Review and Compliance

A partner in assisting federal, state and local governments meet their historic preservation obligations.

Review and Compliance

The Nevada State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) is a state agency created by the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended.  

The Review and Compliance staff work with some 45 federal agencies, state agencies and governmental divisions, municipalities, regional authorities, and private property owners to provide technical review and assist those parties in complying with federal law and regulation, state statutes and, in select instances, with regional planning ordinances.

As a service to state and local agencies conducting projects for which there is no federal nexus, the SHPO reviews projects for potential effects to cultural resources under the authority of state statutes.

The bulk of our work, however, assumes the form of consultation and review under the authority of Section 106 of the NHPA.  

SHPO Guidance on Section 106 Submissions, applies to all submissions and All Federal Agencies: 

Hard Copy Review of Submissions are REQUIRED: Submissions are reviewed in the order in which the hard copy documentation is received in accordance with the time frames found in the existing regulations, agreement documents, or policy. 

  • The SHPO uses the U.S. Postal Service to reply to adequately documented submissions.  The SHPO is not able to send mail with any tracking attached.  However, we encourage all agencies to contact us directly at to request a copy of correspondence or to request a status update on our timely review.  Additionally, if a federal agency wishes a scan of our reply letter, please note this in any submission to the office.  If this request is not present, any timely replies will be sent via regular mail. 
  • The SHPO, with a comparatively small review staff, regularly receives submissions from over 45 various federal agencies, local and Tribal governments, and other agencies.  All submissions must be complete and organized so that SHPO staff may begin their review.  Submissions that are not organized, do not contain a cover letter in each package, or are otherwise deficient are not considered adequately documented.  Only adequately documented submissions are subject to timeframes found in regulations, policies or agreement documents.  Additionally, after the initial hard copy submission, the SHPO may determine that some documents that will not be incorporated into the federally-required inventory of cultural resources may be submitted in electronic copy.  Please wait to receive the SHPO's decision in those cases.  
  • PLEASE NOTE: Out of respect for the mutually limited staff time of every public agency including the SHPO, and the requirements of the Section 106 process for adequate consultation, requests for SHPO participation in a meeting prior to the initiation of consultation or prior to the SHPO receipt and review of an adequately documented submission are not possible at this time. 

Meeting RequestsParties requesting information or meetings with the SHPO about specific undertakings must initiate this process by submitting a public records request for the administrative record.   The “Section 106” Process found in 36 CFR Part 800 assigns the responsibility for consulting with consulting parties on the  federal agency, or delegated agency.  As a consulting party in this process, the SHPO responds and communicates with federal agencies in writing, or in recorded meetings, to requests for review submitted in writing.  This ensures that there is a clear, understandable, and transparent public process for review of federal projects in Nevada.  Parties requesting clarification of the administrative record should submit their questions in writing to shpo-info [at]  Due to staffing and workload issues, meetings with SHPO to interpret or explain the administrative record are not possible currently.  The SHPO will ensure that you receive a response in a timely fashion.  The SHPO recommends directing all federal agency compliance questions to the appropriate responsible federal agency or their Federal Preservation Officer.  A list of these individuals can be found on the ACHP website here.

Recording of Meetings: The SHPO may request to record meetings with employees of federal, state, and local government agencies to ensure that there is a transparent public record consistent with the intent for federal and state law unless information protected under federal, state, or local confidentiality laws or regulations is discussed.  Requests for SHPO staff participation in meetings with other public employees, or consultants for public undertakings, on matters dealing with federal, state, or local government compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act will be assumed to be consent to a recording of the meeting. For all SHPO meetings, there is no expectation of privacy regarding any communications. Participation in a recorded meeting will be deemed as consent to be recorded. Information on SHPO systems is the property of the SHPO and may become official records. Please inquire with the SHPO concerning communication options.  

No Expedited Reviews:  Due to staffing issues, the SHPO will not accommodate any requests for expedited reviews.   If the SHPO reviews the documents and decides to reply, all reviews will occur within the timeframes established by regulations, statutes, or agreement documents. If no timeframes are identified in the appropriate authority, such as during the negotiation of an agreement document, the SHPO will reply as time permits.  Please keep in mind that to be fair to all parties, all projects are reviewed on a first-come first-served basis.  This makes the need for early consultation, as advised by the ACHP and 36 CFR Part 800 by federal agencies, even more important. It is strongly recommended by federal regulations that federal agencies ensure that they initiate the consultation process as early as possible to avoid any delays. Please keep in mind that the existing regulations and the guidance provided by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation encourage early consultation with consulting parties so that a broad range of alternatives may be considered during the planning process for the undertaking (36 CFR § 800.1(c)). Early initiation of consultation helps agencies avoid delays later in review and head off potential conflicts.