Notice of Program Comment for the Rural Utilities Service, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency To Avoid Duplicative Section 106 Reviews for Wireless Communication Facilities Construction and Modification, 60280-60281 [E9-27798]
Download as PDF
60280
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 223 / Friday, November 20, 2009 / Notices
Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health,
HHS)
Dated: November 16, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory
Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9–27949 Filed 11–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC
PRESERVATION
Notice of Program Comment for the
Rural Utilities Service, the National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency To
Avoid Duplicative Section 106 Reviews
for Wireless Communication Facilities
Construction and Modification
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY: Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation.
ACTION: The Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation has issued a
Program Comment for the Rural Utilities
Service, the National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency to
avoid duplicative Section 106 reviews
for wireless communication facilities
construction and modification.
SUMMARY: The Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation has issued a
Program Comment for the Rural Utilities
Service, the National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency to
relieve them of the need to conduct
duplicate reviews under Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act
when these agencies assist a
telecommunications project that is
exempt from, or subject to, Section 106
review by the Federal Communications
Commission under existing nationwide
programmatic Agreements.
DATES: The Program Comment went into
effect on October 23, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Address all questions
concerning the Program Comment to
Blythe Semmer, Office of Federal
Agency Programs, Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation, 1100
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 803,
Washington, DC 20004. Fax (202) 606–
8647. You may submit electronic
questions to: bsemmer@achp.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Blythe Semmer, (202) 606 8552,
bsemmer@achp.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act requires Federal
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:03 Nov 19, 2009
Jkt 220001
agencies to consider the effects of their
undertakings on historic properties and
to provide the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation (ACHP) a
reasonable opportunity to comment
with regard to such undertakings. The
ACHP has issued the regulations that set
forth the process through which Federal
agencies comply with these duties.
Those regulations are codified under 36
CFR part 800 (Section 106 regulations)
Under Section 800.14(e) of those
regulations, agencies can request the
ACHP to provide a ‘‘Program Comment’’
on a particular category of undertakings
in lieu of conducting individual reviews
of each individual undertaking under
such category, as set forth in 36 CFR
800.3 through 800.7. An agency can
meet its Section 106 responsibilities
with regard to the effects of particular
aspects of those undertakings by taking
into account ACHP’s Program Comment
and following the steps set forth in that
comment.
I. Background
The ACHP has issued a Program
Comment to the U.S. Department of
Agriculture Rural Utilities Service
(RUS), the U.S. Department of
Commerce National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA), and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) to relieve them from conducting
duplicate reviews under Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act
when these agencies assist a
telecommunications project subject to
Section 106 review by the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC).
The ACHP membership voted in favor
of issuing the Program Comment via an
unassembled vote on October 23, 2009.
The American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provides
NTIA and RUS with $7.2 billion to
expand access to broadband services in
the United States. NTIA will implement
the Broadband Technology
Opportunities Program (BTOP), which
will award grants to expand public
computer capacity, encourage
sustainable adoption of broadband of
broadband service, and deploy
broadband infrastructure to unserved
and underserved areas. RUS, through its
Broadband Initiatives Program (BIP),
will use loan and grant combinations to
support broadband deployment in rural
areas.
Broadband deployment can include
the construction and placement of
communication towers and antennas.
Some of those towers and antennas are
also regulated by the FCC, and therefore
undergo, or are exempted from, Section
106 review under the Nationwide
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Programmatic Agreement for Review of
Effect on Historic Properties for Certain
Undertakings Approved by the FCC and
the Nationwide Programmatic
Agreement for the Collocation of
Wireless Antennas (FCC NPAs). RUS,
NTIA, or FEMA will be relieved by the
Program Comment of the need to
conduct a separate Section 106 review
for undertakings subject to review under
the FCC NPAs.
The ACHP took steps to inform the
public and stakeholders about the
proposed Program Comment, including
an e-mail distribution, posting on the
agency Web site, and a notice published
in the Federal Register. ACHP also sent
a letter to the Indian tribal leaders
requesting their comments on the
Program Comment. Public comments
resulting from the September 17, 2009
public notice in the Federal Register (74
FR 47807–47809) were received by the
ACHP by October 8, 2009.
Various substantive comments from
the public were received and considered
by the ACHP, as noted below.
FEMA requested inclusion in the
provisions of the Program Comment
given that its grant programs provide
funding for emergency communications
facilities that are also subject to review
by FCC under the FCC NPAs. FEMA’s
request would not expand the types of
undertakings covered by the Program
Comment, so FEMA has been added to
the Program Comment.
Two comments objected to how tribal
consultation appeared to have been
coordinated for the Program Comment,
but the characterization of early
coordination with intertribal
organizations by RUS and NTIA prior to
the agencies’ formal request to the
ACHP did not constitute ACHP’s tribal
consultation on this program
alternative.
Two comments expressed concern
about how State and Tribal Historic
Preservation Officers (SHPOs and
THPOs) and Indian tribes will be
notified when the Program Comment is
applied. SHPOs and THPOs and Indian
tribes will be notified according to the
regular FCC NPAs review processes.
There is no change to the FCC NPAs
procedures.
Two comments expressed objections
or concerns about the FCC NPAs and
two comments expressed positive views
on the functioning of the FCC NPAs.
Nothing in the Program Comment will
alter the FCC NPAs, but these comments
will be referred to FCC for their
consideration on the operation of their
NPAs. One comment expressed
concerns about towers that may have
been constructed before undergoing a
Section 106 review. The Program
E:\FR\FM\20NON1.SGM
20NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 223 / Friday, November 20, 2009 / Notices
Comment deals with the construction of
towers and collocation on existing
towers. It does not address or affect preexisting Section 106 issues. Those
issues should be referred to the FCC.
Four comments expressed support for
the efficiencies the Program Comment
will offer in Section 106 reviews.
Two comments offered views on a
concept plan for a nationwide
programmatic agreement circulated
separately by RUS and NTIA. Those
comments will be considered in the
context of that program initiative.
The Colorado Historical Society
requested clarification about the 6-year
term of the Program Comment. This
time period recognizes that ARRAassisted communications facilities
construction may be ongoing for several
years. The ACHP and others will be able
to reevaluate the Program Comment,
and whether to extend its duration prior
to the conclusion of those 6 years.
The Texas Historical Commission
questioned what would happen should
an FCC NPA Section 106 review yield
a finding of adverse effect within a
larger RUS or NTIA undertaking of
multiple components. As explicitly
stated in the Program Comment, RUS,
NTIA, or FEMA will be conducting its
own Section 106 review for the larger
undertaking, but will not have to
consider the effects of the FCC-regulated
component of that larger undertaking.
RUS, NTIA, or FEMA will make effect
determinations based on the non-tower
components of the undertaking. Since it
is possible that the larger undertaking
may not be able to proceed until the
FCC review of the tower component has
concluded, it is expected that RUS,
NTIA, FEMA, and the FCC will
coordinate their review efforts
accordingly and keep consulting parties
appraised.
NTIA, and FEMA must therefore comply
with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 470f, and its
implementing regulations at 36 CFR part 800
(Section 106) for these undertakings. Some of
those communications towers and antennas
are also regulated by the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC), and
therefore undergo, or are exempted from,
Section 106 review under the Nationwide
Programmatic Agreement for Review of
Effects on Historic Properties for Certain
Undertakings Approved by the FCC (FCC
Nationwide PA) and the Nationwide
Programmatic Agreement for the Collocation
of Wireless Antennas (FCC Collocation PA).
The FCC Nationwide PA was executed by the
FCC, the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (ACHP), and the National
Conference of State Historic Preservation
Officers (NCSHPO) on October 4, 2004. The
FCC Collocation PA was executed by the
FCC, ACHP, and NCSHPO on March 16,
2001. The undertakings addressed by the
FCC Nationwide PA primarily include the
construction and modification of
communication towers. The undertakings
addressed by the FCC Collocation PA include
the collocation of communications
equipment on existing structures and towers.
This Program Comment is intended to
streamline Section 106 review of the
construction and modification of
communication towers and antennas for
which FCC and RUS, NTIA, or FEMA share
Section 106 responsibility.
Nothing in this Program Comment alters or
modifies the FCC Nationwide PA or the FCC
Collocation PA, or imposes Section 106
responsibilities on the FCC for elements of a
RUS, NTIA, or FEMA undertaking that are
unrelated to a communications facility
within the FCC’s jurisdiction or are beyond
the scope of the FCC Nationwide PA.
II. Final Text of the Program Comment
IV. Use of This Program Comment To
Comply With Section 106 for the Effects of
Facilities Construction or Modification
Reviewed Under the FCC Nationwide PA
and/or the FCC Collocation PA
RUS, NTIA and FEMA will not need to
comply with Section 106 with regard to the
effects of communication facilities
construction or modification that has either
undergone or will undergo Section 106
review, or is exempt from Section 106
review, by the FCC under the FCC
Nationwide PA and/or the FCC Collocation
PA. For purposes of this program comment,
review under the FCC Nationwide PA means
the historic preservation review that is
necessary to complete the FCC’s Section 106
responsibility for an undertaking that is
subject to the FCC Nationwide PA.
When an RUS, NTIA, or FEMA
undertaking includes both communications
facilities construction or modification
covered by the FCC Nationwide PA or
The text of the issued Program
Comment is included below:
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Program Comment for Streamlining
Section 106 Review for Wireless
Communication Facilities Construction and
Modification Subject to Review Under the
FCC Nationwide Programmatic Agreement
and/or the Nationwide Programmatic
Agreement for the Collocation of Wireless
Antennas.
I. Background
The Rural Utilities Service (RUS), the
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA), and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) provide financial assistance to
applicants for various undertakings,
including broadband deployment, which can
involve the construction and placement of
communications towers and antennas. RUS,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:03 Nov 19, 2009
Jkt 220001
II. Establishment and Authority
This Program Comment was issued by the
ACHP on October 23, 2009 pursuant to 36
CFR 800.14(e).
III. Date of Effect
This Program Comment went into effect on
October 23, 2009.
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60281
Collocation PA and components in addition
to such communication facilities
construction or modification, RUS, NTIA, or
FEMA, as applicable, will comply with
Section 106 in accordance with the process
set forth at 36 CFR 800.3 through 800.7, or
36 CFR 800.8(c), or another applicable
alternate procedure under 36 CFR 800.14, but
will not have to consider the effects of the
communication facilities construction or
modification component of the undertaking
on historic properties. Whenever RUS, NTIA,
or FEMA uses this Program Comment for
such undertakings, RUS, NTIA or FEMA will
apprise the relevant State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal
Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) of the
use of this Program Comment for the relevant
communication facilities construction or
modification component.
V. Amendment
The ACHP may amend this Program
Comment after consulting with FCC, RUS,
NTIA, FEMA, and other parties as
appropriate, and publishing notice in the
Federal Register to that effect.
VI. Sunset Clause
This Program Comment will terminate on
September 30, 2015, unless it is amended to
extend the period in which it is in effect.
VII. Termination
The ACHP may terminate this Program
Comment by publication of a notice in the
Federal Register thirty (30) days before the
termination takes effect.
Authority: 36 CFR 800.14(e).
Dated: November 10, 2009.
Reid Nelson,
Acting Executive Director.
[FR Doc. E9–27798 Filed 11–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–K6–M
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Customs and Border Protection
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Visa Waiver Program Carrier
Agreement (Form I–775)
AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP), Department of
Homeland Security.
ACTION: 60-Day notice and request for
comments; Revision of an existing
information collection: 1651–0110.
SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort
to reduce paperwork and respondent
burden, CBP invites the general public
and other Federal agencies to comment
on the Visa Waiver Program Carrier
Agreement (Form I–775). This request
for comment is being made pursuant to
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104–13; 44 U.S.C. 3505(c)(2)).
E:\FR\FM\20NON1.SGM
20NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 223 (Friday, November 20, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60280-60281]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-27798]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Notice of Program Comment for the Rural Utilities Service, the
National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency To Avoid Duplicative Section 106
Reviews for Wireless Communication Facilities Construction and
Modification
AGENCY: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
ACTION: The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has issued a
Program Comment for the Rural Utilities Service, the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency to avoid duplicative Section 106 reviews
for wireless communication facilities construction and modification.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has issued a
Program Comment for the Rural Utilities Service, the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency to relieve them of the need to conduct
duplicate reviews under Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act when these agencies assist a telecommunications
project that is exempt from, or subject to, Section 106 review by the
Federal Communications Commission under existing nationwide
programmatic Agreements.
DATES: The Program Comment went into effect on October 23, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Address all questions concerning the Program Comment to
Blythe Semmer, Office of Federal Agency Programs, Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 803,
Washington, DC 20004. Fax (202) 606-8647. You may submit electronic
questions to: bsemmer@achp.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Blythe Semmer, (202) 606 8552,
bsemmer@achp.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of
their undertakings on historic properties and to provide the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to
comment with regard to such undertakings. The ACHP has issued the
regulations that set forth the process through which Federal agencies
comply with these duties. Those regulations are codified under 36 CFR
part 800 (Section 106 regulations)
Under Section 800.14(e) of those regulations, agencies can request
the ACHP to provide a ``Program Comment'' on a particular category of
undertakings in lieu of conducting individual reviews of each
individual undertaking under such category, as set forth in 36 CFR
800.3 through 800.7. An agency can meet its Section 106
responsibilities with regard to the effects of particular aspects of
those undertakings by taking into account ACHP's Program Comment and
following the steps set forth in that comment.
I. Background
The ACHP has issued a Program Comment to the U.S. Department of
Agriculture Rural Utilities Service (RUS), the U.S. Department of
Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to relieve
them from conducting duplicate reviews under Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act when these agencies assist a
telecommunications project subject to Section 106 review by the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC). The ACHP membership voted in favor of
issuing the Program Comment via an unassembled vote on October 23,
2009.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provides NTIA and
RUS with $7.2 billion to expand access to broadband services in the
United States. NTIA will implement the Broadband Technology
Opportunities Program (BTOP), which will award grants to expand public
computer capacity, encourage sustainable adoption of broadband of
broadband service, and deploy broadband infrastructure to unserved and
underserved areas. RUS, through its Broadband Initiatives Program
(BIP), will use loan and grant combinations to support broadband
deployment in rural areas.
Broadband deployment can include the construction and placement of
communication towers and antennas. Some of those towers and antennas
are also regulated by the FCC, and therefore undergo, or are exempted
from, Section 106 review under the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement
for Review of Effect on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings
Approved by the FCC and the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for the
Collocation of Wireless Antennas (FCC NPAs). RUS, NTIA, or FEMA will be
relieved by the Program Comment of the need to conduct a separate
Section 106 review for undertakings subject to review under the FCC
NPAs.
The ACHP took steps to inform the public and stakeholders about the
proposed Program Comment, including an e-mail distribution, posting on
the agency Web site, and a notice published in the Federal Register.
ACHP also sent a letter to the Indian tribal leaders requesting their
comments on the Program Comment. Public comments resulting from the
September 17, 2009 public notice in the Federal Register (74 FR 47807-
47809) were received by the ACHP by October 8, 2009.
Various substantive comments from the public were received and
considered by the ACHP, as noted below.
FEMA requested inclusion in the provisions of the Program Comment
given that its grant programs provide funding for emergency
communications facilities that are also subject to review by FCC under
the FCC NPAs. FEMA's request would not expand the types of undertakings
covered by the Program Comment, so FEMA has been added to the Program
Comment.
Two comments objected to how tribal consultation appeared to have
been coordinated for the Program Comment, but the characterization of
early coordination with intertribal organizations by RUS and NTIA prior
to the agencies' formal request to the ACHP did not constitute ACHP's
tribal consultation on this program alternative.
Two comments expressed concern about how State and Tribal Historic
Preservation Officers (SHPOs and THPOs) and Indian tribes will be
notified when the Program Comment is applied. SHPOs and THPOs and
Indian tribes will be notified according to the regular FCC NPAs review
processes. There is no change to the FCC NPAs procedures.
Two comments expressed objections or concerns about the FCC NPAs
and two comments expressed positive views on the functioning of the FCC
NPAs. Nothing in the Program Comment will alter the FCC NPAs, but these
comments will be referred to FCC for their consideration on the
operation of their NPAs. One comment expressed concerns about towers
that may have been constructed before undergoing a Section 106 review.
The Program
[[Page 60281]]
Comment deals with the construction of towers and collocation on
existing towers. It does not address or affect pre-existing Section 106
issues. Those issues should be referred to the FCC.
Four comments expressed support for the efficiencies the Program
Comment will offer in Section 106 reviews.
Two comments offered views on a concept plan for a nationwide
programmatic agreement circulated separately by RUS and NTIA. Those
comments will be considered in the context of that program initiative.
The Colorado Historical Society requested clarification about the
6-year term of the Program Comment. This time period recognizes that
ARRA-assisted communications facilities construction may be ongoing for
several years. The ACHP and others will be able to reevaluate the
Program Comment, and whether to extend its duration prior to the
conclusion of those 6 years.
The Texas Historical Commission questioned what would happen should
an FCC NPA Section 106 review yield a finding of adverse effect within
a larger RUS or NTIA undertaking of multiple components. As explicitly
stated in the Program Comment, RUS, NTIA, or FEMA will be conducting
its own Section 106 review for the larger undertaking, but will not
have to consider the effects of the FCC-regulated component of that
larger undertaking. RUS, NTIA, or FEMA will make effect determinations
based on the non-tower components of the undertaking. Since it is
possible that the larger undertaking may not be able to proceed until
the FCC review of the tower component has concluded, it is expected
that RUS, NTIA, FEMA, and the FCC will coordinate their review efforts
accordingly and keep consulting parties appraised.
II. Final Text of the Program Comment
The text of the issued Program Comment is included below:
Program Comment for Streamlining Section 106 Review for Wireless
Communication Facilities Construction and Modification Subject to
Review Under the FCC Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and/or the
Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for the Collocation of Wireless
Antennas.
I. Background
The Rural Utilities Service (RUS), the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), and the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provide financial
assistance to applicants for various undertakings, including
broadband deployment, which can involve the construction and
placement of communications towers and antennas. RUS, NTIA, and FEMA
must therefore comply with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 470f, and its implementing regulations
at 36 CFR part 800 (Section 106) for these undertakings. Some of
those communications towers and antennas are also regulated by the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and therefore undergo, or
are exempted from, Section 106 review under the Nationwide
Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties
for Certain Undertakings Approved by the FCC (FCC Nationwide PA) and
the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for the Collocation of
Wireless Antennas (FCC Collocation PA). The FCC Nationwide PA was
executed by the FCC, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
(ACHP), and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation
Officers (NCSHPO) on October 4, 2004. The FCC Collocation PA was
executed by the FCC, ACHP, and NCSHPO on March 16, 2001. The
undertakings addressed by the FCC Nationwide PA primarily include
the construction and modification of communication towers. The
undertakings addressed by the FCC Collocation PA include the
collocation of communications equipment on existing structures and
towers.
This Program Comment is intended to streamline Section 106
review of the construction and modification of communication towers
and antennas for which FCC and RUS, NTIA, or FEMA share Section 106
responsibility.
Nothing in this Program Comment alters or modifies the FCC
Nationwide PA or the FCC Collocation PA, or imposes Section 106
responsibilities on the FCC for elements of a RUS, NTIA, or FEMA
undertaking that are unrelated to a communications facility within
the FCC's jurisdiction or are beyond the scope of the FCC Nationwide
PA.
II. Establishment and Authority
This Program Comment was issued by the ACHP on October 23, 2009
pursuant to 36 CFR 800.14(e).
III. Date of Effect
This Program Comment went into effect on October 23, 2009.
IV. Use of This Program Comment To Comply With Section 106 for the
Effects of Facilities Construction or Modification Reviewed Under the
FCC Nationwide PA and/or the FCC Collocation PA
RUS, NTIA and FEMA will not need to comply with Section 106 with
regard to the effects of communication facilities construction or
modification that has either undergone or will undergo Section 106
review, or is exempt from Section 106 review, by the FCC under the
FCC Nationwide PA and/or the FCC Collocation PA. For purposes of
this program comment, review under the FCC Nationwide PA means the
historic preservation review that is necessary to complete the FCC's
Section 106 responsibility for an undertaking that is subject to the
FCC Nationwide PA.
When an RUS, NTIA, or FEMA undertaking includes both
communications facilities construction or modification covered by
the FCC Nationwide PA or Collocation PA and components in addition
to such communication facilities construction or modification, RUS,
NTIA, or FEMA, as applicable, will comply with Section 106 in
accordance with the process set forth at 36 CFR 800.3 through 800.7,
or 36 CFR 800.8(c), or another applicable alternate procedure under
36 CFR 800.14, but will not have to consider the effects of the
communication facilities construction or modification component of
the undertaking on historic properties. Whenever RUS, NTIA, or FEMA
uses this Program Comment for such undertakings, RUS, NTIA or FEMA
will apprise the relevant State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)
or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) of the use of this
Program Comment for the relevant communication facilities
construction or modification component.
V. Amendment
The ACHP may amend this Program Comment after consulting with
FCC, RUS, NTIA, FEMA, and other parties as appropriate, and
publishing notice in the Federal Register to that effect.
VI. Sunset Clause
This Program Comment will terminate on September 30, 2015,
unless it is amended to extend the period in which it is in effect.
VII. Termination
The ACHP may terminate this Program Comment by publication of a
notice in the Federal Register thirty (30) days before the
termination takes effect.
Authority: 36 CFR 800.14(e).
Dated: November 10, 2009.
Reid Nelson,
Acting Executive Director.
[FR Doc. E9-27798 Filed 11-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-K6-M