|
<br />Federal Register / Vol. 48, No. j9(] / Thursday, September 29, 19113 / Notices
<br />
<br />44723
<br />
<br />the defined identification goaL the
<br />historic context(s); then the goals are
<br />adjusted accordingly. In addition, the
<br />historic context narr<1tive. the definition
<br />of properly types and the planning goals
<br />fur evaluation and treatment are all
<br />adjusted as nccessllry to accommodate
<br />the new data.
<br />
<br />Reporting JdentJfication Results'
<br />Reporting of the results of
<br />identification activities should begin
<br />with the statement of obfectives
<br />prepared before undertaking the survey.
<br />The report should respond to each of the
<br />major points documenting:
<br />1. Objectives;
<br />2. Area researched or surveyed:
<br />3. Research design or statement of
<br />objectives:
<br />4. Methods used, including the
<br />intensity of coverage. If the methods
<br />differ from those outlined in the
<br />statement of objectives, the reasons
<br />should be explained.
<br />5. Results: how the results met the
<br />objectives; result analysis. implications
<br />and recomrnedations: where the
<br />compiled information is located,
<br />A summary of the survey results
<br />should be available for examination and
<br />distribution. Identified properties should
<br />then be evuluated for possible inclusion
<br />in appropriate inventories,
<br />Protection of information about
<br />archeological $itcs or other properties
<br />that may be threatened by
<br />dissemination of that information is
<br />nece~sary. These may include frngile
<br />archeological properties or properties
<br />such as religious sites. structures. or
<br />oujects, whose cultural value would be
<br />compromised by public knowledge of
<br />the property's location.
<br />Recommended Sources of Technical
<br />Information
<br />The Archeolog..JcaJ Survey: Methods and
<br />Uses. Thomas F. King. Interagency
<br />Archeological ServicelJ, U,S. Department of
<br />the Interior, 197ft Washington, D,C. Available
<br />throu~h the ~t1perintendenl of Documents,
<br />U.s. Government Printing Office,
<br />Washmglon. D.C. 20402.. GPO slock number
<br />024-{J1!}-(X)()91. Written primarily for the non.
<br />archeologist. this publication presents
<br />methods and objectives [or archeological
<br />sur....eys.
<br />CIlI/ural ResulIrces Evalua/ion of the
<br />Northern Culf of Mexico ContineJ/tal Shelf
<br />National Park Service, U.S. Department of the
<br />Interior. 1977.
<br />Guidelines for Lacal SlIryeys: A BO!Ji!J for
<br />Preservotion PJanning. Anne Derry, H. Ward
<br />Jandt. Carol Shul! and Jan Thorman. N.ationa1
<br />Re!':ister Uivis~n. V.s.. GeparttlJent of the
<br />Interior. 1978. Washin!':ton. D.C. Available
<br />lhrou~h the Supef'intendenl of Documents.
<br />U.S. Government Printing Office.
<br />WHshinJ.\ton. U.c. Zu4Q2. GPO stock number
<br />024-(111)-.{)()a9--7. Ccncrnl guidllru.:e about
<br />
<br />designing and carrying out corrununily
<br />surveys.
<br />The Process of Field Research: Final
<br />Report on tlu' Blue Rir~~e Parkway F()lklirl~
<br />Pm/I'd. Aml'ric!ln Folklif~ Cl'nter.l~lll1.
<br />Regionul .':;ampIi1l8 ill Archeology. David
<br />Hurst Thomas, University of California.
<br />Archl~()l()!<icHI Survey Annull~ Report. lUilu.-9,
<br />11:117-100.
<br />Remote Sensing: A Handbook for
<br />Archeologists and Cultural Resource
<br />Managers. Thomas R. Lyona and Thomas
<br />Eugene Avery. Cultural Resource
<br />Mflnagemcnl Division. National Park Service,
<br />U.S. Department of the Interior. 1977.
<br />Remote Sensing and Noo-Destructive
<br />Archeology. .nlOmas R. Lyons and James L.
<br />Ebert. editors. Remote. Scnlling Division,
<br />Southwest Cultural Resources Center,
<br />National Park Service. U.S. Department of thli:!
<br />Interior and University of New Mexico. HU8.
<br />Remote Sensing Experiments in Cultural
<br />Resource Studies: Non-Deslmctive Methods
<br />of Archeological Exploration, Survey aIld
<br />Anaiysis. Thomas R. Lyons. assembler.
<br />reports of the Chaco Center, Number One.
<br />National Park Service. U.S. Department of the
<br />Interior nnd University of New Mexico. 197ft
<br />Sampling in Archeology. Jame~ W. Mueller,
<br />editor. University of Arizona Press, 1975.
<br />Tucson. Arizona.
<br />Scholars as Contractors. Willi!2m J. Mayer-
<br />Oakes and Alice W. Portnoy, editorB.
<br />Cultuml Resource Management StudieB. U.s..
<br />Dep:utment of the Interior. 1979.
<br />SerlifT){-,flfary .'-;fl!(!ips of Pn!historic
<br />Arr:heological Sites. Sherwood Cagliano,
<br />Chur]e~ Pearson, Richard Weinstein. Diana
<br />Wiseman, and Christopher McClendon.
<br />Division of Slllte Plans Iind Crunts. Nutiooal
<br />Park Service. U.S. Department of thp. Interior,
<br />1982. Wushinglon. D.C. Available from
<br />COliS tal Environrnelils Inc.. IZHO M,lin Strtct.
<br />BHtun Ruu,l\c, Louisiana 7tH30L Eslllblis.ht~8
<br />and evaluRtes a method for employing
<br />sedimentological analysis in distinguishiog
<br />site Areas from non-site areas when
<br />id-enlifyinH submerged archeological sites on
<br />the continental shelf.
<br />Stute Survey Farms. Available [rom
<br />Interagency Resoorce Management Division,.
<br />National Park Service. Depa-rtmenl of the
<br />Interior. Washington, D,C. 20240.
<br />Ch<lri:lclprizes cultural resource survey
<br />documentation methods in State Historic
<br />Preservation Offices.
<br />Truss Brid,i?e l);pes: A Gw'de to Dating and
<br />IdenlJfying. Donuld C. Jackson and T. Allan
<br />Comp. American Asaociation for State and
<br />Local Historv, 1977. Naahville, Tennessee.
<br />Technicfllle~nel #95. Available from
<br />AASLH. 708 Berry Road, Nashville.
<br />Tennessee 37204. Information about
<br />performins surveys of historic bridge5 and
<br />identifying the types of properties
<br />encollntered.
<br />
<br />Secretary of the lntcrior's Standards for
<br />Evaluation
<br />
<br />EVHluation i~ the process of
<br />determining whether identified
<br />properticiI meet defined criteria of
<br />significHncc and therefore should be
<br />incllld{'d in un invlOnlory of hilltoric
<br />pmpcrties dl~tcmlineJ to meet the
<br />
<br />criterin. The criteria employed vary
<br />depending on the inventory's use in
<br />resource management.
<br />
<br />Stwu!(Jrd l. EV(J!uation of the
<br />Significan'ce of Historic Properties Uses
<br />Estahlished Criteria
<br />
<br />The evaluation of historic properties
<br />employs criteria to determine which
<br />properties are significant. Criteria
<br />should lherefore focus on historical.
<br />architectural, archeological. engineering
<br />and cultural values, rather than on
<br />treatments. A statement of the minimum
<br />information necessary to evaluate
<br />properties against the criteria should be
<br />provided to direct information gathering
<br />activities.
<br />Because the National Register of
<br />Historic Places is a major focus of
<br />preservation activities on the Federal.
<br />State and local levels, the National
<br />Register criteria have been widely
<br />adopted not only as required for Federal
<br />purposes, but for State and local
<br />inventories as" well. The N9.tional
<br />Historic Landmark criteria and other
<br />criteria used for inclusion of properties
<br />in State historic site files are other
<br />examples of criteria with different
<br />management purpo.'les.
<br />
<br />5'tandard II. EvaluatiuII of SigIllficance
<br />Applies the Criteria Within Historic
<br />Contexts
<br />
<br />Properties are evaluated using a
<br />historic context thal jdt~nllfic~l the
<br />significant pattern:'! that properties
<br />r~present and defines expected properly
<br />types against which individual
<br />properties may be compared, Within
<br />this campara tive framework. the criteria
<br />for evaluation take on particular
<br />meaning with regard to individual
<br />properties.
<br />
<br />Standard II!. Evaluation Reiwlts in iJ,
<br />List or Inventory of Significant
<br />Properties That Is Consulted In
<br />Assigning Registration and TreatmeJrt
<br />Priorities
<br />
<br />The evaluation process and the
<br />subsequent development of an inventOr}
<br />of significant properties is an on-going
<br />activity, Evaluution of the significance
<br />of a property should be completed
<br />before registration is considered and
<br />before preservu.tion treutmentll are
<br />selected. The inventory entries should
<br />contain fmfficient info.rmation for
<br />subsequent activities iUch aa
<br />registratioD or treatment of prop-erties.,
<br />including an evaluation atatement that
<br />makes clear the siRnificance of the
<br />property within one or more hiBtonc
<br />contexts,
<br />
<br />_ -.d.~~".";'
<br />
|