On October 29 at 9:30 a.m., the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a hearing focused on the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and its Section 106 review process. Lawmakers discussed how preservation intersects with federal permitting, reflecting the growing attention to efficiency, consultation, and the balance between development and protection of historic and cultural resources.

Committee Chair Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) opened the hearing by emphasizing that Section 106 was designed as a procedural safeguard, not a barrier to progress, and questioned whether its implementation has expanded beyond the scope Congress had intended. He cited examples of infrastructure and energy projects delayed by lengthy review processes, calling for a recalibrated approach that maintains heritage protection while reducing uncertainty for developers.

Ranking Member Senator Martin Heinrich (D-NM) offered a complementary but distinct perspective, reaffirming that the NHPA ensures federal agencies consider historic and cultural impacts before approving projects. He underscored the importance of consultation with Tribal nations and local communities, noting that adequate federal staffing is essential to efficiently process permits and uphold preservation standards.

Witnesses included Dr. Chris Merritt, Utah’s State Historic Preservation Officer; Mr. Andy McDonald, Environmental Compliance Manager for Montana-Dakota Utilities; and Mr. Steven Concho, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer for the Pueblo of Acoma. Each shared views on how Section 106 operates in practice, addressing the challenges of staffing, consultation timelines, and coordination among agencies and stakeholders.

Members from both sides of the aisle posed questions to the witnesses inquiring about possible refinements to the Section 106 process. While witness views varied on the efficiency and scope of Section 106, when Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) asked if any of the witnesses supported eliminating the process altogether, all three affirmed that Section 106 must remain in place as a vital safeguard for historic and cultural resources.

The National Trust submitted written testimony for the hearing record, underscoring the importance of Section 106 as a cornerstone of preservation practice and a critical mechanism for transparency and accountability in federal decision-making.

Download the National Trust's full written testimony (PDF).

The full recording of the hearing and the written testimonies from all three witnesses can be found on the committee website.