EPA had determined that the project would have no effect on the sites and so had not requested the comments of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation as required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). EPA had prepared an environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act, however, which noted that the project might have some impact on the park.
The court found that the record revealed that genuine issues of fact existed with respect to NHPA compliance and denied summary judgment. The record contained ambiguous letters from the State Historic Preservation Officer regarding the project and no indication of how the results of archeological surveys were treated; it also left unclear the impacts of the project on the archeological sites. 460 F. Supp. at 246.
|Go to Table of Contents||Go to Top|