TE 10 - Integrated Cultural Resources Management PlanDRAFT.pdf

INTEGRATED CULTURAL RESOURCES

MANAGEMENT PLAN

U.S. ARMY GARRISON ALASKA

2020 - 2025

DRAFT

This page left intentionally blank.

Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan for U.S. Army Garrison Alaska, 2020-2025

Approval

This Integrated Cultural Resources Management Plan meets the requirements for ICRMPs set forth in Department of Defense Instruction 4715.16, Cultural Resources Program, and Army Regulation 200-1, Environmental Protection and Enhancement.

For USAG Alaska:

This page left intentionally blank.

USAG Alaska 2020-2025 i

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................. I LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................III LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................III EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... IV

1 INTRODUCTION

ICRMP Purpose and Organization Changes from the Previous ICRMP Update and Implementation of the ICRMP Mission

U.S. Army Alaska Mission U.S. Army Garrison Alaska Mission U.S. Army Garrison Greely Mission

Management and Responsibilities Partnerships

Alaska Native Tribal Partners Other Partners

Statutes and Regulations Applicable Federal Laws Curation of Federally Owned and Administered Archaeological Collections Executive Orders, Presidential Memoranda, and DoD Issuances Army Regulations and Policy Standards and Guidelines Overlapping Authorities

2 HISTORICAL AND GEOGRAPHIC SETTING

Infrastructure

Training Areas Ranges / Courses

Prehistoric Context Historic Context

Military History Mission Activities, Organizations and Programs that May Affect Cultural Resources ..39

Training Recreation Installation Management Programs Organizations

3 CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY

Archaeology Historic Buildings and Structures Properties of Traditional Religious and Cultural Significance Documentation of Cultural Resources

Historic Context Reports Archaeology Reports Public Outreach Publications Building Documentation

4 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Overall Goals

Archaeological Resources Sacred Sites and Traditional Cultural Properties ii

Historic Buildings, Structures, and Objects Planning Objectives

5 MANAGEMENT PLAN

Archaeological Resource Protection Act Procedures National Historic Preservation Act’s Section 110 Procedures

Minimizing Harm to National Historic Landmarks National Historic Preservation Act’s Section 106 Procedures

Identifying Undertakings Streamlined Undertakings Defining the Area of Potential Effect Identifying Cultural Resources Evaluating Eligibility Assessing Effects Treatment of Adverse Effects

Procedures for the National Historic Landmark Development of Educational Materials and Interpretation Post Review and Unanticipated Discoveries Emergency Actions Archaeological Site Monitoring, Survey, and Evaluation Methods

Principal Investigator Qualifications Minimum Standards Five Year Work Plan

Paleontological Resources Responsibility Procedures

Historic Buildings Maintenance and Assessment Current Maintenance Procedures Future Plans for Assessment of Historic Buildings

Shared Public Data Curation of Artifacts Capacity Building for Alaska Native Tribes Incorporating Traditional Knowledge into Cultural Resources Management

Identifying Traditional Knowledge Traditional Knowledge and its Importance for Historic Properties Management ...82 Confidentiality

6 IMPLEMENTING THE ICRMP

Cultural Resources Implementation Goals and Objectives Reporting Agreements NHPA Section 106 Agreements Organizational Enhancement, Roles, and Responsibilities

Cultural Resource Organization Staffing Qualifications

Coordination Training

Outreach Financial Management and Funding

Environmental Funding Facilities Funding Budgeting iii

Contracting Command Support

Appendix A. Glossary of Commonly Used Terms Appendix B. Commonly Used Acronyms Appendix C. Archaeological Sites Inventory Appendix D. Historic Buildings and Structures Inventory Appendix E. Ladd Field NHL Nomination (Re-evaluation) Appendix F. Reports on USAG Alaska-Managed Lands Appendix G. Summary of National Register of Historic Places Criteria Appendix H. Five-Year Plans for Site Monitoring, Survey, and Evaluation Appendix I. O&M PA Streamlined Review Process Criteria Appendix J. Government-to-Government Consultation and Coordination Appendix K. Citations

List of Figures

Figure 1. Fort Wainwright, Fort Greely, and associated training lands Figure 2. Ladd Field NHL and Ladd Air Force Base Cold War HD Figure 3. Fort Greely Cold War Historic District Figure 4. Planning Branch Organizational Chart Figure 5. Year 1 (2019) archaeological survey plan Figure 6. Year 2 (2020) archaeological survey plan Figure 7. Year 3 (2021) archaeological survey plan Figure 8. Year 4 (2022) archaeological survey plan

List of Tables

Table 1. Archaeological Districts – USAG Alaska-managed Table 2. Archaeological Sites: Eligible or Not Yet Evaluated – USAG Alaska-managed Table 3. Archaeological Sites: Eligible or Not Yet Evaluated – USAG Greely-managed Table 4. Contributing resources – Ladd Field National Historic Landmark Table 5. Contributing resources – Ladd Air Force Base Cold War Historic District Table 6. Contributing resources – Fort Greely Cold War Historic District Table 7. Individually eligible buildings and structures Table 8. Five-year site monitoring plan Table 9. Five-year site evaluation plan iv

Executive Summary

The mission of U.S. Army Garrison Alaska (USAG Alaska) is to integrate resources and deliver installation services to enable readiness of Army forces in Alaska while enhancing the quality of life for Soldiers, Families, and the community. The USAG Alaska provides training areas for active duty military personnel from all branches of service, as well as National Guard and Reserve units. Fort Wainwright—outside Fairbanks, Alaska—is home to units of the U.S. Army Alaska (USARAK) and tenant organizations including Medical Activity-Alaska (MEDDAC), the Bureau of Land Management Alaska Fire Service, Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA), Army and Air Forces Exchange Service (AAFES), Doyon Utilities, North Haven Communities, Logistics Readiness Center, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).

Following a garrison restructuring, some installation support activities for U.S. Army Garrison Greely (USAG Greely) will be performed by Fort Wainwright personnel and vice versa for Donnelly Training Area activities. Fort Greely—outside Delta Junction, Alaska—is home to the Space and Missile Defense Command and tenant organizations including 49th Missile Defense Battalion, Missile Defense Agency, Cold Regions Test Center, MEDDAC, Army Materiel Command, 59th Signal Battalion, USARAK, USACE, AAFES, DeCA, North Haven Communities, Doyon Utilities, and the Logistics Readiness Center. The primary mission of the USAG Greely is to integrate resources and deliver installation services to enable the readiness of U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command and other mission partners while sustaining and enhancing the quality of life for Soldiers, Families, and Civilians.

Army Regulation (AR) 200-1, Environmental Protection and Enhancement, specifies Army policy for cultural resources management including the development of integrated cultural resources management plans for planning purposes. The Installation Management Command (IMCOM) directs and assists its installations with Cultural Resources Management Programs consistent with AR 200-1. The Garrison Commander has direct responsibility for establishing an installation’s Cultural Resources Management Program by means of a plan that successfully integrates cultural resources management within the process of achieving daily mission objectives.

Additionally the Garrison Commander has responsibility for appointing, by letter, an individual to serve as the Cultural Resources Manager.

This document follows the requirements for the preparation of an Integrated Cultural Resource Management Plan (ICRMP) as defined in AR 200-1. While not a decision-making document, this plan provides the Garrison Commander and those responsible for implementing the Commander’s decisions with the data needed for informed decision-making regarding the treatment of cultural resources managed by the USAG Alaska. As a result, USAG Alaska personnel involved in planning activities are the intended audience for this document. This includes, in particular, the Cultural Resources Manager who is the individual responsible for the day-to-day management of cultural resources on the USAG Alaska-managed lands.

v

The ICRMP contains a set of policies that will enable the USAG Alaska to meet its legal responsibilities for the management of Forts Wainwright’s and Greely’s cultural resources. This ICRMP applies to all lands and properties managed by the USAG Alaska, including but not limited to Main Post (Fort Wainwright), Main Post (Fort Greely), Yukon Training Area, Tanana Flats Training Area, Donnelly Training Area, Gerstle River Training Area, Black Rapids Training Area, Whistler Creek Training Area, Whittier Terminal, Seward Recreation Area, Haines Fuel Terminal, Tok Fuel Terminal, and Sears Creek Pump Station.

Included in this document is a five-year plan that outlines goals that would benefit the management of cultural resources at Forts Wainwright and Greely. These goals, listed below, should be considered as recommendations and not as requirements.

• Ensure good stewardship of historic properties by supporting our current agreements and facilitating future agreements.

• Educate and reach out to the installation community and improve understanding of cultural resources and their management.

• Maintain compliance with applicable cultural resource laws and regulations.

• Implement surveys as needed and evaluate archaeological sites and buildings coming of age in conjunction with potential mission activities and installation development.

• Monitor the condition of and maintenance needs of historic properties.

• Consult Alaska Native tribal governments with a customary and/or historical association with Army-managed lands.

[NOTE: In hopes of this remaining a living management document, strikethrough and red text connote edits made by the installation CRM to correct data deficiencies discovered following ICRMP signature. These have only been made when they will not result in substantive changes to policy or procedure.]

1 Introduction

Installations are required to create and implement an ICRMP according to Army Regulation (AR) 200-1. An ICRMP is intended to serve as the key planning tool and for an installation’s Cultural Resources Management Program, ensuring that activities conducted as part of the installation mission address cultural resource management issues, planning and resourcing priorities, and legal compliance requirements. The ICRMP is also designed to serve as a component of the installation’s overall planning, to complement other plans such as the Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan and the Real Property Master Plan, and to provide the Garrison Commander with the information necessary to make informed decisions regarding the cultural resources under his or her control. The policies, protocols, and background information presented here are designed to ensure that the installation and its decision-makers execute professionally- and legally-sound stewardship of the cultural resources. The intent is that this stewardship occur in tandem with the military mission, ensuring that installation lands remain available and in good condition for future training use and Soldier readiness.

ICRMP Purpose and Organization

The primary purpose of this ICRMP is to establish, document, and provide for review cultural resources goals, objectives, and policies that the USAG Alaska will use to manage historic properties located within the boundaries of lands under its jurisdiction.

All the activities programmed for ICRMP implementation measure, maintain, protect, and enhance cultural resources and associated historic properties. It is the intent of the Department of Defense (DoD) to clearly and openly express these management ideals and actions to the public through this ICRMP. The secondary purpose of this ICRMP is to guide the USAG Alaska cultural resources managers and personnel in their decision-making regarding management of historic properties on USAG Alaska-managed lands and the implementation of proposed cultural resource projects. This document follows the recommendations for the preparation of an ICRMP as outlined in the DoD Instruction 4715.16. The ICRMP is organized as follows:

Introduction (Section 1) provides information regarding Army policy and mission, a summary of the major components of the plan, a listing of partnerships, and a brief review of cultural resources laws and regulations. Also included is a discussion of overlapping management responsibilities.

Historical and Geographic Context (Section 2) includes a description of the installation and its infrastructure. It also presents an analysis of the cultural landscape, which includes a discussion of the natural environment, an overview of the development of the installation (including historic and prehistoric contexts), its architectural resources, and historic landscape.

Cultural Resources Inventory (Section 3) provides a review of existing cultural resources including archaeological sites, paleontological sites, buildings, structures, objects, and traditional cultural properties. A summary of previous archaeological and architectural surveys, studies, and management plans is also provided. Potential cultural resources yet to be identified are discussed as well.

Future Requirements and Goals (Section 4) describes plans for the identification and prioritization actions required to implement goals and objectives of the ICRMP.

Management Plan (Section 5) addresses the cultural resources requirements for the management of the resources described in Section 3. This includes a discussion of the roles and responsibilities of staff, internal and external coordination procedures for Army activities that may directly or indirectly impact cultural resources, and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for cultural resources actions. This section also discusses public participation in the cultural resources compliance process, current public education efforts, and recommendations for future public education and outreach.

ICRMP Implementation (Section 6) describes how the USAG Alaska plans to implement the goals and objectives found within the ICRMP. Also, it describes how the ICRMP helps sustain the military mission. It also discusses the partnerships, contracts, and other organizational and funding elements important to the implementation of the

ICRMP.

Appendices (A through I) have been added to supplement the report sections presented in the body of the ICRMP. These include: (A) Glossary of Commonly Used Terms; (B) Commonly Used Acronyms; (C) Archaeological Sites Inventory; (D) Historic Buildings and Structures Inventory; (E) The Ladd Field NHL Nomination (Re-evaluation); (F) Reports on USAG Alaska-managed Lands; (G) Summary of National Register of Historic Places Criteria; (H) Five-Year Plans for Site Monitoring, Survey, and Evaluation;

(I) O&M PA Streamlined Review Process Criteria; (J) Government-to-Government and Consultation and Coordination; and (K) Citations.

Changes from the Previous ICRMP

Beginning in 2019, cultural resources management responsibilities for lands and properties under the stewardship of the USAG Alaska and USAG Greely will be consolidated at the USAG Alaska, utilizing personnel at both Forts Wainwright and Greely with oversight from personnel at Fort Wainwright. This ICRMP, likewise, presents consolidated management plans for both installations. Unless otherwise specifically stated, the use of USAG Alaska throughout this document is implied to be inclusive of USAG Greely.

The previous ICRMP for Fort Wainwright was completed in 2013. Since then, a number of new historic properties have been added or deleted. Since 2013, a re-evaluation of the Ladd Field National Historic Landmark (NHL) has been submitted to the National Park Service (NPS) with an anticipated boundary revision. Two buildings contributing to the NHL were demolished in 2014 and the southern boundary of this district has experienced infill of new construction. A correction is anticipated that will remove the contributing status of one building from the NHL, but it will be retained as contributing to the Ladd Air Force Base Cold War Historic District. One building individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) was determined no longer eligible in 2016. Finally, one structure previously determined not eligible for the National Register was determined eligible based on new research in 2018. Another eligible structure, the Bailey Bridge, is slated for demolition and consultation has begun for this process.

Fifty-one archaeological sites have been evaluated for eligibility for inclusion in the National Register since 2013. Twelve of those sites were determined eligible and thirty-nine were determined not eligible. The boundaries of four existing archaeological districts were reviewed and revised to be more inclusive and facilitate a more holistic approach to management of sites in those areas. Two new districts were established.

These districts, receiving concurrence from the Alaska State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), will be assessed to determine contributing versus non-contributing sites within each district.

A holistic plan of archaeological site monitoring, high-use area surveys, and site evaluations is included in this ICRMP. Sites determined eligible for or those yet to be determined eligible for inclusion on the National Register will be visited within a 5-year cycle, spread across all training areas. Sites visited each year will be relocated, monitored for condition, and photographed. Determinations of Eligibility (DOEs) will be done on a sampling of sites listed for that year’s monitoring plan or in areas near surveys being performed for range and garrison project development. Priority will be given to selected sites based on undertakings that might potentially affect the sites.

See section 5.8.3 and Appendix H for the comprehensive plan details.

A protocol for cultural resources inventory prior to forestry activity is also included in this ICRMP. It outlines when and how survey will occur in response to undertakings with the purpose of forestry management on lands previously unsurveyed.

The previous ICRMP for Fort Greely was completed in 2011.

Update and Implementation of the ICRMP

AR 200-1 directs that ICRMPs be re-evaluated periodically and updated if necessary.

In certain cases involving major changes such as mission change and realignment or closure determinations, the ICRMP should be re-evaluated prior to the five-year review point to determine if it still meets mission requirements or if it should be revised. Other events, such as the adoption of a Programmatic Agreement (PA), can also necessitate the revision of portions of the ICRMP prior to scheduled reviews.

An ICRMP is considered to be implemented if an installation:

• Actively requests, receives, and uses funds for high priority projects and activities.

• Ensures that sufficient numbers of professionally-trained cultural resources management personnel are available to perform the tasks required by the ICRMP.

• Coordinates annually with all internal and external cooperating offices.

• Documents specific ICRMP action accomplishments undertaken each year.

Cultural resources requirements defined as high priority are those projects and activities required to meet mission requirements in compliance with applicable cultural resources laws and regulations.

Not all projects listed in an ICRMP are high priority. The responsibilities of implementing an ICRMP are shared among those entities that use the land and manage facilities (e.g., trainers, facility managers) as well as those who ensure compliance and provide overall program oversight.

Mission

The United States Army must maintain its capability to put overwhelming land combat power on future battlefields and defeat potential enemies. Decisive victories depend on the Army’s ability to rapidly deploy, fight, sustain, and win with minimum casualties. As the DoD’s premiere land force, the Army relies on land to achieve its training and testing objectives and maintain force readiness. Force readiness depends on a high quality, realistic training environment and experience. Part of realistic training is creation of the battle environment where Soldiers train with their units, coordinating their efforts. This skill must be practiced on large-scale training areas and ranges with minimal restrictions to emulate the battlefield prior to going to war.

U.S. Army Alaska Mission

The mission of USARAK is to provide trained and ready forces in support of worldwide unified land operations; support the U.S. Pacific Command Theater Security Cooperation Program in order to contribute to a stable and secure operational environment; and, on order, execute the Joint Force Land Component Command functions in support of Homeland Defense and Defense Support of Civil Authorities in Alaska.

The units at Fort Wainwright which USARAK commands include the 1-25th Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT), Northern Warfare Training Center (NWTC), and 17th Combat Sustainment Support Battalion (CSSB). Other tenant organizations include the 1-25th Attack Reconnaissance Battalion (ARB), 1-52nd General Support Aviation Battalion (GSAB), Cold Regions Test Center (CRTC), Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL), and US Army Medical Department Activity

(MEDDAC).

U.S. Army Garrison Alaska Mission

The USAG Alaska’s mission is to integrate resources and deliver installation services to enable readiness for Army forces in Alaska while enhancing the quality of life for its Soldiers, Families, and community.

U.S. Army Garrison Greely Mission

The USAG Greely’s mission is to integrate resources and deliver installation services to enable the readiness of U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command and other mission partners while sustaining and enhancing the quality of life for its Soldiers, Families, and Civilians.

Management and Responsibilities

Department of Army personnel, at all levels, must ensure that mission requirements are carried out in harmony with statutory and regulatory requirements. Failure to fulfill these requirements could result in halting or delaying ongoing or proposed mission-essential projects, training and testing actions, and could deplete limited financial and staff resources. Proponents of Army actions should coordinate with the USAG Alaska Cultural Resources Management staff early in the planning stage of projects and activities to identify potential cultural resources compliance requirements. That being said, all management activities described in this ICRMP are subject to the availability of funding.

AR 200-1, Environmental Protection and Enhancement, outlines responsibilities with regard to cultural resources legislation for installations, Army commands, and supporting organizations. Specific responsibilities of the USAG Alaska Cultural Resources Program include:

• Develop, approve, and maintain an ICRMP.

• Inventory and evaluate cultural resources located on properties under USAG Alaska control and ownership.

• Protect and maintain eligible resources and promote their rehabilitation and adaptive reuse;

• Integrate preservation requirements with planning and management activities of the military mission.

• Cooperate with federal, state, and local agencies, Alaska Native tribes, and the public in cultural resources management.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Environment, Safety and Occupational Health) (DASA [ESOH]): The DASA (ESOH) is the Army's Federal Preservation Officer (FPO) pursuant to designation by the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations, Logistics, and Environment) on behalf of the Secretary of the Army. As the Federal Preservation Officer, the DASA (ESOH) is responsible for oversight of the Army's activities under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).

Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management (ACSIM): ACSIM is the Army Staff proponent for the military Cultural Resources Program.

Headquarters IMCOM and Army Environmental Command (AEC): The Commander, AEC, under the direction of the HQ IMCOM Commanding General, is responsible for a broad range of technical support and oversight services for execution of the Army’s Cultural Resources Program worldwide. AEC supports HQ IMCOM and installation cultural resources compliance activities and programs. HQ IMCOM for technical oversight and review and approval of agreements within the Cultural Resources Programs, which includes Section 106 PAs and Memorandum of Agreements (MOAs), Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (the NAGPRA) Comprehensive Agreements and Plans of Action, other cultural resources agreements and actions, and National Register nominations.

Installation Management Command (IMCOM): IMCOM Directorates will direct and assist their installations in the conduct of installation Cultural Resources Programs. Each IMCOM Directorate will:

• Ensure that cultural resources responsibilities are implemented across all installations.

• Monitor installation Cultural Resources Management Programs.

• Review cultural resources documents and agreements, and forward to HQ IMCOM for review.

• Implement HQDA cultural resources management policy and guidelines in AR 200-1 at their respective installations.

Garrison Commander: As the installation commander and land manager at the localized level, the Garrison Commander will:

• Establish an installation Cultural Resources Program.

• Designate an installation CRM to coordinate the installation's Cultural Resources

Program. The Garrison Commander will ensure that the CRM has appropriate knowledge, skills, and professional training and education to carry out installation cultural resources management responsibilities. .

• Establish a government-to-government relationship with federally-recognized Indian tribes as needed.

• Ensure that cultural resources management is integrated with installation training and testing activities, master planning (AR 210-20), environmental impact analysis (AR 200-1), natural resources and endangered species management planning and programming to include Integrated Natural Resources Management Plans (AR 200-1), and the Integrated Training Area Management Program (ITAM).

• Serve as the Agency Official as defined in 36 CFR § 800 with responsibility for installation compliance with the NHPA.

• Serve as the Federal Agency Official as defined in 43 CFR § 10 with responsibility for installation compliance with the NAGPRA.

• Serve as the Federal Land Manager as defined in 32 CFR § 229 with responsibility for installation compliance with Archaeological Resources Protection Act (the ARPA). The ARPA permits are issued upon approval of the Garrison Commander in accordance with ER 405-1-12 and AR 405-80 and under a short term lease with the DPW Real Estate Branch.

• Serve as the Federal Agency Official as defined in 36 CFR § 79 with management authority over archaeological collections and associated records.

• Sign the NHPA PAs and MOAs, and the NAGPRA Comprehensive Agreements and Plans of Action, and other installation cultural resources agreements after IMCOM and HQDA comments have been addressed.

Cultural Resources Manager (CRM): The DPW is tasked with the management of natural and cultural resources through the Resource Planning Branch of the Environmental Division of DPW. Historic properties management is coordinated through the Cultural Resources Section of the Resource Planning Branch. The CRM is appointed by the Garrison Commander and reports to the Resource Planning Branch Chief. The Resource Planning Branch Chief reports to the Environmental Division Chief, who reports to the Director of DPW. All personnel in the Cultural Resources Section report to the CRM.

Unless otherwise stipulated by the Garrison Commander, the CRM will be the designated representative and will implement this ICRMP, which includes reviewing proposed projects, determining undertakings, and making decisions regarding DOEs in consideration of historic properties. The CRM is also responsible for coordinating with the public, the SHPO, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), and other consulting parties. As the representative of the Garrison Commander, the CRM is the Point of Contact for all cultural resources concerns and is the initiating party for consultation with interested parties.

Native Liaison: “DoD American Indian/Alaska Native Policy: Alaska Implementation Guidance” encourages the creation of a Native Liaison Officer position to carry out the policy and Alaska guidance on behalf of the installation. The CRM or personnel within the Cultural Resources Section will serve as the Native Liaison for the USAG Alaska.

The capacity of the liaison includes serving as topical SME and advisor to garrison command, having an authority to speak on the Army’s behalf and thus more aptly fulfill the government-to-government relationship. While duties include, but are not limited to the following, the Native Liaison will:

• Serve as the established USAG Alaska Point of Contact for tribes.

• Maintain a list of federally-recognized tribal governments in Alaska with current contact information for heads of each tribal government and secondary contacts.

• Maintain a list of all tribal ordinances or regulations involving consultation protocol, as well as any MOA or Comprehensive Agreement in effect between USAG Alaska and individual tribes and tribal organizations.

• Draft correspondence to tribes for signature by the Garrison Commander when initiating consultation or at Changes of Command.

• Maintain an administrative record of contact with each relevant tribe.

• Engage in efforts to improve and enhance government-to-government relations with the tribes through regular and open dialogue and partnering agreements (as authorized).

Partnerships

The USAG Alaska recognizes the contributions that non-Army interested parties can make to the management of historic properties. To that end, the USAG Alaska’s goal is to develop partnerships for the completion of collaborative work that accomplishes the USAG Alaska’s goal for stewardship to the most professional standard available in a fiscally responsible manner. Partnerships include those with Alaska Native tribes, the SHPO and other state agencies, the NPS, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and universities.

Alaska Native Tribal Partners

While any federally-recognized tribe will be offered government-to-government interaction if they feel their tribal rights or resources are potentially affected by Army undertakings or actions, there are seven Alaska Native tribal governments that are regularly consulted. These federally-recognized tribes have a historic relationship with the USAG Alaska and have a customary interest in the lands managed by the USAG Alaska.

The primary consulting tribal governments with whom USAG Alaska enjoys a government-to-government relationship include the Chilkoot Indian Association (Haines), Village of Dot Lake, Healy Lake Village, Nenana Native Association, Northway Village, Native Village of Tanacross, and Native Village of Tetlin. USAG Greely additionally has relations with Gulkana Village.

Additionally, interaction with Alaska Native organizations also take place for the purposes of stakeholder input, mutually-beneficial relationship building, or other purposes. These organizations are currently identified as Doyon, Ltd., Tanana Chiefs Conference, and the Fairbanks Native Association.

Other Partners

Other partnerships with professional or municipal entities have been historically developed for mutual benefit. Currently the USAG Alaska has such relationships with the Alaska Historical Commission, Fairbanks North Star Borough Historic Preservation Commission, Festival Fairbanks, Interior and Arctic Alaska Aeronautical Foundation, Tanana-Yukon Historical Society, and University of Alaska Museum of the North. The USAG Greely has an additional relationship with the Delta Chamber of Commerce.

Other partners worthy of further description include:

Alaska State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO): The SHPO, located in the Office of History and Archaeology (OHA) and part of the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources, is responsible for carrying out the National Register Programs in Alaska, statewide historic preservation planning, statewide survey and inventory of historic properties, and administering the federal historic preservation grants-in-aid program.

These programs were established under the NHPA and many of the programs are conducted in partnership with the U.S. Department of the Interior and the NPS Alaska Region. With these programs as the tools, the SHPO works with the USAG Alaska, interested tribal governments, and concerned citizens to insure that the USAG Alaska’s National Register-eligible prehistoric and historic properties are taken into account when planning activities that potentially could affect them.

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP): The ACHP is the independent federal agency established by the NHPA to comment on federal undertakings and to encourage federal agencies to consider historic properties in their project planning. The ACHP’s regulation, titled “Protection of Historic Properties” (36 CFR § 800), govern the Section 106 review process. The ACHP contributes to the USAG Alaska’s historic property management by participating, as needed, in consultation of undertakings and in the development of agreement documents. The ACHP is also the arbitrator of disputes between the agency and the SHPO.

National Park Service (NPS): The NPS, acting for the Secretary of the Interior, administers both the NHL and National Register programs. The NPS National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is the nation’s official list of cultural properties worthy of preservation. It includes districts, sites, buildings, structures, and object of local, state, or national significance. NHLs are nationally significant historic places designated as such by the Secretary of the Interior because they possess exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States. The NPS provides technical preservation advice to and consults during Section 106 undertakings with stewards of NHLs.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM): Some of the Army-managed lands within USAG Alaska training areas are in land withdrawal status from the BLM. Because of this status, the USAG Alaska and BLM have shared management responsibilities over training areas outside of the cantonment area. A MOA between BLM and the USAG Alaska outlines how those responsibilities will be divided. The USAG Alaska has the lead in meeting Section 106 obligations for its own and third party undertakings. The USAG Alaska also issues permits to third parties for archaeological activities on Army and withdrawn lands. The USAG Alaska will provide BLM with copies of Section 106 reports of archaeological activities conducted on withdrawn lands. Consultation and communication are standard management practices between the agencies.

Additionally, there are partner entities on the installations which steward existing or potential historic properties that were once under Army custody and may be again in the future. Doyon Utilities is the partner for privatized heat and power delivery. Under privatization, facilities and structures were transferred out of the garrisons’ jurisdiction.

North Haven Communities is the housing privatization partner for Forts Wainwright and Greely and have taken possession of many buildings at both locations. One historic property, Building 1048 on Fort Wainwright, is under the stewardship of this partner and is treated according to the Secretary of the Interior standards in consultation with the

CRM.

Statutes and Regulations

A large body of federal legislation, regulations, and executive directives exists that outlines the responsibilities of federal agencies for preservation of cultural resources and provides procedural guidelines for the management of federally owned or controlled properties. The USAG Alaska is responsible for managing cultural resources in accordance with relevant federal laws and regulations.

Among the federal laws of primary importance to the USAG Alaska are the Antiquities Act, the NHPA, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the ARPA, and the NAGPRA. Accompanying Army regulations, particularly AR 200-1, prescribe management responsibilities and standards of treatment for historic properties.

Applicable Federal Laws

Antiquities Act : The Antiquities Act of 1906 (54 USC § 3203) authorizes the President to designate historic and natural resources located on federally owned or controlled land as National Monuments. The act provides protection to prehistoric and historic ruins and objects by providing criminal sanctions against excavation, injury, or destruction of those resources. The Departments of the Interior, Agriculture, and Defense can issue permits to recognized educational and scientific institutions for archaeological investigations. Permits are issued by the USAG Alaska in consultation with the DPW Real Estate Branch under a short term license and with the approval of the Garrison Commander.

National Historic Preservation Act (the NHPA): The NHPA of 1966, as amended through 2004, is the cornerstone of federal cultural resources management law. It is the responsibility of the federal government to be a leader in preservation, stating that government agencies should "provide leadership in the preservation of the prehistoric and historic properties of the United States and ... administer federally owned resources in the spirit of stewardship for the inspiration and benefit of present and future generations” [the NHPA, § 2(2) - 2(3)]. The NHPA establishes a national historic preservation program that includes elements for identification, evaluation, and protection of cultural resources. It presents a policy of supporting and encouraging the conservation of historic properties [defined as "any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register, including artifacts, records, and material remains related to such a property or resource" [54 USC § 300101]] by directing federal agencies to assume responsibility for those cultural resources under federal jurisdiction.

The act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to expand and maintain the National Register, which is composed of historic properties—buildings, sites, structures, and objects—determined significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. The act directs the Secretary of the Interior to set forth procedures for nominating historic properties to the National Register by establishing criteria for the determination of those cultural resources that are eligible for inclusion.

The term “eligible for inclusion in the National Register” encompasses those properties formally determined as eligible and all other properties that meet the National Register criteria as defined by 36 CFR § 60.4 [ie. “historic properties”]. The Department of the Interior has issued guidelines [36 CFR § 60] that describe identification and evaluation procedures for federal agencies to request DOEs [36 CFR § 63].

The NHPA further directs the Secretary of the Interior to establish a SHPO, who directs and approves state preservation programs, and who, with the cooperation of private organizations, local governments, and state and federal agencies, identifies and inventories cultural resources within the state and ensures that eligible properties are protected. Through the act, a National Historic Preservation Fund and a grant program authorize funds to the states for historic preservation projects and to individuals for the preservation of historic properties. The NHPA authorized the establishment of the ACHP, which is to act as an independent federal agency to advise the President, Congress, and other federal agencies on historic preservation matters; to review the policies and programs of federal agencies; and to inform and educate federal agencies on matters relating to historic preservation.

Of particular importance to military installations are Section 106 and Section 110 of the NHPA. Section 106 requires federal agencies to consider effects of undertakings on resources listed in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register. Section 110, part of a 1980 amendment, requires federal agencies to institute programs to identify, evaluate, and nominate National Register-eligible cultural resources under their care.

Compliance with preservation requirements on military lands is largely compliance with these sections of the NHPA. Numerous federal regulations, orders, and instructions elaborate upon and clarify these provisions of the NHPA and the compliance process.

PAs and MOAs are executed pursuant to the NHPA Section 106 and 36 CFR § 800 and are compliance agreements that set forth how the USAG Alaska will avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to historic properties. Section 106 PAs that address and define ongoing installation-wide undertakings associated with mission activities and their effects on historic properties over a five-year programming and budgeting cycle or longer are encouraged because they can streamline the NHPA compliance process and serve as a program management tool. Any management procedures and determinations provided in PAs and MOAs should be integrated into the ICRMP. However, the NHPA PAs and MOAs will not refer to or implement an ICRMP.

Section 106 (54 USC § 306108) of the NHPA ensures that cultural resources are properly considered in the planning stage of any federal agency activity. Federal agencies are required to consider the effects of their undertakings on any properties eligible for inclusion or listed on the National Register during the planning stage and to provide the ACHP an opportunity to comment. This process is detailed in implementing regulation 36 CFR § 800 (Protection of Historic Properties). An undertaking is defined as a project, activity, or program funded in whole or in part under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of a federal agency, including those carried out by or on behalf of a federal agency; those carried out with federal financial assistance; those requiring a federal permit, license, or approval; and those subject to state or local regulation administrated pursuant to a delegation or approval by a federal agency.

Failure to take the effects of an undertaking on historic properties into account in accordance with the NHPA Section 106 and 36 CFR § 800 can result in formal notification from the ACHP to the Secretary of the Army of foreclosure of ACHP's opportunity to comment on the undertaking pursuant to the NHPA. A notice of foreclosure can be used by litigants against the Army in a manner that can halt or delay critical mission activities.

The USAG Alaska will ensure that the efforts to identify, evaluate, and treat historic properties follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation and are conducted under the supervision of personnel who meet the applicable professional qualifications standards set forth in 36 CFR § 61, Appendix A.

Disagreements between the Garrison Commander and SHPO regarding the eligibility of a property for listing in the National Register will be resolved through the procedures at 36 CFR § 63.2(d).

Section 106 does not require that an undertaking be stopped, but that reasonable efforts must be made to minimize harm to eligible properties. The reissued 36 CFR § 800 regulation (effective August 5, 2004) provides for increased involvement with additional consulting parties. These consulting parties include the SHPO, the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer when applicable, Native American tribes, local governments, applicants for federal permits or licenses, and the public, including individuals and organizations which have a demonstrated interest in the outcome of any undertaking (36 CFR § 800.2(c)). Further discussion of the involvement of consulting parties in the Section 106 process can be found in 36 CFR § 800.3 - 36 CFR § 800.7, 36 CFR § 800.10, and 36 CFR § 800.12.

Section 110 of the NHPA states that the federal agency must assume responsibility for the preservation of historic properties that are owned or controlled by the agency and that the federal agency should use, to the maximum extent possible, historic structures that are available. Section 110 reinforces the responsibilities of the federal agency to inventory, evaluate, and preserve historic properties. It is the responsibility of the agency to establish a program to locate, inventory, and nominate to the Secretary of the Interior all cultural resources that appear to qualify for inclusion in the National Register.

Each agency is required to ensure that no potentially National Register eligible historic property is inadvertently transferred, sold, demolished, substantially altered, or allowed to deteriorate significantly. If federal actions will substantially alter or destroy a National Register-eligible property, sufficient time and effort must be expended to properly record the property. Section 110 also dictates that planning and actions necessary to minimize harm to NHLs will be undertaken when an undertaking may adversely affect such properties.

Section 110 of the NHPA imposes specific responsibilities upon the USAG Alaska regarding historic preservation. In accordance with Section 110 (a) (1), the affirmative preservation responsibilities in Section 110 must be undertaken in a manner consistent with the installation's mission. Such responsibilities include but are not limited to:

• Establish a historic preservation program to include the identification, evaluation and nomination of historic properties to the National Register in consultation with the ACHP, SHPO, local governments, Alaska Native tribes, and the interested public as appropriate.

• Prior to acquiring, constructing, or leasing buildings, use available historic properties to the maximum extent feasible.

• Document historic properties that will be altered or destroyed as a result of Army action. Such actions must be reviewed in accordance with the NHPA Section 106.

• In transferring Army historic properties, ensure that the significant historic values of the property are appropriately preserved.

• The Secretary of the Army must document decisions to proceed with Army undertakings that adversely affect historic properties when the Garrison Commander has been unable to reach agreement through execution of a MOA or PA with the ACHP and SHPO.

Section 111 of the NHPA complements the directives of Section 110 by addressing the responsibilities of a federal agency concerning adaptive use, lease, exchange, or management of federal historic properties. It requires Garrison Commanders, to the extent practicable, to implement adaptive uses for historic properties that are not needed for current or projected agency purposes. After consultation with the ACHP, agencies may lease or exchange historic properties if the action is compatible with preservation.

Section 112 of the NHPA requires that all research, preservation, and protection activities be conducted by persons meeting professional standards developed by the Secretary of the Interior, including both agency and contractor personnel. Personnel responsible for the management of historic properties are required to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s standards. All data produced by research is to be maintained permanently in appropriate databases.

Section 304 of the NHPA authorizes the head of a federal agency to withhold from public disclosure any information about the location, character, or ownership of a historic property if that disclosure might cause invasion of privacy, might cause harm to the resource, or might impede the use of a traditional religious site by practitioners.

Only a Freedom of Information Act filing can make such information available.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): NEPA of 1969 (42 USC § 4321) establishes a national policy that encourages productive and enjoyable harmony between us and our environment, to promote efforts that will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man;

and to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the nation. Under NEPA, federal agencies are required to preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage. The act requires all federal agencies to prepare a document, most commonly a Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) or an Environmental Assessment (EA), which assesses the potential impacts of any proposed action on the environment. If impacts are judged potentially significant, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared. An EIS identifies any unavoidable adverse environmental effects, as well as alternatives to the proposed action, prior to its implementation. The EIS will be prepared as early in the planning process as possible and will accompany the action's proposal through the agency review process.