Section 106 (Other Keyword)

1-25 (27 Records)

Addressing Anthropogenic Safety Concerns in the Archeological Workplace: A Case Study (2015)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Steven Katz. Addison Kimmel.

The changing nature of contract and academic archaeology has led to new safety challenges that cannot be addressed simply through adherence to OSHA regulations. In this paper we move beyond the still-relevant environmental safety challenges that were the focus of earlier work on archaeology and workplace safety, and examine anthropogenic safety issues that can commonly arise during fieldwork. We address issues such as potential theft, assault, harassment, uncontrolled animals, as well as the...


Archaeological Landscapes and Districts and Section 106 of the NHPA - Examples from California (2015)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Jessica Tudor.

Archaeological sites have traditionally been considered only as potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D (data potential) of the NRHP, but professionals in the field of Cultural Resources Management have begun to push for archaeological sites to be considered under Criteria A (significant events), B (significant people), and C (artistic value or method of construction) as well. Furthermore, archaeological sites are increasingly considered...


Bureau of Indian Affairs Archaeology Program in Alaska (1989)
DOCUMENT Citation Only S. Neal Crozier.

This resource is a citation record only, the Center for Digital Antiquity does not have a copy of this document. The information in this record has been migrated into tDAR from the National Archaeological Database Reports Module (NADB-R) and updated. Most NADB-R records consist of a document citation and other metadata but do not have the documents themselves uploaded. If you have a digital copy of the document and would like to have it curated in tDAR, please contact us at comments@tdar.org.


Changing conceptions of significance, importance, and value—moving beyond the "research exception" in Section 106 archaeology (2016)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Tom McCulloch.

Until the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation revised its regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act in 2000, an undertaking that would destroy all or parts of a National Register listed or eligible archaeological site could be considered to not adversely affect the site if data recovery was carried out beforehand. This in spite of the fact that generally only a small percentage of the site was usually excavated, and the rest subsequently destroyed. This...


Circumstance and Scale in After-the-Fact Applications: Maximizing Fair and Equitable Compliance for Stakeholders through Mitigation (2017)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Trent Stockton.

Recent efforts by the Corps of Engineers New Orleans District in achieving compliance with Federal laws and regulations within the Regulatory Program are reviewed. Special emphasis is given to the role(s) of stakeholders in the Section 106 process in reviewing after-the-fact applications. The role mitigation in these scenarios is also reviewed and discussed.


Collaborative Pfforts to Preserve Los Angeles'History: Saving The Campo Santo (2015)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Joseph Ontiveros. Desiree Martinez.

In October 2010, human remains were uncovered during the development of Los Angeles County land leased to the La Plaza De Cultura y Artes located in the heart of Los Angeles, California. The remains, which were within the well-known Camp Santo historic cemetery, were that of Los Pobladores, Native Americans, indigenous Mexicans, and the Gente de Razon, the very people who founded and built the Pueblo of Los Angeles during the early and mid 1800's. Over 90 individuals were removed, unbeknownst to...


Cultural Resource Protection Responsibilities: On Being a Federal Archeologist (2015)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Caven Clark.

Archeologists who have chosen a career with a Federal agency have many responsibilities that are different than those of academics, chief among which is to be the subject matter expert and/or champion/advocate for the protection of the non-renewable resource. It’s not a question of which is better, more relevant, or more important, but that we as Federal archeologists have a compelling need to be conversant in cultural resource law, to assist in investigations, and educate our peers, our...


Divergent Paths: Reflections on Section 106 and the Archaeology of Nostalgia (2018)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Thomas E. Emerson. Robert F. Mazrim. Duane E. Esarey.

For nearly half-a-century Illinois historical archaeologists have been buffeted by changing disciplinary goals, compliance directives, and academic fluxes. Early efforts in the 1920-50s at Lincoln’s New Salem, French Colonial sites, and pioneer sites were classic "handmaidens to history" designed to materialize significant historic events.  The focus shifted dramatically with the NHPA and processualistHistoric emphasis in Criteria D on significance resting solely on material remains.  Given the...


Final Report of a Phase IA Cultural Resources Survey of the Savan Gut Flood Control Project, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands (1981)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Elizabeth Righter. R. Mitchell.

This resource is a citation record only, the Center for Digital Antiquity does not have a copy of this document. The information in this record has been migrated into tDAR from the National Archaeological Database Reports Module (NADB-R) and updated. Most NADB-R records consist of a document citation and other metadata but do not have the documents themselves uploaded. If you have a digital copy of the document and would like to have it curated in tDAR, please contact us at comments@tdar.org.


In the Shadow of the Capitol – Stateless and Compliant: 50 Years of the NHPA in Washington, D.C. (2016)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Ruth Trocolli.

Despite the District of Columbia’s small size (69 sq. miles), the proportion of property in federal ownership, about 25%, results in a large number of projects annually subject to Section 106 review. Every federal agency, quasi-federal agency, and non-federal entity using federal funds enters 106 consultation, even those without in-house preservation professionals to guide them. Agencies without archaeologists rely on the District’s archaeologist for expertise and guidance. Mitigation has...


Keepers of the Treasures Protecting Historic Properties and Cultural Traditions on Indian Lands (1990)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Patricia L. Parker. David M. Banks.

This resource is a citation record only, the Center for Digital Antiquity does not have a copy of this document. The information in this record has been migrated into tDAR from the National Archaeological Database Reports Module (NADB-R) and updated. Most NADB-R records consist of a document citation and other metadata but do not have the documents themselves uploaded. If you have a digital copy of the document and would like to have it curated in tDAR, please contact us at comments@tdar.org.


Lessons Learned: When the Public Speaks Out (2016)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Leslie B. Kirchler-Owen.

Public involvement is a critical aspect of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) evaluations, yet many times consultation with the public is treated as an afterthought. Achieving consensus and ensuring stakeholders are afforded the opportunity to provide meaningful input requires adequate time and resources. The lack of an effective program may create risk to achieving project goals. So, how does one engage the public? How can valuable input be solicited? Who are the...


Long Days Journey into Night, Government to Government Consultation under Section 106, on the Navajo Nation (2017)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Ronald Maldonado.

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended requires that the Federal Agencies consult with American Indian Tribes on a Government to Government basis. There are numerous guidelines and trainings on how this should be accomplished under the law, but these do not consider the Tribal point of view. American Indian Tribes are sovereign Nations and expect to be treated as such, expecting long term relationships with Federal Agencies. During my tenure with the Navajo...


Mitigating the Sacred? Examining the Role of Native American Associative Values in Resolving Adverse Effect (2015)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Theresa Pasqual. Kurt Dongoske.

Under federal historic preservation legislation, mitigating adverse effects to archaeological sites commonly involves treating the site as a materialistic entity from which scientific information about the past is retrieved through systematic data recovery. Native American associative values associated with archaeological sites that view these places as sacred because they are home of ancestors that exhibit physical affirmations of oral histories and collective cultural identities are rarely...


Models for Anthropological Practice and For Training Practitioners (1985)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Robert T. Trotter.

This resource is a citation record only, the Center for Digital Antiquity does not have a copy of this document. The information in this record has been migrated into tDAR from the National Archaeological Database Reports Module (NADB-R) and updated. Most NADB-R records consist of a document citation and other metadata but do not have the documents themselves uploaded. If you have a digital copy of the document and would like to have it curated in tDAR, please contact us at comments@tdar.org.


A New View of the Desert - The Permian Basin Programmatic Agreement Research Program in Southeastern New Mexico (2015)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Martin Stein.

The research program described in this paper is providing much needed new information for a portion of southeastern New Mexico that was previously understudied. The program is funded by an innovative approach to Section 106 compliance which trades redundant survey information for monetary contributions to a dedicated research account. The Permian Basin Programmatic Agreement (PA) has been in effect for six years. The purpose of the PA (formerly the Permian Basin Memorandum of Agreement or MOA)...


Pragmatism in Practice: Advocacy, ethics, and impediments in compliance (2016)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Shannon Dunn.

The practice of “compliance archaeology” within existing structures requires practitioners to constantly weigh ideals against practicalities. What we think should be done, and how, is often limited by shortfalls in budgets, labor, time, and access. It is evident that few cultural resource stewards or managers have the resources they need to sufficiently address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, much less compliance with any other legislation, guideline,...


Public Engagement and Compliance Archaeology in a Museum Setting (2015)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Christina Rieth.

Public engagement in compliance archaeology is inherent in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act as well as many state historic preservation ordinances. Engagement in publically funded projects allows those who pay for the research to share in the project results but also provide information as stakeholders of the past. Although such regulations provide for public engagement, the process and type of involvement varies by project, geographic area, and archaeological resource. This...


Report on Field Investigations in the Big Spring Developed Area in Advance of Installation of a Buried Power Cable to Serve Building 420, Ozark National Scenic Riverways, Carter, Missouri (2002)
DOCUMENT Full-Text James E. Price.

During a thunderstorm on Thursday, July 26, 2001, a major lightning strike hit near Big Spring causing a major power outage to the maintenance buildings and other structures to the south of the Big Spring discharge branch. All major lines were replaced following that event but recently the buried cable that serves Building 420 failed and must be replaced. James E. Price was instructed to provide Section 106 Clearance for the project and fieldwork ensued which is reported herein. The Big...


Role of Cultural Resources Management in a Changing Legislative Environment (1988)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Rona S. Mazer. Celia B. Orgel.

This resource is a citation record only, the Center for Digital Antiquity does not have a copy of this document. The information in this record has been migrated into tDAR from the National Archaeological Database Reports Module (NADB-R) and updated. Most NADB-R records consist of a document citation and other metadata but do not have the documents themselves uploaded. If you have a digital copy of the document and would like to have it curated in tDAR, please contact us at comments@tdar.org.


Section 106 @ Fifty – A Look Back and A Glimpse Ahead (2016)
DOCUMENT Citation Only J Joseph.

My first job in cultural resource management was in 1976, the American bicentennial. While I thus missed the first decade of the National Historic Preservation Act and Section 106, I have been actively engaged since. The first fifty years of Section 106 resulted in profound changes to the field of archaeology. From the growth of the cultural resource industry and private sector cultural resource management firms; to NAGPRA and the treatment of human remains; to the creation of Tribal Historic...


Section 106 Contributions to Urban Archaeology: What Was Lost is Now Found (2016)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Elizabeth Crowell.

When improvements were proposed for the Whitehurst Freeway in Washington, DC, existing conditions would not have recommended this heavily urbanized project area for a research-oriented archaeological investigation. The area was traversed by elevated freeway ramps and major roadways. As well, it had been the site of a 20th century school and 19th and 20th century industrial use.  Yet, because of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, archaeological investigations led to the...


Section 106 Mitigation in Memoradum of Agreements: A View From the Corps (2017)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Lance Lundquist. Chris Jenkins.

What constitutes acceptable Section 106 mitigation to resolve adverse effects under the National Historic Preservation Act? Stipulations in a Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) need to be enforceable, with sufficient specificity and accountability for an Agency to monitor compliance. Are there limits to what is possible in Stipulations in Section 106 MOAs? This paper uses examples from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Regulatory Program-permitted projects to explore the concept and...


Section 106 Review for Effects of Special Project RC1-89 (Shore Protection) (1995)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Design & Delineation. Archaeological Services Consultants, Inc..

This resource is a citation record only, the Center for Digital Antiquity does not have a copy of this document. The information in this record has been migrated into tDAR from the National Archaeological Database Reports Module (NADB-R) and updated. Most NADB-R records consist of a document citation and other metadata but do not have the documents themselves uploaded. If you have a digital copy of the document and would like to have it curated in tDAR, please contact us at comments@tdar.org.


Survey intervals and the world of Section 106: Eligible site size as a factor in survey design (2017)
DOCUMENT Citation Only Brandon Gabler.

Cultural resources management companies are routinely caught between a proverbial rock and a hard place in NHPA Section 106 compliance projects. On one hand, SHPOs prefer to evaluate a project based on the results of 100-percent survey at their preferred survey interval, often requiring shovel testing at 15-meter intervals or closer (especially in the eastern US, where surface visibility is typically low), in order to identify all archaeological sites, whether they end up eligible for the NRHP...