The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation voted today to establish a timeline for considering revisions to the 800 regulations that underpin Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).
ACHP Vice Chair Travis Voyles had announced in February that the Council would consider changes to the regulations. At their summer business meeting today in Washington, DC, the Council approved a motion offered by the Interior Department that called on the Council to “expedite” the drafting of revisions by directing Council staff to develop a schedule, including milestones and deliverables, within 30 days; and give Councill members 60 days from today to “provide substantive feedback and proposed changes to current regulations.” The motion does not direct any specific changes to the 800 regulations or establish a deadline for when the Council may issue or vote on any changes.
The Council voted down a motion from the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (NATHPO) that called on the Council to engage in substantive discissions and ensure “broad and meaningful coordination with Indian tribes . . . to inform the process” set forth in the Interior Department’s motion. After the vote, Vice Chair Voyles pledged that the Council would engage meaningfully with Tribes and THPOs.
ACRA’s Government Relations Committee is closely tracking the ACHP’s review of the 800 regulations and working with its preservation partners to ensure that any changes do not undermine the Section 106 review process.
Please expand on the reasoning for voting down the THPO motion to engage in substantive discussions. It appears as though you are going through the motions and are not actually open to considering the needs of SHPOs, THPOs, and other interested parties and are seeking to weaken the Section 106 process.
Hi Andrew –
Not all members provided the reasoning for their vote, but Vice Chair Voyles noted that he voted the way he did because he felt that the motion from NATHPO was unclear as to how it would be applied in relation to the timeline motion that was voted on immediately before. As noted in the post above, he emphasized his commitment to engaging with the Tribes meaningfully in the process while sharing his explanation on the reasoning for his vote.
ACRA does not have a seat on the Council and therefore does not vote in its business meeting. As an organization, ACRA does work very closely with other preservation-related organizations – including SHPOs and THPOs – on all issues that affect historic preservation, including those discussed in the ACHP meeting. We remain committed to working with our preservation partners on this and all other issues in our issue jurisdiction.