- October 24, 2026
- Darren Tobia
In 1975, a highway construction project near the Abbott Farm National Historic Park in Mercer County, triggered a Section 106 review, requiring an archaeological dig of the site.
This led to a discovery of prehistoric Native American artifacts and the findings of the firm who oversaw the dig — Louis Berger & Associates — ended up filling 15 volumes of research about the 10,000-year history of indigenous people living along the Delaware River Vally.
Richard Grubbs was one of the archaeologists working at the site and he learned firsthand the importance of this particular provision of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.
“All of that would not have happened if the roads were built without Section 106 applying,” Grubb said.
Now, Grubb, who founded his own namesake firm Richard Grubb & Associates in 1988, is among the preservationists sounding the alarms about efforts that could dismantle Section 106.
In July, the Advisory Council of Historic Preservation voted to advance sweeping changes to a part of the law — Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This part of the law requires community involvement and public participation that in the past have unearthed important archaeological findings and led to important historic landmarks and tribal sites being protected.
More pressing, a bill was introduced last month in the Senate known as the Bipartisan American Affordability Act and Jobs Act of 2026 that would achieve the same goal only through passing a new federal law. A cloture vote on the bill is scheduled for Nov. 9. A group called the Section 106 Coalition is planning a rally in the steps of the United States Capitol that day.
“It’s not a lost cause if the Senate does vote this in, but it just means we’ve got to keep on working and trying to prevent this from becoming law,” said Katherine Sorrell, a lawyer for Cultural Heritage Partners, the firm that founded the coalition. “If it passes the Senate, then the next big fight is to defeat it in the House.”
Even if the bill is defeated, Sorrell’s coalition will still have to contend with the Advisory Council of Historic Preservation’s effort to change Section 106 through regulatory means.
“We’re probably in for a three to five year battle to secure historic preservation,” she said. “Our goal is not just to win and preserve the status quo, but to strengthen these processes and build a coalition that protects them in the future.”
Two Democratic Senators, Sheldon Whitehouse and Martin Heinrich, are sponsoring this bill. Sorrell believes that some Democrats could side with Republicans on this issue as a concession to get more green-energy initiatives, namely offshore wind turbines, which President Donald Trump has opposed. Whitehouse has been a major proponent of wind farms and many new turbines have been proposed in places that would trigger Section 106 review, for instance, along the coast of Nantucket.
“We’re not willing to accept that compromise,” Sorrell said. “That’s not a good deal for anybody.”
These proposed changes are coming at a time when the Bureau of Land Management has proposed revoking a 20-year ban on oil and gas development near the Chaco Culture National Historical Park. The Forest Service also proposed repealing the “roadless rule,” established in 2001, a measure that could open 45 million acres of protected forest to the construction of new roads and logging, including near tribal lands. Section 106 not only triggers review of historic landmarks but also properties on tribal land.
“Someone could go ahead and build a data center next to an Indian burial mound, and nobody could do anything about it,” Grubb said. “We could have a situation where an archaeological site gets destroyed and nobody knows anything about it, whereas now we have an opportunity to find a site.”
Grubb said that many who work in the preservation field believe there are places where Section 106 could be streamlined, but “gutting” it would have the adverse effect of slowing the process down as it could lead to more lawsuits and a “logjam at the federal level.”
“That’s the message we’re trying to get across to politicians,” Grubb said.
Vincent Grassi, a press officer for the New Jersey Historic Preservation Office, said the department has “serious concern” about the proposed changes and he believes Section 106 review process helps “increase efficiency” of proposals.
“The DEP values the longstanding process by which meaningful input from the public or state and local governments is incorporated as part of a collaborative, consultative framework that Congress established in the National Historic Preservation Act,” Grassi said.
For more information on the Section 106 Coalition, visit their website.
