Historical sites at risk in proposed changes to National Historic Preservation Act

SALT LAKE CITY — If the majority of board members on the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, or ACHP, get their way, federal agencies will no longer have to seek the input of stakeholders like tribes, archaeological organizations and state historic preservation offices in the permitting process. This comes after a board vote last month to rewrite section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

Tina Hart, president of the Utah Professional Archaeological Council, or UPAC, has some serious concerns about the proposed changes.

"It's important because federal agencies don't have all the answers all by themselves," Hart explained. "Tribal members, tribal historic preservation officers, they have special knowledge about places that are culturally important to tribes that archeologists may not know about."

Hart said the proposed changes would give federal agencies the choice as to whether they would want to consult with those groups. She added that agencies wouldn't be necessarily required to manage impacts to historical sites either.

"That text shifts to, 'They must address adverse effects.' It doesn't specifically say to avoid the effect or minimize it or mitigate for it. It just says to address it, which introduces a lot of vagueness," Hart said.

Hart plans to take the concerns of UPAC members to Gov. Spencer Cox and Utah's congressional delegation in Washington, D.C. She said once the proposed changes are published in the federal register, there will likely be a 30-day comment period. Ultimately, the ACHP will make the final call.

"We knew that this was coming," Hart said. "And the National Historic Preservation Act isn't the only one that's in the crosshairs right now. Right now, the federal government is taking a broad look at streamlining federal permitting across the board."

Hart adds that while the changes might be intended to speed up the process, they could instead send more fights to be held up in the courts.

A statement from the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers executive director, Ira L. Matt, posted on the organization's website, read in part, "The ACHP's proposed regulations are an affront to Tribal sovereignty. Any effort to diminish our voice or disregard the places, traditions, and practices we hold sacred is egregious and represents a violation of the federal government's trust and treaty responsibilities that is neither morally nor ethically defensible."

Related topics