DEVELOPMENT OF CULTURAL RESOURCES PROTECTION GUIDELINES FOR ALASKA'S ON-SCENE COORDINATORS

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 941-942
Author(s):  
Pamela Bergmann
Keyword(s):  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
State Agencies ◽  
Cultural Resources ◽  
Hazardous Substance ◽  
Emergency Procedures ◽  
Response Team ◽  
Require Response ◽  
National Historic Preservation Act

ABSTRACT In recognition that oil spills and hazardous substance releases typically require response actions within the first 24 hours, the Alaska Regional Response Team (RRT) has developed draft Cultural Resources Protection Guidelines for Alaska to establish an emergency procedure for taking cultural resources into account during responses and to ensure that response actions comply with the National Historic Preservation Act. The draft guidelines were developed in consultation with the Alaska State Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The mechanism for formally establishing the guidelines’ emergency procedures is a programmatic agreement, which will be signed by appropriate federal and state agencies’ historic preservation officials.

Development and Implementation of Guidelines for Federal On-Scene Coordinators for Protecting Historic Properties

1999 ◽  
Vol 1999 (1) ◽  
pp. 363-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan C. Thorman ◽  
Pamela Bergmann
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Emergency Response ◽  
The United States ◽  
Hazardous Substances ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
Hazardous Substance ◽  
Contingency Plan ◽  
National Response ◽  
Response Team

ABSTRACT In 1997, the National Response Team completed a Programmatic Agreement on Protection of Historic Properties during Emergency Response under the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. This agreement, which was drafted by a National Response Team ad hoc committee consisting of representatives of National Response Team member agencies, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, has important ramifications for federal On-Scene Coordinators and responsible parties conducting spill response in the United States. The purpose of the Programmatic Agreement is to ensure that historic properties are appropriately taken into account in planning for and conducting emergency response to oil spills and hazardous substance releases under the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. The agreement provides a uniform, nationwide approach to considering and protecting historic properties before and during an emergency response. Signatories, which include the U.S. Coast Guard and the Environmental Protection Agency, agree to implement this Programmatic Agreement or to develop and then implement regional Programmatic Agreements that are consistent with the nationwide Programmatic Agreement and the National Historic Preservation Act. As of September 1998, implementation of the nationwide Programmatic Agreement and development of regional Programmatic Agreements were just beginning by Regional Response Teams and federal On-Scene Coordinators throughout the United States. The Alaska Regional Response Team, whose development of regional cultural resources guidelines in the early 1990s led to the development of the nationwide Programmatic Agreement, had begun preparing a document on implementation of the nationwide Programmatic Agreement in Alaska. The emergency response provisions of the nationwide Programmatic Agreement were implemented for the first time in the November 1997, M/V Kuroshima spill near Dutch Harbor, Alaska. The major lesson learned from this incident with regard to the nationwide Programmatic Agreement is that its provisions are workable and can contribute to the overall success of the response.

The Opportunities and Limitations of Tribal Consultation in Studies Conducted Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act

1998 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 5-8
Author(s):  
Gail Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Decision Maker ◽  
National Park ◽  
National Park Service ◽  
Development Projects ◽  
Cultural Resources ◽  
Cultural Properties ◽  
Park Service ◽  
Traditional Cultural Properties ◽  
National Historic Preservation Act

Proposed construction and development projects that require Federal permits are subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires that the Federal decision-maker take into account the project's potential effects on cultural resources listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Over the years and especially after 1990 when the National Park Service released Bulletin 38, Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs), Section 106 review has increased the consideration of designating TCPs and consultation with the Indian tribal organizations that value them. Bulletin 38 defines TCPs as places that have been historically important in maintaining the cultural identify of a community.

Religion as Cultural Resource

2020 ◽  
pp. 127-170
Author(s):  
Michael D. McNally
Keyword(s):  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Cultural Resources ◽  
Cultural Resource ◽  
Tribal Governments ◽  
Preservation Law ◽  
Traditional Cultural Properties ◽  
National Historic Preservation Act ◽  
Sacred Lands

This chapter explores what results when Native peoples articulate religious claims in the language of culture and cultural resources under environmental and historic preservation law. It argues that cultural resource laws have become more fruitful in two respects. First, there is more emphatic insistence on government-to-government consultation between federal agencies and tribes. Second, in 1990, National Historic Preservation Act regulations were clarified by designating “Traditional Cultural Properties” as eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and in 1992, that law was amended to formally engage tribal governments in the review process. In light of these developments, protection under the categories of culture and cultural resource have proved more capacious for distinctive Native practices and beliefs about sacred lands, but it has come at the expense of the clearer edge of religious freedom protections, while still being haunted, and arguably bedraggled, by the category of religion from which these categories ostensibly have been formally disentangled.

scholarly journals 2018-2019 Annual Report of Work Carried Out at Memorial Park, City of Houston, Harris County, Texas

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Quennoz
Keyword(s):  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Survey Methods ◽  
Archaeological Site ◽  
Cultural Resources ◽  
Harris County ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Project Area ◽  
Research Survey ◽  
National Historic Preservation Act ◽  
Age Structures

On behalf of the City of Houston and the Memorial Park Conservancy, Gray & Pape, Inc. conducted intensive pedestrian surveys of three areas totaling 144.4 hectares (357.6 acres) of Memorial Park, City of Houston, Harris County, Texas. Fieldwork was carried out between April 1, 2018 and March 31, 2019, under Texas Antiquities Annual Permit Number 8465. The following report presents the results of site file and background research, survey methods, field results, and conclusions and recommendations for each of these surveys. The goals of the intensive pedestrian surveys were to assist the Memorial Park Conservancy in identifying the presence of cultural resources as they are defined by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (36 CFR 800), and provide management recommendations for identified resources. Survey methods, site identification and delineation, and reporting adhere to standards established by the Archeology Division of the Texas Historical Commission, the Council of Texas Archeologists, and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. At this time, the Memorial Park Conservancy plans to conduct standard park maintenance activities including low impact mechanical clearing of the invasive understory, spraying, and new plantings in each of the areas surveyed. Gray & Pape, Inc. focused particular attention on the State Antiquities Landmark-designated (#8200003264) Camp Logan archaeological site (41HR614) that encompasses large portions of Memorial Park. As a result of survey findings, the boundary for 41HR614 has been expanded to include the entirety of the former Camp Logan footprint as preserved within the boundaries of Memorial Park. The boundary of the previously recorded prehistoric site 41HR1217 was also extended. Four new prehistoric sites (41HR1226, 41HR1227, 41HR1229, 41HR1230) and one new multicomponent site (41HR1228) were also recorded. The 12.4-hectare (30.6-acre) Sports Complex survey resulted in the identification of five historic features considered part of 41HR614: the partial remains of a Camp Logan era road, segments of two Camp Logan era ditches, a Camp Logan concrete grease trap, and a concrete signpost from the 1940s. Gray & Pape recommends that the grease trap and signpost be avoided by Memorial Park Conservancy planned activities. The remaining features will not be impacted by current planned Memorial Park Conservancy activities. Based on the results of this survey, and with these protective measures in place, Gray & Pape recommends that the no further cultural resources work be required in the remaining portions of the Sports Complex project area and that the project be cleared to proceed as currently planned. The 76-hectare (189-acre) Bayou Wilds – East survey resulted in the identification of four new prehistoric sites (41HR1226, 41HR1227, 41HR1229, 41HR1230) and one new multicomponent site (41HR1228). The boundaries of the prehistoric site 41HR1217 and the historic site 41HR614 were extended A total of 14 new features were identified as associated with 41HR614, as well as two historic-age structures. Gray & Pape, Inc. recommends avoidance of the identified sites, features, and historic age structures. Based on the results of this survey, and with these protective measures in place, Gray & Pape, Inc. recommends no further cultural resources work be required in the remaining portion of the Bayou Wilds – East project area and that the project be cleared to proceed as planned. The 56-hectare (138-acre) Northwest Trails – North survey resulted in the identification of four historic-age structures, nearly identical footbridges constructed of irregular blocks and mortar that are part of the park’s active trail network; as well as a historical isolate. Based on the results of this survey, and with these protective measures in place, Gray & Pape, Inc. recommends that the no further cultural resources work be required in the remaining portions of the Northwest Trails – North project area and that the project be cleared to proceed as currently planned. As part of the Unanticipated Finds Plan developed by Gray & Pape, Inc. and the Memorial Park Conservancy, Gray & Pape, Inc. archaeologists identified and recorded nine cultural features (seven manholes, one grease trap, one segment of vitrified clay pipe) uncovered by activities undertaken by the Memorial Park Conservancy and their contractors. In each case ongoing work in the area of the newly encountered feature was halted until the feature was fully documented by a Gray & Pape, Inc. archaeologist, and potential impacts were coordinated between Gray & Pape, Inc., the Memorial Park Conservancy, and the Texas Historical Commission. Gray & Pape, Inc. also coordinated with the Texas Historical Commission on two occasions in relation to Memorial Park Conservancy projects for which no fieldwork was required. As a project permitted through the Texas Historical Commission, Gray & Pape, Inc. submitted project records to the Center of Archaeological Studies at Texas State University in San Marcos, Texas.

scholarly journals Alternative Mitigation to Counter Resource Losses from the Lake Cumberland Drawdown, Kentucky

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie J. McCormack ◽  
Kary Stackelbeck
Keyword(s):  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Educational Outreach ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Dam Failure ◽  
Army Corps ◽  
Cultural Resources ◽  
Army Corps Of Engineers ◽  
National Historic Preservation Act

ABSTRACTThis article presents a case study of the process of developing and implementing mitigation as the result of adverse effects to cultural resources from the drawdown of Lake Cumberland, Kentucky. Signs of a dam failure in early 2007 triggered the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to implement the emergency drawdown. While the drawdown prevented a life safety catastrophe, it created a new erosion zone and exposed archaeological sites to looters. When it became clear that conventional Section 106 procedures to identify and evaluate these endangered archaeological resources were not an option, alternative and creative mitigation became a necessary approach for the Corps to meet its obligations under the National Historic Preservation Act. This article discusses the creative brainstorming among the Corps, Kentucky state historic preservation officer, and tribes that led to three alternative mitigation measures aimed at educational outreach, raising public awareness, and staff training. Furthermore, the article identifies challenges encountered during the implementation of the mitigation measures. Through the presentation of our mitigation journey, we share some of our lessons learned to improve awareness of the challenges and successes one may encounter during the execution of such alternative measures.

DEVELOPMENT OF A DISPERSANT DOCTRINE IN THE GULF OF MEXICO

1997 ◽  
Vol 1997 (1) ◽  
pp. 637-641
Author(s):  
CAPT James W. Calhoun ◽  
CDR Stephan P. Glenn ◽  
LCDR Lynn M. Henderson ◽  
Welcome T. Duncan ◽  
Cheryl Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Gulf Of Mexico ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
State Agencies ◽  
Significant Shift ◽  
Aerial Application ◽  
Gulf Region ◽  
Response Team ◽  
Response Method ◽  
Spilled Oil

ABSTRACT To minimize the environmental damage caused by catastrophic oil spills, the response community must work together to keep spilled oil from impacting sensitive areas and natural resources. Since no response method is 100% effective, it is essential to consider the use of all available cleanup methods simultaneously. Preapproval for the use of dispersants by on-scene coordinators (OSCs) is necessary to maximize the benefits of dispersant application in a major coastal oil spill, and such preapproval is the responsibility of federal and state agencies. Over the past several years, the petrochemical industry, the response community, and the Region VI Regional Response Team (RRT VI)1 have studied the efficacy of various cleanup technologies. On the basis of their findings, in January 1995 RRT VI gave OSCs authority to use dispersants off the coasts of Texas and Louisiana under specific conditions. This was a significant shift from past philosophies, under which OSCs relied almost exclusively on mechanical recovery methods. Concurrently, industry has developed reliable and dedicated resources for the aerial application of dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico and has strategically located stockpiles of dispersants throughout the Gulf region. Delivery aircraft and trained controllers have been retained by industry to maintain a readiness and response posture that will maximize the effectiveness of an aerial application.

scholarly journals Cultural Resources Intensive Pedestrian Survey within the Dayton Loop Pipeline Project, Harris and Liberty Counties, Texas

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Scott ◽  
Amanda Kloepfer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Historic Preservation ◽  
United States Army ◽  
The United States ◽  
Army Corps ◽  
Cultural Resources ◽  
Army Corps Of Engineers ◽  
Corps Of Engineers ◽  
United States Army Corps ◽  
National Historic Preservation Act

Gray & Pape, Inc., of Houston, Texas, conducted an intensive pedestrian cultural resources survey of jurisdictional portions of survey corridor within a proposed pipeline alignment measuring a total of approximately 30 kilometers (18.5 miles) located in Harris and Liberty Counties, Texas. The pipeline route is on privately-owned property; therefore, a Texas Antiquities Permit was not required prior to survey. In total, the surveyed property totals approximately 2.8 hectares (7 acres) which defines the Area of Potential Effects. The goals of the survey were to establish whether or not previously unidentified archaeological resources were located within the project area, also defined as the project’s Area of Potential Effects, and whether the pipeline alignment would affect any previously identified cultural resources. The lead agency for the project has been identified as the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Galveston District. The procedures to be followed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to fulfill the requirements set forth in the National Historic Preservation Act, other applicable historic preservation laws, and Presidential directives as they relate to the regulatory program of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (33 CFR Parts 320-334) are articulated in the Regulatory Program of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, Part 325 -Processing of Department of the Army Permits, Appendix C -Procedures for the Protection of Historic Properties. All fieldwork and reporting activities were completed following accepted standards set forth by the Texas Historical Commission and the Council of Texas Archeologists and in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Fieldwork took place in March 2019 and required 32 work hours to complete. Field investigation consisted of intensive pedestrian inspection, subsurface shovel testing, photographic documentation, and mapping. A total of 20 shovel tests were excavated, of which none were positive for buried cultural materials. No historic structures were identified as a result of survey. Based on the results of the survey, Gray & Pape, Inc. recommends that no further cultural resources work be required and that the project be cleared to proceed as currently planned.

Industry and Government Roles in Addressing Historic Properties in Oil Spill Response: Lessons Learned From A Recent Exercise and Incidents

2001 ◽  
Vol 2001 (1) ◽  
pp. 693-697
Author(s):  
Tina M. Toriello ◽  
Jan Thorman ◽  
Pamela Bergmann ◽  
Richard Waldbauer
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Response ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Hazardous Substances ◽  
Hazardous Substance ◽  
National Response ◽  
Response Team ◽  
Oil Spill Response

ABSTRACT This paper focuses on industry and government roles for addressing historic properties during oil spill response. In 1997, the National Response Team (NRT) developed a Programmatic Agreement on Protection of Historic Properties during Emergency Response under the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (PA) (National Response Team, 1997). At the 1999 International Oil Spill Conference (IOSC), U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) representatives discussed the development and implementation of the PA, which is intended to ensure that historic properties are appropriately taken into account during the planning for and conducting of emergency response to oil spills and hazardous substance releases. Following the 1999 IOSC, DOI and Chevron representatives began a dialog regarding industry and government roles under the PA. Chevron invited the DOI representatives to participate in an October 1999 large-scale, industry-led spill exercise; a precedent-setting drill that included historic properties protection as a key objective. This 2001 paper focuses on how industry and government have worked together to protect historic properties, government roles in PA implementation, and lessons learned. As an example of what industry can do to support the protection of historic properties during planning and response activities, this paper describes Chevron's Historic Properties Program, a program managed under its emergency spill response environmental functional team (EFT). A discussion of lessons learned focuses on the need for clear definition of industry and government roles, and the benefits of building a foundation of cooperation between industry and government to protect historic properties. Of particular importance is the inclusion of historic properties in all aspects of oil spill preparedness and response, including planning, drills, training, and response organization structure and staffing. Experience from incident response in Alaska has shown that the PA assists Federal On-Scene Coordinators (FOSCs) and responsible parties, while also protecting historic properties, when the FOSC is prepared to implement the PA promptly and effectively.

scholarly journals Beyond Data Recovery: Developing Digital Information Systems for Cultural Resources in the Online Era

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lance K. Wollwage ◽  
Allyson Brooks ◽  
Rob Smith ◽  
Morgan McLemore ◽  
Annie Strader ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Information System ◽  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Data Recovery ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Cultural Resources ◽  
Digital Information ◽  
Washington State Department

ABSTRACTFor historic property types such as archaeological sites and historic buildings, data recovery is often the main part of mitigation plans offered by federal agencies with undertakings that will destroy part or all of a cultural resource. In theory, by extracting important information before destruction, we recover some part of a historic resource's cultural value. In some situations, however, data recovery is impossible or otherwise undesirable, and “creative” or off-site mitigation measures are necessary to mitigate adverse effects. In such circumstances, the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation has accepted funding from federal agencies to create, implement, and enhance an online digital information system for cultural resources. This article describes the Washington Information System for Architectural and Archaeological Records Data (WISAARD) and provides an example of a federal agency funding WISAARD development as creative mitigation for the transfer of archaeological sites out of federal ownership. We discuss the benefits of such systems and address how their development meets preservation goals established by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.

History Beneath the Surface: Natural Gas Pipelines and the National Historic Preservation Act

2004 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Castaneda
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
Gas Pipelines ◽  
National Register ◽  
Natural Gas Pipelines ◽  
National Historic Preservation Act

This article is a case study of how natural gas pipelines have been treated under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). It examines three recent pipeline projects that involved determinations of eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places. In one case, a pipeline firm sought an exemption from Section 106 review, and this led to a proposed congressional amendment to the NHPA. In order to forestall a legislative amendment, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation issued an administrative exemption from Section 106 review for natural gas pipelines. This essay traces the process and events that led to this exemption.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document