HR. 3964, NCSHPO Testimony, May 10, 1988. V. Preservation Loan Guarantee Program Page 4 The 1980 NHPA Amendments require the Secretary of the Interior to establish a preservation loan guarantee program (Section 104). The Secretary has not set up that program, which requires no direct appropriation. VI. Office of Surface Mining The Office of Surface Mining, an agency of the Department of the Interior, continues to ignore its preservation responsibilities under the NHPA. The Secretary has done nothing to foster the compliance with federal law by OSM. The NCSHPO, the Society of Professional National Trust, and other groups have joined purpose is to force OSM to obey the law. Archaeologists, the in a law suit whose need for HR 3964, for These preservation examples reinforce the taking politics out of the process of managing our irreplaceable natural and cultural heritage. HR.3964 RETURNS PROFESSIONALISM TO THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE HR.3964 will return the professionals to the management of the Park System and work to remove purely political motivations from policy setting and decision making. It will assist in allowing the NPS managers to address the mission of the NPS without politically motivated meddling from above. HR. 3964 assures the independence and professionalism of the NPS in several ways. by (a) The Director is appointed by the President, is confirmed the Senate, and must have professional qualifications. (b) The Secretary of the Interior's authorities related to Park System are automatically conveyed to the Director. the (The NCSHPO is unclear as to whether this transfer includes the Secretarial authorities in the National Historic Preservation Act.) (c) The NPS operates independently of the Department of the Interior in fulfilling the Service's mission. (d) The NPS submits its budget to Congress independently. HR.3964 COULD GO FURTHER HR.3964 addresses the most obvious problem of the politically motivated micro-management of the NPS by the Department of the Interior. The NCSHPO believes the bill could go further to address problems of the "external" programs, specifically historic preservation, within the NPS. The national preservation program (6) is suffering, like the Service, from micro-management. Political pressure and political motivation filter down from Interior through the NPS to preservation HR. 3964, NCSHPO Testimony, May 10, 1988. Page 5 and contravene professional decision making. However, politicization is not the principal problem. The NPS lacks the resources to take care of its primary mission: the National Park System. The attention the NPS pays to the national preservation program is, perhaps inevitably, a low priority. The Parks come first. The SHPOS can understand the primacy of the Parks. However, the SHPOs, in order to do their federal preservation job, need leadership and adequate management and administration from their federal partner. At a time when NPS itself is making the case that the Parks cannot be saved from within themselves, the importance of the "external programs, "responsible for encouraging the preservation of resources on the 96% of the nation's lands that the NPS does not own, is clearer than ever. Beginning in 1984 as a celebration of the 20th anniversary of the NHPA, the SHPOs undertook an exhaustive study of the national preservation program. The result of that study was a comprehensive proposed revision of the NHPA adopted by the NCSHPO at the March 1987 annual meeting. The draft legislation is a discussion document that describes how the NCSHPO believes the national preservation program best operate. can The NCSHPO legislative proposal covers all aspects of the national program: strengthening protective mechanisms at the federal level, involving Indian tribes formally for the first time, clarifying the partnership aspects of the national program, establishing a historic preservation trust fund, allowing qualified SHPOs to have both the authority and the responsibility for decision-making, etc. The one aspect that received the greatest discussion was the administration of the national program and the concept of an independent agency for historic preservation. To a large extent, HR. 3964 represents accomplishment of a goal of the NCSHPO legislative proposal: to provoke discussion in Congress on administration and leadership of the national preservation program. NATIONAL PRESERVATION, RECREATION, AND PARK ADMINISTRATION with coneach Park Compatible to both HR. 3964 and the NCSHPO legislative draft is the leadership and administration recommendation of the Forum for the national preservation program, the National Park Service, and the state side of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) activities. Meeting in Baltimore in November of 1987, the Forum came up an innovative administrative structure: an independent agency taining three separate units, albeit unequal in size, that reported to an advisory board. Preservation, the National Service, and recreation/conservation would each have a director, each of whom would report to an administrator. This structure would allow, from a preservation perspective, for efficient and focused administration and decision-making without having the constant distraction of the needs of the Parks. Each organization would retain its identity. The National Park Service would stay the National Park Service, with its own director. Each would have equal access to the budget process. HR.3964, NCSHPO Testimony, May 10, 1988. Page 6 to justify its funding needs. The Forum proposed trust funds to finance the operations of each of the three components. The tripartite composition of the Forum proposal, in fact, echoes the three-man review board proposed in HR. 3964. Both share a commitment to independence, professionalism, and responsible government. Including the Forum organizational proposal in HR.3964 would mean only broadening the scope--not changing the bill's fundamental philosophy. HR.3964--SUGGESTIONS FOR CHANGE HR.3964 presents an opportunity for improving the National Park Service. The NCSHPO believes the opportunity exists for more improvement through the expansion of the bill to include the Forum organization concept to create an comprehensive independent conservation agency with a clear mission. As a variant on this proposal, and working within the NPS, the creation of a tri-partite directorate covering the National Park System, historic preservation, and recreation, conservation and open space programs would be a considerable improvement over the current administrative structure of the NPS. While all the "children" are not equal in such a structure, at least the differing programs are administratively established on a peer basis, instead of being add-ons to the operation of the Park system. Such a system would acknowledge that the mandate of the national historic preservation program (and the companion LWCF programs) is significant enough, the challenges great enough, and the methods different enough (dealing with non-owned resources) to warrant its own administrative structure within the larger agency. In addition, the NCSHPO questions the advisability of creating an independent NPS Director who "co-administers" the agency with a three-person, paid, full-time, fully staffed Review Board. The NCSHPO feels this would create a difficult administrative situation. The NPS Director needs to report to someone, the Director needs oversight and guidance. That goal could be accomplished by establishing a topnotch, professional Review Board, Presidentially appointed and Senate confirmed, that is more like a Board of Directors. Further, the bill should specify expertise and experience relevant to the NPS' three major program responsibilities: units of the Park system, historic preservation, and recreation/conservation and open space programs. The members would meet on a regular basis, but would not be full-time, federal employees. This would allow for guidance and oversight, would costs less to operate and would attain the management goals of the bill. The NCSHPO notes also that the bill as drafted calls for both the Director and the Review Board to independently submit budget requests to Congress. HR. 3964, NCSHPO Testimony, May 10, 1988. Page 7 CONCLUSION The NCSHPO appreciates the leadership Chairman Vento has taken toward improving the National Park System. The NCSHPO encourages the Chairman and the Subcommittee to match their vision with those who created the National Park System to establish the best mechanism possible for the National Parks and for the preservation and enhancement of the nation's heritage beyond the boundaries of the Parks. F. Lawerence Oaks, President, NCSHPO Executive Director, Alabama Historical Commission HR. 3964, NCSHPO Testimony, May 10, 1988. Page 8 (2) ENDNOTES (1) National Parks and Conservation Association, Investing in Park (3) (4) (5) (6) The NHPA also gives responsibilities to the Advisory Council on The regulations are found in 36 CFR 800 and cover comments to For the purposes of this testimony, "the national preservation program" refers to the preservation partnership between the federal government and the SHPOs that runs the nation's preservation program pursuant to the NHPA. Enclosure: National The National Conference of SHPOS attached a copy of the Preservation Forum consensus points (November 1987), Forum publication (October 1987), and the NCSHPO legislative proposal (March 1988) for the Subcommittee staff. |