Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP)

Reader task: Understand the authority, structure, and compliance obligations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), determine when federal grant projects trigger ACHP involvement, and navigate Section 106 review workflows.

What it is and who runs it

As described on the official page on 2026-11-08, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) is an independent federal agency of the United States Government. Established by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) and codified at 54 U.S.C. §§ 304101–304108, the Council serves as the primary policy advisor to the President and Congress on national historic preservation. While statutory provisions are detailed in our National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Sections 106 and 110 guide, the ACHP is the autonomous agency overseeing Section 106 compliance across federal departments.

The agency is governed by a 24-member statutory Council (54 U.S.C. § 304101) representing federal, state, tribal, local, and public interests, supported by 24 professional staff in Washington, D.C.:

• A Chairman appointed by the President from the general public, confirmed by the Senate;
• The Secretary of the Interior, Architect of the Capitol, Secretary of Agriculture, and heads of seven other designated federal agencies;
• One Governor and one Mayor appointed by the President;
• The heads of NCSHPO, NATHPO, and the National Trust for Historic Preservation;
• Four appointed preservation experts (architecture, history, archeology) and three public members;
• One appointed member of an Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization.

Appointed members serve four-year terms. Day-to-day casework, regulations, training, and reviews are managed by professional staff across the Offices of Federal Agency Programs, Native American Affairs, and Policy and Legislative Affairs.

Eligibility (summary, with the official source)

As described on the official page on 2026-11-08, the ACHP does not award competitive research grants. Instead, eligibility defines which projects fall under Council oversight.

Under 54 U.S.C. § 306108 and 36 CFR § 800.16(y), ACHP oversight applies to any federal “undertaking”—a project, activity, or program funded, permitted, or licensed by a federal agency. This includes direct federal activities, permits, grants, a federal cooperative agreement, or a research subaward from agencies such as NEH, NSF, or DoD.

Consulting parties under 36 CFR § 800.2 include:

• Grant Applicants and Grantees: Academic institutions and investigators receiving federal funds;
• SHPOs and THPOs: State and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers administering cultural resource inventories;
• Tribal Nations: Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian Organizations with ancestral ties to affected sites;
• Local Governments and the Public: Municipalities and parties with a demonstrated interest.

What it funds or requires

As described on the official page on 2026-11-08, the ACHP is an oversight body, not a grant maker; preservation grants are administered separately by the National Park Service (NPS) through the Historic Preservation Fund. The ACHP requires procedural compliance under 36 CFR Part 800 (authorized under 54 U.S.C. § 304108):

• Historic Property Consideration: Agencies must evaluate effects on National Register-listed or eligible properties before committing funds or approvals.
• Opportunity to Comment: Agencies must allow the ACHP reasonable opportunity to comment prior to final decisions.
• Stakeholder Consultation: Agencies must consult with SHPOs, THPOs, tribes, and applicants to avoid or mitigate harm.
• Mandatory e106 Filing: Agencies must submit adverse effect notices through the ACHP portal (e106).
• Binding Agreements: Where adverse effects occur, parties must execute and file an MOA or Programmatic Agreement (PA).

Application or compliance steps

As described on the official page on 2026-11-08 and set forth in 36 CFR Part 800 Subpart B, compliance follows a four-step review process. For a university Office of Sponsored Programs (OSP) or principal investigator conducting archaeological field research, these steps integrate into project management:

1. Initiate Review (36 CFR § 800.3): The funding agency determines if the project is an undertaking with potential to affect historic properties, notifies the SHPO/THPO, and invites consulting parties.
2. Identify Historic Properties (36 CFR § 800.4): The agency defines the Area of Potential Effects (APE) and evaluates whether cultural resources meet National Register criteria. If no historic properties are affected, the finding is documented; if no objection occurs within 30 days, review concludes.
3. Assess Adverse Effects (36 CFR § 800.5): The agency applies the Criteria of Adverse Effect (36 CFR § 800.5(a)(1)). An effect is adverse if it diminishes the integrity of location, design, setting, materials, or feeling. The agency consults to reach a formal finding.
4. Resolve Adverse Effects (36 CFR § 800.6): If adverse effects are found, the agency notifies the ACHP via e106. Consulting parties negotiate mitigation measures (such as data recovery or documentation) and formalize them in an MOA or PA filed with the ACHP.

Typical timeline phases (no calendar dates as facts)

Review phases follow standard regulatory response clocks in 36 CFR Part 800:

• Phase 1: Scoping and Consultation Initiation: The agency submits project documentation; SHPO/THPO has 30 calendar days to respond.
• Phase 2: Survey and Identification: Field surveys and cultural resource reports are completed; consulting agencies review within 30 calendar days.
• Phase 3: Effect Assessment: The agency submits its effect finding; consulting parties have 30 calendar days to concur or object.
• Phase 4: Resolution and Agreement: For adverse effects, notice is filed via e106. The ACHP has 15 calendar days to decide whether to participate. Multi-party MOA negotiation typically spans several months.
• Phase 5: Implementation: Agreed mitigation stipulations are fulfilled during project execution.

Common mistakes

As described on the official page on 2026-11-08, applicants and research administrators often encounter avoidable delays from recurring missteps:

• Treating ACHP as a Funder: Applying to ACHP for grants; the Council oversees compliance but awards no research grants.
• Delayed Review Initiation: Waiting until grant awards are finalized or construction begins before starting Section 106, risking stop-work orders.
• Unauthorized Direct Filings: Grantees consulting ACHP or SHPO without federal agency authorization; the legal duty belongs to the federal action agency.
• Constricting the APE: Limiting the APE strictly to excavation trenches while ignoring staging areas, access roads, or visual viewscapes.
• Conflating SHPO and Tribal Consultation: Assuming SHPO approval satisfies tribal obligations; agencies must consult directly with federally recognized tribes on ancestral sites.
• Failing to Notify ACHP: Executing an MOA with an SHPO without submitting the required e106 notice to ACHP.

Related programs (table)

The federal historic preservation framework divides responsibilities across several statutory entities. Connecting history and archaeology methodologies, the table below compares these related programs as of 2026-11-08:

Entity or Program	Statutory Authority	Primary Role	Administers Grant Funds?	Core Operational Trigger
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP)	54 U.S.C. §§ 304101–304108	Independent federal oversight; issues 36 CFR Part 800; advises President/Congress	No	Federal undertakings; adverse effect filings via e106
National Park Service (NPS) Cultural Resources	54 U.S.C. § 302101 et seq.	Maintains National Register of Historic Places; sets Secretary Standards	Yes (Historic Preservation Fund)	National Register nominations; federal preservation grant competitions
State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs)	54 U.S.C. § 302301 et seq.	State cultural surveys and inventories; primary Section 106 reviewer	Yes (Subgrants from federal HPF)	State-level federal project notifications; statewide preservation planning
Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs)	54 U.S.C. § 302702	Assumes SHPO duties on tribal lands; protects ancestral resources	Yes (Direct NPS tribal grants)	Undertakings on tribal lands or affecting sacred sites
National Trust for Historic Preservation	54 U.S.C. § 312102	Public advocacy; site stewardship; legal defense of historic sites	Yes (Private non-profit small grants)	Private preservation initiatives, legal amicus filings

FAQ

What is the difference between ACHP and the National Park Service (NPS)?

The ACHP is an independent oversight agency that writes and administers Section 106 regulations (36 CFR Part 800) for federal undertakings. The National Park Service (NPS), within the Department of the Interior, manages the National Register of Historic Places, sets the Secretary’s Standards, and distributes Historic Preservation Fund grants.

Does the ACHP award grants to researchers or universities?

No. The ACHP is an independent regulatory agency, not a grant-awarding foundation. Investigators seeking preservation funding should apply to the National Park Service, the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), or state SHPO subgrants.

When does the ACHP directly participate in a Section 106 review?

Most Section 106 reviews are resolved between the agency, applicant, and SHPO/THPO. The ACHP enters direct consultation only when an undertaking meets criteria under 36 CFR Part 800 Appendix A, such as substantial impacts to significant historic properties, major controversy, or threats to National Historic Landmarks.

What is the ACHP e106 system?

The e106 system is the ACHP’s official electronic submission portal. Federal agencies use e106 to notify the Council of adverse effects, submit documentation, or file executed MOAs and Programmatic Agreements.

Can a federal grant be delayed due to ACHP review?

Yes. Section 106 requires federal agencies to complete review before approving expenditures. Unresolved cultural resource issues can delay grant disbursements, permits, or construction.

Sources

• Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), “About the ACHP”, official overview: achp.gov/about, read 2026-11-08.
• Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), “Council Members”, leadership roster: achp.gov/about/council-members, read 2026-11-08.
• Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), “Protecting Historic Properties: Section 106 Review Process”, regulations: achp.gov/protecting-historic-properties, read 2026-11-08.
• United States Code, Title 54, Subtitle III, Division A, Chapter 3041: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (54 U.S.C. §§ 304101–304108), Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School: law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/54/3041, read 2026-11-08.
• Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36, Chapter VIII, Part 800: “Protection of Historic Properties” (36 CFR Part 800), eCFR: ecfr.gov/current/title-36/chapter-VIII/part-800, read 2026-11-08.
• Federal Register, “Advisory Council on Historic Preservation: Agency Overview and Notices”, National Archives: federalregister.gov/agencies/advisory-council-on-historic-preservation, read 2026-11-08.