49–010 

Calendar No. 640 

113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 113–300 

MOUNTAINS TO SOUND GREENWAY NATIONAL HERITAGE 

AREA ACT 

DECEMBER 10, 2014.—Ordered to be printed 

Ms. LANDRIEU, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 2602] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 2602) to establish the Mountains to Sound 

Greenway National Heritage Area in the State of Washington, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Heritage Area Authorization Act of 2014’’. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY. 

In this Act, the term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of the Interior. 

SEC. 3. NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA DESIGNATIONS. 

The following areas are designated as national heritage areas, to be administered 

in accordance with this Act: 

(1) APPALACHIAN FOREST NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA, WEST VIRGINIA AND MARYLAND.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—There is established the Appalachian Forest National 

Heritage Area in the States of West Virginia and Maryland, as depicted on 

the map entitled ‘‘Appalachian Forest National Heritage Area’’, numbered 

T07/80,000 and dated October 2007, including— 

(i) Barbour, Braxton, Grant, Greenbrier, Hampshire, Hardy, Mineral, 

Morgan, Nicholas, Pendleton, Pocahontas, Preston, Randolph, Tucker, 

Upshur, and Webster counties in West Virginia; and 

(ii) Allegany and Garrett Counties in Maryland. 

(B) LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY.—The Appalachian Forest Heritage 

Area, Inc., shall be the local coordinating entity for the national heritage 

area established under subparagraph (A). 

(2) MARITIME WASHINGTON NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA, WASHINGTON.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—There is established the Maritime Washington National 

Heritage Area in the State of Washington, to include land in Whatcom, 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

Skagit, Snohomish, San Juan, Island, King, Pierce, Thurston, Mason, 

Kitsap, Jefferson, Clallam, Grays Harbor counties in the State, as generally 

depicted on the map entitled ‘‘Maritime Washington National Heritage Area 

Proposed Boundary’’, numbered 584/125484 and dated August, 2014. 

(B) LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY.—The Pacific Northwest Maritime Heritage Advisory Council, operating under the Washington Trust for Historic 

Preservation, shall be the local coordinating entity for the national heritage 

area established under subparagraph (A). 

(3) MOUNTAINS TO SOUND GREENWAY NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA, WASHINGTON.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—There is established the Mountains to Sound Greenway 

National Heritage Area in the State of Washington, to consist of land in 

King and Kittitas counties in the State, as generally depicted on the map 

entitled ‘‘Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area Proposed 

Boundary’’, numbered 584/125,484 and dated January 31, 2011. 

(B) LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY.—The Mountains to Sound Greenway 

Trust shall be the local coordinating entity for the national heritage area 

established under subparagraph (A). 

(4) SUSQUEHANNA GATEWAY NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA, PENNSYLVANIA.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—There is established the Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage Area in the State of Pennsylvania, to include Lancaster and 

York counties in the State. 

(B) LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY.—The Susquehanna Heritage Corporation, a nonprofit organization established under the laws of the State, shall 

be the local coordinating entity for the national heritage area established 

under subparagraph (A). 

(5) SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA, CALIFORNIA.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—There is established the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 

National Heritage Area in the State of California, to consist of land in 

Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, and Yolo counties in the 

State, as generally depicted on the map entitled ‘‘Sacramento-San Joaquin 

Delta National Heritage Area Proposed Boundary’’, numbered T27/105,030 

and dated October 2012. 

(B) LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY.—The Delta Protection Commission 

shall be the local coordinating entity for the national heritage area established under subparagraph (A). 

(6) ALABAMA BLACK BELT NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA, ALABAMA.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—There is established the Alabama Black Belt National 

Heritage Area in the State of Alabama, to include Bibb, Bullock, Butler, 

Choctaw, Clarke, Conecuh, Dallas, Greene, Hale, Lowndes, Macon, 

Marengo, Monroe, Montgomery, Perry, Pickens, Sumter, Washington and 

Wilcox counties in the State. 

(B) LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY.—The Center for the Study of the Black 

Belt at the University of West Alabama shall be the local coordinating entity for the national heritage area established under subparagraph (A). 

SEC. 4. ADMINISTRATION. 

(a) AUTHORITIES.—For purposes of carrying out the management plan for each of 

the national heritage areas designated by section 3, the Secretary, acting through 

the local coordinating entity, may use amounts made available under section 9— 

(1) to make grants to the State or a political subdivision of the State, nonprofit organizations, and other persons; 

(2) to enter into cooperative agreements with, or provide technical assistance 

to, the State or a political subdivision of the State, nonprofit organizations, and 

other interested parties; 

(3) to hire and compensate staff, which shall include individuals with expertise in natural, cultural, and historical resources protection, and heritage programming; 

(4) to obtain money or services from any source including any money or services that are provided under any other Federal law or program; 

(5) to contract for goods or services; and 

(6) to undertake to be a catalyst for any other activity that furthers the national heritage area and is consistent with the approved management plan. 

(b) DUTIES.—The local coordinating entity for each of the national heritage areas 

designated by section 3 shall— 

(1) in accordance with section 5, prepare and submit a management plan for 

the national heritage area to the Secretary; 

(2) assist units of local government, regional planning organizations, and nonprofit organizations in carrying out the approved management plan by— 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

(A) carrying out programs and projects that recognize, protect, and enhance important resource values in the national heritage area; 

(B) establishing and maintaining interpretive exhibits and programs in 

the national heritage area; 

(C) developing recreational and educational opportunities in the national 

heritage area; 

(D) increasing public awareness of, and appreciation for, natural, historical, scenic, and cultural resources of the national heritage area; 

(E) protecting and restoring historic sites and buildings in the national 

heritage area that are consistent with national heritage area themes; 

(F) ensuring that clear, consistent, and appropriate signs identifying 

points of public access and sites of interest are posted throughout the national heritage area; and 

(G) promoting a wide range of partnerships among governments, organizations, and individuals to further the national heritage area; 

(3) consider the interests of diverse units of government, businesses, organizations, and individuals in the national heritage area in the preparation and implementation of the management plan; 

(4) conduct meetings open to the public at least semiannually regarding the 

development and implementation of the management plan; 

(5) for any year that Federal funds have been received under this section— 

(A) submit to the Secretary an annual report that describes the activities, 

expenses, and income of the local coordinating entity (including grants to 

any other entities during the year that the report is made); 

(B) make available to the Secretary for audit all records relating to the 

expenditure of the funds and any matching funds; and 

(C) require, with respect to all agreements authorizing expenditure of 

Federal funds by other organizations, that the organizations receiving the 

funds make available to the Secretary for audit all records concerning the 

expenditure of the funds; and 

(6) encourage by appropriate means economic viability that is consistent with 

the national heritage area. 

(c) PROHIBITION ON THE ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY.—The local coordinating 

entity shall not use Federal funds made available under section 9 to acquire real 

property or any interest in real property. 

SEC. 5. MANAGEMENT PLAN. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, 

the local coordinating entity for each of the national heritage areas designated by 

section 3 shall submit to the Secretary for approval a proposed management plan 

for the national heritage area. 

(b) REQUIREMENTS.—The management plan shall— 

(1) incorporate an integrated and cooperative approach for the protection, enhancement, and interpretation of the natural, cultural, historic, scenic, and recreational resources of the national heritage area; 

(2) take into consideration State and local plans; 

(3) include— 

(A) an inventory of— 

(i) the resources located in the national heritage area; and 

(ii) any other property in the national heritage area that— 

(I) is related to the themes of the national heritage area; and 

(II) should be preserved, restored, managed, or maintained because of the significance of the property; 

(B) comprehensive policies, strategies and recommendations for conservation, funding, management, and development of the national heritage area; 

(C) a description of actions that governments, private organizations, and 

individuals have agreed to take to protect the natural, historical and cultural resources of the national heritage area; 

(D) a program of implementation for the management plan by the local 

coordinating entity that includes a description of— 

(i) actions to facilitate ongoing collaboration among partners to promote plans for resource protection, restoration, and construction; and 

(ii) specific commitments for implementation that have been made by 

the local coordinating entity or any government, organization, or individual for the first 5 years of operation; 

(E) the identification of sources of funding for carrying out the management plan; 

(F) analysis and recommendations for means by which Federal, State, 

and local programs, including the role of the National Park Service in the 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

national heritage area, may best be coordinated to carry out this section; 

and 

(G) an interpretive plan for the national heritage area; and 

(4) recommend policies and strategies for resource management that consider 

and detail the application of appropriate land and water management techniques, including the development of intergovernmental and interagency cooperative agreements to protect the natural, historical, cultural, educational, scenic, 

and recreational resources of the national heritage area. 

(c) DEADLINE.—If a proposed management plan is not submitted to the Secretary 

by the date that is 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the local coordinating entity shall be ineligible to receive additional funding under this Act until 

the date on which the Secretary receives and approves the management plan. 

(d) APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF MANAGEMENT PLAN.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of receipt of the management plan under subsection (a), the Secretary, in consultation with the 

State, shall approve or disapprove the management plan. 

(2) CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL.—In determining whether to approve the management plan, the Secretary shall consider whether— 

(A) the local coordinating entity is representative of the diverse interests 

of the national heritage area, including governments, natural and historic 

resource protection organizations, educational institutions, businesses, and 

recreational organizations; 

(B) the local coordinating entity has afforded adequate opportunity, including public hearings, for public and governmental involvement in the 

preparation of the management plan; and 

(C) the resource protection and interpretation strategies contained in the 

management plan, if implemented, would adequately protect the natural, 

historical, and cultural resources of the national heritage area. 

(3) ACTION FOLLOWING DISAPPROVAL.—If the Secretary disapproves the management plan under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall— 

(A) advise the local coordinating entity in writing of the reasons for the 

disapproval; 

(B) make recommendations for revisions to the management plan; and 

(C) not later than 180 days after the receipt of any proposed revision of 

the management plan from the local coordinating entity, approve or disapprove the proposed revision. 

(4) AMENDMENTS.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall approve or disapprove each amendment to the management plan that the Secretary determines make a substantial change to the management plan. 

(B) USE OF FUNDS.—The local coordinating entity shall not use Federal 

funds authorized by this section to carry out any amendments to the management plan until the Secretary has approved the amendments. 

SEC. 6. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Nothing in this Act affects the authority of a Federal agency 

to provide technical or financial assistance under any other law. 

(b) CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION.—The head of any Federal agency planning 

to conduct activities that may have an impact on a national heritage area designated by section 3 is encouraged to consult and coordinate the activities with the 

Secretary and the local coordinating entity to the maximum extent practicable. 

(c) OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES.—Nothing in this Act— 

(1) modifies, alters, or amends any law or regulation authorizing a Federal 

agency to manage Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Federal agency; 

(2) limits the discretion of a Federal land manager to implement an approved 

land use plan within the boundaries of a national heritage area designated by 

section 3; or 

(3) modifies, alters, or amends any authorized use of Federal land under the 

jurisdiction of a Federal agency. 

SEC. 7. PRIVATE PROPERTY AND REGULATORY PROTECTIONS. 

Nothing in this Act— 

(1) abridges the rights of any property owner (whether public or private), including the right to refrain from participating in any plan, project, program, or 

activity conducted within a national heritage area designated by section 3; 

(2) requires any property owner— 

(A) to permit public access (including access by Federal, State, or local 

agencies) to the property of the property owner; or 

(B) to modify public access or use of property of the property owner under 

any other Federal, State, or local law; 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
5 

(3) alters any duly adopted land use regulation, approved land use plan, or 

other regulatory authority of any Federal, State, tribal, or local agency, 

(4) conveys any land use or other regulatory authority to the local coordinating entity; 

(5) authorizes or implies the reservation or appropriation of water or water 

rights; 

(6) diminishes the authority of the State to manage fish and wildlife, including the regulation of fishing and hunting within a national heritage area designated by section 3; or 

(7) creates any liability, or affects any liability under any other law, of any 

private property owner with respect to any person injured on the private property. 

SEC. 8. EVALUATION AND REPORT. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—For each of the national heritage areas designated by section 

3, not later than 3 years before the date on which authority for Federal funding terminates for each national heritage area, the Secretary shall— 

(1) conduct an evaluation of the accomplishments of the national heritage 

area; and 

(2) prepare a report in accordance with subsection (c). 

(b) EVALUATION.—An evaluation conducted under subsection (a)(1) shall— 

(1) assess the progress of the local management entity with respect to— 

(A) accomplishing the purposes of the authorizing legislation for the national heritage area; and 

(B) achieving the goals and objectives of the approved management plan 

for the national heritage area; 

(2) analyze the investments of Federal, State, tribal, and local government 

and private entities in each national heritage area to determine the impact of 

the investments; and 

(3) review the management structure, partnership relationships, and funding 

of the national heritage area for purposes of identifying the critical components 

for sustainability of the national heritage area. 

(c) REPORT.—Based on the evaluation conducted under subsection (a)(1), the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives a report that includes recommendations for the future role of the National Park Service 

with respect to the national heritage area. 

SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be appropriated for each national heritage area designated by section 3 to carry out the purposes of this Act $10,000,000, 

of which not more than $1,000,000 may be made available in any fiscal year. 

(b) AVAILABILITY.—Amounts made available under subsection (a) shall remain 

available until expended. 

(c) COST-SHARING REQUIREMENT.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of the total cost of any activity under this 

Act shall be not more than 50 percent. 

(2) FORM.—The non-Federal contribution of the total cost of any activity 

under this Act may be in the form of in-kind contributions of goods or services 

fairly valued. 

(d) TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.—The authority of the Secretary to provide assistance under this Act (other than sections 10 and 11) terminates on the date that is 

15 years after the date of enactment of this Act. 

SEC. 10. EXTENSION OF NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA AUTHORITIES. 

(a) Section 12 of Public Law 100–692 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; 102 Stat. 4558; 112 

Stat. 3258; 123 Stat. 1292; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314) is amended— 

(1) in subsection (c)(1), by striking ‘‘2015’’ and inserting ‘‘2030’’; and 

(2) in subsection (d), by striking ‘‘2015’’ and inserting ‘‘2030’’. 

(b) Division II of Public Law 104–333 (16 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended by striking 

‘‘2015’’ each place it appears in the following sections and inserting ‘‘2030’’: 

(1) Section 107 (110 Stat. 4244; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314). 

(2) Section 408 (110 Stat. 4256; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314). 

(3) Section 507 (110 Stat. 4260; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314). 

(4) Section 707 (110 Stat. 4267; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314). 

(5) Section 809 (110 Stat. 4275; 122 Stat. 826; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314). 

(6) Section 910 (110 Stat. 4281; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314). 

(c) Section 109 of Public Law 105–355 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; 112 Stat. 3252) is 

amended by striking ‘‘September 30, 2014’’ and inserting ‘‘September 30, 2030’’. 

(d) Public Law 106–278 (16 U.S.C. 461 note) is amended— 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

(1) in section 108 (114 Stat. 818; 127 Stat. 420; 128 Stat. 314), by striking 

‘‘2015’’ and inserting ‘‘2030’’; and 

(2) in section 209 (114 Stat. 824), by striking ‘‘the date that is 15 years after 

the date of enactment of this title’’ and inserting ‘‘September 30, 2030’’. 

(e) Section 157(i) of Public Law 106-291 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; 114 Stat. 967) is 

amended by striking ‘‘2015’’ and inserting ‘‘2030’’. 

(f) Section 7 of Public Law 106–319 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; 114 Stat. 1284) is amended by striking ‘‘2015’’ and inserting ‘‘2030’’. 

(g) Section 804(j) of title VIII of division B of H.R. 5666 (Appendix D) as enacted 

into law by section 1(a)(4) of Public Law 106–554 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; 114 Stat. 

2763, 2763A-295; 123 Stat. 1294) is amended by striking ‘‘the day occurring 15 years 

after the date of enactment of this title’’ and inserting ‘‘September 30, 2030’’. 

SEC. 11. JOHN H. CHAFEE BLACKSTONE RIVER VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR 

AMENDMENTS. 

Public Law 99–647 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; 100 Stat. 3625) is amended— 

(1) in the first sentence of section 2 (110 Stat. 4202), by striking ‘‘the map 

entitled ‘Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Boundary Map’, 

numbered BRV–80–80,011, and dated May 2, 1993’’ and inserting ‘‘the map entitled ‘John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor— 

Proposed Boundary’, numbered 022/111530, and dated November 10, 2011’’; 

(2) in section 7 (120 Stat. 1858, 125 Stat. 155)— 

(A) in the section heading, by striking ‘‘TERMINATION OF COMMISSION’’ and inserting ‘‘TERMINATION OF COMMISSION; DESIGNATION OF LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY’’; 

(B) by striking ‘‘The Commission’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Commission’’; and 

(C) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(b) LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY.— 

‘‘(1) DESIGNATION.—The Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor, 

Inc., shall be the local coordinating entity for the Corridor (referred to in this 

section as the ‘local coordinating entity’). 

‘‘(2) IMPLEMENTATION OF MANAGEMENT PLAN.—The local coordinating entity 

shall assume the duties of the Commission for the implementation of the Cultural Heritage and Land Management Plan developed and approved under section 6. 

‘‘(c) USE OF FUNDS.—For the purposes of carrying out the management plan, the 

local coordinating entity may use amounts made available under this Act— 

‘‘(1) to make grants to the States of Massachusetts and Rhode Island (referred 

to in this section as the ‘States’), political subdivisions of the States, nonprofit 

organizations, and other persons; 

‘‘(2) to enter into cooperative agreements with or provide technical assistance 

to the States, political subdivisions of the States, nonprofit organizations, Federal agencies, and other interested parties; 

‘‘(3) to hire and compensate staff, including individuals with expertise in— 

‘‘(A) natural, historical, cultural, educational, scenic, and recreational resource conservation; 

‘‘(B) economic and community development; or 

‘‘(C) heritage planning; 

‘‘(4) to obtain funds or services from any source, including funds and services 

provided under any other Federal law or program; 

‘‘(5) to contract for goods or services; and 

‘‘(6) to support activities of partners and any other activities that further the 

purposes of the Corridor and are consistent with the approved management 

plan.’’; 

(3) in section 8 (120 Stat. 1858)— 

(A) in subsection (b)— 

(i) by striking ‘‘The Secretary’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary’’; and 

(ii) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(2) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—Notwithstanding chapter 63 of title 31, 

United States Code, the Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements with 

the local coordinating entity designated by paragraph (1) and other public or 

private entities for the purpose of— 

‘‘(A) providing technical assistance; or 

‘‘(B) implementing the plan under section 6(c).’’; and 

(B) by striking subsection (d) and inserting the following: 

‘‘(d) TRANSITION MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.—The Secretary shall enter 

into a memorandum of understanding with the local coordinating entity to ensure— 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
7 

‘‘(1) the appropriate transition of management of the Corridor from the Commission to the local coordinating entity; and 

‘‘(2) coordination regarding the implementation of the Cultural Heritage and 

Land Management Plan.’’; 

(4) in section 10 (104 Stat. 1018, 120 Stat. 1858)— 

(A) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘in which the Commission is in existence’’ and inserting ‘‘until September 30, 2016’’; and 

(B) by striking subsection (c); and 

(5) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘SEC. 11. REFERENCES TO THE CORRIDOR, INC. 

‘‘For purposes of sections 6, 8 (other than section 8(d)(1)), 9, and 10, a reference 

to the ‘Commission’ shall be considered to be a reference to the local coordinating 

entity.’’. 

SEC. 12. REDESIGNATION OF THE LAST GREEN VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage 

Corridor Act of 1994 (16 U.S.C. 461 note; Public Law 103–449) is amended— 

(1) in section 103— 

(A) in the heading, by striking ‘‘QUINEBAUG AND SHETUCKET RIVERS VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR’’ and inserting 

‘‘LAST GREEN VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR’’; and 

(B) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers 

Valley National Heritage Corridor’’ and inserting ‘‘The Last Green Valley 

National Heritage Corridor’’; and 

(2) in section 108(2), by striking ‘‘the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley 

National Heritage Corridor under’’ and inserting ‘‘The Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor established by’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or 

other record of the United States to the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘The Last Green 

Valley National Heritage Corridor’’. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 2602 as introduced is to establish the Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area in the State of 

Washington. 

The purpose of the bill as ordered reported is to establish six National Heritage Areas, including the Mountain to Sound Greenway 

National Heritage Area, and to rename or extend 12 existing National Heritage Areas. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

National Heritage Areas are designated by Congress as areas of 

national significance in order to protect and promote their natural, 

historic, cultural, and recreational resources. Unlike units of the 

National Park System, which are owned by the Federal Government and managed by the National Park Service, National Heritage Areas are community-based initiatives to preserve, promote, 

and interpret an area’s resources. The property within the National 

Heritage Area is not acquired by the Federal Government, and the 

resource management plan for the area is developed and implemented by a local coordinating entity. Congress authorizes the National Park Service to provide technical and limited financial assistance to the coordinating entity, but the National Park Service 

does not manage the Areas itself. National Heritage Areas have 

been shown to provide economic benefits to the communities and 

regions they serve. 

S. 2602, as ordered reported, designates six new National Heritage Areas. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
8 

Appalachian Forest National Heritage Area 

The Appalachian Forest Heritage Area encompasses eighteen 

counties in the highlands of West Virginia and western Maryland. 

They include Allegany and Garrett counties in Maryland, and 

Barbour, Braxton, Grant, Greenbrier, Hampshire, Hardy, Mineral, 

Morgan, Nicholas, Pendleton, Pocahontas, Preston, Randolph, 

Tucker, Upshur, and Webster counties in West Virginia. These 

counties collectively represent the significant highlands timber-producing areas of these two states. The forest and industry from the 

forest have been commanding factors in the region’s economy. 

A study conducted by West Virginia University’s Davis College of 

Agriculture, Forestry and Consumer Sciences determined the feasibility of establishment of a national heritage area found that the 

central Appalachian Forest has outstanding natural resources and 

historical and cultural themes of state and national significance. 

Timber harvesting in the region helped fuel the industrial revolution. This area is the core of the central hardwood forest that is 

today the largest of its kind in the world, having regrown from the 

original cutting aided by forest management and protection of public lands. 

Protected and designated natural resources within the Heritage 

Area include Monongahela National Forest, portions of George 

Washington National Forest, Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge, the nation’s first National Recreation Area at Seneca Rocks/ 

Spruce Knob, 14 National Natural Landmarks, 5 wilderness areas, 

12 West Virginia State Parks, 5 West Virginia State Forests, 9 

Maryland State Parks, and 4 Maryland State Forests, plus a number of natural areas protected by non-profit organizations. 

Significant historic and cultural sites and resources within the 

Heritage Area include five National Historic Landmarks, portions 

of the C&O Canal National Historical Park, the Historic National 

Road, Canal Place Heritage Area, four national scenic byways, significant Civilian Conservation Corp (CCC) works at Watoga State 

Park, state designated byways, and a total of 26 historic districts 

and 215 individual sites listed on the National Register. 

The Forest Heritage story can be expressed in the Heritage Area 

through a variety of existing resources, such as remnants of old 

growth forests, protected wilderness areas, historic sites from the 

logging era including the intact logging company town at Cass Scenic Railroad State Park, national and state forest lands created to 

foster regrowth of the forest, CCC structures demonstrating conservation efforts, experimental forests demonstrating the evolution 

of forestry management, managed public and private forests, and 

a dynamic forest industry with mills and value-added products that 

demonstrate the ongoing importance of the forest and forest products to this region. 

The extensive central hardwood forests and undeveloped rural 

character of the Appalachian Forest Heritage Area provide natural 

and recreational resources, scenic vistas, outdoor recreation, and 

opportunities for nature observation for people throughout the 

United States to enjoy. 

The central Appalachian culture includes folk life, music, dance, 

crafts, and traditions that are inextricably tied to the forest and reliance upon forest products. The Heritage Area represents a cross 

section of American history illustrating how people lived in and 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
9 

interacted with the forested mountains, including Native Americans, frontier settlements, the Civil War First Campaign and formation of a state, blending of cultures from periods of European 

and African-American immigration, and adaptation to changing 

economies in contemporary America. The forested landscapes of the 

present directly link the Forest Heritage of the past to the future, 

as do the historic valley settlements, farmlands, and industrial 

landscapes. 

Maritime Washington National Heritage Area 

The Maritime Washington National Heritage Area covers an 

area in the counties of Whatcom, Skagit, Snohomish, San Juan, Island, King, Pierce, Thurston, Mason, Kitsap, Jefferson, Clallam, 

and Grays Harbor in western Washington State. Western Washington State’s heritage is defined by its relationship to the waters 

of Puget Sound, the Straits of Juan de Fuca and the Pacific Ocean. 

Native communities found a bounty of resources in the waters and 

shorelines of this area where permanent settlements arose. While 

salmon and sea life provided an abundance of sustenance, western 

red cedar provided the material to make these people a maritime 

culture. Canoe culture allowed an extensive trade and social network throughout the region and was reliant on these open waterways. The very resources that provided for native peoples to have 

a thriving culture also attracted European and American explorers 

and settlers. 

In 1774, Spanish ships were the first European craft to sail the 

region’s waters. Juan Perez landed men along Washington’s coast 

and the following year Bruno de Heceta established Spanish claims 

to the region. They soon were followed by other explorers including 

James Cook (1778), who spotted Cape Flattery at the entrance to 

the waterway that leads to Puget Sound. It wasn’t until 1787 that 

a non-Native entered these straits when Captain Charles Barkley 

named it for Juan de Fuca. For the next five years both Spanish 

and British explorers explored more of the region, including Captain George Vancouver who named the Sound for Peter Puget, one 

of his sailors. American inroads to the region began in earnest 

when Captain Robert Gray discovered the Columbia River and also 

that otter furs obtained from the natives of the Pacific Northwest 

sold for a handsome profit in China. Trading vessels foreshadowed 

fur trade forts including the Hudson’s Bay Company’s Fort 

Nisqually in 1833. From this establishment’s farms came an export 

trade that tied Puget Sound to Russian Alaska, Mexican California, 

Hawaii and Great Britain. 

Following the settlement of the international boundary between 

British and American land, American settlements began to gain 

strength following 1846. The timber industry spurred these settlements and the transformation of the region from a backwater to a 

center of maritime commerce. Pacific Northwest ships helped supply the Klondike gold rush. Lumber shipped from the region helped 

rebuild San Francisco after the earthquake of 1906 and was exported throughout the world. 

Shipyards followed after exporting of lumber began. In fact, the 

history of ship building—both civilian and military—highlights a 

major economic activity of the region today. Naval activity at 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
10 

Bremerton, Bangor and Everett a vital connection to the region’s 

maritime past. 

Today, the region continues to be tied to its saltwater heritage 

both in commerce and recreation. In 2010, the Washington State 

Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation undertook a 

feasibility study of the designation of a national heritage area to 

preserve and promote this heritage. Designation of a National Heritage Area and a coordinating organization would allow for the significant number of maritime resources (museums and interpretive 

centers, historic vessels, maritime education centers, lighthouses 

and locks, waterfronts and public spaces) to actively develop opportunities for visitors. 

Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area 

Stretching from the shores of Puget Sound to the heart of Washington State, the Mountains to Sound Greenway is a mosaic of 

thriving communities, living history, and vast natural lands in 

King and Kittitas counties, Washington. With 1.5 million acres of 

rugged mountains, vast forests, high desert, suburban parks and 

gardens, and metropolitan streets, the Greenway encompasses a 

shared heritage of historic towns, healthy ecosystems, spectacular 

alpine wilderness, working farms and forests, and extensive outdoor recreation in a region that includes one of the major metropolitan areas in the United States. 

Following an initial surge of logging and mining, local residents 

began to consider ways of living close to the land without exhausting it. Twenty years ago, a coalition of civic leaders and community 

activists came together around the need to preserve the Greenway 

and its natural and historical assets. 

During 2009 and 2010, the Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust 

(Trust) engaged stakeholders in discussions about the Greenway 

and what opportunities exist for conserving and enhancing a sustainable balance into the future. In March, 2012, the Trust completed a study of the feasibility of establishing the Mountains to 

Sound Greenway National Heritage Area. 

Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage Area 

The Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage Area includes the 

Lower Susquehanna River corridor and all of Lancaster and York 

Counties in south-central Pennsylvania, along the Susquehanna 

River. It stretches along the banks of the longest river on the East 

Coast, the 441-mile long Susquehanna River. The cultural and religious beliefs of this area’s European settlers flourished and spread 

to the outlying East Coast regions during the 17th and 18th centuries. 

The area’s name is based on its earlier inhabitants, an Iroquoian 

tribe who called themselves the Conestoga. The Virginia 

Algonquian name for the Tribe was Susquehannock. Captain John 

Smith entered a trade alliance with the Tribe when he traveled up 

the Susquehanna River in the summer of 1608, beginning a tradition of commerce that spanned hundreds of miles and years. The 

region is recognized as an area of not just commerce, but also invention. Along the banks of the Susquehanna John Elgar constructed the first iron steamboat in America and it was the birthplace of the original inventor of the boats, Robert Fulton. During 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
11 

the Revolutionary War, the Continental Congress met in Lancaster 

and York Counties and it was in York where the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union were approved. 

The area is also known for its natural resources, including remnant old growth forests and migratory bird nesting grounds. Within 

the area are also two designated National Natural Landmarks, 

Ferncliff and the Susquehanna Gorge, and two National Recreation 

Trails, Kelly’s Run and Susquehanna River Water trails. 

In 2001, the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources designated the Lancaster-York Heritage Region as 

a state heritage area, now known as the Susquehanna Gateway 

Heritage Area. The management entity, formerly known as the 

Lancaster-York Heritage Region, changed its name to the Susquehanna Heritage Corporation in order to highlight its connection to 

the Susquehanna River and its focus on, ‘‘the cultural and economic value of the river’s heritage and outdoor recreation.’’ The 

Susquehanna Heritage Corporation prepared a feasibility study for 

the area. After a review of the feasibility study, the National Park 

Service found the study area to meet the national significance criteria for potential designation as a heritage area. 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area 

The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is formed by the confluence 

of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers as well as the 

Mokelumne, Consumnes, and Calaveras Rivers within the five 

counties of Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, and 

Yolo. The resulting rare inland Delta is the largest estuary on 

America’s west coast (1,000 square miles). Today, the Delta’s diverse habitats support a wide variety of plants and animals including migrating birds and anadromous fish. 

Native American groups used the Delta prior to the influx of fur 

traders in the 18th and 19th centuries. During the mid-1800s Gold 

Rush, prospectors recognized the agricultural value of the Delta’s 

fertile soils and abundant water. Marshlands were converted into 

agricultural lands, which are still in production today. The process 

of reclamation and the ensuing agriculture brought with it a diversity of cultural heritage including Chinese, Japanese, Filipinos, 

East Indians, Portuguese and Italian immigrants who helped develop the former marsh lands into highly productive agricultural 

lands. By 1930, the Delta marsh lands had been reclaimed into a 

network of waterways and islands. Approximately 1,100 square 

miles of levees are still in use today to support the agricultural industry. 

Recreational opportunities within the Delta include boating, 

wakeboarding, windsurfing, fishing, and bird watching. These opportunities attract visitors and provide outdoor experiences for people living nearby in the large urban centers that surround the area. 

The Delta area also serves as an important infrastructure corridor 

between northern and central California for power, gas, water, 

roads, and shipping canals. The Delta is one of California’s largest 

watersheds, draining approximately 40 percent of California’s land. 

Since the early 1900s, urban sprawl has been identified as a significant threat to the Delta. 

In 2009, the California State Legislature charged the Delta Protection Commission to develop a proposal to establish State and 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
12 

Federal designation of the Delta as a place of special significance, 

including the ability to apply for designation as a National Heritage Area. As a result, the Delta Protection Commission, along with 

public and private stakeholders, worked together to develop a draft 

feasibility study of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National 

Heritage Area. The draft study is currently under review by the 

National Park Service and the Delta Protection Commission. 

Alabama Black Belt National Heritage Area 

The Black Belt region of Alabama (Black Belt) stretches across 

the lower-central portion of Alabama, from the eastern border of 

Mississippi to the western border of southern Georgia. The Black 

Belt is named for the exceptionally fertile black soil in the region. 

In the 1820s and 1830s, this soil influenced the construction of 

a large network of cotton plantations, which in turn made the region one of the wealthiest and most politically powerful in the 

United States. When the Civil War began in the early 1860s, the 

city of Montgomery was established as the first capital of the Confederacy. The region is recognized by many as the center of the 

civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Several pivotal 

events in the civil rights movement took place in the region including the Montgomery bus boycott and the march from Selma to 

Montgomery, which helped lead to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 

the Voting Rights Act of 1965. 

The geography of the Black Belt is comprised of prairies, forests, 

and rivers, and the area contains diverse species of flora and fauna 

as well as many fossils, including shells and bones of ancient sea 

life. 

The Black Belt contains three units of the National Park System: 

the Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail; the Tuskegee 

Airmen National Historic Site; and the Tuskegee Institute National 

Historic Site. The region also includes the Talladega National Forest and the Tuskegee National Forest. The Bartram Trail, a National Recreation Trail, runs through the Tuskegee National Forest. Additionally, the region contains two National Wildlife Refuges 

and two Army Corps of Engineers projects: the Alabama River 

Lakes and the Black Warrior and Tombigbee Lakes, river basins 

provide public recreation opportunities and natural resource sites. 

The Alabama Black Belt Heritage Area Task Force was formed 

in 2004 with the purpose of exploring National Heritage Area designation. It completed a feasibility study in February 2009, which 

concluded that National Heritage Area designation would best promote and preserve the unique historical, cultural, ecological, and 

geographical assets of the Black Belt, while creating much-needed 

economic and community development. 

Extension and modification of existing National Heritage Areas 

Congress has traditionally authorized National Heritage Areas 

for periods of 15 years. In addition to designating 6 new National 

Heritage Areas, S. 2602, as ordered reported, extends the authorizations for 13 National Heritage Areas to 2030. The 13 National 

Heritage Areas are: the Delaware and Lehigh Canal National Heritage Corridor in Pennsylvania; the National Coal Heritage Area in 

West Virginia; the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area in southwestern Pennsylvania; the Essex National Heritage Area in MassaVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
13 

chusetts; the Silos to Smokestacks National Heritage Area (America’s Agricultural Heritage Partnership) in Iowa; the Ohio and Erie 

Canal National Heritage Corridor in northeast Ohio; the Hudson 

River Valley National Heritage Area in New York; the Automobile 

National Heritage Area in southeastern Michigan; the Lackawanna 

Valley National Heritage Area in Pennsylvania; the Schuylkill 

River Valley National Heritage Area in Pennsylvania; the Wheeling National Heritage Area in West Virginia; the Yuma Crossing 

National Heritage Area in Arizona; and the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor in New York. 

In addition, S. 2602, as ordered reported, designates the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor, Inc., as the local coordinating entity for the John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley 

National Heritage Corridor in Massachusetts and Rhode Island, 

and redesignates the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor in as the Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor in south-central Massachusetts and eastern Connecticut. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 2602 was introduced by Senator Cantwell on July 15, 2014. A 

similar bill, H.R. 1785 was introduced in the House of Representatives by Representative Reichert on April 26, 2013. The subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 2602 on July 23, 

2014. At its business meeting on November 13, 2014, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 2602 reported 

with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. 

The amendment incorporates the text of 14 other National Heritage Area bills. They are: 

S. 219, the Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage Area Act, 

which was introduced by Senator Casey on February 4, 2013. The 

Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 219 on April 

23, 2013 (S. Hrg. 113–27). During the 112th Congress, Senator 

Casey introduced identical legislation, S. 1150. The Subcommittee 

on National Parks held a hearing on S. 219 on March 7, 2013 (S. 

Hrg. 112–401). 

S. 228, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage 

Area Establishment Act, which was introduced by Senators Feinstein and Boxer on February 4, 2013. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on April 23, 2013 (S. Hrg. 113–27). In 

the 112th Congress similar legislation, S. 29, was introduced by 

Senator Reid for Senators Feinstein and Boxer on January 25, 

2012. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 

29 on March 7, 2012 (S. Hrg. 112–401). 

S. 371, the Blackstone River Valley National Historical Park Establishment Act, which was introduced on February 14, 2013, by 

Senators Reed, Whitehouse, Warren, and Cowan. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 371 on April 23, 

2013 (S. Hrg. 113–27). The amendment adopted only portions of 

this bill that pertain to the John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley 

National Heritage Area. A similar bill, H.R. 706, was introduced 

was introduced on February 13, 2013, in the House of Representatives by Representative Cicilline. In the 112th Congress similar 

legislation, S. 1708, was introduced on October 13, 2011. The SubVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
14 

committee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 1708 on March 

7, 2012 (S. Hrg. 112–401). 

S. 702, a bill to designate the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers 

Valley National Heritage Corridor as ‘‘The Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor,’’ which was introduced by Senators 

Blumenthal, Cowan, Murphy, and Warren on April 10, 2013. The 

Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 702 on July 

31, 2013 (S. Hrg. 113–93). A similar bill, H.R. 1471, was introduced 

in the House of Representatives on April 10, 2013, by Representative Courtney. 

S. 869, the Alabama Black Belt National Heritage Act, which 

was introduced by Senators Shelby and Sessions on May 7, 2013. 

The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 869 on 

July 31, 2013 (S. Hrg. 113–93). A similar bill, H.R. 2254, was introduced into the House of Representatives on June 4, 2013, by Representative Sewell. In the 111th Congress, a similar bill, S. 2892, 

was introduced by Senators Shelby and Sessions on December 16, 

2009. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on the 

bill on March 17, 2010. The Committee ordered S. 2892 favorably 

reported, as amended, at its business meeting on June 21, 2010. (S. 

Rept. 111–265.) 

S. 1138, a bill to reauthorize the Hudson River Valley National 

Heritage Area, which was introduced by Senator Gillibrand on July 

11, 2013. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on 

S. 1138 on July 31, 2013 (S. Hrg. 113–93). A similar bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on June 18, 2013, by Representative Maloney. 

S. 1151, America’s Agricultural Heritage Partnership Reauthorization Act, which was introduced by Senator Harkin on June 12, 

2013. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 

1151 on July 31, 2013 (S. Hrg. 113–93). 

S. 1157, a bill to reauthorize the Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area, the Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area, the 

Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Area, and the Schuylkill 

River Valley National Heritage Area, which was introduced by Senator Casey on June 13, 2013. The Subcommittee on National Parks 

held a hearing on S. 1157 on July 31, 2013 (S. Hrg. 113–93). A 

similar bill, H.R. 2360, was introduced into the House of Representatives on June 13, 2013, by Representative Fitzpatrick. 

S. 1186, the Essex National Heritage Area Reauthorization Act, 

which was introduced by Senators Warren and Cowan on June 19, 

2013. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 

1186 on July 31, 2013 (S. Hrg. 113–93). A similar bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on June 27, 2013, by Representative Tierney. 

S. 1339, a bill to reauthorize the Ohio & Erie Canal National 

Heritage Canalway, was introduced by Senator Brown on July 23, 

2013. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 

1339 on July 31, 2013 (S. Hrg. 113–93). 

S. 2111, the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area Reauthorization Act, which was introduced by Senator McCain on March 12, 

2014. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 

2111 on July 23, 2014. A similar bill was introduced in the House 

of Representatives on March 12, 2014 by Representative Grijalva. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
15 

S. 2221, the MotorCities National Heritage Area Extension Act, 

which was introduced by Senators Levin and Stabenow on April 8, 

2014. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing on S. 

2221 on July 23, 2014. A similar bill was introduced in the House 

of Representatives on April 8, 2014 by Representative Dingell. 

S. 2318, a bill to reauthorize the Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Act, which was introduced by Senator Gillibrand on 

May 12, 2014. The Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing 

on S. 2318 on July 23, 2014. A similar bill was introduced in the 

House of Representatives on May 9, 2014, by Representative Higgins. 

S. 2576, the Maritime Washington National Heritage Area Act, 

which was introduced by Senators Cantwell and Murray on July 9, 

2014. The Subcommittee on National Park held a hearing on S. 

2576. A similar bill was introduced in the House of Representatives 

on July 8, 2014 by Representative Kilmer. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 

open business session on November 13, 2014, by a voice vote of a 

quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 2602, if 

amended as described herein. 

COMMITTEE AMENDMENT

During its consideration of S. 2602, the Committee adopted an 

amendment in the nature of a substitute. The amendment incorporated provisions from 14 other National Heritage Area bills into 

S. 2602, establishing 5 new National Heritage Areas (in addition 

to the Mountains to the Sound Greenway National Heritage Area), 

extending the authorization for 13 existing national heritage areas, 

designating a new management entity for the John H. Chafee 

Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor, and renaming 

the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor the Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor. The 

amendment also amends the short title and consolidates management provisions for the National Heritage Areas designated by the 

measure. 

The Committee Amendment is explained in detail in the sectionby-section analysis below. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 provides the short title, ‘‘National Heritage Area Authorization Act of 2014.’’ 

Section 2 defines the term ‘‘Secretary’’. 

Section 3 establishes six new national heritage areas including 

the Appalachian Forest National Heritage Area in the states of 

West Virginia and Maryland; the Maritime Washington National 

Heritage Area in the State of Washington; Mountains to Sound 

Greenway National Heritage Area in the State of Washington; Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage Area in the State of Pennsylvania; Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area in 

the State of California; and, Alabama Black Belt National Heritage 

Area in the State of Alabama. For each of the new national heritage areas, a local coordinating entity is named. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
16 

Section 4 details how the new national heritage areas will be administered. Subsection (a) provides the Secretary with the authority to: use funds authorized by section 9; provide grants; enter into 

cooperative agreements; hire and compensate staff; and obtain 

money or services. 

Subsection (b) details the duties of the local coordinating entities. 

Subsection (c) prohibits the local coordinating entity from using 

Federal funds to acquire real property or any interest in real property. 

Section 5 requires that the local coordinating entities submit a 

proposed management plan within 3 years of enactment. 

Section 6 affirms the authority of Federal agencies to provide 

technical or financial assistance under any other law; encourages 

agencies to consult and coordinate activities with the Secretary and 

local coordinating entity; and clarifies that nothing in this Act 

modifies authorities of Federal agencies to manage Federal land, 

limits the discretion of a Federal agency to implement an approved 

land use plan, or modifies or alters any authorized use of Federal 

land. 

Section 7 contains several savings provisions to clarify that the 

designation of the national heritage area will not affect private 

property rights, affect governmental land use regulation, reserve or 

appropriate water rights, diminish the authority of the State to 

manage fish and wildlife, or create any liability for property owners 

within the heritage area. 

Section 8 requires the Secretary to conduct an evaluation of the 

National Heritage Areas that assesses the progress of the local coordinating entity with respect to accomplishing the purposes of this 

Act and whether the local coordinating entity achieved the goals 

and objectives of the approved management plan. The evaluation 

is also required to analyze governmental and private investments 

in the heritage area to their impact. 

Section 9 authorizes not more than $1 million to be appropriated for any fiscal year and a total authorization of $10 million. 

Section 10 extends the following national heritage area authorities: Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Corridor; Coal National 

Heritage Area; Steel Industry (Rivers of Steel) National Heritage 

Area; Essex National Heritage Area; America’s Agricultural Heritage Partnership (Silos and Smokestacks) National Heritage Area; 

Ohio & Erie Canal National Heritage Area; Hudson River Valley 

National Heritage Area; Automobile (MotorCities) National Heritage Area; Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area; Schuylkill 

River National Heritage Area; Wheeling National Heritage Area; 

Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area; and, Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. 

Section 11 designates the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor, Inc. as the local coordinating entity for the John H. 

Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor. 

Section 12 renames the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley 

National Heritage Corridor as the Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The Congressional Budget Office estimate of the costs of this 

measure has been requested but was not received at the time the 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
17 

report was filed. When the Congressional Budget Office completes 

its cost estimate, it will be posted on the Internet at www.cbo.gov. 

REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following evaluation 

of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in carrying out 

S. 2602. 

The Act is not a regulatory measure in the sense of imposing 

Government-established standards or significant economic responsibilities on private individuals and businesses. 

No personal information would be collected in administering the 

program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal privacy. 

Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the enactment of S. 2602, as ordered reported. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

S. 2602, as reported, does not contain any congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The testimony provided by the National Park Service to the Subcommittee on National Parks hearing on S. 2602, and other National Heritage Area legislation incorporated in the amendment in 

the nature of a substitute follows: 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTINA GOLDFUSS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, 

CONGRESSIONAL AND EXTERNAL RELATIONS, NATIONAL

PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present 

the Department of the Interior’s views on S. 2602, a bill 

to establish the Mountains to Sound Greenway National 

Heritage Area in the State of Washington. 

The Department supports the objectives of S. 2602. The 

Mountains to Sound Greenway area has been found to 

meet the National Park Service’s interim criteria for designation as a National Heritage Area. However, the Department recommends that Congress pass program legislation that establishes criteria to evaluate potentially qualified National Heritage Areas and a process for the designation, funding, and administration of these areas before 

designating any additional new National Heritage Areas. 

The Department also recommends a technical amendment 

to provide for an official NPS map to accompany the legislation. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, although there is no authority in law that guides 

their designation and administration as a national system. 

National Heritage Area Program legislation would provide 

a much-needed framework for evaluation of proposed national heritage areas, guiding planning and management, 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
18 

clarifying roles and responsibilities, and standardizing 

timeframes and funding for designated areas. 

S. 2602 would establish the Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area to include lands within the 

Yakima River basin upstream of Manastash Creek and the 

cities of Ellensburg, Roslyn, Cle Elum, and South Cel 

Elum in Kittitas County. It would also include all lands in 

the Snoqualmie River, Cedar River, and Lake Washington 

watersheds, the Puget Sound near shore watersheds within and including the cities of Seattle and Shoreline, and 22 

additional cities in King County. 

The proposed local coordinating entity would be the nonprofit corporation Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust 

(Trust). 

NPS review of the Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area Feasibility Study completed by the 

Trust in March 2012, found that the study did not meet 

the NPS Interim National Heritage Area Feasibility Study 

Guidelines. The NPS requested the Trust provide a revised 

statement of national importance; themes and a list of associated resources; a summary of traditions, customs, beliefs and folk life; and a boundary justification. The NPS 

received the Addendum from the Trust on May 27, 2014, 

which (1) explained that the Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area is nationally important for its 

association with the expansion of our national transportation system and the creation of our modern timber industry; (2) identified three themes associated with the region’s national importance and their related historic and 

natural resources; (3) summarized the ongoing traditions, 

customs, beliefs, and folklife that interprets and celebrates 

the region’s national importance; and (4) justified the proposed boundary in relation to the strategic assemblage of 

resources and opportunities for conservation, recreation 

and education, as well as public interest in this national 

heritage area designation. 

The proposed Mountains to Sound Greenway National 

Heritage Area tells a nationally important story of how the 

Northern Pacific and Milwaukee railroads, and later the 

Sunset Highway and Interstate 90, created the final section of an historic transportation corridor that wove the 

Northwest into the nation’s fabric, opened up trade between the United States and Asia, and led to the development of the nation’s modern timber industry. 

Although the Puget Sound area was part of the United 

States by 1950, the Cascade Range isolated the region 

from the rest of the nation, with little access to its abundant natural resources and sheltered deep-water ports. 

Chartered by President Lincoln in 1864, the Northern Pacific Railroad was constructed along a Native American 

pathway through the nearly impassible Snoqualmie Pass 

to reach Seattle 20 years later. The connection of the Eastern seaboard and Great Lakes with the farthest reaches of 

the continental United States reinforced the newly drawn 

American-Canadian border. The City of Seattle grew into 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
19 

a booming hub for shipbuilding and the trade of foreign 

goods and the region’s own wealth of natural resources, 

opening the country’s first trade routes on what we now 

call the Pacific Rim. Rail towns sprung up along the main 

lines with mill and coal towns on the spurs, while piers 

stretched into Puget Sound, attracting immigrant workers 

whose descendants live in the region today. 

The Milwaukee Road crossed the Cascades in the early 

1900s using pioneering tunneling and electrification techniques. The high speed electric trains of the Milwaukee 

Road carried Japanese silk to New York, the nation’s most 

precious rail commodity after gold and silver bullion, but 

the railroad made its money carrying passengers to ski, 

hike, and climb at Snoqualmie Pass. The conservation 

ethic that developed in the region from enjoyment of the 

region’s natural beauty is strongly held today. 

Washington’s modern economy is descended directly 

from the Northern Pacific Land Grant that was used to 

build the railroad. In place of public financing, the railroad 

received the largest federal land grant in American history. The railroad was granted 40 million acres—every 

other square mile of land in a checkerboard pattern up to 

forty miles on either side of the right-of-way. This consolidated ownership, as well as steam technology brought by 

the railroad, created the booming timber industry that 

helped rebuild San Francisco after the 1906 earthquake 

and fueled shipbuilding in World War I. Airplanes being 

produced for the military on a large scale for the first time 

were built from the region’s prized spruce trees. Demand 

for this aircraft led William Boeing to found a company in 

the region in 1916 that supplies the nation’s air transportation industry today. 

Plantation forestry involving sustained-yield harvest and 

reforestation was invented in 1937 by William 

Weyerhauser, who had amassed one and a half million 

acres of Washington timberland. He established the first 

seedling industry at Snoqualmie Falls and began to manage timber across multiple harvests, a radical idea at the 

time. This remains the industry standard across much of 

the country today, 

The cultural heritage of the Mountains to Sound Greenway National Heritage Area is alive in the ethnic diversity 

of the region’s population, in the traditions, customs and 

celebrations, and in museums, festivals, historic sites, and 

interpretive trails that both residents and visitors enjoy 

today. Following modern-day political and land-management structures, the proposed heritage area boundaries 

are pragmatic, thus offering the best formula for long-term 

success as communities seek to manage, enhance, and interpret resources across this landscape. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

happy to answer any questions you or any other members 

of the subcommittee may have. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
20 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTINA GOLDFUSS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, 

CONGRESSIONAL AND EXTERNAL RELATIONS, NATIONAL

PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present 

the Department of the Interior’s views on S. 2576, a bill 

to establish the Maritime Washington National Heritage 

Area. 

The Department supports the objectives of S. 2576. The 

Maritime Washington National Heritage Area has been 

found to meet the National Park Service’s interim criteria 

for designation as a National Heritage Area. However, the 

Department recommends that Congress pass program legislation that establishes criteria to evaluate potentially 

qualified National Heritage Areas and a process for the 

designation, funding, and administration of these areas before designating any additional new National Heritage 

Areas. The Department also recommends a technical 

amendment to provide for an official NPS map to accompany the legislation. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, although there is no authority in law that guides 

their designation and administration as a national system. 

National heritage area program legislation would provide 

a much-needed framework for evaluation of proposed national heritage areas, guiding planning and management, 

clarifying roles and responsibilities, and standardizing 

timeframes and funding for designated areas. 

S. 2576 would establish the Maritime Washington National Heritage Area to include Federal, State, local and 

tribal lands that allow public access and are at least partly 

located within one-quarter mile landward of the shoreline 

from Grays Harbor to the Canadian border and extending 

through the City of Seattle to include Lake Union. This 

‘‘Salt Water Coast’’ covers 3,000 linear miles of coastline. 

The proposed local coordinating entity would be the Pacific Northwest Maritime Heritage Advisory Council operating under the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation. 

A Feasibility Study for a Washington State National 

Maritime Heritage Area was completed and published by 

the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic 

Preservation in April 2010. The NPS conducted a review 

of the study for consistency with the interim National Heritage Area Feasibility Study Guidelines. The review of this 

document and a subsequent revised Statement of Importance and boundary justification, submitted March 5, 2012, 

found that it meets these criteria. The Washington Trust 

for Historic Preservation was informed of this finding in a 

letter dated June 5, 2012. 

The unique geography of the Puget Sound, northern 

coast, and Grays Harbor region reflects a maritime history 

both before and after our nation’s borders were set. The 

steep terrain of glacier-clad mountain ranges juxtaposed to 

saltwater shoreline with a temperate climate enabled naVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
21 

tive people build a complex culture around canoe routes 

and salmon cycles. By the late 18th century Spanish, 

English, and Russian explorers were mapping and naming 

places in the region in the name of science and the interest 

of colonial empire. After the 49th parallel was established 

as the nation’s northern border in 1846, this new corner of 

the country entered a dramatic period of social, political 

and military development. The vast conifer forests were 

easily accessible for timber production and the coastal geography made possible its transport to the developing 

American west. The timber trade and the abundant marine resources—especially salmon—of the Strait of San 

Juan de Fuca, Puget Sound, and the Pacific Ocean, attracted American, European, and Pan-Asian settlers who 

provided the labor for thriving port economies such as Port 

Angeles, Port Townsend, and Port Gamble. 

The proposed Maritime Washington National Heritage 

Area stretches from northern points of entry at Bellingham and Blaine south to the protected harbors of Aberdeen and Hoquiam. The focal point of the heritage area is 

the greater Puget Sound area, a system of interconnected 

marine waterways, harbors, bays, and inlets along the 

shores of the San Juan Archipelago and the many waterfront towns, cities, and ports that have grown up here over 

time. The naval facilities on Puget Sound have built and 

repaired vessels in their fleet for over a century. Today, 

the region still relies on these waterways to make up the 

largest marine highway system—its famous ferries—for 

day-to-day transportation. 

The cultural landscape of the region tells the stories of 

a rich Native American civilization, development of the 

farthest territorial corner of the United States, of gold 

rushers and ship builders, and of a gateway to Alaska, 

Asia, and the seaports of the world. Traditional Native 

American sites, lumber towns, logging mills, salmon processing plants, historic ships, lighthouses, museums, and a 

host of other maritime-related objects, sites, and traditions 

relate these stories and make up the proposed Maritime 

Washington National Heritage Area. The designation 

would strengthen and encourage the partnership of organizations that have for two decades been committed to the 

recognition, preservation, and continued economic, recreational, and educational use of this landscape and its resources. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

happy to answer any questions you or any other members 

of the subcommittee may have. 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTINA GOLDFUSS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, 

CONGRESSIONAL AND EXTERNAL RELATIONS, NATIONAL

PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present 

the Department of the Interior’s views on S. 1641, a bill 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
22 

to establish the Appalachian Forest National Heritage 

Area, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports the objectives of Title I of S. 

1641, which would designate the Appalachian Forest National Heritage Area. This area has been found to meet the 

National Park Service’s interim criteria for designation as 

a National Heritage Area. However, the Department recommends that Congress pass program legislation that establishes criteria to evaluate potentially qualified National 

Heritage Areas and a process for the designation, funding, 

and administration of these areas before designating any 

additional new National Heritage Areas. 

Regarding Title II, which provides for the extension of 

funding authority for the National Coal Heritage Area and 

the Wheeling National Heritage Area, the Department recognizes the important work that has been done by the organizations involved with both national heritage areas. 

However, we recommend that Title II be amended to authorize an extension for both heritage areas’ program funding until such time as the National Park Service (NPS) 

has completed an evaluation and report on the accomplishments of the area and the future role of the NPS; and until 

national heritage area (NHA) program legislation is enacted that standardizes timeframes and funding for designated national heritage areas. 

The NPS is initiating phase-in of a funding formula for 

NHAs, which is a merit-based system for allocating heritage area funding that considers a variety of factors based 

upon criteria related to program goals, accountability, and 

organizational sustainability. When fully implemented, the 

performance-based funding formula plan will reward NHA 

entities that bring in additional non-Federal investment 

and that have developed a sustainability plan. The Department would like to work with Congress to determine the 

future federal role when national heritage areas reach the 

end of their authorized eligibility for heritage program 

funding. We recommend that Congress enact national heritage area program legislation during this Congress. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides their 

designation and administration as a national system. National heritage area program legislation would provide a 

much-needed framework for evaluation of proposed national heritage areas, guiding planning and management, 

clarifying roles and responsibilities, and standardizing 

timeframes and funding for designated areas. 

Title I of S. 1641 would establish the Appalachian Forest 

National Heritage Area encompassing 16 counties in 

northeastern West Virginia and two counties in western 

Maryland, a region that has a rich history of human activity shaped by the geography of the forested central Appalachian Mountains. The proposed local coordinating entity 

would be the Appalachian Forest Heritage Area, Inc., a 

non-profit organization that currently coordinates forestrelated heritage tourism activities in this region. The proVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
23 

visions in this bill are similar to provisions in most of the 

other NHA designation bills that have been enacted in recent years, including a total authorization of $10 million 

and a sunset date for the authorization of funding 15 years 

after the date of enactment. 

The Appalachian Forest Heritage Area, Inc. prepared a 

feasibility study for designation of the area as a national 

heritage area several years ago. The National Park Service 

reviewed the study and found that it met the NPS interim 

criteria contained in National Heritage Area Feasibility 

Study Guidelines. The Appalachian Forest Heritage Area, 

Inc. was informed of this finding in a letter dated August 

16, 2007. 

The area encompassed by the proposed NHA is a significant part of the central Appalachian highlands that has a 

long history of timber harvesting, forest management, and 

the production of forest products. It is an area that provided resources for industrial expansion in the late 19th 

and early 20th Centuries, but where large portions of the 

forests have regrown. Areas within the proposed NHA include the Monongahela National Forest, portions of the 

George Washington National Forest, the Canaan Valley 

National Wildlife Refuge, and the Seneca Rocks-Spruce 

Knob National Recreation Area, along with a large number 

of state forests and parks and areas protected by nonprofit 

conservation organizations. The extensive hardwood forests and undeveloped rural character of the area provide 

scenic vistas, opportunities for nature observation, and 

outdoor recreation opportunities. 

There are also numerous historic and cultural sites within the area, such as historic sites from the logging era and 

Civilian Conservation Corps structures. It is an area wellsuited to demonstrate the connection between forest and 

forest products, and the folklife, music, dance, crafts, and 

traditions of central Appalachia. Designation as a NHA 

would help the region realize the full potential of the cultural, natural, historic, and recreational resources of the 

region. 

Title II of S. 1641 would extend the authorization of 

funding for the National Coal Heritage Area until September 30, 2017. The National Coal Heritage Area was established in 1996 by Public Law 104–333. Its funding authorization, which expired in 2012 under that law, has 

been extended through appropriations acts through September 30, 2015. In total, the NHA has received approximately $3.6 million, and every federal dollar has been 

matched at least once with non-federal funds or in-kind 

services. 

The National Coal Heritage Area spans 13 counties in 

the Appalachian Mountains of West Virginia and includes 

significant resources such as coal mines, camps, company 

stores, train depots, memorials, parks, National Register 

Districts, and trails. Its mission is to preserve, protect, and 

interpret historic, cultural, and natural resources associated with West Virginia’s coal mining heritage to stimuVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
24 

late tourism and economic development, enhancing the 

quality of life for residents. The NPS is currently concluding an evaluation of this NHA, as required under Public Law 110–229. 

Title II would also extend the authorization of funding 

for the Wheeling National Heritage Area until September 

30, 2017. The Wheeling National Heritage Area was established in 2000 by Public Law 106–291. Its funding authorization will expire under that law on September 30, 2015. 

In total, the NHA has received approximately $9.7 million 

of the total $10 million authorized to be appropriated, and 

every federal dollar has been matched in accordance with 

its enabling act. 

The Wheeling National Heritage Area encompasses significant historic and cultural resources in and around City 

of Wheeling, West Virginia, including many that are National Historic Landmarks or listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Wheeling played an important role 

in the development and establishment of a multitude of industries in the United States that facilitated the Nation’s 

expansion. The NHA helps preserve the city’s Victorian architecture, waterfront park, historic city markets, and renovated industrial buildings. 

We recommend a technical amendment to the Title II 

heading and to the section subheadings to make it clear 

that the bill would extend the authorization for federal 

funding for the two national heritage areas, instead of reauthorizing the national heritage areas. While both National Coal and Wheeling face sunset dates for their federal funding, their national heritage area designations will 

not sunset. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

happy to answer any questions you or any other members 

of the subcommittee may have. 

STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE TOOTHMAN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, CULTURAL RESOURCES, PARTNERSHIPS, AND

SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE

INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to appear before you today to 

present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 

869, a bill to establish the Alabama Black Belt National 

Heritage Area, and for other purposes. 

The Department recommends deferring action on S. 869 

until the National Park Service (NPS) completes a final review of the feasibility study for the proposed Alabama 

Black Belt National Heritage Area. The NPS has reviewed 

the current feasibility study, submitted by the Center for 

the Study of the Black Belt at the University of West Alabama, and determined that there are nationally significant 

resources and stories associated with the Alabama Black 

Belt. However, the study needs to be revised before the 

NPS can determine that it meets the interim criteria for 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
25 

designation as a national heritage area. We recommend 

that the Center for the Study of the Black Belt continue 

to work with the NPS National Heritage Area Program to 

refine the statement of national importance, contributing 

resources, supporting themes, and boundary for the proposed heritage area, as well as other key sections of the 

study associated with these assessment topics. 

In addition, the Department recommends that Congress 

enact program legislation that establishes criteria to evaluate potential qualified national heritage areas and a process for the designation, funding, and administration of 

these areas before designating any additional new national 

heritage areas. 

Geographically, Alabama’s Black Belt is part of a larger 

crescent-shaped area known as the Southern Black Belt, 

which extends from Virginia to Texas. The term refers to 

the fertile black soil of the region. This soil drew pioneers 

to settle the lower-central portion of Alabama in the 1820s 

and 1830s where they established and operated a network 

of cotton plantations using the labor of enslaved African 

Americans. During the Antebellum era, the Alabama Black 

Belt became one of the wealthiest and most politically 

powerful regions in the United States. 

Throughout the Twentieth Century, this area gained 

fame as the site where the Tuskegee Airmen trained during World War II, and as a center of the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s. Montgomery County was the 

site of the 1955–56 bus boycott that challenged segregation 

of public transportation. Highway 80 in Dallas, Lowndes, 

and Montgomery counties shaped the route taken by participants of the historic march for equal rights from Selma 

to Montgomery in 1965. The Lowndes County Freedom Organization, later the Black Panther Party, was an outgrowth of that march. 

S. 869 would establish the Alabama Black Belt National 

Heritage Area within nineteen counties in the State of Alabama. The Center for the Study of Black Belt would be 

designated as the Heritage Area’s local coordinating entity, 

and the bill defines the duties of the Center for the Study 

of Black Belt, including the preparation and implementation of a management plan. S. 869 also provides a process 

for review and approval of the management plan by the 

Secretary of the Interior. 

If the committee decides to move forward with S. 869, 

we would like to work with the committee to provide the 

appropriate map reference for the national heritage area 

and to ensure that the language of the bill is consistent 

with previously enacted national heritage area designations. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I 

would be pleased to answer any questions you or any 

members of the subcommittee may have. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
26 

STATEMENT OF PEGGY O’DELL, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF

THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present 

the Department of the Interior’s views on S. 228, a bill to 

establish the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta National Heritage Area. 

The Department supports the objectives of S. 228. The 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) area has been 

found to meet the National Park Service’s interim criteria 

for designation as a National Heritage Area. However, the 

Department recommends that Congress pass program legislation that establishes criteria to evaluate potentially 

qualified National Heritage Areas and a process for the 

designation, funding, and administration of these areas before designating any additional new National Heritage 

Areas. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides the designation and administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas, offering guidelines 

for successful planning and management, clarifying the 

roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing 

timeframes and funding for designated areas. 

S. 228 would establish the Sacramento-San Joaquin 

Delta National Heritage Area within the counties of 

Contra Costa, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, and Yolo, 

in the State of California, with the Delta Protection Commission designated as the Heritage Area’s management 

entity. 

The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is a rare inland/inverse delta at the confluence of the Sacramento and San 

Joaquin Rivers, the largest estuary on the West Coast of 

the Americas. Its vast size, unique shape, and geographic 

location in the heart of California have produced a heritage of habitat and community diversity, industry, innovation, and unique infrastructure. 

After the last ice age 10,000 years ago, a rapid rise in 

sea level inundated the alluvial valley of the Sacramento 

River and formed the Delta, an extensive system of freshwater and brackish marshes, grassland, oak woodland, savannah, chaparral, and riparian habitat rich with wildlife. 

Native Americans built villages and trading posts, and 

early fur traders such as Jedediah Smith trekked into the 

region in search of otter, mink and beaver. 

Then, gold seekers on their way from San Francisco to 

the gold fields in the Sierra Nevada recognized the fertility 

of the Delta’s soils. Beginning in the 1880s, with significant contributions from Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, East 

Indian, Portuguese and Italian immigrants, and the development of innovative equipment, one of the largest scale 

reclamation projects in the United States converted the 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
27 

vast marshes into the landscape that characterizes the 

Delta today. 

The Delta is the lynchpin of a vast watershed, linking 

waterways originating in the Cascade, Coastal and Sierra 

Nevada mountain ranges with the San Francisco Bay and 

the Pacific Ocean. While the Delta today is predominantly 

agricultural, it also encompasses diverse habitats— 

intertidal, non-tidal, and seasonal wetlands, rivers, 

sloughs, riparian woodland, scrub, grasslands, 

floodplains—that support hundreds of species of flora and 

fauna. The Delta is a key stopover on the Pacific Flyway 

and an important anadromous fish corridor. 

The Delta’s heritage values are inextricably linked to its 

economic activities. As one of the most productive agricultural regions in the country, the Delta irrigates over seven 

million acres of the State’s farmland, contributes billions of 

dollars to the California economy, and exports crops 

throughout the world. The Delta also supplies two-thirds 

of California’s residents with drinking water. 

Recreation and tourism are also important economic 

drivers, and a Delta National Heritage area has the potential to increase access to many resource-based recreational 

opportunities, such as boating and fishing, both for regional residents and large, nearby, urban populations in 

the San Francisco Bay area and Great Central Valley. Opportunities to watch wildlife are abundant on the Delta’s 

quiet waterways, and many influential artists reside in the 

Delta, attracted by the slower pace of life. Planning for the 

Great Delta Trail is underway, and agritourism projects 

and programs—local markets, farm stays, and wineries— 

are springing up to showcase and share the region’s agricultural traditions. 

A Feasibility Study for a Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 

National Heritage Area was completed and published by 

the Delta Protection Commission in July 2012. The National Park Service conducted a review of the Commission’s study for consistency with the interim National Heritage Area Feasibility Study Guidelines, found that it 

meets these criteria, and informed the Delta Protection 

Commission of this finding in a letter dated July 11, 2012. 

The mission for the Delta National Heritage Area would 

be to recognize, enhance and promote ‘‘Delta as Place’’ to 

help cultivate and retain appreciation and understanding 

of the Delta as an ecological, agricultural, recreational, historical and cultural treasure. According to the feasibility 

study, ‘‘The center of the Delta’s story is that of a young 

nation encouraging the reclamation of swampland to create some of the world’s most productive farmlands in the 

center of California, from which spawned innovations, 

technologies, and infrastructure unique to the development 

of the State, as well as other parts of the nation and 

world.’’ 

The proposed National Heritage Area would promote a 

wide range of partnerships among governments, organizations and individuals to educate the public about ‘‘Delta as 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
28 

Place’’ and build more support for its preservation, protection and enhancement. It would support economic development by drawing visitors to designated partner sites and 

other recreation and visitor facilities. It would promote 

heritage tourism, ecotourism, and agri-tourism consistent 

with existing activities, infrastructure, and land uses in 

the Delta. As the proposed management entity for a Delta 

heritage area, the Delta Protection Commission is already 

working to establish partnerships and to further projects 

in the region compatible with a national heritage area, 

such as a historical resources and recreation inventories, 

development of the Great California Delta Trail, and a 

Delta narratives project. Through partnerships and community engagement it has the potential to connect and 

unite citizens in the conservation and increased resilience 

of the natural, historic, scenic and cultural resources of the 

Delta, while sustaining the area’s economic vitality. 

If the committee decides to act on S. 228, we recommend 

that the bill be amended to address the following matters: 

1) To change the bill’s map reference to a map that is fully 

consistent with the feasibility study boundary recommendation; 2) to change ‘‘management entity’’ to ‘‘local 

coordinating entity’’ throughout the bill; and 3) to make 

the bill language more consistent with other National Heritage Area legislation enacted most recently. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

happy to answer any questions you or any other members 

of the subcommittee may have. 

STATEMENT OF PEGGY O’DELL, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF

THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present 

the Department of the Interior’s views on S. 219, a bill to 

establish the Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage 

Area in Pennsylvania. 

The Department supports the objectives of S. 219. The 

Susquehanna Gateway area has been found to meet the 

National Park Service’s interim criteria for designation as 

a National Heritage Area. However, the Department recommends that Congress pass program legislation that establishes criteria to evaluate potentially qualified National 

Heritage Areas and a process for the designation, funding, 

and administration of these areas before designating any 

additional new National Heritage Areas. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides the designation and administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas, offering guidelines 

for successful planning and management, clarifying the 

roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing 

timeframes and funding for designated areas. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
29 

Flowing for 441 miles, the Susquehanna River is the 

longest river on the East Coast and the largest contributor 

of fresh water to the Chesapeake Bay. The portions of the 

river flowing through Lancaster and York Counties in 

Pennsylvania exhibit exceptional natural and recreational 

value and traverse landscapes of historical importance to 

our nation. 

The region of the proposed Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage Area was first inhabited by Native Americans who left evidence of their occupation in a myriad of 

archeological sites, as well as rock art at several 

petroglyph sites. When Captain John Smith journeyed up 

the Susquehanna River in the summer of 1608, he sent 

emissaries to the Susquehannock town located on the east 

side of the river near present day Washington Boro in 

Lancaster County. Tribal leaders there entered a trade alliance, opening to the English a trade network extending 

hundreds of miles. 

In 1668, William Penn set the tone for religious tolerance in Pennsylvania and brought colonists who settled 

the great fertile valley of the Susquehanna Gateway region, beginning its long history as an abundant agricultural center. Serving as an important transportation corridor, the river provided opportunities for commerce and 

invention. It was here that John Elgar constructed the 

first iron steamboat in America. The birthplace of Robert 

Fulton, the original inventor of steam powered boats, is a 

National Historic Landmark in Lancaster County. Here, 

too, Phineas Davis designed and built the first practical 

coal burning steam locomotive, thereby revolutionizing 

railroad transportation. 

The region is the home ground of the ‘‘Plain People’’— 

the Amish and Mennonites. Their religious values, simple 

way of life, and well-tended farms speak to the deepest 

feelings that Americans have about ourselves and our national experience. 

In this region, visitors also find evidence of our Revolutionary War past. Lancaster and York Counties served as 

venues for the Continental Congress when it left Philadelphia upon the British occupation of that city. In the courthouse in York, the Congress approved the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, the nation’s ‘‘first constitution,’’ and sent it forth to the states for ratification. In 

the summer of 1781, Continental Army General James 

Wood established Camp Security, housing more than a 

thousand British soldiers from General John Burgoyne’s 

army, which had surrendered at Saratoga. 

The region also has an abundance of natural resources 

including migratory bird nesting sites, remnants of old 

growth forests, and areas of both ecological diversity and 

scenic quality. Ferncliff, known for its wildflowers, and the 

Susquehanna Gorge are both designated National Natural 

Landmarks. Recreational resources abound in the region, 

including the Kelly’s Run and Susquehanna River Water 

Trails, both National Recreation Trails. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
30 

S. 219 designates the Susquehanna Heritage Corporation, a non-profit organization, as the local coordinating 

entity for the Susquehanna Gateway National Heritage 

Area. This organization has served as the coordinator for 

the state heritage area covering this region designated in 

2001. The Susquehanna Heritage Corporation has demonstrated success in coordinating diverse partners in Lancaster and York Counties. Over the past nine years, the 

Corporation has been effective in facilitating preservation, 

interpretative, and educational projects and in leveraging 

community participation and funding. The heritage area 

has strong support from the public and from a myriad of 

state, local, federal, and non-govemmental partners 

throughout the area. In 2008, the Corporation prepared a 

national heritage area feasibility study that was reviewed 

by the National Park Service and found to meet the interim criteria for potential designation found in the National Heritage Area Feasibility Study Guidelines. 

If the committee decides to act on S. 219, we would like 

to recommend language to make the bill more consistent 

with other National Heritage Area legislation enacted 

most recently and also to simply the criteria for approval 

of management plans. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions from members of the 

Committee. 

STATEMENT OF PEGGY O’DELL, DEPUTY DEFLECTOR FOR

OPERATIONS, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF

THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 371, a bill to establish the 

Blackstone River Valley National Historical Park, to dedicate the Park to John H. Chafee, and for other purposes. 

The Department supports S. 371. 

S. 371 would establish a new unit of the National Park 

System, the Blackstone River Valley National Historical 

Park (Park) within the existing, bi-state, Blackstone River 

Valley National Heritage Corridor (Corridor) that extends 

from Worcester, Massachusetts, to Providence, Rhode Island. The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to establish a park boundary after acquiring a sufficient amount of land or interests in land containing the 

historic resources to constitute a manageable park unit. 

The bill allows the Secretary to include in the boundary resources that are subject to a cooperative agreement with 

either of the two states or their political subdivisions. It 

authorizes the Secretary to enter into cooperative agreements with nonprofit organizations, including the coordinating entity for the Corridor, as well as state and local 

govemments, for the purpose of collaborating on programs, 

projects, and activities that further the purposes of the 

Park. It also permits the acquisition of up to 10 acres in 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
31 

Woonsocket, Rhode Island for the development of facilities 

for the Park. 

The bill directs the Secretary to complete a General 

Management Plan for the Park within three years after 

funds are made available. Among other things, the plan 

must seek to make maximum practicable use of certain 

named visitor facilities in the Corridor that are operated 

by Corridor partners, many of which were developed with 

significant investment of federal funds. The bill also allows 

the Secretary to provide technical assistance, visitor services, interpretive tours and educational programs to sites 

outside the boundary of the Park that are within the Corridor. And, the bill dedicates the Park to former Senator 

John H. Chafee and requires the Secretary to display an 

appropriate memorial to him. 

Finally, the bill amends the authorization for the John 

H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor to provide for a non-profit organization, the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor, Inc., to be 

the local coordinating entity for the Corridor. This entity 

would assume the responsibility for coordinating activities 

for the Corridor that have rested with the Blackstone 

River Valley Heritage Corridor Commission since the National Heritage Area was first established. The new coordinating entity would be eligible to receive National Heritage Area funding for through the end of fiscal 2016. 

S. 371 reflects the findings of the special resource study 

that the National Park Service (NPS) completed in accordance with Public Law 109–338, which directed the NPS to 

conduct the study to ‘‘evaluate the possibility of (A) designating one or more sites or landscape features as a unit 

of the National Park System; and (B) coordinating and 

complementing actions by the [Corridor] Commission, local 

governments, and State and Federal agencies, in the preservation and interpretation of significant resources within 

the Corridor.’’ The NPS consulted with Native American 

tribes associated with the Blackstone River Valley in the 

preparation of the study. 

The study evaluated a broad range of sites, features and 

resources throughout the Blackstone River Valley and concluded that the following meet the criteria for designation 

as a unit of the National Park System: Old Slater Mill National Historic Landmark district in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, the historic mill villages of Ashton and Slatersville in 

Rhode Island, and Hopedale and Whitinsville in Massachusetts; the Blackstone River and its tributaries; and the 

Blackstone Canal. The study also evaluated various management alternatives with different scopes and levels of 

NPS involvement. The preferred alternative was a new 

unit of the National Park System that consists of these 

sites and features, and that would partner with the coordinating entity for the Corridor and others to undertake the 

protection and interpretation of these resources. 

If established based upon the management alternative 

recommended in the study, we estimate that the cost to 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
32 

create the Park would be $6.1 million in one-time expenditures on research, planning, construction and/or rehabilitation, and exhibits. When the Park is fully established, 

operational costs are estimated to be $3.5 million annually 

for salaries, supplies and equipment. All funds would be 

subject to NPS priorities and the availability of appropriations. 

We would like to thank the sponsor, Senator Reed, and 

the committee for working with us in making changes to 

last Congress’ version of this legislation. We appreciate 

that this legislation now includes a matching requirement 

for the expenditure of Federal funds under cooperative 

agreements, authority to acquire land for administrative 

purposes in Woonsocket, where the NPS currently has office space, and an appropriate recognition for Senator John 

H. Chafee’s role in preserving the resources of the Blackstone River Valley that does not set a precedent in naming 

the park for a congressional sponsor, as the previous 

version would have done. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. I would be 

happy to answer any questions that you or other members 

of the Subcommittee may have. 

STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE TOOTHMAN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, CULTURAL RESOURCES, PARTNERSHIPS, AND

SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE

INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1138, a bill to reauthorize the 

Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area. 

The Department recognizes the important work of the 

Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area to preserve 

heritage resources in the Hudson River Valley between 

Yonkers and Troy, New York. We recommend that S. 1138 

be amended to authorize an extension for heritage area 

program funding until we have completed an evaluation 

and report on the accomplishments of the area and the future role of the National Park Service; and until national 

heritage area program legislation is enacted that standardizes timeframes and funding for designated national heritage areas Consistent with congressional directives in the 

FY 2009 and FY 2010 Interior Appropriations Acts, the 

Administration proposed, in the FY 2014 budget, focusing 

most national heritage area grants on recently authorized 

areas. The Department would like to work with Congress 

to determine the future federal role when national heritage areas reach the end of their authorized eligibility for 

heritage program funding. We recommend that Congress 

enact national heritage legislation during this Congress. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides the designation and administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a much-needed framework for evaluVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
33 

ating proposed national heritage areas, offering guidelines 

for successful planning and management, clarifying the 

roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing 

timeframes and funding for designated areas. 

S. 1138, as introduced, would extend the authorization 

of federal funding for the Hudson River Valley National 

Heritage Area for an additional 9 years. The Hudson River 

Valley National Heritage Area was established in 1996 by 

Public Law 104–333. The national heritage area includes 

250 communities in ten counties bordering the Hudson 

River for 154 miles of tidal estuary along with three million acres of the Hudson Highlands, the Catskill Mountains, rolling farmland and compact villages, as well as 

small cities and hamlets. The region extends from the confluence of the Mohawk and Hudson Rivers, south to the 

northern border of New York City. 

The mission of this national heritage area is to recognize, preserve, and promote the natural and cultural resources of the Hudson River Valley. This is accomplished 

through a voluntary partnership with communities and 

citizens, and local, state, and federal agencies emphasizing 

public access, economic development, regional planning, 

and interpretive programs. 

Public Law 104–333 designated the Hudson River Valley 

Greenway Communities Council and the Greenway Heritage Conservancy, Inc., as the local coordinating entities for 

the national heritage area. The heritage area local coordinating entities facilitate public private partnerships for the 

preservation of heritage resources and work closely with 

National Park Service staff at Roosevelt-Vanderbilt National Historic Sites. The national heritage area’s work focuses on regional initiatives for heritage programming, interpretation, and education, preservation and resource 

stewardship, heritage development and infrastructure, and 

planning and design. 

During its 16 years of existence, the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area has a significant record of 

achievement and, with government funding assistance 

since its establishment, has shown significant success in 

working with partners and the federal government to preserve, interpret, and promote the significant resources in 

their local areas. Every federal dollar has been matched 

with non-federal funds. In total, Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area has received nearly $9 million in federal funding, and every federal dollar has been matched at 

least once with non-federal funds. 

The Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area has 

taken the lead on numerous initiatives to engage the public. One such initiative, Heritage Weekend, gives visitors 

the opportunity to discover—or rediscover—many historic, 

architectural, and natural treasures in the state. The national heritage area staff also works tirelessly to connect 

sites and schools to create unique place-based curriculum; 

this curriculum can be replicated and used by others 

through a website that provides academic resources reVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
34 

garding the heritage and culture of the Hudson River Valley. Moreover, the staff facilitates the creation of regionwide ‘‘shows’’ focusing on nature and culture sub-themes. 

On a more fundamental level, the staff prints map and 

guides, and advances a graphic identity at partner sites. 

The staff also continues to help communities and trail 

groups establish a system of trails that link cultural and 

historic sites, parks, open spaces, and community centers. 

This trail system provides public access to the Hudson 

River as well. 

We recommend a technical amendment to the long title 

of the bill to make it clear that the bill would extend the 

authorization for federal funding for the national heritage 

area instead of reauthorizing the national heritage area. 

While the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area 

faces a sunset for its Federal funding, its national heritage 

area designation will not sunset. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you or other members of 

the committee may have. 

STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE TOOTHMAN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, CULTURAL RESOURCES, PARTNERSHIPS, AND

SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE

INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1151, a bill to reauthorize the 

America’s Agricultural Heritage Partnership in the State 

of Iowa. 

The Department recognizes the important work of the 

America’s Agricultural Heritage Partnership, better known 

as the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area, in 

northeast Iowa. We recommend that S. 1151 be amended 

to authorize an extension for heritage area program funding until Congress has had time to consider the recently 

completed evaluation and report on the accomplishments 

of the heritage area and the future role of the National 

Park Service that was recently transmitted to Congress 

this past month; and until heritage area program legislation is enacted that standardizes timeframes and funding 

for designated national heritage areas. Consistent with 

congressional directives in the 2009 and 2010 Interior Appropriations Acts, the Administration proposed, in the FY 

2014 budget, focusing most national heritage area grants 

on recently authorized areas. The Department would like 

to work with Congress to determine the future federal role 

when heritage areas reach the end of their authorized eligibility for heritage program funding. We recommend that 

Congress enact national heritage area legislation during 

this Congress. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides the designation and administration of these areas. Program legisVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
35 

lation would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas, offering guidelines 

for successful planning and management, clarifying the 

roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing 

timeframes and funding for designated areas. 

The Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area was 

established in 1996 by Public Law 103–333 to interpret 

farm life, agribusiness and rural communities, past and 

present. It preserves and tells the story of American agriculture and its global significance through partnerships 

and activities that celebrate the land, people, and communities of the area. The heart of America’s agricultural revolution still exists in the region, and the national heritage 

area is telling the breadth and scope of this story in a compelling, meaningful way. 

The heritage of American agriculture and its influence 

on the global agricultural revolution was considered to be 

nationally distinctive and met the criteria for national heritage area designation. American agriculture is one of the 

primary sources of this country’s wealth and world leadership and should be preserved and interpreted. The Silos 

and Smokestacks National Heritage Area preserves and 

interprets a rich cultural landscape that includes family 

farms, historic industrial architecture, and rural communities across a 37-county region in northeast Iowa covering 

over 20,000 square miles. This broad agrarian landscape is 

rare in today’s pattern of urban and suburban expanding 

into rural areas. 

The national heritage area is managed by the America’s 

Agricultural Heritage Partnership (Partnership), this local 

coordinating entity facilitates public private partnerships 

for the preservation and interpretation of heritage resources. The Partnership’s work focuses on regional initiatives for heritage programming, interpretation and education, preservation and resource stewardship, heritage development and infrastructure, and planning and design. 

During its 16 years of existence, the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area has a significant record of 

achievement. It has worked closely with the regional business community, county and state governments, and multiple nongovernmental organizations to build a network of 

partner sites dedicated to preserving and interpreting the 

past, present, and future of America’s agricultural story. 

Working together, the network has developed a successful 

public information and way-finding program for promoting 

tourism that welcomes visitors along the major highway 

corridors surrounding the region and identifies the more 

than 100 partner sites in the heritage area. The new signs 

serve as a connecting thread for this network of sites, 

while letting visitors know they can discover a piece of 

America’s agricultural story being preserved at the site. 

This way-finding program has not only helped visitors find 

tourism destinations within the Silos and Smokestacks 

National Heritage Area, but has also helped the heritage 

area develop a regional identity. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
36 

The bedrock of the National Heritage Area concept has 

always been building partnerships for achieving goals. The 

Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area, with minimal government funding assistance since its establishment, has shown significant success in working with partners and the federal government to preserve, interpret, 

and promote the significant resources of northeast Iowa. 

Since its establishment, the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area has received almost $9.5 million in 

federal funding, and every federal dollar has been matched 

at least once with non-federal funds. 

S. 1151, as is written now, would extend the authorization for federal funding for the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area for an additional 10 years. The Silos 

and Smokestacks National Heritage Area is one of the 

nine heritage areas evaluated by the National Park Service pursuant to Public Law 110–229. The completed evaluation for the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage 

Area was recently transmitted to Congress this past 

month, and included recommendations on the future role 

of the National Park Service in the area. 

We recommend a technical amendment to the long title 

of the bill to make it clear that the bill would extend the 

authorization for federal funding for the heritage area instead of reauthorizing the heritage area. While the Silos 

and Smokestacks National Heritage Area faces a sunset 

for its federal funding, its national heritage area designation will not sunset. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you or other members of 

the committee may have. 

STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE TOOTHMAN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, CULTURAL RESOURCES, PARTNERSHIPS, AND

SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE

INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1157, a bill to reauthorize the 

Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area, the Lackawanna 

Valley National Heritage Area, the Delaware and Lehigh 

National Heritage Corridor, and the Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area. 

The Department recognizes the important work of the 

four national heritage areas to preserve historic, cultural, 

natural, and recreational resources in Pennsylvania. We 

recommend that S. 1157 be amended to authorize an extension for heritage area program funding until we have 

completed an evaluation and report on the accomplishments of the national heritage areas and the future role of 

the National Park Service; and until program legislation is 

enacted that standardizes timeframes and funding for designated national heritage areas. Consistent with congressional directives in the 2009 and 2010 Interior AppropriaVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
37 

tions Acts, the Administration proposed, in the FY 2014 

budget, focusing most national heritage area grants on recently authorized areas. The Department would like to 

work with Congress to determine the future federal role 

when national heritage areas reach the end of their authorized eligibility for national heritage program funding. 

We recommend that Congress enact national heritage area 

legislation during this Congress. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides the designation and administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas, offering guidelines 

for successful planning and management, clarifying the 

roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing 

timeframes and funding for designated areas. 

All four areas have lengthy records of leadership and accomplishment. All four are recognized for their important 

histories and rich and distinctive historic and natural resources. At each, numerous partner organizations and 

local, state, and federal agencies work together through 

the singular opportunity for collaboration that the national 

heritage area model provides. Each area developed a 

thoughtful plan with the community and has made enormous strides in saving historic resources, developing trails, 

preserving open space, building community pride, enhancing education, and promoting economic development that 

responds to these essential elements of their quality of life. 

Created by Public Law 104–333 in 1996, the Rivers of 

Steel National Heritage Area (Rivers of Steel) is made up 

of eight counties in southwestern Pennsylvania known for 

their significant contributions to the steel industry in 

America. The mission of Rivers of Steel is to preserve and 

interpret the history of the region and share the dynamic 

story of the evolution of southwestern Pennsylvania from 

a small colonial settlement to the flourishing of the steel 

industry in the area. 

The Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area (Lackawanna) was established by Public Law 106–278 in 2000. 

The Lackawanna includes four counties in northeastern 

Pennsylvania with historical ties to the anthracite coal industry. These counties preserve nationally distinctive resources related to Pennsylvania and America’s industrial 

history, including the history of major labor unions and 

the struggle to improve working conditions of mine workers. The architecture, ethnic traditions, and infrastructure 

of the anthracite region tell the story of the Lackawanna 

Valley and its role in the industrial development of the 

United States. The mission of the Lackawanna is to conserve, interpret, and develop the historical, cultural, natural, recreational, and economic development resources associated with the area’s significant history. 

The Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor 

(Delaware and Lehigh) was established by Public Law 

100–692 in 1988, the third National Heritage Area created 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
38 

by Congress. The 150-mile spine of the Delaware and Lehigh is the historic Delaware Canal and Lehigh Navigation 

Canal through five counties in eastern Pennsylvania. The 

Delaware and Lehigh commemorates the historic routes of 

rivers, canals, and railroads—and the people and communities involved—that brought anthracite coal from the 

mines to market in the early nineteenth century, fostering 

the development of vibrant towns and culture. The purpose 

of the Delaware and Lehigh is to provide an integrated 

management structure that facilitates preservation, recreation, education, and economic development. 

The Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area 

(Schuylkill River Valley) was established by Public Law 

106–278 in 2000. The Schuylkill River Valley conserves, 

interprets, and develops the historical, cultural, natural, 

recreational, and economic resources related to the heritage of the area. encompassing five counties in southeastern Pennsylvania, including Philadelphia. The area is 

rich in Revolutionary War history, and the anthracite, 

charcoal, iron, and textile industries of the region grew 

here. 

The bedrock of the national heritage area concept has always been building partnerships for achieving goals. All 

four of these non-profit national heritage areas, with government funding assistance since their establishment, 

have shown significant success in working with partners 

and the federal government to preserve, interpret, and promote the significant resources in their local areas. In total, 

Lackawanna has received approximately $6.7 million in 

Federal funding, Rivers of Steel has received about $13.4 

million in Federal funding, Delaware and Lehigh has received almost $12.7 million, and Schuylkill River Valley 

has received nearly $5.9 million in Federal funding, and 

every federal dollar has been matched at least once with 

non-federal funds. 

S. 1157, as drafted, would extend the authorization for 

federal funding for these four heritage areas for an additional ten years. Currently, the Evaluation and Report required by Public Law 110–229 is being completed for Rivers of Steel and we anticipate the evaluation will be transmitted to Congress this year. The NPS and the Delaware 

and Lehigh completed an evaluation for the Delaware and 

Lehigh; however, this evaluation did not include recommendations on what the future role of the National 

Park Service should be in the area. The National Park 

Service will take another look at the evaluation and include recommendations on the future role of the National 

Park Service prior to transmitting it to Congress in order 

to be consistent with the other reports. 

We recommend a technical amendment to the long title 

of the bill to make it clear that the bill would extend the 

authorization for federal funding for the four heritage 

areas instead of reauthorizing the heritage areas. While 

the four heritage areas face a sunset date for their federal 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
39 

funding, their national heritage area designation will not 

sunset. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you or other members of 

the committee may have. 

STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE TOOTHMAN, ASSOCIATE DIREC- TOR, CULTURAL RESOURCES, PARTNERSHIPS, AND

SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE

INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1186, a bill to reauthorize the 

Essex National Heritage Area. 

The Department recognizes the important work of the 

Essex National Heritage Area to preserve heritage resources in Essex County, Massachusetts. We recommend 

that S. 1186 be amended to authorize an extension for heritage area program funding until Congress has had time to 

consider the completed evaluation and report on the accomplishments of the area and the future role of the National Park Service that was recently transmitted to Congress during this past month; and until heritage area program legislation is enacted that standardizes timeframes 

and funding for designated national heritage areas. Consistent with congressional directives in the 2009 and 2010 

Interior Appropriations Acts, the Administration proposed, 

in the FY 2014 budget, focusing most national heritage 

area grants on recently authorized areas. The Department 

would like to work with Congress to determine the future 

federal role when heritage areas reach the end of their authorized eligibility for heritage program funding. We recommend that Congress enact national heritage legislation 

during this Congress. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides the designation and administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas, offering guidelines 

for successful planning and management, clarifying the 

roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing 

timeframes and funding for designated areas. 

Essex National Heritage Area was established in 1996 

by Public Law 103–333. This national heritage area was 

established to recognize, preserve, promote, and interpret 

the historic, cultural, and natural resources of the North 

Shore and lower Merrimack River valley in Essex County, 

Massachusetts. The early settlement history, maritime history, and the imprint of the early industrial era on the 

landscape, in particular, were considered to be nationally 

distinctive and met the criteria for national heritage area 

designation. Essex National Heritage Area preserves and 

interprets a rich cultural landscape that includes historic 

homes, small family farms, and historic industrial archiVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
40 

tecture. Additionally, it contains an array of scenic and 

natural resources such as rocky coasts and harbors, 

marshlands, and rivers. Essex National Heritage Area 

spans 500 square miles in northeastern Massachusetts, 

and includes 34 cities and towns. 

The Essex National Heritage Area is managed by the 

Essex National Heritage Commission (Commission), which 

facilitates public private partnerships for the preservation 

of heritage resources and works closely with National Park 

Service staff at Salem Maritime National Historic Site and 

Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site, both of which 

are within the boundary of the national heritage area. The 

Commission’s work focuses on regional initiatives for heritage programming, interpretation, and education, preservation and resource stewardship, heritage development and 

infrastructure, and planning and design. 

During its 16 years of existence, Essex National Heritage Area has a significant record of achievement. The national heritage area has worked closely with National Park 

Service staff at Salem Maritime and Saugus Iron Works on 

a variety of educational and interpretive programs to educate visitors and students about local heritage resources. 

One successful example is the Trails & Sails weekend, a 

county-wide event that involves more than 50 host organizations at over 140 locations in Essex County in providing 

interpretive tours, hikes, walks, sail trips, and special 

events at no charge to participants. The Essex Local History In a National Context program has also successfully 

brought the main themes of the Essex National Heritage 

Area into area classrooms. 

The national heritage area has played a significant role 

in local communities in helping to inventory and research 

historic resources. Working with the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation, the Essex National Heritage Area created a catalog of heritage landscapes that communities had identified as being valuable 

and worthy of protection. In all, communities identified 

1,320 resources in 24 of the 34 municipalities included 

within the boundary of the national heritage area. Additionally, the inventory articulated strategies for preserving 

these historic resources and landscapes. 

Essex National Heritage Area has also implemented a 

successful public information and wayfinding campaign for 

promoting tourism. More than 80 directional highway 

signs have been installed within the national heritage area 

that point visitors toward regional visitor centers and historic and natural visitor destinations. These signs not only 

have helped visitors find tourism destinations within 

Essex National Heritage Area, they have also helped create a regional identity for the national heritage area. 

Essex National Heritage Area also plays a significant role 

in leveraging federal dollars. In total, Essex National Heritage Area has received approximately $13.2 million in federal funding, and every federal dollar has been matched at 

least once with non-federal dollars. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
41 

S. 1186, as written, would extend the authorization of 

federal funding for Essex National Heritage Area for an 

additional 15 years and increase the authorization of appropriations by $10 million. The Essex National Heritage 

Area is one of the nine national heritage areas identified 

for evaluation by the National Park Service pursuant to 

Public Law 110–229. The completed Essex National Heritage Area evaluation was recently transmitted to Congress 

this past month. The evaluation report includes recommendations on the future role of the National Park 

Service in the area. 

We recommend a technical amendment to the long title 

of the bill to make it clear that the bill would extend the 

authorization for Federal funding for the heritage area instead of reauthorizing the heritage area. While the Essex 

National Heritage Area faces a sunset for its federal funding, its national heritage area designation does not sunset. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you or other members of 

the committee may have. 

STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE TOOTHMAN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, CULTURAL RESOURCES, PARTNERSHIPS, AND

SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE

INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1339, a bill to reauthorize the 

Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway. 

The Department recognizes the important work of the 

Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway to preserve heritage resources in northeast Ohio from Cleveland to New 

Philadelphia and its role in linking Cuyahoga Valley National Park to the residents of Cleveland, Akron, and other 

communities through the preservation and maintenance of 

the canal’s towpath that runs through the heart of the 

park. We recommend that S. 1339 be amended to authorize an extension for heritage area program funding until 

we have completed an evaluation and report on the accomplishments of the area and the future role of the National 

Park Service; and until national heritage area program 

legislation is enacted that standardizes timeframes and 

funding for designated national heritage areas. Consistent 

with congressional directives in the FY 2009 and FY 2010 

Interior Appropriations Acts, the Administration proposed, 

in the FY 2014 budget, focusing most national heritage 

area grants on recently authorized areas and reducing 

and/or phasing out funds to well-established recipients to 

encourage self-sufficiency. The Department would like to 

work with Congress to determine the future federal role 

when national heritage areas reach the end of their authorized eligibility for heritage program funding. We recommend that Congress enact national heritage legislation 

during this Congress. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
42 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides the designation and administration of these areas. Program legislation would provide a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage areas, offering guidelines 

for successful planning and management, clarifying the 

roles and responsibilities of all parties, and standardizing 

timeframes and funding for designated areas. 

S. 1339, as introduced, would extend the authorization 

of federal funding for the Ohio & Erie National Heritage 

Canalway for an additional 9 years. The Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway, originally called the Ohio & 

Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor, was established in 

1996 by Public Law 104–333. This national heritage area 

includes the counties of Cuyahoga, Summit, Stark, and 

Tuscarawas in northeast Ohio. The region extends from 

Lake Erie along the Erie Canal through Cleveland to New 

Philadelphia. 

The mission of this national heritage area is to preserve 

and interpret and celebrate the rails, trails, landscapes, 

towns and sites that grew up along the first 100 miles of 

the Ohio & Erie Canalway that helped Ohio and our nation grow. This is accomplished through a voluntary partnership with communities and citizens, and local, state, 

and federal agencies emphasizing public access, economic 

development, regional planning, and interpretive programs. 

Public Law 104–333 designated the Ohio & Erie Canal 

Association as the management entity for the national heritage area. The heritage area management entity facilitates public private partnerships for the preservation of 

heritage resources and works closely with National Park 

Service staff at Cuyahoga Valley National Park. The national heritage area’s work focuses on regional initiatives 

for heritage programming, interpretation and education, 

preservation and resource stewardship, heritage development and infrastructure, and planning and design, all 

linking the canal communities together through the canal’s 

towpath trail. 

During its 16 years of existence, the Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway has a significant record of 

achievement and, with government funding assistance 

since its establishment, has shown significant success in 

working with partners and the federal government to preserve, interpret, and promote the significant resources of 

the local communities along the Ohio & Erie Canalway. In 

total, the Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway has received almost $13.3 million in federal funding, and every 

federal dollar has been matched at least once with non-federal funds. 

The Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway has taken 

the lead on initiatives such as the development of 73 miles 

of the multi-use recreational Towpath Trail from Cleveland to New Philadelphia, Ohio, that is used by thousands 

of visitors each year. The management entity has worked 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
43 

tirelessly to connect sites, communities and parklands, resulting in the creation of thousands of new national park 

and towpath trail users. They continue to help communities and trail groups establish a system of county trails 

and green spaces, with over 400 miles of trails that link 

cultural and historic sites, parks, open spaces, and community centers as well as providing public access to the Ohio 

& Erie Canalway. 

We recommend two technical amendments to the long 

title of the bill to make it clear that the bill would extend 

the authorization for federal funding for the national heritage area instead of reauthorizing the national heritage 

area and to correct the name of the Ohio & Erie National 

Heritage Canalway. While the Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway faces a sunset for its federal funding, its national heritage area designation will not sunset. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you or other members of 

the committee may have. 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTINA GOLDFUSS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, 

CONGRESSIONAL AND EXTERNAL RELATIONS, NATIONAL

PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 2111, a bill to reauthorize the 

Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area (NHA). 

The Department recognizes the important work of the 

Board and Staff of the Yuma Crossing National Heritage 

Area Corporation to preserve Yuma, Arizona, a natural 

crossing area on the Colorado River, and a landmark in 

America’s westward expansion. We recommend that S. 

2111 be amended to authorize an extension for heritage 

area program funding until such time as the National 

Park Service (NPS) has completed an evaluation and report on the accomplishments of the area and the future 

role of the NPS; and until national heritage area program 

legislation is enacted that standardizes timeframes and 

funding for designated national heritage areas. In this 

case, we note that funding is currently authorized for the 

Yuma Crossing NHA through FY 2015. 

The NPS is initiating phase-in of a funding formula for 

NHAs, which is a merit-based system for allocating heritage area funding that considers a variety of factors based 

upon criteria related to program goals, accountability, and 

organizational sustainability. When fully implemented, the 

performance-based funding formula plan will reward NHA 

entities that bring in additional non-Federal investment 

and that have developed a sustainability plan. The Department would like to work with Congress to determine the 

future federal role when national heritage areas reach the 

end of their authorized eligibility for heritage program 

funding. We recommend that Congress enact national heritage area program legislation during this Congress. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
44 

There are currently 49 designated heritage areas, yet 

there is no authority in law that guides the designation 

and administration of new heritage areas as a national 

system. Program legislation would provide a much-needed 

framework for evaluating proposed national heritage 

areas, offer guidelines for successful planning and management, clarify roles and responsibilities of all parties, and 

standardize timeframes and funding for designated areas. 

S. 2111 would extend the authorization for federal funding for the Yuma Crossing NHA for 15 additional years, 

until September 30, 2030. The Yuma Crossing NHA was 

established in 2000 by Public Law 106–319. Since its creation, this NHA has become the nexus of the Yuma, Arizona, community, bringing together a multitude of partners including business and Quechan Indian Tribe leaders; 

economic development organizations; city, county, state, 

and federal government representatives; and members of 

the agricultural community to focus on improving regional 

recreation, economic development, historic preservation efforts, and natural resource conservation opportunities. In 

total, the NHA has received $4.2 million in federal Heritage Partnership Program funding, and every federal dollar 

has been matched at least once with non-federal funds. 

Yuma Crossing NHA is an example of how effective collaborative efforts can be in supporting local communities 

and economies. This NHA has made tremendous progress 

over the last decade revitalizing Yuma’s riverfront, which 

was once an overgrown thicket of non-native trees and underbrush and a corridor for illegal activities. Thanks to the 

work coordinated and accomplished by the NHA, working 

with the Bureau of Reclamation and other state and federal agencies, the Yuma Crossing NHA has reconnected 

the community to the Colorado River, created an extensive 

multi-use recreational trail system and restored more than 

400 acres of wetlands. The effectiveness of Yuma Crossing 

NHA in creating an increased sense of community for the 

region, expanding regional recreational opportunities, supporting the restoration of critical wetlands habitat and important community cultural assets, and leveraging local financial and human capital support cannot be overstated. 

The Yuma Crossing NHA has succeeded in leveraging its 

relationships and abilities to better the overall community. 

For instance, in 2008–2009, when faced with a severe economic recession, Arizona State Parks contemplated closing 

the Yuma Quartermaster Depot and the Yuma Territorial 

Prison, both key state historical parks within the City of 

Yuma. In response to this situation, the City of Yuma and 

the Yuma Crossing NHA agreed to lease and manage the 

two parks, rather than see them shuttered. The community embraced this collaborative effort and demonstrated 

its support by donating $70,000 during the first two 

months of the parks’ new management. Since then, the 

NHA has upgraded the parks’ museum exhibits, reduced 

operational costs, and increased visitation. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
45 

We recommend a technical amendment to the long title 

of the bill to make it clear that the bill would extend the 

authorization for federal funding for the national heritage 

area, instead of reauthorization of the national heritage 

area. While the Yuma Crossing NHA faces a sunset date 

for its federal funding, its national heritage area designation will not end. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you or other members of 

the committee may have. 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTINA GOLDFUSS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL AND EXTERNAL RELATIONS, NATIONAL

PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present 

the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 2318, a 

bill to reauthorize the Erie Canalway National Heritage 

Corridor Act. 

The Department recognizes the important work of the 

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor Commission 

(Commission) and its primary partner, the Erie Canalway 

Heritage Fund, Inc., in preserving, interpreting, and promoting the 524-mile system of historic canals that compose 

the Erie Canalway. We recommend that S. 2318 be amended to authorize an extension for the Commission until such 

time as the National Park Service (NPS) has completed an 

evaluation and report on the accomplishments of the Erie 

Canalway National Heritage Corridor (Corridor) and the 

future role of the NPS, and to provide for the transition of 

management of the Corridor from the Commission to the 

Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc., during the evaluation 

period. We further recommend that National Heritage 

Area (NHA) program legislation be enacted that standardizes timeframes and funding for designated national heritage areas. 

The NPS is initiating phase-in of a funding formula for 

NHAs, which is a merit-based system for allocating heritage area funding that considers a variety of factors based 

upon criteria related to program goals, accountability, and 

organizational sustainability. When fully implemented, the 

NPS funding formula plan will reward NHA entities that 

bring in additional non-federal investment and that have 

developed a sustainability plan. The Department would 

like to work with Congress to determine the future federal 

role when national heritage areas reach the end of their 

authorized eligibility for heritage program funding. We 

recommend that national heritage area program legislation 

be enacted during this Congress. 

There are currently 49 designated national heritage 

areas, yet there is no authority in law that guides the designation and administration of these areas as a national 

system. Program legislation would provide a much-needed 

framework for the evaluation of proposed national heritage 

areas, offer guidelines for successful planning and manageVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:14 Dec 31, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
46 

ment, clarify the roles and responsibilities of all parties, 

and standardize timeframes and funding for designated 

areas. 

S. 2318, as introduced, would extend the authorization 

of the Commission for an additional 15 years, until December 21, 2030. The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor was designated by Public Law 106–554, enacted on 

December 21, 2000, to preserve, interpret, promote, and 

provide access to the Erie Canalway’s historical, natural, 

cultural, scenic, and recreational resources. That law established the Commission to develop and implement the 

Canalway Plan and foster initiatives within the Corridor, 

and provided for the Commission to sunset 10 years after 

enactment. Section 8203 of Public Law 111–11 extended 

the authorization for the Commission for an additional five 

years, until December 21, 2015. 

As the designated authority for implementing the 

Canalway Plan, the Commission serves as the management or local coordinating entity. A more limited extension 

of the Commission’s authorization would enable it to continue beyond December 21, 2015, as the entity able to receive federal heritage area funding while a transition to 

the local coordinating entity takes place. Through FY 

2014, the Corridor has received approximately $8.4 million. 

The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor encompasses the most commercially enduring and historically 

significant system of canals in the United States. This waterway played a key role in turning New York City into a 

preeminent center for commerce, industry, and finance. 

Besides being a catalyst for growth in the Mohawk and 

Hudson Valleys, these canals helped open up western 

America for settlement and for many years transported 

much of the Midwest’s agricultural and industrial products 

to domestic and international markets. The Corridor covers 4,834 square miles, includes portions of 23 counties 

and 234 municipalities, and is home to 2.7 million people 

across the state of New York. The mission of the Corridor 

is focused on preserving and sharing the extraordinary 

heritage of the Erie Canalway, promoting the Corridor as 

a world-class tourism experience, and fostering vibrant 

communities connected by the waterway. This is accomplished through close collaboration among the Commission, 

the Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc., and voluntary 

partnerships with communities and citizens, and local, 

state, and federal agencies. 

As mentioned earlier in this statement, the Department 

recommends that S. 2318 be amended to provide for the 

Erie Canalway Heritage Fund, Inc., (Fund) to be the local 

coordinating entity for the Corridor. The Fund is a 

501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that has been established 

exclusively for charitable, educational, and civic purposes. 

It focuses its activities on implementing the vision formed 

by the citizens of the Erie Canalway National Heritage 

Corridor and is a key partner with the Commission in 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
47 

helping to implement the Corridor’s preservation and management plan. We would be happy to work with the committee on language that would provide for the appropriate 

transition of management of the Corridor from the Commission to the Fund. 

Amending the bill to provide for the nonprofit organization to be the local coordinating entity would be consistent 

with the general trend of other national heritage areas 

that were first authorized with commissions as the management entity. As our experience with heritage areas has 

grown, we have found that nonprofit organizations have 

certain advantages over federal commissions as local coordinating entities, including the fact that they do not sunset and they are better situated to do the fundraising 

needed to sustain the heritage area as it moves toward 

self-sufficiency. At this time, only three of the 49 authorized national heritage areas, including Erie Canalway, 

have federal commissions serving as their management or 

local coordinating entities. 

Finally, we recommend a technical amendment to the 

title of the bill to make it clear that the bill would reauthorize the Commission rather than the entire Erie 

Canalway National Heritage Corridor Act, which suggests 

that the Corridor designation faces expiration. While the 

Commission faces a sunset date in 2015, the Act establishing the Corridor as a national heritage area does not 

sunset. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you or other members of 

the committee may have. 

STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE TOOTHMAN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, CULTURAL RESOURCES, PARTNERSHIPS, AND

SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE

INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 702, a bill designating the 

Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage 

Corridor as ‘‘The Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor.’’ 

The Department supports enactment of S. 702. This legislation would change the name of the Quinebaug and 

Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor to 

‘‘The Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor.’’ It 

has been proven over the years that the current name of 

the heritage corridor is both difficult for people to remember and to spell. This change would help improve the identification of the corridor for the many partners involved 

with the heritage area and would be consistent with how 

the area is promoted in and beyond the region. 

The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National 

Heritage Corridor was designated a National Heritage 

Area by Congress in November 1994 through P.L. 103– 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
48 

449. At that time, Congress recognized that the valley represents one of the last traditional upland farming and mill 

village communities in the Northeastern United States. In 

1999, Congress passed P.L. 106–449 to enlarge the corridor to include river valley towns in both Massachusetts 

and Connecticut. Now forest and farmland make up 78 

percent of its 695,000-acres, yet it lies only an hour from 

three of New England’s four largest urban areas. This relatively undeveloped rural island, in the midst of the most 

urbanized region in the nation, makes it a resource of 

local, regional, and national importance. 

The Department first became involved in the area in 

1992 when the National Park Service (NPS) undertook a 

feasibility study. The name ‘‘The Last Green Valley’’ was 

coined by a NPS historian and was later used in an NPS 

brochure. People in the area have been associating the 

river corridor with the term ‘‘The Last Green Valley’’ ever 

since. 

The NPS has provided technical assistance and managed 

an agreement with the management entity of the heritage 

area from the time it was designated, and continues to do 

so today. That management entity started using the name, 

The Last Green Valley, informally in 2001, and the board 

decided to officially change the name of its nonprofit 

through the Secretaries of State in both Massachusetts 

and Connecticut in November 2008. 

Changing the name of the corridor through this bill will 

be consistent with how people in the region refer to the 

area and with the name of the management entity with 

which the NPS has an official agreement—The Last Green 

Valley, Inc. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you or other members of 

the subcommittee may have. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill S. 

2602, as ordered reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 

printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is 

shown in roman): 

PUBLIC LAW 100–692 

AN ACT To establish the Delaware and Lehigh Navigation Canal National Heritage 

Corridor in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

* * * * * * * 

(c) MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN.— (1) IN GENERAL.—To implement the management action plan 

created by the Corporation, there is authorized to be approVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:52 Dec 30, 2014 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR300.XXX SR300

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
49 

priated $1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2000 through ø2015¿ 

2030. 

(2) LIMITATION ON EXPENDITURES.—Amounts made available 

under paragraph (1) shall not exceed 50 percent of the costs of 

implementing the management action plan. 

(d) Termination of Assistance.—The authority of the Secretary to 

provide financial assistance under this Act terminates on September 30, ø2015¿ 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

PUBLIC LAW 104–333 

OMNIBUS PARKS AND PUBLIC LANDS MANAGEMENT 

ACT OF 1966 

AN ACT To provide for the administration of certain Presidio properties at minimal 

cost to the Federal taxpayer, and for other purposes 

* * * * * * * 

DIVISION II 

TITLE I—NATIONAL COAL HERITAGE AREA 

SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE. 

This title may be cited as the ‘‘National Coal Heritage Area Act 

of 1996’’. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 107. SUNSET. 

The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any assistance 

under this title after September 30, ø2015¿ 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE IV—STEEL INDUSTRY HERITAGE 

PROJECT 

SEC. 401. SHORT TITLE. 

This title may be cited as the ‘‘Steel Industry American Heritage 

Area Act of 1996’’. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 408. SUNSET. 

The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any assistance 

under this title after September 30, ø2015¿ 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE V—ESSEX NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA 

* * * * * * * 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
50 

SEC. 507. SUNSET. 

The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any assistance 

under this title after September 30, ø2015¿ 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VII—AMERICA’S AGRICULTURAL 

HERITAGE PARTNERSHIP 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 707. SUNSET. 

The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any assistance 

under this title after September 30, ø2015¿ 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VIII—OHIO & ERIE CANAL NATIONAL 

HERITAGE CORRIDOR 

SEC. 801. SHORT TITLE. 

This title may be cited as the ‘‘Ohio & Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor Act of 1996’’. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 809. SUNSET. 

The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any assistance 

under this title after September 30, ø2015¿ 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE IX—HUDSON RIVER VALLEY NATIONAL 

HERITAGE AREA 

SEC. 901. SHORT TITLE. 

This title may be cited as the ‘‘Hudson River Valley National 

Heritage Area Act of 1996’’. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 910. SUNSET. 

The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any assistance 

under this title after September 30, ø2015¿ 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

PUBLIC LAW 105–355 

AUTOMOBILE NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA ACT 

AN ACT To authorize the Automobile National Heritage Area in the State of 

Michigan, and for other purposes 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 109. SUNSET. 

The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any assistance 

under this title after øSeptember 30, 2014¿ September 30, 2030. 

* * * * * * * 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
51 

PUBLIC LAW 106–278 

AN ACT To designate the Lackawanna Valley and the Schuylkill River National 

Heritage Areas, and for other purposes 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE I—LACKAWANNA VALLEY NATIONAL 

HERITAGE AREA 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 108. SUNSET PROVISION. 

The Secretary shall not provide any grant or other assistance 

under this title after September 30, ø2015¿ 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE II—SCHUYLKILL RIVER VALLEY 

NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 209. SUNSET. 

The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any assistance 

under this title after øthe date that is 15 years after the date of 

the enactment of this title¿ September 30, 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

PUBLIC LAW 106–291 

AN ACT Making appropriations for the Department of the Interior and related 

agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 157. (a) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be cited as the 

‘‘Wheeling National Heritage Area Act of 2000’’. 

* * * * * * * 

(i) SUNSET.—The Secretary may not make any grant or provide 

any assistance under this section after September 30, ø2015¿ 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

PUBLIC LAW 106–319 

AN ACT To establish the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 7. SUNSET. 

The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any assistance 

under this Act after September 30, ø2015¿ 2030. 

* * * * * * * 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
52 

PUBLIC LAW 106–554 

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001 

APPENDIX D—H.R. 5666 

MISCELLANEOUS APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001 

* * * * * * * 

DIVISION B 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE VIII—ERIE CANALWAY NATIONAL 

HERITAGE CORRIDOR 

SEC. 801. SHORT TITLE; DEFINITIONS. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This title may be cited as the ‘‘Erie Canalway 

National Heritage Corridor Act’’. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 804. THE ERIE CANALWAY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR COMMISSION. 

* * * * * * * 

(j) TERMINATION.—The Commission shall terminate on øthe day 

occurring 15 years after the date of enactment of this title¿ September 30, 2030. 

* * * * * * * 

PUBLIC LAW 99–647 

AN ACT To establish the John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage 

Corridor in Massachusetts and Rhode Island 

* * * * * * * 

BOUNDARIES AND ADMINISTRATION 

SEC. 2. (a) BOUNDARIES.—The boundaries shall include the lands 

and water generally depicted on øthe map entitled ‘‘John H. Chafee 

Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Boundary 

Map’’, numbered BRV–80–80,011, and dated May 2, 1993¿ the map 

entitled ‘‘John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage 

Corridor—Proposed Boundary’’, numbered 022/111530, and dated 

November 10, 2011. The map shall be on file and available for public inspection in the office of the Department of the Interior in 

Washington, DC and the Massachusetts and Rhode Island Departments of Environmental Management. The Secretary of the Interior (hereafter referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall publish in the 

Federal Register, as soon as practical after the date of enactment 

of this Act a detailed description and map of the boundaries established under this subsection. 

* * * * * * * 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
53 

SEC. 7. øTERMINATION OF COMMISSION¿ TERMINATION OF 

COMMISION; DESIGNATION OF LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY. 

øThe Commission¿ (a) IN GENERAL.—The Commission shall terminate on September 30, 2015. 

(b) LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY.— (1) DESIGNATION.—The Blackstone River Valley National 

Heritage Corridor, Inc., shall be the local coordinating entity 

for the Corridor (referred to in this section as the ‘local coordinating entity’). 

(2) IMPLEMENTATION OF MANAGEMENT PLAN.—The local coordinating entity shall assume the duties of the Commission for 

the implementation of the Cultural Heritage and Land Management Plan developed and approved under section 6. 

(c) USE OF FUNDS.—For the purposes of carrying out the management plan, the local coordinating entity may use amounts made 

available under this Act— 

(1) to make grants to the States of Massachusetts and Rhode 

Island (referred to in this section as the ‘States’), political subdivisions of the States, nonprofit organizations, and other persons; 

(2) to enter into cooperative agreements with or provide technical assistance to the States, political subdivisions of the 

States, nonprofit organizations, Federal agencies, and other interested parties; 

(3) to hire and compensate staff, including individuals with 

expertise in— 

(A) natural, historical, cultural, educational, scenic, and 

recreational resource conservation; 

(B) economic and community development; or 

(C) heritage planning; 

(4) to obtain funds or services from any source, including 

funds and services provided under any other Federal law or 

program; 

(5) to contract for goods or services; and 

(6) to support activities of partners and any other activities 

that further the purposes of the Corridor and are consistent 

with the approved management plan. 

SEC. 8. DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY. 

* * * * * * * 

(b) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.—øThe Secretary¿ (1) IN GENERAL.— 

The Secretary shall, upon request of the Commission, provide technical assistance to the Commission in the preparation of the plan 

and for implementing the plan as set out in section 6(c). 

(2) COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS.—Notwithstanding chapter 63 of 

title 31, United States Code, the Secretary may enter into cooperative agreements with the local coordinating entity designated by 

paragraph (1) and other public or private entities for the purpose 

of— 

(A) providing technical assistance; or 

(B) implementing the plan under section 6(c). 

(c) IMPLEMENTATION.—(1) To assist in the implementation of the 

Cultural Heritage and Land Management Plan in a manner consistent with purposes of this Act, the Secretary is authorized to undertake a limited program of financial assistance for the purpose 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
54 

of providing funds for the preservation and restoration of structures on or eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places within the Corridor which exhibit national significance 

or provide a wide spectrum of historic, recreational, or environmental education opportunities to the general public. 

(2) To be eligible for funds under this section, the Commission 

shall submit an application to the Secretary that includes— 

(A) a 10-year development plan including those resource protection needs and projects critical to maintaining or interpreting the distinctive character of the Corridor; and 

(B) specific descriptions of annual work programs that have 

been assembled, the participating parties, roles, cost estimates, 

cost-sharing, or cooperative agreements necessary to carry out 

the development plan. 

(3) Funds made available pursuant to this subsection shall not 

exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the work programs. 

(4) In making the funds available, the Secretary shall give priority to projects that attract greater non-Federal funding sources. 

(5) Any payment made for the purposes of conservation or restoration of real property or structures shall be subject to an agreement either— 

(A) to convey a conservation or preservation easement to the 

Department of Environmental Management or to the Historic 

Preservation Commission, as appropriate, of the State in which 

the real property or structure is located; or 

(B) that conversion, use, or disposal of the resources so assisted for purposes contrary to the purposes of this Act, as determined by the Secretary, shall result in a right of the United 

States for reimbursement of all funds expended upon such resources or the proportion of the increased value of the resources attributable to such funds as determined at the time 

of such conversion, use, or disposal, whichever is greater. 

(6) The authority to determine that a conversion, use, or disposal 

of resources has been carried out contrary to the purposes of this 

Act in violation of an agreement entered into under paragraph 

(5)(A) shall be solely at the discretion of the Secretary. 

ø(d) SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY.—(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary 

shall conduct a special resource study of sites and associated landscape features within the boundaries of the Corridor that contribute to the understanding of the Corridor as the birthplace of 

the industrial revolution in the United States. 

ø(2) EVALUATION.—Not later than 3 years after the date on 

which funds are made available to carry out this subsection, the 

Secretary shall complete the study under paragraph (1) to evaluate 

the possibility of— 

ø(A) designating 1 or more site or landscape feature as a 

unit of the National Park System; and 

ø(B) coordinating and complementing actions by the Commission, local governments, and State and Federal agencies, in 

the preservation and interpretation of significant resources 

within the Corridor. 

ø(3) COORDINATION.—The Secretary shall coordinate the Study 

with the Commission. 

ø(4) REPORT.—Not later than 30 days after the date on which the 

study under paragraph (1) is completed, the Secretary shall submit 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
55 

to the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives 

and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate 

a report that describes— 

ø(A) the findings of the study; and 

ø(B) the conclusions and recommendations of the Secretary.¿ 

(d) TRANSITION MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING.—The Secretary shall enter into a memorandum of understanding with the 

local coordinating entity to ensure— 

(1) the appropriate transition of management of the Corridor 

from the Commission to the local coordinating entity; and 

(2) coordination regarding the implementation of the Cultural 

Heritage and Land Management Plan. 

* * * * * * * 

AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS 

SEC. 10. (a) There is authorized to be appropriated annually to 

the Commission $1,000,000 for each year øin which the Commission is in existence¿ until September 30, 2016 to carry out the purposes of this Act; except that the Federal contribution to the Commission shall not exceed 50 percent of the annual operating costs 

of the Commission. 

(b) DEVELOPMENT FUNDS.—There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out section 8(c) not more than $10,000,000 for the 

period of fiscal years 2006 through 2016, to remain available until 

expended. 

ø(c) SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY.—There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out section 8(d).¿ 

SEC. 11. REFERENCES TO THE CORRIDOR, INC. 

For purposes of sections 6, 8 (other than section 8(d)(1)), 9, and 

10, a reference to the ‘‘Commission’’ shall be considered a reference 

to the local coordinating entity. 

PUBLIC LAW 103–449 

AN ACT To establish the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage 

Corridor in the State of Connecticut, and for other purposes 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE I—QUINEBAUG AND SHETUCKET RIVERS VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 103. ESTABLISHMENT OF øQUINEBAUG AND SHETUCKET RIVERS 

VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR¿ LAST GREEN 

VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR; PURPOSE. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is hereby established in the State of 

Connecticut øthe Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National 

Heritage Corridor¿ The Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor. 

* * * * * * * 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
56 

SEC. 108. DEFINITIONS. 

For the purposes of this title: 

(1) The term ‘‘State’’ means the State of Connecticut. 

(2) The term ‘‘Corridor’’ means øthe Quinebaug and 

Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor under¿ 

The Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor established 

by section 3. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS