skip
specific nav links
Home Working
with Section 106 ACHP
Case Digest
Fall 2002
Case
Digest, Fall 2002
Protecting Historic Properties: Section 106 in Action
Introduction
and Criteria for ACHP Involvement
California:
Closed case: Geothermal Development at Medicine
Lake Highlands
District
of Columbia:
Security Upgrades at the Washington Monument
Louisiana:
Redevelopment of the St. Thomas Housing Project,
New Orleans
New
Mexico:
Closed case: Land Transfer at Los Alamos
National Laboratory
New York:
Transfer of Ownership of the Mechanicville
Hydroelectric Plant
New York:
Redevelopment of the TWA Terminal at JFK
International Airport, New York
Oregon:
Rehabilitation of the Pioneer Square U.S.
Courthouse and U.S. Post Office, Portland
Pennsylvania:
Widening of U.S. Route 202, Chester and Delaware
Counties
Virginia:
Development at Chancellorsville Battlefield,
Fredericksburg
Introduction
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act requires Federal agencies to consider historic preservation values
when planning their activities. In the Section 106 process, a Federal
agency must identify affected historic properties, evaluate the proposed
actions effects, and then explore ways to avoid or mitigate those
effects. The Federal agency conducts this process in consultation with
State Historic Preservation Officers, representatives of Indian tribes
and Native Hawaiian organizations, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
(ACHP), and other parties with an interest in the issues.
Each year thousands of Federal actions
undergo Section 106 review. The vast majority of cases are routine and
resolved at the State or tribal level, without involvement of ACHP. However,
a considerable number of cases present issues or challenges that warrant
ACHPs attention. The specific Criteria for Council Involvement in
reviewing Section 106 cases are set forth in Appendix
A of ACHPs regulations. In accordance with those criteria, ACHP
is likely to enter the Section 106 process when an undertaking:
- has substantial impacts on important historic properties (Criterion
1);
- presents important questions of policy or interpretation (Criterion
2);
- has the potential for presenting procedural problems (Criterion 3);
and/or
- presents issues of concern to Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations
(Criterion 4).
This report provides information on a small but representative cross-section
of undertakings that illustrate the variety and complexity of Federal
activities in which ACHP is currently involved. It illustrates the ways
the Federal Government influences what happens to historic properties
in communities throughout the Nation, and highlights the importance of
informed citizens to be alert to potential conflicts between Federal actions
and historic preservation goals, and the necessity for public participation
to achieve the best possible preservation solution.
In addition to this report, ACHPs Web site contains a useful library
of information about ACHP and Section
106 review.
Posted October 23, 2002
Return to Top |