Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
1987 Old Jail Designation as National Historic Landmark
TELEPHONE: 319-5B9-4441 -1 u/uque County eoa,c/ O .Su ervioors COURTHOUSE DUBUQUE, IOWA 52001 February 27, 1987 The Honorable James Brady, Mayor City of Dubuque City Hall Dubuque, IA 52001 Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council: LLOYD C. HAYES ALAN R. MANTERNACH DONNA L. SMITH Enclosed is our notice that the United States Department of the Interior that the National Park Service has completed the study of the Old Jail for the purpose of nominating it for possible designation as a National Historic Landmark. You will note that the Advisory Board which will make the final recommendation is soliciting comment until April 1, 1987. Should the City of Dubuque wish to make a comment on the recommendation, please submit that comment to us. We will then compile the comments and forward them in a packet to the Department of the Interior. We thank you. jh encl. Sincerely, DUBUQUE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS "Aff-k Donna L. Smi h, Chairperson Cl) THE CITY OF �.0 ET DUBUQUE e s� Cc,MM V N I1 y` Donna L. Smith, Chairperson Dubuque County Board of Supervisors Dubuque County Courthouse 720 Central Avenue Dubuque, IA 52001 Dear Madame Chairperson and Board Members: OFFICE OF THE MAYOR DUBUQUE. IOWA 52001 March 19, 1987 The City Council of the City of Dubuque, Iowa, is pleased to support and endorse the designation of the Old Jail as a National Historic Landmark. The old Jail is intimately woven with the early history of the Dubuque area and is a rare architectual gem. Its continued existence and present use is an important facet in the life of our community. Sinc es E. Brady ayor JEB:kak Unitea States Department of th, interior �--_ IN REPLY REFER 10: H34(418) NATIONAL PARK SERVICE P.O. BOX 37127 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20013-7127 FEB 2 637 Ms. Donna Smith, Chairman Board of Supervisors of Dubuque County 720 Central Dubuque, Iowa 52001 Dear Ms. Smith: We are pleased to inform you that the National Park Service has completed the study of the property identified on the enclosed sheet for the purpose of nominating it for possible designation as a National Historic Landmark. We enclose a copy of the study report. The National Park System Advisory Board will consider the nomination during its next meeting, at the time and place indicated on the enclosure. The Board will make its recommendation to the Secretary of the Interior based upon the criteria of the National Historic Landmarks Program. You have 60 days before the meeting of the Advisory Board to submit your views in writing, if you so desire. After the 60-day period, we will submit the nomination and your comments to the Advisory Board and then inform the Secretary of the Board's recommendations for his final action. To assist you in considering this matter, we have enclosed a copy of the regulations that govern the National Historic Landmarks Program. They describe the criteria for designation (Sec. 65.4), the effects of designation (Sec. 65.2), and specify how you may comment on a proposed designation (Sec. 65.5(d)(4-5)). Should you wish to comment, please send your comments to me, at the National Park Service, History Division (418), P.O. Box 37127, Washington, DC 20013-7127. Sincerely, Edwin C. Bearss Chief Historian Enclosures FEBOG • BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DUBUQt►F rOUNITY PROPERTY STUDIED FOR NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION Dubuque County Jail, Dubuque, Iowa / % As a private owner of the property identified above you may concur in or object to the designation. Your comments may govern whether or not the property will be designated. You can find guidance for your comments in Section 65.5(d)(4-5) of the enclosed regulations. /X/ In commenting on the possible designation of the property identified above you can find guidance in Section 65.5(d)(4) of the enclosed regulations. The above property will be considered for possible designation as a National Historic Landmark by the National Park System Advisory Board at a meeting on April 9, 1987, beginning at 8:00 AM, at the Port of the Islands Resort in Marco, Florida. Should you wish to obtain information about the meeting, or about the National Historic Landmarks Program, please contact Ben Levy at the National Park Service, History Division (418), P.O. Box 37127, Washington, DC 20013-7127, 202-343-8164 or FI'S-343-8164. If you have questions about the study report, you may contact Mr. Ralph Christian at the Iowa State Historical Department, Office of Historic Preserva- tion, Historical Building, Fast 12th Street and Grand Avenue, Des Moines, Iowa 50319, 515-281-8697. MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS OF NATIONAL HISIURIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR PROPERTIES UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS When a property waned or controlled by an agency of State or local government is designated a National Historic Landmark (NHL), the agency responsible for managing the property naturally may be concerned about how designation may affect its actions. This leaflet is designed to help answer this question. Federal Requirements Federal law places no constraints on how a State or local goverment manages a NHL, as long as the managing agency does not use Federal funds, or require a license or permit from a Federal agency, in carrying out its actions. In other words, a State or local government can manage a NHL in any way it chooses, can make any modification it wishes, and can demolish the NHL if it decides to do so, without being in any way hindered or otherwise affected by Federal law, as long as it does so without using Federal funds, and as long as it does not need a Federal permit or license to do so. Where a Federal agency proposes an action that will affect a NHL, or where another party proposes to use Federal funds or obtain a Federal permit or license (for example, a permit from the Corps of Engineers to discharge fill into a waterway), for a project that will affect a NHL, the Federal agency involved must comply with Sections 106 and 110(f) of the National Historic Preservation Act. Where such a project is supported by Community Development Block Grant funds, an Urban Development Block Grant, or funds from certain other grant programs, the local government administering the grant, rather than the Federal agency involved, is responsible for Section 106 and 110(f) compliance. Section 106 requires that the effects of the project on properties included in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places be taken into account, and that the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be afforded an opportunity to comment on the project. The regulations of the Advisory Council (36 CFR Part 800) establish procedures for compliance with Section 106. 2 When a property is designated a NHL, it automatically is placed on the National Register; therefore effects on it are subject to review under Section 106. It is important to note, however, that Section 106 applies to all properties included in or eligible for the National Register, not just to NHLs. Thus if the property were not designated a NHL, the first step in review under Section 106 would be to determine whether it was eligible for inclusion in the Register. This step is eliminated by the NHL designation. On the other hand, because of Section 106's broad applicability, addressing the effects of a project on the NHL may not be enough to provide compliance with Section 106. Other properties that are subject to effect may be on or eligible for the National Register, and also require review. Section 110(f) establishes special requirements for Federal, federally assisted, and federally licensed projects that directly and adversely affect NHLs. Planning and other actions to avoid or reduce harm to the NHL must be undertaken, and the Advisory Council must be given the opportunity to comment. Section 110(f) review is carried out as part of regular Section 106 review by Federal agencies and State and local governments. . The Advisory Council recommends the development of management plans.to balance Federal agency or State or local government needs against the preservation of • NHLs and other historic properties. Such plans can be adopted through "Progranmatic.Memoranda of Agreement" under the Council's regulations, and eliminate the need to comply with Sections 106 and 110(f) on a case -by -case basis. State and Local Requirements Some State environmental or historic preservation laws, and sane local ordinances, give special protection to NHLs or properties on the National Register. Such legal requirements should be investigated before undertaking an action that might affect a NHL. For additional information For additional information on State historic preservation laws and procedures, contact your State Historic Preservation Officer, whose name, address, and telephone number can be obtained from: The National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers Hall of the States 444 North Capitol Street, Suite 332 Washington, DC 20001 (202)624-5465 3 For additional information on Section 106 and Section 110(f) review, contact: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Eastern Division of Project Review (Eastern States) 1100 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, #809 Washington, DC 20004 (202)786-0505; 1.-1S 786-0505 Western Division of Project Review (Western States) 730 Simms Street #450 Golden, CO 80401 (303)236-2682; Pm 776-2682 For additional information on the National Historic Landmarks Program, contact; National Park Service History Division (418) P. O. Box 37127 Washington,, DC 20013-7127 (202)343-8174; FTS 343-8174 Preservation Assistance Division (424) P. O. Box 37127 Washington, DC 20013-7127 (202)343-8158; FTS 343-8158 N 0!. Form 10-P00 0421 O.tB No. 1024-0018 Expires 10-31-87 United States Departmei of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory —Nomination Form See instructions in How to Complete National Register Forms Type all entries —complete applicable sections For NPS use only received date entered 1. Name historic Dubuque County Jail and or common 2. Location street & number 36 East 8th Street city, town state not for publication Dubuque _ vicinity of Congressional District: Second Iowa code IA county Dubuque code 061 3. Classification Category — district building(s) — structure — site object Ownership X public — private - both Public Acquisition - in process - being considered Status X occupied — unoccupied _ work in progress Accessible a_ yes: restricted —_ yes: unrestricted •no Present Use _ agriculture commercial R educational entertainment X government industrial military — museum - pack private residence ____ religious __ scientific transportation — other: 4. Owner of J2roperty name Dubuque County (Contact: Donna Smith. Chairman, County Board of Supervisors) street & number 720 Central Avenue city, town Dubuque vicinity of state Iowa 5. Location of Legal Description courthouse, registry of deeds, etc. Dubuque County Courthouse street & number 720 Central Avenue city, town Dubuque state Iowa 6. Representation in Existing Surveys Historic American Buildings Survey; Iowa Windshield Survey; Dubuque Historic Sites Field title Survey; National Register of Historic has this property been determined eligible? — yes no Places date 1967, 1977; 1974; 1973, 1972 X federal X state _ county Y local Library of Congress; State Historical Society of Iowa; dapaattory for survey records National Park Service city, town Ltachingrnn; Des Moineaa, Washington Districtof Columbia; Iowa state District of Columbia 7. Description Condition Check on• Check on• excellent _ deteriorated unaltered original site X good ruins X altered _ moved date fair _ unexposed Describe this present and original (if known) physical appearance Since its construction in 1857-58, the Egyptian Revival Dubuque County Jail has been a major landmark in this important Mississippi River town in northeastern Iowa. Situated south of Dubuque's principal downtown business district and located a few feet north of the Dubuque County Courthouse, this two-story pile, constructed of locally quarried limestone, consists of a square- s`laped main block, originally used as a sheriff's residence and offices, and a connected, rectangular -shaped rear wing, originally used as the jail proper. This building is one of only a handful of known extant edifices designed in the Egyptian Revival mode. As such, it exhibits the overall massiveness and monumental effect, battered walls, bundled shaft or lotus -like columns, gorge and roll cornice along the roofline, rope -like cornice moldings, sun disk symbols, and cavetto cornice window and door hoods that are characteristic of the style. Except for an appropriate small rear addition in 1874 and changes in landscaping, there have been few major changes, and the building possesses a high degree of integrity. The Dubuque County Jail is an L-shaped, two-story edifice that consists of two enclosed masses. The northernmost mass, the old sheriff's and jailer's offices and residence, is square in plan, measuring approximately 46 by 46 feet. The second mass, the jail or lockup, is rectangular, however, and measures approximately 36 by 54 feet, and is joined to the first mass by its north wall which forms part of the south wall of the latter. The predomina-: structural material used in the construction of this edifice is blue limestone, which was quarried from the Mississippi River bluffs at Dunleith (present day East Dubuque) directly across the river from Dubuque. The walls of this edifice are 2-1/2 feet thick and consist of large, square -cut, rock -faced ashlar blocks that are regularly coursed and feature narrow mortar joints. These load bearing walls rest on stone foundations over a partially raised full basement, which features a curved brick tunnel vault that supports the large open space on the jail's first floor. Windows and doors throughout are set in rectangular shaped cast iron surrounds. As might be expected, doors and windows in the jail section have cast iron bars while those in the office -residence Pin Fens t041(114 GAM United States Department of the Interior Nat?onal Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form Continuation sheet Description Item number 7 GM Approval m, . 2 024.002 J Page 3 side by twenty-four cells...arranged in three tiers, and on the west side by a large open space which served as an area for congregate meals and for indoor exercise and recreation. Eight additional cells were located in the basement, and this section, popularly known as the "Dungeon," was used for the most dangerous and notorious prisoners. Each cell was of stone construction, measured 4'4" by 10', featured stone slab flooring, and had a cast iron, barred door. The two upper tiers of cells on the main floor were served by continuous north and south metal catwalks. In 1874, an addition, described as measuring 10'byl4'by18'by46', was constructed a the rear of the jail proper to house juveniles and women prisone.,. T. Crawford and William Coates were credited with designing this addition. It appears that they simply followed John F. Rague's original plans and design because there is little discernible difference, either in terms of style or construction, between the two portions of the building. Constructed at a cost of $5600, this section contained three tiers of cells as well with two on each level. After serving its purpose for a number of years, women and juvenile prisoners were relocated to another facility, the addition replaced the "Dungeon" as the principal lockup for the more unmanageable male prisoners. For the most part, alterations to the building itself over the years, both internal and external, have been of a relatively minor nature and have had little impact on its overall character and integrity. Some of the sun disks on window and door hoods have fallen off as their bolts rusted, but these could easily be replicated and put back in place. The most noticeable changes to the building have been in terms of its landscaping and surrounding environment. Early descriptions mention a board fence around the facility and late 19th century photographs show what appears to be a rather intricate cast iron fence. None of \this fencing material is extant today. The outdoor court or exercise yard, surrounded by a ten foot high stone wall and connected to the west side of the jail, originally extended almost to the edge of the street. Today, it appears to be approximately half that size. The most dramatic environmental change occurred between 1891 and 1893 with the construction of a new county courthouse that replaced one similar in scale to the jail. This new edifice, standing 3 1/2-stories tall and featuring a 190 foot high tower and highly ornate exterior finish, presents a sharp contrast with the jail and in fact dwarfs it. Presently, the northernmost portion of the building is utilized 0,13 Approval Mo. 2024-OO1& United States Departmer of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory —Nomination Form Continuation shut Description Item number 7 page 2 section are wood with panelled doors and six -over -six sash windows predominating. The building is capped with a low-pitched, hipped roof, sheathed in tin, and pierced by interior end brick chimneys that feature pilastered caps. The decorative treatment of the exterior is drawn largely from the Egyptian Revival and to a limited degree from the Greek Revival. The rough texture, narrow mortar joints, large stone blocks, and battered effect provided by the corner pilasters provide the jail with a sense of the feeling and monumentality of ancient Egyptian architecture. This sense of "Egyptianess" is carried still further by the cavetto cornice window and door hoods, some of which feature sun disk symbols with lion's faces, a distyle in antis entrance portico with bundled shaft or lotus - like cast iron columns, and the deep cavetto or gorge and roll cornice with rope -like moldings along the roofline. The influence of the Greek Revival can be discerned in the use of engaged corner pilasters, the platform -like front portico and the distyle in antis arrangement, and the use of a rectangular transom over two engaged piers and flanked by sidelights at the front entry door. On the inside, the northernmost section of the building follows a center hall plan. A wide north to south corridor runs from the front entry to a doorway that opens into the jail portion. On the east side, the hall is flanked by what was the private dining room of the sheriff and his family, a stair hall leading to the second floor, and the old kitchen area where food was prepared for the sheriff, his employees and family, and the jail population. On the west side of the hall is a large room, which originally was a parlor that often served as a visiting area for prisoners, a small, private office for the sheriff, and a larger office space, presumably utilized by the deputies, jailer, and any other employees. The second floor, which originally was intended as a private residence for the sheriff and set up so he could easily supervise and observe the prisoners from a barred door, contains five rooms, the four larger of which were bedrooms. The small room, which is located directly over the sheriff's private office, likely served as an office annex. Throughout this wing of the building, despite such modifications 13 dropped ceilings and wood panelling , a remarkable amount of what appears to be original fabric has survived, including rather elaborate wooden architrave door and window trim, wainscoting, and pressed tin ceilings and wall coverings. -„The_interior of the jail proper presents a sharp_contrast with the other section with its rock faced walls, flanked on the east MPS Pam 10 464 DMZ United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form Continuation sheet Description Item number 7 cwz Approval No. 1024.4048 Page by the county, primarily for probation offices, while the southernmost section is under lease to the Dubuque Art Association and serves as its "Old Jail Gallery." Some changes have been made to accomodate these new uses. In the section occupied by the county, alterations have been confined largely to dropped ceilings and panelling, all of which are easily reversible, and the replacement of the front door with one that meets fire codes. In the portion occupied by the Art Center, the catwalks to the two upper tiers of cells have been removed for safety reasons, and one cell door has been removed and placed outside to serve as logo for the gallery sign. 8. Significance Period prehistoric 1400-1499 1500-1599 _ 1600-1699 1700-1799 X 1800-1899 _X_ 1900- Areas of Significance—Checic and justify below ___ archeology -prehistoric _ community planning __ archeology -historic _ __ conservation __ agriculture ___ economics Xr architecture ____ education .___ art _ engineering ..__ commerce __ communications exploration/settlement industry ._.__invention . _ _. landscape architecture. _ law __._ literature __ military ___ music —_ philosophy __ politics/government — religion — science sculpture X social/ humanitarian __ theater .— transportation other (specify) Specific dates 1858-present Builder/ArchitectArchitect: John 1?. Rague; Builder: David Statement of Significance (in ono paragraph) The Dubuque County Jail possesses national significance on both architectural and historical grounds. This massive stone edifice is an outstanding example of Egyptian Revival architecture, perhaps the rarest of American architectural styles, and, according to distinguished architectural historian G.E. Kidder Smith, "is one of the few Niolitic-inspired stuctures to survive from the romantic flings of the last century."- Its completion in 1858 drew down the curtain on the first and perhaps most significant phase of the Egyptian Revival movement, making the building, say Marcus Whiffen and Frederick Koeper, "the last building of any importance in which Egyptian forms were employed," until the brief revival in the 1920 s inspired by the discovery of King Tutankhamen's tomb.2 The Dubuque County Jail is also important because it is one of only a handful of extant buildings designed by John F. Rague, a talented 19th century midwestern architect whose skills ranked with those of his more famed eastern contemporaries and who produced a number of masterpieces, including the Old Illinois and Iowa State Capitols (both NHL's), and the Langworthy House in Dubuque, an outstanding example of the octagon mode. The Dubuque County Jail was his only known foray into the Egyptian Revival style, and clearly, it is one of his most original works. By clearly differentiating between the residential portion and the jail proper in his plan and design, Rague broke with tradition and produced an honest edifice which enabled the passerby to discern that form followed function. 1 G.E. Kidder Smith, The Architecture of the United States, Volume 3: The Plains States and Far West (Garden City: Anchor Books, 1981), 315. 2 Marcus Whiffen and Frederick Koeper, American Architecture, 1607-1967 (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1981), 178 Armstrong C 1Q74-G .i. United States Departrr -nt of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form Continuation sheet Significance ftem number 8 Page 2 Finally, the Dubuque County Jail is significant because it is one of the few remaining standing symbols of the antebellum penal reform movement in the United States that made American jails and prisons international models in terms of design, planning, and organization. The Egyptian Revival was the preferred style for these reformers, says Richard Carrott, because it "symbolized for them, values beyond mere man -manipulated ones -those of the incorruptible righteousness of law and order," and "while ancient Egyptian structures eternally guarded hope for men in the next world, Egyptian Revival buildings temporarily guarded men for hope in this world."3 Before the construction of John F. Rague's Egyptian Revival masterpiece in 1857-58, at least three jails were used tohouse city and county lawbreakers. Dubuque's first jail, a stone structure erected shortly after the city's founding in 1833 and affectionately referred to as the "Calaboose," was so insecure that the new, two-story, hewed log courthouse was converted to jail purposes shortly after its completion in 1836. Within two years, it had proved inadequate, and one newspaper described it as"almost useless and but a mockery of what it should be; it schools villains in the art of making escapes and makes them more hardened, impudent and ready to commit crime."4 By late 1841, the proponents of improved jail conditions had managed to persuade their fellow citizens to support construction of an additional building. Early in 1842, William Smith was appointed superintendent of construction for a new stone building, which was completed in 1843. In the early 1850 s Dubuque County and the city proper underwent a period of explosive population growth which put great stress on governmental services and facilities, especially the jail. In 1852 the issue of a special tax for a new jail was placed before the voters but defeated, and a proposal by the county that the city assist in the construction of a new facility was rejected by the Dubuque City Council. In 1855 Stephen Hempstead made a new jail, poorhouse, and hospital issues in his successful race for county judge, and in April 1856, the voters approved a bond issue for the construction of these facilities. Although economics and sheer need were important factors in the success of the bond issue, the general reform spirit of the era played a major role 3 Richard G. Carrott, The Egyptian Revival: Its Sources, Monuments and Meaning, 1808-1858 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978), 120. 4 Iowa News, August 1838, cited in Weston A. and K.C. Goodspeed, History of Dubu uue County, Iowa (Chicago: Goodspeed Historical Association, 19T1173Y5. MIS ftm, 1Q41011M 040 OMB Approval. aa. 1024.-001. United States Departrnt . of the interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form Continuation sheet Significance Marnnumba. 8 Page 3 as well. Support for a new jail received major impetus in January 1856 when a report appeared in the Dubuque Daily Republican, which claimed that the jail was being kept so cold at night that at least one prisoner had awakened with frozen feet. Although this particular story proved to be an exaggeration, it was determined that the prisoners were not being provided sufficient fuel for warmth. In a series of editorial comments and letters from concerned citizens, the jail was depicted as a "miserable hole," "a disgrace to the county," and a facility in which "all offenders of the law are huddled together like so many hogs."5 Shortly after the passage of the bond issue, John F. Rague received the commission to design the new jail. Rague, who had moved to Dubuque in 1854, was an established and politically well connected architect with numerous designs to his credit, including the capitol buildings of Illinois and Iowa. Born in New Jersey in 1799, the son of a French surgeon who had served with Lafayette, he grew up in New York City and received training as an architect in the office of Minard Lafever, a significant figure in early 19th century architectural circles. After practicing architecture for a time in New York City, Rague moved to Springfield, Illinois in the early 1830's. In Springfield Rague did more than design buildings, becoming a leader in the city's governmental, commercial, and civic affairs, and directing a church choir whose members included Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas. These contacts paid off for him in 1837 when he received the commission to design a new state capitol building, and was subsequently hired to superintend its construction. Two years later, he won the design competition for the Iowa Territorial Capitol Building in Iowa City. Although he had been hired to supervise construction of the Iowa Capitol, Rague resigned his position nine days after the building's cornerstone was laid on July 4, 1840, probably because of financial uncertainties. In 1844 Rague moved to Milwaukee where he carried on an extensive practice in that city and the state of Wisconsin until his removal to Dubuque in 1854. The Dubuque County Jail is believed to be Rague's first and only design executed in the Egyptian Revival style. Prior to this commission, his major works, like the capitols of Illinois and Iowa, had been in the Greek Revival mode. Unfortunately, there is virtually no documentation on how the decision to design the jail in this style was reached. None of Rague's correspondence on the subject has ever surfaced, and the county records do not speak to the issue. Based on the data at hand, especially the silence concerning design in the Minutes of the Dubuque County Court, it appears that Rague's radical departure in style for the jail met with general public approval. The appropriateness of 5 Dubuque Daily Republican, January 9, 11, 1856. United States Departrr it of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory --Nomination Form COntlnuation sheet Sigtificance Item number 8 OMB Approval No, 1024-0018 Page 4 this style for a major public building in a municipality seeking to become the principal city on the "American Nile" probably did not pass unnoticed. Additionally, the cause of jail reform and improvement was extremely popular in Dubuque, and as Carrott has noted, the Egyptian Revival style for many was "the architecture symbolic of enlightened prison discipline."6 As to influences on Rague, it should be noted that architects versed in the Greek Revival frequently utilized Egyptian motifs in their work, and, as Whiffen and Koeper have noted, "the frequency with which Egyptian and Greek forms were combined, if nothing else, shows that architects regarded Egyptian as a kind of proto-Greek."7 It is highly unlikely that Rague had ever viewed a completed Egyptian Revival Building since most major examples were in the east and had been erected after his departure from that region. His mentor Lafever worked in the style, but most likely Rague's acquaintance with it came either from architectural books and journals, or the popular magazines of the day, which often contained plans and engraved views of major examples. Available evidence indicates that the single most important influence on Rague was John Haviland's New York Halls of Justice, better known as "The Tombs." Erected between 1835 and 1838 in New York City, this Egyptian Revival building was considered a model jail facility by many reformers, and its plan and design had received wide circulation in both architectural and popular publications for a number of years. Although influenced by Haviland's work, Rague's Dubuque County Jail is by no means a scaled down or miniature version of "The Tombs." At first glance, the two buildings appear to have little in common except for.what might be regarded as the generic characteristics of the Egyptian Revival. Rague appears to have copied very little exterior detailing from the "Tombs," instead choosing his own decorative vocabulary, and except for what Carrott has described as "the generalized handling of the column capitals, the deemphasized winged orbs and the strongly accented lintels," the ornamentation and decorative detailing of the two buildings have little in common.8 The greatest influence Haviland's "Tombs" had on Rague, however, was in terms of general approach to jail planning, layout, and 6 7 8 Carrott, The Egyptian Revival, 121. Whiffen and Koeper, American Architecture,178. Carrott, The Egyptian Reviva1,120. NI Fenn 1G4*.. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory —domination Form Continuation sheet Sigiif icance Item number 8 0O Approval. No. 1024-0031 Rags 5 interior arrangement. Functionalism was one of the hallmarks of the "Tombs," and Rague employed it in a number of ways. Like Haviland, he used form, massing, and detailing to differentiate the functions of different portions of the building. Thus, the sheriff's office and residence portion and the jail proper, although connected, are distinct and easily identifiable. By following this approach, Rague broke with the tradition of jails resembling residences, thus designing an honest building which enabled passerby to more closely discern that form followed function. Like Haviland, he also used stone and wrought and cast iron almost exclusively to make the facility as fireproof as possible. In addition, the jail proper resembled its New York City counterpart with its separate cells for each prisoner; an open center gallery between cell blocks that allowed light to enter and air to circulate, and also provided an indoor exercise area and an easy vantage point for prisoner supervision; a separate and segregated section for the most desperate and hardened prisoners; and a large, walled outdoor court or exercise area. Like many 19th century architects, Rague did not confine his activities to merely designing buildings, but attempted to participate in their construction as well. Rague submitted a bid to construct the jail, but, unfortunately, local contractor David Armstrong's bid of $36,011 was selected. Rague,however, did manage to obtain for himself the post of supervising architect. Construction on the new jail started February 1, 1857, and appears to have moved rather smoothly in spite of the financial exigencies occasioned by the panic of that year that forced the county to sell $9,000 of the bonds issued to finance construction at seventy cents on the dollar. This money problem is the likely reason why wood was used for cell doors when the jail was completed, a deficiency the county moved to correct a few months after the facility opened. By the end of 1857, the Dubuque County Jail was, for the most part finished. On January 8, 1858, a gala ball was held in the facility to celebrate its completion. In February Sheriff Hayden and Jailer Saciles marched the 13 prisoners in their charge from the old jail to the new, and the citizens of Dubuque at last had the model jail, which the reform minded among them had advocated for so many years. Except for periodic interior remodeling and a small rear addition constructed in 1874 in keeping with the original architectural design, the Dubuque County Jail underwent little significant physical change over the years. This building served its original purpose from 1858 until 1971, some 113 years, when it was closed due to being declared substandard by the State of Iowa. For some time, there was concern the structure might be demolished, but local support Ny Venn 104004 on! OMB Approv.L No. 1024-OO1S United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places • Inventory —Nomination Form Continuation sheet S ig rificance Item numter 8 Page 6 materialized for converting the building into a cultural center. In 1975 the Dubuque Art Association leased the jail portion of the building from the county for $1 per year. Their efforts have focused on an adaptive reuse plan which emphasizes restoration of the most significant architectural features of the building, but at the same time is committed to rehabilitating it as a local art gallery. The residential and office portion of the building was remodeled by the county for use as probation offices. Currently, plans are under consideration for the Art Association to lease and restore/rehabilitate this portion of the building as well. Because of the covenants imposed in the lease and Historic Preservation Fund Grant agreements, this work will have to be reviewed and approved by the Office of Historic Preservation, State Historical Society of Iowa, which will review any proposed changes in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior°s Standards for Restoration and Rehabilitation. 9. Major Bibliogrz hical References See Continuation Sheets 10. Geographical Data Acreage of nominated property Le6,s than orte acre Quadrangle name D.buque North; Dubuque South UT M References Quadrangle scale 7. 5 1 ; 7. 5' A 111 51 t 61 9 1 1 1 8 19 /01- LI 710171814101 B 1 1 l I Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing CIIILIIIIIIIIIIIIII D Li j ___ I I 1 I 1 I I ELL11It_ _Li I I I I 1...1.11 FL-..1 III tit II GHIIIIIIIJIIIIIIII H LIL J I I I I I I I i I I l i I I Verbal boundary description and justification The boundary of the inventoried property coincides with the boundaries of lots 284 and 285, Original Town of Dubuque. Ust all states and counties for properties overlapping state or county boundaries state code county code state code county code 11. Form Prepared By nameltitie Ralph J. Christian and Howard Iber, Architectural Historians • State Historical Society of Iowa organization Office of Historic Preservation street & number East l2th and Grand Avenue date January 20. 1987 telephone 515/281-8697 city or town Des Moines state Iowa 12. State Historic Preservation Officer Certification The evaluated significance of this property within the state is: national state local As the designated State Historic Preservation Officer for the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Public Law 89- 664 I hereby nominate this property for inclusion in the National Register and certify that it has been evaluated according to the criteria and procedures set forth by the National Park Senile*. State Historic Preservation Officer signature title date For NIPS use or* I hereby certify that this property Is included in the National Register date Keeper of the Notional Register Ater date G1ief of Registration PIPS Item to404 044 .,United States Depertmz tom,: ether Interior - = National Park Service - National Register of Historic Places Inventory -Nomination Form Bibliography Continuation sheet OMB Apprvvtl 80. 1024-0011 ttem number 9 Page 1 Carrott, Richard G., The Egyptian Revival: Its Sources, Monuments, and Meaning, 1808-1858 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978. Des Moines Sunday Register, January 27, 1957. Dubuque Daily Express Herald, December 22, 1855; May 5, July 9, 31, September 2, 23, 1857; May 19, June 16, August 1, 1858. Dubuque Daily Globe Journal, November 21, 1898. Dubuque Daily Herald, April 16, 1873; March 7, May 7, 1874; September 21, 1876; June 10, 1877; February 10, 1886; April 26, 1893; June 14, 1900. Dubuque Daily Northwest, October 6, 1857. Dubuque Daily Republican, January 1, 9, 11, 17, 1856. . Dubuque Daily Times, November 24, 1863; January 5, 28, 1866; February 10, 1880; June 7, 1881. Dubuque Evening Globe Journal, June 3, 1906. Dubuque Express and Herald, July 31, 1858. Dubuque Folklore (Dubuque: American Trust and Savings Bank, 1975). Dubuque Telegraph Herald, December 3, 1903; March 12,28, 1904; March 2, 1906; January 7, 1907; May 29, 1912; May 3, 1922; October 6, 1935. Dubuque Weekly Express Herald, February 4, May 13, July 15, 1857. • Goodspeed, Weston A. and K.C., History of Dubuque County, Iowa (Chicago: Goodspeed Historical Association, 1911). '. History of Dubuque County, Iowa (Chicago: Western Historical Company, 1880). Hoffman, Martha M., "John Francis Rague, Pioneer Architect of Iowa," Annals of Iowa, Third Series, XIX, (1933-35), 444-48. Horton, Loren, "Early Architecture of Dubuque," The Palimpsest, Vol. 55, No.5 (Sept. -Oct., 1974), 130-51. 040 United States Department of the interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Inventory -Nomination Form Continuation sheet Bibliography Itom number 9 OMB Approval No. 1024-0018 Page Minutes of Count Court, Dubuque County, 1851-61, Dubuque County Courthouse, Dubuque, Iowa. Myers, Denys Peter, "Dubuque County Jail," excerpt from consultant's report to National Trust for Historic Preservation, May 16, 1971, copy in Office of Historic Preservation files, State Historical Society of Iowa, Des Moines. 2 Shank, Wesley I., The Iowa Catalog: Historic American Buildings Survey (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1979). Smith, G.E. Kidder, The Architecture of the United States: Volume 3, The Plains States and Far West (Garden C ty, New York: Anchor Books, 1981. Sommer, Lawrence J., The Heritage of Dubuque: An Architectural View (Dubuque: First National Bank of Dubuque, 1975). Whiffen, Marcus and Koeper, Frederick, American Architecture, 1607-1976 (Cabridge: MIT Press, 1981). Woodman, Betsy H., "John Francis Rague, Mid -Nineteenth Century Revivalist Architect," unpublished Master of Arts thesis, University of Iowa, 1969. L',... , i7 St FTanc!S �' \� '�. Convent �l ,\ ospiYi�! 7TJO�i33'42 r \Y� • '4' %, ; %;. Jam r4 'sSt #!-r t L ..4111111.A �. L 5 ■u.vc. T FEET O'4ETE? GTON.D.( :oNSIN 5: REQUEST Q0'`-;. £Asr ,via v s ?o, 9 n.i • Dubuque County Jail 36 East 8th Street Dubuque, Iowa U.S. G.S. 7.5' Series Ia.—Wis.—I11.; Dubuque North Quad. 1956; photorevised 1972 Zone 15 691,890/4,707,840 \LOCK AND DAAL_ - / - 3 o Eaa'e Point Bridge '. (Toll) gle Point • Ada \.i,'11 avv '`6+ ��6 • C490000 FEET ' (WIS.) —•cJC-\\ 'A S �-/ • ° ° ' 1 830000 FEET (WIS.) R 2: 42.30' 694000m E. 90 ° 3 7'30" OAD CLASSIFICATION Light -duty Unimproved dirt _ Route State Route FORTH, IOWA—WIS.--1LL. •230—W9037.5/7.5 1956 PlIOTDR_visED 197: AMS 7869 II SW —SERIES V876 mo sin Dubu:ue County Jail, view from northwest, 1986 Pho:: raph courtesy of Harold Iber, State Historical Society of Iowa Zounty Jail, view from northwest (Dubuque County Courthouse in the ::::.:4.4-ound to the right), 1986 r iph courtesy of Harold Iber, State Historical Society of Iowa Dubuque County Jail, view from southeast, 1986 Photograph courtesy of Harold Iber, State Historical Society of Iowa i .r • f tit Dubuque County Jail, view of basement or "Dungeon" area, 1986 �,• 0- i \. l ia- 3 Se i• 3444,4 .. 4444 M la 0 • 0 O C▪ O y 1-+ L fa W >. C 0 L O • U O • .O .0 O C...) CO 0. an ✓ 3', 0 • nOv: 0" 0 .0 0 A • a. CO CO On 0 .�•a L U r� Q> U L 1✓ 2 U L C. cry 4852 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 2. 1983 / Rules and Regulations offer and sale of commodity options is currently limited to member FCMs and their APs. as already noted. Rule 33.3(b) expressly allows non-member FCMs and their APs to engage in the offer and sale of commodity options if they are members of a registered futures association which regulates the option - related activities of,its members in a manner equivalent to that required of contract markets under the Cornmission'n rules. In this connection. the National Futures Association ("NFA") has submitted. pursuant to Section 17(j) of the Commodity Exchange Act. as amended. 7 U.S.C. 21(j)(1978), proposed compliance rules governing the solicitation and handling of option accounts by NFA-member Fars and their sales personnel and option sales practice audit procedures. The Division staff is currently reviewing NFA's submission and anticipates completion of the review process shortly.' At such time as NFA rules governing options and the requisite joint audit agreements are approved by the Commission. and NFA implements -its program to regulate the option -related activities of its members in a manner equivalent to that required of contract markets under the Commission's rates, any person adversely affected by this decision will be able to solicit and accept option orders as an NFA member. Thus, the restrictions imposed by this determination raay be expected to be mitigated in the near future.* 'Th. NPA proposal howne, also rd ier upon the execution of joint aodtt agreements between the NPA and those exchanges designated or applying for designation to trade options. Although those joint auditagreamemts most also be approved by the Conunisaioo before NFA's option program can become effective. NFA and the participant exchanges have not yet submitted the agreamenta for Commission review. 'Consistent with the Commission's prior interpretation of Rale gad the Commission also notes that a at entree Cr.4 may decide whether to accept option ceders eollrited and accepted by tin APs of Its agents (except by agents which are non- member FC7.4a or agents of mush Mal so tong as the Hiles of the relevant contract market permit In this regard. the Commission wishes to memphasms the obligations of a mamba FChf which maker an affirmative decision on this bets, as originally expressed at the time the final option rules wan adopted Specifically. an PCM must 'seams full responsibility for the acts of sorb agnate and. in particular. must sup.vise the option sales practices of their AFs. Further. a meober Ftal may not accept option adorn from coo -member F 4a or agents of eao-eeeenber Plats which were solicited and accepted to violation of Role a33(b)(1). as interpreted by the Ganonie.ion Siatlf.rly,aontract marked which have option males practices audit programs are reminded that they have represented that they will carefully manta participation by - agettm of member PCTU in the pilot program to ensure that their activities are conducted in conformity with the foregoing limitations and oblegstioe s. Issued in Washington. D.C. on January 28, 1983. by the Commission Jane IC Stuckey, Secretary of the Commission. (PR Dos. t nest vt7.d 1-1-as It./ am) aaira coo( sass-oI-a DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 6a (T.D. 7832) Income Tax: Temporary Income Tax Regulations tinder Subtitle C of Title XI of the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1960; Foreign investment to United Slaters Real Property Correction • In FR Doc. S2-25a29, beginning on page 41532, in the issue of Tuesday, September 21,1982. on page 41538, in the first column, in the second line, "June 21, 1982" should read "June 21, 1983." MUM coos heat-rl-at DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Pant Service 36 C'FR Part 65 National Historic Landmarks Program Aoasicv: National Park Service. Interior. ACTrOf<C Final rule. SUMMARY: These regulations set forth the Secretary of the Interior's criteria for national significance and the process used to identify. designate, recognize and monitor the integrity of National Historic Landmarks. This final rule , incorporates revisions required by .the National Historic Preservation Act Amendments of 1980 Pub. L 98-615 ("Amendments"), and updates and revises in other minor respects the National Historic Venrimark procedures based in part on comments received in response to publication of prior regulations. The regulations make - available to Federal agencies. State and local govelmnlemts, private organisations, and individuals information necessary for understanding of and participation in the National Historic !Landmarks Program. ituazu Final rule effective February 2. 1983. root Fusman a POt MAT1OW ccorr*CT. Edwin C. Beans. Chief. History Dfvisioa (202) 113-11 ifp . Address: Chief. Litistory Won. National Park Service, P.O. B si 37/2 y Washington. DC t® 2000 -Tl zry SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIOte The National Historic Landmarks Program. administered by the National Park Service, is the program of the Department of the Interior for identifying. designating, recognizing, listing, and monitoring National Historic Landmarks Two offices in the national Park Service cooperate in managing the program: the Office of the Associate Director, Cultural Resources Management. through the History Division. manages the functions of identifying designating and recognizing landmarks: the Office of the Associate Director for National Register Programs lists landmarks on the National Register of Historic Places and monitors their condition. The program provides limited protection to historic properties and assists the planning needs of Federal. . State and local agencies and private organizations and individuals because it is the primary Federal means of assessing the national level of significance of historic properties, including those proposed for inclusion in the National Park System and for addition to the World Heritage List. Authority for the National Historic Landmarks Program is derived from the historic Sites Act of 1935 (49 Stat. 888, 18 U.S.C. 481etseq.), which established a national policy to preserve "historic eites, buildings, and objects of national significance," and the National Historic Preservation Act Amendments of 1980 (Amendments). . intense rules for the National Historic Lanch arks -Program were published in the Federal Eashtet on December 18. 1979. 44 PR 74826. with a request for comments. The December 18.1979 interim rules are replaced by the final rules published today. Responses to the publication of the December 18. 1979 interim rules indicate the wide range of parties participating in the Landmarks Program. including State Historic Preservation Officers, other State and Federal agencies. university faculties, business firms, private organizations and individuals. On December 12, 1980. the Amendments became law necessitating revisions in the National 'Historic Landmark designation process. The Amendments require the Secretary of the Interior to promulgate or revise regulations for the following (a) Establishing and revising criteria for National Historic Landmarks; (b) Designating properties as National Historic landmarks and removing such designations; Federal Register / Vol. 48. No. 23 / Wednesday, February 2. 1983 / Rules and Regtu]ationa 4853 (c) Considering appeals from such nominations, removals. and designr.ticns (or any failure or refusal by a nominating authority to nominate or designate); (d) Notifying the owner of a property, appropriate local governments and the general public. when the property is beirr considered for designation as a National Historic Landmark: (e) Notifying the ow-aeri of private property and provirinj them an opportunity (including a reasonable period of time) to concur in or object to the nomination of the property or . district for designation; (f) Revieveing the nomination of the property or district where any such objection leas been made. determining whether or not the property or district is eligible for designation. and informing the Advir ry-Council on Historic Preservation. the appropriate State official, the appropriate chief elected local official and the owner or owners of such property of the Secretary's determination: and, (g) In the case of National Historic Landmark districts for which no boundaries have been established. publishing proposed boundaries in the Federal Registrar and submitting the -ter to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the United States Senate and to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs of the United Staten House of Representatives. The Amendments require the Secretary to send any proposed regulations published thereunder to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate before publication in tha Federal Register for comment and to send final regulations to Congress before publication. In addition to the changes required by the Amendments, these final regulations reflect comments made in response to the December 18, 1979 interim regulations. Since the issuance of the December 18. 1979 interim regulations. the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service (HtS) has been abolished and the National Historic Landmarks Program transferred to the National Perk Service (NPS). Comments received often refer to the Conauiting Committee which was a review board proposed to examine and make professional recommendations to the Director (HORS) and the S.em-etary of the Interior regarding the qualifications of nominated National Historic Landmarka. With the transfer of the program to the National Park Service. these regulations substitute the National Park System Advisory Board -for the Consulting Committee. Summary of comments and response to comments on the December 18, 1979 interim regulations: One State urged that a Specific system be established for nominations by State Historic Preservation Officers. The Nations! Panic Service also emphasized that National Historic Landmarks should be selected primarily on the basis of theme studies because of the importance of comparative analysia. Both of these concerns are incorporated into the priorities for selecting atudiea established in these regulations. Several comments were received concerning the composition of the Consulting Committee and the role of the Committee. One comment suggested that designation by the Secretary without Consulting Committee review should be provisional and should require Committee cancurrence-within a specified period of t ne..Another comment recommended that the Committee include expertise in both historic and prehistoric archeology. As a result. the reguiatinns b.ave been made more specific concerning when -and hose the Secretary may designate fiatioaal Historic Landanarka without National Park System Advisory Board review. , Several private companies expressed concerns about the effects of designation. One company interpreted the Historic Sites Act to mean that the Depnrmient of the interior must obtain an interest in a property before designation. The Department does -not agree with this interpretation of the act. The same company expressed concern that the owners were giving up soma right in their property. Under Federal law, National Historic Landmark desigation of a private property dove not prohibit any actions which may otherwise bo taken by the owner with respect to the property. Others suggested that the role of the Director in the designation procesa should be clarified. This has been done in the regulations. One comment also urged that NPS should assure that all National Historic Landmark studies, public meetings. etc., should be carried out by NPS or with an NPS representative present While this concern is not addressed in the regulations. NT-S will assure that there is adequate NPS oversight of all aspects of the program_ One continent expressed concern that some aspects of the National Historic Landmark criteria are too broad. for example. the references to movements. ideals. beliefs and phenomena. The regulations make clear that the criteria are the general standards for evaluation of national significance: however. NPS emphasizes that the significancrof each property must bo evaluated on the basis of n thorough and detailed scholarly study. The notification procedures before designadon were the subject of a number of commenta. One State Historic Preservation Officer recommended that State Historic Preservation Officers always: participate in public meetings. Although thin i3 not addressed in the regulations. NPS always welcomes State Historic Preservatioa Officers' participation in public meetings as well as in other aspects of the program. Other comments recommended that additional parties bo notified. as well as those included in the interim regulations. Because notice is costly. NFS can routinely notify only a certain number of parties as part of the nomination pi -cease. A number of comments recommended revising the re4atratioa section. Some comments recommended that certificates be presented to all National Historic Landmarks. This has been included. Others recommended that plaques not bo.presented unless the recipients are willing to publicly display them. Thi.a has been included. Another comment questioned getting owners to eiga a pre4erraeon agreement which is not binding. Based on these comments the registration aspect of the program has been substantially revised. To fulfill the requirements of the Amendment3 and on the basis of the comments received on the December 1t3, 197e3 interim regulations, subatantive revisions have been made in the sections of the regulations listed below: Section ti'5.2. A new section on the effects of designation has been added. Section 0,5.4. The National Historic Landmark Criteria. Section 120.5.9 in the December 18. 197n interim ruie3 (reprinted art 33 CFR Part 65 in 1981 to reflect the reorgeni; ration of HCRS into NPS) have been :loved to a nave position to emphasize their importance as the basis for all decisions on landinark designation. These criteria were revised following consultation with historical and archeological associations. the History Areas Committee of the National Park System Advisory Board and the National Register. As a result, the revised criteria herein have been substituted for those of the 1979 rules. With some changes. these are the criteria used by the National Historic Landmarks Program before the 1979 rules. They are lens cumbersome and more closely parallel with the criteria of the National Register (38 UI'R Part 6(1). 4854 Federal Register / 48, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 983 / Rules and Regulations Section 85.5. New language has been inserted to clarify the method and priorities used to identify prospective landmarks, to assure general understanding of how National Historic Landmark studies are scheduled and to define the role of the appropriate State officials, Federal agencies and other parties in that process. The Department receives numerous requests to designate properties as National Historic Landmarks from State officials, property owners and others. The requests to study and designate such properties far exceed the funds and staff available to the Department for the conduct of the program. National Historic Landmarks will. with rare exceptions, be identified on the basis of theme studies which provide the contextual framework to evaluate the relative significance of properties. The theme studies, which organize the study of American history. and special studies for properties not in active therne studies will be conducted according to priorities established herein. State and Federal agencies evaluate, document. and nominate significant historic properties to the National Register of Historic Places, under the authorities of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1988, as amended. and Executive Order 11593. Their efforts are one basis for establishing National Historic Landmark Program priorities and assist in avoiding duplication of effort. Section 65.5(c)(2). This paragraph has been modified to state that onsite visits will be required unless NPS determines such a visit is not necessary and to indicate that NPS may conduct a public information meeting for properties with more than 50 owners and will do so for such a property upon request by the chief elected official of the local, county or municipal political jurisdiction in which the property is located. This section also provides that properties on which the onsite visit was conducted before the effective date of these regulations are not subject to the notice provisions announcing that a study is being conducted. Section 65.5) 0(41 New language has been added to identify minimum requirements for the study report or nomination for each prospective landmark. Section 65.5(d)(5). This paragraph has been modified to provide owners an opportunity to concur in or object to designation and to specify how a statement of objection shall be transmitted to NPS. Section 65.5(e)(2). New language has been added to provide that studies submitted to the Consulting Committee or National Park System Advisory Board before the effective date of these regulations need not be resubmitted to the National Park System Advisory Board. In such instances, if a property appears to qualify for designation. NPS will provide at lease 30 days notice, a copy of the study report. and an opportunity to comment. and. for owners. an opportunity to concur in or object to the designation as specified in 4 65.5(d) (2) and (3). before suhrnitting a property to the Secretary for designation. Section 65.5(03). New language has been added to clarify the role of the Director in the evaluation and designation of landmarks. Section 65.5(fJ. New language has been added to provide that if the owners of private property or for a district the majority of such owners have objected to the designation, the Secretary shall make a determination of a property's eligibility for National Historic Landmark designation. as required by the Amendments. The paragraph also establishes that the Keeper may list in the National Register properties considered for National Historic Landmark designation which do not meet the National Historic Landmark criteria but do meet the National Register criteria for State or local significance or determine such properties eligible for listing if the private owners or a majority of such owners object to listing. Section 65.5(g). This paragraph describes the notices which NPS will provide concerning designations, determinations of eligibility for designation or other actions taken by the Secretary. Section 65.5(h). New language has been added to clarify when the Secretary may designate National Historic Landmarks without review by the National Park System Advisory Board and to identify notification procedures and other procedural steps to be followed in the designation of landrr.arks without Advisory Board re -new. Sect;on 65.6. Landmark Registration has been redefined as Landmark Recognition: this change will eliminate potential confusion between Registered" Landmarks and National Register properties. Section 65.8(d0(1). A new provision is added that in the case of National Historic Landmark districts for which no boundanes have been established proposed boundaries shall be published in the Federal Register for comment and submitted to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the United States Senate and the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs of the United States House of Representatives to. allow not less than 30 nor more than eo days to comment on the proposed boundaries. Section 65.9(a). New language expands the potential justification for withdrawals of landmark designation from three to four. including alternation of kind or degree of significance because of previously undiscovered information and reevaluation of the theme under which the designation was originally granted. Section 65.9(b). This section specifies that properties designated as National Historic Landmarks before enactment of the Amendment's, December 13. 1980. can only bd'�'1esignated if they have ceased to meet the criteria for designation because the qualities which caused them to be originally designated have been lost or destroyed. This provision is consistent with the Amendments' "grandfatherng" all historic properties listed as National Historic Landmarks in the Federal Register of February 8. 1979 nr thereafter prior to the effective date of the Amendments. and with the Congresaional committee reports on the Amendments which recognize that the Secretary may dedesignate properties which have lost the historic qualities for which they were designated. Section 65.9(c). A process is established for appeals for dedesignabon. Section 65.9(e). New language provides for possible continued National Register listing when a landmark designation is withdrawn and automatic National Register eligibility when designation is withdrawn because of procedural error. Section 65.10. A new section has been added which establishes a formal process for appealing decisions not to designate a property a National Historic Landmark. These substantive revisions are accompanied by minor changes in language throughout the regulati:.r.s for purposes of clarity and consistency. The Department of the lntenor emphasizes that the National Historic Landmark criteria constitute the standards against which all prospective landmarks are measured. These criteria do not contain a specific definition of significance. Instead, they are purposely worded to create a qualitative framework that cart be applied to the wide variety of properties of national significance. The basis for designation of properties as landmarks is a scholarly, professional analysis of the historical documentation for each property and of the property's y Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 2. 1983 "/ Rules and Regulations relative significance within a major field or theme of American history or prehistory. The Department of the Interior has given particular -attention to the need for expanded public participation in the National Historic Landmark designation process. Notification requirements have been set which will insure that property owners. appropriate State officials, local govgrnments, Members of Congress, and other interested parties will have ample opportunity to participate in the National Historic Landmarka Program. Authority: This rulemaking to developed under the authority of the Historic Sites Act of 1935. 16 U.S.0 481 et seq., and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1958. as amended. 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq. The Department of the Interior has determined that this document is not a major rule under Executive Order 12291 and does not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). These revisions are procedural. not substantive. They tell the public how properties are nominated for designation - as National Historic Landmarks and because they are procedural only they have no significant economic effect on small entities. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule does not contain information collection requirements which require approval by the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.0 3501 et seq. Since this rule has to do only with the procedural aspects of the National Historic Landmarks Program and does not constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the"quality of the human environment under the National . Environmental Policy Act of 1969 an environmental impact statement is not required. List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part BS Historic preservation. The originator of these procedures is Benjamin Levy. History Division. National Park Service. Dated: October 19. 1982 Ric Davidge, Acting Assistant Secretary. Fish and Wildlife and Ports. (18 U.S.C. 481 et seq.: 18 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) Accordingly 38 CFR Part 85 is revised to read as follows: PART 65—NAT1ONAL HISTORIC LANDMARKS PROGRAM Sec. 85.1 Purpose and authority. 85.2 Effects of designation. Sec. 65.3 Definitions. 85.4 National Historic Landmark Criteria. 65.5 Designation of National Historic Landmarks. 65.6 Recognition of National Historic Landmarks. 65.7 Monitoring National Historic Landmarks. 65.8 Alteration of National Historic Landmark Boundaries. 65.9 Withdrawal of National Historic Landmark Designation- 85.10 Appeals for designation. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 461 et seq. Sa U.S.C. 470 et seq. 65.1 Purpose and auttiortty• The purpose of tha National Mitotic Landmarks Pingram is to identify and designate National Historic Landmarks; and encourage the long range preservation of nationally significant properties that illustrate or commemorate the history and prehistory, of the United States. These regulations set forth the criteria for establishing national significance and the procedures used by the Department of the Interior for conducting the National Historic Landmarks Program. (a) In the Historic Sites Actof 1935 (45 Stat 868, 18 U.S.C. 481 et seq.) the Congress declared that It is a national policy to preserve for public use historic sites. buildings and objects of national significance for the aspiration and benefit of the people of the United States and (b) To implement the policy, the Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to perform the following duties and functions, among others: (1) To make a survey of historic and archeological sites, buildings and objects for the purpose of determining which possess exceptional value as commemorating or illustrating the history of the United States: (2) To make necessary investigations and researches in the United States relating to particular sites, buildings or objects to obtain true and accurate historical and archeological facts and information concerning the same: and (3) To erect and maintain tablets to mark or commemorate historic or prehistoric places and events of national historical or archeological significance. (c) The National Park Service (NPS) administers the National Historic Landmarks Program on behalf of the Secretary. § 65.2 Effects of designation. (a) The purpose of the National Historic Landmarks Program is to focus attention on properties of exceptional value to the nation as a whole rather than to a particular State or locality. The program recognizes and promotes the preservation efforts of Federal. State and local agencies, as well as of private organizations and individuals and" encourages the owners of landmark properties to observe preservation precepts. (b) Properties designated'as National Historic Landmarks are listed ha the National Register of Historic Places upon designation as NationaiHistoric Landmarks. Listing of private property on the National Register does not Rabbit under Federal law orregnlations any actions which may otherwise be taken by the property owner with respect to the property. (c) Specific effects of designation are: (1) The National Register was designed to be and is administered as a planning tooL Federal agencies undertaking a project having an effect on a listed or eligible property must provide the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity -to comment pursuant to Section 108 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1968. as amended. The Advisory Council has adopted procedures concerning, inter aiia, their commenting responaibility in 38 CFR Part 800. (2) Section 110(f) of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1908. as amended. requires that before approval of any Federal undertaking which may directly and adversely affect any National Historic Landmark. the head of the responsible Federal agency shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions as may be necessary to minimize harm to such landmark, and shall afford the Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on the undertaking. (3) Listing in the National Register makes property owners eligible to be considered for Federal grants-in-aid and loan guarantees (when implemented) for historic preservation. (4-) if a property is listed in the National Register. certain special Federal income tax provisions may apply to the owners of the property pursuant to Section 2124 of the Tax Reform Act of 1978. the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 and the Tax Treatment Extension Act of 1980. (5) If a property contains surface coal resources and is listed in the National Register. certain provisions of the Surface Mining and Control Act of 1977 require consideration of a property's historic values in determining issuance of a surface coal mining permit (8) Section 8 of the National Park System General Authorities Act of 1970. as amended (90 StaL 1940. 16 U.S.C. 1- 5). directs the Secretary to prepare an 4856 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 2, 1983 / Rule© and Regulations annual report to Congress which identifies all National Historic Landmarks that exhibit known or anticipated damage or threats to the integrity of their resources. In addition. National Historic Landmarks may be studied by NPS for possible recommendation to Congress for inclusion in the National Park System. (7) Section 9 of the•Mining in the National Parka Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 1342. 16 U.S.C. 1980) directs the Secretary of the Interior to submit to the Advisory Council a report on any surface mining activity which the Secretary has determined may destroy a National Historic Landmark in whole or in part, and to request the advisory Council's advice on alternative measures to mitigate or abate such activity. ¢ 55.3 D.Nrdtiora. As used in this rule (a) "Advisory Council' means the Advisory Council an Historic Preservation. established by the -• National Historic Preservation Act of 1958, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). Address: Executive Director, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. 1522 K Street NW, Washington, DC 2E005. (b) "Chief elected local official" _ means the mayor, comity judge ar otherwise titled chief elected administrative official who is the elected bead -of the local political jurisdiction in which the property is located (c) "Advisory Board" means t'ne. National Park System Advisory Board which is a body of authorities in several fields of knowledge appointed by the Secretary rimier authority of the Historic Sites Act of 11c, as amended. (d) "Director" means Director. National Park Service. (e) "District" means a geographically definable area. urban or rural. that possesses a significant concentration, linkage or continuity of sites. buildings. structures or objects united by past events or aesthetically by.plan or physical development. A district may also comprise individual elements separated geographically but linked by association or history. (f) "Endangered property" means e historic property which is or is about to be subjected to a major impact that will destroy or seriously damage the resources which make it eligible for National Historic Landmark designation. (g) "Federal Preservation Of firer" means the official designated by the head of each Federal agency responsible for coordinating that agency's activities under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. including norninwting properties under that agency's ownership or control to the Nattonat•Regtstetu' -- « . -- (h) "Keeper" means the Keeper of the National Register of Historic Places. (i) "Landmark" means National Historic.Landmark and is a district, site, building. structure or object. in public or private ownership, judged by the Secretary to possess national significance in American history, archeology. architecture, engineering and culture, and so designated by him (j) "National Register" means the National Register of Historic Places, which is a register of districts, sites. buildings. structures and objects significant in American history. • architecture. archeology, engineering and culture, maintained by the ' Secretary. (Section 2(b) of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 (49 Stat. 666,15 U.S.C. 461) and Section 101(a)(1) of the • National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (80 Stat. 915:18 U.S.C. 470), as amended.) (Address: Chief. Interagency Resource Management Division. 440 G Street NW, Washingtoii. DC 20243.) (k) "National Historic Landmarks Program" means the program which' identifies, designates, recognizes. lists, and monitors National Historic Landmarks conducted by the -Secretary through the National Park Service:''• (Address: Chief. History Dtviisiate .. National Park Service, Washington. DC 20240; addresses of other participating • divisions found throughout them • regulations.) - (1) "Object"-neans-a material tug of functional aesthetic,.cuitural, historical or scientific value that may be, by nature or design. movable yet related to a specific vetting or envirrmmerrt. _ (m) "Owner" or "(milers" means those individuals. pertnerahipe " corporations or public egencies bolrt4ng - fee simple title to property. "Owner' or "owners" does not include fariivildtrals, partnerships, corporations ar public ' agencies holding easements or lees than fee interests (including leasehihlds) of • any nature. - (n) "Property' means a site, buflding, object. structere ar a collection of the above which farm a district (o) "Cecretary" means the Secretary of the interior. (p) "Site" means the location of a significant event. a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity. or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished. where the location itself maintains historical or archeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. (q) "State official" means the person. who has been designated in each State to administer the State Histnrir Preservation Program , (r) "Structure" means a work made by Erman beings and composed of -- interdependent and interrelated parts in a definite pattern of organization. 0 area Katmai Historic Landrearir criteria. The criteria applied to evaluate properties for possible designation as National Historic Landmarks or possible determination of eligibility for National Historic Landmark designation listed below. These criteria shall be used by NPS in the preparation, review and evaluation of National Hlatoric Landmark studies. They shall be used by the Advisory Board in reviewing National Historir Landmark studies and preparing recommendations to the Secretary. Properties shall be designated National Historic Landmarks only if they are nationally significant. Although assessments of national significance should reflect both public perceptions and professional judgments, the evaluations of properties being considered far landmark designation are undertaken by professionals, including historian, architectural historians, archeologists and anthropologists _familiar with the broad range of the nation's resources and historical themes The criteria applied by theta specialists to potential landenerks do not define significance nor set a rigid standardfor gmtlity. Rather, the criteria establish the q;ialttative framework in which a comparative professional analysis of , _ national significance can occur. The final decision on whether a property possesses national significance is made by the Secretary on the basis of documentation including the comments and recommendations of the public who Participate in the designation process. (a) Specific Criteria ai National Significance: The quality of national significance is ascribed to districts, - sites, buildings, structures and -objects that possess exceptional valve or - quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States in history. architecture. archeology, engineering and culture and that possess a high degree of integrity of location. design. setting, materials, workmanship. feeling and association. and: (1) That are associated with event- that heve,raade a significant contribution to, and are identified with, or that outstandingly represent the broad national patterns of United States history and from which an understsnriing and appreciation of those patterns may be gained: or • (2) That -are associated importantly with the lives of persons nationally significant in the history of the United States; or Federal � / 48, No. 23 / Wednesday; February 2. 1903 / Ru)eo and Regulations WSW (3) That represent some great idea Cr ideal of the American people; or (4) That embody the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural type ape men exceptionally valuable for e study of a period. -tyle or method of construction. or that reprtrserat a . - significant, distinctive and exceptional sanity whcee components may facie individual dist-acticez or (5) That are =repos-ed of integral parts of the environment not sufficiently significant by reason of Instvric ll associaticn ar artistic merit to warrant individual ie eepeitien but cohectfvel7 compose an entity of exceptional historical or artistic significance. or outstandingly commemorate or illustrate a way of life or culture: or (8) That have yielded or may be likely to yield information of atajar scientific importance by revealing new cultures, ear by shedding light teem periods of Gee -EL -pence over large areas of thus United State. Such Bite a are thole .e • which have yielded, ar which may reasonably be expected to yield. data affecting theories. code -reds and ideas to a major degree. (b) Ordinarily, cemeteries, birthplaces. graves of historical flguree, properties owned by reiigiacra iraatit^tiana or nrre9d for religious purpe es. senctizres that . have been waved from their origfrai locations, rtzveetructe'-d historic bvilding;a and properties that have - achieved significance idart the past 50 years are not eligible fur designation. Such properties, however, will qualify if they fall within the following categories: (1) A rellgioue property deriviazg its primary national sigiificance from architectural or ereatio distinction cx historical importance: or (2) A budding or structure reti,rved from its origimai loc_otion but which is nationally aignilcnnt p`eenariiy for itg architectural merit or fox aseaciadon with pertione or events of tranaaendant importance in tba nation's histrary and the association consequential: or • (3) A site of a building or structure no long :- standing but the perwin ar evioit associated with it is of tra.rtacendent importance in the nation's history end the association consequential: or (4) A birthplace, grave or burial if it is of a historical figure of transcendent national significance and no other appropriate site. building or structure directly associated with the productive life of that person exists: or (5) A cemetery that derives its primary national significance from graves of persons of transcendent importance. or from an exceptionally distinctive design or from an exceptionally significant event or (8) A reconstructed building or eni mble of buildings of extraordinary national significxance wha.;:a accurately executed Lea suitable environment and presented in a dignified termer as part of a restoration master plan. and when no other buildings or atruciu ee with the same association have surv°iv d cr (71 A preparty primarily commcs native in intent if design. age, tredittem., ar symbolic value hale tweeted It wtth its own national historical .significance: or (8) A prmpercy achieving national significance within the past 50 years if it ix of extraordinary national importance. I 6fL5 nes:graft e* of National Matil 6e Lenemartine Potential National Historic Landmark' are identified primarily by means of theme studies and in came byes by special steadies. Nominations and recotereen detioae made by the . appeoprziaVr Stain offirdele Federal Prwervattan Officers and other inter ,s~i parties will by casnsideri Ln- tstherieling mid cundunting st zii;a . (a) Meme etndiis. NPS dew and systematically cc mete organized theme actuates whir h encrimasiza the. major aspects of American b tvry. The • them= r idies provide a cone -sal _famaesve to evalteste the relative aigitificance of historic properness and determine which properties meet Natienad Historic LandmErk t;lit ria. Theme etudici will be announced in advanc through direct notice to appropriate State officiaLs. Federal Preservation Officers and other interested parties and by nodes in the Federal Register. Within the established theoretic framework. NPS will schedule and conduct National Historic Landmark theme atudie acccord:ag to the folloveir priorities. Theme which meet more of these priorities ordinarily will be studied before those which meet fewer of the priorities: (1) Theme studies not yet begun as identified in "History and Prehistory in the National Park System." 1982. (2) Theme studies in senoue need of revision. (3) Tierra stodies which relate to a significant nurjber of properties listed in the National Register bearing opinions of State Historic Preservation Officers and Federal Preservation Officers that such properties are of potential national significance. (Only those recommendations which Ire determines are likely to meet the landmarks criteria will be enumerated in determining whether a significant number exists in a theme study.) (4) Themes which reflect the broad planning needs of NPS and other Federal agendes and for which the fund.& to conduct the study are made available from sources other than the rei3ul�y pied funds of the National Historic Landmarks Program. (b) Special Studies. NPS wi l conduct special st�rl;ps for histc. is properties outside of active theme etudes according to the following priorities: (1) Studies authorized by Congress or mandated by Executive Orrice will receive the highest priority. (2) Properties which NPS determines are endangered and potentially meet the Nathonal Historic Landmarks criteria. whether or not the theme in which they are significant has been studied. (3) Properties listed In the National Register bearing State or Federal agency recommendations of potential national - sign ficace where NPS concur i z the evaluation and the property is significant in a theme already studied. (c)(1) When a property is selected foe study to dntermino its potential far designation as a National Historic Landmark. NPS will notify in writing. except as provided below, (I) the owncs(a), (ii) the chief elected local official. (lit) the appropriate State official. (iv) th3 M, ibera of Congress. who repre nt the distrfci and State in wh..ich the property is located. and. (v) if the property is on an Indian reservation. the chief executive officer of ±3 Indian tribe. that it will he is -tidied to determine its potent+.a1 for deeigaiatian as a National Historic Landmark. This notice will provide information on the National Historic Landmarks Program, the deagn-ation process and the effects of designation. (2) When the property has more than 50 owners., PIPS will notify in writing (i) the chief-eles.ted local official, (ii) the appropriate State official. (ail the Members of Congn:13 who represent the district and State in which the property is located. and. (iv) if the property is on an Indian reservation. the chief executive officer of the Indian tribe, and (v) provide general notice to the . property oimere. Tina general notice will be published in one or more local newspapers of general circulation in the area in which the potential National Hiatoric Landmark is located and will provide information on the National Historic Landmarks Program. the designation process and the effects of designation. The researcher will visit each property selected for study unle..is it is determined that an onsite investigation is not necessary. In the case of districts with more than 50 owners NPS may conduct a public information meeting if widespread 4858 Federal Rester / Vol. 48. No. 23 / Wednesday, February 2. 1983 / Rules and Regulations public interest so wateants or een,eequeste by the chief elected 'local official. (3) Properties for which a study was conducted before the effective date of these regulations are not subject to the requirements of paragraph (c) (1) and (2) of this section. (4) The results of each study will be incorporated into a report which will contain at least (i) a precise description of the property studied; and (ii) an analysis of the significance of the property and its relationship to the National Historic Landmark criteria. (d)(1) Properties appearing to qualify for designation as National Historic Landmarks will be presented to the Advisory Board for evaluation except as specified in subsection (h) of this section. (2) Before the Advisory Board's review of a property. NPS will provide written notice of this review, except as provided below, and a copy of the study report to (i) the owner(s) of record: (ii) the appropriate State official: (iii) the chief elected local official; (iv) the Members of Congress who represent the district and State in which the property is located: and. (v) if the property is located on an Indian reservation, the chief executive officer of the Indian tribe. The list of owners shall be obtained from official land or tax record. whichever is most appropriate. within 90 days prior to the notification of intent to submit to the Advisory Board. If in any State the land or tax record is not the appropriate list an alternative source of owner's may be used NPS is responsible for notifying only those owners whose names appear on the list Where there is more than one owner on the list each separate owner" shall be notified.- . (3) In the case of a property with more than 50 owners, NPS •willeaotify, in writing. (i) the appropriate State Official: (ii) the chief elected local official; (iii) the Members of Congress who represent the district and State in which the property is located: (iv) if the property is located on an Indian reservation. the chief executive officer of the Indian tribe: and, (v) will provide general notice to the property awners. The general notice will be published in one or more local newspapers of general circulation in the area in which the property is located. A copy of the study report will be made available on request. Notice of Advisory Board review will also be.. published in the Federal Register. • (4) Notice of Advisory Board review will be given at least 80 days In advance of the Advisory Board meeting. The notice will state date. time and location of the meeting: solidi writtertomments and recommendations on the study report; provide inforinRtion on the majority re required.to make National Historic Landmarks Program, recommendation of designation. The the designation process and the effects of designation and provide the owners of private property not more than 60 days in which to concur in or object in writing to the designation. Notice of Advisory Board meetings and the agenda will also be published in the Federal Register. Interested parties are encouraged to submit written comments and recommendations which will be presented to the Advisory Board. Interested parties may also attend the Advisory Board meeting and upon request will be given an opportunity to address the Board concerning a property's significance. integrity and Board's recommendations are advisory. (2) Studies submitted to the Advisory Board (or the Consulting Committee • previously under the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service) before the effective date of these regulations need not be resubmitted to the Advisory Board. In such instances. if a property appears to qualify for designation. NPS will provide notice and a copy of the study report to the partie.i es specified in subsections (d)(2) and (3) of this section and will provide at least _ 30 days in which to submit written comments and to provide an opportunity for owners to concur in or object to the proposed boundaries. designation. (5) Upon notification. any owner of (3) The Director reviews the study private property who wishes to -object report and the Advisory Board shall submit to the ('hief, History recommendations, certifies that the Division. a notarized statement that the procedural requirements set forth in this party is the sole or partial owner of section have been met and transmits the record of the property, as appropriate. study reports. the recommendations of and objects to the designations. Such the Advisory Board. his notice shall be submitted during the.80- recommendations and any other day commenting period. Upon receipt of recommendations and comments notarized objections respecting a district received pertaining to the properties to or an individual property with multiple the Secretary. ownership it is the responsibility of NPS (f) The Secretary reviews the to ascertain whether a majority of nominations, recommendations and any owners have so objected. If an owner comments and, based on the criteria set whose name did not appear on the list forth herein. makes a decision on certifies in a written notarized statement National Historic Landmark designation. that the party is the sole or partial properties that are designated National owner of a nominated private property Historic Landmarks are entered in the such owner shall be counted by NPS in National Register of Historic pieces, if determining whether a majority of not already so listed. owners has objected. Each owner of (1) If the private owner or, with private property in a district has one act to districts ar individual vote regardless of how many properties reap or what part of one property that party properties with multiple ownership, the owns and regardless of whether the - majority of such owners have objected property contributes -to the significance to the designation by notarized statements, the Secretary shall not make a National Historic landmark designation but shall review the nomination and make a determination of its eligibility for National Historic Landmark designation. (2) The Secretary may thereafter such factors as a property's significance, designate such properties as National integrity, proposed boundaries and the Historic Landmarks only upon receipt of professional adequancy of the study. Li notarized statements from the private the Board finds that these conditions are owner (or majority of private owners in met. it may recommend to the Secretary the event of a district or a single that a property be designated or property with multiple ownership) that declared eligible for designation as s they do not object to the designation. National Historic Landmark. If one or (3) The Keeper may list in the more of the conditions are not met. the National Register properties considered Board may recommend that the property far National Historic Landmark not be designated a landmark or that - designation which do not meet the consideration of it be deferred for National-Historio Landreerk criteria but further study. as appropriate. In making which do meet•the National Register its recommendation. the Board shall criteria for evaluation in 38 CFR Part 80 state, if possible, whether ar not it finds or determine such properties eligible for that the criteria of the landmarks • the National Register if the private program have been met. A simple owners or majority of such owners in of the district (8) The commenting period following notification can be waived -only when all property owners and the chief elected local official hgve agreed in writing to the waiver. (e)(1) The Advisory Board evalntes Federal Register / VoL 48, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 2. 1983 / Rules and Regulations 4859 the case of diatrfcts object to designation. A property determined eligible for National Historic Landmark designation is determined eligible for the National Register. (g) Notice of National Historic Landmark designation. National Register listing. or a determmaticn of eligibility will be sent in the same -- manner as specified he subsections (d)(2) and (3) oithis section. For prepestfes which are determined eligible tfse Advisory Council will also be notified Notice will be published in the Federal - Rester. (b)(1) The Secretary may designate a National Historic Landhrark without Advisory Board review through accelerated procedures described in this section when necessary to assist in -the preservation of a nationally significant property endangered by a threat of imminent damage or destruction. . (2) NPS will conduct the study and prepare a reedy report aa described in subsection (c)(4) of this section. (3) If a property appear, to qualify for designation. the National Peek Service will provide notice sad a copy of the study report to the parties specified in subsections (d)(2)aasl< (3) and will allow at least 3.0 days fur the submittal of • Britten comments and to provide owners of private prvp=ty an opportunity to concur in or object to designation as provided in subsection (d)(5) of this section except that the commenting period may be less than 80 days. (4) The Director will review the study report and any comments, will certify that procedural requirements have been met. and will transmit the study report. his and any other recommendations and comments pertaining to the property to the Secretary. (5) The Secretary will review the nomination and recommendations and any cnrnmente and. based on the criteria set forth herein. make a decision on National Historic Landmark designation or a determination of eligibility for designation if the private owners or a majonty of such owners of historic districts object. (6) Notice of National Historic Landmark designation or a determination of eligibility will be sent to the same parties specified in subsections (d)(2) and (3) of this section.; § 65.6 Recognition of National Historic j Landmarks. (a) Following designation of a property by the Secretary as a National Historic Landmark, the owner(,) will receive a certificate of designation. In the case of a district. the certificate will be delivered to the chief elected local official or other local official, or to the chief Officer of a private organization involved with the preservation of the district. or the chief officer of an organization representing the owners of the district. as appropriate. (b).NPS will invite the owner of each designated National Historic Landmark to accept free of charge. a landmark plaque. In the case of a district the chief elected local official or other local official, or the chief oi$car of an organization involved in the preservation of the district. or chief officer of an organization mereseating the owners of the district. as . appropriate. may accept the plaque on behalf of the owners. A plaque will be presented to properties where the appropriate recipient(s) (from those listed above) agrees to display it publicly sad appropriately. ft) The epprveriate rectp (s) may accept the plaque at any time after designation of the National Historic Landmark. is so doiarg owneriegire up none of the rights and prtvilegrss-of • ownership or use of the landmark property nor does the Department of the Inadesignated. tacquire any interest in property (d) NPS will provide ono standard certificate and plaque for each designated National Hietosic Landmark. The certificate and plaque remain the property of NPS. Should the Natinaal Historic Landmark dNesigraiina at any time be withdrawn. in accordance with the procedures specified in f 65.9 of these rules. or ahonld tha certificate and plaque not be publicly or appropriately displayed the certificate and the plaque. if issued. will be reclaimed by NPS. (e) Upon request, and if feasible. NPS will help arrange and participate in a presentation ceremony. § 65.7 Lionttockiq National wato/in (a) NPS maintains a continuing relationship with the owners of National Historic Landmarks. Periodic visits. contacts with State Historic Preservation Officers, and other appropriate means will be used to determine whether Landmarks retain their integrity, to advise owners concerning accepted preservation standards and techniques and to update administrative retards on the propertiea. (b) Reports of monitoring activities form the basis for the annual report submitted to Congress by the Secretary of the Interior. as mandated by Section 8. National Park System General Authorities Act of 1970. as amended (90 Stat. 1940. 16 U.S.C. la-5). The Secretary's annual report will identify those National Historic Landmarks which exhibit known or anticipated damage or threats to their integrity. fit evaluating National Historic Landmarks for listing in the report. the seriousness and imminence of the damage or threat are considered. as well aa the intcwity of the landmark at the time of designation taking into account the criteria in Section 135.4. (e) Aa mandated in Section 9. Mining in the National Parka Act of 1978 (90 Stat 1342. 18 U.S.C. 1980). whenever the Secretary of the Interior finds that a National Historic Landmark may be irreparably lost or destroyed in whale or in part by any surface mining activity. including exploration for, removal or production of minerals or materials. the Secretary shall (1) notify the person conducting such activity of that finding; (2) submit a report thereon. inrind rig the. basis for his finding that such activity may cause irreparable loss or destruction of a National Historic landmark. to the Advisory Council: and (3) request from the Council advice as to alternative measures that may be taken by the United States to mitigate or abate such activity. (d) Monitoring activities described in this section. including the preparation of the mandated reports to Congress and - the Advisory Council are carried out by NPS regional office under the direction of the Preservation Assistance Division, NPS (Address: Chief. Resource Assistance Division. National Park Service. 440 G Street NW, Washington. DC 202431 in cenauitation with the History Division. NPS. § 66.3 Actors on of National Historic Lanctreerk nominee*: (a) Two justifications exist for enlarging the boundary of a National Historic Landmark Documentation of previously unrecognized significance or professional -error in the anginal designation. Enlargement of a boundary will be approved only when the area proposed for addition to the National Historic Landmark possesses or contributes directly to the characteristics for which the landmark was designated. (b) Two justifications exist for reducing the boundary of a National Historic Landmark Loss of integrity or professional error in the original designation. Reduction of a boundary will be approved only when the area to be deleted from the National Historic Landmark does not possess or has lost the characteristica for which the landmark was designated. (c) A proposal for enlargement or reduction of a National Historic Landmark boundary may be submitted 4660 Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 23 / Lti'ednesday,_Fabru 2, 1�� fRulesand Regulations to or can originate with the History Division. NPS. NPS may restudy the National Historic Landmark and subsequently make a proposal. if appropriate. in the same manner as specified is § 65.5 (c) through (h). In the ease of boundary eniargements only those owners in the newly nominated but as vet undesignated area will be notified and will be cou-led in deters lining whether a majority of private owners object to listing. (d)(1) When a boundary is proposed for a National Historic Landmark for which no specific boundary was identified at the time of designation. NPS shall provide notice. in writing, of the proposed boundary to (i) the owner(9): (ii) the appropriate State official: (iii) the chief elected local official: (ivj the Members of Congress who represent the district and State in which the iandrnark is located, aridly) if the property is located on an Indian . reservation, the chief executive officer of the Indian tribe, and shall allow not less than 30 nor more than 60 days for submitting written comments on the proposal. In the case of a landmark with more than 50 owners. the general notice specified in § 85.5(d)(3) will be used. In the case of National Historic Landmark districts for which no boundaries have been established. proposed boundaries shall be published in the Federal Register for comment and be submitted to the Committee on Eneney and Natural Resources of the United States Senate and to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs of the United States House of Representatives and not less than 30 nor more than 60 days shall be provided for the submittal of written • comments on the proposed boundaries. (2) The proposed boundary and any comments received thereon shall be submitted to the Associated Director for National Register Programs. NPS. who may approve the boundary without reference to the Advisory Board or the Secretary. (3) NPS will provide written notice of the approved boundary to the same parties specified in subsection (d)(1) of this section and by publication in the Federal Register. (4) Management of the activities described in (d)(1), (2), and (3) is handled by the National Register of Historic Places. NPS, (Address: National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service. Department of the Interior, Washington. DC 20240). (e) A technical correction to a boundary may be approved by the Chief. History Division. without Advisory Board review or Secretarial approval. NPS will provide notice, in writing. of any technical correction in a boundary to the same parties specified in (d)(1). §E5.9 Withdrawal of National Landmark designation. (a) National Historic Landmarks will be considered for withdrawal of designation only at the request of the owner or upon the initiative of the Secretary. (b) Four justifications exist for the withdrawal of National Historic Landmark designation: (1) The property has ceased to meet the criteria for designation because the qualities which caused it to be originally designated have been lost or destroyed. or such qualities were lost subsequent to nomination. but before designation; (2) Additional information shows conclusively that the property does not .. possess sufficient_ significance to meet the National Historic Landmark criteria; (3) Professional error in the designation; and (4) Prejudicial procedural error in the designation process. (c) Properties designated as National Historic Landmarks before December 13, 1980. can be dedesignated only on the grounds established in subsection (b)(1) of this section. (d) The owner may appeal to have a property dedesignated by submitting a request for dedesignation and stating the grounds for the appeal as established in subsection (a) to the Chief. History Division. National Park Service, Department of the Interior. Washington. DC 20240. An appellant will receive a response within 60 days as to whether NPS considers the documentation sufficient to initiate a restudy of the landmark. (e) The Secretary may initiate a restudy of a National Historic Landmark and subsequently a proposal for withdrawal of the landmark designation as appropriate in the same manner as a new designation as specified in § 65.5 (c) through (h). Proposals will not be submitted to the Advisory Board if the grounds for removal are procedural. although the Board will be informed of such proposals. (f)(1) The property will remain listed in the National Register if the Keeper determines that it meets the National Register criteria for evalution in 36 CFR 60.4. except if the property is ,dedesignated on procedural grounds. (2) Any property from which designation is withdrawn because of a procedural error in the designation process shall automatically be considered eligible for inclusion in the National Register as a National Historic Landmark without further action and will be published as such in the Federal Register. (g)(1) The National Park Service will provide written notice of the withdrawal of a National Historic Landmark designation and the status of the National Register listing. and a copy cf the report on which those actions are based to (i) the owner(s); (ii) the appropriate State official: (iii) the chief elected local official; (iv) tho. Members of Congress who represent the dis': cl and State in which the landmark is located; and (v) if the landmark is located on an Indian reservation, the chief executive officer of the Indian tribe. in the case of a landmark with more than 50 owners. the general nc,-;re specified in § 65.5(d)(3) will Le used. (2) Notice of withdrawal of designation and related National Register listing and determinations of eligibility will be published periodically in the Federal Register. (h) Upon withdrawal of a National Historic Landmark designation. NPS will reclaim the certificate and plaque. if any, issued for that landmark. (i) An owner shall not be considered as having exhausted administrative remedies with respect to dedesignation of a National Historic Landmark until after submitting an appeal and receiving a response from NPS in accord with these procedures. 465.10 Appeals for designation. (a) Any applicant seeking to have a property designated a National Historic Landmark may appeal. stating the grounds for appeal. directly to the Director, National Park Service. Department of the Interior. Washington. DC 20240, under the following circumstances. Where the applicant— (1) Disagrees with the initial decision of NPS that the property is not likely to meet the criteria of the National Histur;c Landmarks Program and will not be submitted to the Advisory Board: or (2) Disagrees with the decision of the Secretary that the property does not meet the cr.tena of the National Historic Landmarks Program. (5) The Director will respond to the appellant within 60 days. After reviewing the appeal the Director may. (1) deny the appeal: (2) direct that a National Historic Landmark nomination be prepared and processed according to the regulations if this has not yet occurred; or (3) resubmit the nomination to the Secretary for reconsideration and final decision. (c) Any person or organization which supports or opposes the consideration of a property for National Historic Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 2. 1983 / Rules and Regulations 4881 Landmark designation may submit an appeal to the Director. NPS, during the designation process either supporting or opposing the designation. Such appeals received by the Director before the study of the property or before its submission to the National Park System Advisory Board will be considered by the Director. the Advisory Board and the Secretary. as appropriate. in the designation process. (d) No person shall be considered to have exhausted administrative remedies with respect to failure to designate a property a National Historic Landmark until he or she has complied with the procedures set forth in this section, [PR Doc a-V4 P[l..d 7-1-. ebs.si *Wei COON a »-n ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT! • AGENCY - 40 CFR Part 123 (SW-2-FRL 2296-61 Flazerdous Waste Yartagernent Pregranr, Phase! lntorim Authorization AGSPICY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region IL AC77OC Granting of phase I interim authorization to State hazardous wastes program. suaRav: The State of New Jersey has applied for Interim Authorization of its hazardous waste program under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and, Recovery Act (RCRA) of 19784 as amended. and EPA guidelines for the approval of State hazardous waste programs (40 CFR Part 123. Subpart F). EPA has reviewed New Jersey's hazardous waste program and has determined that the program is substantially equivalent to the Federal program.. EPA is hereby granting Phase 1 interim Authorization to New Jersey to operate a hazardous waste program in lieu of Phase I of the Federal hazardous waste program in its juriadiction. EFFRCTTva DATA February 2, 1983. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION C0NfTACT: Deborah Craig. Solid Waste Branch. Air and Waste Management Division. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Region IL 28 Federal Plaza, New York. New York 10278, 212/284-5188. suPPL EMIDiTARY ItiFORMAT1Olt L Background Subtitle C of RCRA. requires EPA to establish a comprehensive Federal program to assure the safe management of hazardous waste. Once a Federal program is established. EPA is authorized under Section 3006 of RCRA to approve State hazardous waste programs to operate in lieu of the Federal program in their jurisdiction. Two types of State programs approvals are authorized under RCRA: "Final Authorization" is a permanent approval - which -may be granted to States whose programs are "equivalent" to and "consistent" with the Federal program and provide adequate enforcement "Interim Authorization" is a temporary approval for States which might not - meet the requirements of Final Authorization but whose programs are at least "substantially equivalent" to the Federal program. RCRA contemplates that States receiving -Interim Authorization will use the Interim Authorization period to make the changes in their regulations and statutes necessary to qualify for Final Authorization. On May 19. 1980, EPA published the first phase of the Federal hazardous waste program regulations (40 CFR Parts .280-283 and 285) including guidelines for authorizing State hazardous waste program under Section 3008 (40 CFR Part 1231. These guidelines set forth the requirements for Interim Authorization and the procedures which EPA will follow in acting on State applicatlona for Interim Authorization. They also provide that EPA will grant Interim Authorization in two major phases (Phase I and Phase II); corresponding to the two major phases of the Federal program On January 11. 1982. the State of New Jersey submitted to EPA its complete application for Phase I Interim Authorization (lA application). In the February 11, 1982 Federal Register (47 FR 8298). EPA announced the availability for public -review of the New Jersey application. EPA also indicated that a public hearing would be held on March 24. 1982. with the public record open until March 31, 1982. At the public hearing. the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) made available copies of draft amendments to its hazardous waste regulations which were subsequently proposed in the October 18. 1982 State Register. These and other amendments were initially requested by EPA when it commented on an earlier draft version of the State's IA application. On May 10. 1982, DEP requested that EPA delay making a final determination on the State's IA application until after the State had an opportunity to solicit public comment on the regulatory amendments requested by EPA. EPA granted DEP. request. Presented below in Section II of this notice Is a synopsis of the public comments on the State's IA application and EPA's responses. After detailed review of the final New Jersey IA application. EPA transmitted comments to DEP on June 1. 1982. These - comments requested additions and revision to the Program Description. Attorney General's Statement. Memorandum of Agreement and Authorization Plan portions of the IA application, including the State's hazardous waste regulations. On December 17. 1982. the State submitted amendments to the above mentioned portions of the IA application. The major issue raised by EPA concerned the confidentiality of information obtained by inspection. New jersey law may restrict the State's ability to use confidential information collected during inspections in enforcement proceedings or in court. and to share such information with EPA. DEP satisfied this area of concern by amending the Attorney General's Statement so as to commit the State to rely upon RCRA Section 3007(a) to support ita inspection authority..As a result of such reliance on Section 3007(a), Section 3007(b) of RCRA would govern the use of information gained through inspections. Thus, there would be no unacceptable restrictions upon the use of information obtained through inspections: The minor comments in EPA's June 1, 1982 letter were also addressed by DEP in its December 17, 1982 submission. The following summarizes the moat significant of these comments and the State's response& (1) A Deputy Attorney General signed the Attorney General's Statement in lieu of the Attorney General. Under 40 CFR 123.125, this certification must be made by the Attorney General Ina letter dated August 18, 1982, the Assistant Attorney General demonstrated that the Deputy had the authority to perform this duty for the Attorney General (2) New Jersey's statutory definition of "solid waste" excludes from regulation. industrial sewage treated at publicly - owned treatment works (POTWs) devoted exclusively to the treatment of industrial wastes. This exclusion is not provided for under the RCRA definition. DEP satisified this area of concern by amending the Program Description to include a demonstration that no existing POTWs in the State treated exclusively industrial wastes. Therefore, the statutory exemption could not be utilized by any existing POTWs. (3) Pursuant to 40 CFR 123.127, the State must identify those statutory and regulatory changes needed to make the State program equivalent to the Federal