Programmatic Section 4(f) evaluations can be used in place of individual evaluations for highway projects where uses are considered minor. A determination of minor use is generally based—for parks, recreation areas and refuges—on the size of the impact compared to the size of the resource. For cultural resources, it is based on the degree of adverse effect resulting from Section 4(f) use. To get a determination, you must consult with the appropriate official with jurisdiction over the resource.

The primary advantage of a programmatic evaluation is that it saves time. Unlike an individual evaluation, a programmatic evaluation does not require a draft, a comment period, or circulation, because its framework and basic approach has already been circulated and agreed upon by the US Department of the Interior (DOI). Project specific details are then applied to the programmatic to determine whether or not it can be used. Programmatic evaluations are usually approved much faster than individual evaluations.

Despite their differences, programmatic and individual evaluations are similar in their coordination with the Department of Transportation (DOT) and officials with jurisdiction . Other similarities include the formatting and level of detail and analysis required. It is important to note that programmatic evaluations are not exemptions from Section 4(f) compliance.

THE EVALUATIONS
To date, there are four programmatic evaluations that have been approved for use nationwide:

1. Independent Bikeway or Walkway Construction Projects (approved May 23, 1977)
   
2. Use of Historic Bridges (approved July 5, 1983)
   
3. Minor Involvement with Public Parks, Recreation Lands, and Wildlife and Waterfowl Refuges (approved December 23, 1986)
   
4. Minor Involvement with Historic Sites (approved December 23, 1986)

Additional programmatic evaluations may be approved by the FHWA for use on a national basis. For more information, go to www.fhwa.dot.gov.

STRUCTURE
While each of the four programmatic evaluations has unique requirements, they all share a common structure, which addresses the following issues:

Applicability
In order for a project to qualify for one of the four programmatic evaluations, the following conditions must be met:

Back to List

Evaluation of Alternatives
The project record must show that the following avoidance alternatives have been fully evaluated and are not feasible and prudent:

Back to List

Findings
The findings must be supported by circumstances, studies and consultations with the appropriate agencies. In general, they must demonstrate the following:

Back to List

Mitigation & Minimization
The proposed project must include all possible planning to minimize harm, and the official with jurisdiction must agree with the mitigation measures and the assessment of impacts from use.

Back to List

Coordination
Early project coordination is necessary with the official with jurisdiction, the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and other interested parties. When an individual bridge permit is required, coordination with the United States Coast Guard (USCG) is also necessary. Written agreement from the official with jurisdiction and cooperating agencies is essential. Unlike individual evaluations, programmatic evaluations require no circulation of the document and no 45-day comment period.

Back to List

Approval Procedures
The state transportation agency must determine (along with the Federal Highway Administration [FHWA]) and document that the project meets the following conditions:

Back to List

The navigation links below will open printable documents with detailed information for each approved nationwide programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation.

bikeways & walkways
historic bridges
parks & refuges
historic sites