29–010 

Calendar No. 685 

108TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 108–329 

NATIONAL HERITAGE PARTNERSHIP ACT 

AUGUST 25, 2004.—Ordered to be printed 

Filed, under authority of the order of the Senate of July 22, 2004 

Mr. DOMENICI, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 2543] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 2543) to establish a program and criteria for 

National Heritage Areas in the United States, and for other purposes, 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 out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof 

the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Heritage Partnership 

Act’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents of this Act is as follows: 

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

Sec. 2. Definitions. 

Sec. 3. National Heritage Areas program. 

Sec. 4. Studies. 

Sec. 5. Management plans. 

Sec. 6. Local coordinating entities. 

Sec. 7. Relationship to other Federal agencies. 

Sec. 8. Private property and regulatory protections. 

Sec. 9. Authorization of appropriations. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITY.—The term ‘‘local coordinating entity’’ means 

the entity designated by Congress— 

(A) to develop, in partnership with others, the management plan for a 

National Heritage Area; and 

2 

(B) to act as a catalyst for the implementation of projects and programs 

among diverse partners in the National Heritage Area. 

(2) MANAGEMENT PLAN.—The term ‘‘management plan’’ means the plan prepared by the local coordinating entity for a National Heritage Area designated 

by Congress that specifies actions, policies, strategies, performance goals, and 

recommendations to meet the goals of the National Heritage Area, in accordance with section 5. 

(3) NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA.—The term ‘‘National Heritage Area’’ means an 

area designated by Congress that is nationally significant to the heritage of the 

United States and meets the criteria established under section 4(a). 

(4) NATIONAL IMPORTANCE.—The term ‘‘national importance’’ means possession of— 

(A) unique natural, historical, cultural, educational, scenic, or recreational resources of exceptional value or quality; and 

(B) a high degree of integrity of location, setting, or association in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States. 

(5) PROGRAM.—The term ‘‘program’’ means the National Heritage Areas program established under section 3(a). 

(6) PROPOSED NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA.—The term ‘‘proposed National Heritage Area’’ means an area under study by the Secretary or other parties for potential designation by Congress as a National Heritage Area. 

(7) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of the Interior. 

(8) STUDY.—The term ‘‘study’’ means a study conducted by the Secretary, or 

conducted by 1 or more other interested parties and reviewed by the Secretary, 

in accordance with the criteria and processes established under section 4, to determine whether an area meets the criteria to be designated as a National Heritage Area by Congress. 

SEC. 3. NATIONAL HERITAGE AREAS PROGRAM. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a National Heritage Areas program under which the Secretary shall provide technical and financial assistance to 

local coordinating entities to support the establishment of National Heritage Areas. 

(b) DUTIES.—Under the program, the Secretary shall— 

(1)(A) conduct studies, as directed by Congress, to assess the suitability and 

feasibility of designating proposed National Heritage Areas; or 

(B) review and comment on studies undertaken by other parties to make such 

assessment; 

(2) provide technical assistance, on a reimbursable or non-reimbursable basis 

(as determined by the Secretary), for the development and implementation of 

management plans for designated National Heritage Areas; 

(3) enter into cooperative agreements with interested parties to carry out this 

Act; 

(4) provide information, promote understanding, and encourage research on 

National Heritage Areas in partnership with local coordinating entities; 

(5) provide national oversight, analysis, coordination, and technical assistance 

and support to ensure consistency and accountability under the program; and 

(6) submit annually to the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate 

a report describing the allocation and expenditure of funds for activities conducted with respect to National Heritage Areas under this Act. 

SEC. 4. STUDIES. 

(a) CRITERIA.—In conducting or reviewing a study, the Secretary shall apply the 

following criteria to determine the suitability and feasibility of designating a proposed National Heritage Area: 

(1) An area— 

(A) has an assemblage of natural, historic, cultural, educational, scenic, 

or recreational resources that together are nationally important to the heritage of the United States; 

(B) represents distinctive aspects of the heritage of the United States 

worthy of recognition, conservation, interpretation, and continuing use; 

(C) is best managed as such an assemblage through partnerships among 

public and private entities at the local or regional level; 

(D) reflects traditions, customs, beliefs, and folklife that are a valuable 

part of the heritage of the United States; 

(E) provides outstanding opportunities to conserve natural, historical, cultural, or scenic features; 

(F) provides outstanding recreational or educational opportunities; and 

(G) has resources and traditional uses that have national importance. 

3 

(2) Residents, business interests, nonprofit organizations, and governments 

(including relevant Federal land management agencies) within the proposed 

area are involved in the planning and have demonstrated significant support 

through letters and other means for National Heritage Area designation and 

management. 

(3) The local coordinating entity responsible for preparing and implementing 

the management plan is identified. 

(4) The proposed local coordinating entity and units of government supporting 

the designation are willing and have documented a significant commitment to 

work in partnership to protect, enhance, interpret, fund, manage, and develop 

resources within the National Heritage Area. 

(5) The proposed local coordinating entity has developed a conceptual financial plan that outlines the roles of all participants (including the Federal Government) in the management of the National Heritage Area. 

(6) The proposal is consistent with continued economic activity within the 

area. 

(7) A conceptual boundary map has been developed and is supported by the 

public and participating Federal agencies. 

(b) CONSULTATION.—In conducting or reviewing a study, the Secretary shall consult with the managers of any Federal land within the proposed National Heritage 

Area and secure the concurrence of the managers with the findings of the study before making a determination for designation. 

(c) TRANSMITTAL.—On completion or receipt of a study for a National Heritage 

Area, the Secretary shall— 

(1) review, comment, and make findings (in accordance with the criteria specified in subsection (a)) on the feasibility of designating the National Heritage 

Area; 

(2) consult with the Governor of each State in which the proposed National 

Heritage Area is located; and 

(3) transmit to the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives 

and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, the study, 

including— 

(A) any comments received from the Governor of each State in which the 

proposed National Heritage Area is located; and 

(B) a finding as to whether the proposed National Heritage Area meets 

the criteria for designation. 

(d) DISAPPROVAL.—If the Secretary determines that any proposed National Heritage Area does not meet the criteria for designation, the Secretary shall include within the study submitted under subsection (c)(3) a description of the reasons for the 

determination. 

(e) DESIGNATION.—The designation of a National Heritage Area shall be— 

(1) by Act of Congress; and 

(2) contingent on the prior completion of a study and an affirmative determination by the Secretary that the area meets the criteria established under 

subsection (a). 

SEC. 5. MANAGEMENT PLANS. 

(a) REQUIREMENTS.—The management plan for any National Heritage Area 

shall— 

(1) describe comprehensive policies, goals, strategies, and recommendations 

for telling the story of the heritage of the area covered by the National Heritage 

Area and encouraging long-term resource protection, enhancement, interpretation, funding, management, and development of the National Heritage Area; 

(2) include a description of actions and commitments that governments, private organizations, and citizens will take to protect, enhance, interpret, fund, 

manage, and develop the natural, historical, cultural, educational, scenic, and 

recreational resources of the National Heritage Area; 

(3) specify existing and potential sources of funding or economic development 

strategies to protect, enhance, interpret, fund, manage, and develop the National Heritage Area; 

(4) include an inventory of the natural, historical, cultural, educational, scenic, and recreational resources of the National Heritage Area related to the national importance and themes of the National Heritage Area that should be protected, enhanced, interpreted, managed, funded, and developed; 

(5) recommend policies and strategies for resource management, including the 

development of intergovernmental and interagency agreements to protect, enhance, interpret, fund, manage, and develop the natural, historical, cultural, 

educational, scenic, and recreational resources of the National Heritage Area; 

4 

(6) describe a program for implementation for the management plan, including— 

(A) performance goals; 

(B) plans for resource protection, enhancement, interpretation, funding, 

management, and development; and 

(C) specific commitments for implementation that have been made by the 

local coordinating entity or any government agency, organization, business, 

or individual; 

(7) include an analysis of, and recommendations for, means by which Federal, 

State, and local programs may best be coordinated (including the role of the National Park Service and other Federal agencies associated with the National 

Heritage Area) to further the purposes of this Act; and 

(8) include a business plan that— 

(A) describes the role, operation, financing, and functions of the local coordinating entity and of each of the major activities contained in the management plan; and 

(B) provides adequate assurances that the local coordinating entity has 

the partnerships and financial and other resources necessary to implement 

the management plan for the National Heritage Area. 

(b) DEADLINE.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 3 years after the date on which funds are 

first made available to develop the management plan after designation as a National Heritage Area, the local coordinating entity shall submit the management 

plan to the Secretary for approval. 

(2) TERMINATION OF FUNDING.—If the management plan is not submitted to 

the Secretary in accordance with paragraph (1), the local coordinating entity 

shall not qualify for any additional financial assistance under this Act until 

such time as the management plan is submitted to and approved by the Secretary. 

(c) APPROVAL OF MANAGEMENT PLAN.— 

(1) REVIEW.—Not later than 180 days after receiving the plan, the Secretary 

shall review and approve or disapprove the management plan for a National 

Heritage Area on the basis of the criteria established under paragraph (3). 

(2) CONSULTATION.—The Secretary shall consult with the Governor of each 

State in which the National Heritage Area is located before approving a management plan for the National Heritage Area. 

(3) CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL.—In determining whether to approve a management plan for a National Heritage Area, the Secretary shall consider whether— 

(A) the local coordinating entity represents the diverse interests of the 

National Heritage Area, including governments, natural and historic resource protection organizations, educational institutions, businesses, recreational organizations, community residents, and private property owners; 

(B) the local coordinating entity— 

(i) has afforded adequate opportunity for public and governmental involvement (including through workshops and hearings) in the preparation of the management plan; and 

(ii) provides for at least semiannual public meetings to ensure adequate implementation of the management plan; 

(C) the resource protection, enhancement, interpretation, funding, management, and development strategies described in the management plan, if 

implemented, would adequately protect, enhance, interpret, fund, manage, 

and develop the natural, historic, cultural, educational, scenic, and recreational resources of the National Heritage Area; 

(D) the management plan would not adversely affect any activities authorized on Federal land under public land laws or land use plans; 

(E) the local coordinating entity has demonstrated the financial capability, in partnership with others, to carry out the plan; 

(F) the Secretary has received adequate assurances from the appropriate 

State and local officials whose support is needed to ensure the effective implementation of the State and local elements of the management plan; and 

(G) the management plan demonstrates partnerships among the local coordinating entity, Federal, State, and local governments, regional planning 

organizations, nonprofit organizations, or private sector parties for implementation of the management plan. 

(4) DISAPPROVAL.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Secretary disapproves the management plan, the 

Secretary— 

(i) shall advise the local coordinating entity in writing of the reasons 

for the disapproval; and 

5 

(ii) may make recommendations to the local coordinating entity for 

revisions to the management plan. 

(B) DEADLINE.—Not later than 180 days after receiving a revised management plan, the Secretary shall approve or disapprove the revised management plan. 

(5) AMENDMENTS.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—An amendment to the management plan that substantially alters the purposes of the National Heritage Area shall be reviewed 

by the Secretary and approved or disapproved in the same manner as the 

original management plan. 

(B) IMPLEMENTATION.—The local coordinating entity shall not use Federal 

funds authorized by this Act to implement an amendment to the management plan until the Secretary approves the amendment. 

SEC. 6. LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITIES. 

(a) DUTIES.—To further the purposes of the National Heritage Area, the local coordinating entity shall— 

(1) prepare a management plan for the National Heritage Area, and submit 

the management plan to the Secretary, in accordance with section 5; 

(2) submit an annual report to the Secretary for each fiscal year for which 

the local coordinating committee receives Federal funds under this Act, specifying— 

(A) the specific performance goals and accomplishments of the local coordinating committee; 

(B) the expenses and income of the local coordinating committee; 

(C) the amounts and sources of matching funds; 

(D) the amounts leveraged with Federal funds and sources of the 

leveraging; and 

(E) grants made to any other entities during the fiscal year; 

(3) make available for audit for each fiscal year for which the local coordinating entity receives Federal funds under this Act, all information pertaining 

to the expenditure of the funds and any matching funds; and 

(4) encourage economic viability and sustainability that is consistent with the 

purposes of the National Heritage Area. 

(b) AUTHORITIES.—For the purposes of preparing and implementing the approved 

management plan for the National Heritage Area, the local coordinating entity may 

use Federal funds made available under this Act to— 

(1) make grants to political jurisdictions, nonprofit organizations, and other 

parties within the National Heritage Area; 

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

political jurisdictions, nonprofit organizations, Federal agencies, and other interested parties; 

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

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

(B) economic and community development; and 

(C) heritage planning; 

(4) obtain funds or services from any source, including other Federal laws or 

programs; 

(5) contract for goods or services; and 

(6) support activities of partners and any other activities that further the purposes of the National Heritage Area and are consistent with the approved management plan. 

(c) PROHIBITION ON ACQUISITION OF REAL PROPERTY.—The local coordinating entity may not use Federal funds authorized under this Act to acquire any interest in 

real property. 

SEC. 7. 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 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; or 

6 

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

jurisdiction of a Federal agency. 

SEC. 8. 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 the National Heritage Area; 

(2) requires any property owner to permit public access (including access by 

Federal, State, or local agencies) to the property of the property owner, or to 

modify public access or use of property of the property owner under any other 

Federal, State, or local law; 

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

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

land use or other regulatory authority to any local coordinating entity; 

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

rights; 

(5) diminishes the authority of the State to manage fish and wildlife, including the regulation of fishing and hunting within the National Heritage Area; 

or (6) 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. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

(a) STUDIES.—There is authorized to be appropriated to conduct and review stud- ies under section 4 $750,000 for each fiscal year, of which not more than $250,000 

for any fiscal year may be used for any individual study for a proposed National 

Heritage Area. 

(b) LOCAL COORDINATING ENTITIES.— (1) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out section 6 $15,000,000 for each fiscal year, of which not more than— (A) $1,000,000 may be made available for any fiscal year for any individual National Heritage Area, to remain available until expended; and (B) a total of $10,000,000 may be made available for all such fiscal years 

for any individual National Heritage Area. 

(2) TERMINATION DATE.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The authority of the Secretary to provide financial assistance to an individual local coordinating entity under this Act (excluding 

technical assistance and administrative oversight) shall terminate on the 

date that is 15 years after the date of the initial receipt of the assistance 

by the local coordinating committee. 

(B) DESIGNATION.—A National Heritage Area shall retain the designation 

as a National Heritage Area after the termination date prescribed in subparagraph (A). 

(3) ADMINISTRATION.—Not more than 5 percent of the amount of funds made 

available under paragraph (1) for a fiscal year may be used by the Secretary 

for technical assistance, oversight, and administrative purposes. 

(c) MATCHING FUNDS.— (1) IN GENERAL.—As a condition of receiving a grant under this Act, the recipient of the grant shall provide matching funds in an amount that is equal 

to the amount of the grant. 

(2) ADMINISTRATION.—The recipient matching funds— 

(A) shall be derived from non-Federal sources; and 

(B) may be made in the form of in-kind contributions of goods or services 

fairly valued. 

PURPOSE OF THE MEASURE

The purpose of S. 2543 is to establish a program and criteria for 

National Heritage Areas in the United States. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

The National Park Service has defined a Natural Heritage Area 

as a ‘‘place designated by the United States Congress where natural, cultural, historic and recreational resources combine to form 

a cohesive nationally distinctive landscape arising from patterns of 

human activity shaped by geography.’’ They are established to comVerDate Aug 04 2004 06:28 Aug 27, 2004 Jkt 029010 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR329.XXX SR329
7 

memorate, conserve and promote important areas that include natural, scenic, historic, cultural or recreational resources. Unlike 

areas that are under the sole jurisdiction of the National Park 

Service, such as national parks or monuments, heritage areas typically remain in non-Federal ownership and are managed by local 

communities and partners. To date, Congress has designated 24 

National Heritage Areas. 

National Heritage Areas receive financial and technical assistance through cooperative agreements with the National Park Service. They also receive funds from other agencies and non-Federal 

sources. Most heritage areas are authorized to receive appropriations of up to $1 million each year, with a maximum total appropriation of $10 to $15 million. Generally, the authorizing legislation 

for each heritage area includes a requirement that Federal funds 

must be matched equally by non-Federal funds. For fiscal years 

1997 through 2002 National Heritage Areas received $310 million 

in funding. Of this total, approximately $154 million came from 

State and local governments and private sources and $156 million 

came from the Federal Government. 

Although the National Park Service has developed suggested criteria for assessing whether an area may qualify as a National Heritage Area, there are currently no statutory criteria, no systematic 

process for identifying or evaluating potential heritage areas and 

no formal program for managing them. Of the 24 existing heritage 

areas, ten have been designated by Congress without a thorough 

National Park Service review. Of those ten, six, a quarter of the 

existing heritage areas, were designated by Congress despite the 

agency’s recommendation that designation be deferred. Not surprisingly, the opportunity for Federal funding has resulted in an increase in proposals for new heritage areas, with more than 30 heritage area proposals currently pending in the 108th Congress. The 

sizable number of new proposals before Congress has raised some 

concern regarding the most effective means to manage the program 

in the future. 

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently published 

a report that examined heritage areas and suggested ways to improve their accountability (GAO04–593T, March 30, 2004). The report recommends that standardized criteria be adopted for evaluating potential National Heritage Areas. The GAO report also suggests, given the magnitude of funds appropriated, that certain key 

management controls be instituted to ensure accountability and 

program consistency. S. 2543 will establish program requirements 

and criteria for evaluating potential National Heritage Areas as 

well as place limitations on Federal funding for the program. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Senators Thomas and Burns introduced S. 2543 on June 17, 

2004. The Senate Subcommittee on National Parks held a hearing 

on S. 2543 on June 21, 2004. The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 2543, as amended, favorably reported on 

July 14, 2004. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in an open 

business session on July 14, 2004, by a unanimous voice vote of a 

8 

quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 2543, if 

amended as described herein. 

COMMITTEE AMENDMENT

During its consideration of S. 2543, the Committee adopted an 

amendment in the nature of a substitute. In addition to making 

several clarifying and conforming changes. The amendment 

changed the reference for the standard by which potential heritage 

areas are to be evaluated from one of ‘‘national significance’’ to ‘‘national importance’’ consistent with the Administration’s recommendations. The amendment also deleted a provision in section 

4(d) which would have allowed the Secretary of the Interior to recommend against designation of an area in the study of the area, 

notwithstanding that the proposed area met the criteria for designation. The purpose of the study is to provide Congress with an 

analysis of the merits of the proposed area, which may differ from 

an Administration’s ultimate recommendation whether to support 

legislation establishing any particular area. The amendment is described in detail in the section-by-section analysis below. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1(a) entitles this Act the ‘‘National Heritage Partnership 

Act’’. 

Subsection (b) contains the table of contents for this Act. 

Section 2 contains definitions of key terms used in the Act. This 

section was amended to define the term ‘‘national importance’’ in 

place of ‘‘national significance’’. 

Section 3 directs the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to establish a National Heritage Area (NHA) program and to provide 

technical and financial assistance to local coordinating entities. 

Subsection (b) describes the duties of the Secretary under the 

program. 

Section 4(a) describes the criteria to be used by the Secretary to 

determine the feasibility and suitability of a proposed NHA. This 

section also describes the administrative process for the transmittal, approval and disapproval of the feasibility study. Designation of NHA’s shall be contingent upon the completion of the feasibility study and approval of that study by the Secretary. 

Section 5 describes the requirements for a heritage area’s management plan. This section also includes procedural requirements 

for the submission, approval, disapproval and amendment of the 

plan. 

Section 6 describes the duties and responsibilities of the local coordinating entity for a heritage area. This section also describes the 

purposes under which the coordinating entity is authorized to expend Federal funds and prohibits the entity from using Federal 

funds to acquire real property. 

Section 7 states that nothing in this Act affects the authority of 

a Federal agency to provide technical or financial assistance to a 

NHA. Other Federal agencies are encouraged to consult with the 

Secretary on issues concerning the NHA to the extent practicable. 

Nothing in this Act limits, modifies, alters or amends any authorized use of Federal land. 

Section 8 contains several savings provisions. 

9 

Paragraph (1) states that nothing in this Act shall affect the 

rights of any private property owner. 

Paragraph (2) states that nothing in this Act requires a private 

property owner to permit public access. 

Paragraph (3) states that nothing in this Act affects any existing 

land use regulation or alters any land use or provides regulatory 

authority to the coordinating entity. 

Paragraph (4) states that nothing in this Act authorizes or implies the reservation or appropriation of water, or water rights. 

Paragraph (5) provides that nothing in this Act diminishes the 

authority of a State to manage fish and wildlife. 

Paragraph (6) states that nothing in this Act shall affect the liability of any private property owner. Section 9(a) authorizes the appropriation of $750,000, for each 

fiscal year, to conduct and review feasibility studies for potential 

heritage areas. Not more than $250,000 is authorized for any individual study for any given fiscal year. 

Subsection (b) authorizes and limits annual appropriations for heritage areas to $15,000,000 with not more than $1,000,000 annually for any individual heritage area. A total appropriation of 

$10,000,000 may be made for an individual heritage area over all 

fiscal years. The Secretary’s authority to provide technical and financial assistance to each heritage area is limited to 15 years, but 

the area is authorized to retain the designation of National Heritage Area after Federal funding has terminated. The Secretary may 

extend up to five percent of the annual authorized appropriation of 

$15,000,000 for the purposes of technical assistance and oversight 

and administration of the program. 

Subsection (c) requires the recipient of any grant made under 

this Act to provide, through non-Federal sources, an amount equal 

to the Federal grant. The non-Federal contribution may include inkind contributions of goods and services. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of the cost of this measures has been provided by the Congressional Budget Office. 

S. 2543—National Heritage Partnership Act 

S. 2543 would provide a framework for establishing new national 

heritage areas (NHAs). NHAs are cultural or historical areas managed locally in cooperation with the National Park Service (NPS) 

but are not units of the National Park System. CBO estimates that 

enacting S. 2543—by itself—would have no effect on the federal 

budget because none of the activities authorized by the bill could 

occur without further authorizing legislation. The bill, however, 

would establish a new procedure that could affect how many and 

how quickly new NHAs could be established using future appropriations. Enacting S. 2543 would not affect direct spending or revenues. 

This legislation contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 

mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 

would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

S. 2543 would establish criteria and mechanisms for assessing, 

planning, designating, and developing new national heritage areas. 

For each proposed new NHA, Congressional action would be reVerDate Aug 04 2004 06:28 Aug 27, 2004 Jkt 029010 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR329.XXX SR329
10 

quired to authorize both the first step, a feasibility study, and the 

final step, a formal NHA designation. 

Under the bill, once a feasibility study of a potential NHA has 

been authorized by the Congress, the NPS would either conduct the 

study itself or allow one to be undertaken by an interested local entity. Completed and assessed studies would then be submitted to 

the Congress. If legislation to designate the NHA is enacted and 

funds are made available, the chosen local coordinating entity for 

the area would have three years to submit a general management 

plan to the Secretary of the Interior for approval. 

The bill would authorize the appropriation of up to $250,000 annually for individual feasibility studies (up to a total of $750,000 

a year). Finally, the bill would authorize the appropriation of up to 

$1 million per NHA per year (up to a total of $15 million annually) 

for financial and technical assistance to local coordinating entities. 

Such funds (up to a 15-year total of $10 million per NHA) would 

be used to develop and implement management plans and administer the area. 

Because the authority to appropriate funds provided in S. 2543 

would depend on subsequent acts of Congress to authorize feasibility studies and designate new NHAs, CBO estimates that enacting this legislation alone would have no effect on the federal budget. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Deborah Reis. The estimate was reviewed by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

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. 2543. 

The bill 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. 2543. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

On June 24, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources requested legislative reports from the Department of the 

Interior and the Office of Management and Budget setting forth 

Executive agency recommendations on S. 2543. These reports had 

not been received when this report was filed. The testimony provided by the Department of the Interior and the Government Accountability Office at the Subcommittee hearing on S. 2543 follows: 

STATEMENT OF A. DURAND JONES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, 

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, it is 

my pleasure to appear before you today to testify on behalf 

of the Department of the Interior on S. 2543, the National 

11 

Heritage Partnership Act. The Department strongly supports this bill, but has a few concerns about some of the 

provisions. 

The Department strongly supports legislation to establish a national heritage areas program. We would like to 

thank Chairman Thomas for his leadership over the last 

year in evaluating programmatic issues, identifying areas 

for legislative action, and introducing this bill based on the 

Administration’s legislative proposal. This legislation was 

developed through a year-long process of Congressional 

oversight hearings, outside evaluations of the program 

(such as the March 2004 report by the General Accounting 

Office) and meetings among may of the groups interested 

in this issue. 

S. 2543 provides a much-needed framework for evaluating proposed national heritage area designations, offers 

guidelines for successful planning, clarifies the roles and 

responsibilities of all parties, and standardizes timeframes 

and funding for designated areas. 

The Department supports the national heritage areas 

approach to resource conservation through partnerships 

with communities. National heritage areas are intended to 

preserve nationally important natural, cultural, historic, 

and recreational resources through the creation of partnerships among Federal, State and local entities. National 

heritage areas are locally driven, initiated and managed by 

the people who live there and do not impose Federal zoning, land use controls nor do they require land acquisition. 

At its best, the collaborative approach of this program embodies Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton’s ‘‘Four Cs’’— 

Communication, Consultation and Cooperation, all in the 

service of Conservation. 

S. 2543 supports a conservative strategy that recognizes 

that the people who live in a heritage area are uniquely 

qualified to preserve it. Being designated as a national 

heritage area can benefit visitors, community residents, 

existing National Park units located in the area, and other 

federal lands by expanding the opportunity to interpret 

and protect resources over a larger landscape and by telling our shared national story. 

There are three provisions in S. 2543 that we wish to 

discuss in more detail and to offer suggestions for improvements. 

CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION

The standards for evaluating areas proposed for national 

designation are an essential element in establishing a national heritage areas program. While many places in this 

nation have special meaning to the people that live there, 

for many places designation as a State or local heritage 

area may be most appropriate. The National Park Service 

should be the lead partner only when the resource within 

a proposed heritage area are of national importance. 

The Department has some concerns about the use of the 

term ‘‘national significance’’ and the definition provided in 

12 

S. 2543. We recommend replacing the term ‘‘national significance’’ with the term ‘‘national importance’’ to avoid 

confusion. The National Park Service specifically uses the 

term ‘‘national significance’’ in suitability and feasibility 

studies for new National Park System units. For this reason, the term ‘‘national importance’’ has been informally 

used by the National Park Service to describe the assessment of national heritage area resources. 

In addition, having a concise, appropriate, and practical 

definition for ‘‘national significance’’ or ‘‘national importance’’ is critical. We would suggest a revised definition as 

applied in practice to existing and proposed national heritage areas: 

‘‘The term ‘National Importance’ is ascribed to a proposed heritage area that illustrates major historic, cultural, natural or social themes important to the history of 

the United States and contains resources that are outstanding examples of natural and cultural features that 

contribute to the theme, and which possess a high degree 

of integrity, and are compatible with continued community 

development, public enjoyment, and use.’’ 

SUITABILITY/FEASIBILITY STUDY

The Department believes that a study should be required for every proposed national heritage area and the 

study should be evaluated against legislatively established 

criteria before designation. S. 2543 requires that such a 

study be prepared that demonstrates evidence of placebased resources that tell a nationally significant story, 

which has the support and involvement of the local community. This requirement has been field-tested and has 

been shown to increase the future success of the heritage 

area. 

The Department recommends a modification to the terminology used for studies. In order to be consistent with 

terminology used in past study and designation bills for 

national heritage areas, we recommend that the studies be 

called ‘‘feasibility studies’’ instead of ‘‘suitability/feasibility 

studies.’’ This would also lessen any confusion with studies 

for new units of the National Park System that are called 

suitability and feasibility studies. We recommend that this 

change in terminology be used throughout the bill when 

referring to these studies. 

FUNDING AND TIMEFRAMES

When the first national heritage corridors were designated twenty years ago, a Federal commission provided 

management for the areas and the National Park Service 

provided most of the staff. The national heritage corridor 

or area was conceived as a less expensive alternative to 

the acquisition and operation costs of creating a new unit 

of the National Park System. These areas were originally 

authorized for five years with a five-year extension; over 

time, the corridors have been reauthorized for additional 

periods. 

13 

For the 18 national heritage areas established after 

1995, the National Park Service encouraged management 

with greater involvement by local entities as a more costeffective use of Federal resources. Most of these newer 

areas are managed by a non-profit entity or a State government and include a funding formula of not more than 

$10 million Federal dollars over a fifteen-year period. Our 

legislative proposal recommends codifying this approach 

and for the first time requires that a business plan be developed as part of the management planning for proposed 

new areas. This would ensure that from the beginning, national heritage areas are working towards and have an established plan for self-sufficiency. So far, no existing areas 

has ‘‘graduated’’ from the program, even after 20 years and 

in some cases, and nearly $100 million invested overall. 

For this reason, we recognize the need to work with existing areas to assist them in a transition strategy as they 

reach the end of their funding authorization. As areas become self-sufficient, available resources could be reallocated to newly designated areas or other priorities. 

The Department is concerned with the new provision in 

section 9 of S. 2543 that caps the heritage areas program 

at $15 million per year. The Administration did not propose a cap on the program because we believe it is more 

appropriate to cap the amount of appropriations each area 

is authorized to receive, and to limit the authorized period 

for appropriations. Currently, there are 15 new national 

heritage areas pending for designation in Congress. In addition, there are 24 designated national heritage areas, 

many of which are authorized to receive appropriations of 

$1 million per year. However, we would expect to allocate 

funding among these areas within the levels of funds appropriated, which might require providing less than the individual authorized ceilings in some instances. 

CONCLUSION

Recent studies and our own experiences have shown that 

the national heritage area approach links people and 

place, nature and culture, and the present with the past. 

National heritage areas capitalize on the unique role local 

communities play in preserving their heritage and telling 

their stories. S. 2543 respects these principles. It assigns 

the appropriate roles and responsibilities to the key partners that must work together to make the program successful. It also recognizes the need to target our assistance 

to those areas where there is a national interest and 

where the local partners meet established criteria for success. We look forward to working with the committee to 

enact this important legislation. 

14 


Insert offset folio 34 here SR329.001
15 


Insert offset folio 35 here SR329.002
16 


Insert offset folio 36 here SR329.003
17 


Insert offset folio 37 here SR329.004
18 


Insert offset folio 38 here SR329.005
19 


Insert offset folio 39 here SR329.006
20 


Insert offset folio 40 here SR329.007
21 


Insert offset folio 41 here SR329.008
22 


Insert offset folio 42 here SR329.009
23 


Insert offset folio 43 here SR329.010
24 


Insert offset folio 44 here SR329.011
25 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no changes in existing law are made by the bill S. 2543 as ordered reported. 

Æ