< Previous | Index | Next >

II. Project Methodology and Approach

This section provides a summary of the project methodology and approach used to analyze and synthesize the Federal Land Transfer process. This project approach consisted of the following primary steps:

• Conducting a review of HEPE's streamlining initiatives to assess applicability of elements of HEPE's approach to the analysis of the Interagency Real Estate Agreements.
• Inventorying and reviewing existing Interagency Real Estate Agreements and other related processes.
• Planning and conducting a series of stakeholder interviews to identify a baseline set of key issues and opportunities to help establish the agenda for a series of national stakeholder workshops.
• Planning and conducting six one-day stakeholder workshops nationally.

Each of these components of the project approach is described in further detail below.

A. Review of HEPE Streamlining Initiatives

Because it was FHWA's intent for this task order to leverage HEPE's success in using collaborative problem solving and interest-based negotiation methods between Agencies to streamline their environmental review and approval process, the team's first step during October and November 2004 was to review the results from the HEPE Interagency Collaborative Problem Solving Workshops. The purpose of this review was to build on the work completed by HEPE for application to Federal Land Transfers associated with the acquisition of right-of-way on highway projects funded by FHWA. The National Environmental Streamlining Initiatives have been ongoing for over 5 years and are more detailed than the work effort contemplated under this task order. For instance, FHWA has held several multiple-day national workshops with Federal Resource and Permitting Agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), USFWS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Corps of Engineers (USACE), and state historic property offices (SHPOs) to name a few.

There were three objectives for the review of the HEPE workshops:

• Defining elements of the HEPE approach or methodology applicable to the approach and methodology for this task order and incorporating these elements, to the extent possible, into the task order work plan. The workshop agenda and format are examples of work approach elements from the HEPE initiative incorporated into this task order.
• Identifying best practices from the HEPE workshops that are applicable for and adaptable to the Interagency Transfer process. Examples of best practices from the HEPE initiative applicable to the Interagency Agreement streamlining effort include the following:
  • Beginning the Federal Land Transfer process well in advance of the initiation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.
  • Promoting Interagency coordination with formal and/or informal understandings, including designating the lead contact individuals early in the process.
  • Providing for early and continuous stakeholder/public involvement.
  • Pursuing political support (local, regional, or national as appropriate).
  • Helping with the development and use of state initiatives.
  • Developing procedures for facilitating preparation and review of the environmental document.
  • Thinking outside the box to develop workable solutions to problems that may arise during the environmental process.
• Leveraging lessons learned from the HEPE initiative that showed some techniques were less successful and thus are probably not good candidates for adoption within the Federal Lands Transfer process. Techniques or approaches that past experience suggested should be avoided include the following:
  • Establishing rigid processes and lack of flexibility for the NEPA process which is dynamic and should be treated as such.
  • Being inflexible in your position based upon perceived requirements. Just because "it has always been done that way" is inappropriate. Turf wars will only impede the process.
  • Attempting to coordinate with many Agencies in one large meeting. Breaking out into smaller groups for discussion and identification of issues is more effective.
  • Ignoring or putting off addressing the hard issues. Not talking about the "500 pound gorilla" in the middle of the room is a sure way for the project to get off-track.

B. Inventory and Review of Existing Interagency Real Estate Agreements

In parallel with the review of the HEPE workshop initiative, the team also reviewed a number of existing Interagency Real Estate Agreements and processes. The goal of this review was to identify existing best practices and to identify potential Federal and state staff to participate in detailed interviews and/or stakeholder workshops. In addition, the team learned about other Interagency Agreements, procedure manuals, and documentation during the detailed stakeholder interviews and stakeholder workshops, and these documents were analyzed as appropriate and incorporated into the project working papers. A list of these Interagency Agreements is contained in Appendix E.

C. Conduct of Stakeholder Interviews

As the next step in this study, Dye Management Group, Inc. conducted telephone interviews with a sampling of headquarters and field staff from several Federal Lands Agencies in December 2004 and January 2005. The results of these interviews were then used to help plan the agenda for the series of Interagency workshops conducted during the spring of 2005.

The research approach for conducting these detailed interviews was as follows:

• Compiling through multiple sources a list of regional and headquarters representatives from each Federal Lands Agency to be interviewed.
• Developing a brief Web-based survey for completion by FHWA Division Realty Officers to help identify additional interview candidates.
• Developing a structured interview instrument and reviewing this with FHWA.
• Making initial contact with each prospective interviewee to attempt to schedule an interview.
• Faxing or e-mailing the structured survey instrument to interview participants prior to scheduling the interview.
• Administrating the telephone survey.
• Compiling notes from each interview using the survey instrument.
• Reviewing the interview notes to help develop an overall summary of findings from the interviews.

The telephone interviews had a response rate of 59 percent or 38 completed interviews out of a pool of 64 potential interviewees. These 38 interviews were completed with staff from the Agencies identified in Exhibit II-1.

Exhibit II-1: Summary of Interviewees by Agency

D. Conduct of Stakeholder Workshops

Based on the insights gained through the stakeholder interviews and following the general format of the stakeholder workshops conducted as part of the HEPE process, the Dye Management Group, Inc. team developed an agenda for and conducted six one-day workshops nationally. These workshops sought to refine the early interview results and add clarity to how the Federal Land Transfer process is perceived and to what specific needs exist to make it better understood and more workable.

Representatives from FHWA, USFWS, USFS, BLM, BOR, NPS, BIA, and state departments of transportation were invited to attend. The list of potential participants was identified through a variety of channels at the headquarters and field levels, and potential participants were then contacted through e-mail and phone as appropriate.

The purpose of these six workshops was to do the following:

• Identify and understand any issues with current intra- and inter-Agency communication and processes for Federal Land acquisitions, transfers, and mitigation for right-of-way projects.
• Identify best practices in these areas.
• Discuss ideas for streamlining these processes.

The agenda for each workshop was structured to achieve the following objectives:

• Help Agencies understand each other's missions and mandates, as well as how these affect Federal Land Transfers.
• Present and discuss best practices and strategies regarding Federal Land Transfers.
• Identify opportunities for streamlining the Federal Land Transfer process.
• Introduce dispute resolution concepts that can assist in overcoming process and communication barriers between Agencies.
• Identify approaches for enhancing dialogue and communication between Agencies.

The workshops were held during March and April 2005 in Denver; Washington; Sacramento, Calif.; Vancouver, Wash.; Albuquerque, N.M.; and Bloomington, Minn. (in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area).

Based on attendee input, slight changes were made in the agenda after the first two workshops, which were held in Denver and Washington, to allow for greater participant input earlier in the morning part of the workshop. This revised agenda was then utilized for the last four workshops. Both the original and revised agendas are provided in Appendix D.

Seventy-three stakeholders from nine Federal Agencies and five state departments of transportation attended the workshops. Exhibit II-2 provides a summary of workshop attendees by Agency. Exhibit II-3 provides a list of workshop attendees by location.

Exhibit II-2: Workshop Attendance by Agency

Exhibit II-3: Workshop Attendance by Location

The input received from the stakeholders at each of these workshops was a primary input to the analysis conducted by the Dye Management Group, Inc. team and formed a substantial part of the research for the opportunity areas, best practices, and recommendations presented in the next section of this report.

< Previous | Index | Next >