National Heritage Area

STATEMENT OF JOY BEASLEY, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR FOR CULTURAL RESOURCES, PARTNERSHIPS AND SCIENCE, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SENATE ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, CONCERNING LEGISLATION PERTAINING TO NATIONAL HERITAGE AREAS.   

October 6, 2021
_____________________________________________________________________________

Chairman King, Ranking Member Daines, and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on S. 1942, to authorize a National Heritage Area Program; on five bills that would establish new national heritage areas, S. 511, S. 825, S. 1643, S. 2296, and S. 2441; and on sixteen bills that would extend authorities for several existing national heritage areas, S. 336, S. 378, S. 635, S. 654, S. 787, S. 972, S. 990, S. 1004, S. 1224, S. 1258, S. 1318, S. 1329, S. 1954, S. 2482, S. 2648, and S. 2763.

National Heritage Area Program Legislation
The Department recognizes that every one of the 55 national heritage areas that have been established by Congress serves an important role in preserving, interpreting, and promoting the unique natural and cultural characteristics of the area it encompasses.  We support establishing a statutory framework for the National Park Service’s (NPS) role in administering the national heritage area program, as S. 1942 would do, but would like to work with the sponsors and the Committee on revisions to the bill. 

National heritage areas foster stewardship of our nation’s heritage without creating new park units.  Rather than providing direct management, the NPS partners with national heritage area coordinating entities to provide technical and financial assistance.  National heritage areas match and leverage federal funds appropriated by Congress to carry out heritage projects and programs in collaboration with local partners, expanding the impact of the federal dollars invested.  National heritage area designation does not change land ownership or impose land use controls on any lands (private or otherwise) within the authorized boundary that constitutes a heritage area.  Through public-private partnerships, national heritage areas support historic preservation, natural resource conservation, recreation, heritage tourism, and educational projects. 

The first national heritage area was designated 37 years ago, and since that time, Congress has established a total of 55 national heritage areas in 34 states.  Based on the number of national heritage area proposals that have been introduced in Congress, interest in creating new heritage areas remains high.  Each heritage area is designated in perpetuity, but in most cases, Congress has included a federal funding sunset date that is 15 years after the date of enactment, and an initial funding limit of $10 million.  Congress has typically extended the authorization of funding for heritage areas once a sunset date or funding limit has been reached.  This year, 30 of the 55 national heritage areas require an extension of their authorizations of funding in order to be eligible to receive funds in FY 2022.

The NPS carries out its role in national heritage area activities through its Heritage Partnership Program.  This program’s responsibilities include evaluating heritage area feasibility studies; evaluating and approving national heritage area management plans; performing evaluations of heritage areas after they have been established for several years; and overseeing the use of funding that Congress provides to individual heritage areas through the NPS.  The program provides a significant amount of technical support and assistance on an ongoing basis to the existing national heritage areas and to organizations interested in pursuing national heritage area designation.  The program’s authority is derived from the provisions included in the various laws that established the 55 designated national heritage areas.  

S. 1942 would recognize national heritage areas as a system, rather than as individual entities, and would provide clear statutory authority for the NPS to administer the national heritage area program.  The bill would specify the authorities and responsibilities of the Secretary of the Interior and would provide uniform standards for conducting feasibility studies, approving management plans, and conducting evaluations.  Additionally, it would authorize appropriations of up to $1,000,000 per year for each individual national heritage area, regardless of an individual heritage area’s sunset date or spending cap under current law.  

The Department supports enacting the bill’s provisions for the NPS to carry out its role in the operation of heritage area activities, which would provide authority for the NPS’s important ongoing responsibilities for national heritage areas.  However, we recommend clarifying the bill’s provisions for conducting feasibility studies, approving management plans, conducting evaluations, and carrying out other activities as they apply to existing laws that established national heritage areas or authorized feasibility studies.  Currently, it is unclear whether these provisions would apply to existing national heritage areas and authorized studies, or only to national heritage areas designated and feasibility studies authorized after the enactment of this act. 

Designation of New National Heritage Areas 
Five bills would establish new national heritage areas, S. 511, S. 825, S. 1643, S. 2441, and S. 2296.  Each one of the proposed areas has unique characteristics that have contributed to the rich tapestry of American history and culture.  However, only two, so far, have been found to meet the NPS’s criteria for establishment of a national heritage area: S. 2296, which would designate the Northern Neck National Heritage Area, and S. 2441, which would designate the Southern Campaign of the Revolution National Heritage Corridor.  The Department supports these two bills and recommends amendments as described below.  While they may have merit, the Department recommends Congress consider deferring action on the other three bills while the NPS works with the sponsoring organizations to ensure their feasibility studies meet the criteria for designation.  Without such studies, the NPS is not able to assess whether the necessary conditions exist to form and implement national heritage areas that will be successful in preserving and interpreting the resources associated with the history and culture of each of these areas.  Studies may be conducted by the NPS through congressional authorization, or by an entity that submits a study to the NPS for a determination, provided that the study demonstrates that the area meets the NPS criteria. 

S. 2296 would establish the Northern Neck National Heritage Area, which would include land in King George, Lancaster, Northumberland, Richmond, and Westmoreland Counties in Virginia.  S. 2296 generally follows the recommendations of the national heritage feasibility study that was conducted by the NPS pursuant to P.L. 111-11 and transmitted to Congress in 2020.  The Department recommends the development of a legislative map based on the one referenced in the bill.

S. 2441 would establish the Southern Campaign of the Revolution National Heritage Corridor for the purpose of preserving, promoting, and interpreting resources related to the American Revolutionary War in the Carolinas.  S. 2441 generally follows the recommendations of the national heritage area feasibility study that was conducted by the NPS pursuant to P.L. 109-338 and transmitted to Congress in 2015.  The Department recommends conforming the language used in S. 2441 to that typically used in other national heritage area legislation in areas where S. 2441 differs, including adding a requirement for non-federal cost sharing.  We also recommend the development of a legislative map based on the one referenced in the bill.

S. 511 would establish the Bronzeville-Black Metropolis National Heritage Area, for the purpose of interpreting the distinctive landscape, history, and culture of Chicago’s Black Metropolis and the story of the Great Migration.  The NPS has been working with the sponsoring organization on its draft feasibility study and would like to continue to do so to ensure that the study meets the NPS criteria, which will help set the potential national heritage area up for success.  If the Committee moves forward with the legislation, the Department recommends conforming the language used in S. 511 to that typically used in other national heritage area legislation in areas where S. 511 differs.  We also recommend the development of a legislative map to reference in the bill.

S. 825 would establish the Southern Maryland National Heritage Area, an area that would include portions of St. Mary’s, Calvert, Charles, and Prince George’s counties.  A feasibility study by a local group is still in progress and has not been completed.  If the Committee moves forward with the legislation, the Department recommends conforming the language used in S. 825 to that typically used in other national heritage area legislation in areas where S. 825 differs.  We also recommend the development of a legislative map to reference in the bill. 

S. 1643 would establish the Alabama Black Belt National Heritage Area for the purpose of conserving and interpreting sites and stories central to the American Civil Rights movement within 19 counties in the State of Alabama.  The NPS has been working with the sponsoring organization on its draft feasibility study and would like to continue to do so to ensure that the study meets the NPS criteria, which will help set the potential national heritage area up for success.  If the Committee moves forward with the legislation, the Department recommends conforming the language used in S. 1643 to that typically used in other national heritage area legislation in areas where S. 1643 differs.  We also recommend the development of a legislative map to reference in the bill.

Extension of Authorities for National Heritage Areas 
Sixteen bills on the agenda would extend existing authorities for 23 national heritage areas, S. 336, S. 378, S. 635, S. 654, S. 787, S. 972, S. 990, S. 1004, S. 1224, S. 1258, S. 1318, S. 1329, S. 1954, S. 2482, S. 2648, and S. 2763.  The Department supports these bills’ provisions for extension of federal funding and recommends Congress provide for an ongoing authorization of funding for national heritage areas, subject to appropriations.  If ongoing authorization of federal funding is not enacted, the Department recommends amending the termination date in S. 1224 from fiscal year 2031 to fiscal year 2036 to align with the other extension bills.  We also recommend standardizing the approach to federal funding limitations as only some of the bills eliminate a funding limitation.  The Department seeks consistent cost-share requirements for national heritage areas as part of this public-private partnership program and recommends that the nonfederal match requirement in S. 2482 not be reduced.

The sixteen bills are:

• S. 336, which would extend the authorization of Ohio & Erie National Heritage Canalway to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036 and would raise the federal funding limitation for the area to $30,000,000.
• S. 378, which would extend the authorization of the Steel Industry American Heritage Area (Rivers of Steel NHA), the Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area, the Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area, and the Oil Region National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036 and would eliminate the federal funding limitation for each area.  The bill would also extend the authorization of the Delaware & Lehigh National Heritage Area to received federal funding through fiscal year 2036.
• S. 635, which would extend the authorization of The Last Green Valley National Heritage Corridor and the Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036 and would eliminate the federal funding limitation for each area.
• S. 654, which would extend the authorization of the Blue Ridge National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036 and would eliminate the federal funding limitation for the area.
• S. 787, which would extend the authorization of the Atchafalaya National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036.
• S. 787, which would extend the authorization of the Atchafalaya National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036.
• S. 972, which would extend the authorization of the Essex National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036 and would eliminate the federal funding limitation for the area.
• S. 990, which would extend the authorization of the Northern Rio Grande National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036.
• S. 1004, which would extend the authorization of the Mormon Pioneer National Heritage Area and the Great Basin National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036.  The bill would also rename the Great Basin Heritage Route as the Great Basin Heritage Area and the Great Basin Heritage Route Partnership as the Great Basin Heritage Area Partnership. 
• S. 1224, would extend the authorization of the Silos & Smokestacks National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2031 and would raise the federal funding limitation for the area to $23,000,000.  The bill would also rename the America’s Agricultural Heritage Partnership as the Silos & Smokestacks National Heritage Area.
• S. 1258, would extend the authorization of the National Coal Heritage Area and Wheeling National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036.  The bill would also extend the deadline from 3 years to 4 years for national heritage areas established by the John D. Dingell Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act (P.L. 116-9) to submit their management plans to the Secretary of the Interior.
• S. 1318, would extend the authorization of the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036.
• S. 1329, would extend the authorization of the National Aviation Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036.
• S. 1954, would extend the authorization of the John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036.
• S. 2482, would extend the authorization of the Champlain Valley National Heritage Partnership to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036 and would reduce the nonfederal cost-share amount from 50 percent to 25 percent.
• S. 2648, would extend the authorization of the Kenai Mountains-Turnagain Arm National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036 and would eliminate the federal funding limitation for the area.
• S. 2763, would extend the authorization of the Motor Cities National Heritage Area to receive federal funding through fiscal year 2036 and would raise the federal funding limitation for the area to $23,250,000.  Additionally, the bill would suspend the nonfederal match requirement for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 due to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Regarding the bills described in this statement for which the Department recommends amendments, we would be pleased to work with the bill sponsors and the Committee to draft those amendments.

Chairman King, Ranking Member Daines, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.  I would be happy to answer any questions you or other members of the Subcommittee may have.