SHiP can help others wade through the often-bewildering environmental compliance process. We understand the challenges of solving complex compliance issues and are committed to helping our partner organizations achieve the delicate balance between meeting regulatory requirements and advancing projects in a timely manner.
Backed by our intimate understanding of federal, state, and local regulatory processes and rooted in our positive relationships with many state and local agencies in Ohio, SHiP can effectively guide others in meeting cultural resource requirements and can help develop strategies that best meet the needs of the project. Recognizing the importance of timely and cost-effective approaches, SHiP prioritizes proactively working with state and local departments and agencies and the State Historic Preservation Office to develop innovative solutions that promote the success of your project.
Most importantly, we understand that cultural resource issues are just one aspect of the larger environmental compliance and project development process and that responsiveness, timeliness, and completing the project right the first time are critical to meeting aggressive schedules and budgets. Our areas of proficiency include:
- Archaeological Resources Protection Act
- Clean Water Act (404 permits)
- Department of Transportation Act (Section 4(f))
- National Environmental Policy Act
- National Historic Preservation Act
- Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Appendix C
Most compliance-related cultural resource projects involve Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (NHPA), which requires all federal agencies to take into account the effects of their actions on properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). To trigger Section 106, a project must use either federal funding or permitting (thus defined as an undertaking) and have the potential to have an effect on cultural resources. Such undertakings include, for example, funding for highway construction and permitting for projects such as communications towers and pipelines.
Generally speaking, the Section 106 process seeks to accommodate historic preservation concerns with the needs of federal undertakings by requiring federal agencies to evaluate the potential consequences of their actions on historic properties. This process is partly dependent upon feedback and consultation, and requires agencies to give the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs)/ Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs), and the public an opportunity to comment on projects and their potential effects on historic properties. Section 106 does not mandate an outcome and does not guarantee the preservation of historic properties. Instead, it is intended to find a balance between project activities and the historic environment.
For more information on the Section 106 process, see the ACHP’s A Citizen’s Guide to Section 106 Review.