The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation held its June 2026 Business Meeting in Washington, D.C. The meeting included updates on ACHP committee structure, Section 106 regulations, Program Alternatives, housing and historic preservation guidance, legislative priorities, Preserve America reporting, and other Council business.
For NATHPO members, THPOs, Tribal leaders, and Tribal preservation partners, the most significant discussions focused on where Tribal perspectives are represented within ACHP’s committee structure and how ACHP will move forward with its review of the Section 106 regulations.
NATHPO Representation on the Council
Lakota Hobia. NATHPO Chair; Citizen Potawatomi Nation citizen; THPO for the Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians, also known as the Gun Lake Tribe.
Ira L. Matt. NATHPO Executive Director, Indigenous Diplomacy and Federal Relations; Séliš citizen of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes.
Meeting Snapshot
Date: Thursday, June 4, 2026
Time: 9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Eastern Time
Location: National Building Museum, First-Floor Auditorium, 401 F Street NW, Washington, D.C.
Public Access: Livestreamed through ACHP’s Facebook and YouTube channels
Agenda: ACHP June 2026 Business Meeting Agenda
- Vice Chairman’s Report
- Welcome
- Recent activities
- Council organization
- Executive Director’s Report
- Budget, staffing, and operations update
- Legislative Agenda
- Regulatory Updates
- Section 106 regulation review
- Program Alternatives updates
- Housing and Historic Preservation Guidance
- Preserve America Executive Order Section 3 Guidance
- New Business
- Adjournment
SECTION 106 REGULATION REVIEW
The Section 106 regulations review was the central regulatory issue discussed at the meeting. The Council approved a motion directing ACHP’s Executive Director and staff to develop a schedule with milestones and deliverables for revising the Section 106 implementing regulations within 30 days. Council members will have 60 days from the meeting to provide substantive feedback and proposed changes, and ACHP staff will provide updates to Council members every two weeks.
Important clarification: the 30-day timeline applies to ACHP staff’s development of the schedule, milestones, and deliverables. The 60-day timeline applies to ACHP Council members providing substantive feedback and proposed regulatory changes.
NATHPO maintains that any potential changes to the Section 106 regulations could have significant implications for Tribal Nations, especially regarding consultation, Tribal lands, properties of religious and cultural significance, and the ability of Tribal Nations to participate effectively in federal decision-making processes.
Because of those potential implications, early coordination is essential. During the meeting, NATHPO Chair Lakota Hobia, with support from NATHPO Executive Director Ira L. Matt, advanced a motion seeking to have ACHP commit to broad and meaningful coordination with Indian Tribes, Alaska Native communities, THPOs, and Native Hawaiian organizations before the next scheduled business meeting in September. That motion did not pass, but the need for early and meaningful Tribal coordination remains.
Motion offered by Lakota Hobia: “I make a motion that the Council engages concurrently in substantive discussions and ensures broad and meaningful coordination with Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native communities, Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, and Native Hawaiian organizations, to inform the process as set forth in the previous motion, and that input received through the coordination efforts be provided to the Council before the September meeting.”
While the motion did not pass, NATHPO was successful in placing the need for early Tribal and Native Hawaiian coordination on the record. NATHPO will continue working to ensure Tribal governments and THPOs are informed, engaged, and able to provide meaningful input as the Section 106 regulations review moves forward.
As Ira L. Matt noted following the meeting: “As the ACHP reviews Section 106 historic preservation regulations, the voices of Tribal Nations and Native Hawaiian communities must be part of this conversation early, not after decisions have already been shaped. While NATHPO is not a federal agency and is not the entity responsible for consultation or implementation of this regulatory review process, we nevertheless fully intend to continue working with Tribal Nations to host meetings and forums, share information, and help ensure Tribal governments and their communities are fully informed and able to effectively participate.”
Program Alternatives. ACHP staff provided updates on implementation of recently adopted Program Alternatives, including the Program Comment on Certain Housing, Building, and Transportation Undertakings and the exemption for Indigenous Knowledge-informed activities by Native Hawaiian organizations.
For the Native Hawaiian Organization Indigenous Knowledge exemption, NATHPO supported reconsidering whether annual reporting requirements are necessary given the limited number of undertakings reported under the exemption. At the same time, NATHPO encouraged ACHP to retain some form of rolling submission or periodic feedback process so implementation information can inform future preservation policy, guidance, training, and potential Program Alternatives.
As Lakota Hobia stated during the meeting:
“This exemption is important because it recognizes the perpetuation of Indigenous cultural practices that should not unnecessarily be subjected to federal regulatory review when those activities are Native Hawaiian-led, informed by Indigenous Knowledge, and connected to traditional cultural practices. NATHPO looks forward to working together with the ACHP and the Native Hawaiian community to ensure this exemption continues to support Indigenous Knowledge, cultural practice, and future policy development.”
ACHP staff also discussed the Housing, Building, and Transportation Program Comment. Staff reported that several agencies have notified ACHP that they are using the Program Comment. Initial reporting showed significant use of Appendix A and much more limited use of Appendix B. ACHP staff suggested that the Council may wish to consider whether the Program Comment should be simplified, narrowed, amended, or converted in part to an exemption.
NCSHPO also raised broader concerns about Program Comments, including the recently approved Army Warfighting Readiness Program Comment. NCSHPO noted that concerns about that Program Comment remain unresolved and that potential legal action remains a possibility.
NATHPO will continue monitoring any proposed amendments to Program Alternatives to ensure they are developed with appropriate Tribal and Native Hawaiian input and do not reduce consultation, limit consideration of Tribal concerns, or create new risks for Tribal cultural resources.
Housing and Historic Preservation Guidance. ACHP discussed forthcoming guidance responding to Executive Order 14394, Removing Regulatory Barriers for Affordable Home Construction. Section 3(b) of that Executive Order directs ACHP to issue guidance on reducing burdens on housing construction and infrastructure that facilitates housing construction under Section 106.
ACHP staff described several potential areas for guidance, including use of the Housing, Building, and Transportation Program Comment, application of ACHP’s housing and historic preservation policy principles, clarification of when housing rehabilitation and renovation activities are subject to Section 106 review, and opportunities to create housing through reuse of existing buildings and infrastructure.
NATHPO will continue to evaluate how national housing policy discussions intersect with Tribal consultation, Tribal lands, and Tribal cultural resources. Housing policy should not be advanced in a way that weakens consideration of historic properties, archaeological sites, cultural landscapes, or properties of religious and cultural importance to Tribes.
Legislative Priorities. ACHP discussed its legislative agenda and the Council’s role in advising Congress and the administration on historic preservation matters. ACHP staff explained that legislative priorities help guide staff analysis, committee work, and potential Council comments on preservation-related legislation.
NATHPO supported ACHP adopting legislative priorities that strengthen the national preservation program and guide the Council’s advice to Congress and the administration. NATHPO also emphasized that improving federal review must not mean reducing Tribal consultation, weakening protections, or diminishing the role of Tribes, THPOs, SHPOs, and consulting parties.
NATHPO reiterated its strong support for reauthorizing and making permanent the Historic Preservation Fund. NATHPO specifically highlighted the need for THPO funding to be defined and predictable.
As Lakota Hobia noted during the meeting, when unobligated or unused THPO funding is recaptured, one improvement would be to have those funds “redistributed among eligible THPOs” rather than lost to Tribal preservation programs.
Preserve America Executive Order Section 3 Guidance. ACHP discussed federal agency reporting under Section 3 of Executive Order 13287, Preserve America. Under that Executive Order, federal agencies periodically report on their progress in identifying, using, protecting, and managing historic properties under their ownership or control. ACHP uses those agency reports to prepare a report to the President. The next ACHP report to the President is due in February 2027.
ACHP staff noted that advisory guidelines are being developed for federal agencies as they prepare their next progress reports. These guidelines help ACHP understand agency stewardship practices and identify broader federal preservation themes.
Several recommendations were raised during the discussion. GSA suggested that the reporting process should consider the effect of reduced qualified preservation staffing within federal agencies and how staffing levels affect Section 106 implementation and historic property stewardship. Another recommendation focused on addressing federal property disposal, given the administration’s focus on disposing of federal properties.
NATHPO recommended that ACHP include a question asking how co-stewardship, co-management, and other partnership-based stewardship models are helping federal agencies improve the identification, protection, use, and management of historic properties. NATHPO noted that this could help identify practical ways agencies are working more effectively with Tribal Nations, Native Hawaiian communities, states, local governments, and other partners while supporting both preservation and agency mission needs.
Key Updates from the Meeting
Council Committee Structure. Early in the meeting, ACHP Vice Chairman Travis Voyles discussed the Council’s standing committee structure and proposed committee rosters. The standing committees include the Regulations and Governance Committee, the Preservation Initiatives Committee, and the Tribal and Indigenous Peoples Committee.
NATHPO welcomed the opportunity to continue serving as Vice Chair of the Tribal and Indigenous Peoples Committee and emphasized the importance of that committee’s work on burial sites, human remains, funerary belongings, Indigenous Knowledge, Native Hawaiian issues, and other matters affecting Indigenous Peoples.
NATHPO also raised concern that NATHPO, NCSHPO, and the National Trust were not formally included on the Regulations and Governance Committee. That committee is expected to address Section 106 regulations, improvements to the Section 106 process, policy and guidance, nationwide Program Alternatives, and internal ACHP operating procedures.
NATHPO emphasized that Tribal issues should not be confined to the Tribal and Indigenous Peoples Committee alone. Because Section 106 regulations, Program Alternatives, and related policies directly affect Tribal Nations and THPOs, Tribal perspectives need to be represented where those decisions are shaped.
NCSHPO also requested to be added to the Regulations and Governance Committee, noting that SHPOs, like THPOs, work with Section 106 on a daily basis and bring practical implementation experience to the Council’s regulatory and policy discussions. The Vice Chairman stated that members may participate in committees beyond their formal assignments, but the proposed committee structure would proceed for now.
Other ACHP Updates. ACHP also provided updates on agency operations, staffing, appropriations, office renovations, information technology needs, and internship support. These updates provided general context on ACHP’s current operating capacity and internal administration.
NATHPO’s Role. As a member organization of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, NATHPO works to ensure that Tribal perspectives, THPO expertise, and the interests of Tribal Nations are represented in national preservation policy discussions.
NATHPO’s role includes monitoring ACHP actions, participating in Council discussions, coordinating with preservation partners, engaging with THPOs and Tribal leaders, and providing comments or recommendations when issues affect Tribal Nations and Tribal cultural resources.
Next Steps for NATHPO. NATHPO will host additional virtual forums with Tribes and THPOs to continue elevating Tribal voices in this process. We are also planning a panel conversation at its upcoming conference in Albuquerque to share information and gather additional feedback and perspectives from Tribal leaders, THPOs, and preservation partners.
Resources
- ACHP June 2026 Business Meeting Notice
- ACHP June 2026 Business Meeting Agenda
- ACHP livestream through Facebook and YouTube
- NATHPO resources on the Section 106 regulation review
- June 2026 Meeting Book Materials
For questions about NATHPO’s engagement with the ACHP business meeting or related preservation policy issues, please contact Ira L. Matt, NATHPO Executive Director, Indigenous Diplomacy and Federal Relations, at Ira@NATHPO.org.