[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 41 (Friday, March 1, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6996-7005]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03658]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
36 CFR Parts 60 and 63
[NPS-WASO-NHPA; PPWONRADE2, PMP00EI05.YP0000]
RIN 1024-AE49
National Register of Historic Places
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Park Service proposes to revise regulations
governing the listing of properties in the National Register of
Historic Places. The proposed changes would implement the 2016
Amendments to the National Historic Preservation Act, extend the
timeline for the Keeper to respond to appeals, and ensure that if the
owners of a majority of the land area in a proposed historic district
object to listing, the proposed district will not be listed over their
objection. The rule would also make several minor, non-substantive
changes to existing regulations.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received by 11:59 p.m. EST
on April 30, 2019.
Information Collection Requirements: If you wish to comment on the
information collection requirements in this proposed rule, please note
that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is required to make a
decision concerning the collection of information contained in this
proposed rule between 30 and 60 days after publication of this proposed
rule in the Federal Register. Therefore, comments should be submitted
to OMB by April 30, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Regulation Identifier
Number (RIN) 1024-AE49, by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Mail to: National Register of Historic Places, National
Park Service, 1849 C Street NW, MS 7228, Washington, DC 20240.
Instructions: Comments will not be accepted by fax, email,
or in any way other than those specified above. All submissions
received must include the words ``National Park Service'' or ``NPS''
and must include the docket number or RIN (1024-AE49) for this
rulemaking. Comments received may be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background
documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
search for the RIN (1024-AE49).
Information Collection Requirements: Send your comments and
suggestions on the information collection requirements to the Desk
Officer for the Department of the Interior at OMB-OIRA at (202) 395-
5806 (fax) or [email protected] (email). Please provide a
copy of your comments to NPS Information Collection Clearance Officer,
National Park Service, 1201 Oakridge Drive, Fort Collins, CO 80525
(mail). Please reference OMB Control Number 1024-0018/AE49 in the
subject line of your comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joy Beasley, Acting Associate
Director, Cultural Resources Partnerships and Science & Keeper of the
National Register of Historic Places, NPS (WASO), (202) 354-6991,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 6997]]
Background
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), enacted in 1966,
declared a national policy to preserve significant historic sites,
districts, buildings, structures, and objects ``for the inspiration and
benefit of the people of the United States.'' 54 U.S.C. 302101. It has
been amended several times since 1966, with the most substantive
amendments in 1980 and 1992.
The NHPA authorized the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to
``expand and maintain a National Register of Historic Places composed
of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in
American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture.''
54 U.S.C. 302101. This authority is delegated by the NHPA to the
Director of the National Park Service (NPS) and has been further
delegated to the Keeper of the National Register (Keeper). 54 U.S.C.
300316; 36 CFR 60.3(f). The National Register is the official list of
the Nation's historic places worthy of preservation. As of November 26,
2018, a total of 94,364 properties (i.e., districts, buildings,
structures, sites, and objects) were listed in the National Register.
The Keeper processes an average of 1,619 National Register actions
annually that are submitted by States, Tribes, and Federal agencies.
The NHPA directed the NPS to promulgate regulations for
``nominating properties for inclusion on, and removal from, the
National Register'' and for ``notifying the owner of a property, any
appropriate local governments, and the general public, when the
property is being considered for inclusion on the National Register. .
.'' 54 U.S.C. 302103(2).
The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for the state in
which a property is located ``is responsible for identifying and
nominating eligible properties to the National Register'' (36 CFR
60.6(a)), and for ascertaining whether the property owner of an
individual property or a majority of private property owners within a
proposed district object to listing a property in the National
Register. 36 CFR 60.6(g). Each Federal agency is required by the NHPA
to designate a qualified official to be the agency's Federal
Preservation Officer (FPO). 54 U.S.C. 306104. FPOs are responsible for
nominating properties under the jurisdiction or control of the Federal
agency. Pursuant to the 1992 Amendments to the NHPA, Tribal Historic
Preservation Officers (THPOs) can assume nomination responsibilities on
tribal land, including nominating eligible properties for listing in
the National Register.
Prior to submitting a nomination involving privately owned property
to the Keeper, SHPOs are required to notify private property owners
that a nomination of their property is being considered or, in the case
of a historic district, that their property is within a district
considered for nomination. Any private property owner who objects to a
nomination is required to submit a notarized statement to the SHPO
certifying that the party is the sole or partial owner of the private
property and objects to the listing. 36 CFR 60.6(g). The objections are
treated as votes against listing the property. NPS regulations state
that--in the case of districts that are nominated--each owner of
private property in that district has one vote regardless of how many
properties or what part of one property that party owns and regardless
of whether the property contributes to the significance of the
district. 36 CFR 60.6(g). The SHPO is responsible for determining
whether a majority of owners have objected, 36 CFR 60.6(g), though
objections may also be submitted to the Keeper after a property has
been nominated and prior to listing. 36 CFR 60.6(r). If a majority of
owners object to listing, the property cannot be listed, but the Keeper
is required to determine whether or not it is eligible for listing in
the National Register. 54 U.S.C. 302105(b)-(c); 36 CFR 60.6(g) and (n).
The section of the NHPA that authorizes the Secretary to establish
criteria for properties to be included in the National Register and to
promulgate regulations requires ``consultation with national historical
and archeological associations.'' 54 U.S.C. 302103. This applies to the
promulgation of regulations regarding: Nominations of properties for
inclusion in the National Register; removing properties from the
National Register; considering appeals; making eligibility
determinations; and owner notification. 54 U.S.C. 302103. After
publication of the proposed rule, the NPS will consult with SHPOs,
FPOs, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and other national
historical and archeological associations.
Proposed Rule
This rule proposes several changes to the regulations governing the
listing of properties in the National Register of Historic Places. One
group of changes would implement the 2016 Amendments to the NHPA.\1\
Another group of changes would ensure that if the owners of a majority
of the land area in a proposed historic district object to listing, the
proposed district will not be listed over their objection. The rule
would also extend the timeline for the Keeper to respond to appeals of
the failure of a nominating authority to nominate a property for
inclusion in the National Register. Finally, the rule would make a
number of minor, non-substantive changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 2016 Amendments to the NHPA were enacted on December 16,
2016 in Title VIII--National Historic Preservation Amendment Act of
the National Park Service Centennial Act (Pub. L. 114-289).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation of the 2016 Amendments to the NHPA
The 2016 Amendments to the NHPA inserted a new subsection (c) into
54 U.S.C. 302104 that sets forth a specific process for Federal
agencies to directly submit nominations of properties for inclusion in
the National Register. This process applies only to properties that are
under the jurisdiction or control of a Federal agency.
Specifically, subsection (c) states that the Secretary, acting
through the Director of the NPS, may accept a nomination directly from
a Federal agency, but only if six preconditions are satisfied. These
are: (1) The FPO has sent a completed nomination to the SHPO for review
and comment regarding the adequacy of the nomination, the significance
of the property, and the property's eligibility for the National
Register; (2) the SHPO has been given 45 days to make a recommendation
regarding the nomination to the FPO, and failure to comment within this
timeframe constitutes ``a recommendation to not support the
nomination''; (3) the chief elected officials of the county (or
equivalent governmental unit) and municipal political jurisdiction in
which the property is located have been notified and given 45 days in
which to comment; (4) the FPO has forwarded the nomination to the
Keeper after determining that all procedural requirements have been
met, including those described in (1)-(3) above, that the nomination is
adequately documented, that the nomination is technically and
professionally correct and sufficient, and--at the discretion of the
FPO--including an opinion as to whether the property meets the National
Register criteria for evaluation; (5) notice has been provided by the
Keeper in the Federal Register that the nominated property is being
considered for listing in the National Register that includes
[[Page 6998]]
any comments and the recommendation of the SHPO and a declaration
whether the SHPO has responded within the 45 day-period of review; and
(6) the Keeper addresses in the Federal Register any comments from the
SHPO that do not support the nomination of the property in the National
Register before the property is included in the National Register.
The proposed rule would revise the regulations governing the
process for nominations by SHPOs in 36 CFR 60.6, nominations directly
by Federal agencies in 36 CFR 60.9, and concurrent State and Federal
nominations in 36 CFR 60.10, all to be consistent with 54 U.S.C.
302104(c). In addition to ensuring that the six preconditions that are
stated in the 2016 Amendments are also stated affirmatively in the
regulations, the proposed rule would remove regulatory provisions that
are inconsistent with the establishment by Congress of an exclusive
process for the nomination of properties directly by Federal agencies.
The rule would remove paragraph (y) in section 60.6 that provides an
alternative process for the FPO to forward nominations of federal
property to the Keeper that were originally submitted by a SHPO. The
rule would remove a provision in paragraph (h) of section 60.9 that
provides for the automatic listing of nominated Federal property within
45 days of receipt by the Keeper unless the Keeper disapproves the
nomination or an appeal is filed. The proposed rule would also revise
the regulations governing the publication of notice in the Federal
Register in 36 CFR 60.13 to be consistent with the notice requirements
in 54 U.S.C. 302104(c).
The proposed rule would revise paragraphs (a) and (c) of 36 CFR
63.4 in response to the 2016 Amendments. The rule would revise
paragraph (a) to clarify that the Keeper will not make eligibility
determinations for properties if the Keeper returns the nomination to
the Federal agency for technical or professional revision, or because
of procedural requirements. The NPS believes this change is required by
the 2016 Amendments because nominations can only be accepted by the
Keeper if all procedural requirements have been met, including that the
nomination is technically and professionally correct and sufficient. If
a nomination is not accepted by the Keeper, the Keeper cannot make an
eligibility determination. The NPS seeks comment from the public on
this interpretation of the 2016 Amendments or, in contrast, whether the
NPS could interpret the 2016 Amendments to allow the Keeper to make
eligibility determinations for properties whose nominations have been
returned to the Federal Agency.
Outside of the nomination process for listing properties in the
National Register, SHPOs and FPOs sometimes request that the Keeper
determine whether a property is eligible for listing in the National
Register. This usually occurs as part of compliance with section 106 of
the NHPA, which requires Federal agencies to take into account the
effects of their undertakings on historic properties. Paragraph (c) of
36 CFR 63.4 allows the Keeper to make eligibility determinations for
properties that have not been nominated if necessary to assist in the
protection of historic resources. The proposed rule would revise
paragraph (c) to clarify that the Keeper may only determine the
eligibility of properties for listing in the National Register after
consultation with and a request from the appropriate SHPO and concerned
Federal agency, if any. The NPS believes this change is consistent with
the 2016 Amendments and other provisions in the NHPA that dictate the
roles and responsibilities of SHPOs and FPOs. See 54 U.S.C. 302104(a);
54 U.S.C. 306101(a) and (c).
Subsection (d)(2) of 54 U.S.C. 302104, unchanged by the 2016
Amendments, provides in pertinent part that ``Any person or local
government may appeal to the Secretary . . . the failure of a
nominating authority to nominate a property in accordance with this
chapter.'' The proposed rule would clarify that the Keeper cannot hear
an appeal of a Federal agency's failure to nominate a property unless
all of the conditions precedent listed in 54 U.S.C. 302104(c) are met,
including a requirement that the FPO forwards the nomination to the
Keeper. If all of the criteria are not satisfied, the nomination is not
properly before the Secretary and therefore the Secretary does not have
jurisdiction to hear an appeal under 54 U.S.C. 302104(d)(2).
Related to appeals but unrelated to the 2016 Amendments, the
proposed rule would extend the timeline for the Keeper to respond to
the appellant and the applicable SHPO or FPO from 45 days to 60 days.
The rule would also allow the Keeper to extend the initial 60-day
period for an additional 30 days, upon the request of the appellant or
the applicable SHPO or FPO. Upon receipt of an appeal, the Keeper
routinely provides the applicable SHPO or FPO an opportunity to submit
information and provide comment regarding the appeal, and these
officials often request extensions of time in order to submit relevant
information. These changes would provide SHPOs and FPOs with additional
time to respond to the issues raised by appellants and to explain their
position, and would provide the Keeper with additional time to resolve
complex issues that are sometimes raised by appellants regarding the
nomination of properties to the National Register.
Owner Objections to Nominations
In some cases, a property that is nominated for listing in the
National Register will have more than one owner. This happens most
often in the case of a proposed historic district, which is identified
in the NHPA as a type of historic property that can be listed in the
National Register. 54 U.S.C. 300308. Under the NHPA, if a majority of
the owners of privately owned property object to the inclusion of the
property in the National Register prior to listing, the property cannot
be listed until the objection is withdrawn, but its eligibility must
still be determined. 54 U.S.C. 302105. Owners are defined under
regulations as individuals, corporations or partnerships that hold fee
simple title to real property. 36 CFR 60.3(k). Owners are required to
submit notarized objections prior to listing.
The proposed rule would revise 36 CFR 60.6 and 60.10 to provide
that a property shall not be listed in the National Register if
objections are received from either (i) a majority of the land owners,
as existing regulations provide; or (ii) owners of a majority of the
land area of the property. This proposal would ensure that if the
owners of a majority of the land area in a proposed historic district
object to listing, the proposed district will not be listed over their
objection. The NPS seeks comment on whether it should remove the
requirement that objecting property owners submit notarized statements
certifying that they are the sole or partial owner of the property in
order to submit an objection. The NPS seeks comment on whether there is
an alternative way to certify ownership, or otherwise object to the
listing of a property, that is less burdensome on the property owner
but maintains or improves the fidelity of the objection process.
The proposed rule would also revise 36 CFR 60.6(g) to clarify that
if the SHPO receives information that calls into question the accuracy
of the owner or objector count, it is the SHPO's duty to exercise due
diligence to ensure the accuracy of the owner and objector count prior
to submitting a nomination to the Keeper. This proposed change is
intended to prevent situations in which a nomination must be returned
to the SHPO due to potential inaccuracies in the owner or objector
count. The SHPO, not the Keeper, is in the best position to
[[Page 6999]]
determine the ownership of nominated properties, the number of owners
within a nominated historic district, and the number of objections
received with respect to a nominated property.
Paragraph (i) of section 60.9 allows any person or organization to
petition the Keeper during the nomination process to accept or reject
the nomination of a property by a FPO. Similarly, paragraph (t) of
section 60.6 allows any person or organization to petition the Keeper
during the nomination process to accept or reject the nomination of a
property by a SHPO. The NPS seeks comment on whether these provisions
are redundant with the requirement in section 60.13 that the NPS
publish notice in the Federal Register asking for public comment on the
significance of properties nominated for listing in the National
Register.
Minor, Non-Substantive Changes
The NPS proposes to make several minor, non-substantive changes in
order to remove outdated provisions and clarify existing regulations.
The changes are identified in the table below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section Proposed change Purpose
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 60.1(a).............. Replace the citation These sections of
to ``16 U.S.C. 470 Title 16 U.S. Code
et seq.'' with a were recodified in
citation to 54 Title 54.
U.S.C. 300101 et
seq.''
Sec. 60.2(b).............. Note that owners of Clarify that these
property listed in grants are subject
the National to availability and
Register may be not automatically
considered for given to property
Federal grants for owners.
historic
preservation ``when
available.''
Sec. 60.2(c).............. Replace the Remove outdated
paragraph with an references to
updated description provisions of the
of current tax tax code that have
incentives that may been removed or
apply to listed substantially
properties. amended.
Sec. 60.3(a), (d), (j), Add updated and more Give the public
(k), and (p). diverse examples of better examples of
historic districts, the types of
objects, sites, and properties that are
structures. listed in the
National Register.
Sec. 60.3(g).............. Change the term The documents used
``Multiple Resource to nominate
Format submission'' multiple properties
to ``Multiple that share
Property Submission/ historical context
Multiple Property and significance
Documentation have changed.
Form'' and replace
the definition of
that submission/
form.
Sec. 60.3(i).............. Replace the title of The title of the
the reference document has
document from ``How changed.
to Complete
National Register
Forms'' to ``How to
Complete the
National Register
Registration Form''.
Sec. 60.3(q).............. Delete the This submission type
definition of has been superseded
``Thematic Group by the Multiple
Format submission''. Property Submission/
Multiple Property
Documentation Form.
Sec. 60.4................. In the last The title of the
paragraph, update document has
the reference to changed.
the guidance
document further
explaining the
exception for
properties that
have achieved
significance within
the past 50 years.
Sec. 60.5(a).............. Delete the sentence The sentence is
``For archival obsolete because
reasons, no other this is no longer a
forms, photocopied valid concern.
or otherwise, will
be accepted''
Sec. 60.6(e).............. Change the term The title of the
``Multiple Resource documents used to
Format submission'' nominate multiple
to ``Multiple properties that
Property Submission/ share historical
Multiple Property context and
Documentation significance has
Form''. changed.
Sec. 60.6(h).............. Delete paragraph.... This paragraph is
obsolete because it
only applied to
properties
nominated prior to
the effective date
of the regulations.
Sec. 60.6(j).............. Delete the phrase This edit removes
``on the nomination redundant language.
forms'' in the
second sentence.
Sec. 60.6(o).............. Update the The nomination form
references to the has changed. No new
nomination form by information is
replacing ``block being collected;
12'' with ``Section information
3''. Update the contained within
certification by the form has been
the SHPO in Section moved to the cover
3 to include an page.
identification of
the applicable
criteria and level
of significance for
the property.
Sec. 60.6(w).............. Replace the More accurately
reference to refer to
nominations nominations
``rejected'' by the returned for
Keeper with the correction and
term ``returned'' resubmission.
instead.
Sec. 60.14(b)(3)(iii)..... Remove the With the advent of
requirement that GPS and readily
the SHPO submit available online
U.S. Geological mapping sources,
Survey maps of USGS quadrangle
moved properties. maps are no longer
the required
mapping form.
Sec. 60.14(b)(3)(iv) and Replace the The level of
(v). requirements that specificity in the
the SHPO submit continuation sheet
acreage and a assists the
verbal boundary preparers in
description of providing the
moved properties requisite
with a requirement information for the
that the SHPO Keeper.
submit a
``Continuation
sheet with up-to-
date Sections 2, 5,
7, and 10.''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compliance With Other Laws, Executive Orders and Department Policy.
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs in the Office of Management and Budget will review
all significant rules. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has determined that this rule is not significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of Executive Order
12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system
to promote predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best,
most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory
ends. The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory
approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of
choice for the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible,
and consistent with regulatory
[[Page 7000]]
objectives. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes further that regulations
must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking
process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of
ideas. The NPS has developed this rule in a manner consistent with
these requirements.
Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs (Executive Order
13771)
This rule is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because
this rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule will not have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This certification is based on information
in the report entitled ``Cost-Benefit and Regulatory Flexibility
Threshold Analyses: General Revisions to Regulations Governing the
Listing of Properties in the National Register of Historic Places''
which is available online at www.regulations.gov.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:
(a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more.
(b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions.
(c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S. based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per
year. The rule does not have a significant or unique effect on State,
local, or tribal governments or the private sector. A statement
containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
is not required.
Takings (Executive Order 12630)
This rule does not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have takings implications under Executive Order 12630. A takings
implication assessment is not required.
Federalism (Executive Order 13132)
Under the criteria in section 1 of Executive Order 13132, the rule
does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism summary impact statement. This rule
pertains to procedures governing the listing of properties in the
National Register of Historic Places and would not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. A Federalism
summary impact statement is not required.
Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)
This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988.
This rule:
(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all
regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be
written to minimize litigation; and
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all
regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
Consultation With Indian Tribes (Executive Order 13175 and Department
Policy)
The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its
government-to-government relationship with Indian Tribes through a
commitment to consultation with Indian Tribes and recognition of their
right to self-governance and tribal sovereignty. The NPS has evaluated
this rule under the criteria in Executive Order 13175 and under the
Department's tribal consultation policy and has determined that tribal
consultation is not required because the rule will not have a
substantial direct effect on federally recognized Indian tribes.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains existing and new information
collections. All information collections require approval by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). An agency may not conduct or sponsor and
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has
reviewed and approved the information collection requirements
associated with nominations for listing of historic properties in the
National Register and assigned OMB Control Number 1024-0018 (expires 2/
28/19, and in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10, an agency may continue to
conduct or sponsor this collection of information while the submission
is pending at OMB).
The information collection requiring OMB approval is the
requirement for property owners to submit notarized letters to the SHPO
objecting to the property being listed in the National Register.
Additionally, we updated the name of Form 10-900-b to be ``Multiple
Property Submission/Multiple Property Documentation Form'' (MPDF).
Title of Collection: Nomination of Properties for Listing in the
National Register of Historic Places, 36 CFR 60 and 63.
OMB Control Number: 1024-0018.
Form Numbers: NPS Forms 10-900, 10-900a, and 10-900b.
Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.
Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals/households, private
sector, and State/local/Tribal governments.
Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.
Frequency of Collection: On occasion.
Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $500 for costs
associated with notarizing objection letters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated time
Activity Annual number per response Total annual
of responses (hours) burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preparation and Submission of Nomination Forms (individuals) NPS 90 250 22,500
Forms 10-900, 10-900-a, 10-900-b...............................
Preparation and Submission of Nomination Forms (private sector) 5 250 1,250
NPS Forms 10-900, 10-900-a, 10-900-b...........................
Preparation and Submission of Nomination Forms (govt) NPS Forms 5 250 1,250
10-900, 10-900-a, 10-900-b.....................................
Review of Nomination Forms and Submission to NPS (govt)......... 1,282 6 7,692
[[Page 7001]]
National Register Nominations Prepared by Consultants 635 120 76,200
(individuals) NPS Forms 10-900, 10-900-a.......................
Existing Multiple Property Submission by Consultants NPS Forms 75 100 7,500
10-900, 10-900-a...............................................
Newly Proposed MPS Cover Document Prepared by Consultants NPS 36 280 10,080
Forms 10-900-a, 10-900-b.......................................
New Nominations Prepared and Submitted by Consultants 1 150 150
(individuals) NPS Forms 10-900, 10-900-a.......................
National Register District Nominations Prepared by Consultants 435 230 100,050
(govt) NPS Forms 10-900-a, 10-900-b............................
Notarized Statement of Owner Objections......................... 50 1 50
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 2,614 .............. 226,722
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent
burdens, we invite the public and other Federal agencies to comment on
any aspect of this information collection, including:
(1) Whether or not the collection of information is necessary,
including whether or not the information will have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection
of information;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
(4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents.
Send your comments and suggestions on this information collection
by the date indicated in the DATES section to the Desk Officer for the
Department of the Interior at OMB-OIRA at (202) 395-5806 (fax) or
[email protected] (email). You may view the information
collection request(s) at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
Please provide a copy of your comments to Phadrea D. Ponds, Information
Collection Clearance Officer, National Park Service, 1201 Oakridge
Drive, Fort Collins, CO 80525; or by email to [email protected].
Please reference OMB Control Number 1024-0018/AE49 in the subject line
of your comments.
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)
This rule does not constitute a major federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment. A detailed statement
under NEPA is not required because the rule is covered by a categorical
exclusion. NPS NEPA Handbook (2015) Section 3.2.H allows for the
following to be categorically excluded: ``policies, directives,
regulations, and guidelines that are of an administrative, financial,
legal, technical, or procedural nature.'' The NPS has also determined
that the rule does not involve any of the extraordinary circumstances
listed in 43 CFR 46.215 that would require further analysis under NEPA.
Effects on the Energy Supply (Executive Order 13211)
This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition
in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects in not
required.
Clarity of This Rule
The NPS is required by Executive Orders 12866 (section 1(b)(12))
and 12988 (section 3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section 1(a)), and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule the NPS publishes must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use common, everyday words and clear language rather than
jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that the NPS has not met these requirements, send the
NPS comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help the NPS revise the rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you should identify the numbers of
the sections or paragraphs that you find unclear, which sections or
sentences are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables
would be useful, etc.
Public Participation
It is the policy of the Department of the Interior, whenever
practicable, to afford the public an opportunity to participate in the
rulemaking process. Accordingly, interested persons may submit written
comments regarding this proposed rule by one of the methods listed in
the ADDRESSES section of this document.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Parts 60 and 63
Historic preservation.
In consideration of the foregoing, the National Park Service
proposes to amend 36 CFR parts 60 and 63 as set forth below:
PART 60--NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
0
1. The authority citation for part 60 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.
Sec. 60.1 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 60.1(a), remove ``16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.'' and add in its
place ``54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.''
0
3. Amend Sec. 60.2 by:
0
a. In paragraph (b) adding the phrase ``when available'' to the end of
the sentence; and
0
b. Revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.2 Effects of listing under Federal law.
* * * * *
(c) If a property is listed in the National Register, certain
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code that encourage historic
preservation may apply. These may include an investment tax credit for
the rehabilitation of depreciable historic structures or other tax
incentives relating to conservation easements.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 60.3:
0
a. Revise the examples in paragraphs (a) and (d);
[[Page 7002]]
0
b. Revise paragraph (g).
0
c. In paragraph (i), remove the phrase ``How to Complete National
Register Forms'' and add in its place ``How to Complete the National
Register Registration Form''.
0
d. Revise the examples in paragraphs (j), (l), and (p).
0
e. Remove and reserve paragraph (q).
The revisions to read as follows:
Sec. 60.3 Definitions.
(a) * * *
Examples to Paragraph (a)
Carolina, Clinchfield & Ohio Railroad Station and Depot, Johnson City,
TN
E.E. Haugen House, Brookings, SD
St. Joseph's Roman Catholic Church, Massillon, OH
* * * * *
(d) * * *
Examples to Paragraph (d)
Capitol View Historic District, Atlanta, GA
Saratoga National Historical Park, Saratoga County, NY
Rockland Rural Historic District, Front Royal, VA
* * * * *
(g) Multiple Property Submission/Multiple Property Documentation
Form. A Multiple Property Submission is the assembled individual
registration forms together with the information common to the group of
properties that serves as the historic context(s) and outlines the
registration requirements for listing properties under that cover
document, known as the Multiple Property Documentation Form (MPDF). The
MPDF is a cover document and is not a nomination form in its own right.
However, given that it serves as the basis for evaluating the National
Register eligibility of individual properties associated with it, it is
submitted by nominating authorities to the Keeper for approval.
* * * * *
(j) * * *
Examples to Paragraph (j)
Mural ``La Familia,'' San Juan, Puerto Rico
``Spirit of the American Doughboy'' Statue, Muskogee, OK
Hinckley State Line Marker, Ogema, MN
* * * * *
(l) * * *
Examples to Paragraph (l)
Bell Witch Cave, Adams, TN
Minertown, Carter, WI
Dunlap Colored Cemetery, Dunlop. KS
Port Gibson Battle Site, Port Gibson, MS
* * * * *
(p) * * *
Examples to Paragraph (p)
Marion Steam Shovel, LeRoy, NY
Ross Grain Elevator, Audubon, IA
Albion River Bridge, Albion, CA
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec. 60.4(g) by revising the last sentence to read as
follows:
Sec. 60.4 Criteria for evaluation.
* * * * *
(g) * * * Criterion consideration (g) is further described and
addressed in NPS guidance entitled ``Guidelines for Evaluating and
Nominating Properties that Have Achieved Significance within the Past
Fifty Years.''
Sec. 60.5 [Amended]
0
7. Amend Sec. 60.5 by removing the last sentence of paragraph (a).
0
8. In Sec. 60.6:
0
a. In paragraph (e), remove the phrase ``Multiple Resource and Thematic
Group Format'' and add in its place ``Multiple Property Submission/
Multiple Property Documentation Format''.
0
b. Remove and reserve paragraph (h);
0
c. Revise paragraph (g);
0
d. In paragraph (j), revise the second sentence;
0
e. Revise paragraphs (n), (o), (r), (s), and (v);
0
f. In paragraph (w), revise the first sentence; and
0
g. Remove and reserve paragraph (y).
The revisions to read as follows:
Sec. 60.6 Nominations by the State Historic Preservation Officer
under approved State Historic Preservation Programs.
* * * * *
(g) Upon notification, any owner or owners of a private property
proposed to be nominated for listing who wish to object shall submit to
the State Historic Preservation Officer a notarized statement
certifying that the party is the sole or partial owner of private
property proposed for listing and objects to the listing. With respect
to historic districts, owners may object regardless of whether the
owner's individual property contributes to the significance of the
district. For nominations with more than one owner of a property, the
property will not be listed if either a majority of the owners object
to listing; or the owners of a majority of the land area of the
property object to listing. Upon receipt of notarized objections
respecting a property with multiple owners, it is the responsibility of
the State Historic Preservation Officer to ascertain whether a majority
of owners, or owners of a majority of the land area, have objected. If
an owner whose name did not appear on the list of owners certifies in a
written notarized statement that the party is the sole or partial owner
of a nominated private property, such owner should be counted by the
State Historic Preservation Officer in determining whether a majority
of owners, or owners of a majority of the land area, have objected. If
the State Historic Preservation Officer receives other information that
would call into question the accuracy of the owner or objector count,
the State Historic Preservation Officer shall exercise due diligence to
determine whether a majority of owners, or owners of a majority of the
land area, have objected.
* * * * *
(j) * * * The State Review Board shall review the nomination forms
or documentation proposed for submission and any comments concerning
the property's significance and eligibility for the National Register.
* * *
* * * * *
(n) If the owner of a private property has objected or, for a
district or single property with multiple owners, the majority of
owners or the owners of a majority of the land area have objected, to
the nomination prior to the submittal of a nomination, the State
Historic Preservation Officer shall submit the nomination to the Keeper
only for a determination of eligibility pursuant to paragraph (s) of
this section.
(o) The State Historic Preservation Officer signs Section 3 of the
nomination form if in his or her opinion the property meets the
National Register criteria for evaluation. The State Historic
Preservation Officer's signature in Section 3 certifies that:
(1) All procedural requirements have been met;
(2) The nomination form is adequately documented;
(3) The nomination form is technically and professionally correct
and sufficient; and
(4) In the opinion of the State Historic Preservation Officer, the
property meets the National Register criteria for evaluation, The State
Historic Preservation Officer must identify the applicable criteria and
indicate the property's level of significance.
* * * * *
(r) Nominations will be included in the National Register within 45
days of receipt by the Keeper or designee unless the Keeper disapproves
a nomination, an appeal is filed, or the owner of private property (or
the majority of such owners, or the owners of a majority of the land
area, for a district or single property with multiple owners) objects
by notarized statements received by the
[[Page 7003]]
Keeper prior to listing. Nominations which are technically or
professionally inadequate will be returned for correction and
resubmission. When a property does not appear to meet the National
Register criteria for evaluation, the nomination will be returned with
an explanation as to why the property does not meet the National
Register criteria for evaluation.
(s) If the owner of private property (or the majority of such
owners, or the owners of a majority of the land area for a district or
single property with multiple owners) has objected to the nomination by
notarized statement prior to listing, the Keeper shall review the
nomination and make a determination of eligibility within 45 days of
receipt, unless an appeal is filed. The Keeper shall list such
properties determined eligible in the National Register upon receipt of
notarized statements from the owner(s) of private property that
constituted the objection that the owner(s) no longer object to
listing.
* * * * *
(v) In the case of nominations where the owner of private property
(or the majority of such owners, or the owners of a majority of the
land area for a district or single property with multiple owners) has
objected and the Keeper has determined the nomination eligible for the
National Register, the State Historic Preservation Officer shall notify
the appropriate chief elected local official and the owner(s) of such
property of this determination. The general notice may be used for
properties with more than 50 owners as described in Sec. 60.6(d) or
the State Historic Preservation Officer may notify the owners
individually.
(w) If subsequent to nomination a State makes major revisions to a
nomination or re-nominates a property returned by the Keeper, the State
Historic Preservation Officer shall notify the affected property
owner(s) and the chief elected local official of the revisions or re-
nomination in the same manner as the original notification for the
nomination, but need not resubmit the nomination to the State Review
Board. * * *
* * * * *
0
9. Amend Sec. 60.9 by revising paragraphs (c) through (j) to read as
follows:
Sec. 60.9 Nominations by Federal agencies.
* * * * *
(c) Completed nominations are submitted to the appropriate State
Historic Preservation Officer for review and comment regarding the
adequacy of the nomination, the significance of the property and its
eligibility for the National Register. Within 45 days of receiving the
completed nomination, the State Historic Preservation Officer shall
make a recommendation regarding the nomination to the appropriate
Federal Preservation Officer. The State Historic Preservation Officer
signs Section 3 of the nomination form with his/her recommendation.
Failure to meet the 45-day deadline shall constitute a recommendation
to not support the nomination.
(d) At the same time completed nominations are submitted to the
appropriate State Historic Preservation Officer under paragraph (c) of
this section, the chief elected local officials of the county (or
equivalent governmental unit) and municipal political jurisdiction in
which the property is located are notified by the Federal Preservation
Officer and given 45 days in which to comment.
(e) After receiving the comments of the State Historic Preservation
Officer and chief elected local officials, or if there has been no
response within 45 days, the Federal Preservation Officer may approve
the nomination if in his or her opinion the property meets the National
Register criteria for evaluation and forward it to the Keeper of the
National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service, United
States Department of the Interior, Washington, DC 20240. Prior to
forwarding the nomination to the Keeper, the Federal Preservation
Officer signs Section 3 of the nomination form certifying that:
(1) All procedural requirements have been met;
(2) The nomination form is adequately documented;
(3) The nomination form is technically and professionally correct
and sufficient; and
(4) In the opinion of the Federal Preservation Officer, the
property meets the National Register criteria for evaluation.
(f) When a Federal Preservation Officer submits a nomination form
for a property that he or she does not believe meets the National
Register criteria for evaluation, the Federal Preservation Officer
signs a continuation sheet Form NPS 10-900a explaining his/her opinions
on the eligibility of the property and certifying that:
(1) All procedural requirements have been met;
(2) The nomination form is adequately documented; and
(3) The nomination form is technically and professionally correct
and sufficient.
(g) The comments of the State Historic Preservation Officer and
chief local official are appended to the nomination, or, if there are
no comments from the State Historic Preservation Officer, an
explanation is attached. Concurrent nominations (see Sec. 60.10)
cannot be submitted, however, until the nomination has been considered
by the State in accord with Sec. . 60.6, supra. Comments received by
the State concerning concurrent nominations and notarized statements of
objection must be submitted with the nomination.
(h) Notice will be provided in the Federal Register that the
nominated property is being considered for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places in accord with Sec. 60.13.
(i) Nominations which are technically or professionally inadequate
will be returned for correction and resubmission. When a property does
not appear to meet the National Register criteria for evaluation, the
nomination will be returned with an explanation as to why the property
does not meet the National Register criteria for evaluation.
(j) Any person or organization which supports or opposes the
nomination of a property by a Federal Preservation Officer may petition
the Keeper during the nomination process either to accept or reject a
nomination. The petitioner must state the grounds of the petition and
request in writing that the Keeper substantively review the nomination.
Such petition received by the Keeper prior to the listing of a property
in the National Register or a determination of its eligibility where
the private owner(s) object to listing will be considered by the Keeper
and the nomination will be substantively reviewed.
0
10. In Sec. 60.10, revise paragraphs (a) and (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.10 Concurrent State and Federal nominations.
(a) State Historic Preservation Officers and Federal Preservation
Officers are encouraged to cooperate in locating, inventorying,
evaluating, and nominating all properties possessing historical,
architectural, archeological, or cultural value. Federal agencies may
nominate properties where a portion of the property is not under their
jurisdiction or control. All Federal nominations, including concurrent
State and Federal nominations, must satisfy the procedural requirements
in Sec. 60.9, including:
(1) Providing the appropriate State Historic Preservation Officer
with notice of the proposed nomination and 45-days in which to respond;
(2) Providing the chief elected local officials of the county (or
equivalent governmental unit) and municipal political jurisdiction in
which the property is located notice of the
[[Page 7004]]
proposed nomination and 45 days in which to comment; and
(3) Certifying that all procedural requirements have been met, the
nomination form is adequately documented, and the nomination form is
technically and professionally correct and sufficient.
* * * * *
(d) If the owner of any privately owned property (or a majority of
the owners, or the owners of a majority of the land area for a district
or single property with multiple owners) objects to such inclusion by
notarized statement(s) the Federal Historic Preservation Officer shall
submit the nomination to the Keeper for review and a determination of
eligibility. Comments, opinions, and notarized statements of objection
shall be submitted with the nomination.
* * * * *
0
11. Revise Sec. 60.12 to read as follows:
Sec. 60.12 Nomination appeals.
(a) Appeal Procedures for Nominations by State Historic
Preservation Officers. (1) Any person or local government may appeal to
the Keeper the failure or refusal of a State Historic Preservation
Officer to nominate a property that the person or local government
considers to meet the National Register criteria for evaluation upon
decision of a State Historic Preservation Officer to not nominate a
property for any reason when requested pursuant to Sec. 60.11, or upon
failure of a State Historic Preservation Officer to nominate a property
recommended by the State Review Board. (This action differs from the
procedure for appeals during the review of a nomination by the National
Park Service where an individual or organization may ``petition the
Keeper during the nomination process,'' as specified in Sec. 60.6(t).
Upon receipt of such petition the normal 45-day review period will be
extended for 30 days beyond the date of the petition to allow the
petitioner to provide additional documentation for review.)
(2) Such appeal shall include a copy of the nomination form and
documentation previously submitted to the State Historic Preservation
Officer, an explanation of why the applicant is submitting the appeal
in accord with this section and shall include pertinent correspondence
from the State Historic Preservation Officer.
(3) The Keeper will respond to the appellant and the State Historic
Preservation Officer with a written explanation either denying or
sustaining the appeal within 60 days of receipt. Upon the request of
the State Historic Preservation Officer, the Keeper may extend this
period for an additional 30 days. If the appeal is sustained, the
Keeper will:
(i) Request the State Historic Preservation Officer to submit the
nomination to the Keeper within 15 days if the nomination has completed
the procedural requirements for nomination as described in Sec. 60.6
except that concurrence of the State Review Board or State Historic
Preservation Officer is not required; or
(ii) If the nomination has not completed these procedural
requirements, request the State Historic Preservation Officer to
promptly process the nomination pursuant to Sec. 60.6 and submit the
nomination to the Keeper without delay.
(4) State Historic Preservation Officers shall process and submit
such nominations if so requested by the Keeper pursuant to this
section. The Secretary reserves the right to list properties in the
National Register or determine properties eligible for such listing on
his/her own motion when necessary to assist in the preservation of
historic resources and after notifying the owner and appropriate
parties and allowing for a 30-day comment period.
(5) No person shall be considered to have exhausted administrative
remedies with respect to failure to nominate a property to the National
Register until he or she has complied with procedures set forth in this
section. The decision of the Keeper is the final administrative action
on such appeals.
(b) Appeal Procedures for Nominations by Federal Preservation
Officers. (1) Any person or local government may appeal to the Keeper
the failure of a Federal Preservation Officer to nominate any property
under the jurisdiction or control of a Federal agency for inclusion in
the National Register in accordance with 54 U.S.C. 302104(c). (This
action differs from the procedure for appeals during the Keeper's
review of a nomination where an individual or organization may
``petition the Keeper during the nomination process,'' as specified in
Sec. 60.9(j). Upon receipt of such petition the normal 45-day review
period will be extended for 30 days beyond the date of the petition to
allow the petitioner to provide additional documentation for review.)
The Keeper of the National Register shall only have jurisdiction to
hear appeals if the following criteria are satisfied:
(i) A completed nomination has been sent to the State Historic
Preservation Officer for review and comment regarding the adequacy of
the nomination, the significance of the property, and its eligibility
for the National Register;
(ii) The State Historic Preservation Officer has been given 45 days
to make a recommendation regarding the nomination to the Federal
Preservation Officer;
(iii) The chief elected officials of the county (or equivalent
governmental unit) and municipal political jurisdiction in which the
property is located have been notified and given 45 days in which to
comment;
(iv) The Federal Preservation Officer has forwarded the nomination
to the Keeper of the National Register of Historic Places after
determining that all procedural requirements have been met, including
those in paragraphs (b)(i) through (iii) of this section; the
nomination is adequately documented; the nomination is technically and
professionally correct and sufficient;
(v) Notice has been provided in the Federal Register that the
nominated property is being considered for listing in the National
Register that includes any comments and the recommendation of the State
Historic Preservation Officer and a declaration whether the State
Historic Preservation Officer has responded within the 45 day-period of
review described in paragraph (b)(ii) of this section; and
(vi) The Keeper addresses in the Federal Register any comments from
the State Historic Preservation Officer that do not support the
nomination of the property in the National Register before the property
is listed in the National Register.
(2) Such appeal shall include a copy of the nomination form and
documentation previously submitted to the Federal Preservation Officer,
an explanation of why the applicant is submitting the appeal in accord
with this section, and shall include all pertinent correspondence from
the State Historic Preservation Officer and/or Federal Preservation
Officer.
(3) The Keeper will respond to the appellant and the Federal
Preservation Officer with a written explanation either denying or
sustaining the appeal within 60 days of receipt. Upon request of the
Federal Preservation Officer, the Keeper may extend this period for an
additional 30 days.
(4) No person shall be considered to have exhausted administrative
remedies with respect to failure to nominate a property to the National
Register until he or she has complied with procedures set forth in this
section. The decision of the Keeper is the final administrative action
on such appeals.
[[Page 7005]]
(c) Appeal Procedures for Concurrent State and Federal Nominations.
(1) Any person or local government may appeal to the Keeper the failure
of a Federal Preservation Officer to nominate any property that is
properly considered a concurrent state and federal nomination under
Sec. 60.10 for inclusion in the National Register in accordance with
54 U.S.C. 302104(c). Appeals relating to concurrent state and federal
nominations are subject to the appeal procedures for nominations by
Federal Preservation Officers in paragraph (b) of this section.
0
12. In Sec. 60.13:
0
a. Redesignate paragraphs (b) and (c) as paragraphs (c) and (d).
0
b. Add a new paragraph (b).
0
c. Revise newly re-designated paragraph (d).
The revisions and additions to read as follows:
Sec. 60.13 Publication in the Federal Register and other NPS
notification.
* * * * *
(b) For all nominations that include property under the
jurisdiction or control of a Federal agency, the NPS shall include any
comments and the recommendation of the State Historic Preservation
Officer with respect to the nomination and a declaration whether the
State Historic Preservation Officer has responded within the 45-day
period of review provided by 54 U.S.C. 302104(c)(2) (see also Sec.
60.9(c)) in a notice published in the Federal Register. The NPS shall
further address in the Federal Register any comments from the State
Historic Preservation Officer that do not support the nomination of the
property.
* * * * *
(d) In nominations where the owner of any privately owned property
(or a majority of the owners, or the owners of a majority of the land
area for a district or single property with multiple owners) has
objected and the Keeper has determined the property eligible for
listing in the National Register, NPS shall notify the State Historic
Preservation Officer, the Federal Preservation Officer (for Federal or
concurrent nominations), the person or local government where there is
no approved State Historic Preservation Program, and the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation. NPS will publish notice of the
determination of eligibility in the Federal Register.
0
13. In Sec. 60.14:
0
a. Revise the third sentence of paragraph (a)(1).
0
b. Revise paragraphs (b)(3)(iii) and (b)(3)(iv).
0
c. Remove paragraph (b)(3)(v).
The revisions to read as follows:
Sec. 60.14 Changes and revisions to properties listed in the National
Register.
(a) * * * (1) * * * In the case of boundary enlargements only those
owners in the newly nominated as yet unlisted area need be notified and
will be counted in determining whether a majority of private owners or
owners of a majority of the land area of a property of district object
to listing. * * *
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) Revised maps.
(iv) Continuation sheet with up to date Sections 2, 5, 7, and 10.
* * * * *
PART 63--DETERMINATIONS OF ELIGIBILITY FOR INCLUSION IN THE
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
0
14. The authority citation for part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 54 U.S.C. 320102, 302103, 302105.
0
15. In Sec. 63.4, revise paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4 Other properties on which determinations of eligibility
may be made by the Secretary of the Interior.
(a) The Keeper of the National Register will not make
determinations of eligibility on properties nominated by Federal
agencies prior to returning the nominations for such properties to the
agency for technical or professional revision or because procedural
requirements have not been met.
* * * * *
(c) If necessary to assist in the protection of historic resources,
the Keeper, upon consultation with and request from the appropriate
State Historic Preservation Officer and concerned Federal agency, if
any, may determine properties to be eligible for listing in the
National Register under the Criteria established in part 60 of this
chapter and shall publish such determinations in the Federal Register.
Such determinations will be made after an investigation and an onsite
inspection of the property in question.
Andrea Travnicek,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks
Exercising the Authority of the Assistant Secretary for Fish and
Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2019-03658 Filed 2-28-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-EJ-P