Introduction In its role overseeing the Section 106 review process the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) works with a range of stakeholders to ensure that Section 106 reviews are carried out effectively and without unnecessary delay. In this capacity we occasionally receive inquiries regarding the time limits that govern consultation between lead federal agencies and others in the Section 106 review process.

The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) has seen an increasing number of Section 106 reviews involving large scale historic properties of religious and cultural significance to Indian tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations (NHOs). Improvements in federal agency consultation with Indian tribes and NHOs and greater recognition of their expertise in identifying historic properties of significance to them have likely contributed to this increase. It is equally likely that there have also been increasing development pressures in places not previously developed. These large scale properties are often comprised of multiple, linked features that form a cohesive “landscape.” The recognition, understanding, and treatment of such places can be a struggle for the nontribal or non-Native Hawaiian participants in the Section 106 process, partly due to the lack of experience in addressing such places and partly due to the lack of guidance regarding these traditional cultural landscapes.

A federal agency is allowed, in some circumstances, to delegate to its applicants the responsibility to initiate consultation pursuant to the regulations that implement Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), “Protection of Historic Properties” (36 CFR Part 800). The provision in Section 800.2(c)(4) of the regulations has been used frequently by federal agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission, the Surface Transportation Board, and the Department of Health and Human Services.

The 1992 amendments to the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) included provisions for Indian tribes to assume the responsibilities of the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) on tribal lands, and establish the position of a Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO).1 The regulations implementing Section 106 of the NHPA use the term “THPO” to mean the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer under Section 101(d)(2) of the NHPA.

This guidance has been updated. Please see Guidance on Assistance to Consulting Parties in the Section 106 Review Process.

Sample stipulations for the development of Section 106 agreements. The examples in this section will assist federal agencies in engaging the public in carrying out mitigation measures and provide examples for a range of approaches that may further public education and awareness building, the creation of educational materials for specific audiences, and heritage tourism efforts. These kinds of stipulations also present opportunities to involve students and youth in learning about or working with historic properties.

The ACHP offers this as a reference for Native Hawaiian organizations, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) staff, and federal agency staff with responsibility for compliance with Section 106. In 2008, the ACHP adopted the ACHP Policy Statement on the ACHP’s Interaction with Native Hawaiian Organizations. The policy is intended to set “forth actions the ACHP will take to oversee the implementation of its responsibilities under the NHPA with respect to the role afforded to Native Hawaiian organizations in the NHPA.”

This document offers guidance on preservation conditions, which are restrictions and conditions on transfers of federal real property put in place prior to transfer to ensure the long-term preservation of a historic property's historic significance.