[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 137 (Tuesday, September 27, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 27, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                  AMERICAN HERITAGE AREAS ACT OF 1994

  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill (H.R. 5044) to establish the American Heritage Areas 
Partnership Program, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 5044

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``American 
     Heritage Areas Act of 1994''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.

          TITLE I--AMERICAN HERITAGE AREAS PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

Sec. 101. Short title.
Sec. 102. Congressional findings.
Sec. 103. Statement of purpose.
Sec. 104. Definitions.
Sec. 105. American Heritage Areas Partnership Program.
Sec. 106. Feasibility studies, compacts, management plans, and early 
              actions.
Sec. 107. Management entities.
Sec. 108. Withdrawal of designation.
Sec. 109. Duties and authorities of Federal agencies.
Sec. 110. Lack of effect on land use regulation.
Sec. 111. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 112. Expiration of authorities.
Sec. 113. Report.
Sec. 114. Savings provision.

            TITLE II--DESIGNATION OF AMERICAN HERITAGE AREAS

Sec. 201. American Coal Heritage Area.
Sec. 202. Augusta Canal American Heritage Area.
Sec. 203. Cane River American Heritage Area.
Sec. 204. Essex American Heritage Area.
Sec. 205. Hudson River Valley American Heritage Area.
Sec. 206. Ohio & Erie Canal American Heritage Area.
Sec. 207. Shenandoah Valley Battlefields American Heritage Area.
Sec. 208. Steel Industry American Heritage Area.
Sec. 209. Vancouver American Heritage Area.
Sec. 210. Wheeling American Heritage Area.

     TITLE III--STUDIES REGARDING POTENTIAL AMERICAN HERITAGE AREAS

Sec. 301. Ohio River Corridor.
Sec. 302. Fox and Lower Wisconsin River Corridors.
Sec. 303. South Carolina Corridor.
Sec. 304. Northern Frontier.

TITLE IV--BLACKSTONE RIVER VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR AMENDMENTS

Sec. 401. Boundaries, commission, and revision of plan.
Sec. 402. Implementation of plan.
Sec. 403. Authorization of appropriations.

              TITLE V--BRAMWELL NATIONAL HISTORIC DISTRICT

Sec. 501. Bramwell National Historic District.

 TITLE VI--SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA AMENDMENTS

Sec. 601. Short title.
Sec. 602. Designation of Southwestern Pennsylvania American Heritage 
              Area.
Sec. 603. Powers of the commission.
Sec. 604. Federal participation.
Sec. 605. Congressional oversight.
Sec. 606. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 607. Path of progress.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this Act:
       (1) The term ``compact'' means a compact described in 
     section 106(a)(2).
       (2) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the 
     Interior.
          TITLE I--AMERICAN HERITAGE AREAS PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

     SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``American Heritage Areas 
     Partnership Program Act of 1994''.

     SEC. 102. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds that--
       (1) certain areas of the United States represent the 
     diversity of the national character through the interaction 
     of natural processes, distinctive landscapes, cultural 
     traditions, and economic and social forces that have combined 
     to create a particular pattern of human settlement and 
     activity;
       (2) in these areas, natural, historic, or cultural 
     resources, or some combination thereof, combine to form a 
     cohesive, nationally distinctive landscape arising from 
     patterns of human activity shaped by geography;
       (3) these areas represent the national experience through 
     the physical features that remain and the traditions that 
     have evolved in the areas;
       (4) continued use and adaptive reuses of the natural and 
     cultural fabric within these areas by people whose traditions 
     helped to shape the landscapes enhance the significance of 
     the areas;
       (5) despite existing Federal programs and existing efforts 
     by States and localities, the natural, historic, and cultural 
     resources and recreational opportunities in these areas are 
     often at risk; and
       (6) the complexity and character of these areas distinguish 
     them and call for a distinctive system of recognition, 
     protection, and partnership management.

     SEC. 103. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE.

       The purposes of this title are--
       (1) to recognize that the natural, historic, and cultural 
     resources and recreational opportunities of the United States 
     represent and are important to the great and diverse 
     character of the Nation, and that these resources and 
     opportunities must be guarded, preserved, and wisely managed 
     so they may be passed on to future generations;
       (2) to recognize that combinations of such resources and 
     opportunities, as they are geographically assembled and 
     thematically related, form areas that provide unique 
     frameworks for understanding the historical, cultural, and 
     natural development of the community and its surroundings;
       (3) to preserve such assemblages that are worthy of 
     national recognition, designation, and assistance, and to 
     encourage linking such resources within such areas through 
     greenways, corridors, and trails;
       (4) to encourage appropriate partnerships among Federal 
     agencies, State and local governments, nonprofit 
     organizations, and the private sector, or combinations 
     thereof, to preserve, conserve, and manage those resources 
     and opportunities, accommodate economic viability, and 
     enhance the quality of life for the present and future 
     generations of the Nation;
       (5) to authorize Federal financial and technical assistance 
     to State and local governments and private nonprofit 
     organizations, or combinations thereof, to study and promote 
     the potential for conserving and interpreting these areas; 
     and
       (6) to prescribe the process by which, and the standards 
     according to which, prospective American Heritage Areas may 
     be assessed for eligibility and included in the American 
     Heritage Areas Partnership Program established by this title.

     SEC. 104. DEFINITIONS.

       For purposes of this title:
       (1) American heritage area.--The term ``American Heritage 
     Area'' means an area so designated under this title.
       (2) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' means any 
     Indian tribe, band, nation, pueblo, or other organized group 
     or community, including any Alaska Native village or regional 
     corporation as defined in or established pursuant to the 
     Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), 
     which is recognized as eligible for the special programs and 
     services provided by the United States to Indians because of 
     their status as Indians.
       (3) Technical assistance.--The term ``technical 
     assistance'' means any guidance, advice, help, or aid, other 
     than financial aid.
       (4) Unit of government.--The term ``unit of government'' 
     means the government of a State, a political subdivision of a 
     State, or an Indian tribe.

     SEC. 105. AMERICAN HERITAGE AREAS PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--In order to preserve nationally 
     distinctive natural, historic, and cultural resources, and to 
     provide opportunities for conservation, education, and 
     recreation through recognition of and assistance to areas 
     containing such resources, there is hereby established within 
     the Department of the Interior an American Heritage Areas 
     Partnership Program, which shall consist of American Heritage 
     Areas designated under subsection (d).
       (b) General Authority of Secretary.--In accordance with the 
     purposes of this title, the Secretary is authorized--
       (1) to evaluate, in accordance with the criteria 
     established in subsection (c), areas nominated under this 
     title for designation as American Heritage Areas;
       (2) to advise State and local governments, nonprofit 
     organizations, and other appropriate entities regarding 
     suitable methods of recognizing and preserving thematically 
     and geographically linked natural, historic, and cultural 
     resources and recreational opportunities; and
       (3) to consider any American Heritage Area, designated 
     under this or any other Act, for nomination to the World 
     Heritage List if the Secretary determines that such area 
     meets the qualifications for such nomination.
       (c) Criteria.--To be eligible for designation as an 
     American Heritage Area, an area shall meet each of the 
     following criteria:
       (1) Assemblage of resources.--The area shall be an 
     assemblage of natural, historic, or cultural resources that--
       (A) together represent distinctive aspects of American 
     heritage worthy of recognition, preservation, interpretation, 
     and continuing use; and
       (B) are best managed as such an assemblage, through 
     partnerships among public and private entities, and by 
     combining diverse and sometimes noncontiguous resources and 
     active communities.
       (2) Traditions, customs, beliefs, or folklife.--The area 
     shall reflect traditions, customs, beliefs, or folklife, or 
     some combination thereof, that are a valuable part of the 
     story of the Nation.
       (3) Conservation of natural, cultural, or historic 
     features.--The area shall provide outstanding opportunities 
     to conserve natural, cultural, or historic features, or some 
     combination thereof.
       (4) Recreational and educational opportunities.--The area 
     shall provide outstanding recreational and educational 
     opportunities.
       (5) Themes and integrity of resources.--The area shall have 
     an identifiable theme or themes, and resources important to 
     the identified theme or themes shall retain integrity capable 
     of supporting interpretation.
       (6) Support.--Residents, nonprofit organizations, other 
     private entities, and governments within the proposed area 
     shall demonstrate support for designation of the area and for 
     management of the area as appropriate for such designation.
       (7) Agreements.--The principal organization and units of 
     government supporting the designation shall be willing to 
     commit to agreements to work in partnership to implement the 
     management plan of the area.
       (8) Consistency with economic viability.--The proposal 
     shall be consistent with continued economic viability in the 
     affected communities.
       (d) Conditions for Designation.--An area may be designated 
     as an American Heritage Area only by an Act of Congress or by 
     the means provided in title II. Except as otherwise provided 
     in title II, the Congress may designate an area as an 
     American Heritage Area only after each of the following 
     conditions is met:
       (1) Submission of study and compact to secretary.--An 
     entity requesting American Heritage Area designation for the 
     area submits to the Secretary a feasibility study and compact 
     meeting the requirements of section 106(a). The comments of 
     the Governor of each State in which the proposed American 
     Heritage Area lies, or a statement by the entity that such 
     Governor has failed to comment within a reasonable time after 
     receiving the study and compact, accompanies such submittal 
     to the Secretary.
       (2) Approval and submission by secretary.--The Secretary 
     approves, pursuant to section 106(b), the feasibility study 
     and compact referred to in paragraph (1) and submits the 
     study and compact to the Congress together with any comments 
     that the Secretary deems appropriate regarding a preferred 
     action.
       (e) Relation to National Register of Historic Places.--The 
     act of designation of an American Heritage Area shall not be 
     deemed to signify that such American Heritage Area is 
     included on, or eligible for inclusion on, the National 
     Register of Historic Places, as established in accordance 
     with section 101 of the National Historic Preservation Act 
     (16 U.S.C. 470a). Designation of an American Heritage Area 
     shall not preclude the American Heritage Area or any 
     district, site, building, structure, or object located within 
     the American Heritage Area from subsequently being nominated 
     to, or determined eligible for inclusion on, the National 
     Register.

     SEC. 106. FEASIBILITY STUDIES, COMPACTS, MANAGEMENT PLANS, 
                   AND EARLY ACTIONS.

       (a) Contents and Requirements.--
       (1) Feasibility studies.--Each feasibility study submitted 
     under this title shall include sufficient information to 
     determine whether an area has the potential to meet the 
     criteria referred to in section 105(c). Such information 
     shall include, but need not be limited to, each of the 
     following:
       (A) A description of the natural, historic, and cultural 
     resources and recreational opportunities presented by the 
     area, including an assessment of the quality and degree of 
     integrity of, the availability of public access to, and the 
     themes represented by such resources and opportunities.
       (B) An assessment of the interest of potential partners, 
     including units of government, nonprofit organizations, and 
     other private entities.
       (C) A description of tentative boundaries for an American 
     Heritage Area proposed to be established in the area.
       (D) Identification of a possible management entity for an 
     American Heritage Area proposed to be established in the 
     area.
       (E) An inventory of the amount of land in the area owned by 
     public, private, and private nonprofit entities, 
     respectively.
       (2) Compacts.--(A) A compact submitted under this title 
     shall include information relating to the objectives and 
     management of an area proposed for designation as an American 
     Heritage Area. Such information shall include, but need not 
     be limited to, each of the following:
       (i) A delineation of the boundaries of the proposed 
     American Heritage Area.
       (ii) A discussion of the goals and objectives of the 
     proposed American Heritage Area, including an explanation of 
     the proposed approach to conservation and interpretation and 
     a general outline of the protection measures committed to by 
     the partners referred to in clause (iv).
       (iii) An identification and description of the management 
     entity that will administer the proposed American Heritage 
     Area.
       (iv) A list of the initial partners to be involved in 
     developing and implementing the management plan referred to 
     in paragraph (3) for the proposed American Heritage Area, and 
     a statement of the financial commitment of the partners.
       (v) A description of the role of the State or States in 
     which the proposed American Heritage Area is located.
       (B)(i) The compact shall be prepared with public 
     participation.
       (ii) Actions called for in the compact shall be likely to 
     be initiated within a reasonable time after designation of 
     the proposed American Heritage Area and shall ensure 
     effective implementation of the State and local aspects of 
     the compact.
       (3) Management plans.--A management plan submitted under 
     this title for an American Heritage Area shall present 
     comprehensive recommendations for the conservation, funding, 
     management, and development of the area. The plan shall take 
     into consideration existing State, county, and local plans 
     and involve residents, public agencies, and private 
     organizations in the area. It shall include a description of 
     the actions recommended to be taken, to protect the resources 
     of the area, by units of government and private 
     organizations. It shall specify existing and potential 
     sources of funding for the protection, management, and 
     development of the area. The plan also shall include the 
     following, as appropriate:
       (A) An inventory of the resources contained in the American 
     Heritage Area, including a list of property in the area that 
     should be preserved, restored, managed, developed, or 
     maintained because of the natural, cultural, or historic 
     significance of the property as it relates to the themes of 
     the area.
       (B) A recommendation of policies for resource management 
     that consider and detail the application of appropriate land 
     and water management techniques, including (but not limited 
     to) the development of intergovernmental cooperative 
     agreements to protect the historical, cultural, and natural 
     resources and the recreational opportunities of the area in a 
     manner consistent with the support of appropriate and 
     compatible economic viability.
       (C) A program, including plans for restoration and 
     construction, for implementation of the management plan by 
     the management entity specified in the compact referred to in 
     paragraph (2) and specific commitments, for the first 5 years 
     of operation of the plan, by the partners identified in the 
     compact.
       (D) An analysis of means by which Federal, State, and local 
     programs may best be coordinated to promote the purposes of 
     this title.
       (E) An interpretive plan for the American Heritage Area.
       (4) Early actions.--After designation of an American 
     Heritage Area but prior to approval of the management plan 
     for that area, the Secretary may provide technical and 
     financial assistance for early actions that are important to 
     the theme of the area and that protect resources that would 
     be in imminent danger of irreversible damage without such 
     early actions.
       (b) Approval and Disapproval of Compacts and Management 
     Plans.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Governors of each State in which the relevant American 
     Heritage Area, or proposed area, is located, shall approve or 
     disapprove every compact or management plan submitted under 
     this title not later than 90 days after receiving such 
     compact or management plan. Prior to approving the compact or 
     plan, the Secretary shall consult with the Advisory Council 
     on Historic Preservation in accordance with section 106 of 
     the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f).
       (2) Disapproval and revisions.--If the Secretary 
     disapproves a compact or management plan submitted under this 
     title, the Secretary shall advise the submitter, in writing, 
     of the reasons for the disapproval and shall make 
     recommendations for revisions of the compact or plan. The 
     Secretary shall approve or disapprove a proposed revision to 
     such a compact or plan within 90 days after the date on which 
     the revision is submitted to the Secretary.
       (3) Amendments to management plans.--The Secretary shall 
     review substantial amendments to management plans for 
     American Heritage Areas. Funds appropriated pursuant to this 
     title may not be expended to implement such amendments until 
     the Secretary approves the amendments.
       (4) No requirement for land use regulation as condition for 
     approval.--No provision of this title shall be construed to 
     require any change in land use regulation as a condition of 
     approval of a compact, management plan, or revision of a 
     compact or management plan by the Secretary.

     SEC. 107. MANAGEMENT ENTITIES.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Receipt of federal funds.--Management entities that are 
     designated in compacts approved under section 106(b) for 
     American Heritage Areas are authorized to receive Federal 
     funds in support of cooperative partnerships to prepare and 
     implement the management plans regarding the American 
     Heritage Areas and to otherwise perform the functions 
     contemplated in this title.
       (2) Eligibility.--To be eligible for designation as the 
     management entity of an American Heritage Area, a unit of 
     government or private nonprofit organization must possess the 
     legal ability to--
       (A) receive Federal funds for use in preparing and 
     implementing the management plan for the area;
       (B) disburse Federal funds to other units of government or 
     other organizations for use in preparing and implementing the 
     management plan;
       (C) account for all Federal funds so received or disbursed; 
     and
       (D) sign agreements with the Federal Government.
       (b) Authorities of Management Entity.--The management 
     entity of an American Heritage Area may, for purposes of 
     preparing and implementing the management plan for the area, 
     use Federal funds made available under this title--
       (1) to make grants and loans to States, political 
     subdivisions thereof, private organizations, and other 
     persons;
       (2) to enter into cooperative agreements with Federal 
     agencies; and
       (3) to hire and compensate staff.
       (c) Duties of Management Entity.--The management entity for 
     an American Heritage Area shall do each of the following:
       (1) Management plan.--The management entity shall develop, 
     and submit to the Secretary for approval, a management plan 
     described in section 106(a)(3) within 3 years after the date 
     of the designation of the area as an American Heritage Area.
       (2) Priorities.--The management entity shall give priority 
     to the implementation of actions, goals, and policies set 
     forth in the compact and management plan referred to in 
     section 106(a), including--
       (A) assisting units of government, regional planning 
     organizations, and nonprofit organizations--
       (i) in preserving the American Heritage Area;
       (ii) in establishing and maintaining interpretive exhibits 
     in the area;
       (iii) in developing recreational opportunities in the area;
       (iv) in increasing public awareness of and appreciation for 
     the natural, historical, and cultural resources of the area;
       (v) in the restoration of historic buildings that are 
     located within the boundaries of the area and relate to the 
     themes of the area; and
       (vi) in ensuring that clear, consistent, and 
     environmentally appropriate signs identifying access points 
     and sites of interest are put in place throughout the area;
       (B) consistent with the goals of the management plan 
     referred to in section 106(a)(3), encouraging economic 
     viability in the affected communities by appropriate means; 
     and
       (C) encouraging local governments to adopt land-use 
     policies consistent with the management of the area and the 
     goals of the management plan referred to in section 
     106(a)(3).
       (3) Consideration of interests of local groups.--The 
     management entity shall, in developing and implementing the 
     management plan referred to in section 106(a)(3), consider 
     the interests of diverse governmental, business, and 
     nonprofit groups within the geographic area.
       (4) Public meetings.--The management entity shall conduct 
     public meetings at least quarterly regarding the 
     implementation of the management plan referred to in section 
     106(a)(3).
       (5) Submission of changes in plan.--The management entity 
     shall submit any substantial changes to the management plan 
     referred to in section 106(a)(3) (including any increase of 
     more than 20 percent in the cost estimates for implementation 
     of the management plan) to the Secretary for the approval of 
     the Secretary.
       (6) Annual report.--The management entity shall, for any 
     fiscal year in which it receives Federal funds under this 
     title or in which a loan made by the entity with Federal 
     funds under section 107(b)(1) is outstanding, submit an 
     annual report to the Secretary setting forth its 
     accomplishments, its expenses and income, and the entities to 
     which it made any loans and grants during the year for which 
     the report is made.
       (7) Cooperation with audits.--The management entity shall, 
     for any fiscal year in which it receives Federal funds under 
     this title or in which a loan made by the entity with Federal 
     funds under section 107(b)(1) is outstanding, make available 
     for audit by the Congress, the Secretary, and appropriate 
     units of government all records and other information 
     pertaining to the expenditure of such funds and any matching 
     funds, and require, for all agreements authorizing 
     expenditure of Federal funds by other organizations, that the 
     receiving organizations make available for such audit all 
     records and other information pertaining to the expenditure 
     of such funds.
       (8) Liability for loans.--The management entity shall be 
     liable to the Federal Government for any loans that the 
     management entity makes under section 107(b)(1).
       (d) Disqualification for Federal Funding.--If a management 
     plan regarding an American Heritage Area is not submitted to 
     the Secretary as required under subsection (c)(1) within the 
     time specified in such subsection, the American Heritage Area 
     shall cease to be eligible for Federal funding under this 
     title until such a plan regarding the American Heritage Area 
     is submitted to the Secretary.
       (e) Prohibition of Acquisition of Real Property.--A 
     management entity for an American Heritage Area may not use 
     Federal funds received under this title to acquire real 
     property or interest in real property. No provision of this 
     title shall prohibit any management entity from using Federal 
     funds from other sources for their permitted purposes.
       (f) Duration of Eligibility for Financial Assistance.--
       (1) In general.--A management entity for an American 
     Heritage Area shall be eligible to receive funds appropriated 
     pursuant to this title for a 10-year period beginning on the 
     day on which the American Heritage Area is designated, except 
     as provided in paragraph (2).
       (2) Extension of eligibility.--The eligibility of a 
     management entity for funding under this title may be 
     extended, by the Secretary, for a period of not more than a 5 
     years after the 10-year period referred to in paragraph (1), 
     if--
       (A) the management entity determines that the extension is 
     necessary in order to carry out the purposes of this title 
     and notifies the Secretary of such determination not later 
     than 180 days prior to the end of the 10-year period referred 
     to in paragraph (1);
       (B) the management entity, not later than 180 days prior to 
     the end of the 10-year period referred to in paragraph (1), 
     presents to the Secretary a plan of its activities for the 
     period of the extension, including provisions for becoming 
     independent of the funds made available pursuant to this 
     title; and
       (C) the Secretary, after consulting with the Governor of 
     each State in which the American Heritage Area is located, 
     approves such extension of eligibility.
       (3) Lack of effect of extension on funding limitations.--An 
     extension provided under this subsection shall not be 
     construed as waiving any limitation on funds provided 
     pursuant to this title.

     SEC. 108. WITHDRAWAL OF DESIGNATION.

       (a) In General.--The American Heritage Area designation of 
     an area shall continue unless--
       (1) the Secretary determines that--
       (A) the American Heritage Area no longer meets the criteria 
     referred to in section 105(c);
       (B) the parties to the compact approved in relation to the 
     area under section 106(b) are not in compliance with the 
     terms of the compact;
       (C) the management entity of the area has not made 
     reasonable and appropriate progress in developing or 
     implementing the management plan approved for the area under 
     section 106(b); or
       (D) the use, condition, or development of the area is 
     incompatible with the criteria referred to in section 105(c) 
     or with the compact approved in relation to the area under 
     section 106(b); and
       (2) after making a determination referred to in paragraph 
     (1), the Secretary submits to the Congress notification that 
     the American Heritage Area designation of the area should be 
     withdrawn.
       (b) Public Hearing.--Before the Secretary makes a 
     determination referred to in subsection (a)(1) regarding an 
     American Heritage Area, the Secretary or a designee shall 
     hold a public hearing within the area.
       (c) Time of Withdrawal of Designation.--
       (1) In general.--The withdrawal of the American Heritage 
     Area designation of an area shall become final 90 legislative 
     days after the Secretary submits to the Congress the 
     notification referred to in subsection (a)(2) regarding the 
     area.
       (2) Legislative day.--For purposes of this subsection, the 
     term ``legislative day'' means any calendar day on which both 
     Houses of the Congress are in session.

     SEC. 109. DUTIES AND AUTHORITIES OF FEDERAL AGENCIES.

       (a) Duties and Authorities of Secretary.--
       (1) Grants.--The Secretary may make matching grants to 
     provide assistance regarding feasibility studies and compacts 
     described in section 106(a) and, upon request of the 
     management entity for the relevant American Heritage Area, 
     regarding management plans and early actions described in 
     section 106(a) and capital projects and improvements 
     undertaken pursuant to such management plans. The Secretary 
     may make grants under this section to units of government, 
     and, in consultation with affected units of government, to 
     private nonprofit organizations. In awarding grants, the 
     Secretary shall be guided by the criteria for eligibility for 
     designation referred in section 105(c).
       (2) Technical assistance.--(A) The Secretary may provide 
     technical assistance to units of government and private 
     nonprofit organizations regarding feasibility studies and 
     compacts described in section 106(a) and, upon request of the 
     management entity for the relevant American Heritage Area, 
     regarding management plans and early actions described in 
     section 106(a) and capital projects and improvements 
     undertaken pursuant to such management plans. In providing 
     the technical assistance, the Secretary shall be guided by 
     the criteria for eligibility for designation referred to in 
     section 105(c).
       (B) The Secretary may elect to provide all or part of the 
     technical assistance authorized by this subsection through 
     cooperative agreements with units of government and private 
     nonprofit organizations whose missions and resources can 
     contribute substantially to the purposes of this title.
       (3) Other assistance.--Nothing in this title shall be 
     deemed to prohibit the Secretary or units of government from 
     providing technical or financial assistance under any other 
     provision of law.
       (4) Priorities for assistance.--In assisting an American 
     Heritage Area, the Secretary shall give priority to actions 
     that assist in--
       (A) conserving the significant natural, historic, and 
     cultural resources which support the themes of the American 
     Heritage Area; and
       (B) providing educational, interpretive, and recreational 
     opportunities consistent with the resources and associated 
     values of the American Heritage Area.
       (5) Determinations regarding assistance.--The Secretary 
     shall decide which American Heritage Areas shall be awarded 
     technical and financial assistance and the amount of the 
     assistance. Such decisions shall be based on the relative 
     degree to which each American Heritage Area effectively 
     fulfills the objectives contained in the management plan for 
     the area, achieves the purposes of this title, and fulfills 
     the criteria referred to in section 105(c) and shall give 
     consideration to projects which provide a greater leverage of 
     Federal funds.
       (6) Non-federally owned property.--The Secretary is 
     authorized to spend Federal funds directly on nonfederally 
     owned property to further the purposes of this title, giving 
     priority to assisting units of government in appropriate 
     treatment of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and 
     objects listed or eligible for listing on the National 
     Register of Historic Places.
       (7) Annual report.--The Secretary shall submit an annual 
     report to the Congress regarding the American Heritage Areas 
     Partnership Program. Each report shall include--
       (A) the number, amount, and recipients of any grants 
     provided by the Secretary under this title and the nature of 
     any technical assistance or early action provided under this 
     title;
       (B) a description of the status and condition of, and 
     Federal funding provided under this Act to, each American 
     Heritage Area;
       (C) a description of the areas nominated for the American 
     Heritage Partnership Program;
       (D) the recommendations of the Secretary regarding areas to 
     be designated by the Congress as American Heritage Areas; and
       (E) the status of the implementation of all contractual 
     agreements entered into by the Secretary under this title.
       (8) Oversight of heritage areas with expired eligibility.--
     The Secretary shall investigate, study, and continually 
     monitor the welfare of all American Heritage Areas whose 
     eligibility for Federal funding under this title has expired 
     and shall report to the Congress periodically regarding the 
     condition of such American Heritage Areas.
       (9) Provision of information.--In cooperation with other 
     Federal agencies, the Secretary shall provide the general 
     public with information regarding the location and character 
     of components of the American Heritage Areas Partnership 
     Program.
       (10) Promulgation of regulations.--The Secretary shall 
     promulgate such regulations as are necessary to carry out the 
     purposes of this title.
       (b) Duties of Federal Entities.--Any Federal entity 
     conducting or supporting activities within an American 
     Heritage Area, and any unit of government acting pursuant to 
     a grant of Federal funds or a Federal permit or agreement and 
     conducting or supporting such activities, shall, to the 
     maximum extent practicable--
       (1) consult with the Secretary and the management entity 
     for the American Heritage Area with respect to such 
     activities;
       (2) cooperate with the Secretary and the management entity 
     in the carrying out of the duties of the Secretary and the 
     management entity under this title, and coordinate such 
     activities with the carrying out of such duties; and
       (3) conduct or support such activities in a manner 
     consistent with the management plan for the American Heritage 
     Area unless the Federal entity or unit of government, after 
     consultation with the Secretary and the management entity, 
     determines that there is no practicable alternative.

     SEC. 110. LACK OF EFFECT ON LAND USE REGULATION.

       (a) Lack of Effect on Authority of Governments.--Nothing in 
     this title shall be construed to modify, enlarge, or diminish 
     any authority of Federal, State, and local governments to 
     regulate any use of land as provided for by current law or 
     regulation.
       (b) Lack of Zoning or Land Use Powers of Entity.--Nothing 
     in this title shall be construed to grant powers of zoning or 
     land use to any management entity for an American Heritage 
     Area.
       (c) Management Plan Availability to Local Governments.--Any 
     management plan referred to in section 106(a) and submitted 
     to the Secretary by the management entity for an American 
     Heritage Area shall be made available to the local 
     governments having jurisdiction over land use regulations 
     affecting the American Heritage Area for the use of the local 
     governments in updating their growth management plans and in 
     the event that such governments desire to amend current land 
     use legislation as they may deem appropriate and in 
     accordance with their legal authority.

     SEC. 111. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Feasibility Studies, Compacts, Management Plans, and 
     Early Actions.--From the amounts made available to carry out 
     the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et 
     seq.), there is authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Secretary, for grants and technical assistance pursuant to 
     section 109(a) and the administration of such grants and 
     assistance, annually not more than $8,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended, with the following conditions:
       (1) Percent of cost.--No grant under this title for a 
     feasibility study, compact, management plan, or early action 
     may exceed 75 percent of the cost, to the grantee, for such 
     study, compact, plan, or early action.
       (2) Studies.--The total amount of Federal funding under 
     this title for feasibility studies for a proposed American 
     Heritage Area may not exceed $100,000.
       (3) Compacts.--The total amount of Federal funding under 
     this title for compacts for a proposed American Heritage Area 
     may not exceed $150,000.
       (4) Early action grants.--The total amount of Federal 
     funding under this title for early action grants for an 
     American Heritage Area may not exceed $250,000.
       (5) Management plans.--The total amount of Federal funding 
     under this title for management plans for an American 
     Heritage Area may not exceed $150,000.
       (b) Management Entity Operations.--
       (1) Operating costs.--From the amounts made available to 
     carry out the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 
     470 et seq.), there is authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Secretary, for each management entity of an American Heritage 
     Area, not more than $250,000 annually for the operating costs 
     of such management entity pursuant to section 107.
       (2) Cost share.--The Federal contribution under this title 
     to the operations of any management entity of an American 
     Heritage Area shall not exceed 50 percent of the annual 
     operating costs of the entity.
       (c) Plan Implementation.--From the amounts made available 
     to carry out the National Historic Preservation Act (16 
     U.S.C. 470 et seq.), there is authorized to be appropriated 
     to the Secretary, for grants and technical assistance for the 
     implementation of management plans for designated American 
     Heritage Areas and the administration of such grants and 
     assistance, not more than $14,500,000 annually, to remain 
     available until expended, with the following conditions:
       (1) Percent of cost.--No grant under this title for 
     implementation of a management plan may exceed 50 percent of 
     the cost to the grantee of the implementation.
       (2) Percent of funding for each area.--Not more than 10 
     percent of the annual appropriation for this subsection shall 
     be made available, in any 1 year, to each American Heritage 
     Area.
       (3) Total funding for each area.--Not more than a total of 
     $10,000,000 may be made available under this subsection to 
     each American Heritage Area.
       (4) Agreements.--Any payment made under this subsection 
     shall be subject to an agreement that conversion, use, or 
     disposal of the project so assisted for purposes contrary to 
     the purposes of this title, as determined by the Secretary, 
     shall result in a right of the United States to the greater 
     of--
       (A) reimbursement of all funds made available for such 
     project; and
       (B) the proportion of the increased value of the project 
     attributable to such funds, as determined at the time of such 
     conversion, use, or disposal.
       (d) Limitation on Amounts for Technical Assistance.--The 
     amount of Federal funding made available under this section 
     for technical assistance for an American Heritage Area for a 
     fiscal year may not exceed $150,000.

     SEC. 112. EXPIRATION OF AUTHORITIES.

       The authorities contained in this title shall expire on 
     September 30 of the 25th fiscal year beginning after the date 
     of the enactment of this title.

     SEC. 113. REPORT.

       The Secretary shall submit to the Congress, every 5 years 
     while the authorities contained in this title remain in 
     force, a report on the status and accomplishments of the 
     American Heritage Areas Partnership Program as a whole.

     SEC. 114. SAVINGS PROVISION.

       Nothing in this title shall be construed to expand or 
     diminish any authorities contained in any law designating an 
     individual National Heritage Area or Corridor before the date 
     of the enactment of this title.
            TITLE II--DESIGNATION OF AMERICAN HERITAGE AREAS

     SEC. 201. AMERICAN COAL HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the rise of American industry in the late 19th and 20th 
     centuries led to tremendous growth in the Appalachian coal 
     fields, creating an area of national historic significance in 
     terms of its contributions to the industrial revolution, 
     architecture, culture, and diversity;
       (2) within the Appalachian coal belt, the coal mined in 
     southern West Virginia and in southwestern Virginia produced 
     some of the purest and most sought-after coal in the Nation, 
     and the region associated with this coal contains a rich 
     cultural heritage;
       (3) the influx of labor needed to mine coal in this region 
     created a diverse community of African Americans from the 
     south, recent immigrants from southern and southeastern 
     Europe, Americans from northern mining areas, and native 
     Appalachians;
       (4) it is in the national interest to preserve and protect 
     physical remnants of the late 19th and early 20th century 
     rise of American industry for the education and benefit of 
     present and future generations; and
       (5) there is a need to provide assistance to the 
     preservation and promotion of the vestiges of the coal 
     heritage of Appalachia that have outstanding cultural, 
     historic, and architectural value.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--The purposes of this section are 
     to preserve and interpret, for the educational and 
     inspirational benefit of present and future generations, 
     certain lands and structures with unique and significant 
     historical and cultural values associated with the coal 
     mining heritage of southern West Virginia and southwestern 
     Virginia.
       (c) Designation.--
       (1) In general.--Upon publication by the Secretary in the 
     Federal Register of notice that a compact meeting the 
     requirements for a compact under section 106(a)(2) has been 
     approved by the Secretary under the procedures referred to in 
     section 106(b), there is hereby designated the American Coal 
     Heritage Area (hereinafter in this section referred to as the 
     ``Heritage Area'').
       (2) Compact.--The Secretary may not require, as a condition 
     of approving a compact submitted pursuant to this section 
     regarding the Heritage Area, that both the State of West 
     Virginia and the Commonwealth of Virginia sign the compact.
       (d) Boundaries.--The Heritage Area shall be composed of the 
     lands generally depicted on the map entitled ``Coal Industry 
     National Heritage Area'', numbered CMNHA-80,008, and dated 
     August 1994. The map shall be on file and available for 
     public inspection in the office of the Director of the 
     National Park Service.
       (e) Administration.--The Heritage Area shall be considered 
     to be part of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     and shall be considered for all purposes, including but not 
     limited to the management plan submission requirement of 
     section 107(c)(1) and the provisions of section 108, to have 
     been designated an American Heritage Area under section 
     105(d) on the date on which the Heritage Area is designated 
     under subsection (c) of this section.

     SEC. 202. AUGUSTA CANAL AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the Augusta Canal National Historic Landmark in the 
     State of Georgia, listed on the National Register of Historic 
     Places, is one of the last unspoiled and undeveloped areas in 
     the State of Georgia, has remained largely intact, and has 
     excellent water quality, beautiful rural landscapes, 
     architecturally significant mill structures and mill 
     villages, and large acreage in open space;
       (2) the beautiful rural landscapes, scenic vistas and 
     excellent water quality of the Augusta Canal contain 
     significant undeveloped recreational opportunities for people 
     throughout the United States;
       (3) the existing mill sites and other structures throughout 
     the Augusta Canal were instrumental in the development of the 
     cotton textile industry in the south;
       (4) several significant sites associated with Native 
     Americans, the American Revolution, and African-Americans are 
     located within the area; and
       (5) the Augusta Canal Authority would be an appropriate 
     management entity for an American Heritage Area established 
     in the area of the Augusta Canal.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--The purposes of this section are 
     to--
       (1) designate the Augusta Canal as an American Heritage 
     Area; and
       (2) provide a management framework to assist the State of 
     Georgia, its units of local and regional government, and 
     citizens in the development and implementation of integrated 
     cultural, historical, and recreational land resource 
     management programs in order to retain, enhance, and 
     interpret significant features of the lands, waters, historic 
     structures, and heritage of the Augusta Canal.
       (c) Designation.--Upon publication in the Federal Register 
     of notice that a compact meeting the requirements for a 
     compact under section 106(a)(2) has been approved by the 
     Secretary under the procedures referred to in section 106(b), 
     there is hereby designated the Augusta Canal American 
     Heritage Area (hereinafter in this section referred to as the 
     ``Heritage Area'').
       (d) Boundaries.--The Heritage Area shall be comprised of 
     the lands generally depicted on the map entitled ``The 
     Augusta Canal'', numbered AUCA-80,000, and dated August 1994. 
     The map shall be on file and available for public inspection 
     in the office of the Director of the National Park Service.
       (e) Administration.--The Heritage Area shall be considered 
     to be part of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     and shall be considered for all purposes, including but not 
     limited to the management plan submission requirement of 
     section 107(c)(1) and the provisions of section 108, to have 
     been designated an American Heritage Area under section 
     105(d) on the date on which the Heritage Area is designated 
     under subsection (c) of this section.

     SEC. 203. CANE RIVER AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the settlement in the Natchitoches area along Cane 
     River, established in 1714, is the oldest settlement in the 
     Louisiana Purchase Territory;
       (2) the Cane River area is the locale of the development of 
     Creole culture, from the French-Spanish interactions of the 
     early 18th century to the living communities of today;
       (3) the Cane River, historically a segment of the Red 
     River, provided the focal point for early settlement in the 
     area, serving as a transportation route upon which commerce 
     and communication reached all parts of the colony;
       (4) although a number of Creole structures, sites, and 
     landscapes exist in Louisiana and elsewhere, most, unlike the 
     Cane River area, are isolated examples and lack original 
     outbuilding complexes or integrity;
       (5) the Cane River area includes a great variety of 
     historical features, with original elements, in both rural 
     and urban settings and a cultural landscape that represents 
     various aspects of Creole culture, providing the base for a 
     holistic approach to understanding the broad continuum of 
     history within the region;
       (6) the Cane River region includes the Natchitoches 
     National Historic Landmark District, composed of 
     approximately 300 publicly and privately owned properties, 4 
     other national historic landmarks, and other structures and 
     sites that may meet criteria for landmark significance 
     following further study;
       (7) historic preservation within the Cane River area has 
     greatly benefited from individuals and organizations that 
     have strived to protect their heritage and educate others 
     about their rich history; and
       (8) because of the complexity and magnitude of preservation 
     needs in the Cane River area, and the vital need for a 
     culturally sensitive approach, a partnership approach is 
     desirable for addressing the many preservation and 
     educational needs of the area.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--The purposes of this section 
     are--
       (1) to recognize the importance of the Cane River Creole 
     culture as a significant element of the cultural heritage of 
     the United States; and
       (2) to establish a Cane River American Heritage Area to be 
     undertaken in partnership with the State of Louisiana, the 
     city of Natchitoches, local communities and settlements of 
     the Cane River area, preservation organizations, and private 
     landowners, with full recognition that programs must fully 
     involve the local communities and landowners.
       (c) Designation.--In furtherance of the need to recognize 
     the value and importance of the Cane River region, upon 
     publication by the Secretary in the Federal Register of 
     notice that a compact meeting the requirements for a compact 
     under section 106(a)(2) has been approved by the Secretary 
     under the procedures referred to in section 106(b), there is 
     hereby designated the Cane River American Heritage Area 
     (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ``Heritage 
     Area'').
       (d) Boundaries.--
       (1) In general.--The Heritage Area shall be composed of the 
     lands encompassing--
       (A) an acre approximately 1 mile on both sides of the Cane 
     River, as depicted on the map numbered ``CARI-80,000'', and 
     dated January 1994;
       (B) the Natchitoches National Historical Landmark District;
       (C) the Los Adaes State Commemorative Area;
       (D) the Fort Jesup State Commemorative Area;
       (E) the Fort St. Jean Baptiste State Commemorative Area; 
     and
       (F) the Kate Chopin House.
       (2) Map.--The Secretary shall prepare a map of the Cane 
     River American Heritage Area, which shall be on file and 
     available for public inspection in the office of the Director 
     of the National Park Service.
       (e) Administration.--The Heritage Area shall be considered 
     to be part of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     and shall be considered for all purposes, including but not 
     limited to the management plan submission requirement of 
     section 107(c)(1) and the provisions of section 108, to have 
     been designated an American Heritage Area under section 
     105(d) on the date on which the Heritage Area is designated 
     under subsection (c) of this section.
       (f) Management Entity.--Upon petition, the Secretary is 
     authorized to recognize a coalition consisting of the 
     following persons as the management entity, for purposes of 
     title I, for the Cane River American Heritage Area:
       (1) 1 member submitted by the mayor of Natchitoches.
       (2) 1 member submitted by the Association for the 
     Preservation of Historic Natchitoches.
       (3) 1 member submitted by the Natchitoches Historic 
     Foundation, Inc.
       (4) 2 members, with experience in and knowledge of tourism 
     in the area of the Cane River American Heritage Area, 
     submitted by local business and tourism organizations.
       (5) 1 member submitted by the Governor of the State of 
     Louisiana.
       (6) 1 member submitted by the Police Jury of Natchitoches 
     Parish in Louisiana.
       (7) 1 member submitted by the Concerned Citizens of 
     Cloutierville.
       (8) 1 member submitted by the St. Augustine Historical 
     Society.
       (9) 1 member submitted by the Black Heritage Committee.
       (10) 1 member submitted by the Los Adaes/Robeline 
     Community.
       (11) 1 member submitted by the Natchitoches Historic 
     District Commission.
       (12) 1 member submitted by the Cane River Waterway 
     Commission.
       (13) 2 members who are landowners in and residents of the 
     Cane River American Heritage Area.
       (14) 1 member, with experience and knowledge of historic 
     preservation, submitted by Museum Contents, Inc.
       (15) 1 member, with experience and knowledge of historic 
     preservation, submitted by the President of Northwestern 
     State University of Louisiana.
       (16) 1 member, with experience in and knowledge of 
     environmental, recreational, and conservation matters 
     affecting the Cane River American Heritage Area, submitted by 
     the Natchitoches Sportsmans Association and other local 
     recreational and environmental organizations.
       (17) The superintendent of the Jean Lafitte National 
     Historic Park and Preserve, or a designee.

     SEC. 204. ESSEX AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) Essex County, Massachusetts, was host to a series of 
     historic events that influenced the course of the early 
     settlement of the United States, its emergence as a maritime 
     power, and its subsequent industrial development;
       (2) the North Shore of Essex County and Merrimack River 
     valley contain examples of significant early American 
     architecture and significant Federal-period architecture, 
     many sites and buildings associated with the establishment of 
     the maritime trade in the United States, the site of the 
     witchcraft trials of 1692, the birthplace of successful iron 
     manufacture, and the establishment of the textile and leather 
     industries in and around the cities of Peabody, Beverly, 
     Lynn, Lawrence, and Haverhill;
       (3) Salem, Massachusetts, has a rich heritage as one of the 
     earliest landing sites of the English colonists, the first 
     major world harbor for the United States, and an early 
     thriving hub of American industries;
       (4) the Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site is the 
     site of the first sustained, integrated iron works in 
     Colonial America, and the technology employed at the Iron 
     Works was dispersed throughout the Colonies and was critical 
     to the development of industry and technology in America;
       (5) the Salem Maritime National Historic Site contains 
     nationally significant resources that explain the manner in 
     which the Nation was settled, its evolution into a maritime 
     power, and its development as a major industrial force, and 
     the story told at the Salem Maritime and Saugus Iron Works 
     National Historic Sites would be greatly enhanced through the 
     interpretation of significant theme-related resources in 
     Salem and Saugus and throughout Essex County;
       (6) partnerships between the private and public sectors 
     have been created and additional partnerships will be 
     encouraged to preserve the rich cultural heritage of the 
     region, which will stimulate cultural awareness and 
     preservation and economic development through tourism; and
       (7) the resident and business communities of the region 
     have formed the Essex Heritage Ad Hoc Commission for the 
     preservation, interpretation, promotion, and development of 
     the historic, cultural, and natural resources of the area and 
     are investing significant private funds and energy to develop 
     a plan to preserve the nationally significant resources of 
     Essex County.
       (b) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
       (1) to designate the Essex American Heritage Area in order 
     to recognize, preserve, promote, interpret, and make 
     available for the benefit of the public the historic, 
     cultural, and natural resources of the North Shore and lower 
     Merrimack River valley in Essex County, Massachusetts, which 
     encompass the 3 primary themes of the Salem Maritime National 
     Historic site and Saugus Iron Works National Historic site 
     (the histories of early settlement and industry, maritime 
     trade, and textile and leather manufacturing); and
       (2) to provide a management framework to assist the 
     Commonwealth of Massachusetts and its units of local 
     government in the development and implementation of an 
     integrated cultural, historical, and land resource management 
     program in order to retain, enhance, and interpret the 
     significant values of the lands, waters, and structures 
     located in the district.
       (c) Designation.--Upon publication by the Secretary in the 
     Federal Register of notice that a compact regarding the 
     Heritage Area and meeting the requirements for a compact 
     under section 106(a)(2) has been approved by the Secretary 
     under the procedures referred to in section 106(b), there is 
     hereby designated the Essex American Heritage Area 
     (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ``Heritage 
     Area''), within the county of Essex in the Commonwealth of 
     Massachusetts.
       (d) Boundaries.--The Heritage Area shall be comprised of 
     the lands generally depicted on the map numbered NAR-51-
     80,000 and dated August 1994. The map shall be on file and 
     available for public inspection in the office of the Director 
     of the National Park Service.
       (e) Administration.--The Heritage Area shall be considered 
     to be part of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     and shall be considered for all purposes, including but not 
     limited to the management plan submission requirement of 
     section 107(c)(1) and the provisions of section 108, to have 
     been designated an American Heritage Area under section 
     105(d) on the date on which the Heritage Area is designated 
     under subsection (c) of this section.

     SEC. 205. HUDSON RIVER VALLEY AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the Hudson River Valley between Yonkers, New York, and 
     Troy, New York, possesses important historical, cultural, and 
     natural resources, representing themes of settlement and 
     migration, transportation, and commerce;
       (2) the Hudson River Valley played an important role in the 
     military history of the American Revolution;
       (3) the Hudson River Valley gave birth to important 
     movements in American art and architecture through the works 
     of Andrew Jackson Downing, Alexander Jackson Davis, Thomas 
     Cole, and their associates, and played a central role in the 
     recognition of the esthetic values of landscape and the 
     development of an American esthetic ideal;
       (4) the Hudson River Valley played an important role in the 
     development of the iron, textile, and collar and cuff 
     industries in the 19th century, exemplified in surviving 
     structures such as the Harmony Mills complex at Cohoes, and 
     in the development of early men's and women's labor and 
     cooperative organizations, and is home of the first women's 
     labor union in the United States and the first women's 
     secondary school in the United States;
       (5) the Hudson River Valley, in its cities and towns and 
     its rural landscapes--
       (A) displays exceptional surviving physical resources 
     illustrating these themes and the social, industrial, and 
     cultural history of the 19th and early 20th centuries; and
       (B) includes numerous national historic sites and 
     landmarks;
       (6) the Hudson River Valley is the home of the traditions 
     associated with Dutch and Huguenot settlements dating to the 
     17th and 18th centuries, was the locus of characteristic 
     American stories such as ``Rip Van Winkle'' and the ``Legend 
     of Sleepy Hollow'', and retains physical, social, and 
     cultural evidence of these traditions and the traditions of 
     other more recent ethnic and social groups;
       (7) the State of New York has established a structure, in 
     the Hudson River Greenway Communities Council and the 
     Greenway Conservancy, for the Hudson River Valley communities 
     to join together to preserve, conserve, and manage these 
     resources and to link them through trails and other means; 
     and
       (8) the Heritage Area Committee jointly established by the 
     Hudson River Valley Greenway Communities Council and the 
     Greenway Conservancy (agencies established by the State of 
     New York in its Hudson River Greenway Act of 1991) is 
     expected to be the management entity for an American Heritage 
     Area established in the Hudson River Valley.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--The purposes of this section 
     are--
       (1) to recognize the importance of the history and 
     resources of the Hudson River Valley to the Nation;
       (2) to assist the State of New York and the communities of 
     the Hudson River Valley in preserving and interpreting these 
     resources for the benefit of the Nation;
       (3) to maintain agricultural viability and productivity in 
     the region; and
       (4) to authorize Federal financial and technical assistance 
     to serve these purposes.
       (c) Designation.--Upon publication by the Secretary in the 
     Federal Register of notice that a compact regarding the 
     Heritage Area and meeting the requirements for a compact 
     under section 106(a)(2) has been approved by the Secretary 
     under the procedures referred to in section 106(b), there is 
     hereby designated the Hudson River Valley American Heritage 
     Area (hereinafter in this section referred to as the 
     ``Heritage Area'').
       (d) Boundaries.--
       (1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in paragraph 
     (2), the Heritage Area shall be comprised of the lands 
     generally depicted on the map entitled ``Hudson River Valley 
     National Heritage Area'', numbered P50-8002, and dated August 
     1994. The map shall be on file and available for public 
     inspection in the office of the Director of the National Park 
     Service.
       (2) Local agreement to inclusion.--Each of the following 
     counties, cities, and towns in the State of New York shall 
     not be included within the boundaries of the Heritage Area 
     unless the government of such county, city, or town agrees to 
     be so included and submits notification of such agreement to 
     the Secretary:
       (A) The counties of Greene and Columbia.
       (B) Any city or town within the county of Greene or 
     Columbia.
       (C) The counties of Rensselaer and Dutchess.
       (D) Any city or town (except the town of Hyde Park) within 
     the county of Rensselaer or Dutchess and located entirely 
     within the 22d Congressional District of New York.
       (e) Administration.--The Heritage Area shall be considered 
     to be part of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     and shall be considered for all purposes, including but not 
     limited to the management plan submission requirement of 
     section 107(c)(1) and the provisions of section 108, to have 
     been designated an American Heritage Area under section 
     105(d) on the date on which the Heritage Area is designated 
     under subsection (c) of this section.

     SEC. 206. OHIO & ERIE CANAL AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the Ohio & Erie Canal, which opened for commercial 
     navigation in 1832, was the first inland waterway to connect 
     the Great Lakes at Lake Erie with the Gulf of Mexico via the 
     Ohio and Mississippi Rivers and was a part of a canal network 
     in Ohio that was one of the most extensive and successful 
     systems in America during a period in history when canals 
     were essential to the growth of the Nation;
       (2) the Ohio & Erie Canal spurred economic growth in the 
     State of Ohio that took the State from near bankruptcy to a 
     position as the third most economically prosperous State in 
     the Union in just 20 years;
       (3) a 4-mile section of the Ohio & Erie Canal was 
     designated a National Historic Landmark in 1966 and other 
     portions of the Ohio & Erie Canal and many associated 
     structures have been placed on the National Register of 
     Historic Places;
       (4) in 1974, 19 miles of the Ohio & Erie Canal were 
     declared nationally significant, under National Park Service 
     new area criteria, in the designation of the Cuyahoga Valley 
     National Recreation Area;
       (5) the National Park Service found the Ohio & Erie Canal 
     nationally significant in a 1975 study entitled 
     ``Suitability/Feasibility Study, Proposed Ohio & Erie 
     Canal''; and
       (6) a 1993 Special Resource Study of the Ohio & Erie Canal 
     Corridor, conducted by the National Park Service and entitled 
     ``A Route to Prosperity'', has concluded that the corridor is 
     eligible to become a National Heritage Corridor, an 
     affiliated unit of the National Park System.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--The purposes of this section 
     are--
       (1) to preserve and interpret for the educational and 
     inspirational benefit of present and future generations the 
     unique and significant contributions to the national heritage 
     of certain historic and cultural lands, waterways, and 
     structures within the 87-mile Ohio & Erie Canal Corridor 
     between Cleveland and Zoar; and
       (2) to provide a management framework to assist the State 
     of Ohio and its political subdivisions in developing and 
     implementing a management plan for the area and developing 
     policies and programs that will preserve, enhance, and 
     interpret the cultural, historical, natural, recreational, 
     and scenic resources of the corridor.
       (c) Designation.--Upon publication by the Secretary in the 
     Federal Register of notice that a compact regarding the 
     Heritage Area and meeting the requirements for a compact 
     under section 106(a)(2) has been approved by the Secretary 
     under the procedures referred to in section 106(b), there is 
     hereby designated the Ohio & Erie Canal American Heritage 
     Area (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the ``Heritage 
     Area'').
       (d) Boundaries.--The Heritage Area shall be composed of the 
     lands that are generally the route of the Ohio & Erie Canal 
     from Cleveland to Zoar, Ohio, as depicted in the 1993 
     National Park Service Special Resources Study, ``A Route to 
     Prosperity''. The specific boundaries shall be those 
     specified in the management plan submitted under subsection 
     (e). The Secretary shall prepare a map of the area which 
     shall be on file and available for public inspection in the 
     office of the Director of the National Park Service.
       (e) Administration.--The Heritage Area shall be considered 
     to be part of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     and shall be considered for all purposes, including but not 
     limited to the management plan submission requirement of 
     section 107(c)(1) and the provisions of section 108, to have 
     been designated an American Heritage Area under section 
     105(d) on the date on which the Heritage Area is designated 
     under subsection (c) of this section.
       (f) Management Entity.--Upon petition, the Secretary is 
     authorized to recognize a coalition consisting of the 
     following persons as the management entity, for purposes of 
     title I, for the Ohio & Erie Canal American Heritage Area:
       (1) The Superintendent of the Cuyahoga Valley National 
     Recreational Area.
       (2) 2 individuals submitted by the Governor of Ohio, who 
     shall be representatives of the Directors of the Ohio 
     Department of Natural Resources and the Ohio Historical 
     Society.
       (3) 8 individuals submitted by the county commissioners or 
     county chief executive of the Ohio counties of Cuyahoga, 
     Summit, Stark, and Tuscarawas, including--
       (A) from each county, 1 representative of the planning 
     offices of the county; and
       (B) from each county, 1 representative of a municipality in 
     the county.
       (4) 3 individuals submitted by the county or metropolitan 
     park boards of the Ohio counties of Cuyahoga, Summit, and 
     Stark.
       (5) 1 individual with knowledge and experience in the field 
     of historic preservation, submitted by the Director of the 
     National Park Service.
       (6) 1 individual with knowledge and experience in the field 
     of historic preservation, submitted by the Ohio Historic 
     Preservation Officer.
       (7) 1 individual who is a director of a convention and 
     tourism bureau within the area, submitted by the Director of 
     the Ohio Department of Travel and Tourism.
       (8) 4 individuals, who shall include 1 representative of 
     business and industry from each of the counties of Cuyahoga, 
     Summit, Stark, and Tuscarawas, submitted by the Greater 
     Cleveland Growth Association, the Akron Regional Development 
     Board, the Stark Development Board, and the Tuscarawas County 
     Chamber of Commerce.
       (g) Assistance.--The Secretary may provide to public and 
     private entities within the Heritage Area (including the 
     management entity for the Heritage Area) technical, 
     financial, development, and operational assistance. 
     Assistance provided under this subsection shall be provided 
     on a reimbursable basis through the Cuyahoga Valley National 
     Recreation Area.

     SEC. 207. SHENANDOAH VALLEY BATTLEFIELDS AMERICAN HERITAGE 
                   AREA.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) there are situated in the Shenandoah Valley in the 
     Commonwealth of Virginia the sites of several key Civil War 
     battles;
       (2) certain sites, battlefields, structures, and districts 
     in the Shenandoah Valley are collectively of national 
     significance in the history of the Civil War;
       (3) in 1990 the Congress enacted legislation directing the 
     Secretary of the Interior to prepare a comprehensive study of 
     significant sites and structures associated with Civil War 
     battles in the Shenandoah Valley;
       (4) the study, which was completed in 1992, found that many 
     of the sites within the Shenandoah Valley possess national 
     significance and retain a high degree of historical 
     integrity;
       (5) the preservation and interpretation of these sites will 
     make an important contribution to the understanding of the 
     heritage of the United States;
       (6) the preservation of Civil War sites within a regional 
     framework requires cooperation among local property owners 
     and Federal, State, and local government entities; and
       (7) partnerships between Federal, State, and local 
     governments and their regional entities, and the private 
     sector, offer the most effective opportunities for the 
     enhancement and management of the Civil War battlefields and 
     related sites in the Shenandoah Valley.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--The purposes of this section 
     are--
       (1) to preserve, conserve, and interpret the legacy of the 
     Civil War in the Shenandoah Valley;
       (2) to recognize and interpret important events and 
     geographic locations representing key Civil War battles in 
     the Shenandoah Valley, including those battlefields 
     associated with the Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson campaign of 
     1862 and the decisive campaigns of 1864;
       (3) to recognize and interpret the effect of the Civil War 
     on the civilian population of the Shenandoah Valley during 
     the war and postwar reconstruction period; and
       (4) to create partnerships among Federal, State, and local 
     governments and their regional entities, and the private 
     sector, to preserve, conserve, enhance, and interpret the 
     nationally significant battlefields and related sites 
     associated with the Civil War in the Shenandoah Valley.
       (c) Designation.--Upon publication by the Secretary in the 
     Federal Register of notice that a compact regarding the 
     Heritage Area and meeting the requirements for a compact 
     under section 106(a)(2) has been approved by the Secretary 
     under the procedures referred to in section 106(b), there is 
     hereby designated the Shenandoah Valley Battlefield American 
     Heritage Area (hereinafter in this section referred to as the 
     ``Heritage Area'').
       (d) Boundaries.--The Heritage Area shall be composed of the 
     areas of the Commonwealth of Virginia generally depicted on 
     the map entitled ``Shenandoah Valley National Heritage 
     Area'', numbered SVNHA-80,006, and dated August 1994. The map 
     shall be on file and available for public inspection in the 
     office of the Director of the National Park Service
       (e) Administration.--The Heritage Area shall be considered 
     to be part of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     and shall be considered for all purposes, including but not 
     limited to the management plan submission requirement of 
     section 107(c)(1) and the provisions of section 108, to have 
     been designated an American Heritage Area under section 
     105(d) on the date on which the Heritage Area is designated 
     under subsection (c) of this section.

     SEC. 208. STEEL INDUSTRY AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the industrial and cultural heritage of southwestern 
     Pennsylvania, including the city of Pittsburgh and the 
     counties of Allegheny, Beaver, Fayette, Greene, Washington, 
     and Westmoreland, related directly to steel and steel-related 
     industries, is nationally significant;
       (2) these industries include steel-making, iron-making, 
     aluminum, specialty metals, glass, coal mining, coke 
     production, machining and foundries, transportation, and 
     electrical industries;
       (3) the industrial and cultural heritage of the steel and 
     related industries in this region includes the social history 
     and living cultural traditions of the people of the region;
       (4) the labor movement of the region played a significant 
     role in the development of the Nation, including both the 
     formation of many key unions, such as the Congress of 
     Industrial Organizations (CIO) and the United Steel Workers 
     of America (USWA), and crucial struggles to improve wages and 
     working conditions, such as the Rail Strike of 1877, the 
     Homestead Strike of 1892, and the Great Steel Strike of 1919;
       (5) there are significant examples of cultural and historic 
     resources within this 6-county region that merit the 
     involvement of the Federal Government to develop programs and 
     projects, in cooperation with the Steel Industry Heritage 
     Task Force, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and other local 
     and governmental bodies, to adequately conserve, protect, and 
     interpret this heritage for future generations while 
     providing opportunities for education and revitalization; and
       (6) the Steel Industry Heritage Task Force would be an 
     appropriate management entity for a Heritage Area established 
     in the region.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--The purposes of this section 
     are--
       (1) to foster a close working relationship between all 
     levels of government, the private sector, and the local 
     communities in the steel industry region of southwestern 
     Pennsylvania and empower the communities to conserve their 
     heritage while continuing to pursue economic opportunities; 
     and
       (2) to conserve, interpret, and develop the historical, 
     cultural, natural, and recreational resources related to the 
     industrial and cultural heritage of the 6-county steel 
     industry region of southwestern Pennsylvania.
       (c) Designation.--Upon publication by the Secretary in the 
     Federal Register of notice that a compact regarding the 
     Heritage Area and meeting the requirements for a compact 
     under section 106(a)(2) has been approved by the Secretary 
     under the procedures referred to in section 106(b), there is 
     hereby designated the Steel Industry American Heritage Area 
     (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ``Heritage 
     Area'').
       (d) Boundaries.--The Heritage Area shall be composed of the 
     lands generally depicted on the map entitled ``The Steel 
     Industry American Heritage Area'', numbered SINHA-80,007, and 
     dated August 1994. The map shall be on file and available for 
     public inspection in the office of the Director of the 
     National Park Service.
       (e) Administration.--The Heritage Area shall be considered 
     to be part of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     and shall be considered for all purposes, including but not 
     limited to the management plan submission requirement of 
     section 107(c)(1) and the provisions of section 108, to have 
     been designated an American Heritage Area under section 
     105(d) on the date on which the Heritage Area is designated 
     under subsection (c) of this section.

     SEC. 209. VANCOUVER AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the lower Columbia River basin and Vancouver, 
     Washington, have been the focal point of a number of 
     important periods, themes, and events in American history and 
     prehistory, including native settlements, westward expansion 
     of the British colonies and the United States from 1763 to 
     1898, political and military affairs from 1865 to 1939, and 
     military affairs from 1914 to 1941;
       (2) the Columbia River is the central feature around which 
     the history of the proposed Vancouver National Heritage Area 
     and the entire Pacific Northwest revolves;
       (3) the proposed Vancouver National Heritage Area is 
     located on the shores of the Columbia River, 78 miles from 
     the Pacific Ocean, and the Columbia River has been an artery 
     for communication and trade since prehistoric times;
       (4) Fort Vancouver National Historic Site, a unit of the 
     National Park System, was founded in 1825 by the Hudson Bay 
     Company and its development from 1825 to 1860 was seminal to 
     Euro-American settlement of the Northwest;
       (5) the Vancouver barracks served as the principal 
     administrative outpost of the United States Army in the 
     Pacific Northwest from 1849 until World War I, served as a 
     command post during the Native American Wars of the mid- to 
     late-19th century, and provided major facilities for support 
     of United States military ventures throughout the Pacific 
     during the Spanish American War and the 2 World Wars;
       (6) Pearson Airfield was the site of significant events in 
     the history of aviation in the Pacific Northwest, was 
     particularly prominent during the interwar period between 
     1923 and 1941, and today continues to be an important home to 
     historic aircraft and historic aviation;
       (7) the proposed Vancouver American Heritage Area contains 
     a number of discovered and unrecovered archaeological sites 
     significant to the history of North America and the growth of 
     the United States;
       (8) the proposed Vancouver American Heritage Area is 
     located close to major metropolitan areas, including 
     Portland, Tacoma, and Seattle, and is immediately adjacent to 
     Interstate 5, the major north-south interstate of the Pacific 
     Northwest; and
       (9) many Federal, State, and local government entities, as 
     well as numerous private organizations and individuals--
       (A) have expressed a desire to join forces and work 
     together in a cooperative spirit in order to preserve, 
     interpret, and enhance the cultural, recreational, and 
     educational potential of the proposed American Heritage Area;
       (B) have already demonstrated their ability to effectively 
     cooperate in the course of preparing the ``Vancouver National 
     Historical Reserve Feasibility Study and Environmental 
     Assessment'', as required by Public Law 101-523 (104 Stat. 
     2297); and
       (C) are capable of forming the continued cooperative 
     alliances needed to enter into a compact, identify a 
     management entity, and establish an appropriate management 
     plan for the proposed Vancouver American Heritage Area.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--The purposes of this section 
     are--
       (1) to preserve, enhance, and interpret the significant 
     aspects of the lands, water, structures, and history of the 
     proposed Vancouver American Heritage Area; and
       (2) to provide a partnership that will develop and 
     implement an integrated cultural, historical, recreational, 
     and educational land resource management program in order to 
     achieve these purposes.
       (c) Designation.--Upon publication by the Secretary in the 
     Federal Register of notice that a compact regarding the 
     Heritage Area and meeting the requirements for a compact 
     under section 106(a)(2) has been approved by the Secretary 
     under the procedures referred to in section 106(b), there is 
     hereby designated the Vancouver American Heritage Area 
     (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ``Heritage 
     Area'').
       (d) Boundaries.--The Heritage Area shall be composed of the 
     lands generally depicted on the map entitled ``Vancouver 
     American Heritage Area'', numbered VAAM-80,001, and dated 
     August 1994. The map shall be on file and available for 
     public inspection in the office of the Director of the 
     National Park Service.
       (e) Administration.--The Heritage Area shall be considered 
     to be part of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     and shall be considered for all purposes, including but not 
     limited to the management plan submission requirement of 
     section 107(c)(1) and the provisions of section 108, to have 
     been designated an American Heritage Area under section 
     105(d) on the date on which the Heritage Area is designated 
     under subsection (c) of this section, except that the 
     responsibilities of the management entity for the Heritage 
     Area shall not extend to those lands under the control of the 
     Department of the Interior or the Department of the Army. The 
     management entity may enter into cooperative agreements and 
     partnerships with these and other entities as appropriate to 
     further the purposes of this Act.
       (f) Pearson Airpark.--
       (1) Transition.--(A) General aviation shall cease at 
     Pearson Airpark not later than April 3, 2022, unless a 
     continuation of general aviation is expressly authorized by 
     an Act of Congress.
       (B) Not later than January 30, 2010, the management entity 
     for the Heritage Area shall submit to the Secretary a plan 
     regarding general aviation at Pearson Airpark that is 
     consistent with this section.
       (C) Not later than June 30, 2010, the Secretary shall--
       (i) approve such a plan and transmit the plan to the 
     Congress; or
       (ii) notify the Congress that no acceptable plan has been 
     submitted under subparagraph (B).
       (D) If the management entity fails to submit a plan 
     acceptable to the Secretary under subparagraph (B) before 
     June 30, 2010--
       (i) the Secretary may not provide further assistance to the 
     Heritage Area under this Act; and
       (ii) the Secretary shall prepare such a plan for submittal 
     to the Congress not later than June 30, 2011.
       (2) Historic aircraft defined.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term ``historic aircraft'' means any aircraft 
     representing aviation in World War II or earlier.
       (3) Viability and mitigation plan.--Any management plan 
     submitted to the Secretary pursuant to section 107(c)(1) and 
     subsection (e) of this section regarding the Heritage Area 
     shall include a Pearson Airpark Viability and Mitigation Plan 
     that accomplishes the following:
       (A) Identifies incentives and proposes regulations to 
     facilitate a transition from the use of Pearson Airpark from 
     predominantly general aviation to use for historic aircraft.
       (B) Establishes a program to mitigate any conflicts related 
     to the operation of Pearson Airpark and to other activities 
     within the Heritage Area. The program shall, in coordination 
     with the Federal Aviation Administration and other agencies 
     as appropriate, address, but not be limited to, 
     considerations of noise, safety, visual intrusion, and the 
     location of new facilities. Mitigation measures shall include 
     limitations on the number of air-worthy aircraft that may be 
     based at the Airpark.
       (4) Pearson airpark museum plan.--The management plan 
     submitted pursuant to section 107(c)(1) and subsection (e) of 
     this section regarding the Heritage Area shall include a 
     Pearson Airpark Museum Plan, which shall include budgetary 
     strategies by which proceeds from general aviation and other 
     sources will fund the Pearson Airpark Museum and other 
     aviation curation activities.
       (5) Mitigation measures and conditions regarding general 
     aviation.--The management plan submitted pursuant to section 
     107(c)(1) and subsection (e) of this section regarding the 
     Heritage Area shall permit general aviation at Pearson 
     Airpark to continue until April 3, 2022, subject to the 
     following conditions:
       (A) Pearson Airpark and Pearson Airpark Museum shall be 
     operated by the city of Vancouver or its designated entity. 
     Beginning on June 30, 2002, the Secretary shall require 
     payment at fair market value for any National Park Service 
     lands leased within the boundaries of the Heritage Area, 
     except as otherwise provided in this subparagraph. The 
     Secretary may enter into agreements that provide that 
     specific work performed or expenses paid by the city of 
     Vancouver may be used, fairly valued, to reduce or offset the 
     amount of the obligation of the city to pay rent pursuant to 
     this subsection, unless the city is obligated to perform the 
     work or pay the expenses under a statute other than this Act.
       (B) Not later than June 30, 2003, the city of Vancouver 
     shall remove from National Park Service property in the 
     Heritage Area all nonhistoric aviation-related buildings and 
     devices, including T-hangers and associated taxiways, except 
     buildings and devices necessary for navigation and safety.
       (C) The city of Vancouver shall not be compensated for 
     historic buildings remaining on National Park Service 
     property, but shall continue to bear liability and 
     responsibility for continued use and maintenance of these 
     structures.
       (D) No structural improvements or structural additions to 
     any structure or facility of the Pearson Airpark Museum 
     located on property of the National Park Service may be made 
     without the approval of the Secretary.
       (E) Helicopters shall not use Pearson Airpark except in 
     cases of emergency, disaster, or national security needs.

     SEC. 210. WHEELING AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) Wheeling, West Virginia, and its vicinity possess 
     important historical, cultural, and natural resources, 
     representing major heritage themes of transportation, 
     commerce, industry, and Victorian culture in the United 
     States;
       (2) the city of Wheeling played an important part in the 
     settlement of the Nation by serving as the western terminus 
     of the National Road in the early 1800's, by serving as the 
     Crossroads of America throughout the 19th century, by serving 
     as one of the few major inland ports in the United States in 
     the 19th century, and by hosting the establishment of the 
     Restored State of Virginia, and later the State of West 
     Virginia during the Civil War years;
       (3) the city of Wheeling was the first capital of the new 
     State of West Virginia, during the development and 
     maintenance of many industries crucial to the expansion of 
     the Nation, including iron, steel, and textile manufacturing, 
     boat building, glass manufacturing, and stogie and chewing 
     tobacco manufacturing, many of which are industries that 
     continue to play an important role in the Nation's economy;
       (4) the city of Wheeling has retained its national heritage 
     themes with the designations of the old custom house, now 
     Independence Hall, as a National Historic Landmark, with the 
     designation of the historic suspension bridge as a National 
     Historic Landmark, with 5 historic districts, and with many 
     individual properties in the Wheeling area listed on or 
     eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic 
     Places; and
       (5) the heritage themes and number and diversity of the 
     remaining resources of Wheeling should be appropriately 
     retained, enhanced, and interpreted for the education, 
     benefit, and inspiration of the people of the United States.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--The purposes of this section 
     are--
       (1) to recognize the special importance of the history and 
     development of the Wheeling, West Virginia, area in the 
     cultural heritage of the Nation;
       (2) to provide a framework to assist the city of Wheeling 
     and other public and private entities and individuals in the 
     appropriate preservation, enhancement, and interpretation of 
     resources in the Wheeling area that are emblematic of the 
     contributions of Wheeling to the cultural heritage of the 
     Nation; and
       (3) to allow for limited Federal, State, and local capital 
     contributions for planning and infrastructure investments to 
     create the Wheeling American Heritage Area, in partnership 
     with the State of West Virginia, the city of Wheeling, West 
     Virginia, and their designees, and to provide for an 
     economically self-sustaining American Heritage Area that will 
     not be dependent on Federal assistance beyond the initial 
     years necessary to establish the American Heritage Area.
       (c) Designation.--Upon publication by the Secretary in the 
     Federal Register of notice that a compact regarding the 
     Heritage Area and meeting the requirements for a compact 
     under section 106(a)(2) has been approved by the Secretary 
     under the procedures referred to in section 106(b), there is 
     hereby designated the Wheeling American Heritage Area 
     (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the ``Heritage 
     Area'') in the State of West Virginia.
       (d) Boundaries.--The Heritage Area shall be composed of the 
     lands generally depicted on the map entitled ``Boundary Map, 
     Wheeling American Heritage Area, West Virginia'', numbered 
     WHNA-80,005, and dated August 1994. The map shall be on file 
     and available for public inspection in the office of the 
     Director of the National Park Service.
       (e) Administration.--The Heritage Area shall be considered 
     to be part of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     and shall be considered for all purposes, including but not 
     limited to the management plan submission requirement of 
     section 107(c)(1) and the provisions of section 108, to have 
     been designated an American Heritage Area under section 
     105(d) on the date on which the Heritage Area is designated 
     under subsection (c) of this section.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this section not more than--
       (A) $5,000,000 for capital projects;
       (B) $1,000,000 for planning and studies; and
       (C) $500,000 for technical assistance.
       (2) Limitations.--(A) Funds made available pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) for a capital 
     project or for planning and studies regarding a project shall 
     not exceed 50 percent of the total costs of the capital 
     project or project, respectively.
       (B) Funds made available under this section or any other 
     Federal law for the Heritage Area or the Wheeling National 
     Heritage Area (including the Wheeling project) may not exceed 
     $6,500,000 in the aggregate.
       (3) Not eligible for funds under title i.--No funds may be 
     appropriated under title I for purposes of the Heritage Area.
     TITLE III--STUDIES REGARDING POTENTIAL AMERICAN HERITAGE AREAS

     SEC. 301. OHIO RIVER CORRIDOR.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the amenities and resources of the Ohio River, which 
     flows through 6 States from its headwaters in the 
     Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to its confluence with the 
     Mississippi River and comprises a chain of commercial, 
     industrial, historical, archaeological, natural, 
     recreational, scenic, wildlife, urban, rural, cultural, and 
     economic areas, are of major significance and importance to 
     the Nation;
       (2) the national interest is served by--
       (A) preserving, protecting, and improving such amenities 
     and resources for the benefit of the people of the United 
     States; and
       (B) improving the coordination between all levels of 
     government in the Ohio River Corridor;
       (3) the preservation, protection, and improvement of such 
     amenities and resources are failing to be fully realized 
     despite efforts by the States through which the Ohio flows, 
     political subdivisions of such States, and volunteer 
     associations and private businesses in such States;
       (4) existing Federal agency programs are offering 
     insufficient coordination to State and local planning and 
     regulatory authorities to provide for resource management and 
     economic development in a manner that is consistent with the 
     protection and public use of the amenities and resources of 
     the Corridor; and
       (5) the Federal Government should assist in the 
     coordination, preservation, and interpretation activities of 
     public and private entities with respect to the significant 
     amenities and resources associated with the Ohio River.
       (b) Study of Ohio River Corridor.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date on 
     which funds are made available to carry out this section, the 
     Secretary shall complete a study on the suitability and 
     feasibility of designating the Ohio River corridor, from its 
     headwaters in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to its 
     confluence with the Mississippi River, as an American 
     Heritage Area.
       (2) Report to congress.--On completion of the study 
     required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit a 
     report describing the results of the study to the Committee 
     on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate.

     SEC. 302. FOX AND LOWER WISCONSIN RIVER CORRIDORS.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the Fox-Wisconsin waterway is famous as the discovery 
     route of Marquette and Joliet;
       (2) as the connecting route between the Great Lakes and the 
     Mississippi River, the waterway was critical to the opening 
     of the Northwest Territory and served as a major artery in 
     bringing commerce to the interior of the United States and 
     providing a vital communication link for early explorers, 
     missionaries, and fur traders;
       (3) within the Fox and Lower Wisconsin River corridors are 
     an abundance of historic and archaeological sites and 
     structures representing early Native Americans, European 
     exploration, and 19th-century transportation and settlement; 
     and
       (4) the unique aspects of the waterway, from the heavily 
     developed portions of the Fox River to the pristine expanses 
     of the Lower Wisconsin River, should be studied to determine 
     the suitability and feasibility of the waterway for 
     designation as an American Heritage Area.
       (b) Study of Fox-Wisconsin River Corridors.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date on 
     which funds are made available to carry out this section, the 
     Secretary shall complete a study on the suitability and 
     feasibility of designating the Fox and Lower Wisconsin River 
     corridors in the State of Wisconsin as an American Heritage 
     Area.
       (2) Report to congress.--On completion of the study 
     referred to in subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit a 
     report describing the results of the study to the Committee 
     on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate.

     SEC. 303. SOUTH CAROLINA CORRIDOR.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the counties of Oconee, Pickens, Anderson, Abbeville, 
     Greenwood, McCormick, Edgefield, Aiken, Barnwell, Orangeburg, 
     Bamberg, Dorchester, Colleton, and Charleston, in the State 
     of South Carolina, form a corridor, more than 250 miles in 
     length, which possesses a wide diversity of significant rare 
     plants, animals, and ecosystems, agricultural and timber 
     lands, shellfish harvesting areas, historic sites and 
     structures, and cultural and multicultural landscapes related 
     to the past and current commerce, transportation, maritime, 
     textile, agricultural, mining, cattle, pottery, and national 
     defense industries of the region, which provide significant 
     ecological, natural, tourism, recreational, timber 
     management, educational, and economic benefits;
       (2) there is a national interest in protecting, conserving, 
     restoring, promoting, and interpreting the benefits of the 
     region for the residents of, and visitors to, the corridor 
     area;
       (3) a primary responsibility for conserving, preserving, 
     protecting, and promoting the benefits of the region resides 
     with the State of South Carolina and the various local units 
     of government having jurisdiction over the corridor area; and
       (4) in view of the longstanding Federal practice of 
     assisting the States in creating, protecting, conserving, 
     preserving, and interpreting areas of significant natural and 
     cultural importance, and in view of the national significance 
     of the corridor, the Federal Government has an interest in 
     assisting the State of South Carolina, its units of local 
     government, and the private sector in fulfilling their 
     responsibilities.
       (b) Study of South Carolina Corridor.--Not later than 2 
     years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary, acting through the National Park Service, shall 
     cooperate with the South Carolina Department of Parks, 
     Recreation, and Tourism in preparing a study on the 
     suitability and feasibility of designating the corridor 
     formed by the counties of Oconee, Pickens, Anderson, 
     Abbeville, Greenwood, McCormick, Edgefield, Aiken, Barnwell, 
     Orangeburg, Bamberg, Dorchester, Colleton, and Charleston, in 
     the State of South Carolina, as an American Heritage Area.

     SEC. 304. NORTHERN FRONTIER.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the area comprising Tryon County, in the Mohawk Valley 
     of the State of New York, and the Country of the Six Nations 
     (Iroquois Confederacy), known during the American 
     Revolutionary War period as the ``Northern Frontier'', offers 
     excellent opportunities to study a little known or understood 
     aspect of the American Revolution--the frontier experience;
       (2) the Northern Frontier territory was extremely valuable 
     to both sides of the American Revolutionary War and was 
     contested because of its geopolitical, military, 
     agricultural, transportation, and commercial attributes;
       (3) because a complex social, economic, and political 
     society was emerging on the Northern Frontier, the 
     Continental Congress established the Northern Indian 
     Department to conduct affairs there, and the English made the 
     area, and its Indian population, the centerpiece of the 
     English strategy to split the colonies;
       (4) due to the struggle to control the Northern Frontier, 
     privation and hardship were inflicted upon nearly all who 
     lived there, a diverse mix of ethnic and racial groups 
     willingly and unwillingly thrust into the struggle for 
     independence, leaving many dead, homeless, orphaned, or 
     dislocated by the end of the hostilities;
       (5) the tensions on the Northern Frontier reached such a 
     pitch that hostilities erupted, pitting neighbors, families, 
     tribes, and clans against each other, and led to a bloody, 
     savage, and destructive battle;
       (6) new interpretations and interdisciplinary studies of 
     this human drama are not only necessary, but timely because 
     of the abundant supply of assets in the area, including 
     sites, buildings, celebrations, folklore, and collections, 
     many safely preserved and many at risk; and
       (7) if these Northern Frontier assets can be thematically 
     related and portrayed for the education and enjoyment of 
     Americans and foreign visitors, an important and often 
     overlooked chapter in the heritage of the Nation will be 
     displayed for the benefit and edification of all peoples.
       (b) Study.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date on 
     which funds are made available to carry out this section, the 
     Secretary shall complete a study on the suitability and 
     feasibility of designating Tryon County, in the Mohawk Valley 
     of the State of New York, and the Country of the Six Nations 
     (Iroquois Confederacy) as an American Heritage Area.
       (2) Report to congress.--On completion of the study 
     referred to in subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit a 
     report describing the results of the study to the Committee 
     on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate.
TITLE IV--BLACKSTONE RIVER VALLEY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR AMENDMENTS

     SEC. 401. BOUNDARIES, COMMISSION, AND REVISION OF PLAN.

       (a) Boundaries.--Section 2(a) of the Act entitled ``An Act 
     to establish the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage 
     Corridor in Massachusetts and Rhode Island'', approved 
     November 10, 1986 (Public Law 99-647; 100 Stat. 3625), is 
     amended by striking the first sentence and inserting the 
     following new sentence: ``The boundaries shall include the 
     lands and waters generally depicted on the map entitled 
     `Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Boundary 
     Map', numbered BRV-80-80,011, and dated May 2, 1993.''.
       (b) Commission Membership.--(1) Section 3 of the Act 
     entitled ``An Act to establish the Blackstone River Valley 
     National Heritage Corridor in Massachusetts and Rhode 
     Island'', approved November 10, 1986 (Public Law 99-647; 100 
     Stat. 3625), is amended--
       (A) by amending subsection (b) to read as follows:
       ``(b) Membership.--(1) The Commission shall be composed of 
     19 members, appointed as follows:
       ``(A) the Director of the National Park Service, or a 
     designee, ex officio;
       ``(B) 5 individuals appointed by the Secretary after 
     consideration of recommendations from the Governor of Rhode 
     Island;
       ``(C) 5 individuals appointed by the Secretary after 
     consideration of recommendations from the Governor of 
     Massachusetts;
       ``(D) 4 individuals appointed by the Secretary to represent 
     the interests of local government in the State of Rhode 
     Island; and
       ``(E) 4 individuals appointed by the Secretary to represent 
     the interests of local government in the State of 
     Massachusetts.
       ``(2) A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled in the 
     manner in which the original appointment was made.''; and
       (B) in subsection (c), by inserting immediately before the 
     period at the end the following: ``, but may continue to 
     serve until a successor has been appointed''.
       (2) Paragraph (1) shall take effect upon the expiration of 
     the 90-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.
       (c) Revision of Plan.--Section 6 of the Act entitled ``An 
     Act to establish the Blackstone River Valley National 
     Heritage Corridor in Massachusetts and Rhode Island'', 
     approved November 10, 1986 (Public Law 99-647; 100 Stat. 
     3625), is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) Revision of Plan.--(1) Not later than 1 year after 
     the date of the enactment of this subsection, the Commission 
     shall revise the Cultural Heritage and Land Management Plan 
     submitted under subsection (a) and shall submit the revised 
     plan to the Secretary and the Governors of Massachusetts and 
     Rhode Island for approval under the procedures referred to in 
     subsection (b). The revision shall address any change in the 
     boundaries of the Corridor that occurs after the submission 
     of the plan required by subsection (a) and shall include a 
     natural resource inventory of areas or features that should 
     be protected, restored, or managed because of the natural and 
     cultural significance of the areas or features.
       ``(2) No changes other than minor boundary revisions may be 
     made in the plan approved under subsection (b) and revised 
     under paragraph (1) of this subsection, unless the Secretary 
     approves such changes. The Secretary shall approve or 
     disapprove any proposed change in the plan, except minor 
     revisions, in accordance with subsection (b).''.
       (d) Termination of Commission.--Section 7 of the Act 
     entitled ``An Act to establish the Blackstone River Valley 
     National Heritage Corridor in Massachusetts and Rhode 
     Island'', approved November 10, 1986 (Public Law 99-647; 100 
     Stat. 3630), is amended to read as follows:


                      ``termination of commission

       ``Sec. 7. The Commission shall terminate on December 31, 
     2003.''.

     SEC. 402. IMPLEMENTATION OF PLAN.

       Section 8(c) of the Act entitled ``An Act to establish the 
     Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor in 
     Massachusetts and Rhode Island'', approved November 10, 1986 
     (Public Law 99-647; 100 Stat. 3630), is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(c) Implementation.--(1) To assist in the implementation 
     of the Cultural Heritage and Land Management Plan, submitted 
     and revised under section 6, in a manner consistent with the 
     purposes of this Act, and to assist in the preservation and 
     restoration of structures on or eligible for inclusion on the 
     National Register of Historic Places, the Secretary is 
     authorized to provide funds for projects in the Corridor that 
     exhibit national significance or provide a wide spectrum of 
     historic, recreational, environmental, educational, or 
     interpretive opportunities, without regard to whether the 
     projects are in public or private ownership. Applications for 
     funds under this section shall be made to the Secretary 
     through the Commission. Each such application shall include 
     the recommendation of the Commission and its findings 
     regarding the manner in which the project proposed to be 
     funded will further the purposes of this Act.
       ``(2) The Commission shall not be eligible for funds under 
     this section unless it submits to the Secretary an 
     application that includes--
       ``(A) a 10-year development plan including the resource 
     protection needs and projects critical to maintaining or 
     interpreting the distinctive character of the Corridor; and
       ``(B) specific descriptions of any projects that have been 
     identified and of the participating parties, roles, cost 
     estimates, cost-sharing, or cooperative agreements necessary 
     to carry out the development plan.
       ``(3) Funds made available pursuant to this subsection for 
     any project shall not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of 
     such project.
       ``(4) In making funds available under this subsection, the 
     Secretary shall give priority to projects that attract 
     greater non-Federal than Federal funding.
       ``(5) Any payment made under this subsection for the 
     purposes of conservation or restoration of real property or 
     of any structure shall be subject to an agreement--
       ``(A) to convey a conservation or preservation easement to 
     the Department of Environmental Management or to the Historic 
     Preservation Commission, as appropriate, of the State in 
     which the real property or structure is located; or
       ``(B) that upon conversion, use, or disposal of the real 
     property or structure for purposes contrary to the purposes 
     of this Act, the recipient of the payment, or the successors 
     or assigns of the recipient, shall pay to the United States 
     the greater of--
       ``(i) the total of all Federal funds made available for 
     conservation or restoration of the real property or 
     structure, reduced pro rata over the useful life of the 
     improvements funded; and
       ``(ii) the increased value attributable to such funds, as 
     determined at the time of the conversion, use, or disposal.
       ``(6) The determination that, for purposes of paragraph 
     (5)(B), a conversion, use, or disposal has been carried out 
     contrary to the purposes of this Act shall be solely within 
     the discretion of the Secretary.''.

     SEC. 403. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 10 of the Act entitled ``An Act to establish the 
     Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor in 
     Massachusetts and Rhode Island'', approved November 10, 1986 
     (Public Law 99-647; 100 Stat. 3630), is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``$350,000'' and 
     inserting ``$500,000''; and
       (2) by amending subsection (b) to read as follows:
       ``(b) Development Funds.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out section 8 for fiscal years 
     beginning after September 30, 1994, not more than $5,000,000 
     in the aggregate, to remain available until expended.''.
              TITLE V--BRAMWELL NATIONAL HISTORIC DISTRICT

     SEC. 501. BRAMWELL NATIONAL HISTORIC DISTRICT.

       (a) Congressional Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       (1) the coal mining heritage of southern West Virginia is 
     of historical and cultural significance;
       (2) the town of Bramwell, West Virginia, possesses 
     remarkable and outstanding historical, cultural, and 
     architectural values relating to the coal mining heritage of 
     southern West Virginia; and
       (3) it is in the national interest to preserve the unique 
     character of the town of Bramwell, West Virginia, and to 
     enhance the historical, cultural, and architectural values 
     associated with its coal mining heritage.
       (b) Statement of Purpose.--The purpose of this section is 
     to encourage the preservation, restoration, and 
     interpretation of the historical, cultural, and architectural 
     values of the town of Bramwell, West Virginia.
       (c) Designation.--In order to preserve, protect, restore, 
     and interpret the unique historical, cultural, and 
     architectural values of Bramwell, West Virginia, there is 
     hereby designated the Bramwell National Historic District 
     (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ``Historic 
     District''). The Historic District shall consist of the lands 
     and interest therein within the corporate limits of the town 
     of Bramwell, West Virginia.
       (d) Cooperative Agreements.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to enter into 
     cooperative agreements with the State of West Virginia, or 
     any political subdivision thereof, to further the purposes of 
     the Historic District.
       (2) Ratio of non-federal funds.--Funds authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary for the purposes of this 
     subsection shall be expended in the ratio of 1 dollar of 
     Federal funds for each dollar contributed by non-Federal 
     sources. With the approval of the Secretary, any donation of 
     land, services, or goods from a non-Federal source, fairly 
     valued, may be considered as a contribution of dollars from a 
     non-Federal source for the purposes of this subsection.
       (3) Agreements regarding payments.--Any payment made by the 
     Secretary pursuant to a cooperative agreement under this 
     subsection shall be subject to an agreement that conversion, 
     use, or disposal of the project so assisted for any purpose 
     contrary to the purpose of this section, as determined by the 
     Secretary, shall result in a right of the United States to 
     the greater of--
       (A) reimbursement of all funds made available to such 
     project; or
       (B) the proportion of the increased value of the project 
     attributable to such funds, as determined at the time of the 
     conversion, use, or disposal.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $1,000,000 to carry out this section.
 TITLE VI--SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA AMENDMENTS

     SEC. 601. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Southwestern Pennsylvania 
     American Heritage Area Amendments Act''.

     SEC. 602. DESIGNATION OF SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA AMERICAN 
                   HERITAGE AREA.

       The Act entitled ``An Act to establish in the Department of 
     the Interior the Southwestern Pennsylvania Heritage 
     Preservation Commission, and for other purposes'', approved 
     November 19, 1988 (102 Stat. 4618), is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new title:
     ``TITLE III--SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA

     ``SEC. 301. DESIGNATION.

       ``There is hereby designated the Southwestern Pennsylvania 
     American Heritage Area, which shall be comprised of the 
     region in southwestern Pennsylvania described in section 
     101(a).

     ``SEC. 302. CLASSIFICATION.

       ``The Southwestern Pennsylvania American Heritage Area 
     shall not be considered to be an American Heritage Area for 
     purposes of the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
     Act of 1994 or the American Heritage Areas Partnership 
     Program established by section 105(a) of such Act.''.

     SEC. 603. POWERS OF COMMISSION.

       Section 103(h)(3) of the Act entitled ``An Act to establish 
     in the Department of the Interior the Southwestern 
     Pennsylvania Heritage Preservation Commission, and for other 
     purposes'', approved November 19, 1988 (102 Stat. 4618), is 
     amended by inserting ``or an appropriate private nonprofit 
     organization exempt from income taxes under section 501(c)(3) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,'' after ``public 
     agency,''.

     SEC. 604. FEDERAL PARTICIPATION.

       Section 105 of the Act entitled ``An Act to establish in 
     the Department of the Interior the Southwestern Pennsylvania 
     Heritage Preservation Commission, and for other purposes'', 
     approved November 19, 1988 (102 Stat. 4618), is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``SEC. 105. PROCEDURES FOR FEDERAL PARTICIPATION.

       ``(a) Revision of Comprehensive Management Plan and Scope 
     and Cost Document.--(1) The Commission shall revise, to carry 
     out this title in a manner that provides for limited Federal 
     involvement, the management plan developed before the date of 
     the enactment of this section. The Commission shall also 
     revise the scope and cost document developed before the date 
     of the enactment of this section to reflect the total cost of 
     each project proposed for approval under this section and the 
     Federal portion of such cost. Both the management plan and 
     the scope and cost document shall be submitted to the 
     Secretary for approval.
       ``(2) The Secretary shall approve or disapprove any 
     management plan or scope and cost document submitted under 
     paragraph (1) not later than 90 days after receiving such 
     plan or document. If the Secretary disapproves the submitted 
     management plan or scope and cost document, the Secretary 
     shall advise the Commission in writing of the reasons 
     therefor and shall make recommendations for revisions in the 
     plan or document. The Secretary shall approve or disapprove a 
     proposed revision to such a plan or document within 90 days 
     after the date on which the proposed revision is submitted to 
     the Secretary.
       ``(b) Loans, Grants, and Technical Assistance Using Federal 
     Funds.--The Commission may not make loans or grants involving 
     Federal funds under section 104 except as provided in this 
     subsection. The Secretary may provide a loan, a grant, or 
     technical assistance, for the purpose described in section 
     104, pursuant to an application made to the Secretary through 
     the Commission in accordance with procedures required by the 
     Secretary. Each such application shall include the findings 
     of the Commission regarding the manner in which the proposed 
     loan, grant, or technical assistance will further the purpose 
     of this Act. Each such application shall also include the 
     recommendations of the Commission regarding the proposed 
     loan, grant, or technical assistance. The Secretary may 
     approve such an application only if the Federal funds 
     provided pursuant to the application will be used in a manner 
     that is generally consistent with Federal law relating to the 
     type of project or activity to be funded, as determined by 
     the Secretary. Federal funds made available for loans or 
     grants pursuant to section 104 or this subsection may be used 
     to provide for the preservation or restoration of historic 
     properties in an amount not to exceed $100,000 for each 
     project so assisted.
       ``(c) Use of Federal Funds.--(1) Federal funds made 
     available under this Act with respect to projects may be made 
     available only for projects that are consistent with the 
     Standards and Guidelines for Historic Properties promulgated 
     by the Secretary.
       ``(2) Federal funds made available under this Act after the 
     date of the enactment of this section with respect to a 
     project may be used only for planning and design with respect 
     to the project, except that such funds may be used to 
     complete construction commenced before such date regarding 
     Saltsburg Canal Park or West Overton Village.
       ``(3) The total amount of Federal assistance provided under 
     this section for a project in any fiscal year may not exceed 
     20 percent of the total amount of Federal funds made 
     available for that fiscal year for the Southwestern 
     Pennsylvania National Heritage Area.
       ``(4) Federal funds made available under this title with 
     respect to a project may not exceed 50 percent of the total 
     costs of the project. In making such funds available, the 
     Secretary shall give consideration to projects that provide a 
     greater leverage of Federal funds. Any payment made under 
     section 104 or 105 shall be subject to an agreement that 
     conversion, use, or disposal of the project so assisted for 
     any purpose contrary to the purpose of this Act, as 
     determined by the Secretary, shall result in a right of the 
     United States to the greater of--
       ``(A) compensation for all funds made available with 
     respect to such project; and
       ``(B) the proportion of the increased value of the project 
     attributable to such funds, as determined at the time of such 
     conversion, use, or disposal.
       ``(5) No Federal funds made available to carry out this Act 
     for fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1995, may be 
     used to provide operational or maintenance support with 
     respect to any building, site, or structure that is not owned 
     by the Federal Government, except the Railroaders Memorial 
     Museum, Saltsburg Canal Park, and West Overton Village. Such 
     funds for the Railroaders Memorial Museum, Saltsburg Canal 
     Park, and West Overton Village may not exceed $200,000 
     annually, in the aggregate.
       ``(6) No Federal funds made available to carry out this Act 
     may be used for the construction of any visitor center, 
     interpretive center, or museum, except West Overton Village.
       ``(7) The Secretary shall approve or disapprove the use of 
     Federal funds made available pursuant to this title within 30 
     days after application for such funds by the Commission.''.

     SEC. 605. CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT.

       Section 104(b) of the Act entitled ``An Act to establish in 
     the Department of the Interior the Southwestern Pennsylvania 
     Heritage Preservation Commission, and for other purposes'', 
     approved November 19, 1988 (102 Stat. 4618), is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by inserting ``and to the 
     Congress'' after ``Secretary''; and
       (2) by inserting after the first sentence the following: 
     ``Funds made available for a fiscal year to carry out this 
     Act may not be obligated for that fiscal year until the 
     report required for the preceding fiscal year by the 
     preceding sentence is submitted to the Congress.''.

     SEC. 606. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Title I of the Act entitled ``An Act to establish in the 
     Department of the Interior the Southwestern Pennsylvania 
     Heritage Preservation Commission, and for other purposes'', 
     approved November 19, 1988 (102 Stat. 4618), is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``SEC. 106. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary 
     to carry out this Act the following:
       ``(1) For each of the fiscal years 1996, 1997, and 1998, 
     $1,000,000 for planning and design, $1,600,000 for 
     construction, $600,000 for grants and loans, and $400,000 for 
     the operations of the Commission.
       ``(2) For that portion of fiscal year 1999 that occurs 
     before the Commission ceases to exist under section 104(e), 
     $250,000 for planning and design, $400,000 for construction, 
     $150,000 for grants and loans, and $100,000 for the 
     operations of the Commission.''.

     SEC. 607. PATH OF PROGRESS.

       Title II of the Act entitled ``An Act to establish in the 
     Department of the Interior the Southwestern Pennsylvania 
     Heritage Preservation Commission, and for other purposes'', 
     approved November 19, 1988 (102 Stat. 4618), is amended as 
     follows:
       (1) By amending the heading of the title to read as 
     follows:
                    ``TITLE II--PATH OF PROGRESS''.
       (2) By amending section 201 to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 201. IDENTIFICATION OF ROUTE.

       ``In order to provide for public appreciation, education, 
     understanding, and enjoyment of certain nationally and 
     regionally significant sites in Southwestern Pennsylvania 
     which are accessible by public roads, the Secretary, with the 
     concurrence of the agency having jurisdiction over such 
     roads, may provide signs, interpretive materials, and other 
     informational devices for a vehicular tour route, commonly 
     known as the `Path of Progress Heritage Route'.''.

  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 bill presently under consideration before us.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Minnesota?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, the bill before us is a bill for 1994 in reform and a 
proper initiative for Park Service activities today. It is a new idea 
to conserve natural and cultural resources and try to respond to the 
needs of today.
  First of all, it reinvents the idea of a National Park Service 
designation, building upon the concept of national landmarks or 
historic register recognition, this provides for the opportunity to do 
an actual designation on the part of Congress for important natural and 
cultural resources. It is not a massive new Federal program; if 
anything, it is an attempt to try to empower the State and local 
governments to protect that which is within their areas.
  Second, its funding, the American Heritage Partnership Act, is funded 
from existing authorized funds. Of course in a very modest manner. The 
fact is there is $150 million each year authorized. This authorizes but 
$22.5 million of that amount specifically for its purposes and some 
additional operation and maintenance funding.
  It is a new use of exiting authorized funds. It preserves and 
protects property rights. I want to repeat that because there has been 
a lot of misunderstanding about this point. What we do not do is we do 
not superimpose the new wish list of property rights in this bill, as 
some have sponsored and sought.
  Third, it is a true partnership, establishing State and local 
government compacts. They make agreements and match the funds on a 1-
to-1 basis in most instances. In 10 years, when that 10-year window 
availability is over, the National Park Service and Federal support 
concludes.
  Fourth, this is a good process bill. There has been a hearing on 
every one of the bills that are in the American Heritage Areas 
Partnership Act, they have been subject to a hearing, as has the basic 
act. The basic act was marked up and has bipartisan support.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, this provides that Federal Departments and 
Agencies will act together, it provides for consultation so that 
Federal entities will work together.
  Mr. Speaker, the consultation does not indicate dictation. The fact 
is these agencies can go ahead and perform their assigned roles. We 
just want some communication between them and the American heritage 
areas, the units designated in this and future measures.
  It is a good bill. It affects many areas, but small areas, in our 
Nation. You would have to have a magnifying lens to find them. Indeed I 
will show them to the Members as we go through this debate. I urge 
Members to support this program. It is good work product, it affects 
many Members, it is a good bill.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5044, the omnibus heritage areas legislation, 
established the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program, provides 
for individual American heritage area designations pursuant to that 
program, directs the National Park Service to study certain specific 
areas for inclusion in the program, and makes modifications to several 
laws that designated certain heritage corridors or areas in the 1980's. 
This legislation represents a consensus among the administration, a 
bipartisan group of members of the Committee on Natural Resources and 
other interested parties, that innovative ways must be found to extend 
national preservation efforts in a new cost-effective manner.


              american heritage areas partnership program

  H.R. 5044 incorporates the provisions of H.R. 3707, which I 
introduced in November 1993, and which establishes the American 
Heritage Areas Partnership Program within the Department of the 
Interior. The bill was reported favorably to the House by the Committee 
on Natural Resources on May 25, 1994, and has the strong support of the 
administration and members on both sides of the aisle who are committed 
to developing this partnership between the Federal Government and State 
and local officials to assure the preservation and conservation of some 
of our most valuable resources.
  These provisions have continued to evolve through discussions with 
the minority, with the administration, and with other interested 
parties, and I believe the version we are bringing to the floor today 
is a better bill because of this input.
  I would like to commend my colleague on the committee, Mr. Hinchey, 
for his efforts with regard to heritage area legislation. After 
introducing his own version, he has graciously agreed to work with me 
on my draft and has provided substantial insight into the process from 
his own experience in dealing with this type of legislation as a State 
legislator in New York. I appreciate his input.
  As my colleagues know, I have advocated for some time the 
establishment of a more effective process by which to recognize the 
important resources contained in so-called heritage areas while 
limiting Federal involvement in their development and operation. Our 
Nation contains many geographically and thematically unified areas, 
which include significant resources worthy of preservation and 
conservation. In many cases, these areas are connected by greenways, 
trails, or natural corridors which could be the focus of innovative 
management ideas. Such areas are important nationally, and are best 
managed in a true Federal partnership with State and local government 
and private entities.
  In fact, the strong State, local, and private support these areas 
receive, and their diverse resources, indicate that national 
involvement, while welcome and necessary, should be limited. The 
professional expertise of the National Park Service can be useful in 
identifying and providing assistance for defining, establishing, and 
managing these important areas. However, the diversity of their 
resources, the ownership patterns, and the variety of uses and 
activities taking place, suggest that a true Federal partnership, 
wherein the national Government provides recognition and limited 
financial and technical assistance, and other entities, through the 
State and local governments, manage and fund the largest share of the 
necessary preservation and interpretation, is the most appropriate 
method of preserving these areas.
  Proposals for heritage areas or corridors have significantly 
increased in the past several years; there are currently four such 
areas affiliated with the National Park Service. The American Heritage 
Areas Program under consideration today would extend national 
preservation efforts in a new cost-effective manner and would assure 
that new heritage areas or corridors will have been properly reviewed.
  The text of the bill we are considering today incorporates the 
consensus I have reached with various parties on these issues. The bill 
defines an American heritage area and lists the criteria for 
designation. Designation will require an act of Congress after an 
entity requesting designation has submitted a feasibility study and 
compact approved by the Secretary. Proposed areas may qualify for 
limited technical and financial assistance before designation, and 
after established, heritage areas may receive technical and financial 
assistance for the purposes of developing and implementing a 
comprehensive management plan. The bill also provides for the 
withdrawal of designation if the Secretary determines that the area no 
longer meets the criteria.
  The legislation states minimum criteria for recognition of a 
management entity to administer an individual heritage area, prohibits 
the use of Federal funds received through this act for the acquisition 
of property, and limits a management entity's eligibility to receive 
Federal funds for 10 years, with an additional 5 authorized if the 
Secretary approves. Other Federal agencies are required to coordinate 
their activities within a designated heritage area to the extent 
possible.
  Authorization for specified activities within an area are limited as 
follows:
  A maximum of $100,000 for feasibility studies, $150,000 for compacts, 
$150,000 for management plans, and $250,000 for early actions. All of 
the preceding must receive a 25-percent match, and the total annual 
funding for all such assistance is limited to $8 million.
  Management entities may receive up to $250,000 annually, but must 
provide a 50-percent match for Federal funding for this purpose.
  For grants to assist in implementing management plans, the bill 
provides $14.5 million annually, with no one area eligible to receive 
more than 10 percent of the annual appropriation for this purpose, and 
with the conditions that the area must provide a 50-percent match, and 
that no area may receive more than $10 million for this purpose in 
total.
  Technical assistance provided by the National Park Service is limited 
to $150,000 annually for each American heritage area. Such assistance 
is defined as guidance, advice, help, or aid, other than financial aid. 
Services procured from the private sector by a management entity using 
funds provided under the American Heritage Areas Partnership Program 
are not considered technical assistance. Only that assistance provided 
by the employees of the Department of the Interior will be counted as 
technical assistance for the purposes of this program.
  H.R. 5044, authorizes the program for 25 years, and states that this 
act does not affect existing authorities for established heritage 
areas.
  Questions were raised during our discussions on heritage areas about 
certain provisions, and I would like to take this opportunity to set 
the record straight on a few issues.
  This is not a Federal land grab. These areas will be established as 
the result of local initiative; heritage area designation will require 
initial nomination by local groups and a demonstration of strong 
commitment by local and State entities. Furthermore, the bill expressly 
forbids the use of Federal funds to acquire property. Finally, section 
9 underscores the fact that nothing in this act shall be construed to 
enlarge, diminish or modify any current authority under Federal, State, 
and local law to regulate land use. Land use plans for a designated 
area may be adopted and implemented by local governments or those 
entities authorized by State law to exercise such authorities 
concerning private property use. While State and local governments may 
choose to adopt land use plans and regulations in support of American 
heritage areas, nothing in this bill requires such action, nor does 
this bill grant such authority to management entities. Zoning 
regulations are not affected by this act and remain under the 
jurisdiction of State and local governments. No new authorities, 
including the authority to impose or enforce new Federal regulations, 
are included or anticipated.
  After discussion with interested parties on this issue, I have 
amended the legislation further to state that nothing in the American 
Heritage Areas Act requires the Secretary to consider land use 
regulations as a condition of approval of a management plan or compact. 
Further changes include a requirement that a feasibility study include 
an inventory of the amount of land in the proposed area owned by 
public, private, and private nonprofit entities respectively. I believe 
these amendments underscore the fact that the legislation in no way 
creates a system of Federal land use regulation nor does it purport to 
impose such regulation on appropriate State and local authorities.
  The bill does direct other Federal entities to consult with the 
Secretary and to coordinate their activities within an American 
heritage area to the extent practicable. Such agencies are to conduct 
activities within a designated American heritage area consistent with 
the management plan unless the Federal entity determines that there is 
no practicable alternative.
  This requirement does not subordinate other Federal agencies to the 
Secretary of the Interior. The affected Federal entities may take such 
actions as they deem necessary regardless of the Secretary's views. 
This provision merely requires appropriate coordination to eliminate 
wasteful duplication of efforts and to minimize the impacts of actions 
which may adversely affect the resources contained in the American 
heritage area. This language was suggested by OMB, which coordinated 
discussions with other Federal agencies, and is supported by the 
administration.
  Finally, the funding levels prescribed by the bill as introduced were 
those suggested by the administration. This is a program designed to 
minimize the Federal Government's direct involvement in American 
heritage areas. Matches are required for each category of Federal 
funding, and there are conditions placed upon the future uses of 
projects completed with Federal funds. There is an overall cap on 
spending for each American heritage area, and Federal funding is 
limited to 10 years for each area, with a 5-year renewal subject to 
certain conditions.
  As Members know, there have been many requests for funding through 
the appropriations process, and we are seeing more and more Members 
seeking park designation for such areas which are not really 
appropriate for inclusion in the National Park System. This program, 
and the level of funding associated with it, are designed to encourage 
this limited approach instead of continuing the earmarks and park 
designations now consuming so much of the National Park Service budget. 
I believe the funding contained in this bill provides an appropriate 
incentive for areas which seek Federal funding while limiting Federal 
involvement in these initiatives.
  Mr. Speaker, Americans are increasingly interested in conserving and 
preserving natural areas and cultural symbols. There is also an 
increased understanding that resource preservation and economic 
viability are not mutually exclusive but compatible and mutually 
enhancing. Obviously, the national Government can neither own nor 
manage each property or area worthy of preservation. In these active 
communities containing a variety of resources, multiple management and 
funding sources would be the most appropriate method of preserving and 
interpreting the nationally important resources and themes.
  I believe H.R. 5044 provides national encouragement for protecting 
these assets without instituting a massive new Federal bureaucracy or 
providing significant Federal funding. The Federal Government will 
neither own nor manage the resources assembled in these areas. These 
are dynamic, thriving communities, which with the assistance of the 
National Park Service, will maintain an appropriate balance between 
preservation and growth.


                        individual designations

  While H.R. 5044 establishes an American Heritage Areas Partnership 
Program, and specifically a process by which heritage areas could be 
nominated and designated American heritage areas, we are providing for 
the designation in this bill of certain areas as American heritage 
areas.
  Many local groups have already begun working to complete studies and 
nominations pending the enactment of generic heritage area legislation. 
Some of these attempts have been underway for some time and there have 
been concerns expressed by supporters that delays may endanger the 
resources contained in the proposed areas and disrupt the coalitions 
formed to assist these projects. To avoid uncertainty and unnecessary 
delays, I have agreed to consider several of these proposals. These 
proposals have all been heard by the Subcommittee on National Parks, 
Forests and Public Lands and have been tailored to the provisions of 
the generic legislation to the extent possible.


                      AMERICAN COAL HERITAGE AREA

  The section designating the American Coal Heritage Area includes 
provisions of two bills: H.R. 3988, the West Virginia National Coal 
Heritage Act of 1994, introduced by Representative Rahall on March 9, 
1994, and H.R. 4692, the Appalachian Coal Heritage Act of 1994, 
introduced by Representative Boucher on June 30, 1994. These bills 
concern contiguous coal mining communities in southern West Virginia 
and in southwestern Virginia, including Pocahontas, VA, and Bramwell, 
WV, towns on either side of the State line that grew up around the 
Pocahontas coal mine. The Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and 
Public Lands held a hearing on the Rahall and Boucher measures on July 
28, 1994.
  The Pocahontas coal mine opened in 1882, changing forever the corner 
of Appalachia at the Virginia-West Virginia State line. Local 
architecture reflects the migration to this area of Hungarian, German, 
and Welsh workers, along with others, near the turn of the century.
  The West Virginia mining conflicts of the first decades of this 
century pitted workers and their families against not only mine owners, 
but also against the U.S. Army, providing a significant, if dark, 
chapter in the history of the labor movement and Appalachia. The best 
known of these incidents are the Battle of Matewan and the Battle of 
Blair Mountain.
  Section 201 of H.R. 5044 authorizes the establishment of the American 
Coal Heritage Area upon publication in the Federal Register that the 
Secretary of the Interior has approved the compact. The area will be 
managed pursuant to the provisions of title I.


                  AUGUSTA CANAL AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA

  The section designating the Augusta Canal American Heritage Area 
incorporates many of the provisions of H.R. 2949, introduced by 
Representative Johnson of Georgia on August 6, 1993. The subcommittee 
on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands held a hearing on H.R. 2949 
on June 28, 1994.
  The Augusta Canal in Augusta, GA was constructed in 1845 to transport 
cotton from its source to downtown Augusta, prompting the construction 
of several textile mills in the city, and the subsequent rise of the 
area as a center of cotton manufacturing in the South. In 1875, the 
canal was expanded, bringing new economic and social vitality to the 
city. The canal, a national historic landmark, remains intact along 
with much of its associated historic, cultural, and natural setting in 
the adjacent industrial area, an example of 19th century Southern 
Industrial development.
  The Augusta Canal Authority, established by the general assembly of 
Georgia in 1989, has prepared the Augusta Canal master plan with 
funding from the State of Georgia, the city of Augusta, Columbia 
County, and the U.S. Department of Transportation and Interior. The 
plan identifies actions to preserve and interpret the canal and related 
resources, while also proposing strategies to extend the influence of 
the canal and its setting to enhance the natural and urban environment 
of Augusta.
  Section 202 of H.R. 5044 authorizes the establishment of the Augusta 
Canal American Heritage Area upon publication in the Federal Register 
that the Secretary of the Interior has approved the compact. The 
Augusta Canal Authority is identified as an appropriate management 
entity, and the area will be managed pursuant to the provisions of 
title I.


                   CANE RIVER AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA

  The section designating the Cane River American Heritage Area 
incorporates many of the provisions of S. 1980, introduced by Senator 
Johnston on March 24, 1993. The Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests 
and Public Lands held a hearing on S. 1980 on July 28, 1994.
  The town of Natchitoches, LA is the oldest permanent settlement 
within the Louisiana Purchase Territory, and was the site of the 
westernmost fort of the French Empire, Fort St. Jean Baptiste. In 1767, 
this part of the French Empire was ceded to Spain. The subsequent 
conversion of the frontier economy to an agricultural economy led to 
the development of a plantation economy based on slave labor. In 1803, 
this area was ceded back to France, and shortly thereafter the 
Louisiana Purchase gave jurisdiction over the area to the United 
States.
  The early years of French and Spanish domination, and the relative 
isolation of the area, left a lasting legacy in Natchitoches Parish. 
One aspect of this multicultural history was the development and 
nurturing of a unique culture on Isle Brevelle, the Cane River Creoles 
of color, a distinct community which exists today. Nearby Cloutierville 
retains its French small village flavor, and the life and folkways of 
the town were the basis for many of the fictional writings of Kate 
Chopin, who lived there between 1879 and 1884.
  A congressionally directed National Park Service special resource 
study completed in 1993 found several resources within the Cane River 
study area nationally significant, and recommended an approach which 
would combine National Park Service management of certain specified 
properties with a heritage partnership framework for the larger area. 
Section 203 of H.R. 5044 authorizes the establishment of the Cane River 
American Heritage Area upon publication of a notice in the Federal 
Register that the Secretary has approved the compact. The Secretary is 
authorized to designate a coalition of listed representatives as the 
management entity for the area, which will be managed pursuant to title 
I.


                      essex american heritage area

  The section designating the Essex American Heritage Area incorporates 
many of the provisions of H.R. 1685, introduced by Representative 
Torkildsen on April 2, 1993. The Subcommittee on National Parks, 
Forests and Public Lands held a hearing on H.R. 1685 on June 28, 1994.
  Essex County in Massachusetts contains historic, cultural, and 
natural resources reflecting the themes associated with Salem Maritime 
National Historic Site, including the history of early settlement, 
maritime trade, and textile and leather industries. In 1987, the city 
of Salem, MA, contracted for the development of a heritage park plan to 
link the Salem Maritime National Historic Site more closely with the 
surrounding communities. The resulting Salem partnership, including 
representatives from the National Park Service, local government and 
the private sector produced an action plan to promote rehabilitation 
and expansion of the Salem Maritime National Historic Site and 
Improvements in the city's other historic resources and visitor 
services.
  In 1990, the National Park Service produced a study of alternatives 
ranging from rehabilitation of Salem Maritime NHS to a countywide 
system of historic sites with several adjunct visitor centers and 
countywide interpretive themes. The Essex Heritage Ad Hoc Commission, 
consisting of mayors of the towns in Essex County, representatives of 
private interests, and residents, was formed, and along with the Salem 
partnership is proceeding with implementation of the countywide 
preservation and promotion aspects pending legislation authorizing the 
Essex American Heritage Area.
  Section 204 of H.R. 5044 authorizes the establishment of the Essex 
American Heritage Area upon publication in the Federal Register that 
the Secretary of the Interior has approved the compact. The area will 
be managed pursuant to the provisions of title I.
  Because the proposed Essex American Heritage Area contains two 
national Park System units, Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site 
and Salem Maritime National Historic Site, it is expected that park 
operations and heritage operations will be closely coordinated. In 
particular, Salem Maritime National Historic Site will play an 
important role in visitor orientation and interpretation of the related 
themes in the surrounding heritage area.


               hudson river valley american heritage area

  The section designating the Hudson River Valley American Heritage 
Area incorporates many of the provisions of H.R. 4720, introduced by 
Representative Hinchey on June 30, 1994. The Subcommittee on National 
Parks, Forests and Public Lands held a hearing on H.R. 4720 on July 28, 
1994.
  The Hudson River Valley embraces natural, historic, cultural, and 
recreation resources between Troy, NY, and the border of New York City 
representing themes of settlement and migration, transportation, and 
commerce. The Hudson River Valley greenway, created by the State of New 
York, creates a framework for voluntary regional cooperation in the 10 
counties of New York's Hudson River Valley, emphasizing both 
environmental protection and economic development. The State of New 
York has established a structure in which the communities in the Hudson 
River Valley may join together to preserve, conserve, and manage these 
resources, and to link them through trails. The national importance of 
the resources contained in the valley, as well as the scope of the 
greenway project, indicate that Federal participation in development 
and preserving the resources could be appropriate.
  Section 205 of H.R. 5044 authorizes the establishment of the Hudson 
River Valley American Heritage Area upon publication in the Federal 
Register that the Secretary of the Interior has approved the compact. 
The Hudson River Valley Greenway Communities Council and the Greenway 
Conservancy are identified as appropriate management entities, and the 
area will be managed pursuant to the provisions of title I.
  Because of concerns raised by members and residents in certain areas 
of the proposed heritage area, the bill provides that political 
subdivisions within the counties of Greene and Columbia, and in certain 
parks of the counties of Rensselaer and Dutchess, must agree to be 
included in order to participate in the program.


                ohio & erie canal american heritage area

  The section designating the Ohio & Eric Canal American Heritage Area 
incorporates many of the provisions of H.R. 3593, introduced by 
Representative Regula on November 20, 1993. The Subcommittee on 
National Parks, Forests and Public Lands held a hearing on H.R. 3593 on 
April 26, 1994.
  In fiscal year 1991, Congress appropriated funds for a National Park 
Service study of the Ohio & Erie Canal Corridor. That study, released 
in September 1993, found the area suitable for designation as an 
affiliated area of the National Park System. Its purpose would be to 
preserve the canal, the first inland waterway link between the Great 
Lakes and the Gulf of Mexico, and to chronicle the evolution of 
transportation systems in America.
  Section 206 of H.R. 5044 authorizes the establishment of the Ohio & 
Erie Canal American Heritage Area upon publication in the Federal 
Register that the Secretary of the Interior has approved the compact. 
The Secretary is authorized to recognize a coalition of specified 
representatives as the management entity, and the area will be managed 
pursuant to the provisions of title I.


         shenandoah valley battlefields american heritage area

  This section authorizes the establishment of a Shenandoah Valley 
Battlefields American Heritage Area, which incorporates some of the 
provisions of H.R. 746, the Shenandoah Valley National Battlefields 
Partnership Act of 1993, introduced February 2, 1993 by Congressman 
Wolf, and its companion, S. 1033, which was passed by the Senate on 
June 8, 1994.
  The Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, was the site of 326 armed 
conflicts during the Civil War, 15 of which were battles of major 
significance. The valley's position enhanced its strategic significance 
in the war; it is defined at its northern end by the first range of the 
Allegheny Mountains, separated from the Virginia Piedmont by the Blue 
Ridge Mountains and divided in the middle by the large and complex 
ridge of Massanutten Mountain.
  Two significant Civil war campaigns took place in the Shenandoah 
Valley. In 1862 Stonewall Jackson brought 17,000 Confederate troops 
into the valley and, using his detailed knowledge of the valley's 
topography, rivers and road, bested three Union armies of twice the 
manpower, forcing the Union to divert troops from the Confederate 
capital at Richmond, which had been at risk from the growing Union 
presence outside of town.
  In 1864, Union General Sheridan Attacked from the North, devastating 
the Confederate troops commanded by Jubal Early, and burning the 
valley's farms and mills along the way, disrupted the food supply. The 
campaign concluded with a decisive Union victory at Cedar Creek that 
served to build public confidence in the White House in the month 
before Lincoln's re-election.
  In 1990, Congress authorized a National Park Service study of the 
Civil War battlefields of the Shenandoah Valley. The report identifying 
the resources was issued in September 1992. In September 1993, the 
National Park Service issued a followup report recommending the 
creation of a heritage area to protect and interpret these resources.
  Section 207 of H.R. 5044 authorizes the establishment of the 
Shenandoah Valley Battlefield American Heritage Area upon publication 
in the Federal Register that the Secretary of the Interior has approved 
the compact. The area will be managed pursuant to the provisions of 
title I.


                 steel industry american heritage area

  This section authorizes the establishment of the Steel Industry 
American Heritage Area in southwestern Pennsylvania centered around the 
city of Pittsburgh. It contains elements of H.R. 3144, the Steel 
Industry Heritage project, introduced by Representative Coyne on 
September 28, 1993.
  Southwestern Pennsylvania was a center of activity during the 
industrial revolution and the steel industry of that region played a 
key role in the establishment in the 1920's of the preeminence of the 
United States in mass production industries. It also gave occasion for 
a new chapter in the history of the labor movement, spawning such labor 
organizations as the Congress of Industrial Workers and the United 
Steel Workers of America. It attracted immigrants whose culture became 
a part of the region's heritage, and shaped settlement patterns across 
six counties, including the city of Pittsburgh.
  In 1988, as a part of the southwestern Pennsylvania Industrial 
Heritage Preservation Commission's enabling legislation, Public Law 
100-698), Congress authorized the Commission to conduct a study of the 
Greater Allegheny and Washington Counties/Mon Valley Area, in 
coordination with the Pittsburgh Area Steel Industry Heritage Task 
Force. The study, which was completed in March 1993, recommends the 
establishment of a steel heritage area, to be carried out under 
cooperative management.
  Section 208 of H.R. 5044 authorizes the establishment of the Steel 
Industry American Heritage Area upon publication in the Federal 
Register that the Secretary of the Secretary of the Interior has 
approved the compact. The area will be managed pursuant to the 
provisions of title I.


                    vancouver american heritage area

  This section authorizes the establishment of the Vancouver American 
Heritage Area in Washington State, incorporating aspects of H.R. 4607, 
the Vancouver National Heritage Area Partnership Act of 1994, 
introduced on June 21, 1994, by Congresswoman Unsoeld.
  Vancouver, Washington's location on the Columbia River, has played a 
part in several chapters of U.S. history. Fort Vancouver, established 
in 1825, was the regional headquarters of the Hudson's Bay Co. 
Vancouver barracks has served the U.S. Army from the mid-1800's. 
Officer's Row, an avenue of historic homes, housed top military leaders 
for over 100 years. Pearson Airpark, now a general aviation airport, 
played a role in the development of aviation.
  Congress passed a law in 1948 to establish the Fort Vancouver 
National Monument, and in 1961 redesignated it the Fort Vancouver 
National Historic Site. Because nearly all of the Fort's structures 
were destroyed within 6 years of this abandonment by the Hudson's Bay 
Co. in 1860, the site comprises reconstructed structures based on 
archaeological data.
  Next to Fort Vancouver is Pearson Airpark, including an aircraft 
museum. In 1972 the National Park Service paid over $500,000 to acquire 
from the city of Vancouver a portion of the runway and other land 
serving Pearson Airpark. The general management plan for the fort 
provides for the acquired lands to eventually be open space with 
plantings compatible with the fort. Use of this land for airport 
operation has been an ongoing matter of concern and discussion and is 
one of the aspects the bill seeks to address.
  In November 1990, Congress established the Vancouver Historical Study 
Commission to study the feasibility of establishing a historical 
reserve to preserve and protect the area's special resources--Public 
Law 101-523. The study was completed in April 1993, and found the 
establishment of a partnership to preserve Vancouver's resources both 
feasible and suitable.
  Section 209 of H.R. 5044 authorizes the establishment of the 
Vancouver American Heritage Area upon publication in the Federal 
Register that the Secretary of the Interior has approved the compact. 
The area will be managed pursuant to the provisions of title I. In 
addition, the bill provides for the phasing out of general aviation at 
Pearson Airpark by 2022.


                    WHEELING AMERICAN HERITAGE AREA

  The section designating the Wheeling American Heritage Area 
incorporates many of the provisions of H.R. 2843, introduced by 
Representative Mollohan on August 3, 1993. The Subcommittee on National 
Parks, Forests and Public Lands held a hearing on H.R. 2843 November 
16, 1993.
  Wheeling, WV, became a center for transportation and industry in the 
first half of the 19th century. Serving as the western terminus of the 
national road in the early 1800's as well as one of the few major 
inland ports, Wheeling was home to developing industries such as coal, 
iron and steel, tobacco, glass, china, and tile and boat building. The 
resources remaining in Wheeling illustrate and interpret transportation 
and industrial themes in America's development.
  Since enactment of Public Law 100-121, the fiscal year 1990 Interior 
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, which appropriated funds for a 
study, the National Park Service has been working with the city of 
Wheeling and the State of West Virginia to evaluate the city's 
resources and develop a plan for the preservation, promotion, 
interpretation, and development of these resources. In August 1992, all 
parties approved a plan which calls for the establishment of the 
Wheeling National Heritage Area.
  Section 210 of H.R. 5044 authorizes the establishment of the Wheeling 
American Heritage Area upon publication in the Federal Register that 
the Secretary of the Interior has approved the compact. The area will 
be managed pursuant to the provisions of title I, and funding for the 
Wheeling American Heritage Area will be limited to $5 million for 
capital projects, $1 million for planning, and $500,000 for technical 
assistance. Both capital projects and planning require a 50-percent 
match for Federal funds.


                            OHIO RIVER STUDY

  The section directing a study of the Ohio River corridor incorporates 
many of the provisions of H.R. 2095, introduced by Representative 
Hamilton on May 12, 1993.
  The Ohio River flows through six States from its headwaters in the 
commonwealth of Pennsylvania to its confluence with the Mississippi 
River and comprises a chain of commercial, industrial, historical, 
archeological, natural, recreational, scenic, wildlife, urban, rural, 
cultural, and economic areas. Section 301 of title III directs the 
Secretary of the Interior to complete within 2 years a study of the 
feasibility and suitability of designating this section of the Ohio 
River as an American heritage area.


                  FOX AND LOWER WISCONSIN RIVER STUDY

  The section directing a study of the Fox and Lower Wisconsin River 
corridor incorporates many of the provisions of S. 344, introduced by 
Senator Kohl on February 4, 1993, and approved by the Senate on March 
17, 1993.
  The Fox-Wisconsin Waterway, the discovery route of Marquette and 
Joliet, connects the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River, was 
critical to the opening of the Northwest Territory and served as a 
major artery in bringing commerce to the interior of the United States 
and in providing a vital communication link for early explorers, 
missionaries, and fur traders. Section 302 of title III directs the 
Secretary of the Interior to complete within 2 years a study of the 
feasibility and suitability of designating the Fox and Lower Wisconsin 
River corridors as an American heritage area.


                     SOUTH CAROLINA CORRIDOR STUDY

  The section directing the National Park Service to cooperate in a 
study of the South Carolina corridor incorporates many of the 
provisions of H.R. 4330, introduced by Representative Derrick on May 3, 
1994.

  More than 250 miles in length, a corridor stretching from Charleston, 
SC, to Oconee County in the upcountry possesses a diversity of 
significant natural, historic, and cultural resources related to past 
and current commerce, transportation, mining, cattle, pottery, and 
national defense industries in the region providing significant 
ecological, natural, tourism, recreational, timber, management, 
educational, and economic benefits. Section 303 of title III directs 
the Secretary to cooperate with the South Carolina Department of Parks, 
Recreation, and Tourism in preparing a study on the feasibility and 
suitability of designating the South Carolina corridor as an American 
heritage area.


                        northern frontier study

  The section directing a study of the struggle for American 
independence within the Northern Frontier incorporates many of the 
provisions of H.R. 79, introduced by Representative Boehlert on January 
5, 1993.
  The Northern Frontier, comprising the Mohawk Valley in the State of 
New York and the country of the Six Nations--Iroquis Confederacy--was 
extremely valuable to both sides of the American Revolutionary War, as 
well as for the establishment of the Northern Indian Department there. 
Section 304 of title III directs the Secretary to complete within 2 
years a study of the suitability and feasibility of designating the 
Northern Frontier as an American heritage area.


           blackstone river valley national heritage corridor

  The title amending the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage 
Corridor establishment incorporates many of the provisions of H.R. 
2633, introduced by Representative Neal of Massachusetts on July 14, 
1993. The Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands held 
a hearing on H.R. 2633 on April 26, 1994.
  The Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor was 
established by Public Law 99-647 in 1986 to preserve and interpret the 
nationally significant resources of the corridor associated with the 
American Industrial Revolution. The corridor consists of the 46-mile 
segment of the Blackstone River running from Worcester, MA, to 
Providence, RI, and includes 20 communities in two States. The 19-
member Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor Commission 
was established by Public Law 99-647 to develop and implement a plan 
for preserving and interpreting the corridor's resources. The 
Blackstone River Valley cultural heritage and land management plan was 
approved by the Secretary of the Interior in June 1990, and the 
Commission is slated to terminate in 1996. The establishing act 
authorized $250,000 annually for the Commission with the Federal 
contribution not to exceed 50 percent of the costs of the Commission's 
operation.
  Public Law 101-441, enacted in 1990, authorized the Secretary to 
provide limited financial assistance for qualified projects within the 
corridor. The Federal contribution for such projects was limited to 50 
percent, and the Secretary was required to give consideration to 
projects providing a greater leverage of Federal funds. Public Law 101-
441 also authorized $350,000 annually for the Commission's operations 
and $1 million annually for fiscal year 1991-93 for the financial 
assistance authorized by the act.
  Title IV of H.R. 5044 revises the boundaries of the Blackstone River 
Valley National Heritage Corridor to include five additional 
communities--Worcester and Leicester in Massachusetts, and 
Burrillville, Glocester, and Smithfield in Rhode Island, and specifies 
the revision of the cultural heritage and land management plan 
accordingly. The bill extends the Commission for an additional 7 years, 
and increases the authorization for funding for the Commission's 
operation to $500,000 annually. This title also authorizes an 
additional $5 million for development and interpretive materials and 
programs in the corridor.


                  bramwell national historic district

  The section directing the establishment of the Bramwell National 
Historic District accomplishes many of the purposes of H.R. 793, the 
Bramwell National Historical Park Act of 1993, introduced by 
Representative Rahall on February 3, 1993, in recognition of the 
importance of preserving, restoring, and interpreting the historical, 
cultural, and architectural values of the town of Bramwell, WV.


            southwestern pennsylvania american heritage area

  The provisions regarding the southwestern Pennsylvania Heritage Area 
modify the original 1988 law dealing with this area to provide more 
accountability and control on the use of Federal funds in the area, as 
Federal participation in the project draws to a close over the next 
several years. These changes will allow work on the project to continue 
but limits the overall scope and involvement of the Federal Government 
to the minimum necessary to complete the work underway in the area.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  (Mr. HANSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5044, the American Heritage Areas Program will 
create a generic approach for establishment of new Federal Heritage 
Areas. In the past 10 years, local support for these areas has grown 
tremendously. There are currently over 100 heritage areas under various 
stages of consideration nationwide. The difficulty that Chairman Vento 
and I face is that all of these groups and Members are coming to us 
asking for various types of designation and assistance. Thus, 
congressional consideration of every new heritage area is becoming 
overburdensome and inconsistent. It is important that Congress adopt a 
consistent, programmatic approach to address these proposals which 
could affect tens of millions of acres in over 40 States. Moreover, 
with appropriate limitations on this program, heritage area designation 
could be a cost-effective alternative to new Federal parks.
  H.R. 5044 is far from perfect legislation and I have continuing 
concerns: First, is the protection of private property rights and 
second, is cost. Chairman Vento has agreed to insert new language which 
should provide some limitation on the Federal Government's ability to 
force land use controls on local governments.
  H.R. 5044 also authorizes over $22.5 million per year in new funding. 
Although this amount is more than double the amounts I initially 
recommended to the committee, it does represent a $12.5 million 
reduction from the original text of the bill. Due to the accommodations 
made by Chairman Vento, I will support H.R. 5044.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South 
Carolina [Mr. Derrick].
  (Mr. DERRICK asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DERRICK. I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5044, the American 
Heritage Areas Partnership Program. The heritage areas outlined in this 
legislation are very unique because they have been conceived and 
initiated at the grass roots level.
  These heritage areas tie individual kernels of the past together and 
provide an understanding of each area's history through development of 
its natural, cultural, and historic assets.
  The local folks in these regions have formed partnerships with the 
private sector, local resources, State government and the Federal 
Government to establish these areas. They have formed elaborate 
structures of organization to ensure that these areas are developed and 
managed in the best possible way. In South Carolina the Governor placed 
special emphasis on developing the heritage area through an Executive 
order requiring that agencies and departments in South Carolina work 
together to guarantee designation and successful management.
  Rather, than being a Federal mandate, this is truly a local 
initiative. Each of these areas has been organized by committees made 
up of local citizens who have built this concept from the ground up.
  Moreover, this measure limits Federal funding and could result in a 
savings of up to 66 percent. And, it limits Federal involvement.
  Our citizens have asked us to assist them in establishing these areas 
of history, culture and preservation so that future generations will 
have a greater understanding of our country's rich culture and 
historical treasures.
  Those undertaking the planning for these heritage corridors have done 
their part. Now it's our turn. I ask you to support H.R. 5044.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio 
[Mr. Regula].
  (Mr. REGULA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, this is a good bill. It is 
a way of people helping themselves to establish areas that are needed. 
This morning we had a contract with America on the front steps, and one 
of the things that contract said, ``It can be the beginning of a 
Congress that respects the values and shares the faith of the American 
family.''
  That is what this bill does exactly.

                              {time}  1540

  First, Mr. Speaker, I want to address the question of private 
property rights. There have been a lot of calls and conversations on 
this. This bill clearly does not provide any right of taking by the 
Federal Government. It says, and I quote, ``nothing in this title shall 
be construed to modify, enlarge, any authority of the Federal, State 
and local governments to regulate any use of lands provided by current 
law; two, nothing in this title shall be construed to grant powers of 
zoning or land use to any management entity for an American heritage 
area. It is a prohibition of acquisition of real property; there cannot 
be a taking. A management entity,'' and I am quoting directly from the 
law, ``a management entity for an American heritage area may not use 
Federal funds received under this title to acquire real property or an 
interest in real property,'' and lastly, and this is a provision the 
gentleman from Utah put in, ``no provision of this title shall be 
construed to require any change in land use regulation as a condition 
of approval by a management plan or a management plan by the 
secretary.'' Clearly it does not invade in any way private property 
rights, and it is spelled out in the law.
  Why is this important? Because it enables people to help themselves. 
We cannot afford new parks. The gentleman from Utah said this is cost 
effective, and he is absolutely correct. We still have a need. The 
increase last year in the national parks in usage was 10 percent. 
Yosemite was rationing people. They had to wait outside the gate and 
get a number to get in, and, with the increased population it faces in 
the United States, we need these open areas, particularly in the east, 
and, if we look at this map over here where the heritage corridors are, 
they are in the eastern States, and that means that people can get to 
them on a daily basis to take a walk with their family.
  Talk about family values. This is where the family value can go out 
daily and weekly and take a hike, where Boy Scout troops, Girl Scout 
troops, 4-H Clubs, can get together and use these corridors for 
recreational purposes, and more importantly they can be involved in the 
preservation. I know in my own community we have Kiwanis Clubs, Rotary 
Clubs, garden clubs all involved in the 87 miles of the heritage 
corridor following the high end Erie Canal, and they are already 
starting to clean the brush and get the hiking paths ready, and we are 
saying as a Federal Government, ``We want to help you, but only on a 
matching basis, dollar for dollar.''
  I think this bill represents a vision that we can be proud of, that 
we are conserving something for the future of this Nation.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Washington [Mrs. Unsoeld].
  (Mrs. UNSOELD asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Mrs. UNSOELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5044, 
legislation to provide for the long-term preservation and 
interpretation of significant historical resources across the Nation. 
This is a noble objective and I commend the chairman of the 
subcommittee for his efforts to bring this bill to the floor today.
  I am particularly pleased that section 209 of the bill incorporates 
much of my legislation to establish a heritage area in Vancouver, WA.
  Vancouver, which is located just across the Columbia River from 
Portland, OR, was at the center of the settlement and development of 
the Northwest during the 19th and early 20th centuries. In one 360-acre 
area, five historic gems chronicle the sweep of Northwest history since 
Lewis and Clark explored the area between 1805 and 1806.
  For the past five years I have been working with the mayor of 
Vancouver, the Park Service and many others to establish a Federal-
State-local partnership to preserve, restore, and coordinate the 
management of the historic area in Vancouver.
  In 1990 Congress adopted my legislation to establish a Commission to 
analyze various management options for these historic properties. The 
Commission was composed of representatives of the major entities 
interested in the area, including the National Park Service, the Army 
Corps of Engineers, the City of Vancouver, and the State of Washington. 
The Commission completed its work in April 1993 by recommending that a 
partnership be established to ensure effective, coordinated, management 
of the area. The members of the Commission agreed that management of 
the area needed to be coordinated by a federally established management 
framework based on partnership between the interested government 
entities.
  To implement the recommendations of the Commission I introduced H.R. 
4607 to protect all of the key areas and the equally significant 
historic periods and events they represent. Most importantly, by 
unifying and coordinating the management of all these historical 
assets, the bill proposes a partnership to develop the full 
educational, recreational, and historical potential of area.
  Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that resolution of the Pearson Airpark 
controversy--what the appropriate role of the airport should be after 
2002--is crucial to an overall cooperative management agreement for the 
area. While there is now an appreciation that Pearson's aviation 
history is of national significance and should be preserved, there has 
been disagreement over whether it should remain an operating general 
aviation airport.
  My own view is that it would be unconscionable to eliminate the 
aviation history represented by Pearson Airpark and its young but 
flourishing aviation museum. I am also convinced that some general 
aviation activity at Pearson is necessary to help underwrite the costs 
of maintaining the airfield, which is essential to the historic 
aviation mission. Both my legislation and the bill before us today 
follow the recommendation of the Commission that general aviation 
continue through the year 2022. Beyond that time it would take an act 
of Congress to allow general aviation to continue--a decision left to 
another generation.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5044 is about partnership and it is about 
protecting historically significant public resources so that our 
children can understand the past and connect it to the future. For 
people and communities in southwest Washington, this means unifying and 
coordinating the management of the area's historic assets; this means 
developing the full educational, recreational, and historical potential 
of the area; and it means making Vancouver the premier showcase of 
Northwest history.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon [Mr. Smith].
  (Mr. SMITH of Oregon asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Utah 
[Mr. Hansen] for yielding this time to me. Mr. Speaker, Members, let us 
rein in this enthusiasm a tad for this bill. This bill is not exactly 
as it has been purported to be, although those people advocating the 
passage of this measure are certainly well intentioned, and yet this 
bill is a benign coverup for a huge land use taking program for the 
Federal Government.
  Now my colleagues have heard a statement made that this in no way 
affects zoning or land use planning, and I want my colleagues to look, 
if they would like, at page 30 of the bill which provides that these 
heritage programs must be cleared with the Secretary of the Interior. 
They must cooperate, they must consult, they must conduct and support 
with his agreement.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, the point is that, if this bill had been anything 
other than a forthright proposition, we would have brought it here with 
a rule, and we would have debated the bill, and there would have been 
an amendment to provide for private property protection. That is the 
reason it is here on suspension, and the other reason it is here on 
suspension is because it is going to cost $20 million. Now I have some 
cause of concern because I have lived with this kind of legislation. As 
my colleagues know, I have been here for 12 years, on my way back to 
Oregon, but my colleagues all complimented me in 1985 with a bill on 
the Columbia River Gorge programs which I opposed, and I suggested at 
the time that it would downgrade private property and it would abuse 
private property, and it has, and it does, and by the way, Mr. Speaker, 
the restrictions in that bill provided for decreased property values, 
loss of local control, and increased litigation. One person lost 
$150,000 because he could not develop his property.
  Now this idea of going around the national parks system is not new. 
For 10 years I have been sitting with those people in the Committee on 
the Interior, and now the Committee on Natural Resources, who have 
added millions and millions of acres and responsibilities to the 
national parks, and now we are all worrying about what is happened to 
the national parks. They are $9 billion in backlog. We owe $9 billion 
more than we can pay for, and the parks department budget is about a 
billion. We are never going to catch up. We keep loading up the 
national parks program, and now, when we have loaded it to this extent, 
we are going to do the Hail Mary. We are going around end. We are going 
to call this new program the Heritage Program for American because 
there is no money left anywhere else, and then we are going to spend 
$20 million, more money, out of the national parks budget for the 
heritage program.
  Now I am not against these ideas, but why in the world do we not let 
local government do it? What is wrong with the States and local 
communities?
  I tell my colleagues to vote against this. This is against private 
property rights. Please vote against this bill.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. McNulty], a strong supporter of the bill.
  Mr. McNULTY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. 
Vento] and the ranking member, the gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen] for 
their leadership and bringing this bill to the floor, but most of all 
today I want to commend my colleague from New York, Mr. Hinchey, former 
assemblyman Maurice Hinchey who during his years with that title was 
the leader on conservation issues in the State of New York. Now he is 
one of our colleagues in the U.S. Congress.
  I say to the gentleman, ``Maurice, I was with some of your friends in 
Albany yesterday: Commissioner John Davidson, local officials from my 
area, Mayor Jennings, Mayor McNulty, Supervisor Field, County 
Legislator Ackerman, some of your former colleagues from the assembly, 
Assemblyman McEneny, Assemblyman Tonko, and especially one of your 
former colleagues from the assembly who was the first chairman of the 
first urban cultural park in the State of New York, Assemblyman Ron 
Canestrari.''
  So, today, as we talk about all the different issues across the 
country and all of the meaningful developments that this has for 
Members of Congress and their regions, I want to particularly salute 
and pay tribute to former Assemblyman Maurice Hinchey, now Congressman 
Maurice Hinchey, who was the father of the urban cultural park system 
in the State of New York.

                              {time}  1550

  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Doolittle].
  (Mr. DOOLITTLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition, strong opposition, 
to this bill, which I believe is going to prove to be a very costly 
bill to establish a massive new program of Federal land use control 
across the country.
  Mr. Speaker, this 100-plus-page bill to establish an American 
Heritage Area partnership was just recently introduced last week and 
has never been considered, as I understand it, by the Committee on 
Natural Resources.
  Mr. Speaker, this map over here, which has been referred to before, 
illustrates the areas of the country that will be considered for these 
American Heritage Areas. You can see, they are quite extensive. Perhaps 
there are some Members who want to cede this level of authority to the 
Secretary of the Interior. I think, though, in light of the history of 
what has gone on with these Federal regulatory acts and what has been 
happening, we should all be very concerned about this type of activity.
  I represent a district that is going through all of these monumental 
battles under these broad and vague statutes, such as the Endangered 
Species Act and the Forest Land Management Practices Act, et cetera, 
where we are suffering some real economic hardship.
  Reference has been made to the Contract for America, which the 
Republicans met on the steps and talked about earlier today. Well, a 
key part of that is that we subject everything to a cost-benefit 
analysis. A key part of that is reducing regulation. A key part of that 
is restoring the power to the people and the belief in private property 
rights. What concerns me about this bill, and I do not wish to impugn 
the intent of the author, because the author sincerely believes in this 
and I think promotes effectively his point of view. But I simply want 
to observe here that we have got to get back to the basics. We know 
what happens when the bureaucrats take a little authority and run with 
it and cause enormous problems to the private property owner.
  This bill, it seems to me, goes in completely the opposite direction 
that this Congress has been moving in, where we seek to have more 
authority over the bureaucrats, we seek to tighten our standards, we 
seek to validate the rights of private property owners. Instead, this 
is more Federal control.
  If you have a piece of property as a private owner in any of these 
orange areas, once this bill takes effect, and once your area becomes a 
heritage area, if you want to do anything on your property that in any 
way relates to some Federal activity of some type, you are going to 
have to ultimately have that approved by the Secretary of the Interior 
or you cannot do it.
  Mr. Speaker, I would submit, this is big Government. This is not 
reduced regulation. This is not local government. This is the top 
Federal bureaucrat in the Department of the Interior having to 
specifically approve every activity that occurs on your property.
  I urge defeat of this bill.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Hinchey].
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Speaker, this chart is important, because it 
illustrates quite clearly not only where these American Heritage Areas 
are located in our country, but it also further indicates the size of 
these American Heritage Areas.
  There are in fact four American Heritage Areas that are currently 
designated, and they exist for the most part in the eastern portion of 
the United States. This bill will designate 10 additional American 
Heritage Areas, and they are located, for the most part, in the 
Northeast, in the Central section of the United States, but also in the 
South, and, of course, over in the Far West.
  It is important to note, Mr. Speaker, the size of these areas. They 
are in fact very small. Relative, obviously, to the size of the 
Continental United States, they take in relatively small parts of the 
country, but they are important parts of the country.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HINCHEY. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman makes a very, very 
important point, that these are really areas that Congress must 
designate in terms of recognition, first of all, as heritage areas. I 
would point out they are relatively small areas that are impacted.
  Now, as far as local or State governments making agreements with the 
Federal Government, there are no new powers extended to the Federal 
Government, no new powers extended to the State or local government. So 
any power they have today to make such agreements, they could make the 
agreements under existing law. We are trying to in fact channel that 
authority for the purposes of the bill. So the new powers here, in 
other words, all local and zoning authorities that exist today, exist 
under this bill. All Federal powers already are in place.
  I command the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey]. The gentleman 
has been a leader in this policy. He introduced important legislation 
on this topic. We very much appreciate the support and the expertise 
the gentleman [Mr. Hinchey] has provided in terms of helping craft this 
bill, and, of course, the Hudson Valley designation which is so 
important to the gentleman. I appreciate the gentleman yielding, and 
commend him for the statement he is presenting.
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to respond by saying how much I 
appreciate of the work of the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento]. His 
leadership on the Committee on Natural Resources and particularly as 
chairman of the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public 
Lands, is invaluable to this House and the people of our country. The 
gentleman has done an extraordinary job in putting this bill together. 
He has exercised I think incredible patience and fortitude. He has 
spoken to practically every Member of the House, and certainly all 
those affected even marginally by the provisions in this bill.
  The fact that we have such a comprehensive measure, that has strong 
bipartisan support, supported by Members on both sides of the aisle, is 
a tribute to the leadership of my colleague from Minnesota [Mr. Vento], 
and I very much appreciate his work.
  Mr. VENTO. If the gentleman would yield further, I would point out 
every Member of the House affected by this favors this bill. The 
Members that may not favor it, I do not know they are affected.
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to make a couple of points, 
to try to make them very briefly. First of all, there are no new land 
use controls in this measure. None whatsoever. All the existing land 
use controls are kept. None are expanded, none are changed.
  This bill provides us with extraordinary educational opportunities. 
This country is now more than 200 years old. At an earlier time we 
recognized the importance of preserving places like Yellowstone and 
Yosemite. People today pay tribute to those people, the leaders of the 
country at that time, who had the foresight to do so.
  This is precisely what is being done here today. And in the 200 years 
of this country, much has been done here that needs to be protected and 
enhanced and talked about. These American Heritage areas are in fact 
educational laboratories for this and future generations. The 
Blackstone River Valley, for example, in Massachusetts and Rhode 
Island, talks about the development of commerce in this country and 
industry in this country, and the first way it came here. It is very 
important to preserve that.
  The American Coal Heritage Area in West Virginia also talks about the 
way we developed energy in this country. All of these areas across the 
country need to be preserved, need to be enhanced. This bill will do 
it. It does it in a comprehensive way that protects existing controls, 
puts no additional controls on any land, and simply allows for us to 
celebrate this as history in a reasonable way.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Kansas [Mr. Roberts].
  Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 5044 the 
American Heritage Areas Partnership Program Act. The stated purpose of 
this legislation is to foster public/private partnerships to protect 
areas of significance to our American heritage. This is indeed a noble 
goal, but we have seen time and time again that the Federal 
Government's idea of a partnership is, ``You own it, we tell you how 
you can use it.'' I fear that approval of this bill would seriously 
threaten the private property rights in areas designated under the act.
  As disturbing as the substance of the bill, is the process. This bill 
was introduced just 2 weeks ago and has not been the subject of 
hearings or markup in the Natural Resources Committee. It comes to the 
floor under suspension of the rules so that debate is limited and 
members who are concerned about property rights are not allowed to 
offer amendments, despite the fact that the House has supported the 
cause of private property rights on numerous amendments this session of 
Congress.
  I encourage my colleagues to reject both the substance and the 
process.

                              {time}  1600

  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Neal], the sponsor of the measure dealing with 
Blackstone River.
  Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of 
H.R. 5044, the American Heritage Areas Act of 1994. Through its 
partnership program, this legislation provides a unique opportunity to 
preserve and protect important historical and cultural sites of 
national significance, without straining the budget of our already 
overburdened National Park System. The Federal Government does not own 
or manage the land in a national heritage corridor, as it does in a 
traditional National Park and Federal funds cannot be used to acquire 
land for heritage areas.
  Local communities and businesses, along with historic and 
environmental groups work together with the National Park Service 
through a unifying commission to manage, develop and preserve the 
unique characteristics of an American heritage area. The legislation 
requires a 1 to 1 match of Federal dollars with non-Federal dollars. 
This type of partnership between the Federal Government and local 
entities not only makes national heritage areas more cost-effective, 
but also brings successful results.
  The Blackstone River Valley national heritage corridor, part of which 
is located in my district in Massachusetts, is a fine example of how 
successfully the Heritage Program works.
  Running along 46 miles of the Blackstone River from Worcester to 
Providence, the corridor is the birthplace of the American industrial 
revolution. To appreciate the importance of this event, you have to 
understand that in the 1790's, even after we had won the Revolutionary 
War, America was still dependent on England for clothing. This began to 
change in 1793, when Samuel Slater built the first mill that 
successfully used water-power from the Blackstone River to spin cotton. 
This revolutionary method of using water-power spread quickly 
throughout the valley and the rest of New England, changing our economy 
and society forever. If you go there today, you can feel our Nation 
changing from the pre-revolutionary farming-based economy to the 
industrial society that is still the basis of our economy.
  The Blackstone corridor is a model for heritage areas. Its success is 
due to the solid support and enthusiasm it receives from local groups. 
For every Federal dollar spend on the Blackstone corridor, $3 non-
Federal are attracted.
  Despite its remarkable accomplishments, there remains much to be done 
in the Blackstone corridor to secure its future as an integral part of 
our American history.
  This legislation will expand the Blackstone corridor and extend the 
authority of the Blackstone Commission. Over the past few years, areas 
of the Blackstone Valley have been considered for landfill dumps and 
other potentially damaging uses. Expansion and more preservation is 
needed to protect the corridor. Time and economics have moved the 
economic engine of America elsewhere. But the Blackstone today provides 
a unique and irreplaceable way for generations of Americans to see how 
it all began. To let this resource slip away would be a great tragedy.
  There are numerous historical, cultural, and recreational areas in 
this county of national significance. Unfortunately, due to budgetary 
constraints, the National Park Service cannot include all these 
worthwhile areas in its system.
  The American Heritage Areas Act provides a cost-effective and proven 
way to promote historical preservation and environmental conservation 
of such nationally significant sites. Without this legislation, these 
sites could be irreparably destroyed and their importance to our 
American history and culture lost forever.
  I strongly urge you to support this legislation, H.R. 5044.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Louisiana [Mr. Tauzin].
  (Mr. TAUZIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the consideration of 
this bill under suspension. It is being considered under suspension of 
the rules for one reason: to avoid the offering and the adoption of any 
amendments on this floor.
  What kind of amendments? Let me suggest to my colleagues the 
amendments that we would like to offer and we are being denied the 
right to offer.
  One that would say that the Secretary, as a condition of granting any 
money under this program, would not require the modification or 
addition of land use regulations. They do not want that amendment on 
this bill.
  One that would say that property owners have the right to consent to 
the listing of their property, which is going to get listed just like 
endangered rats in California under this bill, to say the landowners 
would have a right to consent to that listing. They do not want that 
amendment on this bill.
  Most importantly, the provision that would say that in effect the 
entity that manages property under this bill would have to compensate 
landowners if the management of that property, the listing of that 
property has the effect of taking away the value of that property. They 
do not want that in the bill.
  What is in the bill? A provision that says the Federal Government 
cannot pay a landowner when it regulates his land and takes away its 
value.
  What is in the bill? What is in the bill is procedures by which, with 
the grant of moneys, local governments will be encouraged to put in 
areas of heritage management and protection without compensation, areas 
as big as Pugh and six counties wide, as long as the Mississippi is, 
over 1,200 miles, little tiny areas, two and six counties wide.
  This bill ought to be on the floor so we can offer amendments to it. 
We ought to have property rights protections in this bill, and we do 
not. This bill requires land use regulation. If Members do not believe 
it, read the section that says that top priority shall be encouraging 
local governments to adopt land use policies consistent with the 
protections of this bill.
  Some of the protections of this bill are laudatory and good. But we 
ought to have one protection that is not in this bill, and that is to 
say that landowners have a right to consent to be so managed and they 
have a right to compensation if the government takes their property 
from them and refuses to pay them.
  I urge the rejection of this bill on suspension.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Coyne], who has an excellent proposal in here dealing 
with steel heritage.
  (Mr. COYNE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. COYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5044, 
the American Heritage Areas Act.
  I want to begin by commending Chairman Vento and the members of the 
House Committee on Natural Resources for their efforts to preserve 
America's nationally distinctive natural, historic, and cultural 
resources through the American Heritage Areas Act. I also want to thank 
Chairman Vento for his leadership in providing for a clear and well-
considered approach to addressing the issue of heritage areas through 
the authorization process.
  H.R. 5044 is a bipartisan effort to help preserve our Nation's 
heritage. This legislation also provides a strict criteria for judging 
the historical significance of projects worthy of support by the U.S. 
National Park Service.
  Finally, this bill leaves to States and local communities the 
authority to initiate heritage area proposals. No Federal funds may be 
used to acquire local property and all decisions on zoning and land 
management are left to the local governments and communities initiating 
heritage area proposals.
  H.R. 5044 includes authorization for the Steel Industry American 
Heritage Area which is a locally controlled effort to document and 
conserve the industrial and cultural heritage of southwestern 
Pennsylvania. The focus of this work is the Pittsburgh industrial 
district which emerged in the 19th century as a distinct industrial 
center for the production of iron and steel. The development of new 
industrial techniques in southwestern Pennsylvania's steel and steel-
related industries resulted in Pittsburgh being known around the world 
as the center of U.S. industrial might.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5044 deserves the support of the House. This bill 
helps to preserve America's past for future generations to study and 
enjoy. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from West 
Virginia [Mr. Rahall].
  (Mr. RAHALL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, in my capacity as chairman of the Surface 
Transportation Subcommittee, last May I brought a highway and transit 
bill to the floor that contained 2 billion dollars' worth of projects.
  It passed this body by a vote of 412 to 12.
  Today, I think that the pending legislation should enjoy the same 
level of support.
  I say this because just as we must insure that our transportation 
systems are properly maintained, and improved, so too must we place the 
same kind of emphasis on the preservation and restoration our most 
significant historic and cultural resources.
  The pending legislation would do just that.
  It would preserve, and advance, the historic and cultural 
infrastructure of this country.
  It is not enough to simply address our public works infrastructure.
  Our history, and our culture, represents the very soul of the Nation.
  Cold steel and concrete alone does not make a Nation whole.
  So I would say to my colleagues, this legislation, this fiscally 
responsible legislation I might add, deserves all of our support.
  If there was any area of this bill with which I would quarrel, it is 
with its extremely stingy authorizations and stringent matching 
requirements.
  For the most part, this legislation requires a 50-percent non-Federal 
match for projects relating to historic and cultural resources.
  Now, when we provide Federal assistance for a road--even those off 
the Interstate System I might add--we only require a 20-percent non-
Federal match.
  Yet in this bill, to preserve some very important historic resources 
of national significance, we will be limited to a 50-percent 
contribution.
  I, personally, do not find this to be appropriate. I recognize the 
tremendous concessions and fairness Mr. Vento has exercised, against my 
counsel and urgings.
  However, the gentleman from Minnesota, the distinguished subcommittee 
chairman, has chosen to take this approach in an attempt, I would 
suspect, to meet the concerns of some of our colleagues.
  So with this reservation, I support this bill. And again, I would 
urge this body to approve it overwhelmingly.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
New York [Mr. Fish].
  Mr. FISH. Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor of this legislation, I rise to 
congratulate its authors and in strong support of H.R. 5044, the 
American Heritage Areas Partnership Programs. The key word in this 
legislation is ``partnership.'' This bill is a financial 
``partnership'' between State, local, and Federal governments to make 
possible worthwhile capital projects and improvements in areas of 
historical, cultural, and recreational importance. The value of the 
legislation and the important point that there is no Federal taking has 
been covered by Mr. Derrick and Mr. Regula. The beautiful Hudson River 
Valley of New York, which I represent, is one of the heritage areas.

                              {time}  1610

  Mr. Speaker, it is rich in history of early English and Dutch 
settlements, as well as home to two of our Presidents. The credit this 
afternoon properly has been given to the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Hinchey] for his work in establishing our heritage areas. However, Mr. 
Speaker, the Hudson Valley is also in the midst of economic hard times. 
This legislation would assist districts such as mine by combining the 
forces of economic growth and conservation to bring increased tourism 
and revitalization to towns and cities throughout the designated 
heritage areas.
  I urge my colleagues to join in supporting H.R. 5044, which helps 
preserve and develop areas of national significance, without Federal 
land acquisition or an expensive price tag.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia [Mr. Johnson], sponsor of the Augusta, GA, canal heritage area.
  (Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support this 
bill which would establish the American Heritage Area Partnership 
Program within the Department of the Interior. One of the heritage 
areas authorized in this bill is located in the 10th District of 
Georgia. It is the Augusta Canal, one of this country's most treasured 
natural resources. The canal which dates back to 1845 has played an 
instrumental role in Georgia's history--from production of black powder 
during the Civil War, to development of Georgia's cotton textile 
industry.
  Over the years, the canal has faced tremendous pressure from 
developers even though the National Park Service designated it a 
national historic landmark in 1978. In addition, establishing the 
corridor as a heritage area is of great importance to both the State of 
Georgia and the citizens of Richmond and Columbia Counties. In fact in 
1993, the Georgia Department of Community Affairs designated the canal 
as one of four regionally important resources within the State. Local 
citizens have consistently indicated the importance of this legislation 
in continuing the preservation efforts currently underway at the canal.
  Mr. Speaker, the opponents of this bill claim that this is a Federal 
land grab program and will cost too much. In fact, this bill clearly 
states that no Federal money can be used to acquire property, nor does 
the bill give the Department of the Interior or any Federal agency the 
ability to control local land use regulations. Let us keep in mind that 
heritage areas are voluntary, initiated locally, and managed locally.
  Finally, this bill puts a lid on the amount of spending currently 
being appropriated to five existing heritage areas. Enactment of this 
legislation could ultimately result in savings of up to 66 percent in 
Federal spending on heritage areas. If Members are really concerned 
about the deficit, you will vote for this bill to cap spending on 
unauthorized projects. Do the fiscally responsible thing. Vote for H.R. 
5044.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I have yet to see a Member rise who has a 
designated area opposing the bill. They favor the bill. Members that 
are affected favor the bill before the House today.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Blute], one of the cosponsors of the Blackstone 
River Valley National Heritage Area.
  Mr. BLUTE. Mr. Speaker, I would first like to commend the gentleman 
from Minnesota [Mr. Vento], the chairman of the committee, and the 
ranking member, the gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen] for their fine 
work on this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor of the Blackstone River Valley National 
Heritage corridor bill, with my friend and colleague, the gentleman 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Neal], I rise in strong support of the American 
Heritage Areas Partnership Program Act, which includes the Blackstone 
and a handful of other small Park Service proposals.
  Representing some of the area that is included in the Blackstone 
corridor, I know, from first-hand knowledge, that the concept of 
heritage areas is a sound one.
  In 1986, the Congress enacted legislation that established the 
Blackstone corridor, and in so doing created a public/private 
partnership that has turned out to be an extremely cost-effective way 
of restoring and highlighting our Nation's historical natural 
resources.
  For a very small investment, these cooperatives are able to achieve 
excellent leverage against the Federal dollars they receive. In the 
case of the Blackstone, the partnership finds $4 for every $1 it gets 
from the Federal Government. I am sure anyone would agree that this 
constitutes an excellent return on investment.
  Beyond sheer efficiency, however, are the good things that 
partnerships like the Blackstone coalition are able to accomplish with 
some modest assistance from the Federal Government. The level of 
restoration and preservation that have been achieved in the corridor 
are remarkable.
  For those of you who don't know, the Blackstone Valley is the 
birthplace of the industrial revolution. The mills that line the 
Blackstone River and powered the Nation into the industrial age during 
the 17th and 18th century also turned the beautiful Blackstone into one 
of the most polluted waterways in the entire country.
  Now, though, thanks to the Blackstone partnership, the river has been 
restored for the enjoyment of Kayakers, fishermen, and swimmers--A 
truly remarkable accomplishment.
  This is the kind of community involvement and commitment involved in 
these heritage areas that we will vote on here today. You can take my 
word for it, as one who has seen one in action. They are a good idea, 
they work and, in my opinion, they are something that we can not afford 
to do without.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this important legislation.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kentucky [Mr. Mazzoli], a friend and colleague who is a sponsor of the 
Ohio Heritage corridor study.
  (Mr. MAZZOLI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. MAZZOLI. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from 
Minnesota [Mr. Vento], the chairman of the committee, for yielding me 
the time, and congratulate him and my friend, the gentleman from Utah 
[Mr. Hansen], for putting this bill on the floor.
  As the gentleman from Minnesota says, I rise in support of the bill, 
but especially to call some attention to title III of the bill, which 
deals with the Ohio River corridor. Mr. Speaker, I am a son of the Ohio 
River, born alongside its shores in the city of Louisville, and always 
will, and the Ohio River has been very important to our heritage as a 
city.
  Mr. Speaker, the Ohio River starts in the State of Pennsylvania and 
goes on down through six States, into its confluence with the 
Mississippi River. It drains an area in which millions of Americans 
work and live and recreate. It has some of the most spectacular scenery 
and some of the most important industrial areas in this Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, under title III of the bill, as put together by the 
gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento] and his counterpart from Utah, 
there has been a study of the Ohio River corridor to see that it might 
possibly be designated an American heritage area. I hope that 
designation is actually the fruit of this bill, because I think no 
other river than the Ohio deserves that designation.
  Mr. Speaker, it has served this Nation in its historical sense, it 
has served this Nation in its industrial sense, and it has served this 
Nation in its recreational and scenic sense. Particularly in 
Louisville, when we are redeveloping our Belvedere, our waterfront, I 
think the Ohio River has been a very important element for our heritage 
and for our development and for our future. I hope that this bill 
passes. I would like to see title III implemented. I thank the 
gentleman for yielding time to me, and rise in support of the bill.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Minnesota [Mr. Grams].
  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Utah for yielding 
time to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 5044, the American 
Heritage Area Partnership Program Act.
  This bill may be well-intentioned, but in its current form will only 
hurt American taxpayers, further overburden our park system, and 
threaten private property rights.
  Let us take a look at how it punishes the taxpayers. Since the 
introduction of the American Heritage Areas Program, its cost has 
skyrocketed.
  As introduced, this legislation provided over $10 million per year 
for the program. Under the bill we are considering today, not only is 
$10 million provided for planning grants, but the bill authorizes an 
additional $25 million for development and $250,000 for annual 
operating funds. This amounts to an increase of over 350 percent--all 
at taxpayer expense.
  This legislation not only punishes the taxpayers, but it also places 
additional financial burdens on our already-underfunded existing park 
system. At a time when the National Park Service faces a 37-year 
backlog in construction and a 25-year backlog in land acquisition, how 
can Congress even think about placing an added burden on our national 
parks?
  To make matters worse, the bill's current language raises serious 
questions about the protection of private property rights. While H.R. 
5044 rightly prohibits Federal land acquisition, it fails to give 
proper assurances that the Federal Government cannot impose land and 
water use restrictions on local entities.
  In fact, the bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to approve 
a Federal land use and development plan which must be followed by 
residents and local governments. In addition, the Interior Secretary 
can unilaterally block any Federal or federally assisted construction 
project which directly affects the heritage area. In essence, some 
local control would be removed and Federal control would be imposed.
  Mr. Speaker, in 1988 Congress approved a similar Federal land grab 
along the Mississippi River and through the heart of the twin cities of 
Minneapolis and St. Paul that will continue to adversely affect many of 
Minnesota's local governments, small businesses, farmers, barge 
operators, and homeowners. Unfortunately, Congress ignored their 
concerns and passed that measure as suspension.
  Today, Congress has been given a second chance to listen to the 
groups affected by this bill. This time, let us put the people first.
  By voting ``no'' on this bad bill, we can stand up for our existing 
national parks, the American taxpayers, and the Constitution.

                              {time}  1620

  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman 
from Utah [Mr. Hansen] have 5 additional minutes and that I have 5 
additional minutes to grant and to yield.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fields of Louisiana). Is there objection 
to the request of the gentleman from Minnesota?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding the protestations about the bill, the 
Members that are affected by the bill favor the bill. Each designation 
that is made under this legislation would have to be acted upon by 
Congress. This does not expand or diminish the local and State powers 
with regard to zoning and regulation, nor does it expand or diminish 
the powers of the Department of the Interior of the Federal Government. 
They can make agreements. These areas designated are not proposed to be 
units of the National Park System.
  This is a reform bill that substantially saves money. The money that 
is in the American Heritage Partnership Act is already authorized money 
under the Heritage Preservation Fund. There is a lack of understanding 
on the part of Members, it is understandable, because they do not work 
in detail on some of these issues. Private property rights are 
maintained under this particular bill. What we do not do is to 
superimpose some radical new definition of what constitutes private 
property rights. There are sponsors of bills in the House that propose 
to do that. It has been the debate on many land use and environmental 
bills this session, but it is not a part and should not be superimposed 
on the American Heritage Partnership Act legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Colorado [Mr. Hefley].
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Utah [Mr. Hansen] 
for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, with this bill we are talking about an area which needs 
to be addressed. I originally addressed it in a bill that is going to 
follow. Then we broke that out and put it into this separate bill. I 
have no designations in this bill so I have no dog in this fight from 
that standpoint. I have supported every piece of private property 
legislation that has come before this House of Congress and frankly I 
think we could have strengthened some of those private property 
sections in this bill. Maybe it will be strengthened as it goes through 
the process.
  I think we could have done it without doing damage to either the 
wishes of the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento] or the gentleman 
from Louisiana [Mr. Tauzin]. But the facts are that heritage areas are 
happening and have been an issue for some time. One way or another, 
many of them are being created with little or no guidance or control 
over what they are or how they are supposed to be operated, and this 
bill seems to give some of that kind of guidance. There have been 
millions of dollars appropriated for these things without this kind of 
guidance. This bill makes an attempt to do that.
  Finally I think an effort has been made by the gentleman to deal with 
the private property issue. If we are going to put Federal dollars into 
heritage areas, it should be done in a logical process and the process 
should include local governments. This bill does that.
  Mr. Speaker, I am inclined to go ahead and support this bill, let it 
go through the process and let us see if we cannot work out a logical 
process for these heritage areas.


                ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair announces that any rollcall vote 
ordered on this motion will be taken immediately following the 
conclusion of debate and not postponed.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
New York [Mr. Boehlert].
  (Mr. BOEHLERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, today, we are helping communities help 
themselves.
  On common ground, a responsible blueprint for local communities 
interested in protecting their valuable cultural and historic resources 
has been produced by the committee.
  In central New York, this help is welcomed. There, heritage inspires 
creativity and a united effort among all citizens to protect and 
enhance it. Community pride, new economic opportunities, and an 
appreciation for the sacrifices of our ancestors has resulted.
  This legislation includes a study of the northern frontier region of 
central New York to ascertain its future suitability as an American 
heritage area. The Nation must know more about the mostly Indian and 
poor European population on the frontier that sacrificed life and 
property for our independence.
  This coordinated help from the Federal Government is responsible, and 
protects the interest of the taxpayer, the landowner, and the integrity 
of the park system. It authorizes matching assistance for locally 
initiated and managed American heritage areas; limits Federal funding 
to each proposal; protects property rights by authorizing no Federal 
land purchases and no federally mandated zoning rules; and draws its 
funding from the already authorized Historic Preservation Fund.
  This is responsible bipartisan government in action. Local 
communities hold authority and power to attain a better quality of life 
with an option for modest Federal assistance and Park Service 
expertise.
  If we fail to act, and incorporate these accountability measures, the 
National Park Service will continue to create heritage areas that 
exceed the funding limitations agreed to by the committee.
  I want to thank Chairman Vento and ranking minority member, Mr. 
Hansen, for developing this bill and a bipartisan commitment to help 
our communities.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Torkildsen], who is a cosponsor of the Essex 
Heritage Partnership provision in this bill.
  Mr. TORKILDSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Minnesota, 
the distinguished subcommittee chairman, for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5044, the American 
Heritage Area Partnership Act, and applaud Mr. Vento and Mr. Hansen for 
their leadership role.
  This legislation creates a framework for heritage areas to be created 
and designated throughout the country.
  One area, Essex County, MA, has a great history to tell. The National 
Park Service has identified three significant historical themes which 
contributed to the settlement and development of our Nation. Essex 
County has the highest concentration of first-period homes in our 
country, and also contributed enormously to the early maritime trade 
and industrial revolution. But, we in Essex County do not have a 
monopoly on history.
  Under this bill, newly designated heritage areas will be initiated by 
and managed at the local level, rather than created by Washington to be 
run by the Park Service.
  And with a cap on Federal spending on heritage areas, they will not 
become a burden on the taxpayers. Under the partnership provision of 
this bill, local communities will be required to raise matching funds.
  As a strong and consistent supporter of the rights of people to own 
private property, I would not support this bill if its passage would 
result in a land grab by the Federal Government.
  In fact, quite the opposite is true. H.R. 5044 states explicitly that 
a heritage area may not use Federal funds to acquire real property, and 
that heritage area management entities do not have zoning power. The 
bill also states explicitly that current laws granting local and State 
authority to regulate land use will not be changed.
  H.R. 5044 is a bipartisan bill that will help protect historic 
resources, protect people's right to private property, cap Federal 
spending, and keep management locally based. I urge my colleagues to 
support H.R. 5044 to protect our Nation's history.
  Mr. HANSEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of the time on our side 
to the gentleman from California [Mr. Herger].
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California [Mr. Herger] 
is recognized for the balance of the time, not to exceed 3 minutes.
  Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this 
legislation, which I fear represents one more effort by the Federal 
Government to undermine private property rights.
  Here we have a proposal that would allow the Secretary of the 
Interior to impose land use restrictions on private property within 
these designated heritage areas without providing any compensation to 
the affected property owners. In effect, I fear that this is yet 
another massive land grab by the Federal Government.
  While I am a supporter of preserving truly historic sites, I believe 
that some of the more radical environmentalists are using our historic 
preservation laws as a trojan horse for locking up more private land.
  In my own congressional district, this tactic is being used to 
declare an entire mountain a historic district. Based on claims that it 
is of religious significance to American Indian tribes, the keeper of 
the National Register of Historic Places has decided to designate 235 
square miles as an historic district. One-third of this area is private 
property.
  This is an area where there is no physical evidence of the activities 
that are being designated as historic. The reason for the designation, 
I believe, is primarily to stop economic development in the community 
of Mount Shasta. This is a clear abuse of the historic preservation 
process.
  Mr. Speaker, this perversion of the process will become more 
prevalent under the legislation we're considering today. Let us not let 
that happen. Let us defeat this bill.

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HERGER. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that if we defeat this 
bill under suspension of the rules, the authors can bring it up under a 
rule and allow us to offer proper amendments. We ought to defeat this 
under suspension to give us an opportunity to correct those errors in 
the bill.
  Mr. HERGER. I thank the gentleman from Louisiana. That is absolutely 
correct.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is in error. He is concerned about the 
historic districts. The previous gentleman who spoke, the gentleman 
from California [Mr. Herger], was concerned about historic district 
designation which is today being accomplished administratively. That is 
being done under existing law, under existing procedures.
  This law provides for the Congress to designate these areas. All of 
the fears that have been expressed on the floor really are easily 
answerable. There is no reason to amend this bill. It has been worked 
on a bipartisan basis.
  This bill is a reform bill. It reforms the ad hoc heritage funding 
procedure and process which is running amok. The concerns the gentlemen 
have expressed about the Historic Preservation Act are dealt with in 
this bill, by Congress doing oversight and designating specifically the 
areas of interest in this bill. It has no new spending for such new 
areas. It saves money in the sense that the Historic Preservation Act 
that is in it reform the dollars in that they are going to be 
designated in a different way. This does not grant any new powers to 
the Department of the Interior in the sense that they are going to 
impose land use controls.
  It does provide an opportunity for agreement between local 
governments to exercise their land use controls and zoning to in fact 
come to an agreement how about the dollars are going to be spent.
  This finally puts some dollars and some impetus in terms of programs 
that before had not had resources. This is a new effort to try to deal 
with some of the problems that the gentleman and others are fearing and 
concerned about, and at the same time preserve some of what is our 
natural and cultural environment, the heritage of this country, the 
legacy of future generations.
  The Members who are affected by this bill have looked at it. They are 
all in favor of it. The fears that are being raised here today simply 
are not justified and have been resolved with regard to numerous 
amendments to this bill and are not being raised by Members affected.
  I urge the Members to support this bill. It is a good bill. It 
deserves our support. It is a good piece of bipartisan policy. It 
reforms the Park Service. It deals with the problems the way they 
exist, it should receive the affirmative action of this House today, 
and I urge Members to support it.
  Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5044, 
legislation which establishes an American Heritage Area Partnership 
Program within the Department of Interior.
  The bill before us today establishes a new method of designating and 
managing nationally important heritage areas. Specifically, H.R. 5044 
creates a partnership with State and local governments, as well as 
private entities, to preserve these historical regions by allowing 
communities to develop and implement operation and management plans. 
This new partnership will go a long way in preserving valuable 
historical areas while limiting the Federal Government's role and 
future financial obligations.
  I am especially pleased that this legislation includes 
reauthorization for the Blackstone River Valley National Heritage 
Corridor. H.R. 5044 includes $500,000 for administrative costs, as well 
as $1 million per year for development for this precious heritage area. 
The bill also includes three new towns, Glocester, Smithfield, and 
Burriville, into the corridor. Most importantly, the bill extends the 
Blackstone Valley Commission for 7 additional years. This will allow 
the Commission to continue enhancing the distinctive character and 
nationally significant resources of the corridor.
  The Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Corridor is the largest 
national park in New England, and is widely recognized as the 
birthplace of the American Industrial Revolution. It was here, at 
Slater Mill, where the first successful water-powered cotton spinning 
mill was used in 1790. This rich area best exemplifies the entire 
history of the American Industrial Revolution and the complex economic 
and social relationships of the people who lived and worked there.
  The Blackstone Valley Heritage Corridor has become an example of how 
surrounding communities can work together toward a common theme of 
protecting and promoting their area. This rich and historic national 
resource needs to be protected so that the history of the industrial 
revolution can be preserved for all generations.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge Members to vote for passage of this 
bill.
  Mr. FINGERHUT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5044, 
legislation to create a process for designating American heritage 
areas. The legislation designates 10 specified areas as American 
heritage areas.
  This bill came to my attention in the context of my support for the 
Ohio and Erie Canal Heritage Area which is located in my home State of 
Ohio.
  A number of communities in the 19th District of Ohio border the 
Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area and have demonstrated to me 
the critical importance of preserving our natural resources. A national 
heritage corridor designation would provide an important focus for a 
unified planning effort within the Cuyahoga Valley to ensure the best 
possible approach to developing a mixed-use, public access-oriented 
natural attraction.
  The diversity of support among the many communities that border on 
the proposed corridor is the best example of cooperation among State, 
county, and local municipalities. Financial commitments from both the 
private and public sector toward development, and responsible 
stewardship of the resource are found throughout. It is projected that 
the corridor will attract an additional $41 million in visitors and 
tourists to participate in the many recreational and historical 
opportunities. Educational opportunities also abound with heavy use 
from the local and visiting school districts expected.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my gratitude to Congressman 
Ralph Regula for his exceptional efforts to guide the corridor 
initiative through the legislative process. His untiring advocacy to 
make this project a reality has energized all of us in the Ohio 
delegation in our support of the national heritage corridor designation 
for the Ohio and Erie Canal.
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Fields of Louisiana). 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. 5044, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 273, 
nays 150, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 442]

                               YEAS--273

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Andrews (ME)
     Andrews (TX)
     Applegate
     Bacchus (FL)
     Baesler
     Barca
     Barlow
     Barrett (WI)
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bishop
     Blackwell
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brooks
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Byrne
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Castle
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (IL)
     Collins (MI)
     Condit
     Conyers
     Coppersmith
     Costello
     Coyne
     Darden
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Derrick
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Dooley
     Durbin
     Edwards (CA)
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Fawell
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Fingerhut
     Fish
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford (MI)
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Glickman
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hamburg
     Hamilton
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastings
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Hinchey
     Hoagland
     Hobson
     Hochbrueckner
     Hoke
     Holden
     Horn
     Hoyer
     Hughes
     Hutto
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Jacobs
     Jefferson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnston
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kennedy
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Klein
     Klink
     Kolbe
     Kopetski
     Kreidler
     LaFalce
     Lambert
     Lantos
     LaRocco
     Lazio
     Levin
     Levy
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     Lloyd
     Long
     Lowey
     Machtley
     Maloney
     Mann
     Manton
     Margolies-Mezvinsky
     Markey
     Martinez
     Matsui
     Mazzoli
     McCandless
     McCloskey
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McHale
     McInnis
     McKinney
     McMillan
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Meyers
     Mfume
     Michel
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moran
     Morella
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Myers
     Nadler
     Neal (MA)
     Neal (NC)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Pelosi
     Penny
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickle
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quillen
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Ravenel
     Reed
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Richardson
     Roemer
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Rostenkowski
     Roukema
     Rowland
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sangmeister
     Santorum
     Sawyer
     Schenk
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sharp
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shepherd
     Shuster
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stokes
     Strickland
     Studds
     Swett
     Swift
     Synar
     Tanner
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Tucker
     Unsoeld
     Valentine
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Vucanovich
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Whitten
     Williams
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates
     Young (FL)
     Zimmer

                               NAYS--150

     Allard
     Andrews (NJ)
     Archer
     Bachus (AL)
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bentley
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Brewster
     Browder
     Bunning
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Chapman
     Coble
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Cooper
     Cox
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cunningham
     Danner
     de la Garza
     DeLay
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards (TX)
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fields (TX)
     Fowler
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Gekas
     Geren
     Gingrich
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Grams
     Grandy
     Green
     Gunderson
     Hall (TX)
     Hancock
     Hastert
     Hayes
     Herger
     Hilliard
     Hoekstra
     Houghton
     Huffington
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Inglis
     Istook
     Johnson, Sam
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kyl
     Lancaster
     Laughlin
     Leach
     Lehman
     Lewis (FL)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     McCurdy
     McHugh
     McKeon
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Molinari
     Moorhead
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Parker
     Paxon
     Payne (VA)
     Peterson (FL)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Quinn
     Ramstad
     Ridge
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Roth
     Royce
     Sarpalius
     Saxton
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Sensenbrenner
     Sisisky
     Skelton
     Smith (IA)
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Snowe
     Solomon
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Stupak
     Talent
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas (CA)
     Thomas (WY)
     Thurman
     Upton
     Volkmer
     Walker
     Weldon
     Wilson
     Young (AK)
     Zeliff

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Armey
     Carr
     Dicks
     Fazio
     Ford (TN)
     Gallo
     Inhofe
     Slattery
     Sundquist
     Washington
     Wheat

                              {time}  1658

  The Clerk announced the following pairs:
  On this vote:

       Mr. Dicks and Mr. Fazio for, with Mr. Armey against.

  Mr. de la Garza, Mr. Lehman, Mrs. Thurman, Mr. Hilliard, and Mr. 
Cunningham changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. Quillen, Mr. Lipinski, Mrs. Vucanovich, and Messrs. Skeen, 
Livingston, Costello, Poshard, Swett, Myers of Indiana, Rose, and 
Pomeroy changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So (two-thirds not having voted in favor thereof) the motion was 
rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

                          ____________________