highlights the most common screened actions listed in Appendix 2. Again, the latter table lists
types of actions with counts greater than 10.
For the purpose of identifying patterns among the unscreened and screened actions, the project
team collapsed all of the action subcategories and individual activities associated with these
subcategories (i.e., listed in Tables 4 through 9 and Appendices 1 and 2) into overarching action
categories. The latter include categories such as roadways; utilities; landscaping; erosion control;
signage, lighting, and signalization; and miscellaneous. The spreadsheets used to conduct this
pattern analysis for unscreened and screened actions are presented in Appendix 3 and
Appendix 4, respectively.
The project team also created a spreadsheet on the steps in the Section 106 process that are
conducted by state DOT staff without SHPO or ACHP consultation. This spreadsheet is
presented in Appendix 5.
Finally, the project team created spreadsheets listing unscreened and screened actions found in
non-FHWA and non-transportation agency PAs and related documents that might be applied to
FHWA and state DOT projects. These spreadsheets are presented in Appendix 6 and
Appendix 7.
2.3
CONDITIONS FOR USE OF UNSCREENED AND SCREENED ACTIONS
Most of the PAs and other documents include conditions or criteria that must be met in order for
an action to be excluded from further Section 106 review. Several of the state DOT PAs stipulate
that excluded actions must meet the criteria for a Categorical Exclusion pursuant to FHWA’s
NEPA regulation (i.e., 23 CFR 771). Other conditions relate to the physical limits of the action,
the types of transportation structures involved, and the presence or absence of historic properties.
The following are some examples of these types of conditions:








Must occur within an existing right of way or easement.
Is not part of a larger undertaking.
Is not within or adjacent to a National Register listed or eligible property.
Cannot involve impacts on historic properties or historic districts.
Does not affect a bridge that is listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register.
The action has no known public controversy based on historic preservation issues.
Any additional right-of-way proposed is limited in its entirety to areas that can be
documented as having been previously disturbed and/or surveyed for cultural resources,
and contain no National Register listed or eligible properties.
There are no National Register properties adjacent to the project that will be altered or
otherwise adversely affected by the project.
These conditions or qualifying criteria are usually stipulated in the PAs or other documents prior
to the listing of unscreened or screened actions.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
6
April 3, 2015
2.0 Collection, Review and Analysis of
Programmatic Agreements and Other Documents
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
2.4
PATTERNS OBSERVED IN USE OF UNSCREENED AND SCREENED ACTIONS
State DOTs
Using the overarching action categories listed in the spreadsheets, the project team first charted
the percentage of unscreened actions by these categories (Figure 3) and percentage of screened
actions (Figure 4). Most actions fall under the Roadways category, followed by Miscellaneous.
The Roadways category includes such actions as general maintenance and repair; pavement
resurfacing, restoration, and replacement; lane additions and widening; intersection
improvements; and roadway safety. As noted earlier, the Miscellaneous category includes
actions such as land acquisition and disposal; noise barriers; curbs, gutters, and sidewalks;
recreational trails; and activities involving DOT-owned properties.
A comparison of these two charts (see Figure 5) shows only minor differences between
percentages of unscreened and screened actions. The two differences that do stand out are the
higher percentage of screened actions associated with Bridges and the absence of Roadway
Monitoring and Surveillance actions under unscreened actions. More pronounced differences
occur when looking at the percentage of unscreened vs. screened actions among the PAs and
other documents. Figure 6 presents the percentage of PAs and documents with unscreened
actions, by action category. Figure 7 presents the percentage for screened actions. A comparison
of these two figures is presented in Figure 8. The latter figure shows that a higher percentage of
actions associated with Bridges are screened than not screened. Other differences between
unscreened and screened are found in actions associated with Culverts, Ditches, and Drainage
Systems; Landscaping; and Erosion Control. The possible reasons for the patterns seen in
Figures 5 and 8 are discussed in Section 3.0 below.
As noted above in the comparison of Figures 1 and 2, there are differences in the number of
unscreened versus screened exclusions listed in the states’ PAs and other documents. Figures 9
and 10 provide another view of these differences. Figure 9 compares the number of screened and
unscreened actions listed in the PAs and other documents, sorted by unscreened actions (that is,
unscreened actions are listed first in descending order). Figure 10 presents the same information
but sorted by screened actions. These two figures clearly show that some states screen most or all
of the actions listed in their PAs and other documents, while other states screen only a few or
none of the listed actions. Furthermore, in some cases, the same types of actions are unscreened
by one state while screened in another state. The project team attempted to find a reason for these
differences using available data on the PAs, documents, and state DOT CRM programs (such as
the date of a PA or other document, size of a DOT’s CRM staff, and degree of delegation of
Section 106 decisions and findings to a DOT’s CRM staff). The team, however, could not find a
link between these currently available data and the patterns seen in Figures 9 and 10. The
interviews of the 25 states that include these lists of unscreened and/or screened actions in their
PAs or other documents (see Section 3.0 below) did not reveal the reason or reasons behind these
differences among the states.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
7
April 3, 2015
2.0 Collection, Review and Analysis of
Programmatic Agreements and Other Documents
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
The project team found only one PA that included a list of property types excluded from further
Section 106 review; these properties are subjected to an internal review by qualified staff or a
qualified DOT consultant before they are excluded from further consideration. These properties
are listed in Attachment 4 of the California DOT PA. These properties are organized by property
categories, and these categories have specific conditions or requirements that must be met before
a property can be excluded from further review. These properties include, for example, isolated
mining prospect pits; refuse scatters less than 50 years old; minor, ubiquitous, or fragmentary
infrastructure elements; buildings, structures, objects, districts, and sites less than 30 years old;
and buildings, structures, and objects moved within the past 50 years.
Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agencies
As noted above, the project team examined 23 non-FHWA and non-transportation agency PAs.
In terms of excluded actions, most of these fell into the Miscellaneous category, involving
routine maintenance, repair, stabilization, or rehabilitation of buildings and structures (see
Table 12). This is not surprising given the agencies involved (e.g., Housing and Urban
Development, General Services Administration, FEMA). The next most common categories
were General Maintenance and Repair, Utilities, and Railroads. Within the category of General
Maintenance and Repairs, excluded actions include those relating to the maintenance, repair, or
replacement of signage, lighting, and/or signalization; road maintenance, repair, or replacement;
and the repair or replacement of fencing.
Under screened actions, most of the actions are under the General Maintenance and Repair
category, followed by Miscellaneous and Utilities (see Table 13). Within the category of General
Maintenance and Repair, excluded actions include roadway maintenance and repairs,
undertakings on trails and paths, and actions involving signage and surveillance. The
Miscellaneous category includes mostly actions involving landscaping, buildings and structures,
and ground-disturbing activities.
For the most part, the types of unscreened and screened actions included in the non-FHWA and
non-transportation PAs and other documents are similar to those found in the state DOT PAs,
with the exception of the former having a greater focus on buildings. A comparison of the state
DOT and non-FHWA/non-transportation agency master spreadsheets (Appendix 6 and
Appendix 7), however, shows that the latter agencies’ PAs and other documents do include some
actions that are not found in the state DOT PAs, and may be worthy of consideration by state
DOTs and FHWA. For example, under Culverts, Ditches, and Canals, one of the nontransportation PAs’ excluded actions involving repair, replacement, and upgrade of culvert
systems, including those listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register, when the work is
to be in-kind. These actions are not screened. Screened actions that might be worthy of
consideration by state DOTs and FHWA involve sidewalks, repairs, and undertakings associated
with trails, paths, and historic roads. Examples of these screened actions include:

Existing roads that have been determined eligible for the National Register, in
consultation with the SHPO/Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO), may be
repaired or resurfaced in-kind.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
8
April 3, 2015
2.0 Collection, Review and Analysis of
Programmatic Agreements and Other Documents
National Cooperative Highway Research Program



2.5
Undertakings proposed on existing non-historic sidewalks within a historic district,
conducted in accordance with an approved treatment plan (such as a historic structures
report, cultural landscape report, or preservation maintenance plan).
Existing trails and associated features that have been determined eligible for the National
Register, in consultation with the SHPO/THPO, may be repaired or resurfaced in-kind.
Changing the material color of existing surfaces using materials that are recommended in
an approved treatment plan or in keeping with the cultural landscape.
PATTERNS IN DELEGATION OF SECTION 106 DECISIONS AND FINDINGS
Not only did this study look at the use of unscreened and screened actions by state DOTs, the
project team also examined the extent to which state DOT CRM staff made Section 106
decisions and findings without consultation with their respective SHPO or with the ACHP.
Twenty states had PAs or other documents that include stipulations delegating these decisions
and findings to the DOT’s CRM staff. Figure 11 shows the distribution of these decisions and
findings among the PAs or other documents. There are eight discrete Section 106 decisions and
findings stipulated among these PAs or other documents. Eighty-six percent of these PAs and
other documents include stipulations whereby the DOT CRM staff make decisions on defining
an action’s Area of Potential Effects (APE) without further consultation. Defining level of effort
for conducting inventories, and making a finding of no historic properties affected, are also
included in most of the PAs and other documents. Several of the PAs and other documents also
allowed DOT CRM staff to make a decision related to one of the elements of a no historic
properties affected finding (i.e., a determination that there are no historic properties present in an
action’s APE).
Decisions on National Register eligibility, however, usually require consultation with the SHPO
and other consulting parties. Only a few PAs and other documents stipulate that a DOT’s CRM
staff can make findings of no adverse effect and no adverse effect with conditions without further
consultation; only one PA includes a stipulation where the DOT CRM staff can decide on
resolving adverse effects without further consultation, under certain conditions. The latter is
found in Vermont’s PA. Figure 12 highlights the distribution of these eight Section 106 decisions
and findings among the state DOT PAs and other documents.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
9
April 3, 2015
3.0 APPLIED EXPERIENCES IN STREAMLINING SECTION 106
COMPLIANCE
3.1
INTERVIEWING STATE DOTS
After collecting and reviewing the state DOT PAs and other documents, the project team
interviewed a sample of the DOTs. The focus of these interviews was to obtain information on
the DOTs’ applied experiences in streamlining Section 106 compliance by excluding classes of
actions from further Section 106 review. The following is the interview questionnaire:
1. Does your use of excluded actions streamline Section 106 compliance and the project
delivery process? If your answer is yes, in what specific ways does the use of excluded
actions streamline Section 106 compliance and project delivery?
2. Our research found that some state DOTs screen actions before they can be excluded
from Section 106 review, and this screening is done by the agencies’ qualified cultural
resource management (CRM) staff. Other state DOTs, however, excluded these same
actions without being screened by qualified CRM staff. Please answer one or more of the
following questions, depending on which question applies to your agency:
 Why does your agency require the screening of certain actions before they are
excluded from further Section 106 review?
 Why does your agency not require the screening of certain actions before they are
excluded from further Section 106 review?
 Have you been able to expand the types of actions excluded from review because you
have in-house CRM staff to screen these actions before they are excluded from
further Section 106 review?
 Yes___
 No___
 Comments:
3. What is your process for adding to or changing your list of excluded actions?
4. Based on your experience applying these excluded actions over a time:
 Would you add any new excluded actions? If yes, what actions would you add and
why?
 Would you remove any actions that are currently excluded from further review? If
yes, what actions would you remove and why?
 Are there any actions that are now excluded without being screened by in-house
CRM staff that you believe should be screened? If yes, which actions and why should
they be screened?
 Conversely, are there now any actions that are screened by in-house CRM staff that
you believe should be excluded from further review without screening? If yes, which
actions and why should they not be screened?
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
10
April 3, 2015
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
3.0 Applied Experiences in Streamlining Section 106 Compliance
The project team sent the questionnaire via email to the 31 state DOTs that list unscreened and/or
screened actions in their PAs or other documents. Of the 31 state DOTs to receive the
questionnaire, the following 25 states responded:












California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of
Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa













Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Missouri
New Mexico
North Carolina
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Texas
Vermont
Washington
At the request of the NCHRP panel, the project team also sent a questionnaire to one of the nontransportation federal agencies: the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
3.2
INTERVIEW RESULTS
Below are the responses from the 25 state DOTs. The responses are organized by each of the
questions in the questionnaire. It should be noted that some states did not respond to all of the
questions. FEMA’s response to the questionnaire is presented after those from the state DOTs.
1. Does your use of excluded actions streamline Section 106 compliance and the project delivery
process? If your answer is yes, in what specific ways does the use of excluded actions streamline
Section 106 compliance and project delivery?
All of the responding state DOTs said the use of unscreened/screened actions streamlined both
the Section 106 process and project delivery. Georgia DOT noted that lacking their agreement on
these actions, it would take a minimum of three months to “clear” a project. Their agreement
saved the DOT time and money by channeling their resources to larger projects. Indiana DOT
noted that it took approximately two weeks to complete Section 106 compliance using their list
of unscreened/screened actions, whereas the regular Section 106 process for projects with a no
historic properties affected finding may take four to six months. In their response, the DOT for
the District of Columbia said:
This has streamlined our review and approval process significantly by cutting down the
review time as well as has made project schedules more predictable. It has also made
projects well-coordinated with SHPO and more sensitive to historic perseveration needs.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
11
April 3, 2015
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
3.0 Applied Experiences in Streamlining Section 106 Compliance
Oregon DOT noted:
Specifically, it allows us to quickly reduce the amount of projects that are innocuous to
historic resources, and focus our limited personnel and time on projects that will have
effects on historic resources. What’s more, we can permit projects that have a short fuse,
and relatively simple actions (i.e. paving, striping) without hassling the SHPO, extensive
and expensive time of our staff, and in our minds, makes us feel like the spirit of Section
106 is being upheld.
Similarly, Ohio DOT processes about 300 unscreened/screened actions a year, and:
[W]e save at least 15–30 days of review time per project since they do not require
coordination with the SHPO. The low level project types included in Appendices A and
B [of the PA] can be processed much more quickly than those that must be coordinated
with the SHPO, which keeps the projects on schedule and saves time and money. It also
allows cultural resources staff and SHPO staff to focus their efforts on more complex
projects/impacts.
California DOT (Caltrans) noted that since 2004, under their PA, consistently 80% of their
cultural resource review workload stays in-house and does not go to the SHPO for review.
2. Our research found that some state DOTs screen actions before they can be excluded from
Section 106 review, and this screening is done by the agencies’ qualified cultural resource
management (CRM) staff. Other state DOTs, however, excluded these same actions without
being screened by qualified CRM staff. Please answer one or more of the following questions,
depending on which question applies to your agency:
Why does your agency require the screening of certain actions before they are excluded from
further Section 106 review?
Most of the DOTs that responded to this question said the listed actions were screened by a CRM
specialist in order to ensure a project conforms to the description of a listed excluded action, and
that all of the conditions associated with an excluded action are met. For example, Georgia DOT
noted that only a qualified CRM staff person is capable of reviewing a project description and
determining if the project should be excluded from further review. Indiana DOT, which has lists
of both unscreened and screened actions, stated that screening certain actions ensures consistent
compliance with its PA and gives the Indiana SHPO added confidence that the PA is being used
appropriately. The Maryland State Highway Administration noted:
it is our experience that actions interpreted by engineering or maintenance staff as exempt
may not in fact fit the narrow definition in our PA. Finally, our PA requires screening of
exempt projects by qualified CR[M] staff.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
12
April 3, 2015
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
3.0 Applied Experiences in Streamlining Section 106 Compliance
Washington State DOT noted that by having a qualified specialist reviewing actions:
we assure SHPO and the consulting Tribes that exemptions are made based on solid
archaeological methods and experience, and this allows us to exempt a broader variety of
agency actions because our exemptions do not have to be so narrowly written and
specific.
These statements provide an explanation for the patterns observed in Figure 8. This figure shows
that a higher percentage of actions associated with Bridges are screened than not screened. In
addition, this figure shows that a higher percentage of actions associated with Culverts, Ditches,
and Drainage Systems; Landscaping; and Erosion Control are also screened than not screened.
The reasons for these patterns is the concern that only a qualified specialist has the ability to
determine that these types of actions will have no potential to affect historic properties, such as
historic bridges and archaeological sites.
Why does your agency not require the screening of certain actions before they are excluded from
further Section 106 review?
Fewer states responded to this question compared to the previous question on screened actions.
Illinois DOT stated that some actions are not screened “because they are unlikely to impact
historic properties.” Connecticut DOT noted that:
“Appendix A” [of the PA] undertakings include actions that are stand-alone and have no
potential to impact historic properties. These include: highway markings, pothole filling,
pavement milling, surface treatments to existing roadways, resurfacing in previously
disturbed right-of-ways, repair in kind of curbs/sidewalks/street furniture, new pavement
markings, replacement of utility poles and beam end repair of bridges that are less than
50 years old.
Ohio DOT had a similar response, but the review of actions by non-CRM staff included an
additional step:
Appendix A of our Section 106 PA includes a list of actions that do not require screening
by our qualified cultural resources staff. These project types are considered “Exempt”
under our CE PA (c-listed projects under 23 CFR 771.117) and cannot involve new right
of way. District environmental staff can clear these but they must check the SHPO’s
electronic GIS website to ensure that no known properties exist in the APE.
In Indiana, the cultural resource staff conducts a yearly “Quality Assurance Review” to verify
that the DOT district environmental staff is correctly applying and documenting the excluded
actions listed as “Category A” projects in its PA. Finally, Texas DOT conducts a “risk
assessment” at the district level:
empowering the environmental coordinators to certify such findings without the need to
consult with professionally qualified CRM staff in such clear-cut examples. This Risk
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
13
April 3, 2015
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
3.0 Applied Experiences in Streamlining Section 106 Compliance
Assessment process was embedded in the PA…to provide SHPO with confidence in the
proposed process allowing this discretion.
Have you been able to expand the types of actions excluded from review because you have inhouse CRM staff to screen these actions before they are excluded from further Section 106
review?
Fifteen of the state DOT said yes to this question. Four of the DOTs said no. Vermont DOT
provided a comment in relation to this question that mirrored some of the earlier comments on
the use of unscreened/screened actions to streamline Section 106 reviews and project delivery
(i.e., Question 1 above):
We have added items such as replacing at-grade RR crossings, in-kind sidewalk
replacements outside of Historic Districts, in-kind culvert replacements of noncontributing culverts where all work takes place from the road. We have discovered over
the years that items such as these have had no potential for effect and we don’t need to
spend as much time on them. It allows us to focus our attention on those activities with
greater potential for affect.
3. What is your process for adding to or changing your list of excluded actions?
Some of the DOTs’ PAs have to be formally amended in order to add or remove an
unscreened/screened action. Other states simply consult with the agencies that signed the
agreement and modify the PA without a formal amendment (i.e., following a standard
amendment stipulation). For example, Idaho DOT contacts and notifies the signatories to the
agreement on what is to be added to the appendix listing the actions, and then the DOT sends the
agreement signatories a clean copy of the new appendix once the signatories agree that it is
appropriate to add the actions to the appendix. Massachusetts and Pennsylvania DOTs follow a
similar approach, obtaining written authorization/agreement from all of the parties to their PAs
without a formal PA amendment. Georgia DOT built in a process to add actions each year. It is
able to request the SHPO’s and FHWA’s approval for the addition, and once it gets the approval,
the DOT adds the actions to the list in its agreement. Indiana DOT follows a similar process.
4. Based on your experience applying these excluded actions over a time:
Would you add any new excluded actions? If yes, what actions would you add and why?
Ten DOTs said yes to this question. Five said no. In terms of comments associated with this
question, Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) noted that it plans to add to its PA
“routine building maintenance and infrastructure upgrades and maintenance of SHA owned
facilities where no new ground disturbance is required.” Indiana DOT would like to include:
more landscaping actions, wetland and stream mitigation sites, noise barriers, and
roundabouts under our Category B actions requiring INDOT [cultural resource staff]
approval because we have spent a lot of time and energy processing a lot of projects
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
14
April 3, 2015
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
3.0 Applied Experiences in Streamlining Section 106 Compliance
within these categories where the outcome has been the same – no impacts to historic
properties.
South Carolina DOT stated it would not add any actions because it considers the current list in its
PA to be comprehensive. A few other DOTs made similar statements. Oregon DOT staff does
not see the need to add new actions to its list of excluded actions; however, the DOT did note
that:
One aspect that isn’t well discussed are actions with railroads. Replacement and actions
that result in no net effect to the rail, in our view, should be considered actions acceptable
under the PA. Of late we are seeing lots of rail projects, and would anticipate more, thus
having a broader scope within that framework would allow for projects to go forward
that, following close study by specialists for resources that might otherwise be missed by
a generalist (we recently found 1880s Chinese graffiti on a stone culvert below routine
track work), so as mentioned earlier, without awareness of important historical events
(like Chinese influence on rail construction in the west) one could easily overlook
cultural markers in the landscape that have national import.
Would you remove any actions that are currently excluded from further? If yes, what actions
would you remove and why?
Three of the DOTs said yes, they would remove actions from the list of actions in their PAs.
Seventeen of the states said no. In terms of comments on this question, New Mexico DOT noted
that the inclusion of fencing was a “tricky” excluded action, as fencing can run through
archaeological sites and this would be a trigger for tribal interests and concerns. Therefore, the
DOT has to “tread very carefully with fencing projects.”
Are there any actions that are now excluded without being screened by in-house CRM staff that
you believe should be screened? If yes, which actions and why should they be screened?
Two of the states said yes to this question. Seventeen of the states said no. Ohio DOT provided
one of the few comments in relation to this question, noting that:
our district environmental staff is trained that if there is any question, they should consult
the cultural resources staff. We are only aware of one instance in the last three years in
which a project was cleared by a district and, in hindsight it should have come to the
cultural resources staff.
Conversely, are there now any actions that are screened by in-house CRM staff that you believe
should be excluded from further review without screening? If yes, which actions and why should
they not be screened?
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
15
April 3, 2015
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
3.0 Applied Experiences in Streamlining Section 106 Compliance
Only one DOT answered yes to this question. Seventeen states said no. Oregon DOT was the
only state to comment on this question:
We really don’t think, however…that something is so basic that we’d want to remove our
review from it (and give it over to a generalist). Yes, we think some could handle some of
those, but that could lead to a larger problem and invite misses on projects.
FEMA Response to Questionnaire
The project team contacted FEMA’s Federal Preservation Officer (FPO) and asked which of its
statewide PAs would be most representative of the agency’s use of unscreened/screened actions.
The agency’s FPO said the Louisiana Statewide PA would be the best example.
On the question about how the use of unscreened/screen actions streamlines the Section 106
process, FEMA noted that including these actions in the Louisiana PA expedited the review
process for emergency activities occurring within 30 days of an emergency declaration. FEMA
uses:
An extensive list of activities, Programmatic Allowances, that are specifically related to the
types of work FEMA may be involved in following a disaster that have little or no potential
to adversely affect historic properties. FEMA may identify and review projects comprised of
these activities in-house without review by SHPO or Tribes.
FEMA also noted that having such a list in the PA helps to avoid misunderstandings when new
staff is assigned review responsibilities.
When asked why the agency requires the screening of actions by a qualified CRM staff, the
agency said:
NHPA and the ACHP regulations require Federal agencies to meet the standards established
by the [Secretary of the Interior (SOI)], and the use of qualified CRM staff is one option in
meeting this requirement but the screening is done by either qualified EHP [Environmental
Planning and Historic Preservation] contractors or FEMA EHP staff. Often FEMA staff must
review drawings and specifications as part of the Section 106 review and a technical
background along with strong grounding in the SOI Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties is often necessary to determine if the Programmatic Allowances apply.
Additionally, the review of previously recorded archaeological sites is often necessary and
archaeological site files in Louisiana are restricted to SOI-qualified individuals.
FEMA has added new exclusions to this PA over the years, including the removal of temporary
facilities. It is also considering adding Americans with Disabilities Act street cuts, curbs, and
sidewalks. The agency is permitted to add to the list of actions in consultation with the other
parties to the agreement, without amending the agreement. FEMA does not plan to remove any
actions that are currently listed in its PA, and it would continue to have all actions screened by its
EHP staff prior to excluding the action from further Section 106 review.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
16
April 3, 2015
4.0 LESSONS LEARNED
The state DOT responses to the questionnaire clearly demonstrate the value of including lists of
unscreened and/or screened actions in their statewide PAs. As noted in Ohio DOT’s response to
the questionnaire, having these unscreened/screened actions allows “cultural resources staff and
SHPO staff to focus their efforts on more complex projects/impacts.”
Most of the DOTs said the actions listed in their PAs were screened by a CRM staff member in
order to ensure a project conforms to the description of a listed excluded action, and that all of
the conditions associated with the excluded action are met. Some states, however, do permit a
non-CRM specialist to exclude certain classes of actions from further Section 106 review. To
make sure that the decisions made by these non-CRM staff are appropriate and correct, some
states implement a training program for these non-CRM staff, have periodic reviews of the
decisions made by these individuals, or establish a process whereby non-CRM staff can consult
with the DOT’s CRM staff prior to making a decision to exclude an action from further review.
In presenting the results of this study to the NCHRP panel, one member of the panel noted how
much overlap there was between the screened and unscreened actions, with several states
requiring screening by either a CRM specialist or a non-CRM specialist for the same activities
that other states require no screening. The panel member suggested that these differences among
the states may be a result of the fact that PAs are negotiated agreements reflecting the views of
the state DOT, FHWA, the SHPO, and the ACHP. These parties to a PA, therefore, can agree on
any number of actions that can be excluded from further Section 106 review, in addition to how a
decision to exclude an action from further review will be made. It should be remembered that
PAs are a “Program Alternative” under the Section 106 regulation, and the regulation allows a
great deal of flexibility in how projects are reviewed, how historic properties are identified, and
how project effects are assessed. FHWA, SHPOs, and the ACHP all have a role in making these
determinations in the context of preparing a PA.
In terms of expanding lists of unscreened/screened actions, this NCHRP study found that most
state DOTs have added to the lists in their PAs. These additions were accomplished through
formal amendments to their PAs or, in some cases, through a streamlined process whereby the
DOT can consult with the other signatories to the agreement or just with the FHWA and SHPO,
and, once the parties are in agreement, add or modify the actions in the list included in the PA.
Furthermore, very few state DOTs would remove any of the actions currently included in their
PAs.
The project team also observed that recent statewide DOT PAs build upon the structure and
content of previous PAs, adapting and modifying what other states have done in order to address
the circumstances and character of their own state. The latter include the types of actions
implemented in the state, the nature of their archaeological record and historic built environment,
and the DOT’s relationship with their FHWA division office, SHPO, and other consulting
parties.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
17
April 3, 2015
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
3.0 Applied Experiences in Streamlining Section 106 Compliance
In summary, state DOTs can use what other states have accomplished, in addition to the results
of this NCHRP study, as a foundation for developing a new PA that includes lists of unscreened
and/or screened actions. This NCHRP study can also assist states interested in revising, updating,
and expanding the list of actions included in their current PA.
NCHRP 25-25/Task 91 Synthesis of Transportation
Exclusions to Section 106 Review
18
April 3, 2015
TABLES
Table 1. State Department of Transportation Programmatic Agreements and Other Documents
Document
California Statewide PA
Full Title
First Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the California State Historic Preservation Officer,
and the California Department of Transportation Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of
the NHPA, As it Pertains to the Administration of the Federal-Aid Highway Program in
California
Colorado Statewide PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation, Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Colorado
Department of Transportation Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, As it Pertains to the Administration of the Federal-Aid Highway Program in
Colorado
Connecticut Minor Projects Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Connecticut
PA
Department of Transportation, the Connecticut State Historic Preservation Officer, and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Implementation of Minor Transportation
Projects
Delaware Statewide PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation, the Delaware Department of Transportation, and the Delaware State
Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Implementation of the Federal Aid Highway Program
in Delaware
District of Columbia Citywide Programmatic Agreement Among the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Federal
PA
Highway Administration, the District of Columbia Department of Transportation, and the
District of Columbia State Historic Preservation Office Regarding Implementation of the
Federal Aid Highway Program
Florida Funding Agreement
Funding Agreement Between Florida State Historic Preservation Officer and State of Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) and United States Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration, August 15, 2003
Georgia Minor Projects MOU Memorandum of Understanding Between Federal Highway Administration, Georgia
Department of Transportation, and Georgia Department of Natural Resources Historic
Preservation Division - No Potential to Cause Effects GDOT Maintenance and Minor Highway
Projects
Idaho Minor Projects PA
First Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
Idaho Department of Transportation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the
Idaho State Historic Preservation Office Regarding Minor Highway Improvement Projects
Date
2013
2014
2012
2013
2008
2003
2014
2006 (Appendix A
amended 2013)
Illinois Minor Projects PA
Programmatic Agreement (PA) Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Illinois
2010
Department of Transportation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the Illinois
State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding the Implementation of Delegation Authority for
Minor Projects of the Federal Aid Highway Program in the State of Illinois
Indiana Minor Projects PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Indiana
2006
Department of Transportation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the Indiana
State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Implementation of the Federal-Aid Highway
Program in the State of Indiana
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Iowa Department 2012
of Transportation, the Iowa State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation Regarding Implementation of Federal-Aid Transportation Projects in the
State of Iowa
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, Kentucky
2011
Transportation Cabinet, Kentucky State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation Regarding Implementing Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act for Federally Funded Road Projects in the Commonwealth of Kentucky
Iowa Statewide PA
Kentucky Statewide PA
Maine Statewide PA
Programmatic Agreement among Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit
2004
Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Maine State Historic
Preservation Officer, and Maine Department of Transportation Regarding Implementation of
the Federal Aid Highway and Federal Transit Programs in Maine
Maryland Minor Projects PA
Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
Maryland State Highway Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and
the Maryland State Historic Preservation Officer for Minor Projects (with Appendix 1 and 2)
1 of 2
2008
Table 1. State Department of Transportation Programmatic Agreements and Other Documents
Document
Massachusetts Minor
Projects PA
Michigan Letter Agreement
Full Title
First Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
Massachusetts Highway Department, the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer,
and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Implementation of Minor
Highway Projects
Revised Final Guidance for Projects Exempt from SHPO Review
Date
2004
2005
Missouri Minor Projects PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Missouri Highway 2009
and Transportation Commission, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the
Missouri State Historic Preservation Officer for Minor Highway Projects
Nebraska Minor Projects
Letter Agreement
New Mexico Statewide PA
Activities that are Undertakings with No Potential to Cause Effects to Historic Properties
2010
Pursuant to 36 CFR 800.3(a)(l)
First Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
2010
New Mexico Department of Transportation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and
the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Implementation of the FederalAid Highway Program in New Mexico
North Carolina Minor Projects Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, North Carolina
PA
Department of Transportation, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and North Carolina
State Historic Preservation Officer For Minor Transportation Projects in North Carolina
2007
Ohio Statewide PA
2011
Oregon Statewide PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation, the State Historic Preservation Office, and the State of Ohio,
Department of Transportation Regarding the Implementation of the Federal-Aid Highway
Program in Ohio
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation, the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, and the Oregon
Department of Transportation Regarding Implementing Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act for the Federal-Aid Highway Program in Oregon
2011
Pennsylvania Statewide PA
Modification of Appendix C of the Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway
2010
Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Pennsylvania State Historic
Preservation Officer, and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Regarding
Implementation of the Federal Aid Highway Program in Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico Statewide PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Puerto Rico State 2012
Historic Preservation Officer, the Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority, and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding the Federal Aid Highway Program in
Puerto Rico
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Rhode Island
2001
Transportation Authority, the Rhode Island State Historic Preservation Officer, the J.H. Chafee
Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission, and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation for Minor Transportation Projects
Rhode Island Minor Projects
PA
South Carolina Statewide PA Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the South Carolina
2011 (As amended
Department of Transportation, the South Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer and the 2014)
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Section 106 Implementation for FederalAid Transportation Projects in the State of South Carolina
Texas Statewide PA
Vermont Statewide PA
Washington Statewide PA
First Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
Texas Department of Transportation, the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer, and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Implementation of Transportation
Undertakings
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Vermont Agency
of Transportation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the Vermont State
Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Implementation of the Federal-Aid Highway Program
in Vermont
Second Amended Programmatic Agreement Implementing Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act for the Federal-aid Highway Program in Washington State
Administered by the Federal Highway Administration
2 of 2
2005
2000
2012
Table 2. State DOT PAs and Other Documents Delegating Section 106 Decisions and Findings to the State DOT
Document
California Statewide PA
Full Title
First Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the California State Historic Preservation Officer,
and the California Department of Transportation Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of
the NHPA, As it Pertains to the Administration of the Federal-Aid Highway Program in
California
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation, Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Colorado
Department of Transportation Regarding Compliance with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act, As it Pertains to the Administration of the Federal-Aid Highway
Program in Colorado
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation, the Delaware Department of Transportation, and the Delaware
State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Implementation of the Federal Aid Highway
Program in Delaware
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Iowa Department
of Transportation, the Iowa State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation Regarding Implementation of Federal-Aid Transportation Projects in
the State of Iowa
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, Kentucky
Transportation Cabinet, Kentucky State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Implementing Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act for Federally Funded Road Projects in the Commonwealth of
Kentucky
Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
Maryland State Highway Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and
the Maryland State Historic Preservation Officer for Minor Projects (with Appendix 1 and 2)
Date
2013
First Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
Massachusetts Highway Department, the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer,
and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Implementation of Minor
Highway Projects
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Minnesota State
Historic Preservation Office, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Department
of the Army, Corps of Engineers St. Paul District, and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation Regarding Implementation of the Federal-Aid Highway Program in Minnesota
2004
Missouri Minor Projects PA Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Missouri
Highway and Transportation Commission, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and
the Missouri State Historic Preservation Officer for Minor Highway Projects
2009
Nebraska Minor Projects Activities that are Undertakings with No Potential to Cause Effects to Historic Properties
Letter Agreement
Pursuant to 36 CFR 800.3(a)(l)
New Mexico Statewide PA First Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
New Mexico Department of Transportation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
and the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Implementation of the
Federal-Aid Highway Program in New Mexico
2010
North Carolina Minor
Projects PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, North Carolina
Department of Transportation, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and North Carolina
State Historic Preservation Officer For Minor Transportation Projects in North Carolina
2007
Ohio Statewide PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation, the State Historic Preservation Office, and the State of Ohio,
Department of Transportation Regarding the Implementation of the Federal-Aid Highway
Program in Ohio
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation, the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, and the Oregon
Department of Transportation Regarding Implementing Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act for the Federal-Aid Highway Program in Oregon
2011
Colorado Statewide PA
Delaware Statewide PA
Iowa Statewide PA
Kentucky Statewide PA
Maryland Minor Projects
PA
Massachusetts Minor
Projects PA
Minnesota Statewide PA
Oregon Statewide PA
1 of 2
2014
2013
2012
2011
2008
2005
2010
2011
Table 2. State DOT PAs and Other Documents Delegating Section 106 Decisions and Findings to the State DOT
Document
Full Title
Pennsylvania Statewide PA Modification of Appendix C of the Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway
Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Pennsylvania State
Historic Preservation Officer, and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Regarding
Implementation of the Federal Aid Highway Program in Pennsylvania
Date
2010
Rhode Island Minor
Projects PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Rhode Island
Transportation Authority, the Rhode Island State Historic Preservation Officer, the J.H.
Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission, and the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation for Minor Transportation Projects
2001
South Carolina Statewide
PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the South Carolina
2011 (As amended 2014)
Department of Transportation, the South Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Section 106 Implementation for FederalAid Transportation Projects in the State of South Carolina
Texas Statewide PA
First Amended Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the
Texas Department of Transportation, the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer, and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Implementation of Transportation
Undertakings
Vermont Statewide PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Highway Administration, the Vermont Agency
of Transportation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the Vermont State
Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Implementation of the Federal-Aid Highway Program
in Vermont
Washington Statewide PA Second Amended Programmatic Agreement Implementing Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act for the Federal-aid Highway Program in Washington State
Administered by the Federal Highway Administration
2 of 2
2005
2000
2012
Table 3. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency PAs and Other Documents
PA
Army Corps of Engineers and
Virginia SHPO
Full Title of PA
Programmatic Agreement Among U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Norfolk District Regulatory Office, Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and
Virginia State Historic Preservation Office Regarding
Implementation of The Norfolk District Corps of Engineers State
Program General Permit and Section 106 of The National Historic
Preservation Act.
Protocol for Managing Cultural Resources on Lands Administered
by the Bureau of Land Management in Alaska
Year
2012
State Protocol Agreement Among the California State Director of
the Bureau of Land Management and the California State Historic
Preservation Officer and the Nevada State Historic Preservation
Officer Regarding the Manner in which the Bureau of Land
Management Will Meet Its Responsibilities Under the National
Historic Preservation Act and the National Programmatic
Agreement Among the BLM, the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, and the National Conference of State Historic
Preservation Officers
State Protocol Agreement between the Idaho State Director,
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Idaho State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) Regarding the Manner in which the
BLM will meet Its Responsibilities Under the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) as Provided for in the National
Programmatic Agreement (NPA)
Protocol Agreement between New Mexico Bureau of Land
Management and New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer
2007
Bureau of Land Management
and Nevada SHPO
State Protocol Agreement between the Bureau of Land
Management Nevada and the Nevada State Historic Preservation
Office for Implementing the National Historic Preservation Act
2009
Bureau of Land Management
and Oregon SHPO
Protocol for Managing Cultural Resources on Lands Administered
by the Bureau of Land Management in Oregon
1998
Bureau of Land Management
and Utah SHPO
Programmatic Agreement Between the U.S.D.I. Bureau of Land
Management, Utah, the Utah State Historic Preservation Officer,
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the State of Utah
School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration, and GASCO
Energy, Inc. Regarding the Unita Basin Natural Gas Development
Project Development Plan in Unitah and Duchesne Counties, Utah
Programmatic Agreement Among the Bureau of Land
Management, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the
National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers
Regarding the Manner in Which BLM Will Meet Its Responsibilities
under the National Historic Preservation Act; State Protocol
Between the Wyoming BLM State Director and the Wyoming
SHPO
2011
Bureau of Land Management
and Alaska SHPO
Bureau of Land Management
and California and Nevada
SHPOs
Bureau of Land Management
and Idaho SHPO
Bureau of Land Management
and New Mexico SHPO
Bureau of Land Management
and Wyoming SHPO
Page 1 of 3
1998
1998
no
date
2006
Table 3. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency PAs and Other Documents
PA
Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management and ACHP
Department of Energy and
SHPOs - Prototype PA
Federal Emergency
Management Administration
and Louisiana SHPO
Federal Railroad
Administration and California
SHPO
Federal Railroad
Administration and California
SHPO
Federal Railroad
Administration, New York
DOT and New York SHPO
Federal Railroad
Administration, Federal
Transit Administration,
Connecticut DOT,
Connecticut SHPO, and
Massachusetts SHPO
Full Title of PA
Programmatic Agreement Among the U.S. Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management; the State Historic
Preservation Officers of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia,
and Florida; the Catawaba Indian Nation and the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation Regarding Review of Outer Continental
Shelf Renewable Energy Activities Under Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act
Prototype Programmatic Agreement Between The United States
Department of Energy, the [insert state name] Energy Office and
the [insert state name] State Historic Preservation Office
Regarding EECBG, SEP and WAP Undertakings
Programmatic Agreement Among The Federal Emergency
Management Agency, The Louisiana State Historic Preservation
Officer, The Louisiana Governor's Office Of Homeland Security and
Emergency Preparedness, The Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas,
The Caddo Nation, The Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana, The
Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana,
The Jena Band of Choctaw Indians, The Mississippi Band of
Choctaw INDIANS, the Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma, The Seminole
Tribe of Florida, The Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana, And The
Advisory Council On Historic Preservation
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Railroad
Administration, The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, The
California State Historic Preservation Officer, and The California
High-Speed Rail Authority Regarding Compliance With Section 106
of The National Historic Preservation Act, As It Pertains To The
California High-Speed Train Project [Merced to Fresno]
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Railroad
Administration, The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, The
California State Historic Preservation Officer, and The California
High-Speed Rail Authority Regarding Compliance With Section 106
of The National Historic Preservation Act, As It Pertains To The
California High-Speed Train Project [Fresno to Bakersfield]
Draft Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Railroad
Administration, The New York State Department of
Transportation, and The New York State Historic Preservation
Officer Regarding The High Speed Rail Empire Corridor Program
Programmatic Agreement Among the Federal Railroad
Administration, The Federal Transit Administration, The
Connecticut State Historic Preservation Office, The Massachusetts
State Historic Preservation Office, and The Connecticut
Department of Transportation Regarding Compliance With Section
106 of The National Historic Preservation Act, As It Pertains To The
New Haven-Hartford-Springfield High Speed Intercity Passenger
Rail Project
Page 2 of 3
Year
2013
2010
2009
2011
2011
2014
2012
Table 3. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency PAs and Other Documents
PA
General Services
Administration, ACHP and
SHPOs
General Services
Administration and District of
Columbia SHPO
Housing and Urban
Development and Louisiana
SHPO
National Park Service, ACHP
and SHPOs
US Department of Agriculture
- Forest Service, and
California and Nevada SHPOs
US Department of Agriculture
- Rural Development and
Pennsylvania SHPO
US Army Corps of Engineers,
US Fish and Wildlife Service,
FHWA, and North Dakota
DOT
Full Title of PA
Programmatic Agreement Among Region 9 of the General Services
Administration; The State Historic Preservation Officers of AZ, CA,
HI, and NV and The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Regarding Preservation, Maintenance, Rehabilitation, and Use of
Historic Properties and Consideration of Historic Properties in
Planning Activities
Programmatic Agreement among the United States General
Services Administration, the District of Columbia Historic
Preservation Office, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation,
the National Capital Planning Commission, the National Park
Service, and Trump Old Post Office LLC Regarding the Ground
Leasing, Rehabilitation, Ongoing Maintenance and Stewardship of
the Old Post Office Building and Annex, and Associated
Transportation Improvements, Washington, D.C.
Programmatic Agreement Among The City of New Orleans, The
Housing Authority of New Orleans, The Louisiana State Historic
Preservation Officer, and The Advisory Council On Historic
Preservation Regarding The Choice Neighborhoods Initiative
Iberville/Treme Transportation Plan New Orleans, Louisiana
Programmatic Agreement Among The National Park Service (U.S.
Department of The Interior), The Advisory Council On Historic
Preservation, And The National Conference Of State Historic
Preservation Officers For Compliance With Section 106 Of The
National Historic Preservation Act
Programmatic Agreement Among The U.S.D.A. Forest Service,
Pacific Southwest Region (Region 5), California State Historic
Preservation Officer, Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer,
And The Advisory Council On Historic Preservation Regarding The
Processes For Compliance With Section 106 of The National
Historic Preservation Act For Management of Historic Properties
By the National Forests Of The Pacific Southwest Region
Programmatic Agreement Among U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Rural Development, The Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation
Officer, And The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Regarding The Implementation of USDA Rural Development
Programs In Pennsylvania
Emergency Relief Programmatic Agreement Between The United
States Army Corps of Engineers, The United States Fish & Wildlife
Service, The Federal Highway Administration, North Dakota
Division, And The North Dakota Department of Transportation
Page 3 of 3
Year
2008
2013
2013
2008
2012
2005
2011
Table 4. State DOT Unscreened Actions: Roadways
General Maintenance and Repairs
 Routine maintenance and repair work within previously disturbed rights-of-way including filling ruts and
potholes, crack sealing, drainage maintenance, etc.
Pavement Resurfacing, Restoration, and Replacement
 Pavement resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, overlay, sealing, filling, milling,
grinding, grooving, etc. within previously disturbed right-of-way
Lane Additions and Widening
 Addition of lanes, turning lanes, and road widening within the existing right-of-way, roadbed or disturbed
median that is limited to less than one full travel lane
Shoulders
 Adding shoulders; paving, repaving, and flattening paved shoulders
Intersection Improvements
 Intersection improvements and ramp rehabilitation without additional right-of-way and in previously
disturbed areas
Roadway Safety
 Installation, repair, or replacement of safety appurtenances including glare screens, median barriers,
safety barriers, and safety cables in the highway median
 Installation, repair, or replacement of highway right-of-way fencing in previously disturbed soils
 Installation or replacement of guardrails and median barriers outside of NRHP listed or eligible properties
 Installation, removal or replacement of pavement markers, rumble strips, roadway striping, traffics
sensors, etc.
 Removal of objects on the roadways, hazardous waste, traffic accident cleanup, and fire control
Erosion Control
 Placement of rip rap to prevent erosion affecting bridges and waterways in previously disturbed soils or
where no ground disturbance is required
 Erosion control through slide and slope corrections within previously disturbed soils
Landscaping
 In-kind replacement of existing landscaping, removal of trees and vegetation, landscaping on fill slope
and back slope within the existing right-of-way and not within or adjacent to NRHP eligible properties
 Mowing, seeding/reseeding, planting and other ground cover maintenance activities, brush removal,
herbicidal spraying within the existing right-of-way
Signage, Lighting, and Signalization
 Installation, maintenance, repair, replacement of lighting, signals, and other traffic control systems
within the existing right-of-way or in previously disturbed soils
 Installation, maintenance, repair, or replacement of highway signs, advisory signs, warning signs,
interpretative signs, etc. , within the existing right-of-way
 Installation or replacement of Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) cameras and devices, and electronic
advisory signs
Utilities
 Installation, repair, relocation, in-kind replacement of existing underground utilities and utility poles
within the exiting footprint or roadway
Page 1 of 1
Table 5. State DOT Unscreened Actions: Bridges, Culverts, and Railroads
Bridges
 Bridge work, including replacement, rehabilitation, reconstruction, maintenance and repair of bridges
not listed in or eligible for listing in the NRHP or bridges less than 45 or 50 years where work is limited to
the existing right-of-way and/or to previously disturbed soils
 Routine bridge and structure maintenance and repair actions, including and limited to: cleaning of the
bridge; in-kind painting of bridge; in-kind replacement of bridge decking and expansion joints and
compression seals; deck overlay with the same or similar materials, etc. (No age limit, no mention of
NRHP status)
 Bridge structural maintenance, stabilization, and rehabilitation work (no further elaboration)
Culverts, Ditches, and Drainage Systems
 Repair, replacement, maintenance of non-NRHP eligible culverts and other drainage structures,
stormwater facilities, and sewers in previously disturbed soils within the existing right-of-way
 Stream stabilization and restoration activities, (including removal of debris or sediment obstructing the
natural waterway)
 All work on ditches and channels including reestablishment of existing ditches to original width in
previously disturbed soils
Railroads
 Rehabilitation, reconstruction, or refurbishing of existing at-grade railroad crossing including installation
of railroad crossing signs, signals, gates, and other safety upgrades in previously disturbed areas
Page 1 of 1
Table 6. State DOT Unscreened Actions: Miscellaneous
Land acquisition and disposal
 Acquisition of land, acquisition of easements, renewal of leases, transfer of federal lands to another
federal agency, disposal of excess right-of-way previously purchased with federal funds
Noise Barriers
 Installation and maintenance of noise barriers within existing roadway right-of-way
Curb, gutter, and sidewalk
 Construction of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks including curb cuts made under ADA
 In-kind replacement or repair of existing curb, gutters, and sidewalks with or without the addition of
benches, lights, and other street furniture
Bicycle, Recreational, Pedestrian Trails
 Improvements to existing bicycle lanes and pedestrian trails including adding lanes and walkways;
installation of shelters, bike racks and other facilities
 Projects involving construction of bicycle and pedestrian lanes, paths, and facilities; and multi-use paths
and facilities, outside of NRHP listed or eligible bridges, districts or properties
DOT Owned properties
 Maintenance and minor improvements to existing rest areas, park and ride areas, weigh stations,
welcome centers, maintenance facilities within previously disturbed soils
Non-Construction related Activities
 Non-construction activities, such as preliminary engineering, training, technical studies, non-invasive
inspections, and educational programs
 Purchase of materials and equipment including vehicles
Page 1 of 1
Table 7. State DOT Screened Actions: Roadways
General Maintenance and Repairs
 Routine roadway and roadside maintenance and repair activities within existing interchanges,
medians, and adjacent frontage roads in previously disturbed areas
Pavement Resurfacing, Restoration, and Replacement
 Restore, rehabilitate, and/or resurface existing pavement including sealcoats, chipseal, milling,
grooving, patching, etc., within the existing roadway prism
 Pavement reconstruction, resurfacing, placement of sealcoats and chipseals, and/or crack filling
that extends beyond the existing roadway prism
 Resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation, including minor roadway widening, milled rumble
strips, patching, intersection modifications
 Roadway rehabilitation and reconstruction which may include construction of turning lanes,
parking lots, auxiliary lanes and shoulder widening within a previously disturbed area
Lane Additions and Widening
 Widening of existing roads where additions are limited to a specified lane width (e.g., less than
one half lane) or distance from the existing right-of-way (e.g., less than 20 feet); includes minor
changes in road alignment
 Addition of lanes within the existing right-of-way where no cultural resources or NRHP eligible
sites or districts are present
Shoulders
 Adding new shoulders, paving or widening existing shoulders
Intersection/Interchange Improvements
 Intersection improvements including construction of turn and auxiliary lanes, minor realignment
of on/off ramps, channelization, signage, pavement markings, etc.
 Correcting substandard roadway geometrics and intersections in previously disturbed areas
 Placement of fill material on the side slopes of intersection crossroads and access for purposes
of flattening these slopes to meet safety criteria
Roadway Safety
 Removal of hazardous waste, traffic accident cleanup, objects on the roadway
 Emergency repairs to maintain integrity of bridges and roadways
 Storm damage repairs and debris cleanup and removal
 Installation, repair, or replacement of fencing including highway fencing, wildlife fencing, vandal
fencing etc.
 Installation of or repairs to guardrails, median barriers, safety barriers, guideposts, glare
screens, etc.
 Installation, removal, replacement of roadway markings such as painted stripes, raised
pavement markers, rumble strips, sensors, traffic impact attenuators, etc.
 Clear zone safety improvements including removal of rock fall and fixed objects
 Construction in areas of continuous slides, borrowing of rock and rock removal within the
exiting rights-of-way, installation of rock fall containment systems
Page 1 of 2
Table 7. State DOT Screened Actions: Roadways
Signage, Lighting and Signalization
 Installation, repairs, replacement, and maintenance of highway signs including directional,
safety and operational signs, mile marker signs, right-of-way markers, etc.
 Installation, replacement, upgrade to, or addition of lighting to roads, highways and
intersections
 Installation, repair, or replacement of traffic signalization and control systems
Roadway Monitoring and Surveillance
 Installation of highway monitoring systems including cameras, radio systems, metering
equipment, traffic loop detectors, Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
Erosion Control
 Erosion control measures including slide and slope corrections, placement of rip rap, scour
control measures, and emergency erosion control measures
Landscaping
 Installation, replacement, maintenance or removal of landscaping, vegetation, mowing, burning,
cutting and spraying of noxious weeds within and adjacent to the right-of-way
Utilities
 Installation, relocation, replacement, or repair of utilities including conduits, fiber optic cables,
pipelines, etc.
Page 2 of 2
Table 8. State DOT Screened Actions: Bridges, Culverts, and Railroads
Bridges
 Replacement, reconstruction, rehabilitation, relocation, and structural alterations to non-NRHP
eligible bridges and/or bridges that do not meet an established age threshold (e.g., less than 50
years old)
 Routine maintenance, stabilization, and repair work on NRHP listed or eligible bridges including
in-kind replacement of original materials, concrete patching and sealing, scour protection, etc.
 Bridge work, including bridge removal, structural repairs, replacement of expansion joints, deck
rehabilitation, utility projects, etc., (NRHP eligibility status or age not specified)
 All bridge/culvert related work with exceptions for bridges/culverts of a specified age or length
(e.g., less than 20 feet)
Culverts, Ditches, and Drainage Systems
 Repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of minor drainage features within the highway right of
way, including culverts, pipes, intake/outtake features, drainage ditches and rundowns
 Installation, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of minor drainage structures that are
specifically limited by age (e.g., less than 50 years), size (e.g., less than 15 feet) or NRHP status
 Improving existing drainage systems elements; reestablishment of existing ditches to original
width; stream stabilization and restoration
Railroads
 Installation, removal, replacement, reconstruction, or alterations to railroad crossings including
surfaces, gates, signals, warning signs, flashing lights, etc.
 Maintenance, repair and replacement of railroad tracks, rail beds, ties, circuitry
Page 1 of 1
Table 9. State DOT Screened Actions: Miscellaneous
General
 Work within existing permitted material source pits, quarries, or borrow sources; construction of projects
on and within dredge spoil sites, former strip mines, or borrow sources that have been previously
inventoried and where no cultural resources were identified
 Development of construction staging and temporary use areas for stockpiling equipment, gravels, and
waste materials that are outside of NRHP listed or eligible properties in previously disturbed areas
 Construction of wetland mitigation areas in previously disturbed soils, wetlands testing and delineation,
wetlands enhancement activities
 Non-construction related activities such as planning and technical studies, grants, research, and the
promulgation of rules, regulations, and directives
 Construction or repair of fish screens or ladders, springs, waterholes, or stream channels
Land Acquisition and Disposal
 Disposal or transfer of excess properties that do not contain cultural resources, NRHP listed or eligible
properties, or structures that are 50 years old or older
 Right-of-way activities such as hardship acquisition or acquisition of scenic or conservation easements
Testing and Drilling
 Engineering tests, including seismic, geologic, hazardous materials testing, drill samples, ground boring,
etc. in and outside highway right-of-way
Noise Barriers
 Installation of noise barriers or retaining walls and other noise reduction measures
DOT Owned Properties
 Construction or improvements to existing rest areas, chain control, park and ride lots, weigh stations,
rest areas, etc., where no new right-of-way is acquired
 Restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction of non- historic buildings
 Construction of bus transfer structures, visitors centers, museums
 Rehabilitation of historic buildings, structures, or facilities
Curb, gutter, and sidewalk
 Installation, replacement, or repair of curb, gutter; sidewalk improvements
Streetscapes
 Streetscape improvements including installation or removal of benches, boulders, garbage receptacles,
signage, lighting, landscaping, and pavers
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Compliance
 Installation of and improvements to ADA-compliant features
Bicycle, Recreational, Pedestrian Trails
 Construction, rehabilitation, and widening of existing bicycle and pedestrian trails, walkways and
amenities
Transit and Port facilities
 Modernization of transit facilities within existing property boundaries including roadway resurfacing,
installation of bus shelters, pullouts, park and ride facilities, bike racks, benches, etc.
 Modernization of a port facility within existing property boundaries involving roadway resurfacing,
equipment restoration, facility replacement, rehabilitation, and reconstruction
Page 1 of 1
Table 10. Most Common State DOT Unscreened Actions by Rank Order
Actions
Routine maintenance and repair work within previously disturbed rights-of-way, including
filling ruts and potholes, crack sealing, drainage maintenance, etc.
Pavement resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, overlay, sealing, filling,
milling, grinding, grooving, etc. within previously disturbed right-of-way.
Installation, maintenance, repair, replacement of lighting, signals, and other traffic control
systems within the existing right-of-way or in previously disturbed soils.
Installation, maintenance, repair, or replacement of highway signs, advisory signs, warning
signs, interpretative signs, etc. , within the existing right-of-way.
In-kind replacement or repair of existing curb, gutters, and sidewalks with or without the
addition of benches, lights, and other street furniture.
Installation or replacement of guardrails and median barriers outside of NRHP listed or eligible
properties.
Installation, removal or replacement of pavement markers, rumble strips, roadway striping,
traffics sensors, etc.
Repair, replacement, maintenance of non-National Register eligible culverts and other drainage
structures, stormwater facilities, and sewers in previously disturbed soils within the existing
right-of-way.
Rehabilitation, reconstruction, or refurbishing of existing at-grade railroad crossing including
installation of railroad crossing signs, signals, gates, and other safety upgrades in previously
disturbed areas.
Maintenance and minor improvements to existing rest areas, park and ride areas, weigh
stations, welcome centers, maintenance facilities within previously disturbed soils.
Non-construction activities, such as preliminary engineering, training, technical studies, noninvasive inspections, and educational programs.
Installation, repair, or replacement of highway right-of-way fencing in previously disturbed
soils.
Bridge work, including replacement, rehabilitation, reconstruction, maintenance and repair of
bridges not listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register, or bridges less than 45 or 50
years where work is limited to the existing right-of-way and/or to previously disturbed soils.
Acquisition of land, acquisition of easements, renewal of leases, transfer of federal lands to
another federal agency, disposal of excess right-of-way previously purchased with federal
funds.
Page 1 of 1
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
8
9
10
10
10
Table 11. Most Common State DOT Screened Actions by Rank
Actions
Replacement, reconstruction, rehabilitation, relocation, and structural alterations to nonNational Register eligible bridges and/or bridges that do not meet a established age threshold
(e.g., less than 50 year old).
Construction, rehabilitation, and widening of existing bicycle and pedestrian trails, walkways
and amenities.
Installation of or repairs to guardrails, median barriers, safety barriers, guideposts, glare
screens, etc.
Repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of minor drainage features within the highway right of
way, including culverts, pipes, intake/outtake features, drainage ditches and rundowns.
Installation, repairs, replacement, and maintenance of highway signs including directional,
safety and operational signs, mile marker signs, right-of-way markers, etc.
Installation, removal, replacement, reconstruction, or alterations to railroad crossings including
surfaces, gates, signals, warning signs, flashing lights, etc.
Installation, replacement, maintenance or removal of landscaping, vegetation, mowing,
burning, cutting and spraying of noxious weeds within and adjacent to the right-of-way.
Restore, rehabilitate, and/or resurface existing pavement, including sealcoats, chipseal, milling,
grooving, patching, etc., within the existing roadway prism.
Widening of existing roads where additions are limited to a specified lane width (e.g., less than
one half lane) or distance from the existing right-of-way (e.g., less than 20 feet). Includes minor
changes in road alignment.
Installation, replacement, upgrade to, or addition of lighting to roads, highways and
intersections.
Installation, repair, or replacement of traffic signalization and control systems.
Bridge work, including bridge removal, structural repairs, replacement of expansion joints, deck
rehabilitation, utility projects, etc., (National Register eligibility status or age not specified).
Installation, replacement, or repair of curb, gutter; sidewalk improvements.
Installation, removal, replacement of roadway markings such as painted stripes, raised
pavement markers, rumble strips, sensors, traffic impact attenuators, etc.
Construction or improvements to existing rest areas, chain control, park and ride lots, weigh
stations, rest areas, etc., where no new right-of-way is acquired.
Routine roadway and roadside maintenance and repair activities within existing interchanges,
medians, and adjacent frontage roads in previously disturbed areas.
Erosion control measures including slide and slope corrections, placement of rip rap, scour
control measures, and emergency erosion control measures.
Installation of noise barriers or retaining walls and other noise reduction measures.
Page 1 of 1
Rank
1
2
3
3
4
5
6
7
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
10
Table 12. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions by Overarching Category (Counts of Actions Listed in Each PA)
General Road
Maintenance
and Repairs
Army Corps and Virginia SHPO 2012
Bureau of Land Management and Alaska SHPO 1998
Bureau of Land Management and New Mexico SHPO
no date
Bureau of Land Management and Nevada SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land Management and Oregon SHPO 1998
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and ACHP 2013
Department of Energy and SHPOs 2010
FEMA and Louisiana SHPO 2009
Federal Railroad Administration and New York DOT
and SHPO 2014
Federal Railroad Administration/Federal Transit
Administration and Connecticut and Massachusetts
SHPOs 2012
General Services Administration and ACHP and SHPOs
2008
General Services Administration and District of
Columbia SHPO 2013
Housing and Urban Development and Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service and California and Nevada SHPO
2012
US Department of Agriculture and Pennsylvania SHPO
2005
US Fish and Wildlife Service and North Dakota DOT
2011
Total
Unscreened Actions
Bridges Utilities Culverts,
Railroads
Ditches,
and Canals
Miscellaneous
Total
2
2
1
2
1
6
9
1
2
1
1
55
1
3
1
1
81
1
3
1
11
2
1
3
1
1
5
6
1
5
7
1
1
2
4
6
1
15
16
1
2
3
32
47
1
5
118
187
2
1
2
1
25
4
Page 1 of 1
9
3
1
20
6
14
Table 13. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Screened Actions, by Category (Counts of Actions Listed in Each PA)
SCREENED ACTIONS
GENERAL ROAD MAINTENANCE &
REPAIRS
UTILITIES
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land National Park US Department of
Bureau of Land
Management and
Management Management and Management and
Management and Service, ACHP
Agriculture and
Management and
California and
Wyoming SHPO
and Idaho SHPO
Nevada SHPO
Oregon SHPO
and SHPOs
California and
Utah SHPO 2011
Nevada SHPOs
2006
1998
2009
1998
2008
Nevada SHPOs 2012
2007
2
5
4
2
2
1
1
4
21
5
40
2
4
1
14
CULVERTS
MISCELLANEOUS
TOTAL
2
2
9
15
4
11
1
3
1
1 of 1
4
5
Total
2
8
16
43
5
11
41
97
FIGURES
Figure 1. Number of Unscreened Actions Listed in PAs and Other
Documents (From High to Low)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Figure 2. Number of Screened Actions Listed in PAs and Other
Documents (From High to Low)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Figure 3. Percent of Unscreened Actions by Category
(High to Low)
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Figure 4. Percent of Screened Actions by Category (High to Low)
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Figure 5. Percent of Unscreened vs. Screened Actions by Category
(High to Low)
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Unscreened
Screened
Figure 6. Percent of PAs and Other Documents with Unscreened
Actions, by Category (High to Low)
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Figure 7. Percent of PAs and Other Documents with Screened
Actions, by Category (High to Low).
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Figure 8. Percent of PAs and Other Documents with Unscreened
and Screened Activities, Compared by Category
120
100
80
60
40
20
Unscreened
Screened
0
Figure 9. Counts of Unscreened and Screened Actions Listed in All
PAs and Other Documents, Sorted by Unscreened Actions
60
50
40
30
20
Unscreened
Screened
10
0
Figure 10. Counts of Unscreened and Screened Actions Listed in
All PAs and Other Documents, Sorted by Screened Actions
60
50
40
30
20
Unscreened
Screened
10
0
Figure 11. Section 106 Decisions and Findings Delegated to State
DOTs, by Percent of PAs and Other Documents
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Determine Area of Determine level of Make NRHP
No historic
Potential Effects effect, conduct determinations properties present
(APE)
Inventory
No historic
properties
affected
No adverse effect No adverse effect
with conditions
Adverse effect
Figure 12. Number of Section 106 Decisions and Findings
Delegated to State DOTs (by PA and Other Documents)
8
7
6
N
U
M
B
E
R
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
APPENDICES
Appendix 1. State DOT Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA and Other Documents)
Colorado
Connecticut
Statewide PA Minor
2014
Projects PA
2012
ROADWAYS
General Maintenance and Repairs
Routine maintenance and repair work within
previously disturbed rights-of-way including filling
ruts and potholes, crack sealing, drainage
maintenance, etc.
Pavement Resurfacing, Restoration, and
Replacement
Pavement resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, overlay, sealing, filling, milling,
grinding, grooving, etc. within previously disturbed
right-of-way
Delaware
District of
Statewide PA Columbia
2012
Citywide PA
2008
1
1
2
1
1
4
1
1
Florida
Funding
Agreement
2003
1
Georgia
Minor
Projects MOU
2014
2
Illinois
Minor
Projects PA
2010
Indiana
Minor
Projects PA
2006
3
3
1
1
Kentucky
Statewide PA
2011
Maryland
Minor
Projects PA
2008
1
Massachusetts
Minor Projects
PA 2004
Michigan
Letter
Agreement
2005
Missouri
Minor
Projects PA
2009
Nebraska
Letter
Agreement
2010
New Mexico
Statewide PA
2010
North
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Carolina Statewide PA Statewide PA
Minor
2010
2011
Projects PA
2007
1
2
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
Texas
Statewide PA
2005
2
5
1
1
2
1
1
1
Vermont
Statewide PA
2000
Total
31
1
25
Lane Additions and Widening
Addition of lanes, turning lanes, and road widening
within the existing right-of-way, roadbed or disturbed
median that is limited to a defined width e.g., less
than one full travel lane; less than twice the width of
the existing paved roadway
Shoulders
Adding shoulders; paving, repaving, and flattening
paved shoulders
1
3
1
Intersection Improvements
Intersection improvements and ramp rehabilitation
without additional right-of-way and in previously
disturbed areas
Roadway Safety
Installation, repair, or replacement of safety
appurtenances including glare screens, median
barriers, safety barriers, and safety cables in the
highway median.
Installation, repair, or replacement of highway rightof-way fencing in previously disturbed soils
1
1
1
1
1
Installation or replacement of guardrails and median
barriers outside of NRHP listed or eligible properties
Installation, removal or replacement of pavement
markers, rumble strips, roadway striping, traffics
sensors, etc.
Removal of objects on the roadways, hazardous
waste, traffic accident cleanup, and fire control
1
Subtotal
10
EROSION CONTROL
Placement of rip rap to prevent erosion affecting
bridges and waterways in previously disturbed soils
or where no ground disturbance is required
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
6
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
2
5
4
1
1
1
1
8
7
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
11
2
16
1
16
1
4
6
12
5
5
4
4
10
6
3
7
11
1
1
5
7
1
Erosion control through slide and slope corrections
within previously disturbed soils
Subtotal
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
4
126
2
5
1
7
LANDSCAPING
In-kind replacement of existing landscaping, removal
of trees and vegetation, landscaping on fill slope and
back slope within the existing right-of-way and not
within or adjacent to NRHP eligible properties
1
2
1
1 of 3
7
Appendix 1. State DOT Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA and Other Documents)
Colorado
Connecticut
Statewide PA Minor
2014
Projects PA
2012
Delaware
District of
Statewide PA Columbia
2012
Citywide PA
2008
Florida
Funding
Agreement
2003
Georgia
Minor
Projects MOU
2014
Illinois
Minor
Projects PA
2010
Indiana
Minor
Projects PA
2006
Mowing, seeding/reseeding, planting and other
ground cover maintenance activities, brush removal,
herbicidal spraying within the existing right-of-way
Subtotal
SIGNAGE, LIGHTING, AND SIGNALIZATION
Installation, maintenance, repair, replacement of
lighting, signals, and other traffic control systems
within the existing right-of-way or in previously
disturbed soils
Installation, maintenance, repair, or replacement of
highway signs, advisory signs, warning signs,
interpretative signs, etc. , within the existing right-ofway
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
Kentucky
Statewide PA
2011
Maryland
Minor
Projects PA
2008
2
1
2
2
1
1
Massachusetts
Minor Projects
PA 2004
Michigan
Letter
Agreement
2005
Missouri
Minor
Projects PA
2009
Nebraska
Letter
Agreement
2010
New Mexico
Statewide PA
2010
North
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Carolina Statewide PA Statewide PA
Minor
2010
2011
Projects PA
2007
BRIDGES
Bridge work, including replacement, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, maintenance and repair of bridges
not listed in or eligible for listing in the NRHP or
bridges less than 45 or 50 years where work is limited
to the existing right-of-way and/or to previously
disturbed soils.
4
2
1
2
1
Routine bridge and structure maintenance and repair
actions, including and limited to: cleaning of the
bridge; in-kind painting of bridge; in-kind
replacement of bridge decking and expansion joints
and compression seals; deck overlay with the same
or similar materials, etc. (No age limit, no mention of
NRHP status)
UTILITIES
Installation, repair, relocation, in-kind replacement of
existing underground utilities and utility poles within
the exiting footprint or roadway
CULVERTS, DITCHES, AND DRAINAGE SYSTEMS
Repair, replacement, maintenance of non-NRHP
eligible culverts and other drainage structures,
stormwater facilities, and sewers in previously
disturbed soils within the existing right-of-way
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
7
2
1
2
2
14
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
4
2
3
49
1
1
10
1
5
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
4
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Stream stabilization and restoration activities,
(including removal of debris or sediment obstructing
the natural waterway).
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
RAILROADS
Rehabilitation, reconstruction, or refurbishing of
existing at-grade railroad crossing including
installation of railroad crossing signs, signals, gates,
and other safety upgrades in previously disturbed
areas
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2 of 3
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
22
2
2
2
17
2
9
1
12
1
All work on ditches and channels including
reestablishment of existing ditches to original width
in previously disturbed soils
Subtotal
3
1
1
1
25
1
1
1
Total
1
4
1
Bridge structural maintenance, stabilization, and
rehabilitation work (no further elaboration)
Subtotal
4
Vermont
Statewide PA
2000
1
Installation or replacement of Intelligent
Transportation System (ITS) cameras and devices,
and electronic advisory signs
Subtotal
Texas
Statewide PA
2005
3
1
1
2
1
3
2
17
1
1
1
12
Appendix 1. State DOT Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA and Other Documents)
Colorado
Connecticut
Statewide PA Minor
2014
Projects PA
2012
Delaware
District of
Statewide PA Columbia
2012
Citywide PA
2008
Florida
Funding
Agreement
2003
Georgia
Minor
Projects MOU
2014
Illinois
Minor
Projects PA
2010
Indiana
Minor
Projects PA
2006
MISCELLANEOUS
Land acquisition and disposal
Acquisition of land, acquisition of easements,
renewal of leases, transfer of federal lands to
another federal agency, disposal of excess right-ofway previously purchased with federal funds
Kentucky
Statewide PA
2011
Maryland
Minor
Projects PA
2008
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
North
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Carolina Statewide PA Statewide PA
Minor
2010
2011
Projects PA
2007
1
1
2
1
1
1
Texas
Statewide PA
2005
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
3
Vermont
Statewide PA
2000
Total
3
2
11
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
9
2
1
2
2
18
1
4
1
Non-Construction related Activities
Non-construction activities, such as preliminary
engineering, training, technical studies, non-invasive
inspections, and educational programs
TOTAL
New Mexico
Statewide PA
2010
1
2
DOT Owned properties
Maintenance and minor improvements to existing
rest areas, park and ride areas, weigh stations,
welcome centers, maintenance facilities within
previously disturbed soils
Subtotal
Nebraska
Letter
Agreement
2010
3
Projects involving construction of bicycle and
pedestrian lanes, paths, and facilities; and multi-use
paths and facilities, outside of NRHP listed or eligible
bridges, districts or properties
Purchase of materials and equipment including
vehicles
Missouri
Minor
Projects PA
2009
1
Curb, gutter, and sidewalk
Construction of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks
including curb cuts and ramps made under ADA
Bicycle, Recreational, Pedestrian Trails
Improvements to existing bicycle lanes and
pedestrian trails including adding lanes and
walkways; installation of shelters, bike racks and
other facilities
Michigan
Letter
Agreement
2005
2
Noise Barriers
Installation and maintenance of noise barriers within
existing roadway right-of-way
In-kind replacement or repair of existing curb,
gutters, and sidewalks with or without the addition of
benches, lights, and other street furniture
Massachusetts
Minor Projects
PA 2004
4
1
1
1
2
1
1
12
2
4
1
3
1
1
1
13
4
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
4
3
6
4
3
7
3
5
13
7
5
5
78
18
9
14
12
8
15
16
13
12
17
28
12
13
16
15
22
24
21
25
19
329
3 of 3
Appendix 2. State DOT Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA or Other Documents)
California
Statewide PA
2013
ROADWAYS
General Maintenance and Repairs
Routine roadway and roadside maintenance and
repair activities within existing interchanges,
medians, and adjacent frontage roads in previously
disturbed areas
1
Pavement Resurfacing, Restoration, and
Replacement
Restore, rehabilitate, and/or resurface existing
pavement including sealcoats, chipseal, milling,
grooving, patching, etc., within the existing
roadway prism
Pavement reconstruction, resurfacing, placement
of sealcoats and chipseals, and/or crack filling that
extends beyond the existing roadway prism
Colorado
Statewide PA
2014
Connecticut
Minor
Projects PA
2012
1
Delaware
Statewide PA
2012
1
Idaho Minor Illinois Minor Indiana
Projects PA Projects PA Minor
2006
2010
Projects PA
2006
1
1
1
Florida
Funding
Agreement
2003
1
3
Maryland
Minor
Projects PA
2008
Missouri
Ohio Statewide Oregon
Minor
PA 2011
Statewide PA
Projects PA
2011
2009
2
1
1
3
3
2
1
10
1
14
4
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
Placement of fill material on the side slopes of
intersection crossroads and access for purposes of
flattening these slopes to meet safety criteria
1
1
1
1
Emergency repairs to maintain integrity of bridges
and roadways
Installation, repair, or replacement of fencing
including highway fencing, wildlife fencing, vandal
fencing etc.
1
1
1
1
9
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
7
1
1
4
1
1
5
1
1
5
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1 of 4
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
4
14
1
Correcting substandard roadway geometrics and
intersections in previously disturbed areas
Installation of or repairs to guardrails, median
barriers, safety barriers, guideposts, glare screens,
etc.
2
Total
1
1
1
Shoulders
Adding new shoulders, paving or widening existing
shoulders
Storm damage repairs and debris cleanup and
removal
2
1
Addition of lanes within the existing right-of-way
where no cultural resources or NRHP eligible sites
or districts are present.
Roadway Safety
Removal of hazardous waste, traffic accident
cleanup, objects on the roadway
Rhode
South Carolina Texas
Washington
Island
Statewide PA Statewide PA Statewide PA
Minor
2011
2005
2012
Projects PA
2001
1
Roadway rehabilitation and reconstruction which
may include construction of turning lanes, parking
lots, auxiliary lanes and shoulder widening within a
previously disturbed area
Intersection/Interchange Improvements
Intersection improvements including construction
of turn and auxiliary lanes, minor realignment of
on/off ramps, channelization, signage, pavement
markings, etc.
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Statewide PA 2010 Statewide PA
(Appendix C
2012
update)
1
2
Resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation,
including minor roadway widening, milled rumble
strips, patching, intersection modifications
Lane Additions and Widening
Widening of existing roads where additions are
limited to a specified lane width (e.g., less than one
half lane) or distance from the existing right-of-way
(e.g., less than 20 feet). Includes minor changes in
road alignment.
Iowa
Maine
Statewide PA Statewide PA
2012
2004
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
11
2
17
Appendix 2. State DOT Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA or Other Documents)
California
Statewide PA
2013
Installation, removal, replacement of roadway
markings such as painted stripes, raised pavement
markers, rumble strips, sensors, traffic impact
attenuators, etc.
2
Colorado
Statewide PA
2014
1
Connecticut
Minor
Projects PA
2012
Delaware
Statewide PA
2012
1
1
Subtotal
Maryland
Minor
Projects PA
2008
Missouri
Ohio Statewide Oregon
Minor
PA 2011
Statewide PA
Projects PA
2011
2009
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Statewide PA 2010 Statewide PA
(Appendix C
2012
update)
1
2
Rhode
South Carolina Texas
Washington
Island
Statewide PA Statewide PA Statewide PA
Minor
2011
2005
2012
Projects PA
2001
1
2
1
12
17
7
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
3
2
1
1
2
1
Installation, replacement, upgrade to, or addition of
lighting to roads, highways and intersections
Installation, repair, or replacement of traffic
signalization and control systems
Iowa
Maine
Statewide PA Statewide PA
2012
2004
1
Construction in areas of continuous slides,
borrowing of rock, removal of rock and vegetation
on slopes within the exiting rights-of-way,
installation of rock fall containment systems
Installation, repairs, replacement, and maintenance
of highway signs including directional, safety and
operational signs, mile marker signs, right-of-way
markers, etc.
Idaho Minor Illinois Minor Indiana
Projects PA Projects PA Minor
2006
2010
Projects PA
2006
1
Clear zone safety improvements including removal
of rock fall and fixed objects
Subtotal
SIGNAGE, LIGHTING AND SIGNALIZATION
Florida
Funding
Agreement
2003
6
11
6
2
4
1
3
7
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
3
4
3
3
Total
1
12
1
2
2
4
14
136
1
16
6
2
9
12
6
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
12
1
1
1
1
1
12
2
3
4
3
40
2
2
3
2
1
1
2
ROADWAY MONITORING AND SURVEILLANCE
Installation of highway monitoring systems
including cameras, radio systems, metering
equipment, traffic loop detectors, Intelligent
Transportation Systems (ITS)
EROSION CONTROL
Erosion control measures including slide and slope
corrections, placement of rip rap, scour control
measures, and emergency erosion control
measures
LANDSCAPING
Installation, replacement, maintenance or removal
of landscaping, vegetation, mowing, burning,
cutting and spraying of noxious weeds within and
adjacent to the right-of-way.
CULVERT, DITCHES, AND DRAINAGE SYSTEMS
Repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of minor
drainage features within the highway right of way,
including culverts, headwalls, pipes, and
intake/outtake features, drainage ditches and
rundowns.
1
2
Installation, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement
of minor drainage structures that are specifically
limited by age (e.g., less than 50 years), size (e.g.,
less than 15 feet) or NRHP status
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
Improving existing drainage systems elements;
reestablishment of existing ditches to original
width; stream stabilization and restoration
Subtotal
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
2 of 4
1
1
3
2
2
9
1
1
10
1
2
1
1
13
1
1
1
1
18
1
1
5
1
4
2
3
1
1
27
Appendix 2. State DOT Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA or Other Documents)
California
Statewide PA
2013
BRIDGES
Replacement, reconstruction, rehabilitation,
relocation, and structural alterations to non-NRHP
eligible bridges and/or bridges that do not meet a
established age threshold (e.g., less than 50 year
old).
Routine maintenance, stabilization, and repair work
on NRHP listed or eligible bridges including in-kind
replacement of original materials, concrete
patching and sealing, scour protection, etc.
Colorado
Statewide PA
2014
1
2
1
1
Bridge work, including bridge removal, structural
repairs, replacement of expansion joints, deck
rehabilitation, utility projects, etc., (NRHP eligibility
status or age not specified)
RAILROADS
Installation, removal, replacement, reconstruction,
or alterations to railroad crossings including
surfaces, gates, signals, warning signs, flashing
lights, etc.
1
Delaware
Statewide PA
2012
1
2
All bridge/culvert related work with exceptions for
bridges/culverts of a specified age or length (e.g.,
less than 20 feet)
Subtotal
UTILITIES
Installation, relocation, replacement, or repair of
utilities including conduits, fiber optic cables,
pipelines, etc.
Connecticut
Minor
Projects PA
2012
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
Maryland
Minor
Projects PA
2008
2
Missouri
Ohio Statewide Oregon
Minor
PA 2011
Statewide PA
Projects PA
2011
2009
2
1
2
1
1
1
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Statewide PA 2010 Statewide PA
(Appendix C
2012
update)
1
Rhode
South Carolina Texas
Washington
Island
Statewide PA Statewide PA Statewide PA
Minor
2011
2005
2012
Projects PA
2001
2
2
5
3
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
4
1
2
2
2
2
1
23
6
1
1
1
4
4
1
1
6
2
2
2
4
1
1
3
3
1
1
3
1
1
2
1
1
17
1
20
1
3
1
2
1
3
2
1
1
43
3
1
1
Land Acquisition and Disposal
Disposal or transfer of excess properties that do
not contain cultural resources, NRHP listed or
eligible properties, or structures that are 50 years
old or older
4
1
1
Non-construction related activities such as planning
and technical studies, grants, research, and the
promulgation of rules, regulations, and directives
12
7
1
1
Construction of wetland mitigation areas in
previously disturbed soils, wetlands testing and
delineation, wetlands enhancement activities
1
1
2
1
Total
2
Development of construction staging and
temporary use areas for stockpiling equipment,
gravels, and waste materials that are outside of
NRHP listed or eligible properties in previously
disturbed areas
Right-of-way activities such as hardship acquisition
or acquisition of scenic or conservation easements
1
Iowa
Maine
Statewide PA Statewide PA
2012
2004
2
MISCELLANEOUS
General
Work within existing permitted material source
pits, quarries, or borrow sources; construction of
projects on and within dredge spoil sites, former
strip mines, or borrow sources that have been
previously inventoried and where no cultural
resources were identified
Construction or repair of fish screens or ladders,
springs, waterholes, or stream channels
Idaho Minor Illinois Minor Indiana
Projects PA Projects PA Minor
2006
2010
Projects PA
2006
2
Maintenance, repair and replacement of railroad
tracks, rail beds, ties, circuitry
Subtotal
Florida
Funding
Agreement
2003
2
1
1
1
3
2
1
6
1
3 of 4
3
Appendix 2. State DOT Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA or Other Documents)
California
Statewide PA
2013
Colorado
Statewide PA
2014
Connecticut
Minor
Projects PA
2012
Testing and Drilling
Engineering tests, including seismic, geologic,
hazardous materials testing, drill samples, ground
boring, etc. in and outside highway right-of-way.
1
2
Noise Barriers
Installation of noise barriers or retaining walls and
other noise reduction measures
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
DOT Owned Properties
Construction or improvements to existing rest
areas, chain control, park and ride lots, weigh
stations, rest areas, etc., where no new right-ofway is acquired.
Restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction of nonhistoric buildings.
Delaware
Statewide PA
2012
1
Streetscapes
Streetscape improvements including installation or
removal of benches, boulders, garbage receptacles,
signage, lighting, landscaping, and pavers
Idaho Minor Illinois Minor Indiana
Projects PA Projects PA Minor
2006
2010
Projects PA
2006
Iowa
Maine
Statewide PA Statewide PA
2012
2004
Maryland
Minor
Projects PA
2008
Missouri
Ohio Statewide Oregon
Minor
PA 2011
Statewide PA
Projects PA
2011
2009
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Statewide PA 2010 Statewide PA
(Appendix C
2012
update)
Rhode
South Carolina Texas
Washington
Island
Statewide PA Statewide PA Statewide PA
Minor
2011
2005
2012
Projects PA
2001
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
10
1
1
5
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
10
1
1
Total
1
1
1
1
1
1
Construction of bus transfer structures, visitors
centers, museums.
Rehabilitation of historic buildings, structures, or
facilities
Curb, gutter, and sidewalk
Installation, replacement, or repair of curb, gutter;
sidewalk improvements.
Florida
Funding
Agreement
2003
1
1
1
1
1
1
12
1
5
1
6
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Compliance
Installation of and improvements to ADA-compliant
features
Bicycle, Recreational, Pedestrian Trails
Construction, rehabilitation, and widening of
existing bicycle and pedestrian trails, walkways and
amenities
1
Transit and Port facilities
Modernization of transit facilities within existing
property boundaries including roadway resurfacing,
installation of bus shelters, pullouts, park and ride
facilities, bike racks, benches, etc.
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Modernization of a port facility within existing
property boundaries involving roadway resurfacing,
equipment restoration, facility replacement,
rehabilitation, and reconstruction
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
20
1
3
1
2
Subtotal
9
13
6
4
13
6
1
1
3
3
8
2
7
4
3
1
12
1
1
6
104
TOTAL
31
48
27
16
38
19
5
10
14
19
23
13
15
23
8
16
39
11
4
30
409
4 of 4
Appendix 3. State DOT Unscreened Actions by Overarching Action Category
EXEMPTED ACTIONS
COUNTS OF UNSCREENED ACTIONS LISTED IN
EACH PA AND OTHER DOCUMENTS, PER
CATEGORY
Colorado Statewide PA 2014
Connecticut Minor Projects PA 2012
Delaware Statewide PA 2012
District of Columbia Citywide PA 2008
Florida Funding Agreement 2003
Georgia Minor Projects MOU 2014
Illinois Minor Projects PA 2010
Indiana Minor Projects PA 2006
Kentucky Statewide PA 2011
Maryland Minor Projects PA 2008
Massachusetts Minor Projects PA 2004
Michigan Letter Agreement 2005
Missouri Minor Projects PA 2009
Nebraska Letter Agreement 2010
New Mexico Statewide PA 2010
North Carolina Minor Projects PA 2007
Ohio Statewide PA 2011
Pennsylvania Statewide PA 2010
Texas Statewide PA 2005
Vermont Statewide PA 2000
Total
ROADWAYS
10
6
8
4
2
5
8
7
4
6
12
5
4
4
10
6
3
7
11
4
126
EROSION
CONTROL
1
LANDSCAPING
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
7
14
SIGNAGE, LIGHTING, AND
SIGNALIZATION
4
2
2
4
4
1
1
1
4
3
1
2
4
1
3
3
4
2
3
49
BRIDGES
UTILITIES
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CULVERTS, DITCHES,
AND DRAINAGE
SYSTEMS
RAILROADS
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
17
1 of 1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
9
1
1
1
3
2
17
1
1
2
1
1
1
12
MISCELLANEOUS
4
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
4
3
6
4
3
7
3
5
13
7
5
5
78
TOTAL
18
9
14
12
8
15
16
13
12
17
28
12
13
16
15
22
24
21
25
19
329
Appendix 4. State DOT Screened Actions by Overarching Action Category
Screened Actions
COUNTS OF SCREENED ACTIONS LISTED IN EACH PA
AND OTHER DOCUMENTS, PER CATEGORY
California Statewide PA 2013
Colorado Statewide PA 2014
Connecticut Minor Projects PA 2012
Delaware Statewide PA 2012
Florida Funding Agreement 2003
Idaho Minor Projects PA 2006
Illinois Minor Projects PA 2010
Indiana Minor Projects PA 2006
Iowa Statewide PA 2012
Maine Statewide PA 2004
Maryland Minor Projects PA 2008
Missouri Minor Projects PA 2009
Ohio Statewide PA 2011
Oregon Statewide PA 2011
Pennsylvania Statewide PA 2010
Puerto Rico Statewide PA 2012
Rhode Island Minor Projects PA 2001
South Carolina Statewide PA 2011
Texas Statewide PA 2005
Washington Statewide PA 2012
Total
SIGNAGE,
LIGHTING AND
ROADWAYS SIGNALIZATION
12
2
17
4
7
3
2
6
11
1
6
2
2
4
1
3
2
7
3
4
2
3
3
3
6
4
2
2
9
2
12
3
6
1
2
14
3
136
40
ROADWAY
MONITORING AND
SURVEILLANCE
1
2
1
EROSION
CONTROL
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
LANDSCAPING
1
CULVERT,
DITCHES, AND
DRAINAGE
SYSTEMS
2
2
3
1
1
10
1
13
1 of 1
1
27
BRIDGES
2
5
3
1
3
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
1
1
3
1
4
43
UTILITIES
1
1
1
1
1
RAILROADS
1
4
1
1
6
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
7
20
MISCELLANEOUS
9
13
6
4
13
6
1
1
3
3
8
2
7
4
3
1
12
1
1
6
104
TOTAL
31
48
27
16
38
19
5
10
14
19
23
13
15
23
8
16
39
11
4
30
409
Appendix 5. Delegation of Section 106 Decisions and Findings to State DOTs
California Statewide PA 2013
Colorado Statewide PA 2010
Delaware Statewide PA 2013
Iowa Statewide PA 2012
Kentucky Statewide PA 2011
Maryland Minor Projects PA 2008
Massachusetts Minor Projects PA 2004
Minnesota Statewide PA 2005
Missouri Minor Projects PA 2009
Nebraska Letter Agreement 2010
New Mexico Statewide PA 2010
North Carolina Minor Projects PA 2007
Ohio Statewide PA 2011
Oregon Statewide PA 2011
Pennsylvania Statewide PA 2010
Rhode Island Minor Projects PA 2001
South Carolina Statewide PA 2011
Texas Statewide PA 2005
Vermont Statewide PA 2000
Washington Statewide PA 2012
Total Count
Determine Area
of Potential
Effects (APE)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Section 106 Decision or Finding
Determination
Determine level
that no
of effort for
historic
No historic
No adverse
conducting
properties
effect
Evaluate National properties are
present
inventory
Register eligibility
affected finding
finding
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
17
X
17
X
X
X
X
13
X
X
Resolving
adverse effect
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
16
15
1 of 1
No adverse effect
finding with
conditions
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
5
3
1
Total Count
5
1
5
6
4
3
5
4
3
1
5
5
7
2
5
5
5
6
8
2
87
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
ROADWAYS
Road maintenance, repairs, or replacement
Roadway. Repair or replace the roadway surface or
roadbed.
Roadway. Reestablish the original footprint (cross section
and profile).
Road maintenance requiring no new surface disturbance
and which is unlikely to impact known or undocumented
sites
Routine road or trail maintenance in previously inventoried
areas
Repair of roads to pre-disaster geometric design standards
and conditions using in-kind materials, number and width
of lanes, shoulders, medians, curvature, grades, clearances,
and side slopes.
Repair of road composition finish course with materials to
maintain pre-disaster size, traffic capacity, and load
classifications of motor vehicles, including the reshaping
and compacting of roadbed soil and the repair of asphalt or
concrete pavements.
Repair or replacement of traffic control devices such as
traffic signs and signals, delineators, pavement markings,
traffic surveillance systems.
In-kind repair of road lightjng systems, including period
lighting fixture styles.
In-kind repair of road appurtenances such as curbs, berms,
fences, and sidewalks that are not brick or stone.
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
1
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
Sub Totals
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
In-kind repair of roadway safety elements such as barriers,
guardrails, and impact-attenuation devices.
Repairs to road slips and landslides that do not require
grading of undisturbed soils on the up­ hill side of the slip
and that do not require work or staging areas in sites of
properties where buildings or structures are more than 45
years old.
Rebuilding or re-establishing an eroded or slumped
roadbed on the downhill side of the road using such
methods as lag and piling walls, gabions, rock fill, etc.
Re-establishing and/or armoring of existing ditches
Repair or replacement of fencing
Repair or in-kind replacement of fencing.
Signage, ligthing, and signalization - maintenance, repair,
or replacement
Removal or replacement of signal snd signal foundations
that are not individually listed in the NRHP , have not been
previously determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, or
have not been determined to be a contributing resource to
a NRHP lited or eligible historic district , & where the
removal or replacement is required to provide safe, &
where removal or replacement is required to provide safe,
reliable rail infrastructure.
Placement of recreational, special designation, or
informational signs unless within known sites
Installation or repair of routine signs, markers, or cattle
guards on or adjacent to existing roads if within existing
disturbed grounds
Routine maintenance of exterior building lighting, including
building illumination
Installation of routine signs, markers or cattleguards on
shoulders of existing roads.
Installations of signposts and monuments, when no new
ground disturbance is involved
Repair or in kind replacement of signs and/or awnings.
Installation of temporary signage, as long as it does not
adversely affect character defining features.
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 of 12
1
1
3
1
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
2
1
1
2
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
Sub Totals
Maintenance, repair or replacement of traffic control
systems or devices utilizing existing infrastructure, including
cameras, traffic signals, hazard identification beacons, etc.
Installation or replacement of Intelligent Transportation
System (ITS) cameras and devices, and electronic advisory
signs
Maintenance, repair or replacement of highway signs, at
their existing locations
Replacement of outdated highway signs that do not meet
current reflectivity standards
Signs, signal installation, or modification and surface
improvements to existing railway/transit crossings
New signage (roadway signs, advance warning signs,
changeable message signs [CMS]), rumble strips, chevrons,
stop bars and other pavement markings (raised, reflective,
or otherwise)
Installation of traffic signs, interpretive signs, traffic signals,
traffic signal interconnect systems, or overhead lighting on
existing roads
Installation or upgrade of regulatory signs, and railroad
warning signs and devices; or upgrade of advisory signs
Installation of lighting or signals at intersections
Repair, replacement, or upgrade of existing lighting, signals,
signage, and other traffic control devices in previously
disturbed soils.
Installation of new lighting, fencing, retaining walls, traffic
signals, advisory signs, barriers and/or noise walls
In-kind replacement of existing lighting within interstate
right-of-way or at underpasses
Upgrade of existing tower lighting to new technologies
Restoration, replacement, upgrading, or addition of
highway lighting systems (includes under-deck,
conventional, high mast and offset lighting systems) on
controlled access highways
Sub-base improvement limited to the depth of the existing
sub-base, for drainage purposes
Subtotal
1
3
1
11
2 of 12
1
2
25
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
BRIDGES
Bridges. In-kind repairs of bridge abutments where no
excavation or new construction is proposed.
Bridges. In kind repairs of abutments, wing walls, piers,
decks, and fenders, where no new construction is proposed.
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
1
1
All work to be done on bridges less than 50 years of age and
not listed or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places.
All work, up to and including replacement of bridge
structures with less than a 20-foot span length, excluding
stone slab culverts and stone arch and brick arch structures
Bridge work, in general, where the project takes place in
previously disturbed soils; AND The work is limited to
bridge substructure or superstructure elements without
replacing, widening, or elevating the superstructure; AND
EITHER The bridge is less than 45 years old; OR The bridge
is over 45 years old and the bridge was determined not
NRHP eligible OR The bridge is over 45 years old, is part of
the Interstate system, and was determined not NRHP
eligible
Minor bridge rehabilitation, bridge rails, or substructure
alterations where the work is confined to the bridge itself,
the bridge is no older than 45 years at the date of project
review, and the bridge has been determined ineligible for
the National Register of Historic Places
Bridge deck resurfacing, overlay, pavement repair, seal
coating, pavement grinding, and pavement marking on
NRHP eligible or listed bridges where work is limited to the
roadway cross section, the existing surface is already
concrete or aspahlt, the work does not impact structural
members of the bridge.
Bridge reconstruction and rehabilitation which does not
include roadway widening or modification of existing piers
and abutments, but which may include bridge repairs, deck
replacement or repair, railing repair, painting and other
maintenance work, excluding historic bridges or bridges
more than 40 years old.
Routine bridge and structure maintenance and repair
actions, including and limited to: cleaning of the bridge; inkind painting of bridge; in-kind replacement of bridge
decking and expansion joints and compression seals; deck
overlay with the same or similar materials, etc.
Bridge rehabilitation projects including minor widening or
minor changes in alignment provided that all standing
structures visible to and from the work limits are less than
50 years old, or all properties over 50 years old were
previously determined not eligible
For bridges that are not fifty years old, rehabilitation of
existing pavement and/or application of new pavement on
bridge decks, replacement of membranes, and replacement
of expansion joints, and replacement/repair of railings
where bridge is located outside a historic district
Bridge painting, joint replacements and pin and hanger
replacements on bridges less than fifty (50) years old
Heat straightening anchor pipes and/or minor in-kind
replacement of structural members as a result of collisions
3 of 12
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
Sub Totals
1
1
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
Sub Totals
Installation of chain link safety (jump-inhibiting) fencing
Bridge painting, bridge jacking, and bridge joint
replacement
Pile encasement
Installation of “helper” support piles through the existing
bridge deck
Milling and/or hyrdro-demolition of bridge decks or full
deck replacement
Beam end and bearing repair of bridges less than 50 years
old
Installation of carbon fiber reinforcement or posttensioning design
Repair/replace existing box girder drainage system, epoxy
crack damage inside box girder, and repair undermined
edge bents
Replacement of beams (floor and edge) on bridges
Repair/replace portions of approach slabs & bridge deck,
damaged PE pipes, tower elevators, field splice bolts, joints
and headers, voids, cheek & back walls, concrete bent caps,
bridge/pot bearings, and slope paving
Crack repair, spall and delaminated repair, post tension
duct repair, repair/replace co-polymer overlay, etc.
Replacement of existing bridge fender structures
Placement of rip rap or fill over existing in-kind materials at
bridge bents
Bridge structural maintenance, stabilization, and
rehabilitation work
Interstate bridge or roadway projects where all work occurs
within the previously disturbed areas of the roadway rightof-way
Emergency structural repairs to maintain the structural
integrity of a bridge, unless the bridge is listed on or
determined eligible for listing on the National Register.
Bridges. Repair of replacement of non-historic bridges
wehre repair work, including the establishment and use of
staging areas, does not exceed the existing road right of
way.
Temporary bridge supports. Construct temporary bridge
supports or other structures that are necessary to conduct
the repairs as necessary.
Subtotal
UTILITIES
Upgrading or adding new overhead lines (electric or
telephone) to existing poles from existing access when
there is no change in pole configuration or upgrading of
existing access
Rights-of-way for overhead lines involving no pole or tower
on NM BLM land
Construction of overhead utility lines on or immediately
parallel to roads or streets within the corporate limits of a
community, or areas immediately contiguous to these
limits, or, if unincorporated, the limits of the developed
areas within the Applicant's service area if located outside
of or adjacent to a historic district.
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
Construction of single-pole or double-pole overhead power
lines on or immediately parallel to existing road or highway
right-of-way where the line will: a. Be on or within five (5)
feet of the edge of the existing right-of-way; b. Be in
cultivated land, or in an open area where no tree clearing is
needed; and, c. Include the installation of poles only by
auguring in the standard
Projects involving underground utilities installed by plow.
Placement of transformers, utility pedestals, or water
meters immediately adjacent to installed utility lines.
4 of 12
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
Upgrading existing telecommunications towers where no
height increases are proposed and where the same or
substantially equivalent support structure will be utilized at
the existing tower location.
Repair or replacement of existing wires, anchors, crossarms,
and other miscellaneous hardware on existing overhead
lines, and of existing poles when conducted at or
immediately adjacent to the old pole locations.
Relocation of existing overhead lines or cables resulting
from highway reconstruction or improvement projects,
where the relocated lines or cables will be located within or
immediately adjacent to the new highway easement.
Repair or replacement of subsurface water, sewer, natural
gas, electric or telecommunications lines within previously
disturbed road right-of-ways or utility corridors.
Modifications to existing water, sewer, natural gas
distribution, electric or telecommunication facilities where
no new above-ground structures are involved and the area
where such modifications will occur has been substantially
disturbed.
Ground disturbing activities related to the repair,
replacement, reinforcing or pouring of footings,
foundations, retaining walls, and utilities (including sewer,
water, drains, electric service or distribution, gas,
communications, leaching systems, cesspools, and septic
tanks).
Repair, replacement, or hardening of utilities under existing
previously disturbed rights of way, and for repair,
replacement, or hardening of above ground improved roads
or roadways, or within utilities where they are set in or
immediately adjacent to their previous location.
Utilities. Replacement or relocation of existing utility poles
between the edge of sidewalk and the road.
In rural settings, replcement of poles located along road
shoulders
In off-road alignments, replacement of power/utility poles
within an established right of way that are either replaced
in the same hole or replaced within 15 feet of existing
poles. Relocation/realigµment of segments of power lines
to existing roadways or other previously disturbed rights of
way.
Repair or replacement of damaged equipment, such as
generators, switch boards, pumping equipment, etc.
Collocation of communication equipment on existing
telecommunication towers or buildings provided that the
equipment is not located on National Register eligible or
listed building or structure or located within the viewshed
of a National Register eligible or listed districts.
Installation of warning or communications systems and
similar devices within previously disturbed soils that are not
adjacent to or on National Register-eligible or listed
building or structure or within the viewshed of a National
Register eligible or listed district.
In-kind repair or replacement of landscaping and utilities,
such as paving, planters, trellises, irrigation, lighting, signs
(e.g. street signs, traffic signs, and freestanding facility
signage), retaining walls, ramps and steps.
Subtotal
2
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
Sub Totals
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
5 of 12
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
9
20
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
CULVERTS, DITCHES, & CANALS
Substantial in kind repair,replacement,or upgrade of
culverts systems within rivers, streams or drainage ways,
including any moderate increase in capacity. This Allowance
also appliesto related features of historic properties such as
headwalls and wing walls that may be included in or eligible
culvert systems within rivers,streams,or for inclusionin the
Register,when the work is to be in kind.
Sediment removal from man-made drainage facilities,
including retention/detention basins, ponds, ditches, and
canals, in order to restore the facility to its pre-disaster
condition.
Repair, replacement, or hardening of utilities under existing
improved roads or roadways, or within previously disturbed
rights of way, and for repair, replacement, or hardening of
above ground utilities where they are set in or immediately
adjacent to their previous location
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
Sub Totals
1
1
1
1
1
1
Repairs to historic stone masonry culverts that are not
individually listed in the NRHP or have not been previously
determined to be individually eligible for listing in the NRHP
and where the exterior appearance of the culvert, including
existing stone masonry wing walls and headwalls, is
unaffected.
Replacement and upgrades of non-historic culverts
Replacement, repair, lining, or extension of culverts and
other drainage structures which do not extend beyond or
deeper than previous construction limits
1
1
2
Routine cleaning, maintenance and repair of existing
drainage, stormwater management, and water quality
facilities and devices
Storm sewer installation within existing right-of-way limits
Stream stabilization and restoration activities, (including
removal of debris or sediment obstructing the natural
waterway).
Any bridge remedial activity to an existing concrete box
culvert; or concrete rigid frame small structure, or pipe and
the length of the small structure is less than 20 feet, so long
as the remedial work is aesthetically and functionally inkind and in the same footprint
Drainage improvements, including installation, replacement
or rehabilitation, and cleaning activities associated with
existing drains, dikes, headwalls, culverts with an opening 8
feet or less in width, pipes and storm sewers
All work between the flowlines of the ditches and channels
and above the original line and grade
Reestablishment of existing ditches to original width
Culverts & pipes. Reinstall or replace at pre-existing size(s)
and invert(s)
Subtotal
RAILROADS
Repair or replacement of railroad safety components
Repair of railroad crossings
Replacement of existing bolt-connected railroad tracks and
wood ties.
Railroads. A. In kind repair or replacement of railroad
safety components. B. Repair of railroad crossings, gates,
and signals. C. In kind replacement and repair of existing
track system. D. Repair of passenger loading areas.
3
1
6 of 12
1
1
1
1
1
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
Maintenance of railroad structures within or outside a
historic district where no substantial ground disturbance is
required & the affected structures are not individually listed
or eligible for individual listing in the NRHP or have not
been determined to be a contributing resource to a NRHP
listed or eligible historic district.
Repairs to historic properties where such repairs are
undertaken in accordance with the Sec. of the Interior's
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
Replacement of structural elements or other components
of historic bridges, culverts, or structures where the
affected elements or components do not contribute to the
historic significance of the structure & where the
replacement requires only minimal alterations to historic
fabric of the structure and where the alterations to the
appearance of the historic structure are not visible from the
public right of way
Replacement of ties or rail where there are no changes in
vertical or horizontal geometry.
Repointing of masonry joints in bridges, culverts, or
buildings where the color, texture, aggregate of the grout
and the rake of the joint matches the existing color, texture,
aggregate of the grout or the rake of the joint.
Subtotal
MISCELLANEOUS
Ineligible properties
Properties determined not eligible for inclusion in the
Register and properties listed as non-historic
Properties determined to be ineligible for inclusion in the
NR within the last five years from the date the Recipient
made its application for DOE financial assisitance.
1
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
Sub Totals
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
5
5
3
1
12
1
1
1
Handicap improvements
Installation of wheelchair ramps on secondary elevations
meeting code as long as ramps can be easily removed and
are not permanently affixed to the building. Stairs and
railings may not be removed to construct a ramp.
Installation of handicapped curb cuts is permissible.
Wells and mineshafts
Decommissioning or plugging wells and backfilling mine
shafts when the backfilling does not remove or destroy
supporting walls or character defining elements.
Dredged or fill materials
Discharges of dredged or fill materials into jurisdictional
wetlands that were in agricultural crop production prior to
Dec. 23, 1985, with foundations & building pads for
buildings or agricultural related structures necessary for
farming activities.
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
1
1
1
1
1
1
7 of 12
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Roadways
No case-by-case consultation with the SHPO is necessary for
continued use or reuse of a road when a physical barrier
along the traveled way (e.g., fences, boulder barriers,
existing pavement) prevents further damage to cultural
resources or where the roadway or railway was cut through
or is situated below a property (e.g., archaeological deposit)
through which it passes
Seismic operations on maintained roads or trails, and those
involving no use of explosives, blading, or other land
modifications, nor appreciable disturbance or compaction
of vegetation, soils, or desert pavement by vehicle
movement or other means except for concentrated foot
traffic.
Easement acquisitions
Easement acquisitions, where the historic properties
received are not considered in exchange for any historic
properties relinquished
Meteorological Towers and/or Buoys
Meteorological Towers and/or Buoys: The signatories agree
that offshore meteorological towers and/or buoys have no
effect on onshore historic properties since they are
temporary in nature and indistinguishable from lighted
vessel traffic.
Ground disturbing activities
Ground disturbing activities related to the repair,
replacement, reinforcing or pouring of footings,
foundations, retaining walls, other slope stabilization
systems
Activities that involve less than one square meter (11 sq ft
of cumulative ground disturbance), provided the activity is
not taking place on a NR listed or eligible property
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Sub Totals
1
1
2
Shallow ground disturbance of soil to a depth of twelve (12)
inches or less, on a land area of 1 acre or less (i.e.
landscaping).
In-kind repair or replacement of fencing and freestanding
exterior walls
In-kind repair or replacement of driveways, paths, trails,
parking areas, and walkways
Placement of emergency beach berms seaward of improved
property where severe erosion has occurred
Activities involving temporary structures
Raise minimal emergency grades to restore essential traffic.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Installation of temporary structures for uses such as
classrooms, offices, or medical support facilities, except
when located in historic districts or archaeologically
sensitive areas.
Temporary placement of generators and permanent
installation of generators placed inside existing buildings or
that occupy an area under 50 square feet behind the
building they service.
Removal of non-valuable & abandoned materials or
property
Debris collection from public rights of way and other public
areas, transport, and disposal in existing licensed solid
waste facilities
Removal of woody debris, such as sticks, small limbs, and
branches from cemeteries and archaeological properties if
heavy equipment or other machinery is not used
1
1
1
Removal of root balls except from cemeteries, known
archeological sites or when there are unexpected finds
Routine removal of trash and abandoned property less than
45 years of age that does not qualify as a historic property.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8 of 12
1
1
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Removal of non-valuable, recent (less than 50 years old)
structures and materials (including abandoned
automobiles9 dumps, fences and buildings) and
reclamation of the site. The site from which these materials
are removed may be reclaimed without additional SHPO
consultation as long as the reclamation does not expand
previous surface disturbance.
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
1
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
Sub Totals
1
Dewatering of flooded developed areas or flooded buildings
and structures by physical or mechanical means
1
Buildings & structures in general
Repairs or replacement on historic properties when all work
is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards.
1
1
1
1
Repair or alteration of non-historic buildings and structures
less than 50 years old; except when it is located adjacent to
a listed or eligible property or located in a historic district
3
1
In kind repair or replacement of metal utilitarian structures
(i.e. pump houses, etc.), including exposed pipelines.
Modern materials may be used, provided their finish is
compatible with existing structures and the site.
1
Rehabilitation of single-family homes greater than 50 years
old when rehabilitation consists solely of activities listed as
being excluded in this Appendix.
In-kind repair, replacement, restoration, preservation,
protection, maintaining of materials, or features on interior
work on floors, walls, stairs, and ceilings, or partial
replacement of trim.
Non-destructive or concealed testing for hazardous
materials or for assessment of hidden damages
Windows & doors
Windows. In kind repair or replacement of damaged or
deteriorated windows, shutters, stomr shuters, and doors
including all hardware.
Window panes. Replacement of window panes in kind.
Clear plate, double, liminated or triple insulating glazing can
be used, provided it does not result in altering the existing
window material or form.
Windows. Installation of new window jambs or jamb liners,
installation of metal panning in window wells, and
replacement of non-significant flat stock trim.
Doors. In kind repair or replacement of damaged or
deteriorated doors.
Door and/or Window hardware repair or replacement
Walls, Cornices, Porches, and Foundations
Walls. In kind repair or reconstruction of concrete and
masonry walls, columns, parapets, chimneys, or cornices,
using compatible brick and mortar.
Walls. In kind repair or replacement of siding.
Repointing with mortar that matches the original in
strength, composition, color, and texture and that
duplicates the rake and other joints that define the existing
characteristics.
Walls. Anchoring of walls to floor systems, provided the
anchors are embedded and concealed from exterior view,
and disturbed historic fabric is restored in kind.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
2
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
3
1
1
4
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Cleaning, repair or repainting of surfaces, provided that
destructive surface cleaning and preparation treatments
are not used (e.g., water blasting, sandblasting, power
sanding, chemical cleaning).
9 of 12
1
1
1
Replacement of damaged plaster and lath with drywall
where the plaster is non character­ defining detail,
excluding properties individually listed on the National
Register or contributing properties to NHL Historic Districts.
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
Partial in-kind replacement of porches, cornices, siding,
balustrades, stairs, or trim.
In-kind repair or replacement of signs or awnings.
Installation of temporary stabilization bracing or shoring,
provided such work does not result in additional damage,
significant loss of historic fabric, or irreversible alterations
to this or adjacent areas.
Bracing and reinforcing of walls, chimneys and fireplaces,
provided the bracing and reinforcing are either concealed
from exterior view or removable in the future.
Strengthening and reinforcing of foundations and addition
of foundation bolts, provided that visible new work is inkind, and if required, mortar repair or replacement as
previously described.
Repairs to and replacement of elements of curtain wall
assemblies or exterior cladding that is hung on the building
structure, usually from floor to floor, and when the color,
size reflectivity and visual patterns are unaltered
Roofs & chimneys
Roof, gutters, &/or downspouts.. In kind repair,
replacement, or strengthening .
Chimneys. In kind repair or reconstruction of chimneys.
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
Repairs to a flat roof, including changes in roofing materials,
where the repairs are not highly visible from the ground
level.
In-kind replacement of metal roofing materials.
In-kind replacement of greenhouse glass panels.
Utilities, Mechanical, and Electrical Systems
Minor utility system work, including interior mechanical
(e.g., HVAC), electrical, or plumbing work, which is limited
to upgrading, or in-kind replacement.
Replacement or installation of interior fire detection, fire
suppression, or security alarm systems.
Elevation of HVAC and mechanical equipment as long as it is
placed or located where it is not highly visible from th
street, or if its installation does not result in significant loss
of historic fabric, or character-defining details.
Replacement, repair or installation oflightning rods.
Porches
Porches. In kind repair or partial replacement.
Foundations
Foundations. Strengthening of foundations and the
addition of foundation bolts, provided that visible new
work is in kind.
Foundations. Installation of cross bracing on pier and post
foundations
Ceilings
Repair or replacement of suspended or glued ceiling tile.
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
Sub Totals
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
10 of 12
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
1
Fascia board & soffit. Repair or in-kind replacements when
the new fascia/soffit will be of the same dimensions,
configuration, design and material as the original.
Roof vents. Installation of ridge vents or louver type soffit
vents.
Replacement of three-tab asphalt shingles with
dimensioned architectural shingles; replacement of cement
asbestos shingles with asphalt-based shingles or other
roofing of similar appearance to the original such as slate;
replacement of corrugated asbestos panels with corrugated
metal panels or other roofing of similar appearance to the
original; replacement of untreated wood shingles or shakes
with similar items of fire resistant wood; and in kind
replacement of corrugated metal panels
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
1
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
Floors
Replacement of wood gymnasium floors with contemporary
gym flooring materials
Replacement of damaged vinyl floor tile or asbestos floor
tile with contemporary floor tile of the same dimension and
thickness, and similar texture or pattern.
Painting , Caulking, Insulation
Painting. 1. Repainting of surfaces, provided that
destructive surface cleaning and preparation treatments
are not used.
Caulking, weatherstripping, or sealing of windows, jambs,
or jamb liners (color should match trim)
Caulking and weather-stripping to complement the color of
adjacent surfaces or sealant materials.
In-kind repair or replacement of specialized finishes such as
decorative painting, glazing, or gilding on flat or ornamental
plaster; or repair or replacement of ornamental plaster,
when such repair or replacement is undertaken by those
experienced in such finish work.
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
1
1
1
3
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Stabilization necessary to secure and protect vacant
buildings and structures more than fifty years old,
consistent with NPS Preservation Brief #31 Mothballing
Historic Buildings.
Temporary stabilization bracing or shoring with no damage,
loss or historic fabric or irreversible alterations.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
Correcting structural deficiencies in basements, crawl
spaces, and beneath porches.
1
1
11 of 12
Sub Totals
1
1
Bracing. Bracing and reinforcing of chimneys provided the
bracing and reinforcing are either concealed from exterior
view, or removeable in the future.
Bracing. Installation of temporary stabilization bracing or
shoring, provided such work does not result in additional
damage, significant loss of historic fabric, or irreversible
alterations to this or adjacent areas.
Installation of scaffolding, temporary barriers (e.g., chain
link fences), polyethylene sheeting, or tarps, provided such
work will not result in additional damage, irreversibie
alterations, or significant loss of historic fabric
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
1
1
Interior cleaning on non-porous surfaces using a weak
solution of household bleach and water, mold remediation,
or mold removal.
Stablilization
The installation of the following upgrades, provided that
such upgrades are not visible on the exterior or within
character-defining historic interiors: attic bracing, cross
bracing on pier and post foundations; metal fasteners;
collar ties; gussets; tie downs; strapping and anchoring of
mechanical, electrical, and plumbing equipment; concealed
anchoring of furniture; installation of plywood diaphragms
beneath first floor joists, above top floor ceiling rafters, and
on roofs; and automatic gas shut off valves.
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
1
1
In-kind replacement or installation of insulation systems,
provided that existing interior plaster, woodwork, or
exterior siding is not altered.
Cleaning
Cleaning masonry surfaces with natural bristle brushes and
mild detergent using low-pressure water.
Cleaning. Power washing of exterior features if performed
at no more than 600-psi with mild detergent. Refer to
National Park Service Preservation Brief # 6
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
1
Appendix 6. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Unscreened Actions (Counts of Unscreened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Army Corps and
Virginia SHPO 2012
Bureau of Land
Bureau of Land
Management and Management
Alaska SHPO 1998 and New
Mexico SHPO
(no date)
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of
Department FEMA and Federal Railroad
Ocean Energy of Energy and Louisiana
Administration
Management SHPOs 2010 SHPO 2009 and New York
and ACHP 2013
DOT and SHPO
2014
Code work
In kind repair,-replacement, or upgrade to codes and
standards of existing piers, docks, boat ramps, boardwalks,
stands, gazebos, and dune crossovers, provided the
footprint would substantially match the existing footprint.
Federal Railroad
Administration/Federal
Transit Administration and
Connecticut and
Massachusetts SHPOs 2012
General Services
Administration
and ACHP and
SHPOs 2008
General Services
Administration and
District of Columbia
SHPO 2013
Housing and
Urban
Development and
Louisiana SHPO
2013
US Forest Service
and California
and Nevada
SHPO 2012
1
Activities to bring buildings and structures up to
code/standards, provided no structural alterations are
involved.
Installation of wheelchair ramps on secondary elevations
meeting code as long as ramps can be easily removed and
are not permanently affixed to the building.
Installation of grab bars and other such minor interior
modifications required for compliance with the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Subtotal
EXEMPTED TOTAL
US Department
of Agriculture
and
Pennsylvania
SHPO 2005
US Fish and
Wildlife
Service and
North Dakota
DOT 2011
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
0
1
1
6
1
1
2
3
1
1
55
81
1
1
12 of 12
Sub Totals
1
0
6
0
7
1
1
4
6
15
16
2
3
32
47
1
5
118
187
Appendix 7. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Bureau of Land
Management
and California
and Nevada
SHPOs 2007
GENERAL ROAD MAINTENANCE & REPAIRS
Roadway maintenance and repairs
Repair, maintenance, and minor expansion of existing roads in areas previously
inventoried within last 15 years when adverse effects to Historic Properties will
be avoided.
Maintenance of roads that does not widen or otherwise extend surface
disturbance, unless archaeological features are exposed and which have not
been evaluated.
Maintaining, replacing or modifying existing routes or facilities that do not
disturb additional surface area, or historic properties; or where the ground has
been previously disturbed to the extent that historic properties could not exist;
or where the facility itself is not a historic property.
Resurfacing, blading,, or maintenance of existing roads where disturbance
outside the existing constructed prism/tread and existing alignment will not
occur.
Routine road maintenance and resurfacing where work is confined to
previously maintained surfaces, ditches, culverts, and cut and fill slopes within
road prism, where there are no known historic properties.
Temporary road closures
Designating areas closed to vehicles or areas limited to travel only on existing
roads and trails.
Maintenance of crowned or ditched roads that does not widen or otherwise
extend surface disturbance, unless archaeological features which have not
been evaluated are exposed.
Existing roads that have been determined not eligible for the National Register
in consultation with the SHPO/THPO may be repaired or resurfaced in-kind or
in similar materials as long as the extent of the project, including staging areas,
is contained within the existing surfaced areas. The repair or resurfacing
cannot exceed the area of the existing road surface and cannot exceed the
depth of existing disturbance.
Existing roads that have been determined eligible for the National Register in
consultation with the SHPO/THPO may be repaired or resurfaced in-kind.
Existing surfaced areas may be expanded or new surfaces constructed if the
extent of new surfacing can be demonstrated to occur on land that has been
disturbed by prior excavation or construction and has been shown not to
contain buried historic properties.
Bureau of Land
Management
and Idaho SHPO
1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Utah SHPO
2011
Bureau of Land
Management
and Wyoming
SHPO 2006
National Park
Service, ACHP
and SHPOs 2008
US Forest
Service and
California and
Nevada SHPO
2012
1
Total
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Page 1 of 8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Appendix 7. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Bureau of Land
Management
and California
and Nevada
SHPOs 2007
Bureau of Land
Management
and Idaho SHPO
1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Existing surfaced areas may be removed if the surfaced area is not a historic
property, it is not located within a historic property and all project activities,
including staging areas, will occur on land that has been disturbed by prior
excavation or construction and has been shown not to contain buried historic
properties.
Repairs or undertakings on sidewalks and walks - 4
In-kind regrading, graveling, repaving, or other maintenance treatments of all
existing walks within existing disturbed alignments.
Minor realignment of walks where the ground is previously disturbed as
determined by a qualified archaeologist.
Changing the material color of existing surfaces using materials that are
recommended in an approved treatment plan or in keeping with the cultural
landscape.
Undertakings proposed on existing non-historic sidewalks that are located
within previously disturbed areas and do not exceed the depth of the previous
disturbance or if the proposed undertaking is conducted in accordance with an
approved treatment plan (such as a historic structures report, cultural
landscape report, or preservation maintenance plan).
Repairs or undertakings on trails and paths -12
In-kind regrading, graveling, repaving, or other maintenance treatments of all
existing trails and paths within existing disturbed alignments.
Minor realignment of walks where the ground is previously disturbed as
determined by a qualified archaeologist.
Changing the material color of existing surfaces using materials that are
recommended in an approved treatment plan or in keeping with the cultural
landscape.
Undertakings proposed on existing non-historic trails and/or paths that are
located within previously disturbed areas and do not exceed the depth of the
previous disturbance or if the proposed undertaking is conducted in
accordance with an approved treatment plan (such as a historic structures
report, cultural landscape report, or preservation maintenance plan).
Existing trails, and associated features that have been determined not eligible
for the National Register in consultation with the SHPO/THPO may be repaired
or resurfaced in-kind or in similar materials as long as the extent of the project,
including staging areas, is contained within the existing surfaced areas. The
repair or resurfacing cannot exceed the area of the existing road surface and
cannot exceed the depth of existing disturbance.
Existing trails and associated features that have been determined eligible for
the National Register in consultation with the SHPO/THPO may be repaired or
resurfaced in-kind.
Page 2 of 8
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Utah SHPO
2011
Bureau of Land
Management
and Wyoming
SHPO 2006
National Park
Service, ACHP
and SHPOs 2008
US Forest
Service and
California and
Nevada SHPO
2012
Total
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Appendix 7. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Bureau of Land
Management
and California
and Nevada
SHPOs 2007
Existing surfaced areas may be expanded or new surfaces constructed if the
extent of new surfacing can be demonstrated to occur on land that has been
disturbed by prior excavation or construction and has been shown not to
contain buried historic properties.
Existing surfaced areas may be removed if the surfaced area is not a historic
property, it is not located within a historic property and all project activities,
including staging areas, will occur on land that has been disturbed by prior
excavation or construction and has been shown not to contain buried historic
properties.
Installation of routine signs or markers within or alongside existing trails.
Resurfacing, blading,, or maintenance of existing trails where disturbance
outside the existing constructed prism/tread and existing alignment will not
occur.
Routine trail maintenance limited to brushing and light maintenance of
existing tread with hand tools, including chain saws.
Trail maintenance of existing tread on slopes exceeding 30%.
Safety Improvements and Hazard Removal
Road closures with the installation of gates and barriers in which cattle guard
installation is not involved.
Felling of hazardous trees along roadways, within recreation areas, or other
areas for health and safety reasons provided they are left in place or cut up
with hand tools, including chain saws, and removed by hand.
Felling and removal of hazard and wind thrown trees from road prisms where
deemed necessary for health, safety, or administrative reasons, so long as
trees are felled into and removed from within existing road prisms (area clearly
associated with road construction, from road surface to top of cut and/or toe
of fill) where previous disturbance is such that the presence of historic
properties is considered unlikely, and so long as ground disturbance is not
allowed off previously disturbed areas associated with road prisms.
Signage and Surveillance
Installation of routine signs or markers on shoulders of existing roads and
markers adjacent to existing roads, or placing recreational, special designation
or information signs, or visitor registers, unless within known historic
properties.
Installation of routine signs or markers within or alongside existing roadways.
Installing signs and markers adjacent to existing roads.
Replacement of existing signage in the same location with similar style, scale,
and materials.
Bureau of Land
Management
and Idaho SHPO
1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Utah SHPO
2011
Bureau of Land
Management
and Wyoming
SHPO 2006
National Park
Service, ACHP
and SHPOs 2008
US Forest
Service and
California and
Nevada SHPO
2012
Total
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Page 3 of 8
1
Appendix 7. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Bureau of Land
Management
and California
and Nevada
SHPOs 2007
New signs that meet NPS standards, e.g., at entrance to the park or related to
the park's interpretive mission, provided the sign is not physically attached to a
historic building, structure, or object.
Replacement of interpretive messages on existing signs, wayside exhibits, or
memorial plaques.
Temporary signage for closures, repairs, detours, safety, hazards, etc. in
previously disturbed areas or areas inventoried and found not to contain
historic properties.
Memorial plaques placed within established zones that allow for such
placement.
Subtotal
UTILITIES
Designation of existing transportation and utility corridors under Section 503
of FLPMA when current BLM information indicates that such corridors have
low probability of containing or being in proximity to historic properties.
Activities at designated communication sites that do not affect historic
properties and where Section 106 consultation has been previously completed.
The removal of oil well stand pipes where there is no other evidence of historic
or archaeological remains.
Upgrading or adding new lines (power or telephone) to existing pole(s) when
there is no change in pole configuration or number, and when the lines are not
historic properties and no other cultural resources issues are known.
Emplacement of buried utility lines, pipelines, telephone lines and similar
linear features within the existing previously constructed prism and alignment
of a road.
Replacement of, or repair of exiting water lines, buried power or telephone
lines, vault toilets or similar underground improvements, in exact previous
locations with same size tank replacement of water collector systems and
pipeline when no additional ground disturbance occurs.
Authorizing new lines on existing overhead structures when there is no change
in pole or tower configuration and no new surface disturbance.
Issuing rights-of-way for overhead lines with no pole, tower, or other surface
disturbance on BLM-administered lands where there are no historic properties
present for which setting contributes to integrity.
Maintenance (that does not add to nor change the configuration of the
existing facilities) to existing electronic communication sites involving no
ground disturbance or impacts to known historic properties.
Maintenance or replacement of buried linear infrastructure [non-historic utility
or transmission lines] in previously disturbed areas.
2
Bureau of Land
Management
and Idaho SHPO
1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
5
2
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
0
Bureau of Land
Management
and Utah SHPO
2011
1
Bureau of Land
Management
and Wyoming
SHPO 2006
4
National Park
Service, ACHP
and SHPOs 2008
US Forest
Service and
California and
Nevada SHPO
2012
Total
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
21
5
40
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Page 4 of 8
1
1
Appendix 7. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Bureau of Land
Management
and California
and Nevada
SHPOs 2007
Replacement of non-historic materials [utility or transmission lines], provided
the undertaking will not impact adjacent or nearby historic properties and is
not located in a historic property or visible from an above ground historic
property.
Maintenance or replacement of infrastructure, such as old water distribution
systems, that has been determined to be not eligible for the National Register.
Enhancement of a wireless telecommunication facility, including the uploading
of mechanical equipment, provided the activities do not involve excavation nor
any increase to the size of the existing facility.
Subtotal
CULVERTS
Culvert replacement. The existing culvert and/or associated road, rail bed, or
cultural landscape has been determined not eligible for the National Register.
Culvert replacement. The existing culvert is less than 50 years old.
Subtotal
MISCELLANEOUS
Seismic operations on roads
Seismic operations on maintained roads or trails, and those involving no use of
explosives, grading, or other land modifications, and resulting in no
appreciable disturbance or compaction of vegetation, soils, or desert
pavement by vehicle movement or other means, in areas in which previous
Section 106 consultation has been completed.
Seismic surveys conducted along existing roads where no new disturbance will
occur.
Core drilling on roads
Core drilling within the constructed prism of existing roads where no new
disturbance will occur.
Ground disturbing activities
Activities which involve no more than two (2) square meters of cumulative
surface disturbance and no more than one (1) square meter of contiguous
disturbance in any given location.
Limited archaeological testing and/or artifact collection during field
identification, evaluation, and recording activities, so that the significance or
research potential of a cultural property may be better understood but not
substantially diminished. Limited testing is defined as affecting no more than
four (4) cubic meters of an archaeological deposit or more than 25% of the
surface area of the deposit.
Activities that involve less than one cubic meter of cumulative ground
disturbance per acre.
4
Bureau of Land
Management
and Idaho SHPO
1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
2
0
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
1
Bureau of Land
Management
and Utah SHPO
2011
0
Bureau of Land
Management
and Wyoming
SHPO 2006
2
National Park
Service, ACHP
and SHPOs 2008
US Forest
Service and
California and
Nevada SHPO
2012
Total
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
14
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Page 5 of 8
1
Appendix 7. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Bureau of Land
Management
and California
and Nevada
SHPOs 2007
Activities that do not involve ground or surface disturbance, and that do not
have the potential to affect access to or use of resources by Indians based on
the nature of the undertaking or prior or current consultation with Indian
tribes.
Right-of-way activities
Right-of-way which would add or remove another radio transmitter to an
existing communication site that is neither an historic property nor located on
or within the proximate area of an historic property.
Issuance, granting, or renewal of permits, easements, or rights-of-way that do
not authorize surface or resource disturbance and do not have the potential to
affect access to or use of resources by Indians based on the nature of the
undertaking or prior or current consultation with Indian tribe.
Removal of property or material less than 50 years old
Removal of, recent (less than 50 years old) structures and materials not
associated with older remains which may qualify for listing in the National
Register and where no historic properties will be affected, after screening by
professional cultural resource staff.
Removing modern materials and trash scatters less than 50 years old and not
associated with a larger eligible or unevaluated cultural entity. Abandoned
vehicles and modern trash dumps are included in this class.
Fence modifications, maintenance, or replacement
Modification of existing fences, gates, grills, or screens to provide improved
wildlife ingress and egress where such modification does not affect the
integrity of potentially historic adits, stopes, or shafts.
Maintenance and replacement in kind of existing nonstructural facilities (e.g.,
cattle guards, gates, fences, stock tanks, guardrails, barriers, traffic control
devices, utility poles, light standards, curbs, sidewalks, etc.) that do not involve
new ground disturbance, or where ground disturbance is limited to less than
one cubic meter total per acre and in areas where there are no known historic
properties or where the presence of historic properties is considered highly
unlikely.
Enclosure fences can be categorically determined to have no adverse effect
where cultural resources within the proposed enclosure have been sufficiently
inventoried and evaluated so that the fence will not divide an historic property
and place a portion of it outside of the fence and there will be no historic
properties within 10 meters of the fence. An exception is possible where the
fence can run through a historic property by following the edge of an existing
road that is on the outside of the enclosure, and the fence is kept on the edge
of the road disturbance.
Bureau of Land
Management
and Idaho SHPO
1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Utah SHPO
2011
Bureau of Land
Management
and Wyoming
SHPO 2006
National Park
Service, ACHP
and SHPOs 2008
US Forest
Service and
California and
Nevada SHPO
2012
1
1
Total
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
Page 6 of 8
1
1
Appendix 7. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Bureau of Land
Management
and California
and Nevada
SHPOs 2007
Landscaping
Routine roadside and trail maintenance and cleanup with no ground
disturbance.
Grass replanting in some locations with approved species.
Woodland and woodlot management (including tree trimming, hazard tree
removal, thinning, routine removal of exotic species that are not a significant
component of a cultural landscape.
Maintaining existing vegetation on earthworks, trimming trees adjacent to
roadways and other historic roads and trails.
Routine maintenance of gardens and vegetation within cultural landscapes
with no changes in layout or design.
Routine grass maintenance of cemeteries and tombstones with no tools that
will damage the surfaces of the stones.
Trimming of major specimen trees needed for tree health or to address critical
health/safety issues.
Planting of non-invasive plant species in non-historic areas.
Removal of dead and downed vegetation using equipment and methods that
do not introduce ground disturbance.
Replacement of dead, downed, overgrown, or hazard trees, shrubs, or other
vegetation with specimens of the same species.
Replacement of invasive or exotic landscape plantings with similar noninvasive plants.
Routine lawn mowing, leaf removal, watering, and fertilizing.
Routine orchard maintenance and pruning.
Any revegetation by hand seeding that does not involve ground disturbance
other than the minor disturbance of placing seeds on the ground.
Manual tree planting using hand-held augers or planting bars.
Routine maintenance, repair work, stabilization, or rehabilitation of buildings or structures
Actions limited to retaining and preserving, protecting and maintaining,
repairing and replacing in-kind, as necessary, materials and features,
consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties (Standards) and the accompanying guidelines.
Actions involving emergency stabilization, including limited replacement of
irreparably damaged features or materials and temporary measures that
prevent further loss of historic material or that correct unsafe conditions until
permanent repairs can be accomplished. Streamlined activities for
archaeological sites and cultural landscapes includes work to moderate,
prevent, or arrest erosion.
Bureau of Land
Management
and Idaho SHPO
1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Utah SHPO
2011
Bureau of Land
Management
and Wyoming
SHPO 2006
National Park
Service, ACHP
and SHPOs 2008
US Forest
Service and
California and
Nevada SHPO
2012
Total
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Page 7 of 8
1
1
1
1
Appendix 7. Non-FHWA and Non-Transportation Agency Screened Actions (Counts of Screened Actions Listed in Each PA)
Bureau of Land
Management
and California
and Nevada
SHPOs 2007
Actions involving routine repairs necessary to continue use of a historic
property
Emergency repair or stabilization of historic properties using methods that do
not have an effect upon the values that make the properties significant, after
screening by professional cultural resource staff.
Activities or alterations involving facilities or structures that are less than 45
years of age as of the date of the project and will not alter the viewshed of
historic buildings, structures, or districts.
Replacement and repair of existing pipelines and the addition of new pipelines
in an area previously inventoried within the last 15 years (& reviewed by
cultural resource personnel for adequacy) when Historic Properties will be
avoided following avoidance procedures.
Repair, maintenance, and minor expansion of existing well pads or facilities in
an area previously inventoried within the last 15 years (& reviewed by cultural
resource personnel for adequacy) when Historic Properties will be avoided
following avoidance procedures.
Routine maintenance of existing facilities, including minor routine and
preventative maintenance of BLM facilities which do not disturb additional
ground surface area or historic properties at the facility including the facility
itself.
Subtotal
TOTAL
Bureau of Land
Management
and Idaho SHPO
1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Nevada
SHPO 2009
Bureau of Land
Management
and Oregon
SHPO 1998
Bureau of Land
Management
and Utah SHPO
2011
Bureau of Land
Management
and Wyoming
SHPO 2006
National Park
Service, ACHP
and SHPOs 2008
US Forest
Service and
California and
Nevada SHPO
2012
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
15
Total
1
4
11
1
3
Page 8 of 8
0
1
2
3
2
8
16
43
5
11
39
95