Active Case

War Room: Fight Back

ACHP Proposes New Regulations that Devastate Protections for Historic Properties

On Friday, July 17,  2026  the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s Vice Chairman sent a draft revision of 36 C.F.R. Part 800 to members of the Council asking for their vote on these new Section 106 regulations through email by Friday July 24, 2026. You can read the redlined version here and the draft here.

These revisions would devastate our ability to protect and preserve historic places and would dramatically curtail public participation in federal decisions that affect local communities. They strip the regulations of the language for meaningful consultation, change the definition of consultation, eliminate the requirements for “avoidance, minimization, and mitigation,” eliminate protections for Traditional Cultural Landscapes, and imperil thousands of significant cultural and historical sites who will not meet the new definition of “historic.” They are a betrayal of Congress’s intent when it passed the NHPA sixty years ago, and a betrayal of the government-to-government relationship with Tribal Nations. 

We convened a strategy session on Sunday evening to review what these changes would do and discuss what steps we can take as preservation advocates. You can watch the recording below or view and download the presentation here. Once ACHP votes to approve the draft, it will be sent to the OIRA for review and will then be published on the Federal Register with a 30 day public comment period.

We urge you all to begin the process of drafting comment letters now in order to make your voice heard and your comment count. You can do this by focusing on 8 key points:

  • Answer ACHP’s Numbered Questions: Cite the specific question number from the NPRM you’re responding to.
  • Lead With Evidence: Real projects, data, costs, and delays outweigh opinions in the record.
  • Cite the Exact Provision: Reference the specific section — e.g., § 800.16(k)(2) — not the rule in general.
  • Propose Alternative Text: Don’t just object — suggest the specific fix you want to see adopted.
  • State Who You Are: Tribes, SHPOs, CRM firms, and local governments each carry distinct weight.
  • Preserve Issues for Litigation: Courts generally only review arguments raised during the comment period.
  • Keep It Organized & Concise: Executive summary, section headers, one clear ask per point.
  • Nail the Mechanics: 30-day deadline; submit via regulations.gov with the docket/RIN number. We will let you know when the comment period has started and how to submit when it is time.
  • If you know of a project where federal agencies are already cutting corners in the Section 106 review process, contact us confidentially on Signal (marionchp.106) or by email (fightback@culturalheritagepartners.com). Let us know what you are seeing and hearing in your communities.

Resources

In the News

CNN

"Trump administration seeking to rewrite historic preservation rules to smooth way for pet projects”

by  (

The New Republic

"Trump’s Latest Plan to Sell Your History Out From Under You”

by Timothy Noah (

The washington Post

"Trump officials seek to weaken historic-preservation reviews of projects”

by Dan Diamond and Jake Spring (July 20, 2026)

The Atlantic

"Inside Trump’s Rush Job to Build His Arch”

by Janay Kingsberry (July 19, 2026)

Times-Standard

"Trump administration’s EO may result in roll back of historic preservation efforts”

by Robert Schaulis (March 10, 2025)

New York Times

"The Words Federal Agencies Are Discouraged From Using Under Trump”

by Karen Yourish, Annie Daniel, Saurabh Datar, Isaac White and Lazaro Gamio (March 7, 2025)

Follow for Upates

Follow Cultural Heritage Partners for the latest developments:

Media Contact