Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017- Final Version of AAF PA Cathy Testa From:Kate Pingolt Cotner <kcotner@ircgov.com> Sent:Friday, May 05, 2017 2:37 PM To:O'Connor, Jim; 'Falls, Monte'; Joseph Griffin Subject:FW: SAJ-2012-01564 - All Aboard Florida - Final PA for signature Attachments:20160505-SAJ-2012-01564-SHPO Final PA coordination.pdf; 20170505- SAJ-2012-01564-AAF Phase II - Final PA.pdf Please see the following email concerning AAF and Section 106. Thank you, and I hope you all have a great weekend. Kate -----Original Message----- From: Phillips, Andrew W CIV USARMY CESAJ (US) \[mailto:Andrew.W.Phillips@usace.army.mil\] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 2:28 PM To: Jones, Ginny L. <Ginny.Jones@DOS.MyFlorida.com> Cc: Gonzalez, Jose <Jose.Gonzalez@feci.com>; Kate Pingolt Cotner <kcotner@ircgov.com>; Overton, Randall D CIV <Randall.D.Overton@uscg.mil>; SADOWSKI, Irene Felicia CIV USARMY CESAJ (US) <Irene.Sadowski@usace.army.mil>; Payne, Lyal C CIV USARMY CESAJ (US) <Lyal.C.Payne@usace.army.mil>; JOHNSON, Benjamin S (Seth) CIV USARMY CESAJ (US) <Benjamin.S.Johnson@usace.army.mil> Subject: SAJ-2012-01564 - All Aboard Florida - Final PA for signature Good afternoon Ginny, Please find attached the final version of the AAF PA which has been signed by the District Engineer. The Corps will circulate the PA with the cosigner's after the SHPO has signed it. Please contact me if you have any questions. Regards, Andrew Phillips Project Manager USACE 400 High Point Drive, Suite 600 Cocoa, Florida 32926 321-504-3771 ex 14 321-504-3803 fax ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL OPTIONS: Send NEW PERMIT APPLICATIONS to northbranchapps@usace.army.mil. Send all COMPLIANCE-RELATED documents to CESAJ-ComplyDocs@usace.army.mil. Emailing a File over 10MB? Please use our Safe Access File Exchange: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- 3A__safe.amrdec.army.mil_safe&d=DwIFAg&c=1jJTNVi2PpmC33K3swoRR3Bhiny4gbEmMqlSxu72JJQ&r=Rz1TPqGzpmCU PFX4jb1aNf2X9ZFREOQUO1A8XGeUfp0&m=nAf7Fym6Z9ahvSCR1OfnJ91JI2WMEcFuRqSKLqhXoN8&s=w4ro3_5NMDOFb rmc5PCYHWyS1Tghwq8GUopiGvEAvnw&e= . 1 Let us know how we're doing! Complete this brief survey: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__corpsmapu.usace.army.mil_cm-5Fapex_f-3Fp-3Dregulatory- 5Fsurvey&d=DwIFAg&c=1jJTNVi2PpmC33K3swoRR3Bhiny4gbEmMqlSxu72JJQ&r=Rz1TPqGzpmCUPFX4jb1aNf2X9ZFREO QUO1A8XGeUfp0&m=nAf7Fym6Z9ahvSCR1OfnJ91JI2WMEcFuRqSKLqhXoN8&s=Z81cNj4TmROZRy10b5O9A9wtwEhoOD 2I3qoZBvNNQhA&e= 2 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS 400 HIGH POINT DRIVE, SUITE 600 COCOA, FLORIDA 32926 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF May 2, 2017 Regulatory Division North Permits Branch Cocoa Permits Section SAJ-2012-01564(SP-AWP) Dr. Timothy Parsons Compliance and Review R. A. Gray Building 500 S. Bronough Street, Room 423 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 ATTN: Ginny Jones Dear Dr. Parsons: This letter is in reference to U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) permit application SAJ-2012-01564,All Aboard Florida(AAF)Intercity Passenger Rail Project, Phase II. The Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) completed a Section 106 Determination of Effects for AAF–Operations, LLC’sproposed Orlando to Miami, Florida Intercity Passenger Rail Project, Phase II(undertaking). By letter dated December 29, 2015, your office provided a determination document to the FRA for the proposed undertaking. A stipulation of the determination was the completion of a Programmatic Agreement (PA) and implementation of an archaeological monitoring plan. By letter dated June 27, 2016, FRA informed the Corps that it is not making a decision on AAF’s Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing application at this time and is not executing aPA.Becausetheundertakingwould require certain permits fromthe Corps and the Coast Guard,the Corps and the Coast Guardhave assumed the responsibilities forcompletion ofSection 106 Consultation (36 CFR Part 800). The Corps has independently evaluated and adopts the consultationsspecific to the Corps’ regulatory program completed between FRA, State Historic Preservation Officer, and Advisory Council on Historic Preservationin accordance with 33 C.F.R. § 325 Appendix C Paragraph 2(c) and 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(a)(2).The Coast Guard is responsible for issuing Coast Guard Bridge Permits for the construction, replacement, or modification of bridges over the navigable waters of the United States pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Subchapter J. After considering comments received from the consulting parties and completing field assessments,the Corps has determined there are five (5) distinct archaeological sitesand archaeologically sensitive locationswithin the Phase II, North- South Corridor Area of Potential Effect which were not documented in AAF’s Cultural Resource Assessment Report or FRA’s Determination of Effect. -2- With the implementation of the attached PAwhich includesadditional monitoring at these distinct locations,the Corps concludes the proposed undertaking will have no adverse effect to the additional locations identified in Table 1 below. The sites have been added to Table 8of the PA attached. Table 1Archaeological Sites Located Within the N-S Corridor APE Archaeological Sites added by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 8SL3Ft. Pierce MoundMound/MiddenNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect SHPO High Probability -Site AUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect SHPO High Probability -Site BUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect SHPO High Probability -Site CUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect SHPO High Probability -Site DUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect SHPO After considering comments received from the consulting parties and the PA signatories the Corps is pleased to provide the final version of the Programmatic Agreement AmongU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, the Florida State HistoricPreservation Officer, All Aboard Florida –Operations, LLC, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Regarding Compliance with Section 106 ofthe National Historic Preservation Act for the All Aboard Florida Intercity Passenger Rail Project Phase IIOrlando to West Palm Beach, Floridafor your signature.Upon receipt of your signature the Corps will obtain signatures from the remaining signatories. If you have any questions or comments concerning the determination of effects above or the PA, please contact the project manager, Andrew Phillipsat the letterhead address, by emailatandrew.w.phillips@usace.army.mil or by phone at 321-504-3771 ex 14. Sincerely, for Donald W. Kinard Chief, Regulatory Division Enclosure -3- cc: (electronically) U.S. Coast Guard; Randy Overton Indian River County Attorney; Kate Cotner AAF; Jose Gonzalez CESAJ-OC-T CESAJ-RD PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENTAMONG U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,U.S. COAST GUARD,THE FLORIDA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER,ALL ABOARD FLORIDA – OPERATIONS, LLC,AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATIONREGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 106 OF THE NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACTFOR THE ALL ABOARD FLORIDA INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL PROJECT PHASE IIORLANDO TO WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA Preamble The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) served as the lead federal agency for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance through publication of a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)on August 4, 2015 for the All Aboard Florida Intercity Passenger Rail Project(Project).OnJune 27, 2016, FRA notified the U.S. Army Corpsof Engineers andU.S. Coast Guard, both cooperating agencies, that it wouldnot bemaking a decision onAll Aboard Florida -Operations, LLC (All Aboard Florida or AAF)application for Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing program(a/k/a "RRIF") to fund Phase IIof the Project.FRA is not executing the draft Programmatic Agreement previously circulated with the Consulting Parties. The applicant, AAF, will implement the Projectthrough a phased approach. Phase I willprovide passenger rail service along 66.5 miles of the Florida East Coast Railroad (FECR) Corridor connecting West Palm Beach, Fort Lauderdale, and Miami. AAF has obtained private financing for Phase I and is proceeding to implement Phase I. Phase II would extend service from West Palm Beach to Orlando, Florida. AAF prepared an Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Statement (EA) for Phase I includingstations and the vehicle maintenance facility (VMF).The EA was reviewed, revised, and adoptedby FRA for public circulation and comment from October 31, 2012 through December 3, 2012.FRA issued a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) on January31, 2013 for passenger rail service and rail and station improvements proposed by AAFwithinPhase I.Since the 2013 Phase I FONSI, AAF proposed and FRA has evaluated a new location for the Fort Lauderdale Station and issued a re-evaluation decision that found no significant difference from the location evaluated in the 2012 EA. Also since the 2013 Phase I FONSI, AAF proposed and FRA has evaluated a new location in West Palm Beach for the proposed Fort Lauderdale layover and maintenance facility. FRA issued a Supplemental EA and subsequently issued a FONSI for this element of Phase IinJanuary 2015.FRA concludedin their 2012 EAthat Phase I has independent utility from Phase II (that is, it could be advanced and serve a transportation need even if Phase II were not constructed). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) also concluded that Phase I has independent utility of Phase II. The Corps issued single and complete Nationwide permit verifications (33 C.F.R. §325.5(c)(2)) for minor shoreline stabilization and loss of mangrove habitats required to implement bridge improvements associated with Phase I. See table 1 below for Department of the Army (DA) permit numbers and project locations. 1 May 3, 2017 DA Mile LatitudeLongitude WaterwayCityCounty NumberPost(north)(west) SAJ-2013-MP Palm C-51 Canal26.618880.0590Lake Worth 00379304.05Beach C-16 SAJ-2013-MP Boynton Boynton Palm 26.525480.0590 00378311.45Beach BeachBeach Canal SAJ-2013-MP Hillsboro Deerfield Palm 26.340180.0814 00383326.58RiverBeachBeach SAJ-2013-MP N. Fork Oakland 26.180380.1372Broward 00376337.91Middle RiverPark SAJ-2013-MP S. Fork Ft. 26.153180.1233Broward 00382338.52Middle RiverLauderdale SAJ-2013-MP Miami- Oleta River25.948480.1506Ojus 00381353.74Dade Table 1 The Corps issued Regional General Permit, SAJ-14, verifications (33 C.F.R. §325.5(c)(1)) to All Aboard Florida for the installation of fiber optic cable using directional drilling at nine (9) separate and distinct locations within Phase II (D-08 segment) of the Projectarea on October 14, 2015. The Corps later determined the work authorized by the Regional General Permit Verifications do not have independent utility and are a component of the Phase II Project. The Corps rescinded the Regional General Permit verifications dated October 14, 2015, and evaluated these actions as part of the Standard Permit (33 C.F.R. §325.5(b)(1)) evaluation for the Project. Because Phase I has independent utility from Phase II, the Corps’ scope of action is limited to the geographic limits of Phase II of the Project.The Corps is not considering the work proposed within Phase Ior within the geographic boundaries within Orlando International Airport (OIA)in this evaluation. Work within OIAhas been previously authorized under separate Department of the Army (DA) permits issued to Greater Orlando Aviation Authority. The U.S. Coast Guard(Coast Guard)is the federal regulatory agency responsible for approving the locations andplans forbridges over navigable waters of the United States. As the initial lead federal agency for National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) compliance, FRA was responsible for fulfilling the collective responsibilities under Section 106 (36 C.F.R. Part 800). As part of the FEIS, FRA 1) defined the Project as an “Undertaking” pursuant to 36 C.F.R. § 800.16; 2) defined an Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the undertaking; 3)identified historic propertieswithin the APE;4) assessed adverse effects;and 5) attempted to resolve adverse effects. 2 May 3, 2017 The identified historic properties within this APE are documented in the Cultural Resources Assessment Reports (CRAR)dated September 2013 and May 2015. Florida State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)concurred on November 20, 2013 (amended May 21, 2015) that the properties identified in the CRAR and in the All Aboard Florida –Orlando to West Palm Beach, Florida Intercity Passenger Rail Project –Phase II Determination of Effects Report, Tables 1 through 8 (Attachment 1 to this PA) are listed in and/or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).By letter dated December 29, 2015, SHPO provided an updated determination document concluding that they concur with FRA’s findingthat the proposed undertaking will have an effect, but not an adverse effect,on the FECR Linear Resource Group;andthat the ground disturbing activities associated with construction have the potential to cause adverse effects to National Register-eligible archaeological sites.Conditioned upon the successful completion of the Programmatic Agreement(PA)and the implementation of thearchaeological monitoring planoutlinedin this PA,SHPOconcurredwith FRA’s determination of “no adverse effect” tothese archaeological sites. By letter dated June 27, 2016, FRA informed the Corps and Coast Guardthat it is not making a decision on AAF’s Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing application at this time. FRA also concluded it is not executing the draft Programmatic Agreement (PA) developed June 24, 2016 in consultation withthe Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP);Broward County; City of Stuart; City of Vero Beach; Indian River County; Indian River County Historical Society Inc.;Martin County; Old Vero Ice Age Sites Committee; St. Lucie County; and Town of St. Lucie Villagefor the undertaking. By letter dated November 15, 2016, the Corps coordinated a secondaddendum,dated November 2016,to the Cultural Resources Assessment Reportwith SHPO. The CRARaddendum included: 1)a previously inaccessible private property parcel; 2) the revised footprint for the Cocoa Curve;and 3) various ponds and drainage features which were not evaluated in the original CRAR, by the FRA or SHPO. The Corps determined that no effect to historic properties are likely within the second addendum APEand no further survey work is required. By letter dated November 30, 2016, SHPO concurredwith the determination made by the Corps that no historicproperties are located in the areas surveyed in the second addendum and the proposed undertakingwill have no effect on historic propertieswithin the addendum’s APE. The Corps hasindependently evaluated and adopts the consultations completed between FRA, SHPO, and ACHP in accordance with 33 C.F.R. § 325 Appendix C Paragraph 2(c) and 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(a)(2).In accordance with the procedures at 33 C.F.R. § 325 Appendix C(1)(g) the Corps’Regulatory Program defines permit area as thoseareas comprising water of the United States that will be directly and/or indirectly affected by the proposed undertaking. For the Phase II undertaking, the Corps has determined there is enough federal control to expand the permit area to align with the APE as previously defined by FRA.TheCoast Guardhasindependently evaluated 3 May 3, 2017 and adoptedthe bridge-related consultations completed between FRA, SHPO, and ACHP in accordance with 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(a)(2). After considering comments received from the consulting parties and completing field assessments, the Corps has determined there are five (5) distinct archaeological sites within Phase II, North-South Corridor Area of Potential Effect (APE) for direct effects which were not documented in AAF’s Cultural Resource Assessment Report or FRA’s Determination of Effect. The sites have been coordinated with SHPO by letter dated May 2, 2017 and the sitesare incorporated into Stipulation IV below andhave been added to Table 8 of Attachment 1. Therefore, the Corps and Coast Guard will execute this PA. Basis for Agreement The parties acknowledge the following basis for agreement: WHEREAS, All Aboard Florida proposes to construct and operate the All Aboard Florida Intercity Rail Project Phase II, which would involve the institution of intercity passenger rail service between Orlando and West Palm Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, the Commandant, U.S.Coast Guard, is responsible for issuing Coast Guard Bridge Permits for the construction, replacement, or modification of bridges over thenavigable waters of the United States pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Subchapter J; and WHEREAS, the Jacksonville District of the Corps has received an application for a DA permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1344) (CWA) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. § 403)(RHA); and WHEREAS,the Corps and the Coast Guard havedetermined the undertakingmay directly and adversely affect designated historic properties and the Corps’ public interest review requirements contained in 33 C.F.R. § 320.4; and WHEREAS, the Corps has determined there is sufficient Federal control and responsibility to extend the Corps’ scope of analysis to entirety of Phase II of the undertakingwith the exception of bridges over navigable waters of the United States, for which the Coast Guard will remain the responsible Federal agency. Activities associatedwith the undertakingoutside the waters of the United States within the Phase II APE are included in the permit area, because all of the following tests are satisfied: Such activities would not occur but for the authorization of the work or structures within the waters of the United States; such activities are integrally related to the work or structures that would be authorized within waters of the United States; the work or structures that would be authorized are essential to the completeness of the overall undertaking; and such activities are directly associated with the work or structures to be authorized; and 4 May 3, 2017 WHEREAS, the undertakingwould require certainpermitsfrom the Corps and the Coast Guard, the Corps and Coast Guardare complying with the their applicable regulations implementing Section 106 (36 C.F.R. Part 800) which require that the Corps and Coast Guardtake into account the effects of the undertakingon properties listed inor eligible for inclusion inthe NRHP,and the Corps and Coast Guardhave independently evaluated and adopted the Project Phase II consultations completed between FRA, SHPO, and ACHP datedNovember 20, 2013 (amended May 21, 2015); and WHEREAS, the Corps and Coast Guardhave consulted with the Florida Division of Historical Resources (FDHR), which is the SHPO, under 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(c)(1); and WHEREAS, the construction of the undertakingwill involve the following: (1) the removal and replacement of the Eau Gallie River Bridge (Florida Master Site File Number 8BR3058) and St. Sebastian River Bridge (Florida Master Site File Numbers 8BR3062/8IR1569), which are individually eligible for listing in the NRHP; (2) rehabilitation or replacement of historic bridges contributing to the Florida East Coast Railway (FECR) Historic District; and (3) ground-disturbing activities, including installation or relocation of signal and communication systems, relocation of buried fiber optic cable, and track reconstruction within the existing FECR right of way; and WHEREAS, through consultation SHPO has concurred on December 29, 2015 with FRA’s determination that the undertakingwill have an adverse effect on the Eau Gallie River Bridge, St. Sebastian River Bridge, and the ground disturbing activities associated with construction have the potential to cause adverse effects to National Register-eligible archaeological sites under 36 C.F.R. § 800.5(a)(2)(i) through demolition; and WHEREAS, through consultation FRA has determined, and SHPO has concurred, that the undertakingwill not have an adverse effect to the other NRHP-listed or eligible properties in Attachment 1 either throughdemolition, alteration, change in the character of the property’s setting, or the introduction of visible, atmospheric, or auditory elements under 36 C.F.R. § 800.5(a)(2)(ii) through (v); and WHEREAS, through consultation, the SHPO has concurred on December 29, 2015 with FRA’s determination that the ground-disturbing activities associated with construction, performed consistent with the Archaeological Monitoring Plan in StipulationIV, should not havean adverse effect on archaeological sites; and WHEREAS, the FRA notified the ACHP on April 24, 2015,of the adverse effect and ACHP agreed to participate in the Section 106 consultation; and WHEREAS, FRA initiated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process for the undertakingin April 2013 and involved the public at five scoping meetings in 5 May 3, 2017 May 2013 held in Orlando, Miami, West Palm Beach, Fort Pierce, and Fort Lauderdale before the publication of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the undertaking; and eight public meetings during the public comment period on the DEIS in October and November 2014 held in accordance with NEPA along the undertakingcorridor, where Section 106 considerations (including identification of and potential adverse effects to historic properties) were presented to the public and locally affected parties; and WHEREAS, on August 4, 2015,FRA published a Final EIS (FEIS) which included as an attachment a draft Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) thatwill besuperseded and replaced by this PA; and WHEREAS, FRA engaged in government-to-government consultation with the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, the Muscogee Creek Nation, the Poarch Band of Creek Indians, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma and the Seminole Tribe of Florida regarding the undertaking.Of these, the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of the Seminole Tribe of Florida has consulted with FRA and has requested that FRA continue government-to-government consultation concerning archaeological sites. The Corps continues to engage in government-to- government consultation with the Tribal Historic Preservation Officerfor the Seminole Tribe of Florida; and WHEREAS, FRA identifiedand contacted local governments and other entities to participate inthe Section 106 process as Consulting Partiesunder 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(c)(3) and (c)(5) on May 19, 2015, and nine entities responded with their intent to participate (Broward County, June 9, 2015; City of Stuart, June 9, 2015; City of Vero Beach, June 4, 2015; Indian River County, June 10, 2015); Indian River County Historical Society Inc., June 6, 2015; Martin County, June 12, 2015; Old Vero Ice Age Sites Committee, June 2, 2015; St. Lucie County, June 12, 2015; and Town of St. Lucie Village, June 12, 2015); and WHEREAS, FRA has consulted with the Consulting Parties and provided the Consulting Parties a draft Determination of Effects (DOE) Report on May 19, 2015, and a revised draft DOE Report, draft Memorandum of Agreement, and draft Archaeological Monitoring Plan on October 5, 2015, and held a meeting on October 19, 2015,concerning the identification of historic properties within the APE for direct and indirect effects and concerning FRA’s determination of effects to those historic properties; and WHEREAS, FRA, Corps, and Coast Guardreceived comments from the public and consulting parties regarding the potential effects of the undertakingon historic propertiesandaddressed the comments through development of this PA; and WHEREAS, AAF has committed to use alternative construction methods such as extended directional drilling to avoid adverse effects to known sites and areas of archaeological sensitivity within the APEidentified in Stipulation IV; and 6 May 3, 2017 WHEREAS, the FRA, Corps,andCoast Guardhave considered the Consulting Parties’ comments on the identification of historic properties within APEand on FRA’s Determination of Effects to those historic properties and determined that all historic properties within the APE, respectively,have been identified consistent with Section 106 and its implementing regulations for Protection of Historic Properties (36 C.F.R. Part 800)and in compliance with thedata analysis and reporting standards embodied in FDHR‘s Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Standards and Operational Manual (Florida Department of State 2002), and Chapter 1A 46 (Archaeological and Historical Report Standards and Guidelines), Florida Administrative Code, and to professional guidelines set forth in the Secretary of Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716, as amended);and WHEREAS,the Corps published a public noticeJanuary 10, 2017, advising the Corps and Coast Guard will execute a PA; and WHEREAS,the Corps and Coast Guardhave coordinated a draftPA with the Signatories,and the Consulting Parties by letterdatedJanuary 11, 2017; and WHEREAS, the Corps and Coast Guard held a meeting on February 9, 2017,with the consulting partiesconcerning the draft PA; and WHEREAS,the Corps completed field assessmentsat known archaeological sites and important archaeological areaswith representatives of the consulting parties in Indian River and St. Lucie Counties onMarch 6 and 7, 2017,at the request of the consulting parties; and WHEREAS, the Corps and Coast Guardamended the PA as a result of the comments receivedfrom the consulting partiesand field visits completed by the Corps; and NOW THEREFORE,the Signatories agree that the undertakingshall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations to take into account the effectsof the undertakingon the historic properties listed in Attachment 1. STIPULATIONS The Corps and Coast Guard, in coordination with AAF, will ensure that the following measures are carried out: I.APPLICABILITY A.This PA does not apply to elements of the undertakinginvolving Positive Train Control (PTC) infrastructure covered by ACHP’s Program Comment for Positive Train Control Wayside Poles and Infrastructure(May 16, 2014). B.This PA does not apply to elements of the undertakinginvolving the construction of new communications towers or the collocation of equipment on existing towers that are 7 May 3, 2017 covered by ACHP’s Program Comment to Avoid Duplicative Reviews for Wireless Communications Facilities Construction and Modification(September 24, 2015). C.This PA does not apply to Phase I of All Aboard Florida’s Intercity Passenger Rail Project from West Palm Beach to Miami, Florida. II.STANDARDS AND PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS A.All architectural history work or archaeological work carried out under this PA will be conducted by, or under the direct supervision of, a person or persons meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Architectural History (48 FR 44738-9) and the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology (48 FR 44738-9). B.The Signatories acknowledge that the Corps is the federal agency responsible for coordinating any and all aspects of this PA with the Native American Tribes. AAF shall not contact the Native American Tribes regarding any aspect of this PA. C.The Signatories acknowledge that Native American Tribes possess special expertise in assessing the eligibility of historic properties that may possess religious and cultural significance to them. III.BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, REHABILITATION, AND CONSTRUCTION A.Bridges Advisory Group i.The Coast Guardis the federal agency responsible for implementation of Stipulation III. ii.A Bridges Advisory Group will be formed by AAF. The purpose of the Bridges Advisory Group is to review the proposed design of the new replacement bridgesat Eau Gallie River and St. Sebastian Riverand rehabilitation of existing bridges listed in stipulation III.A.IV that are contributing elements to the FECR Historic District and make recommendations to AAF to assist AAF in developing bridge designs consistent with the character of the FECR Historic District. A preliminary navigation clearance determination will be issued by the Coast Guard prior to proposing bridge designsfor review by the Bridges Advisory Group. iii.The Bridges Advisory Group willseek input from interested parties on the design of the replacement of the Eau Gallie River Bridge and St. Sebastian River Bridge and the design for the rehabilitation or replacement of historic bridges contributing to the FECR Historic District. iv.The Bridges Advisory Group will consist of AAF, SHPO, the Independent Archeological Monitor described in Stipulation IV.B, and any Consulting Party that expresses an interest in participating and that is situated in the localities where the bridge work will occur.Consulting Parties must notify AAF of their interest in 8 May 3, 2017 participating in the Bridges Advisory Group in writing within 15business days of receiving notification from AAF that the PA has been executed.Any Consulting Party participating on the Bridges Advisory Group may provide written comments to AAF, Coast Guard, and SHPO only on the design of bridges listed below located in the county or city with which they are affiliated. The Eau Gallie River Bridge is located in Brevard County and the City of Melbourne; the St. Sebastian River Bridge is located in Brevard and Indian River Counties and the City of Sebastian. Historic bridges contributing to the FECR Historic District that will be demolished and replaced include: Crane Creek Bridge (Brevard County) Turkey Creek Bridge (Brevard County) Goat Creek Bridge (Brevard County) Rio Waterway Bridge (Martin County) Salerno Waterway Bridge (Martin County) Manatee Creek Tributary 1 Bridge (Martin County) Manatee Creek Tributary 2 Bridge (Martin County) Historic bridges contributing to the FECR Historic District that will be rehabilitated include: Taylor Creek (St. Lucie County) St. Lucie River (Martin County) Loxahatchee River (Palm Beach County) v.AAF will provide design plans to the Bridges Advisory Group, Coast Guard, and SHPO for review at the 60 percent design stage for each bridge identified in Stipulation III.A.ii. The Bridges Advisory Group will have 30business days to review the design plans and provide recommendations to AAF, SHPO, and Coast Guard. AAF and SHPO will meet as needed to review the recommendations of the Bridges Advisory Group. The recommendations of the Bridges Advisory Group are advisory only. AAF is responsible for ensuring that the structural and engineering design of these bridges meets engineering standards for passenger and freight railroads at the specified loadings. In addition, AAF will take into account any recommendationsin accordance with this paragraph in preparing the final designs for the bridges and will choose and implement designs for the bridges that are compatible with the character of the historic districts where they are located.The Coast Guard will review the final designs for the bridges to confirm that the recommendations have been taken into account and the final design meetsrequirements of the General Bridge Act of 1946. B.Documentation for the Historic Eau Gallie River Bridge and St. Sebastian River Bridge i.Prior to the demolition of the historic Eau Gallie River Bridge and St. Sebastian River Bridge, AAF will prepare the following documentation of these bridges in accordance with Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) standards: 9 May 3, 2017 Drawings –Select drawings of both of the existing bridge plans, as available, scanned and provided in an acceptable digital format (i.e. jpeg files); Photographs –Photographs with large-format negatives of context and views from all sides of the bridges and approaches, roadway and deck views, and noteworthy features and details. All negatives and prints will be processed to meet archival standards. One photograph of a principal elevation shall include a scale; and Written Data –Reports with narrative description of both bridges, summary of significance, and historical context. ii.AAF will provide copies of the documentation completed in accordance with Stipulation III.B.ias follows: An archival copy of documentation for both bridges to the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), National Park Service Southeast Regional Office for review and approval before demolition of the structure, per HAER guidelines; and An archival copy of the DOI-approved documentation for both bridges to the SHPO for inclusion in the Florida Master Site File (FMSF); and A copy of the DOI-approved documentation for both bridges to the Florida Historical Society in Cocoa, Florida, and copiesof the St. Sebastian River Bridge documentation to Indian River County and the Indian River County Historical Society in Vero Beach, Florida. IV.ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING AND UNANTICIPATED ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERIES A.The Corps is the federal agency responsible for implementation of Stipulation IV. B.AAF agrees to submit plans and specification on the means and methods of construction ofMain Canal (MP 226.8)and North Canal (MP 223.8)bridges prior to commencement of construction on the bridges. The Corps will review the plans to ensure AAF has taken all reasonable efforts to avoid and minimize ground disturbanceactivities at the canal banks.The plans shall be submitted toU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Division, P.O. Box 4970, Jacksonville, Florida 32926.Reference DA number SAJ-2012- 01564 in any correspondence transmitted. C.This Stipulation is the Archaeological Monitoring/Unanticipated Discoveries Plan (Plan) that AAF will implement during ground-disturbing construction activities of the undertakingalong the corridor between West Palm Beach and Orlando that was reviewed in FRA’s FEIS. These activities may include the reinstallation of a second track, relocating a buried fiber optic cable line, installing subsurface signals and 10 May 3, 2017 communications systems, and other construction activities associated with the undertaking.The Plan also establishes a process for identifying and protecting unmarked human remains and significant archaeological resources that may be encountered during undertakingconstruction. AAF will implement the Plan in accordance with state and Federal laws, including Florida laws Chapter 872 Offenses Concerning Dead Bodies and Graves and Chapter 267 Historical Resources. The Plan is applicable to the following known sites and areas of archaeological sensitivity: Hobe Sound National Wildlife Refuge#3 Site (8MT1287); Fort Capron Site (8SL41); Vero Man/Vero Locality Site (8IRI/8IR9); Fort Pierce (8SL31); Fort Pierce Mound (8SL3) Railroad Site (8IR846); Avenue A-Downtown Fort Pierce (8SL1772) Gifford Bones Site (8IR7); SavannahNorth Dunes Site (8SL3063); Pinecrest Colored Cemetery (8BR2808); Cocoa Cemetery (BR1777); City of Melbourne Cemetery; Malabar Cemetery; Sebastian River; Fort Pierce Cemetery (8SL1101); Eden Cemetery (8SL1634); All Saints Cemetery (8MT1288); St. Lucie River; Hobe Sound AME Church Cemetery (8MT1290); Loxahatchee River; Evergreen Cemetery (8BP218); Bridge demolition and construction locations; and Those areas listed as high probability locations in the monitoring mapsincluded asAttachment 2. This Plan provides methods to avoid impacts to these sites and areas of archaeological sensitivity during construction through the use of archaeological monitoring. Implementation of the Plan will ensure that any deposits of archaeological materials are identified, documented, and protected, or mitigated if impacts cannot be avoided. D.Independent Archaeological Monitor i.AAF will submit to the Corps for approval the qualifications of at least three differentpersons meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology (48 FR 44738-9) (Archaeologist). Noperson maybe affiliated with the same company or organization as another person whose qualifications are submitted.Once approved by the Corps, AAF will engage the services of such person or persons to provide an independent review of the archaeological monitoring undertaken as described in Stipulation IV.C., to be 11 May 3, 2017 known as the Independent Archaeological Monitor (IAM).The IAM will have knowledge and experience in the archaeology of the undertakingarea (i.e., central and eastern coastal Florida). The IAM will consult, as appropriate, with identified professional archaeologists familiar with the sites and archaeologically sensitive areas listed in Stipulation IV.C. (e.g., the Principal Investigator and/or Lead Archaeologist at the Vero Man Site, and the Principle Investigator and/or Lead Archaeologist at the Fort Pierce Mound Site) before initiating and during archaeological monitoring activities. The IAM will provide sufficient qualified personnel to monitor simultaneous construction at multiple locations. ii.AAF will bear the costs incurred by the IAM. The IAM will function as an Independent Third Party Contractor.The scope of work of the IAM will be determined by the Corps.The Corps, AAF, and the IAM will enter into a Memorandum of Understanding that is consistent with the terms of this PA and details the scope of work and schedule at least30 calendar days priorto the start of any ground-disturbing construction activities at the sites or archaeologically sensitive areas listed in Stipulation IV.C. iii.AAF’s Project Archaeologist will be responsible for communication with the IAM. For each site or archaeologicallysensitive area listed in Stipulation IV.C., AAF’s Project Archaeologist will provide the IAM with reasonable notice in advance of any ground-disturbing construction activities and will provide the IAM with a description of the specific activities and anticipated construction schedule and duration. AAF will ensure that the IAM has a reasonable opportunity to be present during all ground disturbing and archaeological monitoring activities. The IAM will have discretion to decide whether or not to be present. iv.AAF’s Project Archaeologist will immediately notify the IAM of any archaeological artifacts or features discovered during ground disturbing activities at the sites or archaeologically sensitive areas listed in Stipulation IV.C., or of any inadvertent discoveries within the APE.The IAM will independently evaluate the find for significanceand provide a finding within 24 hours. v.The IAM will review the Project Archaeologist logsdaily(Stipulation IV.E.iv) and will review the Monitoring Report prepared by the Project Archaeologist for each site and archaeologically sensitive areaslisted in Stipulation IV.C, and will provide weekly written reports to the Corps and SHPO. vi.The IAM will have the authority to stop work if he/she observes a circumstance where any archaeological artifacts or features are at risk of damage or destruction from work being performed at a site or archaeologically sensitive area listed in Stipulation IV.C.AAF, the Corps,and SHPO willfollow Stipulations IV.E.iand V.E.iibefore work can proceed.This stipulation shall be included in any contracts associated with ground disturbing activities for the AAF project. 12 May 3, 2017 E.Monitoring Methods and Documentation i.Personnel: AAF will engage the services of a person or persons meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology (48 FR 44738-9) (Project Archaeologist) to fulfill its obligations under this Stipulation IV.AAF proposes to use Janus Research as the Project Archaeologist. All archaeological monitoring will be conducted by, or under the direct supervision of, the Project Archaeologistwith the exception of the IAM’s monitoring activities. The Project Archaeologist will ensure that the archaeological monitors have the education, training, and experience to properly monitor construction activities. The Project Archaeologist will determine the appropriate number and placement of monitors for each site dependent on subsurface conditions and the nature of the construction activity. An archaeological monitor will be present for all ground disturbing activities at the archaeological sites and areas of archaeological sensitivity listed in IV.Cand represented on the mapsin Attachment 2. ii.Construction Crew Education: Before the commencement of any ground disturbing activities, AAF’s Project Archaeologist will brief a designated construction supervisor on the monitoring goals and procedures, stop work procedures, the stratificationin the project area, and applicable Federal, state, and local laws pertaining to the discovery of human remains and archaeological materials. AAF’s Project Archaeologist will show construction crew members involved in ground disturbing activities study collections of midden soil, faunal remains, shell, bone, and stone tools, lithic fragments, pottery sherds, and other types of artifacts that could potentially be encountered at each of the archaeological sites and known areas of archaeological sensitivity.AAF’s Project Archaeologist will also explain to the construction crew members the stop work procedures they must follow if archaeological materials are encountered.The stipulations in this section shall be included in any contracts associated with ground disturbing activities for the AAF project. iii.Field Methods: AAF’s Project Archaeologist will be present to monitor all ground disturbing activity at each site and archaeologically sensitive area listed in Stipulation IV.C.AAF will inform a designated construction crew supervisor that the Project Archaeologistand/or IMAwill be present and has the authority to stop or redirect work in the event of an unanticipated discovery. iv.AAF’s Project Archaeologist will be responsible for the observation, collection, and documentation of archaeological features or artifacts encountered during ground disturbing activities. The documentation of archaeological features and artifacts will include: (1) plotting their approximate locations on a map of the project area; (2) writing a description of the resources encountered that includes their location, size, approximate depth, type of material encountered, and any other pertinent information; (3) drawing of profiles; and (4) taking photographs. The Project Archaeologist will keep a daily log of construction and monitoring activities and submit the logs to the IAM weekly. 13 May 3, 2017 v.Any artifacts collected during the course of monitoring will be bagged and recorded separately by AAF’s Project Archaeologist with the appropriate provenience information noted on the field bags. Obvious features will be treated as separate collection proveniences. The Project Archaeologist will assign all artifact and soil sample bags Field Specimen numbers in the field. The Project Archaeologist will also conduct laboratory processing, which will consist of the cleaning, inventorying, packaging, and temporary storage of the artifacts recovered.Artifact analysis will involve the morphological and techno-functional classification of artifacts and, if possible, will establish their temporal/cultural affiliations. The Project Archaeologist will make any artifacts available for inspection by the IAM. vi.In the event of a potentially significant find, as determined by AAF’s Project Archaeologist or the IMA in the field based on a preliminary assessment, the following procedures will be followed: AAF’s Project Archaeologist or the IMA will stop/redirect all work within 100 feet of the find, and flag and secure the find. The Project Archaeologistor IMA will immediately notify the construction supervisor, AAF, and the IAMor Project Archaeologistof the find.The IAM will independently evaluate the find for significance. If the Project Archaeologist determines and the IAM concurs that the find is NRHP-potentially eligible, AAF will consult with the Corpsand SHPOto develop appropriate treatment measures, if necessary. The Corps will share the proposed treatment measures with any Consulting Parties located within the jurisdiction of the find. Such Consulting Parties will have seven (7) calendar days to review and provide written comments to the Corps, SHPO and AAF on any such treatment measuresstarting from the date on which the Corps contacts the Consulting Parties. If the Project Archaeologist orIAM determines that the find is eligible or potentially eligible for NRHP listing and other significant archaeological materials may be damaged by allowing the ground disturbing activities to continue, AAF will cease all such activities within 100feet of the find until consultation has been completed between the Corps, AAF, SHPO, and until the Consulting Partieslocated within the jurisdiction of the findhave been given seven (7)calendar days to review and provide written comments to SHPO, Corps,and AAF. At the conclusion of the commentperiod, the Corps will provide a DOEbased upon the information submitted and a final treatment for the resource property will be developed. The treatment plan must be carried out prior to re-commencement of ground disturbing activities within 100 feet of the find.AAFwillprovide the funds for such treatment. vii.Curation: AAF agrees that Janus Research will provide temporary storage and curation of all archaeological material (artifacts, ecofacts, etc.) and related documentation recovered during the course of monitoring.Collected archaeological material will becurated to professional standards and transferred to 14 May 3, 2017 AAF at the completion of the undertaking.AAF will consult withSHPO, Corps, and Consulting Parties regarding the appropriate transfer or disposition of any artifacts andrecords, including possible transfer toan appropriate Native American Tribe or other entity.Prior to transferofownership of the collection to a Native American Tribe or other entity, AAF must ensure that the recovered artifacts and related records will be curated in a suitable repository as agreed to by SHPO and affected Native American Tribe(s) and that applicable Florida state or Tribal guidelinesare followed. viii.Analysis and Report/Documentation: The Project Archaeologist will present the results of the archaeological monitoring to the IAM, AAF, the Corps, SHPO and any affected Native American Tribes in a Monitoring Report addressing methods, findings, daily logs, and photographs of monitoring operations, at the conclusion of ground disturbing activities at each archaeological siteand area of archaeological sensitivity.The Monitoring Report will be submitted within thirty (30)calendar days of the conclusion of ground-disturbing activities. The Project Archaeologist will complete a FMSF Archaeological Site Form (available at http://dos.myflorida.com/historical/preservation/master-site-file/documents-forms/) for any archaeological sites identified during the monitoring. F.Resolution of Disputes between Project Archaeologist and IAM i.In the event of a dispute between the IAM and the Project Archaeologist concerning the significance of an archaeological discovery, or the need to stop construction on a temporary basis as a result of a potentially significant find under Stipulation IV.C.vii, the Project Archaeologist will notify AAF and the IAM will notify the Corps, Coast Guard,and SHPO. ii.If the dispute concerns the need to temporarily stop construction at a specific archaeological monitoring location, AAF will cease ground disturbing activities at that site or archaeologically sensitive area until the Corps, Coast Guard, and SHPO have consulted and concurred on any measures to address the archaeological discovery. The Corps, Coast Guard,and SHPO will conclude their consultation on the treatment measures within fourteen (14)calendar days and work will resume in accordance with the resolution of the consultation. iii.In the event of a dispute concerning the significance of an archaeological discovery that does not require that construction be temporarily stopped, the IAM will provide a written evaluation and recommendations to the Corps, Coast Guard, and SHPO. The Corps and Coast Guardwill consult with SHPO. The SHPO will provide the Corps and Coast Guardwith a recommendation, andthe Corps and Coast Guard will take the recommendation intoaccount in reaching a final decision regarding the dispute. 15 May 3, 2017 iv.If AAF or SHPO disagree with the Corps and Coast Guarddecision, either party may trigger the dispute resolution procedures in Stipulation IX. V. AVOIDANCE OF ADDITIONAL POTENTIAL CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS A.The Corps is the federal agency responsible for implementation of Stipulation V. B.If AAF proposes to use private property or property outside of the APEfor direct effects for work site ingress/egress, materials staging, or construction, AAF will consult with SHPO, the Corps, and Consulting Parties located within the jurisdiction of theproposed work area(s) to assess the potential effects of new activities on archaeological and historic resources and will locate such activities in such a manner as to avoid effects to known historic properties listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP, including sites listed in Stipulation IV.B. C.If archaeological or historical resources are discovered during ground disturbing activities within the APEor areas that are not listed in Stipulation IV.C, all ground disturbing activities will cease and the Project Archeologist and IAM will be immediately contacted. The archaeological monitors will then follow the procedures outlined in Stipulation IV.E. D.AAF will also consider any cumulative and indirect effects to historic properties that may occur as a result of such new activities described in Stipulation V.B. E.AAF will use alternative construction methods such as vibratory or sonic pile driving to reduce the vibration impact from pile/sheet piledriving when within 135 feet from archaeological sitesand historic districts identified in Stipulation IV.C. F.AAF willuse alternative construction methods such as horizontaldirectional drilling to avoid adverse effects to known sites and areas of archaeological sensitivity within the APEidentified in Attachment 2. If extended directional drilling is not feasible due to physical constraints (e.g.existing utilities that could be affected by drilling), thenanIMA shall be implemented at these locationsusing a separate monitoring protocol developed by the IMA and agreed to by the Corps. G.AAF will provide construction crew education, as described in Stipulation IV.E.ii, prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activitiesof the undertaking. VI. HISTORIC INTERPRETATION WEBSITE A.The Corps is the federal agency responsible for implementation of Stipulation VI. B.AAF will develop and host a website that will focus and highlight the contributions of Henry Morrison Flagler and the history of the FECR and its passenger rail service along the corridor.The website must also provide a background describing the prehistoric and historic context of the corridor. AAF will consult with SHPO during the development of the website. 16 May 3, 2017 C.Before launching the website, AAF will meet with SHPO and demonstrate the website content to ensure that all historic information is accurate and consistent with historic records. D.The website will be available for public access for a minimum of five (5) years from the start of revenue service by AAF or subsequent operator. E.AAF will provide a link on its website to the historic website to enable both interested passengers and the general public with access to the historic information. VII. REPORTING At least every two months, AAF’s public information officer willholda telephone conference with Consulting Parties, public officialsand other interested community representatives and public officials to provide a status report on the implementation of the undertaking.This obligation will continue until completion of the undertaking. AAF will also maintain a public website providing periodic updates on the undertaking’s implementation.AAF will notify Consulting Parties in writing seven (7) calendar days prior to commencing construction in proximity to properties listed on or eligible for inclusion inthe NRHP (Attachment 1 to this PA),the archaeological sites,and archaeologically sensitive areas listed in Stipulation IV.C. VIII.POST REVIEW DISCOVERIES A.Human Remains. In the unlikely event that unmarked human remains are identified on non-federal lands, they will be treated in accordance with Section 872.05 Florida Statutes. All work and ground disturbing activities within a 100-meter diameter of the unmarked human remains shall immediately cease and the AAFshall immediately notify the medical examiner, Corps, Coast Guard, and State Archeologist within the same business day (8-hours). The Corps shall then notify the appropriate SHPO, Coast Guard,and THPO(s). Such activity shall not resume without written authorization from the State Archeologist and the Corps. B.Historic Properties. Follow the procedures outlined in Stipulation IV.E.vi. IX.OBJECTIONS BY SIGNATORIES A.Should any Signatory object in writing to the Corpsor Coast Guardregarding any action proposed or carried out with respect to the undertaking or implementation of this PA, the Corps and Coast Guardwill consult with the objecting party to resolve the objection. B.If after initiating such consultation with the objecting party the Corps and Coast Guard determine that the objection cannot be resolved, the Corps and Coast Guardwill forward all documentation relevant to the objection to the ACHP, including the Corps’ and the Coast Guard’sproposed response to the objection and request that the ACHP comment on the proposed resolution within 30calendar days of receipt. Within 30 calendar days after receipt of all pertinent documentation, ACHP will: i.Concur in the Corps andCoast Guardproposed resolution; or 17 May 3, 2017 ii.Provide the Corps and Coast Guard with recommendations, which the agencies will take into account in reaching a final decision regarding the dispute; ornotify the Corps and Coast Guard that it will comment under 36 C.F.R. Part 800, and proceed to refer the objection and comment.Any ACHP comment provided in response to such a request will be taken into account by the Corpsand Coast Guard in accordance with 36 C.F.R. § 800.7(c)(4) with reference to the subject of the dispute. C.Should ACHP not respond within 30days of receiving adequate documentation, the Corps and Coast Guardmay make a final decision on the dispute and proceed accordingly. D.Any recommendations or comments provided by ACHP will be understood to pertain only to the subject of the dispute; The Corps’,Coast Guard’s, and AAF’s responsibility to carry out all other terms of this PA that are not the subject of the dispute will remain unchanged. X. OBJECTIONS BY THE PUBLIC If a member of the public believes that this PA is not being implemented according to its terms, that person may provide the Corps and Coast Guardwith written notice specifying their concerns. The Corps andCoast Guardwill consider those concerns and may consult with the member of the public, consulting parties, or other Signatories, as the Corps and Coast Guarddeem appropriate. The Corps and Coast Guardwill respond to the member of the public in writingand copy Signatories on its response. XI.AMENDMENTS Any Signatory to this PA may request that it be amended, whereupon the signatory parties will consult in accordance with 36C.F.R. Part 800.6 to consider theamendment. The Corps and Coast Guardwill consult, as appropriate based on the nature of the proposed amendment, with Consulting Parties regarding amendments to this PA. All signatoriesmust signify their acceptance of the proposed changes in writing within thirty (30)days of their receipt.This PA shall only be amended by a written instrument executed by all signatories.The amendment will be effective on the date of signature of the last party to sign the amendment. When no consensus can be reached, the PA will not be amended and the dispute resolution process set forth in Stipulation IXwill be followed. XII.TERMINATION Any of the Signatories may terminate this PA by providing written notice to the other parties, provided that the parties will consult during the period before termination to seek agreement on amendments or other actions that mayavoid termination. Termination of this PA must be in compliance with 36 C.F.R. Part 800. This PA may be terminated by the execution of a subsequent Agreement that explicitly terminates or supersedes the terms of the PA. XIII.DURATION Unless terminated under Stipulation XIIabove, this PA will be in effect for ten (10)years following execution by all signatoriesor until the signatories determinethe termsof the PA aresatisfactorily fulfilled, whichever is later. This PA will also be terminated if AAF 18 May 3, 2017 notifies the Signatories in writing that it is unable or has decided not to construct the undertaking. Execution of this PA by the Corps, Coast Guard, SHPO, AAF and ACHP, and implementation of its terms, demonstratesthat the FRA, Corps,andCoast Guardhave taken into account the effects of the undertakingon historic properties. 19 May 3, 2017 ATTACHMENT 1: PROPERTIES LISTED IN OR ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, AND DETERMINATIONS OF EFFECT FINDINGS 1 Table 1Historic Linear Resources Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Direct Effects National Register Determination FMSF #Site Name / AddressResource TypeStatusof Effect 8BR1870/ 8IR1497/ 8IR1518/ 8SL3014/ Florida East Coast RailwayLinear ResourceNRHP-EligibleNo Adverse MT1391/ 8MT1450/ 8PB12102Effect 1Includes properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. For a full list of surveyed properties, please see the 2013 CRAR and 2015 CRAR Addendum Appendices (online). Table 2FECR Historic Bridges Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Direct Effects National Mile Date Register Determination PostEstimateStatusof Effect CountyFMSF #Site Name / Address 190.47Brevard8BR3058Fixed Railway Bridge over the Eau Gallie 1925Eligible as Adverse Effect River –SteelFECR Contributing Resource/ Individually Eligible 194.34Brevard8BR3059Fixed Railway Bridge over the Crane 1925Eligible as No Adverse Creek and Melbourne Street –SteelEffect FECR Contributing Resource 197.7Brevard8BR3060Fixed Railway Bridge over the Turkey 1925Eligible as No Adverse Creek –SteelFECR Effect Contributing Resource 202.59Brevard8BR3061Fixed Railway Bridge over the Goat 1959Eligible as No Adverse Creek –SteelFECR Effect Contributing Resource 212.07Brevard and 8BR3062/Fixed Railway Bridge over the Sebastian 1926Eligible as Adverse Effect River –Steel Indian River8IR1569FECR Contributing Resource/ Individually Eligible 240.1St. Lucie8SL3191Fixed Bridge over the Taylor Creek -1961Eligible as No Adverse Concrete with Steel Beam SpanFECR Effect Contributing Resource 21 May 3, 2017 Table 2FECR Historic Bridges Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Direct Effects National Mile Date Determination Register PostEstimateStatusof Effect CountyFMSF #Site Name / Address 259.95Martin8MT1623Fixed Bridge over the Rio Waterway -1958Eligible as No Adverse Steel and Timber PilesFECR Effect Contributing Resource 260.93Martin8MT1382Movable Bridge over the St. Lucie River –1938Eligible as No Adverse Effect SteelFECR Contributing Resource/ Individually Eligible 266.86Martin8MT1624Fixed Bridge over the Salerno Waterway -1958Eligible as No Adverse Steel and Timber PilesFECREffect Contributing Resource 267.34Martin8MT1625Fixed Bridge over the Tributary to Manatee 1962Eligible as No Adverse Creek 1 -Steel and Timber PilesEffect FECR Contributing Resource 267.70Martin8MT1626Fixed Bridge over the Tributaryto Manatee 1962Eligible as No Adverse Creek 2 -Steel and Timber PilesFECR Effect Contributing Resource 282.58Palm Beach8PB16041Movable Bridge over the Loxahatchee 1935Eligible as No Adverse River –SteelEffect FECR Contributing Resource/ Individually Eligible 1 Table 3Brevard County: Historic Properties within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect Effects Resource National TypeConstructRegister Determination of ion DateStatusEffect FMSF #Site Name / AddressStyle 8IR2173Union Cypress Saw Mill Historic Mixed NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect DistrictDistrict 8BR215Florida Power & Light Co. Ice Plant / Building1926Industrial NRHP–ListedNo Adverse Effect 1604 S, Harbor City BoulevardVernacular 8BR759Building1930NRHP-ListedNo Adverse Effect Marion S. Whaley Citrus Packing Frame House/ 2275 Rockledge Blvd W.Vernacular 8BR1163Buildingc. 1917NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect Mattie Lamar House/ 361 Stone Frame StreetVernacular 22 May 3, 2017 1 Table 3Brevard County: Historic Properties within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect Effects Resource National TypeConstructRegister Determination of ion DateStatusEffect FMSF #Site Name / AddressStyle 8BR1710Jorgensen's General Store/5390 US Building1894Frame NRHP-ListedNo Adverse Effect Hwy 1Vernacular 8BR1723Buildingc. 1931NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect Cocoa Cemetery Storage Building/Masonry 101 N. Cocoa Blvd.Vernacular 8BR1739Buildingc. 1932Tudor RevivalNRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect Ashley's Cafe & Lounge/ 1609 Rockledge Blvd. W. 8BR1741Rockledge Gardens Nursery & Buildingc. 1930Industrial NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Landscaping/2153 Rockledge Blvd. VernacularEffect W. 8BR1765Buildingc. 1927NRHP-Eligible Bohn Equipment Company/ Industrial No Adverse 255Olive StVernacularEffect 8BR2779317 Rosa Jones DriveFECR c. 1962InternationalNRHP-EligibleNo Adverse StationEffect 8BR1724Hilltop CemeteryCemeteryc. 1887NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect 8BR1777Cocoa CemeteryCemeteryc. 1890NRHP-Eligible No Adverse Effect 1Includes properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. 1 Table 4Indian River County: Historic Properties within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect Effects Resource Construction National Determination FMSF#Site Name / AddressTypeDateStyleRegister Statusof Effect 8IR859McKee Jungle GardensResource NRHP-ListedNo Adverse GroupEffect 8IR1519Dixie HighwayNRHP-Eligible Linear No Adverse ResourceEffect th 8IR681903NRHP-Listed Vero Railroad Station/ 2336 14FECR Frame No Adverse AvenueStationVernacularEffect 8IR99Building1908NRHP-Eligible George Armstrong Braddock House/ Georgian No Adverse 1309 Louisiana AvenueRevivalEffect 8IR100Baughman House/ 1525 North Building1900Neo-Classical NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Louisiana AvenueRevivalEffect 8IR3885056 North Old Dixie HighwayBuildingc. 1920BungalowNRHP-Eligible No Adverse Effect 8IR624Building1935Frame NRHP-ListedNo Adverse Old Vero Beach Community th AvenueVernacularEffect Building/ 2146 14 8IR858Hall of Giants, McKee Jungle Building1940OtherNRHP-Eligible No Adverse th Gardens/ US 1 and 4Street(individually and Effect contributing to district) 23 May 3, 2017 1 Table 4Indian River County: Historic Properties within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect Effects Resource Construction National Determination FMSF#Site Name / AddressTypeDateStyleRegister Statusof Effect 8IR975Building1926NRHP-Listed Vero Beach Diesel Power Plant/ Masonry No Adverse th 1133 19PlaceVernacularEffect 8IR1464Cemetery1966ModernNRHP-Eligible Vero Beach Community Center/ No Adverse th AvenueEffect 2266 14 st 8IR14751146 21StreetCemetery1966ModernNRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect 1Includes properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. For a full list of surveyed properties, please see the 2013 CRAR and 2015 CRAR Addendum Appendices (online). Table 5St. Lucie County: Historic Properties Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect 1 Effects Resource National TypeConstruction Register Determination FMSF #Site Name / AddressDateStyleStatusof Effect 8SL2801Edgar Town Historic DistrictHistoric NRHP- No Adverse DistrictEligible (also Effect local designation) 8SL76St. Lucie Historic DistrictHistoric NRHP-No Adverse DistrictListedEffect 8SL78Fairmont Manor/ 5707 South Building1896Neo-NRHP-No Adverse Indian River DriveClassical EligibleEffect Revival 8SL2209015 South Indian River DriveBuildingc. 1890Frame NRHP-No Adverse VernacularEligibleEffect 8SL2277901 South Indian River DriveBuildingc. 1910CraftsmanNRHP-No Adverse EligibleEffect 8SL2296109 South Indian River DriveBuildingc. 1915Colonial NRHP-No Adverse RevivalEligibleEffect 8SL2315703 South Indian River DriveBuildingc. 1915Prairie StyleNRHP-No Adverse EligibleEffect 8SL2345309 South Indian River DriveBuildingc. 1935Colonial NRHP-No Adverse RevivalEligibleEffect 8SL236Riverhill/ 4625 South Indian River Building1903Frame NRHP-No Adverse DriveVernacularEligibleEffect 8SL237Britt House/ 4511 South Indian River Building1908Frame NRHP-No Adverse DriveVernacularEligibleEffect 8SL238N.E. Card House/ 3915-3917Building1914Masonry NRHP-No Adverse Indian River DriveVernacularEligibleEffect 8SL247Hoskins House/ 2929 North Indian Building1910Frame NRHP-No Adverse River DriveVernacularEligibleEffect 24 May 3, 2017 Table 5St. Lucie County: Historic Properties Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect 1 Effects Resource National TypeConstruction Register Determination FMSF #Site Name / AddressDateStyleStatusof Effect 8SL289Old Fort Pierce City Hall/ 315 A Buildingc. 1925ItalianateNRHP-No Adverse AvenueListedEffect 8SL799Sunrise Theater/ 117 2nd Street Buildingc. 1923MediterraneNRHP-No Adverse Southan RevivalListedEffect 8SL825601 South 2nd StreetBuildingc. 1935Masonry NRHP-No Adverse vernacularEligibleEffect 8SL826Frank Tyler House/ 519 2nd Street Buildingc. 1924MediterraneNRHP-No Adverse Southan RevivalEligibleEffect 8SL917Banyon Belle Manor/ 1001 South Building1905Georgian NRHP-No Adverse Indian River DriveRevivalEligibleEffect 8SL9181009 South Indian River DriveBuilding1925MissionNRHP-No Adverse EligibleEffect 8SL9201029 South Indian River DriveBuilding1920Georgian NRHP-No Adverse RevivalEligibleEffect 8SL926O.L. Peacock House/ 2211 South Building1920MediterraneNRHP-No Adverse Indian River Drivean RevivalEligibleEffect 8SL930Stephen Lesher House/ 2501 Building1920Italian NRHP-No Adverse South Indian River DriveRenaissancEligibleEffect e Revival 8SL931Carlton-Vest House/ 2507 South Building1920Masonry NRHP-No Adverse Indian River DriveVernacularEligibleEffect 8SL932Casa Del Rio/ 2513 South Indian Building1920Italian NRHP-No Adverse River DriveRenaissancEligibleEffect e Revival 8SL933Babe Phelps House/ 2521 South Building1935MontereyNRHP-No Adverse Indian River DriveEligibleEffect 8SL1599Shadetree Studio/ 2900 Old Dixie Building1950Frame NRHP-No Adverse HighwayVernacularEligibleEffect 8SL1922East Coast Packers/ 2130 Old Building1950Industrial NRHP-No Adverse Dixie HighwayVernacularEligibleEffect 1Includes properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. For a full list of surveyed properties, please see the 2013 CRAR and 2015 CRARAddendum Appendices (online). 25 May 3, 2017 Table 6Martin County: Historic Properties Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect 1 Effects National Resource Construction Register Determination FMSF #Site Name / AddressTypeDateStyleStatusof Effect 8MT1573Witham Field AirportMixed NRHP-No Adverse DistrictEligibleEffect 8MT1621Dixie HighwayLinear NRHP-No Adverse ResourceEligibleEffect 8MT46George W. Parks Store/ Stuart Feed/ Building1901Frame NRHP-No Adverse 101 South Flagler AvenueVernacularEligibleEffect 8MT84Fern Building/ 73 West Flagler Buildingc. 1950Masonry NRHP-No Adverse AvenueVernacularEligibleEffect 8MT86Lyric Theatre/ 59 Southwest Flagler Buildingc. 1926Mediterranean NRHP-No Adverse AvenueRevivalListedEffect 8MT130East Coast Lumber and Supply/ 49 Building1917Frame NRHP-No Adverse Southwest Flagler AvenueVernacularEligibleEffect 8MT131Hobe South Cabinetry/ 500 South Building1917-c. 1926Masonry NRHP-No Adverse Dixie HighwayVernacularEligibleEffect 8MT307Crary House/ 161 Southwest Flagler Building1925Tudor NRHP-No Adverse AvenueRevivalEligibleEffect 8MT83812200 Southeast Nassau StreetBuildingc. 1941Frame NRHP-No Adverse VernacularEligibleEffect 8MT1066250 North Flagler RoadBuildingc. 1940Masonry NRHP-No Adverse VernacularEligibleEffect 1Includes properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. For a full list of surveyed properties, please see the 2013 CRAR and 2015 CRAR Addendum Appendices (online). Table 7Palm Beach County: Historic Properties within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect 1 Effects National Register Resource Construction Determination FMSF #Site Name / AddressTypeDateStyleStatusof Effect 8PB13340Kelsey City LayoutHistoric NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse DistrictEffect 8PB218Evergreen CemeteryCemetery1916NRHP-Eligible No Adverse (also local Effect designation) 8PB6064St. John’s Baptist Church/ 2010 A. Building1929MissionNRHP-EligibleNo Adverse E. Isaacs AvenueEffect 26 May 3, 2017 Table 8Archaeological Sites Located Within the N-S Corridor APE National Register Determination of FMSF #Site Name / AddressSite TypeStatusEffect 8IR846RailroadMalabar-Period Shell Midden and Not Evaluated by No Adverse Effect Artifact ScatterSHPO 8MT1287Hobe Sound National Prehistoric Campsite and Previously No Adverse Effect Wildlife Refuge #3Prehistoric Shell Middenrecommended as Potentially Eligible: Not Evaluated by SHPO 8SL41Fort CapronHistoric FortPreviously No Adverse Effect recommended as Potentially Eligible: Not Evaluated by SHPO 8SL1772Avenue A-Downtown Precolumbian Habitation, Not Evaluated by No Adverse Effect FortPierceMidden, Campsite, and extractive SHPO Site; Historic American Building Remains, Refuse, and Artifact Scatter 8IR1/8IR9Vero Man/Vero LocalityPleistocene Faunal assemblage: NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect Redeposited Precolumbian Burial 8SL31Fort PierceHistoric FortNRHP-ListedNo Adverse Effect Sites added by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, May 2017 8SL3Ft. Pierce MoundMidden/MoundNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect SHPO High Probability -Site AUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect SHPO High Probability -Site BUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect SHPO High Probability -Site CUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect SHPO High Probability -Site DUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect SHPO 27 May 3, 2017 ATTACHMENT 2: KNOWN SITES AND AREAS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY WHERE MONITORING WILL OCCUR AND LOCATIONS WHERE HORIZONTAL DIRECTIONAL DRILL WILL BE EMPLOYED 28 May 3, 2017