Overview
- The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation produced a draft notice Tuesday that would add a “geographically compact” test and state that “noncompact, unimproved natural features” do not qualify for protection under Section 106.
- The draft would lower review and consultation burdens by replacing strict 'avoid, minimize or mitigate' language with 'reasonable mitigation measures' and by moving the proposal through a reported 30-day public comment window before final steps.
- Former ACHP officials and preservation lawyers say the changes would let large construction and resource-extraction projects proceed with less review, putting sites such as Oak Flat/Chi’chil Biłdagoteel at immediate risk of irreversible harm.
- Cultural Heritage Partners and other preservation groups have launched coordinated legal and public-response efforts, created an online 'war room', and are pressing Congress for statutory fixes like Rep. Dina Titus’s proposed protections.
- If the rule is published and finalized quickly, advocates warn it will change how federal agencies assess historic impacts nationwide, likely prompting more lawsuits, faster project approvals, and heightened fights in Congress.