Environment - Compliance

• Policy
• Requirements for obtaining approval
• Unavoidable impacts
• Evaluation documentation
• Section 4(f) materials and procedures
• Section 6(f) guidance    

Policy

Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 USC 303) declares a national policy "to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.”   

Requirements for Obtaining Approval

Under Section 4(f), the FHWA and other USDOT agencies cannot approve a transportation program or project that requires the use of any publicly owned land from a significant public park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or any land from a significant historic site, unless a determination is made that:

• The use will have no more than a de minimis impact on the area; or
• There is no feasible and prudent alternative to using the property; and
• The program or project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the property resulting from the use.

Before approving use of these lands for a transportation project, supporting information must demonstrate that there are unique problems or unusual factors involved in the use of alternatives that avoid these properties, or that the cost, social, economic, and environmental impacts, or community disruption resulting from such alternatives reach extraordinary magnitude.    

Unavoidable Impacts

In addition to mandating the physical protection of certain lands, (avoiding unintended physical "use" of them) Section 4(f) also addresses proximity impacts like noise and vibration which may constitute a "Constructive Use" without actually intruding into the protected area. FHWA rules require that when the physical location of a project will produce severe impacts to the activities, features, or attributes of a publicly owned park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or any significant historic site, then a Section 4(f) Evaluation must be completed.

Proximity impacts may include:

• Resources affected by noise levels.
• Aesthetic features of the resource compromised by the transportation facility.
• Access restricted, substantially diminishing the utility of the resource.
• Vibrations impair use of the resource and diminish the value of wildlife habitat.

These impacts will only be considered a "Constructive Use" if they substantially impair the Section 4(f) resource.   

Evaluation Documentation

Section 4(f) is a federal requirement and needs to be considered in any NEPA document in which any USDOT agency (FHWA, FTA, FRA, FAA) is involved. However, not all NEPA actions require a 4(f) evaluation. For example, if a project proposal does not have the potential to use Section 4(f) resources, then the NEPA document need only explain that Section 4(f) does not apply.

Programmatic Section 4(f) evaluations can be used for highway projects which meet the programmatic criteria. The primary advantage of a programmatic evaluation is that it saves time. A programmatic evaluation does not require a draft, legal sufficiency review, or circulation, because its framework and basic approach has already been circulated and agreed upon by the US Department of the Interior (DOI).

The programmatic Section 4(f) does not relax the Section 4(f) standards, but only streamlines the amount of interagency coordination that would be required for an individual Section 4(f) evaluation. Interagency coordination is required only with the official(s) with jurisdiction and not with DOI, USDA, or HUD (unless the Federal agency has a specific action to take, such as DOI approval of a conversion of land acquired using Land and Water Conservation Funds).

The use of five Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluations may be applied by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to projects which meet the following criteria:
 

1.  Independent Walkway and Bikeways Construction Projects
	A.	This programmatic 4(f) evaluation is only applicable for independent bikeway or walkway construction projects which require the use of recreation and park areas established and maintained primarily for active recreation, open space, and similar purposes.
	B.	It is applicable only when the official having specific jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) property has given his approval in writing that the project is acceptable and consistent with the designated use of the property and that all possible planning to minimize harm has been accomplished in the location and design of the bikeway or walkway facility.
	C.	It does not apply if the project would require the use of critical habitat of endangered species, the use of any land from a publicly owned wildlife or waterfowl refuge or any land from a historic site of national, State, or local significance.  It also does not cover those projects where there are unusual circumstances (major impacts, adverse effects, or controversy). A separate Section 4(f) statement and environmental document must be prepared in these categories.
	D.	This document does not cover bicycle or pedestrian facilities that are incidental items of construction in conjunction with highway improvements having the primary purpose of serving motor vehicular traffic.
2.  Historic Bridges
	A.	The bridge is to be replaced or rehabilitated with Federal Funds.
	B.	The project will require the use of a historic bridge structure that is on or is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.
	C.	The bridge is not a National Historic Landmark.
	D.	The FHWA Division Administrator determines that the facts of the project match those set forth in the section of this document labeled Alternatives, Findings, and Mitigation.
	E.	The FHWA Division Administrator determines that the facts of the project match those set forth in the section of this document labeled Alternatives, Findings, and Mitigation.
3.  Minor Involvements with Historic Sites
	A.	The proposed project is designed to improve the operational characteristics, safety, and/or physical condition of existing highway facilities on essentially the same alignment. This includes "4R" work (resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation and reconstruction); safety improvements, such as shoulder widening and the correction of substandard curves and intersections; traffic operation improvements, such as signalization, channelization, and turning or climbing lanes; bicycle and pedestrian facilities; bridge replacements on essentially the same alignment, and the construction of additional lanes. This programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation does not apply to the construction of a highway on a new location.
	B.	The historic site involved is located adjacent to the existing highway.
	C.	The project does not require the removal or alteration of historic buildings, structures or objects on the historic site.
	D.	The project does not require the disturbance or removal of archeological resources that are important to preserve in place rather than to remove for archeological research. The determination of the importance to preserve in place will be based on consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and, if appropriate, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP).
	E.	The impact on the Section 4(f) site resulting from the use of the land must be considered minor. The word minor is narrowly defined as having either a "no effect" or "no adverse effect" (when applying the requirements of Section 206 of the National Historic Preservation Act and 36 CFR Part 800) on the qualities that qualified the site for listing or eligibility on the National Register of Historic Places. The ACHP must not object to the determination of "no adverse effect."
	F.	The SHPO must agree, in writing, with the assessment of impacts of the proposed project on and the proposed mitigation for the historic sites.
	G.	This programmatic evaluation does not apply to projects for which an environmental impact statement (EIS) is prepared, unless the use of Section 4(f) lands is discovered after the approval of the final EIS.
4.  Minor Involvements with Parks, Recreation Areas and Waterfowl and Wildlife Refuges
	A.	The proposed project is designed to improve the operational characteristics, safety, and/or physical condition of existing highway facilities on essentially the same alignment. This includes "4R" work (resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, and reconstruction), safety improvements, such as shoulder widening and the correction of substandard curves and intersections; traffic operation improvements, such as signalization, channelization, and turning or climbing lanes; bicycle and pedestrian facilities; bridge replacements on essentially the same alignment; and the construction of additional lanes. This programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation does not apply to the construction of a highway on a new location.
	B.	The Section 4(f) lands are publicly owned public parks, recreation lands, or wildlife and waterfowl refuges located adjacent to the existing highway.
	C.	The amount and location of the land to be used shall not impair the use of the remaining Section 4(f) land, in whole or in part, for its intended purpose. This determination is to be made by the FHWA in concurrence with the officials having jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) lands, and will be documented in relation to the size, use, and/or other characteristics deemed relevant. The total amount of land to be acquired from any Section 4(f) site shall not exceed the values in the following table: Total Size of Section 4(f) Site   Maximum to Be Acquired < 10 acres   10 percent of site 10 acres - 100 acres   1 acre > 100 acres   1 percent of site
	D.	The proximity impacts of the project on the remaining Section 4(f) land shall not impair the use of such land for its intended purpose. This determination is to be made by the FHWA in concurrence with the officials having jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) lands, and will be documented with regard to noise, air and water pollution, wildlife and habitat effects, aesthetic values, and/or other impacts deemed relevant.
	E.	The officials having jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) lands must agree, in writing, with the assessment of the impacts of the proposed project on, and the proposed mitigation for, the Section 4(f) lands.
	F.	For projects using land from a site purchased or improved with funds under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, the Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Act (Dingell-Johnson Act), the Federal Aid in Wildlife Act (Pittman-Robertson Act), or similar laws, or the lands are otherwise encumbered with a Federal interest (e.g., former Federal surplus property), coordination with the appropriate Federal agency is required to ascertain the agency's position on the land conversion or transfer. The programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation does not apply if the agency objects to the land conversion or transfer.
	G.	This programmatic evaluation does not apply to projects for which an environmental impact statement (EIS) is prepared, unless the use of Section 4(f) lands is discovered after the approval of the final EIS. Should any of the above criteria not be met, this programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation cannot be used, and an individual Section 4(f) evaluation rust be prepared.
5.  Transportation Projects That Have a Net Benefit to a Section 4(f) Property
		This nationwide programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation (programmatic evaluation) has been prepared for certain federally assisted transportation improvement projects on existing or new alignments that will use property of a Section 4(f) park, recreation area, wildlife or waterfowl refuge, or historic property, which in the view of the Administration and official(s) with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) property, the use of the Section 4(f) property will result in a net benefit to the Section 4(f) property.
top