Section 106 Archaeology Guidance

Principle VIII of the ACHP’s 2006 Policy Statement on Affordable Housing and Historic Preservation [Affordable Housing Policy, 72 FR 7387-7389] (http://www.achp.gov/polstatements.html) states that: “Archaeological investigations should be avoided for affordable housing projects limited to rehabilitation and requiring minimal ground disturbance.”

Neither existing guidance from the Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD; e.g., Historic Preservation Fact Sheet #6, “When Should I do Archaeological Surveys?” (http://www.hud.gov/utilities/intercept.cfm?/offices/cpd/  read more »

The identification effort is based on what might be found and where it is likely to be located. In other words, the APE is the geographic area where identification occurs, but it doesn’t necessarily follow that the entire APE must be subject to archaeological scrutiny. Generally, the level of effort would be expected to be more intensive if there is potential for the APE to contain an archaeological site of national significance or value to a living community.

While guidance on the scope of archaeological identification issued by SHPOs or other non-federal agencies often is helpful in determining the appropriate level of effort, it does not define the federal standard and must be considered guidance only.  read more »

Yes. Since an undertaking’s effects are not restricted to the surface, in delineating the APE, a federal agency also should consider the potential for the undertaking’s effects to occur above and below ground. Because the APE is three dimensional, agencies should consider how the undertaking might impact historic properties on the surface, above it, and below it.  read more »

The APE is defined by the federal agency, in consultation with the SHPO/THPO, prior to initiating identification efforts. It is therefore a good idea to start out with an APE that is reasonably broad enough to capture the full geographic extent of the undertaking’s effects, and reassess it as more information is gathered.  read more »

The APE is the geographic area(s) within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist. The area of potential effects is influenced by the scale and nature of the undertaking and may be different for different kinds of effects caused by the undertaking [36 CFR § 800.16(d)].(d) Area of potential effects means the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly or indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.  read more »

Federal agencies should seek the advice, guidance, and assistance of the ACHP in resolving disputes with other consulting parties on its level of effort to identify and evaluate historic properties [36 CFR § 800.2(b)(2)].(2) Council assistance. Participants in the section 106 process may seek advice, guidance and assistance from the Council on the application of this part to specific undertakings, including the resolution of disagreements, whether or not the Council is formally involved in the review of the undertaking.  read more »

In conducting its identification effort, federal agencies are required to consult with the SHPO/THPO to determine the scope of identification efforts, including the initial determination of the undertaking’s area of potential effects, and to seek information from consulting parties and others about historic properties and effects to them. Federal agencies should also gather information from Indian tribes or NHOs to assist in identifying properties of traditional religious and cultural significance to them within the APE that may be eligible for the National Register.  read more »

A review of previous archaeological work done within or in the vicinity of the area of potential effects (APE) is essential in determining the scope of the identification effort. For example, where portions of the APE have been subjected to archaeological survey using methods that conform to current professional standards, it may not be necessary to conduct additional fieldwork on those areas. Conversely, a more intensive effort reasonably would be expected for an APE that has been the subject of little or no previous archaeological study.  read more »

A federal agency is not expected to conduct a 100 percent survey of the area of potential effects. Rather, the identification effort should be conditioned by where effects are likely to occur and the likely impact of these effects on listed or eligible archaeological sites. For example, archaeological identification efforts for a license renewal from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission likely would not involve the entire area of potential effects (APE).  read more »