CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE

http://www.achp.gov/book/notes.html

{280} 42 U.S.C. § § 4321-4335 (1994).

{281} 49 U.S.C. § 303 (1994). See also Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, 23 U.S.C. § § 101(a) and 133 (1994).

{282} 16 U.S.C. §§ 469-469c (1994).

{283} 16 U.S.C. §§ 470aa-470ll (1994).

{284} 25 U.S.C. §§3001-3013 (1994).

{285} 42 U.S.C. §§ 1996-1996a (1994).

{286} This report does not include a discussion of or citations to the many cases decided under these laws that do not address historic preservation but that deal with other aspects of the statutes.

{287} The statutes discussed in Section VIII.C. have generated relatively little litigation. Only those cases raising NHPA claims as well as claims under the statutes in that section are cited.

{288} Preservation Coalition, Inc. v. Pierce, 667 F.2d 851 (9th Cir. 1982).

{289} 42 U.S.C. § 4331(b)(4) (1994).

{290} 42 U.S.C. § 4332(2)(C) (1994).

{291} More specifically, the process is as follows: If an agency determines that a proposed action is neither adequately covered by an existing NEPA document nor subject to a categorical exclusion, the agency must, at a minimum, prepare an EA to determine whether the action will significantly impact the environment. If the EA supports a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), the agency documents that determination and proceeds with the action. If the agency does not reach a FONSI, it must publish a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS and begin the scoping process. An agency may opt to proceed directly to preparation of an EIS, without preparing an EA.

{292} Gettysburg Battlefield Preservation Ass'n v. Gettysburg College, 799 F. Supp. 1571 (M.D. Pa. 1992), aff'd, 989 F.2d 487 (3d Cir. 1993); Walsh v. United States Army Corps of Eng'rs, 757 F. Supp. 781 (W.D. Tex. 1990); Connecticut Trust for Historic Preservation v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n, 841 F.2d 479 (2d Cir. 1988); Ringsred v. City of Duluth, 828 F.2d 1305 (8th Cir. 1987).

{293} The Council's regulations encourage agencies to coordinate their NEPA review with their compliance under § 106 of NHPA. 36 C.F.R. § 800.14(a) (1995).

{294} Indiana Coal Council v. Lujan, 774 F. Supp. 1385 (D.D.C. 1991), vacated in part and appeal dismissed, No. 91-5397 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 26, 1993) (court noted that NEPA threshold appeared higher than NHPA).

{295} Preservation Coalition, Inc. v. Pierce, 667 F.2d 851 (9th Cir. 1982); Bayou St. John Improv. Ass'n v. Sands, No. 81-1358 (E.D. La. May 28, 1981), injunction modified, [1983] 13 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. L. Inst.) 20,011 (June 17, 1982); National Indian Youth Council v. Andrus, 501 F. Supp. 649 (D.N.M. 1980), aff'd, 664 F.2d 220 (10th Cir. 1981); Cobble Hill Ass'n v. Adams, 470 F. Supp. 1077 (E.D.N.Y. 1979). Contra, Environmental Defense Fund v. Tenn.Valley Auth., 371 F. Supp. 1004 (E.D. Tenn. 1973), aff'd per curiam, 492 F.2d 466 (6th Cir. 1974).

{296} Warm Springs Dam Task Force v. Gribble, 378 F. Supp. 240 (N.D. Cal. 1974).

{297} Gettysburg Battlefield Preservation Ass'n v. Gettysburg College, 799 F. Supp. 1571 (M.D. Pa. 1992), aff'd, 989 F.2d 487 (3d Cir. 1993); Sugarloaf Citizens Ass'n v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 959 F.2d 508 (4th Cir. 1992); Village of Los Ranchos v. Barnhart, 906 F.2d 1477 (10th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1109 (1991); People for Responsible Omaha Urban Dev. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n, CV88-0-247 (D. Neb.Feb. 14, 1989), aff'd, No. 89-1342 NE (8th Cir. Sept. 14, 1989), 889 F.2d 1092 (mem.), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 957 (1990).

{298} Sugarloaf Citizens Ass'n v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 959 F.2d 508 (4th Cir. 1992); Village of Los Ranchos v. Barnhart, 906 F.2d 1477 (10th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1109 (1991); Ringsred v. City of Duluth, 828 F.2d 1305 (8th Cir. 1987).

{299} National Trust for Historic Preservation v. Department of State, 834 F. Supp. 443 (D.D.C.), recons. denied, 834 F. Supp. 453 (D.D.C. 1993), aff'd in part, rev'd in part sub nom. Sheridan Kalorama Historical Ass'n v. Christopher, 49 F.3d 750 (D.C. Cir. 1995); Gettysburg Battlefield Preservation Ass'n v. Gettysburg College, 799 F. Supp. 1571 (M.D. Pa. 1992), aff'd, 989 F.2d 487 (3d Cir. 1993); Village of Los Ranchos v. Barnhart, 906 F.2d 1477 (10th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1109 (1991); People for Responsible Omaha Urban Dev. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n, CV88-0-247 (D. Neb. Feb. 14, 1989), aff'd, No. 89-1342 NE (8th Cir. Sept. 14, 1989), 889 F.2d 1092 (mem.), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 957 (1990); Attakai v. United States, 746 F. Supp. 1395 (D. Ariz. 1990); Ringsred v. City of Duluth, 828 F.2d 1305 (8th Cir. 1987).

{300} See, e.g., West Branch Valley Flood Protection Ass'n v. Stone, 820 F. Supp. (D.D.C. 1993).

{301} Village of Los Ranchos v. Barnhart, 906 F.2d 1477 (10th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1109 (1991).

{302} Id.

{303} Sugarloaf Citizens Ass'n v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 959 F.2d 508 (4th Cir. 1992).

{304} Ringsred v. City of Duluth, 828 F.2d 1305 (8th Cir. 1987).

{305} Gettysburg Battlefield Preservation Ass'n v. Gettysburg College, 799 F. Supp. 1571 (M.D. Pa. 1992), aff'd, 989 F.2d 487 (3d Cir. 1993).

{306} People for Responsible Omaha Urban Dev. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n, CV88-0-247 (D. Neb. Feb. 14, 1989), aff'd, No. 89-1342 NE (8th Cir. Sept. 14, 1989), 889 F.2d 1092 (mem.), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 957 (1990).

{307} National Trust for Historic Preservation v. Department of State, 834 F. Supp. 443 (D.D.C.), recons. denied, 834 F. Supp. 453 (D.D.C. 1993), aff'd in part, rev'd in part sub nom. Sheridan Kalorama Historical Ass'n v. Christopher, 49 F.3d 750 (D.C. Cir. 1995).

{308} City of Grapevine v. Department of Transp., 17 F.3d 1502 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 635 (1994); Citizens for the Scenic Severn River Bridge, Inc. v. Skinner, 802 F. Supp. 1325 (D. Md. 1991), aff'd, 972 F.2d 338 (4th Cir. 1992).

{309} El Rancho La Comunidad v. United States, No. 90-113 (D.N.M. May 21, 1991).

{310} Abenaki Nation of Mississquoi v. Hughes, 805 F. Supp. 234 (D. Vt. 1992), aff'd, 990 F.2d 729 (2d Cir. 1993) (court found that permit conditions obviated need for EIS because conditions reduced impact of the project).

{311} Council on Environmental Quality Memorandum to Agencies Containing Answers to 40 Most Asked Questions on NEPA Regulations, 46 Fed. Reg. 18,026-38 (1981).

{312} 40 C.F.R. § 1508.27 (b)(3), (8) (1995).

{313} Committee to Save the Fox Bldg. v. Birmingham Branch of the Fed. Reserve Bank, 497 F. Supp. 504 (N.D. Ala. 1980). But see Colorado River Indian Tribes v. Marsh, 605 F. Supp. 1425 (C.D. Cal. 1985) ("major Federal action" does not have meaning independent of "significantly affecting the quality of the human environment").

{314} Aertson v. Landrieu, 488 F. Supp. 314 (D. Mass.), aff'd, 637 F.2d 12 (1st Cir. 1980) (demolition in and adjacent to historic district); Nehring v. Harris, No. 79-C-1182 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 12, 1979), dismissed, 605 F.2d 559 (7th Cir. 1979) (demolition of eligible property). In one early decision, Saint Joseph Historical Soc'y v. Land Clearance for Redev. Auth., 366 F. Supp. 605 (W.D. Mo. 1973), the court found that NEPA was not applicable because the historic properties at issue had not been listed in the Register.

{315} City of Grapevine v. Department of Transp., 17 F.3d 1502 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 635 (1994) (court found that agency considered cumulative impacts of most elements of project, but those elements not considered could not be included in approved plan); Walsh v. United States Army Corps of Eng'rs, 757 F. Supp. 781 (W.D. Tex. 1990) (court upheld agency study where EIS included analysis of cumulative impacts of proposed actions, but not cumulative impacts of "contemplated" actions).

{316} City of Grapevine v. Department of Transp., 17 F.3d 1502 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 635 (1994); Communities, Inc. v. Busey, 956 F.2d 619 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 953 (1992).

{317} Communities, Inc. v. Busey, 956 F.2d 619 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 953 (1992) (court upheld agency EIS that identified and discussed potential mitigation measures, even though EIS did not specify which mitigation measures would be adopted); Sierra Club v. Watt, No. CV-835878 AWT (C.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 1983), aff'd sub nom. Sierra Club v. Clark, 774 F.2d 1406 (9th Cir. 1985) (court found agency in compliance with NEPA where EIS addressed several mitigation measures and agency implemented substantial site-specific mitigation measures which had not been incorporated into EIS).

{318} Bayou St. John Improv. Ass'n v. Sands, No. 81-1358 (E.D. La. May 28, 1981), injunction modified, [1983] 13 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. L. Inst.) 20,011 (June 17, 1982) (levee improvements); National Indian Youth Council v. Andrus, 501 F. Supp. 649 (D.N.M. 1980), aff'd, 664 F.2d 220 (10th Cir. 1981) (mining); Montana Wildlife Fed'n v. Morton, 406 F. Supp. 489 (D. Mont. 1976) (road); Warm Springs Dam Task Force v. Gribble, 378 F. Supp. 240 (N.D. Cal. 1974) (dam). But see James v. Lynn, 374 F. Supp. 900 (D. Colo. 1974) (EIS did not discuss historic resources; court declined to issue injunction because building still stood and plans could be changed). See also 40 C.F.R. §§ 1502.16(g), 1508.27(b)(8) (1995).

{319} Preservation Coalition, Inc. v. Pierce, 667 F.2d 851 (9th Cir. 1982) (urban renewal); Sierra Club v. Watt, No. CV-83-5878 AWT (C.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 1983), aff'd sub nom. Sierra Club v. Clark, 774 F.2d 1406 (9th Cir. 1985) (motorcycle race); Bayou St. John Improv. Ass'n v. Sands, No. 811358 (E.D. La. May 28, 1981), (injunction modified, [1983] 13 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. L. Inst.) 20,011 (June 17, 1982) (levee improvements); National Center for Preservation Law v. Landrieu, 496 F. Supp. 716 (D.S.C.), aff'd per curiam, 635 F.2d 324 (4th Cir. 1980) (community development); Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 460 F. Supp. 1120 (E.D. Wis. 1978), 490 F. Supp. 1334 (1980) (urban renewal); Libby Rod & Gun Club v. Poteat, 457 F. Supp. 1177 (D. Mont. 1978) (dam); Aluli v. Brown, 437 F. Supp. 602 (D. Hawaii 1977), aff'd in part, rev'd in part on other grounds, 602 F.2d 876 (9th Cir. 1979) (military operations); Inman Park Restoration, Inc. v. Urban Mass Transp. Admin., 414 F. Supp. 99 (N.D. Ga. 1975), supp. order, 414 F. Supp. 121 (1976), aff'd per curiam sub nom. Save Our Sycamore v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth., 576 F.2d 573 (5th Cir. 1978) (mass transit system); Warm Springs Dam Task Force v. Gribble, 378 F. Supp. 240 (N.D. Cal. 1974), aff'd, 621 F.2d 1017 (9th Cir. 1980) (dam); Environmental Defense Fund v. Tenn. Valley Auth., 371 F. Supp. 1004 (E.D. Tenn. 1973), aff'd per curiam, 492 F.2d 466 (6th Cir. 1974) (dam).

{320} Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 460 F. Supp. 1120 (E.D. Wis. 1978), 490 F. Supp. 1334 (1980) (urban renewal); Save the Courthouse Comm. v. Lynn, 408 F. Supp. 1323 (S.D.N.Y. 1975) (urban renewal); Boston Waterfront Residents Ass'n v. Romney, 343 F. Supp. 89 (D. Mass. 1972) (waterfront development).

{321} Warm Springs Dam Task Force v. Gribble, 378 F. Supp. 240 (N.D. Cal. 1974) (dam); Sierra Club v. Watt, No. CV-83-5878 AWT (C.D. Cal. Nov. 18, 1983), aff'd sub nom. Sierra Club v. Clark, 774 F.2d 1406 (9th Cir. 1985).

{322} Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334 (E.D. Wis. 1980) (the court reasoned that plaintiffs should have brought their concerns about the historic properties to the attention of the agency during the time the EIS was being prepared; the EIS must be judged in light of the information available to the agency at the time it prepared the EIS).

{323} James v. Lynn, 374 F. Supp. 900 (D. Colo. 1974).

{324} Aluli v. Brown, 437 F. Supp. 602 (D. Haw. 1977), aff'd in part, rev'd in part on other grounds, 602 F.2d 876 (9th Cir. 1979).

{325} Natural Resources Defense Council v. City of New York, 528 F. Supp. 1245 (S.D.N.Y. 1981), aff'd, 672 F.2d 292 (2d Cir.), cert. dismissed, 456 U.S. 920 (1982); Inman Park Restor., Inc. v. Urban Mass Transp. Admin., 414 F. Supp. 99 (N.D. Ga. 1975), supp. order, 414 F. Supp. 121 (1976), aff'd per curiam sub nom. Save Our Sycamore v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth., 576 F.2d 573 (5th Cir. 1978). See also West Branch Valley Flood Protection Ass'n v. Stone, 820 F. Supp. 1 (D.D.C. 1993); Abenaki Nation of Mississquoi v. Hughes, 805 F. Supp. 234 (D. Vt. 1992), aff'd, 990 F.2d 729 (2d Cir. 1993).

{326} WATCH v. Harris, 603 F.2d 310 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 995 (1979).

{327} See, e.g., Department of Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. § 303 (1994) and Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1968, 23 U.S.C. § 138 (1994).

{328} Department of Transportation Act, § 4(f), Pub. L. No. 89-670, 80 Stat. 931, 933 (1966).

{329} District of Columbia Fed'n of Civic Ass'ns v. Volpe, 459 F.2d 1231 (D.C. Cir. 1971), supp. op., 459 F.2d 1263, cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1030 (1972).

{330} These cases are beyond the scope of this report. See 23 C.F.R. § 771.135(p) (1994).

{331} Benton Franklin Riverfront Trailway & Bridge Comm. v. Lewis, 701 F.2d 784 (9th Cir. 1983).

{332} Ferris v. Secretary of the United States Dep't of Transp., No. 89-C779-C (W.D. Wis. 1990) (removal of lens in lighthouse constituted use).

{333} Coalition Against a Raised Expressway, Inc. v. Dole, [1987] 17 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. L. Inst.) 20,466 (S.D. Ala. Oct. 20, 1986).

{334} Id.

{335} City of Grapevine v. Department of Transp., 17 F.3d 1502 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 635 (1994); Communities, Inc. v. Busey, 956 F.2d 619 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 953 (1992).

{336} Nashvillians Against I-440 v. Lewis, 524 F. Supp. 962 (M.D. Tenn. 1981) (court held that the claimed harm must be to the historic value or quality of the properties).

{337} Town of Belmont v. Dole, 766 F.2d 28 (1st Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1055 (1986). See also 23 C.F.R. § 771.135 (p) (1995).

{338} Stop H-3 Ass'n v. Coleman, 533 F.2d 434 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 999 (1976).

{339} But see Nashvillians Against I-440 v. Lewis, 524 F. Supp. 962 (M.D. Tenn. 1981) (compliance with § 4(f) not required for every property within the scope of § 106 of NHPA).

{340} 49 U.S.C. § 303(c) (1994).

{341} Blue Grass Land & Nature Trust, Inc. v. Adams, No. 77-65 (E.D. Ky. Sept. 7, 1979).

{342} Benton Franklin Riverfront Trailway & Bridge Comm. v. Lewis, 701 F.2d 784 (9th Cir. 1983).

{343} Citizens for the Scenic Severn River Bridge, Inc. v. Skinner, 802 F. Supp. 1325 (D. Md. 1991), aff'd, 972 F.2d 338 (4th Cir. 1992).

{344} Blue Grass Land & Nature Trust, Inc. v. Adams, No. 77-65 (E.D. Ky. Sept. 7, 1979).

{345} Town of Belmont v. Dole, 766 F.2d 28 (1st Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1055 (1986); see 23 C.F.R. § 771.135(g) (1995).

{346} The act is also known as the "Archeological Recovery Act" or the "Moss-Bennett Act."

{347} 16 U.S.C. § 469-469c (1994).

{348} 16 U.S.C. § 470aa (1994).

{349} 16 U.S.C. § 470bb(6) (1994). The act has been interpreted to apply to "purposeful" excavation and removal of archeological resources. Attakai v. United States, 746 F. Supp. 1395 (D. Ariz. 1990).

{350} 16 U.S.C. § 470ee, 470ff (1994).

{351} 16 U.S.C. § 470gg (1994).

{352} 25 U.S.C. § 3003 (1994).

{353} Abenaki Nation of Mississquoi v. Hughes, 805 F. Supp. 234 (D. Vt. 1992), aff'd, 990 F.2d 729 (2d Cir. 1993).

{354} 60 Fed. Reg. 62,159 (Dec. 4, 1995) (to be codified at 43 C.F.R. pt. 10).

{355} Federal lands are defined in NAGPRA as "lands which are controlled or owned by the United States." 25 U.S.C.§ 3001(5) (1994). At least one court has declined to interpret "control" broadly and found that NAGPRA did not apply where the degree of Federal involvement was limited to issuance of a permit. Abenaki Nation of Mississquoi v. Hughes, 805 F. Supp. 234 (D. Vt. 1992), aff'd, 990 F.2d 729 (2d Cir. 1993).

{356} 25 U.S.C. § 3002(c) (1994). If the items are on tribal land then consent of the tribe must be obtained prior to excavations.

{357} 25 U.S.C. § 3002(d)(1) (1994).

{358} 42 U.S.C. § 1996 (1994).

{359} Attakai v. United States, 746 F. Supp. 1395 (D. Ariz. 1990) (citing Crow v. Gullet, 541 F. Supp. 785 (D.S.C. 1982), aff'd, 706 F.2d 856 (8th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 977 (1983) (court found that AIRFA does not create a cause of action in Federal courts for violation of religious freedom)). [Ed. note: The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb(b) (1994), provides such judicial relief.]

{360} AIRFA was augmented by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb(b) (1994), which established statutory standards for free exercise rights "substantially burdened" by Federal, State, and local agency actions, and allowed plaintiffs to bring causes of action for violations of the act.

http://www.achp.gov/book/notes.html