Jump to main content.

Notice of Availability of the Proposed Army Alternate Procedures Regarding the Protection of Army Historic Properties and Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact for the Adoption of the Army Alternate Procedures

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 [Federal Register: May 23, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 100)]
[Notices]
[Page 28427-28428]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23my01-44]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
 
Notice of Availability of the Proposed Army Alternate Procedures 
Regarding the Protection of Army Historic Properties and Environmental 
Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact for the Adoption of the 
Army Alternate Procedures

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of availability.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This announces the availability of the Army Alternate 
Procedures (AAP) to 36 CFR Part 800: Protection of Army Historic 
Properties and Environmental Assessment (EA)/Finding of No Significant 
Impact (FNSI) for the adoption of the AAP. The Army intends to sign the 
FONSI unless public comments identify significant impacts or issues 
that have not been considered. The AAP is an optional procedure that an 
installation may choose to adopt to satisfy compliance with Section 106 
of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) in lieu of the 
existing regulations set forth in the Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation's (Council) regulations at 36 CFR Part 800. The Army and 
the Council have consulted extensively with State Historic Preservation 
Officers, Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, and the 
National Trust for Historic Preservation throughout the development of 
the AAP. The EA gives full consideration and adoption of alternate 
procedures as the proposed action, and two reasonable alternatives to 
the proposed action.

DATES: Submit comments on or before June 22, 2001.

ADDRESSES: To obtain copies of the proposed AAP, the EA, and FONSI, 
contact the U.S. Army Environmental Center, ATTN: SFIM-AEC-PA (Joe 
Ricci), Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5401.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Chuck Wright at (703) 693-0675.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action is the adoption of the 
proposed AAP for compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA and for 
comprehensive management and preservation of historic properties on 
lands owned or controlled by the Department of the Army. The AAP, once 
adopted, would stand in place of the project-by-project review 
procedures set forth in 36 CFR Part 800. The AAP's build upon and rely 
on the internal policy requirement for installations to prepare 
Integrated Cultural Resource Management Plans in accordance with Army 
Regulation 200-4, Cultural Resources Management, as implemented by more 
detailed guidance in Department of the Army Pamphlet 200-4. The AAP's 
would authorize Army installation commanders to develop Historic 
Property Components (HPC) to the installation's Integrated Cultural 
Resources Management Plan (ICRMP). Once certified by the Council, the 
HPC would serve as the installation's Section 106 compliance agreement 
for a five (5) year period. The installation's Section 106 compliance 
responsibilities would be met through implementation of the HPC rather 
than case-by-case, formalized, external review of individual 
undertakings as presently required by 36 CFR Part 800. Installations 
choosing not to develop certified HPC's would continue to review 
undertakings in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800.
    The EA considered, evaluated and assessed alternatives: (a) The No 
Action Alternative (continued project-by-project review under 36 CFR 
Part 800); (b) The Programmatic Agreement (PA) Alternative (adoption of 
an agency policy encouraging the use of PA's under existing regulations 
to implement the historic preservation portions of an installation's 
ICRMP); and (c) the proposed action alternative (adoption of the 
AAP's). Consideration of the alternatives analyzed in the EA leads to 
the Army's decision to adopt the AAP's. The No Action Alternative would 
allow a continued ad-hoc approach to compliance with Section 106 and 
management of historic properties. With the anticipated growth in the 
Army's historic properties inventory, continued review of undertakings 
on a case-by-case basis will likely remain inefficient and lead to 
increased program costs. The PA Alternative better meets the stated 
purpose and need since it would provide a programmatic basis for 
Section 106 compliance, relying on an installation's ICRMP. The Army's 
past experience with PA's, however, is that they have not been 
effective in resolving adverse effects, and, generally result in 
reversion to case-by-case, formalized, external review when such 
effects are identified. The proposed action (i.e., AAP's) more squarely 
meets the stated purpose and need for action. The AAP's) more squarely 
meets the stated purpose and need for action. The AAP's build on the 
present management approach established by Army Regulation 200-4 and 
leverage the existing Army historic properties management policy, 
programs and participants. Management in this manner will facilitate 
overall Army

[[Page 28428]]

compliance with Section 106; and, will otherwise provide the agency 
with the ability to act as a more responsible steward for historic 
properties entrusted to its care.
    Copies of the AAP, EA and FONSI can also be found on the Council's 
web site at www.achp.gov/army.html.

    Dated: May 17, 2001.
Raymond J. Fatz,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army, (Environment, Safety, and 
Occupational Health) OASA(I&E).
[FR Doc. 01-13008 Filed 5-22-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-M

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.