[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 242 (Monday, December 16, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66057-66059]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-31759]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Programmatic Agreement

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management (BLM), DOI.

ACTION: Notice of proposed national programmatic agreement; request for 
comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to invite comments on a proposal 
to execute a programmatic agreement among the Bureau of Land 
Management, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the 
National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers. The 
agreement would establish an alternate structure, to substitute for the 
standard regulatory process in 36 CFR Part 800, for complying with 
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Representatives 
of the Bureau of Land Management have been meeting with representatives 
of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the National 
Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers to develop concepts 
for the proposed agreement and to prepare a draft agreement. The Bureau 
of Land Management requests comments from parties interested in 
historic preservation and other uses of public lands.

DATES: Comments should be received by January 15, 1997.

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, you may mail comments to the Bureau 
of Land Management, Administrative Record, Room 401LS, 1849 C Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20240, or you may hand-deliver comments to the 
Bureau of Land Management, Administrative Record, Room 401, 1620 L St., 
N.W., Washington, D.C. You may also transmit comments electronically 
via the Internet to WOC[email protected]. Please include ``attn: 240'' 
and your name and return address in your internet message. If you do 
not receive a confirmation from the system that we have received your 
Internet message, contact us directly at (202) 452-5030. You will be 
able to review comments, including names and street addresses of 
respondents, at BLM's Regulatory Management Team office, Room 401, 1620 
L St., N.W., Washington, D.C., during regular business hours (7:45 a.m. 
to 4:15 p.m.) Monday through Friday, except holidays. Individual 
respondents may request confidentiality. If you wish to withhold your 
name or street address, except for the city or town, from public review 
or from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, you must state 
this prominently at the beginning of your comment. Such requests will 
be honored to the extent allowed by law. All submissions from 
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying 
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or 
businesses, will be made available for public inspection in their 
entirety.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. John G. Douglas, BLM's 
Preservation Officer, (202) 452-0327, between 7:15 a.m. and 3:45 p.m., 
Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) invites 
comments on the concepts that are being considered for a proposed 
national programmatic agreement, the purpose of which would be to 
streamline the procedure and to strengthen the BLM's internal 
organizational structure for complying with Section 106 of the National 
Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).

[[Page 66058]]

    Under Section 106, the BLM's field office managers are required (a) 
to take into account the potential effects of proposed BLM undertakings 
(both direct BLM actions and BLM authorizations for others to act) on 
properties included in or eligible for the National Register of 
Historic Places, and (b) to give the Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation (Council) a reasonable opportunity to comment on the 
undertakings. The Council has published regulations at 36 CFR part 800 
to implement Section 106. The regulations specify the manner in which 
Federal agencies are to take effects into account and to give the 
Council its opportunity to comment. In both Section 106 and 36 CFR part 
800, the requirements are predominantly procedural in nature. Each 
Federal agency is required to follow the governmentwide standard 
procedures in 36 CFR part 800 unless the Council has approved 
alternative compliance procedures for the agency to follow.
    Provisions at 36 CFR 800.13 offer an opportunity for an Agency 
Official to negotiate alternative procedures with the Council, leading 
to a programmatic agreement that tailors the compliance process to fit 
the agency's particular circumstances. Under 36 CFR 800.13, the Agency 
Official and Council are the principal consulting parties. They are 
directed to invite the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to 
participate in developing and signing the agreement if a particular 
State would be affected, or to invite the National Conference of State 
Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO) to participate if more than one 
State would be affected.
    Representatives of the BLM, the Council, and the NCSHPO have been 
meeting to develop a BLM national programmatic agreement. In addition 
the BLM has held information meetings and briefings with 
representatives of regulated industries, cultural resource professional 
and trade associations, and a Native American association devoted to 
protecting traditional cultural and religious practice.
    As envisioned, the programmatic agreement would apply to most of 
the BLM's planning, administrative, and management actions that have 
potential to affect historic properties and other cultural properties, 
on BLM-administered public lands, in areas off the public lands 
affected by BLM decisions, and in areas subject to development of 
subsurface minerals under BLM jurisdiction or control. The agreement 
would allow the BLM to meet its responsibilities under Sections 106, 
110(f), and 111(a) of the NHPA by applying BLM-specific procedures and 
mechanisms in place of the Council's general regulations (36 CFR part 
800). It would permit the BLM to plan projects, review land use 
applications, and undertake management activities of a routine, non-
controversial nature without case-by-case review from the SHPO or the 
Council.
    The BLM, the Council, and the NCSHPO have jointly prepared a draft 
agreement for discussion and public comment. Principal features of the 
draft agreement are:
     The BLM would establish an internal Preservation Board, 
consisting of a professionally qualified Preservation Officer reporting 
to the Director, professionally qualified Deputy Preservation Officers 
reporting to each of the 12 State Directors, and 3 representative line 
managers. The Board would advise the Director, State Directors, and 
field office managers on appropriate historic preservation policies and 
procedures, and oversee the uniform implementation of the policies and 
procedures.
     With the direct participation of the Council and SHPOs and 
with broad solicitation of public input, the Preservation Board would 
review, update, revise, and adapt to the purposes of the agreement the 
comprehensive ``cultural resource management'' policies and procedures 
contained in the BLM Manual (8100 Series), including enhancement of 
policies and procedures on Native American coordination and 
consultation.
     The Preservation Board, with the assistance of SHPOs and 
the Council, would develop and deliver a training program for BLM field 
office managers and cultural heritage personnel and others who may be 
involved in implementing the revised procedures, such as land use 
applicants and cultural resource consultants.
     Each State Director would meet with the appropriate 
SHPO(s) to develop protocols (a) to involve the SHPO(s) early in BLM 
planning, (b) to maximize the benefits of data sharing, (c) to explore 
new means for delivering benefits of historic preservation to the 
public, and (d) to guide BLM field office managers and cultural 
heritage staffs in applying the revised national BLM policies and 
procedures in ways adjusted to the individual State's cultural, 
historical, geographical, and administrative context.
     The Preservation Board would certify BLM offices as 
qualified to operate under the agreement, dependent on the availability 
of appropriate professional expertise, on managers' and staffs' 
completion of training, on appropriate staff duty assignments, and on 
completion of signed BLM/SHPO protocols to regularize day-to-day 
working relationships.
     A significant aim in revising standards for project 
planning, review, and dispute resolution would be to integrate them 
more fully with other BLM responsibilities and procedures, especially 
those relating to long-range planning under the Federal Land Policy and 
Management Act and environmental review under the National 
Environmental Policy Act.
     Enhanced cooperation and communication among the BLM, the 
SHPOs, and the Council would feature early and continuing SHPO and 
Council involvement with BLM's activities, rather than having historic 
preservation considerations come toward the end of decision making when 
options are few.
     The BLM Preservation Board would regularly monitor and 
report actions under the agreement to the SHPOs, the Council, and the 
BLM Directorate. The SHPO and the Council would join the Preservation 
Board in carrying out field reviews of selected BLM State programs and 
field offices.
    The agreement would not take effect directly upon signing. Rather, 
the BLM would be obligated to establish the Preservation Board and, in 
cooperation with the Council and each affected SHPO, to revise the BLM 
Manuals and Handbooks; to develop BLM/SHPO protocols; to train field 
managers and staffs; and to certify offices qualified to operate under 
the revised procedures, before there could be a change in the way 
Section 106 compliance is conducted. Individual BLM States would come 
under the new procedures one at a time over the course of a year or 
more.
    Once in effect, the agreement would not diminish the nature of 
public participation and Native American involvement currently 
available in BLM's Section 106 compliance process. To the contrary, the 
effectiveness should be enhanced as a result of incorporating guidance 
on public participation and tribal involvement directly in the revised 
BLM Manual procedures that will substitute for the standard Section 106 
procedures.
    A draft of the agreement, dated November 3, 1996, is available for 
examination. It may be obtained from Dr. John G. Douglas, Preservation 
Officer, Cultural Heritage Staff, Bureau of Land Management (240), 1849 
C Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20240, telephone (202) 452-0327. The 
final text of the agreement will be subject to consideration of public 
comments and

[[Page 66059]]

internal review among the signing parties.
Tom Walker,
Deputy Assistant Director, Renewable Resources and Planning.
[FR Doc. 96-31759 Filed 12-13-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-84-P