Document QzpgOOJZMzGBJ1Gk3DOvkNZ8

BRIEFING STATEMENT PREPARED FOR: NWRS LEADERSHIP TEAM DATE: 30 May 2018 TITLE: Priority Heritage Assets--De-Mystifying our Historic Buildings ISSUE: Over A of the FWS portfolio (2890 buildings) is now 50 years of age or older! Buildings 50 years of age or older trigger review under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). At least 75% of these buildings are at a point where their integrity is beginning to fail. BACKGROUND: Under the NHPA, FWS, as stewards of this trust resource, is responsible to determine if heritage assets are historically significant and have the potential to be useful to the agency mission and in what capacity. To date, our consideration of heritage assets has been lacking and not adequately addressed in DOI guidance for Real Property (Asset Priority Index and Attachment G) resulting in only a small number of such assets being part of our 5 year planning. STATUS/KEY POINTS: A new way to consider historic buildings is needed, one that is complementary to the Asset Priority Index process, but that establishes a priority standing for heritage assets within the Service. This ranking process will clarify for field stations managers and Regional Staff: historic buildings that are Priority Heritage Assets--those that warrant investment and that will return that investment in the form of re-use for Service-related functions, education and/or interpretation and, those historic buildings that, after proper due diligence, can be considered for deconstruction and/or materials re-use (harvesting materials from a deconstructed historic asset for use in a Priority Heritage Asset). ACTIONS: Regional leadership is encouraged to direct their RHPOs to (1) identify Priority Heritage Assets from the Region's asset list (a draft assessment tool is attached; a new SAMMI module for historic preservation will launch later this summer), and (2) discuss those assets with the pertinent station managers to foster a conversation that will, ultimately, de-mystify, or provide clarity, as to the potential historical significance of these assets, the value they can add to the overall mission of the field station, and how making such a determination will enable us to better meet our compliance and stewardship responsibilities under the law. PREPARED BY: Eugene Marino, Federal Preservation Officer, USFWS HQ Attachment UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Priority Horttafo Assets (PHA) Rankins Worksheet Tliis worksheet is intended to help Regional Historic Preservation Officers (RHPOs), in consultation with Managers and Facilities Staff rank priority heritage assets within the Service. Priority Heritage Assets (PHAs) are defined as buildings and structures that have been determined to be eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places and have a high potential to be productively reused, engage partners and the community, and help fulfill the mission of the field station and Service. Ibis worksheet uses six elements to rank PHAs through the use of a weighed final score. Heritage Assets attaining scores of at least 70 out of 100 possible total points are considered "Priority Heritage Assets'* and qualify for heightened Service attention and funding; and should be included as part of the Service 5 year plan. Those assets with a score less than 70, continue to be heritage assets and will require the accompanying compliance. Also, because situations can change on the ground, these assets may rise to the level of Priority Heritage .Asset during subsequent ranking and review. Asset Name: National Register Historic District Name: Region: Station: RPI U: PhototsVlocation topo map attached Form reviewed by: Station Manager. Name: Facilities Manager. Name: Area Supervisor. Name: Form completed by RHPO. Name: Date: Date: Date: Date: 1, I'nique F.xamplc (IT.): Can the heritage asset be considered architecturally unique to this region? Choose one answer. (100 pts max) Score: background: Ibis element examines a heritage asset's architectural uniqueness in the geographic area covered by the region--not just on Service land. __ The asset is a rare and very important type. 100 pts The asset is a great example of its type. 75 pts __ The asset is one of only a few examples of this type. 50 pts __ The asset is not unique; many other or better examples exist. 25 pts __ Tile asset is a very common example of its type. 0 pts Justification. 1 2. Community Connections (CC): Does the surrounding community retain strong connections to the heritage asset? Choose one answer. (100 pis maximum) Score: Background: This element examines how strong the local community identifies, connects, and interacts with the heritage asset. Evidence of connections include: heightened community pride and history, media interest, good accessibility/visibility, and great research or tourism use/value. __The asset demonstrates exceptional aspects of community connections. 100pis __ The asset demonstrates high aspects of community connections. 75 pis __The asset demonstrates moderate aspects of community connections. 50 pis __The asset demonstrates low aspects of community connections. 25 pis __ The asset demonstrates no aspects of community connections. 0 pis yustifleation: 3. Effort Sustainability (ES): Are efforts to preserve this heritage asset sustainable? Answer both parts and add scores together. (100pts maximum) Score: Background: This element examines to what degree the heritage asset has been identified as a priority to the station and its partners, what resources have been applied to the asset already and the likelihood that additional station and outside resources will continue to be applied. Part 1 __There is an active Friends group or other partner organization interested in the preservation of the asset. 25 pts __There is no active Friends group or other partner organization interested in the preservation ofthe asset. 0pts Part 2 __Preservation of the asset has been identified as a high priority by both the station and its partners, and significant level of financial and other resources have already been invested in its preservation. 75 pts __Preservation of the asset has been identified as a moderate priority by both the station and its partners, and a moderate level of financial and other resources have already been invested in its preservation. 50pts __ Preservation of the asset is considered a low priority by both the station and its partners, and only a low level ofresources have already been invested in its preservation. 25 pts __ Preservation of the asset is not considered a priority by either the station or its partners, and virtually no resources have been invested in its preservation. 0pts yustifleation: 2 4. Mission Potential (MP): Does the heritage asset have the potential to contribute to the Big 6 missions of the Service? Put in a point valuefor all that apply and add together. (100 pts maximum) Score: Background: This element examines the heritage asset's ability to contribute to one or more of the Big 6 Missions: Hunting, Fishing, Wildlife Observation, Photography, Environmental Education and Interpretation. ____ The asset has the potential to contribute to Hunting and/or Fishing. 25- 75 pts ____ The asset has the potential to contribute to Wildlife Observ ation. 25-75pts __ The asset has the potential to contribute to Photography. 25-75pts __ The asset has the potential to contribute to Environmental Education. 25-75pts ____ The asset has potential to contribute to Interpretation. 25-75pts ____ The asset doesn't have the potential to contribute to any of them. Opts Justification: 5. Preserv ation Viability (PV): Is the preservation of the heritage asset a viable option? Choose one answer. (100pts maximum) Score: Background: This element examines the practical likelihood that the heritage asset can be used for its original purpose, adapted to a new purpose, stabilized/mothballed with the idea that reuse could occur sometime in the future, or only preserved as a ruin. __ The asset is currently in use and actively maintained by the station. 100pts __The asset could serve its original or a new purpose with minimal repairs. 80 pis __The asset retains a high degree of structural and physical integrity and could be repaired and adapted for use if currently mothballed. 60 pts __The asset could be stabilized/mothballed for eventual reuse. 40pts __The asset could only be preserved as a structural ruin. 20pts __The asset is in poor physical condition and cannot be reused/stabilized. // pts [Justification: 3 6. Situation Urgency (SU): Is there an urgent need for action to preserve the heritage asset? Choose one answer. (100 pts maximum) Score: Background: This element examines the urgency of taking action to preserve the heritage asset at the time of this evaluation. __ 'Hie asset is being actively degraded, and requires action within 6 months if it is to be preserved. 100 pts The asset is endangered, and requires action within 6-12 months if it is to be preserved. 75 pis __The asset is threatened, and requires action within 1-2 years if it is to be preserved. 50 pts __ The asset is vulnerable, and requires action within 2-5 years if it is to be preserved. 25 pts __The asset is stable, and requires no action within 5 years. 0pts FINAL SCORE (100points max) March 2018