Viewing page 117 of 239

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

-86-

Page Two

At that same meeting there was discussion of the opportunity to obtain the space shuttle "Enterprise" from NASA, and I received encouragement to do what I could to secure the early transfer of "Enterprise".  Over the course of the next two months, that objective was met, at considerable expense to NASA and involving some rather extensive and at times intensive "discussions" to resolve issues that arose in the course of preparing for that transfer.  Fundamental to the eventual success of that transfer was the fact that "Enterprise" was to be one of the centerpieces of "the proposed new Dulles facility for the National Air and Space Museum".

Also at that meeting, the Board adopted a motion expressing its appreciation for efforts made by private individuals in support of the proposed facility, and instructing the Secretary to review the efforts undertaken by that group of individuals, known as the Washington Dulles Task Force, and to determine to extent to which their efforts would be helpful to the Smithsonian in completing the goal of developing a NASM facility at Dulles.  Particular attention was to be given to the prospects of developing an "interim facility" to house "Enterprise".

During the considering of the planning authorization legislation by the Senate Rules Committee, the question of an alternative site at Baltimore-Washington airport was thoroughly examined.  I don't think I really need to remind you that in August of 1986, when the legislation was before the Senate Rules Committee, Senator Mac Mathias, of Maryland, was its Chairman.  The committee staff made inquiries with the appropriate officials in Maryland and determined that there was, in fact, NO interest in pursuing that location as an expansion site.  That position was consistent wiht the previous "history" of the expansion idea.  Believe me, that legislation would never have seen the light of day with a specific Dulles site identification included in it had there been ANY indication of interest on the part of Maryland authorities, or an organized "constituent" group of individuals.

Consequently, when the Committee recommended passage of the legislation, and when the Senate subsequently adopted it overwhelmingly, it was clearly with the understanding that a Dulles location was contemplated.

Another development regarding the Dulles site was the offer, and subsequent acceptance by the Institution, of an option for the lease of Federal Aviation Administration acreage at Dulles, for use in eventual construction of the facility there.  At the Regents' meeting on September 15, 1986, the agreement between the Institution and FAA was described and it was clearly understood that, since there had been no expression of objection from the chairmen of the appropriations subcommittee with jurisdiction for the Smithsonian, the Institution would proceed with the agreement.

The clear perception of anyone observing the evolution of the NASM expansion concept would have to be that a Dulles location was virtually a "given".  Certainly, the Regents' specific vote in support of that would be sufficient indication of intent, not to mention the other related actions, some of which I have