[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 89 (Tuesday, July 12, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: July 12, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
REFORMING OPERATION OF THE STEAMTOWN NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE
Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 3708) to reform the operation, maintenance, and development of
the Steamtown National Historic Site, and for other purposes, as
amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3708
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
TITLE I--STEAMTOWN NATIONAL HISTORIC SITE
SEC. 101. ESTABLISHMENT.
(a) Establishment.--In order to preserve and interpret
certain elements of railroading, especially steam-operated
railroads during the period of 1850 to 1950, there is hereby
established the Steamtown National Historic Site (hereinafter
in this title referred to as the ``historic site''). The
purposes of the historic site shall include interpretation of
the evolution of railroads and their impact on the
development of this nation, including technological,
economic, social, and political effects and the relationship
of railroads to industrialization.
(b) Boundaries.--The historic site shall consist of the
lands and interests in lands within the area generally
depicted on the map entitled ``Boundary Map, Steamtown
National Historic Site'', numbered STTO-80,000B, and dated
June, 1994. The map shall be on file and available for public
inspection in the offices of the National Park Service,
Department of the Interior. No revisions may be made in the
boundary of the historic site, except by Act of Congress.
(c) Repeal.--Sections 1 through 5 of the Steamtown National
Historic Site Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-591; 100 Stat. 3341-
248-249) are hereby repealed.
SEC. 102. ADMINISTRATION.
The Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter in this title
referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall administer the
historic site in accordance with this title and with the
provisions of law generally applicable to units of the
national park system, including the Act entitled ``An Act to
establish a National Park Service, and for other purposes'',
approved August 25, 1916 (39 Stat. 535; 16 U.S.C. 1, 2, 3,
and 4). On or before September 30, 1995, the Secretary shall
prepare and submit to the Committee on Natural Resources of
the United States House of Representatives and to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the United
States Senate a new comprehensive general management plan for
the historic site. The plan shall be prepared with the
assistance of nationally recognized experts in railroad
management and history and shall be consistent with this
title, with section 12 of the Act of August 18, 1970 (16
U.S.C. 1a-1 through 1a-7) and with other applicable
provisions of law. The Secretary shall provide for public
participation and comment in the development of the plan.
SEC. 103. ACQUISITION OF LAND.
(a) In General.--The Secretary may acquire lands or
interests in land within the boundaries of the historic site
only by donation or by purchase with donated funds.
(b) Contaminated Lands.--The Secretary may not acquire any
lands or interests in lands for purposes of the historic site
unless such lands are not contaminated with a hazardous
substance or a pollutant or contaminant which will require
removal or remedial action at the expense of the United
States. The Secretary shall take such steps as are necessary
to obtain cost recovery under the Comprehensive Environmental
Compensation, Response, and Liability Act of 1980 (Superfund)
for any funds of the National Park Service expended, prior to
the date of the enactment of this Act, on removal or remedial
action with respect to any contamination of lands within the
boundaries of historic site. Any such reimbursement shall be
credited to miscellaneous receipts in the Treasury.
SEC. 104. PARK SERVICE ACTIVITIES.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall take such actions as
necessary and appropriate to administer the historic site, to
maintain and preserve the facilities at the historic site, to
interpret the resources of the site and their history to the
public, and to provide essential services to the public at
the historic site.
(b) Railroad Equipment.--(1) The Secretary shall preserve
the collection of railroad equipment, including locomotives
and rolling stock, which is present at the historic site as
of the date of enactment of this Act. The Secretary may also
preserve such equipment and essential machinery as is
necessary for the maintenance of the locomotives and rolling
stock. The Secretary may not purchase any additional
locomotive for operation at the historic site if such
purchase would result in the operation by the United States
at the historic site of more locomotives than the number of
locomotives operating at the site as of June 22, 1994.
(2) No Federal funds may be expended to provide access
between the historic site and any structure that is privately
owned and operated for profit. The Secretary may exchange or
purchase appropriate examples of locomotives and rolling
stock to enhance the site's collection if the total number of
such equipment does not increase and if all such actions are
consistent with the general management plan for the historic
site.
(3) The Secretary shall dispose of all locomotives and
rolling stock that are not needed for exchange under
paragraph (2), that do not meet the criteria of the National
Register of Historic Places, and that are not necessary for
the interpretive activities of the historic site.
(4) The Secretary shall submit a report to the Congress no
later than February 28, 1995 containing an inventory of all
locomotive and rolling stock at the historic site, a
statement of the range of historic significance of the
components of the collection, a statement of how many of each
are needed to meet the purposes of the historic site, the
restoration and repair plans and estimates of the
Secretary for facilities and equipment at the historic
site, and a detailed deaccession plan.
(5) The Secretary shall, to the extent practicable, seek
donations and assistance from volunteers and other cost-
sharing methods to restore the locomotives and rolling stock.
(c) Artifacts and Archival Materials.--The Secretary shall
preserve the artifact collection and archival materials
located at the site.
(d) Excursions.--To the extent that it furthers public
understanding, and provided that appropriate interpretation
is provided, the Secretary may provide a regular excursion
from Scranton, Pennsylvania, to Moscow, Pennsylvania. For
purposes of such excursions, the Secretary may provide
essential visitor services at Moscow, Pennsylvania. The
Secretary may not expend funds of the National Park Service
for the restoration or maintenance of tracks, bridges or
tunnels located outside the historic site, except that the
Secretary may use funds appropriated prior to November 15,
1991 for restoration of tracks and bridges between the
historic site and Moscow, Pennsylvania, pursuant to a
cooperative agreement to be entered into between the
Secretary and the owner of such tracks and bridges permitting
the national park service to use such tracks and bridges for
excursions authorized under this section. The Secretary may
pay customary and appropriate track usage fees and may also
provide additional special excursions if no such excursion is
longer than 60 miles one way.
(e) User and Interpretive Fees.--(1) User or interpretive
fees charged for the rail excursion from the historic site to
Moscow, Pennsylvania, or to any other location shall be
established at a level such that a minimum of 100 percent of
the costs of maintenance, personnel, equipment, and fees
imposed on the Secretary for the excursion shall be recovered
by the Secretary.
(2)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Secretary is authorized to impose a fee on any person using
the core complex within the site. The amount of such fee
shall not exceed a single charge of $5 per person per day for
the use of the entire core complex. No fee shall be imposed
for the use of such complex by any person under 16 years of
age or any person who is part of an organized school group or
outing conducted for educational purposes by a school or
other bona fide educational institution.
(B) The proceeds of any fee imposed under this section
shall be credited to a special account established for the
National Park Service in the Treasury of the United States
and shall be available, without further appropriation, for
use by the Secretary of the Interior to further educational
and interpretive programs at the site, including the
cooperative agreement specified in subsection (g)(2).
(C) As part of each annual budget submission to the
Congress, the Secretary shall provide a report detailing the
amount of fees received under subparagraph (A) and the
expenditures under subparagraph (B) during the immediately
preceding fiscal year. A copy of such report shall also be
made available annually to the Committee on Natural Resources
and the Committee on Appropriations of the United States
House of Representatives and to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources and the Committee on Appropriations of the
United States Senate.
(D) For purposes of this section, the term ``core complex''
means the two museums, the theater, the visitor center, and
roundhouse.
(f) Track and Switch Rehabilitation.--The Secretary may
assist the owner of Bridge 60 and Bridge 60 Wye with track
and switch rehabilitation to facilitate activities directly
associated with the historic site. Any financial assistance
for any such project shall be limited to a portion of the
total costs of the project. The portion paid by the Secretary
shall not exceed that fraction of the total costs of the
project which is equal to the fraction of the total usage of
such tracks and switches attributable to use by equipment
associated with the historic site. Nothing in this Act or in
any other provision of law shall authorize the Secretary to
acquire either of such bridges or the associated tracks
and switches.
(g) Cooperative Agreements.--(1) The Secretary may enter
into cooperative agreements with appropriate authorities for
law enforcement and for purposes of controlling rail traffic
through the historic site, but the Secretary may not enter
into any other cooperative agreement relating to
administration of the historic site with any entity (other
than a department or agency of the United States) without
specific authorization by an Act of Congress approved after
the enactment of this Act, except as provided in paragraph
(2) of this subsection.
(2) The Secretary is authorized to enter into a cooperative
agreement with a qualified educational institution to
provide, at the Secretary's direction, certain visitor
services and educational programs within the historic site
and to collect the fees authorized under paragraph (2) of
subsection (e). The Secretary shall transmit any cooperative
agreement proposed to be entered into under this paragraph to
the Committee on Natural Resources of the United States House
of Representatives and to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the United States Senate at least 60 days before
such agreement is entered into by the Secretary.
(h) Report on Alternatives.--(1) The Secretary shall
prepare a report identifying any feasible and suitable
alternatives for managing the historic site, including
partnerships or direct management by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, local governments, other agencies, or private
entities. Such report shall be submitted to the Congress not
later than 2 years after the enactment of this Act.
(2) In taking the action referred to in paragraph (1) the
Secretary shall consult with other Federal land managing
agencies, State and local officials, the national park System
Advisory Board, resource management, recreation, and
scholarly organizations, and other interested parties as the
Secretary deems advisable. Such consultation shall include
appropriate opportunities for public review and comment.
SEC. 105. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums as
may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this title,
except that no funds may be appropriated after the enactment
of this Act for any construction, development, or related
activities with respect to the site without specific
authorization by an Act of Congress pursuant to a law enacted
after the enactment of this Act. No Federal funds may be
expended at the site for purposes other than those specified
in section 104 and in section 105(d). Not more than 5 percent
of the funds appropriated annually for operation of the
historic site may be used for the restoration or repair of
locomotives, cars, and other rolling stock without specific
authorization by an Act of Congress enacted after the
enactment of this Act.
TITLE II--DELAWARE WATER GAP NATIONAL RECREATION AREA
SEC. 201. BOUNDARIES.
Section 2(a) of the Act of September 1, 1965 (79 Stat. 612;
16 U.S.C. 460o-1(a)) establishing the Delaware Water Gap
National Recreation Area is amended by striking ``as
generally depicted on the drawing entitled `Proposed Tocks
Island National Recreation Area' dated and numbered September
1962, NRA-TI-7100, which drawing is on file'' and inserting
``as generally depicted on the map entitled `Delaware Water
Gap National Recreation Area' dated November 1991 and
numbered DWGNRA-620/80,900A which shall be on file''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Minnesota [Mr. Vento] will be recognized for 20 minutes, and the
gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen] will be recognized for 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento].
general leave
Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on
the legislation presently before us.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Minnesota?
There was no objection.
{time} 1310
Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3708, which I introduced, attempts to redefine and
refine the policy Path in law that guides Steamtown National Historic
Site in Scranton, PA. Steamtown National Historic Park received a
backdoor authorization in 1986 through provisions included in the
fiscal year 1987 Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
Since that time considerable funds have been expended on the site
beyond the authority of that 1986 law, and there has been considerable
attention given to Steamtown in the media, almost much of it negative.
To date, the National Park Service has already spent over $80 million
on Steamtown.
Few people are neutral about Steamtown--it has ardent proponents and
equally passionate opponents. Steamtown proponents, proclaim the site
virtues; a unique educational experience in a historic setting. For its
opponents, argue that Steamtown is a collection of locomotives and
railcars, that lacks integrity and significance and which derails
limited National Park Service resources.
Beyond these polarized views there is the problem of management
irregularities at the site. In the past, considerable amounts of
Federal funds were spent on lands and interests in lands the National
Park Service didn't own. The National Park Service paid for cleaning up
hazardous wastes on non-federally owned lands, raising serious issues
of policy and liability. Plans for the site have undergone little or no
critical internal review.
The National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Subcommittee, which I
chair and which has jurisdiction over this matter, learned less than
just the day before our hearing on this bill that the National Park
Service was in the process of entering into a cooperative agreement
with the University of Scranton that proposed to convey major
administrative functions to the University of Scranton, and would have
allowed it to collect fees from visitors that would have been channeled
into the university's coffers. This proposal caused considerable
consternation, once discussed the Director of the National Park Service
stated that no such arrangement will be made final without close
collaboration with the Natural Resource Committees. The bill before us
today has been amended to in fact prohibit such arrangements, while
specifying the nature of cooperative agreements that are appropriate
and permissible.
After pragmatically examining the pros and cons of Steamtown, and the
reality of the present status, and separating issues of management
irregularities from that of the National Park Service's, and the
taxpayer's, investment and interest in the site to date, I have
concluded that Steamtown should continue as a national historic site.
However, the future development and operation of the site should be
carefully outlined--consistent with congressional and National Park
Service policies and practices, and the site's momentum for
programmatic expansion must be properly defined and curtailed by
statute. My legislation accomplishes this. In addition, at the
suggestion of Representative Hefley, H.R. 3708, as amended, includes a
provision to require the Secretary of the Interior to prepare a report
within 2 years that identifies any feasible and suitable alternatives
for managing the historic site, included partnerships or direct
management by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, local governments,
other agencies, or private entities.
Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Natural Resources has considered the
Steamtown matter carefully. The committee has reported legislation to
put this railroad historic site back on the right track, one that
provides a much needed focus and parameters for Steamtown National
Historic Site. In doing so, the committee has applied the brakes to
what has been a runaway project without adequate governance. The
committee-passed measure scales back both the development and operation
of the site.
The bill reduces the site's boundary and eliminates nonessential
lands. It limits use of the annual operating appropriation on the
rehabilitation and restoration of rolling stock to 5 percent each year.
It specifically prohibits adding to the number of operating
locomotives, replacing an earlier restriction on the number of special
excursions each year with a requirement that all excursions be
completely financed with ticket revenues, and increases the maximum
one-way distance of such excursions from 50 to 60 miles. A section on
cooperative agreements was added in committee, reflecting the concern
about the University of Scranton proposal. In addition, the committee
has specifically provided the authority for the National Park Service
to collect and retain a fee for visitation to the core complex of the
site. Such a fee is to be used solely for interpretive and educational
programs at the site. The NPS has testified they need such revenue in
order to fully open and operate the Steamtown site. Such a fee will
greatly diminish the need for further operating fund increases.
As I noted earlier, the bill also requires a report examining
alternative management options for the site as well as a report on the
disposition of rolling stock that is not historically significant and
not required to meet the interpretative purposes of the site. Because
the inventory of rolling stock at Steamtown is large and varied, the
bill calls for a report to Congress on plans to retain and restore as
well as deaccession excess elements in the collection. Finally, the
bill requires the Secretary to seek reimbursement under Superfund for
the cleanup of contaminated lands.
As my statement today indicates, Steamtown is a very controversial
matter. The committee has addressed this issue in a fair and reasonable
way and has provided the House with what I believe is a balanced
approach to the future development and operation of what has been a
controversial site.
Mr. Speaker, the House in the last Congress passed a similar measure,
but the Senate failed to act on it. I believe this bill is improved
over the previous one, through further committee action and cooperative
work with interested parties, including the National Park Service and
Congressmen Joe McDade, in whose district this site is located.
For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I recommend that the House adopt H.R.
3708, as amended.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3708, is a bill to authorize Steamtown National
Historic Site. I strongly believe the proper place for congressional
Interior Department policymaking is in the authorizing committee not
the appropriations committee, whether we are referring to establishing
new parks, mining or grazing. Therefore, I support the general purpose
of this bill, to ensure all parks have proper authorization.
With respect to the future of Steamtown, I believe there continues to
be outstanding questions. I cannot support continuation of a project
simply because the Federal Government has invested money in it in the
past. For that reason, I am very pleased that Mr. Hefley has added an
amendment to this bill which requires that the National Park Service
evaluates the role it should play at this park in the future.
In recent years, Congress has authorized a number of questionable
additions to the National Park System. Congress must do a better job of
setting priorities for new National Park Service programs, just as we
must within the entire Federal Government.
I am pleased that this version of the bill deletes most of the
congressional micromanagement language which has appeared in previous
versions of this bill. Regardless of the history of this site, Congress
should not be developing reactionary legislation, whether we agree with
past actions at that park or not.
Finally, I must say that I am concerned about the user fees
authorized in this bill. This concern is not one of general opposition
to user fees in parks. There is ample evidence that recreational use of
parks and other Federal lands is the most subsidized use of our Federal
lands and I believe that more costs should be recovered from park
users. However, the approach in this bill sets up a piecemeal policy
path which is likely to be sought after by a variety of other park
proponents. This is not a good direction and I hope the Senate will
carefully review this section of the bill.
Mr. McDADE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3708, a bill to
authorize the Steamtown National Historic Site in Scranton, PA.
I commend my colleague from Minnesota [Mr. Vento] and the members of
the House National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Subcommittee for
their efforts in this legislation to address issues related to
Steamtown. I was pleased to testify on May 12 at hearings held by the
subcommittee regarding the development of Steamtown and concerns I had
about specific provisions of H.R. 3708.
At that hearing, I reported that the project is on time and within
budget. Planning is now underway for the official grand opening in July
1995. Over 675,000 people have already visited the site, and as many as
600,000 people are projected to visit the site annually once it
officially opens.
Visitors walk away from this historic site with a greater knowledge
of steam railroading and America's industrial heritage. Steamtown
affords visitors an educational, safe, and enjoyable opportunity to see
how a working steam locomotive railyard operated in an earlier American
era.
Steamtown enjoys strong bipartisan support. Pennsylvania Senators
Arlen Specter and Harris Wofford, Gov. Robert Casey and former Gov.
William Scranton submitted statements at the May 12 hearing in support
of Steamtown. They are particularly proud of the high levels of
voluntarism and the over $14.5 million in funds and donations from non-
Park Service sources.
I am also submitting for inclusion in today's debate a statement from
the hearing record from noted rail historian William L. Withuhn. Mr.
Withuhn was an early critic of Steamtown who now supports it as a
unique and valuable national public resource. I am also submitting
articles on Steamtown from the Akron Beacon Journal and the Fort
Pierce, FL, Tribune. The Tribune article was written by nationally
syndicated columnist Charley Reese.
Mr. Vento and the subcommittee staff worked in good faith with me and
the National Park Service to craft a bill that allows this worthwhile
project to continue its operation for the education and enjoyment of
current and future generations of Americans. The bill before us today
contains several cost containment measures and a number of changes to
ensure the responsible management of Steamtown.
Those who are concerned about future costs associated with Steamtown
will be pleased with this legislation. It directs that no more than 5
percent of annual operating funds may be used for restoration or repair
of locomotives, cars, and other rolling stock.
H.R. 3708 also requires that 100 percent of all excursion costs be
recovered through ticket revenues. It allows for collection of a
program fee as part of a cooperative agreement with the University of
Scranton in an effort to control Federal operating costs.
In addition, the bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to
identify private sector alternatives to managing Steamtown and that the
Secretary seek cost recovery under Superfund law for any funds expended
by the Park Service for removal or remedial action of contaminated
lands.
I am grateful to Mr. Vento for his willingness to modify some of the
orignial provisions of his legislation which I expressed reservations
about at the hearing. In particular, I objected to a proposed freeze on
annual operating funds and supported the cooperative agreement with the
university. His flexibility in addressing these matters is appreciated.
I urge my colleagues to support passage of H.R. 3708. It is
responsible and fair legislation which allows the effective management
of the Steamtown National Historic Site.
Statement of William L. Withuhn, May 12, 1994, Before the Subcommittee
on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands, House Committee on Natural
Resources, on H.R. 3708
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear at
these hearings in regard to the future management of the
Steamtown National Historic Site.
My name is William L. Withuhn, and for identification
purposes, I am curator of transportation at the National
Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution. I appear
here on my own time, not as a Smithsonian employee, and not
in any way speaking for the Smithsonian.
To establish my perspective on the issues raised by H.R.
3708, I view the creation and operation of the Steamtown
National Historic Site from two points of view: first as a
historian of American transportation and secondly as a former
small-business person and former manager of several
profitable freight railroad companies. I am concerned with
the meaningful and effective interpretation to wider
audiences of the historical legacy of American working
people, and I am concerned about the costs of such
interpretation activities. Especially in activities related
to railroad sites and the operation of those, I have had some
28 years of experience, including a great deal of time spent
in the maintenance and operation of a wide variety of
historic steam locomotives.
I have visited the Steamtown site on many occasions,
especially during the past year. I have gotten to know the
professional staff there, and I have had a chance to see the
plans for the ongoing site improvements and to become very
familiar with the operations. As importantly, I have been
able to talk informally but frequently with visitors. For the
record, and for what is to follow, it is also worth stating
that except for responding to a couple of questions from the
dais during the 1991 hearing on Steamtown, I have never met
or spoken with the Representative on whose list I appear
today.
I was an early critic of Steamtown. In my judgment, much of
its early planning was poorly done. With respect to the early
years that followed historic site designation, that still is
my view. I believe it would be helpful to be candid about
that. When I was asked to evaluate the 1987 draft management
plan for Steamtown, I found the costs--both the proposed
capital costs and the proposed annual operating costs--to be
vastly understated in my opinion. The rough cost estimates
that I submitted back then, I must tell you, have been borne
out.
It is now some seven years later. Is Steamtown worth it?
Will the operation of the site be worth it in the future?
From both perspectives of concern to me, historical
interpretation and costs, the answer is emphatically, yes.
Steamtown is not a museum. It is a site created for the
direct visitor experience of a part of our industrial
heritage. As operated today, and as operated according to the
plans developed for operations subsequent to the park's
formal opening in 1995, the Steamtown complex will do what no
other railroad historical site or museum now does: combine a
valid interpretation of working life on a mainline railroad
with direct visitor experience in full context.
The approach is fundamentally different than either a
static museum or a tourist railroad. There are, indeed, a lot
of tourist railroad rides around. Not a single one of these
train rides has any concern with conveying a sense of
railroading as part of our nation's history and social
changes. The ``interpretation,'' such as it is at such
tourist railroads, is to my mind bogus. The only ingredients
are a false nostalgia and an ahistorical, romantic view
unrelated to the lives of real working people. So I do not
see Steamtown as duplicating, in any valid sense, train rides
already offered elsewhere.
The museum approach is also not Steamtown's approach.
Ordinary museums, for the most part, focus on the objects
themselves. Good museums go a step further and try to use
objects to interpret something of their makers or users, but
that is hard to do with static displays. Steamtown
is actually part of an international movement toward
``living history'' sites, where the focus is squarely
where I believe it should be, on the lives of people, not
on objects. The U.S. is, frankly, behind in the
development of industrial living-history sites and has
very few of them, compared to other countries. It has been
somehow unfashionable in the U.S. to celebrate working
people and the industries in which they labored. Steamtown
can help to redress the balance.
Steamtown's collection of locomotives and cars is
appropriate to its mission. Certainly there are other museums
with more historic specimens, but nowhere else in the country
is the combination of resources--specimens, site, repair
shops, heavy tools, a large urban station under private
auspices, and operational facilities--as good for the
interpretive mission or conveying what working life was like
on the railroads, and for interpreting the connections
between railroading and the rest of social and economic life.
There is also ample opportunity at Steamtown for
cooperative agreements to both enhance interpretation and to
share costs. An example is the recent educational partnership
with the University of Scranton. And from the beginning,
there have been cost-sharing agreements between Steamtown and
the Lackawanna County Railroad Authority as to rail
operations and track repair. In the future, I believe
partnerships should be permitted to allow repair and
operation of locomotives in the Steamtown collection that are
of American origin. Steamtown has been criticized for the use
of two Canadian locomotives, ignoring the fact that these two
engines are noteworthy for their operational reliability and
less costly to operate than the possible alternatives at
present. But partnerships should be explicitly encouraged, at
zero cost to the federal government, to sponsor the repair
and periodic operation of some of the significant American
pieces in the collection. For that reason, I would suggest
amending the bar in H.R. 3708 limiting the number of
locomotives that can be restored to operating condition. I
also support the other amendments to H.R. 3708 suggested by
the Park Service.
Returning to overall costs, both capital and operating, is
Steamtown worth it? Recently, the Steamtown superintendent
provided your subcommittee with a breakdown of costs and
investments, from Steamtown's inception to date. Based on my
experience with rail operations and with renovating or
erecting industrial buildings, and based on my familiarity
with the present site, the costs in that breakdown seem to me
entirely reasonable. Given the scope of the project, there
are simply no surprises here. Had some care been given to
some of the initial estimates seven years ago, one might
wonder how different the subsequent debate about Steamtown
might have been.
Steamtown is today, and can be in the future, a unique and
valuable national public resource. I believe in its mission.
With the encouragement of cooperative agreements and other
sorts of public-private partnerships, I believe that its
benefit/cost for the American public will be great.
Visitation will grow, and Steamtown will take its proper
place as one of the premier interpretive centers of the
National Park Service.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
testify. I would be happy to respond to any questions.
Appended: Letters from/to Senator Harris Wofford, in regard
to Steamtown, 3 August 1993.
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC, August 3, 1993.
Mr. William Withuhn,
Curator of Transportation, National Museum of American
History, Smithsonian Institute, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Withuhn: In your capacity as Curator of
Transportation at the National Museum of American History, I
am writing to request your comments on the Steamtown Historic
Site at Scranton, Pennsylvania.
The Steamtown Historic Site has been under development for
several years and has enjoyed Federal-State-Local funding
well as private support. When completed, Steamtown is
disigned to provide a working demonstration of our nation's
railroad history and its role in the nation's industrial
revolution. Although the project enjoys significant support,
its historical significance has been questioned.
Considering your knowledge of the history of our nation's
transportation industry and its contribution to the
industrial revolution, I request that you provide Congress
with your comments on the cultural and historical
significance of Steamtown. In particular, I am interested in
your analysis of Steamtown's collection of railroad hardware,
the significance of Scranton to the railroad industry, and
the historical interpretation of the site.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Harris Wofford.
____
National Museum of American History, Smithsonian
Institution,
Washington, DC, August 3, 1993.
Hon. Harris Wofford,
Dirksen Senate Office Building, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Wofford: Thank you for your inquiry of August
3, 1993, in regard to the Steamtown National Historic Site of
the National Park Service.
I have followed closely the progress of this National
Historic Site since its initial legislation, for it involves
my particular field of historic preservation. My opinions on
Steamtown come from two distinct perspectives. First, as an
historian and museum professional, I look at the site for its
value to the American public as an historical legacy and,
more importantly, as a place for the effective interpretation
of that legacy. Secondly, as a former railroad manager and
small business person, I look at the site in terms of its
management, its costs, and especially its value-for-dollar to
the public. If I may, therefore, I would like to respond to
your request, and especially to your third paragraph, from
the above perspectives.
I was an early critic of Steamtown. In my judgment, much of
its early planning was poorly done. With respect to the early
years that followed NHS designation, that still is my view.
Much has changed, however. During the last two years, and
especially since last spring, I have spent considerable time
at the site. The Park Service and its on-site staff have
worked hard to respond to the early criticisms that came from
various quarters, and they have taken a planning and
management path that I find to be first-rate. I have examined
the plans and proposed exhibits for the new visitor center
now under construction, and I have become familiar with the
daily operations of the site. In addition, I have had many
opportunities to talk informally with visitors.
To summarize my views today, I believe Steamtown is a
significant national asset and that its significance will
increase. Steamtown will become one of the premier sites in
the nation for the public interpretation of America's
important industrial heritage. It will engage the public as
no museum of static displays ever can.
The site will be, and is already, a place of living
history. Visitors can see actual railroad operations, with
real people operating and interpreting the pieces on view.
And that is the point. The approach is fundamentally
different from either a static museum or a tourist railroad.
The former is focused on historic objects for their own sake;
the latter is focused on giving tourists a pleasant ride,
with no concern for conveying a sense of railroading as part
of our nation's industry and history. Steamtown is a facility
unique in North America, focused on the relationship of
Americans to their industrial past, focused on working people
and their roles in that legacy, and bringing an
interpretation of this fully to life. When it is finished, in
my view, the Steamtown National Historic Site will be a major
step forward in helping Americans from all over the country
understand the industrial heritage on which this country is
built.
There has been controversy about the historic character of
the site and its collections, but I think most of this
discussion misses the point. Scranton is one of the few
medium-sized cities in this country where there is a
combination of historic railroad resources located close to
center-city, and where the historic physical connections of
railroad to city still exist. Certainly there are other
places with more historic specimens, but nowhere else in the
country is the combination of resources--specimens, historic
site, repair shops, heavy tools, a large urban station, and
operational facilities--as good for the interpretive mission
of conveying what working life was like on the railroads.
The unique quality of the collections is that, for the most
part, they are operable. The collection consists primarily of
typical equipment from the ``standard era'' of steam
railroading--locomotives, freight cars, and passenger cars.
Their typicality is essential to the interpretive mission. In
fact, it would be a serious mistake in my view to be
operating unique, one-of-a-kind historical specimens--those
belong in museum in protected conditions. The Steamtown
collection is one suited for operation--and therefore, to me,
of greater value to the goal of interpretation for the
general public, as opposed to an audience of specialists.
As to costs, I believe that the public is being well
served. Management of the planning process and of costs has
been aggressive. Hard choices have been made as to what to
preserve. The roundhouse/visitors center has been planned for
maximum educational benefit, and from my museum management
background, I believe the capital costs are reasonable. The
operating costs, too, are reasonable and have been well
thought out.
By and large, the US has been laggardly in preserving and
interpreting its industrial history, compared to other
countries. Great Britain, Germany, France, and even
Switzerland, have outstanding industrial and railroad
historic sites and living, operating museums.
Internationally, the trend to living-history museums is well
under way. Steamtown fits that trend. In this country, it has
usually been unfashionable to celebrate working people and
the industries in which they labored all their lives.
Steamtown is helping redress the balance, in my view.
Visitors that I have talked to are enthusiastic in their
reactions. They understand, I think, that Steamtown still
looks rough around the edges. Amenities are few at this
point, because the site is under construction. But already
the interim operations are well received. And the high-
quality interpretation, by experienced park rangers and
guides, already adds greatly to the overall visitor
experience, visitation from around the country, I believe,
will rapidly increase once the site is fully open and
functioning.
``Functioning'' is a fundamental part of the whole. The
investment in the site can be rendered meaningless by unwise
cuts in its operations. Care in budgeting is always
essential. I believe the Park Service has exercised that
care. I would urge those who are concerned to study the site
and its operations, as I have, to better evaluate the cost/
benefit in the interests of the public. A cut of operating
funds at this juncture would be disastrous, in my view,
Steamtown would then simply revert to being just another
static industrial museum. The heart would then be cut out of
its essential character and unique value to the American
public.
Sincerely,
William L. Withuhn,
Curator of Transportation.
____
[From the Beacon Journal, Akron, OH, July 11, 1993]
Locomotives Breathe Fire in National Historical Site--Steamtown Keeps
Railroad's Past Alive in Its Natural Habitat in Scranton Train Yard
(By Michael Schuman)
Scranton, PA.--The place is gritty, coarse. Steam engines
stand stewing in their own sweat, and industrial buildings
squat, watching over rolling stock as they have for years.
Here are trains in their natural habitat, not along miles of
aisles in some spiffed-up museum gallery, roped off and
protected, but accessible and outdoors in a railroad yard, as
they were in their heyday.
There are dozens of railroad museums in North America, but
Steamtown National Historic Site in Scranton is special. The
National Park Service, always casting an eye toward
historical accuracy, reports Steamtown to be one of the few
collections of railroad engines and cars to be interpreted
and displayed in its natural setting. In this case, it's
Scranton's Delaware, Lackawanna & Western rail yards, a
breathing relic from the days when FDR occupied the White
House and the interstate highway system seemed as futuristic
as space travel.
Steamtown is one of the National Park Service's newest
offerings; yet, it's not totally new. Once operated by a
private foundation, Steamtown for 20 years was a tourist
attraction in Bellows Falls, VT., before leaving its longtime
home for Scranton in 1983 because of a shortage of visitors.
Easily accessible via interstate highways, Scranton seemed
to promise the hordes of visitors lacking in sparsely settled
Vermont.
After four years, though, Steamtown encountered financial
difficulties again.
The collection of 35 steam locomotives and 78 cars,
regarded as one of the country's finest, attracted the
attention of U.S. Rep. Joseph McDade, R-Scranton, who felt
the nation's steam railroad heritage should be preserved.
His efforts paid off. The Steamtown Foundation donated the
equipment to the National Park Service in 1988.
Plans--big plans--are in order for the sprawling railroad
yard. Over the next few years, existing structures will be
refurbished and given new lives as exhibit buildings, a
visitor center and a theater. Restoration of the 13-stall
roundhouse and construction of a new turntable were completed
in 1992, and tours through the structure are now available.
You also can climb up to the cupola of a 1938 red caboose
to savor the expansive view once available to the train's
crewmen, who cooked, rested, ate, stored equipment and kept
records there. Then try to make some semblance of order out
of the jumble of knobs and gears and levers inside a
locomotive. Or inspect the Railway Post Office car, a 1913
artifact from the Louisville & Nashville Railroad. Slots and
canvas sacks are in abundance, reminders of the times when
sorting mail on trains was daily practice. In its day, only
armed postal workers were permitted inside.
Better yet, hop on one of the gray and maroon coaches
pulled by Canadian Pacific locomotive No. 3254 or Canadian
National locomotive No. 2317 for an excursion ride of about
2\1/4\ hours taking you across 26 miles and back 60 years.
You might not find puffs of Lucky Strikes and Camels swirling
through the air inside your passenger car, as you would have
six decades ago, but you still will see whiffs of steam
emanating from the engine.
The conductor and fireman on board are decked out in period
costumes, while Park Service rangers discuss life during the
1920s and 1930s, a time when travelers not adventurous enough
to drive their Nashes or Hudsons on long journeys ventured by
rail. Life magazine's debut issue in 1936 carried ads from
major railroad lines such as the Chesapeake & Ohio and the
Panama Pacific, but anyone who journeyed between Hoboken,
N.J., and Buffalo, N.Y., knew the DL&W was the ticket to
catch.
Today you will hear tales of the train yard workers as you
rumble along the rails, through the 1\1/3\ mile Nay Aug
tunnel and precariously high across a steel-girder bridge.
Says guide Ken Ganz, ``Kids love the dark and the heights.
It's the adults that get scared.''
However, Ganz adds, children might get rattled by the steam
whistle, something they likely have never heard before.
Indeed, many young adults have never had their ears tickled
by the once-common shrill whistle of the steam engine, nor
have they witnessed other hallmarks of rail life.
Rail people
A trip to the visitor center introduces observers to old
railroad characters such as fictional Phoebe Snow and some
anonymous hobos, part of a whole subculture that for decades
centered around this country's rail yards.
Phoebe Snow, today the name of a pop singer, was recognized
around the turn of the century as the spokeswoman for the
DL&W Railroad. She predated the Gibson Girl as an advertising
spokeswoman. Her likeness is recreated on park bulletins and
as part of displays in the visitor center: Look for a
brunette ingenue donning a wide-brimmed hat, head jauntily
cocked to one side. She often was accompanied with a rhyme
like this:
Says Phoebe Snow
About to go
Upon the trip to Buffalo
My gown stays white
From morn till night
Upon the road made of anthracite.
The DL&W burned hard anthracite, as opposed to softer
bituminous coal, and was therefore cleaner and less likely to
leave a coating of coal dust on one's clothes, as Phoebe
proclaimed in DL&W advertisements.
On the other hand, there were some very genuine people
riding trains earlier this century who also are celebrated at
Steamtown. The first hobos were Civil War veterans who took
to the road following the war, using the hide-and-ride
method: hitching free rides on trains while avoiding
authorities. During the hard times of the 1930s, hobos were a
frequent sight around the whistle-stops of America.
Ganz has many tales to tell about hobos who were quite
resourceful in finding concealed riding places, for example,
on top or inside battery boxes under passenger coaches. Hobos
communicated with each other in their own language, drawing
chalk figures on fence posts and sidewalks to indicate where
they ate and slept.
Their language is decoded in a visitor center display.
Other exhibits relate railroad trivia and diagram the
technical mechanisms of a steam engine.
Ganz says the Park Service hopes Steamtown National
Historic Site will emerge as ``the country's railroad
museum.''
Or as Phoebe Snow might have said:
From hill and dale
The hearty and hale
Come to ride the rail
Without fail
To Pennsylvania they go
Cameras in tow
To tour Steamtown
With Phoebe Snow.
____
[From the Tribune, Fort Pierce, FL, January 22, 1992]
Steamtown is Worth Funding
(By Charley Reese)
I'd like to say a word in behalf of trains and a national
park you probably have never visited, but ought to, and may
never have heard of.
It's called Steamtown. It's in the heart of Scranton, Pa.
It's being called a pork barrel boondoggle by its critics,
but often that's just another way of saying the project is in
someone else's backyard and I want the money spent in my
district.
Steamtown is no boondoggle. I've been there twice and my
sons and I love it. It is just shy--about $20 million shy--of
being one of the greatest living museums of Americana in the
country, a great tribute to America's industrial age.
These 41 acres and 13 buildings, all of which are on
National Register of Historic Places, are situated on an
abandoned railroad yard of the old Delaware, Lackawanna and
Western Railroad. When it's completed--if it's completed--
you'll be able to see machinists and craftsmen restoring
steam locomotives just as they did in the days when the
railroads were America's major means of transportation. Your
children will be able to see a working railroad repair shop,
roundhouse, and marshalling yard and talk to the skilled men
who know how to shape steel and iron with a sculpture's
touch.
Even now it is well worth a visit and is one of the few
places in the country where you can take excursions on a
train pulled by a steam locomotive. Furthermore, Steamtown is
a national park in a city that will allow future generations
to see the role urban America played in the nation's history.
The wild places with their natural wonders are part of our
heritage, but so, too, are the urban areas and urban areas
have unfortunately received short shrift in the preservation
and parks budgets. It just as important for America's youth
to be able to see the industrial contributions America's
cities made to our history as it is for them to see the great
plains or the Rocky Mountains.
When America was a wild place, Americans were as poor as
the Indians they were displacing. The exploration of this
great continent and the westward movement of people is an
important part of our history--a tragic part if you were an
Indian in the path of this human wave.
But what made the America we know today--the great
industrial power--were the cities, like Scranton, and others,
which grew from frontier towns into the seats of mighty
industries--coal, steel, railroads. It was this great
burst of industrial growth in the late 19th Century and
early 20th that turned America from a poor nation into a
rich one.
Not much of this part of our history is being preserved.
Steamtown is one great start toward it. My kids were just as
fascinated by Steamtown and the Anthracite Coal Museum, also
in Scranton, as they were by the Amish farms and the mighty
Niagara.
So I hope Congress will spend the $20 million necessary to
complete Steamtown. If it can hand out $15 billion a year to
foreign countries, it could certainly spare $20 million to
complete an urban national park in Scranton that will allow
generations to see and know a great segment of American
history as no other place can.
Old railroad yards and locomotives may seem like junk but
the saddest part of loving history is to witness how much of
our past is lost forever because somebody in authority
doesn't have the wit to see its value.
After Steamtown is completely developed, then we ought to
consider a Steeltown project before all the great mills, many
of them now idle, are torn down and carted off.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento] that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 3708, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________