Texas Register, Volume 37, Number 35, Pages 6819-7008, August 31, 2012 Page: 6,872
6819-7008 p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
(10) Commission staff will write the marker inscription.
One review copy will be provided via email to the CHC contact only
for local distribution as needed. Inscription review is for accuracy of
content only; the commission determines the content, wording, punc-
tuation, phrasing, etc.
(A) Upon approval of the inscription, the CHC contact
provides additional copies as necessary for committee, commission, or
sponsor review and conveys a single response to the commission.
(B) Upon receipt of emailed approval by the CHC, the
commission proceeds with the order.
(C) If changes recommended by the CHC are approved
by the commission, staff will send a revised copy for content review.
Because inscription reviews are for content only, only two reviews
should be necessary to complete this step of the process. Additional re-
quests for revisions are subject to approval by the commission, which
will be the sole determiner of warranted requests for changes. Exces-
sive requests for change, or delays in response, may, in the determina-
tion of the commission, result in cancellation of the order.
(D) Only the authorized CHC contact - chair or marker
chair - can make the final approval of inscriptions at the county level.
Final approval will be construed by the commission to mean concur-
rence by any interested parties, including the sponsor.
(11) After final approval, the order is sent to marker sup-
plier for manufacturing. Subject to the terms of the commission vendor
contract, only authorized commission staff may contact the manufac-
turer relative to any aspect of Official Texas Historical Markers, includ-
ing those in process or previously approved.
(12) Commission staff reviews galley proofs of markers.
With commission approval, manufacturing process proceeds. Manu-
facturer inspects, crates and ships completed markers and notifies com-
mission, which in turn notifies CHC contact.
(13) With shipment notice, planning can begin on marker
dedication ceremony, as needed, in conjunction with CHC, sponsors
and other interested parties.
(14) Information on planning and conducting marker cere-
monies is provided by the commission through its web site.
(15) Once the planning is complete, the CHC posts the in-
formation to the commission web site calendar.
(16) Commission staff enters marker information into the
Texas Historic Sites Atlas at website atlas.thc.state.tx.us, an online in-
ventory of marker information and inscriptions.
(d) Application content.
(1) Each marker application must address the criteria spec-
ified in 21.9 of this chapter in sufficient detail to allow the commission
to judge the merit of the application.
(2) Documentation. Each marker application must contain
sufficient documentation to verify the assertions about the above cri-
teria. If the claims in the application cannot be verified through docu-
mentation, the application will be rejected.
(e) Limitation of markers awarded.
(1) The commission will set a numerical limit on the num-
ber of markers that will be approved annually.
(2) No markers in excess of the limit may be approved ex-
cept by vote of the commission to amend the limit.
21.9. Application Evaluation Procedures.(a) The commission adopts the following criteria governing
evaluation for approval or rejection of applications for Official Texas
Historical Markers, Recorded Texas Historic Landmarks (RTHLs), or
Historic Texas Cemetery designations.
(1) Age: Structures eligible for the RTHL designation and
marker must be at least 50 years old. Older structures may be awarded
additional weight.
(2) Historical significance/Architectural Significance: Ar-
chitectural significance alone is not enough to qualify a structure for the
RTHL designation. It must have an equally significant historical asso-
ciation, and that association can come from an event that occurred at
the site; through individuals who owned or lived on the property; or, in
the case of bridges, industrial plants, schoolhouses and other non-resi-
dential properties, through documented significance to the larger com-
munity.
[(-3)] [Architectural significanee-] Structures deemed
architecturally significant are outstanding examples of architectural
history through design, materials, structural type or construction
methods. In all cases, eligible architectural properties must display
integrity; that is, the structure should be in a good state of repair,
maintain its appearance from its period of significance and be consid-
ered an exemplary model of preservation. Architectural significance
is often best determined by the relevance of the property to broader
contexts, including geography. Any changes over the years should be
compatible with original design and reflect compliance with accepted
preservation practices, e.g., the Secretary of the Interior's Standards
for Rehabilitation.
(3) [(4)] State of repair/Integrity: Structures not consid-
ered by the commission to be in a good state of repair are not eligible
[ineligible] for RTHL designation. The commission reserves the sole
right to make that determination relative to eligibility for RTHL mark-
ers. Subject marker topics placed at the appropriate site (site integrity)
or topics that are documented and understood by the public maintain a
high degree of integrity.
(4) [(-5)] Diversity of topic for addressing gaps in histori-
cal marker program. This criterion addresses the extent to which topic
relates to an aspect or area of Texas history that has not been well rep-
resented by the marker program.
(5) [(6)] Value of topic as an undertold or untold aspect
of Texas history. This criterion addresses the extent to which topic
addresses undertold facets of Texas history and increases the diversity
of history and cultures interpreted through the marker program.
(6) [(-7)] Endangerment level of property, site or topic. This
criterion addresses the extent to which the property (RTHLs), site or
story is in danger of being lost if its history and significance are not
addressed through the marker program.
(7) [(8)] Available documentation and resources [CHG
support and existing documentation]. This [this] criterion addresses
[the exten to which the 4 has shown strong support and partn rship.
in developingth the pie and] the quality and balance of the research
and documentation for the application.
(8) [(-9)] Diversity among this group of candidates. This
criterion addresses the extent to which this topic represents an under-
told story of Texas history among the applications received during that
year's marker cycle.
(9) [(4O)] Relevance to other commission programs. This
criterion addresses the extent to which the topic coordinates with other
significant programs and initiatives of the agency.37 TexReg 6872 August 31, 2012 Texas Register
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
Texas. Secretary of State. Texas Register, Volume 37, Number 35, Pages 6819-7008, August 31, 2012, periodical, August 31, 2012; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth253227/m1/54/?rotate=90: accessed April 26, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.