    [House Hearing, 107 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                      H.R. 2099, H.R. 3917 and H.R. 4874

    =======================================================================

                              LEGISLATIVE HEARING

                                   before the

          SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS

                                     of the

                             COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
                         U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                          ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                  July 9, 2002

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 107-136

                                   __________

               Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources

     Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
                                     house
                                       or
             Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov

                                     ______

    80-550              U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
                                WASHINGTON : 2003
    ____________________________________________________________________________
    For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
    Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov  Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
    Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001

                             COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES

                        JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
           NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia, Ranking Democrat Member

    Don Young, Alaska,                   George Miller, California
      Vice Chairman                      Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts
    W.J. ``Billy'' Tauzin, Louisiana     Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
    Jim Saxton, New Jersey               Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon
    Elton Gallegly, California           Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
    John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee           Samoa
    Joel Hefley, Colorado                Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
    Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland         Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
    Ken Calvert, California              Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
    Scott McInnis, Colorado              Calvin M. Dooley, California
    Richard W. Pombo, California         Robert A. Underwood, Guam
    Barbara Cubin, Wyoming               Adam Smith, Washington
    George Radanovich, California        Donna M. Christensen, Virgin
    Walter B. Jones, Jr., North              Islands
        Carolina                         Ron Kind, Wisconsin
    Mac Thornberry, Texas                Jay Inslee, Washington
    Chris Cannon, Utah                   Grace F. Napolitano, California
    John E. Peterson, Pennsylvania       Tom Udall, New Mexico
    Bob Schaffer, Colorado               Mark Udall, Colorado
    Jim Gibbons, Nevada                  Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
    Mark E. Souder, Indiana              Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
    Greg Walden, Oregon                  Hilda L. Solis, California
    Michael K. Simpson, Idaho            Brad Carson, Oklahoma
    Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado         Betty McCollum, Minnesota
    J.D. Hayworth, Arizona               Tim Holden, Pennsylvania
    C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, Idaho
    Tom Osborne, Nebraska
    Jeff Flake, Arizona
    Dennis R. Rehberg, Montana

                          Tim Stewart, Chief of Staff
               Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel/Deputy Chief of Staff
                    Steven T. Petersen, Deputy Chief Counsel
                        Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
                     James H. Zoia, Democrat Staff Director
                   Jeffrey P. Petrich, Democrat Chief Counsel
                                     ------
          SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC LANDS

                   GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California, Chairman
          DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands Ranking Democrat Member

    Elton Gallegly, California            Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
    John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee       Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American
     Joel Hefley, Colorado                   Samoa
    Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland         Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey
    Walter B. Jones, Jr., North          Tom Udall, New Mexico
        Carolina,                        Mark Udall, Colorado
      Vice Chairman                      Rush D. Holt, New Jersey
    Mac Thornberry, Texas                Anibal Acevedo-Vila, Puerto Rico
    Chris Cannon, Utah                   Hilda L. Solis, California
    Bob Schaffer, Colorado               Betty McCollum, Minnesota
    Jim Gibbons, Nevada
    Mark E. Souder, Indiana
    Michael K. Simpson, Idaho
    Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Hearing held on July 9, 2002.....................................     1

    Statement of Members:
        Baird, Hon. Brian, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Washington........................................     4
            Prepared statement on H.R. 2099..........................     6
        Murtha, Hon. John P., a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Pennsylvania, Prepared statement on H.R. 3917.....     7
        Otter, Hon. C.L. ``Butch'', a Representative in Congress from
          the State of Idaho.........................................     2
            Prepared statement on H.R. 4874..........................     4
        Radanovich, Hon. George P., a Representative in Congress from
          the State of California....................................     1
            Prepared statement on H.R. 2099, H.R. 3917, and H.R. 4874     2

    Statement of Witnesses:
        Anderson, Bruce, Land Surveyor, Kootenai County, Coeur
          d'Alene, Idaho.............................................    54
            Prepared statement on H.R. 4874..........................    55
        Anderson, Robert, Deputy Assistant Director, Minerals, Realty
          and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, U.S.
          Department of the Interior.................................     9
            Prepared statement on H.R. 4874..........................    10
        Hagensen, Bruce, Board Member, Vancouver National Historic
          Reserve Trust, Vancouver, Washington.......................    40
            Prepared statement on H.R. 2099..........................    42
        Kemmerer, Elizabeth, Flight 93 Family Organization
          Representative, Budd Lake, New Jersey......................    38
            Prepared statement on H.R. 3917..........................    39
        Pollard, Hon. Royce E., Mayor, City of Vancouver, Washington.    20
            Prepared statement on H.R. 2099..........................    22
        Smith, P. Daniel, Special Assistant to the Director, National
          Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior..............    10
            Prepared statement on H.R. 2099..........................    12
            Prepared statement on H.R. 3917..........................    14
        Tokar-Ickes, Pamela, Somerset County Commissioner, Somerset,
          Pennsylvania...............................................    33
            Prepared statement on H.R. 3917..........................    36

    LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 2099, TO AMEND THE OMNIBUS PARKS AND PUBLIC
    LANDS MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1996 TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE FUNDING AUTHORIZATION
    FOR THE VANCOUVER NATIONAL HISTORIC RESERVE; H.R. 3917, TO AUTHORIZE A
     NATIONAL MEMORIAL TO COMMEMORATE THE PASSENGERS AND CREW OF FLIGHT 93
       WHO, ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, COURAGEOUSLY GAVE THEIR LIVES THEREBY
       THWARTING A PLANNED ATTACK ON OUR NATION'S CAPITAL, AND FOR OTHER
      PURPOSES; AND H.R. 4874, TO DIRECT THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO
    DISCLAIM ANY FEDERAL INTEREST IN LANDS ADJACENT TO SPIRIT LAKE AND TWIN
     LAKES IN THE STATE OF IDAHO RESULTING FROM POSSIBLE OMISSION OF LANDS
                              FROM AN 1880 SURVEY

                                  ----------

                             Tuesday, July 9, 2002

                         U.S. House of Representatives

          Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands

                             Committee on Resources

                                 Washington, DC

                                  ----------

        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2 p.m., in room
    1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. George Radanovich
    [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.

       STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE RADANOVICH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                 CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

        Mr. Radanovich. Good afternoon. The Subcommittee on
    National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands will come to
    order. And this afternoon we are going to hear testimony on
    three bills, H.R. 3917, H.R. 4874, and H.R. 2099. Our first
    bill, H.R. 3917, is introduced by Representative John Murtha,
    would authorize a national memorial to commemorate the
    passengers and crew of Flight 93 who, on September 11th, 2001,
    courageously gave their lives, thereby thwarting a plane attack
    on our Nation's Capital.
        Our second bill is H.R. 4874, introduced by our Committee
    colleague Butch Otter, which would direct the Secretary of the
    Interior to disclaim any Federal interest in lands adjacent to
    Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes in the State of Idaho resulting from
    possible omission of lands from an 1880 survey.
        Finally, our last bill H.R. 2099, introduced by
    Representative Brian Baird, would amend the Omnibus Parks and
    Public Lands Management Act of 1994 to provide for increased
    funding authorization for the Vancouver National Historic
    Reserve.
        Before--let's see. I am informed that Mrs. Christensen will
    not be here today, so I am going to ask for unanimous consent--
    I will likely get it--that Mr. Baird, Mr. Murtha, and Mr. Otter
    would be permitted to sit on the dais following statements.
    Without objection, so ordered.
        Gentlemen, welcome to the hearing. And I think that what we
    will do is go to our first panel, and I am proud to recognize
    the Honorable Butch Otter, Representative from the First
    District of Idaho. Butch, welcome to your Committee, and please
    begin your testimony on H.R. 4874.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Radanovich follows:]

          Statement of The Honorable George P. Radanovich, Chairman,
          Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands

        Good afternoon. The hearing will come to order.
        This afternoon the Subcommittee will hear testimony on three bills,
    H.R. 3917, H.R. 4874, and H.R. 2099.
        Our first bill, H.R. 3917, introduced by Representative John
    Murtha, would authorize a national memorial to commemorate the
    passengers and crew of Flight 93 who, on September 11, 2001,
    courageously gave their lives thereby thwarting a planned attack on our
    Nation's Capital.
        Our second bill, H.R. 4874, introduced by our Committee colleague
    Butch Otter, would direct the Secretary of the Interior to disclaim any
    Federal interest in lands adjacent to Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes in the
    State of Idaho resulting from possible omission of lands from an 1880
    survey.
        And finally, our last bill, H.R. 2099, introduced by Representative
    Brian Baird, would amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management
    Act of 1996 to provide for increased funding authorization for the
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve.
        Before turning the time over to Mrs. Christensen, I would ask
    unanimous consent that Mr. Baird, Mr. Murtha, and Mr. Otter be
    permitted to sit on the dais following their statements. Without
    objection, so ordered.
        I now turn to the Ranking Member, Mrs. Christensen for any opening
    statement she may have.
                                     ______

      STATEMENT OF HON. BUTCH OTTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                        FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO

        Mr. Otter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was going--I
    hesitated, but I was going to ask for a division of that
    question, being the only other member of the Committee here. I
    might have allowed myself to sit up there, but I am not so sure
    about Brian.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having this hearing today and
    for providing the opportunity for me to testify before the
    Subcommittee. I introduced House Resolution 4874, a bill to
    direct the Secretary of Interior to disclaim any Federal
    interest in lands adjacent to Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes in
    northern Idaho. The bill requires the Bureau of Land Management
    to conduct a new survey of the lakes to correct errors
    identified in the original 1880 survey.
        For over 100 years, individuals have owned land around the
    beautiful lakes located in Idaho's Kootenai County. However,
    ownership is now in question for more than 400 families who
    bought the land and have paid taxes on the property. House
    Resolution 4874 will correct that problem.
        In 1880, John B. David, a surveyor under contract with the
    General Land Office, grossly misrepresented portions of the
    actual lakeshore around Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes. In some
    places the meander line along the shore are up to a mile and a
    half away from their actual location. No one noticed the
    inaccurate survey when the land was originally patented, and no
    one caught the mistake over the years as the land changed
    hands. In the meantime, the shorelines of these popular lakes
    have become heavily developed. It was not until recently that
    Kootenai County surveyor Bruce Anderson--who will be testifying
    on the third panel, Mr. Chairman--discovered the problem.
        County officials have expressed concern over their
    inability to approve and regulate new developments, surveys,
    and permits due to the inaccuracy of the original government
    survey. The problem will only worsen as the lake becomes more
    developed. Under current law the Bureau of Land Management is
    required to conduct a survey of the actual meander of the
    lakes. The lands between the old incorrect meander line and the
    new meander line will become omitted land and would revert to
    the Federal ownership. Property owners would be required to
    repurchase at fair market value the land they believed they had
    owned for over 100 years as well as pay for the survey and the
    administrative costs, and I think that that is simply not fair.
    These individuals bought the land in good faith, and the
    government should not be allowed to take it from them simply
    because of a survey error over 120 years ago.
        My legislation corrects the problem by creating a solution
    that retains the correct ownership situation without placing
    the expense of correcting it on the affected property owners.
    H.R. 4874 allows BLM to issue a, quote, disclaimer of interest,
    end quote, in the affected lands so title companies in Kootenai
    County can proceed with ownership-related matters around clear
    title.
        The legislation also authorizes the necessary funding at
    Bureau of Land Management to conduct a new survey and perform
    the required administrative procedures. Most of the property
    owners involved in this situation have a chain of title that
    goes back well over 100 years. H.R. 4874 is really the only
    acceptable solution to that problem, and I look forward to
    hearing from the witnesses, both from the Administration as
    well as from Kootenai County, and I want to work with my
    colleagues on this legislation.
        I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for your time.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Otter.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Otter follows:]

     Statement of The Honorable C.L. ``Butch'' Otter, a Representative in
                        Congress from the State of Idaho

        Mr. Chairman, thank you for having this hearing today and for
    providing the opportunity for me to testify before the Subcommittee.
        I introduced H.R. 4874 a bill to direct the Secretary of the
    Interior to disclaim any Federal interest in lands adjacent to Spirit
    Lake and Twin Lakes in northern Idaho. The bill requires the Bureau of
    Land Management to conduct a new survey of the lakes to correct errors
    identified in the original 1880 survey.
        For over one hundred years, individuals have owned land around the
    beautiful lakes located in Idaho's Kootenai County. However, ownership
    now is in question for more than 400 people who bought the land and pay
    taxes on the property. H.R. 4874 will correct that problem.
        In 1880 John B. David, a surveyor under contract with the General
    Land Office, grossly misrepresented portions of the actual lakeshore
    around Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes. In some places the meander lines
    along the shore are up to a mile and a half away from their actual
    location. No one noticed the inaccurate survey when the land was
    originally patented, and no one caught the mistake over the years as
    the land changed hands. In the meantime, the shorelines of these
    popular lakes have become heavily developed.
        It was not until recently that Kootenai County Surveyor Bruce
    Anderson, who will be testifying on the third panel, discovered the
    problem. County officials have expressed concern over their inability
    to approve and regulate new developments, surveys, and permits due to
    the inaccuracy of the original government survey. The problem will only
    worsen as the lakes become more developed.
        Under current law, the Bureau of Land Management is required to
    conduct a resurvey of the actual meander of the lakes. The lands
    between the old incorrect meander line and the new meander line would
    become omitted land and would revert to Federal ownership. Property
    owners would be required to repurchase, at fair market value, the land
    they believed they owned for over 100 years, as well as pay for survey
    and administrative costs. That is simply not fair. These individuals
    bought the land in good faith and the government should not be allowed
    to take it from them simply because of a survey error over 120 years
    ago.
        My legislation corrects the problem by creating a solution that
    retains the correct ownership situation without placing the expense of
    correcting it on the affected property owners. H.R. 4874 allows BLM to
    issue a ``disclaimer of interest'' in the affected lands so title
    companies and Kootenai County can proceed with ownership related
    matters surrounding clear title. The legislation also authorizes the
    necessary funding for BLM to conduct a new survey and perform the
    required administrative procedures.
        Most of the property owners involved in this situation have a chain
    of title that goes back over 100 years. H.R. 4874 is really the only
    acceptable solution to the problem. I look forward to hearing from the
    witnesses and I want to work with my colleagues to get this legislation
    passed.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
                                     ______

        Mr. Radanovich. We will now move on to the honorable Brian
    Baird, who is representing the Third District of Washington,
    speaking on H.R. 2099. Brian, welcome back to Committee. It is
    good to have you here again, and please begin your testimony.

      STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN BAIRD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                      FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

        Mr. Baird. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity to
    testify before you today. I will make essentially two points,
    which will be reiterated by my good friends Mayor Royce Pollard
    and Bruce Hagensen of America's Vancouver.
        The two points I want to emphasize are these: First of all,
    the historic reserve in Vancouver is of tremendous national
    historical significance, as you will hear shortly. And, second,
    any investment by the Park Service in the National Historic
    Reserve in Vancouver is leveraged strongly by additional
    funding by the local and private partners in this venture.
        Fort Vancouver is located on the banks of the Columbia
    River, and is perhaps the most important significant historical
    site in the Pacific Northwest. It is of rich cultural and
    historical significance, and that historical significance
    actually predates even the Lewis and Clark expedition.
        The Vancouver Barracks was established originally in 1849,
    when the first contingent of U.S. Army troops arrived in the
    newly American lands. From 1849 until World War I, during which
    time some of the Army's most promising officers, including
    Ulysses S. Grant, Phil Sheridan, George McClellan, and George
    C. Marshall, were stationed in Vancouver, during that period
    the barracks was the principal military headquarters for the
    entire Pacific Northwest. Owing to this national significance,
    the site was designated by Congress as a national historical
    monument in 1948, and later as a national historical site. The
    55-acre Vancouver Barracks contains 32 structures, many of
    which have been determined to be eligible for listing on the
    National Register of Historic Places, including several rare
    examples of military architecture.
        The barracks is an important part of the Vancouver National
    Historic Reserve, which was designated by Congress in 1996 for
    coordinated preservation, public use, and management of
    historic sites within the Vancouver area. The reserve was
    established as a partnership among landowners in the reserve,
    which included the National Park Service, the city of
    Vancouver, the U.S. Army, and the Washington State Office of
    Archaeology and Preservation. The 366-acre historic reserve
    contains Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, the Vancouver
    Barracks, Officers Row, Pearson Air Field, the Water Resource
    Center, and portions of the Columbia River waterfront. It is
    truly a unique and wonderful resource.
        The 1996 Act that created the historic reserve provided an
    initial $5 million authorization for capital projects which has
    now been fully appropriated. It is important to note that a
    provision was included in the Fiscal Year 2002 Interior
    appropriations bill which essentially said there will be no
    further Federal appropriations for capital projects until a new
    authorization for such projects is approved by Congress. Of
    great importance to the district and to our Nation, the
    legislation before us today would increase from 5 million to 25
    million the authorization for appropriations.
        For over a half century, local, State and Federal agencies,
    along with private individuals and organizations, have
    collaborated to preserve and interpret the history of Vancouver
    and the region. During the past 15 years--and this is important
    to emphasize--more than $30 million has been invested in
    property improvements and projects within the present historic
    reserve boundaries. The Federal Government to date has provided
    approximately 25 percent of the capital funds, while the
    remaining 75 percent has been provided by local and State
    governments and foundations, such as the Vancouver National
    Historic Trust as well as individuals and businesses. You will
    be hearing from, again, my friends Mayor Pollard and former
    Mayor Hagensen about these investments.
        Based on the Barracks Adaptive Reuse and Economic Analysis,
    it has been determined that rehabilitation of buildings in the
    area will require approximately $40 million. The city of
    Vancouver has committed $6 million for this purpose, the State
    of Washington has committed $6 million for educational uses,
    and private donations will make up an additional 8 million;
    hence, the aforementioned leveraging of the Federal funds. Thus
    we are asking for eventually a total Federal contribution of
    $20 million, which is why we need the authorization today.
        I appreciate the Committee's careful consideration of this
    request for an increase in authorization for Fort Vancouver
    National Historic Reserve, and I look forward to working with
    the Chairman and the Committee to make that happen. I
    appreciate your time today and your interest in this matter.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Baird.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Baird follows:]

     Statement of The Honorable Brian Baird, a Representative in Congress
                          from the State of Washington

        Mr. Chairman, Madame Ranking Member, and Members of the
    Subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today
    in support of my legislation, H.R. 2099. This bill would increase the
    authorization for Federal spending on preserving and rehabilitating the
    Fort Vancouver National Historic Reserve.
        Fort Vancouver, located on the banks of the Columbia River, is
    perhaps the most significant historic site in the Pacific Northwest. It
    is rich in historic and cultural national significance, pre-dating the
    arrival of Lewis and Clark through the mid-20th century. Before the
    arrival of the American traders and well before the Lewis and Clark
    expedition arrived, this site on the shore of the Columbia River was a
    home to a variety of Indian tribes for over 10,000 years, including the
    Cascades, Chehalis, Chinook, Clallam, Cowlitz, Klickitat, Nisqually,
    Tillamook, and Shasta tribes. Fort Vancouver was also headquarters for
    the Hudson's Bay Company's Columbia Department, embracing present-day
    British Columbia, Washington, Oregon and Idaho. The trading post, which
    was the center of the region's fur trading enterprise, represented
    Britain's business and governmental interests in competition with the
    United States. The 1846 treaty between Great Britain and the United
    States established today's northern-most boundary at the 49th parallel.
        The Vancouver Barracks was established in 1849 when the first
    contingent of U.S. Army troops arrived in the newly American lands.
    From 1849 until World War I, during which time some of the Army's most
    promising officers (including Ulysses S. Grant, Phillip Sheridan,
    George McClellan and George C. Marshall) were stationed at Vancouver,
    the barracks was the principal military headquarters for the Pacific
    Northwest. Owing to its national significance, the site was designated
    by Congress as a National Historic Monument in 1948, and later as a
    National Historic Site. The 55-acre Vancouver Barracks contains 32
    structures, many of which have been determined to be eligible for
    listing on the National Register of Historic Places, including several
    rare examples of military architecture.
        The Vancouver Barracks is an important part of the Vancouver
    National Historic Reserve, which was designated by Congress in 1996 for
    the coordinated preservation, public use and management of historic
    sites within the Vancouver area. The Reserve was established as a
    partnership among the landowners in the Reserve, which include the
    National Park Service, the city of Vancouver, the U.S. Army and the
    Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. The
    366 acre Historic Reserve contains Fort Vancouver National Historic
    Site, the Vancouver Barracks, Officers Row, Pearson Field, the Water
    Resources Center and portions of the Columbia River waterfront.
        Today, I welcome the opportunity to discuss the importance of H.R.
    2099, which seeks to preserve Fort Vancouver for future generations.
    The 1996 Act that created the Historic Reserve provided an initial $5
    million authorization for capital projects, which has been fully
    authorized. It is important to note that a provision was included in
    the Fiscal Year 2002 Interior Appropriations bill which essentially
    says there would be no further Federal appropriations for capital
    projects within the Vancouver National Historic Reserve unless and
    until a new ``authorization'' for capital projects is approved by
    Congress. Of great importance to my congressional district, to the
    Pacific Northwest and our nation, the legislation would increase from
    $5 million to $25 million the authorization of appropriations for the
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve development costs.
        For over half a century local, state and Federal Government
    agencies, along with numerous private individuals and organizations,
    have been collaborating to preserve and interpret the history of the
    Vancouver area and the region. During the past 15 years in excess of
    $30 million has been invested in property improvements and projects
    within the present Historic Reserve boundaries. The Federal Government
    has provided approximately 25% of the capital funds for these efforts.
    The remaining 75% has been provided by local and state governments,
    foundations such as the locally based Vancouver National Historic
    Trust, and numerous other individuals, businesses and not-for-profit
    organizations. In fact, you will be hearing from two of these partners,
    Vancouver Mayor Royce Pollard and Bruce Hagensen, Board Member of the
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust, later during this hearing.
        Based on the Vancouver Barracks Adaptive Reuse and Economic
    Analysis completed in early 2000, it has been determined that the
    rehabilitation of buildings and the adaptations necessary for new uses
    in the west barracks will cost approximately $40 million. The city of
    Vancouver has committed $6 million for infrastructure improvements, the
    state of Washington has committed $6 million for educational uses, and
    private donations will make up an additional $8 million for building
    preservation efforts. A total Federal contribution of $20 million is
    being sought to match non-Federal funding for the west Barracks
    project. This Federal funding has been deemed key to successful private
    fund-raising efforts, securing tenants for the property, minimizing the
    impact of inflation and avoiding additional serious property
    deterioration.
        I appreciate your careful consideration of this request for an
    increase in the authorization for the Fort Vancouver National Historic
    Reserve. I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and the
    other members of the Subcommittee to move this legislation forward and
    continue progress on this significant project for the Pacific Northwest
    and our nation.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to answering any questions
    that members of the Subcommittee may have.
                                     ______

        Mr. Radanovich. Our next bill is H.R. 3917. Representative
    John Murtha was unavoidably detained and won't be here to make
    an opening statement or to testify; however, we do have his
    written testimony on hand, and I ask unanimous consent that Mr.
    Murtha's statement be included into the record. There being no
    objection--Mr. Otter, are you OK with that?
        Mr. Otter. Yes.
        Mr. Radanovich. OK. So ordered.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Murtha follows:]

    Statement of The Honorable John P. Murtha, a Representative in Congress
                         from the State of Pennsylvania

        I want to thank the Chairman, Ranking Member and the Subcommittee
    for holding this hearing on this extremely important bill.
        By now we are all too familiar with the story of United Airlines
    Flight 93, which crashed on September 11, 2001 in Shanksville,
    Pennsylvania at 10:06 am after being hijacked by terrorists en route
    from Newark, New Jersey to San Francisco, California.
        The people on Flight 93 were courageous and heroic in giving their
    lives to bring down that airplane before it could reach its intended
    target in our Nation's capital. Hundreds if not thousands of additional
    lives would have been lost, and our government would have been
    disrupted if this attack had been carried out as planned. I don't think
    anybody can argue with the fact that the crash site has national
    historical significance as the first site in America where citizens
    fought back against terrorism. As the bill says, the crash site is 'a
    profound symbol of American patriotism and spontaneous leadership of
    citizen-heroes.'
        As we approach the one-year anniversary of that fateful, horrible
    day in our Nation's history, I am confident that we will pass this bill
    expeditiously to indicate our unwavering commitment to honoring these
    brave souls with a memorial site befitting their character.
        The passage of this legislation will not set in stone any type of
    memorial plan, but rather a process for establishing a memorial site.
    The process of designing this National Monument must move forward, but
    it also must be careful and deliberate. All stakeholders need a voice
    in the process. That includes the family of passengers and crew, the
    local community surrounding the crash site, landowners at the site, the
    Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, emergency responders, historians and the
    National Park Service, who will inherit the responsibility for not only
    assisting in the design, development and construction of the memorial
    but maintaining the memorial site in perpetuity.
        As we envisioned the process, two groups will be involved:
        The Flight 93 Task Force will be organized by local stakeholders
    and families of victims. It is my understanding that this
    organizational effort has begun and has been ongoing as the families of
    victims have been sorting out who will be primarily speaking for them.
    However, it will be given added momentum by the passage of this
    legislation. The Task Force will be as broad-based as possible among
    the affected parties and include as many people as possible to satisfy
    concerns regarding input. I think everyone agrees fully with this
    concept of including as much input as possible from the stakeholders to
    make sure all have a say and their concerns are addressed throughout
    the process.
        The Task Force will recommend members whom the Secretary of
    Interior will appoint to a 15-Member Flight 93 Advisory Commission.
    This Commission will then undertake the formal process of developing
    the plan for the site. As with the Task Force, it is expected that the
    Commission will comprise the broadest and fairest possible
    representation of all stakeholders.
        Nearly one million dollars have already been raised privately for
    this memorial, and we expect more donations as the process moves
    forward. However, I also look forward to working with my Colleagues in
    Congress to ensure that the project receives adequate Federal funding
    as needed.
        I would like to thank each and every single person who has worked
    and will continue to work to make this memorial a reality.
        Finally, I would also like to remember individually the people on
    that plane. They are the reason we are here today. They are:

                    ,--                                   ,

            Jason Dahl                   Jane Folger
            LeRoy Homer, Jr.             Colleen L. Fraser
            Lorraine Bay                 Andrew Garcia
            Sandra Bradshaw              Jeremy Glick
            Cee Cee Lyles                Lauren Grandcolas
            Wanda Green                  Donald F. Greene
            Deborah Anne Jacobs Welsh    Linda Gronlund
            Christian Adams              Richard Guadagno
            Todd Beamer                  Toshiya Kuge
            Alan Beaven                  Hilda Marcin
            Mark Bingham                 Waleska Martinez
            Deora Bodley                 Nicole Miller
            Marion Britton               Louis J. Nacke II
            Thomas E. Burnett Jr.        Donald and Jean Peterson
            Willam Cashman               Mark ``Mickey'' Rothenberg
            Georgine Rose Corrigan       Christine Snyder
            Patricia Cushing             John Talignani
            Joseph DeLuca                Honor Elizabeth Wainio
            Patrick ``Joe'' Driscoll     Kristin Gould White
            Edward Porter Felt

        Thank you.
                                     ______

        Mr. Radanovich. And with that, I want to thank you
    gentlemen. You are more than welcome to join us on the dais for
    the rest of the hearing.
        And we will move on to panel two, which is Mr. Daniel
    Smith, special assistant to the Director of the National Park
    Service, and also Robert Anderson, the Deputy Assistant for
    Minerals, Realty, and Resource Protection of the BLM, to speak
    on these bills.
        Gentlemen, welcome. We are going to turn the clock on you
    guys. It is a 5-minute clock. Give your testimony. And it is
    just like the regular traffic rules: Green is go, yellow is
    speed up, and red is stop.
        So, you may begin your testimony, Mr. Anderson. Welcome to
    the Committee; and let's go.

     STATEMENT OF ROBERT ANDERSON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT FOR MINERALS,
       REALTY, AND RESOURCE PROTECTION, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

        Mr. Robert Anderson. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify on H.R. 4874. This bill directs the
    Secretary of the Interior to disclaim any Federal interest in
    lands adjacent to Spirit and Twin Lakes in Idaho resulting from
    omission of such lands from an 1880 survey. The Department of
    Interior supports H.R. 4874.
        Errors were recently discovered in the 1880 survey of the
    Spirit and Twin Lakes area. The original survey shows the
    meander lines along the lakes at up to 1/2 mile away from their
    actual location, in effect omitting about 600 acres of land
    from the official survey of record. Between 1891 and 1908, land
    surrounding the lakes was patented out of Federal ownership
    based on the belief that the 1880 survey was correct. A
    discovery of errors in the 1880 survey raises concerns about
    potential clouds on title to some 400 properties along these
    two lakes. Many property owners have a chain of title that goes
    back over 100 years. No one disputes that the current cloud on
    the title is due to errors of the 1880 survey.
        The Bureau of Land Management has no interest in retaining
    the lands and believes it is in the public interest to remove
    the cloud on the many titles to the property. This is an
    unusual situation because it involves a large number of private
    homes and lands with lengthy chains of title. The 1880
    surveyors were discovered by private and Kootenai County
    surveyors and brought to the attention of BLM in 2001.
        The BLM believes that use of the normal Agency procedures
    for clearing lands, title to lands erroneously described in the
    1880 survey would raise unnecessary concerns to affected
    residents and be costly and time-consuming to property owners
    and the United States.
        H.R. 4874 would authorize BLM to investigate alleged errors
    in the 1880 survey; to resurvey the area to establish the
    official record of land and lakeshore areas; and, based on that
    resurvey, issue a disclaimer of interest that would divest the
    United States of any interest in the affected lands. The
    investigation and resurvey authorized by H.R. 4874 would allow
    the BLM to establish an official survey plat through which
    legal descriptions of real property could be referenced. This
    would remove the cloud on title to over 400 properties. The
    Department believes the establishment of an accurate survey
    plat is in the public interest, and therefore it is appropriate
    that the Federal Government rather than the individual
    landowners bear the costs of the resurvey.
        The Department supports enactment of H.R. 4874, and would
    like to work with the Committee on a few technical changes to
    the legislation.
        Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. Thank you.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Anderson.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Robert Anderson follows:]

      Statement of Robert Anderson, Deputy Assistant Director, Minerals,
        Realty and Resource Protection, Bureau of Land Management, U.S.
                           Department of the Interior

        Thank you for the opportunity to testify on H.R. 4874. This bill
    directs the Secretary of the Interior to disclaim any Federal interest
    in lands adjacent to Spirit Lake and Twin Lakes in Idaho resulting from
    the omission of such lands from an 1880 survey. The Department of the
    Interior supports H.R. 4874.
        Errors were recently discovered in an 1880 survey of the Spirit
    Lake and Twin Lakes areas. The original survey shows the meander lines
    along the lakes at up to one-half mile away from their actual location,
    in effect omitting approximately 600 acres of land from the official
    survey of record. Between 1891 and 1908, land surrounding the lakes was
    patented out of Federal ownership based on the belief that the 1880
    survey was correct. The discovery of the errors in the 1880 survey
    raises concerns about potential clouds on title to some 400 properties
    along these two lakes. Many property owners have a chain of title that
    goes back over 100 years. No one disputes that the current cloud on the
    title is due to the errors in the 1880 survey. The Bureau of Land
    Management (BLM) has no interest in retaining the lands erroneously
    omitted from the 1880 survey, and believes it is in the public interest
    to remove the clouds on title to the properties.
        This is an unusual situation because it involves a large number of
    private homes and lands with lengthy chains of title. The 1880 survey
    errors were discovered by private and Kootenai County surveyors and
    brought to the attention of the BLM in 2001. The BLM believes that use
    of normal agency procedures for clearing title to the lands erroneously
    described in the 1880 survey would raise unnecessary concerns to
    affected residents and be costly and time consuming to property owners.
        H.R. 4874 would authorize the BLM to investigate alleged errors in
    the 1880 survey, resurvey the area to establish the official record of
    land and lakeshore areas, and, based on that resurvey, issue a
    ``disclaimer of interest'' that would divest the United States of any
    interest in the affected lands. The investigation and resurvey
    authorized by H.R. 4874 would allow the BLM to establish an official
    survey plat to which legal descriptions of real property could be
    referenced. This would remove the cloud on title to over 400 properties
    resulting from the errors in the 1880 survey. The Department believes
    establishment of an accurate survey plat is in the public interest, and
    therefore it is appropriate that the Federal Government, rather than
    individual landowners, bear the cost of the resurvey.
        The Department supports enactment of H.R. 4874, and would like to
    work with the Committee on some technical changes to the legislation.
    This concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer any
    questions.
                                     ______

        Mr. Radanovich. Mr. Smith, welcome to the Committee, here
    to speak on, I believe, two bills.
        Mr. Smith. Yes, Mr. Chairman. And I will summarize both and
    submit the entire testimony for the record.
        Mr. Radanovich. Terrific.

        STATEMENT OF P. DANIEL SMITH, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE
                    DIRECTOR, NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

        Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to
    appear before your Committee to present the views of the
    Department of the Interior on H.R. 3917, a bill to commemorate
    the passengers and crew of Flight 93 who, on September 11,
    2001, courageously gave their lives thereby thwarting a planned
    attack on our Nation's Capital and for other purposes. The
    Department supports the enactment of this bill with minor
    amendments discussed at the end of this testimony.
        On September 11, 2001, terrorists hijacked four United
    States passenger aircraft with the intent to kill American
    citizens and to use the planes as weapons to destroy important
    structures critical to this country. The targets were in New
    York City and Washington, D.C. Three out of four of the planes
    hit their mark, destroying the Twin Towers of the World Trade
    Center, destroying a significant portion of the Pentagon,
    causing the deaths of almost 3,000 people, and affecting
    millions of people worldwide.
        But one hijacked plane did not succeed in its mission.
    Passengers and crew on the fourth plane, United Airlines Flight
    93, learned of these disasters in midair and took heroic
    action--excuse me--by thwarting a planned attack on our
    Nation's Capital, which resulted in the crash of the plane into
    a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, within the rural, remote,
    and previously peaceful Stonycreek Township.
        The passengers and crew of Flight 93 are remembered and
    honored as having given their lives to save others. They have
    inspired other airline passengers and crews to be significantly
    more vigilant and proactive in dealing with hijackers, and have
    directly influenced new airline security systems. Flight 93
    will be understood to be nationally significant, because on
    Flight 93 America began to fight back.
        The way people traditionally mourn victims of catastrophic
    events by visiting the site of the occurrence reflects an
    instinctive public choice of the appropriate location for a
    memorial. In the months that followed September 11th's attacks,
    thousands of people have visited the Flight 93 site, drawn by
    the heroic action and sacrifice of the Flight 93 passengers and
    crew. Many are profoundly concerned about the future
    disposition of the crash site, including grieving families of
    the passengers and crew, the people of the region who are the
    current stewards of the site, and a broad spectrum of citizens
    across the United States.
        The Stonycreek Township and Shanksville have no resources
    to enable them to protect the site from inappropriate relic
    seekers or to serving the visiting public. Congress provided
    emergency appropriations to secure the site, but for only a
    short time. Establishing a permanent memorial would serve as a
    meaningful way to honor those who sacrificed their lives on
    September 11th, and would provide an opportunity to provide a
    respectful setting for family members and other visitors.
        Like so many families in America, we continue to mourn the
    loss of a member of our Interior family, Richard Guadagno, a
    17-year employee of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
    manager of the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge in
    California, who was among the heroic passengers of Flight 93.
    The Department offers our deepest sympathy to all those who
    lost a friend or family member because of the attacks on 9/11.
        The National Park Service has had the opportunity to
    conduct reconnaissance and analysis of the site of the crash of
    Flight 93. Numerous National Park Service professional staff
    have visited the Flight 93 site over the past 10 months to
    understand the site and its changes over time and to meet with
    local people, including landowners, the local historical
    society volunteers, the mayor of Shanksville, county
    commissioners, rescue workers, and others to provide technical
    assistance and advice.
        There is a critical need for the National Park Service to
    provide technical assistance to consult on the immediate needs
    of collection, storage, oral history, and archives. We learned
    from our role at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, there is a
    great need to permit the public to place mementos and express
    feelings. The Somerset County Historical Society has begun an
    archive and collection of such materials; the National Park
    Service should be available to provide whatever consultation or
    assistance is desired.
        This legislation recognizes the need for a special process
    to determine how best to treat the site, whether as a preserved
    landscape, a designed memorial structure, or some other
    appropriate treatment. Most importantly, the legislation, with
    special sensitivity and insight, provides time for listening
    and time for allowing a consensus to build, with an appropriate
    role for the family members of the flight passengers and crew,
    for the public, the community, and for the Secretary of
    Interior. It is appropriate the crash sight of Flight 93 be
    designated a national memorial as a unit of the National Park
    System, and that it be done contemporaneously, and that the
    National Park Service participate in this public process.
        The legislation suggests the commission will have the
    authority to raise funds. We believe many Americans will want
    to have an active part in the fundraising process and therefore
    recommend that the authorization for fundraising be explicit in
    the legislation.
        We look forward to work with the Committee on this
    amendment and a couple of technical amendments needed to the
    bill.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]

       Statement of P. Daniel Smith, Special Assistant to the Director,
             National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior

        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to present the views of
    the Department of the Interior on H.R. 2099, a bill to amend the
    Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to increase the
    authorization of appropriations for the Vancouver National Historic
    Reserve and for the preservation of Vancouver Barracks.
        The Department recognizes and appreciates the efforts of our
    partners to cooperatively administer the Vancouver National Historic
    Reserve. This is a partnership that has worked well, and we look
    forward to continuing our work with the City of Vancouver, State of
    Washington, and the Department of the Army to achieve the goals outline
    in the Cooperative Management Plan for the Reserve. However, in light
    of the Department's commitment to supporting the President's initiative
    to eliminate the deferred maintenance backlog in our parks, we cannot
    support diverting limited funds away from the Service's own needs. We
    believe that funds that are appropriated to the National Park Service
    are more appropriately directed to reducing the long list of necessary
    but deferred construction projects that have been identified in our
    national parks.
        The Vancouver area of southwestern Washington was an important site
    of 19th-century social, economic, political, and military activity in
    the Pacific Northwest. In recognition of its historical significance,
    Congress in 1948 designated a portion of the area Fort Vancouver as a
    National Monument, and in 1961 Fort Vancouver became a National
    Historic Site. Over the next several decades, continuing efforts to
    preserve the area's other historic sites prompted Congress, in 1990, to
    pass legislation authorizing the creation of a Vancouver Historical
    Study Commission. Subsequently, the commission recommended the
    establishment of a reserve as the best management strategy for
    protection of the resources within the study area, and in 1996,
    Congress passed legislation that established the Vancouver National
    Historic Reserve. The Reserve itself is not a unit of the National Park
    System, although the Fort Vancouver National Historic Site component is
    part of the System.
        The Reserve encompasses 366 acres along the Columbia River within
    the City of Vancouver, Washington, and includes a particularly rich
    collection of cultural resources, including Fort Vancouver National
    Historic Site, Officers Row, Vancouver Barracks, Pearson Air Museum and
    Air Field, portions of the Columbia River waterfront, and the Water
    Resources Education Center. In this nationally significant historic
    setting, the Reserve celebrates well over 200 years of history
    including the use of the area by Native Americans; the creation of the
    first multi-cultural village of its kind in the Pacific; the Hudson Bay
    Company's Fort Vancouver, which was one of the largest such British
    enterprises; and the growth of the U.S. Army in the Pacific Northwest
    as reflected in the historic Officers Row and Vancouver Barracks.
        The law that established the Reserve directed the preparation of a
    general management plan to be developed by a partnership comprised of
    the National Park Service, the Historic Preservation Office of the
    State of Washington, the Department of the Army, and the City of
    Vancouver, Washington. The plan, completed in early 2000 and approved
    by the Secretary of the Interior, envisions an active public/private
    partnership in managing the shared assets of the Reserve. The Reserve
    partners, while maintaining full authority and management
    responsibilities for their individual areas consistent with applicable
    laws, work cooperatively on all matters relating to the Reserve.
    Additional financial support comes from the privately based nonprofit
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust. The cornerstones of the 15-
    year Cooperative Management Plan are preservation, education, and
    public use.
        The plan, however, is not a budget document. While it identified
    estimated costs for recommended actions, it did not commit any of the
    agencies or other partners to specific funding requirements. Signature
    by the partners or the Secretaries did not commit the Department of
    Interior or Army to any funding requirements outside of agency budgets
    as approved by Congress.
        The law that established the Reserve authorized the appropriation
    of $400,000 annually for operational costs, and a total of $5 million
    for development costs. These funds have been provided in the National
    Park Service budgets for fiscal years 1998 through 2002 in the
    construction and statutory aid accounts.
        The Cooperative Management Plan for the Reserve provided a summary
    of development costs estimated at approximately $85 million (in 1998
    dollars). The plan contemplates that the costs will be shared by the
    Federal Government, the state, the city, nonprofit groups and
    organizations, and private investors, corporations, and businesses. The
    Federal share could be allocated from the U.S. Army, the U.S. Army
    Reserve, the Department of Defense, or the Department of the Interior.
        The Vancouver National Historic Reserve has benefitted greatly from
    the contributions made by our partners and other donors, who have
    already provided over $19 million for a wide variety of projects, and
    plan to provide approximately $20 million more for projects that have
    already been identified.
        We would like to emphasize that we are committed to working with
    our partners in the Vancouver National Historic Reserve to find
    appropriate ways to meet the goals outlined in the Cooperative
    Management Plan. We encourage our partners in the Reserve to continue
    to seek funding and other solutions for the preservation and protection
    of its resources through grants and other programs administered by the
    Service, the Department, and other Federal agencies.
        This concludes my testimony. I am glad to answer any questions that
    you or members of the Subcommittee may have.
                                     ______

        Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, the second bill is H.R. 2099,
    which would amend the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management
    Act of 1996 to increase the authorization of appropriations for
    the Vancouver National Historic Reserve and for the
    preservation of Vancouver Barracks.
        The Department recognizes and appreciates the efforts of
    our partners to cooperatively administer the Vancouver National
    Historic Reserve. This is a partnership that has worked well,
    and we look forward to continuing our work with the city of
    Vancouver, State of Washington, and the Department of the Army
    to achieve the goals outlined in the cooperative management
    plan for the reserve. However, in light of the Department's
    commitment to supporting the President's initiative to
    eliminate the deferred maintenance backlog in our parks, we
    cannot support diverting limited funds away from the Service's
    own needs. We believe that the funds that are appropriated to
    the National Park Service are more appropriately directed to
    reducing the long list of necessary, but deferred construction
    projects that have been identified in our national parks.
        Congress in 1948 designated a portion of the area, Fort
    Vancouver, as a national monument, and in 1961 Fort Vancouver
    became a national historic site. In 1996, Congress passed
    legislation that established the Vancouver National Historic
    Reserve. The reserve itself is not a unit of the National Park
    System, although the Fort Vancouver National Historic Site
    component is part of the System. The reserve encompasses 366
    acres along the Columbia River within the city of Vancouver,
    Washington, and includes a particularly rich collection of
    cultural resources. The Fort Vancouver National Historic Site
    is approximately 208 of those acres.
        The law that established the reserve directed the
    preparation of a general management plan to be developed by a
    partnership comprised of the National Park Service, the
    Historic Preservation Office of the State of Washington, the
    Department of the Army, the city of Vancouver, and others. The
    plan, completed in early 2000 and approved by the Secretary of
    the Interior, envisions an active public/private partnership in
    managing the shared assets of the reserve.
        The plan, however, is not a budget document. While it
    defined--while it identified estimated costs for recommended
    actions, it did not commit any of the agencies or other
    partners to specific funding requirements. The law that
    established the reserve authorized the appropriation of 400,000
    annually for operational costs and a total of 5 million for
    development costs. These funds have been provided to the
    National Park Service budgets for fiscal years 1998 through
    2002 in the construction and statutory aid accounts.
        The cooperative management plan for the reserve provided a
    summary of development costs estimated at approximately $85
    million. The plan contemplates that the costs will be shared by
    the Federal Government, the State, the city, nonprofit groups,
    and organizations, and private investors, corporations, and
    visitors. The Federal share could be allocated from the U.S.
    Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, the Department of Defense, or the
    Department of the Interior.
        We would like to emphasize that we are committed to working
    with our partners in the Vancouver National Historic Reserve to
    find appropriate ways to meet the goals outlined in the
    cooperative management plan. We encourage our partners in the
    reserve to continue to seek funding and other solutions for the
    preservation and protection of its resources through grants and
    other programs administered by the Service, the Department, and
    other Federal agencies.
        Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony on the two bills,
    and I look forward to any questions you or members of the
    Committee may have.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Smith.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]

       Statement of P. Daniel Smith, Special Assistant to the Director,
             National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior

        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before your
    Committee to present the views of the Department of the Interior on
    H.R. 3917, a bill to commemorate the passengers and crew of Flight 93
    who, on September 11, 2001, courageously gave their lives thereby
    thwarting a planned attack on our Nation's Capital, and for other
    purposes. The Department supports the enactment of this bill with minor
    amendments discussed at the end of our testimony.
        H.R. 3917 would do several things. It would establish a national
    memorial at the crash site to honor the passengers and crew of United
    Airlines Flight 93 of September 11, 2001; it would establish a Flight
    93 Advisory Commission to assist with consideration and formulation of
    plans for a permanent memorial to the passengers and crew of Flight 93,
    including its nature, design and construction; and it would authorize
    the Secretary of the Interior to coordinate and facilitate the
    activities of the Flight 93 Advisory Commission, provide technical and
    financial assistance to a Flight 93 Task Force, and to administer a
    Flight 93 memorial as a unit of the National Park System.
        On September 11, 2001, terrorists hijacked four United States
    passenger aircraft with the intent to kill American citizens and to use
    the planes as weapons to destroy important structures critical to this
    country. The targets were in New York City and Washington, D.C. Three
    out of four planes hit their mark destroying the Twin Towers of the
    World Trade Center, destroying a significant portion of the Pentagon,
    causing the deaths of almost 3,000 people, and affecting millions of
    people worldwide.
        But one hijacked plane did not succeed in its mission. Passengers
    and crew on the fourth plane, United Airlines Flight 93, learned of
    these disasters in mid-air, and took heroic action by thwarting a
    planned attack on our Nation's Capital, which resulted in the crash of
    the plane into a field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, within the rural,
    remote and previously peaceful Stonycreek Township. The passengers and
    crew of Flight 93 are remembered and honored as having given their
    lives to save others. They have inspired other airline passengers and
    crews to be significantly more vigilant and proactive in dealing with
    hijackers and have directly influenced new airline security systems.
    Flight 93 will be understood to be nationally significant because on
    Flight 93, America began to fight back.
        The way people traditionally mourn victims of catastrophic events
    by visiting the site of the occurrence reflects an instinctive public
    choice of the appropriate location for a memorial. In the months that
    followed the September 11th attacks, thousands of people have visited
    the Flight 93 site, drawn by the heroic action and sacrifice of the
    Flight 93 passengers and crew. Many are profoundly concerned about the
    future disposition of the crash site, including grieving families of
    the passengers and crew, the people of the region who are the current
    stewards of the site, and a broad spectrum of citizens across the
    United States. Many of these people are forming a Flight 93 Task Force
    as a broad, grassroots, inclusive organization to provide a voice for
    all interested and concerned parties.
        The Stonycreek Township and Shanksville have no resources to enable
    them to protect the site from inappropriate relic seekers, or to serve
    the visiting public. Congress provided emergency appropriations to
    secure the site, but for a short time only. Establishing a permanent
    memorial would serve as a meaningful way to honor those who sacrificed
    their lives on September 11th and would provide an appropriately
    respectful setting for family members and other visitors. As we
    testified earlier this year on another memorial bill, in the case of
    enormous national tragedies, we have found that commemoration seems
    most appropriate at the site of the tragedy itself. The Oklahoma City
    National Memorial would not have nearly the power it has if it had been
    constructed anywhere else but at the site of the Murrah Building. The
    memorial landscapes of Gettysburg and Antietam National Battlefields
    still haunt visitors who contemplate what occurred there nearly 150
    years ago. Indeed, people from all over the world continue to be drawn
    to these hallowed grounds to reflect on the historical events that took
    place at these sites or to pay their respects to those who lost their
    lives there.
        Like so many families in America, we continue to mourn the loss of
    a member of our Interior family. Richard Guadagno, 17-year employee of
    the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and manager of the Humboldt Bay
    National Wildlife Refuge in California, was among the heroic passengers
    on Flight 93. The Department offers our deepest sympathy to all those
    who lost a friend or family member because of the attacks on September
    11th. We understand that the road to healing will be long, but we
    believe that through the strength and unity of this country, the spirit
    of America lives on.
        Public Law 105-391, the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of
    1998, requires congressional authorization of areas to be studied for
    potential new units of the National Park System. The law also
    designates the criteria to be followed by the National Park Service in
    determining whether to recommend an area as a unit of the National Park
    System. The National Park Service has had the opportunity to conduct a
    reconnaissance and analysis of the site of the crash of Flight 93.
    Numerous National Park Service professional staff have visited the
    Flight 93 site over the past ten months to understand the site and its
    changes over time, to meet with local people including landowners, the
    local historical society, volunteers, the Mayor of Shanksville, County
    Commissioners, rescue workers, and others, to provide advice and
    technical assistance in the areas of site security and in the
    preservation and curation of artifacts left by visitors at the site,
    and to facilitate public meetings regarding the future of the site. We
    also brought to the site people directly involved with the creation of
    the Oklahoma City National Memorial to provide assistance to the local
    people and officials. Although this would not be considered a standard
    special resource study as required under the public law, these visits
    and meetings have provided information on the site's significance,
    ability of local and regional governments in managing the site on a
    long-term basis as a memorial site, and providing services to a large
    number of visitors on a long-term basis.
        H.R. 3917 also departs from the normal process for creation of a
    unit of the National Park System because places that may be deemed
    historical in nature are typically not designated until the passage of
    a sufficient interval of time to allow for historical judgment. Yet,
    the events of September 11th are so clearly important to contemporary
    America that some kind of national recognition is appropriate now. In
    addition, there is a crucial need for National Park Service technical
    assistance to be available to consult on the immediate needs of
    collections, storage, oral history, and archives. We learned from our
    role at the Vietnam Veteran's Memorial there is a great need to permit
    the public to place mementos and express feelings. The Somerset County
    Historical Society has begun an archive and collection of such
    materials; the National Park Service should be available to provide
    whatever consultation or assistance is desired. During consideration of
    the appropriate treatment of the site, the families, the community, the
    public and the commission will likely need staff support for the public
    process and for design and planning.
        This legislation recognizes the need for a special process to
    determine how best to treat the site, whether as a preserved landscape,
    a designed memorial structure, or some other appropriate treatment.
    Most importantly, the legislation, with special sensitivity and
    insight, provides time for listening and time to allow a consensus to
    develop, with an appropriate role for the family members of the flight
    and crew, for the public, the community, and the Secretary of the
    Interior.
        While generally we have requested no new additions to the National
    Park System while we continue to focus our resources on caring for
    existing areas in the National Park System, there is little doubt that
    the events of September 11th were nationally significant and have had
    international implications. It is appropriate that the crash site of
    Flight 93 be designated as a national memorial, as a unit of the
    National Park System, that it be done contemporaneously, and that the
    National Park Service participate in a sensitive process with the
    public and the affected parties to recommend the appropriate treatment
    of the site. One family member of a passenger of Flight 93, at a press
    conference announcing the introduction of this legislation expressed a
    desire that the memorial be ``a place of beauty.'' The National Park
    Service would like to support the families, the public, and the
    community while they develop their vision to achieve this goal.
        The legislation suggests the commission will have the authority to
    raise funds. We believe many Americans will want to have an active part
    in the fundraising process, and therefore, recommend that the
    authorization for fundraising be explicit in the legislation. We look
    forward to working with the Committee on this amendment and a couple of
    technical amendments needed to the bill.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to comment. This
    concludes my prepared remarks and I will be happy to answer any
    questions you or other Committee members might have.
                                     ______

        Mr. Radanovich. Is there any questions from anybody on the
    panel?
        Mr. Baird.
        Mr. Baird. Mr. Smith, briefly. I fully understand the
    challenge the National Park Service faces with the backlog of
    maintenance and other projects, and I respect that and
    appreciate your comments in that regard.
        What I find unique about the Vancouver Barracks and the
    historic reserve is that there is tremendous leveraging of the
    funds, and essentially you are getting buy one, get two free,
    or something of that sort. You are getting tremendous resource
    magnification of the investments. Has the Park Service
    considered that factor in its deliberations?
        Mr. Smith. Congressman, it has. Part of our rationale is
    that with the 208 acres of the 366 actually being a unit of the
    System, that is about a million dollars a year, 14 FTE. So we
    have a tremendous presence there. And at this time we are aware
    there are certain appropriations that are moving through DOD
    because of your Active components of military that are there
    and that type of thing.
        So, at this time I would have to say we do--I try to
    recognize that, that we do realize this is a very valuable
    partnership. But at this particular time right now, the
    Department, because of its other budget constraints, needs to
    step back and not be a participant at the level that this bill
    has asked us to participate in.
        Mr. Baird. Just for the record, Mr. Chair, obviously I
    disagree with that conclusion and would note that I think that
    it--the other emphasis I would make is that there are
    relatively no other, that I know of, comparably important
    historical sites in this particular vicinity. Indeed, the first
    U.S. Army post in the Pacific Northwest was established there.
    There is--as you know for sure, there is a wonderful--young
    people can come visit a fort that was the first fort in the
    Pacific Northwest. This is where important treaties were
    signed. This is where basically the U.S. established its formal
    presence in the Pacific Northwest with a military presence. It
    is a tremendously rich history, and I hope we can foresee and
    make possible further expansion. This fort has been active in
    the military for years.
        The other thing I think to emphasize that wasn't mentioned
    in the testimony: When the original $5 million authorization
    was established, there was a more constrained geographical
    area. The Army is making--is departing from what is called the
    west barracks part of this, which is an historical area of
    buildings which I understand are relatively unparalleled in
    terms of their era of construction, et cetera. And it is that
    addition of the new property which expands the need for
    additional authorization for this resource so that we can
    maintain it and keep it up to the standards that it warrants.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Baird.
        Mr. Otter?
        Mr. Otter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Anderson, you are very familiar now with the Spirit
    Lake, Twin Lakes problem that we have got. Is this something
    that is unique for the BLM, for the Department of Interior?
        Mr. Robert Anderson. No, sir, it isn't, although I don't
    know how many cases specifically we have on bidded lands. We
    had a couple of cases around Jackson Hole, Wyoming, for
    example, along the Snake River back in the 1970's and 1980's,
    which ended up in court with high litigation costs, and
    eventually ruled in favor of the landowners in terms of the
    land obtained from the government. But we--this is not a
    frequent occurrence.
        Mr. Otter. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you, Mr. Otter.
        Mr. Smith, I do have one question regarding H.R. 3917. Can
    you tell me how the National Park Service envisions working
    with the advisory council on the development of this memorial?
        Mr. Smith. Mr. Chairman, what we hope to do is to work as
    the legislation gives us direction to use the existing task
    force that is already existing for Flight 93, and, as the
    Secretary forms the commission, to take all of the advice that
    this existing task force provides. Among other things, that
    task force will actually recommend 14 members of what the
    commission that the Secretary will form will consist of.
        We haven't done a study on this area, Mr. Chairman, but the
    Park Service has had literally probably more than a dozen
    individuals, professional staff, to the site, have talked to
    the local people, have talked to local government, the State
    government, and there is a tremendous feeling of coordination
    to move forward with input from the people directly affected by
    this, especially the families of those who were lost on this
    flight. And we perceive it being a very smooth transition from
    this task force into a commission to get an awful lot of
    consensus before we ever move forward to what will eventually
    be at this site.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you.
        Mr. Smith, there was a reconnaissance and analysis of this
    site done by National Park Service already? Am I--
        Mr. Smith. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Radanovich. --saying that?
        Mr. Smith. On several visits, just because of the
    importance of this, we have actually had land acquisition
    people out there. We have had planners. They have brought staff
    who dealt directly with the Oklahoma City memorial who went
    through sort of the same very quick process--appropriate
    process, but nonetheless quick, a full understanding of what
    this rural area can and cannot do, working closely with the
    mayor. It really has been an outpouring of professional advice
    and consultation that has moved into a real awareness of what
    this local area is trying to accomplish. And in that regard,
    our people have gathered an awful lot of information that will
    help us move forward from the task force and into this
    commission that will eventually advise the Secretary on what
    should occur at this site.
        Everyone is in agreement that what happened in this rural
    land in Pennsylvania needs to be commemorated, and we think we
    can build a consensus with all of these interested parties to
    accomplish this if Congress does enact it into law.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much.
        One other question regarding Mr. Baird's bill. Is the
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve, is it a unit of the
    National Park System?
        Mr. Smith. The actual Fort Vancouver, 208 of these 366
    acres which are in the reserve is a national historic site and
    a unit of the Park System.
        Mr. Radanovich. OK.
        Mr. Smith. So about 160 plus or minus are the actual
    reserve; the actual Fort Vancouver itself, national historic
    site, is a unit of the System.
        Mr. Radanovich. And the reason for the jump in authorized
    spending from 5 to 20 million in 6 years is because of what?
        Mr. Smith. It is because of things located on the site, as
    the Congressman talked about, the barracks, which may or may
    not--I kind of have conflicting information on whether that
    will actually be used by Reserve components in the BRAC
    process. People are coming back to where they might not have
    been before, but to improve these very historic buildings on
    the national historic site, but then also other considerations
    the city has with its education portion and its actual
    riverfront.
        Mr. Radanovich. I will yield to you in just a second, but
    one other question.
        The cooperative management plan, is that an actual budget
    document of the National Park Service, or is this done by
    somebody else?
        Mr. Smith. It is a planning document, Congressman. It is
    not a budget document.
        Mr. Radanovich. All right. Mr. Baird, I would be happy to
    yield.
        Mr. Baird. Just to explain, if I may. Envision, if you
    will, a field in which sits an old stockade-style fort, which
    we are all familiar with the parapets and whatnot, lodge poles
    and things like that. Then up the hill from that, you have the
    barracks of the more modern military, which have now been
    vacated. But these are barracks that served from the World War
    II and before era. Further along there are barracks or what we
    call Officers Row, which were not barracks, but were the
    officers' buildings in a classic, almost colonial style, in
    which, for example, Ulysses S. Grant, Sheridan, McClellan, and
    General George C. Marshall resided. And also up the field a
    ways from the historic fort itself, you have Pearson Air Field
    in which the first transpolar flight, the Chkalov Russian
    flight, came overseas or over the North Pole.
        So it is a very unique and integrated area in which you
    have a replica of the very first military fort originally
    established by Hudson's Bay Company, then occupied later on, on
    up through modern military times.
        So that is what we see as unique. In fact, a slogan for the
    Historic Reserve has been One Place Across Time, where you can
    really follow the transition of the U.S. military presence in
    the Pacific Northwest from its earliest days up to modern
    times. And it is that which we are seeking to preserve in this
    additional authorization. And that is the more--the 20th
    century, the mid to 20th century barracks, which, frankly, are
    in some state of disrepair, and yet it is the responsibility of
    the reserve area to take care of.
        Mr. Radanovich. Right. Thank you.
        Any other questions of the panel?
        Mr. Anderson, I want to thank you. Mr. Smith, thank you
    very much for coming to testify today.
        Mr. Radanovich. We will go ahead and call up our third
    panel, which includes the Honorable Royce Pollard, who is the
    mayor of the city of Vancouver, Vancouver, Washington, here to
    speak on 2099; Mr. Bruce Hagensen, board member of the
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust, Vancouver,
    Washington, again on H.R. 2099; Mrs. Pam Tokar-Ickes, Somerset
    County Commissioner, Somerset, Pennsylvania, to speak on H.R.
    3917; Mrs. Betty Kemmerer, Flight 93 Family Organization
    representative from Budd Lake, New Jersey, on 3917; and Mr.
    Bruce Anderson, who is a land surveyor at Kootenai County in
    Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, H.R. 4874.
        Thank you very much for being here. I hope I didn't
    mispronounce anybody's name. You see this name? It gets
    mispronounced a lot.
        We will go ahead and start. Everybody has 5 minutes to
    offer their testimony. We are going to go with everybody, and
    then open up the panel to questions from other members.
        Mr. Pollard, welcome to the Committee, and please begin
    your testimony.

                  STATEMENT OF ROYCE POLLARD, MAYOR,
                CITY OF VANCOUVER, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON

        Mr. Pollard. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and
    members of the Subcommittee. I am Royce Pollard, the mayor of
    America's Vancouver in Washington State. Thank you for this
    opportunity to testify on behalf of House Resolution 2099.
        First off, for those who may not know about America's
    Vancouver, we are not located in Canada. We are the fourth
    largest city in the State of Washington and are located on the
    north bank of the Columbia River. I could go on about the many
    wonderful virtues of our city and community, but for today I
    will focus my discussion with you on the historic reserve.
        Few places in America can match the layers of historic
    assets of the Vancouver National Historic Reserve. I believe
    the Vancouver National Historic Reserve will become one of our
    Nation's premier historic sites. The historic reserve played a
    significant role in the events that shaped the history of the
    West and the Pacific Northwest, from the Indian Nations that
    were long established by the time Lewis and Clark visited our
    shores and declared, and I quote, the only desirable situation
    for a settlement on the western side of the Rocky Mountains,
    unquote, to the Hudson's Bay Company and the fur and trade
    monopoly of the British Empire. It all happened here.
        The 366-acre reserve is located right in the heart of our
    downtown core. It is comprised of Officers Row, the barracks,
    Pearson Air Field, and Fort Vancouver National Historic Site.
    Its southern boundary is the mighty Columbia River. The
    Hudson's Bay Company established its Western fur trade
    headquarters along the Columbia in the 1820's at Fort Vancouver
    and, as a result, greatly influenced the economic, political,
    and cultural developments in the Pacific Northwest. Fort
    Vancouver emerged as the most multicultural and diverse
    community in the West, with close to 1,000 people, made up of
    French Canadians, Hawaiians, Scots, and members of over 30
    different American Indian tribes, calling the reserve home.
        The historic area, and particularly Fort Vancouver, is now
    considered the premier historical archaeological site in the
    Pacific Northwest with a collection of 1.5 million artifacts
    used by researchers and visitors around the world.
        The emergence of Vancouver Barracks as the first U.S. Army
    post in the Pacific Northwest in May of 1849 determined the
    boundaries of the United States, adding the territory that
    would become Idaho, Washington and Oregon. The barracks was the
    headquarters for the Department of Columbia, and, as mentioned,
    many famous soldiers have lived and served there, including
    Captain Ulysses S. Grant, George McClellan, Philip Sheridan,
    General Oliver Otis Howard, and General George C. Marshall, the
    architect of victory in World War II and the Nobel Peace Prize
    recipient for the Marshall Plan.
        From the 19th through the 21st centuries, this post
    continued a rich tradition of military service with soldiers
    serving in the Indian wars, the Philippine war, and both World
    Wars. Officers Row, which served as residential housing for
    many of the soldiers' and officers' families stationed at
    Vancouver Barracks, has been beautifully restored and
    rehabilitated and is one of our city's signature assets and is
    the oldest neighborhood in the Pacific Northwest. The Reserve
    is also home to the oldest, continuously operated air field in
    the country, Pearson Air Field.
        As mentioned, in 1937, a Soviet aviator and his crew landed
    there at the end of history's first nonstop transpolar flight.
    They were welcomed to America by the commander of the barracks,
    General George C. Marshall.
        As you can tell by my brief history, the historic reserve
    is of national and international significance and is an
    American gem. While I can tell you more about the reserve's
    historical significance than you would ever want to know, my
    main purpose is to urge you to support this increase in
    appropriations so we can preserve, maintain, and reuse this
    valuable piece of our 5nation's history.
        Many things have changed and happened since 1996 when you
    passed legislation creating the four partnerships. The
    nonprofit Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust was created
    and supports the reserve by bringing private resources into the
    partnership.
        In the year 2000, the Army vacated the west barracks, and
    later that year former President Clinton signed the Defense
    Authorization Act which would allow the transfer of the
    barracks to the city of Vancouver. Our delegation, led by
    Congressman Baird, Norm Dicks, and Senators Murray and
    Cantwell, have pledged to secure additional authorizations for
    the reserve. We expect the Army to provide financial support as
    well. The Trust has pledged to raise 20 percent of needed
    funding to establish a permanent endowment for the reserve. We
    are asking the State of Washington to match the city's
    contribution of 15 percent. Federal funding will leverage local
    and State public funding and private contributions. Without
    adequate Federal funding, the city will not be in a financial
    situation to accept transfer of the west barracks from the
    Army. In that event, the Federal Government would remain
    responsible for maintaining and protecting the property in
    accordance with statutory historic preservation requirements.
        Much needs to be done to restore and preserve the buildings
    of this site to achieve our community's vision of turning them
    into classrooms, museums, and interpretive spaces. The scope of
    this project is beyond our local resources, both public and
    private. Because of the national significance of this site, we
    feel that it is critical it be preserved and interpreted for
    future generations. We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to
    connect millions of people to our Nation's heritage and its
    legacies of cultures, commerce, and politics. Given the scope
    of this project, success will be realized only through the
    cooperative support and participation of all of our partners.
    We are presented with an opportunity to create a model public/
    private partnership. The city of Vancouver is absolutely
    committed to the success of this unique preservation
    initiative, and I urge your support for this resolution.
        In summary, America's Vancouver is the birthplace of
    history in the Pacific Northwest. By working together in a true
    public/private partnership, we will create a historic
    destination of national and international significance that
    will attract millions of visitors, making you and our Nation
    proud of our partnership's efforts.
        Thank you very much for this opportunity.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much, Mr. Pollard.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Pollard follows:]

              Statement of The Honorable Royce E. Pollard, Mayor,
                         City of Vancouver, Washington

        Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee on
    National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands. My name is Royce Pollard,
    Mayor of Vancouver, Washington. Thank you for this opportunity to
    testify on behalf of House Resolution 2099, amending the Omnibus Parks
    and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to provide adequate funding
    authorization for the Vancouver National Historic Reserve.
        First off, for those of you who may not know about Vancouver, we
    are the fourth largest city in the state of Washington and are located
    on the north bank of the Columbia River directly across from Portland,
    Oregon. I could go on about the many wonderful virtues about our city
    and community, but for today, I will focus my discussion with you on
    the Reserve.
        Few places in our country can match the historic assets of the
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve. You all know about Colonial
    Williamsburg. Well, we think the Reserve can be the Williamsburg of the
    west. We know the Reserve has the potential to be as intriguing, as
    interesting and as much of a destination as Williamsburg is. We want
    the Reserve to be one of our nation's premiere historic sites.
        The Historic Reserve played a significant role in the events that
    shaped the history of the west and the Pacific Northwest--from the
    Indian Nations that were long-established by the time Lewis and Clark
    visited our shores, to the fur and trade monopoly of the British Empire
    it all happened right here.
        The Reserve, designated by Congress in 1996, has been recognized as
    the most historically significant site in the Pacific Northwest. The
    Historic Reserve's cultural resources encompass successive layers that
    reflect major themes in the nation's history pre-dating the arrival of
    Lewis and Clark through the mid-20th century. Highlights of this
    layered history include:
         Early Native American inhabitants of the area
         Lewis and Clark expedition in 1805 06
         Hudson's Bay Company headquarters operations at Fort
    Vancouver
         150 years of U.S. Army history at Vancouver Barracks, the
    Northwest's military administrative headquarters beginning in 1849
         ``Golden Era of Aviation'' at Pearson Field 1920s-1930s,
    one of the U.S. Army's oldest airfields
         Officers Row (honoring such notables as Ulysses S. Grant,
    O.O. Howard, and George C. Marshall)
         Columbia River, one of the world's great waterways, an
    artery of commerce and productivity from the prehistoric era to the
    present
        The 366-acre Reserve boasts a unique, urban location right in the
    heart of our downtown core. It is comprised of Officer's Row, Vancouver
    Barracks, Pearson Field and Fort Vancouver. Its southern border is the
    mighty Columbia River. As many of you know, the Columbia River has long
    enticed Native Americans, explorers, workers, traders, soldiers, and
    settlers to its shores. Indigenous peoples fished and settled along its
    banks and tributaries. The Hudson's Bay Company established its western
    fur trade headquarters along the Columbia at Fort Vancouver and, as a
    result, greatly influenced the economic, political, and cultural
    development of the Pacific Northwest. Fort Vancouver emerged as the
    most multi-cultural and diverse community in the west with close to a
    1,000 people, made up of French-Canadians, Hawaiians, Scots, and
    members of over 30 different American Indian tribes, calling the
    Reserve home. Thousands of American settlers emigrated over the Oregon
    Trail and arrived at Fort Vancouver in desperate need of supplies and
    assistance. The birth of what is today the Pacific Northwest was made
    possible by the generosity provided to these settlers by the villagers
    at Fort Vancouver.
        Fort Vancouver is now considered the premiere historical
    archaeological site in the Pacific Northwest. Over 50 years of
    excavations have resulted in a collection of 1.5 million artifacts used
    by researchers and visitors from around the world.
        Along with the settlement of these Oregon Trail pioneers, the
    emergence of Vancouver Barracks as the first U.S. Army post in the
    Pacific Northwest determined the boundaries of the United States,
    adding the territory that would become Idaho, Washington and Oregon.
        The Barracks was the headquarters for the Department of the
    Columbia and many ``famous'' soldiers including Ulysses S. Grant,
    George McClellan, Philip Sheridan, O.O. Howard and George C. Marshall
    were stationed here at some point in their careers. From the 19th
    through the 21st centuries, this post continued a rich tradition of
    military service. Soldiers served in the Indian Wars, the Philippines,
    and both World Wars. In 1917, the U.S. Army operated the world's
    largest spruce mill on this site, providing lumber for the manufacture
    of biplanes during World War I.
        Officer's Row, which served as residential housing for many of the
    soldiers, officers and families stationed at Vancouver Barracks has
    been beautifully restored and rehabilitated. Once described as ``21
    white elephants nose to tail'', today, the stately tree-lined row is
    pointed to with pride as one of our city's signature assets.
        Last, but not least, the Reserve is also home to the oldest
    continuously-operated airport in the county, Pearson Field. From 1923
    to 1941, Pearson was home to the U.S. Army Air Service and many key
    events during the ``Golden Age of Flight.'' One of its first commanders
    made the first non-stop transcontinental flight in 1923. In 1937, a
    Soviet aviator and crew landed there at the end of history's first non-
    stop, trans-polar flight.
        As you can tell by my brief history lesson, the Reserve is a
    historic gem. Both Fort Vancouver and Officer's Row are listed on the
    National Register. Vancouver Barracks and Pearson Field are eligible
    for listing on the Register as well.
        While I can tell you more about the Reserve's historical
    significance, my main purpose is to urge you to support this increase
    in appropriations so we can preserve, maintain, and reuse this valuable
    piece of our nation's history.
        When Congress passed legislation establishing the Vancouver
    National Historic Reserve, the designation set forth a partnership
    among the four landowners in the Reserve the National Park Service, the
    City of Vancouver, the U.S. Army and the Washington State Office of
    Historic Preservation. The non-profit Vancouver National Historic
    Reserve Trust supports the Reserve by bringing private resources into
    the partnership.
    Key Congressional Actions
        Congressional involvement in the Reserve goes back to 1948.
         Fort Vancouver National Monument Establishment of Fort
    Vancouver National Monument in Vancouver, Washington; transfer of lands
    by War Assets Administration and Secretary of the Army to Secretary of
    the Interior authorized, (62 Stat. 532) June 19, 1948
         Fort Vancouver National Historic Site Fort Vancouver
    National Monument authorization to increase boundaries revised and
    monument re-designated as ``Fort Vancouver National Historic Site,''
    June 30, 1961 (75 Stat. 196)
         National Historic Preservation Act, 1966 Establishes a
    program for the preservation of historic properties throughout the
    Nation and, in section 106, identifies governmental obligations. 16
    U.S.C. 470; P L 89-665 October 15, 1966 as amended through 1992 by P L
    102-575.
         Vancouver Historical Study Commission Established the
    Vancouver Historical Study Commission for the purpose of evaluating
    resources in the area and determining the feasibility of creating a
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve, P L 101-523, November 5, 1990
         Vancouver National Historic Reserve Legislation
    establishing the Vancouver National Historic Reserve as defined in the
    Feasibility Study and Environmental Assessment, by the Vancouver
    Historical Study Commission, 1993. Required a General Management Plan
    to be completed no later than three years after the Act. This plan was
    to be developed by a Partnership team consisting of one representative
    from each of the following organizations: the National Park Service,
    Historic Preservation Office of the State of Washington, the Department
    of the Army and the city of Vancouver, P L 104-333, Sec. 502, November
    12, 1996
         West Barracks Transfer Authority 2000 Legislation
    provides for transfer of the west Vancouver Barracks property to the
    city of Vancouver. Allows the Secretary of the Army to approve the
    transfer presently scheduled for mid 2002.

    RATIONALE FOR FEDERAL FUNDING REQUEST
        The request for $20 million of Federal funding to assist in the
    preservation and reuse of the Reserve is partially based on principle
    and partially based on the financial benefits derived from the public/
    private partnership proposed by the city of Vancouver and the Reserve
    Trust.
        There are two fundamental principles underlying the funding
    request:

    Principles
        1. Historic Preservation. The U.S. Government has an obligation to
    assist in the preservation of one of the nations important historic
    sites first recognized by the designation of the Fort Vancouver
    National Monument in 1948. (renamed in 1961 as the Fort Vancouver
    National Historic Site) and the establishment of the Vancouver National
    Historic Reserve in 1996.
        2. Conversion of Military Bases. The U.S. Government has an
    obligation to assist in the conversion of no longer needed military
    bases to non-military purposes.

    Financial Benefits
        1. Federal funding will leverage local and state public funding and
    private contributions. The Federal Government share is proposed at 37%
    of the total project cost. The Federal money would be used primarily to
    rehabilitate the buildings to a level of compliance with public safety
    codes and applicable Federal laws such as ADA. Some Federal money would
    also be used to preserve the important historical features of the site
    and buildings. (For example, use of ``Save America's Treasures funds to
    preserve the Red Cross Convalescent House already designated as an
    America's Treasure.)
        2. An early commitment of funding would enable the redevelopment to
    proceed at a more rapid pace resulting in substantial cost savings.
        3. Without adequate Federal funding for the barracks project, the
    city would not be in a financial position to accept transfer of the
    west barracks. In this event, the Federal Government would remain
    responsible for maintaining and protecting the property in accordance
    with statutory historic preservation requirements. In addition, the
    Federal Government would likely be faced with rebuilding old
    deteriorated infrastructure in the near future.

    REQUESTED CONGRESSIONAL ACTIONS
        The City of Vancouver, its partners, and the Reserve Trust are
    grateful for the recent and ongoing efforts by our Congressional
    delegation in support of the Vancouver National Historic Reserve. Our
    Congressional delegation led by Congressmen Brian Baird and Norm Dicks
    and Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, have pledged to secure an
    additional authorization for the Reserve. We expect the U.S. Army to
    provide financial support as well.
    FY 2003 request for the Reserve:
        Pass legislation providing an additional multi-million dollar
    Federal ``authorization'' for capital projects at the Reserve. (The $5
    million `cap' for capital projects included in the 1996 legislation
    creating the Reserve. has now been exceeded; this year's Interior
    earmark was accompanied by a caveat that future appropriations for
    capital projects at the VNHR would require a lift of the lid). Senators
    Cantwell and Murray have introduced S 1649 and a companion measure H.R.
    2099, has been introduced by Congressman Baird. Due to the specific
    language in this year's Interior Conference Committee report, passage
    of this legislation is critical.
        The Trust has pledged to raise 20% of needed funding to establish a
    permanent endowment for the Reserve. We are asking the State of
    Washington to match the city's contribution of 15%.

    CLOSING STATEMENT
        Much needs to be done to restore and preserve the buildings on this
    site to make the community's visions of turning them into to the
    classrooms, museums, or interpretive space a reality. The scope of this
    project is beyond our local resources, both public and private. Because
    of the national significance of this site, we feel that it is critical
    it be preserved and interpreted for future generations. To accomplish
    this, assistance from the Federal Government is crucial. This is an
    amazing, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to connect millions of people
    to our nation's heritage and its legacy of cultures, commerce and
    politics. Given the scope of this project, success will be realized
    only through the cooperative support and participation of all our
    partners. We are presented with an opportunity to create a model
    public/private partnership. The City of Vancouver is committed to the
    success of this unique preservation initiative. I urge your support of
    this resolution.
        Thank you for your consideration of this request. I would be happy
    to respond to any questions you may have.
                                     ______

        [Attachments to Mr. Pollard's statement follow:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.009

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.010

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.011

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.012

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.013

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.014

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.015

                                    ------

        Mr. Radanovich. Next is Ms. Pam Tokar-Ickes. And, Pam, I
    hope I have gotten your name right. Welcome to the Committee,
    And take your time to ready yourself.
        Ms. Tokar-Ickes. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Radanovich. But when you are ready, please.

      STATEMENT OF PAM TOKAR-ICKES, SOMERSET COUNTY COMMISSIONER,
                         SOMERSET, PENNSYLVANIA

        Ms. Tokar-Ickes. It is close.
        Good afternoon, Chairman Radanovich and esteemed members of
    the Subcommittee. I am Somerset County Commissioner Pamela
    Tokar-Ickes, and, on behalf of my colleagues James Marker and
    Brad Cober and the residents of Somerset County, I wish to
    express our strong support for House bill 3917 introduced by
    Congressman John Murtha as an appropriate and a fitting means
    to forever honor the legacy of the passengers and crew members
    of United Airlines Flight 93.
        As I testify before you today, I can assure you that the
    events of September 11th have done nothing but strongly
    reinforce my personal belief that history is not the domain of
    academics; it belongs to us all, because we have not only been
    witness to a literal turning point in our Nation's history,
    every man, woman, and child who will have recall of those
    events profoundly experienced them. It may be recorded by
    scholars, but the history of September 11th is being written by
    us all. That date has entered our collective imagination as one
    of those moments you will never forget, one that for many has
    not been experienced since November 22nd, 1963.
        I am 40 years old, and I can't tell you what I was doing
    when President Kennedy was shot because I was only 2, but I
    will never forget the blur of events during those fateful 2-1/2
    hours on what began as a beautiful, crisp autumn morning that
    changed our Nation, our world, and Somerset County.
        At about 10:10 a.m., with the knowledge of the planes
    hitting the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon, the
    Somerset County Commissioners were preparing for our biweekly
    public meeting when we received a call from our emergency
    operations center. The exact words of our emergency management
    director were, ``We have a report of a jetliner down in
    Buckstown. It's big. This is the real thing, guys.'' And I
    remember looking at my other commissioners, fellow
    commissioners, in stunned disbelief and saying to the
    speakerphone, ``Our Buckstown?'' the reply: ``yes, Buckstown,
    Pennsylvania, and there are 400 on board.''
        From there we just responded, determining shortly
    thereafter that there were only several dozen people on board,
    but we would not know until much later in the day that the
    crash in that remote field was linked in any way to the events
    in New York City and Washington, D.C.; we just responded.
        And then in the days to follow came the stories from family
    members, telephone operators, and emergency dispatchers about a
    series of phone calls that came from the individuals on that
    plane, and the eyewitness accounts of residents throughout
    western Pennsylvania who had noticed the low-flying and
    wavering jetliner in its final moments. And piece by piece the
    puzzle came together, and we soon realized that the smoldering
    crater in an abandoned strip mine in Stonycreek Township marked
    more than the scarred earth of a plane crash. It cradled the
    remains of individuals who exemplified the highest of human
    ideals; and that, whether by fate or destiny, Somerset County,
    Pennsylvania, holds a unique place in American history linked
    forever to one of the most poignant and valiant acts in its
    pages.
        We have become the caretaker of the story of these
    seemingly ordinary people who unknowingly, when they boarded
    United Airlines Flight 93 in Newark, New Jersey, on that
    beautiful day, were to become the Nation's first civilian
    soldiers to fight the first battle in what we now know as the
    war against international terrorism. What a huge responsibility
    we now shoulder for not only their survivors, but for the
    generations who will follow.
        As the enormity and the reality of the events began to set
    into the Nation, the Office of the County Commissioners of
    Somerset County was inundated with calls and donations and
    letters from throughout the world imploring us to establish
    some type of a permanent memorial to the 40 passengers and crew
    members of Flight 93. And I will tell you, those calls began as
    early as September 12th, when most of the country--I would say
    most of the world--was simply trying to wrap its mind around
    what had happened. There were letters from Cub Scout groups who
    held car washes and children who emptied their piggy banks. One
    woman sent $300 she has earmarked for Christmas shopping at the
    request of her children. Another wrote that enclosed in her
    card was the very first check her 14-year-old daughter had ever
    written, and she signed it simply, ``A proud mom.'' a senior
    citizen sent $2. ``Not much,'' she said, ``but from the
    heart.'' corporations called telling us that they were setting
    aside hundreds of thousands of dollars in endowment funds that
    would be available when we were ready. To date, more than $1
    million has been committed, and that number reflects only
    unsolicited contributions with, I have no doubt, millions more
    available for the asking.
        And then came the ideas, literally hundreds, scribbled on
    the backs of napkins and scraps of paper, intricate drawings
    that were carefully sketched by their creators after
    inspirational moments or dreams. Architectural firms
    commissioned professional designers and artists to produce
    their own renderings and offered their services free of charge.
        What was most extraordinary, though, was what began to
    occur almost immediately near the impact site. Temporary
    memorials sprung up as close as people could get, even as the
    recovery efforts continued. They brought flowers and pictures
    and letters and quilts and patches and angels, even a flight
    attendant's uniform; but they did not come to see that crash
    site as voyeurs, they came on more of a pilgrimage seemingly
    drawn there by need to simply get close to the place where this
    event occurred. As the professional historians would soon tell
    us, it is a phenomenon referred to as the power of place, and
    they still come daily, sometimes by the hundreds, just to pay
    their respects and see firsthand how this story which belongs
    to us all began.
        The items they bring now fill two entire rooms of the
    Somerset Historical Center, the home of the Historical and
    Genealogical Society of Somerset County which has been
    appointed by the county to collect, catalog, and archive the
    artifacts that are being left behind, which, individually and
    collectively, have also become an important part of the
    historic record.
        Last December, in response to the groundswell of support
    for the creation of a permanent memorial, a town meeting was
    held in Shanksville in which those who participated identified
    key stakeholder groups that must be represented on this soon-
    to-be-appointed Flight 93 task force. In addition to every
    family member that wishes to participate, they told us that the
    task force must include representatives of the community,
    emergency responders, educators, veterans, and historians.
        In January, the Somerset County Commissioners formally
    requested that Congressman John Murtha introduce legislation
    that would create a national memorial to the passengers and
    crew members of United Airlines Flight 93 under the auspices of
    the National Park Service, the Nation's curator, to ensure its
    proper administration long after all who now remember are gone.
        At a meeting in February, surviving family members
    representing 37 of the 40 individuals who perished on Flight 93
    reached strong consensus that a permanent memorial should be
    constructed. The second question they were asked to answer is,
    where should the permanent memorial be sited? The location,
    they said, had been selected on September 11th when, after the
    fateful struggle in the skies over Pennsylvania, their loved
    ones reached their final resting place. As Jennifer Price, a
    young woman who lost both of her parents on that plane, so
    eloquently told those who gathered at the National Press Club
    last March when the legislation was publicly announced, ``It is
    the place where we will go to say hello and good-bye.''
        House bill 3917, the Flight 93 National Memorial Act, will
    ensure that the crash site of Flight 93 is held in perpetuity
    with the dignity and the honor it deserves. The legislation
    provides a unique framework that will meld the grassroots input
    of the Flight 93 task force with the necessary support and
    oversight provided by the Federal Flight 93 Advisory Commission
    to make a national memorial a reality. And although the members
    of the advisory commission will be appointed by the Secretary
    of the Interior, the bill specifies that those appointments
    come from recommendations of the local Flight 93 task force,
    ensuring that the voices of the families and the community
    where this crash occurred remain central to the memorial
    process.
        Although the story of Flight 93 is significant to our
    Nation's history, its importance in no way diminishes the
    sacrifice of those who died at the World Trade Center towers
    and the Pentagon, but what happened over the skies of western
    Pennsylvania was different. Forty individuals, our newest
    American patriots, who count among their ranks nationals from
    Japan, Puerto Rico, and Germany, fought to overtake the plane,
    and, in so doing, gave their lives to save countless others. It
    is their courage that flamed the fires of freedom in the shadow
    of September 11th and served to inspire a Nation that so
    desperately needed to find its way out of the darkness.
        On behalf of the community that now cradles them as its
    own, the county in which they find their perpetual rest, the
    State to which their destiny was linked, and the country for
    which they died to defend, I respectfully ask the members of
    this Subcommittee and the Congress of the United States to
    honor these extraordinary individuals and their families so
    that their sacrifice will be remembered for generations to
    come. Thank you.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you very much. I know it is tough to
    go back to the memories of that day; I think it is pretty tough
    for a lot of people.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Tokar-Ickes follows:]

                Statement of Pamela Tokar-Ickes, Commissioner,
                         Somerset County, Pennsylvania

        Good afternoon Chairman Radanovich and esteemed members of the
    Subcommittee. I am Somerset County Commissioner Pamela Tokar-Ickes and
    on behalf of my colleagues James Marker and Brad Cober, and the
    residents of Somerset County, I wish to express our strong support for
    House Bill 3917, introduced by Congressman John Murtha, as an
    appropriate and fitting means to forever honor the legacy of the
    passengers and crew members of United Airlines Flight 93.
        As I testify before you today, I can assure you that the events of
    September 11th have done nothing but strongly reinforce my personal
    belief that history is not the domain of academics, it belongs to us
    all. Because we have not only been witness to a literal turning point
    in our nation's history- every man, woman and child who will have
    recall of those events profoundly experienced them. It may be recorded
    by scholars, but the history of September 11th is being written by us
    all. That date has entered our collective imagination as one of those
    moments you will never forget, one that for many has not been
    experienced since November 22nd, 1963. I am forty years old, and I
    cannot tell you what I was doing when President Kennedy was shot
    because I was only two, but I will never forget the blur of events
    during those fateful two and half hours on what began as a beautiful,
    crisp autumn morning that changed our nation, our world, and Somerset
    County.
        At about 10:10 a.m. with the knowledge of the planes hitting the
    World Trade Center Towers and the Pentagon, the Somerset County
    Commissioners were preparing for our bi-weekly public meeting, when we
    received a call from our emergency operations center. The exact words
    of our emergency management director were, ``We have a report of a
    jetliner down in Buckstown. It's big. This is the real thing guys.'' I
    remember looking at the other Commissioners in stunned disbelief and
    saying to the speakerphone, ``Our Buckstown?'' The reply, ``Yes,
    Buckstown, Pennsylvania. They think there are 400 on board.''
        From there, we just responded, determining shortly thereafter that
    there were only several dozen people on board. But we would not know
    until much later in the day that the crash in that remote field was
    linked in any way to the events in New York City and Washington, DC. We
    just responded.
        And then, in the days to follow, came the stories from family
    members, telephone operators, and emergency dispatchers, about a series
    of phone calls that came from the individuals on that plane. And the
    eyewitness accounts of residents throughout Western Pennsylvania who
    had noticed the low flying and wavering jetliner in its final moments.
    Piece by piece the puzzle came together and we soon realized that the
    smoldering crater in an abandoned strip mine in Stonycreek Township,
    marked more that the scarred earth of a plane crash. It cradled the
    remains of individuals who exemplified the highest of human ideals. And
    that whether by fate or destiny, Somerset County, Pennsylvania holds a
    unique place in American history, linked forever to one of the most
    poignant and valiant acts in its pages.
        We have become the caretakers of the story of these seemingly
    ordinary people who, unknowingly when they boarded United Airlines
    Flight 93 in Newark, New Jersey on that beautiful day, were to become
    the nation's first civilian soldiers, to fight the first battle in what
    we now know as the war against international terrorism. What a huge
    responsibility we now shoulder for not only their survivors, but for
    the generations who will follow.
        As the enormity and reality of the events began to set into the
    nation, the Office of the Somerset County Commissioners was inundated
    with calls and donations and letters from throughout the world,
    imploring us to establish some type of permanent memorial to the 40
    passengers and crewmembers of Flight 93. Those calls began as early as
    September 12th, when most of the country, most of the world, was simply
    trying to wrap its mind around what had happened.
        There were letters from Cub Scout groups who held car washes, and
    children who emptied their piggy banks. One woman sent three hundred
    dollars she had earmarked for Christmas shopping- at the request of her
    children. Another wrote that enclosed in her card was the first check
    her 14-year old daughter had ever written, and signed it simply, ``A
    proud mom''. A senior citizen sent two dollars, ``not much,'' she said,
    but ``from the heart''. Corporations called telling us that they were
    setting aside hundreds of thousands of dollars in endowment funds that
    would be available when we were ready. To date, more than one million
    dollars has been committed. That number reflects the unsolicited
    contributions, with I have no doubt, millions more available for the
    asking.
        And then came the ideas, literally hundreds. Scribbled on the backs
    of napkins and scraps of paper, intricate drawings that were carefully
    sketched by their creators after inspirational moments or dreams.
    Architectural firms who commissioned professional designers and artists
    to produce their own renderings and offered their services free of
    charge.
        A man named Herbert from Guatemala, who called to tell me he was
    having a marble plaque designed and shipped at his own expense, and
    asked if I could guarantee that it would be used for the memorial. I
    told him that I could not, but I promised I would personally see it was
    sent to the site and kept until further decisions were made. I did not
    hear from Herbert again until two months ago when he called to tell me
    he didn't forget about his promise, he simply didn't like the first
    plaque and had it redone, this time in green marble with gold embossed
    lettering. A 70-pound crate arrived in my office later that week, and
    was, as promised, taken to the temporary memorial. Herbert called again
    to see if we liked the plaque and said simply ``Thank you, I needed to
    hear that,'' when I told him it was beautiful, and then, he hung up.
        What was most extraordinary though was what began to occur almost
    immediately near the impact site. Temporary memorials sprung up as
    close as people could get, even as recovery efforts continued. They
    brought flowers and pictures and letters, and quilts and patches and
    angels, even a flight attendants uniform. But they did not come to see
    the crash site as voyeurs; they came on more of a pilgrimage, seemingly
    drawn there by need. To simply get close to the place where this event
    occurred. As the professional historians would soon tell us, it is a
    phenomenon referred to as ``the power of place.'' They still come
    daily, sometimes by the hundreds, just to pay their respects and see
    firsthand how this story, which belongs to us all, began.
        The items they bring now fill two entire rooms at the Somerset
    Historical Center, the home of the Historical and Genealogical Society
    of Somerset County which has been appointed by the County to collect,
    catalog and archive the artifacts that are being left behind, which,
    individually and collectively, have become an important part of the
    historic record.
        Last December, in response to the groundswell of support for the
    creation of a permanent memorial, a Town Meeting was held in
    Shanksville in which those who participated identified key stakeholder
    groups that must be represented on the soon to be appointed Flight 93
    Memorial Task Force. In addition to every family member that wishes to
    participate, they told us the Task Force must include representatives
    of the community, emergency responders, educators, veterans, and
    historians.
        In January, the Somerset County Commissioners formally requested
    that Congressman John Murtha introduce legislation that would create a
    national memorial to the passengers and crewmembers of United Airlines
    Flight 93 under the auspices of the National Park Service, the nation's
    curator, to ensure its proper administration long after all, who now
    remember, are gone.
        At a meeting in February, surviving family members representing 37
    of the 40 individuals who perished on Flight 93 reached strong
    consensus that a permanent memorial should be constructed. The location
    they said had been selected on September 11th, when, after the fateful
    struggle in the skies of Pennsylvania, their loved ones reached their
    final resting place. As Jennifer Price, a young woman who lost both of
    her parents on that plane so eloquently told those who gathered at the
    National Press Club last in March when the legislation was publicly
    announced, ``It is the place where we will go to say hello and
    goodbye.''
        House Bill 3917, The Flight 93 National Memorial Act, will ensure
    that the crash site of Flight 93 is held in perpetuity with the dignity
    and honor it deserves. The legislation provides a unique framework that
    will meld the grassroots input of the Flight 93 Task Force with the
    necessary support and oversight provided by the Federal Flight 93
    Advisory Commission to make a national memorial a reality. And although
    the members of the Advisory Commission will be appointed by the
    Secretary of the Interior, the bill specifies that the appointments
    come from recommendations of the local Flight 93 Task Force, ensuring
    that the voices of the families, and the community this crash affected,
    remain central to the memorial process.
        The crash of Flight 93 is significant to our nation's history, and
    its importance in no way diminishes the sacrifice of those who died at
    the World Trade Center Towers and the Pentagon. But what happened over
    the skies of Western Pennsylvania was different. These forty
    individuals, our newest American patriots who count among their ranks
    nationals from Japan, Puerto Rico and Germany, fought to overtake the
    plane, and in so doing, gave their lives to save countless others. It
    is their courage that flamed the fires of freedom in the shadow of
    September 11th, and served to inspire a nation that needed to find its
    way out of the darkness.
        On behalf of the community that now cradles them as its own, the
    county in which they find their perpetual rest, the state to which
    their destiny was linked and the country for which they died to defend,
    I respectfully ask the members of this Subcommittee, and the Congress
    of the United States to honor these extraordinary individuals so that
    their sacrifice will be remembered for generations to come. Thank you.
                                     ______

        Mr. Radanovich. Mrs. Kemmerer, I know it is toughest for
    you because I know you lost your mom on that flight. But
    welcome to the Committee, and I thank you for being here and
    representing the family organization of Flight 93. And your
    testimony will be very valuable to the establishment of this
    site, so please accept my thanks for being here, and you may
    begin.

    STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH KEMMERER, FLIGHT 93 FAMILY ORGANIZATION
                 REPRESENTATIVE, BUDD LAKE, NEW JERSEY

        Ms. Kemmerer. Yes. My mother Hilda Marcin was a passenger
    on Flight 93. Mr. Chairman, Committee members, thank you for
    the opportunity to appear here today. Shanksville,
    Pennsylvania, where Flight 93 crashed, is the final resting
    place for the passengers and crew. The crash site is now a
    cemetery and should be treated with the utmost respect and
    compassion. Ninety-two percent of our families' remains were
    unidentifiable and remain at the site. The site, without proper
    care--sorry for my voice--
        Mr. Radanovich. That is OK.
        Ms. Kemmerer. --and maintenance has the potential of
    becoming a circus atmosphere where trinkets and trash will be
    sold. The meaning of the site and the people who died there
    fighting is much deeper than that.
        The passengers and crew of Flight 93 have been referred to
    by the President of the United States as well as other
    prominent leaders as the first Americans to fight a battle on
    American soil since the Civil War. They were the first
    casualties on U.S. soil in the war against terrorism. I am
    sorry. As such, the site can be compared to battles such as
    Gettysburg and Antietam, both national parks.
        The town of Shanksville is, quote, small-town America and
    thus not equipped to take on the burden, both financial and
    logistical, of maintaining a site where Americans can go to
    remember the heroics of 40 passengers and crew. The crash site
    should be a place to say a prayer, meditate or reflect on just
    what happened on September 11, a day that will be remembered as
    one of America's darkest.
        The only way the site can be maintained properly for future
    generations is to have the National Park Service take over and
    maintain the site. The site is part of U.S. history for current
    and future generations. The story of the crew and passengers of
    Flight 93 will be written in the U.S. history textbooks. To
    rely on Shanksville or on Somerset County and its future
    population to do so in a respectful and dignified manner is
    placing an undue burden on today's children and future
    generations.
        If not the National Park Service, then who? Who can bear
    the responsibility--excuse me--of ensuring that the site is a
    place where Americans can go and feel that the Flight 93
    passengers were properly recognized--I am sorry--for their
    selfless, heroic act. Forty lives were lost saving numerous
    others.
        CBS News has reported on May 23, 2002, that the target of
    Flight 93 was the White House. What must be remembered and
    never forgotten is that beyond the mere plane crash, the people
    on that flight made sure that no others became victims of the
    terrorists. Our government should, in fact, be thankful to them
    for their heroism and make sure that this site is under U.S.
    Government care and funding.
        Mr. Radanovich. Take your time, Ms. Kemmerer.
        Ms. Kemmerer. I am sorry.
        Mr. Radanovich. No. No. No problem.
        Ms. Kemmerer. Remember, no one gave orders to the soldiers
    of Flight 93. They took it upon themselves to save others. They
    fought a battle at 35,000 feet in an aisle no wider than 3
    feet. A proper memorial to their memory is the very least that
    can be done to appropriately remember these brave and valiant
    people. The National Park Service should be the ones to do it.
    It is the right thing to do. I am sorry.
        Mr. Radanovich. Thank you so much.
        Ms. Kemmerer. I read much better than that, believe me. It
    is the subject matter that hurts.
        Mr. Radanovich. If it were up to me, it would be a
    historical site already. We have got a lot of procedures we
    have to go through, and you have helped contribute to that, so
    I want to thank you very much for--
        Ms. Kemmerer. In addition I have also brought photos of the
    temporary memorial which the people in Shanksville and many,
    many thousands of visitors have brought contributions to the
    site, and if anyone would like to see them, they are there.
        Mr. Radanovich. There being no objection, so ordered. Thank
    you very much.
        Ms. Kemmerer. You are welcome.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Kemmerer follows:]

                        Statement of Elizabeth Kemmerer
           (Daughter of Hilda Marcin, Deceased, Flight 93, 9/11/2001)

    WHY THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE?
        Shanksville, PA, where Flight 93 crashed, is the final resting
    place for the passengers and crew. The crash site is now a cemetery and
    should be treated with the upmost respect and compassion. 92% of our
    families remains are were unidentifiable and remain at the site. The
    site, without proper care and maintenance, has the potential of
    becoming a circus atmosphere where trinkets and trash will be sold. The
    meaning of the site and the people who died there fighting is much
    deeper than that.
        .The passengers and crew of United Flight 93 have been referred to
    by the President of the United States, as well as other prominent
    leaders, as the first Americans to fight a battle on American soil
    since the Civil War. They were the first casualties on U.S. soil in the
    war against terrorism. As such, the site can be compared to battle
    sites such as Gettysburg and Antietam, both National Parks.
        The town of Shanksville is ``small town America'' and thus not
    equipped to take on the burden, both financial and logistical, of
    maintaining a site where Americans can go to remember the heroics of
    the 40 passengers and crew. The crash site should be a place to say a
    prayer, meditate or reflect on just what happened on Sept. 11, 2001; a
    day that will be remembered as one of America's darkest.
        The only way the site can be maintained properly for future
    generations is to have the NPS take over and maintain the site. This
    site is part of U.S. History for current and future generations. The
    story of the crew and passengers of Flight 93 will be written in the
    U.S. History text books. To rely on Shanksville and or Somerset County
    and its future population to do so in a respectful and dignified manner
    is placing an undue burden on today's children and future generations.
        If not the NPS, then who? Who can bear the responsibility of
    insuring that the site is a place where Americans can go and feel that
    the Flight 93 passengers were properly recognized for their selfless
    heroic act? Forty lives were lost saving numerous others. CBS News has
    reported on May 23, 2002 that the target of Flight 93 was the White
    House. What must be remembered, and never forgotten, is that beyond a
    mere plane crash, the people on that flight made sure that no others
    became victims of the terrorists. Our government should be thankful to
    them for their heroism and make sure that this site is under U.S.
    Government care and funding.
        Remember, no one gave orders to the soldiers of Flight 93. They
    took it upon themselves to save others. They fought a battle at 35,000
    feet in an aisle no wider than three feet. A proper Memorial to their
    memory is the very least than can be done to appropriately remember
    these brave and valiant people. The NPS should be the ones to do it. It
    is the right thing to do.
                                     ______

        Mr. Radanovich. All right. Next up is Mr. Bruce Hagensen,
    who is a board member of the Vancouver National Historic
    Reserve Trust of Vancouver, Washington, on H.R. 2099, and, Mr.
    Hagensen, you have got 5 minutes.

     STATEMENT OF BRUCE HAGENSEN, BOARD MEMBER, VANCOUVER NATIONAL
             HISTORIC RESERVE TRUST, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON

        Mr. Hagensen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
    opportunity to be here today, and I want to thank Congressman
    Baird as well for his ongoing support of our efforts. Royce
    Pollard, our esteemed mayor, has used his oral and written
    testimony to provide you with the background for the Vancouver
    National Historic Reserve, which was designated by Congress
    through the National Preservation Act of 1996.
        The historic reserve has been recognized as the most
    historically significant site in the Pacific Northwest. It is
    truly an American treasure. But I think more importantly, what
    I want to share with you today is that the Vancouver National
    Historic Reserve is also a rare example of partnerships that
    work.
        For over a half a century, local, State and Federal
    Government agencies along with numerous private individuals and
    organizations have been collaborating to preserve and interpret
    the history of Vancouver and the region. However, in 1996,
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve designation established a
    true partnership among the landowners of the 366-acre historic
    reserve, and that partnership included the National Park
    Service, the city of Vancouver, the United States Army, and the
    Washington State Historic Preservation Office.
        The Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust is a
    nonprofit organization established in 1998 as an outgrowth of
    an earlier citizens' project to help support the historic
    reserve and to bring private resources into the partnership. I
    would like to give you some examples of some of the successes
    that have been referenced earlier.
        First, we have the Fort Vancouver National Historic Site,
    which is operated by the Park Service, and recently it has
    completed a new fur store and an archaeological collections
    facility. It has completed a new carpenter shop all in the
    efforts to recreate the ambiance of this Hudson's Bay holding.
    We have also restored landscape following the removal of more
    than 30 airline hangars that were surrounding that area. They
    have done cultural resource management, and they have also done
    numerous interpretive education programs including tours,
    exhibits and reenactments.
        I would also like to reference Officers Row that was
    mentioned earlier by Congressman Baird and the mayor. Officers
    Row is a $10 million project. It was started in 1986 as the
    city strove to save 21 historic homes on Officers Row that had
    been let fall into disrepair by the General Services
    Administration. That project was successfully completed and is
    financially self-sustaining and is a nationally recognized
    example of a mixed use preservation project that has brought
    economic and public benefit to the community.
        We have Pearson Air Field and the M.J. Murdock Aviation
    Museum. This is a $4.3 million project that was done with local
    funds. We have also rehabilitated the munitions and
    headquarters building. We have the Vancouver National Historic
    Reserve Center, which is a $2.8 million project at the General
    O.O. Howard house. We have renovated this beautiful house, and
    it is used as a visitors' center and administrative office. It
    is also the location of a nationally recognized museum exhibit
    called One Place Across Time, which the mayor referenced
    earlier, which is symbolic of how we are trying to interpret
    this site.
        More importantly, I would like to share with you today some
    of the programs that have emanated out of these particular
    efforts. I think all of us appreciate the fact that we have
    responsibility to preserve our historic assets, but I think
    even more important is what do we do with those assets. How do
    we project those assets and make a learning experience for our
    young people?
        I would like to relate to you our Celebrate Freedom
    programs started in 1991. We have one of the most significant
    Fourth of July celebrations west of the Mississippi. We also
    have Flag Days and Veterans Days events. We have the George C.
    Marshall Lecture, which we bring renowned people to honor the
    past and the service of General Marshall. Past lectures have
    included Senator Daniel Inouye in 2002, Tom Brokaw in 2000,
    Madeleine Albright was with us in 1998, and Colin Powell was
    with us in 1991. We also have the George C. Marshall leadership
    awards for emerging young adults in public service, and we also
    have the George C. Marshall youth leadership award.
        We have completed projects along the Columbia River, trails
    and parks, historical markers and sculptures, and we also
    established about a $3 million project, which was the Water
    Resources Education Center. All this tells of a--that 5 went
    quickly. I apologize.
        Mr. Otter. [Presiding.] It does go very fast.
        Mr. Hagensen. Let me just summarize, Mr. Chairman. You have
    some of the written documentation of what I have spoken about.
    You also have a written documentation of the upcoming project,
    which is the west barracks.
        I would just like to point out that, as mentioned before,
    when the Army pulled back from this historical post that left
    322,000 square feet of buildings, we have to do something
    constructive with those buildings. We have a model of what can
    be done with Officers Row, and we look forward to maintaining
    that progress and that momentum with the help of this bill.
        I thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today
    and will be happy to help answer any questions regarding the
    historic preserve.
        Mr. Otter. Thank you, Mr. Hagensen.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Hagensen follows:]

                  Statement of Bruce Hagensen, Board Member,
                   Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust

        Chairman Radanovich, and Members of the Subcommittee of National
    Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands:
        I am Bruce Hagensen, former Mayor of Vancouver and a member of the
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust board of directors, here
    before you to testify on behalf of H.R. 2099, to amend the Omnibus
    Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 to provide adequate
    funding authorization for the Vancouver National Historic Reserve.
        Royce Pollard, the esteemed Mayor of Vancouver Washington has used
    his oral and written testimony to provide you with the background of
    the Vancouver National Historic Reserve. Designated by Congress through
    the National Preservation Act of 1996, it has been recognized as the
    most historically significant site in the Pacific Northwest. It is
    truly an American treasure.
    Partnerships that Work: A Record of Achievement
        For over half a century local, state and Federal Government
    agencies, along with numerous private individuals and organizations,
    have been collaborating to preserve and interpret the history of the
    Vancouver area and the region.
        The 1996 Vancouver National Historic Reserve (VNHR) designation
    established a partnership among the landowners in the 366-acre Historic
    Reserve the National Park Service, the city of Vancouver, the U.S.
    Army, and the Washington State Historic Preservation Office. The
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve Trust (VNHR Trust), a nonprofit
    organization, established in 1998 as an outgrowth of an earlier
    citizens project, helps support the Historic Reserve and brings private
    resources into the partnership.
        The VNHR, in the heart of the city of Vancouver, Washington
    includes the following components:
         Fort Vancouver National Historic Site
         Vancouver Barracks and Officers Row
         Pearson Air Field
         Portions of the Columbia River Waterfront
         Kaiser Shipyards and Viewing Tower
         The Water Resources Education Center
        This remarkable public/private partnership has benefited many of
    the entities within the Historic Reserve boundaries. During the past 15
    years in excess of $30 million has been invested in property
    improvements and projects within the present Vancouver National
    Historic Reserve boundaries, mostly from non-Federal sources. The
    Federal Government has provided approximately 25% of the capital funds.
    The remaining 75% has been provided by local and state government,
    foundations such as the locally based M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust,
    and numerous other individuals, businesses and not-for -profit
    organizations. Immeasurable in-kind dollars have been provided as well
    by a legion of dedicated volunteers.
        The following are a sample of remarkable Historic Reserve projects
    that have occurred:
    Fort Vancouver National Historic Site
         Fur Store Reconstructed/Archaeological Collections
    Facility, 1993
         Carpenter Shop completed, 1998
         Construction of 1845 Counting House/Commander Thomas
    Baillie residence, 1999 ongoing
         Restored landscape following the removal of more than
    thirty hangers, 2000
         Jail, archaeology excavations and reconstruction, 2001
         Archaeology surveys, excavation, and research at Hudson s
    Bay Company cemetery, Company (Kanaka) Village, Parade Ground, Pearson
    Munitions and Headquarters buildings
         Cultural resource management
         Interpretive and Education programs, including tours,
    exhibits, and reenactments.
    Officers Row
        In 1986, the city of Vancouver saved 21 historic homes on Officers
    Row and accomplished a signature project for Vancouver. The Row is
    financially self-sustaining and is a nationally-recognized example of a
    mixed use preservation project that has brought economic and public
    benefit to the community.
    Pearson Field and M.J. Murdock Aviation Museum
         Completion of M.J. Murdock Aviation Museum, largely with
    private funding, 1997
         The last series of non-historic hangars are being removed
    from National Park Service property, Spring 2002
         Full build out of new hangars away from Historic Reserve
    property, 2000
         Rehabilitation of the Munitions and Headquarters
    Buildings, 2001
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve Visitor Center at the Gen. O.O.
            Howard House
         Renovation and reuse of historic post commander s
    quarters as VNHR Visitor Center and administrative offices, 1998
         A nationally recognized museum exhibit, One Place across
    Time: Vancouver National Historic Reserve, providing the visitor with a
    comprehensive overview of the Historic Reserve within national and
    international contexts, 1998
         Educational publications and programs include books,
    documentary videos, exhibits and school curricula
    Celebrate Freedom Programs
         Fourth of July, Flag Day and Veterans Day Events
         George C. Marshall Lectures: Past lecturers include
    Daniel Inouye (2002), Tom Brokaw (2000), Madeline Albright (1998), and
    Colin Powell (1991).
         George C. Marshall Leadership Award for emerging young
    adults in public service
         George C. Marshall Youth Leadership Award recognizing
    public service in a high school student
    Columbia River Waterfront Projects Trails and Parks
         Historical markers and sculptures
         Water Resources Education Center
    Vancouver Barracks Preservation and Reuse Project
         Planning 1998 and continuing:
          * Vancouver Barracks Physical History Study, 1998. Report and
    resource guide prepared by the National Park Service describing
    selected buildings.
          * Vancouver Barracks Environmental Assessment, 1999. Report
    prepared by the U.S. Army analyzing current conditions at Vancouver
    Barracks.
          * Vancouver Barracks Adaptive Reuse & Economic Analysis, 2000. A
    cooperative effort of the Reserve Partners and the Reserve Trust
    analyzed alternative property use scenarios and the cost of
    rehabilitation and adaptation for new uses of 16 West Barracks
    buildings.
          * American Red Cross Convalescent House, constructed in 1919,
    has been designated as an Official Project of Save America s Treasures,
    with endorsement from the national president of American Red Cross.
    An Outstanding Record of Achievement: A Vision for the Future
        The theme ``Preserving the Past, Shaping The Future'' guides the
    Vancouver National Historic Reserve partners' vision for the future. We
    continue to identify, preserve and adapt for the benefit of the public
    structures on the Historic Reserve. We provide opportunities for more
    than 500,000 annual regional, national, and international visitors to
    access the site and educational programs that tell the stories of this
    ``One Place across Time.'' The Historic Reserve offers opportunities
    for learning experiences preparing citizens for productive lives and
    leadership roles in society.
    Vancouver Barracks Project: The VNHR Partnership in Action
        At the present time the City of Vancouver is proposing to proceed
    with a project to preserve and reuse the west area of the Vancouver
    Barracks, home to the U.S. military for over 150 continuous years. The
    Vancouver Barracks was the first U.S. Army post in the Pacific
    Northwest and served as the headquarters for the vast Department of the
    Columbia. Vancouver Barracks was a center for U.S. military operations
    in the region for the last half of the 19th century and into the 20th
    century. National mobilization efforts took place here, supplying
    lumber and ships for two world wars.
        This project will be a major step toward achieving the goals for
    the Historic Reserve as established in the 1999 Cooperative Management
    Plan (CMP). Preserving and protecting these irreplaceable historic
    assets will bring new sustainable uses to this rare urban park, and at
    the same time, bring its past alive to current audiences. Historic
    places, buildings and furnished rooms bring history alive in a powerful
    way. The Interpretive Plan for the Historic Reserve specifies restoring
    and furnishing several rooms at Vancouver Barracks appropriate to the
    period of the Army's use.
        While specific uses for each of the seventeen buildings are in the
    process of being determined, it is intended that the property will be
    used for formal and informal educational programs for both residents of
    the area and visitors to the Historic Reserve. Educational planning
    work for Vancouver Barracks has involved the Partners, leaders from
    school districts, the local and national arts community, and nonprofit
    executives from regional cultural organizations. The Partners and
    Reserve Trust are currently facilitating dialog among organizations to
    develop collaborative and innovative educational programs. These
    discussions involve Washington State University, Clark College,
    Educational Services District 112, the National Park Service and the
    104th Infantry Training Division of the U.S. Army Reserve.
        However, the Vancouver Barracks site infrastructure is dangerously
    outdated and will need to be replaced as soon as possible. The
    buildings are deteriorating and need major work to comply with building
    safety codes that would be applicable to any new public use. The longer
    the barracks buildings remain unoccupied, the threat to the buildings
    by vandalism, potential water damage, fire, and further structural
    deterioration will increase, thereby increasing costs of restoration.
    Therefore, it is critically important that action be taken as quickly
    as possible.
        Based on the Vancouver Barracks Adaptive Re-use & Economic Analysis
    completed in early 2000, it has been determined that the rehabilitation
    of buildings, and site, plus the adaptations necessary for new uses,
    will cost approximately $40,000,000 provided the work can be done in a
    four year time span.
        The analysis clearly indicates that revenues, to be derived largely
    from space rental, would not be sufficient to finance this project with
    long-term debt. Consequently, it has been determined the full amount
    must be raised from public and private sources.
    West Area Funding Proposal
        The continued Federal appropriation monies for the Vancouver
    National Historic Reserve will be committed to this important project.
    The VNHR Trust has determined that Federal funding, sufficient to
    permit site work and building rehabilitation to begin in late 2002,
    must be obtained now to trigger initiation of the project. A total
    Federal contribution of $20 million (Fiscal Year 2003 2005) is needed
    to match non-Federal funding for the West Barracks project. This action
    is deemed key to successful private fundraising efforts, securing
    tenants for the property, minimizing the impact of inflation, and
    avoiding additional serious property deterioration.
        The $20 million Federal commitment will be matched by non-Federal
    dollars, two to one.

    Federal
        Rehab/Preservation -- $20 million -- 37%
    Non-Federal
        City of Vancouver -- $6 million -- 11%
            Infrastructure/Site (2001 2004)
        State of Washington -- $6 million -- 11%
            Adaptation for Educational Uses (2002 2005)
        Private -- $8 million -- 15%*
            Rehab/Preservation/Adaptation
    Total Capital Investment -- $40 million
    Private -- 26%*
        Program Investment -- $6 million
        Endowment -- $8 million
    Total Project -- $54 million -- 100%
    *Total private support is 41%.

        Please note that, in addition to the capital investment, the
    Vancouver National Historic Trust proposes to raise an additional
    $8,000,000 from private sources as an endowment to provide long-term
    financial security for the project and $6,000,000 for investment in
    educational programs to be located at the Vancouver Barracks.
        The VNHR Trust is prepared to proceed with planning and
    preparations for private fundraising work while progress is being made
    to achieve the above requirements. However, private, city, and state
    money is contingent upon Federal support. The opportunity to transform
    Vancouver Barracks with a proportional mix of public and private
    investment cannot wait. Each year, the project becomes more expensive.
        On behalf of the members of the Vancouver National Historic Reserve
    Trust, I want to reiterate to members of Congress our ongoing
    commitment to match or exceed Federal monies.
        I refer you to a letter from the Reserve Trust's Chairman, Ed
    Lynch. Thank you for your consideration.
                                     ______

        [Attachments to Mr. Hagensen's statement follow:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.016

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.017

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.018

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.019

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.020

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.021

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.022

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.023

        Mr. Otter. I would remind yourself as well as the rest of
    the panel that it is the normal course for the Committee to
    unanimously accept your entire written testimony.
        Mr. Hagensen. Thank you.
        Mr. Otter. So if you have--due to a desire for brevity have
    shortened that somewhat, your entire testimony will be as a
    matter of record.
        Mr. Hagensen. I appreciate that, sir.
        Mr. Otter. Now speaking on House Resolution No. 4874 will
    be Mr. Bruce Anderson from Kootenai County, Idaho.

     STATEMENT OF BRUCE ANDERSON, LAND SURVEYOR, KOOTENAI COUNTY,
                          COEUR D'ALENE, IDAHO

        Mr. Bruce Anderson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of
    the Subcommittee. This is a story that began 120 years ago.
    John B. David was a U.S. General Land Office surveyor under
    contract to survey a couple of townships in north Idaho
    preparatory to the sale and disposition of lands to the
    settlers under the Homestead Act. He was instructed to survey
    the section lines in a certain manner. Included in those
    instructions were instructions to survey any riparian
    boundaries, which would be lake boundaries, lake shores or
    rivers. We have the notes of Mr. David. We have the
    instructions of Mr.--what Mr. David was supposed to do. We have
    the notes of what Mr. David said he did, and now we have
    evidence of what Mr. David actually did on the ground.
        The two lakes we are talking about are Spirit Lake, which
    in the old General Land Office's notes and plats show as Lake
    Tesemini, which is now known as Spirit Lake, and the other lake
    is Lower Twin Lake, which used to be called Fish Lake. Mr.
    David shows, according to the survey, that he would be--if we
    used his survey, the boundaries of the eastern portion of
    Spirit Lake would be between a quarter and a half a mile
    distant from the present shoreline and some 350 feet in
    elevation above the present shoreline of Spirit Lake.
        On Lower Twin Lake it is more dramatic. He was between a
    quarter and a half a mile in distance from the present
    shoreline and over 1,000 feet in elevation above the present
    shoreline of Spirit Lake. Taking that into local perspective,
    that would be like saying that a surveyor of the Washington,
    D.C., area would say that the Tidal Basin is nearly two and a
    half times the height of the Washington Monument.
        The purpose of my testimony is to introduce the exhibits.
    There are eight of them. Exhibit 1 shows pictorially the
    differences between the John B. David survey and the present
    shoreline. Exhibit 2 is the Lower Twin Lake differences between
    John B. David survey, based on Exhibit 2 and 3, which is the
    depiction of the original survey of the maps that were the
    basis--based upon Mr. David's notes. Exhibits 5 and 6 show
    comparisons of the original acreages as reported by the Federal
    Government and modern measurements taken from the Assessor's
    Office records as best available information.
        In the Spirit Lake case, Mr. David shorted the settlers by
    as much as 40 to 50 percent, and in other cases he over--
    understated the acreage by as much as 120 percent. On the Twin
    Lakes situation, again, he understated acreage by as much as 87
    to nearly wiping out the entire government lot. At the other
    extreme he underestimated the correct acreage from anywhere
    from 400 to 600 percent.
        Being the county does not have the resources nor the legal
    authority to rectify the predicament that the current owners
    are in, it is incumbent upon the Federal Government to make
    good on the early survey that gave the settlers clear title
    patents to their property.
        This House Resolution 4874 is very straightforward. It has
    two items. One is to accurately define the omitted lands, and
    two is claim any interest for the current landowners. In this
    manner people can live in peaceful harmony knowing that they
    have at least somewhat of a clear title to their ownership.
    Thank you.
        Mr. Otter. Thank you very much, Mr. Anderson.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Bruce Anderson follows:]

         Statement of Bruce Anderson, L.S., Kootenai County Surveyor,
                             Kootenai County, Idaho

    Purpose
        The purpose of this report is twofold: (a) to explain the history
    and technical aspects of the original survey, which created a
    significant area of omitted lands; and (b) to ask for your support in
    providing relief to the affected landowners abutting these two lakes.
    This bill is comprised of two proposed actions. Firstly, the omitted
    lands must be identified by an accurate survey. Secondly, action must
    be taken to relinquish any Federal interest in the omitted lands,
    according to said survey.

    History
    A. Spirit Lake
        In September 1880, General Land Office contract surveyor, John B.
    David conducted a survey of the township containing the eastern portion
    of Spirit Lake.. His survey affects the east half of Spirit Lake. (See
    Exhibit 1). Exhibit 1 depicts the shoreline as surveyed by Mr. David,
    taken from his notes and the plat of the township. (See Exhibit 3).
    Referring to Exhibit 1, the erroneous survey places the shoreline of
    Spirit Lake between one-quarter and one-half of a mile distant from its
    present location. Also, his survey places the shoreline in excess of
    three-hundred feet in elevation above its present elevation in some
    locations. It is not possible that Spirit Lake ever existed at those
    locations within recent geologic history. His erroneous survey is
    contrasted with the Robinson and Dike survey of the western half of
    Spirit Lake in 1893. The Robinson and Dike survey conforms very well
    with the present shoreline of Spirit Lake, and is not an issue in this
    case.

    B. Twin Lakes
        A similar situation exists along the shore of Lower Twin Lake. John
    B. David also surveyed the township containing the easterly one-half of
    Twin Lakes, referred to now as Lower Twin Lake also in 1880. (See
    Exhibit 2). Mr. David's survey places the shoreline of Lower Twin Lake
    between one-quarter and one-half of a mile distant from its present
    location. In addition, his survey places the shoreline nearly one-
    thousand feet in elevation above its present elevation in some
    locations. This Exhibit is a compilation of the notes and plat by Mr.
    David. (See Exhibit 4). As with his survey of Spirit Lake, it is not
    possible that Lower Twin Lake ever existed per the location as surveyed
    by Mr. David. The westerly portion of Twin Lakes, known as Upper Twin
    Lake, was meandered by Robinson and Dike in 1893. Their survey conforms
    well with the present position of the existing shoreline, and is not an
    issue in this case.

    Applicable Sections of the Manual of Surveying Instructions, 1973
            relating to omitted land.

    Erroneously Omitted Areas
        7-77. Lands exposed by changes in water level or accreted
    subsequent to survey are not erroneously omitted lands. This title is
    applied to lands, not shown on the plat of the original survey, which
    were excluded from the survey by some gross discrepancy in the location
    of a meander line. The unsurveyed land typically lies between the
    actual bank of a lake, stream, or tidewater and the record meander
    line.
        7-78. In some older surveys temporarily flooded lands, or swamp and
    overflowed lands, were meandered as if they were permanent bodies of
    water. In a few cases, meander lines were reported where no body of
    water ever existed in fact. In still other instances, several lakes
    have been surveyed as one lake. All are treated in the same manner as
    those where the discrepancy is a grossly erroneous position of the
    record meander line. The converse is sometimes found where the record
    meander line leaves the bank and extends into the body of water. A
    water area may thus be shown as land.
        7-79. Marginal discrepancies between the meander lines and the
    water at the time of survey fall into two classes, those that are
    merely technical differences and those that constitute erroneous
    omission. The guide lines for determining the class of a particular
    case are laid down in court and departmental decisions.
        7-80. If land is to be regarded as erroneously omitted from survey,
    it must first be shown affirmatively that the area was land in place at
    the date of the original subdivision of the township. Then, if the land
    is similar to the surveyed lands, the usual inference that the official
    survey was correct may be set aside, and the conclusion may be
    substituted that the land should have been covered by that survey.
    However, a convincing showing is needed that the representations of the
    original plat and field notes are grossly in error.
        7-81. Applications for the extension of the subdivisional lines to
    include the areas erroneously omitted from the original survey may be
    initiated either by settlers on the omitted land or by the owners of
    the adjoining land. The owner of the surveyed land, or a claimant who
    has purchased from him, may apply for the survey as a preliminary to
    quieting the title. There may or may not be adverse claims. The
    immediate question is the merit of the application under the acts of
    Congress which grant relief in these cases. A field examination is
    nearly always required to verify the conditions alleged in the
    applications. It is objectionable in principle to amend a plat unless
    large and unwarranted discrepancies can be shown.
        7-82. The survey of erroneously omitted lands may also be
    undertaken as an administrative responsibility for identifying public
    lands. Such cases may be brought to the attention of the Bureau by a
    Federal agency having administrative authority over the general area.
        7-83. No proof is required to show the whys and wherefores of an
    erroneous meander line, but only that the line as run and as
    represented on the plat and in the field notes is in effect grossly in
    error. The rule is concisely stated in John McClennen, 29 L.D. 514
    (1900): It is not necessary to search for the source of the error. The
    result is the same whether such error arose from mistake, inadvertence,
    incompetency or fraud on the part of the men who made the former
    survey.
        7-84. Where lands have been determined to be erroneously omitted
    from the original survey, the original meander line is made a fixed and
    limiting boundary segregating the previously surveyed areas from the
    unsurveyed public lands. The line is reestablished and marked with
    permanent monuments at the old angle points. Retracement between
    successive meander corners nearly always will show differences from the
    record in latitude and departure. The positions of the angle points are
    adjusted by the broken boundary method described in section 5-43 under
    ``Angle Points of Nonriparian Meander Lines.'' The angle points are
    given serial numbers which do not duplicate numbers that may have been
    previously assigned in that section. The monuments are marked as shown
    in section 4-45.
        From the above citations, it is evident that these two surveys
    involve omitted lands. The standard used in the determination of
    omitted lands is the ``fifty percent rule.'' When the area is more than
    fifty percent larger than that reported by the original survey, omitted
    land exists. Exhibits 5 and 6 are comparisons between the area reported
    by John B. David survey, and best available data obtained from
    Assessor's Office records and maps, U.S.G.S. topographic maps, and
    ortho-photographic maps.
        The differences are significant, without rhyme or reason. For
    example, Exhibit 5, the differences on Spirit Lake range from forty-
    five percent smaller than reported, to over one-hundred twenty percent
    in excess of that reported. Exhibit 6, the differences on Lower Twin
    Lake are even more dramatic. They range from a shortage of over eighty
    percent to an excess of six-hundred percent.

    Implications and Problems
        The situation of fraudulent surveys cannot be dealt with by the
    individual land owner abutting these two lakes. They, through their
    predecessors, purchased, in good faith, based upon their belief of an
    accurate survey from the General Land Office. All land lying within the
    area of omitted land on both lakes are claimed by private interests.
    Each claimant within the omitted area has a cloud on their title, that
    is now public knowledge. A cloud of title may preclude a claimant from
    obtaining financing, or refinancing, and may even prevent the sale of
    property without a clear disclaimer of interest in the property by the
    Federal Government. Without such action, a claimant or prospective
    purchasers does not know that a possibility exists, that the Federal
    Government may at any such time lay claim to a portion or all of the
    omitted land. It is beyond the scope of power available to Kootenai
    County to resolve the survey and legal issues, even if it had the
    monetary resources.
        On Spirit Lake, there are over one-hundred seventy (170) parcels of
    land affected, lying within or partly within the area of omitted land.
    (See Exhibit 7). These parcels contain nearly four-hundred acres (400),
    with an assessed value in excess of nineteen million dollars
    ($19,000,000), per Kootenai County Assessor's office figures. The
    parcels range in size, from one-hundred forty-six (146)parcels
    containing less than one acre, to one parcel containing more than one-
    hundred sixty acres (160). There are thirty-six (36)parcels ranging is
    size, from one to six acres, with three parcels in the ten to thirty-
    five (35) acre range.
        On Lower Twin Lake, there are over four-hundred eighty (480)
    parcels of land affected, lying within the area of omitted land,
    claimed by individuals, families, partnerships or corporations. (See
    Exhibit 8). These parcels comprise approximately eight-hundred acres
    (800), with an assessed value in excess of forty million dollars
    ($40,000,000). The average value per parcel is approximately eighty-six
    thousand dollars ($86,000). The parcel size ranges from four-hundred
    fifty (450)parcels containing less than one acre, to one parcel
    containing three-hundred forty (340) acres. There are another thirty
    (30) parcels ranging from one to fifty (50) acres.
        The acreage and assessed values contain many variances, due to site
    specific data. Some parcels fall partly or entirely within the omitted
    lands, with the area calculated on the entire parcel. Appraised value
    varies, depending upon whether it is lake front or upland property, and
    whether the parcel is bare land or has improvements.
        Kootenai County, as a governmental unit, gains little benefit from
    this legislation. The County claims title to eighteen parcels of land
    through dedicated rights-of-way, providing public access to both lakes.
    Of these public access sites, one is developed and lies in the omitted
    land category. Three other sites lie in the omitted land category, but
    are not developed.
        Kootenai County is the collective voice for our constituents, and
    we believe it to be in the best interest of our constituents to have
    peaceful occupation of their lands, by having the title quieted to
    them. We ask Congress to support this resolution, and to pass it as
    written.
                                     ______

        [Attachments to Mr. Anderson's statement follow:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.001

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.002

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.003

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.004

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.005

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.006

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.007

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0550.008

                                    ------

        Mr. Otter. We will now go to the panel--or we will now go
    to the folks seated at the dais. Mr. Kildee, do you have any
    questions of any of the panelists?
        Mr. Kildee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        First of all, I want to thank all the witnesses for their
    testimony. When I drive back to Michigan, I drive near the very
    sacred site in Pennsylvania, and I get a feeling there like I
    get at no other place. And I say a prayer of gratitude. And I
    am going to thank you for your testimony today. I certainly
    support the bill and will do everything I can to see that it is
    enacted. But it is a sacred site, and we should hold it in a
    special way in our history and in our heart.
        Mayor Pollard, my cousin Russell Kildee was mayor of
    Washugal, Washington, just east of you, before you were born, I
    am sure, so there is a connection out there. And Lewis and
    Clark made Washugal historically important also. So I certainly
    will support that bill and also the bill for Idaho. So I again
    thank all of you for your testimony, and thank you very much.
        Mr. Otter. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Kildee. I
    appreciate it.
        Mr. Anderson, not that your bill is any more important than
    any others, but because it is the bill that I introduced, I
    would like to ask you first. Folks that are now the residents
    of those 400 lots who built their homes and built their lives
    on those lots have been paying taxes all along under the
    assumption that this was their property, right?
        Mr. Bruce Anderson. That is correct, Congressman.
        Mr. Otter. And you heard Mr. Robert Anderson's testimony
    representing the Administration and the Department of Interior
    relative to previous errors and what it has cost to correct
    them. Are you familiar with any other sites in Idaho or in the
    West that have had to be corrected this same way?
        Mr. Bruce Anderson. Not any of the other ones mentioned by
    Mr. Anderson.
        Mr. Otter. I see.
        I would just mention to you, as a part of the lure of
    Idaho, that the second lieutenant who was sent out to the
    Salmon River Breaks by then General Grant, President Grant, in
    order to survey the new Idaho Territory, as you might recall,
    the story goes is that he and some of his troops got a little
    inebriated the night before, and when they left, they hit--they
    got onto the wrong mountain range, and as a result they got on
    the Continental Divide instead of where they were supposed to
    be, and Idaho has lost a sizable portion of ground to Montana.
    In fact--which would increase the size of the State by a third.
    And I had meant to ask Mr. Anderson in the Department if they
    would seek to correct that error as well. But I would probably
    find a little opposition from my colleague Mr. Rehberg if he
    were here, and he is not.
        Anyway, I just--it is not unusual, as you have stated, and
    as Mr. Anderson before him has stated, for us to have to go
    back and correct some of these problems.
        Let me ask Ms. Tokar-Ickes--did I say that right?
        Ms. Tokar-Ickes. Tokar-Ickes. That is fine. Thank you.
        Mr. Otter. What has been the involvement--in a brief part
    of your statement you talked about the--some of the community
    involvement. But what has been the involvement of the local
    communities in this effort?
        Ms. Tokar-Ickes. I think the local communities have really
    felt a very great stewardship toward maintaining the integrity
    and the dignity of this site. In fact, many of the community
    residents of Shanksville and Stonycreek Township are actually
    serving as Ambassadors at the temporary crash site on a
    voluntary basis 7 days a week during this peak of visitation
    season really, the height of the tourism season. We are seeing
    thousands of people visiting the temporary crash site, and they
    are serving as citizen Ambassadors to tell those who visit the
    story of what happened and provide some perspective and
    interpretation at the site currently.
        Mr. Otter. And forgive me for not knowing this, because I
    should, but is the site of the crash site, is that private
    ground?
        Ms. Tokar-Ickes. It is currently private property, yes.
        Mr. Otter. And how does the private property owners feel
    about this.
        Ms. Tokar-Ickes. We have talked to all of the landowners
    there.
        Mr. Otter. How many landowners are there?
        Ms. Tokar-Ickes. There are seven. There are seven obviously
    involved in the crash site boundaries. We are going to be
    working with the landowners. They will have a voice on the task
    force that is to be appointed.
        I think to the landowner, they are very supportive of
    moving forward to memorialize this site. They know that life is
    never going to be the way it was prior to September 11, and
    they have been very cooperative with those who are visiting the
    site. We really are--they are hosting really the world at this
    point because it is their private property.
        So I would say unequivocally that we do have support from
    all of the landowners.
        Mr. Otter. Is there any prohibition of any activity that
    that private property owner has on that land right now?
        Ms. Tokar-Ickes. The County of Somerset has been in charge
    of security. It is currently still a coroner's site, and our
    county corner is holding the site, because without that
    jurisdiction, the security would not be able to be there on a
    round-the-clock basis. The private property owners do have
    access to their particular parcels; however, the access is
    restricted. They are not to be bringing anybody else onto the
    property.
        Mr. Otter. I see. Thank you very much.
        Ms. Kemmerer, how do you feel about the role as it has been
    described in 3917, H.R. 3917, of the family--of the family
    folks, organization.
        Ms. Kemmerer. The family organization was just formed over
    the last couple of months. There are three board of directors,
    and what we--our role is to support the task force in coming up
    with an appropriate memorial. Hopefully all the wishes of the
    family members would be combined into a memorial that everybody
    would respect and honor.
        Mr. Otter. I see. Do you see--I know that Ms. Tokar-Ickes
    described the napkins and the more sophisticated drawings and
    renderings and ideas. Do you see this as a memorial to freedom,
    as a memorial--obviously, you know, as has been stated so many
    times, the first time that we went to war since the Civil War
    on our own ground, as well as--I mean, certainly in honor of
    those on Flight 93, but as a war of freedom and civil
    contribution, civilian contribution to our national security?
        Ms. Kemmerer. It definitely speaks very highly of the
    people and their belief that it is a free United States and
    that the terrorists were not going to get their own way. They
    completely took over the plane, kept the plane away from
    hurting any other individuals on the ground, and took it upon
    themselves to act as the caretakers of the United States and
    not letting any other terrorist act occur on that day.
        Mr. Otter. Well, I would certainly join with my colleague
    Mr. Kildee in recognizing that these were the first of the
    citizen patriots; that if we could get 282 million Americans to
    recognize their responsibility to themselves, their families
    and their national security as those folks on Flight 93
    recognized that, this war against terrorism would be over.
        Do you have any further questions, Mr. Kildee?
        Mr. Kildee. No, thank you.
        Mr. Otter. There are no further questions. This panel may
    be excused. There being no further business before the
    Committee, the Committee is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]