Federal Legislative Issues
You can access legislative information or contact any member of Congress at http://thomas.loc.gov. You can also reach any member of Congress by calling the Capitol at (202) 224-3121 or 1-800-962-3524; by writing your Representative at the U.S. House of Representatives, Washington DC 20515, or your Senators at the U.S. Senate, Washington DC 20510; or electronically through either www.house.gov or www.senate.gov.
Section 106 Regulations
In response to the federal lawsuit by the National Mining Association challenging the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's (ACHP) current Section 106 regulations [see March 2000 OAC Newsletter Vol. 12(1)], on July 11 the ACHP published its current Section 106 regulations in the Federal Register as proposed regulations open to public comment. The current Section106 regulations went into effect on June 19, 1999 and remain in effect. It is anticipated that the new final regulations will be submitted to the ACHP for a vote on adoption on November 17, 2000. Comments on the current Section 106 regulations were to be submitted on or before August 10, 2000, addressed to the Executive Director, ACHP, 1100 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 809, Washington D.C. 2004, or by fax to (202) 606-8672, or by email to . The public comment notice and the current Section 106 regulations can be found in the Federal Register at www.access.gpo/su_docs/aces/aces140.html.
HR 701, The Conservation and Reinvestment Act of 2000
HR 701 amends the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act. It will permanently fund many natural and a few cultural resource programs, the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) in particular. The funds come from Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas leases, estimated at $4-5 billion annually. The HPF funds much of the operations of State Historic Preservation Offices, particularly in Ohio. Much of the money will make its way to states for natural and cultural resource programs, including programs that benefit archaeology. Ohio is scheduled to receive one of the largest sums, about $54 million a year. That amounts to over $800 million over the 15 years the law will be in effect. Over 4,000 organizations and all 54 governors support the bill.
The U. S. House of Representatives passed HR 701 on May 11, 2000. The vote was 315 to 102, with 118 Republicans, 196 Democrats, and 1 Independent voting for the bill, showing strong bipartisan support for the measure. Ninety-three Republicans, 8 Democrats, and 1 Independent voted against the bill. All of Ohio's Democratic Representatives and 6 of 11 Republican Representatives voted for the bill. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee voted 13 to 7 in favor of the bill, but its chance for passage by the full Senate is less certain. There is strong opposition from a number of Senators from western states, and the end of the 106th Congress is fast approaching. Ohio Senator DeWine supports the bill while Senator Voinovich does not. If Ohio's $400 million Conservation and Revitalization Fund is approved by Ohioans on November 7, 2000 (see State Issue 1 below), Ohio will be well positioned to take advantage of the federal funds from the Conservation and Reinvestment Act, assuming it is approved by the Senate, a House-Senate Conference Committee, and signed by the President. Please contact Ohio Senators Voinovich and DeWine, or your state Senators, as soon as you can about the bill.
HR 834, National Historic Preservation Act Amendments of 2000
Among other things, HR 834 extends the authorization of the HPF and the ACHP through fiscal year 2005 (September 30, 2006), and reinstates the annual transfer of $150 million into the HPF. President Clinton signed the bill into law on May 26, 2000.
HR 2643, Amendments to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)
HR 2643 would provide for the appropriate study and repatriation of human remains for which a cultural affiliation is not readily ascertainable by repealing the ownership provisions of NAGPRA based on aboriginal land claims. Until several issues concerning the Kennewick Man litigation are settled, this bill is unlikely to move. The bill's sponsor is Rep. Hastings (R-WA). Upon introduction it was referred to the House Committee on Resources. Please contact you Representative about this bill.
S. 2478, The Peopling of America Theme Study Act
On April 27, Senator Daniel Akaka (D-HI), for himself and Senator Bob Graham (D-FL), introduced legislation authorizing the National Park Service (NPS) to conduct a theme study to identify, interpret, and preserve sites relating to the migration, immigration, and settling of America. S. 2478, The Peopling of America Theme Study Act, builds upon the latest official thematic framework authorized in 1996 (PL 101-628, Sec. 1209), and seeks to encourage the nomination of properties for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, the identification of potential new National Historic Landmarks, and the recommendation to Congress of sites for potential inclusion in the National Park System.
In introducing this legislation Senator Akaka noted: "All Americans were originally travelers from other lands. Whether we came to this country as native peoples, English colonists or African slaves, or as Mexican ranchers, or Chinese merchants, the process by which our nation was peopled transformed us from strangers from different shores into neighbors unified in our inimitable diversity -- Americans all."
Senator Akaka stressed that it is essential for all Americans to understand this process. The legislation recognizes that only one NPS unit focuses on the peopling of America, Ellis Island, a part of the Statue of Liberty National Monument. Senator Akaka hopes that the study will serve as a springboard for the preservation and interpretation of several significant properties.
The legislation calls on the NPS to establish linkages with "organizations, societies and cultures" and to enter into a cooperative agreement with educational institutions, professional or local historical organizations, or other entities to prepare the theme study in accordance with generally accepted scholarly standards. Please contact Senators DeWine and Voinovich, or your state's Senators, about S. 2478.
State Legislative Issues
You can view and print copies of Ohio laws, bills, bill summaries, and status reports of bills at www.legislature.state.oh.us.You can reach your Representative or Senator by calling the Legislative Information Office at 1-800-282-0253; by writing your Representative at the Ohio House of Representatives, 77 South High St., Columbus, OH 43266-0603, or your Senator at the Ohio Senate, Senate Building, Columbus, OH 43215. Some members of the General Assembly have email address that are linked through the website.
[The end of the 123rd Ohio General Assembly, 1999-2000, is fast approaching. Bills that have not had hearings are unlikely to be enacted this session and will have to be reintroduced into the 124th Ohio General Assembly, 2001-2002]
State Issue 1, the Ohio Conservation and Revitalization Fund
On November 7, Ohio voters will decide whether or not to approve a $400 million environmental protection bond issue (see H. J. R. 15, May 19 Legislative Issues Committee Report). The fund was proposed by Gov. Taft and nearly unanimously approved by the Ohio General Assembly earlier this year.
The fund will initially provide $400 million over the next four years, with continuing investments as older bonds are retired or as community loans are repaid. From the initial investment, $200 million would be used to clean up brownfields (land that cannot be developed because it is contaminated with industrial wastes, but the site is not a federal Superfund site) and other, as yet unspecified, urban revitalization efforts. $200 million would also be used to preserve green space, farmland, streams, and expand recreational trails.
If Ohio voters pass the issue on November 7, the Ohio General Assembly will need to pass legislation detailing how the funds will be allocated, who would be eligible for funding, etc. Gov. Taft has indicated that local communities should decide on how and where the funds are to be used, based on local needs and priorities. The Governor has stated that city, township, and county governments, conservation districts, park boards, and some private sector entities should be able to apply for funds administered as grants and low-interest loans. The grants are to be matched by local dollars. The amount to be matched will be determined by the Ohio General Assembly. Funds from the program and matching funds can be used to leverage other dollars for environmental programs, particularly at the federal level.
The proposed fund is similar to the NatureWorks bond issue passed by Ohio voters in 1993, a program that continues to provide funds for repairing and enhancing primarily State-owned parks, forests and nature preserves. A relatively small portion of NatureWorks funds goes to local communities. The Conservation and Revitalization Fund is directed at local projects for environmental protection.
The fund does not increase taxes. Funds would come from the sale of bonds, which would be repaid over time with existing State revenues through a mix of general revenues and liquor-profit tax revenues. By law, funds cannot be granted or loaned to parties responsible for the contamination of a site determined to be a brownfield.
Whether or not Conservation and Revitalization Fund projects will be required to take into consideration their impacts on archaeological resources remains to be decided by the Ohio General Assembly and the state agencies that will implement the program, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR), Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Ohio Department of Agriculture, and the Ohio Department of Development, the latter of which recently funded an archaeology review position at the Ohio Historic Preservation Office (OHPO). Presently, NatureWorks projects are reviewed by the OHPO. OHPO indicates that since review of NatureWorks projects began in 1994, 3-4% of OHPO's total workload consists of NatureWorks project reviews. This figure represents about 200-250 projects/year (ca. 1,200-1,500 projects). Archaeological investigations were recommended on 150 of the projects (ca. 10-13%), and OHPO reviewed 62 archaeological reports (40% of the 150 projects for which archaeological investigations were recommended). The number of archaeological sites found as a result of recommended surveys was low, less than 50, and only one archaeological site was determined to meet the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (Dave Snyder, personal communication 2000).
Although the number of significant archaeological sites found as a result of OHPO's review of NatureWorks grants is apparently low, OHPO indicates that the effort has been worthwhile, particularly in raising the awareness of ODNR and NatureWorks applicants that archaeological resources exist and should be considered in project planning. The Ohio Archaeological Council will work to see that a similar review is undertaken for projects under the new program, if passed by Ohio voters on November 7.
House Bill 232/Senate Bill 51, increases the penalty for the offense of desecration
This bill increases the penalty for desecrating a place of worship or any other object of reverence or sacred devotion from a misdemeanor to a felony. The bill also increases from $5,000 to $15,000 the amount of damages a person may recover from the parent of a minor child as a result of a child's vandalism or desecration. The intent of the bill is to protect churches and cemeteries, but could be interpreted by the courts to include traditional cultural properties and sacred places such as prehistoric mounds, earthworks, and cemeteries. The Senate version of the bill was passed the General Assembly and Gov. Taft signed the bill on June 17, 1999. The bill became effective September 20, 1999.
House Bill 279, creates the Ohio Network-to-Freedom Commission as a permanent agency to preserve and promote the history of and to educate the public about the Underground Railroad
The bill creates the Commission, whose tasks include developing a public-private partnership to research, document, mark, and preserve Ohio sites associated with the Underground Railroad. The bill was introduced March 24, 1999 and assigned to the Education Committee. No action has been taken on the bill.
House Bill 393/S. B. 193, replaces the call-before-you-dig law with a single statewide one-call notification system
This bill requires that excavators, including archaeologists, notify the one-call system of the location of an excavation site and the intent to excavate at least 48 hours but not more than 10 days before commencing an excavation. Any excavator who knowingly fails to notify the one-call system is subject to a civil penalty of up to $10,000 for each violation, and fines up to three times the amount of reasonable costs of repairs to damaged underground utilities (see May 19 Legislative Issues Committee Report). The House bill was introduced June 17, 1999 and assigned to the Local Government Committee. The Senate bill was introduced on October 12, 1999 and assigned to the Ways and Means Committee. No action has been taken on either of the bills.
House Bill 463, allows corporations and individuals to receive nonrefundable tax credits of up to $50,000 for rehabilitating a historic property
The bill allows taxpayers to claim corporation franchise and personal income tax credits for 25%, not to exceed $50,000, of the qualifying expenditure incurred to rehabilitate a historic property. The bill was introduced September 30, 1999 and assigned to the Ways and Means Committee. No action has been taken on the bill.
House Bill 550, revises the offense of vandalism to prohibit a person, without privilege to do so, from knowingly causing physical harm to private property and serious physical harm to government property
The bill was introduced on January 18, 2000 on behalf of the Archaeological Society of Ohio (ASO). It was assigned to the Criminal Justice Committee [see March 2000 OAC Newsletter Vol. 12(1)]. Proponent (ASO) testimony was heard on May 16 (see May 19 Legislative Issues Committee Report). No further action has been taken.
House Bill 601, creates the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) Mineral Resource Management Division
This bill merges ODNRs Division of Oil and Gas with the Division of Mines and Reclamation forming the Division of Mineral Resources Management. This is now the division that regulates mining's impact on cultural resources. The bill passed the General Assembly and was signed into law by Gov. Taft on June 14.
House Bill 679, requires that when the theory of evolution is taught in public school the scientific evidence for and against the theory be taught
The bill was introduced on May 2, 2000 and assigned to the Education Committee. No action has been taken.
House Bill 702/Senate Bill 276, revises the application requirements for a non-coal surface mining permit
The bill revises and adds requirements to the permit application process for aggregate (non-coal) industrial minerals mining. The application requirements do not address archaeological resources (see May 19 Legislative Issues Committee Report). The bill was introduced in the House on May 11, 2000 and assigned to the Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee. No action has been taken. The bill was introduced in the Senate on March 28, 2000 and assigned to the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. No action has been taken.
Since the spring members meeting, your President and members of the Board have been busy with Council business. Probably the most important event of the summer was the completion of Bob Genheimer's book containing the proceedings of our 1994 conference on the Late Prehistoric. Entitled Cultures Before Contact: The Late Prehistory of Ohio and Surrounding Regions, it contains 13 chapters including regional overviews, reports on site investigations, and a commentary on the state of the art in the study of the archaeology of this period. Much of the data in this book has not been published previously. Thus, as with the first two volumes in this publication series, we have accomplished our goal of making archaeological knowledge of Ohio prehistory more widely available. Additionally, it is an attractive, durable book that will hold its form even with repeated use. Thanks to Bob for sticking with this project and making it a first rate product.
Equally important is the successful completion of the first Ohio Archaeology Week. This was the product of cooperation between the Council and Sunwatch Indian Village. Among the organizations who participated were The Cleveland Museum of Natural History, the Marietta Natural History Society, Fort Ancient State Memorial, Hopewell Culture National Historical Park, Sunwatch Indian Village/Archaeological Park, Boonshoft Museum of Discovery, Heidelberg College, and the University of Toledo Laboratory of Archaeology. Plans are under way to repeat this event next year and to increase participation and support. Thanks to Sandy Yee for spearheading the project and to Dave Bush for serving as the Council liaison.
On another front, Al Tonetti and I attended a series of meetings beginning in mid-August concerning the Moundbuilders Country Club's proposal to demolish its existing clubhouse and build a new facility. In addition to writing the Director of the Ohio Historical Society to express our concerns about the potential destruction of archaeological remains as a result of the rebuilding, a nomination of the Octagon State Memorial to the National Trust for Historic Preservation's list of the "Eleven Most Endangered Historic Places" in the United States was submitted on behalf of the Council. Initiated by a group of concerned educators in the Newark area, the weekly meetings came to include American Indians, members of the Licking County Archaeological and Landmarks Society, and local citizens, along with representatives of the Club, the National Park Service, the Ohio Historical Society, and the State Historical Preservation Office. Amos Loveday, the State Preservation Officer, assigned several members of his staff to facilitate the drafting of a Memorandum of Understanding in an attempt to reach a consensus regarding the conduct of an archaeological survey on the targeted property, formulation of a policy on public access, and long-term plans for preservation. The process is ongoing. Thanks to Al for agreeing to get involved and lend his considerable knowledge of public archaeology to the issue.
Other accomplishments include the formulation of an amendment to the by-laws to streamline membership nomination approval, a hard look at the reality of constructing a high quality web site, monitoring of hearings on proposed industrial minerals legislation, and input into the planning process for Voyageur Media Group's Ohio Archaeology Video Series. I should not forget to include President-Elect Brian Redmond's suggestion to invite members to prepare short presentations on recent fieldwork at the fall meeting. This suggestion was unanimously embraced by the Board as a way for members to become more aware of what's going on around the state.
Members have been notified of the membership amendment and will be asked to discuss and vote on it at the fall meeting. The Board and I believe it is a positive step toward increasing membership and urge serious consideration of its provisions. In order not to over-extend my contribution to this issue of the Newsletter, I will end on this note. I hope I have said enough to make everyone want to attend the fall meeting to hear more about the above matters, as well as become better informed about recent archaeological activities around the state.
I hope those of you who were lucky enough to be in the field this summer had a successful season and are getting on to the cleaning, cataloging, and analysis. I also hope to read about your activities in upcoming OAC Newsletters or hear about them at future OAC meetings.
I have some good news to report. Bob Genheimer has told the Board that the Late Prehistoric publication should be going to the printer by the first of the year. We are all looking forward to getting back on a regular publication schedule.
Please note on your calendars, if you haven't already, the annual meeting of the Eastern States Archeological Federation on November 18-21. As Ohio's representative to this organization, the OAC is the official host for the meetings. They will be held at the Kings Island Convention Center and Resort, Kings Island, Ohio, about 25 miles northeast of Cincinnati along I-71. A full program and registration form will be sent to OAC members along with the election ballot, which you should receive soon. Bill Dancey has organized an interesting workshop for OAC members on Friday morning, November 19 at Fort Ancient State Memorial, and a symposium on Friday afternoon at the Kings Island Convention Center that should be of interest to both OAC and ESAF members. By the way, you can join ESAF as an individual, which includes a copy of the annual publication Archaeology of Eastern North America. Recent issues have included articles by Brian Redmond, Ken Tankersley, Brad Lepper, and David Stothers, among others. Membership information is available at http://www.siftings.com (further information on the ESAF annual meeting is at http://www.quad50.com).
By the time of our fall meeting, we should have the OAC website on line (or at least very close to being on line). Like the Newsletter, the website will be an important communication link to our members, to potential members, and to people who are interested in or have questions about archaeology in Ohio. Also, like the Newsletter, the website provides an opportunity for all OAC members to write articles, announce fieldwork opportunities, etc. These two outlets are ideal for communicating, perhaps in abstracts or executive summary form, the results of the contract archaeology projects underway in the state.
OAC elections are fast approaching. Thanks to all the candidates for running. As the end of my term as your president approaches, I want to express my thanks to the other officers, trustees, and committee chairs for all their efforts during the past two years. I am confident that the next two years with Bill Dancey at the helm will see the Council expand its membership and continue to make a significant contribution to Ohio archaeology.
Chair's note: It is important that OAC members understand state (and federal) laws affecting archaeology and related matters, such as vandalism, desecration, and cemeteries. This is particularly important now because some members of the Indian artifact collector community in Ohio may seek to modify Ohio laws that they perceive as a threat to collecting Indian artifacts. Also, some Native Americans who worked to get recent revisions to Ohio's vandalism and desecration laws passed may attempt to revise these laws again as they find that these laws are not effective in prohibiting the excavation of Native American (and other) human remains and associated grave goods during archaeological investigations or when the excavator has the permission of, or is, the property owner, and do not affect the curation of such remains and grave goods at non-federally funded institutions. Please prepare to address these matters by educating yourself about Ohio's laws dealing with archaeology.
S.B. 51. Increases penalties for the desecration of a place of worship or an object of reverence or sacred devotion
Despite what you may have heard from some individuals in the Indian artifact collector community, this bill (now law) does not increase the level of offense for desecrating an "Indian mound or earthwork, cemetery, thing, or site of great historical or archaeological interest" [ORC Section 2927.11(A)(3)] from a second degree misdemeanor to a felony. The intent of this law is to increase the level of offense for desecrating churches, temples, and similar places of worship, not archaeological and historical sites or cemeteries as defined in the existing desecration statute. The law increases the penalty for desecrating a "place of worship, its furnishings, or religious artifacts or sacred texts within the place of worship [ORC Section 2927.11(A)(4)], or any other object of reverence or sacred devotion [ORC Section 2927.11(A)(6)]," and specifically references that it does not apply to the section of the existing desecration law prohibiting desecration of archaeological and historical sites and American Indian cemeteries.
Based on the amount of physical harm to such property, the law increases the level of offense from a second degree misdemeanor to a fifth, fourth, or third degree felony. The law also permits the recovery of compensatory, punitive, and exemplary damages, court costs, attorney's fees, and other reasonable expenses in convictions for all forms of desecration (Ohio Revised Code [ORC] Section 2927.11) and vandalism (ORC Section 2909.05) from the offender by the person suffering injury or loss pursuant to ORC Section 2307.70.
This bill was signed into law by Governor Taft on June 17,1999. It became effective September 20, 1999.
The full text of this and all other bills and laws, and the Ohio Legislative Service Commission's analysis of this and all other bills, can be acquired from your State Representative or from the Ohio General Assembly's Web site at http://www.legislature.state.oh.us. Copies of existing Ohio laws, including the vandalism and desecration laws referred to above, can also be accessed on the Internet at http://www.avv.com/orc.
Revisions to 36 CFR Part 800, "Protection of Historic Properties," Approved by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation On February 12, 1999, following six years of review, comment, and study, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) formally adopted revised regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). These regulations were prepared pursuant to the 1992 amendments to the NHPA. The NHPA requires that Federal agencies take into account the affects of their actions on historic properties and provide the ACHP an opportunity to comment on such actions. The version adopted is based on the May 1998 draft of the proposed regulations. The final regulations were published in the Federal Register on May 18th and took effect June 17th.
The revised regulations emphasize the responsibilities of Federal agencies and permits more direct involvement from State, local, and Tribal governments, and the public, in the Section 106 process. The revised regulations also reduces the ACHP's role in routine Federal undertakings, thus permitting the ACHP to focus its involvement on complex and controversial Federal undertakings and overseeing the implementation of the Section 106 process.
Draft Guidance on Archaeological Data Recovery Projects Issued by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
The ACHP has issued a draft Federal Register notice and guidance on consultation for projects involving archaeological data recovery. Basically, the ACHP has developed a recommended approach for consulting on the recovery of significant information from archaeological sites. The guidance is intended to 1) simplify the process of reaching agreement in these situations, 2) clarify expectations for archaeological data recovery plans, 3) clarify expectations for consultation with affected parties, 4) ensure that archaeological data recovery is used only when appropriate, and 5) make clear that if Federal agencies and other consulting parties follow this guidance, the ACHP is unlikely to get involved in consultation or raise objections to resulting agreements unless there is an unusual or controversial situation. This guidance took effect on the effective date of the revised Section 106 regulations, June 17, 1999. Written comments concerning this guidance should be directed to the Executive Director, ACHP, Old Post Office Building, 100 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., #809, Washington D.C. 20004; FAX (202) 606-8647; email .
The guidance identifies 10 basic principles concerning the treatment of archaeological sites when archaeological data recovery is being considered, and 12 principles concerning resolving adverse effects through the recovery of significant information from archaeological sites. A model format for a Memorandum of Agreement concerning archaeological data recovery projects is also included in the guidance.
Current information about the revised 36 CFR Part 800 regulations and the draft guidance on archaeological data recovery projects can be obtained from the ACHP's Web site http://www.achp.gov.
Draft Principles of Agreement Regarding the Disposition of Culturally Unidentifiable Human Remains Issued by the National Park Service
At its June 25-27, 1999 meeting, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) Review Committee approved draft principles of agreement regarding the disposition of culturally unidentifiable human remains pursuant to Section 8 (c)(5) of NAGPRA. Written comments received by September 3, 1999 were to be considered by the Review Committee at their next scheduled meeting. The draft principles were published in the Federal Register on July 29, 1999 (Vol. 64, No. 145, pp. 41135-41136). The Federal Register notice notes that the Review Committee "wishes to underscore the preliminary nature of the principles and their placement as a beginning point for consideration of this topic." Comments should be addressed to, and copies of the notice can also be obtained from, the NAGPRA Review Committee c/o Departmental Consulting Archeologist, National Park Service (2275) 1849 C. St., NW. (NC340), Washington, DC 20240. Electronic comments are unacceptable. For additional information contact Dr. C. Timothy McKeown at the National Park Service at (202) 343-4101.
Revisions to 36 CFR Part 61, "Procedures for State, Tribal, and Local Government Historic Preservation Programs," Approved by U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
On March 9, 1999, following nearly two and half years of review, comment, and study, the National Park Service published the final rule revising requirements for State, tribal, and local historic preservation programs carrying out actions under the NHPA. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, and eight U.S. territories participate in such programs on lands under their jurisdiction, as do more than 1,100 certified local governments and 17 tribal governments. These regulations were prepared pursuant to the 1992 amendments to the NHPA. The rule took effect June 9, 1999.
The revisions to 36 CFR Part 61 do not address the Indian tribe sections of the regulations, 36 CFR Part 61.8 and 61.9. These sections are currently under development by NPS in consultation with federally recognized tribes and other interested parties. When a draft of these sections is completed it will be issued for review and comment in the Federal Register. Given the increased role of federally-recognized tribes, and for that matter state and local governments in the NHPA as a result of the 1992 amendments, Sections 61.8 and 61.9 may result in further revisions to 36 CFR Part 61.
Senate Bill 548, to Establish the Fallen Timbers Battlefield and Fort Miamis National Historical Site in the State of Ohio
On March 4, 1999, Ohio Senator Michael DeWine introduced Senate Bill 548 designating the Lucas County, Ohio sites of Fallen Timbers Battlefield (1794) and Fort Miamis (1794-1813) as national historic sites. These two sites are associated with the U.S. military history and Native American culture between 1794-1813. In May, the bill was recommended for approval by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and is now before the U.S. Senate. The bill would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to provide technical assistance to the State of Ohio, local governments, and to nonprofit organizations in order to implement a stewardship plan and develop programs to preserve and interpret the historical, cultural, natural, recreational, and scenic resources of these two sites.