Heritage Conservation Editing and Proofreading Services

Evidence is what a federal standard asks for before a missing feature goes back on a historic building, and two programs ask in different words. Certification of a rehabilitation for federal tax purposes runs under 36 CFR 67.7(b)(6), which accepts "documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence."¹ A grant-assisted project planned and supervised by the National Park Service and state preservation officers runs under 36 CFR 68.3(b)(6), which calls for "documentary and physical evidence."² A report that satisfies one may not satisfy the other.

The two rehabilitation standards are not worded alike

The Standards for Rehabilitation at 36 CFR 67.7(b) apply to projects seeking certification for federal tax purposes.¹ The Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties at 36 CFR part 68 are used by the National Park Service and by state historic preservation officers in planning, undertaking, and supervising grant-assisted projects.² Each part carries a rehabilitation list of ten numbered standards, and the two lists are close in substance.

They are not close in wording. Part 67 casts each of its ten standards with the word shall.¹ Part 68 casts each of the ten standards in its own rehabilitation list with the word will.² The evidence phrase recurs across part 68, unchanged in the restoration standard at 68.3(c)(7) and in the threshold for reconstruction at 68.3(d)(1), and with or in place of and at 68.3(d)(4).² Three formulations of one requirement run through the two parts, and a writer moving between the parts can carry the wrong formulation across.

Which contents list applies depends on which finding is made

Review under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act has a documentation rule of its own, written as several separate lists. The general test appears at 36 CFR 800.11(a), where the agency official ensures that a determination, finding, or agreement is "supported by sufficient documentation to enable any reviewing parties to understand its basis."³ The paragraphs that follow say what each finding must contain. A finding of no historic properties affected takes three items under 800.11(d).³ A finding of no adverse effect or adverse effect takes six under 800.11(e), and a request for Council comment without a memorandum of agreement takes four under 800.11(g).³

The three lists are not versions of one another. Both 800.11(d) and 800.11(e) open with a description of the undertaking and its area of potential effects, then call for the steps taken to identify historic properties.³ Paragraph (e) adds four items that paragraph (d) does not carry.³ Two of them are a description of the characteristics that qualify the affected properties for the National Register, and an explanation of why the adverse effect criteria were found applicable or inapplicable.³ Paragraph (g) repeats neither of them. It asks instead for alternatives proposed, alternatives considered and rejected with reasons, views submitted, and substantive revisions or additions to documentation already provided to the Council.³

The section 106 criteria name part 68

The criteria of adverse effect at 36 CFR 800.5(a)(1) turn on whether the undertaking would diminish the integrity of a property's "location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association."⁴ The section then gives seven examples of adverse effects at 800.5(a)(2).⁴

The second of those seven examples names the other part. Alteration of a property counts as an adverse effect when it "is not consistent with the Secretary's standards for the treatment of historic properties (36 CFR part 68) and applicable guidelines."⁴ A finding of no adverse effect may rest on conditions, including later review of rehabilitation plans for consistency with those same standards.⁴

The certification application counts its own items

An owner whose property sits inside a registered historic district, and who asks the Secretary whether it contributes to that district, completes part 1 of the Historic Preservation Certification Application.⁵ Section 67.4(c) lists eight kinds of documentation, and the paragraph reaches a preliminary determination request under 67.3(a)(4) on the same terms.⁵ Part 2 covers the rehabilitation itself, and the regulation is explicit about sequence, stating that owners "are strongly encouraged to submit part 2 of the application prior to undertaking any rehabilitation work."⁶

Supporting documentation appears again elsewhere in part 67. Where structural members must be dismantled and rebuilt, part 67 attaches three conditions to certifying that work.¹ The first is that "the necessity for dismantling is justified in supporting documentation," and the other two concern retained architectural features and retained historic materials.¹ Prior approval of a project by other agencies and organizations does not ensure certification by the Secretary, and the Standards for Rehabilitation "take precedence over other regulations and codes."¹

Where an editor's reading stops

Whether a feature is significant, whether an alteration diminishes integrity, and whether a treatment suits a particular building are determinations for the preservation professionals and the reviewing office. We hold no view on any of them. Client documents are confidential from the moment they arrive.

Our reading covers the text and its citations. A rehabilitation report that quotes part 68 while the application seeks certification under part 67 has drawn on the wrong standard, and the two texts differ on comparison. Where a finding names four of the six items its paragraph requires, the two absent items show as gaps in the document. Where an integrity argument answers five of the seven aspects listed at 800.5(a)(1), two of the seven have gone unanswered.