State Section 106 Programmatic Agreement

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
REGARDING
SHA’S HISTORIC HIGHWAY BRIDGES IN MARYLAND

WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) administers the Federal Aid Highway Program (FAHP) in Maryland authorized by 23 U.S.C. 101 et seq. through the Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) (23 U.S.C. 315); and

WHEREAS, the FHWA has determined that the FAHP may be used to rehabilitate or replace SHA-owned highway bridges listed in or eligible for listing the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) (hereafter referred to as “historic bridges”); and

WHEREAS, the FHWA has consulted with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) and the Maryland State Historic Preservation Officer (MD SHPO) pursuant to the ACHP’s regulations found at 36 CFR §800.14(b) implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (16 U.S.C. §470f); and

WHEREAS, the Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) has participated in the consultation, has responsibilities under this agreement, and has been invited to be a signatory to this Programmatic Agreement (PA); and

WHEREAS, the FHWA and SHA have identified and invited the following parties to consult in the Section 106 process for the development of this PA: Maryland County Historic Preservation and Historic District Commissions, Maryland Certified Heritage Areas, Maryland Scenic Byways Commission, Preservation Maryland and the National Park Service - National Capital Region; and

WHEREAS, the SHA administers state funded bridge projects as defined in Section 2-103.1 of the Transportation Article, and the SHA and the MD SHPO agree that SHA shall use the applicable provisions of this PA to fulfill its compliance responsibilities under the Maryland Historical Trust Act of 1985, as amended, State Finance and Procurement Article Sections 5A-325 and 5A326 of the Annotated Code of Maryland (Act); and

WHEREAS, the SHA maintains a staff of cultural resource specialists who meet the professional qualifications in 48 FR 44716 in the fields of architectural history, history and archeology, to carry out its historic preservation programs and responsibilities, including the implementation of the provisions of this PA; and,

WHEREAS, the provisions of the PA only apply to projects involving SHA-owned historic bridges in Maryland;

WHEREAS, the SHA is aware of their responsibility of administering the local agency projects under the stewardship agreement between FHWA and SHA and also the requirement to meet the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS), and in the future a Programmatic Agreement or defined consultation process will be developed for locally owned bridges with the counties and city;

NOW, THEREFORE, the FHWA, ACHP, MD SHPO and SHA agree that the rehabilitation or replacement of SHA-owned historic bridges with FAHP funds (undertakings) shall be administered in accordance with the following stipulations, exercising reasonable judgment and good faith, to satisfy the FHWA’s Section 106 responsibilities for such undertakings.

STIPULATIONS

FHWA and MD SHA will ensure that the following measures are carried out:

I. Purpose

1. This PA sets forth the process by which the FHWA will meet its responsibilities under Sections 106, 110(d), and 110(f) of the NHPA with the assistance of the SHA, for SHA­ owned historic highway bridge projects assisted by the FAHP. Furthermore, the SHA and the MD SHPO have agreed that SHA will use the applicable provisions of this PA to fulfill its compliance responsibilities under the Act. This PA establishes the basis for SHA’s administration of its Historic Highway Bridge Program and establishes how the FHWA and the MD SHPO will be involved in both the Program and individual bridge projects under the Program.
2. The SHA proposes to administer its Historic Highway Bridge Program in accordance with this PA, in order to manage its assets and ensure that SHA’s engineering heritage is preserved and protected for the benefit of Maryland’s citizens. This PA identifies the program’s key components including designation of three treatment categories for SHA­ owned and managed historic bridges:
   1. Preservation Priority Historic Bridges (Listed in Attachment A): historic bridges designated for indefinite preservation;
   2. Eligible Historic Bridges (Listed in Attachment B): historic bridges that will be maintained and preserved, when feasible, and are subject to a streamlined review process; and
   3. Non-Priority Historic Bridges (Listed in Attachment C): historic bridges that do not require preservation in place and are subject to a streamlined review process and standard mitigation treatments,
3. The PA addresses provisions for the appropriate management and corresponding review processes for historic bridges in each of the three treatment categories. It provides streamlined review procedures under certain circumstances, standardized mitigation treatments for Non-Priority Historic Bridges, measures for coordination with Maryland Heritage Areas and Scenic Byways, and use of design exceptions and variances, In addition, the PA includes measures for bridge stewardship and outreach efforts, as resources allow.

II. Applicability

1. Applicability: This PA applies to any FHWA assisted work conducted on SHA-owned eligible historic bridges including, but not necessarily limited to, bridge maintenance, preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, reconstruction, relocation, and/or replacement projects, and projects containing any or all elements of the above project types.
2. Effect on Existing Agreements: The measures contained in this PA do not supersede stipulations contained in previously executed Memoranda of Agreement regarding the rehabilitation or replacement of individual historic bridges in Maryland. Furthermore, this PA does not replace those provisions for minor bridge and small structure work established in SHA’s 2008 Amended Programmatic Agreement for Minor Highway Projects (or any subsequent amendment).
3. Non-SHA Owned Historic Bridges in Maryland: The provisions of this PA do not apply to historic bridges in Maryland owned by local governments, federal agencies, or other entities. Nonetheless, the signatory parties to this PA agree that the treatment principles, guidance, and review considerations contained herein may be relevant to non-SHA owned historic bridges. FHWA, SHA and the MD SHPO will promote the appropriate stewardship of non-SHA owned historic bridges in Maryland through their respective agency programs, where appropriate.

III. Responsibilities of the FHWA, the SHA and the MD SHPO

1. In compliance with its responsibilities under the NHPA, and as a condition of its award to SHA of any assistance for bridge rehabilitation or replacement projects under the FAHP, the FHWA shall require the SHA to carry out the provisions of this PA to meet the requirements of 36 CFR Part 800, and the applicable ACHP standards and guidelines, for all undertakings involving SHA historic bridges that are included in Attachments A-C that receive Federal assistance. The FHWA, ACHP, and the MD SHPO will participate in the process as specified in subsequent stipulations.
2. SHA cultural resource professionals will be responsible for implementing the requirements of this PA that are delegated to SHA.
3. SHA will strive to maintain in-house engineering expertise related to the treatment of historic bridges either on its staff or through consultant services, whose responsibilities will include overseeing work on its historic bridges in accordance with this PA.
4. The SHA will include information about National Register eligibility status of inventoried bridges in its internal databases used by its cultural resources, project planning and structures personnel.

IV. Potential Effects to Other Historic Properties from Bridge Projects

1. SHA will review all undertakings subject to this PA in order to determine if the undertaking has the potential to affect other historic properties, including archeological sites. If there are other historic properties within the APE that may be affected by the undertaking, SHA will follow the standard consultation requirements of 36 CFR Part 800 (where applicable).
2. At SHA’s discretion, or upon the written request of FHWA, the MD SHPO, or other party, SHA may review any project subject to this PA in accordance with the standard review process established in 36 CFR Part 800 and shall include appropriate consulting parties as defined at 36 CFR §800.2 in the consultation process.

V. Identification of SHA Historic Bridges

1. Inventory Efforts: In 1995, SHA began its comprehensive efforts to identify bridges eligible for the National Register on Maryland’s state and county highways, in consultation with the MD SHPO. These initial efforts resulted in the preparation of the Historic Highway Bridges in Maryland: 1631-1960: Historic Context Report (Spero & Company and Berger & Associates, 1995), which included an inventory of SHA-owned bridges constructed between 1809 and 1947. SHA evaluated the National Register eligibility of the identified bridges under Criterion C, at a state level of significance, and obtained concurrence from the MD SHPO with its determinations on July 27, 2001. SHA has continued to identify and evaluate individual bridges on a case by case basis, in consultation with the MD SHPO. SHA completed a second comprehensive evaluation of SHA owned bridges constructed between 1948-1965 that resulted in the preparation of the Phase II State Historic Bridge Context & Inventory of Modern Bridges, Survey Report and Assessments of Significance (URS 2004) and “Tomorrow’s Roads Today,” Expressway Construction in Maryland 1948-1965 (Bruder 2010). SHA coordinated its inventory efforts with the MD SHPO, FHWA, and other relevant parties (such as local governments, historic preservation commissions and heritage areas).
2. Historic Bridges Subject to the PA: The attachments to this PA include SHA-owned bridges that SHA, with concurrence by the MD SHPO, determined eligible for the National Register based on consultation through September 2010. Those bridges that are not individually eligible but may be eligible as contributing elements to a historic district may not be included in the attachments. Attachments A-C list all the SHA-owned historic bridges determined eligible for the National Register by SHA in consultation with the MD SHPO, organized by treatment category:
   1. Attachment A: Preservation Priority Historic Bridges - 17 historic bridges designated for long term preservation;
   2. Attachment B: Eligible Historic Bridges - 91 historic bridges that may be preserved when feasible; and
   3. Attachment C: Non-Priority Historic Bridges - 60 historic bridges that do not require preservation.
   4. The following NRHP-eligible bridges included in Attachments A and B do not meet the requirements of the ACHP’s “Program Comment Issued for Streamlining Section 106 Review of Actions Affecting Post-1945 Concrete and Steel Bridges,” (FR Nov. 16, 2012, 68790-68795) because they have significance as examples of their type that were constructed after 1945 in Maryland:
      1. SHA Bridge No. 1304600, Aluminum Bridge, MD 32 over River Road, Patapsco River and B&O Railroad [now CSXT] (Attachment A, Preservation Priority)
      2. SHA Bridge No. 0306800, MD 128 over Piney Run (Attachment B, Eligible Bridge)
      3. SHA Bridge No. 0307100, Glyndon Bridge, MD 128 over Western Maryland Railroad (Attachment B, Eligible Bridge)
      4. SHA Bridge No. 0309900, MD 151 over Patapsco & Back River Railroad and MD 151B (Attachment B, Eligible Bridge)
      5. SHA Bridge No. 2300800, US 113 over Purnell Branch (Attachment B, Eligible Bridge)
3. Inventory Updates and Revisions to Attachments A-C: SHA and the MD SHPO have agreed on the National Register eligibility determinations based on the inventory efforts which have identified SHA’s bridges constructed between 1809 and 1965. SHA shall continue to identify and evaluate the National Register eligibility of its bridges on a case­-by-case basis as need arises, in consultation with the MD SHPO and any other relevant parties. SHA will not continue to comprehensively inventory unidentified bridges and small structures constructed after 1965 on Maryland highways that meet the ACHP’s “Program Comment Issued for Streamlining Section 106 Review of Actions Affecting Post-1945 Concrete and Steel Bridges,” (77 FR 68790-68795). Annually, the SHA may modify Attachments A-C to reflect the results of any inventory updates based on consultation and mutual agreement between SHA and the MD SHPO. SHA shall provide copies of any revised attachments to this PA to the signatory parties with its annual report produced pursuant to Stipulation XIII of the PA.

VI. Management Plans, Guidelines, Standards, Regulations and Contexts

1. Management Plan: SHA completed the Management Plan for Historic Highway Bridges (KCI Technologies, Inc. & Tran|Systems/Lichtenstein, April 2010) (Management Plan), which includes individual management plans for the preservation of the priority bridges, as well as general guidance for best practices.
2. Guidelines, standards, regulations, contexts and management plans relevant to this PA and its purposes include:
   • 36 CFR Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties (2004);
   • Exemption Regarding Historic Preservation Review Process for Effects to the Interstate Highway System (70 Federal Register, 11928-11931);
   • Program Comment Issued for Streamlining Section 106 Review of Actions Affecting Post-1945 Concrete and Steel Bridges (77 FR 68790-68795)
   • Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR Part 68);
   • Historic Highway Bridges in Maryland: 1631-1960: Historic Context Report (Spero & Company and Berger & Associates, 1995);
   • Phase II State Historic Bridge Context & Inventory of Modern Bridges, Survey Report and Assessments of Significance (URS 2004);
   • ‘Tomorrow’s Roads Today,’ Expressway Construction in Maryland 1948-1965 (Bruder 2010);
   • Standards and Guidelines for Architectural and Historical Investigations in Maryland (Maryland Historical Trust 2000); and
   • Standards and Guidelines for Archeological Investigations in Maryland (Shaffer and Cole, 1994).

VII. Treatment of Preservation Priority Historic Bridges

SHA has selected seventeen (17) historic bridges, listed in Attachment A, for its treatment category, Preservation Priority Historic Bridges, for preservation in perpetuity to the maximum extent possible. SHA will continue to maintain and preserve these bridges, in accordance with relevant guidance contained in the Management Plan.

1. Preservation and Maintenance: SHA will maintain and preserve the Preservation Priority Historic Bridges listed in Attachment A. In accordance with the specific bridge management plan developed for each of these bridges, SHA will incorporate measures that may involve repair, strengthening or replacement of bridge components and/or design exceptions directed at keeping the preservation priority historic bridges in long­ term use. For practical purposes, “long-term” is taken to mean 20 years into the future. A 20-year window was chosen as an upper limit of how far reasonable predictions can be made regarding how any given bridge will react to its existing and proposed environment with the information that is available at the time preservation activities are planned. All repair, strengthening or replacement of bridge components will follow the recommended approaches of the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties, as well as the guidance contained in the individual management plans that will be found in the Management Plan.
2. Biennial Inspection: In order to determine if any of the Preservation Priority Historic Bridges listed in Attachment A require repair or rehabilitation, SHA will inspect each bridge following NBIS requirements on a two-year cycle (or sooner if conditions warrant) and report the inspection results to the Office of Structures (OOS) Structures Remedial Engineer in charge of the bridge.
3. Training for SHA Structures Maintenance Personnel: Within one (1) year of the signing of this PA and SHA’s Office of Planning and Preliminary Engineering (OPPE) and OOS will provide training to SHA structures engineers, structures inspectors and district maintenance workers as well as cultural resources professionals in order to ensure that appropriate maintenance treatments are being applied to the 17 bridges identified for preservation priority. The training will be provided either during the annual bridge inspection training class or other appropriate training and scheduled through the Learning Management System or any subsequent training tracking systems for SHA employees.
4. Funding for Preservation Priority Historic Bridges: Recognizing that individual bridge projects will occur on different schedules depending on available funding sources and individual bridge needs, SHA will begin actively seeking funds for preservation and rehabilitation of the 17 bridges using traditional funding sources on an as-needed basis within one (1) year of the signing of this PA. If needed, additional state and federal funding sources will be sought.
5. Considerations for Replacement of Preservation Priority Bridges:
   1. Review Process for Preservation Priority Historic Bridges: Considering the prominent status of the Preservation Priority Historic Bridges, SHA, FHWA and the MD SHPO shall review all undertakings involving Preservation Priority Historic Bridges in accordance with the standard review process established in 36 CFR Part 800 and shall seek out and include appropriate consulting parties as defined at 36 CFR §800.2 in the consultation process.
   2. If SHA determines that preservation of a Preservation Priority Historic Bridge is no longer feasible, SHA will thoroughly investigate all prudent and feasible alternatives, including the following options, before selecting the replacement alternative:
      • No build;
      • Minor structural rehabilitation to the existing bridge for continued vehicular use;
      • Reducing traffic volumes on the existing bridge, including one-way pair;
      • Bypassing and preserving the existing bridge in place; and
      • Relocating the existing bridge to another site.
   3. If a Preservation Priority Historic Bridge is bypassed or relocated, SHA will develop an alternative management plan for the bridge’s continued use as an integral part of a pedestrian or other type of facility.
   4. If a Preservation Priority Historic Bridge needs to be replaced, appropriate additional efforts will be determined by the signatories of this PA to mitigate the loss of that bridge, through the consultation process noted in Stipulation VII.E.7 below. Examples of appropriate mitigation may be the development of a bridge design that would reflect both the state of twenty-first century bridge design and SHA’s engineering heritage (e.g., a concrete arch bridge), or providing funding to improve another preservation priority historic bridge or identifying an eligible historic bridge listed in Attachment B which can be designated as a Preservation Priority Historic Bridge.
   5. If an Eligible Historic Bridge is made a Preservation Priority Historic Bridge as a result of losing a Preservation Priority Bridge, SHA will develop an individual management plan for that bridge in consultation with the MD SHPO as part of the mitigation for the loss of the other bridge.
   6. If a proposed project subject to this PA includes work on any bridge listed in Attachment A, the SHA will review the project in order to determine if it may have an adverse effect on the bridge or any other historic and archeological properties in the area of potential effects, applying the Criteria of Adverse Effect set forth in 36 CFR §800.5(a)(l).
   7. Status Report: SHA will provide annual updates to FHWA, ACHP, and MD SHPO on the status of the bridge preservation efforts in conjunction with the annual review pursuant to Stipulation XIII of this PA.

VIII. Treatment of Eligible Historic Bridges

SHA has assigned ninety-one (91) historic bridges, listed in Attachment B, to the treatment category Eligible Historic Bridges. SHA will continue to maintain and preserve these bridges, in accordance with relevant guidance contained in the Management Plan, as feasible. Since these bridges may not be ideal candidates for long-term preservation in place, SHA will manage these structures on a case-by-case basis. Rehabilitation, adaptive use, relocation, demolition and replacement are all possible treatment options for this bridge category. The signatory parties to this PA agree that a streamlined approach to the review of projects that result in no adverse effects to Eligible Historic Bridges is appropriate, as established below.

1. Review Process for Eligible Historic Bridges:
   1. If a proposed project subject to this PA includes work on any bridge listed in Attachment B, the SHA will review the project in order to determine if it may have an adverse effect on the bridge or any other historic and archeological properties in the area of potential effects (APE), applying the Criteria of Adverse Effect set forth in 36 CFR §800.5(a)(l).
   2. SHA will use the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and the guidance contained in the Management Plan in order to assess whether or not the proposed work would constitute an adverse effect.
   3. If SHA determines that the project may constitute an adverse effect, they will seek to avoid such effects by incorporating the treatments and guidance contained in the Management Plan. SHA shall consider a full range of project alternatives, including: no action; construct a new structure at a different location without affecting the historic integrity of the old bridge; and rehabilitate the historic bridge without affecting the historic integrity of the structure.
   4. The FHWA, MD SHPO, SHA and the ACHP agree that following the Review Process for Eligible Historic Bridges includes all possible planning to minimize effects to the historic bridge.
2. No Adverse Effects:
   1. For projects SHA reviews under this Stipulation, it will provide notification and opportunities for input from interested parties by copying the relevant local government Planning and Zoning Office, Certified Heritage Area, Scenic Byway, or other appropriate entity on its SHA Historic Bridge Review Form. SHA may copy other organizations at its discretion or upon request.
   2. If SHA determines that the proposed undertaking will have no adverse effect on historic properties, no further consultation with the MD SHPO is required.
   3. SHA shall document its review and no adverse effect determination on a SHA Historic Bridge Review Form (Attachment E). SHA will provide the MD SHPO with an electronic courtesy copy of the SHA Historic Bridge Review Form and will provide a list of all such forms it handles in a given calendar year as part of its annual report, pursuant to Stipulation XIII.
   4. SHA may request written concurrence from the MD SHPO for its determination of no adverse effect for any project subject to this Stipulation, if desired.
   5. If SHA receives comments from the other parties, SHA will provide a copy of the documentation to the MD SHPO and consult with all relevant parties to resolve any issues or handle the individual project review under the standard 36 CFR Part 800 process.
3. Resolution of Adverse Effects:

   If SHA determines that the undertaking will have an adverse effect on an Eligible Historic Bridge, and that that there are no viable alternatives that would avoid causing adverse effects, it will consult with the MD SHPO, FHWA, and any other identified consulting parties, pursuant to 36 CFR §800.6 to resolve the adverse effects. FHWA will notify the ACHP pursuant to 36 CFR 800.6(a) when a finding of adverse effects is made for a bridge in this category.

   1. If SHA determines that the undertaking will have an adverse effect on an Eligible Historic Bridge, and that that there are no viable alternatives that would avoid causing adverse effects, it will consult with the MD SHPO, FHWA, and any other identified consulting parties, pursuant to 36 CFR §800.6 to resolve the adverse effects. FHWA will notify the ACHP pursuant to 36 CFR 800.6(a) when a finding of adverse effects is made for a bridge in this category.
   2. If other historic properties will be affected, SHA will address the effects of the undertaking on all historic properties in a single MOA. All agreed upon mitigation measures will be included in an MOA executed in accordance with 36 CFR 800.6(c).

IX. Treatment of Non-Priority Historic Bridges

SHA has assigned sixty (60) historic bridges, listed in Attachment C, to the treatment category Non-Priority Historic Bridges. SHA will continue to maintain these bridges, in accordance with relevant guidance contained in the Management Plan, as feasible. Since these bridges are representative examples of their type and not ideal candidates for long-term preservation in place, demolition and replacement are possible treatment options for this bridge category, when maintenance and rehabilitation are no longer feasible and cost effective options for these bridges. The signatory parties to this PA agree that a streamlined approach to the review of projects that result in no adverse effects to Non-Priority Historic Bridges is appropriate, as established below. Furthermore, since SHA has generated sufficient documentation regarding these bridges as part of its historic bridge inventory efforts, the signatory parties agree to resolve any adverse effects to these resources through the use of standard mitigation treatments (as defined in IX.D.

1. Review Process for Non-Priority Historic Bridges:
   1. If a proposed project for the type of undertakings listed in the Applicability section of this PA includes work on any bridge in Attachment C, the SHA will review the project in order to determine if it may have an adverse effect on the bridge or any other historic and archeological properties in the APE, applying the Criteria of Adverse Effect set forth in 36 CFR §800.5(a)(l).
   2. SHA will use the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and the guidance contained in the Management Plan in order to assess whether or not the proposed work would constitute an adverse effect. If SHA determines that the project may constitute an adverse effect, they will seek to avoid such effects by incorporating the treatments and guidance contained in the Management Plan.
2. No Adverse Effects:
   1. If SHA determines that the proposed undertaking will have no adverse effect on historic properties, no further consultation with the MD SHPO is required.
   2. SHA shall document its review and no adverse effect determination on a SHA Historic Bridge Review Form (Attachment E). SHA will provide the MD SHPO with an electronic courtesy copy of the SHA Historic Bridge Review Form and will provide a list of all such forms it handles in a given calendar year as part of its annual report, pursuant to Stipulation XIII.
   3. SHA may request written concurrence from the MD SHPO for its determination of no adverse effect for any project subject to this Stipulation, if desired.
   4. For projects SHA reviews under this Stipulation, it will provide notification and opportunities for input from interested parties by copying the relevant local government Planning and Zoning Office, Certified Heritage Area, Scenic Byway, or other appropriate entity on its SHA Historic Bridge Review Form. SHA may copy other organizations at its discretion or upon request.
   5. If SHA receives comments from the other parties, SHA will provide a copy of the documentation to the MD SHPO and consult with all relevant parties to resolve any issues or handle the individual project review under the standard 36 CFR Part 800 process.
3. Resolution of Adverse Effects Through Standard Mitigation Treatments:
   1. If SHA determines that the undertaking will have an adverse effect on a Non-Priority Historic Bridge, and that there are no viable alternatives that would avoid causing adverse effects, SHA will notify the MD SHPO, FHWA, and any other identified consulting parties, of its intent to resolve the adverse effect by implementing the Standard Mitigation Treatment for Non-Priority Historic Bridges.
   2. When using a Standard Mitigation Treatment, execution of a MOA to resolve the adverse effect is not warranted for this bridge category, unless the MD SHPO, FHWA or other consulting party object to the use of Standard Mitigation Treatments within thirty (30) days of SHA’s notification.
   3. If SHA receives comments from the other parties, SHA will provide a copy of the documentation to the MD SHPO and consult with all relevant pai1ies to resolve any issues or handle the individual project review under the standard 36 CFR Part 800 process.
   4. SHA shall ensure that the mitigation, either a Standard Mitigation Treatment or other negotiated measure under a MOA, is completed prior to demolition or alteration of the historic bridge.
4. Standard Mitigation Treatment for Non-Priority Historic Bridges: The signatory parties to this PA agree that SHA may employ the following standard treatment to mitigate the adverse effect of an undertaking on a Non-Priority Historic Bridge.
   1. SHA shall prepare a recordation package to mitigate an undertaking’s adverse effect on a Non-Priority Historic Bridge listed in Attachment C.
   2. SHA prepared Determination of Eligibility (DOE) Forms for all 60 Non-Priority Historic Bridges in October 2009. This documentation includes a full description of the bridge, a brief historic context, mapping and photographs. To serve as the Standard Mitigation Treatment recordation package, SHA shall convert the existing DOE forms into the MD SHPO’s Addendum Sheet format, as illustrated in Attachment D. This documentation shall fulfill SHA’s mitigation requirement for all Non-Priority Historic Bridges.
   3. SHA may provide the MD SHPO with a single recordation package for all 60 Non­ Priority Historic Bridges or may prepare and submit the documentation on a project­-by-project basis. SHA shall ensure that all recordation packages for the bridges listed in Attachment Care provided to the MD SHPO within five (5) years from the execution of this PA.
   4. SHA shall include a list of all the bridges it handled through Standard Mitigation Treatment for Non-Priority Historic Bridges for each given calendar year in its Annual Report produced pursuant to Stipulation XIII of this PA.

X. Coordination with Maryland Heritage Areas and Maryland Scenic Byways

SHA shall identify if an unde11aking subject to this PA includes work within in a Certified Heritage Area or along a Maryland Scenic Byway. SHA shall make sure that any such undertaking supports the objective and mission of the affected heritage area and/or scenic byway and that the project is designed in a manner that acknowledges the area’s unique history, culture, natural resources and heritage tourism goals. SHA shall coordinate with and take into consideration the views of heritage area authorities, tourism agencies and any other consulting parties during project planning and implementation.

XI. Use of Variances

1. FHWA and SHA strongly encourage the development of historic bridge projects in a context sensitive manner, including the use of variances when practical.
2. SHA and FHWA agree design exceptions should not be required for each preservation project affecting the 17 Preservation Priority Historic Bridges if the bridges are solely being maintained and not replaced. If the bridge is not being widened or replaced, the geometrics are not changed, eliminating the need for Design exceptions. Design exceptions are not necessary for the maintenance/preservation activities. Design exceptions are required for Bridge Rehabilitation/Improvement projects in which modifications are possible to improve safety through changes to the geometrics. Design Exceptions would be investigated and applied to on a case-by-case basis include sight distances, vertical and horizontal curve clearances, shoulder widths, and geometric improvements.

XII. Bridge Stewardship and Outreach Efforts

SHA appreciates that the historic bridges under its ownership and control embody significant structures reflecting Maryland’s rich history, technology, engineering, aud transportation accomplishments and these bridges are important to the interests of the State and its citizens. SHA will promote awareness and appropriate stewardship of Maryland’s historic bridges through the measures listed below, as funding and resources allow.

1. National Register of Historic Places Nominations: SHA will nominate the Preservation Priority Historic Bridges to the National Register. Within one year of the signing of this PA, SHA will complete the Multiple Property Documentation Form which will discuss The Historic Highway Bridges of Maryland, 1809-1962, and submit that document along with required attachments to the MD SHPO. SHA shall also submit at least two bridge nominations per year to the MD SHPO, as funds are available for the nomination work. SHA shall develop the nomination package(s) in accordance with the National Register Bulletin How to Complete the National Register Form and all other applicable guidance from the National Park Service and the MD SHPO. SHA shall submit the completed National Register nomination(s) to the MD SHPO for review and approval. SHA shall revise the nomination package(s) in accordance with any MD SHPO comments. Once approved by the MD SHPO, the MD SHPO shall forward the nomination(s) to the Keeper of the National Register of Historic Places for listing.
2. Updating SHA’s Historic Bridges Web Pages and Creation of a Maryland National Register Historic Bridges Web Page: Within one (1) year of the signing of this PA, SHA will work with FHWA, and MD SHPO, to update its Maryland Historic Bridges portion of its web site. Updates will include but are not limited to the following items: a copy of the executed PA, the Management Plan, the individual bridge management plans, historic bridge contexts, guidance for best practices, high resolution scanned images of MIHP bridge forms performed for FHWA funded projects, and high resolution digital images of documented bridges. In addition, SHA will post new bridge studies or documentation to the Historic Bridges Web Pages, as appropriate. The MD SHPO will ensure that the listed bridges are included in the National Register web page that it maintains.
3. Public Outreach: SHA will seek opportunities to make presentations, publish articles, create posters, and/or implement other outreach measures about its Historic Highway Bridge Program during annual meetings or training sessions such as the Maryland Annual Preservation and Revitalization Conference, the County Engineers Association of Maryland’s Annual Meeting, the Maryland Association of Historic District Commissions (MAHDC) meetings, and other relevant events, as resources allow.
4. Historic Bridge Plaques: SHA will install the metal plaques created for the Preservation Priority Historic Bridges listed in Attachment A within one (1) year of executing this PA.

XIII. Annual Reporting

1. Beginning June 30, 2014 and on or about the end of Maryland’s fiscal year for the duration of this PA, the SHA will prepare an annual report, addressing the topics listed below as relevant to the preceding calendar year, and provide it to the MD SHPO and FHWA:
   • List of project reviews completed for the Preservation Priority Historic Bridges;
   • List of project reviews completed for the Eligible Historic Bridges, noting relevant effect determinations and outcomes;
   • List of project reviews completed for the Non-Priority Historic Bridges, noting relevant effect determinations and outcomes;
   • Status of preparing the standard mitigation treatment for the 60 Non-Priority Historic Bridges;
   • Progress in developing and distributing design exceptions for historic bridges;
   • Progress in nominating the Preservation Priority Historic Bridges to the National Register;
   • Progress in updating the SHA Historic Bridge Web Pages;
   • Progress in outreach efforts;
   • Status of installing the plaques on the preservation priority historic bridges;
   • Updates on SHA’s Annual Bridge Candidates for New/Replacement Structure List;
   • Any problems or unexpected issues encountered during the year;
   • Any revisions to Attachments A-C; and
   • Any changes that SHA believes should be made in implementing the PA or the need for formal amendments to the agreement.
2. At the request of any signatory party to this PA, SHA shall hold a meeting or meetings with the signatory parties to facilitate review and comment, to address questions, or to resolve any outstanding issues related to the implementation of the PA.

XIV. Coordination with Other Federal and State Review Processes

For those projects covered by this PA that are also subject to coordination through other federal and state review processes that include the MD SHPO (such as joint federal/state permit applications to the Maryland Department of the Environment/Corps of Engineers and submittals to the Maryland State Clearinghouse for Intergovernmental Assistance), the SHA shall make a good faith effort to provide copies of the relevant SHA Historic Bridge Review Form as part of its joint permit application or State Clearinghouse notification. Inclusion of this form as part of these other federal and state review processes will document the SHA’s compliance with Section 106 for the associated activities and facilitate the MD SHPO’s review and processing of these activities under other federal and state review processes.

XV. Dispute Resolution

1. Resolution of Objections by the Signatories

   Should the MD SHPO, or any of the signatories to this MOA, object in writing within 30 days to any plans or actions proposed pursuant to this MOA, the FHWA shall consult with the objecting party to resolve the objection. If the FHWA determines that such objection cannot be resolved, the FHWA will:

   1. Forward all documentation relevant to the dispute, including the FHWA’s proposed resolution, to the ACHP. The ACHP shall provide the FHWA with its advice on the resolution of the objection within 30 days of receiving adequate documentation. Prior to reaching a final decision on the dispute, the FHWA shall prepare a written response that takes into account any timely advice or comments regarding the dispute from the ACHP, signatories and concurring parties, and provide them with a copy of this written response. The FHWA will then proceed according to its final decision.
   2. If the ACHP does not provide its advice regarding the dispute within the 30 day time period, the FHWA may make a final decision on the dispute and proceed accordingly. Prior to reaching such a final decision, the FHWA shall prepare a written response that takes into account any timely comments regarding the dispute from the signatories and concurring parties to the MOA, and provide them and the ACHP with a copy of such written response.
   3. The FHWA’s responsibility to carry out all other actions subject to the terms of this MOA that are not the subject of the dispute remains unchanged.
2. Resolution of Objections by the Public

   At any time during implementation of the measures stipulated in this MOA, should an objection pertaining to this agreement or the effect of the undertaking on historic properties be raised by another consulting party, a concurring party to the MOA, or a member of the public, the FHWA shall notify the parties to this agreement and take the objection into account, consulting with the objector and, should the objector so request, with any of the parties to this agreement to resolve the objection.

XVI. Amendment

Any signatory to this PA may request that it be amended, whereupon the parties shall consult to consider the proposed amendment.

XVII. Termination

Any party to this PA may terminate it by providing thirty days notice to the other signatories, provided that the parties will consult during the period prior to termination to seek agreement on amendments or other actions that would avoid termination. In the event of termination, the FHWA and MD SHA will comply with 36 CFR §800.4 through 36 CFR §800.6 with regard to individual undertakings covered by this PA.

XVIII. Failure to Comply with Agreement

In the event the FHWA or SHA do not carry out the terms of this PA, the FHWA or SHA will comply with 36 CFR §800.4 through 36 CFR §800.6 with regard to individual undertakings covered by this PA.

XIX. Duration

This PA shall become effective upon execution by FHWA, MD SHPO, the ACHP, and SHA and shall remain in effect for ten years or until December 31, 2023. No later than December 31, 2022, FHWA will consult with the signatories to this PA to determine interest in renewing this PA. The PA may be extended for additional terms upon the written agreement of the signatories.

Execution and implementation of this PA evidences that the FHWA has afforded the ACHP a reasonable opportunity to comment on its programs and their effects on historic bridge properties.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

By: Gregory Murrill, Division Administrator
Date: 6/27/13

MARYLAND STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

By: Melinda B. Peters, Administrator
Date: 6/26/13

MARYLAND STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE

By: J. Rodney Little, State Historic Preservation Officer
Date: 6-27-13

ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION

By: John M. Fowler, Executive Director
Date: 7/19/13