**STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK*,* DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL
PARKS, SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, REGARDING H.R.
759, A BILL TO REDESIGNATE THE ELLIS ISLAND LIBRARY ON THE THIRD FLOOR
OF THE ELLIS ISLAND IMMIGRATION MUSEUM, LOCATED ON ELLIS ISLAND IN NEW
YORK HARBOR, AS THE BOB HOPE MEMORIAL LIBRARY.**

# 

# SEPTEMBER 11, 2007

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity
to appear before you to present the views of the Department of the
Interior on H.R. 759, a bill to redesignate the Ellis Island library on
the third floor of the Ellis Island Immigration Museum as the Bob Hope
Memorial Library.

The National Park Service believes there should be a strong association
between the park and the person being commemorated, and that at least
five years should have elapsed since the death of the person. This basic
principle is reflected in our National Park Service Management Policies.
Therefore, the Department cannot support this bill. On May 12, 2005, the
Department also testified that we could not support H.R. 323, an
identical bill from the 109^th^ Congress.

A unique repository of resources in history, ethnology, and sociology is
located on the third floor of the Immigration Museum on Ellis Island.
The space has been reconfigured to provide a reading room, a preschool
children\'s reading center, an archive for controlled storage of
valuable paper artifacts, and a room designed to provide retrieval
access to the library\'s collection of more than 1,000 oral histories.
It is a resource devoted to the American immigration experience and the
stories of those who came to America with hopes and dreams for a better
life. The library provides important lessons to our citizens of the
meaning of liberty and opportunity in the history of our nation.

Although Bob Hope's life story exemplifies the experience of many who
came to the United States with little, rose to the heights of their
professions, and gave back in abundance to their adopted nation, the
Department cannot support H.R. 759. Bob Hope did enter the United States
through Ellis Island, as did many other great Americans, however there
is no compelling connection between his life and the Ellis Island
Immigration Museum.

Bob Hope was born Leslie Townes Hope, the son of stonemason William
Henry Hope and Avis Townes Hope. The family emigrated from England to
Cleveland, Ohio in 1908, when Leslie, one of seven children, was not yet
five years old. In Cleveland, the Hope family struggled financially, as
they had in England. Mrs. Hope took in boarders to supplement her
husband's erratic income. She gave singing lessons to Leslie, who
entertained his family with song, impersonations, and dancing. When he
left school at age 16, Leslie worked at a number of part-time jobs. He
boxed for a short time under the name of \"Packy East\" but later
changed his name to Lester Hope. His interest in entertainment and show
business led him to take dancing lessons and to seek employment as a
variety stage entertainer. Not until he had achieved considerable
success on the stage did he begin using the name, \"Bob Hope."

Bob Hope\'s more than fifty-year commitment to public service has made
him one of the most honored and esteemed performers in history. His
charitable work and tours on behalf of the armed forces brought him the
admiration and gratitude of millions and the friendship of every
President of the United States since Franklin D. Roosevelt.

*National Park Service Management Policies 2006* state that the National
Park Service will discourage and curtail commemorative works, especially
commemorative naming, except when Congress specifically authorizes them
or there is a compelling justification for the recognition, and the
commemorative work is the best way to express the association between
the park and the person, group, event, or other subject being
commemorated. While Bob Hope had a distinguished career, we do not
believe there is sufficient association between him and the Ellis Island
Library to merit renaming the library.

Mr. Chairman this concludes my statement and I will be happy to answer
any questions that members of the committee may have.

**STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON
NATIONAL PARKS OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES,
CONCERNING H.R. 807, TO DIRECT THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO CONDUCT
A SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY TO DETERMINE THE FEASIBILITY AND SUITABILITY OF
ESTABLISHING A MEMORIAL TO THE SPACE SHUTTLE *COLUMBIA* IN THE STATE OF
TEXAS AND FOR ITS INCLUSION AS A UNIT OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM.**

**SEPTEMBER 11, 2007**

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to present the Department of the
Interior's views on H.R. 807, a bill to direct the Secretary of the
Interior to conduct a special resource study to determine the
feasibility and suitability of establishing a memorial to the Space
Shuttle *Columbia* in the State of Texas and for its inclusion as a unit
of the National Park System.

The Department supports enactment of H.R. 807. The Department testified
on April 28, 2005, that we could not support S. 242, a similar bill in
the 109^th^ Congress that would have designated the areas covered in
this bill as units of the National Park System. At that time we
recommended to the subcommittee that the bill be amended to authorize
the Secretary to study the sites to determine if they are suitable and
feasible as additions to the National Park System.

We appreciate that H.R. 807 would authorize such a study. A study would
provide the opportunity to consult with other agencies and
organizations, including the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), to determine what other commemorative efforts
have been undertaken to memorialize the space shuttle *Columbia* as well
as taking into account the wishes and desires of the crew's families
regarding how they would like their loved ones remembered. A study also
would look at a variety of alternatives that could include National Park
Service (NPS) management or could focus on administering the site
through State or local governments or private organizations.

Studies of this type typically take approximately three years to
complete after funds are made available and cost between \$300,000 and
\$500,000. Also, priority should be given to the 37 previously
authorized studies for potential units of the National Park System,
potential new National Heritage Areas, and potential additions to the
National Trails System and National Wild and Scenic River System that
have not yet been transmitted to the Congress.

H.R. 807 would direct the Secretary to study areas in the Texas cities
of Nacogdoches, Hemphill, Lufkin and San Augustine. Large amounts of
debris from the *Columbia* were found on the parcels specified in the
bill, a combination of public and private land, and the Lufkin civic
center served as NASA's command center for retrieval efforts. As a part
of the study, the Secretary is also authorized to recommend additional
sites in Texas for establishment of memorials to *Columbia*.

*Columbia*, the first space shuttle to orbit the earth, was NASA's
oldest shuttle. On the morning of February 1, 2003, after a three-week
mission devoted to scientific and medical experiments, the *Columbia*
began its return to earth. As re-entry into the earth's atmosphere
continued over the Pacific, problems were noticed by NASA, contact with
the shuttle was lost, and it began to break apart. Debris from the
shuttle was observed from California to Louisiana, however the remains
of the seven astronauts and the most significant parts of the shuttle
were found in several communities across Texas. Soon after the crash, an
independent accident investigation board was established and the first
volume of the board's findings was issued in August 2003, identifying
the factors that led to the shuttle disaster and making recommendations
for future actions.

Many memorials and remembrances have been established in honor of
*Columbia's* crew, including a memorial at Arlington Cemetery and on
Devon Island in the Canadian High Arctic. Asteroids have been named for
members of the crew, as has a highway in Washington and an elementary
school in California. On May 12, 2004, NASA dedicated its new "Altix"
supercomputer to the memory of Kalpana "KC\" Chawla, flight engineer and
mission specialist on the *Columbia*.

An NPS suitability and feasibility study would determine how, or if,
this proposal would complement or add to those already established
memorials.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my remarks, and I would be happy to answer
any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have.

**STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL
PARKS OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES,
CONCERNING H.R. 1021 AND S. 1184, TO DIRECT THE SECRETARY OF THE
INTERIOR TO CONDUCT A SPECIAL RESOURCES STUDY REGARDING THE SUITABILITY
AND FEASIBILITY OF DESIGNATING CERTAIN HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND AREAS IN
TAUNTON, MASSACHUSETTS, AS A UNIT OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES.**

**SEPTEMBER 11, 2007**

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on H.R.
1021 and S. 1184, identical bills that direct the Secretary of the
Interior to conduct a special resources study regarding the suitability
and feasibility of designating certain historic buildings and areas in
Taunton, Massachusetts, as a unit of the National Park System.

The Department does not support these bills. On June 15, 2004, in the
108^th^ Congress, the Department also did not support H.R. 2129, a
similar bill.

The City of Taunton, located in southeastern Massachusetts in Bristol
County, can trace its roots back to the earliest days of our Nation. As
the seat of Bristol County since 1746, Taunton was the site of that
county's first courthouse built in 1772, and the town served as a locale
for colonial discontent prior to the Revolutionary War. In 1774, Taunton
was the site of the raising of the Liberty and Union flag, one of a
number of symbolic representations in the Colonies expressing discontent
with British rule. The town settlement was anchored around the Taunton
River and its tributaries, which provided a focus for its shipbuilding
and shipping activities during the 1800s. The historic nature of the
city draws tourists to visit the well-preserved greens and houses that
date back to the 1800s. Taunton's history spans from its earliest
beginnings as an agrarian hinterland to its development as a major
industrial urban core (particularly for iron) and regional political
center during the Revolutionary War. The city emerged at an early date
as a regional communications focus for the exchange and interaction of
goods, people, and information.

H.R. 1021 and S. 1184 both propose that the Secretary conduct a study of
historic buildings and areas in Taunton, to evaluate the suitability and
feasibility of designating them as a unit of the National Park System.
The study is to be conducted in accordance with the National Park
Service Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1a-5). In addition to the criteria set
out in the Organic Act, the bills also require an evaluation of these
areas against a list of criteria commonly seen in study legislation for
evaluating individual National Heritage Areas, and not part of the usual
evaluation of a park unit.

The Department has concerns about enactment of these bills, because the
named historic properties have been studied and determined not to be
nationally significant, the first criterion that must be met for
inclusion in the National Park System as spelled out in the Organic Act
and in *National Park Service* *Management Policies 2006*. Most of the
historic properties cited in the findings were included in a Multiple
Resource Area nomination to the National Register of Historic Places,
completed in 1984 and nominated by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
which formed the basis for listing properties. The Multiple Resource
Area nomination documented and evaluated Taunton's historic properties
including buildings, structures and districts that were found to have
architectural and historic merit. These properties were evaluated within
the context of significant historical themes and time periods in
Taunton's history. The Multiple Resource Area nomination included 86
individual properties, two districts, three industrial complexes, and
one religious complex, primarily spanning from the mid-18^th^ Century
through the mid-20^th^ Century. The Massachusetts State Historic
Preservation Officer nominated these properties for their local historic
or architectural significance, rather than for their state or national
significance. The National Park Service agreed with this recommendation
and listed the properties in the National Register of Historic Places
for their local historic or architectural importance.

The Department is concerned with H.R. 1021 and S. 1184 because other
authorities and mechanisms exist at the Federal, State, and local
levels, to support the preservation of historic properties of local
significance. To expend limited study funds on properties that are known
not to meet National Park Service standards seems ill-advised when the
Department is pressed to meet the budgetary needs of previously
authorized studies of nationally significant resources.

Currently, the National Park Service is in various stages of progress
with 37 studies previously authorized by Congress. These studies are
focusing on potential National Park System Units, National Heritage
Areas, additions to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, or
additions to the National Trails System. Our highest priority is to
complete the studies previously authorized by Congress, and to begin
work on newly authorized studies as soon as funds are available.

In addition, the Department notes that the National Park Service is
currently in the midst of a wild and scenic river study of the Taunton
River, authorized by Congress in December 2000. The City of Taunton is
actively engaged in this process along with the nine other communities
that abut the main stem of the Taunton River. Historical and cultural
resources associated with the river, including sites in the City of
Taunton, are an important part of the study, recognizing that the river
has a rich history dating from Native American use to colonial
settlement and early industrial development. The study is currently out
for public comment and we expect to finalize and transmit it to Congress
in 2008.

It would appear that the wild and scenic river study is evaluating many
of the same resources identified in H.R. 1021 and S. 1184. Furthermore,
the wild and scenic river study is appropriately considering a larger
area than the city limits of Taunton. To launch an overlapping study
with similar but slightly different criteria from those governing the
wild and scenic river study, would seem to invite both confusion and
duplication. Therefore, the Department does not support enactment of
H.R. 1021 and S. 1184.

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment. This concludes
my prepared remarks and I will be happy to answer any questions you or
other committee members might have.

**TESTIMONY OF DANIEL N. WENK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR**

**BEFORE THE**

**U.S. SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON
NATIONAL PARKS, REGARDING S.127, TO AMEND THE GREAT SAND DUNES NATIONAL
PARK AND PRESERVE ACT**

**OF 2000 TO EXPLAIN THE PURPOSE AND PROVIDE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF
THE BACA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE**

September 11, 2007

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify today on behalf of the Administration on a number
of bills.

**[S. 127, to Amend the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Act
of 2000]{.underline}**

S. 127 would amend the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Act
of 2000 to explain the purpose and provide for the administration of the
Baca National Wildlife Refuge in Colorado. The Administration supports
this bill if amended. The bill amends earlier legislation by
affirmatively establishing a purpose statement for the Refuge

The Fish and Wildlife Service is currently managing the refuge under a
Conceptual Management Plan finalized in 2005. The Plan noted that the
refuge's authorizing legislation did not state a purpose and proposed
language similar to that of S. 127. Specifically, S. 127 would
explicitly define the purpose of the refuge as, "...to restore, enhance,
and maintain wetland, upland, riparian, and other habitats for native
wildlife, plant, and fish species in the San Luis Valley." The Service
would also be required to emphasize migratory bird conservation and
manage the refuge in concert with broader landscape scale conservation
efforts.

The bill also includes a language requiring the Service to manage water
on the refuge in approximately the same manner as has occurred
historically. While this is the current intent of the Fish and Wildlife
Service, such a requirement could be read to run counter to the purpose
of the refuge and the sustainability of the wildlife, plant, and fish
species and their habitat for which the refuge was established. As
discussed below, for this reason we recommend a clarifying amendment to
this language.

**[Background on Baca National Wildlife Refuge]{.underline}**

The Baca National Wildlife Refuge is located in Saguache and Alamosa
Counties in the San Luis Valley of south-central Colorado. The approved
acquisition boundary includes 92,500 acres of wetlands, desert shrub
grasslands, and riparian lands and abuts lands managed by other
conservation agencies and organizations, including the National Park
Service, the U.S. Forest Service, and The Nature Conservancy. Other land
features included within the refuge include stabilized sand dunes,
intermittent streams, and approximately 20,000 acres of wetland basins,
many of which are maintained through irrigation practices with decreed
water rights. The refuge is administered as a unit of the San Luis
Valley National Wildlife Refuge Complex, which includes the Alamosa and
Monte Vista refuges, and other smaller units throughout the Valley.

The refuge's wetlands are an integral part of a larger wetlands complex
that constitutes the largest and most diverse assemblage of wetlands in
the State of Colorado. Several bird species of conservation concern,
such as White-faced ibis, rely on the Baca's wetlands for key foraging
areas during the breeding season. Waterfowl and other water birds
heavily utilize wetlands and other habitats on the refuge at various
times of year, especially during the nesting season. Native fish
species, including a recently discovered population of Rio Grande chub,
which is listed by the State of Colorado as species of concern, and the
Rio Grande sucker, listed by the State as endangered, live on the refuge
in small streams draining from the Sangre de Cristo Range. Elk, mule
deer, and pronghorn also use the refuge.

To date, the Service has acquired 57,000 acres of fee-title land, and,
in cooperation with neighboring landowners, is managing an additional
27,000 acres within the acquisition boundary

The refuge was authorized by Congress in 2000 as part of the larger
creation of the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve. While
Congress did direct the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the
Service, to administer the refuge in accordance with the National
Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 and the Refuge
Recreation Act of 1962, and specified certain water management
requirements, no formal purpose for the refuge was provided.

Typically, national wildlife refuges, when established by Congress or by
Executive action, are assigned a primary purpose that gives the Service
clear management direction for the refuge. For example, many refuges
have as their purpose the conservation of migratory birds. Others were
established primarily for big game, or the conservation of species
protected by the Endangered Species Act. In recent years, an increasing
number of refuges have been established in urban areas to promote
environmental education. Numerous refuges have multiple purposes.

It is important to note that these primary purposes do not necessarily
preclude other management activities, including public use. Rather, they
give refuge managers a framework for planning and implementing
management activities, including long-range conservation planning to
compatibility determinations, both of which were key provisions of the
1997 amendments to the 1966 Refuge Administration Act.

Designating purposes for the Baca National Wildlife Refuge is also
necessary because the refuge is part of a larger public lands complex,
comprised of multiple federal jurisdictions, which is in turn situated
on a landscape with diverse land ownership status. Because refuges, by
definition, are unique in their "wildlife first" approach to land
management, it is important for the Service to be able to communicate
with other area landowners, both public and private, as well as the
general public about the purposes for which the Service will manage the
Baca, as well as the overarching mission of the National Wildlife Refuge
System.

**[Water Use Requirement]{.underline}**

The only change the Administration recommends to the bill as currently
written does not involve the purpose statement of the refuge but the
provision at section 1(3), which would require the Secretary of
Interior, in administering water resources on the refuge to "use decreed
water rights on the Refuge in approximately the same manner that the
water rights have been used historically." As noted above, historically,
water has been used to irrigate lands now included in the Baca National
Wildlife Refuge. The Service expects to continue to manage the land in
such a fashion, however, the document that will guide the future of the
refuge is a Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP). While this plan will
not be finished for a number of years, the refuge will be operating
under the current Plan and provide for "compatible" uses as provided by
the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act. The requirement of
S. 127 to use "decreed water in approximately the same manner" as it has
been used historically could restrict the options for future management
actions available to the Service in developing the CCP.

Additionally, there is a pre-existing water service agreement between
the Service and the Baca Grande Water and Sanitation District associated
with the refuge. This agreement obligates the Service to lease up to
4,000 acre-feet of water rights -- which the Service acquired along with
the refuge -- to the District. Currently, there are several wells on the
refuge that are decreed for irrigation. Under the terms of the
agreement, if the District requests the full amount of water to which
they are entitled, the Service will need to change the decreed use of
these wells from irrigation to municipal to fulfill the District's
request. Because the Service must file in State water court to change
the decreed use of these wells from irrigation to municipal, we wish to
avoid any potential conflict between S.127 and future state water court
proceedings.

For these reasons, we recommend amending the bill to include the
following italicized language:

\(3\) in subsection (d)\--

\(A\) in paragraph (1), by striking "and" at the end;

\(B\) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and inserting
"; and"; and

\(C\) by adding at the end the following:

"(3) ***subject to existing agreements and to the extent it does not
interfere with refuge purposes,*** use decreed water rights on the
Refuge in approximately the same manner that the water rights have been
used historically.".

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my prepared
testimony on S. 127. I would like to extend our appreciation to you and
the rest of the Subcommittee, especially Senator Salazar, for your
leadership and support for the National Wildlife Refuge System and for
landscape conservation efforts in the San Luis Valley. I would be happy
to respond to any questions you may have.

# STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, CONCERNING S. 327 AND H.R. 359, BILLS TO AUTHORIZE THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO CONDUCT A SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY OF SITES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LIFE OF CESAR ESTRADA CHAVEZ AND THE FARM LABOR MOVEMENT

## September 11, 2007

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the
Department of the Interior on S. 327 and H.R. 359, bills to authorize
the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of
sites associated with the life of Cesar Estrada Chavez and the farm
labor movement.

The Department supports both bills, which are virtually identical to
each other and to legislation that we supported during the 108^th^ and
109^th^ Congresses. While the Department supports the authorization of
this study, we also believe that any funding requested should be
directed first toward completing previously authorized studies. We
recommend a technical amendment to S. 327, described later in this
statement.

This study will provide a good opportunity to work with the Cesar E.
Chavez Foundation and others to identify valuable resources associated
with the story of Chavez's life and the movement he led and ways to
protect those resources. Ask historians to name one person who had the
greatest impact on farm labor, and the name of Cesar Estrada Chavez
leaps to mind. Between the 1950's and the 1980's Chavez cultivated a
life-long commitment to bringing respect, dignity, and democracy to the
nation's farmworkers, many of whom were Hispanic. After an initial
career as a community organizer, Chavez focused his organizing skills on
the farmworkers, inspiring them to look their employers in the eyes,
stand up for their rights and take active roles in creating their union
and wielding its power. As a result of his efforts, he continues to
serve as a symbol not only for Hispanic-Americans, but for all
Americans, of what can be accomplished in this country through unified,
courageous, and nonviolent action.

Chavez's death on April 22, 1993, brought a resurgence of interest in
his life and work and a new wave of assessments recognizing his national
and, indeed, international significance. He has taken his place among
other national labor leaders in the Department of Labor's Hall of Fame
and been recognized by an ever-increasing number of states and
communities with special holidays, events, and place names. Because of
the tremendous impact he had, we believe it is appropriate to study
sites associated with Cesar Chavez and the farm labor movement he led in
order to consider ways to preserve and interpret this story of enormous
social change.

The National Park Service and the Cesar E. Chavez Foundation first
discussed the possibility of conducting a national historic landmark
study of sites related to the work of Chavez and the farmworkers'
movement several years ago, as a way of identifying sites important to
the history of the man as well as the migrant worker. The Foundation
represents and fosters the ongoing legacy of Chavez and has a strong
interest in seeing that heritage preserved. In 2002, the National Park
Service collaborated with the Foundation and scholars at universities in
Washington State and California in preparing a preliminary assessment
and scope for future research on sites associated with Chavez and the
farmworkers' movement. The information gathered through that assessment
would give the National Park Service a head start on the study
authorized by S. 327 and H.R. 359.

The legislation would authorize a study of sites in Arizona, California,
and other States that are significant to the life of Cesar Chavez and
the farm labor movement in the western United States to determine
appropriate methods for preserving and interpreting sites. Through this
study, the National Park Service could examine whether certain sites are
suitable and feasible for addition to the National Park System. The
study would be conducted in accordance with the criteria for new area
studies contained in Title III of the National Parks Omnibus Management
Act of 1998.

The study also would consider whether any sites meet the criteria for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places or for designation
as a National Historic Landmark. This would enable the National Park
Service to complete the work that was begun with the preliminary
assessment described earlier. The legislation specifically requires that
the National Park Service consult with the Cesar E. Chavez Foundation,
the United Farm Workers Union, and other entities involved in historic
preservation on this study. The study is estimated to cost approximately
\$250,000.

If the committee acts on S. 327, we recommend amending it on page 1,
line 6 and on page 2, line 1 by inserting "special" before "resource
study" to use the term for the proposed study that is normally used for
such studies and to make it consistent with the title of the bill. H.R.
359 as passed by the House includes this change, which the Department
recommended in testimony before the House Subcommittee on National
Parks, Forests, and Public Lands on March 29, 2007.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to answer
any questions you or the other members of the subcommittee may have.

**STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK,** **DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK
SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON
NATIONAL PARKS, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, CONCERNING S.
868, TO AMEND THE WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT TO DESIGNATE A SEGMENT OF
THE TAUNTON RIVER IN THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS AS COMPONENT OF THE
NATIONAL WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS SYSTEM, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.**

**SEPTEMBER 11, 2007**

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee today to discuss the views of the Department of the Interior
on S. 868, a bill to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act by designating
a segment of the Taunton River as a component of the national wild and
scenic rivers system.

The Department is currently completing the study authorized by Public
Law 106-318 to determine the eligibility and suitability of the Taunton
River for inclusion in the national wild and scenic rivers system. The
draft report and environmental assessment is currently out for public
and agency comment, with the comment period scheduled to close on
September 17, 2007. We request that the committee defer action on the
bill until the study is complete. In addition, if this bill moves
forward, we would like to work with the committee to make this bill
consistent with other wild and scenic river designation bills that have
been enacted by Congress.

S. 868 would designate the entire 40-mile main stem of the Taunton River
as a component of the national wild and scenic rivers system. This
corresponds to "Alternative B: Full Designation" as described in the
draft report, and is identified in the draft as the environmentally
preferred alternative because it is the alternative that, by virtue of
its inclusion of the entire main stem in the designation, provides the
highest degree of protection. The draft study does not include an agency
preferred alternative. The environmentally preferred alternative is
supported by the town meeting and city council votes of all ten
communities abutting the Taunton River, as documented in the draft
report and the companion document developed during the study, the
*Taunton River Stewardship Plan*, dated July 2005.

The draft report concludes that the Taunton River meets the eligibility
requirements of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act by virtue of its
free-flowing condition and presence of one or more outstandingly
remarkable resource values. The 40-mile Taunton River is the longest
undammed coastal river in New England. This unique character, including
the lack of a head-of-tide dam, is directly related to outstandingly
remarkable values identified during the study, including fish, ecology
and biological diversity, and recreation. As such, the Taunton River
represents a natural fit with Wild and Scenic River Act purposes of
recognizing and protecting special free-flowing rivers and the values
they support.

The Taunton River is recognized as the most significant river in
Massachusetts for anadromous fish species, including alewife, blueback
herring, American shad, hickory shad, gizzard shad and rainbow smelt, a
direct result of the free-flowing character of the river which allows
these and other species unfettered access to spawning tributaries.
Similarly, the broader ecology of the river is unusually diverse and
intact, supporting 31 distinct wildlife habitats, globally rare plant
species, regionally significant freshwater and brackish tidal marshes,
and many rare species of birds and amphibians. A Nature Conservancy
study has concluded that the Taunton River represents one of the most
unique, diverse, and intact ecosystems in the North Atlantic Ecoregion,
from Delaware to Maine. Recreationally, the 40-mile Taunton River offers
outstanding flatwater paddling, and, in the lower river, additional
opportunities for broader recreational uses including power boating and
sailing.

The study authorized by Public Law 106-318 has been conducted in
partnership with the local communities of the Taunton River, the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and other local river interests based
upon the partnership wild and scenic river model. This model recognizes
and anticipates a limited federal role stemming from the lack of federal
land ownership. Successful planning and management under these
circumstances requires the fundamental support and involvement of state
and local interests. This common basis of support and involvement for
the Taunton River is outlined in the *Taunton River Stewardship Plan*
(July, 2005). This plan and the strong support it has received through
the extensive public involvement of the study, is the principal basis
for the draft report's conclusion that the Taunton River can be
effectively managed and protected as a component of the national wild
and scenic rivers system, and thereby meets the criteria for wild and
scenic river suitability. The management scheme proposed in the
stewardship plan is similar to ones that have proven effective on other
partnership wild and scenic rivers, including the Sudbury, Concord, and
Assabet Rivers also in Massachusetts.

It is important to point out that the draft report is out for public
review and comment. Once the study is complete, the Secretary is
required by law to submit to the President a report on the suitability
or nonsuitability of the river for addition to the national wild and
scenic rivers system. The President is then required to report to the
Congress his recommendations and proposals with respect to the
designation of the studied river. If the President recommends that this
river be included in the system, we would like to work with the
committee on several amendments to the bill to clarify the management
scheme for the river and to conform to established legislative models.
It would be particularly important in this regard to consider the
*Taunton River Stewardship Plan* as the basis for management of the
designated wild and scenic river segment.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks, and I would be happy
to answer any questions you or other committee members may have
regarding this bill.

**STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS,
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, CONCERNING S. 1051, A
BILL TO AUTHORIZE NATIONAL MALL LIBERTY FUND D.C. TO ESTABLISH A
MEMORIAL ON FEDERAL LAND IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AT CONSTITUTION
GARDENS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED TO HONOR FREE PERSONS AND SLAVES WHO FOUGHT
FOR INDEPENDENCE, LIBERTY, AND JUSTICE FOR ALL DURING THE AMERICAN
REVOLUTION**

**September 11, 2007**

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to present the Department of the
Interior's views on S. 1051, a bill to authorize the National Mall
Liberty Fund D.C. to establish a memorial on Federal land in the
District of Columbia at Constitution Gardens previously approved to
honor free persons and slaves who fought for independence, liberty, and
justice for all during the American Revolution.

The Department supports the establishment of a memorial in the Nation's
Capital that would recognize and commemorate the contributions of
African Americans as they fought for independence, liberty and justice
during the Revolutionary War. However, the Department opposes S. 1051 in
its current form as it is inconsistent with the principles, processes
and requirements set forth in the Commemorative Works Act, which has
successfully guided the process for establishing monuments in the
Nation's Capital since it was enacted in 1986. Over the course of the
succeeding 20 years, 17 memorials have been planned, designed, and
constructed following that process and an additional five memorials are
currently in various stages of completion.

**[S. 1051]{.underline}**

While S. 1051 states that the memorial shall be established in
accordance with the Commemorative Works Act, the bill also contains
provisions that contravene several critical requirements of the
Commemorative Works Act.

First, the provisions in S. 1051 would designate a specific site for the
memorial, rather than allowing for the site selection process under the
Commemorative Works Act to determine the appropriate location of the
memorial. This site selection process requires consultation with the
National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission and approval by the
Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital Planning Commission, and
the National Park Service. Congress has traditionally provided that such
site and design decisions be determined through established processes
under the Commemorative Works Act, and we support this practice that has
worked well for over 20 years.

The specific site identified in the bill is in Area I at Constitution
Gardens which was approved for the Black Revolutionary War Patriots
Memorial in 1988, but expired in 2005 and is now within the Reserve. In
2003, Congress declared the Reserve to be a completed work of civic art
and precluded the establishment of new memorials. The Department
supports Congress's prohibition of new memorial proposals within the
Reserve. The Department recognizes the site selection process and the
Reserve to be basic pillars of the Commemorative Works Act, a safeguard
and a guide to the best use of the parklands of the Nation's Capital.

In addition, S. 1051 is inconsistent with the Commemorative Works Act
provisions relating to expiration of legislative authority, a separate,
but related issue. The Commemorative Works Act specifies that "upon
expiration of the legislative authority, any previous site and design
approvals shall also expire." In 1986, Congress authorized the Black
Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial Foundation to establish the Black
Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial consistent with legislation to
establish the Commemorative Works Act, which was pending before Congress
at the time and enacted later that year. In 1987, Congress enacted
second law authorizing placement of that memorial within Area I as it
was then defined by the Commemorative Works Act. In 1988, the National
Park Service, the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital
Planning Commission approved a site in Constitution Gardens for the
Black Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial and, in 1996, approved the
final design. Despite four extensions of the memorial's authorization
over 21 years, the Foundation was unable to raise sufficient funds for
construction, and the authority finally lapsed in October 2005.

The authority to construct a memorial is granted by Congress to a
specific sponsor to establish a particular memorial typically within
specified timeframes. The expired 1986 authorization was given to the
sponsor, the Black Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial Foundation, to
establish the Black Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial. S. 1051 would
authorize a different sponsor, the National Mall Liberty Fund D.C. to
establish a memorial with a different name, and, as we understand it, a
different design. It has been 19 years since the site was approved for
the Black Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial and 11 years since the
design was approved. In accordance with the Commemorative Works Act,
these previous site and design approvals expired in 2005 along with the
fourth extension of the legislation authorizing that memorial. Given
that the reservation of the site expired in 2005, the new sponsor, the
new name, and a new proposed design, we believe that S. 1051's
authorization to establish the National Liberty Memorial should not be
construed as an extension of an expired legislative authority for the
Black Revolutionary War Patriots Memorial.

Thus, the Department finds that the National Liberty Memorial is a new
proposal and should follow all the provisions of the Commemorative Works
Act, including the site selection process. Unlike all memorial proposals
that seek authorization by means of a discrete bill to recognize and
designate an individual memorial subject matter and sponsor, S. 1051
would amend Public Law 99-558 to establish the National Liberty Memorial
without complete compliance to the provisions and requirements of the
Commemorative Works Act. We are concerned that allowing for what amounts
to an extension of selected provisions of processes required under the
Commemorative Works Act after they have expired is unfair to memorial
sponsors who diligently meet the timeframes of their authorizations and
creates an unwelcome precedent for future efforts to establish memorials
through what has been an even-handed public process.

We also would like to point out that S. 1051 makes no provisions for the
disposition of moneys raised in excess of funds needed for the
establishment of the memorial or to hold in reserve the amount on hand
should the authority to establish the memorial expire before completion.

We reiterate our support of the establishment of a memorial in the
Nation's Capital that recognizes and commemorates the contributions of
African Americans as they fought for independence, liberty and justice
during the Revolutionary War. We look forward to the opportunity to work
with the subcommittee to develop language that would provide for such
authorization in a manner consistent with the principled processes set
forth by existing authorities.

**[Background on the Commemorative Works Act and the
Reserve]{.underline}**

In 1986, following what some characterized as \"monumental chaos\" over
the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, which was dedicated in 1982, Congress
enacted the Commemorative Works Act to guide the process for
establishing memorials in the nation\'s Capital. Since its enactment,
the Commemorative Works Act has played an important role in ensuring
that memorials in the nation's Capital are erected on the most
appropriate sites and are of a caliber in design that is worthy of their
historically significant subjects.

On November 17, 2003, Congress declared the National Mall complete by
establishing the Reserve through an amendment to the Commemorative Works
Act. The Reserve was designated in response to Congressional concern
over the loss of open space on the National Mall to memorials. Between
1980 and 2000, seven new memorials were erected on the Mall. This trend
foreshadowed a proliferation of commemorative works that could threaten
the historic open space of the Nation's greatest symbolic landscape. As
a result of a Congressional hearing in 1997, this committee expressed an
interest in an evaluation of how the Commemorative Works Act was
functioning. Pursuant to that request, the National Capital Memorial
Commission, the Commission of Fine Arts, and the National Capital
Planning Commission established a Joint Task Force on Memorials.

The Joint Task Force recommended the establishment of a Reserve to
preserve the monumental core and developed the Memorials and Museums
Master Plan to redirect memorials throughout the city. The Reserve, an
area where no new memorials would be constructed other than those
previously authorized such as that honoring Martin Luther King Jr., was
envisioned by the Joint Task Force as generally encompassing the central
cross-axis of the Mall from the U.S. Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial and
from the White House to the Jefferson Memorial. Congress expanded this
area to include all of the area between Constitution and Independence
Avenues from 17th Street west to the Lincoln Memorial, as well as lands
south of Independence Avenue from the Tidal Basin to the Potomac River
when it statutorily established the Reserve through passage of the
Commemorative Works Act Clarification Act of 2003.

That concludes my testimony, I would be glad to answer any questions
that you or other members of the subcommittee may have.

STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK, DEPUTY DIRCTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL
PARKS OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, CONCERNING S.
1247, TO AMEND THE ACQUISITION AUTHORITY FOR LAND FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF
VISITOR AND ADMINISTRATIVE FACILITIES AT WEIR FARM NATIONAL HISTORIC
SITE IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT.

SEPTEMBER 11, 2007

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity
to appear before you today to present the Department of the Interior's
views on S. 1247, a bill to amend the Weir Farm National Historic Site
Establishment Act of 1990, and for other purposes.

The Department supports S. 1247, but would like to work with the
committee to simplify the language in the bill.

S. 1247 would amend the Weir Farm National Historic Site Establishment
Act of 1990 (as amended by Public Law 105-363) to expand the geographic
area in which the park could acquire up to 15 acres to develop visitor
and administrative facilities. Public Law 105-363 required that the
acquisition be "in close proximity or contiguous to the park."
Furthermore, by requiring a planning agreement with the towns of
Ridgefield and Wilton, Connecticut before building a facility, Public
Law 105-363 appears to authorize land acquisition only within these two
towns. S. 1247 would expand the National Park Service's authority so
that it can consider the acquisition of property in all of Fairfield
County, Connecticut, including a building in nearby Redding,
Connecticut, that the park has leased for over 13 years for park
curatorial and maintenance functions. This expanded authority would
reduce the cost of building support facilities and would address
concerns that local towns have expressed about the location of
administrative facilities in residential neighborhoods.

Weir Farm National Historic Site was established on October 31, 1990 to
preserve the historic structures and landscapes associated with American
Impressionist artist Julian Alden Weir. The park's authorizing
legislation identifies one of the park's purposes as "to maintain the
integrity of a setting that inspired artistic expression." In keeping
with this purpose, the park's 1995 General Management Plan determined
that all administrative and operational support functions should be
located in off-site facilities. In 1998, Public Law 105-363 authorized a
boundary expansion of up to 15 acres, and in 2000, the National Park
Service purchased nine acres in the town of Ridgefield, Connecticut
under this authority.

Public Law 105-363 required the National Park Service to enter into
agreement with the towns of Ridgefield and Wilton, Connecticut, prior to
building a facility. During discussions, concerns were raised about
locating a 10,000 square foot facility in a residential neighborhood. In
addition, cost estimates for building a facility on the newly acquired
property had increased from \$3.4 million to \$5.9 million.

To address local concerns and rising costs, the National Park Service
would like to consider alternative sites, including space at the
Georgetown Wire Mill (Mill), a 55-acre brownfield development site
listed on the National Register of Historic Places and located less than
2 miles from the park, in the town of Redding, Connecticut. Currently,
the park leases 5,000 square feet of curatorial and maintenance space at
the Mill. S. 1247 would allow the park to acquire 12,000 square feet of
finished space at the Wire Mill in exchange for all or part of the nine
acres acquired by the park in Ridgefield, Connecticut. This acquisition
would reduce construction, operating, and maintenance costs for the
park. Since the National Park Service would use all or part of the nine
acres currently owned to exchange for the space at Georgetown Wire Mill,
no acquisition funds are required. If appraisals indicate that the
Georgetown Land Corporation (Corporation) building exceeds the value of
the National Park Service land, the Corporation has agreed to donate the
difference to the National Park Service.

Environmental sustainability would be another benefit of the Mill site.
Within the next two years, the Mill is expected to be certified as a
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) village center with
residential and commercial services and subsidies for artist housing.

The language in S. 1247 that amends paragraph 2 of section 4(d) of
Public Law 101-485 is complex. Without changing the substance of the
bill, the Department would like to work with the committee to make the
language simpler and clearer.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be happy to answer
any questions you or other members of the subcommittee might have.

**STATEMENT OF DANIEL N. WENK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS OF
THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, CONCERNING S.
1329, A BILL TO EXTEND THE ACADIA NATIONAL PARK ADVISORY COMMISSION, TO
PROVIDE IMPROVED VISITOR SERVICES AT THE PARK, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.**

**SEPTEMBER 11, 2007**

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S.
1329, a bill to extend the Acadia National Park Advisory Commission, to
provide improved visitor services at the park, and for other purposes.
The Department supports enactment of this bill with two technical
amendments.

If enacted, S. 1329 would accomplish four objectives. First, it would
extend the life of the 16-member Acadia National Park Advisory
Commission, which expired in September 2006, for an additional 20 years.
Second, the bill would extend the authority of the Secretary to exchange
land with local towns in order to allow both parties to consolidate land
holdings within their borders. Third, the bill would increase the park's
land acquisition ceiling from \$9.1 million to \$28 million. Fourth, it
would authorize Acadia National Park to participate in the planning,
construction, and operation of an intermodal transportation center
outside the park's boundaries.

# Acadia National Park Advisory Commission

The Acadia National Park Advisory Commission had been in operation for
almost 20 years, before it expired on September 30, 2006, and was a
valuable asset that enhanced communication between park managers and
local communities. The Commission's state and local representatives
participated actively, and they strongly support its re-authorization.
The cost of administering the Commission is minimal and is covered by
the park's operating budget.

[Extension of Land Conveyance Authority]{.underline}

Before 1986, Acadia National Park did not have a well-defined boundary.
The boundary established in 1986 by Public Law 99-420 included certain
lands owned by local towns and excluded certain lands owned by the
National Park Service. In order to allow the park and the towns to
consolidate holdings within their respective boundaries, section
102(d)(2) gave the Secretary the authority to convey lands outside the
park boundary to the towns for no consideration after the towns had
conveyed all of their land within the park boundary to the park. This
provision set a 10-year deadline for these conveyances in order to
encourage timely action.

Several towns missed the 10-year deadline, but are still interested in
exchanging lands with the National Park Service. This bill would extend
the authority of the Secretary to exchange lands with the towns
indefinitely. Without this amendment, the park would continue to own
isolated small tracts of land outside the park boundary, and the towns
would continue to own small isolated tracts of land inside the park
boundary. The proposed change would benefit both the park and the towns
by continuing to allow each of them to consolidate land ownership.

# 

# Increase in Land Acquisition Ceiling

Acadia National Park's authorized land acquisition ceiling of \$9.1
million has been reached, although there are over 100 tracts left to be
acquired to complete the park as authorized by Congress in 1986. Land
prices on Mount Desert Island, where Acadia National Park is located,
have increased dramatically since 1986 and may continue to do so if
local home-inflation trends continue. Many willing landowners are
anxious to sell, but the park cannot buy the land because the land
acquisition ceiling does not permit the use of sufficient appropriated
funds to acquire them, thus leaving valuable resources within the park
threatened with incompatible development.

The Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LWCF) authorizes the National
Park Service to exceed the land acquisition ceiling by 10%, or \$1
million annually, whichever is greater. Under this authority, Acadia NP
may exceed the land acquisition ceiling by a maximum of \$1 million per
year. To date, Congress has appropriated \$8.9 million beyond Acadia's
land acquisition ceiling, bringing total appropriations for land
acquisition at the park to \$18 million. However, because the LWCF
authorization limits National Park Service annual expenditures on
additional land acquisition to \$1 million or less, the National Park
Service has been unable to purchase several undeveloped tracts that are
valued at more than \$1 million. If these undeveloped tracts within the
boundaries of the park are developed with new structures, acquisition
costs will increase. Acquiring these lands sooner rather than later is
more cost-effective for the National Park Service in the long run. In
addition, the park currently faces encroachment issues, where private
landowners use adjacent park lands for swing sets, hot tubs, sheds and
the like. The proposed \$28 million ceiling would allow the National
Park Service to acquire all parcels of land that are located within the
boundary of the park that are currently available for sale.

Incompatible development within park boundaries can degrade the natural
and cultural values that are important to the visitors of Acadia
National Park. There are also "spillover" impacts from use of private
lands that are surrounded by park land including noise and light
impacts, which tend to drive the public away from these parts of the
park. Finally, larger blocks of land are more cost-effective to manage
than smaller discontinuous parcels that are owned by multiple owners and
thus, result in higher boundary monitoring and patrol costs.

# Intermodal Transportation Center

The intermodal transportation center is the final piece of a three-phase
transportation strategy that was developed with the assistance of an
interagency team of transportation and park managers. The interagency
team was established pursuant to the 1997 Memorandum of Understanding
between the Secretary of Transportation and the Secretary of the
Interior to comprehensively address public transportation in and around
our national parks. Language in S. 1329 authorizing Acadia National Park
to participate in the planning, construction and operation of an
intermodal transportation center outside park boundaries is essential
for completion of a highly successful transportation system that
operates through a consortium of twenty partners. These partners include
the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Maine Department of
Transportation, and many local interests who developed this
transportation strategy and have combined their resources to offer the
Island Explorer, a bus system that uses clean propane-powered vehicles
to move visitors around the Island. The operational costs are paid for
by a special transportation fee imposed at Acadia, state and local
funds, and business contributions.

Daily summer use of the Island Explorer has averaged 3,700 riders and
more than 1.5 million riders have used the popular system since it began
in 1999. Traffic congestion on Mount Desert Island and the negative
impacts of too many vehicles in Acadia National Park have been reduced,
and the park's air quality has improved annually.

Currently, overnight visitors are picked up at their lodgings by the
Island Explorer, but the increasing numbers of day use visitors do not
have access to the transit system because it lacks a central parking and
bus boarding area. As planned, the project calls for developing an
off-island intermodal transportation center to serve day users of Mount
Desert Island and Acadia National Park. The center is needed to maximize
the benefits of the transit system and to fully achieve the project's
goals of reducing traffic congestion, preserving park resources and the
visitor experience, and ensuring a vibrant tourist economy.

The proposed center would be strategically located on Route 3 (the only
road to Mount Desert Island and Acadia National Park) in Trenton, Maine.
A non-profit partner will acquire the land using donated funds. The
Maine Department of Transportation and the Federal Transit
Administration will have the lead in the planning and construction of
the center, which will include parking for day users, a visitor
orientation facility highlighting park and regional points of interest,
a bus boarding area, and a bus maintenance garage.

Most of the proposed facility would be built with funds provided by the
U.S. Department of Transportation to the State of Maine. The National
Park Service would be responsible for the design, construction, and
operation of all or part of the visitor orientation portion of the
center, which would include exhibits, media presentations, and general
information for park visitors bound for Acadia National Park. The
National Park Service might also contribute to maintenance and operation
of the facility. The proposed center would replace the park's inadequate
Thompson Island Information Center, which is too small to accommodate
the large number of summer visitors to the park, contains out-of-date
exhibits, and is not optimally located to intercept visitors.

We recommend two technical amendments be made to section 5 of the bill.
First, we would like to clarify that the Secretary would be authorized
to conduct activities that facilitate the dissemination of information
relating to the Island Explorer or any successor to the Island Explorer
in case the transit system is renamed. Second, in order to preserve the
Secretary's flexibility in how resources are allocated in the National
Park Service, we recommend an amendment to the authority provided to the
Secretary to contribute to the Intermodal Transportation Center. The
amendments are attached to this testimony.

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment. This concludes
my prepared remarks and I will be happy to answer any questions you or
other committee members might have.

[Technical amendments to S. 1329, the Acadia National Park Improvement
Act of 2007]{.underline}

On p. 2, line 24, strike "shall" and insert "may".

On p. 3, line 16, strike "system;" and insert "system or any successor
transit system;".