Using Section 106 program alternatives to manage and protect historic properties. Compliance with Section 106 was cited by numerous respondents as their primary mechanism to protect their historic properties. While some agencies utilize the standard review process set out in the ACHP’s regulations (36 CFR §§ 800.3-7), others find it advantageous to use a tailored approach. Section 800.14 of the ACHP’s regulations lays out these tailored approaches to meet agency Section 106 obligations and preservation challenges. The ACHP specifically asked for information regarding this trend to determine the extent to which agency use of program alternatives assisted them in better protecting and managing their historic properties. This will in turn assist and inform the ACHP in determining whether to devote additional resources to their propagation and use. The two most common program alternatives are Programmatic Agreements (PAs) and Program Comments. While most federal agencies use Programmatic Agreements on a case-by- case basis to address complex projects, several large land-managing agencies have used them to implement a consistent approach to NHPA compliance across the country. A greater number have used Programmatic Agreements to tailor Section 106 review to the management needs of specific regions or units. Agencies independently reported that time invested in developing and negotiating PAs has been well spent and determined that the agency can comply with the requirements of Section 106 in a more effective and efficient manner in a variety of ways. These include institutionalizing activities that are similar and repetitive in nature, by stipulating roles and responsibilities, excluding certain categories from further Section 106 review, establishing protocols for consultation to facilitate the identification and evaluation of historic properties, and streamlining the resolution of adverse effects. These innovative comprehensive approaches could be used as a model by land-managing agencies in identifying locations suitable for energy development while considering effects to historic properties, thus increasing predictability for both project sponsors and consulting parties. Highlights: ›› In 2016, BLM California executed a PA with the California SHPO and the ACHP for the Desert Renewable Environmental Conservation Plan. The Plan directs possible siting for future utility scale renewable energy projects on BLM-administered lands in the southern California deserts. Consultation included outreach with 45 federally recognized tribes; seven tribal organizations; 89 federal, state, and local agencies; 42 academic institutions/ museums/historical societies; 29 industry representatives; 72 other organizations; and five individuals. Key aspects of the PA include cultural resource sensitivity analyses intended to inform siting decisions and to start project specific discussions early between consulting parties; a scientific peer review process; a cultural resource training program; and a regional compensatory mitigation program addressing cumulative effects. ›› In 2016, GSA’s Rocky Mountain Region became the fourth among 11 regions to negotiate a multi-state PA, reducing GSA’s compliance workload for routine repairs at historic buildings. The PA has already cut the region’s Section 106 correspondence by 55 percent. Half of GSA’s historic building inventory (by number and statewide coverage) now benefits from streamlined compliance through regional PAs.
38 | IN A SPIRIT OF STEWARDSHIP: A REPORT ON FEDERAL HISTORIC PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 2018
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker