Opinion ID: 3011662
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: historic preservation

Text: Section 106 of the NHPA provides as follows: The head of any Federal agency having dir ect or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed Federal or federally assisted undertaking in any State and the head of any Federal department or independent agency having authority to license any undertaking shall, prior to the approval of the expenditure of any Federal funds on the undertaking or prior to the issuance of any license, as the case may be, take into account the effect of the undertaking on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register. 16 U.S.C. S 470f. The NHPA is a pr ocedural statute designed to ensure that, as part of the planning process for properties under the jurisdiction of a federal agency, the agency takes into account any adverse effects on historical places from actions concerning that pr operty. See Morris County Trust for Historical Preservation v. Pierce, 714 F.2d 271, 278-79 (3d Cir. 1983). The STB, as a federal agency, must adhere to S 106 in considering and approving exemption or abandonment of a rail line. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.2(a). The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) has promulgated regulations outlining the pr ocedures to be 5 followed by an agency in satisfying its responsibilities under S 106, codified at 36 C.F.R. Part 800. See Morris County Trust, 714 F.2d at 280 ([T]he Advisory Council's regulations are particularly persuasive concerning the proper interpretation of NHPA.) An agency is expected to consult with various interested parties thr oughout the S 106 process, including the State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO), who is the state official appointed or designated, pursuant to S 101(b)(1) of the NHP A, 16 U.S.C. S 470a(b)(1), to administer the state historic preservation program. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.16(v); see also 16 U.S.C. S 470a(b)(3) (establishing the responsibilities of the SHPO). The agency, in consultation with the SHPO, must also involve the public in the process, see 36 C.F.R. S 800.3(e), and identify other parties that should be invited to participate in the process as consulting parties, including local governments and those parties that r equest to participate in the process. See 36 C.F .R. S 800.3(f)(1-3). The ACHP itself must be afforded a r easonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings. 16 U.S.C. S 470f; 36 C.F.R. S 800.1(a); see also Concer ned Citizens, 176 F.3d at 695 (holding that the Council's comments must be taken into account and integrated into the decisionmaking process). The ACHP regulations establish a three-step process: identification of historic properties; assessment of any adverse effects of the proposed undertaking on such properties; and creation of a plan to avoid, minimize, or mitigate those adverse effects. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.1(a). The agency, in consultation with the SHPO and other interested parties, may address multiple steps in one consultation as long as all parties are given an adequate opportunity to comment. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.3(g). In order to identify historic properties, the agency must apply the criteria established for the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) to identify pr operties and to determine whether they would be eligible for the National Register. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.4(c)(1). Significantly, the regulations provide that the passage of time, changing perceptions of significance, or incomplete prior evaluations may require the Agency Official to r eevaluate properties 6 previously determined eligible or ineligible. 36 C.F.R. S 800.4(c)(1). If the agency and the SHPO agree that the criteria for the National Register have been met, the property or portion thereof shall be considered eligible for the National Register for S 106 purposes. See 36 C.F .R. S 800.4(c)(2). If the agency and the SHPO agree that the criteria have not been met, the property is considered ineligible. See id. If the agency and the SHPO do not agree, or if the ACHP or the Secretary of the Interior so requests, the agency shall obtain a determination from the Secr etary, acting through the Keeper of the National Register (Keeper), as to the historic eligibility of the property. See id. Other courts of appeals have held that this determination by the Secretary or the Keeper should be conclusive. See Moody Hill Farms Ltd. Partnership v. United States Department of the Interior, 205 F.3d 554, 558 (2d Cir. 1999) (describing the independent authority of the Keeper, on behalf of the Secretary, to determine whether a pr operty should be listed as historic); Stop H-3 Ass'n v. Coleman, 533 F.2d 434, 441 n.13 (9th Cir.) (noting that the Secr etary's opinion as to the historic eligibility of property is conclusive). If the agency finds that there are no historic properties that will be affected by the undertaking, the agency must document its findings and provide such documentation to the ACHP, the SHPO, and other consulting parties. The SHPO and the ACHP have 30 days to object to thatfinding; otherwise, the agency's S 106 responsibilities are deemed completed. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.4(d)(1). If the agency finds that there are historic properties that may be affected, the agency must notify all consulting parties and invite their views on the effects of the proposed undertaking and their assessments of any adverse effects. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.4(d)(2). An adverse effect is found when the undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics that make a property historic and eligible for inclusion in the National Register. See 36 C.F .R. SS 800.5(a)(1), 800.16(i). Such adverse effects include physical destruction of or damage to all or part of the property, alteration of the property, removal of property fr om its historic location, or 7 a change in the character of the property's use. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.5(a)(2). The regulations establish the steps that an agency must take in determining whether or not there are adverse effects and in notifying interested parties of its findings. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.5. However, agencies, as did the STB here, will often assume the occurr ence of adverse effects to properties identified as historic. Once the agency finds (or assumes) the existence of adverse ef fects, the agency must continue consulting with the parties in order to resolve such adverse effects and to develop and evaluate alternatives or modifications to the undertaking that will avoid, minimize, or mitigate such effects. See 36 C.F.R. SS 800.5(d)(2), 800.6(a). The agency must also notify the ACHP of the adverse effect finding and pr ovide certain specified documentation. See 36 C.F .R. S 800.6(a)(1). The process then moves to the third andfinal step, the resolution of adverse effects and the development of a plan to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the adverse ef fects. At this stage, the SHPO and any other consulting parties may invite the ACHP to participate in the consultation; under certain circumstances, the ACHP must be invited to participate. See 36 C.F.R. SS 800.6(a)(1)(i), (ii). The agency and the other consulting parties may also agr ee to invite new parties to consult. They are requir ed to invite any organization that will play a specific r ole or assume special responsibility in any mitigation plan. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.6(a)(2). The ACHP has discretion at this stage to decide if it will consult formally. See 36 C.F.R.S 800.6(a)(1)(iii); see also 36 C.F.R. Part 800 App. A (setting forth criteria that the ACHP uses to determine whether formally to enter a particular S 106 review). Its decision deter mines how the agency must proceed. If the ACHP chooses not to join the consultation formally, section 800.6(b)(1) of the ACHP r egulations controls. The agency consults with the SHPO and other consulting parties in devising a plan to avoid or mitigate the adverse effects. If the agency and the SHPO agree on a plan, they execute a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), a copy of which must be submitted to the ACHP for its comments prior to the agency approving the undertaking. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.6(b)(1)(iv); see also 36 C.F.R. 8 S 800.6(c)(1)(i). An executed MOA evidences the agency's compliance with S 106 of the NHPA and governs the carrying out of the federal undertaking. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.6(c). If the agency and the SHPO fail to agree on a plan, the agency must ask the ACHP formally to join the consultation. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.6(b)(1)(v). If the ACHP again declines to consult formally, it must pr ovide comments on the undertaking and on the status of the S 106 review, which the agency must consider in reaching any final decision as to mitigation. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.6(b)(1)(v); see also 36 C.F .R. S 800.7(c). If, at any point, the ACHP formally joins the consultation on mitigation, section 800.6(b)(2) controls. The ACHP must execute the MOA along with the agency, the SHPO, and any other consulting parties. See 36 C.F .R. S 800.6(b)(2); see also 36 C.F.R. S 800.6(c)(1)(ii). Any party that assumes a responsibility in carrying out the MOA may also be asked to be a signatory to the MOA. See 36 C.F .R. S 800.6(c)(2)(ii). If, at any point during consultation, the agency, the SHPO, or the ACHP determines that further consultation will not be productive, any of them may, upon notice to the other consulting parties, terminate consultation. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.7(a). If the agency ter minates the consultation, it must request and receive comment fr om the ACHP. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.7(a)(1). Comments from the ACHP are governed by S 800.7(c). The ACHP has 45 days from receipt of a r equest to provide comments on an agency's termination of mitigation consultation, pursuant to S 800.7(a)(1), or on an agency's statement that it is unable to reach an MOA thr ough consultation with the SHPO alone, pursuant to S 800.6(b)(1)(v). See 36 C.F.R.S 800.7(c)(2). The agency must take these comments into account in reaching a final decision on the undertaking, see 36 C.F .R. S 800.7(c)(4), and the agency is required to document that it did so by explaining its decision and providing evidence that it considered the ACHP's comments. See 36 C.F.R. S 800.7(c)(4)(i); see also Concerned Citizens, 176 F.3d at 696 (stating that the relevant agency must demonstrate that it has read and considered the opinions and recommendations of the ACHP). This decision and 9 explanation is to be provided to the ACHP , to all consulting parties, and to the public prior to the final appr oval and carrying out of the undertaking. See 36 C.F .R. SS 800.7(c)(4)(i-iii).