Background/Description
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) requires federal agencies to consider the effects of their projects, activities, and programs on historic properties. Transportation agencies must establish the Area of Potential Effects (APE), which is the geographic area within which a federal action has the potential to affect historic properties eligible or listed in the National Register of Historic Places. Accurately and effectively defining the APE is essential to determining the scope or level of effort required for the project’s compliance with Section 106. For example, an APE that is too narrow may not adequately capture all the project effects and may need to be adjusted later in the process, or an APE that is too large may result in survey work that is not actually commensurate with a project’s scale. On large linear transportation projects, an APE that is too large or too small can easily set back project timelines with impacts to funding and construction deadlines. Additionally, consideration of the timing of the APE delineation during a project’s life cycle of planning, design, and construction can determine level of detail as well as the scale and scope of follow-on steps of the regulatory process. As such, careful APE delineation is a preliminary step that informs completion of all subsequent steps in the Section 106 process and can reduce project risk and support efficient project delivery. However, linear transportation corridors, particularly those that cross municipal, state, and/or Tribal boundaries, present unique challenges when defining an APE that include the following considerations:
• Section 106 APEs are generally defined on a project-by-project basis, without a standard methodology by project type or common approach. This can result in lengthy discussions and deliberations between transportation agencies, state and local officials, Tribes, and other interested parties.
• Changes from noise or vibration, as well as changes to important views, resulting from an undertaking are considered under Section 106. Noise, vibration, and visual impacts are also assessed under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Lack of alignment between Section 106 APE delineation and delineation of study areas for NEPA analysis of noise, vibration, and visual considerations can result in inconsistent analysis during the two regulatory compliance processes.
• APE sufficiency has increasingly become an issue of concern to Tribes, particularly when consulting on potential for effects to Traditional Cultural Properties.
• Justifications for delineation of vertical and horizontal APEs seem to be inconsistent across agencies and jurisdictions.
• Across the Nation, transportation agencies, states, and organizations have developed their own standard approaches to establish APEs for their projects, but much of this information resides solely within its respective state or organization and there is no nationwide synthesis to help identify best practices.
• Existing guidance, such as National Park Service Archeology and Historic Preservation; Secretary of Interior’s Standards and Guidelines (1983), and 36 CFR Part 800 (2004) provides broad information but lacks guidance in practical application.

Objective
The purpose of this study is to prepare a synthesis of nationwide best practices for efficiently defining defensible Section 106 APEs. The purpose of this Research Needs Statement (RNS) proposes a comprehensive nationwide survey of Section 106 practitioners at State Departments of Transportation and Federal transportation agencies (FTA, FHWA, FRA), as well as other stakeholders, to seek input on the variety of methods, standards, and agreements in place to define establishing APEs for linear transportation projects. The study will prepare a report to summarize survey findings, highlight case study examples, identify the best practices, and establish nationwide guidance. RNS funding is needed to have a sufficiently wide reach and sample size for the survey, comprehensively synthesize the gathered information, and successfully create a useful guidance tool that will help improve project delivery.

Related Research
A search for relevant topics in both TRID and RIP on 3.2.21 did not produce any results. There were a handful of Section 106-specific topics, but nothing relating to APEs.

Proposed Tasks
Task 1: Nationwide Literature Review and Survey of Section 106 Practitioners. Major components of the survey would include:
1.1 Web-based literature review to identify and review existing available studies, technical guidance, and agreement documents from states, federal agencies, and other stakeholders that address methodologies or approaches to Section 106 APE delineation to inform survey question preparation.
1.2 Creation of an engagement strategy to describe the methods for implementing a nationwide survey, proposed survey questions, and outreach contact lists of Section 106 practitioners and stakeholders. The survey would cast a wide net in soliciting information from a broad group of Section 106 practitioners. Practitioners could include: State Historic Preservation Officers and staff; Tribal Historic Preservation Officers and cultural resource staff, as well as Tribal DOT staff; Federal Preservation Officers and cultural resource staff at federal agencies; cultural resource staff at state transportation agencies; cultural resource contractors working on transportation projects; the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation staff; subject matter experts from federal and states agencies, as well as design engineers and contractors, in disciplines such as noise, vibration, and visual/aesthetics analysis with expertise that can inform APE delineation.
1.3 Preparation, testing, and distribution of a web-based survey implement.
1.4 Outreach to respondents who indicate interest in follow-up interviews to share additional information about examples of best practices, successful methodologies, or other relevant information. During this interview, additional examples or template documents could be collected as supplement to the literature review.
Task 2: Nationwide State of the Practice Synthesis Report and Guidance. Using information gathered during the literature review, survey, and interviews from Task 1, the Nationwide State of the Practice Synthesis Report and Guidance would summarize the current challenges, considerations, practices, and practical advice for the delineation of APEs on linear transportation projects. Major components of the document would include:
* Summaries of the literature review findings, responses to the survey, and interviews.
* Synthesis of challenges, considerations, and best practices related to APE delineation based on information gathered, and include case study highlights from a range of undertakings, project types, and agencies.
* Guidance document establishing best practices for practitioners to use when developing an APE or codifying a system on how APEs can be defined efficiently and defensibly.

Implementation
Potential impediments to implementation include a challenge in getting adequate representation from all the relevant groups to participate in the survey. There may need to be support from agencies or organizations in the field to encourage participation. Ways to overcome this challenge will include keeping the initial survey brief and limiting detailed questions to follow-up interviews with those who indicate they have information to share. Survey participants will be encouraged using: the AME60 Committee to promote the survey to members and State Departments of Transportation; asking the National Council of State Historic Preservation Offices to promote the survey to members; and using available social media and list serves.