National Register of Historic Places, 6996-7005 [2019-03658]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
• National Park Service

[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: https://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 https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
     Docket: For access to the docket to read background 
documents or comments received, go to https://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 OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov (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, 
joy_beasley@nps.gov.

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 
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov (email). You may view the information 
collection request(s) at https://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 phadrea_ponds@nps.gov. 
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