36 C.F.R. § 60.4

Criteria for evaluation

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The criteria applied to evaluate properties (other than areas of the National Park System and National Historic Landmarks) for the National Register are listed below. These criteria are worded in a manner to provide for a wide diversity of resources. The following criteria shall be used in evaluating properties for nomination to the National Register, by NPS in reviewing nominations, and for evaluating National Register eligibility of properties. Guidance in applying the criteria is further discussed in the “How To” publications, Standards & Guidelines sheets and Keeper's opinions of the National Register. Such materials are available upon request.

National Register criteria for evaluation. The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and

(a) that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or

(b) that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or

(c) that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or

(d) that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Criteria considerations. Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, or graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Register. However, such properties will qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria of if they fall within the following categories:

(a) A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance; or

(b) A building or structure removed from its original location but which is significant primarily for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event; or

(c) A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building directly associated with his productive life.

(d) A cemetery which derives its primary significance from graves of persons of transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or from association with historic events; or

(e) A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived; or

(f) A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance; or

(g) A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance.

This exception is described further in NPS “How To” #2, entitled “How to Evaluate and Nominate Potential National Register Properties That Have Achieved Significance Within the Last 50 Years” which is available from the National Register of Historic Places Division, National Park Service, United States Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 35 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1985–2025 · leading case: Rayellen Res., Inc. v. N.M. Cultural Props. Review Comm., 2014 NMSC 6 (N.M. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Rayellen Res., Inc. v. N.M. Cultural Props. Review Comm., 2014 NMSC 6 (N.M. 2014). · cites it 4× “See 36 C.F.R. § 60.4 (2008) (providing the four “National Register criteria,” each of which qualifies a site for National Register listing).”

Pres. Coalition of Erie Cnty. v. Fed. Transit Admin., 129 F. Supp. 2d 551 (W.D.N.Y. 2000). · cites it 6× “” 36 C.F.R. § 60.4 . “Districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects that possess integrity of location, design, material, workmanship feeling and association” can be considered for inclusion in the National Register if they are “significant in American history.”

Montana Wilderness Ass'n v. Gene Terland, 725 F.3d 988 (9th Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “CONNELL 35 on the National Register based on criteria in 36 C.F.R. § 60.4 ; assess the effects of the undertaking on any eligible historic properties found, 36 C.”

Nat'l Mining Ass'n v. Slater, 167 F. Supp. 2d 265 (D.D.C. 2001). · cites it 3× “1 (a), and they describe the process for determining the eligibility of identified properties, 36 C.F.R. §§ 60.4 , 63.2-63.3, and for reviewing and nominating eligible properties for publication in the National Register.”

State Ex Rel. Fort Snelling State Park Ass'n v. Minneapolis Park & Rec. Bd., 673 N.W.2d 169 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “10 (a) (current version at 36 C.F.R. § 60.4 (2003))). Additionally, a historical site typically would also be characterized by one of the following: (1) be associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or (2) be associated…”

Montana Wilderness Ass'n v. Fry, 310 F. Supp. 2d 1127 (D. Mont. 2004). “4 (b); determine whether identified properties are eligible for listing on the National Register based on criteria in 36 C.F.R. § 60.4 ; assess the effects of an “undertaking” on any eligible historic properties found, 36 C.”

Safeguarding Historic Hanscom Area's Irreplaceable Resources, Inc. v. Fed. Aviation Admin., 651 F.3d 202 (1st Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “See 36 C.F.R. § 60.4 (a), (b). In light of this determination, the Commission asked Mass-port to study the hangar’s condition and to consider alternative uses, including possible rehabilitation for occupancy by the Massachusetts Air and Space Museum.”

Lincoln Place Tenants Ass'n v. City of Los Angeles, 31 Cal. Rptr. 3d 353 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “2 All three sets of criteria focus on whether the property is associated with a significant historical event, is associated with the life of an important historical personage, exemplifies a distinctive type, period or method of construction or represents the work of a master…”

Deep Sea Rsch., Inc. v. Brother Jonathan, 883 F. Supp. 1343 (N.D. Cal. 1995). · cites it 2× “Once a request for a determination of historical significance has been made, the Secretary of the Interior will determine whether the particular shipwreck meets the criteria for eligibility set forth in 36 C.F.R. § 60.4 . Id. In this case, the State has never requested that the…”

Battle Mountain Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of W. Shoshone Indians v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt. (In re in Res., LLC), 302 F. Supp. 3d 1226 (D. Nev. 2018). · cites it 4× “1, Section D(3) (stating that "[t]he BLM, in consultation with the SHPO, Tribal Governments, and other Consulting Parties shall evaluate all Cultural Resources (including TCPs) identified within the applicable APEs for Eligibility to the [National Register] (utilizing criteria…”

Friends v. Columbia River (s055915), 212 P.3d 1243 (Or. 2009). “"The criteria for evaluating the eligibility of cultural resources for the National Register of Historic Places appear in the `National Register Criteria for Evaluation' (36 C.F.R. 60.4). Cultural resources are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places if they…”

Sierra Club v. Hodel, 675 F. Supp. 594 (D. Utah 1987). “They found nine of these to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under 36 C.F.R. § 60.4 , and felt that most of these sites will be adversely affected by the proposed construction.”

Show all 35 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.