It is important that, to the extent possible, the section 106 agreement be well drafted without these minor errors to avoid any potential confusion or misunderstanding. If the terms of an agreement have been met, but the agreement remains in effect due to a longer-term clause, the Agency should consider amending the agreement to amend its permanent clause, acknowledge the work done, and fulfill its responsibilities under section 106. The public should be informed of the state of play of the implementation of the Agreement, in accordance with the public interest in its implementation. Where appropriate, they may have the opportunity to comment to the federal agency on subsequent reviews under a section 106 agreement, particularly those related to the assessment of historic properties, the assessment of the impact on historic properties or the development of treatment measures. These provisions are particularly important in a PA that establishes an ongoing process for the implementation of one or more commitments. These guidelines are addressed to all Article 106 stakeholders. It is designed to assist federal agencies, state and tribal historic preservation officers, Native American tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, applicants, local governments, and other advisory parties in developing clear, concise, and comprehensive Memoranda of Understanding (MOAs) and Programmatic Agreements (PAs) under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). It will also assist federal organizations and those they consult through the section 106 process to create, implement, monitor, amend and terminate these agreements. Using this guide can help minimize disputes over agreed actions at all levels and save time better spent finding creative ways to avoid, minimize or mitigate negative impacts on historic properties.
An organization should consider occasionally submitting reports to the advisory parties on the implementation of an agreement (see 36 CFR § 800.6(c)(4)). In some agreements, such as program RFPs, regular and regular reporting may be more relevant and important. The timing, content, structure and distribution of reports can be negotiated when preparing an agreement. There is no one-size-fits-all approach to reporting; The Agency should consider how the information can be used and how best to present it to ensure that the report is as beneficial as possible. The parties should consider whether the report should serve as a follow-up mechanism for the implementation of an agreement or provide quality control in a final report after an agreement has been concluded. The report should openly and honestly identify any implementation issues and, if necessary, discuss the possibility of amending the agreement to address these challenges. In some cases, a meeting between the parties to the consultation may replace a report or be used to follow-up, support or discuss a report. SHPO/THPO: The SHPO/THPO or his/her agent is usually the person signing the agreement on behalf of the SHPO office or THPO. If the current obligation of an agreement occurs on historic lands on tribal lands or interferes with tribal lands, and there is no designated THPO under Section 101(d)(2) of the NHPA (54 U.S.C.
§ 302702), a Tribal Designated Agent must sign the agreement as a signatory in addition to the SHPO. To sign an agreement, the federal agency and the SHPO/THPO (and the ACHP if participating, and in all program PAs) sign and date the agreement. Once signed, the agreement is executed. The federal agency can obtain signatures from all invited signatories and corresponding parties, but such an agreement has already been signed and is in effect. In accordance with 36 CFR § 800.6 (b) (1) (iv), the head of the agency must provide the ACHP with a copy of the signed agreement and the documents referred to in 36 CFR § 800.11 (f) before approving the undertaking. The ACHP does not need to obtain an original copy of the agreement; a scanned PDF or postal copy is sufficient, provided that the text, all signatures and attachments (e.g. attachments, attachments – possibly in colour) are clear. The representative of the Agency should also send copies of the fully implemented agreement to all consultative parties. The modes of agreement are suitable for recording the agreed resolution for a particular entity with a defined beginning and end when negative effects are understood. RFPs, on the other hand, are appropriate for multiple or complex federal entities where 1) impacts on historic real property cannot be fully determined in advance, 2) federal organizations` programs, 3) agencies` day-to-day management activities, or 4) better align the standard section 106 process with the organization`s management or decision-making.
ACHP: If the ACHP participates in the consultation on the development of the agreement, it also signs the Memorandum of Understanding or the PA as a signatory. When the ACHP participates in consultations, the Executive Director of the ACHP is generally the person who signs the agreement on behalf of the ACHP. In certain situations, the President of the BAHP may sign the agreement for the BAHP.
