_edited_edited_edited_e.png)
July 24, 2026
Section 106 Consultation Concludes as the Foundation Enters Its Next Phase of Advocacy
Foundation reflects on the federal historic-preservation review, the record it created, and the concerns that remain
The Memorandum of Agreement concerning the proposed deployment of the SS United States was fully executed on July 16, 2026. On July 24, 2026, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers notified consulting parties that the agreement had been finalized and was in effect, bringing the federal Section 106 consultation to its formal conclusion.
The conclusion of consultation closes one required federal review process. It does not resolve every concern raised during that process, determine the vessel’s final chapter, or end the Foundation’s work.
The SS United States remains afloat in Mobile, Alabama, and the Foundation’s advocacy remains active. The SS United States Preservation Foundation, Inc. continues to monitor developments, examine related federal permitting and regulatory matters, preserve the factual and administrative record, and pursue every lawful, constructive, and honorable avenue available.
What Section 106 Provided
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires federal agencies to consider how undertakings they carry out, approve, fund, or permit may affect historic properties. It also creates a formal process through which Tribal Nations, state historic-preservation officials, local governments, preservation organizations, members of the public, and other consulting parties may identify concerns and participate before federal decisions are completed.
Section 106 does not guarantee that a historic property will be preserved. It requires consideration, consultation, and the creation of a formal record before adverse effects are carried out.
For the SS United States, that distinction proved critically important.
The process gave the Foundation and other consulting parties a formal opportunity to identify potential harm, submit evidence, propose preservation alternatives, question assumptions, and place concerns on the federal record while the vessel remains at risk.
The Foundation’s Participation
The SS United States Preservation Foundation participated in the review as a consulting party and devoted substantial time, research, and resources to advocating for a meaningful examination of alternatives.
Throughout consultation, the Foundation submitted information concerning the vessel’s national historic significance, preservation opportunities, the timing and effects of physical alterations, environmental and hazardous-material concerns, and the adequacy of the proposed measures intended to address adverse effects.
The Foundation also raised procedural and transparency concerns and repeatedly urged that alternatives capable of preserving the vessel be meaningfully evaluated before irreversible actions were taken.
Not every issue raised by the Foundation was resolved to its satisfaction. Nevertheless, participation ensured that those concerns became part of the federal record and could not be dismissed as if they had never been presented.
“Section 106 did not guarantee that the SS United States would be preserved, but it gave her a voice before an irreversible decision is made. That opportunity matters. Our experience demonstrates why the process must be protected, respected, and strengthened.”
— Carlos Camacho Jr., Co-Founder & Chief Communications Officer
The Final Memorandum of Agreement
The executed Memorandum of Agreement records the formal conclusion of the Section 106 consultation and establishes the measures adopted to address the undertaking’s adverse effects on the SS United States as a historic property.
The agreement should be understood for what it is and what it is not.
It is a formal historic-preservation agreement resulting from the federal consultation process. It does not guarantee physical preservation of the vessel, resolve every objection submitted by consulting parties, or necessarily determine the outcome of every separate federal, state, or local review associated with the proposed project.
To promote transparency and allow the public to review the agreement directly, the Foundation is making the final executed Memorandum of Agreement available below.
The record developed through Section 106 now forms part of the foundation for the next phase of the Foundation’s work. The conclusion of consultation does not erase the evidence submitted, the objections raised, or the questions that remain unanswered.
What Remains Unresolved
The conclusion of consultation does not erase the concerns documented during the review.
The Foundation continues to raise questions concerning the timing and extent of physical alterations performed while consultation remained underway, the consideration given to preservation alternatives, the treatment of environmental and hazardous-material evidence, and the transparency and sequencing of related federal decisions.
The Foundation is also continuing to examine the vessel’s present condition and the regulatory, environmental, and public-safety considerations associated with any future movement, deployment, or other irreversible action.
These matters should not be interpreted as conclusively resolved merely because one federal consultation process has reached its formal conclusion.
Why the Experience Matters Nationally
Section 106 does not compel a preservation outcome, but it provides communities with a formal opportunity to identify harm, challenge assumptions, propose alternatives, and place their concerns on the federal record before irreversible actions are taken.
Without a meaningful process, communities may lose their opportunity to speak before the places that embody their history are altered, removed, or destroyed.
The Foundation believes that the lessons emerging from the SS United States review demonstrate why Section 106 must not be weakened.
The process must instead be made more transparent, accountable, participatory, and capable of ensuring that consultation occurs early enough to influence, not merely document, an outcome.
The Foundation’s Advocacy Continues
The formal conclusion of consultation is not the conclusion of the Foundation’s work.
The Foundation will continue to:
- Monitor developments affecting the SS United States;
- Examine outstanding federal permitting and regulatory matters;
- Preserve and organize the administrative and factual record;
- Pursue lawful and constructive preservation opportunities;
- Raise environmental and public-safety concerns supported by evidence;
- Keep the public informed of material developments; and
- Apply the lessons of this experience to the national effort to protect and strengthen Section 106.
Section 106 does not compel a preservation outcome, but it provides communities with a formal opportunity to identify harm, challenge assumptions, propose alternatives, and place their concerns on the federal record before irreversible actions are taken.
Without a meaningful process, communities may lose their opportunity to speak before the places that embody their history are altered, removed, or destroyed.
The SS United States remains above the waves, and her final chapter has not yet been written. The conclusion of one federal process does not conclude the preservation effort. The Foundation remains committed to pursuing every lawful, honorable, and constructive avenue available and will continue informing the public as material developments occur.
Media Contact
Carlos Camacho Jr.
Co-Founder & Chief Communications Officer
SS United States Preservation Foundation, Inc.
(732) 664-5119
cco@ssuspreservationfoundation.com
