STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE HOUSE NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION, CONCERNING H.R. 1574, A BILL TO AMEND THE DAYTON AVIATION HERITAGE PRESERVATION ACT OF 1992 TO RENAME A SITE OF THE PARK.
APRIL 26, 2013
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the Department of the Interior on H.R. 1574, a bill to amend the Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act of 1992 to rename a site of the park.
The Department does not object to H.R. 1574. This bill would amend the enabling act for the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park (Park), a unit of the National Park System, to provide that the Park shall include a site known as the "John W. Berry, Sr. Wright Brothers National Museum" rather than the "John W. Berry, Sr. Wright Brothers Aviation Center."
The facility that is the subject of this legislation is owned and operated by Dayton History, a not-for-profit partner of the National Park Service.It is a major attraction within Carillon Historical Park, a private parcel within the boundary of the Park that is also owned and managed by Dayton History. This facility houses the 1905 Wright Flyer III, the only airplane in the United States designated a National Historic Landmark.Dayton History is planning to change the name of the facility from the John W. Berry, Sr. "Aviation Center" to the John W. Berry, Sr. "National Museum."This bill would ensure that there is no discrepancy between the actual name of the facility and the name used to identify it in the law that includes it within the Park.
If the committee moves forward with this legislation, the Department would recommend amending the title of the bill to more accurately reflect the bill's purpose.The bill would not rename the site, as the title suggests, but rather it would ensure consistency between the new name given to it by Dayton History and the law providing for its inclusion in the Park.
If this bill is enacted, there would be costs for the National Park Service to modify or replace its entrance sign and update its interpretive materials, but these would be minimal and would be made in the course of normal replacement and updating of these items.
That concludes my testimony Mr. Chairman.I would be pleased to respond to any questions from you and members of the committee.