Executive Order 11593: Protection and enhancement of the cultural environment
Summary
Richard Nixon signed Executive Order 11593 on May 13, 1971 to make federal agencies active stewards of historic and cultural properties. It required identification and nomination of qualifying federal properties and precautions against destroying historic resources before their significance had been evaluated. It also assigned the Interior Department a coordinating and technical role. The order connects property management to preservation; it does not mean every old federal building must remain unchanged or that historic significance is decided by age alone.
Status: In effect. Yes. EO 11593's federal cultural-property stewardship framework remains unrevoked in the reviewed disposition record and is still identified in current federal preservation materials. Its original 1972–1973 reporting and inventory dates are historical; current agency duties must also be read with the National Historic Preservation Act and implementing rules.
Key facts at a glance
| Signed | May 13, 1971 |
|---|---|
| President | Richard Nixon |
| Federal Register | 36 FR 8921; published May 15, 1971 |
| Current label | In effect |
| Amended by | No amendment listed in the reviewed disposition; see later-law qualifications below |
| Related orders | EO 13006, EO 13022 |
| Checked | October 25, 2026 |
What it requires today
Section 1 directs agencies to manage cultural properties in a spirit of stewardship and to align policies and programs with preservation of historically, architecturally or archaeologically significant places and objects. Agencies must also consult the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation about procedures affecting nonfederal historic resources. The policy therefore concerns both the government's own estate and the effects of federal plans and programs beyond that estate.
The original inventory assignment required agencies, with Interior's advice and state liaison cooperation, to locate, inventory and nominate qualifying sites, buildings, districts and objects under their jurisdiction or control by July 1, 1973. Pending evaluation, agencies were to avoid inadvertent transfer, sale, demolition or substantial alteration of potentially eligible property. Where significance was uncertain, the agency could obtain Interior's opinion and reconsider the proposal in light of preservation policy before the specified consultation steps.
Section 2 also addresses recording historic property before substantial alteration or demolition resulting from federal action or assistance. Drawings, photographs and maps were to be deposited through the Historic American Buildings Survey or Historic American Engineering Record for future use. Documentation is a preservation measure, not a universal substitute for the separate legal review of whether an action should proceed. The order also calls for maintenance standards and cooperation with transferees on viable compatible uses.
Who it affects
Federal property managers, planning and assistance agencies, Interior, preservation specialists and the Advisory Council have direct roles. State and territorial preservation officials participate through the consultation and nomination arrangements. Communities, purchasers and users of affected property can encounter the consequences through project review and conveyance conditions. National Register eligibility, listing, federal ownership and a particular project's review obligations are related but distinct questions; no single label on a property automatically answers all four.
How it came about
EO 11593 followed the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and NEPA's adoption, using presidential direction to strengthen federal implementation. The 1971 order sought affirmative identification of resources rather than waiting until a proposed disposal or demolition exposed an information gap. Its early deadlines reflected that initial inventory and procedure-building task. Later preservation statutes and regulations developed the system further, so an account focused exclusively on the 1973 deadline would miss the continuing stewardship setting.
What agencies did under it
The National Park Service's current preservation-law materials identify the executive order alongside the governing statutes. Historic American Buildings Survey and Historic American Engineering Record documentation are concrete examples of the recordkeeping functions described in section 2(c). A photograph or drawing in one of these collections documents a resource; it is not by itself evidence that every required consultation occurred before a particular project.
Current historic-preservation review also rests on the National Historic Preservation Act, now principally codified in title 54, and the Advisory Council's regulations in 36 CFR part 800. Those rules implement the statutory review process for federal undertakings and historic properties. They should be read as their own legal authority rather than presented as if every procedural detail had been written into the 1971 executive order.
Interior's responsibilities under EO 11593 include developing evaluation and nomination criteria, providing technical advice, reviewing agency procedures and encouraging information exchange with state preservation officials. Agencies retain responsibility for their own proposed actions and property management. The allocation makes preservation an administrative process with specialist support; it does not transfer ownership of all federal historic properties to Interior or make the Advisory Council the operating manager of every site.
Implementation records: NPS: preservation laws and executive orders; Advisory Council: protection of historic properties regulations; NPS: Heritage Documentation Programs.
Amendments and family tree
The reviewed Federal Register disposition points to EOs 13006 and 13022 as related later instruments but does not identify them as whole-order revocations of EO 11593. Later property, community-preservation and planning policies can interact with it without extinguishing the earlier stewardship direction. Its relationship to the National Historic Preservation Act is especially important: legislation and implementing regulations supply current duties that cannot be evaluated solely by asking whether a later president used the same preservation terminology.
Court cases
No court ruling specifically on EO 11593 was identified in the official order, disposition and agency sources reviewed as of October 25, 2026. A preservation case would need the particular undertaking, property, statutory review requirement and operative relief. Documentation of a historic building is not itself evidence of a judgment authorizing demolition. The order, current preservation rules and the project record have separate roles in that analysis.
Common questions
Did the July 1973 inventory deadline make the order expire?
The deadline concerned the initial inventory and nomination assignment. It was not an overall sunset for the order's stewardship policy. Present responsibilities also depend on later preservation legislation and regulations, which must be examined for a current project.
Does every old federal building qualify for the National Register?
No. Eligibility depends on the applicable criteria and evaluation of significance and integrity. The order directs agencies to identify properties that appear to qualify; it does not declare every property above a particular age automatically listed or protected in the same way.
Can documentation replace all preservation review?
Section 2(c) calls for timely records where listed property will be substantially altered or demolished through federal action or assistance. That documentation responsibility is distinct from deciding whether the proposal satisfies other applicable preservation and review duties.
Does the order apply only to national parks?
No. Its agency responsibilities address cultural properties across the executive branch and specified effects on nonfederal resources. NPS and Interior have important technical roles, but federal historic-property stewardship is not limited to property administered as a national park.
Legal basis
Nixon cited NEPA, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Historic Sites Act and the Antiquities Act. Several historical citations have since been recodified, so a reader should follow the current statutory text rather than assume an old title-and-section reference describes a repealed policy. The order operates in furtherance of these laws and does not displace statutory procedures or authorize action beyond the agency's lawful powers.
Further reading
Sources
Cite this page
EO Explained, “Executive Order 11593: Protection and enhancement of the cultural environment”, checked October 25, 2026. https://eoexplained.com/historic-orders/historic-11593-protection-and-enhancement-of-the-cultural-environment. Include an access date when citing this dated account. For the presidential instrument itself, cite 36 FR 8921 and the official text.
Last checked
. EO 11593 was checked against its signed record, current disposition and cited implementation sources for the status and scope described above. Report an error or a later official source.