Historic Preservation Certifications for Federal Income Tax Incentives, 63428-63431 [2010-25853]
Download as PDF
63428
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 199 / Friday, October 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules
(1) ‘‘Length’’ means a straight line
measurement of the overall length from
the foremost part of the vessel to the
aftmost part of the vessel, measured
parallel to the center line. The
measurement must be from end to end
over the deck, excluding sheer. Bow
sprits, bumpkins, rudders, outboard
motor brackets, handles, and other
similar fittings, attachments, and
extensions are not included in the
measurement.
(2) ‘‘Repair’’ means any repair of a
vessel including installations, painting
and maintenance work. Repair does not
include alterations or conversions that
render the vessel a non-recreational
vessel under § 701.501. For example, a
worker who installs equipment on a
private yacht to convert it to a
passenger-carrying whale-watching
vessel is not employed to ‘‘repair’’ a
recreational vessel. Repair also does not
include alterations or conversions that
render a non-recreational vessel
recreational under § 701.501.
(3) ‘‘Dismantle’’ means dismantling
any part of a vessel to complete a repair
but does not include dismantling any
part of a vessel to complete alterations
or conversions that render the vessel a
non-recreational vessel under § 701.501,
or render the vessel recreational under
§ 701.501, or to scrap or dispose of the
vessel at the end of the vessel’s life.
(c) An individual who performs
recreational-vessel work not excluded
under paragraph (a) of this section or
who engages in other qualifying
maritime employment in addition to
recreational-vessel work excluded under
paragraph (a) of this section will not be
excluded from the definition of
‘‘employee.’’ (See § 701.303).
7. Add § 701.503 to read as follows:
§ 701.503 Did the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 Amend the
Recreational Vessel Exclusion?
Yes. The amended exclusion was
effective February 17, 2009, the effective
date of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009.
8. Add § 701.504 to read as follows:
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 701.504 When does the 2009 amended
version of the recreational vessel exclusion
apply?
(a) Date of injury. Whether the
amended version applies depends on
the date of the injury for which
compensation is claimed. The following
rules apply to determining the date of
injury:
(1) Traumatic injury. If the individual
claims compensation for a traumatic
injury, the date of injury is the date the
employee suffered harm. For example, if
the individual injures an arm or leg in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:00 Oct 14, 2010
Jkt 223001
the course of his or her employment, the
date of injury is the date on which the
individual was hurt.
(2) Occupational disease or infection.
Occupational illnesses and infections
are generally caused by exposure to a
harmful substance or condition. If the
individual claims compensation for an
occupational illness or infection, the
date of injury is the date the illness
becomes ‘‘manifest’’ to the individual.
The injury is ‘‘manifest’’ when the
individual learns, or reasonably should
have learned, that he or she is suffering
from the illness, that the illness is
related to his or her work with the
responsible employer, and that he or she
is disabled as a result of the illness.
(3) Hearing loss. If the individual
claims compensation for hearing loss,
the date of injury is the date the
individual receives an audiogram with
an accompanying report which
indicates the individual has suffered a
loss of hearing that is related to
employment.
(4) Death-benefit claims. If the
individual claims compensation for an
employee’s death, the date of injury is
the date of the employee’s death, even
if his or her death was the result of an
event or incident that happened on an
earlier date.
(b) If the date of injury is before
February 17, 2009, the individual’s
entitlement is governed by section
2(3)(F) as it existed prior to the 2009
amendment.
(c) If the date of injury is on or after
February 17, 2009, the employee’s
eligibility is governed by the 2009
amendment to section 2(3)(F).
9. Add § 701.505 to read as follows:
§ 701.505 May an employer stop paying
benefits awarded prior to the effective date
of the recreational vessel exclusion
amendment if the employee would now fall
within the exclusion?
No. If an individual was awarded
compensation for an injury occurring
before February 17, 2009, the employer
must still pay all benefits awarded,
including disability compensation and
medical benefits, even if the employee
would be excluded from coverage under
the amended exclusion.
Shelby Hallmark,
Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2010–25895 Filed 10–14–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–CF–P
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
36 CFR Part 67
RIN 1024–AD65
Historic Preservation Certifications for
Federal Income Tax Incentives
National Park Service, Interior.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The National Park Service
(NPS) proposes to amend its procedures
for obtaining historic preservation
certifications for rehabilitation of
historic structures. Individuals and
corporations must obtain these
certifications to be eligible for tax
credits from the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS). This rule: Incorporates
references to the revised sections of the
Internal Revenue Code containing the
requirements for obtaining a tax credit;
replaces references to NPS’s regional
offices with references to its Washington
Area Service Office (WASO); requires
NPS to accept appeals for denial of
certain certifications; and removes the
certification fee schedule from the
regulation. These latter two revisions
provide an additional avenue for
appeals and allow NPS to update fees by
publishing a notice in the Federal
Register as administrative costs change.
DATES: Comments must be received by
December 14, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by the number 1024–AD65,
by any of the following methods:
—Federal rulemaking portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
—Mail: National Park Service, Attn.
Michael J. Auer, 1849 C Street, NW.
(org. code 2255), Washington, DC
20240.
All submissions must include the
agency name and the number 1024–
AD65. We will post all comments
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
additional information, see ‘‘Public
Participation’’ under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael J. Auer, National Park Service,
1849 C Street, NW. (org. code 2255),
Washington, DC 20240;
Michael_Auer@nps.gov; fax: 202–371–
1616.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
Section 47 of Title 26 of the United
States Code (the Internal Revenue
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 199 / Friday, October 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Code), formerly Section 48(g),
authorizes tax credits for qualified
expenditures of funds for ‘‘certified
rehabilitation’’ of ‘‘certified historic
structures.’’ This section of the Internal
Revenue Code designates the Secretary
of the Interior as the authority for
review of applications for certifications
to verify: (a) That buildings undergoing
rehabilitation are ‘‘certified historic
structures,’’ and (b) that the
rehabilitation preserves the overall
historic character of the buildings, and
therefore is a ‘‘certified rehabilitation.’’
These approvals take the form of
notifications or ‘‘certifications’’ by the
Secretary of the Interior to the Secretary
of the Treasury. In addition, section
170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code
allows a Federal income tax deduction
for the donation of interests in qualified
real property for conservation purposes.
Section 170(h) also designates the
Secretary of the Interior as the authority
who receives applications and issues
certifications verifying to the Secretary
of the Treasury that the building or
buildings contribute to the significance
of a historic district.
The proposed rule accomplishes four
objectives. First, it removes outdated
references to the Internal Revenue Code.
Second, the proposed rule deletes
references to the regional offices and
substitutes the NPS Washington office
in their place. In 1995, the review
authority on applications for historic
preservation certifications was moved
from the NPS regional offices to the
Washington office. Third, it lifts the
prohibition on appeals from the denial
of preliminary certification for
rehabilitation of a property that is not a
certified historic structure. Removing
this prohibition from the language of
§ 67.10(b) brings the proposed rule into
conformity with longstanding agency
practice, which has been to grant
administrative review in such
circumstances.
Fourth, the proposed rule removes the
certification fee schedule from the
regulation. In 1984, NPS began charging
fees for processing and reviewing tax
incentives applications. This proposed
rule removes the fee schedule from
§ 67.11 and all other specific provisions
regarding the charging of fees from the
regulations, and incorporates an
explanation of the method by which we
will determine the kind and amount of
review fees to be charged in the future.
We will provide public notice of all fee
changes. Until a revised means of
determining fees is decided upon,
approved, and published, the 1984 fee
schedule will remain in effect.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:00 Oct 14, 2010
Jkt 223001
Compliance With Other Laws,
Executive Orders, and Department
Policies
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Order 12866)
The Office of Management and Budget
has determined that this document is
not a significant rule. We have made the
assessments required by E.O. 12866 and
the results are available as a supporting
document with the proposed rule at
https://www.regulations.gov.
(1) The results of the NPS cost/benefit
analysis are that this rule will not have
an effect of $100 million or more on the
economy. It will not adversely affect in
a material way the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities.
(2) This rule will not create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by
another agency. It is an agency-specific
rule. No other Federal agency designates
‘‘certified historic structures’’ or
‘‘certified rehabilitations’’ for Federal
income tax incentives.
(3) This rule does not alter the
budgetary effects of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights
or obligations of their recipients. This
rule updates statutory authority, deletes
references to regional offices and
substitutes the NPS Washington office
in their place, authorizes additional
administrative appeals, and removes
from the text of the regulations the fee
dollar amounts and specific instructions
for charging fees.
(4) This rule does not raise novel legal
or policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The Department of the Interior
certifies that this document 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.).
The NPS threshold analysis as part of
the NPS cost-benefit analysis concluded
the proposed rule would generate
positive benefits for all affected
businesses with no negative impacts.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
This rule:
(1) Does not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more.
The rule merely updates statutory
authority, revises references to NPS
offices, authorizes additional
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
63429
administrative appeals, and deletes
specific dollar amount of application
review fees—changes that the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has
determined are purely technical in
nature.
(2) Will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions. The rule does not
impose any new requirements on
building owners undertaking building
rehabilitations.
(3) 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.
OMB has determined that the changes
proposed in the rule are purely
technical. Moreover, the tax incentives
program involves purely domestic
buildings and entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
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.
Although State Historic Preservation
Offices receive applications for the
Federal tax incentives and forward them
to the NPS, with a recommendation,
State participation in this program is
funded through the Historic
Preservation Fund administered by the
NPS.
Takings (Executive Order 12630)
In accordance with Executive Order
12630, the rule does not have significant
takings implications. Application for the
Federal historic preservation tax
incentives program is on a voluntary
basis by owners seeking a benefit in the
form of Federal income tax incentives.
A takings implication assessment is not
required.
Federalism (Executive Order 13132)
Under the criteria in Executive Order
13132, this rule does not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism summary
impact statement. The rule does not
preempt or conflict with any State or
local law. A Federalism impact
statement is not required.
Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order
12988)
This rule complies with the
requirements of E.O. 12988.
Specifically, this rule:
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
63430
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 199 / Friday, October 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules
(a) Meets the criteria 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)
Under the criteria in Executive Order
13175, we have evaluated this rule and
determined that it has no potential
effects on Federally recognized Indian
tribes. The rule has no Tribal
implications, and does not impose any
costs on Indian Tribal governments.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This rule contains information
collection requirements and a
submission under the Paperwork
Reduction Act is required. OMB has
approved the information collection and
has assigned approval number 1024–
0009, expiring on 03/31/2013. A Federal
agency may not conduct or sponsor and
you are not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. Part 1 of the application is used
in requesting a certification of historic
significance or non-significance and
preliminary determinations. Part 2 of
the application is used in requesting an
evaluation of a proposed rehabilitation
project or (in conjunction with a request
for certification of completed work) a
certification of a completed
rehabilitation project. Information
contained in the application is required
to obtain a benefit. We estimate the
burden associated with this information
collection to be 4.6 hours per response
including the time for reviewing
instructions, gathering and maintaining
data, and completing and reviewing the
form. Direct your comments regarding
this burden estimate or any aspect of
this form to the Manager,
Administrative Program Center,
National Park Service, 1849 C Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20240 and to the
Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project Number
1024–0009, Washington, DC 20503.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
This rule is developed under the
authority of the National Historic
Preservation Act, particularly 16 U.S.C.
470a(a)(1)(A), and 26 U.S.C. 47 (Internal
Revenue Code), and does not constitute
a major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human
environment. A detailed statement
under the National Environmental
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:00 Oct 14, 2010
Jkt 223001
Policy Act of 1969 is not required
because the rule is administrative and
procedural in nature and therefore is
covered by a categorical exclusion
under 43 CFR 46.205(b) and 46.210(i).
We have 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 the National
Environmental Policy Act.
Information Quality Act (IQA)
In developing this rule we did not
conduct or use a study, experiment, or
survey requiring peer review under the
Information Quality Act (Pub. L. 106–
554).
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 is not required.
Clarity of This Regulation
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(c) Use 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 we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help us revise the
rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the numbers of the
sections or paragraphs that are unclearly
written, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel
lists or tables would be useful, etc.
Drafting Information: The primary
authors of this regulation are Michael J.
Auer, Technical Preservation Services,
Heritage Preservation Services, National
Park Service; Philip A. Selleck, Chief,
Regulations and Special Park Uses,
National Park Service; A.J. North,
Branch Chief, Regulations and Special
Park Uses, Regulations, National Park
Service and Maria Elena Lurie, Office of
the Solicitor, Department of the Interior.
Public Participation
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Docket: For access to the electronic
docket to read the proposed rule,
background documents or e-mail
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and enter
‘‘1024–AD65’’ in the ‘‘Keyword or ID’’
search box.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 67
Administrative practice and
procedures, Historic preservation,
Income taxes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the NPS proposes to amend
36 CFR part 67 as follows:
PART 67—HISTORIC PRESERVATION
CERTIFICATIONS UNDER THE
INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
1. The authority citation for part 67 is
revised to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 470a(a)(1)(A); 26
U.S.C. 47 and 170(h).
2. In part 67, revise the heading to
read as set forth above.
3. In part 67, remove the words
‘‘regional office’’ and ‘‘regional offices’’
wherever they occur and add in their
place ‘‘WASO.’’
4. In part 67, remove the words and
numbers ‘‘Sec. 48(g)’’ wherever they
occur and add in their place the words
and numbers ‘‘Sec. 47.’’
5. In part 67, remove the words and
numbers ‘‘section 48(g)’’ wherever they
occur and add in their place the words
and numbers ‘‘section 47.’’
6. In § 67.1,
A. Revise the section heading
B. Revise paragraph (a) and the first
sentence of paragraph (b)
The revisions read as follows:
§ 67.1
Program authority and function.
(a) Section 47 of the Internal Revenue
Code designates the Secretary as the
authority for the issuance of
certifications of historic district statutes
and of State and local historic districts,
certifications of significance, and
certifications of rehabilitation in
connection with certain tax incentives
involving historic preservation. These
certification responsibilities have been
delegated to the National Park Service
(NPS); the following office issues those
certifications: National Park Service,
Washington Area Service Office,
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 199 / Friday, October 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Technical Preservation Services,
Heritage Preservation Services, (WASO),
1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC
20240.
(b) NPS WASO establishes program
direction and considers appeals of
certification denials. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
7. In § 67.4, revise paragraph (g) to
read as follows:
§ 67.4 Certifications of historic
significance.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) For purposes of the other
rehabilitation tax credits under sec. 47
of the Internal Revenue Code, properties
within registered historic districts are
presumed to contribute to the
significance of such districts unless
certified as nonsignificant by the
Secretary. Owners of non-historic
properties within registered historic
districts, therefore, must obtain a
certification of nonsignificance in order
to qualify for those investment tax
credits. If an owner begins or completes
a substantial rehabilitation (as defined
by the Internal Revenue Service) of a
property in a registered historic district
without knowledge of requirements for
certification of nonsignificance, he or
she may request certification that the
property was not of historic significance
to the district prior to substantial
rehabilitation in the same manner as
stated in § 67.4(c). The owner should be
aware, however, that the taxpayer must
certify to the Secretary of the Treasury
that, at the beginning of such substantial
rehabilitation, he or she in good faith
was not aware of the certification
requirement by the Secretary of the
Interior.
*
*
*
*
*
8. In § 67.5 revise the section heading
to read as follows:
§ 67.11 Fees for processing certification
requests.
§ 67.5 Standards for evaluating
significance within registered historic
districts.
*
*
*
*
*
9. In § 67.7 revise the section heading
to read as follows:
§ 67.7
Standards for rehabilitation.
*
*
*
*
10. In § 67.10, revise paragraphs (a),
(b), and (c)(3) to read as follows:
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
§ 67.10
Appeals.
(a) The owner or a duly authorized
representative may appeal any of the
certifications or denials of certification
made under this part or any decisions
made under § 67.6(f).
(1) Appeals must:
(i) Be in writing; e.g. letter, fax, or email;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:00 Oct 14, 2010
Jkt 223001
(ii) Be addressed to the Chief Appeals
Officer, Cultural Resources, National
Park Service, U.S. Department of the
Interior, 1849 C Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20240;
(iii) Be received by NPS within 30
days of receipt by the owner or a duly
authorized representative of the
decision which is the subject of the
appeal; and
(iv) Include all information the owner
wishes the Chief Appeals Officer to
consider in deciding the appeal.
(2) The appellant may request a
meeting to discuss the appeal.
(3) NPS will notify the SHPO that an
appeal is pending.
(4) The Chief Appeals Officer will
consider the record of the decision in
question, any further written
submissions by the owner, and other
available information and will provide
the appellant a written decision as
promptly as circumstances permit.
(5) Appeals under this section
constitute an administrative review of
the decision appealed from and are not
conducted as an adjudicative
proceeding.
(b) The denial of a preliminary
determination of significance for an
individual property may not be
appealed by the owner because the
denial itself does not exhaust the
administrative remedy that is available.
The owner instead must seek recourse
by undertaking the usual nomination
process (36 CFR part 60).
(c) * * *
(3) Resubmit the matter to WASO for
further consideration; or
*
*
*
*
*
11. Revise § 67.11 to read as follows:
(a) Fees are charged for reviewing
certification requests according to the
schedule and instructions provided in
public notices in the Federal Register
by NPS.
(b) No payment should be made until
requested by the NPS. A certification
decision will not be issued on an
application until the appropriate
remittance is received.
(c) Fees are nonrefundable.
Dated: October 5, 2010.
Eileen Sobeck,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and
Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2010–25853 Filed 10–14–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–70–P
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
63431
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[DA 10–1806; MB Docket No. 10–189; RM–
11611]
Radio Broadcasting Services; Willow
Creek, CA
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
This document sets forth a
proposal to amend the FM Table of
Allotments. The Commission requests
comment on a petition filed by Miriam
Media, Inc., proposing the allotment of
FM Channel 258A at Willow Creek,
California. Petitioner, the auction
winner and permittee of Channel 253A,
Willow Creek, has submitted an
application to specify operation of the
station on Channel 254C1 at Loleta,
California. Petitioner proposes the
allotment of Channel 258A at Willow
Creek in order to maintain a first local
service at that community. Petitioner
concedes that the signal contour of
proposed Channel 258A at Willow
Creek would not provide 70 dBu citygrade coverage to the entire Census
Designated Place of Willow Creek, but
argues that it has demonstrated
substantial compliance with section
73.315(a) of the Commission’s rules, and
that the proposed allotment would serve
the public interest. Channel 258A can
be allotted at Willow Creek in
compliance with the Commission’s
minimum distance separation
requirements at 40–57–29 North
Latitude and 123–42–23 West
Longitude. See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION infra.
DATES: The deadline for filing comments
is November 18, 2010. Reply comments
must be filed on or before December 3,
2010.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. In addition to
filing comments with the FCC,
interested parties should serve counsel
for petitioner as follows: Evan Carb,
Esq., Law Offices of Evan D. Carb, PLLC,
1140 Nineteenth Street, NW., Suite 600,
Washington, DC 20036.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Deborah A. Dupont, Media Bureau (202)
418–7072.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No.
10–189, adopted September 24, 2010,
and released September 27, 2010. The
full text of this Commission decision is
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15OCP1.SGM
15OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 199 (Friday, October 15, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 63428-63431]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25853]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
36 CFR Part 67
RIN 1024-AD65
Historic Preservation Certifications for Federal Income Tax
Incentives
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) proposes to amend its
procedures for obtaining historic preservation certifications for
rehabilitation of historic structures. Individuals and corporations
must obtain these certifications to be eligible for tax credits from
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). This rule: Incorporates references
to the revised sections of the Internal Revenue Code containing the
requirements for obtaining a tax credit; replaces references to NPS's
regional offices with references to its Washington Area Service Office
(WASO); requires NPS to accept appeals for denial of certain
certifications; and removes the certification fee schedule from the
regulation. These latter two revisions provide an additional avenue for
appeals and allow NPS to update fees by publishing a notice in the
Federal Register as administrative costs change.
DATES: Comments must be received by December 14, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the number 1024-AD65,
by any of the following methods:
--Federal rulemaking portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
--Mail: National Park Service, Attn. Michael J. Auer, 1849 C Street,
NW. (org. code 2255), Washington, DC 20240.
All submissions must include the agency name and the number 1024-
AD65. We will post all comments without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For
additional information, see ``Public Participation'' under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Auer, National Park
Service, 1849 C Street, NW. (org. code 2255), Washington, DC 20240;
Michael_Auer@nps.gov; fax: 202-371-1616.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 47 of Title 26 of the United States Code (the Internal
Revenue
[[Page 63429]]
Code), formerly Section 48(g), authorizes tax credits for qualified
expenditures of funds for ``certified rehabilitation'' of ``certified
historic structures.'' This section of the Internal Revenue Code
designates the Secretary of the Interior as the authority for review of
applications for certifications to verify: (a) That buildings
undergoing rehabilitation are ``certified historic structures,'' and
(b) that the rehabilitation preserves the overall historic character of
the buildings, and therefore is a ``certified rehabilitation.''
These approvals take the form of notifications or
``certifications'' by the Secretary of the Interior to the Secretary of
the Treasury. In addition, section 170(h) of the Internal Revenue Code
allows a Federal income tax deduction for the donation of interests in
qualified real property for conservation purposes.
Section 170(h) also designates the Secretary of the Interior as the
authority who receives applications and issues certifications verifying
to the Secretary of the Treasury that the building or buildings
contribute to the significance of a historic district.
The proposed rule accomplishes four objectives. First, it removes
outdated references to the Internal Revenue Code. Second, the proposed
rule deletes references to the regional offices and substitutes the NPS
Washington office in their place. In 1995, the review authority on
applications for historic preservation certifications was moved from
the NPS regional offices to the Washington office. Third, it lifts the
prohibition on appeals from the denial of preliminary certification for
rehabilitation of a property that is not a certified historic
structure. Removing this prohibition from the language of Sec.
67.10(b) brings the proposed rule into conformity with longstanding
agency practice, which has been to grant administrative review in such
circumstances.
Fourth, the proposed rule removes the certification fee schedule
from the regulation. In 1984, NPS began charging fees for processing
and reviewing tax incentives applications. This proposed rule removes
the fee schedule from Sec. 67.11 and all other specific provisions
regarding the charging of fees from the regulations, and incorporates
an explanation of the method by which we will determine the kind and
amount of review fees to be charged in the future. We will provide
public notice of all fee changes. Until a revised means of determining
fees is decided upon, approved, and published, the 1984 fee schedule
will remain in effect.
Compliance With Other Laws, Executive Orders, and Department Policies
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order 12866)
The Office of Management and Budget has determined that this
document is not a significant rule. We have made the assessments
required by E.O. 12866 and the results are available as a supporting
document with the proposed rule at https://www.regulations.gov.
(1) The results of the NPS cost/benefit analysis are that this rule
will not have an effect of $100 million or more on the economy. It will
not adversely affect in a material way the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State,
local, or Tribal governments or communities.
(2) This rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency. It is an
agency-specific rule. No other Federal agency designates ``certified
historic structures'' or ``certified rehabilitations'' for Federal
income tax incentives.
(3) This rule does not alter the budgetary effects of entitlements,
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of
their recipients. This rule updates statutory authority, deletes
references to regional offices and substitutes the NPS Washington
office in their place, authorizes additional administrative appeals,
and removes from the text of the regulations the fee dollar amounts and
specific instructions for charging fees.
(4) This rule does not raise novel legal or policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The Department of the Interior certifies that this document 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.).
The NPS threshold analysis as part of the NPS cost-benefit analysis
concluded the proposed rule would generate positive benefits for all
affected businesses with no negative impacts.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:
(1) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more. The rule merely updates statutory authority, revises
references to NPS offices, authorizes additional administrative
appeals, and deletes specific dollar amount of application review
fees--changes that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
determined are purely technical in nature.
(2) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions. The rule does not impose any new
requirements on building owners undertaking building rehabilitations.
(3) 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. OMB
has determined that the changes proposed in the rule are purely
technical. Moreover, the tax incentives program involves purely
domestic buildings and entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
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.
Although State Historic Preservation Offices receive applications
for the Federal tax incentives and forward them to the NPS, with a
recommendation, State participation in this program is funded through
the Historic Preservation Fund administered by the NPS.
Takings (Executive Order 12630)
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the rule does not have
significant takings implications. Application for the Federal historic
preservation tax incentives program is on a voluntary basis by owners
seeking a benefit in the form of Federal income tax incentives. A
takings implication assessment is not required.
Federalism (Executive Order 13132)
Under the criteria in Executive Order 13132, this rule does not
have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism summary impact statement. The rule does not preempt or
conflict with any State or local law. A Federalism impact statement is
not required.
Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 12988)
This rule complies with the requirements of E.O. 12988.
Specifically, this rule:
[[Page 63430]]
(a) Meets the criteria 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)
Under the criteria in Executive Order 13175, we have evaluated this
rule and determined that it has no potential effects on Federally
recognized Indian tribes. The rule has no Tribal implications, and does
not impose any costs on Indian Tribal governments.
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This rule contains information collection requirements and a
submission under the Paperwork Reduction Act is required. OMB has
approved the information collection and has assigned approval number
1024-0009, expiring on 03/31/2013. A Federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor and you are not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
Part 1 of the application is used in requesting a certification of
historic significance or non-significance and preliminary
determinations. Part 2 of the application is used in requesting an
evaluation of a proposed rehabilitation project or (in conjunction with
a request for certification of completed work) a certification of a
completed rehabilitation project. Information contained in the
application is required to obtain a benefit. We estimate the burden
associated with this information collection to be 4.6 hours per
response including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and
maintaining data, and completing and reviewing the form. Direct your
comments regarding this burden estimate or any aspect of this form to
the Manager, Administrative Program Center, National Park Service, 1849
C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240 and to the Office of Management and
Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project Number 1024-0009, Washington, DC
20503.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
This rule is developed under the authority of the National Historic
Preservation Act, particularly 16 U.S.C. 470a(a)(1)(A), and 26 U.S.C.
47 (Internal Revenue Code), and does not constitute a major Federal
action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. A
detailed statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
is not required because the rule is administrative and procedural in
nature and therefore is covered by a categorical exclusion under 43 CFR
46.205(b) and 46.210(i).
We have 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 the National Environmental Policy Act.
Information Quality Act (IQA)
In developing this rule we did not conduct or use a study,
experiment, or survey requiring peer review under the Information
Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554).
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 is not
required.
Clarity of This Regulation
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use 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 we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences
are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be
useful, etc.
Drafting Information: The primary authors of this regulation are
Michael J. Auer, Technical Preservation Services, Heritage Preservation
Services, National Park Service; Philip A. Selleck, Chief, Regulations
and Special Park Uses, National Park Service; A.J. North, Branch Chief,
Regulations and Special Park Uses, Regulations, National Park Service
and Maria Elena Lurie, Office of the Solicitor, Department of the
Interior.
Public Participation
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail 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. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Docket: For access to the electronic docket to read the proposed
rule, background documents or e-mail comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and enter ``1024-AD65'' in the ``Keyword or ID''
search box.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 67
Administrative practice and procedures, Historic preservation,
Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the NPS proposes to
amend 36 CFR part 67 as follows:
PART 67--HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATIONS UNDER THE INTERNAL
REVENUE CODE
1. The authority citation for part 67 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 470a(a)(1)(A); 26 U.S.C. 47 and 170(h).
2. In part 67, revise the heading to read as set forth above.
3. In part 67, remove the words ``regional office'' and ``regional
offices'' wherever they occur and add in their place ``WASO.''
4. In part 67, remove the words and numbers ``Sec. 48(g)'' wherever
they occur and add in their place the words and numbers ``Sec. 47.''
5. In part 67, remove the words and numbers ``section 48(g)''
wherever they occur and add in their place the words and numbers
``section 47.''
6. In Sec. 67.1,
A. Revise the section heading
B. Revise paragraph (a) and the first sentence of paragraph (b)
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 67.1 Program authority and function.
(a) Section 47 of the Internal Revenue Code designates the
Secretary as the authority for the issuance of certifications of
historic district statutes and of State and local historic districts,
certifications of significance, and certifications of rehabilitation in
connection with certain tax incentives involving historic preservation.
These certification responsibilities have been delegated to the
National Park Service (NPS); the following office issues those
certifications: National Park Service, Washington Area Service Office,
[[Page 63431]]
Technical Preservation Services, Heritage Preservation Services,
(WASO), 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240.
(b) NPS WASO establishes program direction and considers appeals of
certification denials. * * *
* * * * *
7. In Sec. 67.4, revise paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 67.4 Certifications of historic significance.
* * * * *
(g) For purposes of the other rehabilitation tax credits under sec.
47 of the Internal Revenue Code, properties within registered historic
districts are presumed to contribute to the significance of such
districts unless certified as nonsignificant by the Secretary. Owners
of non-historic properties within registered historic districts,
therefore, must obtain a certification of nonsignificance in order to
qualify for those investment tax credits. If an owner begins or
completes a substantial rehabilitation (as defined by the Internal
Revenue Service) of a property in a registered historic district
without knowledge of requirements for certification of nonsignificance,
he or she may request certification that the property was not of
historic significance to the district prior to substantial
rehabilitation in the same manner as stated in Sec. 67.4(c). The owner
should be aware, however, that the taxpayer must certify to the
Secretary of the Treasury that, at the beginning of such substantial
rehabilitation, he or she in good faith was not aware of the
certification requirement by the Secretary of the Interior.
* * * * *
8. In Sec. 67.5 revise the section heading to read as follows:
Sec. 67.5 Standards for evaluating significance within registered
historic districts.
* * * * *
9. In Sec. 67.7 revise the section heading to read as follows:
Sec. 67.7 Standards for rehabilitation.
* * * * *
10. In Sec. 67.10, revise paragraphs (a), (b), and (c)(3) to read
as follows:
Sec. 67.10 Appeals.
(a) The owner or a duly authorized representative may appeal any of
the certifications or denials of certification made under this part or
any decisions made under Sec. 67.6(f).
(1) Appeals must:
(i) Be in writing; e.g. letter, fax, or e-mail;
(ii) Be addressed to the Chief Appeals Officer, Cultural Resources,
National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20240;
(iii) Be received by NPS within 30 days of receipt by the owner or
a duly authorized representative of the decision which is the subject
of the appeal; and
(iv) Include all information the owner wishes the Chief Appeals
Officer to consider in deciding the appeal.
(2) The appellant may request a meeting to discuss the appeal.
(3) NPS will notify the SHPO that an appeal is pending.
(4) The Chief Appeals Officer will consider the record of the
decision in question, any further written submissions by the owner, and
other available information and will provide the appellant a written
decision as promptly as circumstances permit.
(5) Appeals under this section constitute an administrative review
of the decision appealed from and are not conducted as an adjudicative
proceeding.
(b) The denial of a preliminary determination of significance for
an individual property may not be appealed by the owner because the
denial itself does not exhaust the administrative remedy that is
available. The owner instead must seek recourse by undertaking the
usual nomination process (36 CFR part 60).
(c) * * *
(3) Resubmit the matter to WASO for further consideration; or
* * * * *
11. Revise Sec. 67.11 to read as follows:
Sec. 67.11 Fees for processing certification requests.
(a) Fees are charged for reviewing certification requests according
to the schedule and instructions provided in public notices in the
Federal Register by NPS.
(b) No payment should be made until requested by the NPS. A
certification decision will not be issued on an application until the
appropriate remittance is received.
(c) Fees are nonrefundable.
Dated: October 5, 2010.
Eileen Sobeck,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2010-25853 Filed 10-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P