[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 71 (Thursday, April 12, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18905-18913]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-9023]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Docket No. 000526158-1016-02]
RIN 0648-XA52


Guidelines for Research, Exploration and Salvage of RMS Titanic

AGENCY: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of 
Commerce.

ACTION: Response to comments; final guidelines.

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

SUMMARY: These final guidelines have been developed for future research 
on, exploration of, and if appropriate, salvage of RMS Titanic. As 
directed by the RMS Titanic Maritime Memorial Act of 1986 (Act), the 
guidelines were developed in consultation with the United Kingdom, 
France, Canada and others. The broad and diverse public interest in RMS 
Titanic was also considered in developing the guidelines. While the 
guidelines set forth a preferred policy of in-situ preservation of RMS 
Titanic, they also set forth the parameters for the research, recovery 
and conservation of RMS Titanic artifacts for the benefit of the 
public.

DATES: These guidelines are effective April 12, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The final guidelines will be available at the following 
address: NOAA, 1315 East-West Highway, SSMC III, Silver Spring, MD 
20910; attention RMS Titanic guidelines.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CDR Craig McLean, (301) 713-2427 ext. 
132.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These final guidelines are issued under the 
authority of the RMS Titanic Maritime Memorial Act of 1986 (Act). 
Section 5(a) of the Act directs the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration (NOAA) to enter into consultations with the United 
Kingdom, France, Canada and others to develop international guidelines 
for research on, exploration of, and if appropriate, salvage of RMS 
Titanic. The guidelines are to (1) be consistent with the national and

[[Page 18906]]

international scientific, cultural, and historical significance of RMS 
Titanic and the purposes of the Act, and (2) promote the safety of 
individuals involved in such operations.
    The purposes of the Act are to: (1) Encourage international efforts 
to designate RMS Titanic as an international maritime memorial to those 
who lost their lives aboard the ship in 1912; (2) direct the United 
States to enter into negotiations with other interested nations to 
establish an international agreement that provides for designation of 
RMS Titanic as an international maritime memorial, and protects the 
scientific, cultural, and historical significance of RMS Titanic; (3) 
encourage, in those negotiations or in other fora, the development and 
implementation of international guidelines for conducting research on, 
exploration of, and if appropriate, salvage of RMS Titanic; and (4) 
express the sense of the United States Congress that, pending such 
international agreement or guidelines, no person should physically 
alter, disturb, or salvage RMS Titanic.
    The Act directs NOAA to consult with the Secretary of State (DOS) 
and promote full participation by other interested Federal agencies, 
academic and research institutions, and members of the public with 
respect to how exploration and research should be conducted, and 
whether and under what conditions salvage of RMS Titanic should occur. 
NOAA and DOS have consulted with representatives of these interested 
groups in the course of developing these guidelines.
    Section 6 of the Act directs DOS to enter into negotiations with 
the United Kingdom, France, Canada and other nations to develop an 
international agreement that provides for: (1) Designation of RMS 
Titanic as an international maritime memorial; and (2) research on, 
exploration of, and if appropriate, salvage of RMS Titanic consistent 
with the international guidelines developed pursuant to the purposes of 
the Act. The final guidelines are consistent with the draft rules 
annexed to the January 5, 2000 draft international agreement that has 
been negotiated by the U.S., Canada, France and the United Kingdom.

Response to Comments

    On June 2, 2000, NOAA published the proposed Guidelines for 
Research, Exploration, and Salvage of the RMS Titanic in the Federal 
Register (65 FR 35326, June 2, 2000). NOAA requested comments on the 
proposed guidelines from the general public and specifically from 
members of academia and research institutions. The comment period was 
from the date of publication through July 3, 2000. NOAA received a 
total of 64 written comments during the open comment period. Twenty-six 
common statements or positions were found repeatedly throughout the 64 
comments received. NOAA offers the following responses:

NOAA Should Not Be Persuaded by ``Mass Mailings''

    Comment 1. One commentor felt that NOAA should not be swayed by a 
``mass mailing'' of letters in support of the guidelines that he 
observed circulating on the Internet.
    Response: NOAA views every comment that is received from a 
different source as separate despite similarities in their wording. 
When multiple letters are received from the same source but via 
different media (e.g. fax, email, US Postal Service) the comments are 
attached to one another and counted as one comment. NOAA appreciates 
the effort put forth by every person that responded to the Federal 
Register notice regardless of the similarity in some of the comments 
and the position or views of the commentor. Below, preceding each 
paraphrased comment, the number and percent of total for each comment 
is given. This, in no way, is meant to insinuate that the comments 
received were tallied as votes in a referendum. The percentages are 
provided merely to give the reader a sense of the level of intensity 
the pool of commentors felt about the comment. As the reader will see 
below, NOAA took into account every comment received on the guidelines 
regardless of how many there were for each position.

Support Implementation of the Guidelines

    Comment 2. Thirty-two of the 64 (50%) commentors stated that NOAA 
should immediately adopt the guidelines as they are currently written.
    Response: The guidelines represent the most widely accepted 
principles in archaeology and are both appropriate and applicable to a 
Memorial Site. As previously noted, the guidelines are based on such 
widely accepted international and domestic professional archaeological 
standards, including the International Council on Monuments and Sites 
(ICOMOS) International Charter on the Protection and Management of 
Underwater Cultural Heritage and the Secretary of the Interior's 
Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation.

Support Implementation of the Guidelines With Modification

    Comment 3. Five of the 64 (8%) commentors were generally in support 
of the guidelines but offered some minor suggestions for improvement.
    Response: NOAA has taken into consideration the accuracy and 
appropriateness of every suggestion made by these individuals as they 
relate to the guidelines. All of the items indicated by these 
commentors have been addressed in this notice through individual 
responses and some have resulted in slight alterations to the proposed 
guidelines that are reflected in the final guidelines.

Oppose Implementation of the Guidelines

    Comment 4. Twenty of the 64 (31%) commentors were opposed to the 
implementation of the guidelines in any form.
    Response: NOAA acknowledges the controversial nature of putting 
forth the guidelines, and that there are many people that feel they 
will adversely affect their livelihood or that government should 
generally not interfere with private enterprise. However, after 
carefully evaluating the costs and benefits of putting forth such 
guidelines, NOAA has determined that it is clearly in the public 
interest to do so. Those commentors that opposed the guidelines 
generally elaborated on their reasons for doing so. Their specific 
concerns are addressed individually below.

Sale or Trade of Artifacts

    Comment 5. Thirty-four of the 64 (53%) commentors were opposed to 
the sale of artifacts from RMS Titanic in one form or another. Another 
commentor suggested inserting ``Underwater cultural heritage is not to 
be traded as items of commercial value'' at the end of paragraph 30.
    Response: Basic professional archaeological standards dictate that 
artifacts recovered or salvaged from a wreck site should be kept intact 
as a collection. Such collections should not be dispersed through the 
sale of individual artifacts to private collectors such as through 
auction house sales. The guidelines, consistent with Article 3 of the 
draft international agreement to protect RMS Titanic, provide that all 
artifacts recovered from RMS Titanic should be kept together and intact 
as project collections. Although not expressly delineated, following 
these guidelines would mean that individual artifacts would not be 
sold. However, this would not necessarily preclude the

[[Page 18907]]

sale, transfer or trade of an entire collection to a museum or other 
qualified institution, provided that this commercial transaction does 
not result in the dispersal of artifacts. As long as the collection is 
kept together and maintained for research, education, viewing and other 
use of public interest, there should not be restrictions on commercial 
transactions which are intended to further these public purposes. This 
guideline is consistent with the RMS Titanic Maritime Memorial Act of 
1986, as well as the admiralty court orders in the in rem action 
against RMS Titanic. It is also consistent with agreements that the 
company with salvage rights to RMS Titanic entered into with the French 
Institute IFREMER for salvage of the artifacts from the wrecksite and 
with the British National Maritime Museum for the display of such 
salvaged artifacts.
    NOAA has decided not to include the referenced sentence at the end 
of paragraph thirty in the final guidelines. This language is taken 
from the ICOMOS Charter, and is not warranted for these guidelines for 
several reasons. First, the final guidelines adequately protect RMS 
Titanic artifacts from sale. Second, the statement appears to go beyond 
the scope of the guidelines and apply to sites other than the wreckage 
of the RMS Titanic. Finally, the ICOMOS Charter term ``commercial 
value'' appears overly broad and subject to possible mis-
interpretation. Commercial transactions between museums, such as loans 
and sales of collections, would appear to be prohibited by this 
language even though such transactions may further the primary 
objective of protecting the resource. Since the guidelines already 
require that the collection be kept together and intact in a manner 
that provides for research, education and other public access, the 
suggested additional language does not appear necessary or appropriate.

Deaccession of Artifacts

    Comment 6. One commentor (2%) expressed that deaccessioning is not 
as commonplace as it may have been implied in the Supplementary 
Information section of the June 2, 2000 Federal Register notice.
    Response: The issue of deaccessioning was raised in the context of 
the sale of coal taken from the wreck site and current professional 
museum practices. It was noted that the professional museum community 
policies for keeping the collection together do not preclude such 
museums from deciding to exclude certain objects from a collection, or 
from subsequently determining that a certain object in a collection 
should no longer be maintained as part of the collection and is 
therefore deaccessioned. There is little information available as to 
the amount and frequency of deaccessioning of artifacts by professional 
museums. However, there was no intent to imply that such deaccessioning 
occurs on a frequent basis. To the contrary, it is NOAA's understanding 
that it only occurs after a rigorous process has proved that an 
artifact no longer holds historical or archaeological significance to a 
collection. Only then can an artifact be deaccessioned. Once an 
artifact is deaccessioned it may be disposed of in a variety of ways 
without violating the general goal of keeping the collection together.

Titanic as a Grave Site

    Comment 7. Eight of the 64 commentors (13%) felt that NOAA should 
not allow further disturbance of the RMS Titanic because it is a 
gravesite for those who died on the ship.
    Response: NOAA acknowledges the intense controversy and 
disagreement over whether the RMS Titanic should be considered a 
gravesite. Most who feel that it is not a gravesite base this view on 
the fact that no bodies have been found on or near the wreck and that 
human bone dissolves into seawater at the depth at which the wreck 
lies. While it is true that no bodies have been found and are not 
likely to be found on or near the wreck of the RMS Titanic, others feel 
that the wreckage of the RMS Titanic should be considered a gravesite. 
Many people died on the RMS Titanic the night it sank and while their 
actual bodies may not today be on or near the wreckage, the site is 
their final resting place and should be respected as such. Congress 
recognized the symbolism of the RMS Titanic wreckage to the memory of 
the victims in its direction to the U.S. State Department to enter into 
international negotiations to declare the RMS Titanic an international 
maritime memorial. 16 USCS 450rr-4. In the treatment of RMS Titanic as 
a maritime memorial, NOAA has determined that it is appropriate to 
treat RMS Titanic as a gravesite. The scientific and archaeological 
approach advocated by these guidelines is applicable to a Maritime 
Memorial as it is consistent with the Congressional intent to recognize 
the scientific, cultural, and historical significance of the site.

Relevant National Authority

    Comment 8. Two commentors (3%) requested clarification as to who 
exactly is a ``relevant national authority'' as mentioned in paragraphs 
17, 26, and 32 of the guidelines.
    Response: The phrase ``relevant national authority'' has been 
deleted from the guidelines to reflect the non-binding nature of the 
guidelines and to make it clear that NOAA, or any other agency, is not 
requesting submission of any information from persons conducting 
activities in relation to the RMS Titanic.

Technical Corrections

    Comment 9. Three commentors (5%) pointed out some grammatical, 
spelling or other errors in the June 2, 2000 Federal Register notice.
    Response: One commentor pointed out that the name of Jean Luc 
Michel, who accompanied Dr. Robert Ballard on the expedition that 
discovered the wreck of RMS Titanic, was spelled incorrectly. The name 
should be spelled Jean Louis Michel. This commentor also pointed out 
that the fourth expedition to the RMS Titanic in 1996 was omitted from 
the notice. There was an expedition to the wreck in 1996, which would 
make the expedition in 1998 the fifth expedition. NOAA also notes that 
there was a sixth expedition to the RMS Titanic after the FR notice was 
published on June 2, 2000.
    Two commentors stated that NOAA should replace paragraph seventeen 
with the following statement from the ICOMOS Charter; ``All intrusive 
investigations of underwater cultural heritage will only be undertaken 
under the direction and control of a named underwater archaeologist 
with recognized qualifications and experience appropriate to the 
investigation.'' NOAA believes that, as written, paragraph seventeen 
provides adequate assurances that operations to the RMS Titanic will be 
undertaken and supervised by people with ample experience in the field. 
Whether the experience comes from archaeology or salvage, if the 
qualified technical and/or professional experts have experience related 
to the goals of the operation they should be qualified to undertake 
that operation.
    One commentor also indicated that the word ``provenance'' in 
paragraph 22 should be replaced with the word ``provenience''. 
According to the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Thesaurus the words 
provenance and provenience are both synonymous with the word source. 
That is, both terms refer to ``where an object or artifact came from'' 
within the ship. This is what was intended by paragraph 22. Either word 
is appropriate in this situation. It is worth noting at this point that 
the

[[Page 18908]]

proposed guidelines in the June 2, 2000 Federal Register notice were 
the product of an international consultation and the best of attempts 
were made to ensure consistent wording considering the language 
differences among the consulting parties.

Scope and Definitions

    Comment 10. Three commentors (5%) wanted clarification, 
modification, or deletion of the terms ``significant threat'', 
``qualified institution'', and ``RMS Titanic.''
    Response: The proposed guidelines did not include a ``scope and 
definitions'' section. Instead, such a section was added to the 
``Supplementary Information'' portion of the June 2, 2000 Federal 
Register notice. NOAA has determined that it would be more appropriate 
to include an expanded version of this within the final guidelines 
themselves. In addition to being defined and explained below, two of 
those terms, as well as some others are defined in the newly added 
``scope and definitions'' section in the final guidelines.
    The phrase ``qualified institution'' as mentioned in first 
paragraph of the ``Sale of Artifacts'' section is any facility where 
the collection is kept together and maintained for the benefit of the 
public consistent with these guidelines and the Act. This will 
typically be a museum, but not always. This definition has been added 
to the final guidelines.
    Three commentors requested either deletion or clarification of the 
phrase ``significant threat'' in paragraph one, the in-situ 
preservation policy, because it is overly vague. If an artifact is 
subject to a significant threat of loss, its recovery would generally 
be necessary to preserve it for education, science, or culture. Since 
the assessment of risk of loss is already a necessary part of the in-
situ preservation policy and the determination of the public's interest 
in the recovery of an artifact, the additional phrase ``significant 
threat'' does not appear necessary. The phrase has been struck from the 
final guidelines. For further clarification, a definition of the in-
situ preservation policy has been added. Representatives from NOAA 
recently visited museum exhibits displaying artifacts salvaged from RMS 
Titanic. NOAA realizes and acknowledges that it is in the public's 
interest to salvage some of these artifacts. To balance this value with 
the Congressional intent to manage the site as a Maritime Memorial, 
NOAA has concluded that the recovery of many of the artifacts from the 
debris field (with certain exceptions) to be consistent with these 
final guidelines, including the in-situ preservation policy. However, 
NOAA has also determined that recovery of artifacts from the hull is 
not consistent with the purposes of a Maritime Memorial.
    One person suggested that NOAA insert the statutory definition of 
the RMS Titanic in the guidelines. The RMS Titanic Maritime Memorial 
Act of 1986 (16 U.S.C. 450rr to 450rr-6) defines ``R.M.S. Titanic'' to 
mean the shipwrecked vessel RMS Titanic, her cargo or other contents, 
including those items which are scattered on the ocean floor in her 
vicinity (16 U.S.C. 450 rr-1(c)). These guidelines are based primarily 
on the rules annexed to the January 5, 2000 draft international 
agreement, particularly the annexed rules for activities aimed at RMS 
Titanic. The guidelines define ``RMS Titanic'' and ``artifacts'' 
separately to better conform to the draft international agreement. The 
combination of these two definitions is similar to that found in the 
Act.

In-situ Preservation

    Comment 11. Sixteen of the 64 commentors (25%) opposed the 
application of an ``in-situ'' preservation approach to RMS Titanic.
    Response: Most of the commentors that oppose the concept of in-situ 
preservation do so because they feel that the wreck is decaying at a 
rapid rate, and that this approach would disallow anyone from the 
salvage, recovery and viewing of artifacts from the wreck in the 
future. In-situ preservation is simply a precautionary management 
approach and is not intended to create any legal presumption to 
preclude recovery or salvage. This is a current professional practice 
for managing heritage resources in place when the disruption of the 
site could lead to its destruction. In identifying ``in-situ'' 
preservation as the preferred alternative, NOAA acknowledges the 
multiple thousands of artifacts that have been recovered from the site 
prior to the development of these guidelines and that adequate planning 
for research, recovery and salvage can protect the artifacts, their 
context, and their interpretation.
    Decisions to excavate sites or remove artifacts are made on a case 
by case basis when the proposed activity: (1) Will meet objective 
management criteria; (2) will be done in accord with professional 
standards; and (3) is justified by either educational, scientific or 
cultural interests, including for mitigatory, protection or 
preservation purposes. This scientific and archaeological approach is 
applicable to a Maritime Memorial as it is consistent with the 
Congressional intent to recognize the scientific, cultural, and 
historical significance of the site.
    NOAA has done an extensive literature review on this topic and has 
found little, and at times contradictory, information on the rate of 
decay of the vessel. While a few reliable, peer-reviewed sources of 
information are available on the subject, most of the support for the 
claim that the ship is decaying very rapidly is anecdotal and has not 
yet been peer-reviewed or published. NOAA would be willing to review 
any additional pertinent literature to the contrary.
    Based on the available information on the rate of deterioration, 
NOAA understands that the wreckage of the RMS Titanic is in a state of 
decay and expects that the hull and structure of the ship may collapse 
to the ocean floor within the next 50 years, perhaps sooner. The intent 
of the guidelines, in keeping with the intent of the Act, is to 
discourage activities that would accelerate the ship's deterioration. 
Such activities include cutting holes in the ship's hull to access 
artifacts in the interior of the wreckage. Consistent with an in-situ 
preservation approach, it is also the intent of the guidelines to 
preserve the wreckage of the RMS Titanic as a memorial for those who 
perished when the ship sank and thus to preserve the integrity of the 
wreckage.
    While the concept of in-situ preservation promotes and encourages 
maintaining the wreckage as it currently exists, it will not prevent 
recovery or salvage that is determined to be in the public interest. 
Nor does this approach detract from the educational value of the ship 
or inhibit the public access to the wrecksite or to any recovered or 
salvaged artifacts by the general public. If followed correctly, the 
guidelines will help salvors and archaeologists plan and execute their 
recovery of artifacts that have educational, scientific, or cultural 
importance in such a manner so that they are properly preserved and 
consequently properly displayed for the general public. Furthermore, 
the guidelines do not discourage the use of remotely operated vehicles 
(ROVs) within the hull of the ship. Videos and photographs taken from 
ROVs are as valuable as artifact recovery, if not more so, in exposing 
the public to the wreckage and educating them about it. As a result of 
the apparent misconception of the in-situ preservation principle, NOAA 
has made some slight changes to the wording of the guidelines. The 
final guidelines are conceptually the same as the previously published 
proposed guidelines, however the re-wording is intended to

[[Page 18909]]

more clearly express the intent of the Act and of the guidelines.

Authority of NOAA

    Comment 12. Fifteen of the 64 commentors (23%) stated that NOAA has 
no legal authority to adopt or enforce these guidelines because they 
are unconstitutional and they unnecessarily contradict the finding of 
the U.S. Admiralty Court in Norfolk, Virginia.
    Response: Congress provided NOAA the authority to develop these 
guidelines in the RMS Titanic Maritime Memorial Act of 1986. The 
guidelines were developed consistent with the U.S. Constitution, the 
1986 Act, and international maritime law.

Regulation of the Salvage Industry

    Comment 13. Four of the 64 commentors (6%) felt that NOAA should 
not regulate the recovery of artifacts from the RMS Titanic or impede 
salvage or scientific research of the wreckage in any way.
    Response: As stated in the June 2, 2000 Federal Register notice the 
guidelines are advisory only and are not legally enforceable. All four 
commentors felt that guidelines would restrict the public from viewing 
recovered artifacts and learning about the RMS Titanic. NOAA does not 
feel that the guidelines restrict the public viewing of recovered 
artifacts. To the contrary, the guidelines will facilitate education in 
that they will assist salvors and researchers in maintaining the 
historical context of each recovered artifact. The intent of the 
guidelines is not to regulate the salvage or scientific community 
working on the wreckage of the RMS Titanic, rather to provide them with 
guidance on how to maintain the ships cultural, social, and historical 
integrity, in accordance with 16 USCS 450rr-3, while performing 
operations at the wreckage.
    Comment 14. Nine of the 64 comments (14%) stated that NOAA will 
adversely impact the salvage industry by putting forth these 
guidelines.
    Response: The traditional salvage community is engaged in assisting 
with the recovery of property associated with recent air and marine 
casualties and thus will not be impacted by these guidelines. There is 
a smaller component of the overall ocean industry that search for and 
recover shipwrecks and the potentially valuable artifacts found there. 
As the guidelines are advisory in nature and they apply only to the 
wreckage of the RMS Titanic, they are not expected to impact this small 
sector of the ocean industry either. Should salvors of the RMS Titanic 
or any other submerged cultural resource choose voluntarily to follow 
these guidelines, NOAA feels that impacts to them financially will be 
minimal. Salvors may take extra time in formulating and adhering to a 
well thought out project design, writing and publishing their findings, 
ensuring that their design will have adequate funding, and securing the 
appropriate qualified professionals. NOAA believes, however, that in 
the long term these will actually help salvors save time and money 
during their expeditions. A small investment of time and money 
initially could yield large dividends in the form of fewer days at sea, 
properly catalogued artifacts, and decreased costs.

Public Interest

    Comment 15. Three of the 64 commentors (5%) stated that the 
proposed guidelines are not in the public interest.
    Response: The guidelines, based on domestic and international 
standards as reflected in the draft international agreement on the 
protection of the RMS Titanic, represent the most widely accepted 
public and professional archaeological and historical preservation 
principles currently known. Following these guidelines is in the public 
interest because artifacts will be preserved and recorded so that 
historical information can be extracted from the wreck without 
destroying it or compromising the ship's integrity. Not following the 
guidelines may cause artifacts to be sold individually, historical 
information to be lost forever, and the deterioration of the ship to be 
accelerated. These are in all likelihood contrary to the public 
interest.

UNESCO Treaty

    Comment 16. Two commentors (3%) stated their opposition to the 
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 
(UNESCO) treaty and did not want the United States to enter into the 
agreement.
    Response: The commentors did not directly refer to the proposed 
guidelines, as they are separate and apart from the UNESCO treaty. They 
felt that the agreement would negatively impact them as members of the 
salvage community. The guidelines refer only to operations at the wreck 
of the RMS Titanic and will not negatively impact salvors as discussed 
above.

Artifact Status of Coal

    Comment 17. Three of 64 commentors (5%) felt that coal from the 
wreck of the Titanic is not an artifact of historical or archaeological 
interest. Eight of the 64 commentors (13%) felt that coal from the 
wreck is an artifact of historical and archaeological interest.
    Response: NOAA recognizes that the current salvor in possession of 
the RMS Titanic has been engaged in the sale of coal specimens 
recovered from the wreck site.
    The Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 defines the 
term ``archaeological resource'' as ``any material remains of past 
human life or activities which are of archaeological interest, as 
determined under the uniform regulations promulgated pursuant to this 
Act. Such regulations containing such determination shall include, but 
not be limited to: pottery, basketry, bottles, weapons, weapon 
projectiles, tools, structures or portions of structures, pit houses, 
rock paintings, rock carvings, intaglios, graves, human skeletal 
materials, or any portion or piece of any of the foregoing items. 
Nonfossilized and fossilized paleontological specimens, or any portion 
or piece thereof, shall not be considered archaeological resources, 
under the regulations under this paragraph, unless found in an 
archaeological context. No item shall be treated as an archaeological 
resource under regulations under this paragraph unless such item is at 
least 100 years of age.''
    NOAA has determined that no definitive study has yet been conducted 
to indicate whether coal from the RMS Titanic has any cultural 
information to impart. As a bulk-loaded natural material, the coal 
might not be expected to contain cultural information. However, it is 
conceivable that coal could have marks that might provide information 
on activities such as mining technique, modification for loading (ex. 
broken up to a proscribed size or shape, etc.) or transfer of the coal 
from the mine to the point where it now rests. Under such conditions, 
it is conceivable that the RMS Titanic's coal might have some moderate 
cultural or archaeological value or interest. Such information might 
provide insight into previously undocumented aspects of maritime or 
mining culture.
    Therefore, NOAA holds the opinion that while the coal may have 
potential for a low level of cultural information, it does not conform 
to the definition of ``archaeological resource'' as defined within 
ARPA. The coal is not likely to be of much historical interest. Though 
the level of historical or archaeological interest may change over 
time. Therefore, NOAA recommends that a representative sample of any 
recovered coal be retained for study should new processes develop, but 
be allowed for deaccession.

[[Page 18910]]

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    Comment 18. Three of the 64 commentors (5%) indicated that the 
estimate of public reporting burden is too low.
    Response: These commentors felt that it would take hundreds of 
hours to plan, execute and do the proper reports for an expedition, as 
opposed to just 12 hours for a project design and 12 hours to submit a 
report. The PRA statement provided with the proposed guidelines was not 
intended to estimate the entire time required for a professional 
expedition. Instead, it was intended to estimate the additional time 
and paperwork burden for those individuals if they voluntarily seek the 
review and approval of NOAA, or other relevant national authority, as 
stipulated in the guidelines. Therefore, the difference between NOAA's 
PRA analysis and this public comment was most likely a misunderstanding 
as to what exactly the estimate entailed. The PRA analysis was intended 
to address the additional amount of time that following these 
guidelines would entail. That is the time over and beyond what 
professional explorers, salvors, and archaeologists take under current 
practices. The estimates appear reasonable when compared with PRA 
estimates made by NOAA for compliance with its archeological guidelines 
and with Department of Interior/National Park Service estimates for 
compliance with their archeological guidelines. However, to address the 
objections raised regarding the application of the PRA, NOAA has 
removed requests for information.

Public Involvement

    Comment 19: One commentor (2%) felt that NOAA did not fully involve 
the public, interested federal agencies, academia and research 
institutions in its development of the guidelines, and the 
international conferences from 1995-2000 allowed limited public 
involvement.
    Response: NOAA did have extensive involvement of interested parties 
in the development of these guidelines. First, though not required, 
NOAA published the proposed guidelines in the Federal Register on June 
2, 2000 (65 FR 35326, June 2, 2000). In that notice, NOAA invited and 
encouraged public comment on and suggestions for improvement for the 
proposed guidelines. Sixty-four comments were received. Furthermore, on 
June 15, 2000, NOAA held a public meeting at which people testified 
providing their views on the proposed guidelines. All comments were 
taken into account and the guidelines have been revised in response to 
these comments. Prior to drafting the proposed guidelines NOAA met with 
many interested parties including RMS Titanic, Inc. (as the salvor in 
possession of the RMS Titanic), other members of the professional 
salvage community, and members of the archaeological community to 
gather information about the wreckage of the RMS Titanic, current 
salvage practices and other information relevant to the preparation of 
the guidelines. In addition, NOAA participated in seven meetings 
between 1997 and January of 2000 with delegates from the United Kingdom 
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, and France. RMS Titanic, 
Inc., as well as various experts in law, science, history, archaeology 
and salvage were periodically consulted prior to and throughout these 
meetings.

NAFTA Analysis/International Implications

    Comment 20. One commentor (2%) felt that NOAA must consider 
international trade implications of promulgating the Guidelines. They 
felt that NOAA must do an analysis of the impact on trade between US, 
Canada and Mexico under NAFTA.
    Response: The guidelines are non-binding. Therefore, there is no 
government action to be challenged. The NAFTA prohibits NAFTA 
governments from maintaining or taking measures that violate certain 
basic principles set out in the agreement, most importantly non-
discrimination with respect to foreign goods, service providers and 
investors (between domestic and foreign, and between foreign). In 
addition, the NAFTA investment chapter requires that governments do not 
expropriate or take measures tantamount to expropriation unless they 
are for a public purpose, non-discriminatory, in accordance with due 
process and compensated. The commentor did not clearly state what 
exactly would be the trade implications of guidelines. In addition, 
there is an exception to the government's services and investment 
commitments for current and future measures related to water 
transportation. The exception lets the U.S. Government preserve 
existing measures and take new measures that would otherwise be 
inconsistent with the agreement. This maritime exception is found in 
NAFTA Annex II, and explicitly covers marine salvage (under SIC 4499, 
Water Transportation Services, not elsewhere classified).

Executive Order 12630

    Comment 21. Two commentors (3%) felt that NOAA's analysis of the 
takings implications of the Guidelines under Executive Order 12630 is 
incorrect.
    Response: As indicated in the Executive Order 12630 analysis found 
in the Miscellaneous Requirements section below, the guidelines are not 
mandatory and therefore could not constitute a regulatory taking. To 
fully demonstrate the non-binding nature of the guidelines, NOAA has 
altered the wording of the guidelines slightly. Specifically, the word 
``shall'' has been replaced by the word ``should'' so that compliance 
with the guidelines is more clearly voluntary.

Recording Scheme for Artifacts

    Comment 22. Two commentors (3%) felt that NOAA's Guidelines 
indicate a too-strict requirement for recording coordinates of every 
single artifact recovered--an unnecessary burden.
    Response: While the guidelines do not specifically state such a 
requirement, such recording is reasonable and appropriate. The most 
widely accepted archaeological principles including the Secretary of 
Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic 
Preservation require such rigorous documentation of locational data. 
The goal of the guidelines is to ensure that any disturbance of RMS 
Titanic artifacts be preceded by complete documentation of an 
artifact's location and any artifacts surrounding it. This data is 
likely to preserve the provenience of recovered artifacts. If an entity 
does not have the ability or willingness to record such data, that 
entity should be discouraged from operating at the wreck of the RMS 
Titanic under these guidelines.

Background Studies

    Comment 23. One commentor (2%) was unsure as to who would perform 
the studies referred to in Section VII (Preliminary Work) of the 
guidelines that call for ``backgrounds studies'' in the project 
assessment.
    Response: The salvor or operator at the wreck site should perform 
the background studies.

Disposition of Artifacts

    Comment 24. One commentor (2%) felt that the Guidelines should 
require that the final stage of the RMS Titanic exploration project 
design should involve establishing a permanent public repository for 
artifacts.
    Response: The guidelines encourage that artifacts should be 
displayed as a collection for the public and not sold individually and 
suggests what artifacts should be included in such a collection. 
However, the guidelines do not suggest creating a permanent public 
repository for these artifacts. NOAA does not

[[Page 18911]]

believe it is within the scope or intent of the guidelines to create 
such a repository. It might be appropriate to consider that those 
recovering the artifacts from the wreck create such a permanent 
repository in binding regulations related to these guidelines.
    Comment 25: One commentor (2%) stated that since the Code of Ethics 
of the International Council of Museums (ICOM) prevents display or 
acquisition of shipwreck artifacts recovered during private-sector 
salvage activities, one wonders who, exactly, will step up to curate 
this collection if not the private-sector.
    Response: NOAA recognizes that professional salvors have had 
difficulty in the past finding a museum to exhibit or curate recovered 
artifacts. While this is generally true, NOAA nonetheless also 
acknowledges that RMS Titanic, Inc. has had considerable success in 
professionally displaying artifacts from the RMS Titanic at several 
qualified institutions worldwide including the Chicago Museum of 
Science and Industry and the British National Museum.
    Comment 26. One commentor (2%) felt that recovery from artifacts 
from RMS Titanic's hull, as well as care of artifacts and decisions on 
their exhibition, should be under the control of a panel of recognized 
experts.
    Response: NOAA has the technical expertise to properly implement 
these final guidelines and advocate the professional scientific 
approach to manage the Maritime Memorial. Therefore, such a panel of 
experts is unnecessary. When involved with a situation that requires 
expertise beyond that of this agency, NOAA will, as a matter of common 
practice, solicit the advice of experts outside the agency.

Miscellaneous Requirements

Executive Order 12866

    This order requires that in deciding whether and how to regulate, 
federal agencies assess the costs and benefits of proposed regulations 
upon society, including individuals and business. While the final 
guidelines are non-binding, NOAA has considered the costs and benefits 
upon society arising from following the approach described in them. For 
those already using the professional scientific approach to research, 
recovery and conservation of artifacts, NOAA does not expect that there 
will be any additional significant costs from following these final 
guidelines. However, those explorers or salvors who do not as a matter 
of practice follow professional scientific standards and policies may 
have to expend additional costs in order to properly follow the 
guidelines. These costs could result in the expenditure of tens of 
thousands of dollars. Since a RMS Titanic salvage expedition can costs 
hundreds of thousands of dollars per day for ships, equipment and 
personnel, the additional costs for following the guidelines are not 
expected to be significant. Although using the guidelines may result in 
additional costs in the careful planning of the expedition, the 
application of the scientific approach generally results in a more 
efficient execution of the project and thus may save money in the end. 
The costs for compliance with the guidelines should also be weighed 
against the potential benefits to the society from protecting RMS 
Titanic and preserving the artifacts and research for present and 
future generations. Adherence to proper scientific methodology and 
approach is in the interest of the public because it preserves the 
integrity of the site, the artifacts recovered and the story contained 
at the wrecksite. Following the guidelines may also be viewed as an 
investment by those that have not followed the scientific standards in 
the past. The proper recording of information and conservation of 
artifacts increases the value of the collection to the salvors, 
researchers, museums and the general public. As a result, the 
additional costs involved in following the scientific approach are 
often offset by increased revenue from documentaries, films, and museum 
receipts. RMST has reported millions of dollars in annual revenues from 
the display of artifacts in museums. Some argue that keeping the 
collection together and intact is not as profitable as selling 
individual artifacts. It is difficult, however, if not impossible, to 
quantify the cost to society if the artifacts are sold such that the 
collection is no longer kept together for public use for research, 
education and viewing by the general public, or how such sale and 
distribution might denigrate a Maritime Memorial site.

Executive Order 12630

    Under this Order, Federal agencies assess the takings implications 
of proposed policies and actions on private property protected by the 
Fifth Amendment. The goal is to better inform the agency decision-
makers about the potential agency activities. To the extent permitted 
by law, consistent with their statutory obligations, agencies are then 
better informed on how to minimize the impacts of such activities on 
constitutionally protected property rights. As these guidelines are 
non-binding in nature, they should not raise any regulatory takings 
implications under the Just Compensation Clause of the Fifth Amendment 
to the U.S. Constitution.

Executive Order 12114

    The purpose of this Order is to enable responsible officials to be 
informed of pertinent environmental considerations and to take such 
consideration into account in agency decision-making with regard to 
major federal actions significantly affecting the environment outside 
the United States, its territories and possessions. While based on 
independent authority, this Order furthers the National Environmental 
Policy Act (``NEPA'') and other laws consistent with the foreign policy 
and national security policy of the United States. The guidelines are 
not a ``major federal action'' as defined in DOC DAO 216-12 
(Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions), because they 
are advisory in nature. In addition, compliance with the guidelines 
would not have any significant adverse effects on the environment. 
However, compliance with the guidelines would further the purposes of 
NEPA and other laws. Conservation of the environment was carefully 
considered in developing the guidelines. Compliance with the guidelines 
would preserve RMS Titanic and would correspondingly further 
preservation of the surrounding natural environment.
    A primary objective of the guidelines is preservation of RMS 
Titanic and its surrounding natural environment. In addition, 
activities that would harm or destroy RMS Titanic are discouraged in 
the guidelines. Since intrusive archaeological research, recovery or 
salvage can often harm the natural environment, compliance with the 
guidelines would correspondingly preserve the surrounding natural 
environment. The guidelines encourage non-destructive and non-intrusive 
research. Since non-intrusive research inherently avoids destruction of 
the surrounding natural environment, this guideline would also protect 
the natural environment. In the event that activities to be conducted 
may harm RMS Titanic and the surrounding natural environment, the 
guidelines provide for an assessment of environmental consequences. 
Thus, the guidelines would further the purposes of NEPA, other laws and 
Executive Order 12114 by conserving RMS Titanic and the surrounding 
natural environment.

[[Page 18912]]

National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470)

    Compliance with the guidelines will not adversely affect RMS 
Titanic. To the contrary, compliance with the guidelines will fulfill 
the public's interest in conserving the national and international 
historical significance of RMS Titanic as directed in the Titanic 
Maritime Memorial Act of 1986. The Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation was consulted in developing the guidelines and fully 
endorses NOAA in putting forth these guidelines.

Paperwork Reduction Act (16 U.S.C. 3541)

    There is no requirement or request for the collection-of-
information. Therefore, it is not subject to review and approval by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
(PRA).

Ted I. Lillestolen,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services and Coastal Zone 
Management.

Guidelines for Research, Recovery and Salvage of RMS Titanic

Contents

Scope and Definitions

I. General Principles
II. Project Design
III. Funding
IV. Duration--Timetable
V. Objectives, Methodology and Techniques
VI. Professional Qualifications
VII. Preliminary Work
VIII. Documentation
IX. Artifact Conservation
X. Safety
XI. Reporting
XII. Curation of Project Collection
XIII. Dissemination

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 450rr to 450rr-6.

Introduction

    It is the sense of Congress that research and limited exploration 
activities concerning the RMS Titanic should continue for the purpose 
of enhancing public knowledge of its scientific, cultural, and 
historical significance, Provided, That, pending the adoption of the 
international agreement or implementation of international guidelines, 
no person should conduct any such research or exploration activity 
which would physically alter, disturb, or salvage the RMS Titanic.

Scope and Definitions

    Scope and applicability: These final guidelines are intended to 
guide the planning and conduct of activities aimed at RMS Titanic, 
including exploration, research, and if appropriate, salvage. As 
guidelines, they are advisory in nature. For the purposes of these 
guidelines the term--
    (a) ``artifacts'' means the cargo of the RMS Titanic and other 
contents, including those associated objects that are scattered in its 
vicinity and any portion of the hull;
    (b) ``collection'' means artifacts and records pertaining to a 
project;
    (c) ``project'' means all activities aimed at RMS Titanic and/or 
its artifacts carried out in accordance with these guidelines;
    (d) ``in-situ preservation'' means that the preservation of RMS 
Titanic at the site of the wreck should be considered as the first 
option for protection. It is a precautionary approach to management of 
RMS Titanic consistent with the character of a Maritime Memorial. It is 
not intended as a legal presumption against the recovery or salvage of 
artifacts conducted in a manner consistent with these guidelines. 
Recovery or salvage of the artifacts may be justified by educational, 
scientific or cultural interests;
    (e) ``qualified institution'' means any facility where the 
collection is kept together and maintained for the benefit of the 
public consistent with these guidelines and the Act. This will 
typically be a museum, but not always; and
    (f) ``RMS Titanic'' means the wreck of the RMS Titanic.

I. General Principles

    1. The preferred policy for the preservation of RMS Titanic and its 
artifacts is in-situ preservation. Recovery or excavation aimed at RMS 
Titanic and/or its artifacts should be granted only when justified by 
educational, scientific, or cultural interests. All artifacts recovered 
from RMS Titanic should be conserved and curated consistent with these 
guidelines and kept together and intact as project collections.
    2. Activities should avoid disturbance of human remains. In 
particular, entry into the hull sections of RMS Titanic should be 
avoided so that they, other artifacts and any human remains are not 
disturbed.
    3. Activities utilizing non-destructive techniques and non-
intrusive surveys and sampling should be preferred to those involving 
recovery or excavation aimed at RMS Titanic and/or its artifacts.
    4. Activities should have the minimum adverse impact on RMS Titanic 
and its artifacts.
    5. Activities should ensure proper recording and dissemination to 
the public of historical, cultural and archaeological information.

II. Project Design

    6. Activities that should be the object of a project design 
include:
    (a) The objectives of the project;
    (b) A general description of the methodology and techniques to be 
employed;
    (c) A description of the anticipated funding;
    (d) A provisional timetable for completion of the project;
    (e) The composition, qualifications and responsibilities of the 
anticipated team;
    (f) The proposal for or results of all preliminary work;
    (g) If applicable, plans for post-fieldwork;
    (h) If applicable, a conservation and curation plan;
    (i) A documentation program;
    (j) A safety policy;
    (k) If applicable, arrangements for collaboration with museums and 
other institutions;
    (l) Report preparation, contents, and dissemination;
    (m) If applicable, the anticipated disposition of archives, 
including artifacts; and
    (n) if applicable, a program for publication.
    7. If unexpected discoveries are made or circumstances change, the 
project design should be reviewed and amended.
    8. Each project should be carried out in accordance with its 
project design.

III. Funding

    9. Projects should be designed to ensure adequate funding in 
advance to complete all stages of the project including the curation, 
conservation and documentation of any recovered artifacts, and the 
preparation and dissemination of the report.
    10. The project design should include contingency plans that will 
ensure conservation of recovered artifacts and supporting documentation 
in the event of any interruption of anticipated funding.
    11. The project design should demonstrate an ability to fund the 
project through completion.
    12. Project funding should not require the sale of artifacts or 
other material recovered or the use of any strategy that will cause 
artifacts and supporting documentation to be irretrievably dispersed.

IV. Duration--Timetable

    13. Adequate time should be assured in advance to complete all 
stages of the

[[Page 18913]]

project, including the curation, conservation and documentation of any 
recovered artifacts, and the preparation and dissemination of the 
report.
    14. The project design should include contingency plans that will 
ensure conservation of artifacts and supporting documentation in the 
event of any interruption in the anticipated timetable.

V. Objectives, Methodology and Techniques

    15. The project design should include the objectives, proposed 
methodology and techniques.
    16. The methodology should comply with the project objectives and 
with the general principles in section I.

VI. Professional Qualifications

    17. Projects should only be undertaken under the guidance of and in 
the presence of qualified technical and/or professional experts with 
experience appropriate to the objectives.
    18. All persons on the project team should be:
    (a) qualified and have demonstrated experience appropriate to their 
project roles; and
    (b) fully briefed and understand the work required.

VII. Preliminary Work

    19. The project design should include:
    (a) An assessment that evaluates the vulnerability of RMS Titanic 
and artifacts to damage by the proposed activities; and
    (b) A determination that the benefits of the project outweigh the 
potential risk of damage.
    20. The assessment should also include background studies and 
relevant bibliography of available historical and archaeological 
evidence, and environmental consequences of the proposed project for 
the long-term stability of RMS Titanic and artifacts.

VIII. Documentation

    21. Projects should be thoroughly documented in accordance with 
professional archaeological standards current at the time the project 
is to be undertaken.
    22. Documentation should include, at a minimum, the systematic and 
complete recording of the provenance of artifacts moved or removed in 
the course of the project, field notes, plans, sections, photographs 
and recording in other media.

IX. Artifact Conservation

    23. The project design should include a conservation plan that 
provides for treatment of the artifacts in transit and in the long 
term.
    24. Conservation should be carried out in accordance with 
professional standards current at the time the project is to be 
undertaken.

X. Safety

    25. All persons on the team should work according to a safety 
policy prepared according to professional standards and set out in the 
project design.

XI. Reporting

    26. Interim reports should be made available according to a 
timetable set out in the project design.
    27. Reports should include:
    (a) An account of the objectives;
    (b) An account of the methodology and techniques employed;
    (c) An account of the results achieved; and
    (d) Recommendations concerning conservation of any artifacts 
removed during the course of the project.

XII. Curation of Project Collection

    28. The project collection, including any artifacts recovered 
during the course of the project and a copy of all supporting 
documentation, should be kept together and intact in a manner that 
provides for public access, curation and its availability for 
educational, scientific, cultural and other public purposes.
    29. Arrangements for curation of the project collection should be 
agreed before any project commences, and should be set out in the 
project design.
    30. The project collection should be curated according to 
professional standards current at the time the project is to be 
undertaken.

XIII. Dissemination

    31. Projects should provide for public education and popular 
presentation of the results.
    32. A final synthesis should be made available to the public as 
soon as possible, having regard to the complexity of the project.

[FR Doc. 01-9023 Filed 4-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-08-P