Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

PennDOT, FHWA, the SHPO, & the PATH to Section 106 Best Practice

684 views

Published on

Kira Heinrich, Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

PennDOT, FHWA, the SHPO, & the PATH to Section 106 Best Practice

  1. 1. PennDOT, FHWA, the SHPO,& the PATH to Section 106 Best Practice Bureau for Historic Preservation
  2. 2. You Know About The PA…* Requires Cultural Resource Professionals in Each District* Details Use of Electronic Consultation through PATH System* Outlines Ongoing Cultural Resources Education for CRP’s and other Environmental Staff* Includes List of Activities that are Exempt from SHPO Review* And Many Other Details on How the Consultation Process Progresses Bureau for Historic Preservation
  3. 3. You Know About ProjectPATH… * PennDOT’s Web-Based Platform for Compliance Consultation.* Result of Partnership Between PennDOT and Preservation PA* Allows for improved Transparency and Public Participation in Transportation Projects Bureau for Historic Preservation
  4. 4. So, How Does BHP Use PATH? The nuts and bolts of our internal process Bureau for Historic Preservation
  5. 5. The Gate Keeper * One Point of Contact for PATH Emails * Coordinates PATH System with BHP’s ER Tracking System * Issues ER Numbers * Coordinates Internal Processes Bureau for Historic Preservation
  6. 6. The Wheels ofBureaucracy Turn* Submissions Passed on for Review by Region and Area of Responsibility* We See What the Public Sees* Reviewers Can Comment on Any Submission, whether it was Submitted for Concurrence or Not Bureau for Historic Preservation
  7. 7. What do We Comment On?• Project Findings made by the CRP’s• Determination of Eligibility (DOE) • Archaeology and Historic Structures• Feasibility Studies and Effect Reports• Mitigation and Agreement Documents• Anything Else Requested Bureau for Historic Preservation
  8. 8. SHPO Response* Electronic Via PATH or Email* BHP Reviewers Have Access to Post Directly to PATH* Paper Files are no Longer Generated for Most New Projects* Archive Files are Still Maintained Bureau for Historic Preservation
  9. 9. Rinse and Repeat Bureau for Historic Preservation
  10. 10. For ExampleScoping Field View and Early Notification Form ER # IssuedArchaeology Finding and Negative Survey Form No Comment RequestedHRSF for Concurrence Staff Committee Determines BHP Opinion SHPO Posts Opinion and Notifies CRP Bureau for Historic Preservation
  11. 11. For Example, Cont.Feasibility StudyConsulting Party Invitations Concurrence Requested SHPO Posts ConcurrenceConsulting Party Meeting (S) : CRP Posts Meeting Notes No Concurrence RequestedStructures Finding: Adverse EffectEffect Report Concurrence Requested SHPO Posts Concurrence Bureau for Historic Preservation
  12. 12. For Example, Cont.CRP Posts Draft Letter Agreement (LA) Concurrence Requested SHPO Posts ConcurrenceFinal LA Delivered to SHPO for Signature SHPO Signs AgreementReview of LA Stipulation: interpretive panels Concurrence Requested SHPO Posts Concurrence Bureau for Historic Preservation
  13. 13. How Is This Better?* Consultation is Transparent for Consulting Parties and the Public* Our Files are the Same as the DOT Files so Everyone is on the Same Page* Paperless! Go Green!* Less Time is Spent Pushing Papers. Email is Virtually Instantaneous.* CRP’s do the legwork. They Provide Consistent, Thorough Information* CRP’s Highlight the Submissions that Impact Resources Bureau for Historic Preservation
  14. 14. Where Do We Go From Here? * PATH as Interactive Interface * PATH and ER Tracking Get Together * Other Agencies use PATH Format/Platform Bureau for Historic Preservation
  15. 15. Questions? Bureau for Historic Preservation

×