skip
specific nav links
Home Working
with Section 106 ACHP
Case Digest
Summer 2003
Case
Digest, Summer 2003
Protecting Historic Properties: Section 106 in Action
Introduction
and Criteria for ACHP Involvement
Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, & Texas:
Amendment of the Forest Service Southwestern Region Programmatic Agreement
California:
Demolition of the East and West Wings of the Naval Postgraduate School,
Monterey
Maryland:
Construction of New Visitor Center at Monocacy National Battlefield, Frederick
Minnesota
& Wisconsin:
Construction of Alternative Crossing of the St. Croix River
Nevada:
Preservation of Cave Rock, Lake Tahoe (closed
case)
New
York :
Construction of Foley Square U.S. Courthouse and Federal Building, New
York
New
York :
Transfer of Ownership of the Mechanicville Hydroelectric Project (closed
case)
North
Dakota :
Expansion of Coal Mining Operations, Mercer County
Oregon:
Rehabilitation of Pioneer Square U.S. Courthouse and U.S. Post Office,
Portland
(closed case)
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 ACHP and Section
106 review.
Updated
November 20, 2003
Return to Top |