skip specific nav links
Home
Working with Section 106 ACHP
Case Digest Spring 2004
Case
Digest, Spring 2004
Protecting Historic Properties: Section 106 in Action
Introduction
and Criteria for ACHP Involvement
Alaska:
Partial Demolition of Site Summit, Chugach Mountains, Anchorage
Colorado:
Transfer of Ownership of Redstone Castle, Redstone
Hawaii:
Partial Demolition of the Moanalua Shopping Center, Oahu
Hawaii:
Transformation of the 2nd Brigade, U.S. Army Garrison (closed
case)
Minnesota
& Wisconsin:
Construction of a New Crossing Over the St. Croix River
New
Jersey:
Development of Revolutionary War Battlefield, Edison
New
York:
Construction of a Federal Courthouse, Buffalo
South
Carolina:
Management of the Savannah River Nuclear Site
Washington:
Expansion of the Monorail System, Seattle
Washington:
Transfer of the Hanford Nuclear Site, Columbia River
Wyoming:
Development of the Lander Trail, Pinedale
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 often conducts this process in consultation with Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), State Historic Preservation Officers,
representatives of Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, and
other parties with an interest in the issues. Sometimes a Programmatic
Agreement or a Memorandum of Agreement is reached and signed by the projects
consulting parties. The agreements are an option provided for in the ACHPs
regulations that sets forth a tailored process to guide how an agency
meets the requirements of Section 106.
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 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 the ACHP and Section
106 review.
Updated
January 6, 2005
Return to Top |