Section 106 guides how federal projects consider impacts on historic and archaeological resources. In Colorado, extensive federal land, tribal consultation requirements, and large-scale infrastructure development dynamics make early coordination essential.
Section 106 is a federal review process used to evaluate how federally funded, permitted, or licensed undertakings may affect historic properties and archaeological resources. It applies to projects funded, licensed, or permitted by federal agencies and involves identifying cultural resources, evaluating their eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and consulting to develop strategies to minimize, avoid, or mitigate negative effects.
Section 106 Regulatory History
Section 106 was established under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), established in 1966. The NHPA created a federal framework for identifying and considering effects to historic properties during federal undertakings. This law also established the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), which oversees the Section 106 review process and consultation framework.
Section 106 was created as a structure for agencies to assume responsibility for any consequences of their actions on historic properties and develop mitigation measures. It includes all activities for NHPA compliance and federal regulations for the use, protection, and enhancement of historic and cultural properties. Local governments may also be included in the consultation process, as well as tribal representatives.
How are Section 106 Requirements Fulfilled?
When a project with historic relevance is identified, federal agency stakeholders follow four steps to fulfill Section 106 requirements:
- Initiate the consultation by notifying the appropriate parties, including the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO), certified local governments, and members of the public.
- Identify properties that may be affected by the project and determine their eligibility or listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)
- Assess the effects of the project on the existing resources in consultation with interested parties.
- Resolve adverse effects by developing and evaluating alternatives that could avoid, minimize, or mitigate these effects on historic resources.
The consultation process may result in a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) or a Programmatic Agreement (PA).
Why is Colorado representative of western federal land under Section 106?
While Section 106 establishes a consistent federal framework nationwide, its implementation in Colorado reflects the state’s unusually large amount of federally managed land, extensive archaeological resources, and complex consultation landscape. Compared to many eastern states, where Section 106 review is often tied to urban development or individual construction parcels, compliance work in Colorado frequently occurs across large public landscapes managed by agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Forest Service, and Bureau of Reclamation.
This federal land emphasis shapes the scale and character of cultural resource management within the state. Section 106 projects in Colorado commonly involve large transportation corridors, energy infrastructure, fuels reduction programs, recreation planning, mining, and public lands management activities. These undertakings may cover extensive survey areas and require coordination between multiple agencies, consulting parties, and Tribal Nations.
Colorado also contains exceptionally dense and culturally significant archaeological landscapes, especially in the southwestern portion of the state. Areas associated with Ancestral Puebloan occupations often contain high site densities, meaning even relatively small undertakings may require substantial archaeological identification efforts and careful avoidance planning.
In Colorado, tribal consultation often extends beyond tribes currently located within Colorado because many Indigenous communities with ancestral ties to the region were displaced historically. Depending on project location, consultation may involve Ute, Pueblo, Navajo, Apache, and Plains-affiliated groups, creating a broader and more complex consultation environment than in many other states.
Colorado’s State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), housed within History Colorado’s office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, also plays a particularly active role in review and consultation. The state has developed extensive site inventory systems, architectural history documentation programs, and programmatic agreements that help agencies manage recurring project types while maintaining compliance with federal preservation law.
How are Programmatic Agreements Helpful in Colorado for Section 106 Review?
Because many Colorado undertakings occur across large federal landscapes, the state places a strong emphasis on early identification of an Area of Potential Effects (APE) and proactively coordinates with the SHPO and tribal leaders. Projects in Colorado often involve ground disturbance, transportation corridors, energy infrastructure, visual changes to a historic landscape, or impact access to a culturally significant area, so agencies are encouraged to consult early and often to avoid delayed findings of adverse effects. This goes beyond the immediate project footprint, extending to broader cultural and historical contexts, particularly in rural and federally managed areas.
Programmatic Agreements (PAs) are especially important in Colorado because of the scale and frequency of federally assisted projects across the state. PAs streamline Section 106 compliance for recurring or large-scale undertakings. For example, transportation projects administered by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) often rely on PAs to establish agreed-upon review procedures, exemption categories, and mitigation frameworks.
These agreements allow agencies to streamline recurring review processes while still addressing effects to historic properties and archaeological resources.
How are Tribal Considerations Addressed Within Section 106 Compliance?
Tribal consultation is another critical component of Section 106 review in Colorado, even when the project site is far from present-day reservations. Many federally recognized tribes maintain ancestral and cultural ties to lands within the state, requiring federal agencies to engage in meaningful consultation when a project may affect cultural properties, archaeological sites, or traditional cultural places, or historic landscapes. Although applicants and consultants often assist with coordination, federal agencies retain legal responsibility for consultation under Section 106.
The complexity of consultation in Colorado, particularly on federally managed land and in areas with overlapping tribal interests, often requires careful coordination between agencies, applicants, consultants, and Tribal Nations. Successful Section 106 review depends on early planning, clear communication, and a solid understanding of both federal compliance procedures and tribal consultation expectations. FirstCarbon Solutions (FCS), an ADEC Innovation, supports clients through these complex cultural resource and environmental review processes across Colorado and the broader western United States.
With experience integrating cultural resource compliance into larger permitting and environmental review strategies, FCS helps public and private sector clients navigate Section 106 requirements while supporting project planning, agency coordination, and preservation compliance efforts.
