THE UNITED STVTES ENVIRONMENT \  I'.i >•! ' '! )  AGENCY
                               uvn
                 Statutes and Legislative History
                               Executive Orders
                                   Regulations
                         Guidelines and Reports
                                           4?

-------

-------
THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    mmm,
               Statutes and Legislative History
                           Executive Orders
                               Regulations
                      Guidelines and Reports
                          OJ
                          I

                                       01
                              JANUARY 1973
                        WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS
                                Administrator
             U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
             Region V, Library
             230 South Dearborn Street
             Chicago, Illinois  60604  "

-------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Goveinment Printing Office
    Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $22.20 per 6-vol. set. Sold in sets only
                          Stock Number 5500-0063

-------
                         FOREWORD
   It has been said that America is like a gigantic boiler in that
once the fire is  lighted, there are  no limits to the power it can
generate. Environmentally, the fire  has been lit.
   With a mandate from the President and an aroused public con-
cern over the environment, we are  experiencing a new American
Revolution, a revolution in our way of  life. The era which began
with the industrial  revolution is over  and things will never be
quite the same again. We  are moving slowly, perhaps even grudg-
ingly at times, but inexorably into an  age  when social, spiritual
and aesthetic values will be prized more than production and con-
sumption. We have reached a  point where we must balance civili-
zation and nature through our technology.
   The U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency, formed by Reorg-
anization Plan No. 3 of 1970, was a  major commitment to this new
ethic. It exists  and acts in the public's name to  ensure that due
regard is given  to the environmental consequences of actions by
public and private institutions.
   In a large measure, this is a regulatory role, one that encompas-
ses basic,  applied, and effects  research; setting and enforcing
standards;  monitoring;  and  making delicate risk-benefit  deci-
sions aimed at creating the kind of world the public  desires.
   The Agency was not created to harass industry or to act as a
shield behind which man could wreak havoc on nature. The great-
est disservice the  Environmental Protection Agency could  do to
American industry is to  be a poor regulator. The environment
would  suffer, public trust  would diminish, and instead of free en-
terprise, environmental anarchy would result.
   It was once sufficient that the regulatory process produce  wise
and well-founded courses  of action.  The public, largely indifferent
to regulatory activities, accepted agency actions as being for the
"public convenience and necessity." Credibility gaps and cynicism
make it essential not only  that today's decisions be wise and well-
founded but that the public know this  to be true.  Certitude, not
faith, is de rigueur.
   In order to participate  intelligently in regulatory proceedings,
the citizen should  have access  to the information available to the
                                                           111

-------
agency. EPA's policy is to make the fullest possible disclosure of
information, without unjustifiable expense or delay, to any inter-
ested party. With this in mind, the EPA Compilation of Legal
Authority was produced not only for internal operations of EPA,
but as a service to the public, as we strive together to lead the
way, through the law, to preserving the earth as a  place both
habitable by and hospitable to man.
                         WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS
                         Administrator
                         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 IV

-------
                         PREFACE
  Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970 transferred 15 governmental
units with their functions and legal authority to create the U.S.
Environmental  Protection Agency. Since only the major laws
were cited in the Plan, the Administrator, William D. Ruckelshaus,
requested that a compilation of EPA legal authority be researched
and published.
  The publication has the primary function of providing a work-
ing document for the Agency itself. Secondarily, it will serve as
a research tool for the public.
  A permanent office in the  Office of Legislation has been estab-
lished to keep the publication updated by supplements.
  It is the hope of EPA that this  set  will assist in the awesome
task of developing a better environment.
                        LANE WARD GENTRY, J.D.
                        Assistant Director for Field Operations
                        Office of Legislation
                        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

-------
                   ACKNOWLEDGMENT
  The idea of producing a compilation of the legal authority of
EPA was conceived and commissioned by William D. Ruckelshaus,
Administrator of EPA. The production of this compilation in-
volved the cooperation and effort of numerous sources, both within
and outside the Agency. The departmental libraries at Justice and
Interior were used extensively; therefore we express our appre-
ciation to Marvin P. Hogan, Librarian, Department of  Justice;
Arley E. Long,  Land & Natural  Resources Division Librarian,
Department of Justice;  Frederic E. Murray, Assistant Director,
Library Services, Department of the Interior.
  For exceptional assistance and cooperation,  my gratitude to:
Gary Baise, formerly Assistant to the Administrator, currently
Director, Office of Legislation, who first began  with me on this
project; A.  James Barnes, Assistant to  the Administrator;  K.
Kirke Harper, Jr., Special Assistant for Executive Communica-
tions ; John Dezzutti, Administrative Assistant, Office of Executive
Communications; Roland 0. Sorensen, Chief, Printing Manage-
ment Branch, and Jacqueline Gouge and Thomas Green, Printing
Management Staff; Ruth Simpkins, Janis Collier, Wm. Lee Rawls,
Peter J. McKenna, James G. Chandler, Jeffrey  D. Light, Randy
Mott, Thomas H. Rawls, John D. Whittaker, John M. Himmelberg,
and Richard A.  Yarmey, a  beautiful staff who gave unlimited
effort; and to many others behind the scenes who rendered varied
assistance.
                        LANE WARD GENTRY, J.D.
                        Assistant Director for Field Operations
                        Office of Legislation
                        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
VI

-------
                       INSTRUCTIONS


   The goal of this text  is to create a useful compilation of  the
legal authority under  which the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency operates. These documents are for the general use of per-
sonnel of the EPA in assisting them in attaining the purposes set
out by the President in creating the Agency. This work is  not
intended and should not be used for legal citations or any  use
other than as reference of a general nature. The author disclaims
all responsibility for liabilities growing out of the use of these
materials contrary to their intended purpose. Moreover, it should
be noted that portions  of the Congressional Record from the 92nd
Congress  were extracted from the  "unofficial" daily version and
are subject to subsequent modification,
   EPA Legal Compilation consists of the Statutes with their legis-
lative history, Executive Orders, Regulations, Guidelines and  Re-
ports.  To facilitate the  usefulness  of this  composite, the Legal
Compilation is divided  into the eight following chapters:
     A. General                          E. Pesticides
     B. Air                             F. Radiation
     C. Water                           G. Noise
     D. Solid Waste                     H. International

                         GENERAL
   The chapter labeled  "General" and color coded red contains  the
legal authority of the Agency that applies to more than one area
of pollution, such as the Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, E.G.
11514, Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality,
Regulation on Certification  of Facilities, Interim Guidelines by
CEQ, and Selected Reports. Acts that appear in General are found
in full text with their legislative history.  When  the same Act
appears under a particular area of pollution, a cross reference is
made back to General for the text.

                       SUBCHAPTERS
Statutes and Legislative History
   For convenience, the Statutes are listed throughout the Compi-
lation by a one-point system, i.e., 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc., and Legislative

                                                           vii

-------
viii                     INSTRUCTIONS

History begins wherever a  letter follows the one-point system.
Thusly, any l.la, Lib, 1.2a,  etc., denotes the public laws compris-
ing the 1.1, 1.2 statute. Each public law is followed by its legisla-
tive history. The legislative history in each case consists of the
House Report, Senate Report, Conference Report  (where applica-
ble), the Congressional  Record beginning with the time the bill
was reported from committee.

  Example:
   1.4 Amortization of Pollution Control Facilities, as amended,
       26U.S.C. §169 (1969).
       1.4a Amortization of Pollution Control Facilities, Decem-
            ber 30, 1969, P.L. 91-172, §704, 83 Stat. 667.
             (1) House Committe^ on Ways and Means,  H.R.
                 REP.  No.  91-413 (Part I), 91st Cong., 1st Sess.
                 (1969).
             (2) House Committee on Ways and Means,  H.R.
                 REP.  No. 91-413 (Part  II),  91st Cong., 1st
                 Sess. (1969).
             (3) Senate Committee on  Finance, S. REP.  No.
                 91-552, 91st Cong., 1st Sess.  (1969).
             (4) Committee  of  Conference,  H.R.  REP.  No.
                 91-782, 91st Cong., 1st Sess.  (1969).
             (5) Congressional Record, Vol. 115  (1969) :
                 (a) Aug.  7:  Debated  and passed House, pp.
                     22746, 22774-22775;
                 (b) Nov.  24, Dec. 5, 8,  9: Debated and passed
                     Senate,  pp.  35486,  38321-37322, 37631-
                     37633, 37884-37888;
                 (c) Dec.  22:  Senate agrees to conference re-
                     port, p. 40718 ;*
                 (d) Dec. 22: House debates and agrees to con-
                     ference report, pp. 40820, 40900.

This example not only demonstrates the pattern followed for legis-
lative history,  but indicates the procedure where only one section
of a P.L.  appears. You  will note that the Congressional Record
cited  pages are  only those pages dealing  with the  discussion
and/or action  taken pertinent to the section of law applicable to
EPA. In the event there is no discussion of the pertinent section,
only action or passage, then the asterisk (*)  is  used to so indicate,
and no text is reprinted in the Compilation. In regard  to the

-------
                          INSTRUCTIONS                        ix

situation where only ona section of a public law is applicable, then
only the parts of the report dealing with same are printed in the
Compilation.

   Secondary Statutes

   Many statutes make reference  to  other laws  and rather  than
have this manual serve only for major statutes, these secondary
statutes have been included where practical. These secondary stat-
utes are indicated in the table of contents  to each chapter  by a
bracketed cite to  the particular section of  the major  Act which
made the reference.

   Citations

   The  United  States Code, being  the official  citation,  is  used
throughout the Statute section of the  compilation.  In four  Stat-
utes, a parallel table to the Statutes at  Large is provided for your
convenience.


               TABLE OF STATUTORY SOURCE

              Statutes                             Source
1.1  Reorganization Plan No.  3  of EPA's originating act.
     1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 15263.
1.2  The  National  Environmental In  §4332(2) (c)  a  mandate was made
     Policy Act of  1969, 42 U.S.C. to all  Federal agencies as to environ-
     §§4332(2) (c),   4344(5).         mental impact statements. EPA func-
                                  tioning as  appropriate  agency, and
                                  §4344  cited in Reorganization Plan
                                  No. 3  of 1970 as a direct transfer to
                                  EPA.
1.3  Environmental Quality Improve- CEQ's originating act
     ment Act  of   1970,  42 U.S.C.
     §4371 et seq. (1970).
1.4  Amortization of Pollution Con- Direct reference in sections cited to
     trol Facilities,  as  amended,  26 Clean  Air Act, Fed. Water Pollution
     U.S.C. §169(d). (1969).         Control Act which were  transferred
                                  to EPA by Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1970.
                                  Also   the certifying  authority was
                                  transferred  to EPA through the  Re-
                                  org. Plan No. 3 of 1970.
1.5  Department of Transportation Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1970 transferred
     Act,  as  amended,  49  U.S.C.  Clean  Air Act and the functions of the
     §1653(f) (1968).               Secty  of Interior  pertaining to same
                                  to EPA  and its Administrator. The
                                  Clean  Air Act at §1857f—10 (b) ref-
                                  erences 1.5  and requires consultation
                                  from the Administrator.

-------
X
                            INSTRUCTIONS
                  Statutes
                                                    Source
1.6  Federal Aid Highway Act, as a-
     mended,  23 U.S.C. §109(h),  (i),
     (j) (1970).
1.7  Airport  and  Airway  Develop-
     ment Act, 49 U.S.C. §§1712(f),
     1716(c)(4), (e)  (1970).

1.8  Disaster Relief  Act of 1970, 42
     U.S.C. §4401 et  seq. (1970).
1.9  Interest on Certain Government
     Obligations,   as   amended,   26
     U.S.C.  §103  (1969).
                                     Direct reference  made  to  EPA  in
                                     sections cited.

                                     Direct references made to appropriate
                                     agency for air, water and noise pollu-
                                     tion which is EPA under Reorg. Plan
                                     No. 3 of 1970.
                                     The  Water  Quality Administration
                                     was  transferred to  EPA  by  Reorg.
                                     Plan No. 3 of 1970 and together with
                                     E.G.   11490,    §§703(3),   11102(1),
                                     11103(2) EPA assumes responsibility.
                                     §103(c)(4)(E) & (F) of the Act pro-
                                     vides  tax  relief on industrial develop-
                                     ment bonds for  sewage or solid waste
                                     disposal facilities and  air  or water
                                     pollution control facilities.

1.10  Uniform  Relocation  Assistance Act  requires  Federal  and  federally
     and  Real  Property Acquisition assisted projects and programs to deal
     Polices  Act of  1970, 42  U.S.C. uniformly and equitably with persons
     §4601 et seq.  (1970).            whose  property was  taken. EPA pro-
                                     mulgated   regulation  at  40  C.F.R.
                                     §§4.1—4.263.
1.11 Departmental  Regulations,  as
     revised, 5 U.S.C. §301 (1966).
1.12 Public Health Service  Act,  as
     amended, 42 U.S.C. §§203, 215,
     242, 242b, c, d, f, i, j, 243, 244,
     244a, 245, 246, 247, 264 (1970).
1.13 Davis-Bacon Act,  as  amended,
     40 U.S. C. §276a-276a-5 (1964).
1.14 Public Contracts, Advertisements
     for Proposals for Purchases and
     Contracts  for  Supplies  or Ser-
     vices  for  Government  Depart-
     ments; Application to  Govern-
     ment Sales and Contracts to sell
     and to Government  Corporations,
     as amended, 41 U.S.C. §5  (1958).
1.15 Per Diem, Travel and Transpor-
     tation  Expenses;  Experts and
     Consultants; Individuals Serving
     Without  Pay,  as   amended,  5
     U.S.C.  §5703 (1969).
                                     Bases of  EPA  regulation 40  C.F.R.
                                     §§3.735—101 —3.735—107.
                                     Referred to in Clean Air Act., basis
                                     for  authority  in  Water, Pesticides,
                                     and  Radiation functions transferred
                                     in Reorg. Plan  No. 3 of 1970.
                                     Referenced from Clean Air Act, Fed.
                                     Water Pollution Control  Act, Solid
                                     Waste Disposal  Act—all  of  which
                                     were  transferred to  EPA in  Reorg.
                                     Plan No. 3 of 1970.

                                     Referred to in Clean Air Act, Federal
                                     Water  Pollution  Control  Act,  and
                                     Public Health  Service  Act—all  of
                                     which transferred to EPA in  Reorg.
                                     Plan No. 3 of 1970.
                                     Referred to in Clean Air Act, Federal
                                     Water Pollution  Control  Act—all of
                                     which  were  transferred  to  EPA in
                                     Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1970.

-------
                         INSTRUCTIONS                       xi

              Statutes                           Source
1.16  Disclosure of Confidential Infor- Referred  to in Clean  Air  Act, and
     mation Generally,  as  amended, FWPCA  which were transferred to
     18 U.S.C. §1905.              EPA both being transferred by the
                                Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1970.
1.17  Appropriation Bills            Beginning with the Agricultural-En-
                                vironmental and Consumer Protection
                                Appropriation  Act  of 1971 each ap-
                                propriation bill for EPA will appear.

                    EXECUTIVE ORDERS

  The Executive Orders are listed by a two-point system (2.1, 2.2,
etc.). Executive  Orders found in  General are ones  applying to
more than one area of the pollution chapters.

                        REGULATIONS

  The Regulations are noted  by a three-point system  (3.1, 3.2,
etc.). Included in the Regulations are those not only promulgated
by the Environmental Protection Agency, but those under which
the Agency has direct contact.

                GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
  This subchapter is noted by  a four-point system (4.1, 4.2, etc.).
In this subchapter is found the statutorily required reports of
EPA, published  guidelines  of EPA, selected  reports  other than
EPA's and inter-departmental  agreements of note.

                         UPDATING
  Periodically, a supplement will be sent to the interagency distri-
bution and made available through the U.S. Government Printing
Office in order to provide an accurate working set of  EPA Legal
Compilation.

-------
                        CONTENTS


A.  GENERAL


                              Volume I
                                                                  Page
   1. Statutes and Legislative History.
      1.1   Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, 5 U.S.C. Reorg. Plan of
           1970 No. 3, Appendix (1970) 	     3
           l.la  Message of the President Relative to Reorganization
                 Plan No. 3, July 9,  1970, Weekly Compilation of
                 Presidential Documents, Vol. 6, No. 28, p. 908 (July
                 13, 1970) 	     8
           l.lb  Message of the President Transmitting Reorganiza-
                 tion Plan No. 3, July  9, 1970, Weekly Compilation
                 of Presidential  Documents, Vol. 6, No. 28, p. 917
                 (July 13, 1970)  	    15
           l.lc  Hearings on  Reorganization  Plan No. 3  of  1970
                 Before the  Subcommittee  on  Executive Reorganiza-
                 tion and Government Research of  the  Senate Com-
                 mittee  on  Government Operations, 91st Cong., 2d
                 Sess. (1970) 	    16
           l.ld  Hearings on  Reorganization  Plan No. 3  of  1970
                 Before the Subcommittee on Government Operations
                 of the House Committee on Government Operations,
                 91st  Cong., 2d Sess.  (1970)  	   112
           l.le  House  Committee on Government  Operations,  H.R.
                 REP.  No. 91-1464, 91st Cong., 2d  Sess. (1970) ___   367
           l.lf  Congressional Record,  Vol.  116 (1970) 	   378
                 (1) July 9: House discussion, pp. 23532-23533	   378
                 (2) Sept. 28:  House approving Reorganization Plan
                     No. 3 of 1970 to Establish Environmental Pro-
                     tection  Agency as an  independent entity of
                     Government,  pp.  33871-33876;  33879-33884;
                     34015  	   380
      1.2   National Environmental  Policy Act of  1969,  42 U.S.C.
           §§4332(2) (c), 4344(5)  (1970)  	   407
           1.2a  National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,  Jan-
                 uary 1, 1970,  P.L. 91-190, §§102(2) (c), 204(5), 83
                 Stat 853,  855 	   414

                                                                  xiii

-------

-------
xiv                           CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
                 (1) Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Af-
                     fairs, S. REP. No. 91-296, 91st Cong., 1st Sess.
                     (1969)  	   420
                 (2) House  Committee  on  Merchant  Marine  and
                     Fisheries, H.R. REP. No. 91-378 (Part 2), 91st
                     Cong., 1st Sess. (1969)  . _     	   458
                 (3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP.  No. 91-
                     765, 91st Cong., 1st  Sess. (1969)  	   467
                 (4) Congressional Record, Vol. 115 (1969)	   482
                     (a)  July  10: Considered and passed  Senate,
                         pp. 19008-19009, 19013  	   482
                     (b)  Sept. 23: Amended and passed House, pp.
                         26569-26591  	   486
                     (c) Oct. 8: Senate disagrees to House  amend-
                         ments,  agreed to conference,  pp.  29066-
                         29074, 29076-29089 	   538
                     (d)  Dec. 20:  Senate agreed to conference re-
                         port, pp. 40415-40417, 40421-40427 	   580
                     (e)  Dec. 22: House agreed to conference report,
                         pp. 40923-40928	   597
                              Volume II
      1.3   Environmental Quality Improvement Act of 1970, 42 U.S.C.
           §43netseq.  (1970)	   611
           1.3a  Environmental Quality Improvement Act of  1970,
                 April 3, 1970,  P.L. 91-224, Title II, 84 Stat. 114 __   614
                 (1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP.
                     No. 91-127, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969)	   617
                 (2) Senate  Committee on  Public  Works, S. REP.
                     No. 91-351, 91st Cong.,  1st Sess.  (1969)  	   617
                 (3) Committee of Conference,  H.R. REP. No. 91-
                     940, 91st  Cong., 2d Sess. (1970)  	   645
                 (4) Congressional Record  	   652
                     (a) Vol. 115 (1969), April 16: Passed p. 9259   652
                     (b) Vol.  115 (1969), Oct. 7:  Amended  and
                         passed Senate,  pp. 28952-28954,  28956-
                         28957, 28962,  28967, 28969, 28972	   652
                     (c) Vol. 116 (1970), March 24: Senate agreed
                         to conference  report, pp.  9004-9005, 9009-   661
                     (d) Vol. 116 (1970),  March 25: House agreed
                         to conference  report, pp. 9333-9334	   662
      1.4   Amortization of  Pollution Control Facilities,  as amended,
           26 U.S.C. §169 (1969)	   663
           1.4a  Amortization of Pollution Control Facilities, Decem-
                 ber 30, 1969, 91-172, §704, 83 Stat. 667	   665

-------
                        CONTENTS                           xv

                                                            Page
           (1) House Committee  on Ways and Means,  H.R.
               REP. No. 91-413 (Part I), 91st Cong., 1st  Sess.
               (1969) 	    670
           (2) House Committee  on Ways and Means,  H.R.
               REP. No.  91-413  (Part II),  91st Cong., 1st
               Sess.  (1969)  	    675
           (3) Senate Committee on Finance, S. REP.  No.
               91-552, 91st  Cong., 1st  Sess.  (1969)  	    679
           (4) Committee  of Conference, H.R.  REP.  No. 91-
               782, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969) 	    684
           (5) Congressional Record, Vol. 115 (1969)	    690
               (a) Aug. 7:  Debated and passed House pp.
                   22746,  22774-22775  	    690
               (b) Nov. 24,  Dec.  5, 8,  9: Debated and passed
                   Senate,  pp.  35486, 37321-37322,  37631-
                   37633,  37884-37888  	    691
               (c) Dec. 22: Senate  agrees to  conference re-
                   port, p.  40718*  	    705
               (d) Dec. 22:  House debates and agrees to con-
                   ference report, pp. 40820,  40900*	    705
1.5   Department  of Transportation Act, as amended, 49 U.S.C.
     §§1651, 1653(f),  1655(g), 1656 (1968) 	    706
     1.5a   Department  of  Transportation  Act,  October 15,
           1966,  P.L. 89-670, 332,  4(f),  (g), 6, 7, 80 Stat. 931_    733
           (1) House Committee  on Government Operations
               H.R. REP. No. 1701, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966)    736
           (2) Senate Committee  on Government  Operations,
               S. REP.  No.  1659,  89th  Cong., 2d  Sess. (1966)    737
           (3) Senate Committee  on Government  Operations,
               S. REP.  No.  1660,  89th  Cong., 2d Sess. (1966)    745
           (4) Committee  of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2236,
               89th Cong., 2d  Sess.  (1966) 	    755
           (5) Congressional Record, Vol. 112  (1966)  	    769
               (a) Aug. 24: Debated, amended  and  passed
                   House, pp. 21236-21237; 21275	    769
               (b) Sept. 29: Amended  and passed Senate, pp.
                   24374-24375, 24402-24403;  	    771
               (c) Oct.  13: House agrees to conference report,
                   pp. 26651-26652;	    773
               (d) Oct.  13: Senate agrees to conference report,
                   pp. 26563, 26568.	    774
     1.5b   Federal Highway  Act of 1968, August 23, 1968, P.L.
           90-495, §18(b), 82 Stat. 824.	    776
           (1) Senate Committee  on Public  Works,  S. REP.
               No. 1340, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968).	    777
           (2) House Committee on  Public Works, H.R. REP.
               No. 1584, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968).	    778
           (3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1799,
               90th Cong., 2d Sess.  (1968).	    780
           (4) Congressional Record, Vol. 114  (1968):	    783

-------
xvi                           CONTENTS

                                                                  Page
                     (a) July  1:  Debated, amended  and  passed
                         Senate, pp. 19529, 19530, 19552; ._	   783
                     (b) July  3:  Amended and  passed House, pp.
                         19937, 19947,  19950;*  	   786
                     (c) July 26: House agrees to conference report,
                         pp. 23712, 23713;	   786
                     (d) July  29:  Senate agrees to  conference re-
                         port,  pp. 24036, 24037, 24038.	   786
      1.6   Federal Aid Highway Act of 1970, as amended, 23 U.S.C.
           §109(h), (i), (j) (1970).	   788
           1.6a  Federal Aid Highway Act of  1970, December 31,
                 1970, P.L. 91-605, §136(b), 84 Stat. 1734.	   791
                 (1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP.
                     No. 91-1554,  91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970).	   792
                 (2) Senate Committee on  Public Works, S. REP.
                     No. 91-1254,  91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970)	   793
                 (3) Committee of Conference, H.R.  REP.  No. 91-
                     1780,  91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970).	   798
                 (4) Congressional Record,  Vol.  116  (1970):	   800
                      (a) Nov. 25: Debated and passed House, pp.
                         38936-38937,  38961-38962,   38974-38976,
                         38997;	   800
                      (b) Nov. 25: Proceedings vacated, laid on the
                         table, pp. 39007-39014;  	   812
                      (c) Dec. 7:  Passed Senate, Senate insists on its
                         amendments  and  asks  for  conference, p.
                         40095; 	   813
                     (d) Dec. 8:  Action of  House rescinded, passed
                         House, House disagrees to Senate amend-
                         ments and agrees to conference, p. 40265; __   813
                     (e) Dec. 17-18: House agrees to conference re-
                         port, pp. 42512-42518;	   814
                     (f) Dec. 19: Senate agrees to conference report,
                         pp. 42717, 42723.	   816
      1.7   Airport and Airway Development Act, 49 U.S.C. §§1712 (f),
           1716(c)(4),  (e)  (1970).	   818
           1.7a  Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970, P.L.
                 91-258, §§12(f),  16(c) (4),  (e),84 Stat. 221,226. __   821
                 (1) House Committee on  Interstate  and  Foreign
                     Commerce, H.R. REP.  No.  91-601,  91st Cong.,
                     1st Sess.  (1969).  	   824
                 (2) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No.
                     91-565, 91st Cong.,  1st Sess. (1969).	   831
                 (3) Committee of Conference, H.R.  REP.  No. 91-
                     1074,  91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970).	   834
                 (4) Congressional Record:	   837
                     (a) Vol. 115  (1969), Nov.  6: Considered and
                         passed  House,  pp.  33293,  33307-33308,
                         33342;	   837

-------
                        CONTENTS                          xvii

                                                             Page
                (b)  Vol. 116  (1970),  Feb.  25-26: Considered
                    and  passed  Senate,  amended,  pp. 4842,
                    5069-5072, 5082-5083; 	   842
                (c)  Vol. 116 (1970), May 12: Senate agreed to
                    conference report p. 15136;	   852
                (d)  Vol. 116 (1970), May 13: House agreed to
                    conference report,  pp. 15294, 15295, 15297-   852
1.8   Disaster Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. §4401 et seq. (1970).__   854
     1.8a  The Administration of Disaster  Assistance, Decem-
           ber 31, 1970, P.L. 91-606, Title II, 84 Stat.  1746..__   874
           (1)  Senate  Committee on  Public  Works,  S. REP.
                No.  91-1157, 91st Cong., 2d  Sess.  (1970).	   891
           (2)  House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP.
                No.  91-1524, 91st Cong., 2d  Sess.  (1970).	   925
           (3)  Committee of Conference, H.R. REP.  No. 91-
                1752, 91st  Cong., 2d Sess. (1970):	   951
           (4)  Congressional Record,  Vol. 116 (1970)  :	   975
                (a)  Sept.  9:  Debated, amended, and passed
                    Senate, pp.  31040-31042, 31044,  31048-
                    31051,  31058-31060, 31062-31063; 	   975
                (b)  Oct.  5: Debated,  amended,  and passed
                    House, pp. 34795-34798;	   993
                (c)  Dec. 15, 17:  House debated and agrees to
                    conference report,  pp. 42212-42214;	  1000
                (d)  Dec. 18:  Senate  agrees to conference re-
                    port, p. 42369.*	  1005
           (5)  Statement  by  the President Upon Signing the
                Bill  into Law December 31,  1970,  Weekly Com-
                pilation of  Presidential Documents, Vol. 7, No.
                1, January 4, 1971 (p.  12).	—  1005
1.9   Interest on Certain Government  Obligations,  as amended,
     26 U.S.C. §103(c)(4)  (1971).	  1006
     1.9a  Amendments to Interest on  Certain Government Ob-
           ligations, Int. Rev. Code, June 28, 1968, P.L. 90-364,
           Title I, §107(a), 82  Stat. 266.	  1008
           (1)  House Committee on  Ways  and  Means,  H.R.
                REP. No. 1104, 90th Cong.,  2d  Sess.  (1968). __  1009
           (2)  Senate Committee on Finance, S. REP. No. 1014,
                90th Cong.,  2d  Sess. (1968).	  1010
           (3)  Committee  of Conference,  H.R. REP. No. 1533,
                90th Cong.,  2d  Sess. (1968).	'	  1010
           (4)  Congressional Record, Vol. 114 (1968) :
                (a)  Feb. 29:  Debated and passed  House, p.
                    4704;*  	  1010
                (b)  March 26,  28, April 2:  Debated in Senate
                   pp. 8159-8162;	  1010
                (c)  June 20: House considers and passes con-
                   ference report, p.  18006;*	  1017
                (d)  June 21:  Senate  agrees to conference re-
                   port, p. 18179	  1017

-------
xviii                         CONTENTS

                                                                  Page
           1.9b  Revenue Act of 1971, December 10, 1971, P.L. 92-
                 178, Title III, §315(a), 85 Stat. 529.	  1017
                 (1)  House Committee on Ways and Means,  H.R.
                      REP. No. 92-533, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971).*  1018
                 (2)  Senate  Committee  on Finance,  S.  REP.  No.
                      92-437,  92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971).*	  1018
                 (3)  Committee of Conference,  H.R. REP. No. 92-
                      708, 92d Cong.,  1st  Sess. (1971). 	  1018
                 (4)  Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971):	  1019
                      (a)  Oct. 5, 6: Considered and passed  House,
                         pp.  H9155-H9178, H9229;*	  1019
                      (b) Nov.  15, 22: Considered and passed  Sen-
                         ate,  amended, pp. S18564-S18579;  	  1019
                      (c) Dec. 9:  Senate agreed to  conference re-
                         port,  pp.  S21095-S21109;*  	  1056
                      (d)  Dec. 9: House agreed to conference report,
                         pp.  H12114-H12134.*  	  1056
      1.10  Uniform  Relocation Assistance and  Real  Property  Ac-
           quisition Policies for Federal and Federally Assisted Pro-
           grams, 42 U.S.C. §4633 (1971).	  1057
           l.lOa Uniform Relocation  Assistance and Real Property
                 Acquisition Policies Act  of 1970, January 2, 1970,
                 P.L. 91-646, §213, 84 Stat. 1900.	  1075
                 (1)  Senate Committee on Government  Operations,
                      S.  REP.  No. 91-488, 91st  Cong., 1st Sess.
                      (1969)	  1076
                 (2)  House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP.
                      No. 91-1656, 91st Cong.,  2d Sess. (1970).	  1084
                 (3)  Congressional Record: 	  1089
                      (a) Vol. 115  (1969), Oct.  27:  Passed Senate,
                         pp.  31533-31535;  	  1089
                      (b) Vol. 116  (1970), Dec. 7:  amended  and
                         passed House, pp. 40169-40172;  	  1095
                      (c) Vol.  116 (1970), Dec. 17: Senate agrees to
                         House  amendment,  with  an amendment,
                         pp.  42137-42140;  	  1102
                      (d)  Vol. 116  (1970), Dec. 18:  House concurs
                         in Senate amendment,  pp. 42506-42507. __  1109
      1.11  Departmental  Regulations,  as  revised,   5 U.S.C.  §301
           (1966).   	  1112
           l.lla Codification  of  5 U.S.C. §301,  September 6, 1966,
                 P.L. 89-554, 80 Stat. 379.	  1112
                 (1)  Senate Committee on the  Judiciary, S. REP.
                      No. 1380, 89th Cong., 2d Sess.   (1966).	  1113
                 (2)  Congressional  Record, Vol.  112  (1966):	  1117
                      (a) July 25:  Amended and passed  Senate, p.
                         17010;*  	  1117
                      (b) Aug. 11:  House concurs in  Senate amend-
                         ments, p.  19077.* 	  1117

-------
                        CONTENTS                           xix

                                                             Page
1.12  Public Health Service  Act, as amended,  42  U.S.C.  §§203,
     215,  241, 242, 242b, c,  d, f, i, j, 243, 244, 244a, 245, 246,
     247,264  (1970).  	  1118
     1.12a The  Public Health  Service Act, July 1,  1944, P.L.
           78-410, Title II, §§202, 214, Title  III,  §§301, 304,
           305,  306, 311,  312, 313,  314, 315, 361, 58  Stat.
           683,  690, 693, 695, 703.	  1151
           (1)  House Committee on  Interstate and  Foreign
                Commerce,  H.R.  REP.  No. 1364, 78th  Cong.,
               2d Sess.  (1944).  	  1158
           (2)  Senate Committee on Education and Labor, S.
                REP. No. 1027, 78th Cong., 2d Sess.  (1944)	  1170
           (3)  Congressional Record,  Vol. 90 (1944):  	  1172
                (a)  May 22: Amended and passed House, pp.
                   4794-4797,  4811; 	  1172
                (b) June  22: Debated,  amended, and  passed
                   Senate,  pp.  6486-6487, 6498-6500;  	  1179
                (c) June 23: House concurs in Senate amend-
                   ments,  pp.  6663-6664.* 	  1186
     1.12b National Mental Health Act,  July 3,  1946, P.L.
           79-487, §§6, 7, (a, b), 9, 60 Stat. 423, 424.	  1186
           (1) House  Committee on Interstate  and  Foreign
               Commerce,  H.R.  REP.  No. 1445, 79th  Cong.,
               1st Sess. (1945).  	  1189
           (2)  Senate Committee on Education and Labor, S.
               REP. No. 1353, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946)—  1191
           (3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2350,
               79th Cong.,  2d Sess. (1946).	  1196
           (4) Congressional Record, Vol. 92  (1946) :	  1198
               (a) March 14, 15: Amended and passed House,
                   pp. 2283,  2284,  2285-2286, 2291,  2992,
                   2293, 2294, 2295; 	  1198
               (b) June 15: Amended and passed  Senate, p.
                   6995;  	  1204
               (c) June 26: Senate agrees to conference re-
                   port, p.  7584;	  1205
               (d) June 28: House agrees to conference re-
                   port, p.  7926.	  1206
     1.12c  National  Heart  Act,  June  16, 1948,  P.L.  80-655,
           §§4(e, f), 5, 6, 62 Stat. 467.	  1206
           (1) Senate Committee on Labor  and Public Wel-
              fare, S. REP. No. 1298, 80th Cong., 2d Sess.
              (1948).  	  1210
           (2) House  Committee  on  Interstate  and Foreign
              Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 2144, 80th  Cong.,
              2d  Sess. (1948). 	  1212
           (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 94 (1948):	  1217
              (a) May  24: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
                  6297, 6298;  	  1217

-------
xx                       CONTENTS

                                                              Page
                 (b) June  8:  Amended and passed  House,  pp.
                     7405-7406; 	   1219
                 (c) June  9:  Senate  concurs in House amend-
                     ment, p.  7555.*  	   1222
       1.12d National Dental Research Act, June 24, 1948, P.L.
             80-755, §4(e)(f),  62. Stat.  601. 	   1222
             (1) Senate Committee on Labor  and Public Wel-
                 fare,  S. REP.  No.  436, 80th  Cong., 1st Sess.
                 (1947).  	   1223
             (2) House Committee on Interstate  and Foreign
                 Commerce, H.R.  REP.  No.  2158, 80th  Cong.,
                 2d  Sess.   (1948). 	   1224
             (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 94  (1948):	   1225
                 (a) June  8:  Amended  and passed House, p.
                     7417;	   1225
                 (b) June  12:  Amended and passed Senate, p.
                     7934;* 	   1226
                 (c) June  14: House concurs in Senate amend-
                     ments, p. 8175.	   1226
       1.12e Public Health Service Act Amendments, June 25,
             1948,  P.L. 80-781, §1, 62 Stat. 1017.	   1227
             (1) House Committee on Interstate  and Foreign
                 Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 1927, 80th Cong., 2d
                 Sess.  (1948). 	   1227
             (2) Senate Committee on Labor and Public Works,
                 S. REP. No. 1578, 80th Cong.,  2d Sess. (1948).   1230
             (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 94  (1948):  	   1232
                 (a) May  18:  Amended and passed House, p.
                     6008;* 	   1232
                 (b) June  12: Passed Senate p. 7933	   1232
       1.12f Career Compensation  Act of 1949, October 12, 1949,
             P.L. 81-351, Title V, §521 (e), 63  Stat.  835.	   1232
                         Volume III
             (1) House Committee on  Armed  Services, H.R.
                 REP. No. 779, 81st Cong., 1st Sess. (1949).  __   1233
             (2) Senate Committee on Armed  Services, S. REP.
                 No. 733,  81st Cong.,  1st Sess. (1949).	   1234
             (3) Congressional  Record,  Vol. 95  (1949) :  	   1235
                 (a) June 14: Debated in House, pp. 7656, 7676;   1235
                 (b) June 15:  Passed  House,  p.  7775;*	   1235
                 (c)  Sept. 26: Amended and  passed  Senate, p.
                     13261;* 	   1235
                 (d) Sept. 27:  House concurs  in Senate amend-
                     ments, p. 13358.*	   1236

-------
                    CONTENTS                           xxi

                                                        Page
1.12g  1953  Reorganization  Plan No. 1, §§5,  8,  67  Stat.
       631.  	  1236
       (1) Message  from  the  President  Accompanying
          Reorganization Plan No. 1, H.R. Doc.  No. 102,
          83rd  Cong., 1st Sess. (1953). 	  1237
1.12h Amendment to Title 13  U.S. Code, August 31,  1954,
      P.L. 83-740, §2, 68 Stat.  1025.	  1239
       (1) House Committee on  the Judiciary, H.R.  REP.
          No. 1980, 83rd Cong., 2d Sess.  (1954).	  1240
       (2) Senate  Committee  on the  Judiciary, S.  REP.
          No. 2497, 83rd Cong., 2d  Sess. (1954).	  1242
       (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 100  (1954):  	  1243
           (a) July 6: Passed House, p. 9806;*	  1243
          (b) Aug. 19:  Amended  and  passed Senate, p.
              15123;*  	  1243
          (c) Aug. 19:  House concurs in Senate amend-
              ments, p.  15269.* 	  1243
1.12i  National Health Survey Act, July 3, 1956,  P.L. 84-
      652, §4, 70  Stat. 490. 	  1244
       (1) Senate  Committee  on Labor  and Public  Wel-
          fare,  S. REP.  No.  1718, 84th Cong.,  2d  Sess.
          (1956).  	  1244
          (2) House Committee on  Interstate and  For-
          eign  Commerce,  H.R.  REP.  No.  2108,  84th
          Cong., 2d  Sess.  (1956).  	  1249
       (3) Congressional  Record, Vol. 102  (1956):  	  1250
          (a) March  29:  Amended  and passed  Senate,
              p. 5816;*	  1250
          (b) May 21: Objected to in House,  p. 8562 ;*__  1250
          (c) June 18:  Amended  and  passed House, p.
              10521.* 	  1250
1.12J  An Act of  Implementing §25(b)  of the  Organic
      Act of Guam, August 1, 1956,  P.L. 84-896, §18, 70
      Stat.  910. 	  1251
      (1) House Committee on  Interior  and Insular Af-
          fairs, H.R. REP. No. 2259, 84th Cong.,  2d  Sess.
          (1956).   	  1251
      (2) Senate  Committee on Interior and Insular Af-
          fairs, S. REP.  No.  2662, 84th Cong., 2d  Sess.
          (1956).   	  1259
      (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 102 (1954):	  1260
          (a) June 18: Passed  House, p. 10510;*	  1260
          (b) July 23: Amended  and passed  Senate, p.
              13909;*	  1260
          (c) July 25: House concurs in Senate,  amend-
              ments, p.  14450.*	  1261
1.12k  Amendments to §314(c)  of the  Public Health Serv-
      ice Act, July 22, 1958, P.L. 85-544, §1, 72 Stat. 400.  1261

-------
xxii                          CONTENTS

                                                                  Page
                 (1) House Committee on  Interstate and  Foreign
                     Commerce, H.R.  REP. No. 1593, 85th Cong.,
                     2d  Sess.  (1958).  	  1262
                 (2) Senate Committee on  Labor and Public  Wel-
                     fare,  S.  REP.  No. 1797, 85th  Cong., 2d  Sess.
                     (1958).  -__  	  1270
                 (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 104  (1958):  	  1280
                     (a) April  21:  Debated  in House,  pp.  6836-
                         6838;  	  1280
                     (b) May 5: Passed House,  pp. 8004-8011;	  1284
                     (c) July 10: Passed Senate, p.  13329.	  1300
           1.121  Health  Amendments  of 1959, July  23,  1959, P.L.
                 86-105, §1, 73 Stat. 239.	  1301
                 (1) House Committee on  Interstate and  Foreign
                     Commerce, H.R. REP. No.  590, 86th Cong., 1st
                     Sess.  (1959).  	  1301
                 (2) Senate Committee on  Labor and Public  Wel-
                     fare,  S.  REP.  No. 400,  86th  Cong., 1st  Sess.
                     (1959).  	  1309
                 (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 105  (1959):  	  1311
                     (a) July 6: Passed House, pp. 12735-12740;__  1311
                     (b) July 8: Passed Senate, p. 12979.	  1315
           1.12m International Health  Research Act of  1960,  July
                 12, 1960, P.L. 86-610, §3, 74 Stat. 364.	  1315
                 (1) Senate Committee on  Labor and Public  Wel-
                     fare,  S.  REP.  No. 243,  86th  Cong., 1st  Sess.
                     (1959).	  1317
                 (2) House Committee on  Interstate and  Foreign
                     Commerce, H.R.  REP. No. 1915, 86th Cong.,
                     2d Sess.  (1960).  	  1321
                 (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 106  (1960):  	  1338
                     (a) June 24:  Committee discharged, amended
                         and  passed House, p.  14293;*	  1338
                     (b) June 30:  Passed Senate, pp.  15132-15133.  1338
           1.12n  Hawaii Omnibus  Act, July 12,  1960,  P.L. 86-624,
                 §29(c), 74 Stat.  419.  	  1340
                 (1) House Committee  on  Interior  and Insular Af-
                     fairs,  H.R. REP.  No. 1564,  86th  Cong.,  2d
                     Sess.  (1960).  	  1340
                 (2) Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Af-
                     fairs, S.  REP. No. 1681, 86th  Cong., 2d  Sess.
                     (1960).  	  1341
                 (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 106  (1960):	  1341
                     (a) May 16: Passed House, pp.  10355, 10357;*  1341
                     (b) June 28:  Amended and passed  Senate, p.
                         14684.*  	  1341
           1.12o  Amendments  to §301 (d) of the  Public Health Serv-
                 ice Act, September 15, 1960, P.L.  86-798, 74  Stat.
                 1053.   	  1342

-------
                    CONTENTS                          xxiii

                                                        Page
       (1)  House  Committee  on  Interstate and Foreign
           Commerce,  H.R. REP. No.  2174,  86th  Cong.,
           2d Sess.  (1960).  	  1342
       (2)  Congressional  Record, Vol.  106  (1960) : 	  1351
           (a) Aug. 30: Passed House, p. 18394;	  1351
           (b) Aug.  31:   Senate  Committee  discharged,
               passed  Senate, p.  18593.	  1352
1.12p  1960 Amendments to Title  III of the Public Health
       Service Act, September 8, 1960, P.L, 86-720,  §l(b),
       2, 74 Stat.  820.	  1352
       (1)  House  Committee  on  Interstate and Foreign
           Commerce,  H.R. REP. No.  1780,  86th  Cong.,
           2d Sess.  (1960).  	  1353
       (2)  Committee  of  Conference,  H.R.  REP.  No.
           2062, 86th Cong.,  2d Sess. (1960).	  1353
       (3)  Congressional  Record, Vol.  106 (1960) :	  1353
           (a) June 24: Amended and  passed House, pp.
               14294-14301;*	  1353
           (b) July  1: Amended and passed  Senate, pp.
               15383-15384;*  	  1353
           (c)  Aug.  26: Senate concurs in conference re-
               port,  pp. 17788-17789;*	  1354
           (d) Aug. 29: House concurs in conference re-
               port,  p. 18172.*	  1354
1.12q  Community Health  Services  and Facilities Act of
       1961, October 5, 1961, P.L. 87-395, §2(a)-(d), 75
       Stat. 824	  1354
       (1)  House  Committee  on  Interstate and Foreign
           Commerce, H.R. REP.  No. 599, 87th Cong., 1st
           Sess. (1961)	  1355
       (2)  Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
           S. REP. No. 845, 87th Cong.,  1st Sess. (1961)..  1361
       (3)  Committee of Conference, H.R  REP.  No.  1209,
           87th Cong., 1st  Sess. (1961)  	  1370
       (4)  Congressional Record, Vol. 107 (1961):	  1375
           (a)  July  25: Amended and  passed House, pp.
               13402,13414,13415;  	  1375
           (b)  Sept. 1: Amended  and  passed Senate, p.
              17947;	  1377
           (c)  Sept.  18: Conference report agreed to in
               Senate, p. 19913;*	  1378
           (d)  Sept. 20: Conference report agreed to in
              House, p. 20484.*	   1378
1.12r Extension of Application of Certain  Laws to Ameri-
      can Samoa, September  25, 1962, P.L. 87-688,  §4 (a)
       (1),  76 Stat. 587.	  1378
       (1)  House  Committee  on  Interior  and Insular
          Affairs, H.R. REP.  No.  1536,  87th Cong., 2d
             s. (1962)	  1379

-------
xxiv                         CONTENTS

                                                                  Page
                 (2) Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Af-
                     fairs, S. REP. No. 1478,  87th  Cong., 2d  Sess.
                     (1962)	  1382
                 (3) Committee of  Conference,  H.R.  REP. No. 2264,
                     87th Cong., 2d Sess. (1962).	  1384
                 (4) Congressional Record, Vol. 108  (1962):	  1385
                     (a) April  2:  Amended and passed  House, p.
                         5576;  	  1385
                     (b) May 17:  Amended and passed Senate, pp.
                         8698, 8699;	  1387
                     (c) Aug. 28: House agrees to conference report,
                         pp. 17881-17882; 	  1387
                     (d) Aug. 30: Senate agrees to conference re-
                         port, p. 18253.	  1388
           1.12s Amendments to Title IV of the  Public Health  Service
                 Act, October  17, 1962, P.L. 87-838, §2, 76 Stat.  1073.  1388
                 (1) House Committee on  Interstate and Foreign
                     Commerce,  H.R. REP.  No.  1969, 87th  Cong.,
                     2d Sess.  (1962).	  1389
                 (2) Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
                     S. REP.  No. 2174, 87th Cong., 2d Sess. (1962).   1390
                 (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 108 (1962):	  1392
                     (a) Aug. 27:  Passed House, p. 17690;	  1392
                     (b) Sept. 28: Amended and passed  Senate, p.
                         21247;*	"_	  1393
                     (c) Oct. 3: House concurs in Senate  amend-
                         ment, p. 21833.*	  1393
           1.12t Graduate Public Health  Training Amendments of
                 1964, August 27, 1964, P.L. 88-497, §2, 78 Stat.  613. .  1393
                 (1) House Committee on  Interstate and Foreign
                     Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 1553, 88th Cong., 2d
                     Sess. (1964)	  1394
                 (2) Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
                     S. REP. No. 1379, 88th Cong., 2d Sess.  (1964)-  1403
                 (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 110 (1964):	  1411
                     (a) July 21:  Passed House, pp.  16445, 16447;  1411
                     (b) Aug. 12:  Passed Senate, pp. 19144-19145.*  1412
           1.12u Community Health Services Extension Amendments,
                 August 5, 1965, P.L. 89-109, §4, 79 Stat. 436.	  1412
                 (1) Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
                     S. REP. No. 117, 89th Cong., 1st Sess.  (1965).  1413
                 (2) House  Committee on  Interstate and  Foreign
                     Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 249, 89th Cong., 1st
                     Sess.  (1965).	  1420
                 (3) Committee of Conference, H.R.  REP. No. 676,
                     89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965).	  1426
                 (4) Congressional Record, Vol. Ill (1965):	-  1427
                     (a) March 11: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
                         4843, 4844;	  1427

-------
                   CONTENTS                          xxv

                                                       Page
           (b)  May  3:   House  Committee   discharged,
               amended and passed House, p. 9141;	  1428
           (c)  July 26:  Senate agrees to  conference re-
               port, p.  18216;  	  1428
           (d)  July 27: House agrees to conference report,
               p. 18425.*	  1429
1.12v Amendments to Public Health Service Act, August
      9, 1965, P.L. 89-115, §3, 79 Stat.  448.	  1429
      (1)  House Committee on Interstate and  Foreign
           Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 247, 89th Cong., 1st
           Sess. (1965)  	  1430
      (2)  Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
           S. REP.  No. 367, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965) __  1438
      (3)  Committee of Conference, H.R.  REP. No. 677,
           89th Cong., 1st Sess.  (1965).	  1445
      (4)  Congressional Record, Vol. Ill (1965) :	  1446
           (a)  May 10:  Debated,  amended  and  passed
               House, pp. 9958, 9960-9962;	  1446
           (b)  June 28:  Debated,  amended  and  passed
               Senate, pp.  14952, 14953, 14954;	  1458
           (c)  July  26:  Conference  report agreed to in
               Senate, p. 18215;	  1460
           (d)  July 27:  Conference report agreed to in
               House p.  18428.	  1460
 1.12w 1966 Reorganization Plan No. 3, §§1,  3, 80 Stat.
      1610.	  1461
      (1)  Message from the President Transmitting  Re-
           organization Plan No. 3, 1966, H. Doc. No. 428,
           89th Cong., 2d  Sess.  (1966).	  1462
1.12x Comprehensive Health Planning and Public  Health
      Services  Amendments of  1966, November 3, 1966,
      P.L. 89-749, §§3, 5,  80 Stat. 1181.	  1466
      (1)  Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
           S. REP.  No. 1665, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966).  1479
      (2)  House Committee on Interstate and  Foreign
           Commerce, H.R.  REP. No. 2271,  89th Cong.,
          2d Sess. (1966).	  1483
      (3)  Congressional Record, Vol. 112 (1966):	  1490
           (a)  Oct. 3: Amended and passed Senate,  pp.
              24764-24766, 24768;	  1490
           (b)  Oct. 17:  Amended and  passed  House,  pp.
              27081, 27085-27086, 27088-27092; 	  1496
           (c)  Oct.  18:  Senate concurs in  House amend-
              ments pp. 27381-27385.	  1509
1.12y Partnership for Health Amendments of 1967, De-
      cember 5, 1967, P.L.  90-174, §§2(a)-(f),  3 (b) (2), 4,
      8(a), (b), 9,  12(d), 81 Stat. 533.	  1518
      (1)  House Committee on  Interstate  and Foreign
          Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 538, 90th Cong., 1st
          Sess.  (1967). 	  1522

-------
xxvi                          CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
                 (2)  Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
                      S. REP. No. 724, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967)._  1536
                 (3)  Committee of  Conference, H.R. REP. No.  974,
                     90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967).	  1546
                 (4)  Congressional Record, Vol. 113 (1967):	  1550
                      (a)  Sept. 20:  Debated,  amended,  and  passed
                         House, pp. 26120-26132;* 	  1550
                      (b)  Nov.  6:  Debated,  amended  and  passed,
                          Senate, pp. 31236-31238; 	  1550
                      (c)  Nov. 21: House agrees to conference report,
                          p. 33338;*  	  1553
                      (d)  Nov.  21:  Senate agrees to  conference re-
                          port,  p. 33436.*	  1553
           1.12z Health Manpower Act  of  1968,  August  16, 1968,
                 P.L. 90-490, Title III, §302(b), 82 Stat. 789.	  1553
                 (1)  Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
                      S. REP. No. 1307, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968).   1554
                 (2)  House Committee on  Interstate and  Foreign
                      Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 1634, 90th Cong., 2d
                     Sess. (1968)	  1558
                 (3)  Congressional Record, Vol. 114 (1968):	  1561
                      (a)  June  24:  Amended and  passed Senate, p.
                         18422;*  	  1561
                      (b)  Aug.  1: Amended and  passed House, p.
                          24801;*  	±_  1561
           1.12aa Public Health  Training Grants Act, March 12, 1970,
                 P.L. 91-208, §3, 84 Stat. 52.	  1562
                 (1)  Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
                     S. REP.  No.  91-586,  91st   Cong., 1st Sess.
                      (1969)	  1563
                 (2)  House Committee on  Interstate and Foreign
                     Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 91-712, 91st  Cong.,
                     1st Sess. (1969)	  1570
                 (3)  Committee of Conference, H.R.  REP. No.  91-
                     855,  91st Cong., 2d  Sess.  (1970).	  1570
                 (4)  Congressional Record:	  1572
                      (a)  Vol.  115  (1969),  Dec.  11:  Amended  and
                         passed Senate,  pp. 37457, 38460;  	  1572
                      (b)  Vol. 115  (1969),  Dec.  16:  Amended  and
                          passed House, pp. 3918-3942;*	  1572
                      (c) Vol. 116  (1970), Feb. 26: Senate agrees to
                         conference report, p. 5084;	  1573
                      (d)  Vol. 116 (1970), Feb. 26: House agrees to
                         conference report,  pp. 5094-5095.	  1574
           1.12ab Medical  Facilities  Construction  and Modernization
                 Amendments  of 1970, June 30,  1970,  P.L.  91-296,
                 Title  I, §111 (b), Title  IV, §401 (b) (A) (1), (C),
                 (D), 84 Stat. 340, 352.	  1576
                 (1)  House Committee on  Interstate and  Foreign
                     Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 91-262, 91st  Cong.,
                     1st Sess. (1969)	  1577

-------
                   CONTENTS                         xxvii

                                                        Page
      (2)  Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
           S. REP. No. 91-657, 91st Cong., 2d Sess.  (1970).  1579
      (3)  Committee of Conference,  H.R.  REP.  No. 91-
           1167, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970).	  1582
      (4)  Congressional Record:  	  1583
           (a)  Vol.  115 (1969), June  4:  Amended and
              passed House, pp. 14654, 14659, 14664;* __  1583
           (b)  Vol.  116 (1970), April  7:  Amended and
              passed Senate, pp. 10542, 10546;*	  1583
           (c)  Vol. 116 (1970), June  8: Senate agreed to
              conference report, pp. 18757, 18758, 18761 ;*  1584
           (d)  Vol. 116 (1970), June  10: House agreed to
              conference report, p. 19199.*	  1584
1.12ac Public Health Service Drug Abuse Research, October
      27, 1970, P.L. 91-513,  Title I, §3(b), 84 Stat. 1241._  1584
      (1)  Senate  Committee on the  Judiciary, S.  REP.
           No. 91-613, 91st Cong., 1st  Sess.  (1969)	  1585
      (2)  House Committee on  Interstate and  Foreign
           Commerce, H.R. REP. No.  91-1444, 91st Cong.,
          2d Sess. (1970).	  1585
      (3)  Committee of Conference,  H.R.  REP.  No. 91-
           1603, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970)	  1587
      (4)  Congressional Record, Vol.  116 (1970):	  1588
           (a) Jan.  28:  Amended and  passed Senate, p.
              1647;*  	  1588
           (b) Sept. 24: Amended and passed House, p.
              33667;*	  1588
           (c) Oct. 14: House agreed to  conference report,
              pp. 36585, 36651;*	  1588
           (d) Oct. 14: Senate agreed  to conference report,
              p. 36885.*	  1588
1.12ad Heart Disease, Cancer, Stroke  and Kidney Disease
      Amendments of 1970, October 30,  1970, P.L. 91-515,
      Title II, §§201-203, 210, 220, 230, 240, 250, 260, (a),
      (b), (c)(l), 270, 280, 282,  292, Title VI, §601(b)
      (2), 84 Stat. 1301, 1303-1308, 1311.	  1589
      (1) House Committee  on Interstate  and Foreign
          Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 91-1297, 91st Cong.,
          2d Sess. (1970).	  1599
      (2)  Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
          S. REP.  No. 91-1090,  91st  Cong., 2d  Sess.
          (1970)	  1600
      (3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-
          1590, 91st  Cong., 2d Sess. (1970).	  1638
      (4) Congressional Record, Vol.  116 (1970):	  1647
          (a) Aug.  12:  Amended and  passed  House, p.
             28532;	  1647
          (b) Sept.  9: Amended  and passed Senate, p.
             31013;	  1647

-------
xxviii                        CONTENTS

                                                                  Page
                      (c) Oct. 13: House agreed to conference report,
                         pp. 36589-36591;	  1648
                      (d) Oct. 14 : Senate agreed to conference report,
                         pp. 36888-36892.   	  1651
           1.12ae Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Pre-
                 vention, Treatment, and Rehabilitation Act of 1970,
                 December  31, 1970, P.L. 91-616, Title III,  §331, 84
                 Stat. 1853.	  1651
                 (1)  Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
                     S. REP. No.  91-1069,  91st Cong.,  2d Sess.
                      (1970)	  1651
                 (2)  House  Committee  on  Interstate and  Foreign
                     Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 91-1663, 91st Cong.,
                     2d Sess. (1970).	  1653
                 (3)  Congressional Record, Vol.  116 (1970):	  1654
                      (a) Aug. 10: Passed Senate, pp. 27857-27871;*  1654
                      (b) Dec. 18: Amended  and passed House, pp.
                         42531, 42536;* 	  1654
                      (c) Dec. 19: Senate concurs in House amend-
                         ments, p. 42751.*	  1654
      1.13  The  Davis-Bacon  Act,  as  amended, 40  U.S.C.  §§276a—
           276a-5 (1964). __.  	  1655
           [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857j-3, 33 U.S.C. §1158 (g),
           42 U.S.C. §3256]
           1.13a The Davis-Bacon Act,  March 3, 1931, P.L. 71-798,
                 46 Stat. 1494.	  1659
                 (1) Senate  Committee  on Manufacturers, S. REP.
                     No. 1445, 71st Cong., 83d Sess. (1931).	  1660
                 (2) House  Committee  on Labor,  H.R. REP.  No.
                     2453, 71st Cong., 83d Sess. (1931).	  1662
                 (3) Congressional Record,  Vol. 74  (1930-1931) :__  1664
                      (a) Feb. 4:  Passed Senate, pp. 3918-3919;	  1664
                     (b) Feb. 28:  Debated and passed  House,  pp.
                         6504-6521.	  1667
           1.13b Amendment to the Act  of March 3,  1931, August 30,
                 1935, P.L. 74-403, 49 Stat. 1011.	  1705
                 (1)  Senate  Committee  on  Education and Labor, S.
                      REP. No 1155, 74th Cong.,  1st  Sess.  (1935). ...  1708
                 (2) House  Committee  on Labor,  H.R. REP.  No.
                     1756, 74th Cong., 1st Sess. (1935).	  1713
                 (3) Congressional Record, Vol.  79  (1935) :	  1720
                      (a) July 30: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
                         12072-12074;	  1720
                      (b) Aug. 23: Debated and  passed House, pp.
                         14384-14385.  	  1723
           1.13c An Act to  Require the Payment of Prevailing Rates
                 of Wages on Federal Public  Works in Alaska and
                 Hawaii, June 15, 1940,  P.L. 76-633, §1, 54 Stat. 399.  1726
                 (1)  Senate  Committee  on  Education and Labor, S.
                      REP. No. 1550, 76th Cong., 3d Sess. (1940). __  1727

-------
                        CONTENTS                         xxix

                                                            Page
            (2)  House  Committee on  Labor,  H.R. REP.  No.
                2264, 76th Cong., 3d Sess. (1940).  	  1728
            (3)  Congressional Record,  Vol. 86 (1940-1941): ..  1728
                (a)  May 28: Passed Senate, p. 6997;	  1731
                (b)  June 3: Passed House, p.  7401.	  1732
     1.13d  Hawaii Omnibus Act, July 12,  1960, P.L. 86-624,
            §26,  74 Stat. 418.	  1733
            (1)  House Committee on Interior and Insular Af-
                fairs, H.R. REP. No. 1564, 86th Cong., 2d Sess.
                (1960).	  1734
            (2)  Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Af-
                fairs,  S. REP. No. 1681, 86th Cong.,  2d Sess.
                (1960)	  1735
            (3)  Congressional Record,  Vol. 106 (1960) :	  1736
                (a)  May 16: Passed House, p. 10353;*	  1736
                (b)  June 28:  Amended  and passed Senate, p.
                   14683;*	  1736
                (c) June 29:  House concurs in Senate amend-
                   ment, p. 15009.*	  1736
     1.13e  Amendments to Davis-Bacon  Act, July 2, 1964, P.L.
            88-349, §1, 78 Stat. 238.	  1736
            (1)  House Committee on Education and Labor, H.R.
                REP. No. 308, 88th Cong., 1st Sess. (1963)	  1738
            (2)  Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
                S. REP. No. 963, 88th Cong., 2d Sess. (1964)._  1774
            (3)  Congressional Record, Vol.  110  (1964):	  1788
                (a) Jan. 28;  Debated and  passed  House, pp.
                    1203-1233;  	  1788
                (b) June 23: Passed Senate, pp. 14768-14770.    1858
     1.13f  Reorganization Plan No. 14 of 1950, 64 Stat. 1267,
            5 U.S.C. §1332-15.	  1863
     1.13g  Suspension  of  Provisions  of Davis-Bacon Act of
            March 3, 1931, Proclamation No.  4031, February 25,
            1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 3457.	  1864
     1.13h  Revocation of Proclamation of Suspension of  Provi-
           visions of Davis-Bacon Act, Proclamation No. 4040,
           April 3, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 6335.	  1866
                       Volume  IV
1.14  Public  Contracts, Advertisements for Proposals  for  Pur-
     chases  and Contracts for Supplies or Services for Govern-
     ment Departments; Application to Government Sales and
     Contracts to Sell  and  to  Government Corporations,  as
     amended, 41 U.S.C. §5  (1958).	  1869
     [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §1857b-l(a) (2) (D), 33 U.S.C.
     §1155(g) (3) (A), 42 U.S.C. §242c(e)]

-------
xxx                          CONTENTS

                                                                  Page
           1.14a To Authorize Certain  Administrative Expenses in
                 the Government Service, August 2, 1946, P.L. 79-600,
                 §9(a), (c), 60 Stat. 809.	   1870
                 (1) House Committee on Expenditures in the Exec-
                     utive  Departments, H.R. REP. No. 2186,  79th
                     Cong., 2d Sess. (1946).  	   1871
                 (2) Senate Committee on Expenditures in the Ex-
                     ecutive Departments, S.  REP.  No. 1636,  79th
                     Cong., 2d Sess.  (1946).  	   1875
                 (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 92 (1946):	   1878
                     (a) June 3:  Amended and  passed  House, pp.
                         6165-6166;*  	   1878
                     (b) July 17: Amended and passed  House, pp.
                         9189-9190;	   1878
                     (c) July 26: House  concurs in Senate amend-
                         ments, pp. 10185-10186.	   1879
           1.14b  To Amend the Federal Property and Administrative
                 Services Act of 1949, September 5, 1950, P.L. 81-744,
                 §§ 6(a), (b), 8(c), 64 Stat. 583, 591.	   1880
                 (1) Senate Committee  on Expenditures in the Ex-
                     ecutive Departments  S.  REP.  No.  2140,  81st
                     Cong., 2d  Sess.  (1950).	   1881
                 (2) House Committee on Expenditures in the Execu-
                     tive Departments,  H.R.  REP.  No.  2747,  81st
                     Cong., 2d Sess.  (1950).	   1883
                 (3) Committee of Conference, H.R.  REP. No. 3001,
                     81st Cong., 2d Sess. (1950).	   1884
                 (4) Congressional Record, Vol. 96  (1950-1951) : __   1887
                     (a) July 26: Passed Senate, pp. 11092,  11094,
                         11096;*  	   1887
                     (b) Aug.  7:  Amended and  passed  House, pp.
                         11919, 11921, 11922,  11927;*	   1887
                     (c) Aug. 31: Senate  agrees to conference re-
                         port, p. 13940;*	   1887
                     (d) Aug.  31: House  agrees to conference re-
                         port, p.  13993.*	   1887
           1.14c  Small  Business Opportunities  Act, August 28, 1958,
                 85-800, §7, 72 Stat. 967.	   1888
                 (1)  Senate Committee  on Government Operations,
                     S. REP. No.  2201, 85th Cong., 2d Sess.  (1958).-   1888
                 (2)  Congressional Record, Vol. 104  (1958):	   1891
                     (a) Aug.  14: Amended and passed Senate, p.
                         17539;*	   1891
                     (b) Aug. 15: Committee discharged  and passed
                         House, pp. 17908-17909.*	   1891
      1.15  Per Diem, Travel and Transportation  Expenses;  Experts
           and Consultants; Individuals  Serving Without  Pay, as
           amended, 5 U.S.C. §5703 (1969) 	   1892
           [Referred  to in 42 U.S.C. §§1857d(i), 1857e(e), 1857f-6e
           (b)(2),  33 U.S.C. §§1159(a)(2)(B), 1160(c) (4),(i), 15
           U.S.C. §1475(b), 42 U.S.C. §242f (b) (5), (6)]

-------
                    CONTENTS                         xxxi

                                                        Page
 1.15a  Administrative Expenses Act, August 2, 1946, P.L.
       79-600, §5, 60 Stat.  808. 	  1893
       (1) House Committee on Expenditures in Executive
           Departments, H.R.  REP. No. 2186,  79th Cong.,
           2d Sess.  (1946).	  1894
       (2) Senate Committee on Expenditures in Executive
           Departments, S. REP. No.  1636, 79th Cong., 2d
           Sess. (1946)	  1895
       (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 92 (1946) :	  1895
           (a) June 3:  Amended and  passed House, p.
               6164;*	  1895
           (b) July 17: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
               9189-9190;  	  1895
           (c) July 26:  House concurs  in  Senate  amend-
               ments, pp. 10185-10186.*	  1896
 1.15b  Amendments to  the 1946 Travel Expense Act, July
       28, 1955, P.L. 84-189, §2, 69 Stat.  394	  1896
       (1) Senate Committee  on  Government  Operations,
           S. REP.  No. 353, 84th Cong., 1st  Sess. (1955).^_  1897
       (2) House Committee on  Government  Operations,
           H.R. REP.  No. 604,  84th  Cong., 1st  Sess.
           (1955)	  1903
       (3)  Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1088,
           84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955):	  1907
       (4) Congressional Record,  Vol. 101 (1955) :	  1909
           (a) June 20: Amended and passed House, pp.
               8752, 8755;*	  1909
           (b) June 22: Amended and  passed Senate, p.
               8928;*	  1909
           (c)  July 12: House agrees to  conference report,
              p. 10300;* _—	  1909
           (d)  July 13:  Senate  agrees  to  conference re-
              port, p.  10387.*	  1909
1.15c Enactment of Title 5, United States Code, "Govern-
       ment Organization and Employees," September 6,
       1966, P.L. 89-554, §5703, 80 Stat. 499	  1909
       (1)  House Committee on the Judiciary,  H.R. REP.
          No. 901,  89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965).	  1911
       (2) Senate Committee on  the Judiciary, S.  REP.
          No. 1380, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966).	  1916
       (3)  Congressional Record:	  1917
           (a)  Vol. Ill  (1965), Sept. 7:  Passed House, p.
              25954;*	  1917
           (b) Vol.  112  (1966),  July 25:  Amended and
              passed Senate, pp.  17006,  17010-17011;*  _  1917
           (c) Vol.  112 (1966),  Aug.  11: House  concurs
              in Senate amendments,  p. 19077.*	 1917
1.15d Increase Maximum Rates Per Diem  Allowance for
      Government Employees, November  10,  1969, P.L.
      91-114,  §2, 83 Stat. 190.	  1918

-------
xxxii                         CONTENTS

                                                                  Page
                 (1) House  Committee  on Government Operations,
                     H.R. REP.  No. 91-111,  91st Cong., 1st Sess.
                     (1969) ______________________________________  1918
                 (2) Senate  Committee on Government Operations,
                     S.  REP.  No.  91-450, 91st  Cong.,  1st  Sess.
                     (1969) ______________________________________  1930
                 (3) Congressional Record, Vol. 115  (1969): ______  1941
                     (a) March 26: Considered and 'passed House,
                         pp. 7748-7752; _________________________  1941
                     (b) Oct. 8:  Amended and  passed  Senate,  p.
                         29042;  ________________________________  1951
                     (c) Oct. 30: House  concurs in Senate amend-
                         ments, pp. 32423-32425. _________________  1952
      1.16  Disclosure  of  Confidential   Information  Generally,   as
           amended, 18 U.S.C. §1905 (1948) _______________________  1958
           [Referred to  in  42 U.S.C.  §§1857c-9(c),  1857d(j)(l),
           1857f-6(b),  1857h-5(a)(l),  33  U.S.C.  §§1160(f) (2), (k)
           1.16a Disclosure of Information, June  25, 1948, P.L. 80-
                 772, §1905, 62 Stat. 791. ________________________  1958
                 (1) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R.  REP.
                     No. 304, 80th Cong., 1st Sess. (1947). ________  1959
                 (2) Senate Committee on the Judiciary,  S.  REP.
                     No. 1620, 80th Cong., 2d Sess. (1948). ________  1960
                 (3) Congressional  Record: ______________________  1960
                     (a) Vol.  93  (1947), May  12:  Amended and
                         passed House, p. 5049;* ________________  1960
                     (b) Vol.  94  (1948), June  18: Amended and
                         passed Senate, pp. 8721-8722; __________  1961
                     (c) Vol. 94  (1948), June 18: House concurs in
                         Senate amendments, p.  8865. ____________  1961
      1.17  Appropriation Bills
           1.17a Agricultural-Environmental and  Consumer Protec-
                 tion Appropriation Act of 1971,  Title III, 85 Stat.
                 183. ___________________________________________  1962
                 (1) House Committee on Appropriations, H.R. REP.
                     No. 92-289, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971). ______  1963
                 (2) House Committee on Appropriations, H.R.  REP.
                     No. 92-253, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971) -------  1981
                 (3) Committee of  Conference, H.R. REP. No. 92-
                     376, 92d Cong., 1st Sess.  (1971). _____________  1991
                 (4) Congressional  Record, Vol. 117  (1971) : ______  1994
                     (a) June 23: Amended and  passed House, pp.
                         H5739-H5742, H5746-H5748,  H5765,  H-
                         5767, H5778-H5779, H5810-H5811; _______  1964
                     (b) July 15: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
                         S11161, S11162, S11163, S11164, S11165,
                         S11207, S11208, S11226-S11228;  _________  2005
                     (c) July 27 : House agrees to conference report,
                         pp. H7170, H7171, H7172, H7173; ________  2015

-------
                           CONTENTS                        xxxiii

                                                               Page
                  (d) July 28:  Senate agrees to conference report,
                      pp. S12334-S12337.* 	  2016
        1.17b Agricultural Environmental and  Consumer  Protec-
              tion Programs Appropriation, August 22, 1972, P.L.
              92-399, Title III, 86 Stat. 604	  2017
              (1) House Committee on Appropriations, H.R. REP.
                  No. 92-1175, 92d Cong., 2d Sess.  (1972)	  2019
              (2) Senate  Committee on  Appropriations,  S.  Rep.
                  No. 92-983, 92d Cong., 2d Sess.  (1972).	  2058
              (3) Committee of Conference, H.R.  REP. No. 92-
                  1283,  92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972).	  2067
              (4) Congressional Record,  Vol. 118 (1972):	  2074
                  (a) June 29: Considered and passed House, pp.
                      H6286-H6288,  H6290, H6291,  H6292, H-
                      6336;	  2074
                  (b) July 27:  Considered and passed   Senate,
                      amended,  pp.  S12051-S12056,   S12139-S-
                      12141;	  2081
                  (c) Aug. 9: House and Senate agreed to  confer-
                      ence  report,  pp.  H7387-H7389,   H3795,
                      H3796-H3797, S13161-S13162.	  2093

2.  Executive Orders

   2.1   E.O. 11472, Establishing the Environmental Quality Coun-
        cil and the Citizens Advisory Committee  on Environmental
        Quality, February 29,  1969, 34 Fed. Reg. 8693  (1969). ___ 2107
   2.2   E.O. 11490, Emergency Preparedness Functions of Federal
        Departments  and Agencies, October 30, 1969, as amended,
        35 Fed.  Reg.  5659  (1970).	 2111
   2.3   E.O. 11507, Prevention, Control, and Abatement of Air and
        Water Pollution at Federal Facilities, February 4, 1970, 35
        Fed Reg. 2573 (1970).	 2163
   2.4   E.O. 11514, Protection and Enhancement of Environmental
        Quality, March 5, 1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 4247  (1970).	 2169
   2.5   E.O. 11575, Administration of the Disaster Relief  Act of
        1970, as amended by E.O. 11662, March 29, 1972, 37  Fed.
        Reg. 6563  (1972)	 2173
   2.6   E.O. 11587, Placing Certain Positions in Levels IV  and V
        of the Federal Executive Salary Schedule, March 15, 1971,
        36 Fed. Reg. 475  (1971).	  2175
   2.7   E.O. 11628, Establishing a Seal for the Environmental  Pro-
        tection Agency,  October  18,  1971,  36  Fed. Reg.  20285
        (1971)	  2176
   2.8   E.O. 11222, Standards  of Ethical  Conduct for Government
        Officers  and  Employees,  May 8,  1965, 30 Fed. Reg. 6469
        (1965)	  2177
   2.9   E.O. 11667, Establishing the President's Advisory Commit-
        tee on the Environmental  Merit  Awards Program, April
        20, 1972, 37 Fed.  Reg.  7763  (1972)	  2185

-------
xxxiv                        CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
   3.  Regulations.
      3.1  Reorganization and Republication, Environmental Protec-
           tion Agency, 36 Fed. Reg. 22369 (1971).	  2187
      3.2  Statement of Organization and General Information, En-
           vironmental  Protection  Agency, 40 C.P.R.   §§1.1-1.43
           (1972). 	
      3.3  Public Information, Environmental Protection Agency,  40
           C.P.R. §§2.100-2.111  (1972).	
      3.4  Employee Responsibilities and   Conduct,  Environmental
           Protection  Agency,  40  C.P.R.  §§3.735-101—3.735-107
           (1971)	
      3.5  Interim Regulations and Procedures  for Implementing the
           Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acqui-
           sition  Policies  Act  of  1970,  Environmental  Protection
           Agency, 40 C.P.R. §§4.1-4.263 (1971).	
      3.6  Tuition Fees for Direct  Training, Environmental Protec-
           tion Agency, 40 C.P.R. §§5.1-5.7  (1972). 	
      3.7  Certification of   Facilities,  Environmental  Protection
           Agency, 40  C.F.R. §§20.1-20.10 (1971).	
      3.8  General  Grants  Regulations and  Procedures,   Environ-
           mental  Protection Agency,  40 C.F.R. §§30.100-30.1001-3
           (1972).	
      3.9  State  and  Local  Assistance, Environmental  Protection
           Agency, 40 C.P.R. §§35.400-35.420 (1972).	
      3.10  Security Classification Regulation, Environmental Protec-
           tion Agency, 41 C.F.R. §§11.1-11.6  (1972).	
      3.11  General,  Environmental  Protection  Agency,  41  C.P.R.
           §§15-1.000—15-1.5301  (1972).	
      3.12  Procurement by Formal  Advertising, Environmental Pro-
           tection  Agency,  41  C.F.R.   §§15-2.406-3-15—2.407-8
           (1972)	
      3.13  Procurement by  Negotiations, Environmental  Protection
           Agency,   41   C.F.R.   §§15-3.51,   15-3.103,    15-3.405,
           15-405-3,  15-3.600—15-3.606, 15-3.805, 15-3.808 (1972)-
      3.14  Special Types and Methods of Procurement, Environmental
           Protection  Agency,  41  C.F.R.   §§15-4.5300—15-4.5303
           (1972). 	
      3.15  Procurement Forms,  Environmental Protection Agency,
           41 C.F.R.  §15-16.553-1 (1972).	
      3.16  Transportation,  Environmental  Protection  Agency,   41
           C.P.R. §§15-19.302—15-19.305 (1972).	
      3.17  Amortization of Pollution Control Facilities, Internal Rev-
           enue Service, 26 C.F.R. §1.169 (1972).	
      3.18  Temporary Income Tax Regulations Under the Tax Reform
           Act of 1969,  Internal Revenue Service, 26 C.F.R.  §§1.179-1,
           1.642(f),  1.642(f)-l (1971).  	
      3.19  Introduction, Environmental  Protection Agency,  41 C.F.R.
           §§115-1.100—115-1.110 (1971)	

-------
                           CONTENTS                        xxxv

                                                               Page
4.  Guidelines and Reports
   4.1   The President's Environmental Program	  2193
        4.1a   The  President's 1971 Environmental Program com-
              piled by  the  Council  on Environmental Quality,
              March 1971, pp. 1-205	  2193
        4.1b   The  President's 1972 Environmental Program, com-
              piled by  the  Council  on Environmental Quality,
              March 1972, pp. 1-75, 223.	  2353


                           Volume  V
   4.2  Council on Environmental Quality, Annual Reports, as re-
        quired by National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,  42
        U.S.C. 34341.	  2419
        4.2a  The First Annual Report of the Council on Environ-
              mental Quality, August 1970, pp. 1-241.	  2419
        4.2b  The Second Annual Report  of the Council on En-
              vironmental Quality, August 1971, pp. 3-265.	  2660
                          Volume VI
        4.2c   The  Third Annual  Report of the Council on En-
              vironmental Quality, August 1972, pp. 3-348.	  2923
   4.3   Citizens' Advisory Committee  on Environmental Quality
        Reports to the President and  the  President's  Council on
        Environmental Quality, as required by E.O. 11472, 3102 (c).  3269
        4.3a   Report to the President  and  the President's Council
              on Environmental Quality, Citizens' Advisory Com-
              mittee on Environmental Quality, August 1969.	  3269
        4.3b   Report to the President  and  the President's Council
              on Environmental Quality, Citizens' Advisory Com-
              mittee on  Environmental Quality, April 1971.	  3292
   4.4   Selected Reports: 	  3317
        4.4a    "Ocean Dumping: A National Policy." Report to the
              President by the Council on Environmental Quality,
              October 1970.	  3317
        4.4b   "Toxic Substances", Report  by the Council on En-
              vironmental Quality, April 1971.	  3377
   4.5   Interim Guidelines,  Executive  Office  of the  President's
        Council on  Environmental Quality,  36  Fed.  Reg.  7724
        (1970)	  3416
   4.6   The Report of HEW and  EPA on the Health Effects of
        Environmental Pollution,  Pursuant to Title V of  P.L. 91-
        515, H.R. Doc.  No. 92-241, 92d  Congress,  2d Sess.  (1972).,  3428

-------
xxxvi                        CONTENTS

                                                                 Page
      4.7   Interagency Agreements:	  3461
        4.7a  Economic Dislocation Early Warning System Memoran-
              dum of  Understanding Between the Administrator of
              the Environmental Protection Agency and the Secretary
              of Labor (1971).	  3461
        4.7b  Establishing and Maintaining an Industrial Security
              Program, Interagency Agreement Between the Environ-
              mental Protection Agency and the Department of De-
              fense (1972).	  3463
        4.7c   Cooperative Efforts  Regarding Air and Water Quality
              in Implementing the Everglades Jetport Pact,  Memo-
              randum of Understanding Between the Environmental
              Protection Agency and National Park Service (1972).  3466
        4.7d  General  Policy and Procedures for Providing Economic
              and Technical Assistance to Developing Nations, Agree-
              ment Between the Environmental Protection Agency and
              the Agency for International Development (1972).	  3468
        4.7e   Cooperative Program Entitled Modular-Size Integrated
              Utility Systems, Memoradum  of  Understanding  Be-
              tween the Environmental  Protection  Agency and the
              Department of Housing and Urban Affairs (1972). „__  3473

-------
           STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1869

   1.14  PUBLIC CONTRACTS, ADVERTISEMENTS FOR
  PROPOSALS FOR PURCHASES AND CONTRACTS FOR
      SUPPLIES OR SERVICES FOR GOVERNMENT
   DEPARTMENTS; APPLICATION TO GOVERNMENT
       SALES AND CONTRACTS TO SELL AND TO
     GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS, AS AMENDED
                     41 U.S.C. §5 (1958)

    [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. § 1857b—1 (a) (2) (D), 33 U.S.C.
            § 155(g) (3) (A), 42 U.S.C. § 242c(e)]


 PUBLIC  CONTRACTS, ADVERTISEMENTS FOR PROPO-
    SALS FOR PURCHASES AND CONTRACTS  FOR SUP-
    PLIES OR SERVICES FOR GOVERNMENT DEPART-
    MENTS;   APPLICATION  TO  GOVERNMENT  SALES
    AND  CONTRACTS  TO SELL AND TO GOVERNMENT
    CORPORATIONS
  41 § 5
  Unless  otherwise  provided in the appropriation concerned or
other law purchases and contracts for supplies or services for the
Government may be made or entered into only after advertising a
sufficient  time previously for proposals,  except (1) when the
amount involved in any one case does not exceed $2,500, (2) when
the public exigencies require the immediate delivery of the articles
or performance of the service, (3) when only one source of supply
is available and the Government purchasing or contracting officer
shall so certify, or (4) when the services are required to be per-
formed by the contractor in person and are (A) of a technical and
professional nature  or  (B)  under  Government  supervision  and
paid for on a time basis. Except (1) as authorized by section 1638
of Appendix to Title 50, (2) when otherwise authorized by law, or
(3) when the reasonable value involved in any one case does not
exceed $500, sales and contracts of  sale by the Government shall
be governed by the requirements of this section for advertising.
  In the case of wholly owned Government corporations, this sec-
tion shall apply to their administrative transactions only. R.S. §
3709; Aug. 2, 1946, c. 744, § 9(a), (c), 60 Stat. 809; June 30,
1949, c. 288, Title VI, § 602(f),  formerly Title  V, § 502 (e), 63
Stat. 400, renumbered Sept. 5,1950, c. 849, §§ 6(a), (b), 8(c), 64
Stat. 583; Aug. 28,1958, Pub.L. 85-800, § 7, 72 Stat. 967.

-------
1870         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   1.14a  TO AUTHORIZE  CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE
      EXPENSES IN THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE
           August 2, 1946, P.L. 79-600, §9(a), (c), 60 Stat. 809

  SEC. 9. (a) Section 3709 of the Revised Statutes of the United
States is hereby amended to read as follows:
  "Unless otherwise provided in the appropriation concerned or
other law, purchases and contracts for supplies or services for the
Government may be made or entered into only after advertising a
sufficient time  previously  for proposals, except  (1)  when the
amount involved in any one case does not exceed $100, (2)  when
the public exigencies require the immediate delivery of the articles
or performance of the service, (3) when only one source of supply
is available and the Government purchasing or contracting officer
shall so certify, or (4) when the services are required to be per-
formed by the contractor in person and are (A) of a technical and
professional nature or (B)  under Government supervision and
paid for on a time basis. Except (1) as authorized by section 29 of
the Surplus Property Act of 1944 (50  U.S.C. App.  1638), (2)
when otherwise authorized by law, or (3) when  the reasonable
value involved  in any one case does  not exceed $100, sales and
contracts of sale by the Government shall be governed by the
requirements of this section for advertising."
      *******
   (c) In the case of wholly owned Government corporations, this
section shall apply to their administrative transactions only.
                                                     [p. 809]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1871

  1.14a(l)  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN
            THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS
            H.R. REP. No. 2186, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946)

ADMINISTRATIVE   EXPENSES  IN   GOVERNMENT  DE-
                        PARTMENTS
MAY 29, 1946.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
               of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. MANASCO, from the Committee on Expenditures in the Execu-
           tive Departments, submitted the following

                         REPORT
                    [To accompany H. R. 6533]

  The Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments,
to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 6533) to authorize certain
administrative expenses in the Government  service and for other
purposes, having considered  the same, report favorably thereon
without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

                      GENERAL STATEMENT
  This bill can  truthfully be referred to as a bill to  eliminate
Government red tape.
  The principal purpose of the bill, which deals with departmental
procedures and expenditures incident to certain employees' travel,
and to contracts and purchases, and related matters, is the perma-
nent enactment of numerous provisions which, although of a con-
tinuing and general character, have been included hitherto in the
annual appropriation acts. That purpose is designed to supplement
the program  announced last year by the  chairman of the Appro-
priations CommitteeJ  to avoid so far as possible  the  recurring
enactment of legislative  items in  appropriation acts. Related to
that purpose are a number of sections designed to authorize the
Appropriations Committee, in its annual review of each agency's
operations, to provide exceptions from certain general prohibitory
administrative-expense legislation, where the special needs of the
current programs of a particular agency may justify them.2 Fi-
  1 See 91 Congressional Record 2671, March 23, 1945.
  2 Many such exceptions now appear in the appropriation acts, but would be subject to point
of order for lack of legislative authorization, such as that now proposed.
                                                         [P. 1]

-------
1872          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

nally, a number of sections are intended to revise and modernize a
group of permanent statutes, comprising an important segment of
the body of legislative guides and rules for the conduct of the
Government's business, which require codification and adaptation
to the current needs, size, and scope of the functions of the  Gov-
ernment.
                    THE COMMITTEE'S STUDY

  The present bill is a revision of, and supersedes,  H.R. 4586,
Seventy-ninth Congress, which was submitted by the Director of
the Budget for the consideration of the  Congress and on which
your committee requested departmental reports and held hearings,
which were attended by  representatives of  the Bureau  of the
Budget and of the General Accounting Office.  The report of those
hearings has been printed and is available to Members.
  The reports received from  the  departments without material
exception are in favor of the purposes and provisions of the bill,
which is designed to cover all the agencies with substantial uni-
formity.  A full report and analysis was obtained from the Comp-
troller General  (on H.R. 4586), and the changes recommended by
him have been incorporated in H.R. 6533.  As to the cost of the bill,
it is doubtful that any measurable increase in out-of-the-Treasury
expenditures will result (except for one  or two minor sections),
since nearly every authorization appearing in the bill now is con-
tained in an appropriation act. So far as any such increase could
result, there can be anticipated a considerably greater countervail-
ing saving in the elimination which the bill provides of a number
of technical or obsolete procedural requirements which are found
now to be unnecessary or unworkable.


                   EXPLANATION BY SECTIONS

  The first  seven sections deal  with travel expenses in various
special categories; sections 8 and  9 deal  with contracts and pur-
chases; the remaining sections, respectively,  deal with (10) wit-
ness fees, (11) advances of public funds, (12) delegation of au-
thority,  (13) purchase of special clothing, (14) employees' awards
for suggestions, (15) the hire of experts and consultants, (16) the
purchase and use of Government automobiles and aircraft, and
 (17)  miscellaneous repeals and amendments.
                                                         [p. 2]

-------
             STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1873

   Section 9. Advertising for bids in public purchases and sales.—
 The basic statute which has regulated purchasing by the Govern-
 ment for many years is section 3709, Revised Statutes, which, in
 brief,  requires that public contracts for  purchases and services
 other  than personal be let  only  after advertising for bids. The
 statute itself has remained unamended since its enactment in 1861
 and the program which it requires is believed to be fundamentally
 in the public interest since by no other means yet discovered is
 assurance provided that (a) the Government as a purchaser and a
 customer will receive the best bargain obtainable, and (b)  build-
 ers, dealers, suppliers, and manufacturers reasonably in a position
 to supply the Government's needs will have a fair and equal oppor-
 tunity to compete for and  share in  the Government's  business.
 During the period of wartime procurement, the First War Powers
                                                        [p. 6]

 Act authorized an exception whenever the President deemed such
 action would facilitate the prosecution  of the war. The amend-
 dents now suggested with respect to Government purchases are
 designed to be perfecting only, and consist of four exceptions, of
 which three are adaptations from existing law and one covers a
 practical  condition recognized by decisions  of the  accounting
 officers in the course of  many years' experience.  It  is believed
 desirable to codify all of these exceptions and enact them as a part
 of the basic law. The exceptions referred to exempt the following
 classes of transactions:
     (1) Those in which the amount involved does not exceed $100
 —many such exemptions now on the books range in amounts from
 $25 to $500. This section proposes to raise to  $100 all  exemptions
 which  are now below that figure but to retain intact all exemp-
 tions of more than $100 which are now a part of the law.
    (2) Those in which the public exigencies require immediate
 delivery or performance.
    (3) Those in which only one source of supply  is available to
 meet the particular needs of the Government service, and  the
contracting officer  so certifies. The Comptroller General has  ad-
vised  the  committee that it is understood that the contracting
officer's certification will be supported by a brief statement of the
facts and reasons on which it is based.
    (4) Those in which the services are to be performed by the
contractor in person, under Government supervision and paid for
on a time basis.

-------
1874
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
  Aside from approving those perfecting amendments, the Comp-
troller General has recommended and the committee has agreed
that the statute should specify in plain terms that its mandate for
advertising for bids is equally applicable whether the Government
deals as a buyer or as a seller. The present statute  does not so
specify with respect  to  sales  by the Government.  The  proposed
section corrects that discrepancy but retains an exemption for (a)
the special procedures directed  under the Surplus  Property  Act,
and (6) any other exceptions authorized by law.
                                                              [p- 7]
            EXISTING LAW

 Section 3709, Revised Statutes  (41
     U. S. C. 5)
   All purchases and  contracts  for
 supplies  or services, in  any of  the
 departments of the Government, ex-
 cept for personal services,  shall be
 made by advertising a sufficient time
 previously for  proposals  respecting
 the same, when the public exigencies
 do not require  the immediate deliv-
 ery of the articles, or performance
 of the service.  When immediate de-
 livery or performance  is required by
 the public exigency, the articles or
 service required may be procured by
 open  purchase  or contract, at  the
 places and in the manner in which
 such articles  are usually bought  and
 sold,  or  such services engaged, be-
 tween individuals.

  The act of October 10, 1940  (54 Stat.
     1109; 41 U. S. C. 6)

    Section 3709 of the Revised Stat-
  utes shall not be  construed  to apply
  to any purchases  or services author-
  ized by  any appropriation  Act for
  the  hereinafter-enumerated depart-
  ments and independent offices—
    (a) Where the aggregate amount
  involved does not exceed the sum of
  $25—
    (1) The Civil Service Commission.
    (2) The Department of Commerce.
    (3) The Department of Justice.
    (b) Where the aggregate amount
                    involved does not exceed the sum of
                    $50—
                       (1)  The Administrative  Office of
                           the United States Courts.
                       (2)  The Department of  Agricul-
                           ture.
                       (3)  The Farm Credit Adminis-
                           tration.
                       (4)  The Federal  Bureau of In-
                           vestigation in the field.
                       (5)  The  Federal   Home   Loan
                           Bank Board.
                       (6)  The Federal Power  Commis-
                           sion.
                       (7)  The Federal Trade  Commis-
                           sion.
                       (8)  The General Accounting Of-
                           fice.
                       (9)  The  Interstate  Commerce
                           Commission.
                      (10)  The National Advisory Com-
                           mittee for Aeronautics.
                      (11)  The National Archives.
                      (12)  The  National  Labor  Rela-
                           tions  Board.
                      (13)  The Navy Department or its
                           bureaus and offices.
                      (14)  The   Railroad   Retirement
                           Board.
                      (15)  The Securities and Exchange
                           Commission.
                      (16)  The Tariff Commission.
                      (17)  The Treasury Department.
                      (18)  The  Veterans'  Administra-
                           tion.
                      (e) Where the aggregate amount
                    involved does not exceed the sum of
                    $100—

-------
             STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                          1875
    (1) The Civil Aeronautics Board.
    (2) The Department of Labor.
    (3) The Federal Loan Agency.

           PROPOSED LAW
    SEC. 9.  (a)  Section 3709 of the
 Revised  Statutes of  the  United
 States is hereby amended to read as
 follows:
    "Unless otherwise provided in the
 appropriation  concerned   or  other
 law,  purchases and  contracts  for
 supplies or services for the Govern-
 ment may be made or entered into
 only  after  advertising a sufficient
 time previously for proposals, except
 (1) when the amount involved in any
 one case does not exceed $100,  (2)
 when the public exigencies require
 the immediate delivery of the  arti-
 cles  or performance  of the service,
                          [P- 14]
(3) when only one source of supply
is available and the Government pur-
chasing  or contracting officer shall
so certify, or  (4) when the services
are to be performed by the contrac-
tor in person,  under Government su-
pervision, and paid for on  a  time
basis. Except as authorized  by sec-
tion 29 of the Surplus Property Act
of 1944  (50 U. S. C. App.  1638), or
unless otherwise authorized by law,
sales and contracts of sale  by  the
Government shall be governed by the
requirements of  this section for ad-
vertising, except when the  reason-
able value involved  in any one case
does not exceed $100."
  (b)  Exemptions from section 3709,
Revised  Statutes, in  other  law in
amounts of  $100 or less are hereby
repealed.

                          [p. 15]
 1.14a(2)  SENATE COMMITTEE  ON EXPENDITURES IN
             THE  EXECUTIVE  DEPARTMENTS
               S. REP. No. 1636, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946)

ADMINISTRATIVE  EXPENSES  IN  GOVERNMENT  DE-
                          PARTMENTS
                 JULY 2, 1946.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. HILL, from the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive
              Departments, submitted the following

                           REPORT
                     [To accompany H. R. 6533]

  The Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments,
to whom was referred the bill (H.R.  6533) to authorize certain
administrative expenses in the Government service, and for other
purposes, having considered  the same, report favorably thereon

-------
1876          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

with amendments  and recommend that the bill as amended do
pass.

                     GENERAL STATEMENT

  This bill might be referred to as a bill to cut down on Govern-
ment red tape.
  The principal purpose of the bill, which deals with departmental
procedures and expenditures incident to certain employees' travel,
and to contracts and purchases,  and related matters, is the perma-
nent enactment of  numerous provisions which, although of a con-
tinuing and general character, have been included hitherto in the
annual appropriation acts. That purpose is designed to supplement
the program  announced last year by the chairman of the House
Appropriations Committee to avoid so far as possible the recur-
ring enactment of  legislative items in appropriation acts. Related
to that purpose are a number of sections designed to authorize the
Appropriations Committee, in its annual review of each agency's
operations, to provide exceptions from certain general prohibitory
administrative-expense legislation, where the special needs of the
current  programs  of a  particular agency  may justify them. Fi-
nally, a number of  sections are intended to  revise and modernize a
group of permanent statutes, comprising an important segment of
                                                        [P. 1]

the body of  legislative  guides and  rules for the  conduct of the
Government's business,  which require codification and adaptation
to the current needs, size, and scope of the functions of  the  Gov-
ernment.

                  EXPLANATION BY  SECTIONS
  The first seven  sections  deal with travel  expenses in various
special categories; sections 8 and 9 deal with contracts  and pur-
chases;  the remaining sections, respectively, deal with (10) wit-
ness fees,  (11) advances of public funds,  (12) delegation of au-
thority, (13)  purchase of special clothing, (14) employees' awards
for suggestions, (15) the hire of experts and  consultants, (16) the
purchase and use  of Government automobiles  and aircraft, and
 (17) miscellaneous repeals and  amendments.
                                                         [p. 2]

  Section 9. Advertising for bids in public purchases and sales.—
The basic statute which has regulated purchasing by the Govern-
ment for many years is section 3709, Revised  Statutes, which, in

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1877

brief, requires that public contracts  for purchases and services
other than personal be let only after advertising for bids. The
statute itself has remained unamended since its enactment in 1861
and the program which it requires is believed to be fundamentally
in the public interest since by no other means yet discovered is
assurance provided that (a) the Government as a purchaser and a
customer will  receive the best bargain obtainable,  and (6)  build-
ers, dealers, suppliers, and manufacturers reasonably in a position
to supply the Government's needs will have a fair and equal oppor-
tunity to compete for and share  in the Government's business.
During the period of wartime procurement, the First War Powers
Act authorized an exception whenever the President deemed such
action would facilitate the prosecution of  the war. The amend-
ments now suggested with respect to Government purchases are
designed to be perfecting only, and consist of four exceptions, of
which three are adaptations  from existing law and one covers a
practical  condition  recognized by decisions of  the  accounting
officers  in the  course of  many years' experience. It  is  believed
desirable to codify all of these exceptions and enact them as a part
of the basic law. The exceptions referred to exempt the following
classes of transactions:
     (1)  Those in  which the amount involved does  not exceed
$100—many such exemptions now on the books range  in amounts
from $25 to $500. This section proposes to raise to  $100 all exemp-
tions which are now below  that  figure but  to retain intact  all
exemptions of more than  $100 which  are now a part  of the law.
                                                        [P. 6]

     (2)  Those in which the  public exigencies require immediate
delivery or performance.
     (3) Those in which only one source of supply is available to
meet  the  particular needs of the Government service, and the
contracting officer so certifies. The Comptroller General has ad-
vised that it is understood that the contracting officer's certifica-
tion will be supported by a brief  statement of the facts and rea-
sons on which it is based.
     (4) Those in which the services are required to be performed
by the contractor in person and either  (a)  are of  a technical and
professional nature  or (6) are under Government supervision and
paid for on a time basis. In this subsection  the committee revised
the language slightly to insure that personal services of a techni-
cal or professional  nature would  not  have to be  advertised for.

-------
1878
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
Certain  other perfecting  or clarifying  amendments also were
adopted at this point, involving sections 9 and 18.
  The committee approves the House proposal, based upon a  rec-
ommendation of the Comptroller General, that the statute should
specify in plain terms that its mandate for advertising for bids is
equally applicable whether the Government deals as a buyer or as
a seller.  The present statute does not so specify with respect to
sales by the Government. The proposed section corrects that dis-
crepancy but retains an exemption for (a) the special procedures
directed under the  Surplus Property Act, and  (6)  any other ex-
ceptions authorized by law.
                                                            [P. 7]
      1.14a(3)   CONGRESSIONAL  RECORD, VOL. 92 (1946)

1.14a(3)(a) June 3: Amended and passed  House, pp. 6165-6166

        [No Relevant Discussion  on Pertinent Section]
1.14a(3)(b) June 17: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 9189-9190
  The PRESIDING OFFICER.  The
clerk will state the next amendment
of the committee.
  The next amendment was, in section
9, page 8, line 12, after the word "or",
to strike out "(4) when the services
are to be performed by the contractor
in person, under Government super-
vision, and paid for on  a time basis"
and to insert "(4) when the services
are required to be performed by the
contractor in person and are  (A) of
a technical and professional nature or
 (B)  under  Government supervision
 and paid for on a time basis."
  The amendment was agreed to.
                         [p.  9189]

  The next amendment  was, on page
 8, line 20, before  the  word "other-
 wise", to strike out "or unless" and to
 insert "(2) when"; and after the word
 "law"  and the comma,  to strike out
                  "sales and contracts of sale by  the
                  Government shall be governed by  the
                  requirements of this section for adver-
                  tising,  except when the reasonable
                  value involved in any one case does
                  not exceed $100" and to insert "or  (3)
                  when the reasonable value involved in
                  any  one  case does  not  exceed $100,
                  sales and contracts of sale by the Gov-
                  ernment shall be governed by the re-
                  quirements of this section  for adver-
                  tising."
                    And on page 9, after  line 4, to in-
                  sert:
                     (c) In the case  of wholly owned
                  Government  corporations, this section
                  shall apply  to  their administrative
                  transactions  only.
                    The amendments  were agreed to.
                    The PRESIDING OFFICER.   The
                  question is on the engrossment of the
                  amendments  and the third reading of
                  the bill.

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             1879
  The amendments were ordered to be
engrossed, and  the  bill  to be  read  a
third time.
  The bill (H. R. 6533)  was read the
third time and passed.
                          [p.  9190]
 1.14a(3)(c)  July 26:  House concurs in Senate amendments,
 pp. 10185-10186
AUTHORIZING CERTAIN  ADMINISTRATIVE
  EXPENSES   IN  THE  GOVERNMENT
  SERVICE

  Mr.  MANASCO.   Mr.  Speaker,  I
ask unanimous consent  to take from
the Speaker's desk the bill (H.  R.
6533) to authorize certain administra-
tive expenses in the Government serv-
ice, and for other purposes, with Sen-
ate amendments  thereto, and concur
in the Senate amendments.
  The Clerk read the  title of the bill.
  The  Clerk read the Senate amend-
ments, as follows:
  Page  2, line 6, strike out "five" and
insert "seven."
  Page  2, line 7,  strike  out "six" and
insert "eight."
  Page  2, line 7, strike out "two" and
insert "seven."
  Page  8, line 12, strike out all after
"or",  down to and  including "basis"
in line  14, and insert "(4) when the
services are  required to be performed
by the contractor in person  and  are
(A)  of a technical and professional
nature or (B) under Government su-
pervision and  paid for on a time ba-
sis."
  Page  8, line 14, after "Except", in-
sert "(1)."
  Page  8, line 16, strike out "or  un-
less" and insert  "(2)  when".
  Page  8, line 17, strike out all after
"law", down to and including "$100"
in line 20, and insert "or (3)  when the
reasonable value  involved  in  any  one
case does not  exceed  $100, sales and
contracts  of sale by the Government
shall be governed by the requirements
of this section for advertising.
  " (c) In the case of wholly owned
Government corporations, this section
shall  apply to  their  administrative
transactions only."
       *****
                         [p. 10185]

  The SPEAKER.  Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Alabama?
  Mr.  MARTIN  of  Massachusetts.
Mr.  Speaker,  reserving the right to
object, will  the gentleman  explain
these Senate amendments?
  Mr.  MANASCO.   Most  of those
amendments  read by the  Clerk  are
purely mechanical  corrections.  This
bill was  drawn  by the General  Ac-
counting  Office, the attorneys for the
Bureau of the Budget, and the House
Committee on Expenditures in the Ex-
ecutive Departments.  The  principal
change in  the bill as it  passed the
House and amended by the Senate was
to except the Senate and House of
Representatives  and the Architect of
the Capitol from the provisions of this
act.  We  had no  intention of placing
the Architect of  the Capitol under the
provisions of this act, anyhow. It was
done  for administrative  expense in
the executive departments.
  The SPEAKER.  Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Alabama?
  There was no objection.
  The Senate amendments were  con-
curred in.
  A  motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
                         [p. 10186]

-------
1880          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   1.14b  TO  AMEND THE FEDERAL PROPERTY AND
        ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES ACT OF 1949
     September 5, 1950, P.L. 81-744, §§6(a), (b), 8(c), 64 Stat. 583, 591

  SEC. 6. The  Federal Property and Administrative Services Act
of 1949 is amended by—
       (a)  redesignating "title V" of such  Act as "Title VI"
    thereof,  and  "title  V",  wherever  it appears therein,  is
    amended to read "title VI";
       (b)  redesignating section 501-505, inclusive, of such Act,
    respectively, as sections  601-605,  inclusive,  thereof, and
    wherever any such section number  appears in such Act  as
    originally enacted, it is amended to conform in numbering to
    the redesignation prescribed by this subsection;
     *******
                                                      [p. 583]
  SEC. 8.
  (d)  Section 602 of the Federal Property and  Administrative
Services Act of 1949 is amended by redesignating subsection  (e)
thereof as subsection (f), and inserting, immediately after subsec-
tion (d) thereof, the following new subsection:
  "(e) No provision of  this Act, as amended, shall apply to  the
Senate or  the House of Representatives  (including the Architect
of the Capitol and any building,  activity, or function  under  his
direction), but any of the services and facilities authorized by this
Act to be rendered or furnished  shall, as far as practicable, be
made  available to the Senate, the House of Representatives, or the
Architect  of  the Capitol, upon  their request,  and,  if payment
would be  required for the rendition or furnishing of a similar
service or facility to an executive agency, payment therefor shall
be made by the recipient thereof,  upon presentation  of proper
vouchers,  in  advance or by reimbursement (as may  be agreed
upon  by the Administrator and the officer  or body making such
request). Such payment may  be credited to the applicable appro-
priation of the executive agency receiving such payment."
                                                      [p. 591]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1881

 1.14b(l)  SENATE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN
            THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS
             S. REP. No. 2140, 81st Cong., 2d Sess. (1950)

AMENDING THE FEDERAL PROPERTY  AND  ADMINIS-
             TRATIVE SERVICES ACT OF 1949
     JULY 24 (legislative day, JULY 20), 1950.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. McCLELLAN, from the Committee on Expenditures in the Ex-
          ecutive Departments, submitted the following'

                         REPORT
                     [To accompany S. 3959]

  The Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments,
to whom was referred the bill (S. 3959) to amend the Federal
Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949,  and for other
purposes,  having considered the same, report thereon, without
amendment, and recommend that the bill do pass. This bill is
reported as a clean  bill in lieu  of S. 3842, to reflect amendments
approved by the committee.
                                                       [P. 1]

  Section  6 of the proposed legislation amends the Federal Prop-
erty and Administrative Services Act of 1949 by inserting a new
title, namely Title 5—Federal  Records. The provisions  of title 5
with respect to  records matters fall into four general categories,
namely: (1) Those  in the nature of perfecting amendments re-
quired to insert in the  Federal Property and Administrative Serv-
ices Act of 1949 the new title; (2) those designed to provide a
permanent statutory charter for activities now authorized by sub-
stantive language appearing in annual appropriation acts;  (3)
those  necessary to retain desirable provisions of existing law in
their original,  or amended form; and  (4) those providing new
authority with respect to records management and archival ad-
ministration.
                                                       [P. 3]

  The provisions of  section 6 fall within four general categories,
namely, (1) those in  the  nature of perfecting amendments re-
quired to insert in  Public Law 152, the new "Title V—Federal

-------
1882          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

Records" of the bill, (2) those designed to provide a permanent
statutory charter for activities now authorized by substantive lan-
guage appearing in annual appropriation acts, (3) those necessary
to retain desirable provisions of existing law in their original or
amended form, and (4)  those providing new authority with re-
spect to records management and archival administration.
  Subsections (a), (b),and (c), and the introductory language of
subsection  (d) preceding "Title V—Federal Records," of section 6
are perfecting  amendments necessary to the insertion of a new
title V in Public Law 152.
                                                       [p. 13]

  Section 8 amends the definition of the  term  "Federal agency" in
the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, so
as to exclude from the  definition thereof the Architect of the
Capitol and  any activities  under his  direction. The other two
subsections of section 8 provide for the  exclusion from the cover-
age of the  Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of
1949 of the Senate and House of  Representatives, including the
Architect- of  the Capitol, unless any of the services or facilities
authorized  to be rendered shall be requested by the Senate, House,
or Architect of the Capitol.
                                                       [p. 19]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1883

  1.14b(2)  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN
            THE  EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS
            H.R. REP. No. 2747, 81st Cong., 2d Sess. (1950)

AMENDING THE FEDERAL  PROPERTY AND  ADMINIS-
             TRATIVE SERVICES ACT OF 1949
JULY 26, 1950.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
               of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. DAWSON, from the Committee on Expenditures in the Execu-
           tive Departments, submitted the following

                         REPORT
                   [To accompany H. R. 9129]

  The Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments,
to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 9129) to amend the Federal
Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, and for other
purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon
with amendments and  recommend that the bill do pass.
                                                       [P. 1]

  Section 6 of the proposed legislation amends the Federal  Prop-
erty and Administrative Services Act of  1949 by inserting a new
title, namely, title V,  Federal Records. The provisions of title 5
with respect to records matters fall into four general categories,
namely:  (1)  those  in the nature of perfecting amendments re-
quired to insert the new title in the Federal Property and Admin-
istrative Services Act of 1949;  (2) those designed to provide a
permanent statutory charter for activities now authorized by lan-
guage appearing in annual appropriation acts;  (3) those neces-
sary to retain desirable provisions of existing law in their  origi-
nal, or amended form; and (4) those providing  new authority
with respect to records management and archival administration.
                                                       [P. 4]

  The provisions of section 6 fall within four general categories,
namely, (1)  those in  the  nature of perfecting amendments re-
quired to insert in Public Law 152, Eighty-first Congress, the new
title V—Federal Records, (2)  those designed to provide a perma-

-------
1884          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

nent statutory charter for activities now authorized by substan-
tive language appearing in annual appropriation acts, (3) those
necessary to retain desirable provisions  of existing law in their
original,  or amended, form, and (4) those providing new author-
ity with respect to records management and archival administra-
tion.
  Subsections (a), (b), and (c), and the introductory language of
subsection (d)  preceding Title V—Federal Records, of section 6
are perfecting amendments necessary to  the insertion of a new
title V in Public Law 152, Eighty-first Congress.
                                                      [p. 11]

  Section 8 amends the definition of the term "Federal agency" in
the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, so
as to exclude from the definition thereof the Architect  of the
Capitol  and any  activities under  his direction.  The  other two
subsections of section 8 provide for the exclusion from the cover-
age of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of
1949 of the  Senate and House of Representatives, including the
Architect of the Capitol, unless any  of the services or facilities
authorized to be rendered shall be requested by the Senate, House,
or Architect of the Capitol.
                                                      [p. 18]
         1.14b(3)  COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
            H.R. REP. No. 3001, 81st Cong., 2d Sess. (1950)

AMENDMENTS  TO FEDERAL PROPERTY AND ADMINIS-
             TRATIVE SERVICES ACT OF 1949
              AUGUST 25, 1950—Ordered to be printed
Mr. DAWSON, from the committee of conference, submitted the
                          following

                  CONFERENCE REPORT
                     [To accompany S. 3959]

  The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses  on the amendment of the House  to the bill  (S. 3959)
entitled "An Act to amend the Federal Property and Administra-

-------
             STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1885

 tive Services Act of 1949, and for other purposes," having met,
 after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do
 recommend to their respective Houses as follows:
   That the Senate recede from its disagreement to the amendment
 of the House and agree to the same  with an amendment as fol-
 lows:
   In lieu  of the  matter proposed to be  inserted by the House
 amendment insert the following: That  the parenthetical expres-
 sion appearing in clause (1) of the final sentence of subsection (a)
 of section 109 of the Federal Property and Administrative Serv-
 ices Act  of 1949  (Public Law  152, Eighty-first  Congress) is
 amended  to read as follows:
                                                          [p. 1]

   Sec. 6.  The Federal Property and Administrative Services Act
of 1949 is amended by—
       (a) redesignating  "title  V"  of such  Act  as  "title VI"
     thereof,  and  "title  V",  wherever it appears therein,  is
     amended to read "title VI";
       (b) redesignating sections 501-505, inclusive, of such Act,
     respectively,  as sections 601-605,  inclusive,  thereof, and
     wherever any such section number appears in such Act  as
     originally enacted, it is amended to conform in numbering to
     the redesignation prescribed by this subsection;
       (c) inserting at the proper place in the table of contents to
     such  Act the following:


                   "Title V—Federal Records

"Sec. 501.   Short title.
"Sec. 502.   Custody and control of property.
"Sec. 503.   National Historical Publications Commission.
"Sec. 504.   Federal Records Council.
"Sec. 505.   Records management; the Administrator.
"Sec. 506.   Records management; agency heads.
"Sec. 507.   Archival administration.
"Sec. 508.   Reports.
"Sec. 509.   Legal status of reproductions.
"Sec. 510.   Limitation on liability.
"Sec. 511.   Definitions."

       (d) inserting, immediately following title IV thereof, the
     following new title:

-------
1886          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

              "TITLE V—FEDERAL RECORDS
                         "Short Title
   "SEC. 501. Thfe title may be cited as the 'Federal Records Act of
1950'."
                                                        [P. 6]

   SEC. 8 (a) Subsection 3 (b)  of the Federal Property and Ad-
ministrative Services Act of 1949 is amended to read as follows:
   "(b) The term 'Federal agency' means any executive agency or
any establishment in the legislative or judicial branch of the Gov-
ernment (except the Senate, the House  of Representatives, and
the  Architect of the Capitol and any  activities under his  direc-
tion) ."
      *******
   (c)  Section  602 of  the Federal Property and Administrative
Services Act of 1949 is amended by redesignating subsection  (e)
thereof as subsection (/), and inserting, immediately after subsec-
tion (d) thereof, the following  new subsection:
      *******
   "(e) No provision of this Act, as amended,  shall  apply  to the
Senate or the House of Representatives (including the Architect of
the Capitol and any building, activity, or function under his direc-
tion), but any of the services and facilities authorized by  this Act
to be rendered or furnished shall, as far as practicable, be made
available to the Senate, the House of Representatives, or the Arch-
itect of  the Capitol, upon their request, and if payment  would
be required for the rendition or furnishing of a similar service or
facility to an executive agency, payment therefor shall be made by
the  recipient thereof,  upon presentation of proper vouchers, in
advance or by reimbursement  (as  may  be agreed upon by  the
Administrator  and the officer or body making such request). Such
                                                        [p. 14]

payment may  be credited to the applicable  appropriation of the
executive agency receiving such payment."
                                                        [p. 15]

   Section 8  (c)  of the Senate bill  added  to section 602 of the
Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949  a new
subsection (e). This subsection provided, in part,  that no  provi-
sion of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of
1949 as originally enacted or subsequently amended should apply
                                                        [p. 17]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1887

to the Senate or House of Representatives (including the Archi-
tect of the Capitol). The House amendment contains this subsec-
tion but with a change to the effect that no provision of such act
as  originally  enacted  or  as herein amended shall apply to the
Senate or the House of Representatives (including the Architect
of the Capitol). The conference substitute retains this subsection
but simply provides that no provision of such act as amended shall
apply  to the Senate or the House of Representatives (including
the Architect of the Capitol).  The conference committee believes
that the language contained in the conference substitute, in con-
junction with the definition of "Federal agency" contained in sec-
tion 3 (b) of the  Federal Property and Administrative Services
Act of 1949 as amended by section 8  (a) of the  conference substi-
tute, will serve effectively to exclude the Architect of the Capitol
from the provisions of the Federal Property and Administrative
Services Act of 1949, as amended, except with respect to services
and facilities which may be requested by him.
                                                       [p. 18]
  1.14b(4)  CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 96 (1950-1951)

1.14b(4)(a)   July 26: Passed Senate, pp. 11092, 11094, 11096;

        [No  Relevant Discussion  on Pertinent Section]
1.14b(4)(b)  Aug.  7:  Amended and passed  House, pp.  11919,
11921, 11922, 11927;

        [No Relevant Discussion  on Pertinent  Section]
1.14b(4)(c)  Aug. 31: Senate agrees to conference report,
p. 13940;

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]
1.14b(4)(d)  Aug. 31: House agrees to conference report,
p. 13993.

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]

-------
1888         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

     1.14c  SMALL BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES ACT
           August 28, 1958, P.L. 85-800, §7, 72 Stat. 967

  SEC. 7. Section 3709 of the Revised Statutes, as amended  (41
U.S.C. 5), is amended further by striking out "$500" in the first
sentence thereof and substituting therefor "$2,500".
                                                   [p. 967]
    1.14c(l)  SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT
                     OPERATIONS
            S. REP. No. 2201, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958)

IMPROVING  OPPORTUNITIES  FOR   SMALL  BUSINESS
    CONCERNS TO OBTAIN A FAIR PROPORTION OF GOV-
    ERNMENT PURCHASES AND CONTRACTS, TO FACILI-
    TATE PROCUREMENT OF PROPERTY AND SERVICES
    BY THE GOVERNMENT, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
              AUGUST 5, 1958.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. McCLELLAN, from the Committee on Government Operations,
                  submitted the following

                       REPORT
                   [To accompany S. 3224]

  The Committee on Government Operations, to whom was re-
ferred the bill (S. 3224) to improve opportunities for small busi-
ness concerns to  obtain a fair proportion of Government  pur-
chases and contracts, to facilitate procurement of property and
services  by the Government, and for other purposes, having con-
sidered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments, and
recommend that the bill, as amended, do pass.
                                                    [p. 1]

  Section 7: Section 7 would increase from $500 to $2,500 the
small purchase limitation contained in  section 3709, Revised Stat-
utes, for the reasons stated in the explanation of section 2 (a) (1)
of the draft bill.
                                                    [p. 8]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1889

        NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS,

                            Washington, D.C., April 21,1958.
 Hon. JOHN L. MCCLELLAN,
 Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
   DEAR SENATOR MCCLELLAN : Your letter of February 6, 1958,
 requested the views of the National Advisory Committee for Aero-
 nautics on S. 3224, a bill to improve opportunities for small-busi-
 ness  concerns to obtain a  fair proportion of  Government pur-
 chases and contracts, to facilitate procurement of property and
 services by the Government, and for other purposes.
   We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this bill.
      *******
                                                      [p. 15]

   Section 7 would clarify administration of the small business set-
 aside program under the Small Business Act of 1953 (15 U.S.C.
 sec.  643)  and provides expressly that the  program may seek to
 assure that a fair proportion of Government procurements are
 placed with small business. The Armed Services Procurement Act
 of 1947 under which NACA operates states congressional policy in
 this regard. Further implementation of the policy may be achieved
 through operation of the set-aside program jointly by the Small
 Business Administration and the procurement agencies.
      *******
       Sincerely yours,
                                        J. F. VICTORY,
                                      Executive Secretary.
                                                      [p. 16]

                        TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY,
                         Knoxville, Tenn., February 25,1958.
 Hon. JOHN L. MCCLELLAN,
 Chairman,  Committee on Government Operations,
    Senate Office Building,  Washington, D.C.
  DEAR SENATOR MCCLELLAN : This is in response to your request
 of February 6 for TVA's comments on S. 3224, a bill to improve
 opportunities for small business concerns to obtain a fair propor-
 tion of Government purchases and contracts, to facilitate procure-
ment  of property and services by the Government, and for other
purposes.

-------
1890         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  The only provisions  of the bill which might have any direct
effect on TVA are sections 7 and 13, providing for amendments to
the Small Business Act of 1953 and the so-called Anti-Kickback
Act, and it appears that any such effect would be minor. Accord-
ingly, we have no suggestions concerning the bill's provisions.
  This report has been submitted to the Bureau of the Budget
which advises that it has no objection to submission of the report
to your Committee.
      Sincerely yours,
                                    HERBERT D. VOGEL,
                                    Chairman of the Board.
                                                      [p. 18]

                            UNITED STATES SENATE,
                 COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY,
                                          February 24,1958.
Hon. JOHN L. MCCLELLAN,
Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,
    U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
  DEAR MR.  CHAIRMAN: I  have your letter dated February 6,
1958, requesting my views on provisions of S. 3224.
  A review of this bill reveals that section 7 is the only portion
with which the Committee  on Banking and  Currency would be
directly concerned. This section amends section 214 of the Small
Business Act of 1953, as amended, by specifically stating that one
of the conditions  under which the SB A joint set-aside program
would operate is that such set-asides be in the interest of assuring
                                                      [P. 19]

small-business concerns a fair share of Government purchases and
contracts. Although this purpose is expressed elsewhere in the act,
there may be some advantage  in setting it forth in section 214,
and I can see no reason why the change would not be favored by
the Committee on Banking and Currency.
  As you may know,  however, the committee has before it several
bills which would completely rewrite the  Small Business Act of
1953, and each of  these bills contains language on this subject. It
is my thought that when the committee considers these  bills in
executive session, it  would  be appropriate also to  consider  the
language contained in section 7 of S. 3224. Unless you have some
objection to this  suggestion, I will  direct the staff to call this

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY      1891

amendment to the committee's attention during committee consid-
eration of the several bills designed to amend or rewrite the act.
      Sincerely yours,
                               J. W. FULBRIGHT, Chairman.
                                                     [p. 20]
   1.14c(2)  CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 104 (1958)

1.14c(2)(a)   Aug. 14: Amended and passed Senate, p.  17539;

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent  Section]
1.14c(2)(b) Aug. 15:  Committee discharged and passed House,
pp. 17908-17909

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]

-------
1892         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   1.15  PER DIEM, TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION
      EXPENSES;  EXPERTS AND CONSULTANTS;
 INDIVIDUALS SERVING WITHOUT PAY, AS AMENDED
                     5 U.S.C. §5703 (1969)

    [Referred to in 42 U.S.C. §§ 1857d(i), 1857e(e), 1857f—
     6e(b)(2), 33 U.S.C. §§ 1159(a)(2)(B), 1160(c)(4), (i), 15
         U.S.C. § 1475(b), 42 U.S.C.  § 242f(b)(5), (6)]

PER DIEM, TRAVEL,  AND TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES;
  EXPERTS  AND CONSULTANTS; INDIVIDUALS SERVING
  WITHOUT PAY

5 § 5703
  (a) For the purpose of this section, "appropriation"  includes
funds made available by statute under section 849 of title 31.
  (b) An individual  employed intermittently in the Government
service as an  expert or consultant and paid on a daily when-actu-
ally-employed basis may be allowed travel expenses under this sub-
chapter while away from his home or regular place of business,
including a per diem allowance under this subchapter while at his
place of employment.
  (c) An individual serving without pay or at $1 a year may be
allowed transportation expenses under this subchapter and a per
diem allowance under this section while en route and at his place
of service or employment away from  his home or regular place of
business. Unless a  higher rate is named in an appropriation or
other statute, the per diem allowance may not exceed—
      (1) the rate of $25 for travel inside the continental United
    States; and
      (2) the rates established under section 5702 (a) of this title
    for travel outside the continental United States.
  (d) Under regulations prescribed under  section 5707  of this
title, the head of the agency concerned may prescribe  conditions
under which  an individual to  whom this section applies may be
reimbursed for the actual and  necessary expenses of the trip, not
to exceed an amount named in the travel authorization, when the
maximum per diem allowance would be much less than these ex-
penses due to the unusual circumstances of the travel assignment.
The amount named in the travel authorization may not exceed—
      (1) $40 for  each day in a travel status inside the continen-
    tal United States; or

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1893

       (2) the maximum per diem allowance plus $18 for each day
     in a travel status outside the continental United States.
Pub.L.  89-554,  Sept.  6,  1966,  80  Stat. 499;  amended  Pub.L.
91-114, § 2, Nov. 10, 1969, 83 Stat. 190.
         1.15a  ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES ACT
              August 2, 1946, P.L. 79-600, §5, 60 Stat. 808

  SEC. 5. Persons in the Government service employed intermit-
tently as consultants or experts and receiving compensation on a
per diem when actually employed basis  may  be allowed  travel
expenses while away from their homes  or regular places of busi-
ness, including per diem in lieu of subsistence while at place of
such employment, in accordance with the Standardized Govern-
ment  Travel  Regulations, Subsistence Expense Act of 1926, as
amended (5 U.S.C. 821-833), and the Act of February 14, 1931,
as amended by this Act, and persons serving without  compensa-
tion or at $1  per annum may be allowed, while away from their
homes or regular places of business, transportation in accordance
with said regulations and said Act of February 14, 1931, as so
amended, and not to exceed $10 per diem in lieu of subsistence en
route and at place of such service or employment unless a higher
rate is specifically provided in an appropriation or other Act.
                                                      [p.  808]

-------
1894         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  1.15a(l)  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN
               EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS
            H.R. REP. No. 2186, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946)

ADMINISTRATIVE  EXPENSES  IN GOVERNMENT  DE-
                       PARTMENTS
 MAY 29, 1946.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
               of the Union and ordered to be printed
 Mr. MANASCO, from the Committee on Expenditures in the Execu-
            tive Departments, submitted the following

                         REPORT

                    [To accompany H. R. 6533]

   The Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments,
 to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6533) to authorize certain
 administrative expenses in the Government service and for other
 purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon
 without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.
                                                       [P. 1]


                   EXPLANATION BY SECTIONS
   Section 5. Travel of consultants and experts.—Section 5 would
  enact permanently provisions which have appeared in appropria-
  tion acts  in very recent years to permit consultants or experts
  employed intermittently, and paid a per diem "when  actually em-
  ployed," to be allowed travel expenses  while away from their
  homes or regular (that is their private) places of business, includ-
  ing a per diem  while at the place of  their Government employ-
  ment. In the case of persons serving without  compensation or at
  $1 per  annum, the  section will allow transportation  to and from
  their homes or regular places of business and a per diem en route
  and while at work at higher than the normal rates of per diem for
  travel purposes.
                                                        [P. 5]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                         1895
 1.15a(2)   SENATE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN
                EXECUTIVE  DEPARTMENTS
             S. REP. No. 1636, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946)

ADMINISTRATIVE  EXPENSES  IN  GOVERNMENT  DE-
                        PARTMENTS
                JULY 2, 1946.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. HILL, from the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive
              Departments, submitted the following

                         REPORT
                    [To accompany H. B. 6533]

  The Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments,
to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6533) to authorize certain
administrative expenses in the Government service, and for other
purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon
with  amendments and  recommend that the bill as amended do
pass.
                                                         [p. 1]
   1.15a(3)   CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 92 (1946)

1.15a(3)(a)   June 3: Amended and passed House, p. 6164

        [No Relevant Discussion on  Pertinent Section]
1.15a(3)(b) July 17: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 9189-9190
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will state  the next amendment
of the committee.
  The next amendment was, in sec-
tion 9, page 8, line 12, after the word
"or", to strike  out  "(4) when  the
services are  to be performed by the
contractor in person, under Govern-
ment supervision, and paid for on a
time basis" and  to insert "(4) when
the  services are required to be per-
formed  by  the contractor in person
and are (A) of a technical and pro-
fessional nature or  (B) under  Gov-
ernment supervision and paid for on
a time basis."
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The next amendment was, on  page
8, line 20,  before  the  word  "other-
wise", to strike out "or unless" and to

-------
1896
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
insert "(2) when"; and after the word
"law" and the comma, to strike  out
"sales and contracts  of  sale  by  the
Government shall be governed by the
requirements of this  section for  ad-
vertising, except when the reasonable
value involved in  any one  case does
not  exceed $100"  and to insert  "or
(3)  when the reasonable  value  in-
volved in any one case does not exceed
                        [p. 9189]

$100, sales and contracts of sale by
the  Government shall be  governed by
the  requirements of this section  for
advertising."
                   And on page 9, after line 4, to in-
                 sert:
                   (c) In the case of wholly owned Govern-
                 ment corporations, this section shall  apply to
                 their administrative  transactions only.
                   The amendments were agreed to.
                   The PEESIDING OFFICER.  The
                 question is on the engrossment of the
                 amendments and  the third reading of
                 the bill.
                   The amendments were ordered to be
                 engrossed, and the bill to be  read a
                 third time.
                   The bill (H. R. 6533)  was read the
                 third time and passed.
                                         [p. 9190]
1.15a(3)(c)   July 26:  House concurs in  Senate  amendments,
pp. 10185-10186

        [No  Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]
  1.15b  AMENDMENTS TO THE 1946 TRAVEL EXPENSE
                              ACT
               July 28, 1955, P.L. 84-189, §2, 69 Stat. 394

  SEC. 2. Section 5 of  the Administrative Expenses Act of 1946
 (60  Stat. 808; 5 U.S.C. 73b-2)  is amended by striking "$10  per
diem" and inserting in lieu thereof "$15 per diem within the limits
of the continental United  States and  beyond  such limits,  not to
exceed the rates of per diem established by the Director  of  the
Bureau of the Budget pursuant to section 3 of the Travel Expense
Act  of  1949, as  amended  (5  U.S.C. 836)"; and by striking  the
period at  the  end thereof and adding  the  following additional
proviso: ": And provided further, That  where due to the unusual
circumstances  of a travel assignment  within the limits  of  the
continental  United States such maximum  per  diem  allowance
would be much less than the amount required to meet the actual
and  necessary  expenses of the trip, the heads of departments  and
establishments may, in accordance with regulations promulgated
by the Director, Bureau of the Budget, pursuant to section 7 of the
Travel Expense Act of 1949 as amended (5 U.S.C. 840) prescribe
conditions under which reimbursement for such expenses may be

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1897

authorized on an actual expense basis not to exceed a maximum
amount to be specified in the travel authorization, but in any event
not to exceed $25 for each day in travel status.".
                                                     [p. 394]
    1.15b(l)  SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT
                       OPERATIONS
             S. REP. No. 353, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955)

AMENDING SECTION 3 OF THE TRAVEL EXPENSE ACT
OF 1949  AS AMENDED,  TO  PROVIDE AN INCREASED
MAXIMUM PER DIEM  FOR SUBSISTENCE  AND TRAVEL
                        EXPENSES
      MAY 17 (legislative day, MAY 2), 1955.— Ordered to be printed
Mr. JACKSON, from the Committee on  Government Operations,
                   submitted the following

                        REPORT
                    [To accompany S. 1795]

  The  Committee on Government Operations, to whom was re-
ferred the bill (S. 1795) to amend section 3 of the Travel Expense
Act of 1949, as amended, to provide an increased maximum per
diem allowance in lieu of subsistence and travel expenses for civil-
ian officers and employees of the Government while traveling on
authorized official business  within  the continental  United States,
having considered the same, report favorably thereon, with an
amendment, and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
  S. 1795 was introduced in response to a request addressed to the
President  of the Senate by the Director  of the Bureau of the
Budget. Its objectives were  endorsed by the President of the
United States in his message to the Congress on Federal personnel
management, on January 11,1955.
  The committee amendment struck out a provision in the  first
section of  the bill which would have extended the present act to
direct the Director of the Bureau of the Budget to prescribe regu-
lations under which heads  of departments and establishments
would be authorized, where unusual circumstances of travel are

-------
1898          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

involved and actual expenses exceed the $13 maximum, to deter-
mine  in advance of such travel  a maximum designed to cover
actual expenses  in lieu of the per diem basis established  by this
act.
                                                         [P. 1]

            HEARINGS BEFORE THE HOUSE COMMITTEE
  The Subcommittee on Executive and Legislative Reorganization
of the House Committee on Government Operations held hearings
on a bill (H. R. 4918)  identical to  S. 1795, and on two related bills,
H. R. 4169 and  H. R. 3950, the latter providing for increases in
per diem to a maximum of $15. Extensive testimony was submit-
ted to the committee by representatives of the Bureau of the
Budget, Civil Service  Commission, and the Departments of Agri-
culture, Interior, Justice, and Defense, all of whom  supported the
administration bill, H. R. 4918. In addition, representatives from
the Government Employees'  Council, American  Federation of
Labor; the National Federation of Federal Employees; the Ameri-
can Federation of Technical Engineers (A. F. of L.) ; the Ameri-
can Federation of Government Employees; and the committee on
legislation for the National Association  of Internal Revenue  Em-
ployees appeared in support of the measure. One of the employee
organizations favored an increase to  a maximum of $15,  as  pro-
posed under H. R. 4169 and H. R. 3950.
  The evidence  submitted at these hearings indicated unanimous
agreement among competent authorities that the existing maxi-
mum  per diem travel allowance of $9 is inadequate to reimburse
Federal employees  who  are in  travel status for actual out-of-
pocket expenses, and numerous instances were cited where accu-
rate accounts had been kept to illustrate that the actual per diem
expense exceeds  $13 in practically all metropolitan areas.

            COMMENTS OF THE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET

  In  support of the draft bill as submitted to the  Congress, the
Director advised the Congress as follows:
  Section 2 of the draft bill proposes that the maximum per diem travel al-
lowance for civilians performing work for the Government without compen-
sation be increased from $10 to $15.  This  would amend section 5 of the
Administrative Expenses Act of 1946. At present the $10 maximum applies
to travel both within and beyond the limits of the continental United States.
Under the proposal the  maximum would apply only  to travel within the

-------
             STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1899

limits of the continental United States.  For travel outside such limits the
maximum per diem rates established by the Director  of the Bureau of the
                                                         [p. 3]

Budget, pursuant to section 3 of the Travel Expense Act of  1949, would
apply.
                                                         [p. 4]

                           SUMMARY
   On the basis of these reports and the supporting evidence, it is
recommended that the present maximum per diem allowance of $9
should be increased to $13 as a matter of  equity,  so that Federal
employees in travel status  will be able to defray normal travel
expenses in metropolitan or other high-cost areas.
   The committee  strongly emphasizes, however, that,  in accord-
ance with the provisions of the Travel Expense Act of 1949, as
amended, the increase in per diem allowance recommended herein
will not be mandatory but would authorize reimbursement up to
and including $13 a day only when the cost of  living in the areas
where travel is to be  performed justifies the payment of that
amount. This is presently recognized in the Standardized Govern-
ment Travel Regulations which provide in part as follows:

  The per diem allowances provided herein represent the maximum allowable,
not the minimum.  It is the responsibility of the  departments and establish-
ments to see that travel  orders  authorize only such per diem allowances as
are justified by the circumstances surrounding the travel.  To this end, care
should be exercised to prevent the fixing of a per diem  allowance in excess of
that required to meet the necessary authorized expenses.

   Information submitted to the committee indicates that agencies
are setting rates below the maximum when a lower rate is deemed
adequate to cover a specific trip. The committee  has been given
assurances that this same general policy would be adhered to in
the application of the new maximum contained in S. 1795, if
approved  by the Congress. For example, the Department of Com-
merce has 10 different rates, ranging from a minimum of $2.40 to
the present maximum of $9. The Department of Agriculture has
30 different rates, ranging from a $1 minimum. In the  fiscal year
1953, only 15.8 percent of the total domestic travel in Agriculture
was performed at  the maximum rate. This is because a large part
of the travel is in rural areas. An analysis of travel vouchers made
by  the Department of the  Army for the month of April  1953
indicated that 55 percent of the travel was at the maximum rate
and the remainder at  lower  rates.

-------
1900          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  In view of the foregoing, and the fact that the Congress has in
several instances recognized the need for an  increase over the
present maximum by special enactments, the  committee recom-
mends the approval of S. 1795. It constitutes a fair and equitable
adjustment in subsistence to permit refunds of out-of-pocket ex-
penses incurred by Federal employees in travel status, based on
evidence  submitted to the committee which clearly  shows that
increases in hotel, food, and other costs since 1949 warrant such
action.
  The maximum subsistence allowance payable to  Federal judges
and justices was established at $10 a day in 1940, and, based on
recognized increases in travel costs since  that time, the per diem
was increased to $15 by Public Law 222, approved August 8, 1953.
The  Congress held, when it took such action, that most of the
judges and justices could not,  in many instances,  pay for meals,
lodging, and  incidental expenses incurred in moderately priced
hotels while on judicial business, under the then authorized maxi-
mum, without drawing on their personal funds.
  Specific authority has also been included in appropriations acts,
and in other enabling statutes authorizing payments of up to $25
                                                        [p. 6]
per day  in lieu of subsistence for official travel performed by
certain  groups of  executives,  consultants,  experts,  and other
officials. For example, under Public Law 108, 83d Congress, mem-
bers of the Hoover Commission may receive reimbursement for
official travel on  an actual expense basis, and members of the
President's Advisory Committee on Government  Organization,
who serve without  compensation, are paid up to $15 a day for
subsistence. Also, consultants appointed to advisory committees of
the Housing and Home Finance Agency, pursuant to title 6 of the
Housing  Act of 1949, may be paid not to exceed $25 per day, and
members of the National Capital Planning  Commission who serve
without compensation are  reimbursed at the rate of $15 a day in
lieu of subsistence. There are other instances where the Congress
has recently authorized payments in lieu of  subsistence to mem-
bers of various study commissions, who serve without compensa-
tion, at rates not to exceed $25 per day. The Career Incentive Act
of 1955 (Public Law 20, 84th Cong.) authorized an increase in the
per diem allowance in lieu of subsistence for military personnel,
from $9 to $12 (sec. 2 (11)).

-------
             STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY        1901

                      MILEAGE ALLOWANCES

   This bill does not propose any change in the mileage allowances
authorized to  be  paid to Government employees for use of their
privately owned  motor vehicles,  while traveling on official busi-
ness. The Bureau of the Budget, in submitting this proposed legis-
lation, recommended that the present law remain unchanged as it
relates to  such travel expenses. For this reason, the adequacy or
inadequacy of the existing rate of 7 cents a mile allowed for use of
privately owned automobiles or airplanes and 4 cents a mile for
privately owned motorcycles was not considered by the committee.

                    CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

   In compliance with subsection 4 of rule XXIX of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill, as
reported, are shown as follows (matter omitted in  brackets; new
material in  italics; existing law in which no change  is reported,
shown in roman)  :

                  TRAVEL EXPENSE  ACT  OF 1949

               (63 Stat.  166, a amended; 5  U. S. C. 836)
    ******        *
  SEC. 3. Civilian officers  and employees of the departments and establish-
ments (except justices and judges covered by section 456 of title 28  of the
United States Code), while traveling on official business and away from their
designated posts of duty, shall be allowed, in lieu of their actual expenses for
subsistence and all fees or tips to porters and stewards, a per diem allow-
ance to be prescribed by the department or establishment concerned,  not to
exceed the rate of [$9] $13 within the limits of the continental  United States
and in case  of travel beyond the limits  of the continental United States not
to exceed rates established  by the Director of the Bureau of the Budget for
the locality  in which the travel is performed: Provided, That such  civilian
officers and employees who  become incapacitated due to illness or  injury, not
due to their own misconduct, while traveling on official business and away
from their designated posts of duty, shall be allowed such per diem allow-
ances, and transportation  expenses to their designated posts of duty, in  ac-
cordance with regulations promulgated and approved under this Act.
    *******
                                                             [p. 7]

         THE  ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES ACT OF  1946
                  (60 Stat. 808; 5 U.S.C. 73B-3)
    *******
  SEC. 5.  Persons in the Government service employed intermittently as con-
sultants  or experts and receiving compensation on a per diem when actually
employed basis may  be allowed travel expenses while away from their homes

-------
1902           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

or regular places of business, including per diem in lieu of subsistence while
at place of such employment,  in accordance with the Standardized Govern-
ment Travel Regulations, sections 73a, 821-823, and 827-833 of this title, and
persons serving without compensation or at $1 per annum may be allowed,
while away from their homes or regular places of business, transportation in
accordance with said regulations and section 73a of this title, and not to ex-
ceed E$10 per diem] $15 per diem within the limits of the continental United
States and, beyond such limits, not to exceed the rate of per diem established
by the Director of the Bureau of the Budget pursuant to section 3 of the
Travel Expense Act of 1949, as amended (5 U. S. C.  836),  in  lieu  of  sub-
sistence en route and at place of such service or employment unless a higher
rate is specifically provided in an appropriation or other Act.
                  TITLE 28, UNITED  STATES  CODE

§ 1823. United States officers and employees.
   (a)  Any officer or employee of the United  States or any agency thereof,
summoned as a witness on behalf  of  the United  States, shall  be  paid his
necessary expenses incident to travel by common  carrier,  [and if  travel is
made by privately owned automobile mileage at a  rate not to exceed 7 cents
per mile, together with a per diem allowance not to exceed  $9 in lieu of sub-
sistence] or, if travel is made by privately  owned automobile, at a rate not
to exceed that prescribed in section  It of the Travel Expense Act of 191*9, to-
gether with a  per diem allowance  in  lieu of subsistence not to exceed the
.rates of per diem as prescribed, in, or established pursuant to, section 3 there-
of under regulations prescribed by the  Attorney General. *  * *
        LEGISLATIVE-JUDICIARY APPROPRIATION ACT, 1955

                              (68 Stat. 399)

                   TITLE I—LEGISLATIVE  BRANCH

                                 SENATE
                   CONTINGENT EXPENSES OF THE SENATE
     *******

   Inquiries and investigations: *  *  * Provided, That no part of this appro-
 priation shall be expended for per diem and subsistence expenses (as defined
 in the Travel Expense Act of 1949) at rates in excess of [$9] $13 per day ex-
 cept that higher rates may be established by the Committee on Rules and
 Administration in the case of travel beyond the limits of the continental
 United States.
                                                                   [p. 8]

-------
           STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1903

    1.15b(2)  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT
                      OPERATIONS
           H.R. REP. No. 604, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955)

AMENDING THE TRAVEL EXPENSE ACT OF 1949 TO PRO-
VIDE AN INCREASED MAXIMUM PER DIEM ALLOWANCE
       FOR SUBSISTENCE AND TRAVEL EXPENSES
MAY 19, 1955.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
              of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. DAWSON of Illinois, from the Committee on Government Oper-
                ations, submitted the following

                        REPORT
                   [To accompany H. R. 6295]

  The Committee on Government Operations, to -whom was re-
ferred the bill (H. R. 6295) to amend  section  3 of  the  Travel
Expense Act of 1949, as amended, to provide an increased maxi-
mum per diem allowance for subsistence  and travel expenses, and
for other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably
thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill do pass.
  The amendments are as follows:
  Page 2, line 9,  strike the period and  insert "for each  day in
travel status."
  Page 3, line 6,  strike the period and  insert "for each  day in
travel status."

                   SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS
  Section 1 amends the Travel Expense Act of 1949 by raising the
maximum per diem allowance for subsistence and travel expenses
for regular Government employees from the present $9 per day to
$13 per day. This section also includes a new provision which will
permit heads of departments and agencies to prescribe conditions
under which reimbursement  may be made for the actual and  nec-
essary expenses of a trip  in unusual circumstances where these
expenses exceed the maximum per diem  amount authorized. This
may be done  before or after the trip depending on the circum-
stances. Such reimbursement may not, however, exceed the sum of

-------
1904          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

$25 per day. This may only be done  under general regulations
promulgated by the Director of the Bureau of the Budget.
  Section 2 amends the Administrative Expenses Act of 1946 by
increasing the per diem rate for those who serve the Government
without compensation from the present $10 per day to $15 per day
and also includes an actual expense proviso not to exceed $25 per
day as contained in section 1.
                                                       [P. 1]

                     GENERAL STATEMENT

  The Subcommittee on Executive and Legislative Reorganization
heard considerable testimony from representatives of the depart-
ments and agencies and from Federal employee organizations  on
the inadequacy of the present $9 per diem rate and the rise in the
cost of subsistence  since the travel bill of  1949  was enacted. It
received recommendations for raising the rate which varied from
$13  to  $15  per day. The subcommittee and the  full  committee
agreed that  $13 was a reasonable maximum figure. Where in unu-
sual circumstances the expenses of  the employee exceed that
amount the  actual-expense proviso contained in section  1 should
take care of it. It was also agreed that employees who serve the
Government without compensation, such as advisers and consult-
ants, should be reimbursed for subsistence and travel expenses at
a rate of $15 per day.
   The committee is aware that in some cases the maximum is not
required. A  number of agencies set per diem rates at less than the
maximum or scaled to the circumstances of the trip, but the com-
mittee feels that Federal employees  should be protected against
being required to pay out of their own pockets  the necessary
expenses incident to their official travel for the Government. The
maximum per diem rate, as well as the actual expense proviso,
would be governed  by general regulations  promulgated by the
 Bureau  of  the Budget and the committee was assured by the
 Bureau that regulations could be drawn and would be drawn to
 prevent any abuse of the higher rate.
   Evidence was presented that the present mileage rates for the
 use of privately owned motorcycles  and automobiles should be
 raised. The rates are now 4 and 7 cents per mile respectively. It
 was felt, however, that on the whole the expenses of operating
 these privately owned conveyances when traveling on Government
 business do not exceed the current rates.

-------
                STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY         1905


    The Bureau of the Budget estimated that the additional cost to

 the Government due to the increase  in per diem from $9 to  $13

 would not exceed $30 million.

    The committee emphasizes the fact that the per diem rate pre-
 scribed  in  the bill  is a maximum one and the committee expects
 that the maximum  rate will only be allowed where the circumstan-

 ces clearly warrant it. The Bureau of the Budget and the heads of
 departments and agencies have both the authority and the respon-
 sibility to see that no deviation from this principle occurs.

                                                                          [p. 2]


                INDIVIDUALS SERVING WITHOUT COMPENSATION

   Section 2 of  the  bill proposes that  the maximum per  diem  travel  allowance  for civilians
 performing work for  the Government  without compensation be increased from  $10 to  $15.
   The existing maximum per diem rate of $10 is prescribed in section 5 of the Administrative
 Expenses Act of 1946 for individuals serving the  Government without compensation and
 applies while they are away from home or  regular places of business.  Since these individuals
 generally serve  as  consultants  for short periods  of time and  serve  without receiving any
 compensation, a higher maximum  rate  of per diem  than  that  prescribed  for  regular
 employees has  been allowed in the past.  In  view  thereof, the maximum  rate of $16  is
 recommended for these individuals. Section  5  of  the Administrative Expenses Act of 1946
 provides  that a rate higher  than that prescribed  therein  may be  authorized  in  specific
 legislation.  The  rate of  $15  was provided in the  Defense Production  Act  of  1950.  The 83d
 Congress authorized the $15 rate for  members of the President's Advisory  Committee on
 Government Organization; members of  the National Capital Planning  Commission who serve
 without compensation; and individuals  serving  without  compensation in an advisory capacity
 under  the item "International contingencies" in the Department of  State appropriation acts
 for the fiscal years  1954 and 1955. A per diem rate not in excess of  $25 has been  provided
 for individuals serving without compensation on advisory  committees  under title VI of the
 Housing  Act of  1949  and under the Housing Act of  1954. The 83d Congress also increased
 to $15 the per diem rate for Federal judges and justices which had  been established at $10
 in 1940. Since rates  of $15  and above have been authorized by the Congress under other acts,
 we believe that individuals  subject to the Administrative Expenses Act of 1946, namely those
 serving without  compensation, should be reimbursed  for travel expenses at the rate of $15
 per day.  We estimate a total of not  more  than  17,000 travel  days  in  fiscal year  1956 by
 persons serving:  without compensation,  which would represent an increase in travel costs of
 $85,000 under H.R. 4918.

                                                                         [P- 7]


                          CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

  In compliance  with  clause  3  of rule XIII of the Rules  of the House of Representatives,
changes in existing  Jaw made by the bill, as introduced, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to  be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italics,  existing
law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman) :


                     TRAVEL EXPENSE  ACT OP 1949


                   (63 Stat. 166, as amended; U. S. C. 836)

     *******

   SEC. 3.  Civilian officers and employees  of the departments  and  establish-
ments (except justices and judges covered by section 456 of title  28 of the

-------
1906            LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

United States Code), while traveling on official business and away from their
designated posts of duty, shall be allowed, in lieu of their actual expenses for
subsistence and all fees or tips  to porters and stewards, a per diem allow-
ance to be prescribed by the department or establishment concerned, not to
exceed the rate of [$9] $13 within the limits of the continental United States
and in case of travel beyond the limits of the continental United States not to
exceed rates established by the Director of the Bureau of the Budget for the
locality in which the travel is performed: Provided, That such civilian officers
and employees who become incapacitated due to illness or injury, not due to
their own misconduct, while traveling on official business and away from their
designated posts  of duty, shall  be allowed such per  diem allowances, and
transportation expenses to their  designated posts of duty, in accordance with
regulations promulgated and approved under this Act: And provided further,
That where due to the unusual circumstances  of a travel assignment within
the limits of the  continental United States such  maximum per diem allow-
ance would be much less than the amount required to meet the  actual and
necessary expenses of the trip, the heads of departments and establishments
may, in accordance with regulations promulgated  by the Director, Bureau of
the Budget,  pursuant to section 7, prescribed conditions under which reim-
bursement for such expenses may be  authorized on an actual expense basis
not to  exceed a maximum amount to be specified in the travel authorization,
but in any event not to exceed $25. for each day in travel status.
    *******
          THE ADMINISTRATIVE  EXPENSES ACT  OF 1946

                     (60 Stat. 808; 6 U. S. C. 73B-2)
  SEC. 5. Persons in the Government service employed intermittently as con-
sultants or experts and receiving compensation on a per  diem when actually
employed basis may be allowed travel  expenses while away from their homes
or regular places of business, including per diem in lieu of subsistence while
at place of such employment, in accordance with the standardized Govern-
ment Travel Regulations, sections 73a, 821-823, and 827-833 of this title, and
persons serving  without compensation or at $1 per annum may be allowed,
while away from their homes or  regular places of business, transportation in
accordance with  said regulations and section 73a of this title, and not to ex-
ceed [$10 per diem] $15 per diem within the limits of the continental United
States and, beyond such limits, not to exceed the rates of per diem established
by the Director  of the Bureau of the Budget pursuant  to section  3  of  the
Travel Expense Act of 1949, as amended (5 U.S.C. 836), in lieu of subsistence
en route and at place of such service or employment unless a higher rate is
specifically provided in an  appropriation or other Act: And provided furtherf
That where due  to the unusual circumstances  of a travel assignment  within
the limits of the continental United States such maximum per diem, allowance
would  be much less than the amount required to meet the actual and neces-
sary expenses of the trip,  the heads of departments and establishments may,
in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Director, Bureau  of the
Budget, pursuant to section 7 of  the Travel Expense  Act  of 1949 as  amended
(5  U.S.C. 840)  prescribe  conditions under which  reimbursement  for such
expenses may be authorized on an  actual expense basis not to exceed a maxi-

-------
           STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1907

mum amount to be specified in the travel authorization, but in any event not
to exceed $25 for each day in travel status.
                                                       *
                                                     [p. 11]
         1.15b(3)  COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
            H.R. REP. No. 1088, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955)

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES TRAVEL EXPENSE ALLOW-
                          ANCES
               JULY 11, 1955,—Ordered to be printed
Mr. FASCELL, from the committee of conference, submitted the
                         following

                  CONFERENCE REPORT

                   [To accompany H. R. 6295]

  The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 6295)
to amend section  3 of  the Travel Expense  Act of  1949,  as
amended, to provide an increased maximum per diem allowance
for subsistence and travel expenses, and for other purposes, hav-
ing met after full and free conference, have agreed to  recommend
and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the  amendment
of the Senate numbered 1, and agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 2:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the  amendment
of the Senate numbered 2, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the  matter proposed to be inserted  by  the Senate
amendment insert the following:
  "Sec. 4. Section 4 of the Travel Expense Act of 1949  (63 Stat.
166;  5  U.S.C. 837) is  amended  by striking out '4 cents' and '7
cents' and inserting '6 cents' and '10 cents,' respectively, in lieu
thereof."

-------
1908         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  And the Senate agree to the same.
                                 WILLIAM L.  DAWSON,
                                 DANTE B. FASCBLL,
                                 J. ARTHUR YOUNGER,
                        Managers on the Part  of the House.
                                 OLIN D.  JOHNSTON,
                                 MATTHEW M. NEELY,
                                 FRANK CARLSON,
                        Managers on the Part of the Senate.
                                                      [p. 1]

  STATEMENT OF THE MANAGERS ON THE PART OF THE HOUSE

  The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the
disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the  amendments of the
Senate to the bill (H. R. 6295) to amend section  3 of the Travel
Expense Act of 1949, as amended, to provide an increased maxi-
mum per diem allowance for subsistence and  travel expenses, and
for other purposes,  submit the following statement in explanation
of the effect of the action agreed upon and recommended in the
accompanying conference report as to each of such amendments,
namely :
  Amendment No.  1: Reduces the maximum per  diem allowance
from  $13 per day as proposed by the  House to  $12 per day as
proposed by the Senate.
  Amendment No. 2: Authorizes an increase in the mileage rate
for privately owned motorcycles from  the present  4 cents  to 6
cents and for privately owned automobiles or airplanes from the
present 7 cents to 10 cents, when engaged on official business, as
proposed by the Senate. No increases  in the maximum  mileage
rates were proposed by the House.
  There was considerable discussion  among the conferees on
whether a per diem rate of $12 or $13 was fair and equitable. The
House managers pointed out that the information presented to it
in hearings and reports from the Bureau  of the Budget and var-
ious agencies indicated that the higher figure would be warranted.
The Senate managers noted,  however,  that the military  had al-
ready been given an increased per diem rate for travel expenses to
$12 and it would be preferable to have a uniform rate as between
civilians and the military. The House managers believed that with
the actual expense proviso in the bill any serious problems of
inequity could be cured.

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1909

  Although the House had received no information to show the
need for an increase in the mileage rate for privately owned auto-
mobiles and motorcycles, the Senate felt such an increase was
necessary.
  The House, therefore, receded in these two particulars.

                                  WILLIAM L. DAWSON,
                                  DANTE B. FASCELL,
                                  J. ARTHUR YOUNGER,
                         Managers on the Part of the House.
                                                      [p. 2]

   1.15b(4)  CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 101 (1955)

1.15b(4)(a) June 20: Amended and passed House, pp. 8752, 8755

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]


1.15(4) (b)  June 22: Amended and passed Senate,  p. 8928

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]


1.15b(4)(c) July 12: House agrees to conference report, p. 10300

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]


1.15b(4)(d) July 13: Senate agrees to conference report, p. 10387

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]


    1.15c  ENACTMENT OF TITLE  5, UNITED STATES
      CODE, "GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND
                      EMPLOYEES"

           September 6, 1966, P.L. 89-554, §5703, 80 Stat. 499

   §  5703.   Per diem, travel, and transportation expenses;
  experts and consultants; individuals serving without pay

  (a)  For the purpose of this section, "appropriation" includes
funds made available by statute under section 849 of title 31.

-------
1910          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  (b) An individual employed intermittently in the Government
service as an expert or consultant and paid on a daily when-act-
ually-employed basis may be  allowed travel  expenses under this
subchapter while away from his home or regular place of business,
including a per diem allowance under this subchapter while at his
place of employment.
  (c) An individual serving without pay or  at $1 a year may be
allowed transportation expenses under this subchapter and a per
diem allowance under this section while en route and at his place
of service or employment away from his home or regular place of
business. Unless a higher rate is named  in  an appropriation or
other statute, the per diem allowance may not exceed—
       (1) the rate of $16 for travel inside the continental United
     States; and
       (2) the rates established under section 5702 (a) of this title
     for travel outside the continental United  States.
  (d)  Under regulations  prescribed under section  5707  of this
title, the head of the agency concerned may prescribe conditions
under which  an individual to whom  this section applies may be
reimbursed for the actual  and necessary expenses of the trip, not
to exceed an amount named in the travel authorization, when the
maximum per diem allowance would  be much less than these ex-
penses due to the unusual circumstances of the travel assignment.
The amount named in the travel authorization may not exceed—
       (1) $30 for each day in a travel status inside the continen-
     tal United States; or
       (2) the maximum per diem allowance plus $10 for each day
     in a travel status outside the continental United States.
                                                      [p.  499]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1911

    1.15c(l)  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE  JUDICIARY
            H.R. REP. No. 901, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965)

TITLE  5, UNITED STATES CODE, "GOVERNMENT  ORGA-
               NIZATION AND EMPLOYEES"
AUGUST 31, 1965.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
             State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. WILLIS, from the Committee on the Judiciary,  submitted the
                          following

                         REPORT
                   [To accompany H. R. 10104]

  The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 10104) to enact Title 5, United States Code, "Government
Organization and Employees," codifying the general and perma-
nent laws relating to the organization of the Government of the
United States and to its civilian  officers and employees, having
considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment
and recommend that the bill do pass.

                   PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

  Purpose.—The purpose of this bill is to restate in comprehen-
sive form, without substantive change, the statutes in effect before
July 1, 1965, that relate to Government employees, the organiza-
tion and powers of Federal  agencies generally, and administrative
procedure, and to enact title 5 of  the United States Code. In the
revised title 5, simple language has been substituted for awkward
and obsolete terms, and superseded,  executed, and obsolete stat-
utes have been eliminated. This bill is a part of the program of the
Committee on the  Judiciary of the House of Representatives to
enact into law all fifty titles of the United States Code.
  History.—The statutes  that  relate to Government  personnel
begin with the first statute  enacted by Congress, 1 Stat. 23. With
the growth of the United States and the accompanying growth in
the size of the Government's work force and the  complexity of
their duties, the personnel  statutes grew in number and in com-
plexity. Attempts were made periodically to consolidate personnel
statutes,  but these  attempts had  only  partial success and grew

-------
1912          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

obsolete through the enactment of subsequent statutes. The Com-
mission on Organization  of the Executive Branch of the Govern-
                                                       [p- 1]

ment (Hoover Commission), in its report on personnel and civil
service, February 1955, recommended that the Civil Service Com-
mission prepare and that Congress enact a statute to codify the
personnel statutes of the United States (Recommendation 17, pp.
82-83). The need for codification of the  statutes relating to per-
sonnel has also been recognized by the Committees on Post Office
and Civil Service of both Houses, the Bureau of the Budget, and
the Civil Service Commission.
  In June of 1956, the Civil  Service Commission directed its Gen-
eral Counsel, L. V. Meloy, to  undertake the recodification of title 5.
The  recodification effort  resulted in two earlier bills, H.R. 8748,
86th Congress, 1st  session, which was introduced on August 20,
1959, and H.R. 4158, 88th Congress, 1st session, which was intro-
duced on February 25, 1963. Both bills were circulated among the
departments and agencies of the Government and, after receipt,
consideration, and adoption of the constructive  comments submit-
ted, and incorporation of subsequent legislation,  the bill was re-
vised into its present form.  Throughout  the project, close liaison
was maintained  between  the office of general counsel  of the Civil
Service Commission and  Dr. Charles J. Zinn, law revision counsel
for the House Committee on the Judiciary.
  Inclusion and  exclusion of statutes.—Title 5 as  revised does not
include all the personnel statutes of the United  States.  Statutes
that  relate to the employees  of only one agency, if not previously
in title 5, have not been brought into the title. Statutes relating to
civilian employees which apply to more  than one agency are in-
cluded in title 5 regardless of where they may have appeared
previously. Some of these statutes also apply to  members of the
uniformed service.
  Statutes that are temporary in nature  are omitted from title 5.
A citation to each of these statutes which was in effect before July
1,1965, is provided  in table III.
  Revision of language.—In order to restate the statutes relating
to personnel in  one comprehensive title, it  is necessary to make
changes in language. Some of the changes are necessary to attain
uniformity within the title. Others are necessary to effect consoli-
dation of related statutes and to conform to common contempo-
rary usage. In making changes in the language, precautions have
been taken against  making substantive changes in any statute.

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1913

  Revision notes.—A revision note has been prepared  for  each
section of the revised title 5 and for each section of titles  4, 18, 28,
37, and 39 amended  by this bill. The  revision note shows the
statutory basis or source of the section, and explains significant
changes in and omissions of language.
  Standard changes—Certain standard changes are made uni-
formly throughout title 5 as revised. Some of these are explained
in chapter 1,  "Organization", and chapter 21, "Definitions". The
most significant of the other standard changes are explained in the
following paragraphs.
  As far as possible, the statute is stated in the present tense and
in the active voice. Where there is a choice of two or more words,
otherwise of  equal legal effect,  the more commonly  understood
word is used.
  The  word  "shall"  is used in the mandatory and  imperative
sense. The word  "may" is used in the permissive  sense, as "is
                                                        [P. 2]

permitted to" and "is authorized to". The words "may  not" are
used in a prohibitory sense, as "is not authorized to" and  "is not
permitted to". The words "no individual may" mean that no  indi-
vidual is required, authorized, or permitted to do the  act.
  The word "includes" means includes but is not limited to. The
word "considered" denotes the  exercise of judgment. The word
"deemed" is used where a legal fiction, or what may in some cases
be a legal fiction, is intended. The word "is" is used for statements
of fact.
  The word "pay" refers to salary, wages, and remuneration for
services. The word "compensation" refers to Federal employees'
compensation benefits and unemployment compensation benefits.
  When a right is conferred, the words "is entitled"  or their
equivalent are used.
  The words  "under section—" are used instead of  "pursuant to
section—" and "in accordance with section—".
  The word "such" is not used as a demonstrative adjective. The
use of  the word "each", "any",  "every", or "all" is confined to
instances in which it is feared that doubt would arise if  the word
were not used.
  Provisos are not used. An exception or limitation  is introduced
by the words  "except that" or "but" or by placing the excepting or
limiting provision in a separate sentence.
  The  phrase "territories  and  possessions" is substituted for
"Territory",  "Territories", "Territories  and  possessions"  and

-------
1914          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

"possessions" as there are now no "Territories"  and to preserve
the intended coverage and acquire  consistency in language. In
some  instances  the phrase "including  the  Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico" is added to the phrase  "territories and possessions"
to continue an emphasis contained in  the statute.
  Substantive change not  intended.—Like other  recent  codifica-
tions undertaken as a part of the program of the Committee on
the Judiciary of the House of Representatives to enact into law all
50  titles of the United  States  Code, there are  no  substantive
changes made by this bill enacting title 5  into law. It is sometimes
feared that mere changes in terminology and style will result in
changes in substance or impair the precedent value of earlier
judicial decisions and other interpretations. This fear might have
some weight if this were the usual kind of amendatory legislation
where it can be inferred that a change of language is intended to
change  substance. In a codification  statute, however, the  courts
uphold the contrary presumption: the statute is  intended to re-
main  substantively unchanged. The  following authorities affirm
this principle :
    Stewart v. Kahn (11 Wall. 493, 502 (1871)).
    Smythe v. Fiske (23 Wall. 374, 382 (1874)).
    McDonald v. Hovey (110 U.S. 619, 628  (1884)).
    United States v. Ryder (110 U.S. 729, 740 (1884)).
    United States v. Sischo (262 U.S. 165, 168 (1923)).
    Fourco  Glass Co.  v. Transmirra Products Corp. (353 U.S.
      222,227 (1957)).
    Walsh v. Commonwealth (224 Mass. 239,  112 N.E. 486, 487
       (1916)).
    State ex rel. Rankin v. Wilbaux  County Bank (85 Mont. 532,
      281 Pac. 341, 344 (1929)).
                                                         [p. 3]

                        SECTION 5703
  Derivation: United  States Code, 5 U.S.C. 73b-2;  Revised Statutes and
Statutes at Large: Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 744, § 5, 60 Stat. 808. July 28, 1955, ch.
424, § 2, 69 Stat. 394. Aug. 14, 1961, Pub. L. 87-139 §§ 2,  8(b), 75 Stat. 339,
340.
   Subsection (a) is added on authority of section  18 of the Act of
Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 744, 60 Stat. 811.
   In subsection (b), the words "in lieu of subsistence" are omitted
as unnecessary in view of  the definition  of "per diem allowance"
in section 5701(4). The words "this subchapter" are substituted

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1915

for "the Standardized Government Travel Regulations, Subsist-
ence Expense Act of 1926, as amended (5 U.S.C. 821-833) and the
Act of February 14, 1931, as amended by this Act" as the Subsist-
ence Expense Act of 1926 and the Act of February 14, 1931, were
repealed by section 9 (a) of the Travel  Expense Act of 1949, 63
Stat.  167, part of which appeared in former section 842 and is
carried  into section 5708, and as the authority for the Standard-
ized Government Travel Regulations in former section 840 is car-
ried into section 5707.
  In subsection  (c), the words  "this subchapter" are substituted
for "said regulations  and said  Act of  February 14, 1931, as so
amended" as the Act of February 14, 1931,  was repealed by sec-
tion 9 (a)  of the Travel Expense Act of 1949, 63 Stat. 167, part of
which appeared in former section 842 and is carried into section
5708, and as  the authority for  the Standardized  Government
                                                      [p.  108]

Travel Regulations in former section 840 is carried into section
5707. The words "in lieu of subsistence" are omitted as unneces-
sary in  view of the definition of "per diem allowance" in section
5701(4).
  In subsection (d),  the words  "under  regulations prescribed
under section 5707 of this title"  are substituted for "in accordance
with regulations promulgated  by the  Director,  Bureau  of  the
Budget, pursuant to section 840 of this title."
  Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions ap-
plicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the
report.
                                                      [p. 109]

-------
1916          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   1.15c(2)  SENATE  COMMITTEE ON THE  JUDICIARY
             S. REP. No. 1380, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966)

TITLE 5, UNITED  STATES CODE, "GOVERNMENT ORGA-
               NIZATION AND EMPLOYEES"
               JULY 21, 1966.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. ERVIN, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
                          following

                         REPORT
                   [To accompany H. R. 10104]

  The Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the bill
(H.R. 10104), to enact title 5, United States  Code, "Government
Organization and Employees," codifying the general and perma-
nent laws relating to the organization  of the Government of the
United States and to  its civilian officers and employees, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon, with amendments,
and recommends that the bill, H.R. 10104, as amended, do pass.
                                                        [P. i]

                       SECTION 5703

  Derivation:  United States Code, 5 U.S.C. 73b-2; Revised Statutes and
Statutes at Large: Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 744, §  5, 60 Stat. 808. July 28, 1955, ch.
424 § 2, 69 Stat. 394. Aug. 14, 1961, Pub. L. 87-139, §§ 2, 8(b), 75 Stat. 339,
340.

  Subsection (a) is added on authority of section 18 of the Act of
Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 744, 60 Stat. 811.
  In subsection (b), the words "in lieu of subsistence" are omitted
as unnecessary in view of the definition of "per diem allowance"
in section 5701(4).  The words "this  subchapter" are  substituted
for "the Standardized Government Travel Regulations, Subsist-
ence Expense Act of 1926, as amended (5 U.S.C. 821-833) and the
Act of February 14, 1931, as amended by this Act" as the Subsist-
ence Expense Act of 1926 and the Act of February 14, 1931, were
repealed by section 9 (a) of the Travel Expense Act of 1949, 63
Stat.  167, part of which appeared in former  section  842 and is
carried  into section 5708, and as the authority for the Standard-

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1917

ized Government Travel Regulations in former section 840 is car-
ried into section 5707.
   In subsection (c), the words "this subchapter" are substituted
for "said regulations and said Act of February  14, 1931, as so
amended" as the Act of February 14, 1931, was repealed by sec-
tion 9 (a) of the Travel Expense Act of 1949, 63 Stat. 167, part of
which  appeared in former section 842 and is  carried into section
5708,  and as the authority  for the Standardized  Government
Travel Regulations in former section 840 is carried into section
5707. The words "in lieu of subsistence" are omitted as unneces-
sary in view of the definition of "per diem allowance" in section
5701(4).
   In subsection (d), the words  "Under regulations prescribed
under  section 5707 of this title" are substituted for "in accordance
with regulations promulgated  by the Director,  Bureau  of  the
Budget, pursuant to section 840 of this title".
   Standard changes  are made to conform with the definitions ap-
plicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the
report.
                                                      [p. 129]
            1.15c(3)   CONGRESSIONAL RECORD

1.15c(3)(a) Vol. Ill  (1965), Sept. 7:  Passed House, p. 25954

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]
1.15c(3)(b) Vol. 112 (1966), July 25: Amended and passed Senate,
pp.17006,17010-17011

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]
1.15c(3)(c) Vol. 112  (1966), Aug. 11: House concurs in Senate
amendments, p. 19077

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]

-------
1918         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

     1.15d  INCREASE MAXIMUM RATES PER DIEM
     ALLOWANCE FOR GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
            November 10, 1969, P.L. 91-114, §2, Stat. 190

AN ACT To increase the maximum rate of per diem allowance for employees
  of the Government traveling on official business, and for other purposes.

  Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of  America in Congress assembled, That section
5702 of title  5, United States Code, is amended by striking  out
"$16" and inserting in lieu thereof "$25", by striking out "$30"
and inserting in lieu thereof "$40", and by striking out "$10" and
inserting in lieu thereof "$18".
  SEC. 2. Section  5703 of title 5, United States Code, is amended
by striking out "$16" and inserting in lieu  thereof  "$25", by
striking out "$30" and inserting in lieu  thereof "$40", and by
striking out "$10" and inserting in lieu thereof "$18".
                                                     [p. 190]
    1.15d(l)   HOUSE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT
                       OPERATIONS
           H.R. REP. No. 91-111, 91st Cong., 1st Sees. (1969)

MAXIMUM PER DIEM ALLOWANCE FOR GOVERNMENT
                       EMPLOYEES
MARCH 20, 1969.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
            State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. DAWSON,  from the Committee on Government Operations,
                   submitted the following

                        REPORT
                   [To accompany H. R. 337]

  The  Committee on Government Operations, to whom was re-
ferred  the bill (H.R. 337) to increase the maximum rate of per
diem allowance for employees of the Government traveling on
official  business, and for other purposes, having considered the
same, report favorably thereon with amendments and recommend
that the bill as amended do pass.

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1919

  The amendments are as follows:
  Page 1, line 4, strike out "$25" and insert "$22".
  Page 1, line 10, strike out "$20" and insert "$22".
  Page 2, strike out lines 3 through 12.

                          PURPOSE
  The purpose of  H.R. 337 is to amend existing travel expense
legislation for Government employees to increase the maximum
per diem in lieu of subsistence and the maximum amounts which
may be reimbursed when actual expenses are paid to more nearly
reflect the costs of official travel at the present time.
  The bill's main features are as follows:
       1. The maximum per diem allowance is increased from its
     present rate of $16 to $22  per day. The specific per diem  will
     be set by the departments and agencies based on the nature
     and destination of the  travel and such other factors as may
     properly be taken into consideration.
       2. The maximum allowance for official travelers authorized
     to be paid  on  an actual expense basis is increased from the
     present $30 to $35 per day.
                                                       [P. 1]

       3. Officials traveling in foreign countries will be allowed an
     additional $15 per day,  rather than the present $10, above the
     per diem set by the State  Department when such additional
     allowance is deemed necessary.

         SECTION-BY-SECTION  ANALYSIS OP THE BILL

  Payment of travel expenses such as hotel, food, and other sub-
sistence costs to Government employees traveling on official busi-
ness is authorized by the Travel Expense Act of 1949 and subse-
quent amendments, now codified in sections 5701-5708 of title 5 of
the United States Code. The pertinent provisions affected by H.R.
337  are  sections 5702 and 5703.  The  act  provides  maximum
amounts which may be paid by departments and agencies and it
was not anticipated by  the Congress that the maximum would be
set  for all travel. Based on the expected costs of the particular
travel, the agencies exercise their discretion to set  rates that in
many cases are  lower  than the maximum. Overall  policies and
regulations are made by the Bureau of the Budget.
  Section 2  makes the same changes  in  payment of travel  ex-
penses for intermittent employees of the  Government such as ex-

-------
1920          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

perts and consultants as have been made for the regular employees
by section 1.  Thus,  the maximum per diem they may be paid is
increased from $16 to $22 per  day. Maximum actual expenses
within the United States are increased from $30 to $35 per day
                                                        [P. 2]

and, outside of the United States, from the $10 added to the per
diem to $15 added to the per diem for the country involved.
  Sections 3 and 4 have been deleted from the bill.

                   COMMITTEE POSITION
  This bill is a slightly different version of H.R.  13738 which
passed the House in the 90th Congress but was not acted upon by
the Senate. The earlier measure called for an increase in the maxi-
mum per diem to $20 per day. The pending bill (H.R. 337) calls
for $22 per day based on the excalated costs of travel and subsist-
ence in the past 2 years. The results of studies presented to us
during our hearings by the Bureau of the Budget clearly substan-
tiated  a minimum increase in hotel and restaurant costs  of 10
percent since our 1967 hearings on which the earlier $20 rate was
based.  Studies and the actual experiences of their members pre-
sented to us by the representatives of Government employee orga-
nizations showed an even greater increase.1 Twenty-two dollars
per day is, therefore,  a conservative estimate of the average cost
of subsistence.
  We support this legislation as  a matter of fairness and equity.
The maximum per diem of $16 per day was established by legisla-
tion in 1961.  Incontrovertible evidence was placed before us that
necessary expenses incident to  official travel  have broken well
through this ceiling in the years that have intervened. To refuse to
recognize this fact would mean that the  Congress would require
Federal employees who travel on official business to pay a portion
of their expenses out of their own pockets.
  In 1967, the Bureau of the Budget advised us of the results of a
study2 it made of employee travel  experiences, 51%0 percent  of
those reporting were under circumstances where the costs of ho-
tels, meals, and miscellaneous expenses were more than $16 per
day. The average daily subsistence expense for this group was
$19.21. To make the average, of  course, a considerable number of
travelers exceeded this figure. It was clear, then, that the present
$16 per diem was inadequate.
  Another study conducted by the Bureau of the Census produced

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1921

a sample which showed a daily cost  for hotel and  meals to be
$17.78, to which a 10-percent allowance of $1.78 should be added
for miscellaneous expense, bringing the total daily subsistence cost
to $19.56.
  Testimony was presented to us based on the studies  of private
accounting firms  and trade associations showing increases  in the
cost of hotel rooms. Harris, Kerr, & Forster reported a  16-percent
increase from 1959 to 1966. The American Hotel and Motel Asso-
ciation reported these typical increases in hotel rates in the period
1959-68: Boston, 36.6 percent; Houston, 63.7 percent;  Minneapo-
lis,  36.8  percent; New  Orleans, 50.9 percent; Philadelphia, 25.5
percent; St. Louis, 19.4 percent; and San Francisco, 40.6 percent.
The Government Employees' Council,  AFL-CIO, states its own
research had revealed that in New York City, the cost of hotel
rooms had risen at least  35.2 percent from 1961 to  1968. The
indexes maintained by the Bureau of Labor  Statistics showed an
  1 Hearings, 91st Cong., on H,R. 337 by the Executive and Legislative Reorganization Sub-
committee of the House Committee on Government Operations, Mar. 19, 1969.
  2 Hearings, 90th Cong., on H.R. 7113 by the Executive and Legislative Reorganization Sub-
committee of the House Committee on Government Operations, Sept. 13, 1967 (pt. 1).
                                                         [p. 3]

increase of 20 percent in the  cost of restaurant meals between
1961 and 1967.
  Numerous personal reports from individual travelers were pre-
sented to us by representatives of  employee organizations,  includ-
ing a log of intercity travel expenses by former Congressman and
Civil Service Commission Chairman  Robert  Ramspeck. They all
pointed up the high cost of subsistence and demonstrated  the
insufficiency of the present $16 per diem.
  The  same justification applies to the increase in the maximum
allowable when due to unusual  circumstances  the per diem is
clearly inadequate and the actual expenses of the travel  are al-
lowed.  The traveler  must submit a detailed accounting of all ex-
penses in these cases. We were informed by the Bureau of  the
Budget that very little travel was performed on an actual expense
basis. The Bureau indicated, however, that there were sufficient
instances of such travel to warrant an increase in the maximum
from $30 to $40 per day. This committee only  approves an in-
crease to $35 per day.
  The  committee reiterates that the $22 per diem and the $35
limit on actual expenses recommended herewith are the maximum
allowable and we charge and expect the departments and agencies,
supervised by the Bureau of the  Budget, to approve only a per

-------
1922          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

diem warranted by the particular travel  being required. Much
travel is accomplished below the maximum per diem and we ex-
pect this to continue.
  We recognize that it is no more possible for the Federal Govern-
ment to conduct its business without traveling by its personnel
than that private corporations can operate on a stationary basis.
We expect, however, in view of present budgetary pressures that
every effort be made to reduce official travel  to the minimum
necessary.
  As was explained in our analysis above, Government employees,
when traveling abroad  on official business, are reimbursed on the
basis of a per diem set for individual countries by the State De-
partment. This bill has no effect on  these per diem rates which
vary from country to country and are changed by the Department
when conditions in those countries warrant a  change. This bill
does provide, however, that when  there are certain unusual cir-
cumstances  of  a  particular trip within a  foreign country tha^
clearly will result in expenses beyond the per diem for that coun-
try, that departments and agencies may reimburse up to  $15 per
day above the per diem. This is an increase from the current $10
per day. The Bureau of the Budget recommended a differential of
$18 per day. We expect that this provision will not be widely used
but is available in the event of special cases of inequities which do
occur from time to time.
  The Bureau of the Budget has estimated that the increase in the
maximum per  diem  rates it recommended  would add  approxi-
mately $27 million to the annual cost of official travel to civilian
agencies. Since the provisions of the reported  bill provide lesser
increases than those recommended by the Bureau, the correspond-
ing added annual cost should be somewhat lower than the above
estimate. The Bureau expects the executive agencies to absorb the
increased costs within available appropriations. See Report of the
Bureau of the Budget dated March 17, 1969, printed below.
                                                        [p. 4]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1923

           REPORTS OF DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

               EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
                                BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
                          Washington, B.C., March 17,1969.
Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,
Chairman, Committee  on  Government Operations, House of Rep-
    resentatives,  Rayburn House Office Building,  Washington,
    D.C.
  DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN:  This is in  reply to your  request for a
report on H.R.  337, a bill to increase the maximum rate of per
diem  allowance for employees of the Government  traveling on
official business, and for other purposes.
  The bill would increase the maximum rate of per diem allow-
ance for travel within the contiguous 48  States and the  District of
Columbia from $16 to $25 and would increase the maximum allow-
ance for reimbursement on an actual expense basis for such travel
from  $30 to $35 per day. For travel outside the contiguous 48
States and  the  District of Columbia the bill would increase the
maximum allowance for travel on an actual expense basis from
$10 plus the established maximum per diem rate to $15 plus the
established maximum per  diem rate.
  In addition, the bill would increase from $9 to $15 the per diem
allowance which may be paid postal employees who are assigned to
road duty, and  would  authorize payment  of travel expense and
allowances for each judge of the Court of Military Appeals on the
same basis as that for judges of other U.S. courts.
  Similar  legislation was introduced in the 90th Congress, and
after hearings by Chairman Blatnik's Subcommittee on Executive
and Legislative Reorganization was reported by your  committee
and passed the  House of  Representatives  on April  23, 1968. As
passed, the bill contained a maximum per diem rate of $20, which
was  in accord with the  recommendation  of the Bureau of the
Budget. In all other respects, however, provisions were identical to
those in H.R. 337.
  With respect to the general travel allowances, the Bureau of the
Budget from time to time has conducted surveys of travel subsist-
ence expenses for  the purpose of determining the adequacy of
maximum  per diem allowances. Such a survey was initiated in
1958 and as  updated in reports to the Congress  in 1960 and 1961
provided a basis for the present maximum per diem allowances. A
similar survey  was conducted  in  the spring of 1967 to obtain
information  and data with respect to the cost  of lodging, meals,

-------
1924          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

and miscellaneous  expenses  for travel within  the  contiguous 48
States and the District of Columbia. The survey included detailed
reports  of employee travel from  18 principal Federal agencies,
supported by a nationwide sampling of costs by the Bureau of the
Census and reports from accounting firms specializing in business
analyses for hotel organizations. As we reported to your commit-
tee in the 90th Congress, the survey data indicated that subsist-
ence expenses incurred in more than 50 percent of the employee
travel experiences were not fully compensated for under the pres-
ent $16 maximum per diem allowance.
  The data submitted in response to the Bureau's request to the 18
principal Federal agencies for information on subsistence costs
represented  12,025 employee travel  experiences covering  63,710
                                                        [P.  5]

man-days of travel. An analysis of these data showed 6,171 travel
experiences, 51.3 percent of the total, where subsistence costs ex-
ceeded $16 per day, the average  of these being $19.21. On this
basis, we recommended to the Congress a maximum  per diem of
$20 in lieu of subsistence expenses.
  This recommendation was also  supported by the results of the
nationwide sampling of hotel and meal costs which was made by
the Bureau of the  Census. The sampling showed costs of lodging
and meals at desirable hotels and restaurants in various size cities
and towns averaged $17.78  per day. Adding  10 percent to this
amount for  miscellaneous expenses  resulted in a total average
daily subsistence of $19.56. Additional support for the recommen-
dation was  furnished  by  the  hotel accounting firms from  data
which they maintain with respect to hotel room rates in principal
cities throughout the Nation. A comparison of average room rates
by cities showed  considerable variation  even among the major
cities with the nationwide average of such  rates for 113 cities  at
$10.14. Data gathered on a statewide basis in five States averaged
$10.90. These rates for hotel rooms, together with reasonable al-
lowances for food  and miscellaneous expenses resulted  in  a  total
subsistence expense falling within the recommended rate.
  Since our 1967 review there have been general price advances
which are reflected in increased costs for hotels, meals, and miscel-
laneous expenses. Current cost data indicates that these increases
are between 10 and 11 percent  over comparable costs in the spring
of 1967. On this  basis, the employee travel  experiences which
justified a maximum per diem allowance of $20 in 1967 would

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1925

require a $22 rate under current cost conditions. Therefore, we
believe a maximum per diem of $22 would be required to provide
adequate reimbursement to Government travelers for the reasona-
ble costs of their travel. This recommendation should also be ap-
plicable to the maximum per diem rate for consultants and others
employed on an intermittent basis. These individuals have been
authorized the same per diem maximum in the past as  Govern-
ment officers and employees.
  In supporting the $22 maximum we recognize that some employ-
ees will incur  expenses  in  excess of $22 per day. This  may be
attributable  in some instances to the personal desires of the em-
ployee. In other instances it will be unavoidable.  Frequently, how-
ever, such experiences will be offset  by other travel experiences
where because of special hotel rates or other circumstances the per
diem authorized is greater than the subsistence costs incurred. In
the overall, the situations in which the $22 rate will be exceeded
should be infrequent, and where they occur and are significant, the
Government traveler  may be  reimbursed on an actual  expenss
basis in accordance with the standardized Government travel reg-
ulations up to the statutory maximum.
  It should be noted that an increase in the maximum per diem
rate to $22  per day should  not result in  a flat increase for all
Government travelers. As a maximum rate for payment of travel
expenses in lieu of actual subsistence, the  highest rate should be
authorized only when expenses are expected to  approximate the
maximum. Where experience has shown that actual subsistence
expenses of  Government travelers in certain circumstances are
less than the maximum amount per day, a lesser per diem should
be authorized. Many agencies have established per diem schedules
                                                        [p. 6]

which reflect such considerations. We would expect agencies to
continue to emphasize the need to authorize  per diem ra^es that
bear a reasonable relationship to the actual expenses of individual
travel.
  With  respect to the maximum per diem allowance for reim-
bursement of Government travelers on an actual expense basis,
agencies in 1967 were asked to provide typical experiences where
subsistence costs  on an actual expense basis exceeded  the $30
maximum  per  diem.  The response showed that  very little travel
was performed under this authority and most was adequately com-
pensated for within  the present $30 maximum. However, there

-------
1926          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

were instances where reimbursement was not adequate and these
were sufficient to support an increase in the maximum allowance
for travel within the contiguous 48 States  and the District of
Columbia. In 1967 we recommended an increase from $30 to $35
per day. In  view of current cost data we believe this maximum
should be increased to $40 per day.
  For the actual expense method involving travel outside of the 48
States and the District of Columbia, we recommend an  increase
from  $10 to $18 to be  added to the applicable per diem rates to
arrive at a  maximum  allowance for a  particular  location. This
amount would  be in keeping with the differential recommended
above for the actual expense method within the 48 States and the
District of Columbia. The same differential is justified since the
maximum per  diem rates for use outside the 48 States and the
District of Columbia are reviewed periodically and adjusted where
appropriate to  keep abreast of changed economic conditions from
a travel standpoint.
  With respect to the maximum per diem for mobile employees of
the Post Office Department, we believe an increase from $9 to $17
is justified.  Our view is  based on recognized cost increases and
because the  proposed amount would be consistent with the equita-
ble ratio of  three-fourths of the maximum per diem for Govern-
ment employee travel, which was the basis for the initial per diem
authorization for these employees.
   The proposal that each  judge of the U.S. Court of  Military
Appeals be paid travel expenses and allowances on the same basis
as that for judges of other U.S. courts is  a desirable amendment to
existing law. It would  insure equitable treatment of these judges
with respect to payment for their travel expenses and allowances.
   We estimate that an  increase in the maximum per diem rates as
recommended above would add approximately $27 million to the
annual cost to civilian agencies for official travel within the contig-
uous  48 States and the District of Columbia. If the legislation is
enacted, we will expect the executive agencies to  absorb the in-
creased costs within available appropriations.
   If amended as recommended above, we would  favor enactment
of H.R. 337.

       Sincerely,

                          ROGER W. JONES, Assistant Director.
                                                        [p. 7]

-------
           STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1927
                        U.S. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,
                          Washington, D.C., March 18,1969.

Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,
Chairman, Committee on Government Operations, House of Rep-
    resentatives, Rayburn House Office Building

  DEAR MR.  CHAIRMAN : This  is in further reply to your request
for the views of the Civil Service Commission on H.R. 337, a bill
to increase the maximum rate of per diem allowance for employees
of the  Government  traveling  on  official business, and for other
purposes.
  In our experience, the maximum  allowable per diem rates are
wholly  inadequate in most instances, and we urge the Congress to
take action as soon as possible.
  The  Commission in strongly supporting the objectives of H.R.
337,  defers to the judgment of the Bureau  of the Budget with
regard  to the amount of increase.
  We suggest, however, that section 4 of H.R. 337 be deleted. The
enactment of Public Law 90-340,  June 15, 1968, no longer makes
this provision necessary.
  The Bureau of the Budget advises that from the  standpoint of
the administration's program there is no objection to the submis-
sion of this report.
  By direction of the Commission:
      Sincerely yours,
                            ROBERT E. HAMPTON, Chairman.
           COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
                          Washington, D.C., March 18,1969.
B-5019.
Hon. WILLIAM L. DAWSON,
Chairman, Committee on Government Operations, House of Rep-
    resentatives.
  DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : We refer to your letter of January 29,
1969,  by which you request our report on the bill  H.R.  337 to
increase the maximum rate of per diem allowance for employees
of the Government traveling on  official business and for other
purposes.
  Section 1 of the bill would amend section 5702 of title 5,  United
States Code, by increasing the current  maximum therein of $16,
$30, and $10. Those amounts represent the  maximum per diem

-------
1928          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

allowance for travel inside the continental United States  ($16),
the maximum reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses of
employees traveling on official  business in the continental United
States ($30), and the maximum reimbursement  for actual and
necessary expenses of employees traveling outside the continental
United States (per diem rate applicable plus $10). The bill would
amend the current figures to read $25, $35, and $15, respectively.
  Section 2 would amend section 5703 of title 5,  United  States
Code, which covers reimbursable traveling expenses of experts
and consultants, as well as individuals serving without pay, travel-
ing on official Government business. Increases would bs provided
for such individuals similar to those provided for employees cov-
ered by 5 U.S.C. 5702 except that the maximum per diem rate for
                                                        [p. 8]

travel inside the continental United States would be raised  to $20
as contrasted to the rate of $25 in the amendment to section 5702.
  Section 3 would  amend section 3581 (d) of title 39,  United
States Code, which is applicable to employees  of  the postal field
service  assigned to road  duty lasting more than 10 hours, by
raising the current maximum per diem rate of $9 to $15.
  Section 4 would amend section 867 (a) (1) of title 10, United
States Code, under which reimbursement of traveling expenses
incurred by the judges of the Court of Military Appeals is author-
ized  by eliminating the current per diem maximum of $15 and by
authorizing such judges reimbursement for traveling expenses
under provisions of title 28,  United  States Code, section  456,
which covers reimbursement of the traveling expenses of justices
and judges of other U.S. courts.
  Our information  concerning subsistence costs at our regional
office sites and  other localities  regularly visited  by our employees
on Government business  indicates  that the costs for lodging,
meals, and other subsistence expenses have increased to the point
where the maximum currently prescribed  does not cover subsist-
ence expenses incurred by prudent employees.
  We note from House Report  1144 on H.R. 13738, 90th  Congress,
covering proposed per diem increases, that the $20 rate approved
by the committee was considered a "conservative maximum." In
view thereof, and since an increase in subsistence  cos*"s since that
time is indicated, a basis exists for a higher maximum than $20.
We understand that Bureau of  the Budget will recommend a maxi-
mum rate of $22. This rate will not fully compensate all  of our
employees who are required to travel.  However, we think  an in-

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1929

crease in the rate to $22 would take care of the travel expenses of
a majority of our employees.
  Regarding the proposed amendment to 5 U.S.C. 5703, we note
that the maximum per diem rate for travel within the continental
United States would be $20 and not $25 as would be applicable to
similar travel performed by regular employees covered by 5 U.S.C.
5702.  We believe that consideration should be given to increasing
that rate to be equal with the rate for similar travel as prescribed
by section 5702.
  Regarding the proposed change  in reimbursement of travel ex-
penses incurred  by judges of  the Court  of Military Appeals,  it
appears that placing those judges on an equal footing with jus-
tices and judges  of other United States courts would be equitable.
      Sincerely yours,
                                         R. F. KELLER,
              Acting Comptroller General of the United States.

 CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
                          REPORTED
  In compliance with clause 3 of rule  XIII of the  Rules of the
House of Representatives, changes in existing law  made by the
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to
be omitted is enclosed  in black brackets, new matter is printed in
italic, existing law in which no change  is proposed is shown in
roman) :
                                                       [p. 9]

§ 5703.  Per diem, travel, and  transportation expenses; experts
    and consultants;  individuals  serving without pay.
   (a) For the purpose of this section, "appropriation" includes
funds made available by statute under section 849 of title 31.
   (b) An individual employed intermittently in the Government
service as an expert or consultant and paid on a daily when-actual-
ly-employed  basis may be allowed travel expenses under this sub-
chapter while away from his home or regular place of business,
including a per diem allowance under this subchapter while at his
place of employment.
   (c) An individual serving without pay or at $1  a year may be
allowed transportation expenses under this subchapter and a per
diem allowance under this section  while en route and at his place
of service or employment away from his home or regular place of
business. Unless a higher rate is  named in an appropriation or
other  statute, the per diem allowance may not exceed—

-------
1930         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

      (1) the rate of [$16] $22 for travel inside the continental
    United States; and
      (2) the rates established under section 5702 (a) of this title
    for travel outside the continental United States.
  (d) Under regulations  prescribed under section 5707 of this
title, the  head of the agency concerned may prescribe conditions
under which an individual to whom this section applies may be
                                                     [p. 10]

reimbursed for the actual  and necessary expenses of the trip, not
to exceed an amount named in the travel authorization, when the
maximum per diem allowance would be much less than these ex-
penses due to the unusual circumstances of the travel assignment.
The amount named in the travel authorization may not exceed—
      (1)  [$30]  $35 for each day in a travel  status inside the
    continental United States; or
      (2) the maximum per diem, allowance plus [$10] $.75 for
    each day in a travel status  outside the continental United
    States.
                                                     [P. HI
    1.15d(2)  SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT
                      OPERATIONS
            S. REP. No. 91-450, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969)

INCREASING  THE MAXIMUM RATE  OF PER DIEM AL-
LOWANCE  FOR  EMPLOYEES  OF  THE GOVERNMENT
TRAVELING ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS, AND FOR OTHER
                        PURPOSES
              OCTOBER 3, 1969.—Ordered to be printed
Mr.  RIBICOFF, from the Committee on  Government Operations,
                   submitted the following

                        REPORT
                   [To accompany H. R. 337]

  The Committee on Government Operations, to  which was re-
ferred the bill (H.R. 337) to  increase the maximum rate of per
diem allowance for employees of the Government traveling on

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1931

official business, and for other purposes, having considered the
same, reports favorably  thereon  with amendments and  recom-
mends that the bill as amended do pass.
  The amendments are as follows:
  On page 1, line 4, strike out "$22" and insert in lieu thereof
"$25".
  On page 1, line 5, strike out "$35" and insert in lieu thereof
"$40".
  On page 1, line 7, strike out "$15" and insert in lieu thereof
"$18".
  On page 1, line 10, strike out "$22" and insert in lieu thereof
"$25".
  On page 2, line 1, strike out "$35" and insert in lieu thereof
"$40".
  On page 2, line 2, strike out "$15" and insert in lieu thereof
"$18".
  On page 2, after line 2, insert the following new section:
  "SEC. 3. The seventh paragraph under the heading 'Administra-
tive  Provisions' in the Senate section of the Legislative Branch
Appropriation Act,  1957  (2 U.S.C. 68b), is amended by striking
out '$16' and inserting in lieu thereof '$25', and by striking out
'$30' and inserting in lieu thereof '$40'."

                          PURPOSE
  The purpose  of this bill  is to increase the maximum amounts
which may be paid  to regular employees of the Federal Govern-
ment and to experts and consultants employed intermittently, who
are traveling on official business, with respect to per diem in lieu
of subsistence,  and  reimbursement when payment of actual ex-
                                                       [P. i]

penses is authorized. It would accomplish this objective by amend-
ing existing travel expense legislation so  as to reflect more closely
the greatly increased costs of official travel at the present time.
  As amended by the committee, the bill would amend sections
5702 and 5703 of title 5, United States Code, formerly embodied in
the Travel Expense Act of 1949, as amended, by (1)  increasing
the maximum per diem allowance for travel in continental United
States from the present rate of $16  to  $25; (2) increasing the
maximum reimbursement for employees authorized to travel on an
actual expense basis within continental United States from $30 to
$40 per day; and  (3)  increasing from  $10 to  $18 per day the
maximum actual  expense reimbursement for foreign  travel au-

-------
1932          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

thorized to be paid in addition to the maximum per diem estab-
lished for the area involved.
  The bill would also amend the Legislative Branch Appropriation
Act, 1957  (2 U.S.C. 68b)  by increasing from $16 to $25 the maxi-
mum per diem allowance which may be paid to Senate Members
and employees engaged in official travel; and from $30 to $40 per
day  the maximum  amount which such  employees  may receive
when authorized by the Senate Committee on Rules and Adminis-
tration to be paid on an actual expense basis.
  As enacted by the House of Representatives on March 27, 1969,
H.R. 337 would have (1) increased  the  maximum per diem for
travel in continental United States from the present rate of $16 to
$22; (2) increased the maximum allowance  for employees author-
ized to  be  reimbursed  on an actual  expense basis for travel  in
continental United  States from $30 to $35  per day;  and (3) in-
creased from  $10  to $15 per  day  the maximum actual  expense
reimbursement for foreign travel authorized to be paid in addition
to the maximum per diem established for the area involved.
  The following table reflects  (1) allowances now authorized; (2)
allowances recommended by the administration; (3) allowances as
passed by the House of Representatives; and (4) allowances  as
reported by this committee:




Executive branch:
Per diem

Foreign travel
Legislative branch:




now
authorized


$16
30
1 10

25
16


recommended
by
administration

$22
40
1 J8




HR.
Allowances
passed
by House

$22
35
'15




337
Allowances
re ported by
committee

$25
40
> 18

* 25
	 MO

 1 In addition to the maximum authorized for the country in which travel is performed.
 ' Per diem.
 ' Actual. Only when authorized by the Committee on Rules and Administration.

                        BACKGROUND

  By act of June 3, 1926,  the  Congress  enacted the Subsistence
Expense Act of 1926 (44 Stat. 688) which established a maximum
per diem allowance in  lieu of subsistence of $6 within the conti-
nental limits of the United States and $7 beyond those limits (44
Stat. 689). The Economy Act  of June 30, 1932  (47 Stat.  405)
                                                        [P. 2]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1933

reduced these amounts to $5 and $6 respectively, reflecting a de-
crease in living costs which appeared to warrant the reduction. By
act of January 30, 1942  (56 Stat. 39), the original amounts were
restored  because of greatly increased  living costs resulting from
war and defense activities.
  The Travel Expense Act of 1949 (63 Stat.  166)  repealed the
Subsistence  Expense Act of 1926,  increased the per diem to  an
amount not to exceed $9 in continental United States, and author-
ized payments for travel outside of the United States at rates not
in excess of those established by the Director of the Bureau of the
Budget. Members of Congress, their offices, and employees of Sen-
ate and House committees were excluded from coverage in this
act, but were provided for in other legislation.
  By act of  July 28, 1955 (62 Stat. 393), the maximum per diem
was increased to $12,  and a  provision was added authorizing de-
partment and agency heads to pay  actual expenses, not to exceed
$25 per day, where the maximum  per diem would be much less
than the  amount required to cover actual and necessary expenses;
the amount was to be fixed in accordance with regulations promul-
gated by the Director of the Bureau of the Budget.  This act also
increased from $10 to $15 per day the maximum per diem in lieu
of subsistence for Government consultants serving without com-
pensation, and not to exceed $25 per day if actual expenses were
authorized.
  Public Law 87-139 (Aug. 14, 1961, 75 Stat. 339)  (1) increased
the maximum per diem for travel inside continental United  States
from $12 to $16 for regular and intermittent Government employ-
ees; (2)  increased from $25 to  $30 the maximum which may be
reimbursed on an actual expense basis for travel within continen-
tal  United States under unusual conditions where it  is found that
the regular  $16 per day is much less  than actual expenses;  (3)
authorized, for foreign travel, actual expense reimbursement up to
$10 per day, in addition to the maximum per diem established for
that area; and (4) provided that the per diem allowance for travel
outside continental United States may not exceed the rates  estab-
lished by the President of the United States, or his  designee, for
the locality where the travel is performed and (5)  made the in-
creases for per diem and reimbursement for actual expenses appli-
cable to Members and employees of the Senate, by  amending the
legislation which provides for their travel allowances.
  Thereafter, by Executive Order No. 10970, October 27, 1961 (26
F.R. 10149), the President delegated to the Secretary of State the

-------
1934          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

authority to establish maximum rates of per diem allowances for
travel in foreign countries.
  The House of Representatives has long followed  the practice of
authorizing travel allowances in accordance with regulations pro-
mulgated by its Committee on Administration.
  The  Senate, however, has provided,  in  its portion  of  annual
legislative branch appropriation acts, for travel allowances not to
exceed those provided for other Federal employees. Thus, prior to
the enactment of the Travel Expense Act of 1949, Members  and
employees of the Senate were reimbursed at rates not in excess of
those provided for by  the Subsistence Expense Act of 1926, as
amended. Following the enactment of the 1949 act, this practice
was continued until 1956, when permanent legislation was enacted
                                                       [P. 3]

in the Legislative Branch Appropriation Act, 1957, relating travel
allowances of its Members and employees to the rates provided for
by the Travel Expense Act  of 1949, as amended  (70 Stat. 360,
June 27, 1956; 2 U.S.C. 68b).
  Accordingly, at the present time, Senate Members and employ-
ees are authorized travel allowances in continental United States
at the  maximum rate of $16 per day;  and, if authorized actual
expenses by the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration
and pursuant to its regulations, not more than $30 per day on an
actual basis. Members and employees of the House  of Representa-
tives have been authorized a travel allowance of $25 per day, since
July 1,1967.

              EXPLANATION OP COMMITTEE ACTION

  The  committee approved  increases  for travel  in  continental
United States of $9 in the maximum per diem, raising it from $16
to $25; $10 per day in maximum  reimbursement for  actual ex-
penses, raising it from $30 to $40; and, for foreign travel, $8 per
day actual expense reimbursement  above the maximum per diem
authorized for that area, raising it from  $10 to  $18. These in-
creases exceed those approved by the House of Representatives by
$3,  $5, and $3 per day, respectively; and exceed by $3 the per diem
allowance of $22 recommended by the Bureau of the Budget, but
conform to the administration's recommendations in all other re-
spects.
  In approving these increases, the committee took into considera-
tion the fact that  (1) there has been no general increase in travel

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY        1935

allowances since 1961; (2)  hotel and motel rates, the cost of food
away from home, sales  taxes on  hotel and  motel bills and on
restaurant meals,  and miscellaneous expenses related  to  official
travel  have increased  appreciably since that time;  (3) a 1967
Bureau of the Budget survey revealed that more than half of all
Federal employees surveyed were  unable to  cover necessary ex-
penses on official travel because of the inadequacy of travel allow-
ances; (4) the increased rates represent maximum amounts which
may be paid by  departments and  agencies,  and  are  not  to be
considered as amounts which must or should be paid for all travel;
and  (5) Federal employees engaged in official travel on behalf of
the U.S. Government should not have to suffer  financial losses.
  The per diem rate of $22, recommended  by the  Bureau of the
Budget, was based upon a survey conducted in the spring of 1967
which included detailed reports of employee travel from 18 princi-
pal Federal agencies, representing  12,025 employee travel experi-
ences covering 63,710 man-days of travel, out  of a total estimated
9 million man-days of travel annually throughout the Federal Gov-
ernment. This survey revealed an average cost of $19.21 for lodg-
ing and food. Additional information furnished to  the  Bureau of
the Budget by the Bureau of Census and by accounting firms
which  specialize in data analysis  for national hotel and  motel
associations resulted in a total subsistence  cost of $19.56, which
included an additional 10  percent for authorized miscellaneous
items such as sales taxes,  tips,  laundry, etc. In arriving  at  the
maximum figure of $22,  the Bureau added  an additional 10 per-
cent to allow for general price advances, resulting in $21.52.
                                                        [P. 4]

  Although this figure may have been valid through 1968, it does
not,  in the committee's judgment,  reflect the  general rise  in  the
Consumer Price Index, compiled by the Bureau of Labor  Statis-
tics, of 5.6 percent between August 1968 and  August 1969. Thus,
if this increase is  applied to  the $21.52 figure developed by  the
Bureau of the Budget, average travel costs would total $22.72.
  In an effort to develop 1969 subsistence costs, the committee
examined  current statistical information supplied by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics and found that, although  the average rise in
the  Consumer Price Index between  August 1968 and August 1969
for  all items amounted to  5.6 percent, average hotel and motel
rates increased 7.8 percent in that period, and restaurant prices
rose 6.3 percent, or an average  total of slightly in  excess of  7
percent. Applying this percentage figure to the $21.52 arrived at

-------
1936          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

by the Bureau of the Budget would amount to $23.03. In addition,
the Bureau of Labor Statistics furnished the committee -with in-
formation showing that, as of August 1969, average daily costs of
hotel and motel rooms amounted to $18.13 in the 12 largest metro-
politan areas, and $14.43 in smaller cities. Since these rates reflect
double occupancy, the Bureau of Labor Statistics agreed that a
reduction of $2 in each figure would reflect average daily rates of
$16.13 and $12.43, respectively, or an average of $14.28. Using an
average daily rate of $8 for restaurant food, total costs for lodg-
ing and food would be $24.13 and $20.43, respectively, or an aver-
age of $22.28. Following the method used by the Bureau of the
Budget, the committee  then added an  additional 10 percent to
reflect miscellaneous allowable items, such as sales taxes, tips, and
so forth, and arrived at total costs  of $26.54 and $22.47, respec-
tively, or an average cost of $24.50.
  As  a check against these figures, the  committee obtained from
the American Hotel and Motel Association  information compiled
by accounting firms employed by the association, relative to travel
costs  for 1968, the latest year for which they  were available. An
analysis of average hotel and motel rates for 14 major cities and
98 smaller cities reflected an average daily rate of $12.30, and food
costs, based upon a survey of 400 hotels throughout the Nation,
reflected a daily average of $9.24. Adding to these figures the 7.8
percent increase for hotel and motel rates  and the average res-
taurant price increase of 6.3 percent for 1969, reflected in the
Consumer Price Index compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
the committee arrived at a total  of $13.26 for lodging and $9.82
for food, or a grand total for lodging and food of $23.08 per day.
To this was added the usual 10 percent for allowable miscellaneous
expenses,  bringing  the total daily average  cost for lodging and
food to $25.38.
  Finally, a sampling of the experience of the committee's own
staff,  relative to travel costs, reflected an average total of approxi-
mately $25.50 per day.
  The Bureau of the Budget advises that the increase in maximum
per diem rates to $22, which was recommended by the administra-
tion, would add approximately $27 million  to the annual cost to
civilian agencies for official travel within the contiguous 48 States
and the District of Columbia;  and  that the increase  to $25, ap-
proved by the committee, would add an additional $13 million, or a
total annual cost of $40 million.
                                                        [p. 5]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1937

  As previously noted, the committee amended the statute which
governs travel allowances for Members and employees of the Sen-
ate by increasing from $16  to $25 the maximum per diem, and
from $30 to $40 per day the maximum amount which they may
receive  when  authorized reimbursement on  an actual  expense
basis. The  increase in maximum per diem will simply provide
Senators and Senate employees with the same travel allowance
provided for other Federal employees on official travel,  and the
same allowance enjoyed by Members and employees of the House
of Representatives since July 1, 1967. It should be noted that this
action is fully supported by Senator B. Everett Jordan, chairman
of the Committee on Rules and Administration, in a letter urging
favorable committee consideration of  increased per diem allow-
ances for Federal employees.
  The increase in maximum actual expenses is believed necessary
to cover those relatively rare situations in which Senate Members
and employees are required to  travel on official business in areas
where  travel costs are so high that  the  maximum  per  diem is
palpably insufficient to reimburse their actual expenses. In this
connection, it should be noted that existing law permits payment
of actual expenses only if approved in advance by the Committee
on Rules and Administration,  in accordance with its  prescribed
rules and regulations. Furthermore, during the past 13  months,
this authority has been granted on only six occasions, and utilized
only five times.

                        CONCLUSIONS

  The committee has been advised by the Bureau of the Budget
that official Government  travel by Federal employees totals an
estimated 9 million man-days each year. Although official travel is
necessary to the conduct of Government business, it is exceedingly
costly, both to the traveler and  the Government. In view of strong
pressures for economy and the reduction of Government expendi-
tures, the committee urges that a determined and concerted effort
be made by all Federal departments and agencies to limit official
travel to the minimum consistent with the effective and efficient
conduct of Government business. The committee desires to make it
clear, however, that when Federal employees travel on official Gov-
ernment business, they should  not be  either expected or required
to suffer personal financial losses.
  We are in a period of high  prices and rising costs  which has
been recognized by the Congress in the form of a series of pay

-------
1938          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

raises designed to achieve comparability with private enterprise
and maintain the integrity of Federal employees. Thus, although
necessary steps have been taken to enable Government employees
to meet their personal ever-increasing costs of living, nothing has
been done, since 1961, to enable the Government to meet its obliga-
tions to those  of its employees who are required to travel in the
course of the transaction of the Government's business.
  Following a'careful analysis of available statistics relative  to
travel  costs, the committee has concluded that a maximum per
diem of $25 is fair and equitable under current economic condi-
tions in the United States. In this connection, the committee calls
attention to the fact that  a statutory device provided for by the
Congress to  assist Federal employees in defraying necessary
                                                        [P. 6]

travel  expenses has been virtually ignored. Since 1955, the Con-
gress has authorized department  and agency heads to reimburse
Federal employees, under regulations prescribed by the  Director
of the  Bureau of the Budget, for actual and necessary expenses,
not to  exceed a specified amount,  "when the maximum per diem
allowance would  be  much less than these expenses due to the
unusual circumstances of the travel assignment." Originally estab-
lished at $25 per day, and increased to $30, in 1961, the maximum
allowance for actual  expenses was increased by the committee to
$40 per day, on the recommendation of  the Bureau of the Budget.
Despite the fact that this authority has existed for 14 years, and
annual travel involves some 9 million man-days, the committee has
learned that only about $150,000 is approved for  this purpose
annually.
  The  committee  firmly believes that the increased use of author-
ity  to  pay  reimbursement for  actual  expenses in  proper  cases
would  result in the correction of existing inequities. It appears
that the paperwork and administrative details  now required  for
the authorization  of actual expenses have played a role in discour-
aging its use. Accordingly, the committee urges the Bureau of the
Budget and agency heads to make use of  this method  of  reim-
bursement  for actual travel expenses,  when  needed, subject,  of
course, to the  exercise of prudence and good judgment.
  The  committee again desires to  emphasize the fact  that the
increased travel allowances which  are provided for by H.R. 337, as
amended, are  maximum rates, to be used by agency heads with
care and  discretion. Although every effort must be made to insure

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1939

fair and equitable handling of travel allowances, agency heads are
expected to exercise vigilance in guarding against abuses.
  No per diem is included in this bill for Senators' staff members
who are required to return to their  respective States and remain
there on official business. Per diem  in lieu of subsistence is nor-
mally paid to  Government employees when away from home on
official business. However, when a Member of Congress returns to
his district or State and directs a member of his staff to accom-
pany him, or return to his State office for official business, no per
diem is paid to such employees from the time of arrival until his
departure. In view of  the financial strain which is placed on such
employees who are required to support their family in Washington
and maintain  temporary  residence away from home, some reim-
bursement, or  tax credit should be allowed for such expenses.
  The committee does not favor payment of per diem for  all
employees who may be needed in each State for the conduct of
congressional business, but it would appear that some credit  or tax
deduction should be permitted for part or all of such  expenses.
  Legislative  jurisdiction  over this  matter is  vested in  another
committee of the Senate and for this reason no amendment was
proposed to H.K. 337. However, the committee strongly recom-
mends that  the appropriate committee consider providing some
tax or other relief to congressional employees who are required to
remain in their Members' State or district at their own expense
for the conduct of official business.
                                                       [P. 7]

                  CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
  In compliance  with  subsection 4 of rule XXIX of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made  by the bill as
reported are  shown  as follows (existing law proposed  to  be
changed enclosed in black brackets, new matter in italic,  existing
law in which no change is proposed to be made in roman) :

     SECTION 5703 OF TITLE 5 UNITED STATES CODE

§ 5703.  Per diem, travel, and transportation expenses;  experts
    and consultants;  individuals serving without pay.

  (a) For the purpose of this section, "appropriation"  includes
funds made available by statute under section  849 of title 31.
  (b) An  individual employed intermittently in the Government
service as an expert or consultant and paid on a daily when-actu-
ally-employed basis may be allowed travel expenses under this sub-

-------
1940         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

chapter while away from his home or regular place of business,
including a per diem allowance under this subchapter while at his
place of employment.
  (c) An individual serving without pay or at $1 a year may be
allowed transportation expenses under this subchapter and a per
diem allowance under this section while en route and at his place
                                                       [P. 8]

of service or employment away from his home or regular place of
business. Unless a higher rate is named  in an appropriation or
other statute, the per diem allowance may not exceed—
       (1)  the rate of [$16] $25 for travel inside  the continental
     United States; and
       (2)  the rates  established under section 5702 (a) of  this
     title for travel outside the continental United States.
  (d)  Under regulations  prescribed under section 5707 of  this
title, the head of the  agency concerned may  prescribe conditions
under which an  individual to whom this section applies may be
reimbursed for the actual and necessary expenses of the trip, not
to exceed an amount named in the travel  authorization, when the
maximum per diem allowance would be much less than these ex-
penses due to the unusual circumstances of the travel assignment.
The amount named  in the travel authorization may not exceed—
       (1)  [$30] $40 for each day in a  travel status inside the
     continental United States; or
       (2)  the maximum per diem, allowance plus [$10] $18 for
     each day  in a  travel status outside the continental  United
     States.
  Seventh  Paragraph under heading  "Administrative Provisions"
in Senate section of Legislative Branch Appropriation Act, 1957
(2 U.S.C. 68b) :
  No part  of the foregoing appropriations made under the head-
ing "Contingent Expenses of the Senate" hereafter may be ex-
pended  for per diem and subsistence expenses (as denned  in the
Travel Expense  Act of 1949, as amended) at rates of  [$16] $25
per day; except  that  (1) higher  rates may be established by the
Committee on Rules  and  Administration for  travel beyond the
limits of the continental United States, and (2) in accordance with
regulations prescribed by the Committee on  Rules and Adminis-
tration  of  the Senate, reimbursement for such expenses may be
made on an actual expense basis of not to exceed [$30] $40 per
day in  the case of travel within the continental limits of the
United States.
                                                        [p. 9]

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY        1941

    1.15d(3)  CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 115 (1969)

1.15d(3)(a)  March 26:  Considered  and  passed House,  pp. 7748-
7752
MAXIMUM  PER DIEM  ALLOWANCE FOR
       GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

  Mr.  PEPPER.  Mr. Speaker,  by
direction of the  Committee on  Rules,
I call  up  House Resolution 337 and
ask for its immediate consideration.
                           [p. 7748]


  The  Clerk  read  the resolution, as
follows:

              R. RES. 837
  Resolved,  That upon the adoption  of this
resolution it shall be in order to move that the
House resolve itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State  of the Union for
the consideration of  the bill (H.R. 337) to in-
crease the maximum rate of per diem allow-
ance  for employees of the Government travel-
ing on official business, and for other purposes.
After general debate, which shall be confined
to the bill and  shall continue  not  to exceed
one hour, to  be equally divided  and controlled
by the chairman and ranking  minority mem-
ber of the Committee on Government Opera-
tions, the  bill shall  be read for amendment
under the five-minute rule.  At  the conclusion
of the consideration of the bill for amendment,
the Committee shall rise and report the bill to
the House with such amendments as may have
been  adopted, and the  previous question shall
be considered as ordered on the hill and amend-
ments thereto to final  passage  without inter-
vening motion except one motion to recommit.

  Mr. PEPPER.  Mr. Speaker, I yield
30 minutes to the able gentleman from
California  (Mr. SMITH), and pending
that I yield myself such time as I may
consume.

  Mr.  Speaker, House Resolution 337
provides an open rule  with 1  hour of
general debate  for consideration  of
H.R. 337  to increase  existing  travel
expenses for  Government employees.
The bill would increase the maximum
per diem allowance within the  United
States  from its present rate of  $16 to
$22 per day.  Thus, where an  agency
or department determines that the ex-
penses are warranted, any amount up
to the maximum may be paid.
  Mr. Speaker, I know that there is a
great  effort  being made to curb ex-
penditures of the Federal Government,
but  I  hope that the  departments or
agencies  for which  an  employee  is
working will grant to that employee
his actual expenses incurred up to the
$22 per day  so that the  employee will
not have  to  bear that additional ex-
pense. I hope the authority will not be
exercised  to reduce this amount be-
cause I think the Federal Government
has  been  making it necessary for
faithful and loyal employees  of this
Government  to  go heavily  into their
savings or  salaries in  order  to pay
their  necessary  traveling  expenses
which they incur on their part.  Even
the $22 a day, with the high  cost of
motel and hotel bills and traveling in
the continental United States is really
not enough for  actual travel expense
within the United  States for Federal
employees, and  I  certainly  hope that
the $22 maximum which under H.R.
337 will not  be reduced  by  the  execu-
tive agencies of the Government.
  When,  due   to  unusual  circum-
stances, the actual expenses of a trip
within the United  States are greater
than the maximum per diem, the em-
ployee's actual and necessary expenses
may be paid up to a present maximum
of $30 per day. H.R. 337  increases this
maximum to $35 per day.
  When  traveling in foreign  coun-
tries, travel expenses are paid on the
basis of a per diem for that country
which  the State  Department  deter-
mines to be adequate.  There are occa-
sions,  however,  when the  per  diem
may  be  exceeded  by  the  expenses.
Presently the law permits  the pay-

-------
1942
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
ment of an  additional $10 above the
per diem  for such  cases  if  accom-
panied by unusual circumstances. The
bill if adopted, would increase the $10
allowance to an additional $15 per day.
  The  legislation makes  the   same
changes in payment of travel expenses
for intermittent employees of the Gov-
ernment, such as  experts and consult-
ants, as have been made for regular
employees. Thus, the maximum per
diem is increased from $16 to $22 per
day and  maximum  actual expenses
within the United States from $30 to
$35 per day  and, outside the  United
States, from the $10 added to the per
diem to $15  added to the per  diem
for the country involved.
  Mr. Speaker, I  think this is legisla-
tion too long delayed by our Govern-
ment  and I  hope this rule will be
adopted so that H.K. 337 may be con-
sidered  and  I hope  adopted by the
House.
  The  SPEAKER.  The Chair recog-
nizes  the  gentleman from  California
(Mr. SMITH).
  Mr.  SMITH  of  California.   Mr.
Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe it is rather
interesting to note that the number on
the resolution, No. 337,  and the bill
which  we will be considering is the
same, H.R. 337.
  Mr.  Speaker, this  resolution  is to
provide a  rule with 1 hour of open de-
bate for  the  consideration  of the bill
H.R. 337,  having  to do with the maxi-
mum per  diem allowance for Govern-
ment employees.
  Mr.  Speaker, the  purpose  of H.R.
337 is to amend current travel expense
legislation for Government employees.
  The per diem allowance is increased
from $16 to  $22 per day.
  The  maximum allowance  on  an
actual expense basis is increased from
$30 to $35 per day.
  Finally, the bill increases the for-
eign travel allowance above the estab-
                   lished per diem from $10 to $15 per
                   day.
                     The estimated cost of the increases
                   contained  in  the  bill,  exclusive  of
                   travel abroad, is $27,000,000. The Bu-
                   reau  of the Budget expects the addi-
                   tional cost to each agency to  be  ab-
                   sorbed.
                     The bill is only slightly  different
                   than  a similar  bill which passed  the
                   House last year but was not acted  on
                   by the Senate.  The difference is an in-
                   crease in the per diem from $20 to $22
                   to reflect  the  approximate  cost  in-
                   crease since  1967 when the last Bu-
                   reau  of the  Budget study was com-
                   pleted.
                     There are  no  minority views.
                     The  administration supports  the
                   bill.
                     Mr. Speaker,  I urge adoption of the
                   rule.
                     Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, I move
                   the previous question on  the  resolu-
                   tion.
                     The previous  question was ordered.
                     The resolution was agreed to.
                     A  motion to reconsider was  laid  on
                   the table.
                     Mr. ROSENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, I
                   move that the  House resolve itself
                   into  the   Committee  of  the  Whole
                   House on  the State of the Union for
                   the consideration  of  the bill  (H.R.
                   337)  to increase the maximum rate of
                   per diem allowance for employees  of
                   the Government traveling on official
                   business, and for other purposes.
                     The SPEAKER. The question is on
                   the motion offered by the gentleman
                   from New York.
                     The motion was agreed  to.

                     IN  THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
                     Accordingly the House  resolved  it-
                   self into the Committee of the Whole
                   House on  the State of the Union for
                   the consideration  of the bill H.R. 337,
                   with  Mr. ANNUNZIO in the chair.
                     The Clerk read the title of the bill.
                     By unanimous   consent, the  first
                   reading of the bill was dispensed with.

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             1943
  The CHAIRMAN.  Under the rule,
the gentleman from New York  (Mr.
ROSENTHAL) will be recognized for 30
minutes, and the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. BROWN)  will  be recognized for
30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from New York (Mr. ROSENTHAL).
  Mr. ROSENTHAL. Mr. Chairman,
I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 337 would  in-
crease the maximum rate of per diem
allowance for civilian employees  of
the Government traveling on official
business. Per diem, as we all know, is
a flat-rate reimbursement which cov-
ers the average cost of subsistence
when   Government   employees  must
travel in carrying out their responsi-
bilities.   This  flat rate covers hotels,
food costs, and certain other expenses.
The present rate is  $16 per day set by
the Congress in 1961. Last  year  we
passed H.R.  13738, raising  the per
diem rate to $20,  but that  bill was
not acted upon by the Senate.
  In summary,  the bill,  as amended
by  the  committee,  raises  the maxi-
mum per diem rate from the present
$16 per day to $22 per day and raises
the maximum  reimbursement for  ac-
tual expenses—only  allowed  in  un-
usual  circumstances—from  $30  per
day to $35.
  When our Government  officials are
traveling in foreign countries, travel
expenses are  paid  on the  basis of a
per diem for that country which the
State  Department sets, but there are
occasions when the per diem may be
exceeded  by actual out-of-pocket ex-
penses. The law now permits the pay-
ment of an additional $10 above the
per diem for such cases  if accom-
panied  by  unusual  circumstances.
H.R. 337 increases this per diem from
$10 to $15 per  day.  The  bill makes
the same changes  in the per  diem
rates and payment of actual expenses
for intermittent employees of the Gov-
ernment, such  as  experts  and con-
sultants, as would be made for regu-
lar employees.
  Other than the increase in the basic
per diem rate to $22 and the elimina-
tion  of certain features of that  bill
affecting judges of the U.S. Court of
Military Appeals  and mobile employ-
ees of the Post Office, the  bill is  the
same as the one  which passed  the
House last year.  The  House-passed
bill  provided for   $20 per  day. H.R.
337,  as introduced in this Congress,
called  for $25  per day, but the com-
mittee agreed with the recommenda-
tions of the Bureau of the Budget that
the figure be set at $22  per day.  The
Bureau  reported  that  its  studies
showed a 10-percent increase in travel
subsistence costs since our hearings of
2  years  ago.  The  Government  em-
ployee unions, however, all supported
the  $25  figure and  submitted their
                           [p, 7749]

own evidence of  the need for  that
maximum.
  This bill, as we present it, is a very
conservative  one and may still be  less
than adequate to meet the expense of
those  Federal  workers  who  must
travel  at the direction of their agen-
cies.  Action  must be taken, however,
to remedy the obvious inequity of the
present $16 per diem.
  The action  of the committee and our
recommendation  that   this  bill   be
passed by the House are based on the
hard statistical  facts of increased  cost
of travel  that  were presented  to us
during our hearings.  They have been
summarized in  our committee report.
The  committe has always  taken  the
position  that Government  employees
should not be expected to pay out of
their own pockets the cost of doing
the Government's work.  Travel is as
necessary to  conducting  our Govern-
ment's business as it is  in private in-
dustry.
  I would direct the attention of my
colleagues to page 3  of the report

-------
1944
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
which indicates the findings of the Bu-
reau of the Budget and the Bureau of
the Census and numerous independent
accounting offices  which shows  that
there has been an increase in the cost
of travel  and the cost  of hotel  and
meals  and other expenses over  and
above what the Bureau of the Budget
reported  in 1967.  All other reports
and investigations by outside agencies
support the figures as provided in this
bill.
  May I  also  state,  Mr.  Chairman,
that our  former colleague, Chairman
Ramspeck testified in support  of  this
bill and he cited his own personal ex-
periences  in  spending   considerably
more than $16 per day in traveling on
official business.
  The  Bureau of the Budget has esti-
mated  that the increase in the maxi-
mum per  diem rates it  recommended
would  add approximately $27  million
to the  annual cost of official travel to
civilian agencies. Since the provisions
of the  reported bill provide lesser in-
creases than those recommended  by
the Bureau, the corresponding added
annual cost should be somewhat lower
than the  above estimate. The Bureau
expects the executive agencies to ab-
sorb the increased costs within avail-
able appropriations.
  Payment of travel expenses such as
hotel, food, and other subsistence costs
to Government employees traveling on
official business is authorized  by the
Travel Expense Act of 1949 and sub-
sequent amendments,  now  codified in
sections 5701 to 5708 of title 5 of the
United States  Code. The  pertinent
provisions  affected by H.R. 337 are
sections 5702 and  5703.  The act pro-
vides maximum amounts  which may
be paid by departments and agencies
and it was not anticipated by the Con-
gress that the maximum would be set
for all travel.  Based on the expected
costs  of  the  particular  travel,  the
agencies  exercise  their discretion to
set rates that in many cases are lower
                   than the maximum.  Overall policies
                   and regulations are made by the Bu-
                   reau of the Budget.
                     Section  1  of  the bill, as  amended,
                   raises the maximum  per diem within
                   the United  States from the present
                   $16 to $22 per day.   Thus, where a
                   department or agency determines that
                   the expenses to be incurred warrant
                   it, any  amount up to  the  maximum
                   may be paid.
                     Per diem  is the customary way  of
                   paying travel expenses but the law
                   provides  that when the  actual  ex-
                   penses of a trip  within the  United
                   States are greater than the maximum
                   per diem due to the unusual circum-
                   stances of the travel assignment, the
                   employee's  actual  and  necessary ex-
                   penses may be  paid  up to a present
                   maximum of $30 per day. Thus, when
                   the  unusual  circumstances  of  the
                   travel  or conditions at  the  destina-
                   tion result  in costs  to the  employee
                   that exceed  the per diem, he may  be
                   paid his specific out-of-pocket expenses
                   up to $30 per day. The bill increases
                   this maximum to $35 per day.
                     When traveling in foreign countries,
                   travel expenses are paid on the basis
                   of a per diem for  that country which
                   the State Department determines is
                   adequate.   But  there  are  occasions
                   when the per diem may be exceeded
                   by the expenses.   The  law  now per-
                   mits the payment of an additional $10
                   above the per diem for such cases if
                   accompanied  by  unusual  circum-
                   stances.  This bill increases the $10
                   to an additional $15  per day.
                     Section 2 makes the same changes
                   in payment  of travel expenses for in-
                   termittent employees of the Govern-
                   ment such as experts and consultants
                   as have  been made for the regular
                   employees  by section  1.  Thus,  the
                   maximum per diem they may be paid
                   is increased from $16 to $22 per day.
                   Maximum actual expenses within the
                   United States are increased from $30
                   to $35  per day and,  outside of the

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             1945
United  States, from the $10 added to
the per diem to $15 added to the per
diem for the country involved.
  Sections 3 and 4 have been deleted
from the bill.
  Mr. Chairman, the passage of this
bill, in  my judgment, is a matter of
simple  justice  and  fairness  to our
dedicated  and  hardworking  Govern-
ment employees. In many, many cases
and perhaps  in the majority of cases,
these employees, while traveling on
official  business,  have had  to  spend
personal funds beyond  the per diem
allotment  of $16 per day.
  Mr. Chairman, I hope the  bill will
be  overwhelmingly   passed  by the
House today.
  Mr. BETTS.   Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROSENTHAL.  I yield  to the
gentleman.
  Mr. BETTS.   I wonder if the gen-
tleman  would explain the difference
between Government employees  and
others  as  is  set  forth in the second
section  and why there has to be a dis-
crepancy in the maximum allowances?
  Mr. ROSENTHAL. Yes; section 1
of the  bill provides  the regular per
diem of Government employees  and
raises the per diem  from $16 to $22
and  from  $30 to $35 under  unusual
circumstances.  All of this was  docu-
mented  by actual experience by the
commission.
  Section  2 of  the bill applies  to in-
termittent employees such as experts
and consultants. I might suggest that,
while we fix a  maximum  of  $22 per
day, each  agency will establish regu-
lations  for its  own  travel and may
well fix  some lower amount if appro-
priate.
  Mr. BETTS.  I was just wondering
why there  should be a difference so
far as  these  travelers are concerned
under section 2  and the Government
employees?  The  only  thing  I  can
think of is that  section 5712  of the
code should be appropriately amended
to follow this procedure.
  Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROSENTHAL.  I am happy to
yield to the gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. HALL. I appreciate the gentle-
man yielding.
  I  wanted  a  point  of  information,
and I want it understood crystally
clear that I  believe all of those who
travel on  official business  should have
a better per diem rate as we of the
Congress  who travel  on  official  busi-
ness on rare occasions, perhaps once
a month back and forth to our homes.
But pertaining to  the   gentleman's
comments about the  Bureau  of the
Budget  estimates, is it not  true that
the estimate made increase above or
below the $27  million because  they
estimated that there  were  9  million
man-days of travel each  year by  all
classes of Federal employees, if I may
use that term loosely,  and that if we
increased  the maximum per diem  al-
lowance by  $6,  as I understand this
bill provides, it would cost $54 mil-
lion.  However, the  Bureau  of the
Budget  estimates that only 50 per-
cent of those who drew per diems last
year spent more than the  present $16
per day maximum, while the other 50
percent  were spending something less
than 60 percent. So that they  figured
that on  the average  the employees
would qualify only for a $3 increase,
or a  total of $27 million.  Does the
gentleman have any idea about how
this  $27 million of additional  cost in
this  time of approaching  austerity
would hold up  under  the  sections  of
the  bill?
  Mr. ROSENTHAL.  The gentleman
is  correct in what  he has  reported,
and I appreciate his comment and his
support.   The Director of the Bureau
of the Budget  suggested that their
budget was  $27 million, and in  view
of the fact that we  made  a  reduction
in  their proposal, it would  be some-
thing less than that.   They  also sug-
gested it was not possible  to make an
accurate and precise projection.  This

-------
1946
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
was their best estimate and they an-
ticipated  the  agencies  could  absorb
this increase within the existing ap-
propriation. The Director of the Bu-
reau of the Budget did not go beyond
that.
  Mr. HALL.  I thank the gentleman.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio.  Mr. Chair-
man, I  yield  myself  such  time as I
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of
H.R. 337, a bill to increase the maxi-
mum rate  of per diem  allowance for
employees  of the Government travel-
ing on official  business.
  Sections 1  and  2  of the  bill  as
amended by the committee would  in-
crease the  maximum rate of per diem
allowance for travel  within the con-
tiguous  48 States  and the District of
Columbia from $16 to $22, or  a 37y2-
percent   increase,  and  it would  in-
crease the maximum allowance for re-
imbursement   on an  actual  expense
basis for such travel  from $30 to $35
per day, or 16% percent.
                          [p. 7750]

  For travel outside the contiguous 48
States and the District of Columbia,
the bill  would increase the maximum
allowance for  travel on an  actual ex-
pense basis from $10 plus  the estab-
lished maximum per diem rate to $15
plus the  established  maximum  per
diem rate.
  Sections  3  and  4,  as noted,  were
stricken from  the bill.
  Section 3 was stricken because it
would amend section  3581 (d)  of title
39,  United States Code, and  thus is
properly within the jurisdiction of the
Post Office and  Civil Service Com-
mittee.
  Section 4 was stricken because it
would  amend  section 867 (a) (1)  of
title 10,  United  States Code,  thus
coming  properly within  the jurisdic-
tion of  the Armed Services Commit-
                   tee.  Moreover, the provisions of sec-
                   tion 4 have already been enacted as a
                   part of Public Law 90-340.
                     There was  complete  agreement in
                   the subcommitte  with  the  need  to
                   raise  allowances to keep  pace  with
                   rising travel costs, and it was felt that
                   the allowances proposed in sections 1
                   and 2 of the bill were appropriate.
                     The percentage  increase, 37% per-
                   cent, from $16 to $22, for unlisted ex-
                   penses, may seem large, but it must
                   be remembered  that 8 years  have
                   elapsed since the act was last amend-
                   ed, and the proposed changes do  no
                   more than reflect the present costs of
                   travel. As a  matter of fact, in the
                   testimony—and  this  relates to  the
                   questions asked by the gentleman from
                   Missouri (Mr. HALL)—in the testi-
                   mony that was presented to the com-
                   mittee it was noted that in the spring
                   of 1967 a survey was conducted by the
                   Bureau  of the Budget in  which they
                   requested 18  principal Federal agen-
                   cies  for  information on  subsistence
                   costs  representing over  12,000 em-
                   ployee travel experiences covering  al-
                   most 64,000 man-days of travel.
                     An  analysis of  these data showed
                   6,171 travel experiences, 51.3 percent
                   of the  total,  where  subsistence costs
                   exceeded $16  per day, the average of
                   these being $19.21.  On this basis, the
                   Bureau recommended to the Congress
                   a national per diem of $20 in lieu of
                   subsistence expenses last year. I pre-
                   sume that the $27 million estimate was
                   based on this 51 percent of maximum
                   as exposed by this survey, and that it
                   was assumed  50  percent of the poten-
                   tial $54 million would bring it to $27
                   million.
                     Mr. HALL.  Mr. Chairman, will the
                   gentleman yield?
                     Mr. BROWN  of  Ohio.  Mr. Chair-
                   man, I yield to  the gentleman from
                   Missouri.
                     Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman,  I be-
                   lieve that  the gentleman's statement
                   is correct, except for the fact that the

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              1947
Bureau of the Budget estimates that
even  if  the per  diem  ceiling were
raised $6, as proposed,  only  50 per-
cent,  or perhaps  less,  of those em-
ployees drawing per diem would  get
the maximum,  and that  50 percent is
why they reduced  it to $27 million.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chair-
man,  I think that is correct.  I think
there is  also the  possibility that  be-
cause this money  is going to  have to
be  taken out  of  presently available
funds, there may be some reduction
in travel, because of the  increased  per
diem  allowance, that might otherwise
have  been authorized.
  Mr. HALL.  Mr. Chairman, as long
as  we have interrupted the  gentle-
man's remarks, will  the gentleman
yield  further?
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio.  I yield to the
gentleman from Missouri.
  Mr. HALL.  Mr. Chairman, I just
wonder—and as I  stated in my first
question  to the gentleman from New
York, I seek equity—I certainly do not
want  any of our  employees   paying
money out  of  their  pockets  for  ex-
penses while traveling on official busi-
ness.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. That has
been done on a. number of occasions.
  Mr. HALL. I understand that from
the committee's well-written report.
  Mr. Chairman, first of all, does this
apply to members of the  executive
branch while traveling on official busi-
ness?
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio.  It applies to
all Government employees who are au-
thorized  to travel  on official business
in this way.
  Mr. HALL.  It is applicable to the
judicial  and legislative  branches  as
well as the executive branch?
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio.  No.  My un-
derstanding  is  that it will be prob-
ably the  executive alone, but perhaps
the gentleman from New York can as-
sist me in that  regard.
  Mr. Hall.  Mr. Chairman, that was
my understanding in April last year
when we passed the previous bill.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio.  It also cov-
ers the quasi-legislative bodies of  the
executive agencies.
  Mr. HALL.  There was for travel
an  increase in  the  travel budget  of
fiscal year 1969 over 1968 a total of
$2,050,000,000.   Does  the gentleman
know what the figure is in the antici-
pated 1970 budget,  and is it provided
for?
  Mr. BROWN of  Ohio.  I  do  not
know the figure in  the  1970  budget.
The anticipation was that this legisla-
tion would have no significant effect
on the budget figure in the 1970 budg-
et, again for the reason that the agen-
cies would be required to live within
the previous request they had made in
preparation of that budget, and that
only  on the  occasion  of absolutely
necessary overspending,  where they
would be obliged to come back and ask
for  additional  funds,  would  those
funds be considered.
  Mr.  HALL.  Mr.  Chairman, if  the
gentleman will yield for a final ques-
tion, what I am trying  to  get at is
whether this is a cost of travel of cost
of living or inflationary increase in or-
der to  keep  up with  the actual  ex-
penditures  or whether there  is poor
travel discipline in the agencies of the
executive branch, and did the gentle-
man's committee go into this problem?
  Mr.  BROWN of Ohio.  The gentle-
man's  committe did  not go into this
problem as to whether the travel  ex-
penditures generally had been  author-
ized with circumspection by the vari-
ous agencies.
  This  legislation,   however,  relates
not to  whether or  not the agencies
have  been  circumspect,  but  as   to
whether or  not Federal  employees
traveling on per diem allowances were
being compensated for the actual ex-
penses incurred. In  other words, the
recommendations here relate only  to
the  cost-of-living increase or the cost-

-------
1948
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
of-travel  increase, maybe  I  should
say, in the per diem that has occurred
since  the last authorization by this
committee.
  Mr.  HALL.  Of course  it follows,
therefore,  that  unless  some circum-
spection  or oversight or surveillance
is exercised on necessary travel, if we
recompense  completely for   travel,
there  might not be the  restriction on
unneeded travel, which would  other-
wise occur.
  I am  still not  recommending that
those  who  travel in  the  executive
branch on necessary  business  be re-
stricted or be underpaid; but just as
in communications there must be some
discipline exercised to  see that un-
necessary messages are not sent, the
same is true with respect to travel in
the executive branch.  If it gets to be
over $2,050 million as an item  in the
executive budget per year,  it  is cer-
tainly worth oversight.
  Mr. BROWN  of Ohio.  Since these
increased individual  allowances will
come out of the  requested budgets for
1970 rather than creating an increase
in those budgets,  it  is assumed, at
least for this first year, that any un-
necessary travel will be spotlighted,
because  the  agencies  may  be hard
pressed  to  fit their  travel  require-
ments  into  the  requested budget, in
view of the fact that they made their
requested budgets on the basis  of $16
per day rather than $22 per day.
  To continue with my statement in
explanation of the various aspects of
this legislation:
  Finally, for travel outside the con-
tinental United  States,  the bill would
increase  the maximum  allowable per
day on an actual  expense basis from
$10 to $15 above the normal per diem
rate for  the locality  involved.  The
Bureau of the Budget had recommend-
ed an increase to $18  a  day above the
per diem.
  Rates  set for travel  to States and
U.S. possessions outside the continen-
                   tal United States are established by
                   the Secretary  of  Defense,  and they
                   are established by the  Secretary of
                   State for travel to foreign  countries.
                     While the figures agreed to in com-
                   mittee were  not everything the em-
                   ployee representatives asked for, they
                   appear  adequate on the  basis of sta-
                   tistics furnished the committee. More-
                   over, the more modest proposals of the
                   committee assure a greater  likelihood
                   of congressional approval and hence
                   are more meaningful to  the Govern-
                   ment  employee.
                     In shaping the bill to its  maximum
                   acceptability the  committee resisted
                   urgings for an amendment that would
                   ask agencies to encourage their pro-
                   fessional employees to travel first on
                   airplanes.  The committee   was not
                   persuaded by the argument  that such
                   a  fringe benefit would  be helpful in
                   retaining the  best people in Govern-
                   ment.
                     The committee rather felt perhaps
                   we should keep some people in Gov-
                   ernment who are economy minded.
                     The annual additional cost of official
                   travel to civilian  agencies  should be
                   somewhat less than  the  $27 million
                   estimated by the Bureau of the Budg-
                   et.  The Bureau estimate was based on
                   the figures which it recommended and
                   which  were  somewhat  higher  than
                   those  agreed upon by the committee.
                   The  Bureau  expects the  executive
                   agencies to absorb the increased costs
                   within  available appropriations.  In
                   some agencies it will have to come out
                                              [p. 7751]

                   of substantive programs,  but in some
                   agencies it will come just out of the
                   standard  salaries  and  expenditures
                   type of appropriation.
                     We feel that the increases are fully
                   justified, if a  bit on the conservative
                   side.  But in  the face of the Nation's
                   economy and the concern for our Fed-
                   eral deficits and our Federal budget
                   this year, such conservatism appears

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             1949
fully  justified in the interest of the
taxpayers. There will still be cases in
high-cost areas where Government em-
ployees may have to pay  a part of
their  travel expenses out of their own
pockets.  This is to be regretted and
avoided where possible.
  The legislation represents, however,
a  reasonable  compromise  between
equity and economy.
  The CHAIRMAN.  The  gentleman
from  Ohio has consumed 12  minutes.
  Mr. BROWN  of Ohio.  Mr. Chair-
man,  I yield 2 minutes to the gentle-
man from Illinois (Mr. ERLENBORN).
  Mr. ERLENBORN. Mr.  Chairman,
I thank the gentleman from Ohio for
yielding.
  I want to compliment  the gentle-
man from New  York, the  sponsor of
the bill;  the gentleman from Minne-
sota,  the chairman of our subcommit-
tee;  and  the gentleman from  Ohio,
who  is handling the bill for the mi-
nority; on what I  consider  to  be a
good  compromise that has  led to the
consideration of H.R. 337.
  I hope this bill passes in this form,
because it  will grant more equity to
Federal employees required to travel
on business.
  Mr.  Chairman, this does represent
a compromise.  The  gentleman  from
New  York, its  sponsor,  I am  sure,
would like to have some higher figures
in here.  The Bureau of the Budget
did recommend some  higher figures in
some  instances. They had $40 here as
actual reimbursement,  whereas  the
committee  recommended  and the bill
contains $35.
  I hope that the other body will act
with dispatch this year, in contrast to
their lack of action last year, because
it is not at all fair to require Federal
employees when traveling to cover any
part  of their expense from their own
pockets.  They should be  reimbursed
for their actual expenses.
  Testimony before our subcommittee
was clear and uncontroverted that in-
creases in travel cost, in hotel rooms
and meals, make the present $16 per
day allowance no longer fair.  We be-
lieve a maximum of $22 will consti-
tute a fair reimbursement for the cost
of per diem travel.
  Mr.  FINDLEY.  Mr.   Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ERLENBORN.  I yield to my
colleague from Illinois.
  Mr. FINDLEY. Mr.  Chairman, as
a new member of the subcommittee, I
would like to express my support for
this legislation and also to congratu-
late the leadership on  both  sides of
the aisle on a job well done.
  Mr. BROYHILL of Virginia.  Mr.
Chairman, I  rise in support of H.R.
337, to increase the maximum rate of
per  diem  allowance for employees of
the  Government  traveling  on official
business.
  Anyone who has traveled within the
past  few  years knows  that  $16 per
day is  woefully inadequate to cover
the expenses  of food and  lodging in
most parts of this Nation.  I believe
an increase to $22 per day is the mini-
mum we can  do to make certain that
our  Federal  employees, traveling  on
the Nation's business, are  not forced
to pay from their own wages a sizable
part of the expenses they incur.
  During  the   90th  Congress, Mr.
Chairman, we acknowledged the fact
that $16 per day was insufficient to
cover  expenses of  travel, and we
passed H.R. 13738, which would have
increased the amount to $20 per day.
Unfortunately, the Senate  failed  to
act.  Two years ago, in considering the
legislation, we were told that the Bu-
reau of the Budget had determined af-
ter  extensive  study  that  the actual
average total  daily subsistence  for
travelers in 1967 was $19.56.  Today,
2 years of continuing  inflation  have
again increased the figure, and I am
convinced that $22 per day is  at best
merely adequate.
  Provision also needs to be made for

-------
 1950
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
the  unusual  situation  when an  em-
ployee  incurs out-of-pocket expenses
greatly in excess of normal per diem,
for   reimbursement  of   a  greater
amount than the $30  per day present
maximum. This amount, too, is raised
in H.R. 337 to $35 per day, and again
I believe this is the minimum we can
do to assist employees faced with such
emergencies.
  All in all, Mr. Chairman, I believe
this bill is long overdue, and should be
acted upon favorably, not only by the
members of this House but by our col-
leagues in the  Senate as well, at the
earliest practicable date, Mr.  Chair-
man, I urge  passage of this legisla-
tion.
  Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr.  Chair-
man, I have  no further requests for
time, and  I yield back the balance of
my time.
  Mr. ROSENTHAL.  Mr. Chairman,
I have no further requests for  time
and yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN.  There being no
further requests  for  time,  the  Clerk
will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

  Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of Amer-
ica in Congress assembled, That section 5702 of
title  5, United  States Code, is  amended by
striking out "$16" and inserting in lieu thereof
"$25," by striking out "$30" and inserting in
lieu thereof "$35," and by striking out  "$10"
and inserting in lieu thereof "$16."
  SEC. 2. Section 6703 of title 6, United States
Code, is amended  by  striking out "$16" and
inserting in lieu thereof "$20," by striking out
"$30" and inserting in lien thereof "$35," and
by striking  out "$10" and  inserting in lieu
thereof "$15."
  SEC. 3. Section 3581 (d)  of title 39, United
States Code,  is amended by striking out  "$9"
and inserting in lieu thereof "$15."
  SEC. 4. The last sentence of section 867(a)
(1) of title 10, United States Code, is amended
to read as follows: "Upon his certificate, each
judge, while attending court, or transacting
official business outside the District of Colum-
                    bia, is entitled to be paid all necessary travel-
                    ing expenses and allowances as provided  for
                    each  Justice or judge of the  United States
                    under section 456 of title 28."

                      With   the   following   committee
                    amendments:
                     Page 1, line  4, strike out "$26"  and insert
                    "$22."
                     Page 1, line 10, strike out "$20"  and insert
                    "$22."
                     Page 2, strike out lines 2 through 12.

                      The CHAIRMAN.  Under  the rule,
                    the Committee rises.
                      Accordingly  the  Committee  rose;
                    and  the Speaker having resumed  the
                    chair,  Mr. ANNUNZIO,  Chairman  of
                    the Committee of the Whole House on
                    the State  of  the Union, reported that
                    that Committee  having had under con-
                    sideration the bill  (H.R.  337) to in-
                    crease the maximum rate  of  per diem
                    allowance for employees of  the Gov-
                    ernment traveling on  official  business,
                    and  for other purposes, pursuant to
                    House Resolution 337, he reported the
                    bill back  to  the House with sundry
                    amendments  adopted by the  Commit-
                    tee of the Whole.
                      The SPEAKER.   Under  the rule,
                    the previous  question  is ordered.
                      Is a separate vote demanded on any
                    amendment?   If not,  the  Chair will
                    put them  en  gros.
                      The  amendments  were agreed to.
                      The  SPEAKER.   The  question is
                    on the engrossment and third reading
                    of  the bill.
                      The bill was ordered to be engrossed
                    and read  a third time, and was read
                    the third time.
                      The SPEAKER.  The question is on
                    the passage of the bill.
                      The bill was passed.
                      A  motion to reconsider was laid on
                    the table.
                                               [p. 7752]

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             1951
 1.15d(3)(b)   Oct.  8:  Amended and passed  Senate, p. 29042
 INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM RATE  OF
  PER  DIEM ALLOWANCE FOR GOVERN-
  MENT  EMPLOYEES TRAVELING ON OF-
  FICIAL BUSINESS
  Mr.  MANSFIELD.  Mr.  President,
 I ask unanimous consent that the Sen-
 ate  proceed  to  the consideration  of
 Calendar No. 446, H.R. 337.
  The  PRESIDING OFFICER.  The
 bill will be stated for the information
 of the  Senate.
  The  ASSISTANT LEGISLATIVE CLERK.
 A bill  (H.R. 337) to increase the max-
 imum  rate of per diem allowance for
 employees of the  Government travel-
 ing on official business, and for  other
 purposes.
  The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.   Is
 there objection to the request of the
 Senator from Montana?
  There  being no objection, the  Sen-
 ate  proceeded  to  consider the  bill,
 which  had  been  reported  from  the
 Committee on Government Operations,
 with amendments, on  page 1, line 4,
 after the word  "thereof", strike  out
 '"$22"'  and insert "'$25'";  at  the
 beginning of line 6, strike out " '$35' "
 and insert " '$40' "; in line 7, after the
word "thereof", strike out " '$15' " and
 insert  "'$18'";  at the beginning  of
line  10, strike out " '22'"  and insert
"'$25'"; on page 2, line 1, after the
word "thereof", strike out " '$35' " and
insert  "'$40'";  in line  2,  after  the
word "thereof",  strike  out '"$15"'
and insert "'$18'"; and after line 2,
insert a new section, as follows:

  SEC. 3. The seventh paragraph under the
heading  "Administrative Provisions"  in  the
Senate section  of the  Legislative Branch  Ap-
propriation  Act, 1957 (2 U.S.C. 68b),  is
amended by striking out "$16" and inserting
in lieu  thereof "$25"; and by  striking out
"$30". and inserting in lieu thereof "$40".
  Mr. MANSFIELD.  Mr. President,
I ask unanimous consent that the com-
mittee amendments be considered en
bloc.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out  objection,  the amendments are
considered and agreed to en bloc.
  The bill is open to  further amend-
ment.  If there be no  further amend-
ment to  be proposed,  the question  is
on  the  engrossment   of the  amend-
ments and  the third  reading of the
bill.
  The amendments were ordered to be
engrossed, and the bill to be read a
third time.
  The bill was read the third time and
passed.
  Mr. HARRIS  subsequently  said:
Mr.  President, I am  happy to note
that  the Senate has passed  today,
unanimously,  H.R. 337,  which pro-
vides for an increase in the maximum
rate of  per diem allowance  for em-
ployees  of  the  Federal Government
traveling on  official   business.   The
Government Operations Committee, of
which I  am a  member, amended H.R.
337 to increase the maximum rate of
per diem allowance from $22 per day
as passed by the House to $25 as pro-
posed in  my bill on this same subject,
S. 820.  This  increase, of course,  is
long overdue, because it is not possible
at today's prices for Government em-
ployees traveling on official business to
meet  their  expenses  at the present
figure of $16 per diem. I feel that the
increase  to a maximum of $25 per day
as recommended by the Senate  Com-
mittee is fully  justifiable, and  I cer-
tainly hope that the House will accept
H.R. 337 as enacted  by the Senate.
Thank you.
                         [p. 29042]

-------
1952
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
1.15d(3)(c)  Oct.  30:  House  concurs  in   Senate  amendments,
pp. 32423-32425
  Mr. BLATNIK. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's desk the bill (H.R. 337) to
increase  the  maximum  rate of  per
diem allowance for employees of the
Government traveling on official busi-
ness,  and  for other purposes,  with
Senate amendments thereto,  and con-
cur in the Senate amendments.
  The Clerk read the title  of the bill.
  The Clerk read the Senate amend-
ment, as  follows:

  Page 1,  line 4, strike out " "$22"," and in-
sert " "$26",".
  Page 1,  line 6, strike out " "$36"," and in-
sert " "$40",".
  Page 1,  line 7, strike out " "$15"." and in-
sert " "$18".".
  Page 1,  line 10, strike out " "$22"," and in-
sert " "$26",".
  Page 2,  line 1, strike out " "$35"," and in-
sert " "$40",".
  Page 2,  line 2, strike out " "$16"." and in-
sert " "$18"."
  Page 2,  after line 2, insert:
  "SEC. 3.  The seventh paragraph under  the
heading "Administrative  Provisions" in  the
Senate section of the Legislative Branch Ap-
propriation Act,  1957  (2 U.S.C. 68b), ia
amended by striking out "$16"  and inserting
in lieu  thereof  "$26", and by striking  out
"$30", and inserting in lieu thereof "$40"."

  Mr. BLATNIK (during the read-
ing).  Mr.  Speaker,  I  ask  unanimous
consent  that  further reading  of the
Senate amendments be dispensed with
and that  they  be   printed  in  the
RECORD.
  The SPEAKER. Is there  objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Minnesota?
  Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, reserving
the right to object, I am not  sure just
exactly   to which unanimous-consent
request  I am making a reservation;
but, be that  as it may, whether  it is
for immediate consideration of  the
Senate amendments  or  whether  the
statement of the managers  on the part
of the House  are to be considered as
read,  I   believe we ought  to have a
                   little  time for an  explanation of this
                   request on the part of all Members.
                   This is in order to give our silent con-
                   sent  to  the  Senate  amendments  to
                   H.  R. 337 which as I understand  it,
                   by courtesy of previous furnishing of
                   information by the gentleman  from
                   Minnesota, has been increased.
                     I wonder, Mr. Speaker,  if the gen-
                   tleman would  explain  the  differential
                   between the House-passed act and the
                   Senate amendments?
                     Mr. BLATNIK.  Mr. Speaker,  if the
                   gentleman will yield, I shall be pleased
                   to do  so.  The  unanimous-consent re-
                   quest was for the further reading of
                   the  Senate  amendments  to  be dis-
                   pensed with and that they be printed
                   in the RECORD.  If  we can  agree  to
                   that,  then I shall  proceed with a dis-
                   cussion of them.
                     The SPEAKER.   The  gentleman
                   from  Missouri has reserved the right
                   to object and has asked for an expla-
                   nation of the Senate amendments.
                     Mr. HALL.   Mr. Speaker,  I will
                   continue  the reservation but I yield to
                   the gentleman from  Minnesota for an
                   explanation at this time.
                     Mr. BLATNIK.  I thank the gen-
                   tleman from Missouri.
                     Mr. Speaker,  H.R. 337  which was
                   passed by  the House on  March 26,
                   raised somewhat the per diem cost al-
                   lowance  for  Government  employees
                   while on official business.
                     The basis of the cost estimates were
                   a study  made by  the  Bureau of the
                   Budget in 1967. Now, this was before
                   us last March when we acted on this
                   bill. However,  when the bill got over
                   to the other body  they decided to up-
                   date the  cost data and base  it on the
                   figures for  1969  subsistence  costs.
                   Thus they had a more  current picture
                   of the expenses involved and the Sen-
                   ate committee came  up with these in-
                   creases to the House bill.

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             1953
   We  do  have a detailed breakdown,
 item by item, as to the  average  food
 cost and as to the average hotel and
 motel rates for 14 major cities and 19
 smaller cities.  The average is about
 $12.30. On the  food cost, based on a
 survey of 400 hotels throughout  the
 Nation, they reported a daily average
 of $9.24.  When you add to these fig-
 ures the percentage for hotel and mo-
 tel rates  and the average restaurant
 price of an increase of 6.2 percent in
 1969 as reflected in the consumer price
 index compiled by the Bureau of  La-
 bor Statistics, the  total comes up to
 $13.26 for lodging and $9.82 for food,
 making the combined cost $23.08 for
 board and room.
   These are  very hard figures, based
 on authoritative sources.
   Mr.  HALL. Mr.  Speaker, does  the
 gentlemen plan to insert this material
 into the RECORD?
   Mr.  BLATNIK. The full  statement
 will be inserted  in the RECORD at this
 point.
   Mr.  HALL. I  thank the gentleman.
  Mr.  Speaker,  as I understand  the
 information  provided  by the distin-
 guished gentleman  from Minnesota,
 there will be a $3 increase in the  per
 diem rate for full-time employees over
 what the House passed, and  second, as
 I understand it,  Mr. Speaker, there is
 a $5 increase for the actual expenses
 allowed over that  which passed  the
 House  on  March 26 of this  year, but
                          [p. 32423]

 based  on  the 1967 cost-of-Iiving fig-
 ures?
  Mr.  BLATNIK. That is correct.
  Mr. HALL. And, third, there is an
 increase in the amount of employees
 traveling  in  foreign countries of $3
 more than that passed by the House?
  Mr. BLATNIK. That is correct.
  Mr. HALL. Mr. Speaker, it is  my
considered opinion  that perhaps  we
have been taking money out of the
pockets, or the regular pay  checks of
the people whom  we  are  forcing to
travel and live  away  from home on
official Government business albeit ex-
cessive. I believe, as a matter of fact,
I was in  favor of the House-passed
rate,  and  in  view of the  explanation
of  the gentleman  from  Minnesota
about the different cost of living ex-
pense figures I  believe I  would have
no objection  to these three.
  I understand  there  is another sec-
tion in the Senate amendments which
makes adjustments  for part-time or
intermittent  employees when  travel-
ing on  official business.  I presume
these  are  some  of these  $100  a day
per diem  people,  and what is  this?
Their living  and actual out-of-pocket
expenses in addition to their income,
or does the gentleman have informa-
tion on that?
  Mr. BLATNIK. Yes.  That is sec-
tion 2, and that is for the  part-time
or intermittent employees such  as the
consultants the gentleman referred to.
The rates would apply to them  as to
the regular full-time employees of the
Federal Government.
  Mr. HALL.  Would this  apply to
some  of those who have been set up in
some  of these consultation laboratories
like Livermore or Rand Corp., or other
means  for  obtaining high-salaried
part-time  consultants?
  Mr. BLATNIK.  Only  if they are
employees of  the Federal Government.
This  just  pertains to  their  per diem
for those   occasions  while  they are
traveling in the  country or elsewhere.
  Mr. HALL.  Finally, Mr. Speaker,
this would apply to those who have
contracts  with  the  Government for
performance of duties under grants or
contracts, or even scholarships; is that
correct?
  But if it were, then this overall gen-
eral rule would not be applicable?
  Mr. BLATNIK.  It would  not  be
applicable.
  Mr. HALL.  Mr.  Speaker, I  have
one more inquiry: I notice that  a sec-

-------
 1954
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
tion  3 was added by the  other body
which purports to make the same ad-
justment for that body's Members and
employees,  the same  adjustments  as
what?  The same adjustments as  the
House-passed bill, or what?
  Mr. BLATNIK.  They raised theii
per diem, they applied our per diem
and lodging and other expenses rela-
tive to Government employees and in-
termittent employees, and  they apply
those rates also to  their Senate em-
ployees, because they have jurisdiction
over their  Senate  employees  and  no
jurisdiction over the employees on this
side.
  Mr. HALL.  This  was agreed to by
the conference out  of comity to  the
other body, I presume?
  Mr. BLATNIK. The other body has
the right to set the  per diem for its
own  employees.
  Mr. HALL.  Mr. Speaker, I can only
say I hope we are  a little bit more
tidy  in our  own  housekeeping  and
with our own  employees.
  Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker,  will the
gentleman yield?
  Mr. HALL.  I yield to  the  gentle-
man from Iowa.
  Mr. GROSS. Do I understand  that
there was an increase for  those trav-
eling overseas?
  Mr. BLATNIK. Yes.
  Mr. GROSS. But not in proportion
to the  increase to those traveling  in
this country?
  Mr.  BLATNIK.  It was  a small
proportion except the maximum limit
of the increase before the  House was
$15 a day and the Senate was $18 a
day.
  This is an increase in the maximum
additional amount depending upon the
circumstances  of the country in which
the person or the employee  may  be
traveling.
  Mr. GROSS.  Does this mean—I ask
the question in view of the fact  that
we are going to have another foreign
handout bill before  the House one  of
                   these days soon—that inflation in for-
                   eign countries has not been as severe
                   as it has been here?  What is the rea-
                   son that the increase was not in the
                   same ratio as in this country?
                    Mr. GROSS. I learned recently of a
                   $260  a day consultant in  the foreign
                   aid outfit.  Would he  get  expenses to
                   go  along  with the $260 a day—does
                   the gentleman have any idea?
                    Mr. BLATNIK.  It would depend on
                   the basis on which he was  hired.  Nor-
                   mally there is no provision for travel
                   and subsistence expenses  in his  orig-
                   inal contract or agreement, then this
                   would apply to the consultant. These
                   are the maximums—it does not say it
                   will have to be paid, it merely says the
                   Secretary  of State, authorizing the
                   administrator or the agency could go
                   up  to that limit if the expenses of the
                   particular mission justified it.
                    Mr. GROSS. Would the gentleman
                   agree with me that if a consultant was
                   paid $260 a day, it would  be outland-
                   ish to then give him expense money.
                    Mr. BLATNIK. Absolutely, I would
                   agree with that. But I do  not know if
                   he were hired, it would be that  high.
                    Mr. ERLENBORN.  Mr. Speaker,
                   will the gentleman yield?
                    Mr. HALL.  I  yield to  the gentle-
                   man from  Illinois.
                    Mr. ERLENBORN.  Mr. Speaker, I
                   would like to point out that allowances
                   for actual expenses—both for domes-
                   tic  and foreign travel—in the bill, as
                   passed by  the House, were below the
                   recommendations  of  the  Bureau  of
                   the Budget.
                    It may have been a conscious effort
                   on  the part  of the managers on the
                   bill in the House to have this lower
                   than the Bureau of the Budget recom-
                   mendations with the almost certainty
                   that  the  other body  would  increase
                   these items.  As increased, these items
                   are in line with the recommendations
                   of the Bureau of the Budget.
                    The only  item above the Bureau
                   recommendation is the $25 per  diem

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             1955
item  which was $22  in  the  House-
passed bill.
  I would point out that $25 per diem
is the same  as  is  allowed to  House
Members or employees.
  I think these  items, as in the bill
passed by the other body, are reason-
able and I support  the motion  of the
gentleman  from Minnesota to concur
in the Senate amendments.
  Mr. BLATNIK.  I thank the gentle-
man.
  Mr. HAYS.  Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
  Mr. HALL. I yield to the  gentle-
man.
  Mr. HAYS. I just want to say in
regard to what  the gentleman  from
Iowa  said with reference  to the $260
a day contract that that  was  $260 a
day plus a per diem, and the AID and
other agencies apparently have the
power so  far as they  can achieve  it
through  the  usual  signed contract
with  these  so-called   experts,  any
amount that  comes into  their head.
There is no limit on the amount they
can pay per diem.
  The limit on the per  diem, I happen
to think the per  diems  in this bill are
too low. If you go to any decent hotel
in this country or abroad and get a
small room with bath,  you are going
to pay more for the room than we are
allowing  for  everything.  But  under
the $260-a-day bid  that was for their
so-called services, whatever they were.
  Mr. GROSS. I would assume that
the best way  to get at situations of
this kind is to end this business of a
foreign handout  program, and  I  sin-
cerely hope that  I may have the help
of the gentleman from Ohio to that
end when the bill comes on the floor
in a week or so.
  Mr. HAYS. You  are going to have
the help of the gentleman, but I do not
think  it is going to be  enough, unfor-
tunately.
  Mr. HALL.  Mr. Speaker, I appreci-
ate the  remarks of  the gentleman
from Minnesota, and  the  gentleman
from Illinois, and others, as far as the
Senate  amendments  to H.R. 337 are
concerned.  I withdraw by reservation
of objection.
  The  SPEAKER.  Is  there objection
to the  request of the gentleman  from
Minnesota  that  further  reading  of
the Senate amendments be  dispensed
with?
  There was no objection.
  The  SPEAKER.  Is  there objection
to the  request of the gentleman  from
Minnesota?
  Mr. FULTON of Pennsylvania. Mr.
Speaker, reserving the  right to object,
on the U.S. foreign aid bill, our House
Foreign Affairs Committee reported it
out today with  practically a $500 mil-
lion  cut from the administration  re-
quest, so that we are keeping it  down
and we are being economical. I would
like  to  call to the  attention of the
Members engaged in the previous col-
loquy the fact that in South Korea  we
have  two American divisions there.
They have 16 divisions on the line. I
hope there will  just not be a negative
vote on the U.S. foreign aid program,
because it would pull the rug out  from
under South Korea,  a  loyal ally  with
40,000 troops beside our men in South
Vietnam, even when  they are in great
trouble.
  Mr. BLATNIK. Mr. Speaker,  H.R.
337  was passed by the   House  on
March 26 and recently  returned  to  us
from  the Senate  in amended form.
The bill increases the maximum travel
allowances for Government employees
                         [p. 32424]

while on official business.  The princi-
pal feature is the per diem which, we
all know, is a flat rate  reimbursement
covering the average cost of subsist-
ence, mainly hotel and food costs.  The
per diem is  convenient to  both the
Government and the employee because
it reduces the amount  of recordkeep-
ing  and analysis  which  otherwise

-------
 1956
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
would be required.   The  bill also in-
creases  the  maximum reimbursement
for travel on an actual expense basis
—only  permitted in unusual circum-
stances—and the maximum additional
amount  over the per diem set by the
State Department which may be paid
when  officials  are  traveling abroad.
The present  rates in these categories
were set by the Congress in 1961 and
as  we clearly showed during debate
last spring the cost of travel has in-
creased  markedly since then.
  The bill as amended by the Senate
made the following changes in  travel
allowances:
  Section   1:  First,  increased  the
maximum per  diem rate for full-time
Federal  employees traveling on official
business from the present $16 per day
to $25 per day. The House set $22 per
day.
  Second,  increased  the maximum al-
lowed for actual expenses from  the
present  $30 per day to  $40 per day.
The House set $35 per day.
  Third, increased  the maximum ad-
ditional  amount allowed for employees
traveling in  foreign  countries  when
actual  expenses are permitted  from
the  present $10 per day  to  $18 per
day.  The House set  $15 per day.
  Section  2  makes   the same  adjust-
ments for  part-time  or  intermittent
employees when traveling  on official
business.
  Section 3  was added by the Senate
and makes the same adjustments for
Senate Members and employees.
  We recommend  that  the  Senate
amendments  be accepted.  The figures
approved by  the House  were  based
primarily on a survey of travel costs
made by the Bureau of the Budget in
1967.  During  our  hearings, however,
employee organizations presented data
showing considerably higher  costs
than the Budget survey revealed. The
Senate Committee on Government Op-
erations decided to  make a more cur-
rent  examination.   Its report on the
bill reveals the following:
                       In an effort to develop 1969 subsistence costs,
                     the committee examined current statistical in-
                     formation supplied by the Bureau  of  Labor
                     Statistics and found that, although the average
                     rise in the Consumer  Price Index between
                     August 1968  and  August 1969  for all items
                     amounted to  5.6 percent, average  hotel  and
                     motel rates increased 7.8 percent in that pe-
                     riod, and restaurant prices rose 6.3 percent, or
                     an average total of slightly in excess of 7 per-
                     cent.  Applying this  percentage  figure to the
                     $21.52  arrived at by the Bureau of the Budget
                     would  amount to $23.03.  In addition, the  Bu-  .
                     reau of Labor Statistics furnished the commit-
                     tee with  information  showing that,  as  of
                     August 1969, average daily costs of hotel  and
                     motel rooms amounted to $18.13 in the 12 larg-
                     est metropolitan areas, and $14.43  in smaller
                     cities.  Since these rates reflect double occu-
                     pancy, the Bureau of Labor Statistics agreed
                     that a reduction of $2 in each figure would re-
                     flect average price rates of $16.13 and $12.43,
                     respectively, or an average of $14.28. Using an
                     average daily rate of $8 for  restaurant food,
                     total  costs for  lodging  and  food  would  be
                     $24.13  and $20.43, respectively, or an average
                     of  $22.28. Following  the  method used by the
                     Bureau of the  Budget,  the  committee  then
                     added an  additional 10 percent to reflect mis-
                     cellaneous allowable items, such as sales taxes,
                     tips, and  so forth, and arrived at  total costs
                     of $26.64  and $22.47, respectively, or an aver-
                     age cost of $24.60.
                       As  a check against these figures, the com-
                     mittee obtained from the American  Hotel  and
                     Motel Association information compiled by ac-
                     counting  firms  employed  by  the association,
                     relative to travel costs for 1968, the latest year
                     for which they were available. An  analysis of
                     average hotel and motel  rates for 14 major
                     cities and 98 smaller  cities reflected  an average
                     daily rate of $12.30, and food costs, based upon
                     a survey of 400 hotels  throughout the Nation,
                     reflected  a daily average of  $9.24.  Adding to
                     these figures the 7.8  percent increase for hotel
                     and motel rates  and the average   restaurant
                     price increase of 6.3  percent for 1969, reflected
                     in the Consumer Price Index  compiled by the
                     Bureau  of Labor  Statistics,  the  committee
                     arrived at a  total of  $13.26  for lodging  and
                     $9.82 for food, or a grand total for lodging and
                     food of $23.08 per day. To this was added the
                     usual  10  percent  for  allowable miscellaneous
                     expenses, bringing the total daily average cost
                     for lodging and food to $25.38.

                       Thus, the Senate found an average
                     cost in excess of  $25 per day but pro-
                     posed  a  maximum per  diem of that
                     amount.

                       Mr. Speaker, the  basic problem is
                     that travel costs, like other costs,  are
                     increasing  so  rapidly that  even  our
                     statistical studies cannot keep up with

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                            1957
them. I am afraid that if we do not
act promptly  on  this  bill  even the
higher Senate per  diem figure  will
soon be obsolete.
  We all agree that our Federal em-
ployees should not be required to sub-
sidize the legitimate costs of Govern-
ment out of their own pockets.
  The other amendment made by the
Senate provides  that  Senators  and
Senate employees  be given  the  same
allowances  available to employees of
the executive branch.
  House Members and committee em-
ployees are governed by travel regu-
lations issued by the House Adminis-
tration Committee—currently set at
$25 per day.
  The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Minnesota?
  There was no objection.
  The Senate amendments were con-
curred in.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
                         [p. 32425]

-------
1958         LEGAL COMPILATION— GENERAL

 1.16 DISCLOSURE OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
               GENERALLY, AS AMENDED
                     18 U.S.C. §1905 (1948)

     [Referred to in  42 U.S.C.  §§ 1857c-9(c), 1857d(j)(l),
       1857f-6(b), 1857h-5(a)(l), 33 U.S.C. §§ 1160(f)(2),
                          ), 1163(g)(3)]
    DISCLOSURE  OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
                      GENERALLY

18 § 1905
  Whoever, being an officer or employee of the United States or of
any department or agency thereof, publishes, divulges, discloses,
or makes known in any manner or to any extent not authorized by
law any information coming to him in the course of his employ-
ment or official duties or by reason of any examination or investi-
gation made by, or return, report or record made to or filed with,
such department or agency or office or employee thereof,  which
information concerns  or  relates to the trade  secrets, processes,
operations, style of  work, or apparatus, or to the identity,  confi-
dential statistical data, amount or source  of any income, profits,
losses, or expenditures of any person, firm, partnership, corpora-
tion, or association ;  or permits any income return or copy thereof
or any book containing any abstract or particulars thereof to be
seen or examined by any person except as provided by law; shall
be fined not more than $1,000, or  imprisoned not more than one
year, or both ; and shall be removed from office or employment.
June 25, 1948, c. 645, 62 Stat. 791.

          1.16a  DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION
            June 25, 1948,  P.L. 80-772, §1905, 62 Stat. 791

§ 1905.  Disclosure  of Confidential Information Generally
  Whoever, being an officer or employee of the United States or of
any department or agency thereof, publishes, divulges, discloses,
or makes known in any manner or to any extent not authorized by
law any information coming to him in the course of his employ-
ment or official duties or by reason of any examination or investi-
gation made by, or return, report or record made to or filed with,
such department or agency or officer or employee thereof,  which
information concerns  or  relates to the trade  secrets, processes,
operations, style of  work, or apparatus, or to the identity,  confi-

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1959

dential statistical data, amount or source of any income, profits,
losses, or expenditures of any person, firm, partnership, corpora-
tion, or association; or permits any income return or copy thereof
or any book containing any abstract or particulars thereof to be
seen or examined by any person except as provided by law; shall
be fined not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than  one
year, or both; and shall be removed from office or employment.
                                                       [p.  791]
    1.16a(l)  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
            H.R. REP. No. 304, 80th Cong., 1st Sess. (1947)

      REVISION OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE
APRIL 24, 1947—Committed to  the Committee of the Whole House on the
             State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. ROBISON, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
                          following

                         REPORT
                    [To accompany H. R. 3190]

  The Committee on the Judiciary submits the following report in
explanation of the  accompanying bill entitled "A bill to revise,
codify, and enact into positive law, title 18 of the United States
Code, entitled  'Crimes and Criminal Procedure.' " The present bill
has been substituted for  an  earlier bill [H.R. 1600] on which
hearings were held, and contains  changes recommended by the
subcommittee.
                                                        [p. 1]

                SECTION 1905—SECTION REVISED

  Based on section  176b of title 15, U. S. C.,  1940 ed., Commerce
and Trade; section 216 of title 18, U. S.  C.,  1940 ed.;  section  1335
of title 19,  U. S. C., 1940 ed.,  Customs Duties  (R. S.  § 3167; Aug.
27, 1894, ch. 349, § 24, 28 Stat. 557; Feb. 26, 1926, ch. 27, § 1115,
44 Stat. 117; June 17, 1930, ch. 497, title III,  § 335, 46 Stat.  701;
Jan. 27, 1938, ch. 11, § 2, 52 Stat. 8).
  Section consolidates section 176b of title  15, U.  S.  C.,  1940 ed.,

-------
1960         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

Commerce and Trade; section 216 of title 18, U. S. C., 1940 ed.,
and section 1335 of title 19, U. S. C., 1940 ed., Customs Duties.
  Words "or of any department or agency thereof"  and words
"such department or agency" were inserted so as to eliminate any
possible ambiguity as to scope  of section.  (See definition of "de-
partment" and "agency" in section 6 of this title.)
  References to the offenses as misdemeanors, contained in all of
                                                    [p. A127]

said sections, were omitted in view of definitive section 1 of this
title. See reviser's note under section 212 of this title).
  The provisions  of section  216 of title 18,  U. S.  C., 1940 ed.,
relating to publication of income tax data by "any person", were
omitted as covered by section 55 (f)  (1) of title 26, U. S. C., 1940
ed., Internal Revenue Code.
  Minor changes were made in translations and phraseology.
                                                    [p. A128]
   1.16a(2)  SENATE  COMMITTEE  ON THE JUDICIARY
             S. REP. No. 1620, 80th Cong., 2d Sess. (1948)

      REVISION OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE
     JUNE 14 (legislative day, JUNE 1), 1948.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. WILEY, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
                          following

                         REPORT
                   [To accompany H. R. 3190]

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]
            1.16a(3)  CONGRESSIONAL RECORD

 1.16a(3)(a)  Vol. 93 (1947), May 12: Amended and passed House,
 p. 5049

        [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]

-------
           STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1961
1.16a(3) (b)  Vol. 94 (1948), June 18: Amended and passed Senate,
pp. 8721-8722

       [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]
1.16a(3)(c)  Vol. 94 (1948), June 18:  House concurs in Senate
amendments, p. 8865

        [No Relevant  Discussion on Pertinent Section]

-------
1962         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

               1.17 APPROPRIATION BILLS
     1.17a  AGRICULTURE—ENVIRONMENTAL AND
  CONSUMER PROTECTION APPROPRIATION ACT OF
                           1971
                     Title III, 85 Stat. 183
       TITLE III—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                  INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND OFFICE  OF ENVIRON-
                      MENTAL QUALITY

  For expenses necessary for the Council on Environmental Qual-
ity and the  Office of Environmental Quality, in carrying out their
functions under the National Environmental Policy Act of  1969
(Public Law 91-190)  and the National Environmental Improve-
ment Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-224), including hire of passen-
ger vehicles, and support of the Citizens' Advisory Committee on
Environmental Quality established  by Executive Order 11472 of
May 29, 1969, as amended by Executive Order 11514 of March 5,
1970, $2,300,000.

             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             OPERATIONS, RESEARCH, AND FACILITIES

  For  necessary  expenses of the  Environmental  Protection
Agency, including official  reception and representation expenses
(not to exceed $2,000) ; hire of passenger motor vehicles;  hire,
maintenance, and operation of aircraft; services as authorized by
5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for  individuals not to exceed  the per
diem rate equivalent to the rate  for GS-18; purchase of reprints;
library memberships in societies or associations which issue publi-
cations to members only or at a price to members lower  than to
subscribers who are not members; $441,400,000, to remain availa-
ble  until  expended: Provided, That this  appropriation shall be
available only within the limits of amounts authorized by law for
fiscal year 1972.

                   CONSTRUCTION GRANTS

  For grants for construction of waste treatment works pursuant
to section  8  of the  Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended, $2,000,000,000, to remain  available until expended: Pro-

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1963

vided, That this appropriation shall be available only within the
limits of amounts authorized by law for fiscal year 1972.

SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES OVERSEAS (SPECIAL FOREIGN CURRENCY PRO-
                           GRAM)

  For payments in foreign currencies which the Treasury Depart-
ment determines to be excess to the normal requirements of the
United States, for necessary expenses  of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency in the conduct of scientific activities overseas in
connection with environmental pollution,  as authorized by law,
$7,000,000, to remain available until  expended: Provided,  That
this appropriation shall be available, in addition to other  appropri-
ations to such Agency, for payments in the foregoing currencies.
                                                     [p. 194]
     1.17a(l)   HOUSE COMMITTEE APPROPRIATIONS
           H.R. REP. No. 92-289, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971)

DEPARTMENT   OF  AGRICULTURE—ENVIRONMENTAL
AND CONSUMER  PROTECTION  APPROPRIATION BILL,
                            1972
JUNE 18, 1971.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
               of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. WRITTEN, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted
                        the following

                        REPORT
                    [To accompany H.R. 9270]

  The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report
in explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for
the Agriculture—Environmental, and  Consumer Protection Pro-
grams for fiscal year 1972.

                      SUMMARY BY TITLE
  The total amount included in the bill is $12,080,596,050, includ-
ing the first full year appropriation for the Environmental Protec-
tion  Agency,  an  increase  of  $2,531,688,500  over  1971 and
$22,117,800 below the budget.

-------
1964          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  The bill is divided into four titles—a division which is designed
to demonstrate the general impact of the appropriation.  Such a
division is by no means precise and is subject to individual inter-
pretation because  of the multiple benefits derived from the pro-
grams funded in this bill.
                                                         [p. 1]

             TITLE III—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

  Title  III  includes $3,126,055,000  for the programs primarily
directed to  improving our environment including  the new Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency and HUD water and sewer grants.
It includes as well, the U.S.D.A. programs long provided in this
bill including the Rural Environmental Assistance Program which
this Committee has had to restore over 16 times. It also includes
the watershed protection  programs  which through dams, stream
channelization and sedimentation control do much to halt pollution
at the headwaters.
                                                          [P. 2]

                  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

  The President's annual report on environmental  quality stated:
  Environment is not an abstract concern, or simply a matter of esthetics, or
of personal taste—although it can and  should involve these as well. Man is
shaped to a great extent by his surroundings. Our physical nautre, our mental
health, our culture and institutions, our opportunities for challenge and ful-
fillment, our very survival—all of these are directly related to and affected
by the environment in which we live. They depend upon the  continued healthy
functioning of the natural systems of the earth.

  To this the Committee would add the other side for man, in
turn, has influenced or changed his environment. From the begin-
ning as man has gone along day by day, year by year, throughout
history, he  has  continued  to change and to build  for himself a
synthetic  environment—his  clothing, his housing, his food; in
fact, almost everything about him  is a result of converting natural
elements into products of use to him.
  Man departed from  natural processes when he domesticated his
first animal and later when he planted a seed.

        THE FARMER'S RELATIONSHIP TO THE ENVIRONMENT

  The farmer has been an environmentalist since  man first tilled
the soil to grow his food. He deals with the mutual relationships of
plants and animals and how they live and flourish  in the essential

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY        1965

elements of land and water, sunlight and air.  He must protect
those elements or he, and those dependent on  him,  will perish.
Agriculture then is a natural custodian of the land.  The farmer
has faced the dual challenge of producing more food each year in a
way that protects his resources and preserves his ability to pro-
duce. It is no accident that the average farmer produces food and
fiber for 46 others and continues to expand this number.
  Farm production per acre has increased about 3 percent a year
due to such influences as the use of fertilizers,  pesticides, better
technology including soil and water  conservation practices, and
less use of lower grade land. One of these influences, the use  of
fertilizer, has been considered by some as a detriment to environ-
mental  quality.  But if  fertilizers  were restricted as a pollution
control, the results undoubtedly would be an increase in consumer
prices for food, and an expansion of intensive agriculture into
so-called marginal land with higher erosion with  greater pollution,
not less. Agricultural scientists find that a more proper direction
would be toward achieving maximum production from the best
soils, using the best combination of all practices. This may  mean
the use of higher rates of fertilizer application by farmers on good
land,  with even  greater attention to erosion and water  control  so
that fertilizer residues will not leave agricultural fields but remain
for their benefit.
  Pesticides are a must if we are to control the pests that compete
with man for  survival. Through the use of these chemical materi-
als, we have  made progress in controlling the insects that  carry
such human diseases as yellow fever, malaria, typhus, and  bubonic
plague.  We have also been making progress over the  years—in
lesser  degree—in controlling  agricultural pests and diseases,
                                                         [P. 7]

rather than accept the full impact  of production, storage, and
quality losses of  food and fiber.
  It is imperative that pesticides be used judiciously, with knowl-
edge of total effects, because of the potential dangers to human
health, livestock, fish and wildlife, desirable plants, and beneficial
insects. It is especially important to use persistent pesticides only
when they are necessary in the best interests of mankind.
  Another  environmental  problem of concern  to agriculture  is
contamination by animal wastes. Concentrations of cattle and hogs
raised in confinement have increased waste-disposal problems. The
tremendous growth in the U.S. broiler industry has brought addi-
tional waste problems. Handling such wastes in  such a way as  to

-------
1966          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

minimize the pollution to the environment is a goal we must ac-
cept, but with present technology it will be costly.

                POLLUTION VERSUS CONVENIENCE
  As soon as primitive man moved his fire into  his cave, he be-
came aware of air pollution in the  form of smoke. He probably
learned to reduce the smoke in his cave by careful placing and
stoking. He  then decided  to accept some smoke in return for the
warmth and convenience  of the fire  nearby. We have been weigh-
ing pollution against convenience ever since.
  We all realize that if the people in our major cities would park
their automobiles, trucks and buses  for a month  or moved out of
town for an equal time, there is no doubt as  to  the progress we
could make  in restoring  many of the  antiquated and deplorable
conditions we find in many sections. But automotive transporta-
tion, too, is  an integral part of our way of life  and part of our
prosperity. It is  essential to our economy, and it will take  a
healthy economy to retain public support as we attempt to find the
billions of dollars needed  if we are to restore our  environment for
present and future generations.
  The cost has been estimated at hundreds of billions of dollars.
  Thus, in view of the costs and of the tremendous job ahead of
us,  with the need to keep our economy healthy and strong as we
try to correct the mistakes of the past and to prevent them in the
future, we believe it will be necessary to set up a system of priori-
ties, putting those conditions that are downright dangerous ahead
of those conditions which may be only undesirable.
  It is not that we don't need both, but we need to establish some
priority so as to deal with first things first.
  Of course, we all know we must stop emptying  raw sewage into
our streams. We must provide for  controlling industrial wastes
and chemicals shown to  be  dangerous to health while  we keep
those things which, by providing protection from insects and dis-
eases, pest and pestilence, have increased  our life expectancy by
20 years since 1900 and  our physical  stature by about  2 inches
since 1900.
  Examples of reports required by the Environmental Protection
Agency presented to the committee are so voluminous as to raise a
serious question as  to whether public  support of needed environ-
mental improvements can be retained.
  The importance of agriculture in our environment can be seen
from the following table:
                                                        [p. 8]

-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 1967



K
1
i
to"
S
QS
o
o
Q.
g
O
O
Q
2
I—"
LU
s
LU
L-
CQ


O
1—
0
0
LU
O
Q-
to
LU
Oi ^
If
_l *0
0 -a
a. c
Q; wi
0 =
e =
o —
i—
o
CD
O
O
LU
1—
E
1—
CO
LU

LU
t—
O
K
CD
U.
O


LU
S
t—
0=
s
LU
Q
to
LU
h-
<
t~
to
0
LU
\—
z
=>


K
Ol
I-H


O)

o
s


s
Ol

oo
g


r-.
Ol



to
2


1

S
O)



s
Ol









I
i;















O CO
CO O
I"-. tO
o
00

oo



as
f=
00

3 S
LO" r-"



5? o
to o
s
^

CM O
CO 0
o





O Ol
ex


to





CM 0
00 0
Ol i— •
^
LT
5
to



8
CM m
in
f»
g
O O [1 ^ (O
co r- ^d- in
co to || 01*0
o
OG




r*. r--.
o in
o" co
OO i— I
38
R a"


to o
*T ^
to ^j-
S"3~
CM C»
CO 1*^
tc
U
o
».
tŁ

^

o
*


03 h^
O -H
^_
tc
^J
__
CM OO
OO -ct
f--
01
CO U1
00 CO
in ir> o to
CO I «d-





I
CM 0
to o
O LO
CO














CO
 a










CM LO
CO •— <
in in
CO
!







o
1
g
c

c
a
O
•5
1



a
^
,
Ol


to to
Ol
co r-.
Ol"

gg
O LO
of
in m
S 5
OO

gg
l*^


m LO
•-I OO
to co
to"

LO in
to co
IT,
ss
•*


CM oo
CM CM
rr




: .1
I ^

S. o-
"s "
E 5

Ł "
"- c
CD a> P
CL CJ Ł
1 i &

TO
1


j= <Ł
!5 S
§
O
""*

g
co
o"
o
g
Ol

o
o
01
o
g
o>

o
8_
oo


o
o
o
f^,"

o
g_
ID
o
o
C3
^


g
m
•*













a
o
If
Cv
to

g
s
o
Cs
^"*

•a
Ł:
S
(N
CM

S
tc
oo -^r CM
r^ oo ^d
IT

m

SO
c
5 2
2

c
o
f
a
rC


CO
to
i
r-

o
to
80 o o
000
OO CM CO CM
,_,
*3'
 ^












g

c
c
c
E






So
CM
o r*>













c














L|

c


% g | S Z



(«
^o: .*> Ł coo^i-S

—
-^J gccu ^ cc
Ł
$
Ł
•Ł "SSo Ł^'c LU '•^•^ci'SS
J2
|-
2 ^; Q± U-
S J2
"5 «

ao
«C




^ to aj '55 "ro ^ Ł
51
-5 o^S "° cc^
^- 'yj TO "x O O i.
co = a. LU o cj
a*- ~
UJ CO
d

"S
a
t5 c
S

u.


















en
,_!
S

CM
S
S
s

o
o
CO
s
o
o
oc
<Ł
r~~
O
to


o
CO
CN
^
c
O
ot
CM CO



to to

oo o
in to


8g
CM

O OO


o  o
•o c

M -
0 >
•• a
> c
S o
c —
0 V
CJ —
*- «
s Ł
K


















s



o


C3
8
m
OC

o
g
in
1
s

1
o
cs
O
Ł
o
o
00
Of
ex
""*
o
s
a

o
s
1
0


8
in
-
c
s

8
~
O
o
o»
p^

8
to
CO


8
ir

g
OO
IT)
CO

I
S3"
g
01
Cv
CO

o
g
CO
CO
to
Ol
in
r*.
CO
00
CT
Cs


CM
oc
O)
CM






















g
to


C3
O
in



8
O
^




co


1
CO



8
in
to


§o
0
i-l CM
r*,"

si
s a a"
8 8 S
00 OO CO
CM LO" rC
OO CM








SO LO
cs CM
— 1 t*~ CM
CM CO
00








8
= E
O *•
]~ 
a
1
LU


a
c

o
_S
c
^
1
^














g
O)
t— (




1
CM










































E
ab
o
0
cu
c:
o

-Q
m
•*
1 E §
2 2 -^

a. ° •=

g
OO
^
CM

g
OO


g
CO
s
I
1 §










X
CM
to
S
CO
c^
Ol
CO
r*


eo
»-•
| N


o
Ol
s
m
01
3


1



in
o
to
1






























;
j

J
E

c
o
c:
o
O
•a

c
o
•E 2
"« ^
*- T3
g § 1 I 2 |

^ g m S 1 j>
^ 0 = _^" ^ ®
03 ° -. = <" ^
= c TO -0 15 E
ffll | |
" o < S


-------
1968         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

           TITLE III—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

                    Independent Agencies

COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND OFFICE OF ENVIRON-
                      MENTAL QUALITY

  The Council and Office of Environmental Quality were created
by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190)
and the Environmental Quality Improvement Act of 1970 (P.L.
90-224) and operate as a single entity. The Council is required to
prepare an annual environmental quality report; prepare  recom-
mendations to the President  on national policies  for improving
environmental quality; conduct investigations and analyze condi-
tions and trends; and evaluate effects of technology.
  The Council must also appraise the effect of Federal programs
and activities on environmental quality; assist Federal agencies in
the development of environmental programs; and recommend to
the President and to Federal agencies priorities in environmental
programs.
  For fiscal year 1972 the committee recommends an appropria-
tion of  $2,300,000, the full  budget request  and an increase of
$800,000 above 1971. The increase  will be utilized for additional
studies by  contract and for 11 additional staff members which
shall be used to more fully  ascertain  and analyze the economic
effects, including effects on employment and unemployment at the
local and  regional level,  of  delays and  restrictions required to
comply with enviornmental standards where  human health is not
involved. The estimated total cost of cleaning up the environment
is so great that we must establish priorities to make sure that we
take care of those environmental problems which are dangerous to
human health first, dangerous to our general  environment second,
and those which are merely undesirable third.

              ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

  The Environmental Protection Agency was established  on De-
cember 2, 1970, by Reorganization  Plan  Number 3 of 1970.  This
reorganization provided for the consolidation of pollution  control
and  abatement activities which were previously  located  in the
following agencies:
Department of the Interior
      All functions of the Federal Water Quality Administration,
     and

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY        1969

      Certain pesticide functions carried out by the Bureau of
    Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare:
      All functions of the National Air Pollution Control Admin-
    istration ;
      All functions of the Bureau of Solid Waste Management;
                                                        [p. 41]

      All functions of the Bureau of Water Hygiene;
      Portions of the Bureau of Radiological Health having to do
    with setting of exposure standards; and
      Pesticide research and standards programs of the Food and
    Drug Administration.
Department of Agriculture: Pesticides label registration.
Atomic Energy Administration: Environmental radiation protec-
  tion standard-setting function.
Council on Environmental Quality: Authority to perform general
  ecological research.
Federal Radiation Council: All functions.
  As can be readily seen, this agency draws together a number of
different agencies with their own authorizing legislation. Coordi-
nating the functions is a large task. The Administrator  stressed
before the committee that his problem is to keep the pace required
by the various laws while bringing the diverse organizations to-
gether to improve their functioning. Several examples of organiza-
tional problems have been brought to the attention of the commit-
tee. For example, it is readily apparent that the 10 regions,  newly
established,  must have a common policy and any  press  releases
should reflect such a policy. Certainly major findings and reports
should be issued from a central location, and only on approval of
the Administrator.
  The Environmental Protection Agency is now charged with the
administration of the following major legislation:
      The Clean Air Act, as amended, places major responsibility
    for prevention and control of air pollution on State and local
    governments. The States are required to establish air quality
    control  regions. The original  38  air quality control regions
    were based on the urban character of the area and on meteo-
    rological factors lending the designated region to coordinated
    standards. The Clean Air Act amendments required that the
    balance of the State must be divided into control regions by
    April 1 of this year.

-------
1970          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

      The law also requires the establishment of national ambient
    air quality standards for implementation in the designated
    regions. On April 30 standards were issued for  six primary
    air pollutants said to be of danger to human health, including
    sulfur oxide, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxide,
    chemical oxidants and particulate matter. The Environmental
    Protection  Agency  has  three years to establish secondary
    standards—those air pollutants affecting animal and  plant
    life. The States have 9 months in which to submit implemen-
    tation plans for meeting the standards within 3 years. The
    law provides for a national program of research and develop-
    ment  with  special emphasis on  fuels and vehicles; standards
    and enforcement for stationary air pollution sources; and
    Federal enforcement, inspections, monitoring and abatement
    through conference procedures.
      The Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, requires a
    comprehensive  program including research, investigation,
    training  and  information pertaining to water pollution con-
    trol ; grants for research and development and for State pro-
    grams ;  grants for construction of waste treatment works;
    enforcement  actions; dealing with oil and hazardous  sub-
    stances, sewage from vessels, acids and other mine pollution
    control demonstration; dealing with pollution in the Great
    Lakes and  cooperation by all Federal agencies in control of
    pollution. Most of the programs are authorized only through
                                                       [p. 42]

    June  30, 1971. In addition, the Refuse Act of 1899 requires
    that all persons dumping pollutants into the navigable waters
    obtain permits from the Army Corps of Engineers.
      The Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource
    Recovery Act,  provides for research,  demonstration  and
    training  in solid waste  disposal technology; special studies
    and demonstrations on recovery of useful energy and materi-
    als and establishment of recommended  guidelines; grants for
    State, interstate, and local planning  for resource recovery
    systems and improved solid waste disposal facilities; grants
    for training and a national disposal site study.
  Each of these laws requires the establishment of national stand-
ards with cooperative enforcement  with State and local  govern-
ments. In  addition, the laws provide  for support of research, plan-
ning and training to improve the fundamental ability of the nation
to deal with the problems of pollution.

-------
             STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY        1971

  The laws are written to recognize the relative differences  that
are found in the problems, concentration, movement and nature of
pollutants. It clearly recognizes the need to protect the public from
the concentrations of pollutants  affecting health. They also recog-
nize that the States  cannot enforce standards for  air  pollution
originating in another jurisdiction  or water contaminants from
upstream.

              OPERATIONS, RESEARCH, AND FACILITIES

  The   Committee   recommends   a   total   appropriation   of
$433,900,000, the budget request, and an increase of $133,996,000
over the total available for 1971. The committee expresses concern
over ability of the  agency to  effectively utilize this increase but
has provided the funds because of the important new assignments
the Agency must undertake. The committee feels further that the
agency must give careful attention  to establishing an accounting
system which can assure the Congress that the funds are in  fact
being spent in the manner the Congress determines.  The Commit-
tee has indicated below the relative  priority it attaches to various
specific pollution problems, and the agency must limit transfers of
funds  between media to not more than  10% without first obtain-
ing approval of the  appropriations committees.
  A breakdown  and discussion of the budget proposals by media
and category follows:

                      ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY

                                        Proposed    1972 Budget  1972 Committee
                            Available 1971   1972 Increase     request   recommendation

Air					  $108,840,000   +$42,000,000  $150,840,000   $150,840,000
Water			   116,627,000    +32,090,000   148,717,000    148,717,000
Solid waste				   19,591,000    +8,509,000    28,100,000     28,100,000
Water hygiene	    2,837,000    +1,763,000     4,600,000     4,600,000
Radiation				    6,903,000    +1,625,000     8,528,000     8,528,000
Pesticides		   16,198,000    +5,277,000    21,475,000     21,475,000
Noise			     285,000      +940,000     1,225,000     1,225,000
Toxic materials		   +1,000,000     1,000,000     1,000,000
Program support..		   25,998,000    +8,666,000    34,664,000    34,664,0000
Facilities.				   +28,000,000    28,000,000     28,000,000
Paycosts		    2,625,000    +4,126,000     6,751,000     6,751,000
    Available or request	  299,904,000   +133.996.000   433.900,000    433,900,000
                                                              [p. 43]

Air Pollution Control	$150,840,000
   In  recognition of the strict deadlines required by the Clean  Air
Act, the committee is placing increased emphasis on the two major

-------
1972          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

aspects on which the goal of clean air must be based: The local
and State agencies, where the committee recommends an  increase
of $12,700,000  for grants; and on research on pollution control
technology,  where the  committee recommends an increase of
$15,239,000 for  research, primarily by grants.  This research will
place emphasis  on research and demonstrations  of control technol-
ogy for sulfur and nitrogen oxides emissions.
  Other  increases include a total of $4,262,000 for monitoring
systems to strengthen the 300 air monitoring stations; $5,796,000
for standards and enforcement, for stationary and mobile sources,
including aircraft and vehicles; $3,061,000  for federal technical
support for  air quality  control regions—in all,  an  increase of
$42,000,000 above 1971.
Water Quality	$148,717,000
  Of this amount, $91,048,000 is  subject to later authorization.
Appropriate legislation is presently under  consideration by the
legislation committee, and the committee has included these funds,
but  with a  limitation  prohibiting  their use  until  authorized.
Major changes  must await final action by the legislative  commit-
tees  which, in turn, may result in  reconsideration of the  amounts
recommended. The total includes increases for  Federal and State
planning and technical  support totalling  $11,801,000; grants to
States for planning,  $5,370,000, and grants to States for control,
$15,000,000 for 1972—compared  to $2,070,000 and $10,000,000,
respectively, for 1971.
  This committee, as well as others of Congress which have re-
viewed the progress to date, have become aware of the need for a
plan of attack on water pollution problems which requires whole-
hearted commitment by  all  water users in a watershed  or  river
basin. Because of the multiple uses and multiple objectives, includ-
ing reservation for agriculture, recreation, and human consump-
tion  on one hand and the need for continued development of our
regions so they  may economically support their rising populat'ons,
plans must be drawn carefully to take into account all aspects of
this difficult problem.
  Research  remains  the key to meeting our  needs for the future.
The  committee recommends a thorough review of the  research
program in  order to achieve a  proper balance between each of the
programs and will expect a full report next year. In the interim, it
approves  the total of $60,011,000 for water research, of which
$41,300,000 shall be  by grant or contract  to  qualified  research
organizations.

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1973

  The research total represents an increase of $2 million over the
budget request, and the reduction is to be derived from a careful
reassessment of needs in standards and enforcement. The commit-
tee is reducing by 150 positions the request for additional person-
nel in enforcement, in view of the recent 1971 supplemental  pro-
viding 549 positions,  principally for this program, and  an addi-
tional $2.1 million. The committee's action will provide an increase
of $10,074,000—more than double the amount available in 1971.
                                                        [P. 44]

The committee further suggests that the  $225,000 increase re-
quested solely to improve the water data system and $2 million for
mathematical models be utilized to study means for integrating
the pollution data gathering systems.
Solid Wastes	$28,100,000
  Late in fiscal year 1971 the committee provided a supplemental
of $2,700,000 to begin the work required by the Resource Recovery
Act  of  1970. This   action  established  a  program   level of
$19,591,000 for this program for that year. Major programs
begun and placed on a full-year basis in this bill include planning
grants, development of solid waste management guidelines, collec-
tion and dissemination of technical information, manpower  sur-
veys  and training, and  research on disposal technology. These
programs represent the starting point for a major future effort in
the solid waste area. The committee recommends major increases
to continue  the solid waste assessment, including an increase of
$12,509,000,  of which $9,177,000 is in research to develop  and
demonstrate new technology. This represents a $4,000,000 increase
over the budget,  to be used for demonstration grants and to be
derived from unobligated balances available from prior years.
Water Hygiene	$4,600,000
  Water hygiene is of special concern to the committee for, be-
yond general water quality, drinking water standards must always
occupy a special concern. The fact that a special 1970 study of 969
communities indicated that 36% of the communities had water
supplies  with one or more bacteriological or chemical pollutants
justifies the proposed increases in research and monitoring.  The
committee recommends $4,600,000, an increase of $1,736,000 over
the amount available in 1971.
Pesticides	$21,475,000
  For pesticides the committee is providing $4,861,000  for  field
monitoring of the effects of pesticides by qualified personnel, in-

-------
1974          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

eluding an increase of $452,000 for epidemiological studies in 200
communities  and $2,815,000 to expand long-term  studies of the
hazards of pesticides in the environment.
Radiation	$8,528,000
  An estimate of $8,528,000, an increase of $1,625,000, is provided
for continued development  of  radiation guidelines and improved
monitoring of radiation exposure in our environment. A complete
review of the existing guidelines is expected to be completed  in
1972.
Toxic Materials	$1,000,000
  A $1 million program will be established to commence work  on
toxic materials in 1972. This will entail a broad-based survey  of
man's exposure to chemicals. The committee will watch the devel-
opment of this program carefully as an indication of the need to
consolidate media research programs in favor  of  this approach.
The work for 1972 will be performed primarily by contract.
Noise  	$1,225,000
  The Clean Air amendement of 1970 authorized a broadened
program of research aimed at  the impact of noise in our environ-
                                                        [P. 45]

ment. The increase for 1972 provides for necessary studies and the
related report on the  degrees of environmental  impairment from
this cause. A report must be filed by January, 1972.
Facilities 	$28,000,000
  The committee approves  the construction of an Environmental
Research Center planned for Cincinnati, Ohio.  The committee
takes this action, however, only because development  has pro-
gressed so far. The committee directs that no further construction
be  undertaken without a full and thorough review  of  existing
research efforts and their locations with a view  toward consolida-
tion of the diverse programs  so recently acquired, as well as a
review of the value of the use of contracts both to reduce costs and
to achieve results more quickly.
  Grant and contract  review board.—The committee has provided
language requiring the Administrator to establish an independent
grant and contract review board. $2,500,000 is provided to finance
the board's activities. The  membership of the board shall be  se-
lected in a manner to assure that there is a balanced panel, includ-
ing members with governmental, industrial and scientific experi-
ence. The board members shall be employed and compensated  as

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1975

authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, and shall meet at appropriate inter-
vals as established  by regulation  of  the  Administrator.  Such
panels, subsections, or other divisions of the board may be estab-
lished by regulation as the Administrator determines to be neces-
sary  to  the  efficient and  expeditious review  of  grants  and
contracts. In the  committee's opinion, the existence of this inde-
pendent  review  board will help  assure that the  significantly
increased amounts included in  this bill for research grants and
contracts will be effectively spent.
  Review of Environmental Impact and Other Statements.—The
committee is aware of the very complex and difficult regulatory
and program decisions which the Administrator must make. Many
of these decisions will be controversial,  and can have a significant
economic impact on the affected communities and industries. This
requires  a judicial-like approach, and  it is essential when such
momentous decisions  are being made that the Administrator be
aware of all sides  of the issue. Some such safeguards already exist,
but they need to be made a pervasive part of the agency's way of
doing business.
  The committee has, therefore, added language, and $6.3 million,
to require that in  addition to  the environmental effects of an
action  all reports  from Departments, agencies, or persons now
required to make reports shall include information  on the effect on
the economy, employment  and unemployment, and other impacts
which may offset marginal, or temporary, environmental damage.
The language also authorizes the agency to spend  such additional
sums as may be necessary, out of general administrative funds, to
refund the costs of preparing such statements. This requirement
will apply primarily to the environmental impact statements re-
quired under Section 102 of the Environmental Quality Act, and
the reports required under the permit dumping program based on
the Refuse Act of 1899. The language requires that these reports
be made  available to the Administrator, but the  committee also
believes they should be made available to the Director  of the Office
of Management and Budget and to  the President,  since  environ-
mental issues are frequently of national importance and can be
                                                       [P. 46]

judged only at that level. The committee has been guided toward
this decision by the belief that major decisions require the presen-
tation of all points of view.
  The  committee  has also provided that the Administrator may
use these funds to enable him to  obtain,  either internally or

-------
1976          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

through contracts with other agencies or persons, the additional
facts required to comply with this requirement.

                    CONSTRUCTION GRANTS

  This program provides grants to States for up to 55%, under
certain circumstances, of the cost of construction of waste treat-
ment facilities. The program is authorized by section 8 of the
Water Pollution Control Act through June, 1971. New legislation
is under consideration which proposes such matters as changes in
the State allocation formula to more closely reflect the needs and
increased authorizations. The Administration has proposed a $12
billion program for 3 years, of which $6 billion shall be the  Fed-
eral share.
  Because of the importance of this program to the preservation
and enhancement of our waterways, the committee is proposing an
appropriation of $2,000,000,000 for fiscal year 1972, an increase of
$1 billion over 1971 and the budget estimate. But, in so doing, the
committee has provided that the funds  shall be available only to
the extent authorized.

SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES OVERSEAS (SPECIAL FOREIGN CURRENCY PRO-
                            GRAM)
  This appropriation covers the support of research, development
and demonstration  projects  in foreign  countries.  Appropriated
funds are used to purchase the currencies which accrue to the
United States primarily through sale of surplus agricultural  com-
modities. The purchased currencies are then employed to support
collaborative research beneficial to the domestic research program
of the Environmental Protection Agency.
  The committee recommends an appropriation of $7,000,000 for
this purpose, double the program level for fiscal year 1971.  This
reduction of $3,670,000 below the budget is based on the need to
thoroughly review the domestic research program before the for-
eign currency program is significantly expanded.
                                                       [p. 47]

                TITLE V—GENERAL PROVISIONS
  Sections 501 through 507 of the general provisions contained in
the accompanying bill for fiscal year 1972 are essentially the  same
as those included in previous appropriation bills.
  Section 501 authorizes  the purchase of 671 passenger motor
vehicles in fiscal year 1972. This will permit the replacement of

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1977

461 vehicles which have reached the Federal replacement standard
of 6 years or 60,000 miles. It also authorizes the purchase of 210
passenger vehicles to  replace an equal number  of sedan delivery
trucks in the Agricultural Research Service and the Soil Conserva-
tion Service, with an annual saving estimated at about $20,000 per
annum.

            LIMITATIONS AND LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

  The following limitations and legislative provisions  not hereto-
fore carried in any appropriation act are included in the bill:
                                                       [P. 59]

  On page 27 in connection  with  the Environmental Protection
Agency:
    , including official reception and representation expenses (not
    to exceed $2,000)
  On page 28 in connection  with  the Environmental Protection
Agency:
     : Provided, That this appropriation shall  be available  only
    within the limits  of amounts authorized by law for fiscal year
    1972
  On pages 28-29 in  connection with the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency:
      The sum of $6,300,000, together with such additional funds
    as may be necessary to be derived from general administra-
    tive  funds  available to the Administrator, is appropriated to
    enable  the Administrator to obtain, except  where there is
    determined to  be an imminent hazard to human  life, in ad-
    vance of determination of action to be taken or recommended
    from those agencies of government or other entities, govern-
    mental  or private, which are required to file reports on major
    Federal actions determined to  have a significant effect on the
    quality  of the human environment, reports as to the probable
    adverse effect on the economy,  including employment and
    unemployment, if such action is  taken and the  project  or
    proposed action is delayed or  terminated. And, if necessary,
    the Administrator is authorized to reimburse the affected
    agency of  government or other  entities for the  reasonable
    costs of preparing such  reports, if additional work is re-
    quired.
                                                       [p. 60]

-------
1978
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

R
O>
Q:
O
u_
— J
m
UJ
h—

Q
UJ
a
z
LLJ
E
0
a
on
h-
Z
O —
s. Ą
^ *""
Q Ł
? I
 M
UJ •—
H Ł
< S
E |
P °
CO 0
w Ł
t- ^
UJ 3
S =U

m o
Q "w
< I
1 1
0= ^-
s |
I I
>— •*"
< I
< "g
1 I
rf —
1 ^
s 1

fc -
C5
O
CD
jŁ
UJ
Z

O
z
UJ
UJ
I—
COMPARATIVE


S «*»
•— E ° *c *~ (a
•5: •§* ,Ł• "
* 3 ic
1 •

E _
= a 1 *2 ^
CD t3 .2 C m C?
f Iff
•s^ tC

|_
f||| Ł

S ]Q O "c
JJ o Ł °*
« ^


(g M
§ g >; S
l*|ll s
"* ° S ro "«
oo "S ™ c>
T3 ^i trt
a «s
CO


-o i—
"S "ra "G 01
S"' "5 iŁ










E

•o
to ^
1
Si









o
g
§

+


1
s
co
CM





O
g
g"
CO
CNJ






i
g"
m





j*1
Z 1
0 0
1— 'ro

UJ c

Ł-c 1
-• S g
< o Ł
Z2 'S
p C v
ZT3 J=
gS °
>&•?
Z-Q «
UJ c _>.
~ 3
o
UJ
C
o
1
a

o
8
UD
co"
I



O O O
S§g
Sg'g"

CO O CO
+ 2

000
ggg
111
§^

esi"



ill
o" g" S
Sis"

CM




ii§
i § 1
OJ O CO
a g





1"
00
o
a


3
c
bo
^
i
'•5 «•
«? s s
nmental Protection -
>erations, research ;
instruction grants.,
;ientific activities ov
_Ł 0 o w
c
LU
I
r-x
co"
I



O
g
CD
0>

P-.
7

o
8
1
o"
"*.
CM



O
g
e
in
5






§
S
S
ro












»
e
S)
<
o
1
o
—
Total, Environment!


O
g_
o"
T









g
o
o"
in






8
O
g"
"






I
o















&
Ł
•r
OJ
13
al Commission on f>
g
n
Z
C5 O
O O
o o
o" o"
in o
>-'


o o~
§o
CD
§g
CM CM
1 +

§1
ii
ss





i
§"
1





"
s
s
o
o"
-



"c
I
«

Q

§ 2
1 Ł

•? 1
o S
g> •& &
•» S E
11!
o IS
| S "g
Deporfmi
for basic water and
lobligated balance '<.
Ł =3
C
O
i
s
+
"^"
_— fc






•^--
s
o
8
O
o
07




i
o
g"
o
g"





. 	 .
I
g"
o
s
en

















J
1
1
K


(—1
O]
t-
ci
I_U


















































-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
1979


esi
o>
0=
o
U_
_j
d
5
UJ
X
H-
0
LU
Q
Z
UJ
O
U
LU
ft:
t-
z
o =5-
S S
< S
Q =5
Z 1=
to .2
i i
to %
LU (U
UJ 3
CD ^
S |
o .2
z S.
< 0
p-i a
r~ a.
"" :
0 °
u- E
*~ Ł
o S
x .E
=> Ł

i 1
0 E
i f
2- "°
t ~
S

CD

LU
Z
U.
O
t—
z
LU
E
UJ
B
CO

>
i
1
0
u



.8 /-v S

•5; a) -.— 'c J5 JU
1 fl1!
a>
ra
g _ Ł g
— S> = .Ł? ^
CO ~° •Ł -g Ł Ł•
tiff ~
 *••'
"Ł "o := ^ —
•0 "o ™ §
CD

•o
>-«. 3 JC
figs? ~
•° s — "° >« ^
» is s +* TS
Z o Ł w
^ OT C











.Ł

C ŁJ
i
<










o
s
1
^
I

o c
ss
OO f
O» (V
oM

o e
ss
(C t-
ss
2S


O C
Si
S c
**• c




II
Sr-
ir
S"
•^









g
J
"3

•c
D»

•s
1 1
1 ?

a «
V c
° s'i
« ^ «
•522
Ł qj a
*|e
Hi
Ł Ł 1
S S ^
| | S
o O '62
'&
C3 C
Si
CO C
ta v
+ ^
4

§c
c
o
m in
in tc
^H t««
-+_
n

O C
o c
o o
er


O C
g§
r-. en
o a
to r^




o o
§o
0
OO Of
to c
^















C
1
a
g
1 c
.=
1
c

5?!
1
•Q, ec
•O t3
'1
t2 k
» «
ss

S" o
o o
;O OO
0 fv
in rn
*s- ~r
+

i
o
o
r—
w
+

§i
C3 O
to oa
to u?


ll
OO —I
oo m
i-« OO
oj in
CSJ i-t



Is
^s- a>
en Rl
SS
—















1

1
c
o

.2 Ł
C (/)
1 1
1 1
SE
U. *-
S
O

o
s
s_

+

o
s
oo"
CsJ
^

1
i
m


|
s"
^T
m



o
s
§
csl
CM


,












8

C
O
•43
«

o
o
1
•3




1
g
Lf
U
in
4





i
Lf
ir
o


a
8
|
C
^



g
c
g
If
If
at
•*"










y"


"5 =
a> Ł
w Ł -t
Ili
> ct i
§ g
2 ± <
3 2
3 ce
5





1
i
C
ir
"

1
1
C
IP


I
.1
c
LT



1
g
c
u
oc
















1
c
X

I

V
o
c
c
1i
E
—








~g
c
"g
c
c
r-

1
"1
" a
^-


1

' c


























E
2
^
c
i
l
>_
•»-
*

§
o
o
r-T


S
§"


o
g"
o
a


o
§





§
§
IB
















Ł

o>
E
c
o

Ł
0)
u
fc-
c
LU

§
i
CNJ
+

§
8
O
r~-

o
s
1
hC


S
O
1
LfT
in



§
s
g"
CM







8
&
•|


C
3
•a
ization an

S
1

"3
o

I




1
i
^
H

1
s
u
a

i
Ł
g
w


i
s
1C
(C
o
c*


i
5
P-
*•
CM












*

ental Prol
E
e
c
u

=
s
"c
























































r— i
CO
C-
ft



















































-------
1980
              LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
   iSS
   i O o

   r o" -T
   i o en
   i o co


   i 3 o o
   I CXI CM i—I
i-l O 5! ŁH
t-j o co r^
  in CM ^j- r-*
  B Ł 8 fS

  2* **" S3 ***
  SiS? 3
  ESS3

  a" K" s s
  c^ o> f> r*-
  IO  C*» CM
  in o 5 o
  oo o 5 o


  is'lS*

  S Ł S S
  OO ID Cf> tŁ>
  in  CM c*j
  SIS!
  m" in" ^H" i
3
H

O-
  E ^ "5 .2

  lit!

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1981

  1.17a(2)  SENATE  COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
            S. REP. No. 92-253, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971)

  DEPARTMENT  OF AGRICULTURE—ENVIRONMENTAL
     AND  CONSUMER PROTECTION APPROPRIATION
                          BILL, 1972
                JULY 14,1971.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. McGEE, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the
                           following

                          REPORT

                     [To accompany H.R. 9270]

  The Committee on Appropriations, to which was referred the
bill  (H.R. 9270)  making  appropriations for  the Agriculture-
Environmental and Consumer Protection Programs for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1972, and  for other purposes, reports the
same to the Senate with various  amendments and presents here-
with information relative to the changes made:

Amount of bill as passed by the House—Total new (obli-
  gational) authority 	 $12,423,896,050
Amount of increase by Senate Committee—New (obliga-
  tional) authority 	    666,370,000
Amount of bill as reported to Senate—New (obligational)
  authority  	  13,090,266,050
Amount  of  1971  Appropriation Act—Budget  (obliga-
  tional) authority to date	   9,548,907,550
Amount of estimates, 1972—New (obligational) authority-.  12,104,813,850
The bill as reported to the Senate:
   Over the Appropriation Act for 1971	   3,541,358,500
   Over the estimates  for  1972—New  (obligational)
     authority  	    985,452,200
                                                         [P-l]

                 GENERAL SUMMARY STATEMENT

  The Senate bill, as reported by  the  Committee, recommends
$13,090,266,050 of new obligational authority for fiscal year 1972,
representing a net increase by the Committee over the House bill
of $666,370,000, and an  increase over the budget estimates of
$985,452,200. The  amounts of new obligational authority for each

-------
1982           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

of the four titles contained in the bill for the 1971 Appropriation
Act, the estimates for 1972, and the House bill for 1972, compared
with the Committee recommendations, are shown in the following
table.  A detailed tabulation showing comparisons appears at the
end  of this report. Recommendations for individual appropriation
items, projects, and activities are carried in the report under the
appropriate item headings.

                            1971 Appro-    1972 budget      1972     1972 Senate
                            priation Act    estimates    House bill    committee

Title I—Agriculture Programs	$4,314,155,550  $5,856,990,850  $5,260,771,050  $5,877,484,050
Title II—Rural Development	   757,975,000   671,847,000   932,847,000    954,397,000
Title III—Environmental Protection	 2,127,521,000  2,916,664,000  3,467,255,000   3,495,362,000
Title IV—Consumer Protection and Services... 2,349,256,000  2,659,312,000  2,763,023,000   2,763,023,000
    Total....	 9,548,907,550  12,104,813,850  12,423,896,050  13,090,266,050
                                                             __

              TITLE III ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                      Independent Agencies
      *****        *        *
                 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                 OPERATIONS, RESEARCH AND FACILITIES
1971 New Obligational (budget) authority to date	 $299,904,000
1972 Budget estimate 	   433,900,000
House bill, 1972	   425,100,000
Committee recommendation (New Obligational authority)	   448,900,000
             THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
  The Environmental Protection Agency was established on De-
cember 2, 1970, by Reorganization Plan No. 3  of  1970. This re-
organization provided  for the consolidation of pollution  control
and abatement activities which were previously assigned to the
Departments of the Interior,  Agriculture, and Health, Education,
and Welfare, the Atomic Energy Commission, the Council on
Environmental Quality, and the Federal Radiation  Council.
  The basic purpose for bringing these functions and responsibil-
ities  together  to  form  the  Environmental  Protection  Agency
(EPA)  was  to permit an aggressive and  coordinated attack on
the problems of environmental pollution. EPA is concerned with
the environment as a single interrelated system and is directing
a coordinated research, monitoring, standard-setting, and enforce-
                                                            [p. 34]

ment effort  to restore and  protect  the quality of  the Nation's
environment.

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1983

             OPERATIONS, RESEARCH, AND FACILITIES
   This appropriation covers the following activities to support a
national program  of  environmental  protection  and  pollution
abatement:
   1. Abatement  and control  programs which provide for the
establishment of environmental standards, monitoring and sur-
veillance activities, planning and technical assistance support to
State and local agencies to improve environmental programs, and
enforcement activities to assure compliance.
   2. Manpower development programs to increase the supply and
improve the performance of manpower required for environmental
protection agencies.
   3. Research,  development, and demonstrating programs  to de-
termine the cause-and-effect relationships  of  environmental  pol-
lutants and to develop and demonstrate technological solutions for
pollution abatement and control problems.
   4. Facilities programs to support the construction of new EPA
facilities and provide for the  alterations,  repairs, and improve-
ments of existing EPA  facilities.
   5. Program direction  and support activities to provide both cen-
tralized and regional leadership and administrative support for
the Agency's programs.
   The following table reflects the fiscal year 1971 appropriations,
the fiscal year 1972  budget estimates,  the amounts  contained in
the House bill, and the Senate Committee recommendations for
the funding of these activities:
Agency and item
Operations, research, and facilities:
Abatement and control 	 	 	 .
Manpower development
Research, development, and demonstration
Facilities
Program direction and support

New budget
(obligational)
authority
enacted to date
fiscal year 1971
$117,575,000
18,628,000
137,119,000
26,582,000

Budget estimates
of new
(obligational)
authority
fiscal year 1972
$185,056,000
19,167,000
165,649,000
28,000,000
36,038,000

New budget
(obligational)
authority
recommended
in House bill
$176,756,000
19,167,000
165,149,000
28 000,000
36;038,000

Committee
recom-
mendation
$185,056,000
19,157,000
180,649,000
28,000,000
36,038,000

   Total, operation, research, and facilities.  299,904,000   433,900,000   425,100,000    448,900,000

  For  Operations, Research, and Facilities of the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Committee recommends an appropriation
of $448,900,000, an increase of $148,996,000 over fiscal year 1971.
This is $15,000,000 more than the budget estimate,  and is $23,.
800,000 more than provided in the House  bill.
  In consideration of this matter the House Committee provided

-------
1984          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

$2,500,000 to finance an independent grant and contract review
board and $6,300,000 to finance the preparation and formulation
of economic impact statements. Both of these items were elimi-
nated from the bill when they were considered on the floor of the
House, resulting in a reduction of $8,800,000 from the budget
estimate.
                                                       IP. 35]

  The $2,500,000 reduction would be applied to research,  develop-
ment, and demonstration grants and contracts. Such a reduction
would affect the Agency's  extramural work in  air, water, solid
wastes, noise, radiation,  and pesticides. This reduction would have
an adverse effect on research progress in these important  areas.
  The reduction of $6.3 million would affect those programs which
involve  field investigations, special studies, and other technical
work necessary to support EPA's activities. Specifically  affected
would be the assistance to the States in developing implementation
plans for the national ambient air quality standards; guidelines
for water quality criteria and waste treatment and discharge re-
quirements; and inventories and studies of feedlot, forestry and
logging, irrigation return flow, and runoff pollution sources. Any
reduction to these activities would reduce EPA's technical assist-
ance to State, local, and other Federal agencies.
  The Committee recommends restoration of the entire reduction
by the House  and the addition of $15  million above the budget
estimate for additional demonstrations for resource recovery sys-
tems and improved solid waste disposal facilities.
  The following table shows the programs  and amounts involved
in the $8,800,000 reduction by the House, and the additions pro-
posed by the Committee.
Operations, research
and facilities
Air pollution
Water pollution
Solid waste
Water hygiene
Radiation
Pesticides
Noise



Total 	 	

House action
1972 budget Grant and Economic
request Contract impact
Review Board statements
$152,114,000
151,364,000
28,378,000
4,750,000
8,852,000
22,161,000
1,233,000
1,010 000
36,038,000
28,000,000

433,900,000
-$1,150,000 $-3,150,000
-900,000 -3,150,000
-350,000 	

-25,000 	
-50,000 .. 	 	
-25,000 	 	 	




-2,500,000 -6,300,000
1972 House Committee
allowance recommendation
$147,814,000
147,314,000
28,028,000
4,750,000
8,827,000
22,111,000
1,208,000
1,010,000
36,038,000
28,000,000
425,100,000
$152,114,000
151,364,000
43,378,000
4,750,000
8,852,000
22,161,000
1,233,000
1,010,000
36,038,000
28,000,000
448,900,000

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1985

  The Committee is aware of the fact that the program levels of
the Environmental Protection Agency are a matter of deep concern
to many Members of Congress and the public. The budget requests
for Operations, Research, and  Facilities, while representing a
rather sharp increase of approximately 45 percent over the 1971
funding level, are far short of the authorizations provided by the
Congress  for  several programs. On the other hand, it must be
remembered that this  is a new  Agency, having been created on
December 2, 1970,  and it has taken some time for the  Agency
to organize in order to proceed with the vast responsibilities with
which it has been charged.
  Representatives of the Agency testified before the Committee
that their original budget requests, with some minor exceptions,
were approved by the Office of Management and Budget, and that
these requests were realistic and adequate to carry on their pro-
grams for 1972. The Committee feels that their opinion and views
in this regard should be accorded considerable weight.
                                                        [p. 36]

  During the  course of the hearings considerable testimony was
received in reference to some solid waste disposal projects which
are now under development. It appears that some of these projects
hold great promise in solving many of the problems, both from an
economic and  environmental standpoint, in the disposal of solid
wastes. The Committee urges the Agency to proceed with further
development of these projects as expeditiously as possible.
  The Committee  expects the Agency to formulate its budget
requests for fiscal year 1973 at a level in keeping with the magni-
tude of the problems involved and with the expressed intent and
urgency of the Congress in the authorizing legislation.

                      CONSTRUCTION GRANTS

1971 New budget (obligational) authority	$1,000,000,000
1972 Budget estimate—New (obligational) authority	  2,000,000,000
House bill—New (obligational) authority	  2,000,000,000
Committee recommendation—New (obligational) authority	2,000,000,000

  This  appropriation covers the Federal grants that  would be
made available to municipal, intermunicipal, State, nd interstate
agencies for the construction of waste treatment works and major
interceptor sewers  under a proposed  bill to extend and amend
Section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as  amended.

-------
1986           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

Section 8 oi the current Act expires on June  30, 1971, and the
Agency has transmitted to the Congress a proposed bill to  extend
and substantially modify the provisions of this section of the Act.
  Federal grant assistance for the construction of municipal waste
treatment works has been authorized since 1956; since that time,
through February 28, 1971, $2.2 billion of assistance has  been
provided  for 11,397 facilities having a total cost of  $9.3 billion.
Over this period both the percentages  of Federal grants and the
annual amount of monies authorized and appropriated has  been
increased in several steps. For 1971  $1.25 billion was authorized
with $1 billion being appropriated. The current percentages of
Federal assistance range between 30  and 55 percent.
  The legislative proposal would authorize $2 billion for each of
the years 1972,1973, and 1974 to provide $6 billion for the Federal
share.
  The Federal share of $6 billion was calculated as follows:

                                                        In billions
     Total requirements to meet construction needs by end of 1974_- $12.00
Estimated average Federal share, 48.5 percent	  5.82
Federal requirement for reimbursements, November 30, 1970	  1.46
Total estimated Federal need by end of 1974	  7.28
Less unobligated  Federal  funds November 30, 1970	  1.26
New need  	  6.02
Average Federal  requirement over 3 years	  2.007


  The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,000,000,000
for "Construction Grants," which is the amount contained in the
House bill, the budget estimate, and an increase of $1,000,000,000
over the fiscal year 1971 appropriation.
  The Committee is providing these funds with the understanding
that they shall be available only to the extent authorized by law.
                                                          [p. 37]
   SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES OVERSEAS (SPECIAL FOREIGN CURRENCY PROGRAM)

1971 New budget (obligational) authority	$ 3,500,000
1972 Budget estimate—New (obligational) authority	 10,670,000
House bill—New (obligational) authority	  7,000,000
Committee recommendation—New (obligational) authority	  7,000,000

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1987

  This appropriation covers the support of valuable research, de-
velopment, and demonstration projects in foreign countries. Ap-
propriated funds are used to purchase the currencies of these
countries  which  have  accrued to the United States  primarily
through the sale of surplus agricultural commodities. These pur-
chased currencies are employed to support the projects undertaken
in the participating countries. This program is authorized by the
Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954 and
the International Health Research Act of 1960.
  The program is designed to gain greater knowledge of the effects
of and  means  of  controlling  environmental pollution. Through
this program, EPA  combines  the talents of U.S. scientists with
the expertise  of foreign specialists in collaborative work that
contributes to the advancement of the domestic  mission of EPA
as well as those of the  participating countries. Further, this pro-
gram enables EPA to study unusual or intensified environmental
conditions in the participating countries that are not readily in-
vestigable in the U.S.
  The  Committee concurs  with the  House recommendation  of
$7,000,000 for this program, which is $3,670,000 below the budget
estimate, and $3,500,000 above the fiscal year 1971 program level.
                                                        [p. 38]

-------
1988
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL



K
01

o
u_
_J
m
UJ
S
z
UJ
O
Z
LU
0
a
0=
1—
z
o
o
z
LU
t-
s
t-
V)
UJ
h-
LU
00
Q
Z
5
Ł
t—
0
^
<
<
z
o
t—
QQ
O
h—
UJ

CO
UJ
Z
U.
O

Z
UJ
Ł
COMPARATIVE STATE

| g
Ł •-!
* ^
2 s S
s =
1 Ł
8
^ ^J
S E
W -^: csj
x sa $
J, a"
01 "C
S in
§
•a „ ^ ~
o .1 ^ >, 2

Is s ^§ ^ ° ^
e
" ill
- = 8 ^
| i 1 "
1 1 1
E

_ fi. E K
a> 
-g'g »^r
5 •§ >.-§ s ff
111 II w
1 =
•Ł *-s
Iiltl
Ł S S | - S

f s " •=
m
^

* ^5 CB "^
f | « ~ 2 ,j
l|jŁl








2 .5
r— *-.
0 0
o E
Ł5 °
-^'i =
2 « ^
TITLE III— ENVIRONMEN
Independent AS
uncil on Environmental Qualit]
mental Quality 	
S
g
O
g'
00
fO
CNJ
+

g
°. .
o to
l/> CO
*•


11 1
i 1 1
oo o" "
+
§1 1
§o o"
O O
oo" o" r*T
c\T


§§ i
g" o" o"
g 0
CM O
es?
So o
o o
0 0 0
.
CO O O
CM"



O O O
si 1
S| "

i
u
'5
Ł
T5
i
o> a.
" ™ «
vironmental Protection Agenc)
Operations, research and fac
Construction grants 	
Scientific activities oversea:
rency program) 	
Ł


g"
OO

CM


g
o
s
~
'


§
s
CsT
+
1
1
in"
~"


§
g
3
CM"
|
cT
"•

CM



^_
S
!



u
E
<-
o
I
"o
Total, Environmental Pr


^
o"
-j-










§
o"
5
+

g
O
'1




§
S


1
1



0
*

s







u
I

tional Commission on Material
R)
z
—





,^
go
- °.
is
§ §
-f- +
' —

§g
o o
o" o
Is.

*-
if
gg
0 0
g g
— '


o o"
88
§1
g'g
"> ~

§
O
§
S
•~

0 ~T

"
I
CD
LO
CO
*"*
"c "
1 1
•S g
i i
Q {g Q.
§i|

=> ™ '»
eporfmenr of Housing and
jnts for basic water and sewer
Unobligated balance availabi
0 -5
~





_
g
°.
§
i
i


i
o
g
8
—
|
o
o
o
g
-"


1
§
g"
r-

1
§
s
— •

s

^
§
LO









Total, facilities. 	

Ł|

-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
1989

•o
3
'c
O
f
CM
O)
ce
0
m
UJ
x
i—
z
o
LM
a
LU
S
s.
o
o
LU
ce
J-
z
o
s
0
Z
CO
CO
UJ
1—
UJ
I
00
9)
ce
O
u_
h-
S
o
I
5
o
_i
00
s
K-
UJ
o
00
s
UJ
z
u.
o
IVE STATEMENT
OMPARAT
u

1
Ł
•a
V
a.
E
8
=
13
Ł
CO
7
s
i
1

1

Ł




|
•c
j;
$
O)
Z
1
E
a
•s
m
a
•a
z











CM
2
3 ^
s S
3
O


Ł
w
.i
F
00

§Ł,,&
s

o. o Ł>
ill
^* C  in  ** >— ' °0 O*
So to m CM en
« 0 CNJ i-H
V9-
linn
SiSslS
2~ S~"
§0 0 0 0 0
O O O O C3
o o o a °
to I-H r- 1-1 oo ^H
«• en o ^ co in
to o ^H ^- »-( oo
in 2 ^ o csi 2
C* ^"

iliili
to tn oo 10 oo c«j
S> °^ r— ?g I-H

1 ;
i ;
< ;
', ;
a g
1 1 E
3~~ s «
•c '•Ł 1
"S ..|'i I
•ft « .2 w g ™
Ijjlltii
Sllllii

I
g
°.
s

+


I
s
OO
•*"


8
O
fN

+
|
csT
22

1
i
10"
1
1
s
^


§
g
s






8
lil Conservation S
CO
•§


•*7

j

; ;
1
! "^
g^ g
0 0
g g"
in o
in" i-T
10 +
. 	 .

Ill
in o" rC

-!- +
lili
§ i I §
in - O c-g
ss--

O o ° °
So o o
000
§ § § I
S S 2 ^1
0 o 0 0
g§8g
s s g g
o o o o
o o o ir>"
^" ^-

§§ §
o o c^
II 1
iO in m
en oo

t i
3 I i
'S '= •
= ll g'

E o- S 'g Ł
|s|f |
o ta **s & qj
<-> -X S •= E
lillss
Ills 11
'•§ s | ° ^ »
Hi^i
||llf|
1 1 s 5

5







g
o
1
S


§
o*4
g

+
I
g
in
l-s

o
g_
o"
s
CM
|
|
S


§
s"
LO
1

C
o
1
c
s
•a
TO
.2
15
;i (cultural Stabiliz
e 	
I1


§
o
o
S3



|
CO
s
ft"


i
i

5
§
CM
m
3
CO~
1
in"
S
01
o
g_
1
to
en


I
a
CM
evj


o
?
•g
Ł
I
tie III, Environmi
1


i— i r-i
 CO
d d<
1— 1 L_ 1






































-------
1990
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

•g
y
c
•gf
e
o
o
CM
s
o
U.
_J
CO
UJ
z
O
Ul
o
z
E
o

OS
CO
z
1
Q
Z
oo
UJ
p
CO
h-
UJ
C3
a
=3
CD
0
Z
*

"-«
g
Ł
h—
ec
0
H-
<
Z
O

2
CO
o
UJ
CD
Q

CO
Ł
UJ

u_
0
h-
z
UJ
E
in
<
t-
co
s
h-
2
S
E
O
o

± S

* ^
s s S
if °

=
1 1
W 2 CM
x la s
•L "&"
s I
S m
§
^ Ł= S
0 .s s >.2
i Hill e
^ S Ł x ^
w o. Jo w "*3 **
Ł 5--S "
g <
ill
Ł E S .-.
Ill s
1 | S
st|cs
11*11 g

^ ^ ^

1 - M

.E Ł o •— cn
to ® *• o ~* gf
i°fl|
3 *-'
CO

•O
f J i * s g..

* — '= 2 S
z o Ł "=










=
i
(Q Łj
g
a






g
S
S
to
+


§
C

g
I
ff
Ą
«
o
4T
O
1
g
IT
O
s
Ł
s
in

o
if



s
if


s
s

^

•«a








z
o
<
= 1
^
< <
(3 J

ce :

«
.
h
g
°..
S
CM



o
IT
S

i
g
(C
01
+
1
s
s
en

8
O
00
CM
S


0

r-.
S
U



|


U












1
E *
3 C
• i
; i
_ i
!]
3 "
'tc

'>i
• H
g
*"!
o
»
+


00 *H
S S
S3"
m t-H

ii
g'S
r*T co
to 5-
-4-
O O
8§
CM CO
ss
in co
O) (0
CO Ol
||
S?3
CM O
tt r—
co" CM"

8S
O O
•«• CM
g S
s i
CM C\T


O O
ss
CM in
m csi

CM -*r

CM CM
i




S
U
1
CO

*3 ca
0 J
' - S
i. S Ł

ii i
*• 2 1
* > S
5 Ł ,3
:1^

- H- P
S
°«
ro
to
(0


s
in"

o
o
in
oo
in
CO
^*
S
CO
o
s
%
o
S
co"
o
to
ffi
CO
CM
CM

g

CO
s
I
•


g
o
-
00


0.


»,
™

Ł
3
^.

O
M
|

a
^i
1
-;
"o


g
°.
5
S
to


8
CM
CM"
in

ii
SI
^ cs
S3 I
+
ii
si
01 W
a ~
CM
O C
SS
si
in CN
rJ
~
si
CO O
CO C
to c
in ^"
^


§1
S g
u> c

oo

oo









^J
2
'5>
"OT
o

,1 ;
.2
g-
1
< o
i-t C







ir
+






§
I
s

•§
g
in
in
a


" o
o
a
g
i
c



i
c
c

a















•

= '
II
|.

?•
5t
x r
§
.
1
^
+


o
^
1
rC
a

i 1
1 i
o> "
CM 1
+
§ i
§oc
0
in g
CD 0

g i
0 C
§ 2
CM «
CO CT
S S


S 8
o c
O ex
3 5
5 °
*T «



§ §
§ "
00 01

to e


]
J
;
•
J2
Q. ,

t-
S
•S n '
E?
2 2 -
«•— o
~a E '

; v «E

1 O
i s
s-s •
j| •

2 f
II
«5 * »
8
.
K
in
CO


I
s
JS

II

S "

+"
i!
•* c
r^  CO C
eg"
"*
> Si
> 03 C
> s s
i 3 '
1 as
' CO C
CM


1 O C
5 S^
I s?
- •* *


* ^« c
ffT
;
i-i
t "O
! '5
51 °"

J 0
: t)

_> ~
* •=
I o
3 5.
U 0.

; .5
' 'a >,

ill
5 "w ^j
s" o" "S
IIs
•4 OJ









!§
{§
3" i-T
+

!§
§S
? R
g

!§
38
3 r-.
•> ?->.
M


= 0

3 tO
H CM
M



||
n CM
T O

•> r<»














CM
to

ii
2 "n
"M "ft
1 1
pi ^
0
CO
•
1— 1






















































-------
           STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY      1991

         1.17a(3)   COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
           H.R. REP. No. 92-376, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971)

AGRICULTURE-ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSUMER PRO-
         TECTION PROGRAMS, FISCAL YEAR 1972
               JULY 22, 1971.—Ordered to be printed
Mr. WHITTEN, from the committee of conference, submitted the
                         following

                  CONFERENCE REPORT
                   [To accompany H.R. 9270]

  The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill  (H.R. 9270)
making appropriations for the agriculture-environmental and con-
sumer protection programs for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1972,  and for other purposes, having met,  after full and free
conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their
respective Houses as follows:  * * *
                                                       [p.i]

          TITLE III—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

                    Independent Agencies
             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

  Amendment No. 22: Provides $441,000,000 for operations, re-
search, and  facilities  instead of $425,100,000 proposed by the
House and $458,900,000 proposed by the  Senate.  In addition to
restoring the $8,800,000 deleted on the House floor, the conferees
agreed to provide an additional $7,500,000 for solid waste disposal
grants.
  The conferees believe it most important that the various agen-
cies of Government and the Congress, in the review and appraisal
of Federal Government programs, projects,  and activities,  have
full information available  not only as to the impact upon the
environment but also the significant economic  impact on the public
and the affected areas and industries.
  The conferees, therefore, direct that, in addition to the environ-
mental effects of an action, all required reports from departments,

-------
1992         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

agencies, or persons shall also include information, as prepared by
the agency having responsibility for administration of the pro-
gram, project, or activity involved, on the effect on the economy,
including employment, unemployment, and other economic im-
pacts.
                                                       [p. 7]

  The conferees expect the agencies involved to spend such addi-
tional sums as may be necessary, out of general funds available, to
cover any additional costs of preparing such statements.
  This requirement will apply primarily to the environmental im-
pact statements required under section 102 of the Environmental
Quality Act, and the reports required under the permit dumping
programs based on the Refuse Act of 1899.

          NATIONAL COMMISSION ON MATERIALS POLICY

  Amendment No.  23: Provides $500,000 for this newly appointed
Commission as proposed  by the Senate instead of $50,000 pro-
posed by the House. At the time of the House action, the Commis-
sion had not been appointed.  In providing the funds for its opera-
tion, the conferees direct that the Congress be kept informed on
the progress of such studies as are undertaken.

    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE—SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE

  Amendment No. 24: Provides $154,734,000 for conservation op-
erations proposed by the Senate instead of $150,146,000 proposed
by the House.
  Amendments Nos. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31: The Senate
concurs with the House recommendation to merge the two appro-
priations "Watershed works  of improvement" and "Flood preven-
tion" because of their similarity. The conference agreement in-
cludes $105,411,000 for watershed programs and $26,688,000 for
flood prevention projects.
  Amendment No. 32: Provides $18,113,500 for the Great Plains
conservation program instead  of  $16,229,000 proposed by the
House and $19,998,000 proposed by the Senate.

     AGRICULTURAL STABILIZATION AND CONSERVATION SERVICE

  Amendment No. 33: Deletes  language added by the Senate to
raise the limitation on payments under the rural environmental

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       1993

assistance program to $5,000  in connection with practices to re-
duce pollution by animal wastes. The conference considered this
matter and calls on the Department to make a thorough review of
the need for such adjustment.
                                                         [p. 8]


           CONFERENCE TOTAL—WITH  COMPARISONS

  The total new budget (obligational) authority for the fiscal year
1972 recommended by the Committee of Conference, with com-
parisons to  the fiscal year 1971 total, the 1972 budget estimate
total, and the House and Senate bills follows:

New budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 1971	  $9,548,907,550
Budget estimates of new (obligational) authority, fiscal year
  1972	  12,104,813,850
House bill, fiscal year 1972	  12,423,896,050
Senate bill, fiscal year 1972	  13,621,677,050
Conference agreement	  13,276,900,050
Conference agreement compared with—
    New budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 1971 — +3,727,992,500
    Budget estimates of new (obligational)  authority as
     amended), fiscal year 1972	+1,172,086,200
    House bill, fiscal year 1972	  +853,004,000
    Senate bill, fiscal year 1972	  -344,777,000

                                  JAMIE L.  WRITTEN,
                                  WILLIAM H. NATCHEE,
                                  W. R. HULL, Jr.,
                                  GEORGE  E. SHIPLEY,
                                  FRANK E. EVANS,
                                  GEORGE  MAHON,
                                  MARK ANDREWS,
                                  ROBERT  H. MICHEL,
                                  BILL SCHERLE,
                         Managers on the Part of the House.

                                  GALE W. MCGEE,
                                  JOHN C. STENNIS,
                                  ROBERT C. BYRD,
                                  ALLEN J. ELLENDER,
                                  HERMAN E. TALMADGE,
                                  ROMAN L. HRUSKA,
                                  MILTON R. YOUNG,
                                  HIRAM  L.  FONG,
                         Managers on the Part of the  Senate.
                                                        [P. 10]

-------
1994
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
   1.17a(4)  CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 117 (1971)
1.17a(4)(a)   June 3:  Amended and  passed House,  pp.  H5739-
H5740,  H5742,   H5746-H5748,  H5765,  H5767,  H5778-H5779,
H5810-H5811
    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE-
   ENVIRONMENTAL AND CONSUMER
  PROTECTION APPROPRIATIONS, 1972
  Mr.  WRITTEN. Mr.  Speaker, I
move that the House resolve itself into
the Committee  of the  Whole  House
on the  State of  the Union for  the
consideration of the bill (H.R. 9270)
making appropriations  for  agricul-
ture-environmental and  consumer pro-
tection programs  for the  fiscal year
ending June 30, 1972, and for  other
purposes;  and  pending  that  motion,
Mr Speaker, I ask unanimous  con-
sent that general  debate be limited to
not to  exceed 3 hours, the time  to be
equally divided  and controlled by the
gentleman from North Dakota  (Mr.
ANDREWS) and myself.
  The  SPEAKER  pro tempore. Is
there  objection  to the request of  the
gentleman from Mississippi?
  There was no objection.
  The  SPEAKER pro  tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Mississippi.
  The  motion was agreed to.
  IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
  Accordingly the House resolved it-
self into the Committee of the Whole
House  on the State of the Union for
the consideration  of the  bill  (H.R.
9270) with Mr. WRIGHT in the chair.
  The  Clerk read the title of the bill.
  By   unanimous  consent, the  first
reading of the bill was dispensed with.
  The  CHAIRMAN. Under the unani-
mous  consent agreement,  the gentle-
man from  Mississippi  (Mr.  WHIT-
TEN) will be recognized for 1% hours,
and the gentleman from North Dakota
 (Mr.  ANDREWS)  will  be  recognized
for 1% hours.
  The  Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Mississippi  (Mr. WHITTEN).
                     Mr. WHITTEN. Mr.  Chairman, I
                   yield myself 15 minutes.
                         *****
                     Mr. Chairman, may I  say that the
                   total amount  included in the bill is
                   $12,080,596,050, including the first full
                   year appropriation for the Environ-
                   mental  Protection Agency, an  in-
                                           [p. H5739]

                   crease  of $2,531,688,500 over  1971
                   and $22,117,800 below the budget.
                     The bill is divided into four titles—
                   a division which is designed to demon-
                   strate the general impact of the ap-
                   propriation. Such a division is by no
                   means precise  and is subject to indi-
                   vidual interpretation  because of the
                   multiple  benefits derived  from the
                   programs funded in this bill.
                         *****
                   TITLE III—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                   Title III includes $3,126,055,000 for
                   the programs  primarily directed to
                   improving our environment including
                   the  new  Environmental  Protection
                   Agency  and HUD water and  sewer
                   grants. It includes as well, the USDA
                   programs  long provided in this bill
                   including the rural environmental as-
                   sistance program which  this commit-
                   tee has had to restore over 16 times.
                   It also includes the watershed protec-
                   tion programs which  through  dams,
                   stream channelization  and sedimenta-
                   tion control do much to halt pollution
                   at the headwaters.
                                           [p. H5740]
                          *****
                        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                     The  President's  annual report on
                   environmental  quality stated:
                     Environment is  not an abstract concern, or
                   simply a matter of esthetics, or  of personal

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              1995
taste—although it can and  should  involve
these as well. Man is shaped to a great extent
by his surroundings. Our physical nature, our
mental  health, our  culture and  institutions,
our opportunities for challenge and fulfillment,
our very survival—all of  these are  directly
related to and affected by the  environment in
which we live. They depend upon the continued
healthy  functioning of the  natural  systems
of the earth.

   To this the committee would  add
the  other side for man,  in  turn, has
influenced or  changed   his environ-
ment.  From the  beginning as man
has gone along day by day, year by
year, throughout history, he has  con-
tinued to  change and to build for him-
self  a  synthetic  environment—his
clothing,  his  housing, his  food;  in
fact, almost everything about him is
a  result  of converting  natural  ele-
ments  into  products of use  to him.
   Man  departed from natural proc-
esses when he domesticated his first
animal and later  when he planted a
seed.

     THK FARMER'S RELATIONSHIP
        TO THE ENVIRONMENT
   The farmer  has  been  an environ-
mentalist since man  first tilled the
soil  to grow his food. He deals with
                          [p. H5741]

the mutual relationships of plants and
animals and how they live and flour-
ish in  the essential elements of land
and water, sunlight and air. He must
protect those  elements  or he,  and
those dependent on him, will  perish.
Agriculture then is a  natural custod-
ian of  the land. The farmer has faced
the dual challenge of producing more
food each year in  a way that protects
his resources and preserves his ability
to produce.  It is no accident that the
average  farmer  produces  food  and
fiber for  46 others and  continues  to
expand this number.
  Farm production per acre has  in-
creased about  3 precent a year due to
such influences as the use of fertiliz-
ers,  pesticides, better technology  in-
cluding  soil  and  water  conservation
practices, and less use of lower grade
land. One of these influences, the use
of fertilizer, has  been considered by
some as a detriment to environmental
quality.  But  if  fertilizers  were re-
stricted  as a pollution control, the re-
sults undoubtedly  would be  an in-
crease in consumer  prices  for  food,
and  an  expansion of intensive  agri-
culture  into so-called marginal land
with higher erosion with greater pol-
lution, not less. Agricultural scientists
find   that  a  more  proper  direction
would be toward achieving maximum
production from the best soils, using
the best combination of all  practices.
This may mean the use of higher rates
of fertilizer application by farmers
on good  land, with even greater atten-
tion  to erosion  and water control so
that fertilizer residues will  not  leave
agricultural  fields  but  remain  for
their benefit.
  Pesticides  are a must  if we are to
control the  pests  that compete with
man for survival.  Through the use of
these  chemical  materials,  we  have
made progress in controlling the in-
sects that carry such human diseases
as yellow fever, malaria, typhus, and
bubonic  plague. We have also  been
making  progress  over the years—in
lesser degree—in  controlling agricul-
tural pests and  diseases, rather than
accept the full impact of production,
storage,  and quality losses of food and
fiber.
  It  is imperative that pesticides be
used  judiciously,  with knowledge of
total effects, because of the potential
dangers  to  human  health,  livestock,
fish,   and wildlife,  desirable  plants,
and  beneficial insects. It is especially
important to use persistent pesticides
only  when they are necessary in the
best  interests of mankind.
  Another environmental problem of
concern  to agriculture is contamina-
tion  by animal wastes. Concentrations
of cattle and hogs raised in confine-
ment have  increased  waste-disposal

-------
1996
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
problems.  The tremendous growth in
the U.S. broiler  industry has brought
additional waste problems.  Handling
such  wastes in  such  a  way  as to
minimize the pollution to the environ-
ment is a goal  we must accept, but
with  present technology it will be
costly.
   POLLUTION VERSUS CONVENIENCE
  As soon as primitive man moved
his fire into his cave, he became aware
of air pollution in the form of smoke.
He probably learned to  reduce the
smoke in his cave by careful placing
and  stoking. He then decided to  ac-
cept  some  smoke in  return for the
warmth and convenience of the fire
nearby.  We  have been weighing pol-
lution against convenience ever since.
  We all realize that if the people in
our  major  cities would  park  their
automobiles,  trucks and buses for a
month or  moved out of town for an
equal time,  there is no  doubt as to
the progress we  could make in restor-
ing many of the antiquated and de-
plorable conditions we find in many
sections. But automotive  transporta-
tion, too, is   an  integral part of our
way of life and part of our prosperity.
Is it essential to our economy, and it
will  take a healthy economy to retain
public support as we attempt to find
the billions of dollars needed if we are
to restore our environment for present
and  future generations.
  The cost   has been  estimated at
hundreds of  billions of dollars.
  Thus, in view of the costs and of
the tremendous job ahead of us, with
the need to keep our economy healthy
and  strong  as we try  to correct the
mistakes of  the past and to prevent
them in the  future, we believe it will
be necessary to  set up  a  system of
priorities, putting those  conditions
that are downright dangerous ahead
of those conditions which may be only
undesirable.
  It is not that we don't need both, but
we need to establish some priority so
as to deal with first things first.
                     Of course, we all know we must stop
                   emptying  raw   sewage   into   our
                   streams. We must provide for con-
                   trolling industrial wastes  and chem-
                   icals shown to be dangerous to health
                   while we keep those things which, by
                   providing protection from insects and
                   diseases, pest and pestilence, have in-
                   creased  our  life  expectancy by  20
                   years  since 1900 and  our  physical
                   stature by about 2  inches  since  1900.
                     Examples of  reports required  by
                   the Environmental Protection  Agency
                   presented  to the committee  are so
                   voluminous as to raise a serious  ques-
                   tion as to  whether public  support of
                   needed  environmental  improvements
                   can be retained.
                                             [p.  H5742]

                     Mr.  ANDREWS  of North Dakota.
                   Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 min-
                   utes.
                          *****
                     For the past 3 months, our subcom-
                   mittee held hearings on the  various
                   agencies that  have  come  under our
                   jurisdiction. I would urge everyone of
                   you, if at  all possible,  to  review the
                   testimony presented in the  over  5,000
                   pages  of the hearings.
                     To  give  you some idea of how far
                   we went into the various problems, we
                   questioned William Ruckelshaus, the
                   Administrator of the Environmental
                   Protection  Agency for  over 8 hours.
                   During that  period,  we heard  what
                   that agency plans to do  in the area of
                   protecting  our  environment for gen-
                   erations to come—a subject that has
                   been  placed  on  the top  of  almost
                   everyone's  priority  list.
                     Our committee has recommended a
                   $2.4 billion budget for EPA for  fiscal
                   year 1972. A majority of this money,
                   $2 billion,  will  be used  for construc-
                   tion grants.  This  particular appro-
                   priation covers  the  Federal grants
                   that would be made available to muni-
                   cipal,  intermunicipal, State, and  in-
                   terstate agencies for  the construction

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             1997
 of waste treatment works and major
 interceptor   sewers.   Administrator
 Ruckelshaus told our  subcommittee
 that in December of 1970, EPA com-
 pleted a comprehensive survey of the
 Nation's municipal  waste treatment
 needs. This  study showed the need for
 a  national  investment of  $12  billion
 through the end of 1974.
   Such an  investment  would  over-
 come the backlog of construction needs
 necessary to bring all municipal dis-
 charges into compliance  with  estab-
 lished  water  quality  standards,  or
 equivalent   levels  of  quality  where
 standards are not established, and the
 development of  self-sufficient pro-
 grams at the State and local levels for
 assuring the future operation, mainte-
 nance, expansion, and replacement of
 treatment works.  This bill,  our bill
 today, is  the beginning  of  the na-
 tional  commitment  to  resolve this
 serious problem.
  During Administrator Ruckelshaus'
 testimony before the  subcommittee I
 asked  him  about  the  problem  of
 mercury contamination and what pro-
 grams EPA plans to initiate toward
 the goal of  obtaining more informa-
 tion  on mercury in  the  environment
 and the ecological and health signifi-
 cance of this mercury presence. We
 have heard  about it in our fish; we
 have heard  about it in our ducks; we
 have  heard about it  in  more and
 more food products. But so far we do
not have the basic knowledge  to  be
 able  to tell  our  people just what the
 impact of this mercury is. Is  it some-
thing new or has it always  been  in
these  products?  And how  should we
react  to it? This budget  calls  for  a
$1.1  million  increase  in  research
capacity  specifically aimed  at  such
problems of  mercury and other  heavy
metals. Certainly the House must go
along with  these  requests. Our so-
ciety's  future depends on  it.
       *****
                         [p. H5746]
   Mr.  RAILSBACK.  I  appreciate
 your answer  to  the other question.
 Illinois is one of those  States that is
 in compliance with the Federal Water
 Quality  Control Act, which  was  en-
 acted  with  provisions in it that  im-
 posed  certain stringent  requirements
 on local communities to come up with
 funds  to improve   their sewer  and
 water systems.  Many of these com-
 munities have been  able to go ahead
 only to find that the Federal Govern-
 ment has not come up with its match-
 ing requirement. I  know too our  ad-
                         [p.  H5747]

 ministration has frozen some of these
 funds,  including, I  believe,  some of
 the direct grant funds,  which greatly
 concerns me. I had a chance to testify,
 not  this year, but  last year,  before
 your subcommittee as well as the sub-
 committee on the Senate side handling
 this matter. The question I have is
 this: I wonder what, if anything, we
 can do to see to it that the  admin-
 istration releases the freeze on these
 funds which are so important to many
 of  our  local  communities. I  might
 mention for  the record that in respect
 to  Illinois,  for  instance, we  have
 many, many communities that  are in
 noncompliance  with the  law,  not
 through their  own fault, but because
 the Federal  Government has not come
 up  with its  fair share  of the  funds.
 I wonder what we can do to undo this
 freeze.
  Mr.  ANDREWS  of North  Dakota.
 Today in this budget we  are reap-
 propriating   amounts  which  were
 frozen and adding $150 million to it.
 That should  give us an adequate solu-
 tion of this  particular problem. I will
 join my colleague  from Illinois  in
 imploring the  powers that be  at the
 other end of the avenue to begin  re-
leasing the  funds.
  Mr.  RAILSBACK.  I want  to com-
ment only that it became a very seri-
ous thing when  you have local com-

-------
1998
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
munities that are in danger  of non-
compliance and could be penalized on
a  daily  basis, because  the  Federal
Government which designed the pro-
gram has not been meeting its respon-
sibilities. It has  been going on ever
since the Federal Government first
enacted the legislation in 1965. I hope
that  your  great subcommittee  and
great  committee   are  able  to apply
pressure to force them to release the
funds. This is a very serious thing
                         [p. H5748]

  Mr. BEGICH. Mr. Chairman, I rise
today to express  some specific disap-
pointment  with  this  appropriation,
and  to make clear my desire for fu-
ture changes. I rise also to make  it
clear that I will support amendments
to this bill which increase the appro-
priations in  the  important area of
water  and waste disposal  grants.
  My disappointment stems from an
appropriation that has been left out
and  my  feeling  that  prompt  action
could have  prevented this  omission.
Specifically, I am speaking  of  an ap-
propriation of up to  $800,000, which
would  have assisted in the construc-
tion  of an incinerator and trash facil-
ity in  Barrow, Alaska.
  Before  my  comments   begin  to
sound too much like special pleading,
let  me elaborate on  the  situation.
First, as many of you know, Barrow
is the northernmost community in this
Nation, and is subject to year-round
permafrost,   long  cold-weather  pe-
riods, and general disability to effec-
tively dispose of  waste materials. In
addition, the  improper  disposal  of
waste is extremely harmful to numer-
ous aspects of the Arctic environment.
  For  some time, the solution to this
situation has been known. It is to con-
struct  a large waste disposal  facility
which  will  incinerate both  solid  and
liquid  wastes, and compact for  dis-
posal  the  innumerable  empty fuel
drums which must be left about since
no workable alternative exists.
                     The Department of the Navy, which
                   has an installation in this  area, has
                   been well aware of this solution, and
                   has completely cooperated. This year
                   they assisted in gaining a $1.2 million
                   appropriation for an incinerator facil-
                   ity  toward a total cost of $2 million.
                   The remainder  was  to  come  from
                   other sources.
                     Since the needs of this area were
                   so obvious, and the possible solutions
                   almost equally obvious, the remaining
                   funding  seemed  very  possible.  The
                   best source, I learned, would be the
                   Environmental  Protection   Agency,
                   for whom we are considering appro-
                   priations  today. Immediate  inquiries
                   were started.
                     The  period  since that  time  is the
                   source of disappointment. Action on
                   this proposal, in spite of EPA's knowl-
                   edge of  the  need,  and of  the short
                   construction season, was  halting and
                   ambiguous. When EPA asked for the
                   participation position of  the Barrow
                   and Alaska governments, full  assur-
                   ance of participation  was given.
                     Still, the  lack  of coordination be-
                   tween  EPA and  the  Navy and the
                   various levels of Alaskan  government
                   was disappointing. I quite frankly ex-
                   pected that EPA  would be the  leader
                   in this struggle   since  the clearest
                   area of concern on this project  was
                   environmental.
                     My intent here  is  simple. It is to
                   point out  that delays, failures  to co-
                   operate and communicate, and lack of
                   information were responsible for the
                   omission of this project.  In no way
                   will I  vote  or speak  to  impair the
                   EPA  appropriation. In fact, I fully
                   plan to argue and vote for  increased
                   funding today.
                     I do  want to reemphasize that good
                   and necessary projects like this should
                   not be  hampered by the sort of  action
                   I have described.  The people of Bar-
                   row  are the  losers  here, and they
                   should not be.
                     Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, the
                   most pressing need in environmental

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              1999
 protection is substantial research into
 every aspect of pollution. Congress,
 has  attacked   businessmen,   cajoled
 local  and  State  governments,  and
 criticized individuals for their lack of
 social concern with  the pollution is-
 sue.  Congress  has taken  action  on
 enforcement and regulation, tax sub-
 sidies, and grants. Congress has re-
 peatedly voiced its concern for doing
 something in this matter. Yet all this
 is meaningless  without the  absolute
 necessity of research. The measure we
 vote  on  today  will provide that re-
 search.
   The necessity of  research is unques-
 tioned. Before  industry  can  devise
 methods of control, for instance, they
 will want to know exactly what  will
 be expected of them. In addition, the
 regulatory powers vitally needed by
 the Environmental Protection Agency
 to enforce standards is  meaningless
 if a  proper  background  of research
 has not been accomplished. The priv-
 ate sector of the United  States  will
 act responsibly only if the  Govern-
 ment does so first. That  is why we
 must have research.
   The proposed Environmental Health
 Center in Cincinnati will meet  the
 needs  of the Nation in  providing this
 research.  In  fact, Congress has indi-
 cated  since the Kennedy administra-
 tion its intent to build this research
 facility.
   Cincinnati has not waited. After the
 authorization was approved, the city
 government  thrust  its efforts  and
 money into  establishing  the  prelim-
 inary steps. First, the city offered the
 Federal Government  several sites for
 the center.  Second,  the  city began
 purchasing land and relocating fam-
 ilies.  This effort is now almost com-
plete.  And,  third,  the city  has, to
 date,  spent $2,143,400 on this  project,
with  a commitment  to the  Federal
 Government to spend a total of nearly
$4,500,000.  The  authorization   has
been  made. Cincinnati  has acted on
this and  accomplished all that it can
 at this stage. We are ready for a re-
 sponsible Congress  to act.
  Why is Cincinnati the best location?
 Because,  Mr.  Chairman,  Cincinnati
 has  the greatest concentration in the
 Nation of trained personnel to handle
 pollution  research. The new research
 facility will be located adjacent to the
 University  of  Cincinnati, which  has
 graduate programs  in environmental
 health, air pollution, industrial  hy-
 giene, occupational medicine, environ-
 mental health engineering,  water pol-
 lution,  and  industrial  solid  refuse
 management.
  There  are  now 13  separate  pro-
 grams in Cincinnati  employing 1,043
 people dealing with pollution research.
 Obviously, the  most  practical  thing
 would be to put  all  this under  one
 roof. To  move  the  center  elsewhere
 would mean  a delay in  the program
 of an additional 1.5 to 2 years. It is
 imperative, therefore, that in this vital
 issue,  Congress should respond in  a
 positive manner.
  Congress  must  meet the  needs  of
 the  people  and on  an  issue  so  ob-
 viously and explicitly defined as this,
 it seems imperative  that  the Govern-
 ment should appropriate this $28 mil-
 lion  for research facilites. The people
 cannot  lose confidence in the  ability
 of its Government to act.
                         [p. H5765]

  Mr. WRITTEN. I  appreciate  the
 gentleman from  Michigan  yielding.
 May  I say  our  committee felt  we
 needed to point these matters up  in
 the bill. We expected  them  to go  out
 on objection, thus, we used substan-
 tially the same language in the report
 and  we will  expect  this  agency and
 others to  follow this  language.
  Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will
 yield further, I would like  to say  at
this  time that this subcommittee was
asked to appropriate hundreds of mil-
lions of dollars  to the Administrator
of   the   Environmental   Protection
Agency without any limitation or re-

-------
2000
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
striction upon  his  action.  Each  and
every business and every person in the
whole country  is in his control with
reference  to this particular program.
No one is questioning his abilities.
However,  there is not anything to
hold him  in  check. The man, in my
opinion, has more power than a good
man would want and more power than
a bad man ought to have. But, we felt
we could not in all fairness bring in
all that money, with all of  that power,
without making  some limitation.
   Mr. DINGELL. As I am sure my
good friend from Mississippi knows,
I  am chairman of the  subcommittee
that has  jurisdiction  over the  Na-
tional Environmental Policy Act. We
have tried in the bill,  and I believe
successfully so, to come forward with
a  piece  of legislation which provides
for this opportunity for consideration
of environmental problems and to ob-
serve and consider the  effects of the
actions  or  the  failure  to  act insofar
as  economic  consequences  are   con-
cerned.  It is  our intention later  this
year to attempt to go further into that
matter  and review the  whole of the
Environmental  Policy Act  and ascer-
tain what future changes  are neces-
sary with  regard  to the  particular
points  about  which my good friend
from Mississippi is concerned and to
which he  has  addressed himself.
   Mr. WRITTEN. Mr. Chairman, if
the gentleman  will yield   further,  I
hope the gentleman will expedite the
action of his committee because in the
meantime  I think a great, powerful
individual—and he impresses me as
being a very fine man—will have al-
most carte blanche authority in the
administration  of  this law.
   Mr. DINGELL.  I would say that
every single  air and  water pollution
statute  we have  passed requires the
actions  of the  Administrator of the
Environmental  Agency  to  reflect the
limits of technology and capability as
well as the  economic  consequences,
and I hope the gentleman  from Mis-
                   sissippi  in  his  consideration of this
                   matter will  view the actions  of the
                   Administrator in the light of the lan-
                   guage of the statutes to which I have
                   alluded.
                     Mr. ANDREWS of North Dakota.
                   Mr.  Chairman,  will  the gentleman
                   yield?
                     Mr. DINGELL. I yield to the gen-
                   tleman from  North Dakota.
                     Mr. ANDREWS of North Dakota
                   I would like to point out that by mak-
                   ing these points  of order  my  good
                   friend from  Michigan who is a great
                   friend of conservation  and  environ-
                   ment has not only  stricken the lan-
                   guage but also  some  $8.8 million  in
                   funds that were in the budget.
                     Mr. DINGELL. I would say to my
                   friend from  North Dakota I am well
                   aware of that. It always pains  me to
                   do this. I will further say with  refer-
                   ence to the last point of order that I
                   have grave doubts as to the wisdom
                   of setting up another  advisory  com-
                   mission without proper committee ac-
                   tion. When there are at least two such
                   advisory  commissions or  boards deal-
                   ing with  water quality, and  one deal-
                   ing with  the quality  of the  entire
                   environment.
                     Mr. Chairman, I might say that I
                   am in sympathy with  the objectives
                   of the gentleman  from Mississippi,
                   and that I do feel that the  economic
                   implications  of  going ahead with  or
                   of halting Federal projects  with en-
                   viromental  implications should   be
                   clearly identified as early as possible
                   in the decision-making process.
                     I raise the point of order,  not  to
                   prevent  this evaluation process from
                   taking place,  but to permit it to take
                   place where it belongs.  While the En-
                   vironmental  Protection Agency is  an
                   organization for which I have a great
                   deal of  respect  and admiration,  its
                   connection with the process of balanc-
                   ing of environmental costs and bene-
                   fits by  agencies of Government is  at
                   best remote. EPA  acts as a regula-
                   tory agency and as a research agency.

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              2001
 It has no responsibilities for injecting
 new economic factors into agency de-
 cisions, nor should it.
   There is an agency which does have
 these responsibilities, and which has
 ample authority to develop procedures
 whereby  other  agencies  of  Govern-
 ment shall take economic factors into
 account in considering whether or not
 to go ahead with a  given project or
 proposal. That agency is the Council
 on Environmental  Quality,  and its
 authority in this  respect is' provided
 by the National Environmental Policy
 Act of 1969—an  act which  resulted
 from legislation  coming out of the
 Subcommittee on  Fisheries  and  Wild-
 life  Conservation, of which I  have
 the honor to be chairman.
   I would refer  the members of the
 Committee to the  language of section
 102  (B) of that  act, which requires
 all agencies of  the  Federal  Govern-
 ment to—
Identify and develop  methods and procedures
— (to)  insure  that presently unquantifled en-
vironmental — values — be  given  appropriate
consideration  in  decisionmaking  along with
economic  and technical considerations.

   The  Council   on  Environmental
 Quality has recently adopted amended
 guidelines to assist agencies  of  Gov-
 ernment in  developing their planning
 processes pursuant to section 102(2)
 (C)  of  the  act.  My staff  has been in
 contact with the Council, to urge them
 to develop supplementary guidelines to
 assist  the  agencies  in carrying  out
the purposes of section 102(2) (B) of
 that act. I understand that  the Coun-
 cil is in agreement with this proposal,
although it is not presently  able  to
tell us how  soon  such supplementary
guidelines might  be  forthcoming.
  I do agree entirely with the gentle-
man that the economic implications of
projects which affect the environment
must be considered. I do not feel that
the language suggested in the measure
before us is the proper route to that
objective the solutions to urban  prob-
lems,  then legislators from  the  cities
must live up  to  their  word  to  the
farmers.
   I  ask,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  the
amendment be defeated.
   Mr. BLATNIK. Mr.  Chairman, I
will support  the  amendment  of  the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr.  STEPH-
ENS) when it is  offered  to  provide
$700 million  for  grants  for basic
water and sewer facilities authorized
by section 702 of the Housing Act of
1965.
   Day after day, we talk and we hear
about pollution—air  pollution,  water
pollution,  noise pollution,  and now
even population pollution. The news-
papers carry story after story describ-
ing  horrible situations in  Lake Erie,
the  Potomac  River,  San  Francisco
Bay, and even Biscayne Bay.  The ad-
ministration sends bill  after  bill to
the Hill for our consideration on these
subjects. However, when it comes time
to do something about it, the  admin-
istration stumbles and falls.
   It is totally inconceivable to  me that
a  program  as vital  and urgently
needed as  this one should be treated
with the  neglect that  it has.  After
freezing  and withholding the funding
for  this  major  environmental  pro-
gram, the  President recommended  no
funds for  the water and  sewer line
program in this year's budget.
   In  H.R. 9270, the  bill  before  us,
there is  included  appropriations  of
$2 billion  for the  sewage treatment
plant construction program  admin-
istered by  the Environmental  Protec-
tion Agency. As recently as 2  years
ago, we were talking about $214 mil-
lion, and  it has been a  tremendous
effort to  raise this  amount to  $2 bil-
lion.  However, one  program   cannot
be successful without the other. It is
sheer folly to build treatment plants
and  at the same time to  ignore  the
necessary storm and sanitary sewer
systems which are complementary and
necessary for the successful carrying
out of a total program.
  The $700 million  proposed  in the

-------
2002
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
amendment is in my judgment an ab-
solute  minimal figure. There are ap-
plications backlogged in the various
HUD field offices involving legitimate
requests of over $1 billion. Anything
less than a $700 million appropriation
would  be folly.
  In  my  judgment,  this   minimal
amount is satisfactory but only if the
President signs and  requests appro-
priation  under the Public Work Ac-
celeration Act which  is now before
him. That act gives special  emphasis
to programs  that  would improve the
quality  of living which includes sew-
ers, waste treatment and water dis-
tribution facilities. The Public Works
Acceleration Act would permit eligible
communities  to  obtain  grants  up to
80 percent of their cost as contrasted
with the 50 percent of eligible land
and construction costs under the HUD
program.  In  fact,  in  same  hard-
pressed communities, grants could go
as high as 100 percent.
  I urge the adoption of the proposed
amendment.
                        [p. H5767]

  Mr. DRINAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise
today in support of the amendment to
the appropriations bill for  agricul-
tural,  environmental,  and  consumer
protection which has been offered by
my distinguished colleagues, the gen-
tleman from  New Jersey (Mr.  WID-
NALL),  and   the   gentleman   from
Georgia   (Mr.   STEPHENS).   This
amendment would increase from $150
to $500 million the amount of new
money provided as grants for the con-
struction of water and  sewer  lines,
pursuant to  section 702 of the Hous-
ing Act of 1965.
  Mr. Chairman, we have for too long
failed to heed the vehement  cries of
our local communities for Federal as-
sistance in the construction  of  vital
sewer and water  lines. I have con-
tacted mayors and selectmen through-
out my district and have found that
the transmission of waste to  treat-
                   ment plants, which these lines would
                   accomplish, remains one of their pri-
                   mary problems. Yet we have done little
                   to facilitate progress  in this area.
                     The  inequities of the present sys-
                   tem of Federal grants for sewer pro-
                   grams  are readily apparent.  Under
                   this system, a community must demon-
                   strate that it has a workable plan for
                   transmitting sewage to the treatment
                   plant in order to qualify  for a Fed-
                   eral  grant for  construction of  the
                   plant itself. But the construction  of
                   lines for this transmission is usually
                   as expensive as building the plant  it-
                   self.  Many communities have, there-
                   fore, been unable  to  obtain Federal
                   funds for a plant because they lack
                   the necessary money to build the lines
                   themselves.
                     It is  clear,  Mr. Chairman, that we
                   must begin to deal with the problem
                   of water pollution control in terms of
                   a unitary, integrated funding system,
                   the dual  components of which—con-
                   struction of sewage treatment plants,
                   and construction of sewer and water
                   lines to transport the sewage and sur-
                   face water to  the  plants—are insep-
                   arable.  It is  incongruous for us  to
                   continue allocating Federal funds for
                   the plants, but not for the sewer and
                   water lines without which the plants
                   cannot function.
                     The   Environmental   Protection
                   Agency's sewage treatment plant pro-
                   gram  can not  alone  cope with the
                   pressing problem  of water pollution.
                   Critical  to the success of the  EPA
                   program  is  its  supplementation  by
                   the Housing Department's  section 702
                   grant program for sewer  and water
                   lines. This amendment is  the  neces-
                   sary  first step toward that supple-
                   mentation, and toward relieving our
                   local communities  of  the  burden  of
                                            [p. H5778]

                   constructing water and sewer  lines
                   without Federal support.
                     This amendment, besides being nec-
                   essary for the success  of  the EPA's

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             2003
sewage treatment plant program, will
also give a significant boost to lagging
economies in  many communities. It
will provide additional  projects for
contractors, and create new jobs on
these projects. At a time when unem-
ployment figures continue to soar, we
must  give serious  consideration  to  a
program such as this which will stim-
ulate  meaningful employment oppor-
tunities.
  Mr. Chairman, it is  easy for us to
sit  here  in Washington and speak in
abstract  terms of the critical need to
solve  our water  pollution  problems.
But to our  local communities, pollu-
tion is more than  an  abstraction—it
is, rather, a grim reality, stifling  their
growth and beauty. The amendment
proposed today, though falling at least
a  billion dollars  short of meeting
present needs in this area, is a mini-
mal first step toward concrete action
by  this body to  improve our sewage
disposal  systems  and  help alleviate
water pollution.  Rejection of   this
amendment  would   be  a clear signal
that our  commitment does  not match
our talk.
  Mr. WRITTEN.  Mr.  Chairman,  I
move  to  strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. The  gentleman
from  Mississippi is recognized.
  Mr. WRITTEN.  Mr.  Chairman  I
move  to strike out the  last word.  The
two gentlemen who have  spoken on
this amendment, the gentleman from
Georgia  (Mr.  STEPHENS)  and  the
gentleman  from  New  Jersey   (Mr.
WIDNALL) have rendered great serv-
ice  in this area. I cannot differ in any
regard with the objective or with the
value of  the program  that they en-
vision or with its  size. I would say,
speaking  for myself as  chairman, and
not binding  the members of the  sub-
committee, that the thing that counted
with us was the  question how far we
could  go  in increasing  money above
the  budget  and  get it used. So we
agreed on $350 million,  $150 million
above the budget.
  Last year, the amount was raised to
$500 million and the President vetoed
the bill,  which was his  privilege. It
came back, and $350 million was pro-
vided, and the Office of Budget  and
Management released only $150 mil-
lion.
  There is a question whether the en-
tire amount in this amendment could
be used in view  of the  showing the
applicants have  to make  including
putting up their share of funds.
  I personally would be  proud to see
a $700 million program, the  question
is can we get it released and get it
used. This we doubt.
  Mr. ANDREWS  of North Dakota.
Mr.  Chairman,  will the gentleman
yield.?
  Mr. WRITTEN.  I yield to my col-
league from  North  Dakota.
  Mr. ANDREWS  of North Dakota.
I should like to endorse  the  remarks
of our  distinguished  chairman.  He
says it like it is.
  I do not believe that anyone in this
House or  in America today does not
want to do his utmost to seek to take
care of the pollution problems we face.
What we want  are programs which
can be implemented out in  the field.
  Certainly what the chairman  said
expresses  the thoughts of those of us
on the subcommittee, and I  commend
him for saying it.
  Mr. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman,
I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  I rise in opposition not because we
do not need sewer  and water treat-
ment facilities in our country but be-
cause the present programs are per-
petuating  inefficiency.
  In studies I have  made of  the over-
all problem of the treatment of sewer-
age and the distribution and treatment
of water,  it appears  that we should
be handling these matters on an area-
wide or drainagewide basin,  perhaps
a river-drainage basin.  We should
have a regional authority which  pro-
vides  one  efficient  treatment plant,
and which contracts out the sale of

-------
2004
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
its  services to the  various  political
subdivisions  which  lie  within  the
drainage basin area.
  It is regrettable we are, under pres-
ent  programs,  subsidizing  a  large
number of small and inefficient plants,
when one large  plant would be the
least costly and most efficient way to
handle the problem.
  I certainly will support the amount
that has been recommended by the
committee.  The  only  reason why  I
oppose the  increase is  that before we
push ourselves further into this field
we should reexamine the whole nature
of the problem and  see what can  be
done to develop and encourage more
efficient treatment methods.
  Mr.  LANDRUM. Mr.  Chairman, I
move to  strike the requisite number
of words.
  Mr.  Chairman, this  is one of the
most important amendments to  be of-
fered to an appropriation  bill.  No
other function of local government is
suffering for money more than that of
water distribution and sewerage treat-
ment.
  Every mayor in these United States
and  every Governor  of the 50 States
has either come in person or written
by mail or called by telephone to urge
upon the members of  the Ways and
Means Committee to pass  $5 billion
additional revenue sharing. For what
purpose? Water distribution and sew-
erage treatment are the basic services
they are requesting. And these serv-
ices are needed. None can deny this.
  Here is a real opportunity to give
true revenue sharing to the real base
of need. I hope that the Members can
take into consideration the  fact that
what my  friend  from Georgia, Mr.
BLACKBURN, has proposed is probably,
in the long run  period  of years  to
come, correct, but it is not going to
solve the problems today of Junction
City and Jasper, Ga., or of New York
City or Los Angeles.
  This is an opportunity to  attack the
problem without awaiting the specula-
                   tive outcome of revenue sharing and
                   without delaying further the service
                   that we ought to send to the localities.
                     I urge adoption of the amendment.
                     Mr.  BEVILL.  Mr. Chairman,  will
                   the gentleman yield  to me?
                     Mr.  LANDRUM.   I  yield  to the
                   gentleman.
                     Mr. BEVILL. Mr.  Chairman, I rise
                   in  support  of  the Stephens-Widnall
                   amendment  to the bill, H.R. 9270, the
                   agriculture-EPA  appropriations  bill
                   for fiscal year 1972. The  bill  under
                   consideration appropriates  a total of
                   $150 million for  new grants for the
                   basic water and sewer facilities pro-
                   gram authorized by section 702  of the
                   Housing and Urban Development Act
                   of 1965. The Stephens-Widnall amend-
                   ment would appropriate  $500 million
                   for this program instead of the $150
                   million  asked for in  this bill,  which
                   means  this  amendment increases the
                   authorization for this popular  water
                   and sewer program  by $350 million.
                   As  many  of us recall in the appro-
                   priations bill last year, the House in-
                   creased the  amount  to be  authorized
                   for  the  water and   sewer program
                   from $150  million to $500 million.
                   The president subsequently vetoed the
                   appropriations  bill,  which  contained
                   this sum and sent it back to us saying
                   that he strongly objected to increasing
                   the funds for this program. The Con-
                   gress  subsequently  appropriated  a
                   total of $350 million for this program.
                   All we are asking to do this afternoon
                   is to appropriate  the same  amount of
                   funds which the House deemed  neces-
                   sary last  year. I recall that we also
                   passed  the   Emergency  Community
                   Facilities  Act, Publie  Law 91-431,
                   which increased the authorizations for
                   this program by $1 billion.  We passed
                   it in the House by a  vote of 281 yeas
                   to 32 nays.
                     The   administration's  budget  has
                   recommended an  increase  in appro-
                   priations  for  sewerage  treatment
                   plant construction from $1 billion in
                   fiscal year 1971 to $2 billion in fiscal

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             2005
year  1972, but the same budget re-
quests no  funds  for  the water  and
sewer program. The water and sewer
program authorizes the  Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development to
make grants to local public bodies to
finance  public water and sewer facil-
ities  other than  sewerage treatment
works. We all recognize  the  absolute
necessity for more sewer and  water
lines when the Federal Government is
making  money  available  for  more
sewerage treatment plants. The $500
million   in  the   Stephens-Widnall
amendment will   bearly  cover  the
backlog  of applications  that  have
been approved and are presently pend-
ing in the Washington  office of the
Department of Housing  and Urban
Development. There are  over $1  bil-
lion in applications for this program
pending in HUD offices. I have heard
from  numerous public  officials in my
district   in  Alabama   complaining
about the difficulty they  are encoun-
tering in  obtaining funds for neces-
sary  water and sewer lines. At  the
present  time, there are some 22  ap-
plications pending at  HUD  totaling
$7,985,910.00  in  grant funds.
  Mr. Chairman,  the amendment of
my   distinguished  colleague  from
Georgia, BOB STEPHENS,  and the  dis-
tinguished  ranking minority  member
of the Banking  and Currency Com-
mittee, BILL WIDNALL, is a small price
to pay for a suitable  living environ-
ment.
                         [p. H5779]

  Mr. FULTON of Pennsylvania.  Mr.
Chairman,  I strongly oppose the new
House appropriation practice of com-
bining so  many diverse programs in
this one appropriation bill, H.R. 9270,
entitled  Department of Agriculture—
Environmental and Consumer Protec-
tion Appropriation Bill, 1972.
  Title III appropriates about $3 bil-
lion, specifically $3,126,055,000 for en-
vironmental protection. These are pro-
grams aimed at improving our envi-
ronment, including financing  the new
Environmental Protection Agency and
HUD water and sewer grants, water-
shed   protection   programs,   dams,
stream  channelization and  sedimen-
tary control to halt pollution. Surely
these important programs of $3  bil-
lion deserve a separate appropriation
bill, to be carefully  considered.  In-
stead,  they are combined  in  one  bill
with  inflationary programs  for  the
purpose of carrying the weight and
the load of such huge inflationary and
deficit-producing programs that have
on their own, been running into more
and more opposition, and beginning
to wake up to the higher taxes, higher
food and clothing prices, higher defi-
cits, and higher inflation caused by
title I.
                         [p. H5810]

  Mr.  WRITTEN.  Mr. Chairman,  I
move that the Committee do  now rise
and report the bill back to the House
with  sundry amendments,  with  the
recommendation that the amendments
be  agreed  to and  that  the bill as
amended do  pass.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly,  the  Committee  rose;
and  the  Speaker  pro tempore  (Mr.
BOSGS)  having assumed the  Chair,
Mr. WRIGHT, Chairman of  the  Com-
mittee  of the Whole House  on  the
State of the Union, reported that that
Committee, having had under consid-
eration  the  bill H.R.  9270,  making
appropriations  for  Agriculture-En-
vironmental and Consumer Protection
programs  for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1972, and for other purposes,
had  directed  him to  report  the bill
back  to   the   House  with  sundry
amendments with the recommendation
that the amendments be agreed to and
that the bill  as amended do pass.
  Mr.  WHITTEN.  Mr.  Speaker,  I

-------
2006
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
move  the previous  question  on the
bill and all  amendments thereto to
final passage.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is a
separate  vote  demanded   on   any
amendment?  If not, the  Chair  will
put them en  gros.
  The amendments were agreed to.
                     The  SPEAKER pro tempore.  The
                   question  is on  the engrossment  and
                   third reading  of the bill.
                     The  bill was  ordered  to be  en-
                   grossed and read  a third  time,  was
                   read the third time, and passed,  and
                   a motion to reconsider was laid on the
                   table.
                                           [p. H5811]
1.17a(4)(b)   July 15:  Amended and passed Senate, pp. S11161,
S11162, S11163,  S11164,  S11165, S11207-S11208, S11226-S11228
  Mr.  McGEE.  Mr. President,  H.R.
9270, the Department of Agriculture,
environmental and consumer  protec-
tion appropriation bill for  fiscal year
1972, as reported to the Senate by the
Appropriations  Committee provides
for $13,090,266,050 in new obligational
authority. This represents an increase
of $985,452,200 over the budget esti-
mates  and  is $666,370,000  more than
provided by  the  other body.
       *****
  As Members of this body are aware,
the jurisdiction of the Appropriations
Subcommittee, previously referred to
as the  Department of Agriculture and
Related Agencies, was greatly expand-
ed  as  a  result of  reorganization of
subcommittee assignments  and juris-
diction. In  addition to those agencies
which  were previously  funded under
the  Department of  Agriculture  and
Related Agencies  bill,  this  subcom-
mittee  assumed jurisdiction of  most of
the environmental  and consumer pro-
tection  agencies  and   commissions.
These include the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, the Office and  Council
on  Environmental  Quality, the  Na-
tional Commission on Materials Policy,
grants for  basic water  and sewer fa-
cilities in the Department of  Housing
and Urban  Development, Office of Con-
sumer  Affairs, the Consumer Product
Information  Coordinating  Center in
the General Services Administration,
                   National  Commission  on  Consumer
                   Finance, Food and Drug Administra-
                   tion, and the Federal Trade Commis-
                   sion. With this additional jurisdiction,
                   the subcommittee now is most appro-
                   priately referred to as the Subcommit-
                   tee for the Department of Agriculture,
                   Environmental and  Consumer Protec-
                   tion, which  reflects  more adequately
                   the jurisdiction and responsibility of
                   the subcommittee.
                     Also,  with this additional jurisdic-
                   tion, the bill is broken down into five
                   separate titles as follows:

                    I.—Agriculture Programs.
                    II.—Rural Development.
                    III.—Environmental Protection.
                    IV.—Consumer Protection and Services.
                    V.—General Provisions.

                     A  further breakdown and  subdivi-
                   sions under  these titles  are contained
                   in both the bill and  the accompanying
                   report.
                     By way of summary, however, the
                   bill as recommended  by the committee
                   contains the following  amount for
                   each of  the  major titles:
                   Title I. Agriculture  programs- $ 5,877,484,050
                   Title II. Rural  development	   954,397,000
                   Title  III.   Environmental pro-
                    tection 	   3,495,362,000
                   Title IV.  Consumer protection
                    and services	   2,768,023,000
                        Total  	$13,090,266,050
                     I think it is important to separate
                   the money items in the bill. For all too
                   long the farmers have been blamed

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             2007
for very large total sums that are at-
tributed  to the Department of Agri-
culture  or agriculture programs and
the man in the street wonders why the
farmer receives sums of that magni-
tude.  Lest the  total appropriation of
something over $13 billion be wrong-
fully  reassigned  to the  various  pro-
grams in agriculture, I will take the
time to break it down. Of the $13 bil-
lion plus, less  than one-half  or  $5.8
billion is  devoted to agriculture  pro-
grams;  a  little less than $1 million
goes  to   rural  development;  almost
$3.5 billion goes to environmental pro-
tection; and  $2.7 billion goes to  con-
sumer protection and services.
  In a bill of  this magnitude, involving
many varied and complex programs,
the breakdown as set forth above is not
and cannot be a  matter  of precise or
                         [p. S11161]

definite determination. Some judgment
is necessarily  involved.  This break-
down, however, will provide the  pub-
lic  with  some general understanding
of  the   Federal  financial  resources
which are being directed to the major
programs and  efforts  which are the
subject matter of this bill.
                         [p. S11162]
   Mr. McGEE.
  The Senate  also recommends  con-
currence with the action taken by the
House in providing $2,000,000,000 for
the construction grants program under
the Environmental Protection Agency.
This item is subject to enactment of
authorizing  legislation which  expired
on June 30, 1971. This authorization,
however, has been  extended   tempo-
rarily to September 30,1971, at an au-
thorized  level  of $500,000,000. It is
expected that the  $2 billion program
will be authorized  between now  and
that later date, at which time the en-
tire $2,000,000,000 appropriation will
become operative.
       *****
  The committee also recommends an
additional appropriation or the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency of $23,-
800,000 over the amount in the House
bill.
  There are other  modifications in re-
gard to the House bill,  but they are
spelled out in the  report, and are of
such nature that they do not require
singling  out at this  time.
                         [p. S11163]
  Mr. HRUSKA.
       *    *    *    *     *
  Another important  aspect of  the
broadened  base  of  this committee is
that it  will  allow  for increased  co-
operation  between   the  agencies   of
Government which  have  the respon-
sibility of the production  of  food and
the protection of our environment.
  U.S.  agriculture   has  had a long
tradition and history of environmental
protection  and  consumer  interest.
Those activities will now proceed with
greater  force and efficiency.
  Examples of this tradition and his-
tory are numerous:
      *****
                         [p. S11164]

  Ninth.  Environmental   Protection
Agency.
  The committee is  a strong supporter
of this new agency  established by  the
President last December.  In  this bill,
the Senate has provided $2.44 billion
for the  total  activities  of  the En-
vironmental Protection Agency. This
is some  $1.1  billion  more than last
year and indicates  our clear recogni-
tion of the needs in this area and  the
high priority  accorded them.
      *****
                         [p. S11165]

-------
2008
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
DEPARTMENT    OF    AGRICUL-
  TURE-ENVIRONMENTAL  AND
  CONSUMER  PROTECTION  AP-
  PROPRIATIONS, 1972
  The Senate continued with the con-
sideration  of  the  bill   (H.R. 9270)
making  appropriations  for the agri-
culture-environmental  and  consumer
protection programs for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1972, and for other
purposes.

STATES NEED FEDERAL FUNDS FOR CLEAN
           AIR ACT EFFORT
  Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, I
have offered an amendment to increase
the environmental  protection  appro-
priation by $10 million.  The expressed
purpose of  this  additional  amount
would be to  increase funding for the
support  of State and local air pollu-
tion planning  and  control programs,
under section 105 of the Clean Air Act,
as amended.
  Under the 1970  amendments to the
Clean Air  Act, a considerable burden
was placed on the resources of State
air pollution  control agencies. They
are required, largely within the balance
of this calendar  year, to develop  com-
prehensive implementation plans, ade-
quate  to bring air quality within the
State to the national standard within
3 years. These plans must include spe-
cific limitations on every air pollution
source  within  the  State, and if the
plan is not adequate the Federal  Gov-
ernment takes over the  responsibility.
  There is no way that most States
can meet  that burden,  and  prepare
that plan adequately to  forestall  Fed-
eral intervention without a substantial
influx  of  money  from  the  Federal
Government. The Committee on Public
Works,  recognizing this fact  during
the consideration of last year's clean
air amendments, asked the administra-
tion to  help us  develop the  level of
authorization necessary  to make  this
program work.
  The  committee,  both  in its report
and through  statements of  members
                    made during debate of the bill, warned
                    that  this  bold  attempt   to  make
                    America's air safe to breathe  by 1975
                    would not   succeed  if  inadequately
                    funded.  We said  in  the  committee
                    report:

                     Appropriations for the 1967 Act have been
                    approximately one-half the amount authorized.
                    This lack of funding has lessened the effective-
                    ness of the Air Quality Act. .  . . This pattern
                    cannot continue if the Congress and the Federal
                    government are to retain credibility with the
                    American people.
                      The total  authorization in the 1970
                    clean air amendments  was $350 mil-
                    lion for fiscal year 1972.  This bill, fol-
                    lowing   the  administration   request,
                    contains only $150,840,000 for  air pol-
                    lution. Once again, this is less than
                    half the  amount which just last De-
                    cember the Congress determined was
                    essential to this program.
                      Mr. President, I have been informed
                    by  the West Virginia Air Pollution
                    Control Commission that  without Fed-
                    eral funding at the authorized  level,
                    West Virginia will be  unable to pre-
                    pare  a realistic implementation plan
                    within the  statutorily  required  time.
                    That State  is faced with  a  Federal
                    takeover  of  their responsibilities.
                      In  recent  correspondence with  the
                    Committee on  Public Works,  Carl  G.
                    Beard II, director of  the  West Vir-
                    ginia Air Pollution Control Commis-
                    sion has made this point emphatically:
                     In West Virginia's situation, we have been
                    informed by EPA that we will not be granted
                    the  total federal monies  that we are  eligible
                    for.  Other  promises of contractual  assistance
                    funded by the  federal  government apparently
                    are  now being  withheld due to lack  of funds.
                    Both of the above according  to EPA  is due
                    to a lack of funds.
                     West Virginia has more  than doubled the
                    appropriation in state funds for  FY  '72, EPA
                    was aware, over a year ago, that we intended
                    to have a  significant increase in state funds
                    for that fiscal  year. However, if the informa-
                    tion we  received  from EPA  is  correct, the
                    Congress has not provided  sufficient funds to
                    carry out the programs as planned. The states
                    need monies now—not in FY '73.
                      Mr. President, the States cannot dis-
                    charge their responsibilities under the

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             2009
Clean Air Act without the extra Fed-
eral funds this amendment would pro-
vide. If the States fail, the Federal
Government must  assume  the  task
and the expense anyway, or the goal
of health  air  will  be many  years
away. This small additional sum, in-
vested now in  the State programs, is
essential to the early attainment of
clean air. I urge  the adoption of this
amendment.
  Mr. President,  a small amount of
money is involved. We have to invest
it to assist the States at a time when
they are attempting to cooperate with
the Federal  Government to comply
with the clean air amendments of 1970
and help the American people to have
a better quality  of life through the
strengthening of this form of environ-
ment need.
  Mr.  McGEE.  Mr.  President,  the
members of the  committee  weighed
this proposal very carefully. The great
emphasis in the testimony was to try
to move the States more rapidly into
this area, which is new to them, as it
is to most of us,  and it was felt this
would help hold  down  the  cost and
bring  a greater amount of perform-
ance.
  The committee is willing to take this
amendment to  conference and see how
we come out with it. It is one of those
areas where, if the States could move
faster, it would serve to implement the
rest of  the efforts we  have already
authorized.
  Mr. HRUSKA. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
  Mr. McGEE. I yield.
  Mr.  HRUSKA.  Mr.  President,  I
rise to express concurrence with the
thoughts expressed  by the  Senator
from Wyoming. It is the type of sub-
ject we would  be willing to take to
conference and do the best we can with
it.
  Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, I
am appreciative  of the  attitude ex-
pressed  by the  Senators from Wyom-
ing and  Nebraska, I know that the
chairman of the Appropriations Com-
mittee  (Mr.  ELLENDER)  and others
feel this is an important subject mat-
ter. I realize that there may be some
difference  of  opinion as to the imple-
mentation needs of the States, but we
do feel, as expressed to our committee,
that the information coming to us is
that the  States want to do this and
they need funds with which  to make
these comprehensive plans.
  I hope that in conference with the
House  of Representatives this amount
of money can be retained.
  Mr.  COOPER.  Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
  Mr.  RANDOLPH. I yield.
  Mr.  COOPER.  Mr.  President,  I
rise to support the amendment offered
by Senator RANDOLPH to increase the
appropriation to implement the  Clean
Air  Act  Amendments  of 1970. Most
Senators will remember at the time of
adoption of the Clean Air Act in Sep-
tember of last year the  committee
report and the floor  manager  paid
special attention to the fact  that the
program would have to be funded ade-
quately for  implementation, if  the
American people were not to be misled
                        [p. S11207]

in the  battle to combat air  pollution.
  The  Appropriation Committees  on
both  sides  have  recommended sig-
nificant increases in the air pollution
budget. The amount, however, does not
fully fund the total authorization of
the  amount  necessary to implement
the act;  an  authorization which the
Committee on Public Works developed
after consultation  with the  adminis-
tration. In its report the  Appropria-
tion  Committee points  out that EPA
is only several months old and requires
a  tooling  up  period.  However,  the
increase asked for  by Senator  RAN-
DOLPH  is for State program assistance
—an already ongoing program and
should be readily utilized without fur-
ther manpower demands on EPA.
  In addition to requiring  perform-

-------
2010
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
ance under some very rigid timetables,
the Clean  Air Act  places  great  re-
sponsibilities on  State air pollution
control  agencies.  In  fact, these  State
agencies are the  heart of the control
program and success will come, or  not
come, as a  result of their  activities.
Section  105  of the Clean  Air Act pro-
vides assistance  to  State air pollu-
tion control  programs. The purpose of
the  amendment   offered  today  by
Senator RANDOLPH is to increase  the
amount of assistance available to  the
States and I support it.
  Without markedly increased assist-
ance State programs will not  be able
to comply with the rigorous require-
ments placed on them by the  act and
the public  will  increasingly  demand
Federal intervention.  I personally  be-
lieve the matter  of air pollution can
best be  addressed at the  field level by
the State and local governments. But
I recognize  that  the  State  and local
governments  must  have  resources
available for full implementation. This
amendment  therefore is  an extension
of the Federal-State partnership cre-
ated in  the Clean Air Act and con-
tinued in the amendments of  1970.
  I am  happy to  join with the chair-
man of  my  committee, with Senators
MUSKIE, BOGGS,  and BAKER as  a  co-
sponsor  of this necessary amendment.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues
to support  this amendment.
                         [p. S11208]

  Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
am delighted that the Senate Commit-
tee on Appropriations acted yesterday
to fund the section  702 water and
sewer grant program at  $700  million.
I can  think of  no  more important
item in  the  appropriations legislation
before the  Senate today. Towns and
cities  around the  country have a des-
perate need  for water and  sewer  fa-
cilities.  Although these  communities
are conscientiously trying to  provide
adequate water and sewer facilities,
they have no source of funds in many
                   cases.  In some cases municipalities
                   have been given a deadline for clean-
                   ing up their water and sewer systems
                   by  the   Environmental   Protection
                   Agency.
                     The  section  702  program is a good
                   program—it is  a  program designed
                   to help the Nation's communities meet
                   their urgent needs for improved water
                   and sewer facilities and it is designed
                   to support our national housing goals.
                   Its purpose is  to  correct the  most
                   basic pollution  problem in America—
                   the problem of proper disposal of the
                   waste of the Nation's towns and cities.
                     As chairman of the Rural Develop-
                   ment Subcommittee, I  have a special
                   interest in seeing that the Nation's
                   small towns are able to finance water
                   and sewer  systems. Without  an ade-
                   quate  water  and  sewer  system, the
                   small towns of the Nation cannot ex-
                   pect to grow; they cannot expect to
                   hold the rural population which is now
                   migrating to metropolitan areas.
                     The  section  702 program  is  not
                   aimed at small towns. It is not aimed
                   at large  cities. It is aimed at towns,
                   cities,  and communities of all sizes.
                   However, 71 percent of the available
                   funds are going to towns of 50,000
                   and under.
                     The section 702 program is oriented
                   toward  the  orderly growth and de-
                   velopment of  an  area. In  order  to
                   qualify for assistance the grant appli-
                   cation  must conform  to a  unified  or
                   officially  coordinated areawide water
                   and sewer facilities system.
                     Although the  section 702 program
                   has been an excellent one, its funding
                   has been far from adequate. Last year
                   the Congress appropriated $500 mil-
                   lion for the program.  The President
                   vetoed  the appropriation bill,  stating
                   that the Congress  had appropriated
                   too much money for water and sewer
                   facilities.
                     When the appropriations legislation
                   went through the Congress again, the
                   figure for section 702 was $350 mil-
                   lion. However,  the President  refused

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              2011
to spend $200 million of this amount.
For the water  and  sewer needs of
towns  and  cities of the  Nation, the
administration  spent only  $150  mil-
lion during the past fiscal year.
  In the  current budget request the
administration  asked  for no  money
for the section 702 program for fiscal
year 1972.  The administration stated
that it intended to spend  $100 million
of last year's appropriation for  water
and sewer  facilities in  the first  6
months in  fiscal year  1972.  On May
13, Secretary Romney testified before
the  Senate  Appropriations  Commit-
tee and stated that only  $100 million
would  be spent because the adminis-
tration would  merge the section 702
water  and  sewer grant program  into
the  new  urban community develop-
ment revenue  sharing  program.  The
Secretary stated that he did not think
that his  Department  could  properly
and efficiently spend the money appro-
priated under section 702 and that  it
would  be   better  to  distribute  this
money to the States to spend as they
wish.
  However, 1 month later, on June 14,
Secretary Romney wrote to the Chair-
man  of  the  Agriculture Appropria-
tions Subcommittee  and  stated  that
the administration had decided to  take
the  section  702 program out of its
urban  community development  reve-
nue sharing program. He stated  that
now the  administration  has decided
to utilize in fiscal year 1972 the full
$200 million of section 702 money that
it refused to spend in fiscal year 1971.
  Mr.  President, the section 702  water
and sewer grant program has proven
worth. It has been extremely success-
ful, and it  is urgently  needed  by the
towns  and communities of the Nation.
I hope that  Secretary Romney  will
make up  his  mind as  to  whether his
Department can administer  this  pro-
gram and spend the money appropri-
ated by the Congress. I hope that the
will of the  Congress will  not again be
frustrated by the administration's re-
fusal to spend money for water  and
sewer grants.
  I would suggest that if the Presi-
dent is really serious about  relieving
the  financial crises  of the  Nation's
communities and towns, that he  will
allow  the  expenditure of  the  money
that is so badly needed to  meet the
water  and sewer needs of these towns.
  Mr.  President, at  this point I  pre-
sent for the RECORD  a table presented
to the  House Banking and  Currency
Committee in June cf 1970 by the Na-
tional   Association  of Counties.  The
table gives a State-by-State breakdown
of grant applications for water  and
sewer   assistance  which  were  not
funded by the Department of Housing
and  Urban Development.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT  GRANT APPLICATIONS FOR
  WATER AND SEWER ASSISTANCE NOT  FUNDED
  BY  DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DE-
  VELOPMENT
  State
                         Grant
               Number    applica-     Total
               of grant     tions   project
               applica-    amount     cost
                 tions
Alabama  	
Alaska 	
Arizona 	
Arkansas  	
California	
Colorado  	
Connecticut  ..
Delaware  	
Florida 	
Georgia  	
Hawaii 	
Idaho 	
Illinois 	
Indiana 	
Iowa  	
Kansas 	
Kentucky  	
Louisiana  ....
Maine 	
Maryland  	
Massachusetts
Michigan  	
Minnesota  ...
Mississippi ...
Missouri 	
Montana 	
Nebraska  	
Nevada 	
 51
 15
 31
 52
271
 73
 95
  8
135
 43
 19
  3
191
 77
 67
 60
 28
107
 48
 47
225
308
 63
 29
104
 14
 45
 16
(millions)
  $15.68
   7.27
   11.85
   20.97
  158.17
   19.71
   59.82
   3.30
   69.12
   19.64
   5.78
    .69
   89.58
   48.57
   20.58
   13.60
   55.89
   70.17
   8.31
   22.44
   93.33
  331.20
   42.49
   10.88
   34.06
   2.47
   16.80
   4.30
(millions)
  $33.66
   17.15
   26.30
   45.57
  365.25
   48.62
  155.36
    6.99
  164.03
   46.39
   14.12
    1.39
  201.96
  131.00
   41.89
   28.89
  136.54
  158.16
   18.58
   51.12
  227.23
  722.95
   68.76
   28.48
   80.56
    4.89
   48.64
   11.27

-------
2012
 LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
LOCAL  GOVERNMENT  GRANT  APPLICATIONS  FOR
  WATER  AND  SEWER  ASSISTANCE  NOT  FUNDED
  BY  DEPARTMENT OF  HOUSING AND URBAN DE-
  VELOPMENT— contin ued
  State
               Number
               of grant
               applica-
                tions
       Grant
     applica-
       tions
     amount
           Total
          project
            cost
New Hampshire .
New Jersey ....
New Mexico	
New York	
North Carolina .
North Dakota  ...
Ohio  	
Oklahoma 	
Oregon 	
Pennsylvania  ...
Rhode  Island  ..
South Carolina .
South Dakota  ...
Tennessee  	
Texas  	
Utah  	
Vermont 	
Virginia 	
Washington 	
West Virginia  ..
Wisconsin  	
Wyoming  	
Puerto Rico ....
Virgin  Islands ..
  National total
 27
163
 13
426
 48
  7
255
 51
 47
317
 26
 44
 17
 47
224
 60
 33
 55
 63
 36
 85
  5
 25
  1
(millions)
   11.84
   92.55
    2.61
  441.50
   19.12
    2.01
  204.45
   15.31
   26.18
  158.68
   16.93
   16.93
    3.76
   16.33
   55.39
   14.01
    7.41
   47.10
   17.06
   25.13
   37.79
     .37
    5.78
     .14
(millions)
   27.00
  209.20
   6.83
  887.13
   51.30
   8.51
  420.62
   36.68
   65.68
  343.72
   39.08
   48.40
   8.07
   38.91
  130.52
   33.41
   16.89
  101.47
   40.51
   35.54
   84.74
    .79
   13.81
    .29
                 4,308  2,496.75  5,538.22
                          [p. S11226]

   Mr. BOGGS. Mr. President, I should
like  to comment on  that portion  of
H.R.  9270 which  appropriates funds
for the activities of the Environmental
Protection Agency. The bill calls for
expenditures of nearly $2.5 billion for
the work of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency during fiscal year 1972.
This  nearly doubles the sums appro-
priated in fiscal 1971, when the com-
ponents  of EPA were divided among
several agencies.
   An  increase  of this  magnitude  is
vital  if we are to carry out effectively
the programs for enhancing the qual-
ity of our air, water, and our land.
   Late last year, the Congress adopted
extensive  amendments  to  the Clean
Air Act.  To meet  the challenge  of
healthy air quality everywhere by the
middle of this decade, more funds must
be spent this fiscal year to implement
air quality programs.  Therefore, this
legislation calls  for  an appropriation
for  air  pollution program  totaling
$162,114,000  this fiscal  year, an  in-
crease  from  the $108,840,000 appro-
priated in 1971.
  Mr.  President. I  was  honored  to
cosponsor and support the amendment
offered by the distinguished Chairman
of  the Committee  on  Public Works
 (Mr. RANDOLPH) increasing the funds
available to support  air pollution con-
trol programs operated by the States.
  Current  Federal  legislation clearly
establishes the policy that the primary
responsibility for controlling pollution
rests with the States. Since the amend-
ments to the Clean Air Act last year
imposed heavy new  State  responsibil-
ities for control  of air pollution, I be-
lieve we are wise to  increase dramati-
cally the program grant funds to the
States.
  Chairman  RANDOLPH'S  amendment
increased  these  funds  in fiscal year
1972 to $52,900,000 from  the  $42,900,-
000 proposed  in the budget  and  the
$30,200,000 appropriated for this pur-
pose in fiscal year 1971.
  To .combat water  pollution, the  bill
appropriates  $2,151,364,000,   an  in-
crease from the $1,116,627,000 appro-
priated last year. The greatest portion
of this increase is due to a doubling of
the funds for construction of munici-
pal waste  treatment facilities. The
1972 fiscal appropriation of  $2 billion
for these  sewage  treatment grants
matches  the  President's request.  I
might point out that a comprehensive
 study by the Environmental Protection
Agency charts an existing backlog of
approximately $12  billion in needed
facilities over the next 3 years to meet
the existing water  quality standards
established on our rivers and lakes.
   On other aspects of the water  pollu-
tion program—program grants to the

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              2013
 States, research,  enforcement,  and so
 forth—the bill appropriates $151,364,-
 000,  an  increase from  last  year's
 $116,627,000.
   This legislation also  includes $43,-
 378,000 for programs to combat solid
 waste pollution, a major increase from
 the $19,591,000 appropriated last year.
 While relatively small, this portion of
 the EPA program is one of the most
 significant covered by this entire bill.
 I  am  referring in  particular  to  the
 funds in support of section 208 of the
 Solid Waste Disposal  Act, the  section
 authorizes projects to demonstrate re-
 source recovery systems.
   The budget requested $4,093,000 for
 section 208. The Appropriations Com-
 mittee is  recommending to the  Senate
 that  $19,093,000 be appropriated  for
 that aspect of the EPA program dur-
 ing fiscal year 1972. I would like to ex-
 plain the reasons  the committee  be-
 lieved it was necessary to increase the
 funds above the level requested in  the
 budget and  approved  in the  House
 version of the bill.
   Section 208 was a part of the Re-
 source Recovery  Act  of 1970. This
 legislation became law on October 26,
 1970.  This  section,  I believe,  is  the
 most  significant aspect of last  year's
 act.  It enables  the Federal  Govern-
 ment to go beyond  resource recovery
 research into  a strong  program  to
 demonstrate the effectiveness of such
 systems.  This  section  will move  re-
 source recovery out of the laboratory
 into  the marketplace  to  show what
 programs  are feasible.
   The Committee on Public Works, in
 its report on this legislation—Senate
 Report 91-1034—observed:
  The  nation  can no longer afford to await
more study and analysis. We must move from
the great deal of information  presently avail-
able to full-scale demonstration of  recovery
systems.
   To  move this program  forward, the
 Congress  authorized $80  million for
 section 208 during  fiscal year 1972.
 That  $80 million exceeds the sums
 authorized in fiscal 1972 for all other
 solid waste programs administered by
 the Environmental Protection Agency.
   The budget seeks $4,093,000 for sec-
 tion  208 this fiscal year. In response
 to questions during the hearings, EPA
 indicated that $4 million would enable
 the agency to initiate two demonstra-
 tion projects.
   I  believe that  $4,093,000 and two
 projects is inadequate to the  magni-
 tude  of  the  solid waste  problem.
 Americans  spend  something  in the
 neighborhood of $5 billion each year
 for the collection, processing, and dis-
 posal of  municipal trash. And after
 that money is spent, more square miles
 of  America  have  been turned  into
 dumps  and valuable materials lost to
 any possible reuse.
   Section 208 provides  the mechanism
 for having technology  into the  cities
 and suburbs to halt the trend of rising
 costs paid by the public for handling
 solid  wastes.  It provides the mechan-
 ism for saving precious resources.
  But recycling will be an answer to
 the solid  waste problem only  if the
 materials recovered from the munici-
 pal trashpile can be successfully mar-
 keted.  Pilot  and  research programs
 have  demonstrated  that many  viable
 technological  answers  exist to  recy-
 cling. Only a program of demonstra-
 tion  projects can  show  if a  steady
 stream  of reusable materials  can be
 successfully marketed.
  The Appropriations  Committee re-
 ceived considerable testimony in sup-
 port  of increased  appropriations for
 section  208. Gov. Russell W. Peterson
 of Delaware testified most elequently
 that  resource recovery was  the only
 feasible long-term answer available to
 a small but well-developed State, like
 Delaware.
  Governor Peterson pointed  out the
 imaginative work  begun by the State
 of Delaware  toward the design  and
 construction  of  a  recycling  plant in
Wilmington.  This  plant, which could
ultimately  qualify  for  a section 208

-------
2014
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
grant of as much as 75 percent toward
the total  cost of  about  $11 million,
would take most  of the  solid wastes
from  northern Delaware and extract
reusable  metals,  compost, and  other
materials. Delaware, to  demonstrate
its  commitment,   has  appropriated
$1,000,000 toward design of this plant.
  I am informed  that several dozen
similar recycling plants are under de-
velopment across the Nation. I believe
it would be  unwise to  initiate  only
two projects this year. An appropria-
tion of $19 million would enable EPA
to find a sufficient number of demon-
stration projects  in order to test  a
variety of recycling concepts.
  The Executive Branch has initiated
a  state-of-the-art  study  on   resource
recovery to  assess  which  types  of
systems appear  most promising  for
section 208 grants. This study will be
completed by the  latter  part of  the
summer and the EPA should be  in a
position to accept official grant appli-
cations by September. It is my belief
that EPA must have the funds to  ini-
tiate  several section 208 grants  in
order to find the  best answers to the
program of solid  waste pollution.
  An  imaginative  section  208  pro-
gram  represents  an  investment—a
start—toward that day when we con-
vert solid  wastes from  an   environ-
mental problem  into a  resource  for
our people.
  Mr. President,  in closing,  I would
commend  the work by the chairman
of the subcommittee (Mr. McGEE) and
by the subcommittee's ranking member
(Mr.  HRUSKA).   Their   cooperative
spirit has  been most helpful to  me,
and I am confident to all members of
the Subcommittee on Agriculture, En-
vironment, and Consumer Protection.
  Further, I want to commend the ex-
                   cellent  work  by the  subcommittee's
                   staff under the direction  of  Dudley
                   Miles.
                     The PRESIDING OFFICER.  The
                   bill  is open to further amendment. If
                   there be no further amendment to be
                   proposed, the question is on the en-
                   grossment of  the  amendments  and
                   third reading of the bill.
                     The amendments  were ordered to be
                   engrossed  and the  bill to  be  read a
                   third time.
                     The bill (H.R. 9270) was read the
                   third time.
                     The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  Do
                   the  Senators yield back the remainder
                   of their time on the  bill?
                     Mr. McGEE. I yield back all remain-
                   ing time on the bill.
                     Mr. HRUSKA. I yield back  all re-
                   maining time on the bill.
                     The  PRESIDING  OFFICER. All
                   time has been yielded back.  The bill
                   having been read the  third time, the
                   question is, Shall it pass?
                     On this question  the yeas and nays
                   have been ordered,  and the clerk will
                   call  the roll.
                     The assistant legislative clerk called
                   the roll.
                                          [p. S11227]

                         *****
                     The result was announced—yeas 78,
                              nays 2, * * *

                         *****
                     So the bill (H.R. 9270) was passed.
                     Mr. McGEE. Mr. President, I move
                   to reconsider  the vote by which the
                   bill was passed.
                     Mr. HRUSKA. I move to  lay  that
                   motion on the table.
                     The motion to lay on the table was
                   agreed to.
                                           [p. S11228]

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              2015
1.17a(4)(c)   July 27:  House agrees to conference report, pp.
H7170-H7173
  CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 9270,
  AGRICULTURE-ENVIRONMENTAL AND
CONSUMER PROTECTION PROGRAMS, 1972
  Mr. WRITTEN. Mr. Speaker, I call
up  the  conference report on the bill
(H.R.  9270)  making  appropriations
for the  agriculture-environmental and
consumer protection programs for the
fiscal year ending June 30, 1972, and
for other purposes,  and  ask  unani-
mous consent that  the statement of
the managers be  read in lieu  of the
report.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Mississippi?
  There was no objection.
  The Clerk read the statement.
  (For  conference report and state-
ment, see proceedings of the House of
July 22, 1971.)
  Mr. WHITTEN (during the read-
ing) . Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent that further  reading  of the
statement be dispensed with.
  The SPEAKER. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Mississippi?
  There was no objection.
  The  SPEAKER.  The  gentleman
from Mississippi is recognized for 1
hour.
  Mr.  WHITTEN.  Mr. Speaker,  we
bring before you today the conference
report on appropriations for agricul-
ture-environmental and consumer pro-
tection programs for fiscal year 1972.
  The bill totals  $13,276,900,500.  Its
impact on America is far greater than
this sum would indicate. For it is this
bill that provides for enhanced farm
income  which,  in  turn,  helps those
whose products farmers buy. It is this
bill that encourages farmers to invest
in good conservation practices through
matching programs  such  as REAP
and the  Great Plains program which
benefit us all. It is this bill which pro-
vides funds to encourage communities
to invest in water and sewer systems
and resource development.
                          [p. H7170]
     ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
  Title HI includes programs for en-
vironmental protection at $3,490,477,-
500, which is $573,813,500 above  the
budget and   $14,884,500  below   the
Senate bill.
  This  title  includes  $2,448,400,000
for the  many functions of  the  En-
vironmental  Protection  Agency,  in-
cluding $2 billion for waste treatment
facilities. This total  also includes an
additional  $7.5  million  above  the
budget for solid waste disposal.
  I wish  to call the attention of the
House to the  following  provision  in
the conference report on the  need for
a balanced approach in assessing the
environment:

  The  conferees  believe  it  most  important
that the various agencies of Government and
the Congress, in the review and appraisal of
Federal Government programs, projects, and
activities, have full information available not
only as to  the  impact upon  the environment
                          [p. H7171]


but also the significant economic impact  on
the public  and  the affected areas and  indus-
tries.
  The  conferees,  therefore, direct that, in ad-
dition  to  the  environmental  effects  of  an
action, all  required reports from departments,
agencies,  or persons shall also include infor-
mation, as  prepared  by the  agency having
responsibility for  administration  of the pro-
gram,  project,  or activity  involved,  on  the
effect on the economy, including  employment,
unemployment, and other economic impacts.

-------
2016
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
  The conferees expect the  agencies involved
to spend such  additional sums  as  may be
necessary, out of  general funds  available, to
cover any additional costs of preparing  such
statements.
  This requirement will apply primarily to the
environmental impact statements  required un-
der section 102  of the Environmental Quality
Act, and the reports  required under the  per-
                   mit dumping programs  based on  the Refuse
                   Act of 1899.
                                             [p. H7172]

                     The question was taken; and there
                   were—yeas 230, nays  162, not voting
                   41, * * *
                                             [p. H7173]
1.17a(4)(d)   July  28:   Senate  agrees  to   conference  report,
pp. S12334-S12337
          [No Relevant Discussion on Pertinent Section]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2017

      1.1 7b  AGRICULTURAL-ENVIRONMENTAL AND
 CONSUMER PROTECTION PROGRAMS APPROPRIATION
           August 22, 1972, P.L. 92-399, Title III, 86 Stat. 604

                           An Act
Making appropriations for Agricultural-Environmental and Consumer Protec-
  tion programs for the fiscal year ending June 30,  1973, and for other
  purposes.

  Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in  Congress assembled, That the follow-
ing sums are appropriate, out of any money in the Treasury not
otherwise appropriated, for Agricultural-Environmental and Con-
sumer Protection programs  for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1973, and for other purposes ; namely :
        TITLE  III— ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS
    *******

             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
              AGENCY AND REGIONAL MANAGEMENT
  For agency  and regional management expenses, including offi-
cial reception and representation expenses (not to exceed $2,000) ;
hire of passenger motor vehicles ; hire, maintenance, and operation
of aircraft; uniforms, or allowances therefor, as  authorized by
5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but
at rates for individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent
to the rate for  GS-18 ; purchase of reprints ; library memberships
in societies or  associations  which issue publications to  members
only or at a price to members lower than to subscribers who are
not members ; $41,960,400.
                 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

  For research  and development  activities,  including hire  of
passenger motor vehicles; hire, maintenance,  and  operation  of
aircraft;  services as  authorized by  5  U.S.C. 3109, but at rates
for individuals not to exceed the  per diem rate equivalent to the
rate of GS-18;  purchase  of reprints; library memberships  in
societies or associations which issue publications to members only
or at a price to  members
                                                      [p. 12]

-------
2018          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

lower than to subscribers who are not members; $182,723,700, to
remain available  until expended: Provided, That not later  than
the date  set forth in section 102 (c) of the joint resolution ap-
proved July  1,  1972  (Public  Law  92-334), as amended, this
appropriation shall be available only within the limits of amounts
authorized by law for fiscal year 1973.
  For an amount to provide for independent grant and contract
review advisory committees for the review of the Agency's pri-
orities to assure that such contracts and grants are awarded only
to qualified research agencies or individuals,  $2,500,000.

                   ABATEMENT AND CONTROL

  For abatement  and control  activities, including hire of pas-
senger motor vehicles; hire, maintenance,  and operation of air-
craft; services  as  authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109,  but  at rates for
individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the rate
for GS-18; purchase of reprints; library memberships in societies
or associations  which issue publications to  members  only or at a
price to members lower than to subscribers who are not members;
$208,935,700, to remain available until expended: Provided, That
not later than the date set  forth in section 102 (c)  of the joint
resolution  approved  July  1,  1972  (Public  Law  92-334),  as
amended, this appropriation shall be  available only within the
limits of amounts authorized by law for fiscal year 1973.
  For an amount to provide for independent grant and contract
review advisory committees for the review of the Agency's pri-
orities to assure that such contracts and grants are awarded only
to qualified agencies  or individuals, $2,000,000.
  Not to exceed 7 per centum of any appropriation made available
to the Environmental Protection Agency by this Act  (except
appropriations for "Construction Grants" and "Scientific Activi-
ties Overseas") may be transferred to any other such appropria-
tion.

                        ENFORCEMENT

  For enforcement activities, including hire of passenger motor
vehicles; hire, maintenance, and operation of aircraft; services as
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates  for individuals not to
exceed the per  diem rate equivalent to the rate for GS-18; pur-
chase of reprints; library memberships in societies or associations
which issue publications to members only or at a price to members
lower than to subscribers who are not members; $28,894,200.

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2019

                    CONSTRUCTION GRANTS

  For construction of waste treatment works pursuant to the Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, $1,900,000,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That this appropria-
tion shall be available only within the limits of  amounts author-
ized by law for fiscal year 1973.

                SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITIES OVERSEAS

  For payments in foreign currencies which the Treasury Depart-
ment determines to be excess to  the normal requirements of  the
United States, for necessary expenses of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency in the conduct of scientific activities overseas in
connection with  environmental  pollution, as authorized  by law,
$4,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That
this appropriation shall be available, in addition to other appropri-
ations to such Agency, for payments in the foregoing currencies.

  1.17b(l)  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
           H.R. REP. No. 92-1175, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972)

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE-ENVIRONMENTAL AND
 CONSUMER PROTECTION APPROPRIATION BILL, 1973
JUNE 26, 1972.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and ordered
                         to be printed
     Mr. WHITTEN, from the Committee on Appropriations,
                   submitted the following

                        REPORT

                   [To accompany H.R. 15690]

  The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report
in explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for
the Agriculture-Environmental  and Consumer  Protection Pro-
grams for fiscal year 1973.

                     SUMMARY BY TITLE
  The bill provides $12,897,010,900 for the regular activities of
the Department of Agriculture, the Commodity Credit Corpora-
tion, rural  development, the Environmental  Protection Agency,

-------
2020          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

the Council on Environmental Quality, and HUD water and sewer
grants. Under Consumer Protection, the bill includes the Food and
Drug Administration, the Federal Trade Commission,  the Office
of Consumer  Affairs,  and the Consumer Product Information
Coordinating  Center. Other  agencies include the Farm Credit
Administration, National  Commission  on Materials Policy,  Na-
tional Industrial Pollution  Control Council, and the National Com-
mission on Consumer Finance.
  The bill is divided into  four major titles—a division which is
designed to demonstrate the general impact of the appropriation.
Such a division is by no means precise and is subject to individual
interpretation because  of  the multiple  benefits derived from the
programs funded in this bill.
                                                       [p. 1]

              TITLE III—ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS

  Title III includes funds  for the  programs of primary benefit to
our environment, such as the activities of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency. It includes funding  for advisory offices such  as
the Council  on Environmental  Quality, the National  Industrial
Pollution Control Council, and the National  Commission on  Ma-
terials Policy.
  It also includes the environmental programs  of the Department
of Agriculture, including the Rural Environmental  Assistance
Program and the watershed and flood prevention  programs which
through dams, terraces, and grassed waterways  do much to  halt
pollution at  the headwaters. In  all, $2,944,684,500 is provided  in
this title for these environmental protection programs.
                                                       [p. 2]

                  ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS

  The Committee has long supported restoration, development, and
improvement of our environment through the agricultural conserva-
                                                       [P. 4]

tion program, now called the rural environmental assistance  pro-
gram, which has built 2.2 million water storage reservoirs, 114
million acres of strip cropping systems and many other pollution
control measures. To date,  the first 1,000 Soil Conservation Service
watershed projects funded  by  this  Committee  have  prevented
damage totaling $178 million. In  addition, national reforestation
efforts have meant the replanting of 30 million acres.
  For the past two years,  the Committee has reviewed the activi-

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2021

ties  of  the Environmental Protection Agency.  It  has become
increasingly evident that the Agency and  its Administrator have
been subjected to the stress of putting together an agency  from
many dissident parts  while  being1 asked  to  absorb  functions
assigned by more and more legislation. The Committee has identi-
fied serious problems due to a lack of expertise  in many of the
areas on which EPA is asked to rule. The Committee has, there-
fore, provided funds for advisory  committees  to review the re-
search priorities of the Agency to assure that grants and contracts
are properly directed.
  The Committee has, for some time, held the view that it is not
how little can be measured, but the effect that counts. We must
require  standard tests to determine legal tolerances which are no
greater  than the amount determined to be absolutely safe. Such a
tolerance process must be widely understood for there is no such
thing as zero tolerance with modern ultra-sensitive testing devices.
  The Committee has also provided funds for scientific and tech-
nical training  to assure that EPA employees are of a caliber  equal
to their awesome task.
  The Committee has also determined that the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency budget fails to provide adequately for the special
effort needed for the restoration of one of our prime natural re-
sources, the Great Lakes. The Committee has provided $108,500,000
to accelerate this activity as described later in the report.

          ADVERSE EFFECTS OF OMB PERSONNEL CUTS

  The Committee is concerned about several  general  personnel
issues. The most pervasive and the most troublesome problem  is
the refusal of the  Office of Management and  Budget to permit
agencies to hire the full number  of people authorized  by the
Congress in the 1972 appropriations bill. The following table indi-
cates the extent of the problem:
  1972 PERSONNEL INCREASES APPROVED BY CONGRESS BUT NOT HIRED BECAUSE OF OMB ACTIONS




Department of Agriculture:


Other

1972 con-
gressional -
action
+77
+613
+1,515
+1,102
+1,426
+45
+1,245

1972 OMB action
Allowance
+5
+427
+852
-41
-35
-305
-700
Decrease
-72
-186
-663
-1,143
-1,461
-350
-1,945
   Total	   +6,023     +203    -5.820

-------
2022          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  The most striking thing about the above table is the cuts in regu-
latory programs. These programs—such as food plant inspections,
                                                        [p.  5]

meat and poultry inspections, and pollution abatement activities—
can literally affect the life and death of the consumer. They are
also  unique in that because they are regulatory programs with
legal sanctions, their activities  cannot  properly be delegated  to
other levels of government or performed on contract or by some
other means.
  In other words, unlike many other programs, there is no alterna-
tive  except to increase  Federal employment in the  regulatory
agencies if there is to be an increased level of inspectional activity.
  These comments are also relevant because in the 1973 budget
the Committee has again provided for  significant  personnel  in-
creases  in  the  regulatory agencies, as indicated in  the following
table:

                 Personnel Increases Recommended
Food and Drug  Administration	   +1,391
Meat and poultry inspection	    +500
Environmental Protection Agency	    +560
Federal Trade Commission	    +205
     Total 	  +2,656

  In some cases, these increases have had to be larger than might
otherwise have been necessary because, in effect, a year was lost
as a result of the OMB  actions on the 1972 budget. In the case
of the Food and Drug Administration, which proportionately has
the largest increase, the Committee tried to partially alleviate this
problem by providing $8,000,000 in the 1972 Second Supplemental
Appropriation Act.
  Personnel limitations were also imposed on the Environmental
Protection Agency. This  being a new agency there may be justifi-
cation to hire slowly in  order to obtain  qualified and objective
persons.
  The personnel reductions in the programs of the Soil Conserva-
tion Service and the Farmers  Home Administration are equally
disturbing because again  these are organizations with unique per-
sonnel and responsibilities. The Soil Conservation Service is one
of the most technically competent organizations in the environ-
mental field, and restrictions of these technicians in a time of
mounting environmental concern  is  completely unsound.  The
Farmers Home  Administration also is a  vital element in a key

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2023

national goal—the provision of better housing for all Americans.
The expanding responsibilities of the Farmers Home Administra-
tion, which include determining the soundness of a loan and the
proper repayment in cases where rural people cannot get a  loan
elsewhere, are so difficult that the Committee questions here also
whether they should properly be delegated to non-governmental
personnel. When housing loans alone have gone from $800 million
in 1970 to $2.2 billion in 1973,  the potential for mishandling is
great, and the relatively minor  impact  on total  Federal employ-
ment seems insignificant by comparison.
  In summary, these programs are vital to health and well-being,
and there is no  alternative  to increased  Federal employment.
Faced with this situation, the  Committee believes it has acted in
the only responsible way by providing for additional personnel.

NEED FOR INCREASED ATTENTION TO SELECTION AND TRAINING OF
                    QUALIFIED PERSONNEL

  As indicated earlier, the Environmental  Protection Agency and
the  Food  and Drug  Administration  particularly have faced
expanding
                                                       [P. 6]

responsibilities. One thing is certain, the qualifications and train-
ing of the personnel  required to administer these difficult  pro-
grams  must be  of the highest  quality. When any program is
growing dramatically,  an agency must always be on its guard
that it does not relax its standards. Only qualified personnel must
be hired, even if this means temporarily delaying implementation
of a program.  This is especially true for programs which can, if
improperly administered, do irreparable harm to the  reputation
of firms or individuals.
  The Committee  is pleased to  note  the plans by the Farmers
Home Administration and the  Environmental Protection Agency
to begin training operations. In  addition, the Committee calls on
the Department  of Agriculture to review its  meat and poultry
inspection training programs, particularly at the supervisory level.
The Committee has also provided increases in training funds to
accompany its increases in personnel for the Food  and Drug
Administration and for the Federal Trade Commission. The addi-
tional funds in all training programs should be used to assure
both that new employees are adequately trained and that existing
employees receive refresher and such other training as is required
to maintain their qualifications. Rotational assignment policies are

-------
2024          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

also  an important aspect of an agency's  personnel  program—
especially in regard to inspectors—and should also be periodically
reviewed.
  Information provided to the Committee  has indicated that in
some cases the Environmental Protection Agency may be experi-
encing a lack of technical expertise in some areas.  The need for
expert advice was particularly evident in the recent highly publi-
cized decision on DDT. The report demonstrated  a  regrettable
lack  of information on the costs, supplies and programs for cotton.
The  report indicated that information on costs of production were
not available. The Department of Agriculture has made numerous
cost  studies and findings on this crop. The report indicated sup-
plies were  plentiful, while the Department  of Agriculture, which
is officially charged with the responsibility  reports that cotton is
now  in short supply and that we are not meeting minimum export
demands. The report indicated that Federal cotton programs are
designed to provide producer profits, while the Congress has care-
fully written programs to provide the differential  between  U.S.
costs, including a reasonable return on investment and the world
price. To compound this show of  lack of knowledge of the  crop
which will  take the brunt of increased costs and greater dangers
in handling substitutes, the administrator  made reference to "a
per bushel subsidy," a measurement which has never been used for
this  commodity throughout history. Due to the enormity of impact
of EPA's decisions on  the citizens of the country, it  is essential
that  only the very best qualified  personnel be available to the
Agency. In recognition of this need, the Committee has provided
funds for EPA to establish an in-house formal  training program
for scientific and technical personnel.
  The Committee directs the agencies covered  by this bill to in-
clude in their budget justifications for next year detailed descrip-
tions of the actions they have taken to assure  that the selection
and training procedures of the Agency are of the caliber required
to assure that only qualified and objective  persons  are placed in
these responsible positions.
                                                        [p. 8]

   INVESTIGATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

  This is now the second year the Committee  has had responsi-
bility for  funding the Environmental Protection  Agency.  The
Committee questions whether the responsibilities and authorities
which have been delegated to the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency can be met by any one person,  and

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2025

certainly not without the advice, counsel and recommendations of
highly trained advisory boards in each of the major areas such as
air, water, solid waste, etc. composed of qualified and objective
scientists  who  should  conduct  hearings  prior to  conclusions  or
recommendations. Present difficulties have been compounded still
further by the fact that the Agency was created from many other
agencies, and the difficulties of  molding these diverse groups into
one agency  have been immense.  Finally, the Administrator has
been and  will always  be subjected to intense outside pressures
from  groups on  all sides  of the environmental issue. He will
always have to adjust  to continually changing legislative author-
ities which often go so far as to require new actions, which to  be
sound, are dependent upon  new inventions or the development of
new technologies.
  Given all  these almost unprecedented circumstances, there has
inevitably been some difficulties in the initial formative periods
of the Environmental Protection Agency.
  To enable the Committee to better understand how far we have
come, and how  far we yet have  to go, the Committee has directed
the Surveys  and Investigations Staff to undertake a comprehensive
examination of the Environmental Protection Agency. This in-
vestigation has already been underway for several months and,
due to its complexity,  will require more time to complete. The
Committee believes that when completed the investigation will
provide a valuable source of additional information to assist the
Committee and the  agency in  the exercise  of  their respective
responsibilities.
                                                       [P. 10]

AGENCIES SHOULD MORE FULLY UTILIZE  EXISTING LABORATORIES
            BEFORE REQUESTING NEW LABORATORIES
  The  Committee has been  unable to approve  several new labora-
tories  requested and has also  denied several major  repair and
improvement projects.  This action results from  the Committee's
conviction that existing Federal laboratories  are not  being fully
utilized. The Food  and Drug Administration and  the Environ-
mental Protection Agency have been directed to conduct surveys
of the use of existing facilities.
  The  Committee feels this action is also  necessary because some
of the studies  it has  reviewed seem  to be  biased against the
utilization of existing laboratories. Compromises in requirements
may be good. Multi-agency  utilization of a single laboratory may
be necessary. Offsetting advantages,  such  as creative scientific

-------
2026          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

interchange, more rapid availability of increased capability, and
cost savings significantly in excess of the change in capabilities,
may occur and these should be fully weighed in the final decision.
  Committee staff and investigators have visited several facilities
and have seen both the creative adaptation of laboratories for new
missions and the underutilization  of existing  laboratories. Other
information  available to the Committee has further strengthened
the Committee's  belief that what  is being requested is possible,
desirable, and necessary. The Committee has heard much evidence
that existing laboratory space  is not now utilized and can well be
adapted to these needs.
  The Committee has also requested that its Surveys and Investi-
gations Staff undertake a comprehensive study  of this subject.
                                                         [P. 11]

            THE ENVIRONMENTAL ROLE OF AGRICULTURE

  In the early 1930's we awoke to the fact that  we were destroying
our natural resources and wasting  our land. A  book written in the
mid-1930's—about the time that the Soil Conservation Service was
established—stated:

  From erosion surveys, soil surveys,  and other measurements of soil losses,
it is estimated that erosion  in  the United  States already has ruined or
seriously impoverished approximately 282 million acres. From an additional
775  million acres, erosion has stripped away varying proportions of the fertile
topsoil. Considering' only cropland,  it is estimated that erosion has  ruined
about 50 million acres for further practical cultivation.

  In recognition of this dire condition, a dual program of research
and practical programs has been developed and implemented. Our
knowledge of how to conserve the flow of water on the land and
retain and enhance the productivity of our  land  has increased
manyfold. By providing programs which demonstrated the useful-
ness of these techniques and encouraged their implementation, the
Congress has assured a generation of widespread and continuing
conservation effort.
  Through 1971, over  3,000 local Soil Conservation Districts have
been  formed, providing local  leadership  which  has resulted in
reducing erosion by 170 million tons below what might have been
lost if the many soil conservation practices had not  been put into
place.  In  cooperation,  local  farmers, through  the rural environ-
mental assistance program, have constructed over 2 million stor-
age reservoirs and built
                                                         [p. 14]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2027

many acres of terraces and waterways.  In  short, farmers have
been helped to practice  practical ecology where  water flow is
slowed and directed to waterways and  where cropland retains
cover crops to protect it from the wind.
  With all of  this,  much remains to be  done, for far too many
streams, clogged with sediment, flood the  land and are lost to  fish
and recreation. It was testified that the most recent conservation
needs inventory shows 64% of our cropland, over two-thirds of
our grasslands, and nearly 60 %  of our  forest  land  still require
some type of conservation treatment. Keeping up with the changes
of nature  and  the changing needs of our  expanding population is
a continuing task.
  When recognizing the contributions of  agriculture to the resto-
ration of the environment, we must not overlook the contributions
of our forest lands. We had in  this country  about 150 years  ago
8,000 million  board feet  of  timber.  Much  of  this  timber  was
burned and wasted. Up until  1925, there  had only been 1,600,000
acres planted to deforested areas  in the country. Now, that much
is planted  each year. Through 1968 there was a total of 30,000,000
acreas planted and seeded. Beyond the beauty and watershed bene-
fits we receive from our forests,  over 30 million homes constructed
of wood have been built in the last 25 years.

                STRESSES ON THE ENVIRONMENT

  Paralleling our concern with  the waste of our land and forest
resources  was the concern  for pollution  of water as a threat to
public  health.  This became a matter  of public concern in  the
United States in the late nineteenth century when virulent typhoid
epidemics  appeared in various  cities.  The  then new science of
bacteriology identified many of these  outbreaks as the  result of
contaminated water supplies. The public  outcry against pollution
was great. Public health officers attempted to meet this challenge
in two principal ways.
  The first was to select certain  streams for waste disposal and to
reserve other,  protected streams for municipal water supplies.
  The other method was the filtration  and disinfection of water.
  While these  systems have worked for many years, we now face
a period when we must give full  attention to water  pollution or
else pay substantial  penalties for the future.
  In a report  entitled The Economics of Clean Water, an EPA
survey estimated a municipal investment of as much as $18 billion
and an  industrial investment of  $8 billion  over the  next 4-year
period to meet current water pollution standards.

-------
2028          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  For 1971, EPA estimates that about 29% of the nation's waters
were polluted, a deterioration of about 2% below the estimate of
the previous year. For 1970, of the 148 million persons who  live
in communities served by sewer systems, the wastes for about 28 %
received only primary treatment and 6%  received no treatment.

                  AIR POLLUTION PROBLEMS

  Another serious problem we face in our efforts to clean up our
environment is the problem of air pollution. In the second Annual
Report of the President's  Council on Environmental Quality, the
damage cost as a result of air pollution was estimated to be $16.1
                                                       [p. 15]

billion. This  estimate is  based  on the following annual costs:
human health—$6.1 billion, residential property—$5.2 billion, ma-
terials—$4.7  billion, and vegetation—$0.1 billion.  Major sources
of air pollution are motor vehicles and factories which emit such
pollutants as sulfur and nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons and various
types of particulate matter, and smoke, soot, and fly ash.
  Motor vehicles of all types are responsible for much of our air
pollution,  with the internal combustion engine being responsible
for much of the carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen
oxides in  the  air. Under current law, hydrocarbons and  carbon
monoxide  from 1975 model year vehicles must be reduced by 90%
from the allowable 1970 emissions. Nitrogen oxide emissions must
be reduced by 90% in 1976 from measured emissions from  1971
model year cars.
  Major emphasis in this area has been directed toward emission
control devices rather than toward development and demonstra-
tion of new types of engine technology. Emission control devices
are expected to add $150 to $200 to the cost of  a new automobile as
well as increased costs due to a significant reduction in gas mileage.
  Clean-up of pollution  attributable to sources other than motor
vehicles will result primarily from the conversion to clean burning
fuels. Coal gasification,  natural gas, and nuclear power all offer
significant potential for reducing emissions.
  In the area of solid waste, it is estimated that we, as a nation,
throw away each year 3.5  billion tons of solid wastes, which costs
us about $4.5 billion  in handling costs. Of this, more than  360
million tons of industrial, municipal, and commercial solid wastes
are being generated, and this amount is expected to double by 1980.
  Paralleling the symptoms of man's demand  on the environment,
namely, air and water pollution, there is  a dramatic increase in

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2029

our use of resources which fuel our dynamic economy. The U.S.
population of about 208 million is only 5.6% of the world's popula-
tion,  but we  consume approximately one-third of the world's
energy output. In 1971, the U.S. Gross National Product passed
the $1 trillion mark. To support this  level of GNP, energy and
processed materials of mineral origin valued at  over $150 billion
were required.
  Annually over 4 billion tons of new mineral supplies—20 tons
per person—are needed to  sustain our economy.  For forest prod-
ucts alone, 1971  consumption of industrial wood reached an all
time peak of 13 billion cubic feet.

                      HOW DO WE PROCEED

  Though  we all agree that we have  a  problem facing us  with
regard to  the waste of our  resources and the  pollution  of our
streams, we are faced  with what may be done. One thing is cer-
tain : You can take pollution from the air and put it in  the water,
or you can take it  out of the water and put it  on  the land; but
once formed, it must be disposed of somehow.
  There is an  old saying, "There ought to be a law." But a law is
not self-enforcing.  What people really mean  is  that there ought
to be a  correction. Laws  require  the cooperation of the  vast
majority of decent citizens to be effective. The  law is  also blind
to any considerations  not  included  in its framework. If a law
causes more problems than it solves, it will not  be enforced over
a long period of time.
                                                       [p. 16]

  Congress in recent years has been passing  environmental  laws
that are difficult if not impossible not to support, but  which may be
impossible to carry out. These laws are  a reflection of the  feel-
ings of the Nation and the Congress and for the most part  an
earnest desire  to improve and restore the environment.
  But many of the provisions of these laws go well beyond the test
of the prudent man. In many cases, standards  are being estab-
lished, standards for which no known technology exists to  meet
these standards,  or at best  technology that  exists only  in the
laboratory or on the drawing board. For  example, the Committee
has been told that:

  —Phosphates have been removed from detergents  in some cases and the
   chemicals that have been used as replacements are more  dangerous than
   the phosphates.

-------
2030           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  —Emission control devices have been installed on  automobiles to reduce
    carbon monoxide emissions, and nitrogen oxide emissions have been in-
    creased as a result.
  —The new emission control devices may result in a significant increase in
    fuel consumption, thereby indirectly increasing pollution and significantly
    increasing the use of natural resources.
  —Power plant construction is being held up for environmental considera-
    tions—power that is needed to clean up our environment.
  —Some persistent pesticides have been banned and replaced with less per-
    sistent pesticides which we  must use far more often to achieve a similar
    effect with much greater hazards to workers.
  —We have made businesses install pollution abatement equipment and then
    made them replace the equipment as new technology becomes available.
Perhaps with all good intentions we are moving too fast.

               A STEP BACKWARD—THE GYPSY MOTH

  A second danger is using such laws to take sudden action where
alternatives do not exist or at least  are  only in the laboratory
stage of development. The gypsy  moth, which defoliates our trees,
is a case in point.
  This  insect was brought  to this country as  a possible source of
silk in 1869. Unfortunately, some of the moths escaped from cap-
tivity.  Twenty  years later it infested 200 square miles around
Boston. It gradually spread to infest much of New England and,
in the 1920's,  a barrier  zone was established along the line of
the Hudson River. Generally, infestations  beyond the zone were
held in check with aerial treatment with DDT, the treatment of
choice until its extensive use was halted in 1959.  Since that time,
the westward spread has been significant until the 1970's found
the gypsy moth as far  away  as Wisconsin, Ohio,  North Carolina,
South Carolina, and Alabama.
  Current control methods involve the use of  the pesticide Sevin
which, reportedly, does not offer the degree of control due to its
short life and the need for more frequent applications. Further, pub-
lic  opposition to aerial  pest control operations has seriously ham-
pered the success of the gypsy moth program. Sterile male moths
are being released in limited locations where it is possible to over-
whelm insect populations. In addition, experiments are being con-
                                                          [p.  17]

ducted  with parasites, predators,  and sex lures. The appropri-
ations for this research were expanded by $1 million in 1971 for a
total of over $1.6 million for the cooperating  agencies of USDA.
The level for 1973 should reach $1.9 million.

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2031

  Problems with mass rearing- techniques  and with the establish-
ment and careful testing that must precede  the introduction of
predators will mean that it will take several years to see their
effects. Nevertheless, the  Committee fully expects the Department
to use such funds as may be available to exploit any scientific
breakthroughs that may develop regarding this pest. In the mean-
time, our forests are threatened by the spread.

            IT TAKES TIME TO DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES

  The gypsy moth is a good example of the problems which arise
from precipitate action to stop  or ban the use of an available
method  for  controlling problems that man has with nature. Cer-
tainly these actions  are  necessary  where there is  an imminent
hazard to human health. But, for  the most part, we  must move
carefully to develop real alternatives in order to avoid unplanned
damage to the environment and  to  the economy.
  When disease strikes or former  control methods are no longer
available, the development of alternatives takes many, many years.
For  example, the Department has reported that it takes from 10
to 12 years  to develop a  new wheat, 5 years  for a new corn, 15
years for an improved oilseed variety.
  The development of a new pesticide requires about 5 years and
up to $5 million  before it can be approved  and marketed.
  Certainly any estimate of time  is only an average, and  the
development may  stretch  far beyond  that  time.  For example,
literally thousands of potential herbicides have been screened over
the past 27 years, but none has been developed that  possesses the
unique characteristics of 2, 4, D.
  In addition to  effectiveness, the cost implications of alternatives
must be fully explored. The Committee provided $200,000 in last
year's bill to enable the Secretary  of Agriculture  to consider  the
economics of some of the rules and regulations being proposed for
environmental control. The Department reported that a regula-
tion  under consideration  would  have cost an  average size  pig
farmer $15,000 or $7 per animal. The agency proposing the regu-
lation was unaware of this and glad to have the information.
  By the year 2000, 28 years from now, we will grow by 92 mil-
lion  Americans  above today's 208 million Americans who  are
already abusing their resources. Our lakes and rivers have become
catch basins for  the residues of our factories, household and agri-
cultural chemicals, for human wastes from thousands  of villages,
towns, and cities. Our air has become a pall on our major cities as
it is stressed by our factory and automobile exhausts. How we

-------
2032          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

will clean up this situation and learn to handle it without restrict-
ing the means for providing our high standard of living may well
determine the future of our nation.
  As we approach this problem, we must keep in mind that the
power to  control water quality and  air  quality  is  not  only the
power to make or break business  but is a power over the life of
our nation.
                                                       [P. 18]

  If we closed  all our manufacturing plants, that would greatly
improve our  water quality. If we stopped driving automobiles,
just  think what that would do to  improve the  atmosphere. If we
could return to the 800,000 population level of this country at the
time of its discovery, nature would be able to eliminate the pollu-
tion problem.
  Today's population could never  be asked to live the simple life
of the earliest Americans. Neither could we ask  or force the
residents of New York City to quit eating, quit  living,  and quit
breathing while we clean  up the  Hudson. The same is  true for
Washington and the Potomac as  well as many of the people in
thousands of towns and villages.
  However, it should be clear that our use of resources and the
discard of waste materials are directly related to the means by
which we live and prosper. The ability to  control their rate is the
power to control how we live. Yet, under present law and under
several more under consideration, we are investing more and more
of this power in a single agency with a  single head without the
means of setting priorities in public  debate and  where the costs
and the effects  of a decision to clean  up  a  river  or  clean up the
air can be assessed by those workers who must seek other employ-
ment, by the consumers who must  pay higher prices, and by those
industries which must find better locations and manufacturing
processes.

                   THE COST OF CLEANING UP

  A  study was recently released by the Council on Environmental
Quality entitled The Economic Impact of  Pollution Control which
considered the general economic impact of current nationwide air
and water pollution standards as well as the impact on 11 selected
industries. The study indicated that none of the 11 industries, as
a whole, would be seriously threatened solely by the present pollu-
tion abatement costs.
  However, it found that some individual firms  will earn lower

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2033

profits, some will curtail production,  and some firms and plants
will be forced to close. It estimated further that between 200 and
300 plants would be forced to close during the study period (1972-
1976) with  a potential reduction of between 50,000 and 125,000
jobs due to  the pollution abatement requirements. Such closings
are estimated to be significant for 150 communities.
  In terms  of the  general economy,  testimony before the Com-
mittee indicated that  industry will have to spend  $150 billion
between  now and  1980 in  order to meet the standards we have
established.  This cost will  have to be absorbed by the consumer
through  higher prices. Higher  cost of goods produced will mean
shrinking foreign markets and increasing pressure from foreign
imports.  This year  we are facing the largest trade deficit in the
history of the country. Increased prices and increased imports will
mean fewer jobs  for American workers. People out of work do
not care about the environment.
  Much has been written about our participation in international
environmental meetings. The Committee is for them to the extent
that we are able to share our experiences and our knowledge of
problems and learn from others in the process.
  However,  we are never as successful in our international efforts
as we hope.  We did not make the world safe for democracy after
World
                                                       [p. 19]

War I. The  rest of  the world did not  pay attention  to our views.
Nor were we too successful in saving  the world from communism
after World  War II.
  We did not seem to have as  much  influence in the rest of the
world as we thought we  had.  Now it would seem that we are
going to set out to save the world from environmental degradation.
This is a valid concern. But we must recognize that  no matter
how much we may wish to explain what we are learning to China
and India, they will still want to feed  their people first.
  This point was recently raised by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi
of India  when she  addressed the United Nations Conference on
the Environment. Mrs. Gandhi said,
  On the one  hand, the rich look askance at our continuing poverty. On the
other, they warn us against their own methods.
  She went on to say,
  We do not wish to impoverish the environment any further. Yet, we cannot
forget the grim poverty of large numbers of people. When they themselves
feel deprived,  how can we urge the preservation of animals, how can we

-------
2034          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

speak to those who live in villages and in slums about keeping the oceans,
the rivers  and the air clean, when their own lives are contaminated at the
source.
  We should set a  good example, help where we can, and practice
what we  preach. However, we cannot forget that with only 6.3 %
of the land area and 5.6 % of the people,  we are no more  going
to be able to control the rest of the world with  regard  to  the
world environment any more than we were able to save the world
for democracy or from communism.
  Today, the Congress,  the  Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency and others are faced with dealing with  many
of the environmental groups.
  We see many projects opposed by some because it will change
the type of fish or type of animal which they wish to catch and kill.
  Because a major war is not at  our shores, they feel that testing
of weapons is unnecessary.
  Because their lights  come on every night, they  oppose new
electric generation facilities.  They are  trying to stop power gen-
eration when our needs are  doubling each ten years.
  Because they haven't  been hungry, they oppose fertilizers and
pesticides which are fundamental to agriculture production.
  Because they have jobs, they are opposed to development of
areas of this country not so fortunate.
  Because their homes  are not flooded, they  are opposed  to
reservoirs.
  Millions of people have been  sold against "changing the  en-
vironment"—even  though it be for  the good of mankind.

               A  SOUND NATIONAL COMMITMENT
  It  is the general  conclusion of the  Committee, based on hearings
and on the years of experience with agriculture and other matters,
that  we face serious problems with no immediate hope for easy
solutions. At best,  we face hard choices which only through com-
mon  dedication,
                                                       [P. 20]

rigorous  study,  and orderly progress toward reasonable goals  can
we hope to better our present conditions.
  The Committee is not, however,  unmindful of changing world
conditions where peace may yield dividends to be used wisely to
meet our urgent domestic needs. In the past,  the conversion to a
peacetime economy has meant jobless returning veterans, can-
celed war contracts, and diminished  foreign markets for expanded

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY      2035

farm production.  It also seems that war  or the preparation for
war has brought our periods of greatest progress and prosperity.
This need not continue to be true for it is not from war  that
we prosper but rather it is the common dedication and purpose
which brings the economy to its peak.
  In war we spend money to buy guns, ships, and airplanes; we
buy fuel to burn in the airplanes and ships; we spend money on
things  that are destroyed. We dig up our minerals, destroy our
timber, and end up a poorer country because we have used up so
much of our resources.
  If we were just wise enough to put that same effort to use to
improve our own country; if we were wise enough to harness our
streams and reforest our lands,  stop erosion, clean our lakes and
rivers, build schools, and improve our country, we would  have  a
much richer country, We would have a finer country.
  If we leave our children a rich country, rich in natural resources,
rich in the things that provide our high standard of living,  then
we truly will have left them a fine heritage.
                                                      [p. 21]

        TITLE III—ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS
                    Independent Agencies

       COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND OFFICE OF
                   ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
1972  appropriation 	 $2,300,000
1973 budget request	_—	  2,550,000
Recommended  in the bill	  2,550,000
Change  	  	
  The  Council and Office of Environmental Quality were created
by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190)
and the Environmental  Quality Improvement Act of 1970  (P.L.
90-224) and operate as a single entity. The Council  is required to
prepare an annual environmental quality report; prepare recom-
mendations to the President on national policies for  improving
environmental quality; conduct  investigations and analyze condi-
tions and trends; and evaluate effects of technology.
  The  Council must also appraise the effect of Federal programs
and  activities on  environmental  quality;  assist Federal agencies
in the  development of environmental programs; and recommend
to the  President  and to Federal  agencies priorities in environ-
mental programs.
  For  fiscal year 1973, the Committee recommends an  appropria-

-------
2036          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

tion  of $2,550,000, the full  budget request  and an  increase of
$250,000 above  the  amount  provided for  fiscal  year 1972.  The
increase will be utilized for additional studies by contract and for
eight additional staff members.
  The Committee has recommended $767,000  for contract studies,
an increase of $207,000 over the amount available for fiscal year
1972. Studies tentatively planned for fiscal year 1973 are farmland
preservation, additional economic studies,  additional monitoring
parameters, technology assessment, and resource inventory.
  In fiscal  year 1972, the Congress provided funds for 65 perma-
nent positions; however, eight of these  positions were  withheld
by the Office of  Management and  Budget as  part of the Govern-
ment-wide  personnel freeze. The Committee has  again recom-
mended funds for 65 permanent positions  and has been advised
by the Council that they will be allowed to fill these eight positions
in fiscal year 1973.

             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1972 appropriation	   $2,447,520,318
1973 budget  request	   2,453,014,000
Recommended in the bill	   2,401,014,000
Change 	    —52,000,000
  The Environmental  Protection Agency was established on De-
cember 2,  1970 by Reorganization Plan Number 3  of 1970. This
reorgani-
                                                        [p. 56]

zation  provided for the consolidation of  pollution control  and
abatement  activities which were previously located in the follow-
ing agencies:
       Department of the Interior
       Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
       Department of Agriculture
       Atomic Energy Commission
       Council on Environmental Quality
       Federal Radiation Council

  The functions drawn from each of these  agencies had  different
authorizing legislation. Administration of  the various programs
presently within the Environmental Protection Agency is a com-
plex task. To help keep pace with these diverse,  but related func-
tions and authorities the Agency has structured an organization
that operates primarily along the functional lines of planning and
management, enforcement and general counsel, air and water pro-
grams, categorical programs, and  research and monitoring. Also,

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY         2037

to assure continuity of effort and a common  policy in conducting
day-to-day operations, ten Regional Offices have been established,
with each Regional Administrator being delegated responsibility
to manage EPA efforts in his assigned geographic area.
   The Environmental Protection  Agency is  currently  charged
with administration of the following  major legislation:

  The  Clean Air Act, as amended, places major responsibility for prevention
and control of air pollution at its source on  State and local governments, and
directs that Federal financial  assistance and leadership be provided to assure
the development of  cooperative Federal, State, regional and local programs
to prevent and control air pollution. Purposes  of the Act  include the  pro-
tection and enhancement  of the  quality of the  Nation's air resources in the
interest of the public health and welfare through the establishment of national
primary and secondary ambient air quality standards;  the  initiation and
acceleration of a national research and development program  to achieve the
prevention and control of air  pollution; the  provision of technical and finan-
cial assistance to State and local governments in connection with the develop-
ment and execution of their air pollution prevention and control programs;
and  encouragement  and  assistance in the development  and  operation  of
regional air pollution control programs. To carry out the provisions of the
Act, the Environmental  Protection Agency is authorized  to  make  grants
and enter into contracts to provide for a national program of research and
development with special  emphasis on fuels and  vehicles.  The law also  pro-
vides  for  standards  and  enforcement for  stationary air pollution sources;
and  Federal  enforcement, inspections,  monitoring and  abatement through
conference procedures.
  The  Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,  requires  a  Federal
program for the enhancement of the quality  and value of our water resources
and the establishment of a national policy  for the  prevention,  control, and
abatement  of water pollution. Included, as necessary to carry  out the provi-
sions of the Act, are requirements to prepare or  develop  comprehensive  pro-
grams  for  eliminating or reducing pollution and for research, investigation,
training, and information pertaining to water  pollution control. Major  pro-
grams  include grants for  research and development, training, basin planning,
State programs, and for construction of
                                                                [p. 57]

waste treatment works. Other significant  activities are enforcement, control
of pollution by oil  and sewage from vessels, acids and other mine pollution
control demonstration; development of new  and improved  methods and tech-
niques  for  dealing with pollution in the Great Lakes, and cooperation by all
Federal Agencies in control of pollution.
  In addition, the  Rivers  and Harbors Act (Refuse Act) of 1899 requires
that all persons dumping  pollutants into the navigable waters obtain  permits
from the Army Corps of Engineers. These permits must also be approved by
the Environmental Protection Agency.
  Pending before the Congress are amendments  to further  extend and expand
authorizations under the Act,  some of which have or will have expired as  of
June 30,1972.

-------
2038          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  The Solid Wastes Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Recovery Act,
provides for research, demonstration and training  in solid waste  disposal
technology; special studies and demonstrations on recovery of useful energy
and materials and establishment of recommended guidelines; grants for State,
interstate, and local planning for resource recovery systems and improved
solid waste disposal facilities; grants for training and a national disposal site
study.
  Among major legislative  proposals currently  pending  before
the Congress, in addition to the water  legislation referred to
earlier, are  programs concerned with noise, toxic substances,
ocean dumping and pesticides.

                 NEW APPROPRIATION STRUCTURE

  Prior to fiscal  year  1973,  the  operating programs  of  the
Environmental Protection Agency were  carried  under a  single
appropriation entitled "Operations, Research and Facilities." This
single  appropriation account tended to limit Congressional  visibil-
ity and control over the programs of the Agency.
  Therefore,  the Committee has separated the  Agency's fiscal
year 1973 appropriation request into five separate appropriations.
These  appropriations are "Agency  and  Regional  Management",
"Research and  Development",  "Abatement  and  Control",  and
"Enforcement". The  Committee has recommended denying funds
for "Facilities"; therefore, this appropriation account does not
appear in the bill.
  The appropriations recommended to carry out  the responsibil-
ities of the Agency follow:
              AGENCY AND REGIONAL MANAGEMENT
1972 appropriation  	  $34,460,400
1973 budget request  	   41,460,400
Recommended in the bill	   41,960,400
Change	   +500,000
  This activity includes executive direction and  leadership for
all  programs and support in such areas as  public, legislative,
and international affairs, equal  employment opportunity,  coordi-
nation of environmental impact statements and  Federal  agency
pollution control activities, program planning, review and  evalua-
tion, economic analysis, budgeting, accounting, auditing, personnel
management, organizational analysis, ADP operations, grants and
contracting policy, facilities management, and other housekeeping
activities. This activity still  includes direction and leadership for
all programs under the
                                                          [p. 58]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2039

management of  10  regional  administrators, and provision of
administrative support services.
  The amount recommended for agency and regional management
is $41,960,400,  an increase of $7,500,000  over the amount avail-
able for fiscal year 1972,
  Major increases include $3,567,300 to analyze  reports  from
Federal, State and other governmental departments and agencies,
including those supplied from private sources, for use in the estab-
lishment of standards, regulations and abatement strategies. Be-
cause of the importance of this activity,  the Agency has estab-
lished the Office of Planning and Evaluation. The Committee also
recommends an increase of $700,000 to increase the managerial
staffing of the regional  offices by  50 positions.  The  Committee
expects the Agency to be extremely selective  in filling these addi-
tional positions. Because  of  the authority and  responsibility of
regional office personnel, it is extremely important that  only the
very  best  qualified personnel are  placed in these  positions of
responsibility.
  Also included is an increase recommended by the Committee of
$500,000 and 10 positions to allow the Agency to establish  a formal
training program  for their professional and  scientific employees.
  The balance  of  the increase is for the  full-year cost  of head-
quarters and regional office space acquired in fiscal year 1972.

                  RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
1972 appropriation	  $168,154,018
1973 budget  request 	  167,223,700
Recommended in the bill	  185,223,700
Change		  +18,000,000
  This  activity includes  research  concerning the effects of pol-
lutants  on man and the  environment and  the processes which
influence the movement, dispersion and fate of all pollutants; and
it includes research and development leading to new and improved
analytical methods and instruments for detecting and measuring
pollution and to new and improved technology for preventing and
controlling pollution. Research and development activities are con-
ducted through grants, contracts, and other agreements with uni-
versities, industries, other private commercial  firms, non-profit
organizations, State and  local governments, and other Federal
agencies as well as through research and  development at the
Agency's laboratories and field locations. The Committee's recom-
mendations concerning the programs carried out under this activ-
ity  are discussed, by media, later in the report.

-------
2040          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

                   ABATEMENT AND CONTROL

1972 appropriation 	  $186,142,800
1973 budget request 	   207,435,700
Recommended in the bill	   240,935,700
Change	  +33,500,000

  This activity provides for planning grants and control agency
support grants to State, regional, and local  agencies  for  plan-
ning, establishing,  and  improving environmental  quality  pro-
grams. Monitoring and surveillance are performed to determine
baseline quality conditions, to measure pollutants, and to evaluate
the performance of control devices. Pollution prevention, control,
and abatement standards are generally established in cooperation
with State and local agencies. Technical assistance  is  provided
to Federal agencies, States,
                                                        [P. 59]

interstate regions, local communities, and industry. Environmental
impact statements by Federal  agencies are reviewed and  evalu-
ated. Education and training are supported through grants and
other forms of assistance and in-house training programs are con-
ducted for personnel of Federal, State, and  local governments,
industry, and educational institutions. The Committee has recom-
mended $30,000,000  for transfer  to the Rural  Environmental
Assistance Program of the  Department of Agriculture for  liqui-
dation of contracts  under the  1973  program. These funds will
allow the Rural Environmental Assistance  Program to increase
their  newly emphasized conservation and pollution  abatement
efforts,  including such  programs as animal waste storage and
diversion facilities and  disposal of solid waste.  The Committee's
other recommendations appear later in  the  report.

                        ENFORCEMENT

1972 appropriation 	  $21,345,100
1973 budget request 	   28,894,200
Recommended in the bill	   28,894,200
Change 	   	

  This activity includes the certification and  permit programs; the
enforcement of environmental  pollution standards, including the
gathering and preparation of evidential data and the conduct of
enforcement proceedings; and  legal services for the agency. In-
creases recommended by the Committee appear later in the report.

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2041

                          FACILITIES
1972 appropriation 	 $28,000,000
1973 budget request 	   1,000,000
Recommended in the bill	         0
Change	 —1,000,000
  This activity provides for  construction of laboratory facilities
and alterations, repairs, and improvements to existing facilities.
  The Committee recommends that the $1,000,000 requested for
funds  to repair and improve EPA's facilities be denied.  The
amount recommended  is $28,000,000  less than the  amount pro-
vided last year because of the one-time funding in fiscal year 1972
of $28,000,000 for the National Environmental  Research Labora-
tory at Cincinnati, Ohio.
  The repair and improvement projects funded under this activity
are intended to be for the correction of conditions detrimental to
personnel safety or the proper maintenance and protection of the
Government's investment  in  Federally  owned   facilities.  The
Agency advised the Committee that $1,000,000 would be required
in fiscal year 1973 to fund 76 projects at 15 different locations. In
addition, in fiscal year 1972,  $3,696,446 in carryover funds from
prior years are available to fund 88 projects.
  In its report on the fiscal year 1972 appropriation bill, the Com-
mittee directed  the Agency  to  undertake  a full and thorough
review of its various facilities with a view toward consolidation
of some of these diverse facilities. This study is not yet completed.
Therefore, the Committee feels that the carryover funds available
to the Agency are sufficient to fund the higher priority repair and
improvement projects, and projects of a lesser priority can be held
in abeyance until such  time  as the study is completed  and the
Agency is aware of which research facilities are required by the
Agency and which are not.
                                                        [p. 60]

  In addition, testimony before the Committee revealed that the
Agency planned to  construct several small laboratories at a cost
of almost $1,500,000 with  repair and improvement funds, even
before the requirements study was completed. Therefore, the Com-
mittee directs that repair and improvement projects be limited to
$50,000 per project. Similar limitations appear throughout the bill.

                SPECIAL GREAT LAKES PROGRAM

  The Congress has had much evidence of the need to abate water
pollution problems in the Great Lakes. It has been widely reported

-------
2042          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

that Lake Erie is  dead or dying. This may be somewhat of an
exaggeration. The Cuyahoga River,  which enters  Lake Erie at
Cleveland, is so polluted at least one spot caught fire. At any rate
the conditions  are  serious.  The President and  Prime Minister
Trudeau of  Canada recognized this condition  when recently they
signed an agreement  establishing joint clean-up goals and pro-
grams to study the problems of the Great Lakes.
  Prior to submission of the fiscal year 1973 budget to Congress,
the Environmental Protection Agency submitted a proposal to the
Office of Management and Budget proposing that a special national
priority be established to abate water pollution in the Great Lakes.
  The Agency proposed that, in addition to their normal ongoing
program efforts in the  Great  Lakes,  additional manpower  re-
sources be assigned to EPA regional offices to accelerate compli-
ance with regulatory requirements through working closely with
State and local government and industry. The Agency also pro-
posed funding a number of selected combined sewer projects. The
program proposed several approaches to run-off pollution, includ-
ing support  for and funding of proposed Great Lakes soil conser-
vation legislation to be  administered by  the Soil Conservation
Service. Also proposed was demonstration of  a basinwide  effort
to control sediment pollution under section  15 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.  Funding to implement
the administration's proposed urban sediment control legislation
in the Great Lakes area, and for development of a water resources
study for the Maumee River Basin to be conducted under the
auspices of the Water Resources Council was included.
  The program also included increased Great Lakes research, and
support for  and participation in United States-Canada activities
under the auspices of the International Joint Commission.
  The proposal involved  a cost of approximately $141 million,
approximately $125 million of which was  not  authorized by law.
The proposal was not included in the President's  budget for fiscal
year 1973 since implementation of most of the proposal was  de-
pendent upon the pending water pollution  control legislation.
  The Agency did, however, include $5  million  in the budget
request to implement certain portions of the proposal that  did
not require authorizing legislation. The proposed special program,
the funds
                                                       [P. 61]

included in the budget request, and the Committee's recommenda-
tions are as follows:

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY        2043
                          SPECIAL GREAT LAKES PROGRAM
                                               Proposed     Budget    Committee
                     Item                       program     request      action

1.100 additional people to accelerate compliance with regulatory require-
   ments		 $2,000,000   $1,000,000    1,500,000
2.9 or 10 selected storm and combined sewer projects to study the cost/
   benefit of various systems. EPA does not have authority to do this
   but new legislation would give it to them		 10,000,000 	(100,000,000)
3. Great Lakes soil conservation program to be administered by SCS—
   legislation now pending 			  2,000,000	_	
4. Demonstration of a basinwide effort to control sediment pollution under
   sec. 15 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act			  5,000,000    1,600,000    4,600,000
5. Development of a water resources study for the Maumee River Basin to
   be conducted under the auspices of the Water Resources Council
    Fiscal year 1973...					    300,000	
    Future years					  1,500,000		
6. Research on how the Great Lakes respond to various levels of pollution.  5,000,000    1,700,000    1,700,000
7. United States/Canada agreement:
   Upper Great Lakes study:
      Fiscal year 1973	    300,000     300,000     300,000
      Future years	  1,700,000 	
   Agricultural pollution study	    200,000     200,000
8. International Joint Commission study and research coordination			    200,000     200,000
9. Funding to implement urban sediment control legislation in the Great
   Lakes area	_	    400,000		
    Subtotal, FY 1973	  13,000,000    5,000,000  108,500,000
Future years		   3,200,000	
    Total program	  141,200,000    5,000,000  108,500,000
   In the case of Item 1, the budget request provides $1,000,000 to
support an expanded program of field investigations in the Great
Lakes  to  assess  compliance with  water  quality  standards and
waste discharge permits. However, the budget request provides for
contract funds  rather than  100 additional employees as proposed
in the original program. Therefore, the  Committee recommends
the appropriation of $1,500,000 for this item, $500,000 more than
the budget request.  The Committee  has recommended these addi-
tional funds so that the Agency may hire the 100 additional people
rather than contract for the work.
   The Agency  does  not  yet have authority  to  carry out Item 2;
however, the necessary authority is contained in the House version
of  the  Water   Pollution  Act  now  in  conference.  The  proposed
$100,000,000 would   have  allowed the Agency to  fund 9  or  10
selected storm  and combined sewer projects in  order to study the
cost benefit of the various systems. Inadequate storm sewers are a
major  contributor to pollution  in  the  Great  Lakes.   Since  the
Environmental Protection Agency does not yet  have the necessary

-------
2044          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

authority to fund the construction of storm and combined sewers,
the necessary funds cannot be provided to that Agency.
  However, the Department  of Housing and Urban Development
has $500,000,000 in funds  for water and sewer grants that could
be used to fund this program. In fact, HUD plans on using only
$200,000,000  of  the $500,000,000 now available for  their fiscal
year 1973 program. From all indications, the Office of Manage-
ment and  Budget  will  not  allow HUD  to use the  remaining
$300,000,000  for  their programs. Therefore,  the  Commiteee
strongly urges the Environmental Protection Agency, the  De-
partment of Housing and  Urban Development, and the Office of
Management  and Budget to  establish a program, coordinated by
the Environmental Protection Agency, to  make these "frozen"
funds  available,  under HUD's  legislative  authority, to fund
                                                      [p. 62]

the $100,000,000 demonstration program. Through this process,
additional funds are not required; existing  legislative authority
may be used; and the work may proceed immediately.
  Legislation covering Item 3 is now pending  and  will be con-
sidered after enactment.
  Item 4 is the demonstration of  a basin-wide effort to  control
sediment pollution. The Committee recommends $4,600,000 for this
item, $3,000,000 more than the budget request.
  The remaining items  are  primarily either funded at the level
proposed in the special program for fiscal year 1973 or are  not yet
authorized by law.

             TRAINING GRANTS AND FELLOWSHIPS

  For fiscal year 1973 the budget requested $7.41 million for train-
ing grants  and fellowships, a reduction of $3.0 million below the
amount available for fiscal  year 1972. The funds for this program,
according to information  provided to the  Committee, are  dis-
tributed by media as follows:

Air 	 	 	
Water 	 	

Solid wastes. 	

Total 	 	 	
Fiscal year
1972
	 $3,600,000
	 5,595,000
800 000
	 415,000

	 	 	 	 10,410,000
Proposed
reduction
$1,037,000
1,612,000
231 000
120,000

3,000,000
Fiscal year
1973
$2,563,000
3,983,000
569 000
295,000

7,410.000
Committee
action
$3,600,000
5,595,000
800,000
415,000

10,410,000

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2045

   Through this program, in order to meet professional environ-
mental  manpower needs, the Environmental Protection  Agency
provides grants to universities to support environmental training
programs for graduate  students and provides fellowships for
graduate study in the environmental field.
   Testimony before the  Committee indicated that the basis for
reducing this program was that ". . .  there appears to be no large
gap between the demand  for trained environmentalists and people
available for environmental jobs."
   Research by the Committee indicates that a large number of the
individuals that receive training under this program, upon gradu-
ation, are employed by the Environmental  Protection Agency or
other Federal and  State agencies operating in this  field, which
have a pressing need for qualified personnel.
   The Committee feels  that it  is extremely  important to the
Nation  that individuals entering the environmental field be well
qualified. Because of the importance and the magnitude of the job
to be done, we must  have the best. Therefore,  the  Committee
recommends restoring the proposed reduction.
               CONSTRUCTION OP NEW FACILITIES
   Many Members of  Congress and other interested individuals
have expressed concern regarding the present hold up of construc-
tion of new laboratory facilities for which funds have been previ-
ously authorized and appropriated. Many of these proposed labora-
tories would seem to have merit.
                                                       [p. 63]
   The Committee, in  its  report on the fiscal 1972 appropriation
bill, however, directed that "no further construction be undertaken
without a full and thorough review of  existing research efforts and
their locations with a view toward consolidation of the diverse pro-
grams so recently acquired. . . ."
   The Committee has been advised that this study is in the final
stages of completion, and the Agency will very shortly be reporting
their findings and recommendations to the Committee. Therefore,
the Committee has taken no action with respect to the nine new
laboratories proposed  for the Agency and will await the recom-
mendation of the Agency.
                    TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES
   The Committee is very concerned  about  the  large number of
temporary employees on the payroll of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency.  The Agency currently employs approximately 1500
temporary employees  at  an annual cost in  excess  of $7,000,000.

-------
2046          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

According to information provided to the Committee, which ap-
pears on page 379 of volume 5 of the Committee's hearings, the
majority of these employees  are performing work of an adminis-
trative or clerical nature. The Committee is convinced that a re-
view of the  present  situation  is urgently needed. Those holding
positions which are permanent should be so classified and others
released.
  The  Committee recognizes the requirement  for temporary em-
ployees in connection  with the assignment of Federal employees to
State and local agencies to assist in  establishing and developing
air pollution control programs as authorized by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1970. The Committee also recognizes that in cer-
tain  other situations  temporary employees are more practical or
economical than permanent employees.
  However, the Committee does not accept the use of temporary
employees as a means of holding down an Agency's permanent em-
ployment and thus disguising the true  size of an Agency's work
force. The Committee does not recommend a reduction in the funds
for temporary employees since, in terms of the total workload of
the Agency,  they  may well be justified. However, the Committee
intends to closely  monitor the use of temporary employees during
the coming year and  will expect the fiscal year 1974 budget of the
Agency to more accurately reflect the permanent work force re-
quirements of the Agency.
               AREAS IN NEED OF IMPROVEMENT
  The  Committee is  extremely concerned about reports that the
Environmental Protection Agency may be causing serious economic
disruptions because of their lack of proper procedures or standards.
In the case of environmental impact statements, 95% of which are
reviewed at  the regional office level, the Committee has learned
that  EPA has not prepared standards to provide  for a consistent
region-by-region review of the statements. To date, EPA has only
prepared standards  for the  regional offices on how to prepare
standards. The Committee feels that consistent nationwide stand-
ards must be developed immediately.  The confusion  and delay
caused by leaving important decisions  such as this up to individuals
cannot be tolerated.
  The  Committee has also been advised that a great deal of hesi-
tancy is developing in the business community because of the in-
ability of
                                                      [P. 64]
EPA, in some cases, to be able to approve proposed actions. There
are reports  that  businesses are proposing pollution abatement

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2047

actions but EPA personnel  are either unwilling or unable to ap-
proach the proposals. As a result, there is hesitancy to move for-
ward for fear that the large expenditures required to abate pollu-
tion will be ruled to be inadequate  by EPA at some future date.
During the coming year the Committee will expect the Agency to
work to improve its procedures so  that decisions can be reached
in a timely fashion.
   The Committee is convinced that a tax credit should be made up
to probably 50 per cent of the cost of pollution abatement in many
cases.
   The Committee is without authority to provide for such legisla-
tion, but strongly urges both the EPA and the appropriate legisla-
tive Committee to cooperate in the passage of such legislation.
   The Committee also feels that increased attention should  be paid
by EPA to labeling of those pesticides sold for home and  garden
use. The Committee feels the consumer should be fully and accur-
ately advised as to how to best use these products.
     ADVISORY COMMITTEES FOR GRANT AND CONTRACT REVIEW
   Testimony before the Committee has indicated that serious defi-
ciencies may exist in  the  Agency's current  practice  of  setting
priorities,  especially with  regard to work  done by contract or
grant.  As with  all  organizations involved  in research and tech-
nology  development, there  is a  problem of the funding  of, or
placing undue  emphasis on, "pet projects."  As a result, many
projects of questionable value in light of national  goals may be
funded. Projects that look interesting to a research  scientist may,
in fact, have little relevance to the true research requirements of
the Agency. The job of cleaning up the environment is so big and
so important to the future of our  country that it is absolutely
essential that we utilize such resources  as we can in a manner
that will  yield  the greatest return. Therefore, the Committee
recommends that advisory committees be utilized to review the
priorities  of  the Agency and  to  advise the Administrator as to
which contracts or  grants will provide the greatest return to the
Agency in line with priorities.
   The Committee has provided language that would make approxi-
mately 2% of the total funds  available for contracts and grants
available to fund advisory  committees. The membership  of the
committees shall be selected  in such a manner to  assure that there
is a balanced representation, including members  with governmen-
tal, industrial, and  scientific experience. The  committee members
shall be employed and compensated as authorized  by 5 U.S.C. 3109,
and shall meet at appropriate  intervals as established by  regula-

-------
2048          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

tion of the Administrator. Such committees may be established by
regulation as the Administrator determines to be necessary to the
efficient and expeditious  review of grants and contracts. The
existence of such committees will help to assure that the approxi-
mately $240,000,000 included in this bill for grants  and contracts
will  be effectively spent.

     INDEMNITY PAYMENTS FOR ECONOMIC OR PHYSICAL INJURY

  The Committee takes note of the action by the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency banning the use of DDT in
                                                        [p. 65]

this country effective December 31, 1972, except for use on green
peppers, onions, and  sweet potatoes  in storage. In taking this
action the  Administrator overrode the  findings of the  Federal
hearing examiner, who ruled, based on the evidence at hand, that
no reason existed for banning DDT.
  In issuing his decision, the Administrator also urged quick pas-
sage of the  pesticide legislation submitted by the Administration
which has been pending in Congress and stated, "The present law
is completely inadequate to allow me to regulate the use of pesti-
cides for beneficial uses on a restricted basis." Such authority may
well  be used to further ban or at least restrict other essential
pesticides prior to the development of satisfactory alternatives.
  The Committee also takes note  of the fact that the Administra-
tor's order does not  affect export of DDT to other countries. How-
ever, by our action the Administrator is indirectly telling them
that they should likewise ban its use. This raises the  question as to
whether we are following a course that will, if  carried forward,
allow the underdeveloped countries to  develop  toward our own
level while we, at the same time, drift backward toward their level
of health, length of life, and standard of living.
  The Committee is convinced  that the Administrator's  decision
on DDT raises serious  questions. DDT has been widely used
throughout the world and has reportedly saved millions of human
lives through increased food production and disease eradication.
According to information provided to the Committee, throughout
the many years of use, DDT has produced no known  harmful effect
to human health when properly used. The decision is within the
power of the Administrator though doubtless  this matter will
eventually have to be settled by the courts.
  It is to be noted that the  Administrator says that in many  re-
spects the best substitutes constitute  a real hazard—so much so

-------
             STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2049

that he has asked the Committee,  and the  Committee has  acted
favorably, for a training program for the substitutes.
  He plans to  turn to substitutes  with which we have far less
experience, are readily admitted to be highly toxic, and require a
far greater frequency of application for a lesser result. The Com-
mittee believes that funds should be available for indemnity pay-
ments to individuals who suffer economic or physical harm from
the use of  Government-forced substitutes.
  Therefore, the Committee recommends that the Environmental
Protection  Agency give serious consideration to  establishing  an
indemnity program, similar to others now in existence throughout
the Federal government.
          COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL  IMPACT STATEMENTS
  Testimony before the Committee has indicated that in fiscal year
1973  Federal agencies will be required  to spend approximately
$65,000,000 to  prepare Environmental Impact Statements as re-
quired
                                                            [P. 66]
by the National Environmental Policy Act. The estimated cost by
agency follows:
RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PROSECUTION OF NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEC 102(2XC))

                  Agency                     1971       1972       1973
Department of Agriculture 	
Appalachian Regional Commission 	
Atomic Energy Commission 	
Department of Commerce 	 	 	 	 	 	
Department of Defense:
Air Force 	
Army 	
Army Corps of Engineers 	
Navy 	 	 	 , 	
Delaware River Basin Commission 	 _._ 	
Environmental Protection Agency.., 	 _ 	
Federal Power Commission. 	 	 	 	 	 	
Department of HEW 	
Department of HUD 	 	 	
Department of Interior 	 _. 	 	
International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 	
National Science Foundation... 	 	 	 	 	
Tennessee Valley Authority 	 	 	
Department of Transportation 	 _ 	
Department of Treasury 	
730,000
23,000
1,376,000
558,000



4,860,000

25,000
1,140,000
320,000
450,000
173,000
4,249,000
35,000
436,000
8,000
1,425,000
1,296,000
5,000
2,934,000
35,000
6,823,000
659,000

87,000
2,664,000
12,330,000
3,711,000
98,000
2,028,000
544,000
450,000
800,000
8,995,000
43,000
506,000
9,000
2,138,000
2,972,000
171,000
3,932,000
35,000
8,194,000
1,593,000

116,000
3,543,000
19,870,000
1,478,000
223,000
2,601,000
577,000
450,000
1,095,000
14,267,000
61,000
498,000
15,000
1,888,000
4,219,000
281,000
   Total	  17,109,000  48,077,000   64,936,000


 NOTE: Outlay estimates were complied by the Office of Management and Budget from data submitted by the various
agencies. The information was submitted in accordance with the April 1972 request by OMB for information on outlays
associated with the cost of preparing, processing, reviewing, and commenting on environmental impact statements.

-------
2050          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  The Committee is strongly opposed to the cost of preparing im-
pact statements being used as a part of the cost/benefit ratio and
perhaps thereby  defeating or  preventing needed public works
projects throughout the United States. In addition, undue delays
associated with the preparation of impact statements on necessary
public works projects could seriously affect the economy of our
country. As we make the conversion to a peacetime economy, it is
vital that we divert this extra effort to the good of our people.
  -The  Committee takes  this position  because of the increasing
emphasis being  placed on detailed impact statements.  Require-
ments for additional information, if carried to extremes, can be a
costly and time-consuming process. In  order to hold requests for
detailed information to only that necessary to evaluate the state-
ment, the Committee recommends that consideration be given to
making EPA responsible for all or some portion of the cost of all
environmental impact statements.
  Therefore, the Committee recommends that the  Office of Man-
agement and Budget consider  establishing procedures or regula-
tions that would allow the Environmental Protection Agency to
either finance or refund the cost of preparing impact statements.

             BASIS FOR COMMITTEE ACTION BY MEDIA

  The  Committee has indicated  below  the relative priority it at-
taches to various specific pollution problems, and the agency must
limit transfers of funds between media to not more than 10%
without first obtaining approval of the appropriations committees.
                                                        [p. 67]

  A breakdown and discussion of the budget proposals by media
and category follows:
                    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Air
Water
Solid Wastes. 	 ...
Water Hygiene .. .
Radiation. .
Pesticides
Noise
Interdisciplinary

Agency Management and Regional Management
Facilities.. 	 ..
Employment Reduction Savings .

Total 	 	 	
Available
1972
$134,797,000
130,909,100
33,267,700
4,131,100
7,179,900
16,703,100
1,194,400
5,326,400
42,133,200
34,460,400
28,000,000
2,418,000
440,520,300
Proposed 1973
Increase
+$24,978,800
+8,389,600
-11,835,100
-37,600
+262,700
+2,180,000
-11,200
+2,264,100
+1,720,400
+7,000,000
-27,000,000
-2,418,000

+5,493,700
1973 Budget 1973 Committee
Request Recommendation
$159,775,800
139,298,700
21,432,600
4,093,500
7,442,600
18,883,100
1,183,200
7,590,500
43,853,600
41,460,400
1,000,000


446,014.000
$160,812,800
144,410,700
36,552,600
4,093,500
7,673,600
18,883,100
1,183,200
7,590,500
43,853,600
41,960,400


467.014.000

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2051

Air	$160,812,800

  The amount recommended for air programs is $160,812,800, an
increase of $26,015,800 over the amount available for fiscal year
1972.
  The Committee has  recommended $71,116,300 for research on
air pollution processes  and effects, an increase of $12,744,100 over
the amount available  for fiscal year 1972. The Committee has
provided $5,000,000 to provide for the  initiation of regional  air
pollution studies to enable the States and metropolitan areas to
select more effective and less costly standards. An increase of $5
million has been provided to expand research on the health effects
of air pollutants. In the area of pollution control technology, the
Committee recommends a net increase of $4,985,400 for research.
This increase will expand the development of particulate control
technology and improved control of nitrogen oxides and sulfur
oxides emissions.
  For air pollution abatement and control programs the Commit-
tee recommends $85,963,300, an increase of $10,922,200 over the
amount available for fiscal year 1972. This increase will provide
for increased financial assistance to State and local  air pollution
control  agencies  and  expanded surveillance  of stationary  and
mobile  source  standards, including initiation  of  assembly-line
testing of new  1973 model-year vehicles.
  For air enforcement programs the  Committee  recommends
$2,696,200, an increase of $1,310,500 over the amount available for
fiscal year 1972. This  increase is required to  enforce air  quality
standards, new source performance standards,  hazardous mate-
rials standards, and mobile  source standards.
Water	 $144,410,700

  The amount recommended for water programs is $144,410,700,
an increase of  $13,501,600  over the amount  available for fiscal
year 1972. Of this amount, $93,267,000 is subject to later authori-
zation. The appropriate authorizing legislation is now in  confer-
ence between the House and  the Senate. Therefore, the Committee
has included these funds, but  with  a limitation prohibiting their
use until authorized. The final legislation, however, may result in
the need to reconsider  the amounts  recommended.
  The Committee recommends $54,632,400 for water quality  re-
search, approximately the same amount as was available for fiscal
year 1972.
                                                       [p. 68]

-------
2052          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

Included in this amount is an increase of  $7,000,000 to initiate
a program to identify and assess the  pollution problems of the
Great  Lakes and  to develop effective control  measures.  This
increase will be offset  by deemphasizing  the development and
demonstration of waste water control technologies with the intent
of encouraging greater involvement by the private sector.
  The  Committee recommends $70,465,800  for the water quality
program, an increase of $7,238,500 over the amount available for
fiscal year 1972. An increase of $5,000,000 has been recommended
to increase grants to State and interstate water pollution control
agencies to strengthen their programs.  Increased funds have also
been provided to initiate a comprehensive investigation of water
quality in Lake Huron and  Lake Superior and to  expand the
investigation of eutrophication,  agricultural  runoff  and  other
problems in the Great Lakes.
  $19,312,500 has been provided for enforcement of water quality
standards, an increase of $5,222,900 over the amount available for
fiscal year 1972. This increase will be used to handle an increased
number of violations of water quality  standards and Refuse Act
permits. In addition, the increase will be used to upgrade the  com-
puterized system for processing Refuse Act permits and to provide
field sampling and laboratory equipment for the program.
Water  Hygiene	$4,093,500
  The  request  for  water hygiene is $4,093,500,  a  reduction  of
$37,600 below the amount available for fiscal year 1972.  The funds
recommended will provide for  a continuation of the  1972 level of
effort.  Funds are provided for research on the  effects  of water
quality on human health and methods for assessing the quality of
drinking and recreational waters. Assistance is also provided to
State and local  agencies to aid them in providing  municipal water
supplies, meeting drinking water standards,  and protecting the
sanitary quality of recreational  waters.
Solid Wastes	$36,552,600
  The  amount  recommended for  solid  wastes  is $36,552,600, an
increase of $3,284,900  over the amount available for fiscal  year
1972.
  The  Committee recommends adding $15,000,000 to continue the
development and demonstration of solid waste technology at the
fiscal year 1972 level. In addition  to the funds provided for fiscal
year 1973, approximately  $13,500,000  in carryover  funds from
previous years  will  also be available for this effort.
  An increase of over $3 million is recommended to enable greater

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2053

financial and technical assistance to State and local solid waste
agencies.
Pesticides	$18,883,100
  The amount recommended for pesticide activities is $18,883,100,
an increase of $2,180,000 over the amount available for fiscal year
1972.
  The Committee has provided $1,800,000, an increase of $900,000,
to expand research on the development of alternative pest control
methods. This work will be carried out jointly with the  National
Science Foundation and the Department of Agriculture.  The Sci-
entific Advisory Board of the National Center for Toxicological
research, which is  composed of prominent scientists from acade-
mia, industry,
                                                        [p. 69]

and  the Federal Government, has  given tentative approval  to
including research  into the development of microbiological pesti-
cides in the programs of the Center because of its unique capa-
bilities in  this  field.  Since  the Committee fully supports the
maximum utilization of existing research facilities, the Environ-
mental Protection  Agency should consider  using the  National
Center to  the  fullest extent practicable  within the application
of sound scientific principles.
  In addition, the Committee has provided an increase of approxi-
mately $1 million to expand studies on the health effects of pesti-
cides, accident investigations and technical assistance to State and
other agencies, and to improve the effectiveness and efficiency  of
the pesticide registration program.
Radiation	$7,673,600
  The amount  recommended  for radiation  is  $7,673,600, an in-
crease of $493,700 over the amount available for fiscal  year 1972.
The research program on human exposure to and the health effects
of both ionizing and non-ionizing radiation will be continued at the
same level.
  Major changes to the program include an  increase of  $175,000
for development of standards, and the initiation of studies to de-
velop information required for establishment of a standard for the
liquid-metal, fast-breeder reactor.
  An increase of $181,200 is  provided to continue development  of
the National Environmental Radiation Monitoring Program.
  In addition, an increase of $133,900 is provided  for additional
staff to review environmental impact statements.
Noise	$1,183,200

-------
2054          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  The request for noise pollution is $1,183,200, or $11,200 less with
the amount available for 1972. The proposed lesser amount results
from a reduction of $995,000 which reflects the completion of the
required report to the President and the Congress during fiscal
year 1972. This decrease  is offset by an increase of $155,000 to
expand research on the effects of noise on human health and well-
being necessary for the ultimate establishment of  standards. An
increase of $828,500 is also provided in  connection with noise pol-
lution at Federal activities. EPA will provide technical assistance
to other Federal agencies for the purpose of preventing and abat-
ing objectional  noise from Federal activities and will conduct sur-
veys and  studies in order to develop data  on the economic and
engineering aspects of noise  abatement and control.
Interdisciplinary	$7,590,500

  The request for interdisciplinary activities is $7,590,500, an in-
crease of $2,264,100 over the amount available for fiscal year 1972.
The additional  funds will enable the development of basic infor-
mation and the analytical tools  for performing economic studies,
environmental impact analyses, forecasts of environmental quality,
and other analyses to improve the development of standards, regu-
lations, and abatement strategies.
                     CONSTRUCTION GRANTS
1972 appropriation	  $2,000,000,000
1973 budget request	   2,000,000,000
Recommended in the bill	   1,900,000,000
Change 	1	   -100,000,000
                                                        [P. 70]

  This program currently provides grants to States for up to 55%,
under certain circumstances, of the  cost of  construction of waste
treatment facilities. The program is authorized by section 8 of the
Water Pollution Control Act  through April, 1972.
  Amendments to the Water Pollution Control  Act are now in
conference between the House and  the Senate.  For construction
grants, the Administration had proposed a 3-year Federal share
program of $6  billion. However, the House bill proposes  a three-
year program of $18 billion and  the Senate version of the bill pro-
poses a three-year program of $14 billion. In all likelihood, the new
legislation, when it is reported  by the  Committee  of Conference,
will be significantly in excess of the $2 billion  program of the
Administration on which the budget request was based.
  Both the House  and Senate  versions of the new authorizing

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2055

legislation contain a provision for the use of contract authority,
which would avoid the traditional annual congressional appropria-
tion process. Therefore, it would not be necessary to appropriate
any additional funds at this time. The first appropriation required
under contract authority  would be in connection  with  the fiscal
year 1974 budget, to liquidate those contracts entered into in fiscal
year 1973.
  However, the Committee fully recognizes the importance of this
program which is designed to preserve and enhance our waterways
and therefore  recommends  an  appropriation of  $1,900,000,000,
subject  to authorization,  to  remain available until the Federal
Water Pollution  Control  Act amendments  of 1972 become  law.
Once the new legislation  becomes law, the balance of the funds
would be available for reimbursement to States for facilities  con-
structed in anticipation of Federal repayment. These  outstanding
reimbursements are estimated to be $1,900,000,000.
  The Committee feels  the appropriation of these funds is abso-
lutely essential, since they will allow the States and municipalities
to proceed with their programs for fiscal year 1973. Without the
appropriation  of these funds, there is a very real possibility  that
vital programs to clean up the Nation's waterways could  come to a
standstill until such time as the new legislation becomes law.
                                                       [p. 71]

           LIMITATIONS AND LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

  The following limitations and legislative provisions not hereto-
fore carried in any appropriation act are included in the bill:
  On pages 30-31 in connection with research and development
activities of the Environmental Protection  Agency:
     .• Provided, That this appropriation shall be available  only
    within the limits of amounts authorized by law for fiscal year
    1973.
      For an  amount to provide for independent grant and  con-
     tract review  advisory  committees  for the  review  of the
     Agency's priorities to assure that such contracts and grants
     are awarded only to qualified research agencies or individuals'
    $2,590,000.
  On pages 31-32 in connection with abatement and control activi-
ties of the Environmental Protection Agency:
    : Provided, That this appropriation shall be available only
    within the limits of amounts authorized by law for fiscal year
    1978.

-------
2056          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

      For an amount to provide for independent grant and con-
    tract review advisory committees for the review of the Agen-
    cy's priorities to assure that such contracts and grants are
    awarded only to qualified research agencies or individuals,
    $2,000,000.
      For an amount to provide for  conservation  and pollution
    abatement  practices including animal  waste storage and di-
    version  facilities and disposal of solid wastes, to be trans-
    ferred to the Rural Environmental Assistance Program of the
    Department of Agriculture for liquidation of contracts under
    the 1973 program, $30,000,000, to remain available until ex-
    pended.
                                                      [p. 99]

-------
             STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              2057
H es
< H
ca w  ;B
           S-3 .
           *§r
           55 =
           *.»1T
             -? a
               &"
             o S (,
           -a

                               o o o
                               o o o

                               o" o" cT
                               o o o

                               4- oo~ co"
                                 rH CO
                                 69-  i
        O
        O
        O
        O
O
O
o
o
                               ONOOOOO
                               OOOOOOOO
t> C- "* t- 00 N O
_4_ rH ta _L CM I  O
«s o d o
O O O O
                                   in
                                   co
                               O O O O O
                               o o o o o
                               •*_ t-^ t-_   o
                                                 o  ,tJ
             °w ^   w g p




            t) §  4J ^ *
             SO   tJ -^ <



             i|  |


              "3   o>
              fl  *rt



              "[p.  H2]
                                                           [P. 113]

-------
2058          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  1.17b(2) SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
           H.R. REP. No. 92-983, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972)

DEPARTMENT   OF   AGRICULTURE—ENVIRONMENTAL
  AND CONSUMER PROTECTION APPROPRIATION BILL,
  1973
                JULY 24, 1972.—Ordered to be printed
 Mr. McGEE, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted
                        the following

                         REPORT

                    [To accompany H.R. 15690]

  The Committee on Appropriations, to which was  referred the
bill (H.R.  15690)  making appropriations for the Agriculture-
Environmental and Consumer Protection Programs for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1973, and for other purposes, reports the
same  to the Senate with  various amendments  and presents here-
with information relative to the changes made:
Amount of bill as passed by the House—Total new (obli-
  gational)  authority	  $12,897,010,900
Amount of increase by Senate Committee—New (obliga-
  tional) authority 	     497,940,900
Amount of bill as reported to Senate—New (obligational)
  authority  	   13,394,951,800
Amount  of  1972  Appropriation Act—Budget  (obliga-
  tional) authority to date	   13,965,498,427
Amount of estimates, 1973—New (obligational) authority ._   12,952,603,400
The bill as reported to the Senate:
    Under the Appropriation Act for 1972	    —570,546,627
    Over the estimates  for 1973—New  (obligational)
     authority  	    +442,348,400
                                                        [P. 1]

            GENERAL  SUMMARY  STATEMENT

  The Senate bill,  as reported  by the Committee  recommends
$13,394,951,800 of new obligational authority for fiscal year 1973,
representing a net increase by the Committee of $497,940,900 over

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY        2059

the House bill and $442,348,400 over the budget estimates.  The
amounts of new obligational authority for each of the four Titles
contained in  the bill for 1973, and the House  bill for 1973, com-
pared with the Committee recommendations, are shown in the fol-
lowing table. A detailed tabulation showing comparisons appears
at the end of this report. Recommendations for individual appro-
priation  items, projects, and  activities are carried in the report
under the appropriate item headings.

Title 1 — Agricultural Programs
Title II — Rural Development
Title III — Environmental Protection
Title IV— Consumer Protection and Services 	
1972
Appropriation
Act
6,721,810,550
946,392,000
3,489,913,877
. 2,807,382,000
1973
budget
estimates
6,179,628,400
750,226,000
2,934,173,000
3,088,516,000
1973
House
bill
5,961,685,400
899,303,000
2,944,684,500
3,091,338,000
1973
Senate
committee
6,235,814,800
1,077,636,000
2, 984, 985, COO
3,096,516,000
   Total, new budget (obligational) authority. 13,965,498,427 12,952,603,400  12,897,010,900  13,394,951,800

  The Committee strongly urges the Department and the Admin-
istration to fully utilize all of the budget authority contained in the
appropriations bill  hereinafter set forth. The  Committee, during
the course of its hearings and other deliberations, has given con-
siderable attention to each of these items. It is obvious that each of
them carries a high priority with  the Committee.
                                                         [p. 2]


       TITLE III—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

                    INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

       COUNCIL ON  ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND OFFICE OF
                    ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
1972 New budget (obligational) authority	  $2,300,000
1973 Budget estimate—New (obligational) authority	     _   2,550,000
House bill—New  (obligational) authority	  	    2,550,000
Committee recommendation—New (obligational) authority	   2,550,000

  The Council and  Office of Environmental Quality has been as-
signed duties and responsibilities under Public Laws 91-190 (ap-
proved January 1,  1970) and 91-224  (approved April 3, 1970),
and Executive  Orders  11507 and 11514. Some of these duties and
responsibilities include the preparation of an annual environmen-
tal  quality report; preparation of recommendations for the  Presi-
dent on national policies to improve environmental quality; anal-

-------
2060          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

yzing conditions and trends in the quality of environment;  con-
ducting investigations  relating to environment; assisting Federal
agencies on the development of environmental standards, and ad-
vising the President and Federal agencies as to priorities in envi-
ronmental programs.
  The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,550,000 for
the Council on Environmental Quality and Office of Environmental
Quality for fiscal year 1973. This amount is the same as the budget
estimate and the House  allowance, and $250,000 over the fiscal
year 1972 appropriation.

             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             OPERATIONS, RESEARCH, AND FACILITIES
  The following table indicates the action taken by the House on
various activities of EPA:
Item
Research and development
Abatement and control
Enforcement
Facilities..
Agency and regional management..

Appropriation,
1972
$168,154,018
186,142 800
21,345 100
28,000,000
34,460,400

Budget estimate,
1973
$167,223,700
207,435,700
28,894,200
1,000,000
41,460,400

House bill,
1973
$185,223,700
240,935,700
28,894,200
0
41,960,400

   Total, operation, research, and facilities	 "$438,102,318  $446,014,000   $497,014,000

  1 Does not Include $2,418,000 in employment reductions savings.

                                                        [p. 35]

  This appropriation covers the following activities to support a
national program of environmental protection and pollution abate-
ment:
  a. Research and Development programs to determine the cause-
and-effect relationships of environmental pollutants and to develop
and demonstrate technological solutions for pollution abatement
and control.
  b. Abatement and Control programs which provide for develop-
ment and implementation  of environmental standards, monitoring
and surveillance of pollution, pollution control planning,  financial
and technical assistance to State and local pollution  control agen-
cies, assistance to other Federal  agencies  to minimize impact of
their activities on the environment, and support of training of per-
sonnel engaged in pollution control activities.

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2061

   c. Enforcement programs to assist State and local agencies and
to carry out direct  enforcement activities to assure  compliance
with Federal pollution control standards, permits, and regulations.

   d. Facilities  programs  to provide  construction of new  EPA
facilities and repair, improvement, and alteration of existing EPA
facilities.
   e. Agency and Regional Management activities to provide both
centralized and regional leadership and administrative  support for
EPA's programs.
   Prior to House action on the fiscal year 1973 Budget, the operat-
ing programs of the Environmental Protection Agency were car-
ried under a single appropriation entitled, "Operations,  Research
and Facilities" and this method  of budgeting was followed when
the Administration budget for 1973 was prepared and forwarded
to Congress. The House separated the Agency's 1973 appropria-
tions into 5 separate categories and provided 5 separate appropria-
tions in lieu of the  single appropriation described above.  These
titles and appropriations are identified as: Agency and  Regional
Management, Research and Development, Abatement and Control,
Enforcement and Facilities.
   The Agency has appealed the action of the House in  this regard
and requested that this Committee return to the single appropria-
tion account that has heretofore  prevailed and as proposed in the
President's  budget. In support of the appeal the Administrator
cited the need for flexibility of  the Agency in implementing its
budget due to the fact that EPA is a relatively new agency and has
not acquired the  necessary base and  background to enable  it  to
operate effectively under the more rigid  appropriation structure
proposed by the House.
   In addition to the foregoing the Administrator pointed out that
the Agency has issued instructions and has provided financial and
accounting forms to all of its offices and personnel based on the
single appropriation concept and  that to comply with the proposal
of the House would create significant administrative difficulties
and problems.
  The Committee feels that the appeal of the Agency is well taken
and recommends that the appropriation for fiscal 1973  be restored
to the single appropriation concept and procedure as contained  in
the 1972 bill and the President's  budget for 1973. In recommend-
ing such action however for  fiscal year 1973 the Committee  notes
that the Agency is now on  notice that substantial changes will
probably be  made in reference to  budgeting and appropriating for

-------
2062          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

fiscal 1974. The Committee directs that the Agency undertake im-
mediate action to
                                                       [p. 36]

work with both this Committee and the Committee of the House
for developing an appropriation and activity structure for fiscal
year 1974. Therefore, any changes that are to be proposed may be
fully considered at all stages of the budgeting process, including
submission of the President's budget to the  Congress.
  While the  Committee recognizes the need  for some degree  of
flexibility  in implementing  the budget it  does  expect that the
Administration will maintain close contact with the Committees
of both the Senate and the House and that any significant changes
in programs  and fund allocations will be  undertaken only after
consultation with and  approval by both Committees.
  As is indicated above, the  House bill contains an appropriation
of $30,000,000 to the Environmental  Protection Agency which  is
to be transferred to the Department of Agriculture to assist in the
administration of the  Rural  Environmental Assistance Program.
The Agency  has appealed this item  and the Committee recom-
mends  that this item be deleted from EPA's appropriation.
  REAP and its predecessor agency, ACP, was authorized by the
Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, as amended, and
have been within the Department of Agriculture since its incep-
tion 35 years ago. As this Committee has  pointed out on many
occasions, the Rural Environmental Assistance Program is a highly
significant one  in promoting conservation practices and in pro-
tecting, preserving and restoring an acceptable  environment.  It
was established for this purpose and served this function for many
years prior to the time when environmental factors in our nation
commanded the  considerable attention which they enjoy today.
The Committee feels however that all appropriations  for REAP
should  be made to the Department of Agriculture and should not
be channeled through EPA.
  The  Committee has eliminated the language added by the House
which  would have established independent grant and contract re-
view and advisory committees. In commenting on the effects of the
actions of the House, the Agency indicated that it ". . . intends  in
1973 to begin operation of a scientific advisory board for service
to the Administrator to provide advice on technically based Agency
policies and  decisions, and  to assure that the objectives, em-
phases and results of all  scientific and technical programs of the
EPA are optimally  responsive to the Agency mission, legislated

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2063

requirements, and general public interest. This Board will consist
of the Nation's outstanding  scientists and  technologists  in  dis-
ciplines related to  environmental protection." Members  of the
Board would be available to participate in the technical review of
grants and contracts along with many other of the Nation's most
distinguished environmental experts. The review and approval of
research grants and contracts would be a day-to-day consideration.
This process will be more expeditious than could be possible under
the advisory board  concept where meetings must be scheduled at
appropriate intervals and therefore would contribute to the delay
in making awards.
   The Committee concurs with the action taken by the House in
providing additional funds for the several programs designated
except as noted above.  These  are all matters of great concern and
of the highest priority and  the Committee strongly urges the
Agency and the Administration to fully utilize these funds as ex-
peditiously as possible.
                                                        [P. 37]

   In addition to the increases provided by the House the Commit-
tee recommends that $7,500,000 be added to the budget estimate to
implement research programs under Section 104 of the Clean Air
Act. This is another program  of utmost urgency.
   The Committee recommends restoration of the $1,000,000 elim-
inated by the House for Facilities. In addition the Committee rec-
ommends an additional $1,000,000 for facilities, to be utilized for
the construction of  the Water Hygiene Laboratory that has been
proposed for Manchester,  Washington.  This facility has been
planned and authorized for several years and  the Agency has  con-
struction funds available from prior year's appropriation in excess
of $1,000,000. The funds recommended herein, together with the
carry-over  funds should be sufficient for the Agency to proceed
with the construction of this long planned facility.
   The Committee had  considerable discussion in reference to the
proposed sewer demonstration project at Bend, Oregon. Testimony
presented to the  Committee indicated that this proposed  project
has great significance for many cities in several States throughout
the Nation. For that reason, the Committee expresses its particu-
lar interest in this proposal and urges the Agency to carefully re-
view it in terms of its national significance.
  The Committee recommends an additional  $15,000,000 for  Sec-
tion 208 resource  recovery demonstration projects. The Committee

-------
 2064
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
 believes it is important that a wide range of new systems be dem-
 onstrated under this program. While energy recovery systems are
 important and need to be investigated, the Committee believes it
 is vital that EPA also approve systems recovering a  full range  of
 reusable materials from  solid wastes, including humus.
   For Operations, Research  and  Facilities the  Committee recom-
 mends $491,514,000. This  is  a decrease of $5,500,000 from the
 House bill and an increase of $45,500,000 over the budget estimate.
 It is $50,993,700 more than was available in 1972.
   The  Committee recommendation,  broken down  by media  and
 category is as follows:
                             Available
                              1972
                    Proposed
                     1973
                    increase
   1973
  Budget
  request
   1973
  House
   bill
Senate com-
mittee recom-
 mendation
Air		
Water		
Solid wastes	_	
Water hygiene	
Radiation	
Pesticides	
Noise	_.
Interdisciplinary	_		
Program management and support	_.
Agency  management and  regional man-
  agement	
Facilities		_		
Employment reduction savings	
        $134,797,018 +$24,978,800
         130,909,100  +8,389,600
          33,267,700 -11,835,100
          4,131,100    -37,600
          7,179,900   +262,700
          16,703,100  +2,180,000
          1,194,400    -11,200
          5,326,400  +2,264,100
          42,133,200  +1,720,400
          34,460,400  +7,000,000
          28,000,000 -27,000,000
           2,418,000  -2,418,000
$159,775,800
 139,298,700
 21,432,600
  4,093,500
  7,442,600
 18,883,100
  1,183,200
  7,590,500
 43,853,600

 41,460,400
  1,000,000
$160,812,800
 144,410,700
 36,552,600
  4,093,500
  7,673,600
 18,883,100
  1,183,200
  7,590,500
 43,853,600

 41,960,400
 $168,312,800
 144,410,700
  51,552,600
   4,093,500
   7,673,600
  18,883,100
   1,183,200
   7,590,500
  43,853,600

  41,960,400
   2,000,000
    Total	 440,520,318  +5,493,700  446,014,000  '467,014,000   491,514,000

   1 Does not include $30,000,000 appropriated in House bill to REAP for transfer to Department of Agriculture, Excluding
this item, Senate Committee recommendation is $24,500,000 over House bill.

   As stated in the House report, some of the funds provided herein
 are  not fully  authorized  but authorizing legislation is in confer-
 ence. The Committee has included these funds with  a limitation
 prohibiting their use until authorized.
                                                                    [p. 38]
                          CONSTRUCTION GRANTS
 1972 New budget (obligational) authority ___  	    	  $2,000,000,000
 1973 Budget estimate—New (obligational) authority	   2,000,000,000
 House bill—New (obligational) authority	   1,900,000,000
 Committee recommendation—New (obligational) authority	   1,900,000,000

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2065

  This appropriation provides grants to local public agencies for
construction of municipal waste water treatment facilities to as-
sist States and localities in attaining and maintaining water qual-
ity standards.
  For Construction Grants, the House provided $1.9 billion, $100
million less than the budget estimate. The Committee concurs in
this action.
  As pointed out in the House Report, both the Senate and House
version of the new authorizing legislation contain provisions for
the construction program to be placed on a program involving con-
tract authority rather than the  usual annual appropriation pro-
cess. After this new legislation is finally enacted and the contract
program becomes  operational  no appropriations would  be neces-
sary to liquidate the contract authority until fiscal  year 1974. In
the meantime  the  existing construction grant program is being
extended temporarily pending final enactment of the new  legisla-
tion. The  funds provided by the House and  recommended  herein
should be  more than adequate to carry on the construction grant
program on the temporary basis  on which it now exists. The Com-
mittee has included these funds with a limitation prohibiting their
use until authorized.
  The Committee  also concurs with the action of  the  House in
providing  that any funds provided herein which are not obligated
for new construction grant projects should be made available for
reimbursement to  the states and local communities for facilities
constructed in anticipation of federal repayment.
                                                        [p. 39]

-------
2066
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
                <
                5
                I

                     .2 S
                     Is
                     B o
                     Ł .
                     5 I
                     ||
                     C 0)
                     lo
                      8  8
                      +  7
                      §  s
                      o  o
                      •*"  o"
                      IO  O
                      S  8
                         I  7
                              s
                              Ł
                                  [p. 63]

-------
           STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2067

         1.17b(3) COMMITTEE  OF CONFERENCE

           H.R. REP. No. 92-1283, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972)

MAKING  APPROPRIATIONS  FOR  THE  AGRICULTURE-ENVIRON-
   MENTAL AND CONSUMER PROTECTION PROGRAMS  FOR THE
   FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1973, AND FOR OTHER PUR-
   POSES
              AUGUST 2, 1972.—Ordered to be printed
       Mr. WHITTEN, from the committee of conference,
                   submitted the following

                 CONFERENCE REPORT

                   [To accompany H.R. 15690]

  The Committee of Conference on the disagreeing votes of the
two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill  (H.R.
15690) "making appropriations for the Agriculture-Environmen-
tal and Consumer Protection programs for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1973, and for other purposes," having met, after full and
free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to
their respective Houses as follows:
  That the Senate recede from its amendments numbered 6, 9, 10,
11, 14,15, 28, 29, 33, 34, 37, 38, and 44.
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendments
of the Senate numbered 2,19, 20, 23, 25, 26, 27, 39, 43, and 47, and
agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 3:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 3, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $188,036,-
600; and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 4:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 4, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $11,578,-
900; and the Senate agree to the same.
                                                     [P. 1]

-------
2068         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Amendment numbered 5:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 5, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $3,460,-
000; and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 7:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 7, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $289,304,-
000; and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 8:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 8, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $6,444,-
000; and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 12:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 12, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $91,438,-
000; and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 13:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 13, and agree to same with an amendment
as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $120,858,-
000; and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 16:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 16, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $182,168,-
000; and the Senate agree on the same.
  Amendment numbered 17 :
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 17, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $22,834,-
200; and the Senate agree to the same.

-------
           STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2069

  Amendment numbered 18:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 18, and  agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $17,829,-
000; and the Senate agree to the same.
                                                    [p. 2]

  Amendment numbered 21:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 21, and  agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $2,055,-
000; and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 22:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 22, and  agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows :
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $25,805,-
000; and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 24 :
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 24, and  agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $400,000;
and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 32:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 32, and  agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $3,750,-
000; and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 40:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 40, and  agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $160,069,-
000; and the Senate agree to the  same.
  Amendment numbered 41:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 41, and  agree to the same with an amend-
ment as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $7,622,-
000; and the Senate agree to the  same.

-------
2070         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Amendment numbered 42:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 42, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment, as follows :
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $133,549,-
500; and the Senate agree to the same.
  Amendment numbered 45:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 45, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment, as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $1,075,-
500; and the Senate agree to the same.
                                                   [p. 3]

  Amendment numbered 46:
  That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment
of the Senate numbered 46, and agree to the same with an amend-
ment, as follows:
  In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $365,000;
and the Senate agree to the same.
  The committee of conference report in disagreement amend-
ments numbered 1, 30, 31, 35, 36, and 48.
                            JAMIE L. WRITTEN,
                            WILLIAM H. NATCHER,
                            W. R. HULL, Jr.,
                            FRANK E. EVANS,
                            GEORGE MAHON,
                            MARK ANDREWS,
                            ROBERT H. MICHEL,
                            BILL SCHERLE,
                        Managers on the Part of the House.
                            GALE W. McGEE,
                            JOHN STENNIS,
                            WILLIAM PROXMIRE,
                            ROBERT C. BYRD,
                            HERMAN E. TALMADGE,
                            ROMAN L. HRUSKA,
                            MILTON R. YOUNG,
                            HIRAM L. FONG,
                        Managers on the Part of the Senate.
                                                   [p. 4]

-------
            STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2071

      JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE
             COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE
  The managers on the part of the House and Senate at the confer-
ence on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the  amend-
ments of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 15690) making appropria-
tions  for  agriculture-environmental  and  consumer  protection
programs for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1973,  and for other
purposes, submit the following joint statement to the House and
Senate in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon by the
managers and recommended in the accompanying conference re-
port:
                                                      [p. 5]
        TITLE III-—ENVIRONMENTAL  PROGRAMS
             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
  Amendments  Nos. 34, 35, 36, 37 and 38: These amendments in-
volve  all funds in the bill for the Environmental Protection  Agency
except grants for construction of waste treatment works and over-
seas research.
  The House total  for the various activities involved was $497,-
014,000.
  The Senate total was $491,514,000.
  The total agreed upon by the Conferees is $467,014,000, which
$30,000,000 shall be  identified  for the new pollution  abatement
practices.
  With respect to the $30,000,000 below the House total, the House
bill
                                                      [P. 9]

included  that amount for  transfer to the  Rural Environmental
Assistance  Program (REAP) of the Department of Agriculture.
The House managers have agreed that in the announcement of the
1973 REAP program of the Department of Agriculture not more
than $30,000,000 shall be identified for the new pollution abate-
ment practices and such amount as is used shall be paid from funds
available to the Environmental Protection Agency. The  remainder
of the $225,500,000 program announcement shall be for the prac-
tices including all those available under the  1970 program. There-
fore, the House managers yielded to the Senate on this position for
this year.
  With respect to the $24,500,000 below the Senate total, the con-
ference agreement  omits funds added by the Senate, as follows:
(1) $7,500,000 for section 104 of the Clean Air Act; (2) $15,000,-
000 for section 208 of the Resource Recovery Act; and (3) $2,000,-

-------
2072          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

000 for facilities. With respect to the latter item, $1,000,000 was
for repair and improvement projects which had  been  deleted by
the House and $1,000,000 was for construction of a laboratory at
Manchester, Washington. However, the House report on the 1972
appropriation bill directed that "no further construction be under-
taken without a  full and thorough review of  existing research
efforts and their locations with a view toward consolidation of the
diverse programs so recently acquired. .  . ." This review has not
yet been submitted to the House  and Senate Committees, even
though it was requested well over a year ago. Therefore, since the
study is still underway, the Conferees agree to defer action on this
item at this time. However, funds previously appropriated for the
construction  of this laboratory shall remain available until the
completion of this study and  shall  not be diverted to  other pur-
poses.
  Aside from the question  of funding levels  and  objects,  these
amendments also involve the appropriation structure for the EPA.
The House, in order to provide better congressional visibility and
control, separated the Agency's single lump-sum operational ap-
propriation  into  four separate  appropriations.  The Senate dis-
agreed; struck out the four  appropriations;  and  substituted a
single lump-sum appropriation similar to last year's.
  The Conferees have agreed to the separated  structure of the
House bill, but with the addition of limited authority—7 percent—
to transfer between the four appropriations.
  As  to Amendments Nos. 35 and  36, relating to  Research and
Development and Abatement and Control, respectively, the House
bill contained provisions limiting the availability of the two appro-
priations to amounts authorized by law for fiscal year 1973. Legis-
lation authorizing portions of  each of these two appropriations is
still pending in conference (S.  2770, Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act Amendments). In order to avoid complete stoppage of
Agency operations on July 1, these  provisions were suspended by
a special provision in the  continuing resolution,  pending finaliza-
tion of the legislative authorizations. In view of the uncertainties
of the moment and to avoid  possible stoppage of all operations of
the Agency in the near future, the Conferees have agreed that this
suspension must be continued pending further development, and
have accordingly agreed to modify the two contingency provisions
referred to. This can be done by hitching the effective date of the
provisos to the revised terminal date of the
                                                        [p. 10]

-------
             STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY       2073

continuing resolution  (which  will, undoubtedly, be extended be-
yond its present expiration date of August 18).
   To  effectuate these  conference  agreements,  the amendments
would be disposed of as follows :
  Amendment No. 34: Appropriates  $41,960,400 for agency  and regional
management as proposed by the House.
  Amendment No. 35: Reported in technical disagreement. The managers on
the part of the House will move to recede and concur in the Senate amend-
ment with an amendment, the effect  of which  will  be to restore the House
appropriations of  $182,723,700 for research and development and  $2,500,000
for advisory committees, and modifying the contingent availability proviso
as discussed above. The managers on the part of the Senate  will move to
concur in the amendment of the House to the amendment of the  Senate.
  Amendment No. 36:  Reported in technical  disagreement. The  managers
on the part of  the House will move to  recede and concur in the Senate
amendment with  an amendment, the  effect of  which will be (1)  to restore
the House  appropriation  of  $208,935,700  for  abatement  and  control and
$2,000,000 for advisory committees; (2) to delete the $30,000,000 proposed
by the House for transfer to the REAP program in the Department of
Agriculture; (3)  to modify the contingent availability proviso as discussed
above;  and (4) to insert the  agreed upon 7 percent transfer authority dis-
cussed  above. The managers on the part of the Senate will move to concur
in the amendment  of the House to the amendment of the Senate.
  Amendment No. 37: Appropriates $28,894,200 for enforcement activities as
proposed by the House.
  Amendment No. 38:  Strikes out the separate lump-sum  appropriation of
$491,514,000 which the Senate had proposed for Agency operations, research,
and facilities.
                                                              [p. 11]

       CONFERENCE TOTAL—WITH COMPARISONS

   The total new budget (obligational) authority for the fiscal  year
1973 recommended by the Committee of Conference, with compari-
sons to the fiscal year  1972 total, the 1973 budget estimate total,
and the House and Senate bill follows:

New budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 1972  	  $13,965,498,427
Budget estimates  of new  (obligational) authority,  fiscal
  year  1973	   12,952,190,400
House bill, fiscal year 1973	   12,897,010,900
Senate  bill, fiscal year 1973	   13,561,055,800
Conference agreement	   13,434,032,700
Conference agreement compared with—
    New budget (obligational) authority, fiscal  year 1972 __     —531,465,727
    Budget estimates of new  (obligational) authority  (as
      amended), fiscal year 1973	     +481,842,300
    House bill, fiscal year  1973	    +537,021,800
    Senate bill, fiscal year  1973	    —127,023,100

-------
2074
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
  The Conferees agree that any additional expenditures which re-
sult from new obligational authority authorized in this bill should
be in addition to any outlay limitation currently  or hereafter im-
posed on the Department of Agriculture and under no conditions
should reduce current levels of expenditures for authorized pro-
grams.
                                JAMIE L. WHITTEN,
                                WILLIAM H. NATCHER,
                                W. R. HULL, Jr.,
                                FRANK E. EVANS,
                                GEORGE MAHON,
                                MARK ANDREWS,
                                ROBERT H. MICHEL,
                                BILL SCHERLE,
                            Managers on the Part of the House.
                                GALE W. McGEE,
                                JOHN STENNIS,
                                WILLIAM PROXMIRE,
                                ROBERT C. BYRD,
                                HERMAN E. TALMADGE,
                                ROMAN L. HRUSKA,
                                MILTON R. YOUNG,
                                HIRAM L. FONG,
                            Managers on the Part of the Senate.
                                                          [P. 13]
    1.17b(4)  CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, VOL. 118 (1972)

1.17b(4)(a)  June 29: Considered and passed House, pp. H6286-
H6288, H6290, H6291, H6292, H6336
      STRESS ON THE ENVIRONMENT

  Paralleling  our  concern  with  the
waste of our land and forest resources
was the concern for pollution of water
as a threat to public health. This be-
came a matter of public concern in the
United States in the late 19th century
when  virulent typhoid epidemics ap-
peared in various cities. The then new
science of bacteriology identified many
of these  outbreaks  as the result of
contaminated water supplies. The pub-
lic outcry against pollution was great.
Public  health  officers attempted  to
                 meet this challenge in two principal
                 ways.
                   The  first was  to  select  certain
                 streams for waste disposal and to re-
                 serve  other,  protected streams  for
                 municipal water supplies.
                   The other method was the filtration
                 and disinfection of water.
                   While these systems have  worked
                 for many years, we now face a period
                 when we must give full attention to
                 water pollution or else pay  substantial
                 penalties for the future.
                   In a report entitled "The Economics
                 of Clean Water," an EPA survey esti-

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              2075
mated  a municipal investment  of as
much as $18 billion and an industrial
investment of $8 billion over the next
4-year period to meet  current  water
pollution standards.
  For 1971, EPA estimates that about
29  percent of  the  Nation's waters
were polluted, a deterioration of about
2 percent  below the estimate  of the
previous year. For  1970,  of the 148
million persons who live in communi-
ties  served  by  sewer  systems,  the
wastes for about 28 percent received
only primary treatment and 6 percent
received no treatment.
         AIR POLLUTION PROBLEMS

  Another  serious problem we face in
our efforts to  clean up our environ-
ment  is the problem of air pollution.
In the second  Annual  Report  of the
President's Council on Environmental
Quality, the  damage cost  as a  result
of air pollution was estimated  to be
$16.1  billion.  This  estimate  is  based
on the following annual costs: human
health—$6.1  billion, residential  prop-
erty—$5.2  billion, materials—$4.7 bil-
lion,  and   vegetation—$0.1  billion.
Major sources  of  air  pollution  are
motor  vehicles  and factories   which
emit  such  pollutants  as  sulfur  and
nitrogen oxides,  hydrocarbons,  and
various types  of particulate matter,
and smoke, soot, and fly ash.
  Motor vehicles of all types are re-
sponsible for  much of  our air  pollu-
tion, with the internal combustion en-
gine being  responsible for much  of the
carbon  monoxide, hydrocarbons,  and
nitrogen oxides in the air. Under cur-
rent law,  hydrocarbons  and carbon
monoxide  from  1975 model  year ve-
hicles must be reduced by 90 percent
from  the  allowable  1970  emissions.
Nitrogen oxide emissions must be re-
duced  by  90  percent  in  1976 from
measured emissions  from  1971  model
year cars.
  Major emphasis  in   this area  has
been directed toward emission control
devices  rather than toward develop-
ment and demonstration of new types
of engine technology. Emission control
devices  are expected to add $150 to
$200 to the cost of a new automobile
as well as increased costs due to a  sig-
nificant reduction in gas mileage.
  Cleanup of pollution attributable to
sources  other than motor vehicles  will
result primarily from the conversion
to clean burning fuels.  Coal gasifica-
tion, natural gas, and  nuclear power
all  offer significant potential for re-
ducing  emissions.
  In the area of solid waste, it  is esti-
mated  that we, as  a Nation,  throw
away each year 3.5 billion tons of
solid wastes, which  costs us about  $4.5
billion in handling; costs. Of this, more
than 360 million  tons  of industrial,
municipal,  and   commercial    solid
wastes are  being generated,  and  this
amount is expected to double by 1980.
  Paralleling the symptoms of  man's
demand  on  the  environment, namely,
air and water  pollution, there  is  a
dramatic increase in our use  of re-
sources  which fuel  our  dynamic econ-
omy. The U.S. population of about 208
million  is  only  5.6  percent  of  the
world's   population,  but we  consume
approximately one-third of the world's
energy output. In 1971,  the U.S. gross
national product passed the $1 trillion
mark. To support this  level of GNP,
energy  and processed   materials of
mineral  origin  valued at $150 billion
were required.
  Annually over 4 billion tons of  new
mineral supplies—20 tons per person—
are needed to  sustain  our economy.
For forest products alone, 1971 con-
sumption of industrial  wood reached
an alltime peak of 13 billion cubic feet.

           HOW DO WE PROCEED
  Though we all agree that we  have a
problem  facing us with regard to the
waste of our resources  and the  pollu-
tion of our streams, we  are faced with
what may be done.  One thing  is  cer-
tain: You can take pollution from the
air and  put it in the water, or you can

-------
2076
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
take it out of the water and put it on
the land;  but once formed, it must be
disposed of somehow.
  There is an old saying, "There ought
to be a law." But a law is not  self-
enforcing. What people really mean is
that there ought to be  a correction.
Laws require the cooperation of the
vast majority of decent citizens  to be
effective. The law is also blind to any
considerations  not  included  in  its
framework. If a law causes more  prob-
lems  than it solves, it  will  not be
enforced over a long period of  time.
  Congress in  recent years has  been
passing environmental laws that are
difficult if not  impossible not  to  sup-
port,  but  which may be  impossible  to
carry out. These laws are a reflection
of the feeling of the Nation and the
Congress  and for the most part an
earnest desire to improve and restore
the environment.
  But many of the provisions of thess
laws  go well beyond the test of the
prudent man. In many  cases, stand-
ards are being established, standards
for which no known technology exists
to meet these  standards,  or  at  best
technology that  exists  only  in the
laboratory or on the drawing board.
For example, the committee has  been
told  that—
  Phosphates have been removed from
detergents in  some cases and the
chemicals  that have been used as re-
placements are  more dangerous  than
the phosphates;
  Emission control devices have  been
installed on automobiles to reduce car-
bon monoxide emissions,  and nitrogen
oxide emissions have been increased
as a result;
  The  new emission control  devices
may result in a  significant increase in
fuel  consumption, thereby indirectly
increasing pollution  and  significantly
increasing the  use of natural resour-
ces;
  Power  plant  construction is  being
held up for environmental considera-
                   tions—power that is needed to clean up
                   our environment;
                     Some persistent pesticides have been
                   banned and replaced with less persist-
                   ent pesticides which we  must use far
                   more often to achieve a similar effect
                   with much greater hazards to workers;
                   and
                     We have   made  businesses install
                   pollution  abatement  equipment  and
                   then made them replace the equipment
                   as new technology becomes available.
                     Perhaps with all good intentions we
                   are moving too fast.
                       A STEP BACKWARD—THE GYPSY  MOTH

                     A second danger is using such laws
                   to take  sudden action where alterna-
                   tives do not exist or at least  are only
                   in the laboratory  stage  of  develop-
                   ment. The gypsy moth, which defoli-
                   ates our trees, is a case in point.
                     This  insect was  brought  to  this
                   country as a possible source of silk in
                   1869.  Unfortunately,  some  of   the
                   moths escaped from captivity. Twenty
                   years later  it infested  200 square
                   miles  around Boston.  It gradually
                   spread to infest much of New England
                   and, in the 1920's, a barrier zone was
                   established along the line of the Hud-
                   son River. Generally, infestations  be-
                   yond the zone were held in check with
                   aerial treatment with DDT, the treat-
                   ment of choice until its extensive use
                   was halted  in 1959. Since that time,
                   the westward spread has been signifi-
                   cant until the 1970's found the gypsy
                   moth as far away as Wisconsin, Ohio,
                   North Carolina, South Carolina, and
                   Alabama.
                     Current control methods involve  the
                   use of the pesticide Sevin which,  re-
                   portedly, does not offer the degree of
                   control  due  to  its short  life and  the
                   need for more frequent  applications.
                   Further, public opposition to  aerial
                   pest control  operations has  seriously
                   hampered the  success of  the  gypsy
                   moth  program.
                                            [p. H6286]

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             2077
Sterile male moths are being released
in limited locations where it is possible
to overwhelm insect populations. In
addition, experiments are  being con-
ducted with parasites, predators, and
sex lures. The appropriations for this
research were expanded  by $1 million
in 1971 for a total of over $1.6 million
for the cooperating agencies of USDA.
The  level for 1973 should reach $1.9
million.
  Problems with  mass  rearing tech-
niques and with  the establishment and
careful testing that  must precede the
introduction  of  predators  will  mean
that it will take several years to see
their effects.  Nevertheless, the com-
mittee fully expects the Department to
use such funds as may be available to
exploit  any  scientific breakthroughs
that may develop regarding this pest.
In  the  meantime,  our forests  are
threatened by the spread.
  IT TAKES TIME TO DEVELOP  ALTERNATIVES

  The gypsy moth is a good example
of the problems  which arise from pre-
cipitate action to stop or ban the  use
of an available method for controlling
problems that man  has  with nature.
Certainly these  actions  are necessary
where there is an imminent hazard to
human health. But, for the most part,
we  must  move  carefully  to  develop
real  alternatives in order to avoid  un-
planned damage to the environment
and to the  economy.
  When disease  strikes or former con-
trol  methods are no longer available,
the  development of alternatives takes
many, many  years. For  example,  the
Department has  reported that it takes
from 10 to 12 years to develop a new
wheat,  5  years  for a  new  corn, 15
years for an  improved oilseed variety.
  The development of a  new  pesticide
requires about 5 years  and up  to $5
million  before it can be approved and
marketed.
  Certainly any estimate  of  time is
only an average, and the development
may stretch far beyond that time. For
example, literally thousands of poten-
tial herbicides have been screened over
the past 27 years, but none has been
developed that possesses  the unique
characteristics  of  2,4,D.
  In addition to effectiveness, the cost
implications of  alternatives  must  be
fully explored. The committee provided
$200,000 in last year's  bill to enable
the Secretary of Agriculture to con-
sider the economics  of  some  of  the
rules and regulations being proposed
for environmental control. The Depart-
ment reported that a regulation under
consideration would have cost an aver-
age size pig farmer $15,000 or $7 per
animal.  The  agency proposing  the
regulation was  unaware of  this and
glad to have the information.
  By the year  2000, 28  years from
now,  we  will  grow by  92  million
Americans above  today's 208 million
Americans who are  already  abusing
their resources. Our lakes  and rivers
have become catch basins for the resi-
dues  of our factories, household and
agricultural  chemicals,  for   human
wastes  from  thousands of  villages,
towns, and cities.  Our air has become
a  pall  on our major cities as it is
stressed by our factory and automobile
exhausts.  How we will  clean up this
situation  and learn to handle it with-
out restricting the means for provid-
ing our high standard of  living may
well determine the future  of our Na-
tion.
  As we  approach this  problem,  we
must keep in mind that the power to
control  water quality and  air quality
is not only the power to make or break
business but is a  power  over the  life
of the Nation.
  If we closed  all  our manufacturing
plants, that would  greatly improve our
water quality.  If  we stopped driving
automobiles,  just  think   what that
would do  to improve the atmosphere.
If we could  return to the 800,000 pop-
ulation level of this country  at  the
time of its discovery, nature would be

-------
2078
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
able to eliminate the population prob-
lem.
  Today's population could never be
asked to live the  simple life of the
earliest Americans. Neither could we
ask  or  force the  residents  of New
York City to quit  eating, quit  living,
and quit breathing while we clean up
the  Hudson. The  same is true for
Washington and the Potomac as  well
as many of the people in thousands of
towns and villages.
  However,  it should be clear that our
use  of resources and  the  discard of
waste materials are directly related to
the means by which we live and pros-
per. The ability to  control their rate is
the power to control how we live.  Yet,
under present law and under several
more under consideration,  we are in-
vesting  more and more of  this power
in a single agency with a single head
without  the  means of  setting prior-
ities in  public  debate  and  where the
costs and the effects of  a  decision to
clean up a  river or clean  up the air
can be assessed by those workers  who
must seek  other employment, by the
consumers   who   must  pay   higher
prices, and  by  those industries which
must find better locations  and  manu-
facturing processes.

         THE COST OF CLEANING UP

  A study  was recently released by
the Council  on  Environmental Quality
entitled  "The  Economic  Impact of
Pollution Control" which  considered
the general economic  impact of  cur-
rent nationwide air and water pollu-
tion standards  as  well as  the impact
on  11 selected industries.  The study
indicated that  none  of the 11  indus-
tries, as a whole,  would be seriously
threatened solely by the present pollu-
tion abatement costs.
  However, if  found  that  some indi-
vidual firms will  earn lower profits,
some will curtail production, and some
firms and   plants  will be forced to
close. It estimated further  that  be-
tween 200  and 300 plants would be
                   forced to close during the study period
                   —1972-76—with  a  potential  reduc-
                   tion  of  between  50,000  and  125,000
                   jobs  due to the  pollution  abatement
                   requirements.  Such closings are esti-
                   mated to be significant for 150 com-
                   munities.
                     In  terms  of the general economy,
                   testimony before  the  committee indi-
                   cated that industry will have to spend
                   $150 billion between now and  1980  in
                   order to meet the standards we have
                   established. This  cost will have to  be
                   absorbed by  the  consumer  through
                   higher prices.  Higher cost of goods
                   produced will  mean shrinking foreign
                   markets and increasing pressure from
                   foreign  imports.  This year  we are
                   facing the largest trade deficit in the
                   history of the country. Increased prices
                   and increased imports will mean fewer
                   jobs for American workers. People out
                   of work do not care about the environ-
                   ment.
                     Much has been written  about our
                   participation in international environ-
                   mental meetings. The  committee is for
                   them  to the extent that we are able  to
                   share our experiences and our knowl-
                   edge  of problems  and  learn  from
                   others in the process.
                     However, we are never as successful
                   in our international efforts as we hope.
                   We did  not  make the world safe for
                   democracy  after  World  War I.  The
                   rest of the world did not pay attention
                   to our views. Nor were we too  success-
                   ful in saving the world from  commu-
                   nism  after World War II.
                     We did not seem to have as much in-
                   fluence in the  rest of  the world as we
                   thought we  had.  Now it would seem
                   that we are going to set out  to save
                   the world from environmental degra-
                   dation. This is a valid concern. But we
                   must  recognize that  no matter  how
                   much we may wish to  explain what we
                   are learning to China and India, they
                   will  still  want to  feed  their  people
                   first.
                     This  point  was recently  raised by
                   Prime Minister Indira Gandhi of India

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              2079
when she addressed the United Nations
Conference on the Environment. Mrs.
Gandhi said:
  On the  one hand-, the rich look askance at
our continuing  poverty.  On the other, they
warn us against their own methods.
   She went on to say:
  We do not wish to impoverish the environ-
ment any further. Yet, we cannot forget the
grim poverty of large numbers of people. When
they themselves feel deprived, how can we urge
the preservation of animals, how can we speak
to those who live in villages  and  in slums
about keeping the oceans,  the rivers and the
air clean, when their own lives are contami-
nated at the source.
   We  should  set a good example, help
where we  can,  and practice what we
preach.  However,  we  cannot forget
that with only 6.3 percent of the land
area and 5.6 percent of the people, we
are no more going to be able to control
the rest of the world with regard to
the world environment any more than
we were able to  save the world for
democracy or from communism.
   Today, the Congress,  the Adminis-
trator of the Environmental  Protec-
tion Agency and others are faced with
dealing with many of the environmen-
tal groups.
   We  see  many projects  opposed by
some  because it will  change the type
of fish or type of animal which they
wish to catch and kill.
   Because  a major war  is  not at our
shores, they feel that  testing of  wea-
pons is unnecessary.
  Because  their lights come on every
night,  they oppose new electric gener-
ation  facilities. They are trying to
stop power generation when our needs
are doubling each 10 years.
  Because they have not been hungry,
they oppose fertilizers and pesticides
which  are fundamental to agriculture
production.
  Because they have jobs, they are op-
posed to development of areas of this
country not so fortunate.
  Because their homes are not flooded,
they are opposed to reservoirs.
  Millions of people  have been  sold
against "changing the environment"—
                          [p. H6287]

even though it be for the good of man-
kind.
                          [p. H6288]

  NEED FOB INCREASED ATTENTION TO SELECTION
    AND TRAINING OF QUALIFIED PERSONNEL
  As indicated  earlier,  the Environ-
mental Protection  Agency and  the
Food and Drug Administration parti-
cularly have faced expanding  respon-
sibilities.  One thing  is  certain,  the
qualifications  and  training of the per-
sonnel  required  to administer  these
difficult programs must be of the high-
est  quality.  When any  program  is
growing dramatically, an agency must
always be on its  guard that  it  does
not relax its standards. Only qualified
                          [p. H6290]

personnel must  be  hired, even if this
means temporarily delaying implemen-
tation of a program. This is especially
true for programs which  can,  if im-
properly administered, do  irreparable
harm  to  the  reputation of firms or
individuals.
  The committee is pleased to note the
plans by the Farmers Home Adminis-
tration and the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency to begin training oper-
ations.  In  addition,  the   committee
calls on the Department of Agricul-
ture to review its meat and poultry
inspection  training programs,  parti-
cularly at the supervisory  level.  The
committee has also provided increases
in training funds to accompany its in-
creases in personnel for the Food and
Drug Administration and for the Fed-
eral Trade Commission. The additional
funds in all training programs should
be used to assure both that new em-
ployees are  adequately  trained  and
that existing  employees  receive re-
fresher and such other training as is
required to maintain  their  qualifica-
tions.  Rotational assignment policies

-------
2080
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
are also an  important aspect of an
agency's personnel program—especi-
ally  in  regard  to  inspectors—and
should also be periodically reviewed.
  Information  provided  to the com-
mittee has indicated that in some cases
the Environmental Protection Agency
may be experiencing a lack of techni-
cal expertise in some areas. The need
for expert advice was particularly evi-
dent in the  recent highly  publicized
decision on  DDT.  The report demon-
strated a regrettable lack of informa-
tion  on the  costs, supplies and  pro-
grams for cotton. The report indicated
that information  on costs of  produc-
tion  was not available.  The  Depart-
ment of Agriculture has made numer-
out cost studies and  findings on this
crop. The  report  indicated supplies
were plentiful, while the  Department
of  Agriculture,  which   is  officially
charged with the responsibility reports
that cotton is now in short supply and
that we are not meeting minimum ex-
port demands. The report indicated
that Federal cotton programs are de-
signed  to  provide  producer  profits,
while the Congress has carefully writ-
ten programs to provide the differen-
tial  between U.S. costs,  including a
reasonable  return on investment, and
the  world  price.  To  compound this
show of lack of knowledge of the crop
which will take the brunt of increased
costs and greater dangers in handling
substitutes,  the administrator  made
reference to  "a per bushel subsidy" a
measurement which  has  never been
used for this commodity  throughout
history. Due  to the enormity of impact
of EPA's decisions on the citizens of
the country, it is  essential that  only
the very best  qualified  personnel be
available to the Agency. In recognition
of this need, the committee has pro-
vided funds  for EPA to  establish an
in-house formal training program for
scientific and technical personnel.
   The  committee directs  the agencies
covered by this bill to include in their
budget justifications for next year de-
                   tailed descriptions of the actions they
                   have taken to assure that the selection
                   and training procedures of the Agen-
                   cy are of the caliber required to assure
                   that only qualified and objective per-
                   sons are  placed  in  these responsible
                   positions.
                                            [p.  H6291]
                      INVESTIGATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
                              PROTECTION AGENCY

                     This is now the second year the com-
                   mittee has had responsibility for fund-
                   ing  the  Environmental  Protection
                   Agency. The committee questions whe-
                   ther the responsibilities and  authori-
                   ties which have been delegated to the
                   Administrator  of the Environmental
                   Protection Agency can be met by any
                   one person,  and certainly not without
                   the advice,  counsel and recommenda-
                   tions of highly trained advisory boards
                   in each of the major areas such as air,
                   water, solid waste, and so forth, com-
                   posed of qualified and objective  scien-
                   tists  who  should  conduct  hearings
                   prior  to  conclusions  or  recommenda-
                   tions. Present difficulties  have  been
                   compounded  still further by the fact
                   that  the  Agency was created   from
                   many other agencies, and the difficul-
                   ties of molding these diverse groups
                   into  one agency  have been immense.
                   Finally,  the Administrator has  been
                   and will always be subjected to intense
                   outside  pressure  from groups on  all
                   sides  of  the environmental issue. He
                   will always have to adjust  to contin-
                   ually changing legislative authorities
                   which often go so far as to require
                   new actions, which  to be sound, are
                   dependent upon new inventions or the
                   development of new technologies.
                     Given all these almost unprecedented
                   circumstances, there have  inevitably
                   been  some  difficulties  in  the initial
                   formative  periods   of the Environ-
                   mental Protection Agency.
                     To  enable the  committee to better
                   understand  how  far  we have  come,
                   and  how far we yet have to go, the
                   committee has directed the  surveys

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             2081
and investigations staff to undertake a
comprehensive examination of the En-
vironmental Protection  Agency. This
investigation has already been under-
way for several  months and, due to
its complexity, will  require more time
to complete. The committee believes
that when completed the investigation
will provide a valuable source of addi-
tional information to assist  the com-
mittee and the agency in the exercise
of their respective responsibilities.
  AOENCY BUDGETS SHOULD FULLY REFLECT ALL
     DOLLARS AND PERSONNEL AVAILABLE

  The committee has become increas-
ingly disturbed by the failure of sev-
eral agencies to fully reflect the  scope
of their programs in the budgets pre-
sented to the committee.
  Last year, for example, the commit-
tee found that the Office of Consumer
Affairs  had significant numbers of
personnel on detail from other agen-
cies. The committee provided funds to
directly finance  the personnel in the
Office of Consumer  Affairs  budget.
  This year the committee found that
while the Office  of  Consumer Affairs
was directly financing its personnel, it
was  receiving   additional  dollars,
which were not reflected in the budget,
from  other agencies.
  In  the  Environmental  Protection
Agency, the committee found that ap-
proximately 1,500  temporary employ-
ees are being employed. While  these
positions were reflected in the budget,
they are nevertheless  still somewhat
misleading as to the total work  force
of the Agency.
  The committee has included specific
recommendations  in the body of the
report relating to the individual  prob-
lems and  will expect future budgets
of all agencies to  clearly indicate all
personnel  and dollars available  to an
agency and the sources of these dollars
and personnel.
                         [p. H6292]

  The question was taken; and  there
were—yeas 345, nays  33, not voting
54, as follows:
                         [p. H6336]
  So the bill passed.
1.17h(4)(b)   July 27: Considered  and passed Senate, amended,
pp. S12051-S12056, S12139-S12141
               MIREX

  Mr.  NELSON. Mr.  President, last
year I introduced an  amendment to
delete from the agriculture appropria-
tions bill the  $7.8 million in funds for
the continuation of the imported fire
ant control program. The  reason for
the amendment was  the potential en-
vironmental and health hazards of the
chemical  used  in  this program—the
pesticide  Mirex.
  Although I am not proposing a sim-
ilar amendment this year,  I feel that
the events  and decisions of the  past
year relating to Mirex are important
and should be outlined.
  Most significant is the Environmen-
tal  Protection Agency's recent order
on June  30, 1972 which restricts the
use of Mirex. The three major restric-
tions placed on its use are the follow-
ing: First, use of Mirex pesticides  is
banned in all aquatic areas and heav-
ily forested areas;  second, aerial ap-
plication of  Mirex  must be accom-
plished   with   calibrated   equipment
capable of delivering the recommended
dosage. Another significant feature of
the order  is the requirement  for  a
monitoring  program  for   Hawaii,
which was granted an exception to the
ban  on  aerial  spraying  in  coastal
counties.  Hopefully this  monitoring

-------
2082
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
program will be  useful  in  gathering
much needed scientific data  on the en-
vironmental effects of Mirex.
  The administrative review process
which resulted in EPA's recent order
was started  as a result of a March
18, 1971 order  canceling registration
of the pesticide Mirex. This order was
appealed by Allied Chemical Corp. and
the review began. On March 1,  1972,
the  Mirex   Advisory  Committee,  a
panel  of  scientists established  under
the provisions  of the Federal Insecti-
cide,  Fungicide,  and Rodenticide Act,
reported its findings to EPA.  I am
pleased to see that EPA followed these
recommendations in  its final  order.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that EPA's  orders of  March 18,
1971, May 3, 1972, and June  30, 1972
as well as the recommendations  of the
Mirex Advisory Committee's report of
March 1, 1972 be  placed in the RECORD
following my statement.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
   (See exhibit  1.)
  Mr. NELSON.  Mr. President, in my
opinion, it is the final recommendation
of  the  Mirex   Advisory  Committee
which is the most important  one and
which should be strictly followed:
  Considerably more  research  on the  possible
hazards of Mirex to man and  his environment
must be conducted before the role of Mirex, as
a pesticide,  can be accurately assessed.  Chronic
toxicity, carcinogenicity,  mutagrenicity, terato-
genicity and the metabolic fate of this com-
pound in multiple species should be  further
studied. Additional work on the biological sta-
bility, persistence and routes of movement of
Mirex under field  conditions  is needed. Con-
tinued and  expanded monitoring  of key envi-
ronmental carriers and selected  commercially
important species for Mirex residues should be
carried out  with emphasis on  the detection of
any significant contamination  of  the human
food  chain. More thorough studies on the ef-
fects of Mirex  on  aquatic  crustaceans are
needed, especially the monitoring of population
densities in the field. Greater  effort should be
made to correlate laboratory and field research.
Increased research is to be encouraged for the
non-insecticidal control of the imported fire
ant.
  Mr. President,  this emphasis  on re-
                    search and methods of biological con-
                    trol  are precisely what I  advocated
                    last  year  and  continue to  advocate
                    now.  Certainly  we  should  do  every-
                    thing we  can to avoid  repeating the
                    old mistakes  made  with  regard  to
                    DDT  and other pesticides  and herbi-
                    cides  when we freely used  the chem-
                    icals only to find out later the danger-
                    ous consequences  of  such use. It is
                    time we began to examine the poten-
                    tial hazards of chemicals in other than
                    an ex post facto fashion.
                      Fortunately, both  the  USDA and
                    EPA  are currently  conducting re-
                    search on the use of Mirex. It is this
                    research which should proceed as rap-
                    idly as  possible so that we may gain
                    the scientific facts needed to make an
                    intelligent policy judgment  on Mirex.
                      I was pleased to note that the Mirex
                    Advisory  Committee recommended an-
                    other position which was  cited in my
                    arguments last year, namely, that ap-
                    plication of Mirex should be limited to
                    severely  infested  agricultural  areas
                    and in areas where humans could be
                    highly  exposed  to the  imported  fire
                    ants.  Certainly this recommendation is
                    all the more important given the fact
                    that the  scientific data on Mirex is
                    far from  complete.
                      The Mirex Advisory Committee men-
                    tioned some very  important potential
                    hazards  associated  with  the use  of
                    Mirex, including the  following:  First,
                    the significance  to the health of man
                    or his domestic animals  of Mirex resi-
                    dues  in edible food  is unknown; sec-
                    ond,   laboratory  experiments   have
                    shown toxic effects on juvenile crusta-
                    ceans exposed to low concentrations of
                    Mirex;  third,  monitoring studies have
                    indicated  considerable Mirex residues
                    in invertebrates and  vertebrates, es-
                    pecially those that are predaceous on
                    ants and  other insects;  fourth, Mirex
                    residues in aquatic sediments may be
                    of some biological importance because
                    of  ingestion  by  crustaceans;  fifth,
                    studies  indicate that Mirex residues
                    are not degraded by biological sys-

-------
                STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                                 2083
terns;  sixth,  insufficient  data   are
available  on  most mammals  for  an
accurate evaluation of the acute toxic-
ity of  Mirex; seventh,  Mirex  caused
significant reproductive effects in rats
when fed  at  relatively  high  levels;
eighth, Mirex has been demonstrated
to  be tumorigenic  to two  strains of
mice;  ninth,  no conclusions  can  be
reached concerning the carcinogenicity
of Mirex for man until  further study.
                            [p. S12051]

   These  potential hazards  are quite
similar to those I mentioned  in  my
arguments last year.  They deserve the
highest priority  in the  continuing re-
search  on Mirex  and they  should make
us  wary  indeed of using this chemical
any more than is absolutely necessary.
   It  is reassuring to  note that  the
USDA has given up its goal of total
eradication of the  fire  ant, which is
probably impossible  and would be en-
vironmentally disastrous in any event.
By 1969, the USDA had set its sights
on spraying 120 million acres in nine
southeastern  States three times with
1.25  pounds  of  Mirex  per acre  per
treatment at a total cost of some $200
million—a  Mirex broadside equivalent
to 2.22 pounds for every man, woman,
and child in the  United States.  Under
a barrage of criticism, the USDA now
says  it has scaled down  the number of
acres it  intends to  spray, although
more than  17 million  acres  are still
slated for the Mirex application by the
Agriculture Department  in  this year
alone and  no totals are available for
the supposed  new overall objective.
   Mr.  President, everyone  concerned
agrees  that  there  exists  much  too
much  ignorance regarding  the  en-
vironmental effects of Mirex. Given the
lack  of sufficient data on  Mirex,  it is
important  that research  on this  sub-
stance  be  given  the  highest priority
and that EPA's  restrictions  on  its use
be  strictly adhered to.
                EXHIBIT 1
                        MARCH 18, 1971.
Subject: Allied Chemical Fire Ant Bait, USDA
    Reg.  No.  218-495; Allied  Chemical  Fire
    Ant Bait "150," USDA Reg. No. 218-516;
    Allied  Chemical 25% Mirex Special  Con-
    centrate, USDA Reg. No.  218-548; Allied
    Chemical Mirex Granular Bait 2X, USDA
    Reg.  No.  218-564; Allied Chemical Mirex
    Granular Bait 4X, USDA  Keg. No.  218-
    565, Allied Chemical 80% Mirex Technical
    Concentrate, USDA Reg. No. 218-585; Al-
    lied Chemical Harvester  Ant Bait "300,"
    USDA Reg.  No. 218-586; Allied  Chemical
    Mirex  Pelleted Bait "450," USDA Reg. No.
    218-590;  Allied  Chemical A-C Mirex Pel-
    leted Bait "450," USDA Reg. No. 218-628;
    Allied  Chemical Yellow  Jacket  Stopper,
    USDA Keg.  No. 218-633.
ALLIED CHEMICAL Co.,
Agricultural Division,
New York, N.Y.
  GENTLEMEN: Scientists  in the various  pesti-
cide  regulation programs of  the  Departments
of the Interior,  Health, Education, and  Wel-
fare,  and  Agriculture (Pesticides Regulation
Division),  which  are  now consolidated in the
Environmental  Protection Agency,  have had
the insecticide mirex  under  review for time.
Data have been  accumulating  primarily from
tests in the laboratory, that raise serious ques-
tions  about the  possible  effects of mirex on
human health and on  animals.
  Evidence  available to this Agency  at this
time does not allow us to  determine how mirex
moves through the environment  and whether or
not it is accumulating in  man and wildlife. In
short, we  cannot now determine to what ex-
tent  the laboratory  results are  translatable to
man and wildlife in the  environment. Never-
theless, the laboratory data  do raise serious
questions about the safety of mirex.
  On January 1, 1971, the United States  Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
in the case of Environmental  Defense Fund,
et al. v. William D. Ruckelshaus, Administra-
tor of the Environmental Protection Agency,
et al., held that  the Federal  Insecticide, Fun-
gicide, and Rodenticide Act requires the Agency
"to  issue  notices   [of  cancellation]   and
thereby  initiate   the  administrative  process
whenever there is a substantial  question  about
the safety  of a registered pesticide."
  It  has been determined  that  the laboratory
evidence concerning  the  effect of  mirex on
animals raises a  "substantial question"  about
tha safety  of continued use of  pesticide prod-
ucts containing mirex.  Accordingly, this Agency
has  determined   to  commence  the  adminis-
trative process in order to resolve this question.
  Therefore, in accordance with the provisions
of Section  4.c. of the Federal Insecticide, Fun-
gicide,  and Rodenticide Act (7  U.S.C.  136b
(c)), it has been determined that all registra-

-------
2084
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
tions  of  the products referred to above should
be canceled for the reason that continued reg-
istration of these products is contrary to the
provisions  of Section 2z(2) (c), 2z(2) (d), and
2z(2> (g) of the Act (7 U.S.C. 13B(z) (2) (c),
135(z) (2) (d), 135z(2)(g)). You  are hereby
notified that the registrations of  these products
are canceled, effective 30 days following receipt
of this  notice,  unless the procedures set forth
in Section  4.c.  of the Act are invoked.
      Sincerely,
                     LOWELL E. MILLER,
                            Acting Director.

[Before  the Environmental Protection  Agency,
  In re: Allied Chemical Company, Petitioner]

       DETERMINATION AND ORDER or THE
                ADMINISTRATOR

  This proceeding, which arises  under  Section
4.c. of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act  (the FIFEA)  (7 U.S.C. lS5b
(c)),  involves a challenge  by Allied  Chemical
Co. to a notice canceling its registration of a
number  of pesticides  containing Mirex. For
the reasons that follow, I have  determined to
issue  the following  order:  the cancellation of
Allied Chemical's  registrations is affirmed, but
those registrations will be reinstated  if Allied
Chemical complies with the conditions outlined
herein.
  A.  On March 18,  1971, this Agency  issued a
notice of cancellation of Allied's ten  registra-
tions  of pesticides  containing  Mirex  for use
against the imported fire ant and certain other
insects.  The grounds for cancellation were that
evidence, primarily  from  the laboratory, con-
cerning  the effect  of Mirex  on  human  health
and- on  animals raised serious questions about
the safety of  continued use of pesticide prod-
ucts containing Mirex. The  agency determined
to commence the administrative  process in  or-
der to resolve these  questions. Accordingly, the
Agency  canceled all registrations of   products
containing Mirex  on the grounds that contin-
ued  registration of  these  products was con-
trary  to the  provisions of  the  Act  (see 7
U.S.C.  135(z) (2) (c),  (d)  and  (g)).  Allied
Chemical chose to challenge the  order by peti-
tioning,  on April 16,  1971, for referral  of the
matter to a scientific advisory committee  (pur-
suant to  7  U.S.C.  135b(c)).  The  Advisory
Committee  was  appointed  on  September  24,
1971  and  received the relevant  data and  its
charge on  October 5, 1971. The Committee was
charged with  considering  and  evaluating  all
relevant  scientific  evidence concerning both
benefits  and risks from the use  of Mirex and,
based thereon, expressing: its opinion  and rec-
ommendations.  Specifically,  with  respect   to
benefits, it was to consider,  inter alia,  (1)  the
nature  and  extent  of the  problem  posed  by
the fire  ant and other insects at  issue;  (2)  the
effectiveness of  the several types of control
                        measures which utilize Mirex; (S) the benefits
                        expected  to be  achieved  by each such  control
                        program, measured against the  damage which
                        would occur  if  no control were undertaken;
                        and  (4)  the  availability and effectiveness  of,
                        and  the  hazards  connected  with,  alternative
                        control measures. With respect to the hazards
                        associated with  the several uses of Mirex, the
                        Committee was  charged to  consider,  inter alia,
                        the  nature,  scope  and  possibility  of  occur-
                        rences of any (1) direct hazard to the user and
                        to  the  general  public; (2)  hazard  to  vegeta-
                        tion;  (3) hazard to nontarget vertebrate  and
                        invertebrate  animals;  and  (4)  hazard to the
                        environment generally.                  f
                           The Committee submitted its report on Feb-
                        ruary 4, 1972.  With  my approval,  the Com-
                        mittee  later  submitted  revisions  of  certain
                        statements which  had inadvertently appeared
                        in  the  initial report  as  a  result of the press
                        to  meet the statutory time deadline. A revised
                        version of the report,  dated March 1, 1972, and
                        containing, as an addendum, a letter from the
                        chairman explaining each of the revisions, has
                        been  printed. Under  the law, I am  required
                        within  90 days  of my receipt of the report to
                        "make [a]  determination and issue an order,
                        with  findings of fact, with respect to registra-
                        tion * *  *." 7 U.S.C. 135b(c).
                           B.  The Committee  discussed  in  detail the
                        evidence pertaining to Mirex and, based there-
                        on,   made a  number of  findings  regarding
                        Mirex.  Those findings are summarized below:
                           1.  The imported fire ant, which infests more
                        than  126 million acres in nine Southern States,
                        is  both  a major  nuisance  pest  because of its
                        sting  and a health hazard  due  to  dangers of
                        secondary infection and  allergic reaction.
                           2.  The imported fire ant is a  minor agricul-
                        tural pest because the threat of  its sting inter-
                        feres with hand labor on  some crops  and its
                        mounds  may damage  agricultural machinery.
                           3. The imported  fire  ant is  an  aggressive
                        predator to an  unknown extent of  both pests
                        ard beneficial species, and is  also a  scavenger.
                           4.  Mirex bait is effective for fire  ant control
                        to  a  degree correlated with the size of the area
                        treated  and  the  number of applications.  For
                        example, three  applications at  six-month  In-
                        tsrvals virtually eliminated all mounds  exposed
                        to  treatment.
                           5.  The goal which  should  be  sought is  con-
                        trol  of  the  fire  ants, through  publicly spon-
                        sored programs involving application of Mirex
                        bait  as needed,  rather than total elimination of
                        the pest. The latter is not feasible, given  the
                        financial and environmental problems  involved.
                           6.  Mirex  baits  provide highly effective and
                        comparatively selective  control  for  a  number
                        of other pests,  including  certain  species of
                        ants,  yellow  jackets, and,  indirectly aphids,
                        scale insects  and mealy  bugs.
                           7.  The only  effective  alternatives to Mirex
                         for control of the fire ant are even more per-

-------
                  STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE  HISTORY
                                      2085
sistent  chlorinated  hydrocarbons,  e.g.,  chlor-
dane,  aldrin, dieldrin,  and  heptachlor.  Inas-
much  as  their  effective dosage  rates far  ex-
ceed the  rate used  in  Mirex bait,  their sub-
stitution  is  inadvisable.  No  possible  method
of biological control shows immediate  promise.
  8. No instance  of  acute Mirex poisoning of
humans  has been reported  in   more than a
decade  of use,  nor  is  there  any  evidence of
damage  to  vegetation  from the  use of Mirex
bait.
  9. Insufficient data  are available on  most
mammals for an  accurate evaluation of Mirex
acute  toxicity.  No data are  available on  the
chronic toxicity of Mirex to  experimental ani-
mals.
   10. Mirex has caused significant reproductive
effects  in  rats  when  fed at relatively high
levels, but  none  when fed at rates  likely to
occur  in  treated food  or feed applied to con-
trol the fire ant.
  11, Based  on  preliminary   data,  no metab-
olites  or Mirex have  been  detected  in rats.
Mirex is  stored' in animal adipose  tissue,  and
                               [p. S12052]


appeals to  have biological half life of at least
25  days.
   12. Mirex has been  demonstrated to  be tu-
morigenic to mice at  high dosages,
   13. Insignificant residues of Mirex have been
detected  in  the  human  food  chain in treated
areas.
   14, Laboratory  experiments have shown  ex-
ceedingly toxic  effects  on juvenile crustaceans,
especially shrimp  and crabs exposed to  low
concentrations of Mirex,  indicating the  chemi-
cal presents a  hazard to the aquatic environ-
ment.
   15. Mirex residues in both soil and  water in
areas  of normal  treatment  are  minimal,  but
may have some biological importance  in  water
because of   the probable ingestion  of organic
detritus  and  other   components  by bottom
feeding crustaceans.
   Based  on its findings,  the  Committee made
recommendations which  can  be  summarized
as  follows:  (1)  Mirex registrations should be
continued with  labeling  restrictions  to  mini-
mize  environmental  contamination;  (2)  pub-
licly  supported  control  programs  should  be
limited to  infested areas where  the  imported
fire ant is  a problem because of  use by people
or interference with  agricultural  operations;
 (3)  where  publicly  sponsored  programs  are
unavailable  [ non-aerial ]  broadcast  treatment
of  lawns, pastures,  schoolgrounds,  parks,  and
similar  areas  by  individuals is  recommended
instead  of  mound treatment; (4)  more  infor-
mation  should  be obtained in order  to  estab-
lish economic  or nuisance threshold levels  re-
quiring Mirex  treatment  as  well  as  informa-
tion regarding  rates of reinfestation  and pop-
ulation  recovery in  areas receiving a  single
bait  treatment;  and (5)  more research should
be conducted on the possible  hazards of  Mirex
to man  and his environment  in order that the
role  of Mirex as a  pesticide may  be accurately
assessed.
  There is no basis in the data currently  before
me to disregard these findings. Accordingly, I
accept  the findings  stated  above  and  adopt
them as  my  own.  I believe, however, that
additional  discussion  is  in order inasmuch as
I have decided to depart in  some degree from
the Committee's further  recommendations.
  The acute toxicity of Mirex to man  is low.
Though  Mirex  is  capable  of being  stored in
adipose tissue  (as  are DDT  and other related
compounds),  recent  gas chromatograph anal-
yses of more than 700  adipose  tissue samples
collected  in 23  states  showed   that only  12
samples  contained residues  which  could pos-
sibly have  been Mirex.  Those 12  were  tenta-
tive  identifications, and  only 2  samples have
been  confirmed as  containing Mirex.
  Sub-acute  toxicity  studies  in  rats  and mice
have shown some  evidence  of chronicity and
reproductive effects  but only at high  dosage
levels. Mirex was  clearly  tumorigenic  in one
experiment in mice;  the results  were compar-
able to  those obtained from known carcinogens
used  as  positive controls.  The Advisory Com-
mittee  avoided referring  to this  as carcino-
genic because  only one  species of  animal was
involved.  With the  essentially   non-detectable
level  of human exposure, the  risk  to  man's
health must be considered  very low in relation
to the  benefits,  particularly those relating  to
human health, to be derived from use of  Mirex.
  Mirex  is  highly toxic  to   some  species  of
invertebrates,  but  is apparently very ]ow  in
toxicity  to other  closely related  species. Resi-
dues  of Mirex have been found in  some inver-
tebrates and  vertebrates, especially those that
are  predaceous  on  ants  and  other  insects.
There  have  been  some  population declines
demonstrated in terrestrial invertebrates, most
of which apparently  feed directly on the Mirex
bait. In  spite  of  its persistence,  troublesome
concentrations of  Mirex are  not apt to build
up in the terrestrial  environment  in the near
future because of  the extremely  small dosages
used (far less than  one ounce  per acre and
seldom  more than  one application per year).
   On the  other hand, Mirex  is most apt to  do
significant damage in the aquatic environment.
S.gnificant adverse effects to crustaceans have
resulted  from  laboratory  exposure  to  Mirex.
 In the wild, however, the lethal effects to some
aquatic  species, such as the commercial blue
crab, are  delayed so  that such effects would be
d.fficult to discover in the natural environment.
Consequently,  although  troublesome  concentra-
tions of Mirex have  not  yet  been demonstrated
in  the  aquatic  environment,  the  hazard  to
aquatic organisms cannot  be disregarded, par-

-------
2086
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
ticularly in  view of the  fact that Mirex is apt
to be recycled, especially in estuaries,  and be-
cause of the  sensitivity of some economically
important species of crustaceans to Mirex.
  As  a result of the potential  threat to the
aquatic environment  posed by  Mirex, I am
naturally  reluctant to permit  distribution of
Mirex  bait  in a manner that might contami-
nate estuaries, lakes and streams.  Those who
are familiar with aerial application  techniques
believe  that  it  is  practical,  by  the use of
proper  cut-off mechanisms and  guidance  sys-
tems  in the  aircraft, to avoid  contamination
of streams  and  lakes in upland areas where
such  aquatic  environments  cover  a  rather
small proportion of the land. Judicious use of
aerial  application  is  preferable to  hand  dis-
tribution of bait, which often results  in over-
treating obvious  mounds  but   missing  map-
parent  young  colonies with a resultant  rapid
reinfestation.
  At  the  same time,  maximum caution  must
be exercised to prevent  damage  to  the aquatic
environment.  All  broadcast application,  aerial
or  otherwise,  must  be prohibited  in coastal
counties or parishes  and  on  or near rivers,
streams, lakes, ponds  and other  aquatic areas.
I also  believe  it  necessary to restrict aerial or
other broadcast application  in non-coastal, non-
aquatic areas to  Federal,  State,  county,  or
local authorities. Thus, I depart from  the rec-
ommendation  of the Advisory Committee that
non-aerial  broadcast treatment  by individuals
be authorized  where publicly supported control
programs are unavailable. All broadcast  treat-
ment  by private  individuals  must  be  pro-
hibited.
  By  prohibiting: aerial application, I do not
wish to eliminate completely  the use of Mirex
from  coastal  counties or parishes.  Should  we
do  so,  the  homeowners, farmers,  and others
affected  by  the  ants would  in all likelihood
apply  heptachlor,  dieldrin, or another chlori-
nated hydrocarbon as a control  chemical. This
alternative could be worse from  the standpoint
of  environmental  safety than  would  applica-
tions  of Mirex.  Therefore, I have  determined
to authorize the private use of Mirex for appli-
cation on a mound-to-mound basis  only.
  For  the foregoing reasons,  the cancellation
of Allied  Chemical's registrations   is  affirmed,
but the registrations  will  be  reinstated  upon
submission by Allied Chemical, and acceptance
by the Agency, of amended labeling which con-
forms  to  the  conditions set forth in this  deci-
sion,1  and  submission  by the company  for a
two-year  plan to monitor  mirex in the  envi-
ronment to insure  that run-off, leaching: and
erosion of soil in mound-treated areas are not
resulting  in aquatic contamination.
               WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS,
                             Administrator.
                         [Before  the Environmental Protection Agency,
                          In  re:  Allied  Chemical Corporation,  Peti-
                          tioner}

                               DETERMINATION AND ORDER OP THE
                                   ADMINISTRATOR ON MIREX

                          Pursuant to Section 4.c. of the Federal  In-
                         secticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (the
                         FIFRA)   (7  U.S.C.  135b(c)),   I  issued  my
                         Determination and  Order, filed  May 4,  1972,
                         canceling  Allied Chemical Corporation's regis-
                         trations  of pesticides  containing Mirex, pro-
                         viding that such registrations  would be  rein-
                         stated if  Allied  Chemical complied  with  the
                         conditions outlined  in  the Determination and
                         Order. The Determination and Order was pub-
                         lished in the  Federal Register on June 1, 1972
                         (3-7 Fed. Reg. 10987).
                           A.  My  May  3  Order limiting private use
                         of Mirex  to  mound-to-mound  treatment  re>-
                         s ul ted  from  my  concern  that  unrestricted
                         amounts of Mirex should no longer  be allowed
                         to  contaminate  the  environment.  Based  on
                         the information  then before me, I determined
                         that  restricting  use  to the  mound-to-mound
                         application method  was the  best  solution to
                         the problem. Subsequent to  the filing and pub-
                         lishing of  the Determination and Order of the
                         Administrator  on Mirex, Allied  Chemical Cor-
                         poration  submitted information  to  me which
                         showed that ground application  equipment can
                         be calibrated  to deliver  the dosages recom-
                         mended  on  the  labels  of  Mirex  pesticides.
                         Based on  this  information  and the recom-
                         mendation  of  the Mirex  Advisory  Committee
                         to  minimize  environmental contamination,  I
                         am persuaded  that so long  as only  equipment
                         which can be  calibrated to  deliver the recom-
                         mended  label dosages  is used,  ground  broad-
                         cast  treatment with  Mirex baits  by  private
                         persons  should  be authorized.
                           B.  The U.S. Department  of Agriculture has
                         represented to this Agency  that it is engaged
                         in   a  comprehensive  pesticides  monitoring
                         program. The  Agency does not believe a fur-
                         ther  monitoring  program is necessary at this
                         time.  I  have,  therefore,  lifted  the require-
                         ment  that,  as  a  precondition  to  reinstate-
                         ment of  its  registrations,  Allied  Chemical
                           1 The  evidence  presently  available indicates
                         that  the hazard  to  aquatic  organisms from
                         current  use  of  Mirex  in aquatic areas  does
                         not approach the  "imminent" stage. In other
                         words, I am not faced with a  highly danger-
                         ous  situation which  needs   to  be  corrected
                         immediately,  prior to  the  completion  of  the
                         cancellation proceedings.  Consequently,  I have
                         no reason to suspend aquatic use immediately.
                         Instead,  I  am merely canceling the  aquatic
                         use. Under the FIFRA, this cancellation order

-------
                  STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                                     2087
is   not  effective  until, at  the  earliest,  the
expiration  of  the  60 days  allowed  for the
filing of an administrative appeal  from  this
decision. Thus, even  if Allied does not appeal
from this  decision,  it will  have 60  days to
conform its labeling  to  the  newly  imposed
conditions.
                               [p.  S12053]

submit  a  monitoring  program for the South-
east United States.
  C.  Allied  Chemical Corporation  has   sub-
mitted  to this  Agency amended labels  for the
registrations which were  canceled by  my Or-
der of May 3,  1972. These new labels,  for reg-
istrations 218-495, -516, -564, -565, -586,  -590,
-628, and  -638   have been  accepted  by the
Pesticides  Regulation Division  of the  Agency.
Those amended labels conform to the condi-
tions set  forth in  the May  3  Determination
and- Order. Thus, as I stated in that Order,
I am herewith determining to reinstate  those
registrations.
  D.  A petition for  a Stay of the May 3 Or-
der  has  been  submitted  to  me  by  Allied
Chemical  Corporation. The stay  is requested
only  with  respect  to that  provision  of the
Order  which  would prohibit aerial  spraying
of  the  product registered  as number 218-586
in Hawaii. This product is used on pineapples
in  Hawaii to control mealy bug wilt.  Accord-
ing  to  the petition, the  spraying season for
control  of this   pest,  which  can  devastate
pineapple  crops,  is  the  period  from  August
through October.
  In keeping with this Agency's  policy of try-
ing  to  avoid  disruption of a growing season
and in  view of the  fact  that  treatment  with
Mirex has been  incorporated in the plans of
the pineapple growers for  this season, the ef-
fect of  the order is  stayed  through the   1972
spraying   season,   that is,  only the period
August  through   October.  C/.  In Re  Stevens,
I.F.&R. 63 (June  14, 1972). Since the stay will
result in aerial application of Mirex in coastal
counties,  I am requiring  a  monitoring   pro-
gram for  Hawaii.
  This  stay does not lift final  cancellation.
Any  such   action could   only  be  undertaken
upon receipt  of  a  petition   for reconsidera-
tion and a full review of the question on the
merits.
                      II
                    Order

  All  application,  aerial  or  otherwise,  of
Mirex pesticides  is  prohibited  on  or  near
estuaries,  rivers,   streams,   lakes,  swamps,
ponds, other  aquatic  areas,  and  heavily  for-
ested areas.  Ground broadcast  application of
registered  Mirex  pesticides  by  private  per-
sons  is  prohibited  in  all other areas  unless
such application is  accomplished with ground
application equipment which can be calibrated
to deliver the recommended  label dosages.
  Allied  Chemical  Corporation  is  no  longer
required  to submit  a plan  to  monitor Mirex
in  the  environment,  in  addition to meeting
the  other  conditions  as set  forth  in  the
May 3 Order.
  The  amended  labeling  submitted  by Allied
Chemical  for its registered Mirex  pesticides
conforms  to the  conditions set  forth  in the
May  3  Determination  and   Order,  and  I
accept such  labeling  as  being  in  conformity
therewith.  Therefore,  all of  Allied  Chemical
Corporation's  registrations  of  Mirex  pesti-
cid-es, with the  new  labels,  are reinstated.
  The petition for a stay of the Order of May
3, insofar  as that  order  prohibits  aerial ap-
plication  of registration  218-586 in  Hawaii,
is granted for the 1972 spraying season, con-
ditioned  upon   a  monitoring  program, which
has  been  approved  by this  Agency.
  All other provisions and  restrictions of the
May 3 Determination and Order remain in full
force and effect.
             WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS,
                             A dm inistfa tor.

     RECOMMENDATIONS OF MIREX ADVISORY
                  COMMITTEE

  1. The  registration  of  products  containing
Mirex   should  be  continued   with   labeling
restrictions   to  minimize  environmental  con-
tamination.
  2. Publicly   supported   control   programs
should   be   limited  to  Mirex  application,
according to  need  based  on  pest  population
assessment,  to  infested areas  where the im-
ported fire  ant  is  a  problem  because  of use
by  people  or  interference  with agricultural
operations.   Estuaries  and   other   aquatic
habitats,   wildlife    refuges,    and  heavily
forested  areas should  not  be  treated,
  3. Where  publicly  sponsored programs are
unavailable,  broadcast  treatment  of  lawns,
pastures,  schoolgrounds,   parks, and similar
areas by  individuals  is  recommended instead
of  mound   treatment.  Educational  programs
should  instruct  infested  property  owners  as
to  how Mirex  can  he  applied for  the  most
effective  control  of  the imported fire ant with
minimal  environmental contamination.
  4. To  implement  control  programs,  much
more information is  needed to  establish  eco-
nomic  or  nuisance  threshold  levels  requiring
Mirex treatment as well as on rates of  rein-
festation  and   population  recovery  in  areas
receiving a single bait treatment.
  5. Considerably more research on the pos-
sible hazards of Mirex to  man and his en-
vironment  must be  conducted  before the  role
of  Mirex,  as a pesticide,  can be  accurately
assessed.   Chronic   toxicity,   carcinogenicity,
mutagenicity,  teratogenicity  and  the  meta-

-------
2088
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
bolic  fate  of  this  compound  in  multiple
species  should  be  further  studied. Additional
work on the  biological stability, persistence
and routes  of  movement of Mirex under field
conditions  is  needed.   Continued  and  ex-
panded   monitoring  of  key   environmental
carriers and selected commercially  important
species  for Mirex residues  should be carried
out with emphasis on  the detection  of any
significant  contamination of the human  food
chain. More thorough  studies  on the effects
of Mirex on  aquatic crustaceans are needed,
especially   the  monitoring  of  population
densities in the field. Greater effort should be
made to  correlate laboratory  and  field re-
search.  Increased research is to be encouraged
for the  non-insecticidal control of the im-
ported fire ant.
      Respectfully submitted,
       C.  H.  VAN MIDDELEM,  Ph.D.,
                            Chairman.
                          [p.  S12054]

   Mr.  BOGGS. Mr. President, I wish
to express my  support for this legis-
lation, H.R.  15690.  It will provide the
funds  necessary for many essential,
ongoing programs as well as new  ini-
tiatives to improving our agricultural
lands,  our environment and to protect
American consumers.
   Many  of  the important  aspects of
the  bill  have  been  discussed already
by my colleagues. I  would like to com-
ment on a few items, which also have
significance.
   The Appropriations  Committee  has
recommended  a $15,000,000  increase
above the House figure for demonstra-
ting in fiscal 1973 new waste recycling
systems that would reduce pollution.
The   admendment   would  provide
enough money  to construct a variety
of resource  recovery  systems  around
the  Nation,  converting trash  to reus-
able materials, under  section 208 of
the  Solid Waste Disposal Act.
   It is my hope that this  appropria-
tion will assure the  availability of
sufficient  Federal  funds to  demon-
strate  a  broad variety  of recycling
concepts  at  locations  around  the  Na-
tion.
   The President's  budget did  not re-
quest funds  for this recycling program
                    for fiscal 1973. The budget planned to
                    use the  $15,000,000  appropriated last
                    year  over the 2-year period, with all
                    of the grants to be made in fiscal 1973.
                      The committee found that this sum
                    was  totally  inadequate to  meet  the
                    needs of the Nation. The House agreed,
                    adding $15,000,000 for fiscal year 1973.
                    With  the  additional   money  recom-
                    mended   by  the  Senate  committee,
                    $45,000,000 would be available, includ-
                    ing  the  carryover  funds, to  initiate
                    the program this year.
                      When  the  Congress  approved  the
                    Resource  Recovery  Act  of  1970, it
                    authorized  $80,000,000  for fiscal  1972
                    and  $140,000,000 for  fiscal  1973  for
                    this vital section 208 program demon-
                    strating new recycling  systems.
                      The creation of effective answers to
                    our recycling needs, I believe, will save
                    the  Nation  many times  this  cost in
                    materials  saved  and  pollution  pre-
                    vented.
                      Further, I would  like to  point  out
                    language in the Senate report on the
                    committee's evaluation  of the thrust
                    of the section 208 program.  It reads:
                      The  Committee recommends  an additional
                    $15,000,000 for  Section 208  resource recovery
                    demonstration  projects.  The  Committee be-
                    lieves  it is  important that  a wide  range of
                    new   systems  be demonstrated   under  this
                    program.  While  energy  recovery  systems are
                    important  and  need to be investigated, the
                    Committee believes it is vital that EPA also
                    approve systems recovering a full  range of
                    reusable materials from solid wastes, including
                    humus.
                      This paragraph, I believe, reflects a
                    sound approach  to  the  section  208
                    program.
                      Mr. President, I urge the  Senate to
                    support  the committee's recommenda-
                    tion  on  funding of the EPA resource
                    recovery program.
                      The bill contains many other impor-
                    tant  features. It provides $1.9 billion
                    in grants for sewage treatment plants,
                    a sum that  may be altered at some
                    future date  with completion of  the
                    conference on  S. 2770.
                      The  bill  provides $500,000,000  in

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                             2089
grants for construction of water sys-
tems and sewer lines, plus $350,000,000
in operat-
                         [p. S12055]

ing  loans  to farmers  through  the
Farmers Home Administration.
                         [p. S12056]

  Mr.  TUNNEY. Mr. President,  in
giving my approval to that section of
this  appropriation measure which in-
volves  the Environmental Protection
Agency, I wish to draw the attention
of my colleagues to some months  of
correspondence I  have had with EPA
on the subject of its failure to renew
a research and training grant to the
Pacific  Southwest  Universities  Air
Pollution  Association—PSUAPA.
  The  association  is,  as  its name
implies, a  consortium  of  four major
universities  in  southern  California
working to develop and conduct educa-
tional, informational and training pro-
grams  aimed at air pollution control.
  Interestingly enough, the  consor-
tium was established  at EPA's speci-
fic request. The purpose  of  the  pro-
gram is  to provide  direct assistance
and information to air pollution  con-
trol  agencies,  including   EPA,   the
legislature and the general public.
  Special  effort is made toward  pro-
viding  assistance  to air pollution  con-
trol  agencies,  including   EPA,   the
legislature and  the  general public.
Thus, the consortium's  programs are
action-oriented and designed for im-
mediate impact in  California,  where
air  pollution problems are so aggra-
vated. In  its first full year of opera-
tion, the consortium compiled an im-
pressive record of achievements. These
include  numerous  publications, semi-
nars for   legislators,  exciting  com-
munity service and formal university
education   programs,  scientific   and
administrative training programs, and
many others.
  Despite assurances from EPA to the
contrary, the consortium was informed
on April 13, 1972 by EPA's Office of
Air Programs that its operating grant
would not be renewed, due to budget-
ary   limitations.  This   information
came as a  complete surprise  to  the
directors of the consortium and to the
many who have relied on its programs
in its first year.
                         [p. S12139]

  In  my subsequent  correspondence
with EPA, and with my distinguished
colleague, the  chairman of the Appro-
priations  Subcommittee on  Agricul-
ture,  Environmental  and  Consumer
Protection   (Mr.  McGEE),  I  pointed
out that EPA's own budgetary request
for research  and training  had been
decreased by some $3 million over the
fiscal 1972 level—and this despite the
fact that air pollution  problems  re-
mained crucial throughout the country
and especially in southern California.
  Senator  McGEE's  subcommittee re-
sponded favorably to my request, in-
cluding in the bill $3 million to allow
continuation of the research and train-
ing programs at the fiscal year 1972
level.  Immediately after the subcom-
mittee's action, in a personal meeting
with EPA Administrator Ruckelshaus
in my office, I stated that I had every
anticipation that  EPA would be man-
dated by the congressional appropria-
tion  to fund  research and  training
programs at the fiscal year 1972 level.
Since  the  consortium's  contribution
has been outstanding and essential to
the needs of California,  I stated  that
I could see no excuse for EPA's fail-
ure to renew the  grant as soon as the
additional  funds  are  released.  Mr.
Ruckelshaus assured me that he would
personally  look into the  matter  and
subsequent  communications  between
our staffs have contributed to my ex-
pectation that the  renewal will  and
must  be  forthcoming.  It  would be a
profound disappointment to a great
many people in this country  if EPA—
which has recently shown such vigor-

-------
2090
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
ous leadership in the fight to curb air
pollution—were to  fail  now  to carry
out its  clear mandate.
   I ask unanimous consent to insert in
the RECORD at  this point  the relevant
correspondence on  this subject.
   There  being  no  objection,  the  ma-
terial was ordered  to be printed in the
RECORD, as  follows:

  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AOENCY,
Research Triangle Park, N.C., April IS. 1972.

Dr. JAMES N. PITTS,  Jr.,
Director,  Statewide Air  Pollution  Research
  Center,  University of  California,  Riverside.
  Riverside, Calif.
  DEAR rm.  PITTS: This  is  to acknowledge
receipt  of  your  renewal proposal  for  the
Pacific  Southwest  Universities  Air  Pollution
Association. We sincerely  regret to inform you
that we are  unable  to   consider support  of
your  proposal at  the present  time due  to
budgetary  limitations  for Fiscal Year  1972
and 1973.
  Please be advised that this  decision is  not
based upon the scientific  merit and/or tech-
nical  quality  of your  proposal.  Further, this
action  will in no way influence the  review  of
future proposals you may wish  to submit.
      Sincerely yours,
                 BONNIE E.  TOWNSEND,
    Extramural   Programs  Section,  Special
      Projects  Branch,   Manpower  Develop-
      ment Staff.

                            APRIL  28, 1972.
Hon. GALE McGEE,
U.S. Senator,
Washington. D.C.
Attention: Dudley D. Miles.
  DEAR GALE: I am advised that the Environ-
mental  Protection  Agency  notified  the Pa-
cific Southwest Universities Air  Pollution As-
sociation on  April 13,  1972, that it will not
support  the  Association's  renewal  proposal
due  to budgetary  limitations   for  FY   1972
and 1973. According to  EPA's  letter, a copy
of -which I attach,  the decision  was  not  based
on  the scientific  merit  or  technical quality
of  the Association's proposal.
  The  Association  is  a  consortium  of public
and private  universities  in  California which
was formed  at  the request  of  the  National
Air Pollution  Control  Agency  and  is  just
completing  its  first  full  year  of  operation.
Its success is shown  by  the   attached  sum-
mary  of  accomplishments  and  by  the  fact
that the Universities  of Arizona and Nevada
were to  join  the consortium this year.
  According to  my information, the Associa-
tion has been  told  by  EPA  that  it  could
                       anticipate  in excess of $800,000  for FY 197S,
                       and EPA's failure to  renew conies as a com-
                       plete surprise.
                         I am aware that EPA appeared before your
                       Subcommittee to request $1.2  million less in
                       FY 1973  than it had  requested in FY 1972.
                       EPA stated in its  budget  request that grants
                       to  universities  to  support  air  pollution  con-
                       trol training programs are being scaled down
                       in  1973 in  keeping with an agency  policy to
                       direct funds to other programs.
                         I  am  most  disturbed  that   at  the very
                       moment when  research on the  subject of air
                       pollution is urgently needed,  EPA is cutting
                       back its  support  of  education  and  training
                       on  such a  massive  scale. The decision is being
                       made apparently without knowledge of appre-
                       ciation of  the merits of the programs affected.
                         I  hope  that  it will  be possible  for  you to
                       restore $1.2 million to EPA's budget in order
                       to  sustain  it at its FY 1972 level, and to ear-
                       mark  $800,000 of  this  increase for the  Pa-
                       cific   Southwest   Universities   Air  Pollution
                       Association in  order that  it can continue its
                       work for the people of California, Nevada  and
                       Arizona.
                         I  would  be happy to  supply  you with  any
                       additional  information  on  the activities  of
                       the  Association if  you should  so require.  In-
                       quiries  in  this  regard should  be  brought to
                       the  attention of Jane Frank,  my  legislative
                       assistant.
                             Best regards,
                                            JOHN V. TUNNEY,
                                                    V.S. Senator.

                                                  MARCH 20, 1972.
                       HON. WILLIAM D. EUCKELSHAUS,
                       Administrator,  Environmental Protection
                           Agency, Washington, D.C.
                         DEAR  MR.   RUCKELSHAUS:   I  have  just
                       learned that  a  number of research  grants
                       made  by the  Office of  Air Programs  to  the
                       University   of  California to conduct air  pol-
                       lution  research   are   being  terminated  for
                       lack  of funds.
                         These    grants—involving   several   million
                       dollars—were  planned  as   multi-year awards
                       and  their  sudden  termination  will  not  only
                       interrupt   research  in   the   environmental
                       problems   important to the  people  of Cali-
                       fornia but also  cause  considerable  hardship
                       to  the personnel directly involved.
                         This  most disturbing  news  comes immedi-
                       ately on the heels  of  the  President's message
                       to  the Congress  calling for the expansion of
                       science and  technology  efforts  of  the  United
                       States to improve the quality of life.
                         I have also been advised that the  Office of
                       Air  Programs does  not plan  to renew  the
                       funding of the  Pacific Southwest Universities
                       Air  Pollution  Association consortium.  This
                       group was established  at the request of your
                       agency and has proved so successful  that uni-

-------
                  STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                                     2091
versities  in  Arizona and  Nevada  have applied
to join the  three California  universities wl.ich
have  commenced an  outstanding  air  pollution
research  program.
  I  attack   information  concerning-  specific
grants that are  affected  at the University of
California  Riverside  Campus.  There may  also
be  grants   affected  at other  California cam-
puses. I hope that  you  will  review the  ac-
tions  of  the Office for Air  Programs and re-
instate   the  grants  previously  made  to  the
University  of  California.
  I look  forward to your  early reply.
      Sincerely,
                   JOHN  V. TUNNEY,
                               V.S. Senator.

                       U.S.  SENATE,
          COMMITTEE  OF  PUBLIC WORKS,
              Washington, D.C.9 May 8, 1972.
HON. WILLIAM D. RUCXELSHAUS,
Administrator,    Environmental    Protection
    Agency, Washington,  D.C.
  DEAR  BILL: On March  20, 1972, I wrote  you
concerning-  the termination  of a  number of
research grants  made by the  Office  of  Air
Programs  to  the University  of  California to
conduct  air  pollution research.   I  attach  a
copy  of  my letter and its  attachment which
lists  the grants  involved.
  I  have not  yet received a response from
you on  this matter.  I have  made  further in-
quiries   and am informed that the  following
grants,  which were  included  in  the  attach-
ment to my  March   20  letter, have  still  not
come through:
  Fukuto,   "Chemistry & Mode of  Action of
Insecticides," EP 00806-15;
  Mudd,  "Biochemical Effects of  Air  Pollu-
tion Oxidants," AP 00071-10;
   Fukuto,    "Environmental   Sciences,"   ES
00084-05;
  Shorey,   "Behavior  Control of  Insects by
Pheromones,"  EP GM 00873-09.
  In  addition,  on April  13,  another  circum-
stance  mentioned  in my letter  of March 20
came to pass:  the Pacific  Southwest  Univer-
sities  Air  Pollution   Association was  notified
by EPA that its renewal proposal  was turned
down due  to budgetary limitations  for   FY
72  and 73.
   As you  know,  the Association is  a consor-
tium  of public  and  private universities in
California  which was formed at  the request
of  the National  Air  Pollution Control Agency.
After a year and  a  half  of planning,   it is
 just  completing  its first  full year of operation.
 Its  success is  shown by the attached   sum-
 mary of  accomplishments  and  by   the  fact
 that  the Universities  of  Arizona and Nevada
 were  to join  the consortium this year.  Ac-
 cording  to  my information,  the  consortium
had  been  told  by EPA  that it could  antici-
 pate in excess  of $800,000  for FY 73,  and
EPA's failure to renew comes as a complete
 urprise.
  I am certain  that you  realize my concern
 vith  these  various  cutbacks in  pollution  re-
soarch at a time when rapid  progress  is  so
  •gently needed.  I  do  not  understand  why
EPA,  in  its  budgetary request  to  the  Con-
gress for FY 73, requested  $1.2  million less
than  it had requested in FY 72.
  Your  prompt  response  to   this  inquiry
 •ould be  most  appreciated.
      Sincerely,
                   JOHN  V. TUNNEY,
                              U.S. Senator.
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             Washington, D.C.,  May Łff.  1972.
Hon. JOHN V.  TUNNEY,
U.S.  Senate,
Washington, D.C.
  DEAR SENATOR TUNNEY:  This is in response
to  your letter  of  May  8,  1972, regarding  a
number of  proposals for research grants sub-
mitted by  the University of California, River-
side.  Enclosed is a copy of our April 26, 1972,
 eply to your  earlier letter  dealing  with  the
same grants.  There  are  only  two  changes
that  have   developed   in  the  interim.  Pro-
posals 800890 for C.  Ray Tompson  and 800870
for  Lawrence  Ordin  have  been mailed their
notices  of  grant awards.
  Your  concern   for  certain   proposed cut-
backs  in   the   Environmental   Protection
Agency's   (EPA)  budgetary request to  Con-
gress is appreciated. EPA, on  an Agency-wide
basis, has  proposed  a reduction in its train-
ing  grants program in fiscal  year  1973 from
                                [p.  S12140]

$10.4  million  to $7.4 mill:on.  This proposal
was made on the basis  of a recent evaluation
of  the  program which  revealed that:
  a.  There  is  little  evidence  to support the
commonly  held  view that there is  a vast  gap
between  the  demand  for  trained  environ-
mentalists  and  the  number of qualified  ap-
plicants available  for envii'onrnental jobs.
  b.  Many  more universities now offer gradu-
ate training  programs  in  the environment,
and  more   students  are  currently  entering
these fields  than in the past.
  c. Most  EPA  grant programs have matured
and  thus  are  in  less  need of  support than
new  programs  which require substantial "seed
money" to sustain them through the first few
;ears of  the grant.
  Therefore,  it  is   generally  felt  that   the
stimulus of a larger EPA training  grant  pro-
gram is  less  needed now  than in  the past,
and  such  a  program is of  somewhat lower
priority  than   other  pressing  needs   within
the EPA  1973  budget totals.
   EPA has made  no final  decisions on  how
the $3.0  reduction  will be  absorbed. We  esti-
mate,  however,  that  most   existing   grants

-------
2092
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
will  continue  to  be funded  through at lower
levels  of  support.  We  anticipate  that the
effect of those reductions  will not substantially
reduce the supply of EPA funded graduates.
  Your interest  in this matter is appreciated.
      Sincerely yours,
             WILLIAM D.  RUCKELSHAUS,
                             A dministrator.
                            APRIL 25, 1972.
Hon. JOHN V. TUNNEY,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.

  DEAR SENATOR  TUNNEY:  The Administrator
has  requested  that our  office  reply  to your
letter of March 20, 1972, regarding a number
of proposals for  research grants submitted by
the University of California, Riverside.
  In  checking the  status of  these  proposals
we found:
  AP00830-04  (new  EPA  number  800868),
Edgar  R.   Stephens,  "Formation  of   Photo-
chemical Aerosols," $43,519.00  was  placed on
the award  notice  list in  Grants Information
Branch on  March  30, 1972.
  AP00071-10 (new EPA number 800684), for
John R. Mudd,  "Biochemical   Effects  of Air
Pollutants  Oxidants," $42,601.00, was  mailed
an award notice  on January 26, 1972, to cover
grant period from  September 1, 1971, through
August 31,  1972. Mr.  Mudd was  informed on
February 29,  1972  that after August »1, 1972,
support  of  his  work  would  be  terminated.
This  was  done to  enable him to  have time
to obtain funding  from  other  sources.
  ES0084-05,  T.  Roy Fukuto,  "Environmental
Sciences,"   $1,081,035.00,  is  administered by
the National  Institutes of Health.
  AP01407-02  (new EPA number 80089C) C.
Ray  Thompson,  "Effects of Peroxyacetyl Ni-
trate on Orange  Trees,"  $43,779;  AP00568-06,
Ellis  F.  Barley,  "Characteristics  of   Smoke
from  Cellulosic  Fuels,"  $41,155;  AP0213-10
(new EPA number 800870), Lawrence  Ordin,
"Effects of  Air  Pollutants on Cell  Growth,"
$112,607 have all  completed  technical  review
and  are now  in  final processing.
  AP00771-05  (new  EPA  number  801156),
James  N.  Pitts,  Jr. "Singlet  Molecular Oxy-
gen  Oxidation in  Polluted  Air $56,892,  was
received by Grants Administration  on  March
3, 1972, and has  now been sent to the  proper
program  element  manager  to begin  review.
  The other  grant applications are still  un-
der  review or administrative  processing and
have not  officially been approved  or  disap-
proved.
  Regretfully,  there  has  been  no   further
change in  the status of the Pacific Southwest
Universities  Air  Pollution  Association  con-
sortium, whose funding had to be  terminated
                        for  fiscal  year   1973   due   to   budgetary
                        restraints.
                              Sincerely yours,
                                      THOMAS E. CARROLL,
                           Assistant Administrator for Plannino
                                                  and Management.
                                              U.S. SENATE,
                                  COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS,
                                    Washington, D.C., May 26, 197i.
                        Hon. WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS,
                        Administrator, Environmental Protection
                          Agency,
                        Washington, D.C.
                          DEAR  BILL:  You will recall  our  colloquy at
                        the Air and  Water  Pollution Subcommittee
                        hearing last  Monday  concerning  EPA's fail-
                        ure to  respond  to two of  my letters  on the
                        subject  of  cutbacks of air pollution  research
                        grants to California.
                          Subsequently,  your  office has informed me
                        that the letters  were  answered, and  has sup-
                        plied me with a letter which  is date-stamped
                        May 25  and a  retyped copy  of  a  letter  on
                        which the date  of  April 25 is typed by  what
                        clearly appears  as a different typewriter  from
                        the one used for the body of  the letter.
                          My  office  never  received  the   original  of
                        the April 25  letter. While I  have no  desire
                        to be petty about  this affair, it  would  seem
                        that  the   difference  in  the   typewriters
                        coupled  with the  fact that I never  received
                        the original would indicate that  it may well
                        never have been sent.
                          Whatever  the  true  circumstances  may be,
                        neither  response  gives  any   explanation  of
                        EPA's  failure   to  renew  the  grant  to the
                        Pacific  Southwest  Consortium. Rather,  your
                        answer  only repeats what I stated to you in
                        my  letter—that the  cut   was due   to  bud-
                        getary limitations.
                          In view  of  EPA's prior indications to the
                        Consortium that the grant would  be renewed,
                        and the considerable success of the  project and
                        its obvious need in the Pacific southwest where
                        air pollution is  worse than anywhere in the
                        nation,  I am not satisfied that your office has
                        given any  serious consideration to the effects
                        of its action.
                          As  I stated  at  Monday's  hearing, I  will
                        ask for increased appropriations for  this and
                        other vital projects if EPA   is unwilling or
                        otherwise unable   to  encourage and  sustain
                        such needed efforts. The sadness is, of course,
                        the EPA  itself  suffers a  loss  of prestige and
                        effectiveness when it  fails to deal adequately
                        with these problems.
                              Sincerely  yours,
                                   JOHN  V. TUNNEY. U.S. Senator.

-------
                STATUTES  AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                                  2093
                    U.S. SENATE,
          COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS,
           Washington, D.C., July 14, 1972.
Hon. GALE MCGEE,
Chairman,  Subcommittee   on   Agriculture,
    Environmental   and  Consumers  Protec-
    tion,  Committee on  Appropriations, U.S.
    Senate, Washington, D.C.
  DEAR GALE:  You  will recall  that I wrote
you on April 28  concerning EPA's  refusal to
renew  its  grant  to the  Pacific  Southwest
Universities Air Pollution Association.  I urged
that you  restore $1.2 million to EPA's budget
in ord«r  to sustain  it  at  its  FY 1972  level,
and that  you earmark $800,000  of th.s mone^
for the Consortium.
  I am  aware  that  your subcommittee is
taking  up the  EPA appropriations  issue just
after the  recess, and my staff has been assured
by Dudley Miles  that my  request is included
in the  record  and  will  be given  every con-
sideration. So  that your files on  this matter
will  be  complete,  I enclose  copies  of my
correspondence  with  EPA  on  this  issue  as
well as new details respecting the Consortium's
accomplishments in its first successful year.
  Please contact me or  my office if we can be
of further help on  this matter. Jane Frank,
my legislative  assistant, is fully conversant
with the issues.
     Sincerely,
                    JOHN V. TUNNEY,
                           U.S. Senator.

                    U.S. SENATE,
          COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS,
           Washington, D.C., July 26, 19T2.
Hon. WILLIAM D. EUCKELSHAUS, Jr.,
Administrator,    Environmental   Protection
    Agency,  Washington, D.C,
  DEAR BILL:   In our meeting yesterday, you
will recall that I reiterated my strong belief
that  EPA should  immediately renew the air
pollution  control training and  research pro-
gram  of the  Pacific  Southwest  Consortium
in California.
  The Senate Appropriations Committee has,
as you know,  reinstated the full  $3  million
deleted from  the  EPA's  own  budgetary re-
quest  for research  and  training grants for FY
1973.  Thus,  the Agency has been  mandated
to proceed with its training programs  at the
1972  level.  I am  advised by  the  Committee
staff   that the  report  on  the  bill  has been
prepared  and  that this  measure may  reach
the floor  as  early  as tomorrow  afternoon. As
I stated  yesterday, I  fully expect the  Senate
to confirm  the Committee's  decision in  this
regard.
  Once the  funds are made available,  I can
see absolutely no  excuse  for failing to  renew
the grant  for  the  Consortium.  As I have
stated  several  times   in  my  previous  three
letters to you on this matter, I am  vitally
concerned that the  important work  being
done  by  the Consortium  be allowed to con-
tinue. I  enclose copies  of that correspondence,
along  with my exchanges with Senator  McGee
and the Consortium on this matter. I call your
special attention to the Consortium's achieve-
ments in  its  first full year of operations. These
include numerous  publications,  exciting com-
munity service and formal university education
programs, scientific and  administrative  train-
ing programs,  and  many others.  It  is  an
impressive record indeed.
  I appreciate  your prompt personal  atten-
tion  to   this  matter,  and  look  forward  to
hearing  from you.
      Sincerely,
                   JOHN v. TUNNEY,
                           U.S. Senator.
                            [p.  S12141]
1.17b(4)(c)    Aug.  9:  House  and  Senate  agreed  to  conference
report, pp. H7387-H7389, H3795, H7396-H7397, S13161-S13162
CONFERENCE  REPORT  ON  H.R.
  15690, AGRICULTURE  ENVI-
  RONMENTAL  AND  CONSUMER
  RONMENTAL  APPROPRIA-
  TIONS, 1973
  Mr. WRITTEN. Mr. Speaker, I call
up  the  conference report on  the bill
(H.R.  15690)  making appropriations
for agriculture-environmental and con-
sumer  protection   programs  for the
fiscal year ending  June  30,  1973, and
for other purposes, and ask unanimous
consent  that  the  statement   of  the
managers be read in lieu of the report.
   The  Clerk read the title of  the bill.
   The  SPEAKER. Is  there objection
to the  request of the  gentleman from
Mississippi?
   There  was  no  objection.
   The  Clerk read the statement.
   (For  conference  report  and  statement, see
proceedings of the House of August 2, 1972.)
   The   SPEAKER.   The  gentleman

-------
2094
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
from  Mississippi (Mr.  WRITTEN)  is
recognized.
  Mr.  WRITTEN.  Mr.  Speaker,  we
are here first, today, by reason of the
kindness of the  leadership and of my
colleague on the Committee on Appro-
priations. Our colleague in the Senate
who is my counterpart has an engage-
ment which requires him to leave the
country late  this afternoon. I appre-
ciate very much all those cooperating
so that we might bring this conference
report to your attention  early.
  In bringing this  conference  report
to the  House, I call attention once
again to the fact that this subcommit-
tee now has jurisdiction over  quite a
big segment of the national budget.
  I shall not  take up much time be-
cause we wrote a rather thorough re-
port on this  bill prior to when  it
passed  the  House.  The other  body
likewise  wrote a thorough  report. I
think  all of the matters in the bill
have been carefully explained.
  There are several  things I think  it
might be well  to remember, for exam-
ple, while  we have  created the  En-
vironmental   Protection  Agency—a
comparatively new  agency—as early
as  1963, the  Agricultural Yearbook
recognized  the need for  paying atten-
tion to  man's  impact on his environ-
ment and the need for doing many of
the things that are being done through
that agency.
  In addition, this committee handles
consumer  protection.  Certainly   all
Members  are aware of the  efforts
made  by the Congress at the recom-
mendation  of this  subcommittee  on
meat inspection  and the thousand and
one things  that go toward giving fine
food to the American consumer.
  Also included in this bill is the Pood
and Drug  Administration.  The com-
mittee this year had an  investigation
to see what might be done to help this
agency.  This  was  reported  to that
agency  and we went over it with Dr.
Edwards and we feel the $39.4' million
increase we are making in this bill
                   will speed up that degree of protection
                   that that  agency gives to the Ameri-
                   can people all the time.
                     We also have the Federal  Trade
                   Commission  with  its responsibilities
                   for keeping  fair competition and the
                   riding herd on many of the activities
                   in our form  of  business to  see that
                   competition is fair and  open.
                     Here, too, we  had an investigation
                   and we made our recommendations to
                   the chairman and we had cooperation
                   in each of those instances  with the
                   committee. Here again we  saw the
                   need to  add $2.1  million  above the
                   budget.
                     In  the  Environmental  Protection
                   Agency,  we  found  that  this new
                   agency has  not  really gone through
                   its shakedown period.  We found,  as
                   we  pointed out in our earlier  report
                   when the  bill passed the House, that
                   in many areas it appeared to the com-
                   mittee that they do  not have experts
                   who  are trained  to make these impor-
                   tant decisions.
                     In many  instances,  as  we there
                   enumerated,  we  find substitutes re-
                   quired which had nothing like the de-
                   gree of  testing that  the  original has
                   had  which may  be outlawed or pro-
                   hibited by this agency.
                     In this bill by far  the greater part
                   of the money that is provided goes to
                   related or other activities rather than
                   actual operation  of the Department of
                   Agriculture. In fact, the operation of
                   the Department of Agriculture proper
                   is $1,247,717,200. In  addition $4,057,-
                   952,000 is chargeable in the final table
                   to the Commodity Credit Corporation
                   and $895,000,000 is chargeable  to our
                   export activities under Public Law 480.
                     Beyond  the general and widespread
                   impact of this bill I  must again point
                   out that if we did not have agriculture
                   and those who are engaged in agricul-
                   ture—if we  did  not  have any food—
                   then there would be no Environmental
                   Protection Agency and there would be
                   no work for it to do.
                     If the American people did not pro-

-------
               STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              2095
 duce food  and  maintain  a  healthy
 agriculture, industry and labor would
 lose their best market. If it were not
 for the relative few, about 5 percent,
 and their work in the field of  produc-
 tion for the American  consumer,  we
 would have no need for the  Federal
 Trade  Commission,  because   there
 would not be any  money with which
 to buy. Nor would there be a need for
 the  Food  and  Drug Administration
 because there would be  no food  to in-
 spect.  Behind it all  is the necessity  to
 keep that small group of agricultural
 producers in business so that  we will
 have  something to regulate, some-
 thing  to inspect, something to buy—
 in other words, our  whole economy.  It
 ties right back  to  the  protection  of
 agriculture, and  while we  have  dealt
 with these other  agencies and tried  to
 take the actions that would help  them
 best to do their jobs, we  must not ever
 lose sight—and  your committee has
 not  lost sight—that it  is all  tied  to
 healthy agriculture, healthy not only
 in terms of the economy, but to enable
 them to continue and  improve  their
 way of life  at home on  the farm and
 not crowded into big cities.
  One of the saddest things from one
 point of view, and one  of  the  most
 dangerous things  viewed  from an-
 other,  is  the fact  that  those  on the
 farm continue to leave at the  rate of
 400,000 annually. If they ever all leave
 the  farm—and  there is no law yet
 that requires them to stay there—we
 are all going to feel it.
  We bring you a bill that we think  is
well balanced and in the best interests
 of the country.
  In many areas as you have to do in
conferences, we  have agreed with the
other body to split differences to  keep
some items, to  go  along  with other
items and to reduce certain items. In
order  that  we  might  be  sure  that
nothing was done in the temper of the
times and the mood of the Congress to
jeopardize the food  and fiber  of this
Nation, the conference, in my opinion,
 took a real sound action.  I should like
 to read to  you  the  last  statement  in
 our conference report:
  The conferees  agree  that  any  additional
 expenditures which  result from new obliga-
 tional  authority authorized in  this bill should
 be in  addition to any outlay  limita-
                          [p. H7387]

 tion  currently or  hereafter  imposed on the
 Department of Agriculture and under no con-
 ditions  should reduce current levels of ex-
 penditures for authorized programs.
   In  other words, the increases that
 circumstances  required   us  to agree
 to, or perhaps required  us to  include
 in the first instance, shall not be taken
 out of existing levels of agricultural
 operations.  I think  that  is essential;
 otherwise some of these consumer pro-
 grams in which we all believe might
 in turn  dry  up  the  source of that
 which we consume.
     TITLE III—ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS
  The major increases above the bud-
get  for  environmental programs  in-
cluded in the bill are:
  An increase of $3 million for train-
ing  grants and fellowships  for the
Environmental  Protection Agency to
restore the program to its 1972 level;
$15  million  for solid  waste  demon-
stration grants  as authorized  by sec-
tion  208  of the Resource  Recovery
Act; and $3 million for demonstration
of a basinwide  effort to control sedi-
ment pollution  in the  Great  Lakes
under section 15 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act.
  An increase  of $85,500,000  to pro-
vide  for  a rural environmental as-
sistance  program of $225,500,000 in
1973.  The   House   managers  have
agreed that in  the announcement of
the 1973 REAP program  of  the De-
partment  of  Agriculture not more
than  $30 million shall  be identified
for the new pollution abatement prac-
tices and such amount as is used shall
be paid from funds  available to the
Environmental Protection  Agency.

-------
2096
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
  An increase of $13,975,000 for the
environmental programs of the  Soil
Conservation Service. Major changes
are an  increase of $5 million  above
the budget for conservation operations
and $8,412,000 above the budget for
watershed and flood prevention opera-
tions.
  In addition, two other major actions
have  been  taken  by  the  committee
which are not reflected in the amounts
covered by the bill. In order to acceler-
ate the  special Great Lakes program,
the  committee  directed  that  $100
million  in  water and sewer  funds
previously appropriated to the Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Develop-
ment, and frozen by OMB, be used  to
fund  this demonstration program.  In
connection with the  HUD  water and
sewer programs, the budget had pro-
posed using only $200 million in 1973
of  the  $500 million appropriated by
Congress in 1972 and  now frozen by
OMB. The  committee, however,  di-
rected that  HUD use all $500 million
of these funds in 1973.
  This title  includes $2,371,014,000 for
the many programs of the Environ-
mental  Protection Agency,  including
$1.9 billion for waste treatment facili-
ties.
                         [p. H7388]
                   Both  the  House and  Senate ver-
                   sions of the Federal Water Pollution
                   Control Act  amendments  contain  a
                   provision for the use of contract au-
                   thority;  therefore, it would  not  be
                   necessary to appropriate  any addi-
                   tional funds for the waste treatment
                   construction grant program  at this
                   time.  However,  the committee fully
                   recognizes the importance of this pro-
                   gram and has recommended $1.9  bil-
                   lion be available until the new  legisla-
                   tion becomes law.
                     I would like to call the attention of
                   the House to several recommendations
                   contained in our committee's  report.
                   We are  not  a legislative  committee
                   and, therefore, we are unable  to pro-
                   vide for such legislation; nevertheless
                   we  feel  that  these  proposals merit
                   serious consideration by the House.

                         COST or ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
                                STATEMENTS

                     Testimony before the committee has
                   indicated that in fiscal year 1973 Fed-
                   eral agencies will be required to spend
                   approximately $65 million to prepare
                   environmental  impact statements  as
                   required by the National Environmen-
                   tal  Policy Act. The estimated  cost by
                   agency follows:

-------
STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                                        2097
                  fo to 0> eg CM .-,
                   i to oo un to ID
                   '3   38
                      5  >, 2
••«-*-  JB c C = «- ••-
'OO^-J^Odjreoo
•~*iSŁ:«3>-E*:   -a
           L o. o. 
               1 E E
               f S
               11
               i a 5
               «I'i
      It E E > S |Z
      i._l_1_J5TOCfa
                                    •o E
                                    3 .2
                                    1 a
                                    o c
                         «'i
                         E S
                         O C
                                    CO 0}
                                    E E
                                    o E

                                    * E
                                      -
                                    S o

                                    fl

-------
2098
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
  The  committee is strongly  opposed
to the  cost of preparing impact state-
ments  used as a part of the cost/bene-
fit ratio  and perhaps thereby defeat
or prevent needed public  works proj-
ects throughout the  United States. In
addition, undue delays associated with
the preparation of impact statements
on  necessary public works   projects
could seriously affect the economy of
our country. As we  make the conver-
sion to a peacetime economy, it is vital
that we divert this extra effort to the
good of our people.
  The  committee  takes this  position
because  of  the increasing emphasis
being placed on detailed impact state-
ments. Requirements for additional in-
formation, if carried to extremes,  can
be a costly and time-consuming pro-
cess. In order to hold requests for de-
tailed information to only that neces-
sary to  evaluate  the statement,  the
committee recommends that considera-
tion be given to making EPA respon-
sible for all or some portion of  the
cost of all environmental impact state-
ments.
  Therefore,  the  committee   recom-
mends  that the Office of Management
and Budget consider establishing pro-
cedures or regulations that would al-
low  the  Environmental  Protection
Agency  to  either finance or  refund
the cost of  preparing impact  state-
ments.

   INDEMNITY PAYMENTS FOB ECONOMIC OK
            PHYSICAL INJURY

  The  committee  takes note  of  the
action  by  the  Administrator  of  the
Environmental Protection Agency ban-
ning the use of DDT in this  country
effective December 31, 1972, except for
use on  green  peppers,  onions,  and
sweet  potatoes in storage. In taking
this  action, the Administrator over-
rode the findings of  the Federal hear-
ing examiner, who ruled, based on the
evidence at hand, that no reason ex-
isted for banning  DDT.
  In issuing his decision, the Admin-
                   istrator also urged  quick  passage of
                   the pesticide legislation submitted by
                   the  administration  which  has  been
                   pending in Congress and stated:
                     The present  law  is completely inadequate
                   to allow me to regulate the use  of pesticides
                   for beneficial uses on a restricted  basis.
                      Such authority may well  be used to
                   further ban or at least restrict other
                   essential pesticides prior to the devel-
                   opment of satisfactory alternatives.
                      The committee  also takes note of
                   the fact  that the Administrator's or-
                   der does not affect export of DDT to
                   other countries. However, by our ac-
                   tion the Administrator is indirectly
                   telling them that they should likewise
                   ban  its use.  This raises the question
                   as  to whether  we  are  following  a
                   course that will,  if carried forward,
                   allow the underdeveloped countries to
                   develop toward our  own level while
                   we, at the same time, drift backward
                   toward their  level of health, length
                   of life, and standard  of living.
                      The committee is convinced that the
                   Administrator's  decision   on  DDT
                   raises serious questions.   DDT   has
                   been widely used throughout the world
                   and  has  reportedly  saved  millions of
                   human lives through increased  food
                   production  and  disease  eradication.
                   According to information provided to
                   the committee, throughout the many
                   years of use, DDT has produced no
                   known harmful effect to human health
                   when properly used.  The decision is
                   within the power of the  Administra-
                   tor though doubtless this matter will
                   eventually have to be settled  by the
                   courts.
                      It is to be noted that the Adminis-
                   trator says that in many respects the
                   best substitutes constitute a real haz-
                   ard—so much so that he has asked the
                   committee,  and  the  committee   has
                   acted favorably,  for a training  pro-
                   gram for the substitutes.
                      He plans to turn to substitutes with
                   which we have far less experience, are
                   readily admitted  to  be  highly toxic,
                   and  require  a far greater frequency
                   of application for a lesser result. The

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              2099
committee  believes that funds should
be available  for indemnity payments
to individuals who suffer economic or
physical harm from the use of Govern-
ment-forced substitutes.
  Therefore,  the  committee  recom-
mends that the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency give serious consideration
to establishing an indemnity program,
similar to  others now in  existence
throughout the Federal Government.
  TAX  CREDIT FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT COSTS

  The committee  is convinced that a
tax credit  should be made  up to prob-
ably 50 percent of the cost of pollution
abatement in many cases. The  com-
mittee is without authority to provide
for such legislation, but strongly urges
both  the  EPA and  the  appropriate
legislative  committee to cooperate In
the passage of such legislation.
  While the committee did not  spe-
cifically address this item in  the  con-
ference report, we are  convinced  that
the unique problems associated  with
the  proposed   sewer  demonstration
project at Bend,  Oreg., may well be
of  national  significance.   Therefore,
the committee urges the Environmen-
tal Protection  Agency to  carefully
review  this  proposal  in light of its
possible  application to  similar prob-
lems of many cities across the Nation.
The  House concurs with  the Senate
report language on this item.
  This title,  which includes programs
for environmental  protection  totals
$2,951,648,000,  which  is  $17,475,000
above the  budget and $33,337,000 be-
low the Senate bill.
                          [p. H7389]

  Mr. WRITTEN. Mr.  Speaker,  I
move  the  previous question on  the
conference report.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore  (Mr.
BOLLING) .  The question is on the  con-
ference report.
  The question was taken;  and the
Speaker  pro tempore announced that
the ayes  appeared to have it.
  Mr.  DEVINE. Mr. Speaker, I ob-
ject to the vote on the  ground that a
quorum is not present  and make the
point of  order that a quorum is not
present.
  The  SPEAKER  pro  tempore. Evi-
dently a quorum is not  present.
  The  Sergeant  at Arms will notify
absent Members, and the Clerk  will
call the roll.
  The  question was taken; and there
were—yeas 317,  nays 80, not voting
35, as  follows:

       *****
                          [p. H7395]


  So the conference report was agreed
to.
  The  Clerk announced  the  following
pairs:
  Mr. Hebert with Mr.  Broomfield.
  Mr. Rooney of New York with Mr. Felly.
  Mr. Addsbbo with Mr. Minshall.
  Mr. Boggs with Mr. Powell.
  Mr. O'Neill with Mr.  Miller of California.
  Mr. Blatnik with Mr. Gallagher.
  Mr. Lennon with Mr. McClure.
  Mr. Thompson of New Jersey with Mra.
Dwyer.
  Mr. Tiernan with Mr. McCulloch.
  Mr. Gray with Mr. Roybal.
  Mr. McCormack with Mr. Schmitz.
  Mr. Nedzi with Mr. McDonald of Michigan.
  Mr. Passman with Mr. Hagan.
  Mr. Davis of Georgia with Mr. Colmer.
  Mr. Edmondson with  Mr. Badillo.
  Mr. Flynt with Mr. Rarick.
  Mr. Stuckey with Mr. Long of Louisiana.

  Messrs.   MIKVA  and  PEYSER
changed  their votes from "nay"  to
"yea."
  The  result of  the vote  was  an-
nounced  as above  recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was  laid on
the table.

       AMENDMENTS IN DISAGREEMENT
       *****
     MOTION OFFERED  BY MB. WHITTEN

  Mr.  WHITTEN.  Mr.  Speaker,   I
offer a motion.
  The  Clerk read as follows:

-------
2100
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
  Mr.  WRITTEN moves that the House recede
from its disagreement to the amendment  of
the  Senate numbered 36  and concur therein
with an amendment, as  follows:  Restore the
matter  stricken by said amendment, amended
to read as follows:

         "ABATEMENT AND CONTROL

  "For  abatement  and  control activities, in-
cluding  hire  of  passenger motor vehicles;
hire, maintenance,  and operation  of aircraft;
services as authorized by 5 U.S.C.  3109, but at
rates for individuals not to exceed the  per
diem rate equivalent to the  rate  for GS-18;
purchase of reprints; library memberships  in
societies or  associations which  issue publica-
tions to members only or  at  a price to  mem-
bers lower than to subscribers who are  not
members;  $208,935,700,  to  remain  available
until  expended:  Provided.   That not   later
than the date  set  forth in section 102  (c)  of
the  joint  resolution approved July  1,  1972
(Public Law 92-334), as amended, this  ap-
propriation shall be available only within the
limits   of  amounts authorized by  law  for
fiscal year 1973.
                            [p. H7396]

  "For an  amount  to provide for  independent
grant  and contract review  advisory commit-
tees for the review  of the Agency's  priorities
to assure that such contracts and grants are
awarded only to qualified  agencies or individ-
uals, $2,000,000.
  "Not to exceed 7 per centum of any appro-
priation made  available  to  the  Environmen-
tal  Protection  Agency  by this  Act  (except
appropriations  for  "Construction  Grants"
and "Scientific Activities  Overseas")  may  be
transferred to  any  other  such appropriation."
  The motion was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER. The  Clerk will re-
port the next amendment in disagree-
ment.
  The Clerk read as  follows:
  Senate amendment No.  48: Page 45,  line 9,
strike  "$2,341,146,000"  and   insert  in  lieu
thereof "$2,500,000,000."

      MOTION OFFERED BY  MB. WHITTEN

  Mr.  WHITTEN.   Mr.  Speaker,  I
offer  a motion.
  The Clerk read as  follows:
  Mr.  WHITTEN moves that the House recede
from its  disagreement to the amendment  of
the  Senate numbered 48  and concur therein
with an amendment, as  follows: In lieu  of
the  sum stricken and inserted by  said amend-
ment,  insert the following:  $2,500,000,000,  of
which $158,854,000  shall be  placed in contin-
gency reserve by  the Office of Management
                     and Budget to be released upon determination
                     )f need."
                        The motion was agreed to.
                        A motion to reconsider the votes by
                     which action was taken on the several
                     motions was laid on the table.
                                                 [p. H7397]

                     AGRICULTURE    ENVIRONMEN-
                        TAL   AND   CONSUMER   PRO-
                        TECTION    APPROPRIATIONS,
                        1973—CONFERENCE  REPORT

                        Mr. McGEE. Mr.  President,  I sub-
                     mit a report of the committee of con-
                     ference on H.R. 15690, and ask for its
                     immediate consideration.
                        The PRESIDING OFFICER  (Mr.
                     BUCKLEY). The  report will be stated
                     by title.
                        The assistant  legislative clerk read
                     as follows:
                       The committee of conference on the  dis-
                     agreeing votes of  the  two  Houses  on  the
                     amendments  of  the Senate to the bill  (H.R.
                     15690)  making  appropriations  for the Agri-
                     culture-Environmental and Consumer  Protec-
                     tion programs for the fiscal year ending June
                     30, 1973, and for other purposes, having met,
                     after full and free conference, have agreed to
                     recommend and do recommend to their respec-
                     tive Houses  this report,  signed by all  the
                     conferees.
                        The  PRESIDING  OFFICER.  Is
                     there objection to the consideration of
                     the conference report?
                        There being no objection,  the Sen-
                     ate proceeded to  consider the report.
                        (The  conference report is  printed
                     in  the House  proceedings of the CON-
                     GRESSIONAL RECORD of  August 2, 1972,
                     at p. H7139.)
                        Mr.  McGEE.   Mr.  President,   the
                     pending  measure  contains new  obli-
                     gational  authority of  $13,434,032,700.
                     This  is $481,842,300 above the budget
                     estimate,   $537,021,800    above    the
                     amount recommended by the House,
                     and $127,023,100  below  the sum con-
                     tained in  the Senate bill.
                        For title I of the bill—Agricultural
                     Programs—a  total  of $6,200,669,200
                     has been   provided.  This  amount  is
                     $21,040,800 above the budget estimate,
                     $238,983,800 more than the House bill,

-------
              STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                              2101
and $35,245,600 less than  the  Senate
bill. It is $521,141,350 less than was
appropriated for  in  title  I in fiscal
year 1972.
  For  title  II—Rural Development—
the bill contains $1,026,436,000, which
is  $276,150,000 over the budget  esti-
mate,  $127,133,000  more   than   the
House  bill,  and $58,350,000 less  than
the Senate bill. It is $80,044,000 more
than was provided for in  fiscal  year
1972.
  For  title  III—Environmental  Pro-
grams—the bill contains  $2,951,648,-
000. This amount is  $17,475,000  over
the budget  estimate,  $6,963,500 more
than the House bill,  and  $33,337,000
less than contained in the  Senate bill.
This is $538,265,877 less  than was ap-
propriated for these programs in fiscal
year 1972.
  For  the various consumer programs
—title IV—there is appropriated $3,-
255,279,500, which is $167,176,500 over
the budget estimate, $163,941,500 more
than the House bill, and $90,500  less
than the Senate  bill. This amount is
$447,897,500 more  than  appropriated
for these programs in fiscal year 1972.
  Mr.  President,  the  major items for
which  we provided increases over the
budget estimates were, in approxi-
mate figures:

                              Millions
Rural electrification loans  	  $157
Rural telephone loans 	   20
Department of Agriculture science and
  education programs 	   20
Rural   water  and   waste    disposal
  grants 	   92
Conservation   programs, including Soil
  Conservation Service and  Rural En-
  vironmental  Assistance	   100
Food and nutrition programs 	   164

  The  conference committee met and
resolved the differences in  this bill at
a lengthy session  on  August 2. I be-
lieve,  and the  record will  show,  that
the Senate  conferees  did an excellent
job in sustaining the position of the
Senate on  the  various  items which
were at issue. I would like to express
my appreciation  to my  colleagues on
the  conference  committee, and  who
were of such  great  assistance in re-
solving  these  matters as they devel-
oped during the conference.
  Also,  I  would like at this  time to
pay  tribute to  the  chairman  of  the
House  Appropriations  Subcommittee
on  Agriculture, Environmental,  and
Consumer  Programs,  the Honorable
JAMIE L.  WHITTEN. I know of no sub-
committee  chairman  who is  more
knowledgeable  of  his subject  or who
handles that subject  with more thor-
oughness, with greater precision,  and
in more detail than  does  the  gentle-
man from Mississippi.  As a  result,
when we get the bill from the House
it is a good bill, and  one that has been
carefully  and thoroughly considered.
This makes  it  imperative that  any
changes or modifications suggested by
the Senate must also be meritorious
and  sound. I  think  the  amendments
we provided this year—some 48 num-
bered amendments—met that test.
  I shall not go into  detail on the con-
ference  since  the  report of the  com-
mittee of the conference has been filed
and is available to all of the Members
of the Senate. I would  like to say a
few  words, however, about the Envi-
ronmental  Protection Agency.  For fis-
cal year 1972, this agency's operating
budget was provided  on a single item
—operations,  research  and facilities.
The  administration  budget proposed
the  same  procedure for  fiscal  year
1973. The  House,  however, separated
this  single account into five separate
appropriations and five separate titles:
  Agency and Regional Management.
  Research and Development.
  Abatement and Control.
  Enforcement.
  Facilities.
In  taking  this action, the  House
thought  that  such  a  separation of
this major account would provide Con-
gress with a better opportunity to re-
view  the   budget  estimates  and  the
financial requirements of the  agency.
  The agency appealed this action to

-------
2102
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
the Senate, and  we honored that ap-
peal and suggested that we return to
the single appropriation  concept for
the current fiscal year and develop a
procedure which  would be satisfactory
to all concerned  for  subsequent fiscal
years. This was  one  matter, however,
on which the Senate had  to recede in
conference.
  It soon developed during the confer-
ence  that  there  was very  little  dis-
agreement  over  the  concept of  the
multi-title appropriation  as provided
in the  House bill.  With  this appro-
priation item approaching a half bil-
lion  dollars, it was  both logical  and
sound that it should be  broken into
the smaller, more identifiable accounts,
but the timing of the proposed change
was  the subject  of  long and  detailed
analysis by the conference.
  The Senate would have  preferred to
postpone this change until next year,
but  the House  conferees were  both
unified  and adamant that the change
should take place as soon as  possible
and  that  view prevailed  only after it
was obvious that the House would not
agree to the  proposal  of the Senate.
  In order to be  of all possible assist-
ance  to the agency, however, we did
reach  a compromise that will  allow
the agency some degree  of flexibility
in managing their  overall  program
under the  multiple-account  concept.
We agreed to give the  agency author-
ity to transfer funds between  the sev-
eral accounts  up to 7 percent.  This
should  give  them the  flexibility they
need  in their operations.
  The  Senate  also  receded  on  the
amounts we added to this bill in the
category of research and development.
When the House considered this item,
there was added $18 million over the
1973  budget  estimate  for a  total of
$185,223,700.  This  amount is more
than $17  million greater than the ap-
propriation  for  this  item  in  1972.
With this substantial increase already
contained  in  the bill, the  House con-
ferees were most reluctant to approve
                    any  additional increases,  particularly
                    in view  of the fact that the  agency
                    has  substantial  funds  carried  over
                    from 1972  for the solid waste  pro-
                    gram which is of such  great interest
                    to many Members of this body.
                      Mr. President, I  believe that gives
                    the  Senate a summary of the major
                    action and decisions of the conference
                    committee.  As I indicated,  there are
                    many more detailed  matters I  have
                    not  taken  the  time  to discuss,  but
                    these are contained in the conference
                    report and the joint explanation state-
                    ment which has been filed. I shall be
                    happy,   however,   to  entertain   any
                    questions  any Members  might  have
                    to propound in  connection  with the
                    conference  on  this bill  generally.
                      Mr. President, I move the adoption
                    of the conference report.
                      The motion was agreed to.
                      The PRESIDING OFFICER.  The
                    clerk will  state the  amendments in
                    disagreement.
                      The assistant legislative clerk read
                    as follows:
                                              [p. S13161]

                      Resolved, That  the House recede from Its
                    disagreement to the amendment of the Senate
                    numbered  1  to the aforesaid bill, and concur
                    therein with an amendment as follows:
                      In  lieu  of  the sum  stricken and inserted
                    by said  amendment, insert: $11,112,000,  of
                    which $3,464,000  shall  be  available for the
                    Office of Information and
                      Resolved, That the House recede from its
                    disagreement to the amendment of the Senate
                    numbered  30 to the aforesaid bill,  and concur
                    therein with  an amendment as follows:
                      In  lieu  of  the sum  stricken and inserted
                    by said amendment,  insert $150,000,000
                      Resolved, That the House recede from its
                    disagreement  to the amendment of the Sen-
                    ate  numbered 35 to  the aforesaid hill,  and
                    concur therein with an amendment as follows:
                      Restore  the matter stricken by  said amend-
                    ment, amended to read  as follows:

                            RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

                      For research and  development  activities,
                    including  hire of passenger motor vehicles;
                    hire,  maintenance, and  operation of aircraft;
                    services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but
                    at rates for individuals not  to exceed the per
                    diem  rate  equivalent to the rate of GS-18;

-------
                 STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
                                  2103
purchase of reprints; library memberships  in
societies or  associations  which issue publica-
tions to members only or at a  price to  mem-
bers lower than to subscribers who are not
members;  $182,723,700,   to  remain  available
until  expended: Provided,   That  not  later
than the date set forth  in  section  102(c)  of
the joint  resolution  approved July  1,  1972
(Public  Law 92-3*4), as amended, this ap-
propriation  shall   be  available  only within
the limits of amounts authorized by law for
fiscal year 1973.
  For an  amount  to  provide for independent
grant and  contract review  advisory commit-
tees for the review of the Agency's priorities
to assure that such contracts and grants are
awarded  only  to  Qualified-  research agencies
or  individuals, $2,600,000.
  Resolved, That the House recede from its
disagreement  to the amendment  of  the Sen-
ate numbered  36  to  the aforesaid bill, and
concur  therein  with  an  amendment  as fol-
lows:
  Restore the matter  stricken by  said amend-
ment, amended to read as follows:

          ABATEMENT AND CONTROL

  For abatement and control  activities, in-
cluding  hire of  passenger motor vehicles;
hire, maintenance,  and  operation of aircraft;
services  as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but  at
rates for  individuals  not to exceed the per
diem rate equivalent  to  the rate for GS-18;
purchase of  reprints; library memberships  in
societies or  associations  which issue publica-
tions to members only or at a  price to  mem-
bers lower  than to  subscribers who are not
members;  $208,935,700,   to  remain  available
until  expended: Provided,   That  not  later
than the date set forth  in  section  102 (c)  of
the joint  resolution  approved  July 1, 1972
(Public  Law 92-334), as amended, this ap-
propriation shall be available only within the
limits of amounts authorized by law for  fiscal
year 197S.
  For an amount to provide for  independent
grant and contract review  advisory commit-
tees  for the review of the Agency's priorities
to assure that such contracts  and grants  are
awarded only to qualified agencies or  individ-
uals, $2,000,000.
  Not to exceed 7  per centum of any appro-
priation made available to the Environmental
Protection Agency by this Act (except appro-
priations  for  "Construction   Grants"  and
"Scientific   Activities  Overseas")  may  be
transferred to any other such appropriation.
  Resolved, That the House recede from its
disagreement to  the amendment  of the  Sen-
ate numbered 48 to the aforesaid bill, and
concur therein  with  an  amendment  as fol-
lows :
  In lieu  of the sum stricken and  inserted
by said amendment, insert the following:
  $2,500,000,000,  of  which  $168,864,000 shall
be placed in contingency reserve by the Office
of Management  and Budget  to  be  released
upon  determination of need.
   Mr. McGEE. Mr. President, I move
that the Senate concur in the amend-
ments of the House  to  Senate amend-
ments Nos. 1, 30, 35, 36,  and 48.
   The motion was agreed to.
   Mr.  McGEE.  Mr.  President, I  ask
unanimous consent that the table pre-
pared by  the conference which  was
included by the House when  it acted
on the  pending report on August 9,
1972,  be  incorporated  in the RECORD
at this point by reference. This table
gives the complete  results of the con-
ference  in tabular form,  and shows a
comparison  of the  conference  action
with  new  budget  authority   made
available   in  fiscal  year  1972,   the
budget estimates for fiscal year 1973,
the  House bill, and the Senate  bill.
   The PRESIDING  OFFICER. With-
out objection,  it is  so ordered.
                             [p. S13162]

-------

-------
Executive



  Orders

-------

-------
                    EXECUTIVE ORDERS               2107

 2.1   E.G. 11472, ESTABLISHING THE ENVIRONMENTAL
  QUALITY COUNCIL AND THE CITIZENS ADVISORY
      COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
             February 29, 1969, 34 Fed. Reg. 8693 (1969)

ESTABLISHING THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNCIL AND  THE
  CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

  By  virtue of the  authority vested in me as  President of the
United States, it is ordered as follows:

          PART I. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNCIL

  Section 101. Establishment of the Council, (a) There is hereby
established the Environmental Quality Council  (hereinafter re-
ferred to as "the Council").
  (b) The President of the United States shall preside over meet-
ings of the Council. The Vice President  shall preside in the ab-
sence of the President.
  (c) The Council shall be composed of the following members:
      The Vice President of the United States
      Secretary of Agriculture
      Secretary of Commerce
      Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare
      Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
      Secretary of the Interior
      Secretary of Transportation
and such other heads of departments and agencies and others as
the President may from time to time direct.
  (d) Each member of the Council may designate an  alternate,
who shall serve as a member of the Council whenever the regular
member is unable to attend any meeting of the Council.
  (e) When matters which affect the interest of Federal agencies
the heads of which are not members  of the Council are to be
considered by the Council, the President or his representative  may
invite such agency heads or their alternates to participate in the
deliberations of the Council.
  (f) The Director of the Bureau of the Budget, the Chairman of
the Council of Economic Advisers, and the Executive Secretary of
the Council for Urban Affairs or their representatives may partic-
ipate in the deliberations of the Environmental Quality Council as
observers.
  (g) The Science Adviser to the President shall be the Executive
Secretary of the Council and shall assist the President in directing
the affairs of the Council.
  Sec. 102. Functions of the Council, (a)  The Council shall advise

-------
2108          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

and assist the President with  respect to environmental quality
matters and shall perform such other related duties as the Presi-
dent may from time to time prescribe. In addition thereto, the
Council is directed to:
   (1) Recommend measures to ensure that Federal policies and
programs, including those for development and conservation of
natural  resources, take adequate account of environmental effects.
   (2) Review the adequacy of existing  systems for monitoring
and predicting environmental  changes so as to  achieve effective
coverage and efficient use of facilities and other resources.
   (3) Foster cooperation between the Federal Government, State
and local governments, and private organizations in environmen-
tal programs.
   (4) Seek advancement of scientific knowledge of changes in the
environment and encourage the development of technology to pre-
vent or  minimize adverse effects that endanger man's health and
well-being.
   (5) Stimulate public and private participation in programs and
activities to protect against pollution of  the  Nation's air, water,
and land and its living resources.
   (6) Encourage timely public disclosure by all levels of govern-
ment and by private parties  of plans that would affect the quality
of environment.
   (7) Assure assessment of new and changing technologies for
their potential effects on the  environment.
   (8) Facilitate coordination among departments and agencies of
the  Federal  Government  in  protecting  and  improving  the
environment.
   (b) The Council shall review plans and actions of Federal agen-
 cies affecting outdoor recreation and natural beauty. The Council
may conduct studies and make recommendations to the President
 on matters of policy in the fields of outdoor recreation and natural
 beauty. In carrying out the foregoing provisions of this subsec-
tion, the Council shall, as far as may be practical, advise Federal
agencies with respect to the effect of their respective plans and
programs on recreation and natural beauty,  and may suggest to
such agencies ways to  accomplish the purposes of this order. For
the purposes of this order, plans and programs  may include, but
are not  limited to, those for  or affecting:  (1) Development, resto-
ration, and  preservation of  the beauty of the countryside,  urban
and  suburban areas, water resources, wild rivers, scenic roads,
parkways and highways, (2) the protection and appropriate man-
agement of scenic or primitive areas, natural wonders, historic

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2109

sites, and recreation areas, (3) the management of Federal land
and water resources, including fish and wildlife, to enhance natu-
ral beauty and recreational opportunities  consistent  with other
essential uses,  (4)  cooperation with the  States and  their  local
subdivisions and private organizations and individuals in areas of
mutual interest, (5) interstate arrangements, including  Federal
participation where authorized and necessary, and  (6) leadership
in a nationwide recreation and beautification effort.
   (c) The Council shall assist the President in preparing periodic
reports to the Congress on the subjects of this order.
   Sec. 103. Coordination. The Secretary of the Interior may make
available to the Council for coordination of outdoor recreation the
authorities and resources available to him under the Act of May
28, 1963, 77 Stat. 49; to the extent permitted by law, he may make
such authorities and resources available  to the Council also for
promoting  such coordination  of  other matters  assigned  to the
Council by this order.
   Sec. 104. Assistance for the  Council. In compliance with provi-
sions of applicable law, and as necessary to serve the purposes of
this order,  (1) the Office of Science and Technology shall provide
or arrange for necessary administrative  and staff services, sup-
port, and facilities for the Council, and (2) each department and
agency  which has  membership  on the  Council  under  Section
101 (c) hereof shall furnish the  Council  such information and
other assistance as may be available.

PART II.  CITIZENS'  ADVISORY  COMMITTEE ON  ENVIRONMENTAL
                          QUALITY
   Sec. 201. Establishment of the  Committee. There is hereby es-
tablished the  Citizens'  Advisory Committee on  Environmental
Quality  (hereinafter referred to as the "Committee"). The Com-
mittee shall be composed of a chairman and not  more than  14
other members appointed by the President. Appointments to mem-
bership on the Committee shall be  for staggered terms, except that
the chairman of the Committee shall serve until his successor is
appointed.
   Sec. 202. Functions  of the Committee.  The Committee  shall
advise the President and the Council on matters assigned to the
Council by the provisions of this order.
   Sec. 203. Expenses. Members of the Committee shall receive no
compensation from the United States by reason of their services
under this order but shall be entitled to receive  travel  and ex-

-------
2110          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

penses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by
law (5 U.S.C. 5701-5708) for persons in the Government service
employed intermittently.
  Sec. 204. Continuity. Persons who on the date of this order are
members of the Citizens' Advisory Committee on Recreation and
Natural Beauty established by Executive Order No. 11278 of May
4, 1966, as amended, shall, until the expirations of their respective
terms and without further action by the President, be members of
the Committee established by the provisions of this Part in lieu of
an equal number of the members provided for in section 201 of
this order.

                 PART III. GENERAL PROVISIONS

  SEC. 301. Construction. Nothing in this order shall be construed
as subjecting any department, establishment, or other instrumen-
tality of the executive branch of the Federal Government or the
head thereof, or any function vested by law in or assigned pur-
suant to law to any such agency or head, to the authority of any
other such agency or head or as abrogating, modifying, or res-
tricting any such function in any manner.
  SEC. 302. Prior bodies and orders. The  President's Council on
Recreation and Natural Beauty and the Citizens' Advisory  Com-
mittee on Recreation and Natural Beauty are  hereby terminated
and the following are revoked:
   (1)  Executive Order No. 11278 of May 4,1966.
   (2)  Executive Order No. 11359A of June 29,1967.
   (3)  Executive Order No. 11402 of March 29, 1968.
                                            RICHARD NIXON

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2111

      2.2   E.O. 11490, EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
    FUNCTIONS OF FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS AND
      AGENCIES, OCTOBER 30, 1969, AS AMENDED

Oct. 28, 1969, 34 P.R. 17567, as amended by Ex. Ord. No. 11522, Apr. 6, 1970,
       35 F.R. 5659; Ex. Ord. No. 11556, Sept. 4, 1970, 35 F.R. 14193

ASSIGNMENT OF EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUNCTIONS TO FED-
               ERAL AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS

  WHEREAS our national security is dependent upon our ability
to assure continuity of government, at every level, in any national
emergency type situation that might conceivably confront the na-
tion ; and
  WHEREAS effective  national preparedness planning to meet
such an emergency, including a massive nuclear attack, is essential
to our national survival; and
  WHEREAS effective  national preparedness  planning requires
the identification of  functions that would have to  be performed
during such  an emergency,  the assignment of responsibility for
developing plans for performing these functions, and the assign-
ment of responsibility for developing the capability to implement
those plans; and
  WHEREAS the Congress  has directed the development of such
national emergency preparedness plans  and has provided funds
for the accomplishment thereof; and
  WHEREAS this national emergency preparedness planning ac-
tivity has  been an established program of the United States Gov-
ernment for more than twenty years:
  NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the authority vested in me as
President  of  the United States, and  pursuant to Reorganization
Plan No. 1 of 1958 (72 Stat. 1799) [set out as a note under section
2271 of this Appendix], the National Security Act  of 1947, as
amended [section 401 et seq. of Title 50, War and National De-
fense] , the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended [section
2061 et seq. of this Appendix], and the Federal Civil Defense Act,
as amended [section 2211 et seq. of this Appendix], it is hereby
ordered as follows—
                          CONTENTS
Part
 1 Purpose and Scope.
 2 Department of State.
 3 Department of the Treasury.
 4 Department of Defense.
 5 Department of Justice.
 6 Post Office Department.

-------
 2112          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

 7  Department of the Interior.
 8  Department of Agriculture.
 9  Department of Commerce.
 10  Department of Labor.
 11  Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
 12  Department of Housing and Urban Development.
 13  Department of Transportation.
 14  Atomic Energy Commission.
 15  Civil Aeronautics Board.
 16  Export-Import Bank of the United States.
 17  Federal Bank Supervisory Agencies.
 18  Federal Communications Commission.
 19  Federal Power Commission.
 20  General Services Administration.
 21  Interstate Commerce Commission.
 22  National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
 23  National Science Foundation.
 24  Railroad Retirement Board.
 25  Securities and Exchange Commission.
 26  Small Business Administration.
 27  Tennessee Valley Authority.
 28  United States Civil Service Commission.
 28A United States Information Agency.
 29  Veterans Administration.
 30  General Provisions.
                     Part 1—Purpose and Scope
  Section 101. Purpose. This order consolidates the assignment of
emergency  preparedness functions  to  various departments and
agencies heretofore contained in the 21 Executive orders and 2
Defense Mobilization orders listed in Section 3015 of this order.
Assignments have been adjusted to conform to changes in organi-
zation which  have occurred subsequent to the issuance of those
Executive orders and Defense Mobilization orders.

  Sec. 102. Scope, (a)  This order is concerned with the emergency
national planning and  preparedness functions of the several de-
partments and agencies of the Federal Government which comple-
ment the military readiness planning responsibilities of  the De-
partment of Defense; together, these measures provide the basic
foundation for our overall national preparedness posture,  and are
fundamental to our ability to survive.
  (b)  The departments and agencies of the Federal Government
are hereby severally charged with the duty of assuring  the conti-
nuity of the Federal Government in  any national emergency type
situation that might confront the nation. To this end, each depart-
ment and agency with essential functions, whether expressly iden-

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS               2113

tified in this order or not, shall develop such plans and take such
actions, including but not limited to those specified in this order,
as may be necessary to assure that it will be able to perform its
essential functions, and continue as a viable part of the Federal
Government, during any emergency that might conceivably occur.
These include  plans for maintaining the continuity of essential
functions of the department or agency at the seat of government
and elsewhere, through programs concerned with: (1)  succession
to office; (2) predelegation of emergency authority;  (3) safekeep-
ing of essential records;  (4) emergency relocation sites supported
by communications and required services; (5) emergency action
steps; (6) alternate headquarters or  command facilities; and  (7)
protection of Government resources, facilities, and personnel. The
continuity of Government  activities undertaken  by the depart-
ments and agencies shall be in accordance with guidance provided
by, and subject to evaluation by, the Director of  the Office  of
Emergency Preparedness.
   (c)  In addition to the activities indicated above,  the heads  of
departments and agencies described in Parts 2 through 29 of this
order shall: (1)  prepare national emergency plans, develop  pre-
paredness programs, and attain an appropriate state of readiness
with respect to the functions assigned to them in this order for all
conditions of national emergency; (2) give appropriate considera-
tion to emergency preparedness factors in the conduct of the regu-
lar functions of their agencies, particularly those functions consid-
ered essential in time of emergency, and (3) be prepared to imple-
ment, in the event of an emergency,  all  appropriate plans devel-
oped under this order.

  Sec. 103.  Presidential Assistance. The  director of the Office  of
Emergency Preparedness,  in accordance with the provisions  of
Executive Order No. 11051 of September 27, 1962  [set out as a
note under section 2271 of this Appendix], shall advise and assist
the President in determining national preparedness goals and poli-
cies  for the performance of  functions  under this order and  in
coordinating the performance of such  functions  with the total
national preparedness program.

  Sec. 104. General and Specific Functions. The functions assigned
by Part 30, General Provisions, apply to all departments and agen-
cies having emergency preparedness responsibilities. Specific func-
tions are assigned to departments and agencies covered in Parts 2
through 29.

-------
2114          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Sec. 105. Construction. The purpose and legal  effect of the as-
signments contained in this order do not constitute authority to
implement the emergency plans prepared pursuant to this order.
Plans so developed may be effectuated only in the event that au-
thority for such effectuation is provided by a law enacted by the
Congress or by an order  or directive issued by  the  President
pursuant to statutes or the Constitution of the United States.

                    Part 2—Department of State
  Section 201. Functions. The Secretary of State shall  prepare
national emergency plans and develop preparedness programs to
permit  modification or expansion of the activities of the  Depart-
ment of State and agencies, boards,  and commissions  under his
jurisdiction in order to meet all conditions of national emergency,
including attack upon the United States. The Secretary of State
shall provide to all other departments and agencies overall foreign
policy direction, coordination, and supervision in the formulation
and execution of those emergency preparedness  activities which
have foreign policy implications,  affect  foreign  relations, or de-
pend directly or indirectly, on the policies and capabilitiies of the
Department of State. The Secretary of State shall develop policies,
plans, and procedures for carrying out his responsibilities in the
conduct of the foreign relations of the United States under condi-
tions of national emergency, including, but not limited to (1) the
formulation and implementation, in consultation  with the Depart-
ment of Defense and other appropriate agencies,  and the negotia-
tion of contingency and post-emergency plans with our allies and
of the intergovernmental agreements and arrangements required
by  such plans; (2) formulation, negotiation, and  execution of pol-
icy affecting the  relationships  of the United States with neutral
States; (3)  formulation and execution of political strategy toward
hostile  or enemy States, including the  definition of war objectives
and the political means for achieving those objectives;  (4) main-
tenance of  diplomatic and  consular  representation  abroad; (5)
reporting and advising on conditions overseas which bear upon the
national emergency;  (6) carrying out or proposing economic  mea-
sures with  respect to other  nations,  including coordination  with
the export control functions of the Secretary of Commerce; (7)
mutual assistance activities such as ascertaining requirements of
the civilian economies of other nations, making recommendations
to domestic resource agencies for meeting such requirements, and
determining the availability  of and making arrangements for ob-
taining foreign resources required by the United States; (8) pro-

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2115

viding foreign assistance,  including continuous supervision and
general direction of authorized economic and military assistance
programs, and determination of the value thereof; (9) protection
or evacuation of American  citizens and nationals abroad and safe-
guarding their property; (10) protection and/or control of inter-
national organization and foreign diplomatic, consular,  and other
official personnel and property,  or  other  assets,  in the United
States; (11)  documentary  control of persons seeking to enter  or
leave the United States; and  (12)  regulation and control of ex-
ports of items on the munitions list.
                 Part 3—Department of the Treasury
   Section 301. Functions.  The Secretary  of the  Treasury  shall
develop policies, plans, and  procedures for the performance  of
emergency functions with  respect to (1) stabilization  aspects of
the monetary, credit, and financial system;  (2) stabilization of the
dollar in relation to foreign currencies; (3) collection of revenue;
(4)  regulation of financial institutions; (5) supervision of the
Federal depository system; (6) direction of transactions in gov-
ernment securities; (7) tax and debt policies; (8) participation in
bilateral and  multilateral  financial arrangements with foreign
governments; (9)  regulation  of foreign  assets  in the United
States and of  foreign financial dealings (in consultation with the
Secretaries of State and Commerce) ; (10)  development of proce-
dures  for the manufacture and/or  issuance and redemption  of
securities, stamps, coins, and currency; (11) development of sys-
tems for the  issuance and payment of Treasury checks;  (12)
maintenance  of  the central government accounting  and financial
reporting system; (13) administration of customs laws, tax laws,
and  laws on control of alcohol, alcoholic beverages,  tobacco, and
firearms;  (14) suppression of counterfeiting and forgery of gov-
ernment securities, stamps, coins, and currency; (15) protection
of the President and the  Vice President  and  other  designated
persons; (16) granting of loans (including  participation  in  or
guarantees of loans)  for the expansion of capacity, the develop-
ment of technological processes,  or the production of  essential
material; and  (17)  to the extent that such functions have not been
transferred to the  Secretary of  Transportation, enforcement  of
marine inspection and navigation  laws.
  Sec. 302. Financial Coordination. The Secretary shall assume the
initiative in developing plans for  implementation of  national pol-
icy on sharing war losses and for the coordination of emergency
monetary, credit, and Federal benefit payment programs of those

-------
2116          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

departments and agencies which have responsibilities  dependent
on the policies or capabilities of the Department.
                  Part 4—Department of Defense
  Section 401. Functions. In addition to the civil defense functions
assigned to the Secretary of Defense by Executive Order  No.
10952 [set out as a note under section  2271 of this Appendix], the
Secretary of Defense shall perform the following emergency pre-
paredness functions:
   (1) Provide specific strategic guidance as required  for emer-
gency preparedness planning and programing, including,  for ex-
ample, guidance regarding such factors as accessibility  of foreign
sources  of supply and estimated shipping loss discounts and  air-
craft losses in the event of war.
   (2) Develop and furnish quantitative and time-phased military
requirements for selected  end-items, consistent with  defined mili-
tary concepts, and supporting requirements for materials,  compo-
nents, production facilities, production equipment, petroleum, nat-
ural gas, solid fuels, electric power, food,  transportation,  and
other services needed to carry out specified Department of Defense
current and mobilization procurement, construction, research  and
development, and production programs. The items and supporting
resources to be included in such  requirements, the periods to be
covered, and the dates  for  their  submission to the appropriate
resource agency will be determined by mutual agreement between
the Secretary of Defense and the head of the appropriate resource
agency.
   (3) Advise and assist the Office of Emergency Preparedness in
developing a national system of production urgencies.
   (4) Advise and assist the Office of Emergency Preparedness in
developing a system, in conjunction with the Department of State,
for the  international allocation of critical materials and products
among the United States and the various foreign claimants in the
event of an emergency, including an attack on the United States.
   (5) Plan for and  administer priorities and allocations authority
delegated to the Department of Defense.  Authorize  procurement
and production schedules and make allotments of controlled mate-
rials pursuant to program determinations of the Office of Emer-
gency Preparedness.
   (6) Assist the Department of Commerce and other appropriate
agencies in the development of the production  and distribution
controls plans for use in any period of  emergency.
   (7) Develop with industry, plans for the procurement and pro-

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2117

 duction of selected military equipment and supplies needed to ful-
 fill emergency requirements, making maximum use of plants  in
 dispersed locations, and, where essential and appropriate, provid-
 ing for alternative sources of supply in order to minimize the
 effects of enemy attack.
   (8) Develop with industry, plans and programs for minimizing
 the effect of attack damage to plants producing major items  of
 military equipment and supply.
   (9) Recommend to the Office of Emergency Preparedness mea-
 sures for  overcoming potential deficiencies in production capacity
 to  produce selected military supplies and  equipment needed  to
 fulfill emergency requirements, when necessary measures  cannot
 be effected by the Department of Defense.
   (10) Furnish  information and  recommendations,  when  re-
 quested by the Office of Emergency Preparedness, for purposes  of
 processing applications for defense loans under Title III of the
 Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (sections 2091-2094
 of this Appendix).
   (11) Furnish advice and assistance on the utilization of stra-
 tegic  and critical materials in  defense production,  including
 changes that occur from time to time.
   (12) Analyze problems that may  arise in maintaining an ade-
 quate mobilization production base in military-product industries
 and take necessary actions to overcome these problems within the
 limits of the authority and funds available to the Department  of
 Defense.
   (13)  Assist  the Secretary  of  Commerce with  respect  to the
 identification and evaluation of facilities important to the national
 defense.
   (14) Advise and assist the Office of Emergency Preparedness  in
 the development and review of standards for the strategic location
 and physical  security of industries, services, government, and
 other activities for which continuing operation is essential to na-
 tional security, and exercise physical security cognizance over the
 facilities assigned to him for such purpose.
  (15)  Develop and operate damage assessment systems and as-
 sist the Office of Emergency Preparedness and other departments
 and agencies in their responsibilities as stated in Section 3002(2) ;
 participate with the  Office of Emergency  Preparedness in  the
 preparation of estimates of potential damage from enemy attack.
  (16) Advise and assist the Office of Emergency Preparedness in
the development of over-all manpower policies to be instituted in
the event  of  an emergency,  including an  attack on  the  United

-------
2118          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

States, including the provision of information relating to the size
and composition of the Armed Forces.
  (17) Advise  on existing communications facilities and furnish
military requirements for commercial communications  facilities
and services in planning for and in event of an emergency, includ-
ing an attack on the United States.
  (18) Furnish military requirements for all forms of transporta-
tion and transportation facilities in planning for and in the event
of emergency, including an attack upon the United States.
  (19) Assist the Office of Emergency Preparedness in prepara-
tion of legislative programs and plans for coordinating nonmili-
tary support of emergency preparedness programs.
  (20) Develop plans and procedures for  the Department  of De-
fense utilization of nonindustrial facilities in the event of an emer-
gency in order to reduce requirements for new construction and to
provide facilities in a minimum period of time.
  (21) Advise and assist the Office of Emergency Preparedness in
(1) determining what key foreign facilities and operating rights
thereto are important to the security of the United States, and (2)
obtaining  through appropriate channels protection against sabo-
tage.
  (22) Develop plans and procedures to carry out Department of
Defense responsibilities  stated in the National Censorship Agree-
ment between the Department of Defense and the Office of Emer-
gency Preparedness.
  (23) Advise and assist the Department of State in planning for
the evacuation  of dependents from overseas areas, United States
teachers and administrators in the overseas  dependents schools,
and such other United States citizens as may be working in United
States schools overseas.
  (24) Develop plans for  implementation of approved Depart-
ment of State/Department of Defense policies and procedures for
the protection and evacuation of United States citizens and certain
designated aliens abroad.
  (25) Develop plans and procedures  for the provision of logisti-
cal support to  members of  foreign forces, their employees and
dependents as  may be present in the United  States under  the
terms of bilateral or multilateral agreements which authorize such
support in the event of a national emergency.
  (26) Develop with the Department of Transportation  and Fed-
eral Communications Commission plans and programs for the con-
trol of air traffic, civil and military, during an emergency.
  (27) Develop with the Federal Communications  Commission

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2119

and the Office of Telecommunications Policy  (35 F.R. 6421) plans
and programs for the emergency  control of all devices capable of
emitting electromagnetic radiation.

                   Part 5—Department of Justice

  Section 501. Functions. The Attorney General shall perform the
following emergency preparedness functions:
  (1)  Emergency documents  and measures. Provide advice, as
appropriate, with respect to any emergency directive or procedure
prepared  by a department or agency  as a part of its emergency
preparedness function.
  (2)  Industry support. As appropriate, review the legal proce-
dures developed by the Federal agencies  concerned to be instituted
if it becomes  necessary for the Government to institute extraordi-
nary measures with respect to vital production facilities, public
facilities,  communications systems,  transportation  systems,  or
other facility, system, or service essential to national survival.
  (3)  Judicial and  legislative liaison.  In cooperation  with the
Office of Emergency Preparedness, maintain liaison with Federal
courts and with the Congress so there will be mutual understand-
ing of Federal emergency plans involving law enforcement and the
exercise of legal  powers during  emergencies of various magni-
tudes.
  (4) Legal advice. Develop emergency  plans for providing legal
advice to  the President, the Cabinet, and the heads of Executive
departments  and agencies wherever they may be located  in  an
emergency, and provide emergency procedures for the review as to
form and  legality of Presidential proclamations, Executive orders,
directives, regulations, and documents,  and of other documents
requiring approval by the President or  by the Attorney General
which may be issued by authorized officers after an armed attack.
  (5) Alien control and  control of entry and departure. Develop
emergency plans for the  control of alien enemies and other aliens
within the United States and, in consultation  with the Department
of State and  Department of  the Treasury, develop emergency
plans for  the control of persons attempting  to enter or  leave the
United States. These plans shall specifically include provisions for
the following:
  (a) The location, restraint, or custody  of alien enemies.
  (b)  Temporary detention of alien  enemies and  other persons
attempting to enter the United States pending determination of
their admissibility.
  (c) Apprehension of deserting alien crewmen and stowaways.

-------
2120          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   (d)  Investigation and  control of aliens admitted as contract
laborers.
   (e)  Control  of persons entering or departing from the United
States at designated ports of entry.
   (f)  Increased surveillance of the borders to preclude prohibited
crossings by persons.
   (6)  Alien property. Develop emergency plans,  in  consultation
with the Department of State, for the seizure and administration
of property of alien enemies under provisions of the Trading with
the Enemy Act [section 1  et seq. of this Appendix].
   (7)  Security standards. In consultation with the Department of
Defense and with other executive agencies, to the extent appropri-
ate,  prepare plans for adjustment of security standards  governing
the  employment of Federal personnel and Federal contractors in
an emergency.
   (8)  Drug Control. Develop emergency plans and procedures for
the  administration of laws governing  the import,  manufacture,
and distribution of narcotics.  Consult with and render all possible
aid  and assistance to the Office of Emergency Preparedness, the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and the General
Services Administration in the allocation, distribution, and, if nec-
essary, the replenishment of Government stockpiles of narcotic
drugs.

   Sec. 502. Civil Defense Functions. In consonance with national
civil defense programs developed  by the  Department of Defense,
the  Attorney General shall:
   (1)  Local law enforcement. Upon request,  consult with and as-
sist the Department  of Defense to plan, develop, and  distribute
materials for use in the instruction and training  of law enforce-
ment  personnel for civil  defense  emergency  operations; develop
and carry  out a national plan  for civil  defense instruction  and
training for enforcement officers,  designed to utilize to the maxi-
mum  extent practicable  the  resources and facilities of existing
 Federal, State, and local  police schools, academies, and other ap-
propriate institutions of learning; and assist the States  in prepar-
 ing for the conduct of intrastate  and interstate law enforcement
 operations  to meet the extraordinary needs  that would exist for
 emergency  police services under conditions of attack or imminent
 attack.
   (2 ) Penal  and  correctional  institutions.   Develop  emergency
 plans  and procedures for the  custody and protection of prisoners

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2121

and the use of Federal penal and  correctional institutional re-
sources, when available, for cooperation with local authorities in
connection with mass feeding and housing, for the storage of
standby emergency equipment, for  the emergency use of prison
hospitals and laboratory facilities, for the continued availability of
prison-industry products,  and, in coordination with the Depart-
ment of Labor, for the development of Federal prisoner skills to
appropriately  augment the total supply of  manpower, advise
States and their political subdivisions regarding the use of State
and local prisons, jails, and prisoners for the purpose of relieving
local situations and conditions arising from a state of emergency.
  (3) Identification and location  of persons. Develop emergency
plans and procedures for the use of  the facilities and personnel of
the Department of Justice in assisting the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare with the development of plans and proce-
dures for  the identification of the dead and the reuniting of fam-
lies during a civil defense emergency.

                   Part 6—Post Office Department

  Section 601. Functions.  The Postmaster General  shall prepare
plans and programs for emergency  mail service and  shall cooper-
ate with indicated Federal agencies, in accordance  with existing
agreements or directives, in the following national emergency pro-
grams :
  (1) Registering of persons. Assist  the Department  of Health,
Education, and Welfare in planning a national program and devel-
oping technical guidance for States, and directing Post Office ac-
tivities  concerned with registering persons  and families for the
purpose of receiving and answering welfare inquiries and reunit-
ing families in civil defense emergencies. The program shall in-
clude  procurement, transportation, storage, and distribution of
safety notification  and emergency change  of address  cards in
quantities and localities jointly determined by the Department of
Defense and the Post Office Department.
   (2) Other emergency programs, (a) Censorship of international
mails.  (Department  of Defense; Department of the Treasury;
Office of Emergency Preparedness)
   (b) Provision for emergency mail service to Federal agencies at
both regular and emergency sites. (General  Services Administra-
tion)
   (c) Emergency registration of Federal employees. (Civil Serv-
ice Commission)

-------
2122          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   (d) Emergency leasing of space for Federal agencies. (General
Services Administration)
   (e) Registration of enemy aliens. (Department of Justice)

                 Part 7—Department of the Interior
  Section 701. Resume of Responsibilities. The Secretary of the
Interior shall prepare national emergency plans and develop pre-
paredness programs covering  (1)  electric power;  (2) petroleum
and gas; (3) solid fuels;  (4) minerals; and  (5) water, as defined
in Section 702 of this part.

  Sec. 702. Def nitions. As used in this part:
   (1) "Electric power"  means  all forms of electric power  and
energy,  including the generation, transmission, distribution,  and
utilization thereof.
   (2) "Petroleum" means crude  oil and synthetic liquid fuel, their
products,  and associated hydrocarbons,  including pipelines  for
their movement and facilities specially designed for their storage.
   (3) "Gas" means natural gas  (including helium) and manufac-
tured gas,  including pipelines for their movement and facilities
specially designed for their storage.
   (4) "Solid fuels" means all forms of anthracite,  bituminous,
sub-bituminous, and lignitic coals, coke,  and coal  chemicals pro-
duced in the coke-making process.
   (5) "Minerals" means  all raw materials of mineral origin (ex-
cept petroleum, gas, solid fuels, and source materials as defined in
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,  as amended)  [section 2011 et seq.
of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare]  obtained by mining
and like operations and processed through the stages  specified  and
at the facilities  designated in an  agreement between the Secretary
of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce as being within the
emergency preparedness  responsibilities  of the Secretary of the
Interior.
   (6) "Water" means water from all sources except water after
its withdrawal into a community system,  or an emergency system
for treatment, storage, and distribution for public use.

  Sec. 703. Resource functions. With respect to the resources de-
fined in Section  702, the Secretary of the Interior shall:
   (1) Minerals  development. Develop programs and encourage the
exploration, development, and mining of strategic and critical
minerals for emergency purposes.
   (2) Production. Provide guidance and leadership  to assigned
industries in the development of  plans and programs  to insure the

-------
                      EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2123

 continuity of production in the event of an attack, and cooperate
 with the Department of Commerce in the identification and evalu-
 ation of essential facilities.
   (3) Water. Develop plans with respect to water, including plans
 for the treatment and  disposal, after use, of water after its with-
 drawal into a  community system or an emergency system  for
 treatment, storage, and distribution for public use. In developing
 any plans relating to water for use on farms and in food facilities,
 assure that those plans are in consonance with  plans and pro-
 grams of the Department of Agriculture.
   (4) Electric  power and natural gas. In  preparedness planning
 for electric power and natural gas, the Federal Power Commission
 shall assist the Secretary of the Interior as set forth in  Section
 1901 of this order.
                 Part 8—Department of Agriculture
   Section 801. Resume of Responsibilities. The Secretary of Agri-
 culture shall prepare national emergency plans  and develop pre-
 paredness programs covering: (1) food resources, farm equip-
 ment, fertilizer, and food resource facilities as defined below;  (2)
 lands under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of  Agriculture;  (3)
 rural fire control;  (4) defense  against biological and chemical
 warfare and radiological fallout pertaining to agricultural activi-
 ties; and (5) rural defense information and education.
   Sec. 802. Definitions. As used in this part:
   (1) "Food resources" means all commodities and products, sim-
 ple, mixed, or compound, or complements to such commodities or
 products,  that  are  capable  of being  eaten or drunk,  by either
 human beings or animals, irrespective of other uses to which such
 commodities or products may be  put, at all stages of processing
 from the raw commodity to the products thereof in vendible form
 for human or animal consumption. For the purposes of this order,
 the term "food resources"  shall also include all  starches,  sugars,
 vegetable  and animal fats and oils, cotton,  tobacco, wool, mohair,
 hemp, flax fiber, and naval stores, but shall not  include any such
 material after it loses its identity as an agricultural commodity or
 agricultural product.
   (2) "Farm equipment" means  machinery, equipment, and  re-
pair parts manufactured primarily for use on farms in connection
with the production or preparation for  market or use of "food
resources".
   (3) "Fertilizer" means any product or combination of products
for plant nutrition in form for distribution to the  users thereof.

-------
2124          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  (4) "Food resource facilities" means plants, machinery, vehi-
cles  (including on farm), and other facilities  (including farm
housing) for the production,  processing, distribution, and storage
(including cold storage)  of food resources, and for domestic dis-
tribution of farm equipment and fertilizer.
  Sec. 803. Functions. With respect to food resources, food  re-
source facilities,  lands under  the jurisdiction of  the  Secretary,
farm equipment, and fertilizer, the Secretary of Agriculture shall:
  (1) Production, processing,  storage, and distribution. Develop
plans for priorities, allocations, and distribution control systems
and related plans, including control of use of facilities designed to
provide adequate and  continuing production, processing, storage,
and distribution of essential  food resources in an emergency, and
to provide for the domestic  distribution of farm equipment and
fertilizer.
   (2) Stockpiles. In addition to the food stockpile functions identi-
fied in Executive Order No. 10958 [set out as a note under section
2271  of this Appendix], take all possible measures in the adminis-
tration of Commodity Credit Corporation inventories of food re-
sources to assure the availability of  such  inventories when and
where needed in an emergency.  The Secretary shall also  develop
plans and procedures for the proper utilization of agricultural
items stockpiled for survival  purposes.
   (3) Land management. Develop plans and direct activities for
the  emergency protection, management, and utilization of  the
lands, resources, and  installations under the jurisdiction  of the
Secretary of Agriculture and  assist in  the development of plans
for the emergency operation, production, and processing of forest
products  in cooperation  with other Federal, State, and  private
agencies.

   Sec. 804. Civil Defense Functions. In consonance with national
civil  defense programs developed by the Department of Defense,
the Secretary of Agriculture shall:
   (1) Rural fire defense. In cooperation with Federal, State,  and
local agencies, develop plans for a national program  and direct
activities  relating to  the prevention  and control  of fires in the
rural areas of the United States caused by the effects of enemy
attack.
   (2) Biological, chemical, and radiological warfare defense. De-
 velop plans for a national program, direct Federal activities, and
furnish technical guidance to  State and local authorities concern-
 ing  (a)  diagnosis and  strengthening of defensive barriers  and

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                 2125

control or eradication of diseases, pests, or chemicals introduced
as  agents  of biological or  chemical warfare  against animals,
crops, or products thereof;  (b)  protective  measures, treatment,
and handling of livestock, including poultry, agricultural commod-
ities on farms or ranches, agricultural  lands, forest lands, and
water for agricultural purposes, any  of which have been exposed
to or affected by radiation.  Plans  shall be developed for a national
program and  direction  of Federal activities to assure  the safety
and wholesomeness  and to minimize losses from biological and
chemical warfare, radiological effects, and  other emergency haz-
ards of livestock, meat and  meat products, poultry  and poultry
products in establishments under the continuous inspection of the
Department  of  Agriculture,  and agricultural  commodities and
products owned by the  Commodity Credit Corporation or by the
Department of Agriculture.
   (3) Defense information and education. Conduct a defense in-
formation and education program in support of the Department's
emergency responsibilities.

                  Part 9—Department of Commerce
   Section 901. Resume  of Responsibilities. The Secretary of Com-
merce shall prepare  national  emergency plans and develop prepar-
edness programs covering:
   (1) The production and  distribution of all materials, the use of
all production facilities (except those owned by, controlled by, or
under the jurisdiction of the Department of  Defense or the Atomic
Energy Commission),  the control of all construction materials,
and the furnishing of basic industrial services except those involv-
ing the following:
   (a)  Production and  distribution of and use of facilities for
petroleum, solid fuels, gas,  electric power, and water;
   (b) Production, processing, distribution, and storage of food
resources and the use of food resource facilities  for such produc-
tion, processing, distribution, and storage;
   (c) Domestic distribution of farm equipment and fertilizer;
   (d) Use of communications services and  facilities, housing and
lodging facilities, and health, education, and welfare facilities;
   (e) Production, and  related distribution,  of minerals as  denned
in Subsection 702(5),  and  source materials  as defined  in the
Atomic Energy  Act of  1954, as amended [section 2011 et seq. of
Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare] ; and the construction
and use of facilities designated  as within  the responsibilities of
the Secretary of the Interior:

-------
2126          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   (f) Distribution of items in the supply systems of, or controlled
by, the Department of Defense and the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion;
   (g) Construction, use and management of civil aviation facili-
ties; and
   (h) Construction and use of highways, streets, and appurtenant
structures.
   (2) Federal emergency operational control responsibilities with
respect to ocean shipping, ports, and port facilities, except those
owned by, controlled by, or under  the jurisdiction of the Depart-
ment of Defense, and except those responsibilities of the Depart-
ment of the Treasury with respect to the entrance and clearance
of vessels. The following definitions apply to this part:
   (a) "Ocean shipping"  includes all overseas, coastwise, inter-
coastal,  and Great Lakes shipping except that solely engaged in
the transportation of passengers and cargo between United States
ports on the Great Lakes.
   (b) "Port" or "port  area" includes any zone contiguous to or
associated in the traffic  network of an ocean or Great Lakes port,
or outport location, including beach  loading sites, within which
facilities exist for transshipment of persons and property between
domestic carriers and carriers  engaged in coastal, intercoastal,
and overseas transportation.
   (c) "Port facilities" includes all port facilities, port equipment
including harbor craft, and port services normally used in accom-
plishing the transfer or interchange of cargo and passengers be-
tween ocean-going vessels and other media of transportation, or in
connection therewith  (including the Great Lakes).
   (3) Scientific and technological services and functions, essential
to emergency preparedness plans, programs, and operations of the
Federal departments and agencies, in which the Department of
Commerce has the capability, including but not limited to:
   (a) Meteorological and related services;
   (b) Preparation, reproduction, and distribution of nautical and
aeronautical  charts, geodetic, hydrographic,  and  oceanographic
data, and allied services for nonmilitary purposes;
   (c) Standards of measurement and  supporting services; and,
   (d) Research, development, testing, evaluation, application, and
associated services and activities  in  the various fields and disci-
plines of science and technology  in  which the Department has
special competence.
   (4) Collection, compilation, and reporting of  census informa-

-------
                      EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2127

tion and the provision of statistical and related services,  as  re-
quired, for emergency planning and operations.
   (5)  Regulation and control of exports and imports, under the
jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce, in support  of na-
tional  security, foreign policy,  and economic stabilization  objec-
tives.
   (6)  Regulation and control of transfers of capital to, and rein-
vestment of earnings of, affiliated foreign nationals pursuant to
authority conferred by Executive Order No. 11387  of January 1,
1968 [set out as a note under section 95a of Title 12, Banks and
Banking].

   Sec. 902. Production Functions. Within the areas designated in
section 901 (1) hereof, the Secretary of Commerce shall:
   (1) Priorities and allocations.  Develop control systems for prior-
ities, allocation, production, and distribution, including provisions
for  other Federal  departments  and  agencies, as appropriate, to
serve as allotting agents  for materials and other resources made
available under such systems for  designated programs and the
construction and operation of facilities assigned to them.
   (2)  New construction.  Develop procedures by which new pro-
duction facility construction proposals will be reviewed for appro-
priate  location in light of such area factors as locational security,
availability of labor, water, power,  housing, and other support
requirements.
   (3)  Industry evaluation. Identify and evaluate the national  se-
curity  essentiality of those products and services, and their pro-
ducing or  supporting facilities, which  are of exceptional impor-
tance to mobilization readiness, national defense, or post-attack
survival and recovery.
   (4) Production capability. Analyze potential effects of attack on
actual  production capability, taking  into account the entire pro-
duction complex, including shortages of resources, and conduct
studies as a basis for recommending  pre-attack measures that
would strengthen capabilities for post-attack production.
   (5) Loans for plant modernization. Develop plans, in coordina-
tion with the Small Business Administration, for providing emer-
gency  assistance  to  essential  small  business  establishments
through  direct loans or participation loans  for  the financing of
production facilities and equipment.

  Sec.  903. Maritime Functions. Within the areas designated in
section 901(2) of this part, the Secretary of Commerce shall de-
velop plans and procedures in consonance with international treat-

-------
2128          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

ies, under coordinating authority of the Secretary of Transporta-
tion and in  cooperation with other appropriate Federal agencies
and the States and their political subdivisions, to provide for Fed-
eral operational control of ocean ports and shipping, including:
  (1) Shipping allocation. Allocation of specific ocean shipping to
meet the national requirements, including those for military, for-
eign assistance, emergency procurement  programs, and those es-
sential to the civilian economy.
  (2) Ship acquisition. Provision of ships for ocean shipping by
purchase, charter, or requisition, by breakout from the national
defense reserve fleet, and by construction.
  (3) Operations. Operation of ocean  shipping, directly or indi-
rectly.
  (4) Traffic control. Provisions for the control of passengers and
cargo through port areas to assure an orderly and continuous flow
of such traffic.
  (5) Traffic priority. Administration  of priorities for the move-
ment of passengers and cargo through port areas.
  (6) Port allocation. Allocation of specific ports  and port facili-
ties to meet the needs of the Nation and our allies.
  (7)  Support activities.  Performance  of supporting activities
needed  to carry out the above-described functions, such as: ascer-
taining national support requirements for ocean shipping, includ-
ing those for support of military and other Federal programs and
those essential to the civil  economy; maintenance,  repair, and
arming of ships; recruiting, training, and assigning of officers and
seamen; procurement, warehousing, and  issuance  of ships' stores,
supplies, equipment, and  spare parts; supervision of stevedoring
and bunkering; management of terminals, shipyards, repair, and
other facilities; and provision, maintenance, and restoration of
port facilities.

  Sec. 904.  Census Functions.  Within  the area designated in sec-
tion 901 (4) hereof, the Secretary of Commerce shall:
   (1) Provide for the collection and reporting of census informa-
tion on the  status of human  and  economic resources,  including
population, housing, agriculture, manufacture,  mineral industries,
business, transportation, foreign trade, construction, and govern-
ments, as required for emergency planning purposes.
    (2) Plan, create, and maintain a capability for the conduct of
post-attack surveys to provide  information on the status of surviv-
ing populations and resources as required for the  programs of the
Office of Emergency Preparedness.

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2129

   (3) Provide for and maintain the ability to make estimates of
attack effects on industry, population, and other resources for use
within the Department of Commerce.
  Sec. 905. Civil Defense Functions. In consonance with national
civil defense programs developed by the Department of Defense,
the Secretary of Commerce shall:
   (1) Weather functions. Prepare and issue currently,  as well as
in an emergency, forecasts and  estimates  of areas  likely  to be
covered by radiological fallout in event of  attack and  make  this
information available to Federal, State, and local authorities for
public dissemination.
   (2) Geodetic, hydrographic, and  oceanographic data.  Provide
geodetic, hydrographic,  and oceanographic data and services to
the Department of Defense and other governmental agencies, as
appropriate.

                   Part 10—Department of Labor
   Section  1001.  Resume of  Responsibilities. The  Secretary of
Labor shall have primary  responsibility for preparing  national
emergency plans and developing preparedness programs covering
civilian manpower mobilization, more effective utilization of  lim-
ited manpower resources, including specialized  personnel, wage
and salary stabilization, worker incentives and  protection, man-
power resources and requirements, skill development and training,
research, labor-management relations, and critical occupations.
   Sec. 1002. Functions. The Secretary of Labor shall:
   (1) Civilian manpower  mobilization.  Develop  plans  and  issue
guidance designed to utilize to the maximum extent civilian man-
power to resources, such plans and guidance to be developed with
the active participation and assistance  of the  States and local
political subdivisions thereof,  and of  other  organizations  and
agencies concerned with the mobilization of the people  of the Un-
 ited States. Such plans shall include, but not necessarily be limited
to:
    (a) Manpower management. Recruitment,  selection  and refer-
ral, training, employment stabilization  (including appeals proce-
 dures) , proper utilization, and determination of  the skill categor-
 ies critical to meeting the labor requirements of defense and essen-
tial civilian activities;
    (b) Priorities. Procedures for translating survival and produc-
 tion  urgencies into manpower priorities to be used as  guides for
 allocating available workers; and

-------
2130          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   (c) Improving mobilization base. Programs for more effective
utilization of limited manpower resources,  and,  in  cooperation
with other appropriate agencies, programs for recruitment, train-
ing, allocation, and  utilization of persons possessing specialized
competence or aptitude in acquiring such competence.
   (2)  Wage and salary stabilization.  Develop plans and  proce-
dures for wage and  salary stabilization and for the national and
field organization necessary for the administration of such a pro-
gram in an emergency,  including investigation, compliance, and
appeals procedures; statistical  studies of  wages, salaries, and
prices for policy decisions  and to assist operating stabilization
agencies to carry out their functions.
   (3) Worker incentives and protection. Develop plans and proce-
dures for wage and salary compensation and death and disability
compensation for authorized civil defense workers and, as appro-
priate,  measures  for  unemployment  payments,  re-employment
rights, and occupational safety, and other protection and incen-
tives for the civilian  labor force during an emergency.
   (4) Skill development  and training. Initiate current action pro-
grams to overcome or offset present or anticipated manpower defi-
ciencies, including those identified as a  result of resource and
requirements studies.
   (5)  Labor-management relations. Develop, after  consultation
with the Department of  Commerce, the Department of Transpor-
tation, the Department of Defense, the National Labor Relations
Board, the Federal  Mediation and Conciliation Service, the Na-
tional Mediation  Board, and other  appropriate  agencies and
groups, including representatives of labor and management, plans
and procedures, including organization plans for the maintenance
of effective labor-management relations during a national  emer-
gency.
         Part 11—Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
   Section 1101. Resume of Responsibilities. In addition to the
medical  stockpile functions identified in Executive  Order No.
10958 [set out as a note  under section 2271 of this Appendix], the
Secretary of Health, Education, and  Welfare shall  prepare na-
tional emergency plans and develop preparedness programs cover-
ing health services, civilian health  manpower,  health resources,
welfare services, social security benefits,  credit union operations,
and educational programs as defined below.
   Sec. 1102. Definitions.  As used in this part:
    (1) "Emergency health services" means medical and dental care

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2131

for the civilian population in all of their specialties and adjunct
therapeutic fields, and the planning, provision, and operation of
first aid stations,  hospitals, and clinics; preventive health services,
including detection, identification and control of communicable di-
seases, their  vectors,  and other public health hazards, inspection
and control of purity and safety of  food, drugs,  and biologicals;
vital statistics services; rehabilitation and related services for dis-
abled survivors;  preventive and curative care related to human
exposure to radiological, chemical, and biological  warfare agents;
sanitary aspects of disposal of the dead; food and milk sanitation;
community solid  waste  disposal; emergency public water supply;
and the determination of the heatlh significance of water pollution
and the provision of other services pertaining to health aspects of
water  use and water-borne wastes as set forth in an agreement
between the Secretary of Health, Education,  and  Welfare and the
Secretary of  the Interior, approved by the President, pursuant to
Reorganization Plan No. 2 of  1966  [set out by the Appendix to
Title 5, Government  Organization and Employees], which  plan
placed upon the Secretary of the Interior responsibilities for the
prevention and control  of water pollution. It shall be understood
that health services for the purposes of this order, however, do not
encompass the following areas for which the  Department of Agri-
culture has  responsibility: plant and animal diseases and pest
prevention, control, and eradication, wholesomeness of meat and
meat products, and poultry and poultry products in establishments
under continuous inspection service by the Department of Agricul-
ture, veterinary biologicals, agricultural commodities and products
owned by the Commodity Credit Corporation or the Secretary of
Agriculture,  livestock, agricultural commodities stored or harvest-
able on farms and ranches, agricultural  lands  and water, and
registration of pesticides.
   (2)  "Health manpower"  means  physicians  (including osteo-
paths) ;  dentists;  sanitary  engineers;  registered  professional
nurses; and such  other occupations as may be included in the List
of Health Manpower  Occupations issued for the  purposes of this
part by the  Director of the Office  of Emergency  Preparedness
after agreement by the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare.
   (3)  "Health resources" means manpower, material, and facili-
ties required to prevent the impairment of, improve, and restore
the physical  and  mental health conditions of the civilian popula-
tion.
   (4)  "Emergency welfare  services" means feeding; clothing;

-------
2132          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

lodging in private and congregate facilities; registration; locating
and reuniting families; care of unaccompanied children, the aged,
the handicapped, and other  groups needing  specialized care  or
services; necessary financial  or other  assistance; counseling and
referral services to families and individuals; aid to welfare insti-
tutions under national emergency or post-attack conditions; and
all other feasible welfare aid and services to people in need during
a civil defense emergency. Such measures include  organization,
direction, and provision of services to be instituted before attack,
in the event of strategic or tactical evacuation, and after attack in
the event of evacuation or of refuge in shelters.
  (5)  "Social security benefits" means the determination of enti-
tlement and the payment of  monthly insurance benefits to those
eligible, such as workers who have retired because of age or disa-
bility and to their dependent  wives and children, and to the eligi-
ble survivors of deceased workers. It also includes determinations
of eligibility and  payments made on behalf of eligible individuals
to hospitals, home health agencies, extended care facilities, physi-
cians, and other providers of medical services.
  (6)  "Credit union operations" means the functions of any  credit
union, chartered either by a State or the Federal Government, in
stimulating systematic savings  by  members, the investment and
protection of those savings, providing loans for credit union mem-
bers at reasonable rates, and encouraging sound credit and  thrift
practices among credit union members.
  (7)  "Education" or "training" means the organized process of
learning by study and instruction  primarily  through public and
private systems.

  Sec. 1103. Health  Functions. With respect to emergency health
services, as defined above, and in consonance with national civil
defense plans, programs, and operation of the Department of De-
fense under Executive Order No. 10952  [set out as a note  under
section 2271 of this Appendix], the Secretary of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare shall:
  (1)  Professional training. Develop and direct a nationwide pro-
gram to train health manpower both in professional and technical
occupational content and in  civil defense knowledge and  skills.
Develop and distribute health education material for inclusion in
the curricula of schools, colleges, professional schools, government
schools, and other educational facilities throughout the United
States. Develop and distribute civil defense information relative to

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2133

health services to States,  voluntary  agencies, and  professional
groups.
  (2) Emergency public water supply. Prepare plans to assure the
provision  of usable water  supplies for  human consumption and
other essential community  uses  in  an emergency. This shall in-
clude inventorying existing community  water supplies,  planning
for other alternative sources of water for emergency  uses, setting
standards relating to human consumption,  and planning commu-
nity distribution. In carrying on these activities, the Department
shall have primary responsibility but will make maximum use of
the resources  and competence of State and local  authorities, the
Department of the Interior, and other Federal agencies.
  (3)  Radiation.  Develop and coordinate programs  of  radiation
measurement and assessment as may be necessary to carry out the
responsibilities involved in the provision  of emergency health
services.
   (4)  Biological  and chemical warfare. Develop and coordinate
programs for  the  prevention,  detection,  and identification  of
human exposure  to  chemical and  biological  warfare agents as
may be necessary to carry  out the responsibilities involved in the
provision of emergency health services, including the provision of
guidance and consultation to Federal, State, and local authorities
on measures for minimizing the effects of  biological or chemical
warfare.
  (5)  Food, drugs, and  biologicals. Plan and  direct national pro-
grams for the maintenance of purity and safety in the  manufac-
ture and distribution of food, drugs,  and biologicals in  an emer-
gency.
  (6)  Disabled survivors. Prepare  national plans for emergency
operations of  vocational rehabilitation and related agencies, and
for measures  and resources  necessary to rehabilitate and make
available for employment those  disabled persons among the sur-
viving population.
  Sec. 1104. Welfare Functions. With respect to emergency wel-
fare services as defined above, and in consonance with national
civil defense  plans, programs, and  operations of the Department
of Defense under Executive Order No.  10952 [set out  as a note
under  section 2271 of this Appendix],  the Secretary of  Health,
Education, and Welfare shall:
  (1)  Federal support. Cooperate  in the development of Federal
support procedures,  through joint planning  with other  depart-
ments and agencies, including but  not limited to the Post Office
Department, the Department of  Labor,  and the Selective  Service

-------
2134          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

System, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and
resource agencies, including the Department of Agriculture, the
Department of the Interior, and the Department of Commerce, for
logistic support of State and  community welfare services in an
emergency.
  (2)  Emergency welfare training. Develop and  direct a nation-
wide program to train emergency welfare manpower for the exe-
cution of the functions set forth in this  part,  develop welfare
educational materials, including self-help program materials for
use with welfare organizations and professional  schools, and de-
velop and  distribute  civil defense information relative to emer-
gency  welfare services to States, voluntary agencies, and profes-
sional  groups.
  (3)  Financial aid.  Develop  plans and procedures for  financial
assistance  to individuals injured or in want as a result of enemy
attack and for welfare institutions in need of such assistance in an.
emergency.
   (4)  Non-combatant evacuees to the Continental United  States.
Develop plans and procedures for assistance, at ports  of entry to
U.  S.  personnel  evacuated from  overseas areas,  their  onward
movement  to final destination, and follow-up assistance after ar-
rival at final destination.
  Sec. 1105. Social Security Functions. With respect to social secu-
rity, the Secretary of  Health, Education, and Welfare shall:
  (1)  Social security benefits. Develop  plans  for  the continuation
or restoration of benefit payments to those on the insurance rolls
as soon as possible after a direct attack upon  the United  States,
and prepare plans for the acceptance and disposition of current
claims for  social security benefits.
   (2)  Health insurance. Develop plans for the payment of health
insurance claims for reimbursement for items or services provided
by  hospitals, physicians, and  other providers of  medical services
submitted  by or on behalf of individuals who are eligible under the
Medicare program [section 1395 et seq. of Title 42,  The Public
Health and Welfare].

  Sec. 1106. Credit Union Functions.  With  respect to credit union
functions,  the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare shall:
   (1)  Credit  union operations.  Provide instructions to  all State
and Federally chartered credit  unions for  the development  of
emergency plans to be put into effect as soon as possible after an
attack upon the United States in order to guarantee continuity of
credit union operations.

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2135

   (2) Economic stabilization. Provide guidance to credit unions
that will  contribute to  stabilization of the Nation's  economy  by
helping to establish and maintain a sound economic base for com-
bating inflation, maintaining confidence in public and private fin-
ancial institutions, and promoting thrift.
  Sec. 1107. Education  Functions. With respect to education, the
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare shall:
  (1) Program guidance. Develop plans and issue guidance for the
continued function of educational systems  under all conditions  of
national emergency. Although extraordinary  circumstances may
require the temporary suspension of education,  plans should pro-
vide for its earliest possible resumption.
  (2) Educational adjustment. Plan to assist  civilian educational
institutions, both public and private,  to adjust to demands laid
upon them by a large expansion of government activities during
any type  of emergency. This includes advice and assistance  to
schools, colleges,  universities, and  other educational  institutions
whose facilities may be  temporarily needed for Federal, State,  or
local government programs in an emergency or whose faculties
and student bodies may  be affected by the demands of a sudden  or
long-standing emergency.
  (3) Post-attack recovery. Develop plans for the rapid restora-
tion and resumption of education at all levels after an  attack. This
includes assistance  to educators  and  educational institutions  to
locate and use surviving facilities, equipment, supplies, books, and
educational personnel. Particular emphasis shall be given to the
role of  educational  institutions and educational leadership in re-
viving education and training in skills needed for post-attack re-
covery.
  (4) Civil defense education. In consonance with national civil
defense plans,  programs, and operations  of the Department  of
Defense,  develop  and  issue  instructional materials  to assist
schools, colleges, and other educational institutions to incorporate
emergency protective measures and  civil  defense concepts  into
their programs. This includes assistance to various levels of educa-
tion to  develop an  understanding of the role of the individual,
family,  and community for civil defense in the nuclear  age.
        Part 12—Department of Housing and Urban Development
  Section 1201. Resume of Responsibilities. The Secretary  of
Housing and  Urban  Development  shall prepare national emer-
gency plans and develop preparedness programs covering all as-
pects of  housing, community facilities related  to housing, and

-------
2136          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

urban development (except that housing assets under the jurisdic-
tion and control of the Department of Defense, other than those
leased for terms not in excess of one year, shall be and remain the
responsibility of the Department of Defense).
  Sec. 1202. Definition. As used in this part:
  (1) "Emergency housing" means any and all types of accommo-
dations used as dwellings in an emergency.
  (2) "Community facilities related to housing" means installa-
tions necessary to furnish water, sewer, electric, and gas services
between  the housing  unit or project and the nearest practical
source or servicing point.
  (3) "Urban development" means the building or restoration of
urban  community,  suburban, and metropolitan areas  (except
transportation facilities).
  Sec.  1203. Housing and Community Facilities Functions. The
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall:
  (1) New housing. Develop plans for the emergency construction
and management of new housing and the community facilities
related thereto to the extent that it is determined that it may be
necessary to provide for such construction and management with
public funds and through direct Federal action, and to the extent
that such construction of new housing may  have to be provided
through Federal financial or credit assistance.
  (2) Community facilities. Develop plans to restore  community
facilities related to housing affected by an emergency through the
repair of damage, the construction of new facilities, and the use of
alternate or back-up facilities.
  Sec.  1204. Urban Development  Functions. The  Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development shall:
  (1) Regional cooperation.  Encourage regional emergency plan-
ning and cooperation among State and local governments with
respect to problems of housing and metropolitan development.
  (2) Vulnerability and redevelopment. In cooperation with the
Office of Emergency Preparedness, develop  criteria and provide
guidance for the design  and location of housing and  community
facilities related to housing to minimize the risk of loss under
various  emergency  situations. Develop criteria for determining
which areas should  be redeveloped in the event of loss or severe
damage resulting from emergencies.

  Sec. 1205. Civil Defense Functions. In consonance with national
civil defense plans, programs, and operations of the Department

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2137

of Defense under Executive Order No. 10952 [set out as a  note
under section 2271  of this Appendix], the Secretary of Housing
and Urban Development shall:
  (1)  Transitional activities.  Develop plans  for the orderly
transfer of people from fallout shelters and from billets to tempo-
rary or  permanent housing, including advice and guidance for
State and local government agencies in the administration thereof.
These plans shall be coordinated with national plans and guidance
for emergency welfare services of the Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare.
  (2) Temporary housing. Develop plans for tha emergency repair
and restoration for use of damaged housing, for the construction
and management of emergency housing units and the community
facilities related thereto, for the emergency use of tents and trail-
ers, and for the emergency conversion for dwelling use of non-re-
sidential  structures, such activities  to  be  financed  with  public
funds through direct Federal action or through financial or credit
assistance.
  (3) Shelter. In conformity with  national shelter policy, assist in
the development of plans to encourage the construction of shelters
for both old and  new housing, and develop  administrative proce-
dures to  encourage the use of  low-cost design and construction
techniques to maximize protection  in connection  with national
programs.
               Part 13—Department of Transportation
  Section 1301. Resume  of  Responsibilities. The Secretary  of
Transportation, in carrying out  his responsibilities to exercise
leadership in transportation matters affecting the national defense
and those involving national or  regional transportation emergen-
cies, shall prepare emergency plans and develop preparedness pro-
grams covering:
  (1) Preparation  and promulgation of over-all national policies,
plans, and procedures related  to providing civil  transportation of
all forms—air, ground, water,  and pipelines, including public stor-
age and warehousing  (except storage of petroleum and gas and
agricultural food resources including cold storage): Provided that
plans for the movement  of petroleum and natural gas through
pipelines  shall be the responsibility of the Secretary  of the Inte-
rior except to the extent that such plans are  a  part of functions
vested in the Secretary of Transportation by law;
  (2)  Movement of passengers  and materials of all types by all
forms of civil transportation;
  (3) Determination of the proper apportionment and allocation

-------
2138          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

for control of the total civil transportation capacity, or any por-
tion thereof, to meet over-all essential civil and military needs;
   (4) Determination and identification of the transportation re-
sources available and required to meet all  degrees of  national
emergencies and regional transportation emergencies;
   (5) Assistance to the various States, the local political subdivi-
sions thereof, and  non-governmental organizations and systems
engaged in transportation activities in the preparation of emer-
gency plans;
   (6)  Rehabilitation and recovery of the Nation's transportation
systems; and
   (7)  Provisions for port security and safety, for aids  to mari-
time navigation, and for search and rescue and law enforcement
over, upon, and under the navigable waters of the United States
and the high seas.

   Sec. 1302. Transportation Planning and Coordination Functions.
In carrying out the provisions of Section 1301, the Secretary of
Transportation, with  assistance  and  support  of other  Federal,
State and local governmental agencies, and  the transport indus-
tries, as appropriate, shall:
   (1)  Obtain, assemble, analyze, and evaluate data on current and
projected emergency requirements of all claimants for all forms of
civil transportation to meet the needs of the military and of the
civil economy, and on current and projected civil transportation
resources—of all forms—available to  the United States to move
passengers or materials in an emergency.
   (2)  Develop plans and procedures to provide—under emergency
conditions—for the collection and analysis of passenger and cargo
movement demands as they relate to the capabilities of the various
forms of transport, including the periodic assessment of over-all
transport resources available to meet emergency requirements.
   (3) Conduct a  continuing  analysis of transportation require-
ments and capabilities in relation to economic projections for the
purpose of  initiating actions  and/or  recommending incentive
and/or regulatory programs  designed to stimulate  government
and industry improvement of the structure of the transportation
system for use in an emergency.
   (4) Develop systems for the control of the  movement of passen-
gers and cargo by all forms  of  transportation,  except for those
resources owned by, controlled by, or under the jurisdiction of the
Department of Defense, including allocation of resources and as-
signment of priorities, and develop policies, standards, and proce-
dures for emergency enforcement of these controls.

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2139

  Sec. 1303. Departmental Emergency Transportation Prepared-
ness. Except for those resources owned by, controlled by, or under
the jurisdiction of the Department of Defense, the  Secretary of
Transportation  shall  prepare emergency operational  plans  and
programs for, and develop a capability to carry out, the transpor-
tation operating responsibilities assigned to the Department, in-
cluding but not limited to:
   (1)  Allocating air carrier civil air transportation  capacity and
equipment to meet civil and military requirements.
   (2)  Emergency  management, including construction,  recon-
struction, and maintenance of the Nation's civil airports,  civil
aviation  operating facilities, civil aviation services, and civil air-
craft (other than air carrier aircraft), except manufacturing fa-
cilities.
   (3) Emergency management of all Federal, Stats, city, local,
and other highways, roads, streets, bridges, tunnels, and appurten-
ant structures, including:
   (a) The adaptation, development, construction, reconstruction,
and maintenance of the Nation's highway and street  systems  to
meet emergency requirements;
   (b) The protection of the traveling public by assisting State
and local authorities in informing them  of the dangers of travel
through  hazardous areas; and
   (c)  The regulation of highway traffic in an emergency through
a  national program in cooperation with all Federal,  State, and
local governmental units or other agencies concerned.
   (4) Emergency plans for urban mass transportation, including:
   (a) Providing guidance to urban communities in their emer-
gency mass transportation planning  efforts, either  directly  or
through  State, regional, or metropolitan agencies;
   (b) Coordinating all such emergency planning with the Depart-
ment of  Housing and Urban Development to assure  compatibility
with emergency plans for all other aspects of urban  development;
   (c) Maintaining an inventory of  urban mass transportation
systems.
   (5) Maritime safety and law enforcement over, upon, and under
the high ssas  and water, subject to the jurisdiction of the  United
States, in the following specific programs:
   (a) Safeguarding vessels, harbors, ports, and waterfront facili-
ties from destruction, loss  or injury, accidents, or other causes of
a similar nature.
   (b) Safe passage over, upon and under the high  seas and Un-
ited States waters through effective and reliable systems of aids to
navigation and ocean stations.

-------
 2140          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   (c) Waterborne access to ice-bound locations in furtherance of
 national economic, scientific, defense, and consumer needs.
   (d)  Protection of lives, property, natural  resources, and na-
 tional  interests through enforcement of Federal law and timely
 assistance.
   (e)  Safety of life and property through regulation of commer-
 cial vessels, their officers and crew, and administration of mari-
 time safety law.
   (f)  Knowledge of the sea,  its boundaries,  and its  resources
 through collection and analysis of data in support  of the national
 interest.
   (g) Operational readiness for essential wartime functions.
   (6) Planning for the emergency  management and operation of
 the Alaska Railroad, and for the continuity of railroad and petro-
 leum pipeline safety programs.
   (7) Planning for the emergency  operation and maintenance of
 the United States-controlled sections of the  Saint  Lawrence Sea-
 way.

                Part 14—Atomic Energy Commission
   Section 1401. Functions. The Atomic Energy Commission  shall
 prepare national emergency plans and develop preparedness pro-
 grams for the  continuing conduct of atomic energy activities of
 the Federal Government. These plans and programs shall be de-
 signed to develop a state of readiness in  these areas with respect
 to all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon the
 United  States and, consistent with applicable  provisions of the
 Atomic  Energy Act of 1954, as amended [section 2011  et seq. of
 Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare], shall be closely coordi-
 nated with the Department of Defense and the Office  of Emer-
 gency Preparedness. The Atomic Energy Commission shall:
     (1) Production. Continue or resume in an emergency essential
 (a)  manufacture, development, and control of nuclear weapons
 and  equipment, except to the extent that the control over  such
 weapons and  equipment shall have been transferred to the Depart-
 ment of Defense; (b)  development and technology related to reac-
tors; (c)  process development  and production of  feed  material,
 special nuclear  materials, and other special products;  (d) related
raw materials procurement, processing, and development; and (e)
repair, maintenance, and construction related to the above.
   (2) Regulation. Continue or resume in an emergency (a)  con-
trolling the possession, use, transfer, import,  and export of atomic
materials and facilities; and (b) ordering the operation or suspen-
sion of licensed facilities, and recapturing from licensees, where

-------
                      EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2141

necessary, special nuclear materials whether related to military
support or civilian activities,
   (3)  Public health and safety. Shut down, where required, in
anticipation of an imminent enemy attack on the United  States,
and maintain under surveillance, all Commission-owned facilities
which  could otherwise constitute a significant  hazard to public
health and safety, and insure the development  of  appropriate
emergency plans for nuclear reactors and other  nuclgar activities
licensed by the Commission whether privately-owned or Govern-
ment-owned.
   (4)  Scientific, technical, and public atomic energy information.
Organize, reproduce, and disseminate appropriate public  atomic
energy information and scientific and  technical  reports and data
relating to nuclear science research, development, engineering, ap-
plications, and effects to interested Government  agencies, the sci-
entific  and technical communities, and  approved, friendly, and co-
operating foreign nations.
   (5)  International atomic  energy affairs. Maintain, in consulta-
tion with the Department of State, essential liaison with foreign
nations with respect to  activities of  mutual interest involving
atomic energy.
   (6)  Health services.  Assist the Department of  Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, consistent with the above requirements, in inte-
grating into civilian health programs  in an emergency the Com-
mission's  remaining health  manpower and facilities not required
for the performance of  the  Commission's essential  emergency
functions.
   (7)  Priorities and allocations. Plan for the administration of
any priorities and allocations authority delegated to the Atomic
Energy  Commission.   Authorize   procurement  and  production
schedules  and make allotments of controlled materials pursuant to
program determinations of the Office of Emerg2ncy Preparedness.
                  Part 15—Civil Aeronautics Board
   Section 1501. Definitions. As used in this part:
   (1)  "War Air Service Program" (hereinafter referred to as
WASP) means the program designed  to provide for the mainte-
nance of essential civil air routes and services, and to provide for
the distribution  and redistribution of  air carrier aircraft  among
civil air transport carriers after withdrawal of aircraft allocated
to the Civil Reserve Air Fleet.
   (2)  "Civil Reserve  Air  Fleet"  (hereinafter referred to  as
GRAF) means those air carrier aircraft allocated by the Secretary

-------
2142          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

of Transportation to the Department of Defense to meet essential
military needs in the event of an emergency.
  Sec. 1502. Functions. The Civil Aeronautics Board, under the
coordinating authority of the Secretary of Transportation, shall;
  (1) Distribution of aircraft.  Develop plans and be prepared to
carry out such distribution and redistribution of all air carrier
civil aircraft allocated by the Secretary of Transportation among
the civil air transport carriers  as may be necessary to assure the
maintenance of essential civil  routes and services under WASP
operations after the CRAF requirements have been met.
  (2) Economic regulations. Develop plans covering route authori-
zations and operations, tariffs, rates, and fares charged the public,
mail rates, government compensation and subsidy, and accounting
and contracting procedures essential to WASP operations.
  (3) Operational controls and priorities. Develop plans and proce-
dures for the administration of operational controls and priorities
of passenger and cargo movements in connection with the utiliza-
tion of air carrier aircraft for  WASP purposes in an emergency.
  (4)  Investigation. Maintain the capability to investigate viola-
tions of emergency economic regulations affecting air carrier op-
erations.
  (5) Contracting. Prepare to perform as a contracting agency, if
such an agency is necessary, in connection with  distribution and
redistribution of aircraft for WASP.

          Part 16—Export-Import Bank of the United States
  Section 1601. Functions, (a) Under guidance of the Secretary of
the Treasury, the Export-Import Bank shall develop plans for the
utilization of the resources of the  Bank, or other resources made
available to  the Bank, in expansion of productive capacity abroad
for essential materials, foreign barter arrangements, acquisition
of emergency  imports, and  in support of the domestic economy, or
any other plans designed to strengthen the relative position of the
Nation and its allies.
  (b) In carrying out the guidance functions described above, the
Secretary of  the Treasury shall  consult with the  Secretary of
State and the Secretary of Commerce as appropriate.

             Part 17—Federal Bank Supervisory Agencies
  Section 1701. Financial Plans and Programs. The Board of Gov-
ernors of the Federal Reserve System, the Comptroller of the
Currency, the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, the Farm  Credit
Administration, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
shall participate  with the Office of Emergency Preparedness, the

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2143

Department of the Treasury, and other agencies in the formula-
tion of emergency financial and stabilization policies. The heads of
such agencies shall, as appropriate, develop emergency plans, pro-
grams, and regulations, in consonance with national emergency
financial and stabilization plans and policies, to cope  with poten-
tial economic effects of mobilization or an attack,  including, but
not limited to, the following:
  (1) Money and credit. Provision and regulation  of money and
credit in accordance with the needs of the economy, including the
acquisition, decentralization, and distribution of emergency sup-
plies of currency; the collection of cash items and non-cash items;
and the conduct of fiscal agency and foreign operations.
  (2) Financial institutions. Provision for the continued or re-
sumed operation of banking,  savings  and loan, and  farm credit
institutions, including measures for the re-creation  of evidence of
assets or liabilities destroyed or inaccessible.
  (3) Liquidity. Provision of liquidity necessary to the  continued
or resumed operation of banking, savings and loan, credit unions,
and farm  credit institutions,  including  those damaged  or  de-
stroyed by enemy action.
  (4) Cash withdrawals and credit transfers. Regulation of the
withdrawal of  currency and the transfer of credits including de-
posit and share account balances.
  (5) Insurance. Provision for  the assumption and discharge of
liability  pertaining to insured deposits  and insured  savings ac-
counts or withdrawable shares  in banking  and savings and loan
institutions destroyed or made insolvent.

  Sec. 1702. Sharing of war losses. Heads of agencies shall, as
appropriate, participate with  the Office of Emergency Prepared-
ness and the Department of the Treasury in  the development of
policies, plans, and procedures for implementation of national pol-
icy on sharing war losses.

            Part 18—Federal Communications Commission
  Section 1801. Definitions. As used in this part:
   (1)  "Common carrier" means any  person  subject to Commis-
sion regulation engaged in providing, for use by the public, for
hire, interstate or foreign communications facilities or services by
wire or radio; but a person engaged  in radio broadcasting shall
not, insofar as  such person is so engaged,  be deemed a common
carrier.
   (2)  "Broadcast facilities" means those stations licensed by the
Commission for the  dissemination of radio  communications in-

-------
 2144           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

tended to be received by the public directly or by the intermediary
of relay stations.
  (3)  "Safety and  special radio services"  includes those non-
broadcast and non-common carrier services which are licensed by
the Commission under the generic designation "safety and special
radio services" pursuant to the Commission's Rules and Regula-
tions.

  Sec.  1802. Functions. The Federal Communications Commission
shall develop policies, plans,  and procedures, in consonance with
national telecommunications plans and policies developed pursuant
to Executive Order No. 10705 [set out as a note under section 606
of Title 47, Telegraphs, Telephones, and Radiotelegraphs], Execu-
tive Order No. 11556 [set out as a note under section 305 of Title
47, Telegraphs,  Telephones, and Radiotelegraphs],  Executive
Order  No. 11051  [set out as a note under section 2271  of this
Appendix],  the Presidential Memorandum  of August  21,  1963,
"Establishment of the  National  Communications  System", and
other appropriate authority, covering:
  (1)  Common carrier service,  (a) Extension, discontinuance,  or
reduction of common carrier facilities or services, and issuance of
appropriate authorizations for such facilities, services, and per-
sonnel in an emergency;  and control of all rates,  charges,  prac-
tices, classifications, and  regulations for service to Government
and non-Government users during an emergency,  in consonance
with overall national economic stabilization policies.
   (b)  Development and administration of priority systems for
public  correspondence and for the use and  resumption of leased
inter-city private line service in an emergency.
   (c)  Use of common carrier facilities  and services to overseas
points to meet vital needs in an emergency.
  (2)  Broadcasting service. Construction, activation, or deactiva-
tion of broadcasting facilities and services, the continuation  or
suspension of broadcasting services and facilities, and issuance of
appropriate authorizations for  such facilities, services, and per-
sonnel in an emergency.
  (3)  Safety and special radio services. Authorization, operation,
and use of safety and special radio services,  facilities, and person-
nel in the national interest in an emergency.
   (4)  Radio frequency assignment. Assignment of  radio frequen-
cies, and  their use by, Commission licensees in an emergency.
  (5)  Electromagnetic radiation. Closing of any radio station or
any device  capable of emitting electromagnetic radiation or sus-
pension or  amending any rules or regulations applicable thereto

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2145

in any emergency, except for those belonging to, or operated by,
any department or agency of the United States Government.
   (6) Investigation and enforcement. Investigation of violations
of pertinent  law and regultions  in an  emergency, and  develop-
ment of procedures designated to initiate, recommend, or other-
wise bring about appropriate enforcement actions required in the
interest of national security.

                Part 19—Federal Power Commission
   Section 1901.  Functions. The Federal Power Commission shall
assist the Department of the Interior in conformity with Part 7,
in the preparation of national  emergency plans and the  develop-
ment of preparedness programs for electric power and natural gas
in the areas as set forth in the  Memorandum of Agreement dated
August 9, 1962,  between the Secretary of the Interior  and the
Chairman of the Federal Power Commission.

              Part 20—General Services Administration
   Section 2001. Resume of Responsibilities. The Administrator of
General Services shall prepare national emergency plans and  de-
velop preparedness programs designed  to  permit modification  or
expansion of the activities of the  General Services Administration
under the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of
1949, as amended [see  short title note under  section 471 of Title
40, Public Buildings, Property,  and  Works]  and  other  statutes
prescribing the  duties and responsibilities of the Administrator.
These plans and programs shall include, but not be limited to: (1)
operation, maintenance, and protection of Federal buildings and
their sites; construction, alteration, and  repair of public build-
ings ; and acquisition, utilization,  and disposal  of real and personal
properties; (2)  public  utilities service management  for Federal
agencies;  (3) telecommunications to meet the essential  require-
ments of civilian activities of executive departments and agencies;
 (4)  transportation management to meet the traffic service require-
ments of civilian activities of Federal agencies; (5) records man-
agement; (6) Emergency Federal Register; (7) Government-wide
supply support;  (8) service to survival items stockpiles; (9)  na-
tional industrial reserve; (10) guidance and consultation to Gov-
ernment agencies regarding facilities protection measures; (11)
administration of assigned functions under the  Defense Produc-
tion Act [section 2061 et seq. of this Appendix] ;  and  (12) admin-
istration  and operation of the stockpile of strategic  and critical
materials in accordance with policies and guidance furnished  by
the Office of Emergency Preparedness.

-------
2146          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Sec. 2002. Functions. The  Administrator of General Services
shall:
     (1) Public buildings. Develop emergency plans and procedures
for the operation, maintenance, and protection of both existing
and  new Federally-owned and Federally-occupied buildings, and
construction, alteration, and  repair of public  buildings. Develop
emergency operating procedures for the control,  acquisition, as-
signment, and priority of occupancy of real property by the Fed-
eral Government and by State and local governments to the extent
they may be performing functions as agents of the Federal Gov-
ernment.
   (2)  Public  utility service management. Develop  emergency
operational plans and procedures for the claimancy, procurement,
and use of public utility  services for emergency  activities  of
executive agencies of the Government.
   (3)  Communications. Plan  for and provide,  operate, and main-
tain appropriate telecommunications facilities designed to meet
the essential requirements of Federal civilian departments and
agencies during an emergency within the framework of the Na-
tional  Communications System.  Plans  and programs  of the Ad-
ministrator shall  be  in consonance  with national telecommuni-
cations policies, plans, and  programs developed pursuant to Exec-
utive Order No. 10705 [set  out as a note under section  606 of Title
47,  Telegraphs,  Telephones, and  Radiotelegraphs],  Executive
Order No. 11556 [set out as  a note under section 305  of Title 47,
Telegraphs, Telephones, and Radiotelegraphs], Executive Order
No. 11051  [set out as a note under section 2271 of this Appendix],
and the Presidential Memorandum of August 21, 1963, "Establish-
ment of the National Communications System," or other appropri-
ate authority.
   (4)  Transportation. Develop plans and procedures  for  provid-
ing:  (a)  general transportation and traffic management services
to civilian activities of Federal agencies in connection with move-
ment of property  and  supplies, including the claimancy, contract-
ing, routing, and  accounting of Government  shipments by com-
mercial transportation in time of emergency; and (b)  motor vehi-
cle service to meet the administrative needs  of Federal agencies,
including dispatch and scheduled Government motor service at
and between headquarters, field offices, relocation sites, and other
installations of the Federal and State governments.
   (5) Records. Provide instructions and advice on appraisal, selec-
tion, preservation, arrangement, reference, reproduction, storage,
 and salvage of essential records needed for the operation of the

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS               2147

Federal Government after attack, on an emergency basis, includ-
ing a decentralized system.
  (6) Federal Register. Develop emergency procedures for provid-
ing and making available, on a decentralized basis, a Federal Reg-
ister of Presidential Proclamations and Executive Orders, Federal
administrative  regulations,  Federal emergency  notices and  ac-
tions, and Acts of Congress during a national emergency.
  (7)  Government-wide procurement  and supply. Prepare plans
and procedures for the coordination and/or operation of Govern-
ment-wide supply programs to meet the requirements of Federal
agencies under emergency conditions, including the development
of policies, methods, and procedures for  emergency procurement
and for emergency requisitioning  of  private property when  au-
thorized by law and  competent authority; identification of essen-
tial civil agency supply items  under the Federal catalog system;
development  of emergency  Federal specifications  and standards;
determination of sources of supply; procurement of personal prop
erty and nonpersonal services; furnishing appropriate  inspection
and contract administration services; and establishment, coordina-
tion, and/or  operation of emergency storage and  distribution fa-
cilities.
  (8) Survival item  stockpiles. Assist the Department  of Health,
Education, and Welfare, insofar as  civil defense medical stockpile
items under its jurisdiction are concerned, and the Department of
Defense, insofar as survival items under  its jurisdiction are con-
cerned, in formulating  plans and  programs for service activity
support relating  to  stockpiling of  such supplies and equipment.
The Administrator shall arrange  for the procurement,  storage,
maintenance,  inspection,  survey,  withdrawal, and  disposal  of
supplies and equipment in accordance with the provisions of inter-
agency agreements  with the departments concerned.
  (9)  National industrial reserve and machine tool program.  De-
velop plans for the custody of the industrial plants and production
equipment in the national industrial reserve and assist the Depart-
ment of Defense, in collaboration  with the Department of Com-
merce, in the development of plans and procedures for the disposi-
tion, emergency reactivation,  and  utilization  of  the  plants  and
equipment of this reserve in the custody of the Administrator.
  (10)  Excess and surplus  real and  personal property. Develop
plans and emergency operating procedures for the utilization of
excess  and surplus real and personal property by Federal Govern-
ment agencies with emergency assignments or by State and local
governmental units as directed, including review of the property
holdings of Federal agencies  which  do  not possess  emergency

-------
2148          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

functions to determine the availability of property for emergency
use, and including the disposal of real and personal property and
the rehabilitation of personal property.
   (11)  Facilities  protection and building and  shelter manager
service. In accordance with the guidance from the Department of
Defense, promote, with respect to Federal buildings and installa-
tions, a Government-wide  program (a)  to stimulate protection,
preparedness, and control in emergencies in order to minimize the
effects of  overt or covert attack, including dispersal of  facilities;
and  (b)  to  establish shelter manager  organizations,  including
safety and service personnel, shelter manager  service, first aid,
police, and evacuaton service.

   Sec.  2003. Defense Production. The Administrator of  General
Services shall assist the Office of Emergency Preparedness in the
formulation of plans and programs relating to the certification of
procurement programs, subsidy payments, and plant improvement
programs provided for by the Defense Production Act of 1950, as
amended  [section 2061 et seq.  of this Appendix].

   Sec.  2004. Strategic and Critical Materials Stockpiles. The Ad-
ministrator of General Services shall assist the Office of Emer-
gency Preparedness in formulating plans, programs, and reports
relating to the stockpiling  of  strategic  and critical  materials.
Within these plans and programs, the Administrator shall provide
for the procurement (for this purpose, procurement includes up-
grading,  rotation, and beneficiation), storage,  security,  mainte-
nance,  inspection, withdrawal, and  disposal of materials, supplies,
and equipment.

               Part 21—Interstate Commerce Commission

   Section 2101. Resume of Responsibilities. The Chairman of the
 Interstate Commerce Commission, under the coordinating author-
 ity  of  the Secretary of  Transportation, shall prepare  national
 emergency plans and develop  preparedness programs covering
 railroad utilization,  reduction of vulnerability, maintenance, resto-
 ration, and operation in an emergency (other than for the Alaska
 Railroad—see Section 1303(6)) ; motor carrier utilization,  reduc-
 tion of vulnerability, and operation in an emergency; inland wa-
 terway utilization of equipment and shipping, reduction of vulner-
 ability, and operation in an emergency; and also provide guidance
 and consultation  to  domestic surface transportation and  storage
 industries, as defined below, regarding  emergency preparedness

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2149

measures, and to States regarding development of their transpor-
tation plans in assigned areas.

  Sec. 2102. Definitions. As used in this part:
   (1) "Domestic surface transportation and storage" means rail,
motor, and inland water transportation facilities and services and
public storage;
   (2)  "Public storage" includes warehouses  and  other  places
which are used for the storage of property belonging to persons
other than the persons having the ownership or control of such
premises;
   (3) "Inland water transportation" includes shipping on all in-
land waterways and Great Lakes shipping engaged solely in  the
transportation of passengers or cargo between United States ports
on the Great Lakes;
   (4)  Specifically excluded,  for  the purposes of this part,  are
pipelines, petroleum and gas storage, agricultural food resources
storage, including the cold storage of food resources, the St. Lawr-
ence Seaway, ocean ports and Great Lakes ports and  port facili-
ties, highways, streets, roads, bridges, and related appurtenances,
maintenance of inland waterways, and any transportation owned
by or pre-allocated to the military.
   Sec. 2103. Transportation Functions. The Interstate Commerce
Commission shall:
   (1) Operational control. Develop plans with appropriate private
transportation and storage organizations and associations for the
coordination and direction of the use of domestic surface transpor-
tation and  storage  facilities for  movement of  passenger  and
freight traffic.
   (2) Emergency operations. Develop and maintain necessary or-
ders and regulations for the operation of  domestic surface trans-
port and storage industries in an emergency.

         Part 22—National Aeronautics and Space Administration

   Section  2201. Functions. The  Administrator  of  the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration shall:
   (1) Research and development. Adapt and utilize the scientific
and technological  capability  of  the National  Aeronautics  and
Space Administration, consistent with over-all requirements, to
meet priority needs of the programs of the Federal Government in
an emergency.  This  will include the direction and conduct of es-
sential research and  development activities relating to (a)  air-
craft, spacecraft, and launch vehicles, (b)  associated instrumenta-

-------
2150          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

tion, guidance, control and payload, propulsion, and communica-
tions systems, (c) scientific phenomena affecting both manned and
unmanned space flights,  (d)  the life sciences (biology, medicine,
and  psychology) as they apply to aeronautics and space, and (e)
atmospheric and geophysical sciences.
   (2) Military support. Provide direct assistance as requested by
the Department of Defense and other agencies in support of the
military effort. This may include (a) undertaking urgent projects
to develop superior  aircraft,  spacecraft, launch  vehicles,  and
weapons systems, (b) developing  methods to counter novel or
revolutionary enemy  weapons  systems,  (c)  providing technical
advice and assistance on matters involving air and space activi-
ties, and (d)  furnishing personnel and facilities to assist in emer-
gency  repairs of equipment  deficiencies and  for  other essential
purposes.

                Part 23—National Science Foundation

   Section 2301. Functions. The Director of the National  Science
Foundation shall:
   (1)  Manpower functions. Assist the  Department of Labor in
sustaining readiness for the mobilization of civilian manpower by:
(a)  maintaining the Foundation's register of scientific and techni-
cal personnel in such form and at such locations as will assure
maximum  usefulness  in  an emergency;  (b) being prepared for
rapid expansion of the Foundation's current operation as a central
clearing house for information  covering all scientific and technical
personnel in  the United States  and  its possessions; and  (c) devel-
oping, in consultation with the  Department of Labor, the Selective
Service System, the  Department  of  Defense, and the Office of
Science and  Technology, plans and procedures to assure the most
effective distribution  and utilization of the Nation's scientific and
engineering manpower in an emergency.
   (2)  Special functions, (a)  Provide leadership  in developing,
with the assistance of Federal and State agencies and appropriate
nongovernmental organizations, the ability to mobilize scientists,
in consonance with over-all civilian manpower mobilization pro-
grams, to  perform or assist  in performance of special tasks, in-
cluding the  identification of and defense against unconventional
warfare;  (b) advance the national radiological defense capability
by including, in consultation with appropriate agencies, pertinent
scientific  information and radiological defense techniques in the
Foundation's scientific institute program for science, mathematics,
and engineering teachers; (c)  assemble data  on the location and

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2151

character of major scientific research facilities, including non-gov-
ernmental as well as government facilities, and their normal in-
ventories of types of equipment and  instruments which would be
useful in identification and analysis  of hazards to human life in
the aftermath of enemy attack; and  (d) prepare to carry  on
necessary programs for basic research and for training of scien-
tific manpower.

                Part 24—Railroad Retirement Board
  Section 2401. Functions. The Railroad Retirement Board shall:
  (1) Manpower functions. Within the framework of the over-all
manpower plans and programs of the Department of Labor, assist
in the mobilization of civilian manpower in an emergency by de-
veloping plans for the recruitment and referral of that segment of
the Nation's manpower resources subject  to the  Railroad Retire-
ment and Railroad Unemployment Insurance Acts [sections 228a
et seq. and 351 et seq. of Title 45, Railroads].
  (2) Benefit payments. Develop plans for administering, under
emergency conditions, the essential aspects of the Railroad Retire-
ment Act and Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act  [sections
228a et  seq. and 351 et seq. of Title 45, Railroads] consistent with
overall  Federal  plans  for the continuation  of benefit payments
after an enemy attack.

             Part 25—Securities and Exchange Commission
  Section 2501. Functions. The Securities  and Exchange Commis-
sion shall collaborate with the  Secretary  of the Treasury in the
development of emergency financial control plans, programs, pro-
cedures, and regulations for:
  (1) Stock  trading.  Temporary closure of security exchanges,
suspension of redemption rights, and freezing of stock and bond
prices,  if required in  the interest of maintaining economic con-
trols.
  (2) Modified trading. Development of plans designed to reesta-
blish and maintain  a stable and orderly market for securities
when the situation permits under emergency conditions.
  (3) Protection of securities.  Provision  of a national  records
system  which will make it possible to establish current ownership
of securities  in the event major trading centers and depositories
are destroyed.
   (4)  Flow of capital. The control of the formation  and flow of
private capital as it relates to new securities offerings or expan-
sion of  prior offerings for the purpose of establishing or reesta-

-------
2152          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

blishing industries in relation to the Nation's needs in or following
a national emergency.
  (5) Flight of capital.  The prevention of the flight of capital
outside this country, in coordination with the Secretary of  Com-
merce, and the impounding of securities in the hands  of enemy
aliens.
               Part 26—Small Business Administration
  Section 2601. Functions. The Administrator of the  Small  Busi-
ness Administration shall:
  (1) Prime contract authority. Develop plans  to administer a
program for the acquisition of prime contracts by the Administra-
tion and, in turn, for negotiating or otherwise letting of subcon-
tracts to capable small business concerns in an emergency.
   (2) Resource information. Provide data on  facilities, invento-
ries, and potential production capacity of small business concerns
 to all interested agencies.
   (3) Procurement. Develop plans to determine jointly with Fed-
eral procurement agencies,  as  appropriate, which defense con-
tracts are to go to small business concerns and  to certify to the
productive and financial ability of small  concerns to perform spe-
cific contracts, as required.
   (4) Loans for plant modernization. Develop plans for providing
 emergency assistance to  essential individual industrial establish-
 ments through direct loans or participation loans for the financing
 of production facilities and equipment.
   (5) Resource pools. Develop plans for encouraging and approv-
 ing small business defense production and  research and develop-
 ment pools.
   (6) Financial assistance. Develop plans to make loans, directly
 or in participation with private lending institutions, to small busi-
 ness concerns and to groups or pools of such concerns, to small
 business investment  companies, and to State and local develop-
 ment companies to provide them with funds for lending to small
 business concerns, for defense and essential  civilian purposes.
                 Part 27—Tennessee Valley Authority
   Section 2701. Functions. The Board of Directors of the Tennes-
 see Valley Authority shall:
    (1) Electric power. Assist the Department of the Interior in the
 development of plans for the integration of the Tennessee  Valley
 Authority  power system into national  emergency programs and
 prepare  plans  for  the  emergency management,  operation, and
 maintenance of the system and for its essential expansion.

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2153

  (2) Waterways. Assist the Interstate Commerce Commission,
under the coordinating authority  of the Secretary of Transporta-
tion, in the development of plans for integration and  control of
inland waterway transportation systems and, in cooperation with
the Department of Defense and the Department of the Interior,
prepare plans for the management, operation, and maintenance of
the river control system in the Tennessee River and certain of its
tributaries for navigation during an emergency.
  (3) Flood control.  Develop plans and maintain its river control
operations for the prevention or control of floods caused by natu-
ral  phenomena  or overt and covert attack affecting the Tennessee
River System and, in so doing, collaborate with the Department of
Defense with respect to the control of water in the lower Ohio and
Mississippi Rivers.
   (4) Emergency health services and sanitary water supplies. As-
sist the Department of  Health,  Education, and  Welfare in the
development of plans  and programs covering emergency health
services, civilian  health  manpower, and health resources in the
Tennessee Valley authority area and, in collaboration with the
Department of  the Interior and the  Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and  Welfare, prepare plans for the management, operation,
and maintenance of  the  Tennessee  River System consistent with
the needs for sanitary public water supplies, waste disposal, and
vector control.
   (5) Coordination of water use. Develop plans for determining or
proposing priorities  for the use of water by the Tennessee Valley
Authority in the event of conflicting claims arising from the func-
tions listed above.
   (6) Fertilizer. Assist the Department of Agriculture in the de-
velopment of plans  for  the distribution and claimancy  of  ferti-
lizer ; assist the Department of Commerce and the Department of
Defense in the  development of Tennessee Valley Authority produc-
tion quotas and any essential expansion  of production facilities,
and prepare plans for the management, operation, and mainte-
nance of its facilities for the manufacture of nitrogen and  phos-
 phorous fertilizers.
   (7) Munitions production. Perform chemical research in muni-
tions as  requested  by  the Department of  Defense, maintain
standby munitions production facilities, and develop plans for con-
 verting and utilizing fertilizer facilities as required in support of
the Department of Defense's munitions program.
   (8)  Land management.  Develop  plans for  the maintenance,

-------
2154          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

management, and utilization  of Tennessee Valley Authority-con-
trolled lands in the interest of an emergency economy.
  (9) Food and forestry. Assist the Department of Agriculture in
the development of plans for the harvesting and processing of fish
and game, and the Department of Commerce in the development
of plans for the production and processing of forest products.
  (10) Coordination with Valley States. Prepare plans and agree-
ments with Tennessee Valley States, consistent with Federal pro-
grams, for appropriate integration of Tennessee Valley Authority
and State plans for the use of available Tennessee Valley Author-
ity resources.
           Part 28—United States Civil Service Commission
  Section 2801. Functions. The United States Civil  Service Com-
mission shall:
  (1) Personnel system. Prepare  plans for adjusting the Federal
civilian personnel system to simplify administration and to  meet
emergency demands.
  (2) Utilization. Develop policies and implementing procedures
designed to assist Federal agencies in achieving the  most effective
utilization of the Federal Government's civilian  manpower in  an
emergency.
  (3) Manpower policies.  As the  representative  of the Federal
Government as  an employer, participate, as  appropriate, in the
formulation of national and  regional  manpower policies as they
affect Federal civilian personnel and establish implementing poli-
cies as necessary.
  (4) Manpower administration.  Prepare plans, in  consonance
with national  manpower policies  and programs, for the adminis-
tration of emergency civilian manpower and employment policies
within the executive  branch of  the Government,  including the
issuance and enforcement of regulations to implement such poli-
cies.
  (5) Wage and salary stabilization. Participate, as appropriate,
with the Office of Emergency Preparedness and the Department of
Labor in the formulation of national and regional wage and salary
stabilization  policies  as they affect Federal civilian  personnel.
Within the  framework of such  policies,  prepare plans for the
implementation  of such policies and controls established for em-
ployees within the executive branch of the Government, including
the issuance and enforcement of necessary regulations.
  (6) Assistance. Develop plans for rendering personnel manage-

-------
                    EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2155

ment and staffing assistance to new and expanding Federal agen-
cies.
  (7) Recruiting. Develop plans for the coordination and control
of civilian recruiting policies and practices by all Federal agencies
in order to increase the effectiveness of the total recruitment ef-
forts during an emergency and to prevent undesirable recruitment
practices.
  (8) Reassignment. Develop plans to facilitate the reassignment
or transfer of Federal civilian employees, including the movement
of employees from one agency  or  location to another agency or
location, in order to meet the most urgent needs of the executive
branch during an emergency.
  (9) Registration. Develop plans and procedures for a nation-
wide system  of post-attack registration of Federal employees to
provide a means for locating and returning to duty those employ-
ees  who become physically separated from their agencies after an
enemy attack, and to provide for the maximum utilization of the
skills of surviving employees.
  (10) Deferment. Develop plans and procedures for a system to
control Government requests for the selective service deferment of
employees in the executive branch of the Federal Government and
in the municipal government of the District of Columbia.
  (11) Investigation. Prepare plans, in coordination with agencies
having responsibilities in the personnel security field, for the con-
duct of national agency checks and inquiries,  limited suitability
investigations, and full field investigations under emergency con-
ditions.
  (12) Salaries, wages, and benefits. Develop plans for operating
under emergency conditions the essential aspects  of salary and
wage systems and such benefit systems as the Federal Employees
Retirement System, the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance
Program, the Federal Employees and  Retired Federal Employees
Health Benefits Programs, and the  Federal Employees Compensa-
tion Program.
  (13) Federal manpower mobilization. Assist Federal agencies in
establishing manpower plans to meet  their own emergency  man-
power  requirements; identify major or special manpower prob-
lems of individual Federal agencies and the  Federal  Government
as a whole in mobilizing a civilian work force to meet  essential
emergency requirements;  identify sources  of emergency  man-
power supply for all agencies where manpower problems are indi-
cated ; and develop Government-wide  plans for the use of surplus
Federal civilian manpower.

-------
2156          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  (14) Distribution of manpower. Participate in the formulation
of policies and decisions on the distribution of the nation's civilian
manpower resources,  obtain appropriate civilian manpower data
from Federal agencies, and establish necessary implementing poli-
cies and procedures within the Executive Branch.
  (15) Training. Develop, organize, and conduct, as appropriate,
interagency training  programs in emergency personnel  manage-
ment for Federal employees.

             Part 28A—United States Information Agency
  Section 2850. Functions, (a)  The Director of the United States
Information Agency shall prepare national emergency plans and
develop preparedness programs for the continuation  of  essential
emergency foreign information activitites. These plans  and pro-
grams shall be designed to develop a state of readiness which will
permit continuing necessary activities under all conditions of na-
tional emergency including attack upon the United States.
   (b)  The Director shall (1)  develop plans for the formulation
and execution of foreign information programs utilizing the Agen-
cy's  overseas posts and all media designed to promote an intelli-
gent understanding abroad of the status of the emergency within
the  United States and the efforts, policies, activities, needs, and
aims of the United States in dealing with the international situa-
tion then existing; (2) develop emergency plans and programs,
and  emergency organizational structures  required thereby, as an
integral  part of the  continuing activities  of the  United States
Information Agency on the basis that it will have the responsibil-
ity of carrying on such programs during an emergency;  (3) pro-
vide and maintain the capability necessary for simultaneous direct
radio broadcasting in major world languages to all areas of the
world  and wireless teletype to all United  States Embassies; (4)
provide advice to the  Executive Branch on foreign opinion, and its
implications for United  States policies,  programs,  and official
statements; (5) maintain liaison with the information agencies of
friendly nations for  the  purpose of relating the  United States
Government information  programs and facilities to those of such
nations; (6) participate in the development of policy  with regard
to the psychological aspects of defense and develop plans for as-
sisting the appropriate agencies in the execution of psychological
operations with special attention to overseas crises short of war;
 (7)  maintain United  States Information Service staffs abroad for
the conduct of public information for all  agencies of the Govern-
ment, recognizing that in  a theater of operations the United States

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2157

Information Agency  would make available  to  the appropriate
Commander all United States citizen personnel on the staff of the
Agency, who agree to remain, to serve in support of psychological
operations;  and  (8)  lend  appropriate  support  in  psychological
warfare to the military  command in the theater or  theaters of
active military operations, and provide daily guidance and basic
informational materials.
   (c) The Director shall insure development of the appropriate
plans necessary under this  Part and  issue emergency instructions
required to implement all appropriate plans developed under this
Part.

                 Part 29—Veterans Administration
   Section 2901. Functions.  The Administrator of Veterans Affairs
shall develop policies, plans, and procedures for  the performance
of emergency functions with respect to the continuation or resto-
ration of  authorized  programs  of the  Veterans Administration
under all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon
the United States. These include:
   (1)  The emergency conduct of inpatient and outpatient care
and treatment in Veterans Administration medical  facilities  and
participation with the Departments of Defense and Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare as provided for in interagency agreements.
   (2) The emergency conduct of compensation, pension, rehabili-
tation, education, and insurance payments consistent with  over-all
Federal plans for the continuation of Federal benefit payments.
   (3)  The emergency performance  of insurance and loan guar-
anty functions in accordance  with indirect stabilization  policies
and controls designed to deal with various emergency conditions.

                    Part 30—General Provisions
   Section 3001. Resource Management.  In consonance with  the
national preparedness, security, and mobilizaton readiness plans,
programs, and operations  of the Office of Emergency Prepared-
ness under Executive Order No. 11051 of September, 7, 1962  [set
out as a note under section 2271 of this Appendix], and subject to
the provisions of the preceding parts the head of each department
and agency shall:
   (1)  Priorities and  allocations. Develop systems for the emer-
gency application of priorities and allocations to the production,
distribution, and use of resources for which he has  been assigned
responsibility.
   (2) Requirements. Assemble, develop as appropriate, and evalu-

-------
2158          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

ate requirements for assigned resources, taking into account esti-
mated needs for military, atomic  energy,  civilian, and  foreign
purposes. Such evaluation shall take into consideration geographi-
cal distribution of requirements under emergency conditions.
   (3) Evaluation. Assess  assigned resources in order to estimate
availability from all sources  under an emergency situation, ana-
lyze resource availabilities in relation to estimated requirements,
and develop appropriate  recommendations and programs, includ-
ing those necessary for the maintenance of an adequate mobiliza-
tion base. Provide data and assistance before and after attack for
national resource analysis purposes of the  Office of Emergency
Preparedness.
   (5)  Claimancy. Prepare plans to claim from  the appropriate
agency supporting materials, manpower, equipment, supplies, and
services which would be needed to carry out  assigned responsibili-
ties and other essential functions of his department or agency, and
cooperate with other agencies in developing programs to insure
availability of such  resources in an emergency.

   Sec. 3002.  Facilities protection and warfare effects monitoring
and reporting. In consonance with the national preparedness, secu-
rity, and mobilization  readiness plans,  programs, and operations
of the Office of Emergency Preparedness under Executive Order
No. 11051 [set out as a note under section 2271 of this Appendix],
and with the national civil defense plans, programs, and opera-
tions  of the  Department  of Defense under  Executive Order  No.
10952 [set out as a  note under section 2271 of this Appendix], the
head of each department and agency shall:
   (1)  Facilities protection. Provide facilities protection guidance
material adapted to the  needs of the facilities and services con-
cerned and promote a  national program to stimulate disaster pre-
paredness and control in order to minimize  the effects of  overt or
covert attack on facilities or other resources for which he  has
management responsibility. Guidance shall include, but not be lim-
ited to, organization and  training of facility employees, personnel
shelter, evacuation plans, records  protection, continuity  of man-
agement, emergency repair, dispersal of facilities, and mutual aid
assocaitions  for an  emergency.
   (2) Welfare effects monitoring and reporting. Maintain a capa-
 bility, both  at national and  field levels, to estimate the effects of
 attack on assigned resources and to collaborate with and provide
 data to the Office of Emergency Preparedness, the Department of
 Defense, and other agencies, as appropriate, in verifying and up-

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2159

dating estimates of resource status through exchanges of data and
mutual assistance, and provide for the detection, identification,
monitoring and reporting of such warfare effects at selected facili-
ties under his operation or control.
  (3)  Salvage and rehabilitation.  Develop plans for salvage, de-
contamination, and rehabilitation of facilities involving resources
under his jurisdiction.
  (4)  Shelter. In conformity with national shelter policy, where
authorized to engage in  building construction, plan,  design, and
construct such  buildings to protect the public  to the maximum
extent feasible against the hazards that could result from an at-
tack upon  the United States with nuclear  weapons; and where
empowered to extend Federal financial assistance, encourage re-
cipients of such financial assistance to use standards for planning
design and construction  which will maximize protection  for the
public.

  Sec. 3003. Critical skills and occupations, (a) The Secretaries of
Defense, Commerce, and  Labor shall carry out the  mandate of the
National Security  Council, dated February 15, 1968, to "maintain
a continuing surveillance over the Nation's manpower needs and
identify any particular occupation or skill that may warrant quali-
fying for deferment on a uniform national basis." In addition, the
Secretaries of Defense, Commerce, Labor, and Health, Education,
and Welfare shall carry out the mandate of the National Security
Council to  "maintain a continuing surveillance over the Nation's
manpower and education needs  to identify  any  area  of graduate
study that may warrant  qualifying for deferment  in the national
interest." In carrying out these functions, the Secretaries con-
cerned shall consult with the National Science  Foundation  with
respect to scientific manpower requirements.
   (b)  The Secretaries of Commerce and Labor shall maintain and
issue, as necessary, lists of all essential activities and critical occu-
pations that may  be  required for  emergency preparedness  pur-
poses.

  Sec. 3004. Research. Within the  framework of research  policies
and objectives established by the Office of Emergency Prepared-
ness, the head of each department and agency shall supervise or
conduct research in  areas directly concerned with carrying  out
emergency preparedness responsibilities,  designate  representa-
tives for necessary ad hoc or task force groups, and provide advice
and assistance to other agencies in planning for  research in areas
involving each agency's interest.

-------
2160          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Sec. 3005. Stockpiles. The head of each department and agency,
with appropriate emergency responsibilities, shall assist the Office
of Emergency Preparedness in formulating  and carrying  out
plans for stockpiling of strategic and critical materials, and sur-
vival items.
  Sec. 3006. Direct Economic Controls. The head of each depart-
ment and agency  shall  cooperate with the Office of Emergency
Preparedness  and  the Federal financial agencies in the develop-
ment of emergency preparedness measures involving emergency
financial  and credit measures, as well as price, rent, wage and
salary stabilization, and consumer rationing programs.

  Sec. 3007.  Financial Aid. The  head of  each  department and
agency shall develop plans and procedures in cooperation with the
Federal financial  agencies for financial and credit assistance to
those segments of the private sector for which he is responsible in
the event such assistance is needed under emergency conditions.
  Sec. 3008. Functional Guidance.  The head of each department
and  agency in carrying out the functions assigned to him by this
order, shall be guided by the following:
  (1) National program guidance. In consonance with the national
preparedness, security, and  mobilization  readiness  plans, pro-
grams, and operations of the Office of Emergency Preparedness
under Executive Order No. 11051  [set out as a note under section
2271 of this Appendix], and with the national civil defense  plans,
programs, and operations of the Department of Defense, technical
guidance shall be  provided to State and local governments and
instrumentalities thereof, to the end that all planning concerned
with functions assigned herein will be effectively coordinated. Re-
lations with the appropriate segment of the  private sector shall be
maintained to foster mutual understanding of federal emergency
plans.
  (2) Interagency  coordination. Emergency preparedness  func-
tions shall be coordinated by the head of the department or agency
having primary responsibility with all  other departments and
agencies having supporting functions related thereto.
  (3) Emergency preparedness. Emergency plans, programs, and
an appropriate state of readiness, including organizational  readi-
ness, shall be  developed as an integral part  of the continuing
activities of  each  department or agency on  the basis  that  the
department or agency will have the responsibility for carrying out
such plans and programs during an emergency. The head of each
department or agency shall be prepared to implement all appropri-

-------
                    EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2161

ate plans developed under this order. Modifications and temporary
organizational changes, based on emergency conditions, shall be in
accordance with policy determinations by the President.
   (4) Professional liaison. Mutual  understanding and support of
emergency preparedness activities  shall  be  fostered, and the Na-
tional Defense Executive Reserve shall be promoted by maintain-
ing relations with the appropriate non-governmental sectors.

  Sec. 3009. Training. The head of each department and agency
shall  develop  and direct  training programs which  incorporate
emergency preparedness  and civil defense training  information
programs necessary to insure the optimum operational effective-
ness of assigned resources, systems, and facilities.

  Sec. 3010. Emergency Public Information. In consonance with
such emergency public  information plans  and central program
decisions  of the  Office  of Emergency  Preparedness, and with
plans, programs, and procedures established by the Department of
Defense to provide continuity of programming for the Emergency
Broadcast System, the head of each department and agency shall:
   (1) Obtain and provide information as to the emergency func-
tions or assignments of the individual department or agency for
dissemination  to the American people during the emergency, in
accordance with arrangements made by the Office of Emergency
Preparedness.
   (2) Determine requirements  and arrange for prerecordings to
provide continuity of program service over the Emergency Broad-
cast System so that the American people can receive information,
advice, and guidance pertaining to the implementation of the  civil
defense and emergency preparedness plans or assignments of  each
individual department or agency.

  Sec. 3011. Emergency Actions. This order does not confer au-
thority to put into effect any emergency plan, procedure,  policy,
program,  or course of  action prepared or developed  pursuant to
this order. Plans so developed may be effectuated only in the event
that authority for such effectuation is provided by a  law enacted
by the Congress or by an order or directive issued by the Presi-
dent pursuant to statutes or the Constitution of the United States.

  Sec. 3012. Redelegation. The head of  each department  and
agency is hereby authorized to  redelegate the functions  assigned
to him by this order, and to authorize successive redelegations to
agencies or instrumentalities of the United States, and to officers
and employees of the United States.

-------
2162         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Sec. 3013. Transfer of Functions. Any emergency preparedness
function under this order, or parts thereof, may be transferred
from one department or agency to another with the consent of the
heads of the organizations involved and with the concurrence of
the Director of the Office of Emergency  Preparedness. Any new
emergency preparedness function may be assigned to the head of a
department or agency  by the Director of the Office of Emergency
Preparedness by mutual consent.
  Sec. 3014. Retention of Existing Authority. Except as provided
in Section 3015, nothing in this order shall be deemed to derogate
from any now existing assignment of functions to any department
or agency or officer thereof made by statute, Executive order, or
Presidential directives, including Memoranda.
  Sec. 3015. Revoked Orders. The following are hereby revoked:
   (1) Defense Mobilization Order VI-2 of December 11,1953.
   (2) Defense Mobilization Order 1-12 of October 5,1954.
   (3) Executive Order No. 10312 of December 10,1951.
   (4) Executive Order No. 10346 of April 17,1952.
   (5) Executive Order No. 10997 of February 16,1962.
   (6) Executive Order No. 10998 of February 16,1962.
   (7) Executive Order No. 10999 of February 16,1962.
   (8) Executive Order No. 11000 of February 16,1962.
   (9) Executive Order No. 11001 of February 16,1962.
   (10) Executive Order  No. 11002 of February 16, 1962.
   (11) Executive Order No. 11003 of February 16,1962.
   (12) Executive Order No. 11004 of February 16,1962.
   (13) Executive Order No. 11005 of February 16,1962.
   (14) Executive Order No. 11087 of February 26, 1963.
   (15) Executive Order No. 11088 of February 26,1963.
   (16) Executive Order No. 11089 of February 26,1963.
   (17) Executive Order No. 11090 of February 26,1963.
   (18) Executive Order No. 11091 of February 26,1963.
   (19) Executive Order No. 11092 of February 26, 1963.
   (20) Executive Order No. 11093 of February 26,1963.
   (21) Executive Order No. 11094 of February 26,1963.
   (22) Executive Order No. 11095 of February 26,1963.
   (23) Executive Order No. 11310 of October 11,1966.
                                           RICHARD NIXON

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS               2163

      2.3  E.G. 11507, PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND
   ABATEMENT OF AIR AND WATER POLLUTION AT
                   FEDERAL FACILITIES
              February 4, 1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 2573 (1970)

PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND ABATEMENT OP AIR AND WATER POL-
                 LUTION AT FEDERAL FACILITIES

  By virtue  of the authority vested in me as President of the
United States and in furtherance of the purpose and policy of the
Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1857) [section 1857 et seq.
of  this  title],  the  Federal Water Pollution  Control  Act, as
amended (33 U.S.C. 466) [section 466 et seq. of Title 33, Naviga-
tion and Navigable Waters], and the National Environmental Pol-
icy Act of 1969  (Public Law No. 91-190, approved January  1,
1970) [this chapter], it is ordered as follows:

  Section 1. Policy. It is the intent of this order that the  Federal
Government in the design, operation, and maintenance of its facil-
ities shall provide leadership in the  nationwide effort to protect
and enhance the quality of our air and water resources.

  Sec. 2. Definitions. As used in this order:
   (a) The term "respective Secretary" shall mean the Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare in  matters pertaining to air
pollution control  and the Secretary of the Interior in  matters
pertaining to water pollution control.
   (b) The term "agencies" shall mean the departments, agencies,
and establishments of the executive branch.
  (c) The term "facilities" shall mean the buildings, installations,
structures, public works, equipment, aircraft,  vessels, and other
vehicles and property, owned by or constructed or manufactured
for the purpose of leasing to the Federal Government.
   (d) The term  "air and  water quality standards" shall mean
respectively the quality standards and related plans of implemen-
tation, including  emission standards,  adopted pursuant  to the
Clean Air Act, as amended, and the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act, as amended, or as prescribed pursuant to section  4 (b) of
this order.
  (e) The term "performance specifications" shall mean permissi-
ble limits of emissions, discharges, or other values applicable to a
particular Federal facility that would, as a minimum, provide for
conformance with air and  water quality  standards  as  defined
herein.
  (f) The term "United  States" shall  mean the fifty States, the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Vir-
gin Islands, and Guam.

-------
2164          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Sec. 3. Responsibilities, (a) Heads of agencies shall, with regard
to all facilities under their jurisdiction:
  (1) Maintain review and surveillance to ensure that the stand-
ards set forth in section 4 of this order are met on a continuing
basis.
  (2) Direct particular attention to identifying potential air and
water quality problems associated with the use and production of
new materials and make provisions for their prevention and con-
trol.
  (3) Consult  with the respective Secretary concerning the best
techniques and methods available for the protection and enhance-
ment of air and water quality.
  (4) Develop and publish procedures, within six months of the
date of  this order, to ensure that the facilities under their jurisdic-
tion are in conformity with this order. In the preparation of such
procedures there shall be timely and appropriate consultation with
the respective Secretary.
   (b) The respective Secretary shall provide leadership in imple-
menting this order, including the provision of technical advice and
assistance to the heads of agencies in connection with their duties
and responsibilities under this order.
   (c) The Council on Environmental Quality  shall maintain con-
tinuing review of the implementation of this order and shall, from
time to time, report to the President thereon.
  Sec.  4.  Standards, (a)  Heads  of agencies shall ensure that all
facilities  under  their  jurisdiction are designed,  operated,  and
maintained so as to meet the following requirements:
   (1) Facilities shall conform to air and water quality standards
as defined in section 2(d) of this order.  In those cases  where no
such air or water quality  standards  are in force for a particular
geographical area, Federal facilities in that area shall conform to
the  standards  established  pursuant to subsection  (b) of this sec-
tion. Federal facilities shall also conform to the performance spec-
ifications provided for in this order.
   (2)  Actions shall be taken to avoid or minimize wastes created
through the complete cycle of operations of each facility.
   (3)  The use of municipal or  regional waste collection or dis-
 posal systems  shall be the preferred  method of disposal of wastes
 from Federal  facilities. Whenever use of such a system is  not
feasible or appropriate, the heads of  agencies concerned shall take
 necessary measures for the satisfactory disposal of such wastes,
including:
   (A)  When appropriate, the installation and operation  of their

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                 2165

own waste treatment and disposal facilities in a manner consistent
with this section.
  (B) The provision of trained manpower, laboratory and other
supporting facilities as appropriate to meet the requirements of
this section.
  (C) The establishment of requirements that operators of Fed-
eral pollution control facilities meet levels of proficiency consistent
with the operator certification requirements of the State in which
the facility is located. In the absence of such State requirements
the respective Secretary may issue guidelines, pertaining to opera-
tor qualifications and performance, for the use of heads of agen-
cies.
  (4)  The use,  storage, and handling of all materials, including
but not limited to, solid fuels, ashes, petroleum products, and other
chemical and biological agents, shall be carried out so as to avoid
or minimize the possibilities for water  and air pollution. When
appropriate, preventive measure shall be taken to entrap spillage
or discharge or otherwise to prevent accidental pollution. Each
agency, in consultation with the respective Secretary, shall estab-
lish appropriate emergency plans and procedures for dealing with
accidental pollution.
  (5)  No waste shall be disposed of or discharged in  such a
manner as could result in  the pollution of ground water which
would endanger  the health or welfare of the public.
  (6)  Discharges of radioactivity shall be in accordance with the
applicable rules, regulations,  or  requirements of the  Atomic
Energy Commission  and with the  policies and guidance of the
Federal  Radiation  Council  as  published  in  the  FEDERAL
REGISTER.
  (b)  In  those  cases where there  are  no  air  or water  quality
standards as defined  in section 2(d) of  this order in force for a
particular geographic area or in those cases where more  stringent
requirements  are deemed  advisable for Federal  facilities, the
respective Secretary,  in consultation  with appropriate Federal,
State, interstate, and local agencies, may issue regulations estab-
lishing air or water quality  standards  for the purpose  of  this
order, including related schedules for  implementation.
   (c)  The heads of agencies, in  consultation with the respective
Secretary, may from  time to time identify facilities  or uses
thereof which are  to be exempted, including  temporary relief,
from provisions of this order in the interest of national security or
in extraordinary cases where it is in the national interest. Such
exemptions shall be reviewed periodically by the respective Secre-
tary and the heads  of the agencies concerned. A report on exemp-

-------
2166          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

tions granted shall be submitted to the Council on Environmental
Quality periodically.
  Sec. 5. Procedures for abatement of air and water pollution at
existing Federal facilities,  (a)  Actions necessary to meet the re-
quirements of subsections  (a)  (1)  and  (b)  of  section 4 of this
order pertaining to air and water pollution at existing facilities
are to be completed or under way no later than December 31, 1972.
In cases where an enforcement conference called pursuant to law
or air and water quality standards require earlier actions, the
earlier date shall be applicable.
  (b) In order to ensure full compliance with the requirements of
section  5 (a)  and to facilitate budgeting  for necessary corrective
and preventive measures, heads of agencies  shall present to the
Director of the Bureau of the Budget by June 30, 1970, a plan to
provide for such improvements as may be necessary to meet the
required date. Subsequent revisions needed to  keep any such plan
up-to-date shall be promptly submitted to the  Director of the Bu-
reau of the Budget.
  (c) Heads  of agencies shall notify the respective Secretary as to
the performance specifications  proposed for each facility to meet
the requirements of subsections 4 (a) (1) and (b) of this order.
Where the respective Secretary finds that such performance speci-
fications are  not adequate to  meet such requirements,  he shall
consult with  the agency head and the latter shall thereupon de-
velop adequate performance specifications.
  (d)  As may be found necessary, heads of agencies may submit
•requests to the Director of the Bureau of the Budget for exten-
sions  of time for a project beyond  the time  specified in section
5(a). The Director, in consultation  with the respective Secretary,
may approve such requests if the Director deems that such project
is not technically feasible  or immediately necessary to meet the
requirements of subsections 4(a) and (b). Full justification as to
the extraordinary circumstances necessitating any such extension
shall be required.
  (e)  Heads of agencies shall  not use for any other purpose any
of the amounts appropriated and apportioned for corrective and
preventive  measures  necessary to meet  the  requirements of
subsection  (a) for  the fiscal year ending June 30,  1971, and for
any subsequent fiscal year.
  Sec. 6. Procedures for new Federal facilities, (a) Heads of agen-
cies shall ensure that the requirements of section 4  of this order
are considered at the earliest possible stage of planning for new
facilities.

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2167

   (b)  A request for funds to defray the cost  of  designing  and
constructing new facilities in the United States shall be included
in the  annual budget estimates of an agency only if such request
includes funds to defray the costs of such measures  as may be
necessary to assure that the  new facility will meet the require-
ments  of section 4 of this order.
   (c)  Heads of agencies shall notify the respective Secretary as to
the performance specifications proposed for each facility when
action  is necessary to meet the requirements of subsections 4 (a)
(1) and (b) of this  order. Where the respective Secretary finds
that such performance specifications are not adequate to meet such
requirements he shall consult with the agency head and the latter
shall thereupon develop  adequate performance specifications.
   (d)  Heads of agencies shall give due consideration to the qual-
ity of  air and water resources when facilities are constructed or
operated outside the United States.

  Sec. 7. Procedures for Federal water resources projects, (a) All
water  resources projects of the Departments of Agriculture, the
Interior, and the Army, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and the
United States Section of the  International Boundary  and Water
Commission shall be consistent with the requirements of section 4
of this order. In addition, all such projects shall be presented for
the consideration of the Secretary of the Interior at the earliest
feasible stage if they involve  proposals or recommendations with
respect to the authorization or constructio'n of any  Federal water
resources project in the United States. The Secretary of the Inte-
rior shall review plans  and supporting data for all such projects
relating to water quality, and shall prepare a report to the head of
the responsible agency describing the potential impact of the pro-
ject on water quality, including recommendations concerning  any
changes or other measures with respect thereto which he considers
to be necessary  in  connection with the design,  construction,  and
operation of the project.
   (b)  The report of the Secretary of the Interior shall  accompany
at the  earliest practicable stage any report proposing authoriza-
tion or construction,  or a request for funding,  of such a water
resource project. In any case  in which the Secretary of the Inte-
rior fails to submit  a report within 90 days after receipt of project
plans,  the head  of  the agency concerned may propose authoriza-
tion, construction, or funding of  the project without such an ac-
companying report. In  such a case, the  head of the agency con-
cerned shall explicitly state in his request or report concerning the

-------
2168          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

project that the Secretary of the Interior has not reported on the
potential impact of the project on water quality-

  Sec. 8. Saving provisions. Except to the extent that they are
inconsistent with this order, all outstanding  rules,  regulations,
orders, delegations, or other forms of administrative action issued,
made, or otherwise taken under the orders superseded by section 9
hereof or relating to the subject of this order shall remain in full
force and effect until amended, modified, or terminated by proper
authority.
  Sec. 9. Orders Superseded. Executive Order  No. 11282 of May
26,  1966, and Executive Order  No. 11288 of  July 2, 1966, are
hereby superseded.
                                            RICHARD NIXON

-------
                    EXECUTIVE ORDERS               2169

 2.4   E.G.  11514, PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF
               ENVIRONMENTAL  QUALITY
               March 5, 1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 4247 (1970)

    PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
  By virtue of the authority vested  in me as President of the
United States and in furtherance of the purpose and policy of the
National Environmental Policy Act  of 1969 (Public Law  No.
91-190, approved January 1,1970), it is ordered as follows:
  Section 1. Policy.  The Federal  Government shall provide  lead-
ership in protecting and enhancing the quality of the Nation's
environment to sustain  and enrich  human life. Federal agencies
shall initiate  measures needed to direct their policies, plans  and
programs so as to meet national environmental goals. The Council
on Environmental Quality, through the Chairman,  shall advise
and assist the President in leading this national effort.
  Sec. 2.   Responsibilities  of Federal agencies.  Consonant  with
Title I of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, hereaf-
ter referred to  as the "Act",  the heads of Federal agencies shall:
   (a)  Monitor, evaluate, and control  on a continuing basis their
agencies' activities so as to protect and enhance the quality of the
environment. Such activities  shall include those directed to  con-
trolling pollution and enhancing  the  environment and those de-
signed to accomplish other program objectives which may affect
the quality of the environment. Agencies shall develop programs
and  measures to protect and enhance environmental quality and
shall assess progress in meeting the specific objectives of  such
activities. Heads of agencies  shall consult with appropriate  Fed-
eral, State and local agencies in  carrying out their activities as
they affect  the quality of the environment.
   (b)  Develop  procedures to ensure the fullest practicable provi-
sion of timely public information and understanding of Federal
plans and programs with environmental impact in order to obtain
the views  of interested parties. These procedures  shall include,
whenever appropriate,  provision for public hearings, and  shall
provide the public with relevant information, including informa-
tion on alternative courses of action. Federal agencies shall  also
encourage  State and local agencies to adopt similar procedures for
informing  the public concerning their activities affecting the qual-
ity of the environment.
   (c) Insure that information regarding existing or potential en-
vironmental problems and  control methods developed as part of
research, development, demonstration, test, or evaluation activities

-------
2170          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

is made available to Federal agencies, States, counties, municipali-
ties, institutions, and other entities, as appropriate.
   (d)  Review their  agencies'  statutory authority, administrative
regulations, policies, and  procedures, including those relating to
loans,  grants, contracts, leases, licenses, or permits,  in  order to
identify any deficiencies or inconsistencies therein which prohibit
or limit full compliance with  the purposes and provisions of the
Act. A report on this review  and the corrective actions taken or
planned, including such measures to be proposed to the President
as may be  necessary to bring their authority and policies into
conf ormance with the intent, purposes, and procedures of the Act,
shall be provided to the  Council on Environmental  Quality not
later than September 1,1970.
   (e)  Engage in exchange of  data and research results, and coop-
erate with agencies of other governments to foster the purposes of
the Act.
   (f)  Proceed,  in coordination with other agencies, with actions
required by section 102 of the  Act.
   Sec. 3. Responsibilities of  Council  on Environmental Quality.
The Council on Environmental Quality shall:
   (a) Evaluate existing and proposed policies and activities of the
Federal Government directed to the control of pollution and the
enhancement of the environment and to the accomplishment of
other  objectives which affect the quality of the environment. This
 shall  include continuing  review of procedures employed in  the
development and enforcement of Federal standards affecting envi-
ronmental quality. Based  upon such evaluations the Council shall,
where appropriate, recommend to the  President policies  and pro-
grams to achieve more effective protection and  enhancement of
 environmental quality and shall, where appropriate, seek resolu-
 tion of significant environmental issues.
   (b) Recommend to the President and to the agencies priorities
 among programs designed for the control of pollution and  for
 enhancement of the environment.
   (c) Determine the need for new policies and programs for deal-
 ing with environmental problems not being adequately addressed.
   (d) Conduct, as it determines to be appropriate, public hearings
 or conferences on issues of environmental significance.
   (e) Promote the development and use of indices and monitoring
 systems (1) to assess environmental conditions and trends, (2) to
 predict the environmental impact of proposed public and private
 actions, and (3) to determine the effectiveness  of programs for
 protecting and enhancing environmental quality.

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2171

   (f)  Coordinate Federal  programs  related to  environmental
quality.
   (g) Advise and assist the President and the agencies in achiev-
ing  international cooperation  for dealing  with  environmental
problems, under the foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of
State.
   (h) Issue guidelines to Federal agencies for the  preparation of
detailed statements on proposals for legislation and other Federal
actions  affecting  the  environment,  as required  by  section
102 (2) (C) of the Act.
   (i) Issue such other instructions to agencies, and request such
reports and other information from them, as may be required to
carry out the Council's responsibilities under  the Act.
   (j) Assist the President in preparing the annual  Environmental
Quality Report provided for in section 201 of  the Act.
   (k) Foster investigations, studies, surveys, research, and analy-
ses relating to  (i) ecological systems and environmental quality,
(ii)  the impact of new and changing technologies thereon,  and
(iii) means of preventing or reducing adverse effects from such
technologies.

   Sec. 4. Amendments of E.G. 11472. Executive Order No. 11472
of  May  29, 1969,  including  the heading  thereof, is hereby
amended:
   (1) By substituting for the term "the Environmental Quality
Council", wherever it occurs, the following: "the Cabinet Commit-
tee on the Environment".
   (2) By substituting for the term "the Council",  wherever it
occurs, the following: "the Cabinet Committee".
   (3)  By inserting  in subsection (f)  of  section  101,  after
"Budget,", the  following: "the Director of  the Office of Science
and Technology,".
   (4) By substituting for subsection (g)  of section 101 the fol-
lowing :
  " (g) The Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality
(established by Public Law  91-190) shall assist the President in
directing the affairs of the Cabinet Committee."
   (5) By deleting subsection (c) of section 102.
   (6) By  substituting for "the Office of Science and Technology",
in section  104, the  following:  "the Council  on  Environmental
Quality (established by Public Law 91-190)".

-------
2172         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   (7) By substituting for " (hereinafter referred to as the 'Com-
mittee')", in section 201, the following: "(hereinafter referred to
as the 'Citizens' Committee')".
   (8) By substituting for the term "the Committee", wherever it
occurs, the following: "the Citizens' Committee".
                                           RICHARD NIXON

-------
                      EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2173


 2.5  E.O. 11575, ADMINISTRATION OF DISASTER RELIEF
         ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED  BY  E.O.  11662,
                       MARCH 29,  1972
                      37 Fed. Reg. 6563 (I.72)

               EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 11575
    Dec. 31,1970, 36 F.R. 37, as amended by Ex.Ord.No.11662,

                   Mar. 29, 1972, 37 F.R. 6563
              ADMINISTRATION OF CHAPTER

   By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Disaster Relief
 Act of 1970, as amended, hereinafter referred to as the Act  [this
 chapter], and section 301 of title 3 of the United States  Code
 [section 301 of Title 3, The President], and  as President of the
 United  States, it is hereby ordered as follows:
   Section 1. (a) The authorities vested in the President by section
 102(1)  of the Act [section 4402(1) of this title] to declare a major
 disaster, by section 251 of the Act [section 4481 of this  title] to
 provide for the restoration of Federal Facilities, and by section
 253 of the Act [section 4483 of this title] to prescribe time limits
 for granting  priorities for certain  public facilities and certain
 public housing assistance are reserved to the President.
   (b) Except  as otherwise provided  in subsections (a),  (c), and
 (d) of this section, the Director  of the Office  of Emergency Pre-
 paredness is designated  and empowered to exercise, without the
 approval, ratification, or  other action of the President, all of the
 authority vested in the President by  the Act.
   (c) The Secretary  of Defense  is designated and empowered to
 exercise, without the  approval, ratification, or other action of the
 President, all  of the authority vested in the President by section
 210 of the Act [section 4420 of this title] concerning the utiliza-
tion and availability  of the civil  defense communications system
for the  purpose of disaster warnings.
   (d) The Secretary of Agriculture is designated and empowered
to exercise, without the approval, ratification, or other action of
the President, all of the authority vested  in the President by sec-
tion 238 of the Act [section 4457 of this title] concerning  food
coupons and surplus commodities.
  Sec. 2. The  Director of the Office of Emergency Preparedness
may delegate or assign to the head of any agency of the executive
branch  of the Government, subject to the consent of the agency

-------
2174          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

head concerned in each case, any authority or function delegated
or assigned to the Director by the provisions  of this order. Any
such head or agency may redelegate any authority or function so
delegated or  assigned to him by the Director to any officer or
employee subordinate to such head of agency whose  appointment
is required to be made by and with the advice  and consent of the
Senate.
  Sec. 3. Rules,  regulations, procedures,  and  documents issued
under the authority of the Act  of September  30, 1950  (64  Stat.
1109); the Disaster Relief Act of 1966  (80 Stat. 1316); and the
Disaster Relief Act of 1969  (83 Stat. 125) shall remain in effect
for purposes  of the Act unless otherwise modified, superseded, or
revoked by the appropriate Federal official, and, unless inappropri-
ate, all references in those rules, regulations, procedures, and docu-
ments or in any Executive order or other document to the Act of
September 30, 1950, the Disaster Relief Act of 1966, or the Dis-
aster Relief Act of 1969 shall be deemed to be references to the
Act.
  Sec. 4. In  order to assure the most effective utilization of the
personnel,  equipment, supplies,  facilities,  and  other  resources of
Federal  agencies pursuant to the Act, agencies shall make and
maintain suitable plans and preparations in anticipation of  their
responsibilities in the event of a major disaster. The Director of
the Office of  Emergency Preparedness shall coordinate, on behalf
of the President, such plans and preparations.
  Sec. 5. Executive Order No. 10427 of January 16, 1953, Execu-
tive Order No. 10737 of October 29,  1957, and Executive Order
No. 11495 of November 18, 1969, are hereby revoked.  Unless  inap-
propriate,  any  reference to those Executive orders  in any  rule,
regulation, procedure, document, or other  Executive  order,  shall
be deemed to be a reference to this Executive order.
                                               RICHARD NIXON

-------
                    EXECUTIVE ORDERS               2175

    2.6   E.G. 11587, PLACING CERTAIN POSITIONS IN
   LEVELS IV AND V OF THE FEDERAL EXECUTIVE
                   SALARY SCHEDULE
              March 15, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 475 (1971)

AMENDING EXECUTIVE ORDER No. 11248, PLACING CERTAIN POSI-
TIONS IN LEVELS IV AND V OF THE FEDERAL EXECUTIVE SALARY
                         SCHEDULE

  By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 5317 of title 5
of the United States Code, as amended, section 2 of Executive
Order No. 11248 1 of October 10, 1965, as amended, placing certain
positions in level V of the Federal Executive Salary  Schedule, is
further  amended by substituting for the words "Commissioner,
Federal  Water Pollution Control Administration, Department of
the Interior," in item  (8)  thereof,  the words "Commissioner,
Water Quality Office, Environmental Protection Agency."
                                          RICHARD NIXON
  1 30 F.R. 12999; 3 CFR, 1964-1965 Comp., p. 349.

-------
2176         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    2.7   E.O. 11628, ESTABLISHING A SEAL FOR THE
        ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
             October 18, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 20285 (1971)

  ESTABLISHING A SEAL FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                         AGENCY

  The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency has
caused to be made, and has recommended that I approve, a seal for
the Environmental Protection Agency, the  design of which ac-
companies and is hereby made a part of this order, and which is
described as follows:
  A flower with a bloom which is symbolic of all the elements of
the environment. The bloom is a sphere, the component parts of
which represent the blue sky, green earth,  blue-green water. A
white circle within the sphere denotes either  the sun or the moon.
All are symbolic of a clean  environment and  are superimposed on
a disc with a white background, circled by the  title "UNITED
STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY"  in blue
letters.
  It appears that such seal is of suitable design and appropriate
for adoption as the offifficial seal of the Environmental Protection
Agency:
  NOW, THEREFORE, by  virtue of the authority vested in me as
President of the United States, I hereby approve such seal as the
official seal of the Environmental Protection Agency.
                                          RICHARD NIXON
                     /
5

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2177

2.8   E.O. 11222,  STANDARDS OF  ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR
       GOVERNMENT OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES
                May 8, 1965, 30 Fed. Reg. 6469 (1965)

   STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT FOE GOVERNMENT OFFICERS
                       AND EMPLOYEES
  By virtue of the authority vested in me by Section 301 of Title 3
of the United States Code  [section 301 of Title 3, The President],
and  as President of the United States, it is hereby  ordered as
follows:
                         Part I—Policy
  Section 101. Where government is based on the  consent of the
governed, every  citizen is  entitled to have complete confidence in
the integrity of his government. Each individual officer, employee,
or adviser of government must help to earn and mtfst honor that
trust by his own  integrity and conduct in all official actions.
                  Part II—Standards of Conduct
  Section 201. (a) Except in accordance with regulations issued
pursuant to subsection  (b) of this section, no employee shall solicit
or accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, gratuity, favor, enter-
tainment, loan, or  any other thing  of monetary value, from  any
person corporation, or group which—
  (1) has, or is seeking to obtain, contractual or other business or
financial relationships with his agency;
  (2) conducts operations or activities which are regulated by his
agency; or
  (3) has  interests which may  be  substantially affected by the
performance or nonperformance of his official duty.
  (b) Agency heads are authorized to issue  regulations, coordi-
nated and approved by the Civil Service Commission, implement-
ing the provisions of subsection (a)  of this section  and to provide
for such exceptions therein as may  be necessary and appropriate
in view of  the nature  of their agency's work and  the duties  and
responsibilities of their employees. For example, it  may be appro-
priate to provide exceptions  (1) governing obvious  family or per-
sonal relationships where the circumstances make  it clear that it
is those relationships rather than the business of the persons con-
cerned which are the motivating factors—the clearest illustration
being the parents, children or spouses of federal employees;  (2)
permitting  acceptance  of food and refreshments available in the
ordinary course  of a luncheon or dinner or other  meeting or on
inspection tours  where an employee may  properly be in attend-

-------
2178          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

ance; or (3) permitting acceptance of loans from banks or other
financial institutions on customary terms to finance  proper  and
usual activities of employees, such as home mortgage loans. This
section shall be effective upon issuance of such regulations.
   (c) It is the intent of  this section that employees avoid  any
action, whether or not specifically prohibited by subsection  (a),
which might result in, or create the appearance of—
   (1) using public office for private gain;
   (2) giving preferential treatment to  any organization  or  per-
son;
   (3) impeding government efficiency or economy;
   (4) losing complete independence or impartiality of action;
   (5) making a government decision outside official channels; or
   (6) affecting adversely the confidence  of the public in the integ-
rity of the Government.
   Sec. 202. An employee shall not engage in  any outside employ-
ment, including teaching, lecturing, or writing, which might result
in a conflict, or an apparent conflict, between  the private interests
of the employee and his official government duties and responsibil-
ities, although  such teaching, lecturing,  and writing by employees
are generally to be encouraged so long as the laws,  the provisions
of this  order,  and Civil Service Commission and agency regula-
tions covering conflict  of interest and outside employment are
observed.
   Sec. 203. Employees may not  (a)  have direct or  indirect finan-
cial interests that conflict substantially, or appear to  conflict sub-
stantially, with their responsibilities and  duties as  Federal em-
ployees, or (b) engage in, directly or indirectly, financial transac-
tions as a result  of,  or primarily relying upon,  information ob-
tained through their employment. Aside from these  restrictions,
employees are free to engage in lawful financial transactions to
the same extent  as private citizens. Agencies may, however, fur-
ther  restrict such transactions in the light of the special circum-
stances of their individual missions.
   Sec.  204. An employee shall  not  use Federal  property of any
kind for other than officially approved activities. He must protect
 and conserve all  Federal  property, including equipment and sup-
 plies, entrusted or issued to him.
   Sec.  205. An employee  shall not directly or indirectly make use
 of, or permit others to make use of, for the purpose of furthering

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2179

a private interest, official information not made available  to the
general public.

  Sec. 206. An  employee is  expected to  meet all  just financial
obligations, especially those—such as Federal, State, or local taxes
—which are imposed by law.

 Part III—Standards of Ethical Conduct for Special Government Employees
  Section 301. This  part applies to  all "special Government em-
ployees"  as defined in Section 202 of Title 18 of the United  States
Code [section 202 of this title], who are employed in  the Execu-
tive Branch.
  Sec. 302.  A consultant, adviser or other  special Government
employee must refrain from  any use of his public office which is
motivated by, or gives the appearance of being motivated by, the
desire for private gain for  himself  or other persons, including
particularly those with whom he has family, business, or financial
ties.
  Sec. 303. A consultant, adviser,  or other  special Government
employee shall not use any inside information obtained as a result
of  his government service for  private personal gain, either by
direct action on his  part  or  by  counsel, recommendations  or
suggestions to others, including particularly those with whom he
has family, business, or financial ties.

  Sec. 304. An  adviser, consultant,  or other special Government
employee shall not use his position in any way to coerce, or give
the appearance  of coercing, another person to provide any finan-
cial benefit to him or persons with whom he has family, business,
or financial ties.
  Sec. 305. An  adviser, consultant,  or other special Government
employee shall not receive or solicit from persons having business
with his agency  anything of value as a gift, gratuity, loan or favor
for himself  or  persons with whom  he has family, business,  or
financial ties while employed by the government or in connection
with his work with the government.

  Sec. 306. Each agency shall, at the time of employment of a
consultant, adviser, or other  special Government employee require
him to supply it with a statement of all other employment. The
statement shall  list the names  of all the corporations, companies,
firms, State or local  governmental organizations, research organi-
zations and educational or other institutions in which he is serving

-------
2180          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

as employee, officer, member, owner, director, trustee, adviser, or
consultant. In addition, it shall list such other financial informa-
tion as the appointing department or agency shall decide is rele-
vant in the light of the duties the appointee  is to perform.  The
appointee may, but need not, be required to reveal precise amounts
of investments. The statement shall be kept current throughout
the period during which the employee is on the Government rolls.

              Part IV—Reporting of Financial Interests

  Section 401.  (a)  Not later than ninety days after the  date of
this order, the head of each agency, each Presidential appointee in
the Executive Office of the President who is not subordinate to the
head of an agency in that Office,  and each full-time member of a
committee, board, or commission appointed by the President, shall
submit to the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission a state-
ment containing the following:
  (1) A list of the names of all corporations,  companies, firms, or
other business  enterprises, partnerships, nonprofit organizations,
and educational or other institutions—
  (A)  with which he is connected as an employee, officer, owner,
director, trustee, partner, adviser, or consultant; or
  (B)  in which he has any continuing financial interests, through
a pension or retirement plan, shared income, or otherwise, as a
result of any current or prior employment or business or profes-
sional association; or
  (C)  in which he has any financial interest through the owner-
ship of stocks, bonds, or other securities.
  (2)  A list of the names of his creditors, other than those to
whom  he may be indebted  by reason of a mortgage  on property
which  he occupies as a personal residence or to whom he may be
indebted for current and ordinary household and living expenses.
  (3) A list of his interests in real property  or  rights in lands,
other than property which he occupies as a personal residence.
  (b)  Each person who enters upon duty after the  date of this
order in an office or position as to which a statement is required
by this section  shall submit such  statement not later than thirty
days after the date of his entrance on duty.
  (c) Each statement required by this  section shall be kept up to
date by submission of amended statements of any changes in, or
additions to, the information required to be included  in the origi-
nal  statement, on a quarterly basis.

  Sec.  402. The Civil  Service Commission shall prescribe regula-

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2181

 tions, not inconsistent with this part, to require the submission of
 statements of financial interests by such employees, subordinate to
 the  heads of agencies, as the Commission may designate.  The
 Commission  shall prescribe the form  and content of such state-
 ments and the time or times and places for such submission.

   Sec. 403. (a) The  interest of a spouse, minor child, or other
 member of his immediate household shall be considered to be an
 interest of a person required to submit a statement by or pursuant
 to this part.
   (b) In the  event any information required  to be included  in a
 statement required by or pursuant to this part is not known to the
 person required to submit such statement but is known to other
 persons, the person concerned shall request such other persons to
 submit the required information on his behalf.
   (c) This part shall not be construed to require the submission of
 any information relating to any person's connection with, or inter-
 est in, any professional society or any charitable, religious, social,
 fraternal, educational, recreational, public service, civic or politi-
 cal organization or any similar organization not conducted as a
 business enterprise and which is not engaged in the ownership or
 conduct of a business enterprise.
   Sec. 404. The Chairman of the Civil Service Commission  shall
 report to the  President any information contained in statements
 required by Section 401 of this part which may indicate a  conflict
 between  the financial interests of the official  concerned and the
 performance of his services for the Government. The Commission
 shall report, or by regulation require reporting, to the head of the
 agency concerned  any information  contained  in statements sub-
 mitted pursuant to regulations issued  under Section 402  of this
 part which may indicate a conflict between the financial interests
 of the officer or employee concerned and the performance of his
 services for the Government.

  Sec. 405. The statements and amended statements required by
 or pursuant to this part shall be held in confidence, and no infor-
 mation as to the contents thereof shall be disclosed  except as the
 Chairman of  the Civil Service Commission or  the head  of the
 agency concerned may determine for good cause shown.

  Sec. 406. The statements and amended statements required by
 or pursuant to this part shall be in addition to, and not in  substi-
tution for, or  in derogation of,  any similar requirement imposed
by law, regulation, or order. The  submission  of a  statement or

-------
2182          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

amended statements required by or pursuant to this part shall not
be deemed to permit any person to participate  in any matter in
which his participation is prohibited by law, regulation, or order.
Part V—Delegating Authority of the President Under Sections 205 and 208
    of Title 18 of the United States Code Relating to Conflicts of Interest
  Section 501. As used in this part, "department" means an execu-
tive department, "agency" means an independent agency or estab-
lishment or a Government corporation, and "head of an agency"
means, in the case of an  agency headed by more than one person,
the chairman or comparable member of such agency.

  Sec. 502. There  is delegated,  in accordance  with and to the
extent prescribed in Sections 503 and 504 of this part, the author-
ity  of the President under  Sections 205 and 208 (b)  of Title 18,
United  States Code [sections 205  and 208(b)  of this title], to
permit certain actions by an officer or employee of the Govern-
ment, including a special Government  employee, for appointment
to whose position the President is responsible.

  Sec. 503. Insofar  as the authority of the President referred to in
Section 502 extends to any appointee of the President subordinate
to or subject to the chairmanship of the head of a department or
agency, it is delegated to such department or agency head.
  Sec. 504. Insofar  as the authority of the President referred to in
Section 502 extends to an appointee of the President who is within
or attached to a department or agency for purposes of administra-
tion, it is delegated  to the head of such department or agency.
  Sec. 505. Notwithstanding any provision of the preceding sec-
tions of this part  to the contrary, this part does not  include a
delegation of the  authority of the President referred to in Section
502 insofar as it extends  to:
  (a)  The  head  of any  department or  agency in the Executive
Branch;
  (b) Presidential  appointees in the Executive Office of the  Presi-
dent who are not  subordinate to the  head of an agency in that
Office; and
  (c) Presidential  appointees to committees, boards, commissions,
or similar groups established by the President.
Part VI—Providing for the Performance by the Civil Service Commission of
  Certain Authority Vested in the President by Section 1753 of the Revised
  Statutes
  Section 601. The Civil Service Commission  is designated and

-------
                     EXECUTIVE ORDERS                2183

empowered to perform, without the approval, ratification, or other
action of the  President, so much  of the authority vested in the
President by Section 1753 of the Revised Statutes of the United
States (5 U.S.C. 631)  [now covered by sections 3301 and  7301 of
Title  5, Government  Organization and Employees] as relates to
establishing regulations for the conduct of  persons in the civil
service.
  Sec. 602. Regulations issued under the authority of Section 601
shall be consistent with the standards of ethical conduct provided
elsewhere in this order.
                   Part VII—General Provisions
  Section 701. The Civil Service  Commission is authorized  and
directed, in addition to responsibilities assigned elsewhere in this
order:
  (a)  To issue appropriate regulations and instructions imple-
menting Parts II, III, and IV of this order;
  (b)  To review  agency regulations from time to time for con-
f ormance with this order; and
  (c)  To recommend to  the President from time to  time such
revisions  in this  order as may appear necessary to ensure the
maintenance  of  high ethical  standards  within  the  Executive
Branch.
  Sec. 702. Each agency head is hereby directed to supplement the
standards provided by law, by this order,  and by regulations of
the Civil Service  Commission with regulations of special applica-
bility to the particular functions and activities of his agency. Each
agency head  is also  directed  to assure  (1)  the  widest  possible
distribution of regulations issued pursuant to this section, and (2)
the availability of counseling for those employees who  request
advice or interpretation.
  Sec. 703. The following are hereby revoked:
  (a) Executive Order No. 10939 of May 5,1961.
  (b) Executive Order No. 11125 of October 29,1963.
  (c) Section 2(a) of Executive Order No. 10530 of May 10, 1954.
  (d) White House memorandum of July 20,  1961, on "Standards
of Conduct for Civilian Employees."
  (e) The President's Memorandum of May 2, 1963, "Preventing
Conflicts of Interest on the Part of Special Government Employ-
ees."  The effective date  of this revocation  shall  be the date of
issuance by  the Civil Service Commission of regulations under
Section 701 (a)  of this order.

-------
2184          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Sec. 704. All actions heretofore taken by the President or by his
delegates in respect of the matters affected by this order and in
force at the time  of  the issuance of  this order,  including any
regulations prescribed or approved by the President  or by his
delegates in respect of such matters, shall, except as they may be
inconsistent with the provisions of this  order or  terminate  by
operation  of law,  remain  in effect until amended, modified,  or
revoked pursuant to the authority conferred by this order.
  Sec. 705. As used in this order, and except as otherwise specifi-
cally provided herein, the term "agency" means any executive
department, or any independent agency or any Government corpo-
ration ; and the term "employee" means any officer or employee of
an agency.
                                   LYNDON B. JOHNSON

-------
                    EXECUTIVE ORDERS               2185

     2.9 E.G. 11667, ESTABLISHING THE PRESIDENT'S
  ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE  ENVIRONMENTAL
               MERIT AWARDS PROGRAM
               April 20, 1972, 37 Fed. Reg. 7763 (1972)

  On October 31, 1971,1 announced the establishment of the Pres-
ident's Environmental Merit Awards Program. The Administrator
of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Commissioner of
Education sent letters to high school  principals inviting them to
participate in this program by establishing local tripartite com-
mittees to supervise and direct local Environmental Merit Awards
Programs, and to make awards to individual students or groups of
students for significant environmental accomplishments by them.
These committees were to be composed of students,  faculty and
interested members of the community.
  Today, more than 2,500 high schools, including schools  in each
of the 50 States, are actively involved in this program.
  In view of this encouraging response,  I have concluded that I
should establish  a national committee to advise  me of  ways in
which this program can be further expanded and enhanced and of
other ways in which the environmental accomplishments of indi-
viduals and groups may be appropriately recognized.
  NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the authority vested in  me
by the Constitution and laws of  the  United States, it is hereby
ordered as follows:
  SECTION 1. (a)  There is hereby established the President's Ad-
visory Committee on the Environmental Merit Awards Program.
The Committee shall be composed of a Chairman, to be designated
by the President, and such members as the President may, from
time to time, appoint.
  (b) The Committee shall advise the  President and the Adminis-
trator of the Environmental Protection Agency  on ways in which
the Environmental Merit Awards Program can be expanded and
enhanced. The Committee  shall  select individuals or groups of
individuals who deserve special recognition for their local environ-
mental accomplishments and confer  appropriate Environmental

-------
2186         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

Merit Awards upon them on behalf of the President. The Commit-
tee shall perform such  other related functions as the President
may, from time to time,  specify.
  SEC. 2. No member of the Committee shall receive compensation
from the United  States  by reason of service as a member of the
Committee but such members  may  be allowed such travel ex-
penses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as may be au-
thorized by law.
  SEC. 3. The Environmental Protection Agency shall provide, to
the extent permitted by law, administrative support for the Com-
mittee and the Environmental Merit Awards Program.

                                            RICHARD NIXON.

-------
Regulations

-------

-------
                        REGULATIONS                   2189

 [Regulations may be found in full text in the Code of Federal Regulations.
            They are cited below for your convenience.]
3.1  Reorganization  and Republication, Environmental Protec-
     tion Agency, 36 Fed. Reg. 22369 (1971).
3.2  Statement of Organization and General Information, Envi-
     ronmental Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§1.1-1.43 (1972).
3.3  Public Information, Environmental  Protection Agency,  40
     C.F.R. §§2.100-2.111 (1972).
3.4  Employee Responsibilities and Conduct,  Environmental Pro-
     tection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§3.735-101—3.735-107 (1971).
3.5  Interim Regulations and Procedures  for Implementing the
     Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisi-
     tion Policies Act of 1970, Environmental Protection Agency,
     40 C.F.R. §§4.1-4.263 (1971).
3.6  Tuition Fees for Direct Training, Environmental Protection
     Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§5.1-5.7  (1972).
3.7  Certification of Facilities, Environmental Protection Agency,
     40 C.F.R. §§20.1-20.10 (1971).
3.8  General Grants Regulations  and Procedures, Environmental
     Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R.  §§30.100-30.1001.3 (1972).
3.9  State  and  Local  Assistance,  Environmental  Protection
     Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§35.400-35.420 (1972).
3.10 Security Classification  Regulation, Environmental Protec-
     tion Agency,  41 C.F.R. §§11.1-11.6 (1972).
3.11 General, Environmental Protection Agency, 41 C.F.R. §§15-
     1.000—15-1.5301 (1972).
3.12 Procurement by Formal Advertising,  Environmental Protec-
     tion Agency, 41 C.F.R. §§15-2.406-3—15-2.407-8 (1972).
3.13 Procurement by Negotiations,  Environmental  Protection
     Agency, 41 C.F.R. §§15-3.51, 15-3.103, 15-3.405, 15-3.405-3,
     15-3.600—15-3.606, 15-3.805,  15-3.808  (1972).
3.14 Special Types and Methods of Procurement, Environmental
     Protection  Agency,  41  C.F.R.  §§15-4.5300—15-4.5303
     (1972).
3.15 Procurement Forms, Environmental  Protection Agency,  41
     C.F.R. §15-16.553-1 (1972).

-------
2190         LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

3.16  Transportation, Environmental Protection Agency, 41 C.F.R.
     §§15-19.302—15-19.305 (1972).
3.17  Amortization of Pollution Control Facilities, Internal Reve-
     nue Service, 26 C.F.R. §1.169 (1972).
3.18  Temporary Income Tax Regulations Under the Tax Reform
     Act of 1969, Internal Revenue Service, 26 C.F.R. §§1.179-1,
     1.642(f),1.642(f)-l (1971).
3.19  Introduction, Environmental Protection Agency, 41 C.F.R.
     §§115-1.100—115-1.110 (1971).

-------
Guidelines
   and
 Reports

-------

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2193

  4.1  THE PRESIDENT'S ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM

4.1a  The President's 1971 Environmental Program, compiled by
   the Council on Environmental Quality, March 1971, pp. 1-205.

 I. THE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, FEBRUARY
                           8,1971
                                                        [P.I]
 To the Congress of the United States:

   Last August I  sent to the Congress the first  annual report on
 the state of the nation's environment. In my message of transmit-
 tal, I declared that the report "describes the principal problems we
 face now and can expect to face in the future, and it provides us
 with perceptive guidelines for meeting them. . . . They point the
 directions in which we must move as  rapidly  as circumstances
 permit."
   The comprehensive and wide-ranging- action program I propose
 today builds  upon the 37-point  program I submitted to the Con-
 gress a year ago. It builds upon  the progress made in the past
 year, and draws upon the experience gained in  the past year .It
 gives us the  means to ensure that, as a nation, we maintain the
 initiative so vigorously begun in our shared campaign to save and
 enhance our surroundings. This program includes:
   Measures to strengthen pollution control programs
 —Charges on sulfur oxides and a tax on lead in gasoline to supple-
     ment regulatory controls on air pollution
 —More effective  control of water pollution through a  $12 billion
     national program and strengthened standard-setting and en-
     forcement authorities
 —Comprehensive improvement in pesticide control authority
 —A Federal procurement program to encourage  recycling of
     paper

 Measures to control emerging problems
 —Regulation of toxic substances
 —Regulation of noise pollution
 —Controls on ocean dumping

 Measures to  promote environmental quality in land use decisions
 —A national land use policy
 —A new and greatly expanded open space  and recreation pro-
     gram, bringing parks to the people in urban areas

-------
2194          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  —Preservation of historic buildings through  tax policy and
    other incentives
—Substantial expansion of the wilderness areas preservation sys-
    tem
  —Advance public  agency  approval of  power plant sites and
    transmission line routes
  —Regulation of environmental effects  of surface  and under-
    ground mining
Further institutional improvement
—Establishment of an Environmental Institute to conduct studies
    and recommend policy alternatives
Toward a better world, environment
  —Expanded international cooperation
  —A World  Heritage Trust to preserve parks and areas  of
    unique cultural value throughout the world
                                                       [p. 3]

                 1970—A YEAR OF PROGRESS

  The course of events in 1970 has intensified awareness of and
concern about environmental problems. The news of more wide-
spread mercury pollution, late summer smog alerts over  much of
the East Coast, repeated episodes of ocean dumping and oil spills,
and unresolved controversy  about important land  use questions
have dramatized with disturbing regularity the reality and extent
of these problems. No part  of the  United  States has been free
from them, and all levels of government—Federal, State and local
—have joined in the  search for solutions.  Indeed, there is a grow-
ing trend in other countries to view the severity and complexity of
environmental problems much as we do.
  There can be no doubt about our growing national commitment
to find solutions. Last November voters approved several billion
dollars in State and local bond issues for environmental purposes,
and Federal funds for these purposes are at an all time high.
  The program I am proposing today will require some adjust-
ments by governments at all levels, by our industrial and business
community, and by the public in order to meet this national com-
mitment. But as we strive to expand our  national effort, we must
also keep in mind the  greater cost of not  pressing ahead.  The
battle for a better environment can be won, and we are winning it.
With the program I am outlining in this message we can obtain
new victories and prevent problems from reaching the crisis stage.

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2195

  During 1970, two new organizations were established to provide
Federal leadership for the Nation's campaign to improve the envi-
ronment. The Council on Environmental Quality in the Executive
Office of the President has provided essential policy analysis  and
advice on a broad range of environmental problems, developing
many of our environmental initiatives and furnishing guidance in
carrying out the  National Environmental  Policy Act, which re-
quires all Federal agencies to devote specific attention to the envi-
ronmental impact of their actions and proposals. Federal pollution
control programs have been consolidated in the new Environmen-
tal Protection Agency. This new agency is already taking strong
action to combat pollution in air and water and on land.
  —I  have  requested in my 1972 budget  $2.45 billion for  the
    programs of the Environmental Protection Agency—nearly
    double the funds appropriated  for these programs in 1971.
    These funds will provide for the expansion of air and water
    pollution,  solid waste, radiation and  pesticide control pro-
    grams and for carrying out new programs.
  In my special message on the Environment last February, I set
forth  a comprehensive program to improve existing laws on air
and water pollution, to  encourage recycling of materials and to
provide greater recreational opportunities for our people. We have
been able to institute some of these measures by executive branch
                                                       [p. 4]

action. While unfortunately there was  no action on  my water
quality proposals, we moved ahead to make effective use of exist-
ing authorities through the Refuse Act water quality permit pro-
gram  announced in December. New air  pollution control  legisla-
tion, which I signed on  the last day of  1970, embodies all of my
recommendations and reflects strong bipartisan  teamwork  be-
tween the administration and the Congress—teamwork which  will
be needed again this year to permit action on the urgent environ-
mental problems discussed in this message.
  We musl have action  to meet the needs of today if we would
have the kind of environment the nation demands for tomorrow.

        I. STRENGTHENING POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAMS

  The Clean Air Amendments of 1970 have greatly strengthened
the Federal-State air quality program. We shall vigorously admin-
ister the new program,  but propose to  supplement it with mea-
sures  designed to provide a strong economic stimulus to achieve
the pollution reduction sought by the program.

-------
2196          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

                       AIR POLLUTION

Sulfur Oxides Emissions Charge
  Sulfur oxides are among the most damaging air  pollutants.
High  levels of sulfur oxides have been  linked to increased inci-
dence of diseases such as bronchitis and lung cancer. In terms of
damage to human  health, vegetation and property, sulfur oxide
emissions cost society billions of dollars annually.
  Last year in  my State of the Union message I urged that the
price  of goods "should be made to include the cost of producing
and disposing of them without damage to the environment." A
charge on sulfur emitted into  the atmosphere would be a major
step in applying the principle that the costs of pollution should be
included in the price of the product. A staff study underway indi-
cates the feasibility of such a charge system.
  —Accordingly, I have asked the  Chairman of the Council on
    Environmental Quality and the Secretary of the Treasury to
    develop a Clean Air Emissions Charge on emissions of sulfur
    oxides. Legislation  will be submitted to the Congress upon
    completion of the studies currently underway.
  The funds generated by  this charge would enable the  Federal
Government to expand programs to improve the  quality of the
environment. Special emphasis would be given to developing and
demonstrating technology to reduce  sulfur oxides emissions and
programs  to  develop adequate clean energy supplies. My 1972
budget provides increased  funds  for these  activities.  They will
continue to be emphasized in subsequent years.
                                                        [P. 5]

  These two measures—the sulfur  oxides emissions charge and
expanding environmental programs—provide both the incentive
for improving the  quality of our environment and the means of
doing so.

Leaded Gasoline
  Leaded  gasolines  interfere  with effective emission  control.
Moreover, the lead particles are,  themselves, a  source of poten-
tially harmful lead concentrations in the environment. The new
air quality legislation provides authority, which I requested, to
regulate fuel additives, and I  have  recently initiated a policy of
using unleaded or low-lead gasoline in Federal vehicles whenever
possible. But further incentives are  needed. In 1970, I recom-
mended a tax on lead used in gasoline to bring about a  gradual

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2197

transition to the use of unleaded gasoline. This transition is essen-
tial if the automobile emission control standards scheduled to come
into effect for the 1975 model automobiles are to be met at reason-
able cost.
  —I shall again propose a special tax to make the price  of un-
     leaded gasoline lower than the price of leaded gasoline.  Legis-
     lation will be submitted to  the Congress upon completion of
     studies currently underway.

                        WATER QUALITY
  We have the technology now to deal with most forms of water
pollution. We must make sure that it is used.
  In my February 1970 special message to the Congress on the
Environment, I discussed our most important needs in the effort
to control water pollution: adequate funds to ensure construction
of municipal waste treatment facilities needed to meet water qual-
ity standards; more explicit standards, applicable to all navigable
waters; more effective Federal enforcement authority to back up
State efforts; and funds to help States build the necessary capabil-
ity to participate in this joint endeavor.

Municipal Wastes
  Adequate treatment  of  the large volume of commercial, in-
dustrial and domestic wastes that are discharged through munici-
pal systems requires a great expenditure of funds for construction
of necessary facilities.  A thorough study by the Environmental
Protection Agency completed in December 1970 revealed that $12
billion will  be  required by 1974 to correct the national  waste
treatment backlog. The urgency of this need, and the severe finan-
cial problems that face many communities, require that construc-
tion  of waste treatment facilities be jointly funded  by Federal
State, and local governments. We must also  assure that adequate
Federal funds are available to reimburse States that advanced the
Federal share of project costs.
  —I propose that $6 billion in  Federal funds be authorized and
                                                         [p. 6]

     appropriated over  the next three years to provide  the full
     Federal share of a $12 billion program of waste treatment
     facilities.
  Some municipalities need help in overcoming the difficulties they
face  in selling bonds on  reasonable terms to finance their share of
construction costs. The availability of funds to finance a communi-

-------
2198          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

ty's pollution  control facilities should depend not on its credit
rating or the vagaries of the municipal bond market, but on its
waste disposal needs.
  —/ again propose the creation of an Environmental Financing
    Authority so that every municipality has an opportunity to
    sell its waste treatment plant construction bonds.
  A number of administrative reforms which I announced last
year to ensure that Federal construction  grant funds are well
invested have been initiated.  To further this objective:
  —/ again propose that the present, rigid allocation formula be
    revised, so that special  emphasis can be given to  those areas
    where facilities are most needed and where the greatest im-
    provements in water quality would result.
  —I propose  that provisions be added  to  the present  law to
    induce communities to provide for expansion and replacement
    of treatment facilities on a reasonably self-sufficient basis.
  —/ propose that municipalities receiving Federal assistance in
    constructing treatment  facilities be required to recover from
    industrial users the portion of project costs allocable to treat-
    ment of their wastes.

Standards and Enforcement
  While no action was taken in the 91st Congress on my proposals
to strengthen water pollution standard setting and enforcement, I
initiated a program under the Refuse Act of  1899 to require per-
mits for all industrial  discharges into navigable waters, making
maximum use of present authorities to secure  compliance with
water quality standards.  However, the reforms I proposed in our
water quality laws last year are still urgently needed.
  Water quality standards now are often imprecise and unrelated
to specific water quality needs. Even more important, they provide
a poor basis for enforcement: without a precise effluent standard,
it is often difficult to prove violations in court. Also, Federal-State
water quality standards presently do  not apply to many important
waters.
  —7 again proposed  that the Federal-State water quality pro-
    gram be  extended to cover  all  navigable waters and  their
    tributaries, ground waters and waters of the contiguous zone.
  —I again propose that Federal-State water  quality standards be
    revised to impose precise  effluent limitations on both in-
    dustrial and municipal sources.
                                                         [P. 7]

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2199

  —/ also propose Federal standards to regulate the discharge of
hazardous substances similar to those  which I proposed and the
Congress adopted in the Clean Air Amendments of 1970.
  —I propose that standards require that the  best  practicable
technology be used in new industrial facilities to ensure that water
quality is preserved or enhanced.
  —7 propose that the Administrator of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency be empowered to require prompt revision of stand-
ards when necessary.

  We should strengthen and  streamline Federal  enforcement au-
thority, to permit swift action against municipal  as  well as in-
dustrial and other violators of water quality standards. Existing
authority under the Refuse Act generally does not apply to munic-
ipalities.

  —I propose that the Administrator of  EPA  be  authorized to
    issue  abatement orders swiftly and to impose administrative
    fines of up to $25,000 per day for violation  of  water quality
    standards.
  —7 propose that violations of standards  and abatement orders
    be made subject to court-imposed  fines of up to $25,000 per
    day and up to $50,000 per day for repeated violations.
  —7 again  propose that the Administrator be authorized to seek
    immediate injunctive  relief in emergency situations in which
    severe water  pollution  constitutes an  imminent danger to
    health, or threatens irreversible damage to water quality.
  —7 propose that the cumbersome and time-consuming  enforce-
    ment  conference and  hearing mechanism in the current law
    be  replaced by a  provision for swift public  hearings as  a
    prelude to issuance of abatement orders or requiring a revi-
    sion of standards.
  —7 propose an authorization for legal actions against violations
    of standards by private  citizens,  as in the  new  air quality
    legislation, in order to bolster State and Federal enforcement
    efforts.
  —7 propose that the Administrator be  empowered to  require
    reports  by any person responsible for discharging  effluents
    covered by water quality standards.
  —I again propose that Federal grants to State  pollution control
    enforcement agencies be tripled over the next four years—
    from  $10 million to $30  million—to assist these  agencies in
    meeting their expanded pollution control responsibilities.

-------
2200          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

Control of Oil Spills
  Last May I outlined to the Congress a number of measures that
should be taken to reduce the risks of pollution  from oil  spills.
Recent events have underlined  the  urgency of action  on these
proposals. At the outset of this present Congress I resubmitted the
Ports and Waterways Safety Act and the legislation requiring the
use of bridge-to-bridge radio-telephones for safety of navigation.
                                                         [p. 8]

Such legislation would have decreased the chances of the oil spill
which occurred as a result of a tanker collision in San Francisco
Bay.
  —I have provided $25 million in next year's budget for develop-
     ment of better techniques to prevent and clean up oil spills
     and  to provide more  effective surveillance. I am asking the
     Council  on  Environmental  Quality in conjunction  with the
     Department of Transportation and the Environmental Pro-
     tection Agency to review what further measures can be devel-
     oped to deal with the problem.
  —I also am renewing my request that the Senate give its advice
     and  consent on the  two new international conventions on oil
     spills and  the pending amendments  to the  1954 Oil Spills
     Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil.
  The Intergovernmental  Maritime Consultative  Organization
(IMCO)  is presently preparing a convention to establish an Inter-
national  Compensation Fund to supplement the 1969 Civil Liabil-
ity Convention.  Our ratification of  the 1969 convention will be
withheld until this supplementary convention can also be brought
into force because both  conventions  are part of a comprehensive
plan to provide compensation for damages caused by oil spills. In
addition, we have taken the initiative  in  NATO's Committee on
the Challenges of Modern  Society and achieved wide international
support for terminating all intentional discharges of oil and oily
wastes from ships into the oceans by 1975, if possible, and no later
than the end of this decade.  We  will continue to work on this
matter to establish through IMCO an international convention on
this subject.

                          PESTICIDES
   Pesticides have  provided important benefits by protecting man
from disease and increasing his  ability to produce food and fiber.
However, the use  and misuse of pesticides has become one of the
major concerns  of all who are interested in a better environment.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2201

The decline in numbers of several of our bird species is a signal of
the potential hazards of pesticides to  the environment. We are
continuing a major research effort to develop nonchemical  meth-
ods of pest control, but we must continue to rely on pesticides for
the foreseeable future. The challenge is to institute the necessary
mechanisms to prevent pesticides from harming human health and
the environment.
   Currently, Federal controls over pesticides consist of the  regis-
tration and labeling requirements in the Federal Insecticide, Fun-
gicide, and Rodenticide Act. The  administrative processes con-
tained in the law are inordinately cumbersome and time-consum-
ing, and there  is no authority to  deal with the  actual use  of
pesticides.  The labels approved under the Act specify the uses to
which a pesticide may be put, but there is no way to insure that
                                                          [p. 9]

the label will be  read or obeyed. A comprehensive strengthening of
our pesticide control laws is needed.
   —/ propose that the use of pesticides be subject to  control in
     appropriate circumstances,  through a registration  procedure
     which provides for designation of a pesticide  for "general
     use," "restricted use," or "use  by permit  only."  Pesticides
     designated  for restricted use  would be applied only  by an
     approved pest control applicator.  Pesticides  designated for
     "use by permit only" would be made available only with the
     approval  of an approved pest  control  consultant.  This ivill
     help to ensure that pesticides which are safe ivhen properly
     used will not be misused or applied in excessive quantities.
   —/ propose that the Administrator of the Environmental Pro-
     tection Agency be authorized  to permit the experimental use
     of pesticides under  strict controls,  when he needs  additional
     information concerning a pesticide  before deciding whether it
     should be registered.
   —I propose that the  procedures  for cancellation of a registra-
     tion be streamlined to permit more expeditious action.
   —/ propose that the Administrator  be authorized to stop the
     sale or use of, and to seize, pesticides being distributed  or
     held in violation of Federal law.

                     RECYCLING OF WASTES

   The Nation's  solid waste problem is both costly and  damaging
to the environment. Paper, which  accounts for about one-half  of

-------
2202          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

all municipal solid waste, can be reprocessed to produce a high
quality product. Yet the percentage the Nation recycles has been
declining steadily.
  To reverse  this trend, the General Services  Administration,
working with the Council on Environmental Quality, has reviewed
the Federal Government's purchasing policies. It found a substan-
tial  number of prohibitions  against using paper  with  recycled
content. Such prohibitions are no longer reasonable in light of the
need to encourage recycling.
  As a result of this review, the  GSA  has already  changed its
specifications to require a minimum of 3 to 50 percent recycled
content, depending on the product,  in over $35 million per year  of
paper purchases. GSA is currently  revising  other specifications  to
require recycled content  in an additional $25 million of annual
paper purchases. In total, this will amount to more than one-half
of GSA's total paper products purchases. All remaining specifica-
tions will be reviewed to require recycled content in as many other
paper products as possible. The regulations will be reviewed  con-
tinually to increase the percentage of recycled paper required  in
each.
  I have directed that the Chairman of the Council on Environ-
mental Quality suggest to the Governors that they review State
                                                       [p. 10]

purchasing policies and where possible revise them to require re-
cycled paper. To assist them, I have directed the Administrator  of
GSA to set up a technical liaison to provide  States with the feder-
ally revised specifications as well as other important information
on this new Federal program, which represents a significant  first
step  toward a much broader use of Federal procurement policies
to encourage recycling.

             II. CONTROLLING EMERGING PROBLEMS

  Environmental control efforts too often  have been limited  to
cleaning up problems that have accumulated in the past. We must
concentrate more on preventing the creation of new environmental
problems and  on dealing with emerging problems. We must, for
example, prevent the harmful dumping of wastes into the ocean
and  the buildup of toxic materials throughout our environment.
We must roll back increasingly annoying and hazardous levels  of
noise in our environment, particularly in the urban environment.
Our  goal in dealing with emerging environmental problems must

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2203

be to ward them off before they become acute, not merely to undo
the damage after it is done.

                      TOXIC SUBSTANCES
  As we have become increasingly dependent on many chemicals
and metals, we have become acutely aware of the potential toxicity
of the materials entering our environment. Each year hundreds of
new  chemicals  are commercially marketed and some of  these
chemicals  may pose serious potential threats. Many existing chem-
icals and metals, such as PCB's  (polychlorinated biphenyls) and
mercury, also represent a hazard.
  It is essential that we take steps to prevent chemical substances
from becoming environmental  hazards. Unless we develop better
methods to assure adequate testing of chemicals, we will be invit-
ing the environmental crises of the future.
  —7 propose that the  Administrator of EPA  be empowered to
    restrict the use or distribution  of  any substance  which he
    finds is a hazard to human health or the environment.
  —I propose that the  Administrator be authorized to stop  the
    sale or use of any substance that violates the provisions of the
    legislation and to seek immediate injunctive relief  when  use
    or distribution of a substance presents an imminent hazard to
    health or the environment.
  —I propose that the Administrator be authorized to prescribe
    minimum standard tests to be performed on substances.
  This  legislation, coupled with the proposal on pesticides and
other existing laws, will provide greater protection to humans and
wildlife from introduction  of toxic substances into the environ-
ment. What I propose is not to ban beneficial uses of chemicals,
but rather to control the use of those that may be harmful.
                                                       [P. 11]

                       OCEAN DUMPING
  Last year, at my direction, the Council on Environmental Qual-
ity extensively examined the problem of ocean dumping. Its study
indicated that ocean dumping is not a critical problem now, but it
predicted that as municipalities and industries increasingly turned
to the oceans as a convenient dumping ground, a vast new influx
of wastes  would occur.  Once this happened, it would be  difficult
and costly to shift to land-based disposal.
  Wastes  dumped in the oceans have a number of harmful effects.
Many are  toxic to marine life, reduce populations of fish and other

-------
2204          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

economic resources, jeopardize marine ecosystems, and impair aes-
thetic values. In most cases, feasible, economic, and more beneficial
methods of disposal are available. Our national policy should be to
ban unregulated ocean dumping of all wastes  and to place strict
limits  on ocean disposal  of harmful  materials. Legislation  is
needed to assure that our oceans do not suffer the fate of so many
of our inland waters, and to provide the authority needed to pro-
tect our coastal waters, beaches,  and estuaries.
  —/ recommend  a  national policy banning  unregulated ocean
    dumping of all materials and placing strict limits on ocean
    disposal of any materials harmful to the environment.
  —I recommend legislation that will require a  permit from the
    Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for
    any  materials to be dumped into the oceans,  estuaries,  or
    Great Lakes and that will authorize the Administrator to ban
    dumping of wastes which are dangerous to the marine ecosys-
    tem.
  The legislation would permit  the Administrator to begin phas-
ing out ocean dumping of harmful materials. It would provide the
controls necessary to prevent further degradation of the oceans.
  This would go far toward remedying this problem off our own
shores. However, protection of the total marine environment from
such pollution can  only be assured if other nations adopt similar
measures and enforce them.
  —I am instructing the Secretary of State, in coordination with
    the Council on Environmental Quality,  to develop and pursue
    international initiatives directed toward this objective.

                            NOISE
  The American people have rightly become increasingly annoyed
    by the  growing level of noise that assails them. Airplanes,
    trucks, construction equipment, and many  other sources  of
    noise interrupt sleep,  disturb communication, create stress,
    and  can produce deafness  and other adverse  health  effects.
    The urban  environment in particular  is being degraded  by
    steadily rising noise levels. The Federal Government has set
    and  enforces standards for noise from aircraft, but it is now
    time that our efforts to deal with many other sources of noise
    be strengthened and expanded.
                                                       [p. 12]

  The primary  responsibility for dealing with levels of noise in
the general environment rests upon local governments. However,

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2205

the products which produce the noise are usually marketed nation-
ally, and it is by regulating the noise-generating characteristics of
such products that the Federal Government can best assist the
State and local governments in achieving a quieter environment.
  —I propose  comprehensive noise  pollution control  legislation
    that will authorize the Administrator of  EPA to set noise
    standards  on  transportation,  construction and  other equip-
    ment and require  labeling of noise characteristics of certain
    products.
  Before establishing standards, the Administrator would be re-
quired to publish  a  report on the effects of  noise on man, the
major sources, and the control techniques available. The legisla-
tion would provide a method for measurably reducing major noise
sources, while preserving to State and local governments the au-
thority to deal with their particular noise problems.


III.  PROMOTING ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IN OUR LAND  USE
                          DECISIONS

  The use of our land not only affects the  natural environment but
shapes the pattern of our daily lives. Unfortunately, the sensible
use of our land is often thwarted by  the inability of the many
competing  and overlapping local  units of government to control
land use decisions which have regional significance.
  While most land use decisions will continue to be made at the
local level,  we must  draw upon the basic authority of State gov-
ernment to deal with land use issues which spill over local juris-
dictional boundaries. The States are uniquely qualified to effect the
institutional reform that is so badly needed, for they are closer to
the local problems than is the Federal Government and yet re-
moved enough from local tax  and other pressures to represent the
broader regional interests of  the public. Federal programs which
influence major land use decisions can  thereby fit into  a coherent
pattern. In addition,  we must begin to restructure economic incen-
tives bearing upon land use to encourage wise and orderly  deci-
sions for preservation and development of the land.
  I am calling upon the  Congress to  adopt a national land use
policy. In addition, I am proposing other major initiatives on land
use to bring "parks to  the people", to expand our wilderness  sys-
tem, to restore and preserve  historic and older buildings, to pro-
vide an orderly system for power plant siting,  and to prevent
environmental degradation from mining.

-------
2206          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

                A NATIONAL LAND USE POLICY

  We must reform the institutional framework in which land use
decisions are made.
  —I propose legislation to establish a National Land Use Policy
                                                       [p. 13]

    which will encourage the States,  in  cooperation with  local
    government,  to  plan for and regulate  major developments
    affecting  growth and the  use of critical land  areas.  This
    should be done by establishing methods for protecting lands
    of critical environmental concern, methods  for controlling
    large-scale development, and improving use of lands around
    key facilities and new communities.
  One hundred million dollars in new funds would be authorized
to assist the States in this effort—$20 million in each of the next
five years—with priority given to the States of the coastal zone.
Accordingly, this proposal will replace and  expand my proposal
submitted to the last Congress for coastal zone management, while
still giving priority attention to this area of  the country which is
especially sensitive to development pressures. Steps will be taken
to assure that federally-assisted programs  are consistent with the
approved State land use programs.

Public Lands Management
  The Federal public lands comprise approximately  one-third of
the Nation's land area. This vast domain contains land with spec-
tacular scenery, mineral and timber resources, major wildlife hab-
itat,  ecological significance, and tremendous recreational  impor-
tance. In a sense, it is the "breathing space" of the Nation.
  The public lands belong to all Americans.  They are part of the
heritage and the birthright of every citizen. It is important, there-
fore, that these lands be managed wisely, that their environmental
values be carefully safeguarded, and that we  deal with these lands
as trustees for the future. They have an  important  place in na-
tional land use considerations.
  The Public Land Law Review Commission recently completed a
study and report on  Federal public land policy. This  Administra-
tion  will work closely with the Congress in  evaluating the Com-
mission's recommendations and in developing legislative and ad-
ministrative programs to improve public land management.
  The largest single block of Federal public  land lies in the State
of Alaska. Recent major oil discoveries suggest that the State is
on the threshold of a major economic development. Such develop-

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2207

ment can bring great benefits both to the State and to the Nation.
It could also—if unplanned and  unguided—despoil the last and
greatest American wilderness.
  We should  act now, in close  cooperation with  the  State  of
Alaska, to develop a comprehensive land use plan for the Federal
lands in Alaska, giving priority to those north of the Yukon River.
Such a plan should  take account  of the needs and aspirations of
the native peoples, the importance of balanced economic develop-
ment, and  the special need for  maintaining and protecting the
unique natural  heritage  of  Alaska. This can  be  accomplished
                                                       [p. 14]

through a system of  parks,  wilderness, recreation, and wildlife
areas and through wise management of the Federal lands gener-
ally. I am asking the Secretary of the Interior to take the lead in
this task, calling upon other Federal agencies as appropriate.

Preserving Our Natural Environment

  The  demand for  urban open space, recreation, wilderness and
other natural  areas continues to  accelerate. In the  face of rapid
urban  development, the  acquisition and  development  of  open
space, recreation lands and natural areas accessible to urban cen-
ters is often thwarted by escalating land values  and development
pressures. I am submitting to the Congress several  bills that will
be part of a comprehensive effort to preserve our natural environ-
ment and to provide more open spaces  and parks in urban areas
where today they are often so scarce. In addition, I will be taking
steps within the executive branch to assure that all agencies are
using fully their existing legislative authority to these ends.

"Legacy of Parks"

  Merely  acquiring land for open space and recreation is not
enough. We must bring parks to where the people are so that
everyone has access  to nearby recreational areas.  In my budget for
1972, I have proposed a new "Legacy of Parks" program which
will help States and local governments  provide parks and recrea-
tion areas,  not just  for  today's Americans but for tomorrow's as
well. Only if we set aside and develop such recreation areas now
can we ensure that they will be available for future generations.
  As part of this legacy, I have requested a $200 million appropri-
ation to begin  a new program for  the acquisition  and development
of additional park lands in urban areas. To be administered by the
Department of Housing and  Urban Development, this would in-

-------
2208          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

elude provision for facilities such as swimming pools to add to the
use and enjoyment of these parks.
  Also, I have recommended in my 1972 budget that the appropri-
ation for the Land and Water Conservation Fund be  increased to
$380 million,  permitting the continued acquisition  of  Federal
parks and  recreation areas  as well as an expanded  State grant
program. However, because of the way in which these State grant
funds were allocated  over the past five years, a relatively small
percentage has been  used for the purchase and development of
recreational facilities in and near urban areas. The allocation for-
mula should be changed to ensure  that more parks will be devel-
oped in and near our urban areas.
  —I am submitting legislation to reform the State grant pro-
    gram so that Federal grants  for the purchase and develop-
    ment of recreation  lands bear a closer relationship to  the
    population distribution.
  —7 am  also proposing amendments  to the Internal Revenue
    Code which should greatly expand the use of charitable land
    transfers  for conservation purposes and thereby enlarge the
                                                       [p. 15]

    role of private citizens in preserving the best of America's
    landscape.
  Additional public parks will be  created as a result of my pro-
gram for examining the need for retention of real property owned
by the Government. The Property Review Board,  which  I estab-
lished last  year, is continuing its review of individual  properties
as well as its evaluation of the Government's overall  Federal real
property program. Properties identified as suitable for park use
and determined to be surplus can be conveyed to States and politi-
cal subdivisions for park purposes without cost. The State or other
political subdivision must prepare an acceptable park  use plan and
must agree to  use the property as a park in perpetuity.  More than
40 properties with high potential for park use have already been
identified.
  Five such properties are now available for conversion to public
park use. One, Border Field, California, will be developed as a
recreation area with the assistance of the Department of the Inte-
rior. The other 'four will be conveyed to States or local units of
government as soon as  adequate guarantees can be  obtained for
their proper maintenance and operation. These four are: (1) part
of the former Naval Training  Devices  Center  on  Long Island
Sound, New York; (2) land at a Clinical Research  Center  in Fort

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2209

Worth, Texas;  (3) about ten miles of sand dunes and beach along
the Atlantic Coast and Sandy Hook Bay, a part of Fort Hancock,
New Jersey; and  (4)  a portion of Fort Lawton,  Washington, a
wooded, hilly area near the heart of Seattle. In addition, efforts
are underway to open a significant stretch of Pacific Ocean Beach
Front and Coastal Bluffs at Camp Pendleton, California.
  Many parcels of federal real  property are currently under-util-
ized because of the budgetary and procedural difficulties that are
involved in transferring a Federal operation from the current site
to a more suitable location.
  —/  am again proposing legislation to simplify relocation of
    federal installations that occupy properties that could better
    be used for other purposes.
  This will allow conversion of many additional Federal real prop-
erties to a more beneficial  public use. Lands now used for Federal
operations but more suited to park and recreational uses will be
given priority consideration for relocation procedures. The pro-
gram will be self-financing and  will provide new opportunities for
improving the utilization of Federal lands.

Wilderness Areas
  While  there  is clearly  a need for greater efforts to provide
neighborhood parks and other public recreation areas, there must
still be places where nature thrives and man enters  only  as a
visitor. These wilderness areas are an important part of a compre-
                                                        [p. 16]

hensive open space system. We must continue to expand our wil-
derness preservation system, in order to  save for all time those
magnificent areas  of America  where nature still predominates.
Accordingly, in August last year I expressed my intention to im-
prove our performance in the  study  and  presentation of recom-
mendations for new wilderness areas.
  —/ will soon be recommending to the  Congress a number of
    specific proposals for  a major enlargement of our wilderness
    preservation  system by the addition  of a wide spectrum of
    natural areas spread across the entire continent.
National Parks
  While placing much  greater emphasis on parks in urban areas
and the designation of  new wilderness areas, we must continue to
expand  our  national park system. We are  currently  obligating
substantial sums to acquire the  privately owned lands in units of

-------
2210          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

the National Park System which have already been authorized by
the Congress.
  Last year, joint efforts of the administration and the Congress
resulted in authorization of ten areas in the National Park Sys-
tem, including such outstanding sites as Voyageurs National Park
in Minnesota,  Apostle Islands National Lakeshore in Wisconsin,
Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore in  Michigan, Gulf  Is-
lands National Seashore in Mississippi and Florida, and the Ches-
apeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park in the District of
Columbia, Maryland and West Virginia.
  However, the job of filling out the National  Park System is not
complete. Other unique areas must still be preserved. Despite all
our wealth and scientific knowledge, we cannot recreate these un-
spoiled areas once they are lost to the onrush of development. I  am
directing the Secretary of the Interior to review  the outstanding
opportunities for setting aside  nationally significant natural  and
historic areas, and to develop priorities for their possible addition
to the National Park System.

Power Plant Siting
  The power shortage last summer and continuing disputes across
the country over the  siting of power plants and the routing of
transmission lines highlight the need for longer-range planning by
the producers of electric power to  protect their future needs and
identify environmental concerns well in advance of  construction
deadlines. The growing number of confrontations  also suggest the
need for the establishment of public agencies to assure public
discussion of plans, proper resolution of environmental issues,  and
timely construction of facilities. Last fall, the Office of Science  and
Technology  sponsored a study  entitled "Electric Power and the
Environment," which identified  many  of  these issues. Only
through involving the environmental protection agencies early in
the planning of  future power facilities can  we  avoid disputes
which delay construction timetables. I believe that these two goals
                                                        [p. 17]

of adequacy of power supply and  environmental protection  are
compatible if the proper framework is available.
  —I propose a power plant siting law to provide for establish-
    ment within each State or region of  a single agency with
    responsibility for assuring that environmental concerns are
    properly considered in the certification of specific power plant
    sites and transmission line routes.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2211

  Under this law, utilities would be required to identify needed
power supply facilities ten years prior to construction of the re-
quired facilities.  They would be required to identify the  power
plant sites and general transmission routes under consideration
five years before  construction and apply for certification for spe-
cific sites, facilities, and routes two years in advance of construc-
tion. Public hearings at which all interested parties could be heard
without delaying construction timetables would be required.

Mined Area Protection
  Surface and underground mining have scarred millions of acres
of land and have caused environmental damages such as air and
water pollution. Burning coal fires, subsidence, acid mine drainage
which pollutes our streams and rivers and the destruction of aes-
thetic and recreational values frequently but unnecessarily accom-
pany mining activities. These problems will worsen as the demand
for fossil fuels and other raw materials continues to grow, unless
such mining is subject to regulation requiring both preventive and
restorative measures.
  —7 propose a Mined Area Protection Act to establish Federal
     requirements and guidelines for State programs to regulate
     the environmental consequences of surface and underground
     mining. In any State which does not enact the necessary regu-
     lations or enforce  them  properly, the  Federal Government
     would be authorized to do so.

      PRESERVING OUR ARCHITECTURAL AND HISTORIC HERITAGE
  Too often we think of environment only  as  our natural sur-
roundings. But for most of us, the urban environment is the one in
which we spend our daily lives. America's cities, from Boston and
Washington to Charleston,  New Orleans, San Antonio, Denver,
and San Francisco, reflect in the architecture of their buildings a
uniqueness and character that is too rapidly disappearing under
the bulldozer. Unfortunately, present Federal income tax policies
provide much stronger incentives for demolition of older buildings
than for their rehabilitation.
  Particularly acute is  the  continued loss  of many buildings  of
historic value. Since 1933 an estimated one-quarter of the build-
ings recorded by the Historic American Building Survey have
                                                         [p. 18]

been  destroyed.  Most lending institutions are  unwilling to loan
funds for the restoration and rehabilitation of historic buildings

-------
2212          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

because of the age and often the location of such buildings. Fi-
nally, there are many historic buildings under Federal ownership
for which inadequate provision has been made for restoration and
preservation.
  —I shall propose tax measures designed to overcome these pres-
    ent distortions and particularly to encourage the restoration
    of historic buildings.
  —7 shall propose new legislation to permit Federal insurance of
    home improvement loans for historic residential properties to
    a maximum of $15,000 per dwelling unit.
  —I am recommending legislation to permit State and local gov-
    ernments more easily to maintain transferred Federal  his-
    toric sites by allowing their use for revenue purposes and I
    am taking action to insure that no federally-owned property
    is demolished until its historic significance has first been re-
    viewed.

          IV. TOWARD A BETTER WORLD ENVIRONMENT

  Environmental problems have a unique global dimension, for
they afflict every nation, irrespective  of its political institutions,
economic system, or  state of  development.  The  United  States
stands ready to work and cooperate with  all nations,  individually
or through international institutions, in the great task of building
a better environment for man.  A number of the proposals which I
am submitting  to Congress today have important international
aspects, as in the case of ocean dumping. I hope that other nations
will see the merit of the environmental goals which we have set
for ourselves and will choose to share them with us.
  At the same  time, we need  to develop more effective environ-
mental efforts through appropriate regional and global organiza-
tions. The United States is participating closely in the initiatives
of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
 (OECD), with its emphasis on the complex economic aspects of
environmental controls, and of the Economic Commission for Eu-
rope  (ECE), a U.N. regional  organization which is the major
forum for East-West cooperation on environmental problems.
  Following a United States initiative in 1969, the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization has added a new dimension to its cooperative
activities through its Committee  on  the  Challenges of  Modern
Society.  CCMS  has served to stimulate national and international
action on many problems  common to a modern  technological so-
ciety. For example, an important agreement was  reached in Brus-

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2213

sels recently to  eliminate intentional discharges  of  oil and oily
wastes by ships into the oceans by 1975 if possible or, at the latest,
by the end  of the decade. CCMS is functioning  as  an effective
forum for reaching agreements on the development of pollution-
free and safe automobiles. Work on mitigating the  effects of floods
and earthquakes is in progress. These innovative  and specific ac-
                                                        [p. 19]

tions  are  good examples of how efforts of many  nations can  be
focused and coordinated in addressing  serious   environmental
problems facing all nations.
  The United Nations, whose specialized agencies  have long done
valuable work on many aspects of the environment, is sponsoring
a landmark  Conference on the Human Environment to be held in
Stockholm in June  1972.  This will, for the first  time, bring to-
gether all member  nations  of  the  world  community to discuss
thosa environmental issues of most pressing common  concern and
to agree on a world-wide strategy and the  basis for a cooperative
program to reverse the fearful trend toward environmental degra-
dation. I have pledged full support for  this Conference, and the
United States is actively participating in the preparatory work.
  Direct bilateral consultations in this field are also most useful in
jointly meeting the challenges of environmental problems.  Thus,
the United States and Canada have been working closely together
preparing plans for action directed to the urgent task of cleaning
up the Great Lakes, that priceless resource our two nations share.
Over the past few months, ministerial level discussions with Japan
have laid  the basis for an expanded program of cooperation and
technological exchange from which both nations will benefit.
  It is my  intention  that we will  develop a firm and effective
fabric of  cooperation among the nations  of the  world on these
environmental issues.

                    WORLD HERITAGE TRUST

  As  the  United  States approaches the  centennial celebration  in
1972 of the establishment of Yellowstone National Park, it would
be appropriate to mark this historic event  by a new international
initiative  in the general field  of  parks. Yellowstone is the first
national park to have been created in the  modern world, and the
national park concept has represented  a  major  contribution  to
world culture. Similar systems have now  been established through-
out the world. The United Nations lists over  1,200  parks  in  93
nations.

-------
2214          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  The national park concept is based  upon the recognition that
certain areas of natural, historical, or cultural significance have
such unique and outstanding characteristics that they must be
treated as belonging to  the  nation  as a whole,  as part of the
nation's heritage.
  It would be fitting by 1972 for the nations of the world to agree
to the principle that there are certain areas of such unique world-
wide value that they should be treated as part of the heritage of
all mankind and accorded special recognition as part of a World
Heritage Trust. Such an arrangement would impose no limita-
tions on the sovereignty of those nations which choose to partici-
pate,  but would extend  special international recognition to the
areas which qualify and would make available technical and other
assistance  where appropriate to assist  in  their protection  and
                                                        [p. 20]

management. I believe that such an  initiative can add a new di-
mension to international cooperation.
  —I am directing the Secretary of the  Interior, in coordination
    with the Council on Environmental Quality,  and under the
    foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of State, to develop
    initiatives  for presentation in appropriate  international for-
    ums to further the objective of a World Heritage Trust.
  Confronted with the pressures of  population and development,
and with the world's tremendously increased capacity for environ-
mental modification, we must act together now to save for future
generations the most outstanding natural areas as well as places
of unique  historical, archeological, architectural, and  cultural
value to mankind.

           V. FURTHER INSTITUTIONAL IMPROVEMENT

  The solutions to  environmental  and  ecological  problems are
often complex and costly. If we are to  develop sound policies and
programs in the future and receive early warning on problems, we
need to refine our analytical techniques and use the best intellec-
tual talent that  is available.
  After thorough discussions with  a number of private founda-
tions,  the  Federal  Government through  the  National Science
Foundation and the Council on Environmental Quality will sup-
port the establishment of an Environmental Institute. I hope that
this nonprofit institute will be supported not only  by the Federal
Government but also by private foundations. The Institute would
conduct policy studies and analyses  drawing upon the capabilities

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2215

of our universities and experts in other sectors. It would provide
new and alternative strategies for dealing with the whole spec-
trum of environmental problems.

                  VI. TOWARD A BETTER LIFE

   Adoption of the proposals in this message will help us to clean
up the problems of the past, to reduce the amount of waste which
is disposed, and to deal creatively with problems of the future
before they become critical. But action by government alone  can
never achieve the high quality environment we are seeking.
   We  must better understand how economic forces  induce some
forms of environmental degradation, and how we can create  and
change economic incentives to improve rather than degrade envi-
ronmental  quality. Economic incentives, such as the sulfur oxides
charge and the lead tax,  can create a strong impetus to reduce
pollution levels. We must  experiment with other economic incen-
tives as a supplement to our regulatory efforts. Our goal must be
to harness the powerful mechanisms of the marketplace, with its
automatic incentives and restraints, to encourage improvement in
the quality of life.
   We must also recognize that the technological, regulatory,  and
economic measures we adopt to solve our environmental problems
cannot succeed unless we enlist  the  active participation of  the
American people.  Far beyond any legislative or administrative
                                                       [p. 21]

programs that may be suggested, the  direct involvement of  our
citizens will be the critical test of  whether we can indeed have the
kind of environment we want for ourselves and for our children.
   All across the country, our people are concerned about the envi-
ronment—the  quality of the air, of the water, of the open spaces
that their children need. The question I hear everywhere is "What
can 7 do?"
  Fortunately, there is a great deal that each of  us  can do. The
businessman in his every day decisions can take into account the
effects on the  environment of his  alternatives and act in an envi-
ronmentally responsible way. The housewife can make  choices in
the marketplace that will help discourage pollution. Young people
can undertake  projects in their schools and through other organiza-
tions to help build a better environment for their communities.
Parents can work with the schools to help develop sound environ-
mental teaching throughout our education  system. Every commu-
nity in the nation can encourage and promote concerned and  re-

-------
2216          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

sponsible citizen involvement in environmental issues, an involve-
ment which should be broadly representative of the life-styles and
leadership of the community. Each of us can resolve to help keep
his own neighborhood clean and attractive and to avoid careless,
needless  littering and polluting of his surroundings. These are
examples of effective citizen participation; there are many others.
  The building of a better  environment will require in the long
term a citizenry that is both deeply concerned and fully informed.
Thus, I believe that our educational system, at all levels, has a
critical role to play.
  As our nation comes to grips with our environmental problems,
we will find that difficult choices have to be made,  that substantial
costs have to be met, and that sacrifices have to be made. Environ-
mental quality cannot be achieved cheaply or easily. But, I believe
the American people are ready to do what is necessary.
  This nation has met great challenges before. I  believe we shall
meet this challenge. I call upon all Americans to dedicate them-
selves during the decade of  the seventies to the goal of restoring
the environment  and  reclaiming the earth for ourselves  and our
posterity. And I  invite all peoples everywhere to join us in this
great endeavor.  Together, we hold this good earth in trust. We
must—and together we can—prove ourselves worthy of that trust.
                                            RICHARD NIXON.
The  White House
  February 8, 1971
                                                        [p. 22]

 II.  THE  PRESIDENT'S PROPOSALS—SULFUR  OXIDE  EMISSIONS
                           CHARGES
                                                        [p. 23]

              SULFUR OXIDES EMISSIONS CHARGES

  Sulfur oxides  are one of  the most harmful air pollutants dis-
charged into our atmosphere today, accounting for about one-half
of the total damages from air pollution.
  They damage  human health, vegetation, materials, and prop-
erty. Sulfur oxides can permanently damage delicate lung tissue
and  have  been linked to  increased incidence of diseases such as
bronchitis and lung cancer.  National health costs resulting from
sulfur oxides emissions are conservatively estimated at over $3.3
billion  annually. The  effects of sulfur oxides on materials, prop-
erty, and  vegetation cost the Nation an estimated additional $5

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2217

billion annually.  These total damages of $8.3 billion amount to
about $.20 for each pound of sulfur  now emitted into our atmos-
phere.
   Sulfur oxides result from the burning and distilling of oil and
coal, the smelting of  nonferrous ores, and other industrial proc-
esses. An estimated 36.6 million tons of sulfur oxides are now
emitted annually as follows:

                                                Million tons   Percent
Power plants .
Other combustion.. . ..
Smelters 	
Refineries 	
Miscellaneous 	

Total 	


20.0
8.2
4.0
2.4
2.0

. . . 36.6


55
22
11
7
5

100

[p. 25]
  If uncontrolled, annual sulfur oxides emissions will nearly quad-
ruple, to an estimated 126 million tons by the year 2000. Power
generation accounts for an ever increasing proportion of the emis-
sions.
  The Clean Air Amendments of 1970 greatly improve the mecha-
nism to  control air  pollutants, including sulfur  oxides. These
amendments require promulgation of national air  quality stand-
ards for pollutants by the Administrator  of the Environmental
Protection  Agency. Once  standards have  been  promulgated,  the
States must prepare a plan to implement the standards within 3
years. Exemptions to the  3-year period can only be made by the
EPA Administrator if adequate control methods are not commer-
cially available or have not been available for a sufficient period of
                                                       [p. 26]

time. An intensive research, development and demonstration effort
is underway to develop commercial technology for controlling  sul-
fur oxides.
  With no  technology currently available,  industry does not have
an incentive to invest in control equipment until it has  been tested
for some time. Enforcement at all levels of government is likely to
be hampered by arguments on technical feasibility. An economic
incentive would provide pressure for industry to demonstrate  and
use technology as soon as possible to avoid the charge. It would
also provide an incentive  to achieve even  higher levels of abate-

-------
2218          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

ment than required by the standards. As such, it will provide a
powerful tool to help achieve the air quality standards called for
by
THE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL
  Accordingly, the President has directed the council on Environ-
mental Quality  and the Treasury Department to develop a Clean
Air Emission Charge on emissions  of sulful oxides.  The charge
would be levied on sulfur emitted into the atmosphere from com-
bustion or distillation of fossil fuels and from other  possible
sources. To the extent that sulfur is removed from fuels, no pay-
ment of the charge would be required.
  The  funds generated by this charge would enable  the Federal
Government to increase programs to improve  the quality  of the
environment with  special emphasis on development of technology
to reduce sulfur oxides emissions and programs to develop ade-
quate clean energy supplies. These two measures—the sulfur ox-
ides emissions  charge  and expand environmental  programs—
should provide both the incentive for abatement and the means for
doing so.
                                                       [P. 27]

                  TAX ON LEAD IN GASOLINE

  Air pollution from automobiles is clearly one of our major envi-
ronmental problems. The smog that was originally considered to
be  a Southern  California problem  is now becoming a  national
phenomenon.
  Lead in gasoline adds to the automotive air pollution problem in
two ways. First, lead fouls some of the major emission control
systems now being developed to meet the 1975 air quality stand-
ards.
  Second, lead  itself is a pollutant. Over 95 percent of the total
lead emitted into the atmosphere derives from additives in gaso-
line. Lead particles can penetrate the lungs and can be retained
and absorbed in the bloodstream. In urban areas, the margin of
safety between blood levels of lead in humans and levels at which
lead poisoning symptoms have been identified are growing smaller.
While no clear case has been found of lead poisoning from automo-
bile emissions, there is ample reason  for concern.
  The Clean Air Amendments of 1970  authorize control of lead
levels in gasoline. However, a total ban is not feasible because over
one-half of the vehicles now on the road  require high octane gaso-
line which, in general, can only be achieved using lead additives.

-------
                   GUIDELINES AND REPORTS              2219

The Federal Government can and will require that unleaded gaso-
line be available, but it cannot assure that people will buy it. Since
the cost of low-lead or nonleaded gasoline is higher, there is little
incentive for car owners to purchase it. In fact, current low-lead
or nonleaded gasoline is not selling well.

                    THE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL

  The President is again proposing a special tax on lead additives
in gasoline. The tax would  allow consumers  to buy the  low or
unleaded fuels at no  price disadvantage over leaded gasolines, and
hence creates an economic incentive for refiners to produce  more
low or unleded gasoline. This special charge would  help to bring
about, at  reasonable costs, the gradual transition to use of un-
leaded gasoline, which is essential to reduce lead emissions and to
meet the other emission  control  standards scheduled to come into
effect for the 1975 automobiles.
                                                              [p. 30]

                            ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, D.C.
                                                  Washington, D.C.
HON. SPIRO T. AGNEW,
President of the Senate,
Washington, D.C.
HON. CARL B. ALBERT,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
  DEAR MR. [PRESIDENT/SPEAKER] : Enclosed is a draft of  a proposed bill,
"To amend section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
and for other purposes."
  We recommend that the bill  be referred to the appropriate committee for
consideration, and we recommend that it be enacted.
  The proposed legislation would amend section  8 of the  Act to provide
financial  assistance for the  construction of treatment works, and for the
development of financial and other capability to  provide for future  waste
treatment needs. The overall objective of this bill is to achieve an equitable
and fully effective Federal financing1 program for the construction of waste
treatment facilities. This can better be accomplished if investments for
treatment works are made as part of a comprehensive water quality manage-
ment process which relates  these investments to the environmental  quality
objectives. The long range  effectiveness of these investments in  attaining
and  maintaining environmental quality will depend upon the actions taken
now to develop self-sufficient systems at the State and local  levels for
assuring  the future operation, maintenance, expansion and replacement  of
treatment facilities.
  The bill would authorize appropriations of $6 billion,  $2  billion for each
of the three fiscal years beginning with fiscal year  1972. These  requested
appropriations are based on  detailed studies and surveys of waste treatment

-------
2220            LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

facility construction needs for fiscal years 1972, 1973  and 1974.  A detailed
analysis and report of those studies  and surveys will be transmitted  to the
Congress shortly pursuant to the provisions of section  26(a)  of the Federal
                                                                   [p. 31]

Water Pollution  Control Act. In determining the  amounts to  be requested
for this purpose, full account was taken of the amounts expended by  States
and municipalities to prefinance the Federal share of needed waste treatment
facilities,  so  as  to  render such  States  and  municipalities  eligible for
reimbursement. Account was also taken of the unobligated balances of funds
previously appropriated for this  purpose. In  addition,  the bill  would revise
the allocation formula to provide greater flexibility to  meet the most  severe
water pollution problems.
  The new  allocation  formula  for  distributing  construction  grant  funds
among the States would employ four factors.  First, 45 percent  of the funds
would  be  allocated based  on  relative  State  population;  second,  up  to 20
percent would be allocated to  States which agree to pay at least  25 percent
of the cost of all projects receiving construction grants during a fiscal year;
third,  up  to 25 percent would be  allocated to  States which have existing
"reimbursables" for which grants  have not been  made because  of lack of
Federal funds; and fourth, the remainder would be distributed to meet the
most serious water pollution control problems  as determined by  the Adminis-
trator. This new allocation formula would permit the Administrator a  degree
of flexibility to direct construction grant funds to areas where those funds
are most  critically needed and  where  they  can be most effectively used.
Any sums not obligated by a  State at the end of a fiscal year  because of  a
lack of approved projects  would  be reallotted by the Administrator to meet
the most serious water pollution  control needs.
  This  bill  would  authorize Federal payments in  reimbursement of State
or local funds used to prefinance the Federal share of qualified projects on
which construction was initiated after June  30, 1966, but prior to  July 1,
1971. "Reimbursables"  for projects proposed  to  be initiated  after June  30,
1971, would  be  permitted only  if they  met  certain  qualifications.  The
Administrator would  thus be given some pursuant  to  the  provisions of
                                                                   [p. 32]

section  26(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. In determining
the amounts to be requested for this  purpose,  full account was taken of
the amounts expended by States and  municipalities to prefinance the Federal
share of needed waste  treatment facilities, so as to render such  States and
municipalities eligible for reimbursement. Account was also taken  of  the
unobligated  balances  of  funds previously appropriated  for  this purpose.
In addition, the bill would revise the allocation  formula to provide greater
flexibility to meet the most severe water  pollution  problems.
  The  new  allocation  formula for  distributing  construction  grant funds
among the States would employ four factors. First, 45 percent of the funds
would be  allocated based  on relative  State  population;  second, up to 20
percent would be  allocated to  States which agree to pay at least 25 percent
of the  cost  of  all projects  receiving  construction grants  during a fiscal
year;  third, up  to 25 percent  would  be allocated to  States which have
existing "reimbursables"  for which grants  have  not been made because
of lack of Federal funds; and  fourth,  the remainder would be  distributed

-------
                     GUIDELINES AND REPORTS               2221

to meet  the  most serious water  pollution control  problems as  determined
by  the  Administrator.  This  new  allocation  formula  would  permit  the
Administrator  a degree  of flexibility to direct construction  grant  funds
to areas where  those funds are most  critically needed and where they  can
be most effectively used. Any sums not obligated by a State at the end of a
fiscal year because of a  lack  of  approved projects would be reallotted  by
the Administrator to  meet the  most  serious water pollution control needs.
  This bill would authorize Federal  payments  in  reimbursement  of State
or local funds used to prefinance  the  Federal share of qualified projects  on
which  construction was initiated  after June  30, 1966, but prior to July 1,
1971. "Reimbursables" for  projects  proposed to be initiated after  June 30,
1971, would  be permitted  only  if they  met  certain  qualifications. The
Administrator would  thus be  given some control over the  accumulation of
                                                                   [p. 33]

new "reimbursable" projects to minimize  abusive practices.
  A number  of inequities and problems  have been identified in connection
with the treatment  of  industrial  wastes  in  municipal  waste  treatment
facilities  financed in part with  Federal funds. This has  resulted  in  the
ineffective and  inefficient use of construction  grant monies. This  bill is
designed to overcome these problems  by  prohibiting the granting  of funds
for projects treating industrial wastes unless the industrial user  is required
to pay back  that portion of the project  costs attributable to the treatment
of industrial wastes.
  The  $6 billion share proposed in this bill will stimulate about $12 billion
worth  of total waste treatment construction. That estimate represents  our
best estimate of total  investment needs. The President's proposal of last year
was based  on  an estimated  need  of  $10 billion,  including  a  Federal
contribution  of  $4  billion.  That  estimate was based  on  an  estimated need
of $10 billion, including a Federal contribution of  $4 billion.  That estimate
was based upon two independent studies  of nation-wide waste  treatment
facility needs. A  detailed  reassessment  of  the  Nation's needs, including
contacts  with most of the major  cities, has revealed  a total  need of about
$12  billion  by  the  end  of fiscal year  1974.  The increased estimate  of
$2  billion over  last year's proposal  is  attributed  to the identification  of
new needs by the  States and revision of engineering  estimates to reflect
current price levels. In last year's  proposal, the Federal share was 40 percent
of the total  $10 billion  investment required. The  present bill proposes  a
Federal  share  of  $6  billion which  represents 47  percent of the total  $12
billion  investment  required.  This  amount  is   increased by the  amounts
needed to reimburse  States and municipalities which have prefinanced  the
Federal share of needed projects,  and  reduced by the  amount of unobligated
funds appropriated for this purpose.
                                                                   [p. 34]

  Our  underlying concern  is  the attainment of water  quality  standards.
It  is our best  estimate  that the  funds  requested  in  this  bill for  the
construction  of  needed waste treatment facilities will permit us to achieve
our water quality standard goals shortly after 1974.
  This proposed bill  is part of the President's environmental program  as
announced in his Environmental  Message of February  8, 1971.

-------
2222          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  The Office of Management and Budget has advised that this  proposed
legislation would be in acocrd with the program of the President.
                                      Sincerely yours,
                                      WILLIAM D. KUCKELSHAUS.
                                                        [p. 35]
  A BILL To amend section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution  Control Act,
as amended, and for other purposes
   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.),
is further amended as follows:
SECTION I. Section 8 of the Act is hereby amended  to  read as
follows:

"FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION  OF WASTE .TREATMENT
                         FACILITIES"

   "Sec. 8(a) (1). The Administrator is authorized to make grants
to any State, municipality, or intermunicipal or interstate agency
for the construction of necessary treatment works to prevent the
discharge of untreated or inadequately treated sewage or  other
waste into any waters, for the purpose of reports, plans and speci-
fications in connection therewith, and for such additional reports
and studies necessary for the grantee to develop the institutional
arrangements and financial  capacity to assume adequate future
operation, maintenance, expansion and replacement of such works.
   " (2) Federal grants under this subsection shall be  subject to
the following limitations:
       (A)  No grant shall  be made for any project pursuant to
     this subsection unless such project shall have been approved
     by the  appropriate  State water pollution control  agency or
     agencies and by the Administrator.
       (B)  No grant shall be made unless  the grantee agrees to
     pay for all project costs which are not paid for by the grant
     or by the State financial contribution;
       (C)  No grant  shall  be made for  any project  under this
     subsection until the applicant has made provision satisfactory
     to the  Administrator  for  assuring  (i)  that there will  be
     proper and efficient operation and  maintenance of the treat-
     ment works, including adequate provision for trained manage-
     ment and operational personnel, and (ii)  that the applicant
     has or  will take measures  to establish or acquire adequate
     legal,   institutional,  managerial   and  financial   capability
                                                        [p. 36]

-------
             GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2223

for meeting foreseeable future needs with respect to opera-
tion, maintenance, expansion and  replacement  of the  treat-
ment works in order to meet water quality standards;
   (D) No grant shall be made for any project under this
subsection unless such project is in conformity with the State
water pollution control plan submitted pursuant to section 7
of this Act, and the Administrator finds that such project is
consistent with  any planning requirements designated pur-
suant to regulation, including the  economic and engineering
feasibility, and the architectural,  legal, fiscal and economic
investigations, studies, surveys, designs, plans, drawings and
specifications, and has been certified by the appropriate State
water pollution  control agency as entitled  to priority over
other eligible projects on the  basis of criteria  submitted  as
part of the approved State water pollution control plan;
   (E) No grant shall be made for any project in an amount
exceeding 30 per centum of the estimated reasonable cost
thereof as determined by the Administrator, except as herein-
after provided;
   (F) The percentage limitation of 30 per centum  imposed
by subparagraph (E) of this paragraph shall be increased to
a maximum of 40 per centum in the case of  grants made
under this subsection from funds allocated for a fiscal year to
a State  under paragraph  (4) of this subsection if the State
agrees to grant, loan or otherwise finance not less than 25 per
centum  of the estimated reasonable  cost  (as determined by
the Administrator)  of all projects for which Federal grants
are to be made under this subsection from such  allocation,  or
if the grantee has a treatment works user charge system and
otherwise has legal, institutional,  managerial and  financial
capability to assure adequate operation, maintenance, expan-
sion and  replacement of treatment  works throughout the
grantee's jurisdiction, as determined by the Administrator;
   (G) The percentage limitations imposed by clause (E)  of
this paragraph shall be increased  to a maximum of 55 per
centum in the case of grants made under this subsection from
funds allocated  for a fiscal year to a  State under paragraph
(4) of this subsection if  (i) the State agrees to grant, loan,
                                                    [P. 37]

or otherwise finance not less than 25 per centum of the esti-
mated reasonable costs (as determined by the Administrator)
of all projects for which Federal grants are to be made under

-------
2224          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    this subsection from such allocation or  the grantee has a
    treatment works  user charge system and otherwise has legal,
    institutional, managerial and financial capability  to  assure
    adequate operation, maintenance, expansion and replacement
    of treatment works throughout the grantee's jurisdiction, as
    determined by the Administrator, and  (ii) enforceable water
    quality standards have been established for the waters  into
    which the project discharges,  in  accordance with  section
    10 (c) of this Act;
       (H) No grant  shall be made unless the applicant complies
    with such regulations as the Administrator may prescribe to
    assure the effective and efficient use of  funds under this sec-
    tion ; and
       (I) No grant shall be made for any project which will treat
     industrial wastes of a liquid  nature unless the grantee makes
    provisions satisfactory to the Administrator, in accordance
    with regulations  promulgated by him, for the full recovery by
    the grantee,  from the industrial users of the project, of that
    portion to the estimated reasonable cost of construction of
    such project (as determined by the Administrator) which is
    allocable  to  the  treatment  of such industrial  wastes.  The
     amount of estimated  reasonable project costs recovered from
    each industrial user shall be equitably based on the proportion
    which the volume and strength of such user's wastes treated
    by the project bears to the volume and  strength of all wastes
    treated by the project. Revenues derived from such  cost re-
    cover, to the extent  apportionable to  the  Federal share of
    eligible project costs allocable to the treatment of industrial
     wastes,  shall revert  to  the  Treasury of the United  States,
     unless the grantee has, or, in accordance with regulations to
    be promulgated  by the  Administrator,  makes satisfactory
     provision for development, a user charge  system  and other
     legal, institutional, managerial and financial capability to as-
     sure adequate operation, maintenance, expansion and  replace-
     ment of treatment works throughout  the grantee's jurisdic-
                                                        [P. 38]

     tion, in which case such revenues may be retained by the
     grantee to assist in providing the financial capability referred
     to in this subparagraph.
   "(3) In approving Federal financial aid  for  proposed  projects
 for treatment works, the Administrator shall make a determina-
 tion as to the public benefits to be derived by the construction, the

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2225

relation of the ultimate cost of constructing and maintaining the
works to the public interest and to the public necessity  for the
works, and the  adequacy of the applicant's legal, institutional,
managerial and financial capability,  or provisions made by the
applicant to develop such capability,  for meeting foreseeable fu-
ture needs  with respect to operation, maintenance, expansion and
replacement of treatment works in order to comply with applica-
ble water quality standards. The Administrator may from time to
time issue regulations or guidelines to assist in the administration
of this subsection.
   "(4) The sums authorized to be obligated pursuant to subsec-
tion (c) of this section for each fiscal year beginning on or after
July 1, 1971, shall be allotted by the Administrator, from time to
time, in accordance with regulations, as follows:
       (A) 45 per centum of all sums authorized to be obligated in
    the ratio that the population of each State bears to the popu-
     lation  of all the States;
       (B) Not to exceed 20 per centum of such sums as deter-
    mined by the Administrator to  those States which agree to
    grant, loan or otherwise finance not less than 25  per centum
    of the  estimated reasonable cost, as determined by the Admin-
    istrator, of  all projects  for which Federal grants or other
    commitments of financial assistance are to be made under this
     section during any fiscal year, which allotment shall be in the
    ratio  that the population  of each such State bears to the
    population of all such States;
       (C)  Not to exceed 25 per centum of such sums to those
    States which have projects the  construction of  which was
    initiated after June 30,  1966, which were approved by the
    appropriate State  water pollution control agency  and which
    the Administrator found met the requirements of this subsec-
                                                        [p. 39]

    tion but which were constructed  without such  assistance, or
    with a lesser amount of such assistance than that for which it
    was eligible,  because of the unavailability of adequate funds,
    which  allotment shall be in the ratio that the total of such
    unavailable  funds for such projects in a State bears to the
    total of all such unavailable funds for all such projects in all
    the States;
       (D) The  remainder of such sums shall be distributed to
    States, municipalities, and inter-municipal or interstate agen-
    cies to meet the most serious water pollution control problems

-------
2226          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    as determined by the Administrator. Any sums alloted to a
    State which are not obligated at the end of the fiscal year for
    which they are allotted because of a lack of projects which
    have been approved by the  State  water pollution  control
    agency under subparagraph  (2)  (A) of this subsection and
    certified as entitled to priority under subparagraph (2) (D)
    of this subsection shall be reallotted by the Administrator, on
    the basis provided in subparagraph  (D)  of  this paragraph.
    Any sum made available to a State by reallotment under the
    preceding sentence shall be in addition to any  funds otherwise
     allotted to such State under this  Act. Allotment or  reallot-
    ment of sums under or on the basis provided in subparagraph
     (D) of this paragraph shall be subject to any special priori-
    ties for the use of such sums established by any other provi-
    sion of law. The total allotments of a State under the first and
    second  sentences of this paragraph (4) shall be available, in
    accordance  with the provisions of this subsection, for pay-
    ments with respect to projects in such State which have been
     approved under this subsection. For purposes of this subsec-
    tion, population shall be determined on the basis of the last
    year for which satisfactory population figures are available
    from the Department of Commerce.
  "(5) Any project in a State on which construction was initiated
after June 30, 1966, but prior to July 1, 1971, which was approved
by  the  appropriate State  water  pollution  control  agency,  and
which the Administrator finds meets the requirements of section 8
of this Act in effect at the time of initiation of such construction,
                                                        [p. 40]

but which was constructed  (1) without  financial assistance au-
thorized by said section 8, or  (2) with financial assistance author-
ized by said section 8 but in a lesser percentage of the cost of
construction than authorized by said section 8, shall qualify for
payments in reimbursement of  State or local funds used for such
project prior to July 1, 1974, from sums allocated to such State
under subparagraph 4 of this subsection for any fiscal year ending
prior to July 1, 1974, to the extent that assistance could have been
provided under said section 8 if such project  had been approved
thereunder and adequate funds  had been available. Neither a find-
ing by the Administrator that a project meets the  requirements of
this paragraph, nor any other  provision of this paragraph, shall
be  construed to constitute  a commitment or obligation of the

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2227

United States to provide funds to make or pay any grant for such
project.
  "(6) Any project in a State on which construction is proposed
to be initiated after  June 30,  1971,  which is approved  by the
appropriate State water pollution  control agency and  which the
Administrator finds meets the requirements of this subsection, but
for which financial assistance as authorized by this subsection is
unavailable in the fiscal year in which the project is approved by
the Administrator, or is available  in such fiscal year only in  a
lesser percentage of the cost of construction than authorized by
this subsection, shall  qualify for payments in reimbursement of
State or local funds used for such  projects prior to July 1, 1974,
from sums allocated to  such State under subparagraph 4 of this
subsection  for any fiscal year ending  prior to July  1, 1974: Pro-
vided, that prior to the  initiation of construction of such project,
the Administrator finds  (1) that the State in which such project is
located, in approving projects  for  Federal financing out of the
sums allocated to such State under paragraph  (4) of this  subsec-
tion for the  fiscal year in which  qualification for payments in
reimbursement is sought; has given priority to eligible projects in
the more advanced stages of construction,  (2) that such project is
necessary  to achieve compliance with  applicable water  quality
standards,  and (3)  that  the initiation of such  project  will be
                                                        [p.41]

commenced within a reasonable period of time. Neither a finding
by the Administrator that a project meets the requirements of this
paragraph, nor any other provision of this paragraph, shall be
construed to constitute a commitment or obligation  of the United
States to provide funds to make or pay any grant for such project.
  "(7)  The  Administrator  shall  make  payments under this
subsection through the disbursing facilities of the Department of
the Treasury. Funds so  paid shall be used exclusively to meet the
cost of construction of the project for which the amount was paid.
  "(8) The Administrator shall take such action as may be neces-
sary to insure that all laborers and mechanics  employed by con-
tractors or subcontractors on projects for which grants or other
financial assistance are  made under this subsection shall be paid
wages at rates not less than those prevailing for the same  type of
work on similar  construction in the immediate  locality, as deter-
mined by the Secretary of Labor, in accordance with the Act of
March 3, 1931, as amended, known as the Davis-Bacon Act  (46
Stat. 1494; 40 U.S.C. sees. 276a through 276a-5). The Secretary

-------
2228          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

of Labor shall have, with respect to the labor standards specified
in this paragraph, the authority and functions set forth in Reorga-
nization Plan Numbered 14 of 1950 (15 F.R. 3176; 64 Stat. 1267;
5 U.S.C. 133z-15)  and section 2 of that Act of June 13, 1934, as
amended (48 Stat. 948; 40 U.S.C. 276c).
   " (9) For the purposes of this subsection, the term
       "(A) 'industrial wastes'means the waste discharges (other
     than domestic sewage)  of industries identified in the Stand-
     ard Industrial Classification Manual, Bureau of  the Budget,
     1967, as amended and supplemented under the  category "Di-
     vision D  - Manufacturing", and other wastes which  in the
     opinion of the Administrator may appropriately be consid-
     ered industrial wastes for the purposes of this subsection.
       "(B) 'construction' includes preliminary planning to deter-
     mine the economic and engineering feasibility of treatment
     works, the engineering, architectural,  legal, fiscal and  eco-
                                                        [p. 42]

     nomic investigations and studies,  surveys, designs, plans,
     working  drawings, specifications, procedures,  and  other ac-
     tion necessary to the construction of treatment works;  the
     erection,  building, acquisition,  alteration, remodeling, im-
     provement, or extension of treatment works; and the inspec-
     tion and  supervision of the construction of treatment works.
   "(b) The Administrator shall administer the provisions of this
 section and related sections of this Act in a manner to encourage
 and assist any State, municipality, or inter-municipal or interstate
 agencies which will receive Federal assistance for the  construction
 of treatment works, to achieve adequate legal, institutional, mana-
 gerial and financial capability for  meeting foreseeable  future
 needs with respect to operation, maintenance, expansion and re-
 placement of  such works in order to achieve compliance with ap-
 plicable water quality standards. The  Administrator  shall pursue
 this objective through the  determination of  eligible costs under
 subsection  (a)  (1)  of  this  section  and  percentage limitations
 under subparagraphs (a) (2) (F) and  (a)  (2) (G) of this sec-
 tion, through consideration of the adequacy of provisions for oper-
 ation and  maintenance under subparagraph (a) (2) (C)  of this
 section, through provisions  relating to industrial participation in
 municipal projects under subparagraphs (a)  (2)  (I) of this sec-
 tion, through the exercise of his authority concerning approval of
 Federal financial  aid under paragraph  (a)  (3) of  this section,
 through the provision of technical assistance, and through such

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2229

other provisions for administering this section as he may  desig-
nate by regulation.
  "(c) There are hereby authorized to be appropriated for the
purpose of making  grants under this section, $2,000,000,000 for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1972; $2,000,000,000 for the fiscal
year ending June 30,  1973; and $2,000,000,000 for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1974.  Sums so appropriated shall remain available
until  expended.
SECTION 2. The provisions of this Act shall be effective on July
1,1971.
                                                        [p. 43]

                 SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

  Section 1 of the bill would amend section 8 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act.
  Subsection 8 (a)  would authorize Federal  grants  for the con-
struction of treatment works to prevent the discharge  of  inade-
quately treated  wastes  and for  other  purposes.  Paragraph
8 (a) (1) would retain the provisions of the present Act authoriz-
ing the Administrator to make  grants  for treatment works and
related reports, plans  and specifications. A new provision would be
added authorizing grants for reports and studies to develop the
grantee's  financial  and  other capability to  provide for future
waste treatment needs. No change would be made in the existing
definition  of "treatment  works" in section  23 of the Act and no
change would be made in those  eligible to  receive grants,  which
would include States, municipalities, intermunicipal agencies and
inter-state agencies.
  Grant limitations would be listed in paragraph 8 (a) (2).  There
would be some modifications and additions to the grant limitations
in the present Act. Subparagraph 8 (a) (2) (A)  would prohibit a
grant unless it were approved by the State water pollution control
agency and  by  the Administrator.  Subparagraph  8(a)(2)(B)
would prohibit a grant unless the grantee agreed to  pay all costs
not paid for by Federal and State funds.
  Subparagraph  8(a) (2) (C) would permit a  grant only  if the
grantee made provision  for  satisfactory operation  and mainte-
nance of the treatment works. Adequate provision would have to
be made for an operating and managerial  staff of well qualified
personnel. A new provision in this Subparagraph would require
the grantee to have or develop the financial and other capability
necessary to satisfy future waste treatment needs.

-------
2230          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Subparagraph 8(a) (2) (D)  would retain the provisions of the
existing Act which  prohibit a grant unless the project conforms
with a section 7 State plan and is entitled to priority over other
eligible projects. A new provision would be added to emphasize the
need for water quality management planning. To be eligible for a
                                                       [p. 44]

grant, a project would have to be  consistent with any plan for a
basin, metropolitan area or region certified by the Administrator
under subsection 8(d) and with any other planning requirements
specified by the Administrator in regulations.
  Subparagraph 8 (a) (2)  (E)  would retain the provision of the
present Act which specifies that the basic Federal grant share is
30 percent of the cost of the project.
  Modifications would be  made in the provisions of the present
Act relating to the requirements  for an  increased Federal shara
and  the requirements for matching payments by States.  Sub-
paragraph 8 (a) (2)  (F)  would provide that the Federal share
shall be increased to a maximum of 40  percent if the State agrees
to "grant, loan or otherwise finance" 25 percent of the cost.  (The
required State share is 30 percent  in the present Act). The words
"to grant, loan or otherwise finance" would replace the words "to
pay" in the present Act to make it clear that the State matching
funds need not be an  outright grant but  may be in the form of a
loan. This Subparagraph would also provide that the Federal share
shall be increased to  40 percent, regardless of  whether there are
State matching funds, if the grantee has a user charge system as
well as other capability for  satisfying  future waste  treatment
needs.
  Subparagraph 8 (a) (2)  (G)  would retain the provisions of the
present Act which provide  that  the Federal share shall be in-
creased to 50  percent if the  State  agrees to grant, loan, or other-
wise finance 25 percent of the cost and if enforceable water  qual-
ity standards have been established. A  new provision  would be
added increasing the Federal share to 50 percent,  regardless of
whether there are State matching  funds,  if the  grantee has a user
charge system and other capabilities for satisfying future waste
treatment needs and  if enforceable water quality standards have
been established.
   Subparagraph 8 (a) (2) (H) would add a new provision to pro-
hibit grants unless the grantee provides assurance that it  will
comply with regulations to assure  the effective and efficient use of
funds under the section.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2231

  Subparagraph 8 (a) (2) (H) would add a new provision designed
to make more effective and efficient use of construction grant
                                                        [p. 45]

monies and to avoid certain abusive practices and inequities asso-
ciated with the treatment of industrial wastes in municipal waste
treatment facilities. Grants would be prohibited for projects treat-
ing industrial wastes  unless the industrial user were required by
the grantee to pay back that portion of the project cost attributa-
ble to the treatment  of industrial wastes. The Federal share of
such recovered costs would be used by the grantee to operate and
maintain its works and for meeting future waste treatment needs.
  Paragraph 8 (a) (3) outlines the factors which would be consid-
ered by the Administrator  in approving a grant under subsection
8(a). The factors specified in the present Act would be retained
including an  assessment of public benefits, the  propriety of Fed-
eral aid, and the relation of project costs to the public interest.
Two new additional factors would be provided. First, the Adminis-
trator would  be required to consider whether the proposed project
is consistent  with a  water quality  management  plan  certified
under subsection 8(d), and second, he would be required to assess
the capability of the grantee to satisfy its own future waste treat-
ment needs.
  Paragraph 8 (a) (4) would provide a new allocation formula to
permit the optimum distribution of funds over the next three fiscal
years in closer relationship to  the construction needs  of  the re-
specting States. Four factors would be employed in distributing
construction  grant funds among the States. First,  45 percent of
the amounts authorized to be obligated in each fiscal year would be
allocated on the basis of relative State population; second, up to 20
percent would be allocated to States which agree to  grant,  loan or
otherwise  finance at least 25 percent of all project costs during a
given fiscal year;  third, up to  25 percent would be allocated to
States  which have approved projects for which grants have not
been made or which have been made in a reduced amount because
of lack of Federal funds; and  fourth, the  remainder would be
distributed to meet the most serious  water pollution control prob-
lems as determined by the Administrator. The new allocation for-
                                                        [p. 46]

mula would give the Administrator a degree of flexibility to direct
construction grant funds to areas where funds are most critically
needed and where they can be most effectively used. This para-

-------
2232          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

graph would also provide for the reallotment of any sums which
are not obligated by a State at the end of a fiscal year because of a
lack of certified projects. [The Act now calls for reallotment after
18 months.] These funds would be realloted by the Administrator
to meet the most serious water pollution  control needs in accord-
ance with the fourth factor mentioned above.
   Paragraph 8 (a) (5) would authorize Federal payments in reim-
bursement of State or local funds used to pre-finance the Federal
share of qualified projects  on  which construction was initiated
after June 30, 1966, but prior to July 1, 1971. Paragraph 8 (a) (6)
would extend this authorization with respect to projects on which
construction is initiated after June 30, 1971, in order to continue
to provide some  encouragement to  localities to  initiate projects
even though Federal funding is  not then available. However, proj-
ects commenced after June 30,  1971, would not qualify for reim-
bursement unless, prior to the initiation  of construction, the Ad-
ministrator makes three findings. He would be required to find
 (1) that the State in which  the project is located has given fund-
ing priority in the current fiscal year to projects in more advanced
stages of construction; (2) that the project is necessary to achieve
compliance with water quality standards; and (3) that construc-
tion on the project will  be initiated within a reasonable period of
time. This approach would  give the Administrator some control
over the accumulation of reimbursables and thus minimize abusive
practices.
   Paragraph 8 (a) (7) would direct the  Administrator to make
grant payments through the disbursing  facilities of the Depart-
ment of the Treasury. Such payments would be required to be used
exclusively to meet the costs of construction.
   Paragraph 8 (a) (8) would retain the provisions from the pres-
ent Act which direct the Administrator to make certain determi-
nations with regard to the adequacy of wages of laborers working
on projects funded under subsection 8 (a).
   Paragraph 8 (a) (9) would define certain terms used in subsec-
                                                        [P. 47]

tion 8(a). Subparagraph 8(a) (9) (A)  would define "industrial
wastes" as waste discharges (other than domestic sewage) from
industries  identified in the Standard Industrial Classification Man-
ual and other wastes as  determined by the Administrator. Subpar-
agraph 8 (a) (9) (B) would  retain essentially the same definition
of "construction" as appears in the present Act which includes a
range of activities from preliminary planning to the actual instal-

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2233

lation of the facility and  alterations  and improvements of the
facility.
  Subsection 8(b) would direct the Administrator to administer
section 8 and related sections so as to encourage and assist gran-
tees in developing adequate legal,  institutional, managerial  and
financial  capability for meeting foreseeable  future waste treat-
ment needs to achieve compliance with applicable water quality
standards.  Future waste treatment needs would include the opera-
tion, maintenance, expansion and replacement of treatment works.
This would be an important  new provision to encourage  local
self-sufficiency and possibly to reduce the future levels of Federal
funding needed for treatment works construction.
  Subsection 8(c) would authorize the Administrator to incur
obligations in the form of  grants  in an aggregate amount of $6
billion. Of  this sum,  $2 billion would be available for each of the
three fiscal years beginning with fiscal year 1972. A new  concept
would be involved whereby  the Administrator would be authorized
to obligate these sums without a  prior appropriation, with the
understanding that Congress would appropriate funds to liquidate
obligations as they  came due  each year.  Such an  approach is
preferable  to an  annual  appropriation because it would provide
long-term assurance  of Federal funding enabling State and local
governments to  plan their programs on an  orderly  basis.  This
subsection would authorize the appropriation of the sums required
to liquidate any  obligations incurred. The sums authorized to be
obligated would remain available until  obligated.
  Subsection 8(d) would provide for an accelerated water quality
management planning program  designed to meet short-term and
long-term water  pollution  control  objectives and to complement
                                                        [p. 48]

recently issued regulations requiring that construction grant proj-
ects be included  in a  metropolitan, basin, or regional pollution
abatement  plan.  Paragraph 8(d) (1) would authorize the Admin-
istrator to make  grants for water quality management planning
for basins,  metropolitan areas  and regions, in amounts not to
exceed 75 percent of the expenses of developing such plans. Those
eligible to receive grants would include any State, interstate,  mu-
nicipal or intermunicipal agency as well as  any organization of
public officials eligible for assistance under section 701 (g) of the
Housing Act of 1954.
  A planning grant  application would be  required to satisfy the
requirements  listed   in   paragraph  8(d)(2).  Subparagraph

-------
2234          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

8(d) (2) (A) would require that a single agency have the exclusive
responsibility to carry out the planning project in a  given area.
Subparagraph 8(d) (2) (B)  would require that a proposed plan-
ning project be entitled to  priority over other eligible projects.
The Governor of each State involved in accordance with regula-
tions issued by the Administrator, would be required to approve a
project's entitlement for priority over other eligible projects plan-
ning on the basis of water quality management needs. In making a
determination, the Governor would be required to consider various
factors such as the abatement and prevention measures needed in
the area, the existence and adequacy of similar plans for the area,
the scheduled  construction  of various facilities including treat-
ment works, population growth, land planning and other environ-
mental factors.  Subparagraph 8(d) (2) (C)  would  require grant
applications to contain plans outlining how the grant funds will be
spent. Subparagraph 8(d) (2) (D) would require that applications
provide for the submission of progress reports and for  the keeping
of records. The Administrator would prescribe the content of such
reports  and   have   access  to  such  records.   Subparagraph
8(d) (2) (E) would require applications to contain provisions for
fiscal control and fund-accounting procedures.
  Paragraph 8(d) (3) would require agencies receiving planning
grants to develop water  quality management  plans meeting cer-
tain requirements. Subparagraph 8(d) (3) (A) would require a
                                                       [P. 49]

plan to be consistent with water quality standards and to make
recommendations with respect to the maintenance and improve-
ment of such standards. Subparagraph 8(d) (3) (B) would require
recommendations as  to the most effective and economical facilities
for  the   handling   and   control  of  wastes.    Subparagraph
8(d) (3) (C) would require recommendations  for  developing the
grantee's capability to meet future waste treatment needs.
   Paragraph 8(d) (4) outlines the factors which the Administra-
tor would  be  required to consider in approving  a grant under
subsection 8(d). These factors  would include an  assessment of
public benefits, the relation of project costs to the  public interest,
the capability of the grantee to  develop an effective plan for the
area concerned, as well as all of the factors required to be consid-
ered by a Governor in approving the priority of a planning proj-
ect. The Administrator would be required to find that a planning
project is  coordinated with and  not duplicative of other related
planning activities in the area.

-------
                   GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2235

   Paragraph 8(d) (5) would direct the Administrator to certify
that a plan  developed under  subsection 8(d) or other authority
satisfies all necessary requirements, if such is the case.
   Paragraph 8(d) (6) would provide for the funding of planning
grants. Amounts not in excess of seven percent of the sums allo-
cated annually to the respective States under paragraph 8 (a) (4)
for the construction of treatment works  would be available for
water quality management planning grants.
   Paragraph 8(d) (7) would  define certain terms  used in subsec-
tion 8(d). Subparagraph 8(d) (7) (A) would define "basin" as an
area determined by  the Administrator to constitute a  single hy-
drologic system. Subparagraph 8(d) (7) (B) would define "metro-
politan area" as a standard  metropolitan statistical  area,  with
exceptions, or as any urban area determined  to be a metropolitan
area by the Administrator. Subparagraph 8(d) (7) (C)  would de-
fine "region" as an  area  other than urban which  forms an eco-
nomic and socially related region as determined by the Adminis-
trator.
   Subsection 8(e) would direct the Administrator to submit a
                                                           [p. 50]

report to Congress by January 10, 1973, on the financial  require-
ments for the construction of municipal waste treatment works
for F.Y. 1975 and subsequent fiscal years.
   Section 2 of the bill would provide that the provisions of the bill
take effect on July 1,1971.
                                                           [p. 51]

                     ENVIRONMENTAL FINANCING AUTHORITY,
                                                           [p. 52]

                             THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY,
                                                Washington, D.C.
  DEAR MR. [PRESIDENT/SPEAKER] : There is transmitted  herewith a  pro-
posed bill,  "To establish an Environmental Financing Authority  to assist
in the financing of waste treatment facilities, and for other purposes."
  In his Budget Message to Congress,  the President  stated that "Legislation
is again proposed to create the Environmental Financing Authority, which
will assist communities that have difficulty in borrowing at reasonable rates
to meet their share of the cost of water pollution control facilities."
  The proposed Authority would  be  authorized to  purchase obligations
issued by State or local public bodies to finance the non-Federal share of
the cost of waste  treatment construction  projects  eligible  for  Federal
financial assistance  under the Federal  Water Pollution  Control Act.  No
obligation would be purchased by the Authority unless the public body  is
unable to obtain on reasonable terms sufficient credit elsewhere to finance

-------
2236           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

its needs. The  Authority would be authorized to issue its own securities
in the capital market to finance its purchases of State and local obligations.
  To provide initial capital for the Authority, the Secretary of the Treasury
would be authorized to  advance  up to  $100 million to the Authority. In
addition, the Secretary of the Treasury would be authorized and directed
to make annual payments to the Authority in  amounts necessary to cover
the difference between the interest costs on debt issued by the Authority
and the interest receipts from State and local governments on the obligations
purchased.
                                                            [p. 53]

  With the proposed Authority  in  operation, no municipality should be
prevented from participating in the Federal  waste  treatment  assistance
program by its inability to finance  on  reasonable terms its  share of the
program cost.
  The Department has  been  advised by  the  Office of  Management  and
Budget that enactment of the proposed legislation would be in accord with
the program of the President.
      Sincerely yours,
                                              DAVID  M. KENNEDY.
HON. SPIRO T. AGNEW,
President of the Senate,
Washington, B.C.
HON. CARL B. ALBERT,
Speaker of the  House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
                                                            [p. 54]

  A BILL To establish an Environmental Financing Authority to assist in
the financing of waste treatment facilities, and for other purposes.

  Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act
may be cited as the "Environmental Financing Act of 1971".

                     CREATION OF AUTHORITY
   Section 2. There is hereby created a body corporate to be known
as the Environmental Financing Authority, which shall have suc-
cession until dissolved by Act of Congress. The Authority shall be
subject to the general supervision and direction of the  Secretary
of the Treasury. The Authority shall be an instrumentality of the
United States Government and shall maintain such offices as may
be necessary or appropriate in the conduct of its business.

                             PURPOSE
  Section 3. The purpose of this Act  is to assure that inability to
borrow necessary funds on reasonable terms does not prevent any
State or local public body  from carrying  out any project for con-
struction of waste treatment works determined eligible for assist-
ance pursuant to section 5 of this Act.

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2237

                     BOARD OF DIRECTORS

  Section 4. (a) The Authority shall have a  Board of Directors
consisting of five persons, one of whom shall be the Secretary of
the Treasury or his designee as Chairman  of the Board, and four
of whom  shall  be  appointed by the  President from among the
officers or employees of the Authority  or  of  any  department or
agency of the United States Government.
   (b) The Board of Directors shall meet at the call of its Chair-
man. The Board shall determine the general policies which shall
govern the operations of the Authority.  The Chairman of the
Board shall select and effect the appointment of qualified persons
to fill the offices as may be provided for in the bylaws, with such
executive functions, powers, and duties as may be prescribed by
the bylaws or by the Board of Directors, and such persons shall be
the executive officers of the Authority and shall discharge all such
                                                       [p. 56]

executive  functions, powers, and  duties.  The members  of the
Board, as such, shall not receive compensation for their services.

                         FUNCTIONS
  Section 5. (a) The Authority is authorized to make commit-
ments to purchase and to purchase  on terms and conditions deter-
mined by the Authority, any obligation or participation therein
which is issued by a State or local public body to finance the
non-Federal share of the cost of any project for the construction
of waste treatment  works which the  Administrator of the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency has  determined to  be eligible for
Federal financial assistance under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (33 U.S.C. 466).
   (b) No commitment shall be entered into, and no purchase shall
be made, unless the Administrator of the  Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (1) has certified that the public body is unable to
obtain on reasonable terms sufficient credit to finance its  actual
needs;  (2) has approved the project as eligible under the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 466) ;  and  (3) has agreed
to guarantee timely payment of principal and interest on the obli-
gation. The Administrator is authorized to guarantee such timely
payments and to issue  regulations as  he  deems  necessary  and
proper to protect such guarantees. Appropriations are hereby au-
thorized to be made to the  Administrator in such sums as are
necessary to make  payments  under  such  guarantees,  and such

-------
2238          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

payments are authorized to be made from such appropriations or
from any other available funds.
   (c) No purchase shall be made of obligations issued to finance
projects, the permanent financing of which occurred prior to the
enactment of this Act.
   (d) Any purchase by the Authority shall be  upon such terms
and  conditions as to yield a return at a rate  determined by the
Secretary of Treasury taking into consideration (i) the current
average yield on outstanding marketable obligations of the United
States of  comparable  maturity or in its stead whenever the Au-
thority has sufficient of its own long-term obligations outstanding,
the current average yield on outstanding obligations of the Au-
                                                       [P. 57]

thority of comparable maturity; and  (ii)  the market  yields  on
municipal bonds.
   (e) The Authority is authorized to charge fees for its commit-
ments and other services adequate to  cover all expenses and to
provide for  the accumulation of reasonable contingency reserves
and such fees shall be included in the aggregate project costs.

                       INITIAL CAPITAL

  Section 6. To provide initial capital to the Authority, the Secre-
tary of the Treasury is authorized to advance the funds necessary
for this purpose. Each such advance shall be upon such terms and
conditions as  to yield a return at a rate not  less than a rate
determined by the Secretary of the Treasury taking into consider-
ation the current average yield on outstanding marketable obliga-
tions of the  United  States of comparable maturities. Interest pay-
ments on  such advances may be deferred, at the discretion of the
Secretary, but any  such deferred payments shall themselves bear
interest at the rate  specified in this section. There is authorized to
be appropriated not to exceed $100,000,000, which shall be availa-
ble for the purposes of this section without fiscal year limitation.

                OBLIGATIONS OF THE AUTHORITY

  Section 7. (a) The Authority is authorized, with the approval of
the Secretary of the Treasury, to issue and have outstanding obli-
gations having such maturities and bearing such rate or rates of
interest as may be determined by the Authority. Such obligations
may be redeemable  at the option of the Authority before maturity
in such manner as may be stipulated therein.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2239

   (b)  As authorized in appropriation Acts, and such authoriza-
tions may be without fiscal year limitation, the Secretary of Treas-
ury may in his discretion purchase or agree to purchase any obli-
gations issued pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and for
such purpose the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to use as
a public debt transaction the proceeds of the sale of any securities
hereafter issued under the Second  Liberty Bond Act  as now or
hereafter in force, and the purposes for  which securities may be
issued under the Second Liberty Bond Act as now or hereafter in
                                                        [p. 58]

force,  are extended to include such purchases.  Each purchase of
obligations by the Secretary of the Treasury under this subsection
shall be upon such terms and conditions as to yield a return at a
rate not less than a rate determined by the Secretary of the Treas-
ury taking into consideration the current average yield on out-
standing marketable obligations of the United States of compara-
ble maturities. The Secretary of the Treasury may sell, upon such
terms and conditions and at such price or prices as he shall deter-
mine, any of the obligations acquired by him  under this subsec-
tion. All purchases, and sales by the Secretary of the Treasury of
such obligations under this subsection shall be treated as  public
debt transactions of the United States.

               FEDERAL PAYMENT TO THE AUTHORITY

  Section 8. The  Secretary of  the Treasury  is  authorized  and
directed  to  make  annual  payments  to  the  Authority  in such
amounts as are necessary to equal the amount by which the dollar
amount of interest expense accrued by the Authority on account of
its obligations exceeds the dollar amount of interest income ac~
crued by the Authority on account of obligations purchased by it
pursuant to section 5 of this Act.

                      GENERAL POWERS

  Section 9. The Authority shall have power—
       (a) to sue and be sued, complain and defend,  in its corpo-
    rate name;
       (b) to adopt,  alter, and use a corporate seal, which shall be
    judicially noticed;
       (c) to adopt,  amend, and repeal bylaws,  rules, and regula-
    tions as may be necessary for the conduct of its business;
       (d)  to conduct its  business,  carry on its operations,  and

-------
2240          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    have offices and exercise the powers granted by this Act in
    any State without regard to any qualification or similar stat-
    ute in any State;
       (e) to lease, purchase, or  otherwise  deal in and with any
    property, real, personal, or  mixed,  or  any interest therein,
    wherever situated;
       (f) to accept gifts or donations of services, or of property,
    real, personal, or mixed, tangible or intangible, in aid of any
    of the purposes of the Authority.
                                                         tP- 59]

       (g) to sell, convey, mortgage, pledge, lease, exchange, and
    otherwise dispose of its property and assets;
       (h) to appoint  such officers,  attorneys, employees, and
    agents as may be required, to define  their duties, to fix and to
    pay such compensation for their  services as may be  deter-
    mined, subject to the civil service and  classification laws, to
    require bonds for them and pay the premium thereof; and
       (i) to enter into contracts, to execute instruments, to incur
    liabilities, and  to do all things as  are necessary or incidental
    to the proper management of its affairs and the proper con-
    duct of its business.

                        TAX EXEMPTION
  Section 10. The Authority, its property,  its franchise, capital,
reserves, surplus, security holdings, and other funds,  and its in-
come  shall be exempt from all taxation now or hereafter imposed
by the United States or by any State or local taxing authority;
except that (1) any real property and any tangible personal prop-
erty of the Authority shall be subject to Federal, State, and local
taxation to the same extent according to its value as other such
property is taxed, and (2)  any and all obligation issued by the
Authority shall be subject  both  as to principal and  interest to
Federal, State, and local taxation to the same extent as the obliga-
tions  of private corporations are taxed.

OBLIGATION AS LAWFUL  INVESTMENTS, ACCEPTANCE  AS SECURITY

   Section 11. All  obligatons issued by the  Authority shall  be
lawful investments, and may be accepted as security for all fidu-
ciary, trust, and public funds, the investment or deposit of  which
shall  be  under authority or control of the United States or of any
officer or officers thereof. All obligations issued by the Authority

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2241

pursuant to this Act shall be deemed to be exempt securities with-
out the meaning of laws administered by the Securities and Ex-
change Commission,  to  the same extent as securities which are
issued by the United States.

                  PREPARATION OF OBLIGATIONS

  Section 12. In order to furnish obligations  for delivery  by the
Authority, the Secretary  of  Treasury is  authorized to prepare
                                                       [p. 60]

such obligations in such  form as the Authority may approve, such
obligations when prepared to be held in the Treasury subject  to
delivery upon order by the Authority. The engraved plates, dies,
bed pieces, and so forth, executed in connection therewith shall
remain in the custody of the Secretary of the Treasury. The Au-
thority shall reimburse the Secretary of  the Treasury for any
expenditures made in the preparation, custody, and delivery  of
such obligations.

                       ANNUAL REPORT

  Section 13. The Authority shall, as soon as practicable after the
end of each fiscal year, transmit to the President and the Congress
an annual report of its operations and activities.

     OBLIGATIONS ELIGIBLE FOR PURCHASE BY NATIONAL BANKS

  Section 14. The sixth sentence  of the  seventh  paragraph  of
section 5136 of the Revised Statutes, as amended (12 U.S.C. 24),
is  amended  by inserting  "or  obligations  of  the  Environmental
Financing Authority" immediately after "or  obligations, partici-
pation or  other instruments of or issued by the Federal National
Mortgage Association or the Government National Mortgage As-
sociation."
            GOVERNMENT CORPORATION CONTROL ACT

  Section 15. The budget and audit provisions of the Government
Corporation Control Act (31 U.S.C. 846) shall be applicable to the
Environmental Financing Authority in the same manner as they
are applied to the wholly owned Government corporations.

PERMANENT APPROPRIATION FOR FEDERAL PAYMENT TO AUTHORITY

  Section 16. Section 3689 of the Revised Statutes, as  amended
(31 U.S.C. 711), is further amended by adding a new paragraph

-------
2242            LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

following the last paragraph appropriating moneys for the pur-
poses under the Treasury Department to read as follows:
   "Payment to the Environmental Financing Authority: For pay-
ment to the Environmental Financing Authority under section 8
of the Environmental Financing Act of 1971."

                           SEPARABILITY

   Section 17.  If  any provision of  this  Act  or the  application
thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the validitj
of the remainder of the Act, and the application of such provisions
to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected.
                                                               [P. 61]

                                      STATE PROGRAM GRANTS,
                                                              [p. 62]

                            ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
                                                   Washington,  D.C.

  DEAR MR. [PRESIDENT/SPEAKER] :  Enclosed is  a  draft of  proposed legisla-
tion  to amend the  Federal  Water  Pollution  Control Act,  as  amended
(33 U.S.C. 1151 et seg.).
  We recommend that this bill  be referred to the appropriate committee
for consideration, and  we recommend that it be enacted.
  The  bill would provide  increased authorizations for  appropriations for
purposes of State and  interstate water  pollution prevention  and control
programs, increase the Administrator's  grant-awarding  flexibility, and add
bonus  incentives  for  specific categories  of program improvements, and
grants for special pollution control projects.
  Authorizations for appropriations  would be increased  each year for four
years  on  a sliding-scale basis from $15 million  for  fiscal year 1972  to
$30 million for  fiscal  year 1975. Increased Federal financial support  of
State and interstate water  pollution control programs is essential  if States
and  interstate agencies  are  to  meet  the increased  responsibilities and
obligations which result from participation in national  pollution  control
programs.  Emphasis  would be  placed  on  development, performance and
substantial improvements to the  programs.  Grants for the basic programs
would  continue, but the criteria  for  disapproval  of  a  State program plan
would  be  simplified, and criteria for the certification of priority  of  waste
treatment  works would  be required to  meet with  the  Administrator's
approval.  Flexibility  would be  provided  by  the addition  of  three new
                                                               [p. 64]

categories  of grants:  (1)  program development  grants,  (2)  program
improvement grants, and  (3) special project grants  which are intended to
encourage and support substantial program developments and improvements.
   Through the identification of the essential  elements of an  "improved
water  pollution control program"—a permit system, a  treatment facilities
program, a training program, an improved personnel system, and a planning

-------
                    GUIDELINES AND REPORTS               2243

 capability—both the States and the Federal government will more accurately
 direct their  efforts  and  resources to those essential ingredients  of  an
 effective program. The new  Federal  grant  money would  provide  support
 for  specific program  achievements. The  major emphasis  will be  focused
 upon effective  performance  and  substantial improvement of  State  and
 interstate programs.
   Through the use of special project grants the Administrator  would be
 provided with  flexibility  to  deal with unusual  pollution  problems which
 affect a State or interstate program.
   Technical amendments to section 5  of the Act,  relating  to  research and
 development, would extend authorizations for appropriations  for  research
 and  demonstration authorities through FY '72.
   Section 6 of the Act  relating to development of technology in the areas of
 advanced waste treatment, combined sewers, and  industrial waste treatment,
 would be amended to  authorize  the development of such technology within
 the  Environmental Protection  Agency  as  well  as  through  grants  and
 contracts.
   Section 23 of the Act would be amended  to  add American Samoa and
 the  Trust  Territories   of  the Pacific Islands to the definition of  "State".
 This would provide for consistency within the Act, and would extend our
 pollution control efforts to all areas of United States responsibility.
                                                                [p- 65]


   This proposed bill is part  of the President's  environmental program as
 announced  in his  Environmental message  of  February 8, 1971.
   The Office  of  Management and  Budget has advised  that this proposed
 legislation  would  be in accord with the program of the President.

                                          Sincerely yours,
                                          WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS.
 HON. SPIRO T. AGNEW,
 President of the Senate,
 Washington, D.C.
 HON. CARL  B. ALBERT,
 Speaker of  the House of Representatives,
 Washington, D.C.
                                                               [p. 66]


  A  BILL  To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.

   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
 United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Federal
Water  Pollution Control Act,  as  amended (33  U.S.C.A.  1151  et
seq.) is further amended as follows:
Sec. 1.  Section 7 of the Act is amended to  read as follows:
   "SEC. 7. (a)  There are hereby authorized to be appropriated the
following  sums, to remain available until  expended, to carry out
the purposes of this  section—

-------
2244          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

      $15,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1972;
      $20,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1973;
      $25,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1974; and
      $30,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,1975
for grants to States and to interstate agencies to  assist them in
meeting the costs of establishing and maintaining adequate mea-
sures for the prevention  and control of water pollution Provided,
That not less than $10,000,000 shall be available for the allotments
authorized by subsections (b) and (d) hereof.
  " (b) From the sums available therefor for any fiscal  year, the
Administrator  shall make  allotments to  the  several States for
their  basic State water pollution control program, in accordance
with regulations, on the basis of  (1) population,  (2)  extent of
water pollution, and (3) financial need.
  "(c) From each State's allotment under subsection  (b) for any
fiscal  year, the Administrator may pay  to such State an amount
equal to its Federal share  (as determined under subsection (g))
of the cost of carrying out  its basic State water pollution control
program pursuant to a plan approved  under subsection (e), in-
cluding the cost of training personnel for State and  local  water
pollution control work and including the cost of administering the
                                                        [p. 67]

State plan. Nothing herein shall prevent a State from expending
grant funds for State program purposes through participation in
interstate agencies.
  "(d) From the sums available therefor for any fiscal  year, the
Administrator shall, from time to time,  make allotments to inter-
state  agencies  for their  basic interstate water pollution control
program in accordance with regulations on such basis as the Ad-
ministrator finds  reasonable  and equitable. The  Administrator
may,  from time to time, pay to  each such agency  from its allot-
ment, an  amount  not in excess of  such  portion  of  the cost of
carrying out its basic interstate water pollution control program
pursuant  to a  plan approved under subsection (e),  as may be
determined  in accordance with regulations, including the cost of
training personnel for water pollution control work and  including
the cost of administering  the interstate agency's basic program.
  "(e) The Administrator may  approve any plan  for a program
to prevent and control water pollution which is submitted  by the
State water pollution control agency or an interstate agency, if
such plan—

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2245

      "(1) provides for administration or for the supervision of
    administration of the plan by the State water pollution con-
    trol agency, or in the case of a plan submitted by an inter-
    state agency, by such interstate agency;
      " (2) provides that such agency will make such reports, in
    such form and containing information, as the Administrator
    may, from time to time, reasonably require to carry out his
    functions under this Act;
      "(3) sets forth the plans,  policies, and methods to be fol-
    lowed in carrying out the  State (or interstate) plan and its
    administration.
      "(4) provides for extension or improvement of the State or
    interstate program for prevention and control of water pollu-
    tion;
      "(5) provides such accounting, budgeting, and other fiscal
    methods  and procedures as are necessary for the proper and
    efficient administration of the plan; and
      "(6) provides acceptable criteria to be used by the State in
                                                        [p. 68]

    determining priority  of  projects as  provided  in  section
    8(a)(2)(D).
    The Administrator shall not disapprove any plan without first
    giving reasonable notice and opportunity for a conference
    with the Administrator  to the State water pollution control
    agency or interstate agency which has submitted such plan.
  "(f) (1) Whenever the Administrator,  after reasonable notice
to a State water pollution control  agency or interstate agency and
an opportunity for a conference of such agency with the Adminis-
trator, finds that—
          "(A) the plan submitted by such agency and approved
        under this section has been so changed that it no longer
        complies with a requirement of subsection  (e)  of  this
        section; or
          "(B) in the Administration of the plan there is a fail-
        ure to comply substantially with such a requirement, the
        Administrator  shall notify such  agency that no  further
        payments will be made to the State or to the interstate
        agency, as the case may  be, under this section (or in his
        discretion that further payments will not be made to the
        State, or to the interstate agency, for projects under or
        parts of the plan affected by such  failure)  until he is
        satisfied that there  will  no longer be any such  failure.

-------
2246          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

        Until he is so satisfied, the Administrator shall make no
        further payments to such State, or to such  interstate
        agency, as the case may be, under this section  (or shall
        limit payments to projects under or parts of the plan in
        which there is no such failure).
  "(g)(1)  As used in this  section, the 'Federal  share' for any
State shall be 100 per centum less that percentage which bears the
same ratio to 50 per centum as the per capita income of such State
bears to the per capita income of the United States, except that—
           "(A) the Federal share shall in no case be more than
        66-2/3 per centum, and
           "(B) the Federal share for Gaum, American Samoa,
        the Virgin Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific
        Islands shall  be 66-2/3 per centum.
                                                       [p. 69]

      "(2)  The Federal shares shall be promulgated by the Ad-
     ministrator between July 1  and September 30 of each even-
     numbered year, on the basis of the average of the per capita
     incomes of the States and of the continental United States for
     the three most recent consecutive years for which satisfactory
     data are available from the Department of Commerce.
      "(3)  As used in this subsection, the term  'United  States'
     means the fifty States and the District of Columbia.
      "(4)  The population of the several States shall be deter-
     mined  on the basis  of the  latest figures furnished  by the
     Department of Commerce.
      "(5) The regulations relating to the portion of the cost of
     carrying out the interstate agency plan which shall be borne
     by the Federal Government shall be designed to place such
     agencies, so far as practicable, on a  basis similar to that of
     the States.
  "(h) (1)  If the Governor of any State  or the head of an inter-
state agency files a letter of intent with the  Administrator that
such State  or interstate agency  will develop  an improved water
pollution control program  which takes into account the provisions
of subsection  (i)  of  this section; and if the Administrator, in
accordance with regulations, is reasonably assured that such State
or interstate agency  will develop an  improved water  pollution
control program, he may make a grant in any fiscal year to such
State or interstate agency in an  amount not to  exceed  25 per
centum of such State or interstate agency's Federal share under
subsections  (c) or (d) of this section during such fiscal year.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2247

       "(2)  No grant shall be made to any State or interstate
    agency under this subsection in any fiscal year unless during
    such fiscal year such State or interstate agency is conducting
    a basic program to prevent and control water pollution under
    a plan approved pursuant to subsection (e) of this section.
  "(i) As used in this section 'improved  water pollution control
program'  shall be one which the Administrator  determines, in
accordance with regulation, is developed by a State or interstate
agency whereby such State or interstate agency enhances the qual-
                                                        [P. 70]

ity of its waters for required uses and needs. In making his deter-
mination, the Administrator shall consider whether such program
includes—
       "(1)  an  effective mandatory permit system  covering all
    municipal, industrial, and other significant  waste sources, in-
    cluding discharge requirements, with adequate State imple-
    mentation and enforcement authority;
       "(2)  a sewage treatment facilities program  pursuant to
    which such  facilities  are planned, constructed,  and  main-
    tained so  as to achieve efficiency, economy,  and water quality
    enhancement, including comprehensive regulation of the oper-
    ation and maintenance  of such  facilities; a program of
    comprehensive State review of engineering plans and speci-
    fications for  all  proposed waste  collection and treatment
    facilities;  adequate  State manpower  to implement  the
    program,  and mandatory certification of facility operators;
       "(3) a  program of training and development of water pol-
    lution control personnel designed to achieve full implementa-
    tion of the State water pollution control program;
       "(4) balanced  State personnel recruitment  program, with
    an adequate msrit system, job classifications, and competitive
    salary schedules; and
       "(5) a program of planning, including the development and
    maintenance of planning  capability in the  State agency and
    the capacity to adequately evaluate river basin, regional, and
    metropolitan water quality planning."
  "(j)(l) If  the Administrator  determines  in accordance  with
regulations, that a State or interstate agency has developed one or
more  of  the  provisions enumerated in subsection (i),  he may
grant to such  State or interstate agency an amount not  in excess
of 40 per centum of the Federal share for such State or interstate
agency for each fiscal  year for each such element; except that the

-------
2248          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

amount of such grant may be increased to an amount not exceed-
ing 250 per centum of the Federal share of such State or inter-
state agency if the Administrator determines that such agency has
                                                       [p. 71]

developed all five of the elements enumerated in subsection (i).
       " (2)  Whenever the eligible bonuses under this section are
     greater than the amount appropriated, bonuses shall be made
     available to States in order of priority corresponding to the
     times when  such States initially  become eligible for such
     bonuses.
       " (3)  Grants made under this subsection shall be in addition
     to any grants made under other subsections  of this  section.
   "(k) (1) From any sums that may be available  therefor in any
fiscal year, which are not expended for grants under other subsec-
tions of this section, and which do not exceed ten per  centum of
the  total amount of  funds  appropriated for grants under this
section in such  fiscal year, the Administrator may make grants to
States and to interstate agencies to support water pollution con-
trol  projects which  are exceptional because of the nature and
scope of the water pollution problems toward which they are di-
rected and the impact on State or interstate programs.
Sec.  2. Section  5 of  the Act  is  hereby amended by  amending
subsection (n) thereof to read as follows:
   "(n) There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
section, other than subsections  (g)  (1) and (2), not  to  exceed
$65,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30,  1972. There is
authorized to be appropriated to carry  out subsection (g) (1) not
to exceed $7,500,000 for the fiscal year  ending June 30,  1972; and
to carry out subsection (g) (2) not to exceed $2,500,000 for the
fiscal year ending June 30,1972.
Sec.  3. Section 6 of the Act is hereby amended as  follows:
   (1)  by amending subsection (a) as follows:
       "(a)  The Administrator is authorized to  conduct in the
     Environmental Protection Agency  and to make grants to and
     enter into contracts with any State,  municipality, or inter-
     municipal or interstate agency for the purpose of—
           "(1) developing or assisting in the development of any
         project which  will demonstrate a  new  or  improved
         method of controlling the discharge into any waters of
                                                       [P. 72]

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2249

        untreated or inadequately treated sewage or other wastes
        from sewers which carry storm water or both storm
        water and sewage or other wastes, or
           "(2)  developing or assisting in the development of any
        project which will demonstrate advanced waste treat-
        ment and water purification methods (including the tem-
        porary use of new or improved chemical additives which
        provide substantial immediate  improvement to existing
        treatment  processes) or new or improved methods  of
        joint treatment systems  for  municipal and  industrial
        wastes, and for the purposes of reports,  plans,  and speci-
        fications in connection therewith.
  (2) by amending subsection (b) thereof to read as follows:
      "(b) The  Administrator  is authorized to conduct in the
    Environmental Protection Agency and to make grants to and
    enter into contracts  with appropriate public (whether Fed-
    eral, State, interstate, or local) authorities, agencies, and in-
    stitutions, private agencies and  institutions, and individuals
    for the conduct of, research and demonstration projects for
    prevention of pollution  of waters by industry including, but
    not limited to, treatment of industrial waste.
  (3) by amending subsection (e) thereof to read as follows:
      "(e) For the purpose of this section there are authorized to
    be appropriated—
           "(1)  for the purposes set forth in  subsections  (a) and
         (b) of this section, the  sum of $20,000,000 for the fiscal
        year ending June 30,1972;
           "(2)   for  the purposes set  forth in clause  (2)  of
        subsection (a), the additional sum of $20,000,000 for the
        fiscal year ending June 30, 1972; and
           "(3)  for the purposes set forth in subsection  (b) the
        additional  sum of $20,000,000 for the fiscal year ending
        June 30,1972."
Sec. 4. Section 23 of the Act is hereby amended by striking out "the
        Virgin  Islands and Guam" from subsection (d)  thereof,
        and by inserting in lieu thereof the following:  "Guam,
        American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the Trust Ter-
        ritory of the Pacific Islands."
                                                        [P. 73]

-------
2250           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

                WATER  QUALITY STANDARDS AND ENFORCEMENT,
                                                                 [p. 74]
                              ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
                                                     Washington, D.C.
HON. SPIRO T. AGNEW,
President of the Senate,
Washington, D.C.
HON. CARL B. ALBERT,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.

  DEAR MR. [PRESIDENT/SPEAKER] :  Enclosed is  a draft  of a  proposed bill
"To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended."
  We recommend that the bill be referred to the appropriate committee for
consideration, and that it be enacted.
  The proposed legislation would amend section 10 of the Act to strengthen
and clarify the authority of  the Administrator  in  the  establishment  and
enforcement of  water quality standards, and  would add  new  authorities
relating  to monitoring,  surveillance,  citizens'  suits, and  abatement  of
pollution from hazardous substances.
  The Water  Quality Improvement Act  of 1970  provided important new
authorities for the  enhancement of water quality.  These  new  authorities
will assist in  controlling  water  pollution  caused by  oil  and  hazardous
substances, in carrying  out an  important new State-Federal  program for
the  prevention of  water  pollution  from federally  licensed or  permitted
activities, and in other  areas.
  Further  strengthening of the Act is now necessary, however, to enable
this Agency to play a more  active role  in working with  State and  local
governments  to  prevent and  abate  pollution of our Nation's waters.  The
changes we are proposing are discussed in detail below.
  Section 10(a) of  the  present Act makes  subject to abatement pollution
of interstate or navigable  waters which endangers  the  health  or welfare
of  persons. The  proposed  bill  would  extend this jurisdiction  to include
                                                                  [p. 76]

expressly ground  waters,  tributaries  of  interstate  and  navigable waters,
pollution of waters  of  the contiguous  zone which  adversely affects  water
quality in the territorial  sea,  and  pollution of  the  high seas  resulting
from discharges of  matter transported from United States territory.  The
present  Act  also  contains an  inadequate definition of  the  term "water
quality standards." The proposed bill would define water quality standards
to mean water quality  standards established under existing law, and in
addition, water use designations, water  quality criteria,  effluent  require-
ments, and plans  of implementation and enforcement established  pursuant
to new requirements contained in the bill.
  Section 10 (c)  of the present Act provides for the  establishment of  water
quality standards  by the States  and for their  submission  to the  Adminis-
trator for  determination of their consistency with the requirements of the
Act. No  provision  is made for rendering  guidance to the  States in carrying
out their responsibility to develop standards meeting the Act's requirements.
The States have taken  many different approaches in  developing and sub-

-------
                     GUIDELINES AND REPORTS                2251

mitting water quality standards, and the resulting uncertainty and confusion
has delayed the establishment  of enforceable standards.  The  proposed bill
would  require  the Administrator, within  six  months  after  enactment, to
promulgate regulations establishing specifications for water use designations,
water quality  criteria, and effluent requirements. Based  on those regulations,
the States would  submit revised  water quality standards  for those  waters
over which they have jurisdiction. Section  10(e) would authorize the Admin-
istrator to promulgate standards where the State fails, within  one year after
publication of the  regulations, to submit acceptable standards. It is expected
that the Administrator would exercise  this authority only  after considering
the reasons for the State's failure to establish standards, and  that he would
ordinarily grant extensions beyond  the one year provided by the  bill if a
State is unavoidably delayed in  submission of standards.
                                                                   [p. 77]

  The  regulations  would  provide  for  distinguishing between  different
categories of  dischargers, and  it is  expected that different  requirements
would be  established  for municipal and industrial  sources.
  Authority would be provided by section 10 (d) for the  Administrator to
publish information on recommended pollution  control techniques to achieve
compliance with water quality  standards. This would  not be in the form
of binding regulations,  however, since it is  felt that the  Environmental
Protection Agency should  encourage inventive  solutions to pollution abate-
ment problems and that to  prescribe  mandatory  control  techniques would
discourage the development of private  enterprise of improved methods.
  Water quality standards under  the proposed legislation would include two
elements  not  previously  specified:  water use  designations  and  effluent
requirements.  Water quality standards in all  States would be required to
be revised to  include these  new  elements. However,  where  water  quality
standards have been  established under the Water  Quality  Act  of 1965,
it is not  anticipated  that  extensive revisions  would be required, except to
incorporate  the new  elements.  The bill would specify a  requirement that
the Administrator consult with the  States and advise them what  specific
elements of approved  standards require revision. Existing standards would
be preserved to the extent that  they are adequate.  Authority of the "Refuse
Act"  of  1899,  33  U.S.C. 407,  would  not  be superseded  by  the  new
authorities that would be  provided by  this proposal.  The authorities would
be complementary.
  No provision  is made  under present law for the Governor of a State
to initiate revision of standards. The proposed bill  would  authorize  the
Governor  of  a State to submit revised standards  at  any time. Upon  the
Administrator's determination that the revised standards  submitted  by the
State meet the requirements of the regulations issued  under  section  10(d),
they would become effective.
                                                                   [p. 78]

  The  authority of the Administrator  to  promulgate standards for  waters
in areas of exclusive  Federal  legislative  jurisdiction,  or where  the  States
do not have jurisdiction, is unclear under existing laws.  The proposed bill
would provide the  Administrator with clear authority to establish standards
in such areas after public hearings.

-------
2252            LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Two  administrative  enforcement  procedures  are  authorized  under  the
existing provisions  of  section  10:  the  Administrator  may convene an
enforcement conference, or, in  cases of violation  of water quality standards,
he may issue 180-day  notices, followed by  court  action. These  procedures
have not proved sufficiently strong and effective.  The  enforcement conference
results  in  "recommendations" which, in  case  of non-compliance, may be
followed by court action. However, these  recommendations are not  necessarily
the same as the requirements contained in applicable water quality standards,
and the resulting two sets of requirements may overlap and cause confusion.
We believe that  dischargers should  be  subject  to a single  set of require-
ments  under the Act—water quality standards. Accordingly, the  proposed
bill would replace  both  existing  procedures with  a  new administrative
procedure  based  on violation  of water quality standards  (or  of effluent
requirements for  hazardous substances  established  under  section 10(1)).
This new procedure is  set forth  in section 10 (f). Upon the Administrator's
determination,  on the  basis  of any available information, that any  person
is in  violation of water quality standards  or  the requirements of  section
10(1),  he  is  authorized to  notify such person of  the  violation  and  the
required remedial action,  and  simultaneously to provide notification  to the
water  pollution control agencies of the  States involved.  If  the  required
remedial action or  appropriate State action  were not taken within 30 days,
the Administrator  would  be authorized to  issue  an order  requiring  com-
pliance within  a specified time.  Provision is made for a  hearing to  review
the order. Following  such hearing,  the Administrator  would be  required
to affirm, modify  or revoke the  order,  which would then become  his  final
order.  Judicial review  of  final orders  would be available after  exhaustion
                                                                   [p. 79]

of  administrative  remedies.  The  Administrator  would  be  authorized  to
assess a civil penalty for violation  of a  final order of up to $25,000 per day
of violation.
  In addition,  the  Administrator would be  authorized to commence  a civil
action in the appropriate U.S. District Court  for injunctive relief  in any
case of violations  of  water quality standards  or of effluent  requirements
for hazardous substances established under section 10(1). A civil proceeding
in U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal  could also be initiated to recover  a civil
penalty assessed by the  Administrator, in cases in  which  a final order of
the Administrator has been violated. The  Court in  any  such  proceeding
would be  authorized to  assess  a  civil  penalty of  not  more  than $25,000
per day of violation.  District Courts  would also be  authorized to  impose
criminal fines of up to $10,000,  and  imprisonment of up to six months, for
making any  false  statement in  any  document  or  tampering  with  any
monitoring device required by the  section.
  Although the enforcement conference would be eliminated by this proposal,
its  useful features would be retained  in  section  10 (g), authorizing the
Administrator  to  call  fact-finding  public   hearings  for  the  purpose  of
obtaining  information  necessary  to  carry  out the  Act,  including the
investigation of possible water quality  standards violations. Notice  of any
hearing would be required  to be published in the Federal  Register  and
in  a  newspaper  of general circulation in  the  area in which  the hearing
is to  be  held. The hearing would  be  conducted before  a hearing  panel,

-------
                     GUIDELINES AND REPORTS               2253

consisting of the Administrator's representative and representatives of the
States involved.  Any  interested person  would  be  permitted  to make  a
statement of views.
  At the conclusion of the  hearing, the  hearing panel  would  report  its
findings to the Administrator. The Administrator would review the findings,
and  would take such action  as  he deemed  appropriate, which could include
                                                                   [p. 80]

the issuance of an  administrative order or the initiation of a civil action
or the establishment of water quality standards.
  Even where standards  meeting  the  new  requirements which  would  be
imposed  by this  bill have been  approved by  the  Administrator,  situations
can be foreseen in  which revision of the standards would become necessary
and  in  which  it  would  be desirable  to  accomplish  the  revision   more
expeditiously  than  would  be possible if the  Administrator issued revised
regulations  under section  10 (d) and the States submitted revisions within
one  year thereafter. For  dealing with  such  cases, the bill would provide
a means of revising the standards with  minimum  delay. If, after  a hearing
under  section 10 (g), the  Administrator determined  that  the public health
or welfare required expeditious  revision of State water  quality  standards,
he  would  be  authorized  to  request  a  State  or  States  to  adopt revised
standards within 60 days. If the State did not adopt acceptable  standards
within such period,  the Administrator would be  authorized, after notice
and  hearing, to publish standards  and  to  promulgate them after 30  days
following publication.
  Sections 10 (h)  and  10 (i)  are intended  to enable  the  Administrator to
gain access to  information required for effective enforcement, and to  assist
him  in carrying out other functions under the Act, including research and
planning.  Section  10 (h)  would provide  the  Administrator  with  broad
authority to compel the attendance  and  testimony of witnesses at hearings,
and  to order  the  production  of  records.  Section  10 (i) would  authorize
the  Administrator  to  require  dischargers  to  perform  effluent monitoring
and  to report  the  results  to this Agency.  In exercising  this authority the
Administrator  would be required to take into consideration  the availability
of  the  desired  information from   State  or  local  monitoring  programs.
Further  provisions  of  this subsection would authorize the Administrator's
representatives to enter and inspect facilities from which discharge is  made
into  sewers or waters  specified  in  section 10 (c),  and  to  have  access to
                                                                   [p. 81]

monitoring or other records.  Any information obtained under section  10 (i)
would  be available to the  public  except information  which is shown to the
satisfaction of the  Administrator to contain trade  secrets.
  Section 10(j) would  provide  emergency  authority  for  the Administrator
to commence a court action  in  the  appropriate U.S. District Court for  an
injunction  or other appropriate equitable relief whenever a pollution source
presents or may  present an  imminent and  substantial danger to  the health
or welfare of any  person  or to water quality. This subsection is  necessary
in case of environmental emergencies, such as the recent  discoveries involv-
ing mercury pollution,  where the discharge causing  the  pollution may not
be covered by water quality standards.
  Section  10 (k)  provides  for  citizens'  suits  to  enforce  standards  or

-------
2254           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

limitations established under the Act,  or  to compel  the Administrator to
perform non-discretionary  acts.  The plaintiff would be required  to notify
the Administrator  at  least 60 days prior to  commencing  any  suit,  and
would not be  allowed  to  institute an  action to enforce  a  standard  or
limitation  if the Administrator  or a State is taking appropriate  action.
The Administrator  would be authorized to intervene  in any suit  in which
he is not a party. This provision parallels recently enacted amendments to
the Clean Air Act.
  Section  10(1)  would require  the  Administrator,  within  60 days after
enactment of the proposed bill,  to publish in the Federal Register a  list
of hazardous substances,  and, within  six months thereafter, to publish
proposed effluent requirements or prohibitions for such substances. Within
90 days after the  publication of such requirements  or prohibitions,  the
Administrator would  be required to promulgate  them in final form. This
authority  would supplement the existing  section  12 of the  Act, which
provides for Federal clean-up of  discharges of  hazardous  substances,  by
establishing prohibitions or limitations of such discharges, enforceable under
section 10 (f)  by administrative order or court action.
                                                              [p. 82]

  We urge that the Congress give prompt and favorable consideration to
this bill in order to assist the Environmental Protection Agency in carrying
out its mission to enhance the quality of the total environment.
  This proposed bill is part of  the President's environmental program as
announced in his Environmental  Message of February  8,  1971.
  The Office of Management  and Budget  has advised that the  proposed
legislation is in accordance with  the program of the  President.
                                              Sincerely yours,
                                          WILLIAM B. EUCKELSHAUS.
                                                              [p. 83]

  A BILL To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as  amended.

   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of  the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 10
of the  Federal Water Pollution  Control Act, as amended, is fur-
ther amended to read as follows:

          "WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND ENFORCEMENT

   "Sec. 10  (a) As used in this Act:
        " (1) The term, 'water quality standards' shall mean—
            "(A) Water use designations, water quality  criteria,
          effluent limitations, and  a plan of implementation  and
          enforcement adopted pursuant to  subsection  (e) of this
          Section; and
            "(B) Water quality standards, including water quality
          criteria and a plan of implementation and  enforcement,
          adopted pursuant to the Water Quality Act of 1965, until

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2255

         superseded by water quality standards adopted pursuant
         to this section.
       " (2)  The term, 'water use designation' shall mean the legit-
    imate and beneficial uses which are or shall be permitted and
    protected in waters specified in subsection (c)  of this section
    or portion thereof.
       "(3)  The term 'water quality criteria' shall mean those
    physical,  chemical,  and biological characteristics of water
    quality which, for a given  body of water  are required to
    permit and  protect the uses identified in the water use desig-
    nation.
       "(4)  The term 'effluent limitations' shall mean the permis-
    sible quantities of physical, chemical, biological,  and other
    constituents of effluents which are discharged  into waters
    specified in subsection (c) of this section.
       "(5)  The term 'plan  of implementation and enforcement'
    shall mean  a plan for the achievement and maintenance of
    water quality criteria and effluent limitations,  including pro-
    visions for the enforcement of  such criteria and effluent limi-
    tations.
       "(6)  The term 'discharge'  means any addition of matter to
                                                         [p- 84]

    waters  specified in  subsection (c) of  this section, whether
    such matter enters  such waters directly or from runoff or
    percolation.
       "(7)  The term 'person' means an individual, corporation,
    partnership, association, State, municipality, commission, or
    political subdivision of a State, or any interstate body, and
       "(8)  The term 'municipality'  means city, town, borough,
    county, parish, district, or other pliblic body created by or
    pursuant to State law.
  "(b) Consistent with the  policy  declaration of this  Act, State
and interstate action to abate and control water pollution shall be
encouraged. No action shall be  initiated  by the  Administrator
under subsection (f) of this section in any case if he determines
that the State or States involved are taking appropriate and  suffi-
cient action in such case to secure compliance with water quality
standards.
  "(c) Water quality standards  adopted pursuant to  subsection
(e) of this section shall apply to:
       " (1) All interstate waters of the United States;

-------
2256          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

      " (2) All navigable waters of the United States;
      " (3) Ground waters;
      "(4)  The waters of the Contiguous Zone of the United
     States, with respect to pollution thereof, which causes or is
     likely to cause pollution of the territorial sea of the United
     States;
      "(5) The waters of the high seas beyond the territorial sea
     of the United States, with respect to discharges  of matter
     transported  from or  originating  in  areas  over  which  the
     United States has sovereignty; and
      "(6)  Portions or tributaries of any of the waters specified
     in paragraphs (1) through (5) hereof, whether discharges
     reach such waters, tributaries, or portions thereof directly or
     from runoff or percolation.
   "(d)(l) For the purpose  of advising States  in adopting or
revising water quality standards, the  Administrator shall, after
consultation  with appropriate  Federal and  State agencies  and
other interested persons, publish within the time specified in para-
graph (6) of this subsection, and from time to time thereafter,
regulations providing specifications and methods to assure that in
                                                         [p. 85]

the establishment of water use designations, the use and value of
water for public water supplies, propagation of fish and wildlife,
recreational  purposes, agricultural, industrial, navigational,  and
other legitimate uses are adequately taken into account.
   "The Administrator shall not approve  water  use designations
if:
       "(i)  such water use designation specifies transport  or as-
     similation of waste as a primary use; or
       "(ii)  the Administrator  determines that the use and value
     of the waters in question for public water supplies, propaga-
     tion of fish and  wildlife, recreational  purposes, agricultural,
     industrial, navigational,  and other legitimate uses have not
     been adequately taken into account.
       "(2)  For  the  purpose of  advising States in adopting or
     revising water quality standards, the Administrator shall,
     after consultation with appropriate Federal and  State agen-
     cies and other interested persons, publish, within the time
     specified in paragraph (6) of this subsection and from time
     to time  thereafter,  regulations establishing specifications for
     water quality criteria. Such regulations shall reflect the latest
     scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind  and  extent

-------
             GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2257

of all  identifiable effects on health and welfare  and water
quality which may be expected from the presence of a pollu-
tant or combination of pollutants  in  any body of water in
varying quantities. Such regulations  shall,  on the basis of
such scientific knowledge, specify the water quality character-
istics required to protect and enhance water quality, including
those minimum or maximum characteristics  required to per-
mit and protect usas identified in water use  designations, as
well as analytical and test procedures to be used in determin-
ing such characteristics.
  "(3) In cases where the quality of water on the effective
date of this section is higher than water quality criteria appli-
cable to any use designation, such high quality shall be main-
tained  in accordance with regulations.
  "(4) For the purpose of advising States adopting or revis-
                                                    [p.86]

ing water quality standards, the  Administrator  shall  also,
after consultation with appropriate Federal  and State agen-
cies  and  other  interested persons,  publish, within the  time
specified  in paragraph (6) of this  subsection and from  time
to time thereafter, regulations providing specifications for
effluent limitations. Such regulations shall set forth the mini-
mum acceptable levels of treatment or control, including al-
lowable amounts of constituents of effluents,  and permissible
physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of effluents,
which  shall be  based on  the availability of practicable treat-
ment or control measures and shall be generally applicable to
discharges from various categories of:
  "(i)  Industrial facilities  on which construction was  com-
menced prior to the effective date of this subsection;
  "(ii) Industrial facilities on which  construction shall be
commenced after the effective date  of this subsection (taking
into account the best available technology) ;
  " (iii) Sanitary sewers and sewage treatment plants; and
  " (iv) Other sources.
  "(5) For the purpose of providing guidance to the States
in adopting and revising water quality standards, the Admin-
istrator shall also, after consultation with appropriate  Fed-
eral and State agencies and other interested persons, develop
and publish within the time specified in paragraph  (6) of this
subsection and from  time to  time  thereafter, recommended
pollution  control techniques necessary to  achieve applicable

-------
2258          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    water quality criteria and effluent limitations, including iden-
    tification of available technology and  data on the effective-
    ness, cost, and economic feasibility of alternative methods of
    prevention and control of water pollution.
      "(6)  No later than six months after the date of enactment
    of this  subsection, the Administrator  shall promulgate con-
    currently, in  accordance with  5  U.S.C.  §553,  regulations
    under paragraphs (1),  (2), (3), and  (4) of this subsection,
    after allowing a reasonable time  of at least 45 days, but not to
                                                        [P. 87]

    exceed 60 days from the publication  of proposed regulations,
    for interested persons to submit  written comments. Revisions
    of such regulations shall follow  the procedures prescribed in
    this paragraph.
      "(7)  All water quality standards established pursuant to
    this section shall be such as to protect the public health and
    welfare, enhance the quality of water, and serve the purposes
    of this Act.
      "(8)  (A) Plans of implementation  and enforcement shall
    include  remedial  or other measures required to achieve com-
    pliance with effluent limitations and water quality criteria.
          "(B)  No  plan of implementation and  enforcement
         shall be approved by the Administrator unless
          "(i)  in the  case  of industrial and municipal  dis-
         chargers, it provides a phased schedule for the attainment
         of compliance with effluent limitations established pur-
         suant to this subsection as  expeditiously as practicable;
         and
          "(ii) in the case of sources other than those specified
         in subparagraph (B) (i)  of this paragraph, it provides
         for the attainment of applicable  effluent limitations as
         expeditiously as practicable; and
          "(iii)  it identifies the nature and  extent of improve-
         ment of water  quality that is expected to result from
         measures in this plan.
      "(9)  Nothing  in this section  shall require the revision of
    compliance dates specified in plans of implementation  and
    enforcement included in water quality standards established
    pursuant to the Water Quality  Act of 1965; provided, that
    such  dates  may   be   revised  pursuant  to  subsections
    (e) (2) (B), (e) (2) (D),and (g) (6) of this section.
  "(e) (1)  If a  State, after public  hearings, adopts within the

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2259

time specified in paragraph (2) of this subsection water quality
standards applicable to (i) all waters specified in subsection (c)
hereof over which the State has jurisdiction,  or  (ii)  portions
thereof, and if the Administrator determines that such standards
are consistent with the regulations and requirements established
                                                         [p. 88]

pursuant to subsection (d)  of this section, such State standards
shall be approved by the Administrator as the water quality stand-
ards applicable to such waters or portions thereof.
       "(2) (A) Water quality standards established pursuant to
    this Act prior to the effective date of this subsection  shall
    continue in effect until superseded. If a State has not adopted,
    within one year after the promulgation of initial regulations
    under  subsection (d) of this section, water quality standards
    applicable to all waters specified in subsection (c)  hereof over
    which such State has jurisdiction; or  if such State does not,
    within one year after the promulgation of regulations, other
    than initial regulations, pursuant  to  subsection  (d) of this
    section, adopt such  revisions of water quality  standards as
    are consistent with regulations and requirements established
    pursuant to subsection (d) of this section, or if the Adminis-
    trator determines that any  water quality standards adopted
    by a State pursuant to this subsection  are not consistent with
    the  requirements of regulations  established  pursuant  to
    subsection (d) of this section, the Administrator is author-
    ized, after reasonable notice and a public hearing, to be held
    in or near the place where  the standards will take effect, to
    publish proposed regulations setting forth water  quality
    standards for those waters specified in subsection (c)  hereof
    over which the State has jurisdiction.  If within  60 days from
    the date the Administrator publishes  such proposed regula-
    tions,  the State  has not adopted water quality standards
    which  the Administrator finds to be consistent with subsec-
    tion (d) of this section, the Administrator shall  promulgate
    standards which shall be the water quality standards applica-
    ble to such waters or portions thereof.
           "(B) Water  quality standards which,  prior  to  the
        effective date of this paragraph, were adopted by a State
        and approved by the Administrator under this Act or
        submitted to him but not yet so approved by him prior to
        such date, and which do not include all of the elements of
        water  quality   standards   as defined  in  subsection

-------
2260          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

         (a) (1) (A) of this section, shall be supplemented within
         the appropriate time specified in subparagraph  (A)  of
                                                        [P. 89]

         this paragraph by those elements which are not included.
         The Administrator shall consult with the States and shall
         advise them what elements, if any, of existing approved
         standards shall be required to be revised pursuant to this
         subparagraph, giving due  consideration  to the desirabil-
         ity of preserving existing standards to the extent they
         are consistent with the purposes  of this Act.  After the
         effective date  of this section, the Administrator may con-
         tinue to approve standards or portions thereof  submitted
         to him prior to the effective date  of this subsection.
           "(C) Where  the Administrator publishes regulations
         pursuant to subsection  (d) of this section subsequent to
         the initial  publication  of  regulations thereunder, such
         publication shall not constitute  an extension of the date
         on which a State is required to submit  standards pur-
         suant to  any  prior publication  of regulations, provided
         that where:
           "(i)  the Administrator has  issued regulations pur-
         suant to subsection (d)  of this section; and
           "(ii) less than one  year after the issuance of such
         regulations the  Administrator issues subsequent regula-
         tions ; and
           "(iii) such  subsequent regulations affect the  same spe-
         cific criteria or other elements of water quality  standards
         as  the prior  regulations;  a  State may, in submitting
         standards pursuant to the prior regulations, omit the
         elements for which revision will be required pursuant to
         the subsequent regulations.
           "(D)  If  at any time the Governor of a State or the
         State water pollution control agency,  on his or its own
         initiative or at the request of the Administrator, revises
         all or part of the water  quality standards established
         under this section for the waters in subsection (c) hereof
         over which  the State has jurisdiction,  and if the  Admin-
         istrator determines that such revised standards are con-
         sistent with the regulations and requirements of subsec-
         tion (d)  of this section, such standards shall thereafter
         be the water quality standards applicable to such waters.

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2261

      "(3)  For waters in subsection  (c) hereof over which the
    States do not have jurisdiction, the Administrator shall, after
                                                        [P. 90]

    reasonable notice  and a public hearing, promulgate regula-
    tions setting forth such water quality standards for such wa-
    ters.  Such  hearings shall be held in or  near the place where
    such  standards will take  effect.  Affected States, interstate
    agencies, Federal  departments and  agencies,  municipalities,
    industries, and other  interested  persons shall be given an
    opportunity to make a full statement of views.
  "(f) (1) Whenever, on the basis of any information available to
him, the Administrator determines that any person is in violation
of water quality standards or any element thereof or limitations
established under subsection (1) hereof,  he  shall notify such per-
son and the  water pollution control agency of the State or States
in which such violation is occurring of his  determination and of
the remedial action which is required to achieve compliance. If the
Administrator  determines  at any time after 30 days following
such notice  that required  remedial action  or  appropriate  State
action has not been taken, he may issue an order for compliance or
request that the Attorney General bring a civil action pursuant to
paragraph (6) of this subsection.
      "(2)  An order  issued pursuant to paragraph (1) of this
    subsection shall state with reasonable specificity the nature of
    the violation and shall specify: a time for compliance, taking
    into account the practicability of compliance; any applicable
    compliance schedule which is part  of  either the applicable
    standards or a permit issued under section 407 of title 33 of
    the United States Code; the requirements of  subsection (1)
    hereof; the seriousness of the violation; and any good faith
    efforts to comply with water quality standards, requirements
    of subsection (1) hereof, or such permit. A copy of any order
    issued under this subsection shall be sent to the State water
    pollution control agency of the State in which the violation
    occurs.  In  any case in which an order or notice  under this
    subsection is issued to a corporation, a  copy of such order or
    notice shall be  issued to such corporate officers as the Admin-
    istrator may determine to be appropriate.
                                                        [P. 91]

      "(3)  If within 15 days following receipt of an order under
    paragraph (1)  of this  subsection, the person to whom such

-------
2262          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    order is issued files a request for a hearing, the Administrator
    shall promptly hold a public hearing to permit such person to
    present information relating to the order or the violation or
    both. The person requesting the hearing may be required to
    file, in such form as the Administrator may specify, a report
    furnishing  such information  concerning  the  nature  and
    amounts of discharges from facilities which he owns, leases,
    manages, or controls and which are subject to the order, as
    the Administrator may prescribe. Any hearing held pursuant
    to this paragraph shall be of record,  and shall be subject to
    the provisions of section 554 of title  5 of the United States
    Code. Based on the record, the Administrator shall affirm,
    modify, or revoke the original order by a written decision
    which shall constitute his  final order. If no hearing is duly
    requested pursuant to this paragraph and the Administrator
    does not  on his  own initiative modify or revoke an  order
    issued pursuant  to paragraph (1) of this subsection, such
    order shall constitute his final order.
       "(4)  Any final order under paragraph (3) hereof shall be
    subject to judicial review in accordance with section 701 of
    title 5 of the United States Code by the United States  Court
    of Appeals for  the  circuit in which  the violation occurred,
    upon the filing of a petition in such court within thirty days
    from the date of such order by any person aggrieved thereby
    praying that such order be modified to set aside in whole or in
    part. The petitioner shall send a copy of such petition  to the
    Administrator and the appropriate State water pollution con-
    trol agency by registered mail. The Administrator shall cer-
    tify and file in  such court the record upon  which the final
    order was issued. The  court shall hear the  petition on the
    record made before the Administrator. The court may affirm,
    modify, or revoke any  order  of the Administrator, or may
    remand the proceedings to the Administrator for such further
    action as it may direct.
       "(5)  Any person who violates or fails or refuses to comply
                                                        [p. 92]

    with a final order of the Administrator shall be liable to a
    civil penalty in an amount, not to exceed $25,000 per day of
    violation, to be determined by the  Administrator and subject
    to compromise by him, after he has considered the nature,
    circumstances, and extent of such violation, the practicability

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2263

    of compliance with such standards and any good faith efforts
    to comply with such order.
       "(6) Any final order under paragraph (3)  not appealed by
    an aggrieved person and any fine assessed by  the Administra-
    tor under paragraph (5)  shall be enforced by the Attorney
    General, upon the request of the Administrator, by petition to
    the United States Court of Appeals for the circuit in  which
    the violation occurred.
       " (7) The Administrator may request the Attorney General
    to commence  a  civil action for a  permanent  or  temporary
    injunction, an order compelling testimony  or the  production
    of records, or such other relief as may be appropriate,  when-
    ever any person—
       " (i) violates water quality standards;
       " (ii) fails or refuses to comply  with  any  requirement of
    subsection (h) of this section; or
       "(iii) fails or refuses to comply with any requirement of
    subsection (1) of this section.
  Any action under this  paragraph may be brought in the appro-
priate United States district court, and such  court shall have ju-
risdiction to restrain violations and to  require compliance, after
taking into  account the factors specified in subsection (f)  (2) of
this section. Notice of the commencement of any such action shall
be given to the appropriate State and interstate  water pollution
control agencies.
       "(8) The court, in any action under paragraph  (7) of this
    subsection may  assess a  civil penalty  of  not  more than
    $25,000 per day of violation in case of
       " (i) any violation  of water quality standards;
       "(ii) any discharge in violation  of subsection  (1) of this
    section.
  "The amount of such penalty shall be determined by the court
after  considering the  nature,  circumstances, and extent of the
violation and any good faith efforts to comply. In any action under
                                                        [p.93]

paragraph (7) of this subsection which is subsequent to one or
more  previous such actions resulting in the assessment of a pen-
alty for a violation at the same facility, the court  may assess a
penalty of not more than $50,000 per day of violation.
       "(9)  Any person who knowingly makes any material false
    statement or representation in any application, record, report,
    plan, or other document filed or required  to be  maintained

-------
2264          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    under this section or who falsifies,  tampers with, or know-
    ingly renders inaccurate any monitoring device  or  method
    required to be maintained pursuant to this section shall upon
    conviction be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000, or
    by imprisonment for not more than six months, or by both.
  "(s) (1) Whenever the Administrator, on the basis of  any in-
formation available to him or at the request of the Governor of a
State:
           "(A) believes or has reason to believe that pollution of
         any waters specified in subsection  (c) of this section is
         occurring which endangers the  health or welfare of any
         persons, or that water  quality standards are being or
         may be violated, or
           "(B) wishes  to investigate any acts, conditions, prac-
         tices, or matters in order to determine whether any per-
         son has violated or is about to violate any provision of
         this Act or any standards established pursuant thereto or
         to aid in the carrying out of any of the provisions of this
         Act, including the promulgation of water quality stand-
         ards,  rules or  regulations  thereunder,  or  in obtaining
         information to  serve as a basis for  recommending fur-
         ther legislation  concerning the matters to which this Act
         relates, he may call a public hearing for the purpose of
         obtaining information and determining the remedial or
         other action which may be appropriate.
       "(2) Notice of such hearing shall be published in the Fed-
    eral Register and in a newspaper  of general circulation in or
    near the place where the hearing is to be held,  and given to
    the  State and interstate water  pollution control agencies of
    the State or States in which any discharge causing or  contrib-
                                                         [P. 94]

     uting to any pollution which is to be  considered at the hearing
    originates, and of any other State  or States adversely affected
    by any such pollution, to the municipalities concerned, and to
    any person believed  to be causing  or contributing to any such
    pollution.
       "(3) The Administrator shall give the State or States, any
    interstate  agency, and the municipalities involved, and every
    person contributing to any pollution referred to in paragraph
     (1) of this subsection or affected by it, and other interested
    persons, an opportunity to make a full  statement of views at
    the  hearing. Such statements may be made under  oath or

-------
             GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2265

otherwise, and may be written or oral, as the Administrator
may prescribe.
  " (4)  The Administrator shall  prescribe by regulation the
procedures to be followed in any hearing under this subsec-
tion.
  " (5)  In any hearing under this subsection, the Administra-
tor or his representative shall invite representatives  of the
States in which pollution may be originating, and representa-
tives of States affected  by such  pollution,  to  assist him in
conducting such hearing. After any such representatives have
been impaneled, they shall be entitled to question witnesses, to
present evidence, and otherwise fully participate in the hear-
ing. At  the conclusion of the hearing, the hearing panel shall
make a report which  may contain findings concerning the
existence of pollution, violations of any provisions of this Act,
and recommendations for corrective action and any dissent-
ing views of panel members. After such report is  prepared,
the Administrator may take such action pursuant to this Act
as may be appropriate.
  " (6)  Where, after reviewing the  report of a hearing panel,
the  Administrator determines that  pollution is  occurring
which endangers the quality of water or the health and wel-
fare of  persons,  and that  revision  of  previously established
standards is required, he may request  that a State adopt
within a reasonable time, not less than 60 days, specified by
the Administrator, revised standards for those waters speci-
fied  in subsection (c) hereof over which the State  has juris-
diction.  The Administrator shall specify the waters  for which
                                                    [P- 95]

revision is required, and the specific criteria, effluent limita-
tions, or provisions  of the plan  of implementation and  en-
forcement which require revision. If the State adopts revised
standards pursuant to the Administrator's request, and the
Administrator  determines that such revised standards are
consistent with the  requirements of subsection  (d) of this
section, such revised standards  shall  be the water quality
standards for such waters. If the State does not, within the
time specified by the Administrator, adopt acceptable revised
standards, the  Administrator is authorized, after reasonable
notice and a public hearing, to publish proposed regulations
setting  forth such water  quality standards. If within 30 days
from the date the Administrator publishes such regulations,

-------
2266          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    the State has not adopted water quality standards which are
    consistent with subsection (d) of this section  and with the
    purposes of this Act, the Administrator shall promulgate such
    standards.
      "(7) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this subsec-
    tion, the authority of the Administrator pursuant to other
    subsections of this section is not affected.
  " (h) (1) For the purpose of any hearing held under this section,
the Administrator may issue subpoenas for  the attendance  and
testimony  of witnesses and  the  production  of  relevant papers,
books, and documents, and he may administer oaths.  Except for
effluent  data, upon a  showing satisfactory to the Administrator
that such papers, books,  documents, or information or particular
part thereof, if made  public would divulge trade secrets or  secret
processes, the Administrator shall consider such record, report, or
information or particular portion thereof confidential  in accord-
ance with the purposes of section 1905 of title  18 of the United
States Code, except that  such paper, book, document, or informa-
tion may be disclosed to other officers, employees,  or authorized
representatives of the United States concerned with carrying out
this Act. Such attendance of witnesses and the production of any
such records may be required from any place  in the  United  States
                                                        [p. 96]

at any  reasonable place designated for the hearing.  Witnesses
summoned by the Administrator to appear  before him shall be
paid the same  fees and  mileage  that  are paid  witnesses  in the
courts of the United States.
      "(2) The testimony of any witness may be  taken,  at the
     instance of a party,  in any hearing under this Act, by deposi-
    tion, at any time after the notice of the proceeding is pub-
    lished. The Administrator may also order testimony to be
    taken  before any person authorized to administer oaths who
    is not  counsel or attorney to the party making the deposition.
      "(3) If a  witness whose testimony may be  desired to be
    taken  by deposition is in  a  foreign country, the deposition
    may be taken before an officer or person designated  by the
     Administrator, or agreed upon by the parties by stipulation
    in writing to be filed with the Administrator. All depositions
    must be promptly filed with the Administrator.
      "(4) Witnesses whose depositions are taken as authorized
     in this Act, and the person or officer taking the  same, shall be

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2267

    entitled to the same fees and mileage that are paid witnesses
    in the courts of the United States.
  "(i) (1) After the effective date of this subsection, any person
who owns, leases, manages or controls any public or private prop-
erty or facility  from which  discharge is being  made  into water
specified in  subsection  (c) shall with respect to  such discharge
install, use, and  maintain such monitoring equipment or methods
and establish and  maintain such records, make such reports, and
provide such information as the Administrator may require  for
the purpose of ascertaining compliance with water quality stand-
ards, taking into account the extent to which such information is
available to the Administrator from State or locally required mon-
itoring.
       "(2)  The Administrator  or his authorized  representative,
    upon presenting appropriate credentials, is authorized—
           " (A) to enter,  at reasonable  times, any public or pri-
         vate property from which discharge is being made into
         waters  specified in subsection (c) ;
           "(B) to inspect and investigate, at reasonable times,
         within  reasonable limits and in a reasonable manner, the
                                                        [p. 97]

         operation of collection  systems, waste  treatment works
         or  facilities, or conditions relating to pollution or  the
         possible pollution of such waters; and
           "(C) to have access to such record in connection there-
         with, including reports or information required by para-
         graph  (1) of this subsection, as the Administrator may
         require.
       "(3)  Any records, reports, or information  obtained under
    paragraph  (1)  of  this subsection shall be available to  the
    public, except that upon a showing satisfactory to the Admin-
    istrator that records, reports, or information,  or a particular
    part thereof (other than effluent data), to which the Admin-
    istrator has access  under this subsection constitute trade se-
    crets or other matter referred to in section 1905 of title  18 of
    the United States Code, the Administrator shall consider such
    record,  report, or information or particular portion thereof
    confidential, except that such record, report,  or information
    may be disclosed to other officers, employees, or  authorized
    representatives of the  United States  concerned with carrying
    out this Act, and such information may be  disclosed in cam-
    era relevant in any proceeding under this Act.

-------
2268          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  "(j) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the
Administrator, upon his determination that any discharge or com-
bination of discharges into any of the waters specified in subsec-
tion (c)  presents an imminent  and substantial  danger  to the
health or welfare of any person or persons, or to water quality,
may request the Attorney General to bring a suit on behalf of the
United States in the appropriate United States district court to
enjoin immediately any person contributing to the alleged pollu-
tion from further discharges causing such danger and to take such
other action as may be necessary.
  "(k) (1)  Except as provided in paragraph (2) hereof, any per-
son may commence a civil action on his own behalf—
           "(A) against any person, including the United  States
        and any other governmental instrumentality or  agency
         (to the extent permitted by the Eleventh  Amendment to
                                                        [p. 98]

        the Constitution), who is alleged to be in violation  of any
        standard or limitation under this section or a final order
        issued by the Administrator or a State with respect to
        such a standard or limitation, or
           "(B) against the Administrator where there is alleged
        a failure of the Administrator to perform any act or duty
        under this  section which is not  discretionary with the
        Administrator.
  The district courts shall have jurisdiction, without regard to the
amount in controversy or the citizenship of the parties, to enforce
such standard or limitation, or such an order, or to order the Ad-
ministrator to perform such act or duty, as the case may be, taking
into account the practicability of compliance; any applicable com-
pliance schedule which is part of either the applicable standards
or a permit issued under section 407 of title 33 of the United States
Code; the requirements  of  subsection (1)  hereof; the seriousness
of the violation; and any good faith  efforts to comply with water
quality standards, requirements of subsection (1) hereof, or such
permit.
       " (2) No action may be commenced—
           "(A) under subparagraph (1) (A) hereof—
           "(i)  prior to 60 days  after the plaintiff has given no-
        tice of the violation to the Administrator, to the State in
        which the violation occurs, and to any  alleged violator of
        the standard, limitation, or order; or
           "(ii) if the administrator or State has commenced and

-------
             GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2269

    is diligently prosecuting a civil action in a court of the
    United States or a State to require compliance with the
    standards, limitation, or order; or
       "(iii) if the Administrator has issued and is diligently
    seeking to enforce an order pursuant to subsection  (f) of
    this section.
       "(B) under subparagraph (1) (B) hereof prior to 60
    days after the plaintiff has given  notice of such action to
    the Administrator in such manner as the Administrator
    shall prescribe by regulation.
  " (3) (A) Any action respecting a violation of a standard or
limitation or an order respecting such standard or limitation
may be brought  only in the  judicial district in which the
violation occurs.
                                                    [p. 99]

       "(B) In  any  such action under this subsection in
    which the United States is not  a  party, the  Attorney
    General, at the request of the Administrator, may inter-
    vene on behalf of the United States as a matter of right.
  "(4)  The Court, in issuing any final order in any  action
brought pursuant to paragraph (1)  hereof, may award costs
of litigation (including reasonable attorney and expert wit-
ness fees) to any party, whenever the court determines such
award is appropriate.
  "(5) The injunctive relief provided by this subsection shall
not restrict any right which any person  (or class of persons)
may have under any statute or common law to seek enforce-
ment of any standard or limitation or  to seek any other relief
(including  relief  against the  Administrator or a  State
agency).
  "(6) (A) In order to direct notice of the commencement of
any action brought pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subsec-
tion to persons who may join in the action  under subpara-
graph  (B) of  this paragraph, the court, upon motion of any
party made within sixty days of the commencement of the
action, shall order notice published in at least one newspaper
of general circulation  in the place where the court sits and
shall direct the Administrator to publish notice in the Federal
Register. The  notice shall advise that the judgment, whether
favorable or not, will be binding on all such persons and that
any such  person  may if he desires join the suit, and shall

-------
2270          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    contain such other matters and be in such form as the court
    may provide.
           "(B) Any person who might have brought suit on his
         own behalf on the matters alleged in the complaint may
         join such suit as a plaintiff, and, in any case where notice
         was given as provided in subparagraph (A) of this para-
         graph,  a failure to join shall  bar any subsequent suit
         under this subsection by such person as if such person
         has joined in such suit.
           "(C) In any action under this subsection the court, in
         its discretion, may  make such orders as it  deems appro-
         priate to prevent undue repetition  or complication in the
         presentation of  evidence or argument, including orders
         that one or more parties may adequately and fairly rep-
         resent other parties.
                                                      [p. 100]

    "(1)(1) The Administrator shall, within sixty days after the
enactment of this section and from time to time thereafter, pub-
lish in the Federal Register a list of those elements and com-
pounds  other than  oil as denned in  section 11 of this  Act,  or
combination of such elements and compounds  which in his  judg-
ment  possess a  high  potential for presenting an imminent and
substantial danger to the health or welfare of persons or to water
quality because  of  their  nondegradable  or persistent nature  or
because they can be biologically magnified, or because they can be
immediately lethal,  or because they otherwise cause or  tend  to
cause detrimental cumulative effects, and which may be subject to
an effluent limitation  established under  this section. He shall  si-
multaneously publish a summary of all evidence available to him
concerning the effects of those elements, compounds,  and combina-
tions  thereof on the health  or welfare of  persons  or on water
quality.
      "(2)  Within six months after the publication of such list,
    or revision  thereof,  the Administrator, in accordance with
    section 553  of title 5 of  the United States  Code, shall publish
    for comment proposed effluent limitations including, if appro-
    priate, prohibition of discharges, of each such element and
    compound  or combination of elements and  compounds to-
    gether with a summary  of the evidence on which such limita-
    tions are based. No later than ninety days after such publica-
    tion the Administrator shall promulgate final limitations.
      "(3)  Prior to publishing any lists or regulations pursuant

-------
                   GUIDELINES AND REPORTS              2271

     to this subsection the Administrator shall, to the maximum
     extent practicable within the time provided, consult with ap-
     propriate advisory committees, independent experts,  and Fed-
     eral departments and agencies.
       "(4) The President may exempt any person from  any limi-
     tation or limitations established under this subsection for a
     period of not more than two years if he finds that such ex-
     emption is required for reasons of national security. An ex-
     emption  under  this  paragraph may be extended for one or
     more additional periods, each period not to exceed two years."
                                                           [p. 101]

Sec. 2. Section 23 of  the Federal  Water Pollution Control Act,
as amended,  is amended to  revise subsection  (a) to read as fol-
lows:
  "(a) The term  'State  water pollution control agency' means a
single State agency  designated by that State  as the official State
water pollution control agency for purposes of this Act."
and to add the following subsection (g) :
  " (g) 'Contiguous  zone' means the entire zone defined  by article
24  of  the  Convention  on the Territorial Sea and  the Contiguous
Zone."
                                                           [p. 102]

                                               PESTICIDES,
                            ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
                                                 Washington,  D.C.
  DEAR MR. [PRESIDENT/SPEAKER] : Enclosed  is a draft of a proposed bill
"to  protect the public  health and welfare  and  the  environment through
improved regulation of  pesticides, and for other purposes."
  I  recommend that  the bill be referred  to the appropriate committee for
consideration and that  it  be enacted.
  The legislative proposal would, among  other things:
  (1) Require  the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency,
      when registering a pesticide, to consider  the  environmental  effects
      of the pesticides;
  (2) Require  classification of pesticides, upon registration, as being: (a)
      for general use;  (b) for restricted use;  (c) for use by permit only;
  (3) Permit experimental registration of pesticides. Pesticides  designated
      as being  for restricted use could be used only by or under the direct
      supervision of approved pesticide  applicators.  Pesticides   designated
      as being for use by permit only  would require the  approval of an
      approved  pest management consultant for  each  application  of the
      pesticide.  Contracts  are authorized to provide for Federal  assistance
      in training applicators and consultants;
                                                           [p.104]

-------
2272           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  (4) Simplify the existing procedures relating to cancellation and suspen-
      sion of pesticide registrations;
  (5) Allow the Administrator to order a stop to the sale of a pesticide if
      he believes that the pesticide is in violation of the Act;
  (6) Provide for  registration and inspection  of establishments manufac-
      turing or processing pesticides;
  (7) Require that pesticide exporters file with the Administrator a certifi-
      cation that the article  exported is in compliance  with  the laws and
      regulations of the  foreign  country to which it  is being sent.
  The provisions of the proposal  would considerably strengthen the Federal
Government's efforts in pesticides regulation.
  A  section-by-section  analysis of  the bill is  enclosed. A similar letter is
being sent to the [President/Speaker].
  The bill is part of the  President's environmental programs  as announced
in his Environmental Message of February 8,  1971. It will be administered
by the Environmental Protection  Agency and was developed in coordination
with the Council on Environmental Quality.
  The Office of Management  and  Budget  advises that enactment of this
proposed legislation would be  in accord with the program of the President.

                                          Sincerely yours,
                                          WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS.

HON. SPIRO T. AGNEW,
President of the Senate,
Washington, D.C.
HON. CARL B. ALBERT,
Speaker of House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
                                                             fp. 105]


THE FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PESTICIDE CONTROL ACT OF  1971

A BILL to  protect the  public health and welfare  and the  environment
through improved regulation of pesticides, and for other purposes.

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


                       TITLE  AND  FINDINGS

  Section 1.  (a) This act may be cited as the Federal Environ-
mental Pesticide  Control Act  of 1971.
  (b)  The Congress hereby  finds that pesticides are valuable to
our Nation's agricultural  production and to the protection of man
and the environment from insects, rodents, weeds and other forms
of life which may be pests; but it is essential to the public health
and welfare that they be regulated closely to  prevent  adverse
effects  on human life  and the environment, including pollution of
interstate and navigable waters; that pesticides are used  through-

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2273

out the Nation and the major portion thereof moves in interstate
or foriegn commerce; that it is essential in the public interest to
protect the public health and welfare from adverse effects of pesti-
cide residues on food which  is consumed throughout the Nation
and which moves in interstate or foreign commerce; and  that
regulation by the Administrator and cooperation by the States and
other jurisdictions as contemplated by this Act are appropriate to
prevent and eliminate burdens upon interstate or foreign com-
merce, to effectively regulate such commerce and to protect the
public health and welfare and the environment.
                         DEFINITIONS

  Section 2. For the purposes of this Act—
   (a) The term  'pesticide' means  (1) any substance or mixture of
substances intended for preventing, destroying, repelling, or miti-
gating any insects, rodents,  nematodes,  fungi, weeds,  and other
forms of terrestrial or aquatic plant  or animal life or viruses,
bacteria, or other micro-organisms, except viruses, bacteria,  or
other micro-organisms on or in living man or other animals, which
the Administrator  shall  declare to be a pest, and  (2) any  sub-
                                                        [p. 106]

stance or mixture of substances intended for use as a plant regula-
tor, defoliant or desiccant.
   (b)  The term 'device' means  any instrument or  contrivance
intended for trapping, destroying, repelling, or mitigating insects,
birds, predators, or rodents or destroying, repelling, or mitigating
fungi, nematodes, or such other pests as may be designated by the
Administrator, but not including  equipment used for  the applica-
tion of pesticides when sold separately therefrom.
   (c) The term  'plant regulator' means any substance or mixture
of substances,  intended through physiological action, for accelerat-
ing or retarding the rate of growth or rate of maturation, or for
otherwise altering the behavior of plants or the produce thereof,
but shall not  include substances  to the extent that they are in-
tended as plant  nutrients,  trace  elements, nutritional chemicals,
plant inoculants, and soil amendments.
   (d)  The term 'defoliant' means any substance or mixture of
substances intended for causing the leaves or foliage to drop from
a plant, with or without causing abscission.
   (e) The term 'desiccant' means any substance or mixture of
substances intended for artificially accelerating  the drying  of
plant tissue.

-------
2274          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  (f) The term 'environment' includes water, air, land, all plants
and animals living therein, and the interrelationships which exist
among these.
  (g)  The term 'animal'  means all  vertebrate and invertebrate
species, including  but not limited to man and  other mammals,
birds, fish, and shellfish.
  (h)  The term  'nematode'  means  invertebrate animals of the
phylum nemathelminthes and  class  nematoda, that is, unseg-
mented round worms with elongated, fusiform, or saclike bodies
covered with cuticle,  and  inhabiting soil, water,  plants or plant
parts; may also be called nemas or eelworms.
  (i) The term 'weed' means any plant which grows where not
wanted.
  (j) The term 'insect' means any of the numerous small inverte-
brate animals generally having the body more or less obviously
segmented, for the most part belonging  to the class insecta, com-
prising six-legged, usually winged forms, as, for example, beetles,
bugs, bees, flies, and  to other allied  classes  of arthropods whose
                                                       [p. 107]

members are wingless and usually have more than six legs, as, for
example, spiders, mites, ticks, centipedes, and wood lice.
  (k)  The term 'fungi' means  all non-chlorophyll-bearing thallo-
phytes (that is, all non-chlorophyll-bearing plants of a lower order
than mosses  and  liverworts) as, for example, rusts, smuts, mil-
dews, molds, yeasts, and bacteria, except those on or in living man
or other animals, and except those in or  on processed food, bever-
ages, or Pharmaceuticals.
  (1) The term 'ingredient statement' means either—
       (1) a statement of  the name and  percentage of each active
    ingredient, together with  the total  percentage of the inert
    ingredients, in the pesticide; or
       (2)  a statement of the name of each active ingredient,
    together with the name  of each and total percentage of the
    inert ingredients, if any there  be, in the pesticide (except
    paragraph 1 of this subsection shall apply if the preparation
    is classified as for restricted use or for use by permit only
    under section 4(d) of this Act) ; and, in addition to (1)  or
     (2) in  case  the  pesticide  contains  arsenic in any  form,  a
    statement of the percentage of total and  water soluble ar-
    senic, each calculated as elemental arsenic.
  (m) The term 'active ingredient' means—
       (1) in the case of a pesticide other than a plant regulator,

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2275

    defoliant or desiccant, an ingredient which will prevent, de-
    stroy,  repel,  or  mitigate  any  insects,  nematodes, rodents,
    fungi, weeds, or other pests;
       (2)  in the case of a plant regulator, an ingredient which,
    through physiological action, will accelerate or retard the rate
    of growth or rate of maturation or otherwise alter the behav-
    ior of plants or the product thereof;
       (3)  in  the case  of a  defoliant, an  ingredient which will
    cause the leaves or foliage to drop from a plant;
       (4) in the  case of a desiccant, an  ingredient which will
    artificially accelerate the drying of plant tissue.
   (n)  The term 'inert ingredient' means an ingredient which is
not an active ingredient.
                                                       [P. 108]

   (o) The term 'antidote' means a practical treatment  in case of
poisoning and includes first-aid treatment.
   (p)  The term 'State' means  a  State, the District of  Columbia,
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, the
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and American Samoa.
   (q) The term 'Administrator' means the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
   (r) The term 'registrant' means a person who has registered
any pesticide pursuant to the provisions of this Act.
   (s) The term  'label' means the written, printed, or graphic
matter on, or attached to, the pesticide or device or the immediate
container thereof, and the outside container or wrapper of the
retail package, if any there be, of the pesticide or device.
   (t) The term  'labeling' means  all labels and other written,
printed, or graphic matter—
       (1) upon the pesticide or device or any of its containers or
    wrappers;
       (2) accompanying the pesticide or device at any time ;
       (3) to which reference is made on the label or in literature
    accompanying  the  pesticide  or device,  except  to current
    official publications of the Environmental Protection Agency,
    the United States Departments of Agriculture and Interior,
    the Department of Health, Education and  Welfare, State ex-
    periment stations, State agricultural colleges, and other simi-
    lar Federal or State institutions  or agencies authorized by
    law to conduct research in the field of pesticides.
   (u) The term  'adulterated' shall apply  to any pesticide  if its
strength or purity falls below the professed standard of  quality as

-------
2276          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

expressed on its labeling or under  which it is sold, or if  any
substance has been substituted wholly or in part for the article, or
if  any valuable  constituent of the article has been wholly or in
part abstracted.
   (v) The term 'misbranded' shall apply—
       (1)  to  any pesticide or device if its labeling bears  any
     statement, design, or graphic representation relative thereto
     or to its ingredients which is false or misleading in any par-
     ticular or if it is contained in a package, other  container or
                                                       [p. 109]

     wrapping which does not conform  to the standards  estab-
     lished  by the Administrator pursuant to the provisions of
     section 6  of this Act, or  if it was manufactured, prepared,
     propagated, compounded, or processed in  an establishment for
     which a registration was not effective under subsection 9(b)
     of this Act; and to any device if it does  not comply  with the
     provisions of subparagraph 2(z) (2) (C), (D), or (G) when
     such compliance is required under section 6;
       (2) to any pesticide—
           (A)  if it is an imitation of or is offered for sale under
         the name of another pesticide;
            (B)  if its labeling bears any reference to registration
         under this Act other than the pesticide registration num-
         ber, the number assigned to the manufacturing establish-
         ment, and the use classification of the pesticide;
           (C)  if the labeling accompanying it does not contain
         directions for use which are necessary for  effecting the
         purpose for which the product is intended  and if com-
         plied with adequate for the protection of health and the
         environment;
            (D)  if the label does not contain a warning or caution
         statement which may be necessary and if complied with
         adequate to protect health and  the  environment, includ-
         ing- living man and other vertebrate animals, vegetation,
         and invertebrate animals other than those against which
         the pesticide is intended to be used;
            (E) if the label does not bear an  ingredient statement
         on that part of the immediate container  and on the out-
         side container or wrapper, if there be one, through which
         the ingredient statement on the immediate container can-
         not be clearly read,  of the retail package which is pre-
         sented or displayed under customary conditions of pur-

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2277

         chase: Provided, That the Administrator may permit the
         ingredient statement  to  appear prominently  on some
         other part of the container, if the size or form of the
         container makes it impracticable to place it on the part
         of the  retail  package which  is presented or displayed
         under customary conditions of purchase;
           (F)  if any word, statement, or other information re-
                                                       [p.110]

         quired by or under authority of this Act to appear on the
         label or labeling is not prominently placed thereon with
         such conspicuousness  (as compared  with other  words,
         statements, designs, or graphic matter in the labeling)
         and in  such terms as  to render it likely to be read and
         understood by the ordinary individual under customary
         conditions of purchase and use;
           (G)  if when used as  directed or in accordance with
         common practice it shall be injurious to living man, in-
         cluding the person applying such pesticide, or to the envi-
         ronment, except pests as designated by the Administra-
         tor. In  determining whether a pesticide is injurious the
         Administrator shall consider both the  short-term and
         long-term effects on man, and the environment, including
         its persistence, degradation, and potential for movement
         and accumulation in the environment. In the case of  a
         plant regulator, defoliant, or  desiccant,  used in accord-
         ance with the label claims and recommendations, physical
         or physiological effects on plants or parts thereof shall
         not be  deemed to be injury, when such effects are the
         purpose for which the plant regulator, defoliant, or desic-
         cant was applied.
   (w) The terms 'proper court' and 'district court' mean a United
States district court, the District Court of Guam, the District
Court of the Virgin Islands, and the highest  court of American
Samoa.
   (x) The term  'imminent hazard' means a situation which exists
when the evidence is sufficient to  show that a  pesticide creates  a
hazard to man or the environment (1) that should be corrected
immediately to prevent injury, and (2)  that should not be permit-
ted to continue  while  a hearing  or other formal proceeding is
being held.
   (y) The  phrase 'protect health and the  environment'  means
protection against any injury to man and protection against any

-------
2278          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

substantial adverse effects to environmental values, taking into
account the public interest.
                       PROHIBITED ACTS
  Section 3. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to distribute,
sell, or offer for sale or hold for sale in any State or to ship or
deliver for shipment from any State to any other State, or to any
                                                       [p. ill]

foreign country, or to receive in any State, from any other State
or foreign country,  and having so received, deliver or  offer to
deliver to any person, any of the following:
       (1) any pesticide which is  not registered pursuant to the
     provisions of  section 4 of this Act, or any pesticide if any of
     the representations made for it or any of the directions for its
     use differ in substance from the representations approved in
     connection with  its registration, or if the composition of a
     pesticide  differs from  its composition as represented in
     connection with its registration: Provided, That in the discre-
     tion of the Administrator, a change in the labeling or formula
     of a pesticide  may be made within a registration period with-
     out  requiring reregistration  of the product, provided that
     such change will not have  an adverse impact  on man or the
     environment.
       (2) Any pesticide unless there is affixed to its container,
     and  to the outside container or wrapper of the retail package,
     if there be one, through which the required information on
     the immediate container cannot be clearly read,  a label bear-
     ing—
           (A) the name and address of the manufacturer, regis-
         trant, or person for whom manufactured;
           (B) the name, brand, or trade-mark  under which said
         article is  sold;
           (C) the  net weight  or measure of the content: Pro-
         vided, That the  Administrator may permit  reasonable
         variations; and
           (D) when required by regulation of the Administrator
         to effectuate the purposes of this  Act, the registration
         number assigned to the article under this  Act, the use
         classification, and the number assigned  to each establish-
         ment under section 9 (b)  of this Act, in which the article
         was manufactured, prepared, propagated, compounded or
         processed.

-------
               GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2279

    (3) Any pesticide which  contains any substance or sub-
  stances in quantities injurious to man or the  environment,
  determined as provided in section 6 of this Act, unless the
  label shall bear, in addition  to any other matter required by
  this Act—
        (A) the skull and crossbones;
        (B) the word "poison" prominently in red on a back-
      ground of distinctly contrasting color; and
        (C) a statement of an antidote for the pesticide.
                                                     [p. 112]

    (4) Any pesticide which the Administrator,  after investi-
  gation of and a public hearing on the necessity for such action
  for  the protection of health and the  environment and the
  feasibility of such coloration or discoloration, shall, by regula-
  tion, require  to be distinctly colored or discolored,  unless it
  has been so colored or discolored.
    (5) Any pesticide which  is adulterated or misbranded or
  any device which is misbranded.
(b) It shall be unlawful—
    (1) for any person to detach, alter,  deface, or destroy, in
  whole or in part, any label or labeling provided for in this Act
  or the rules and regulations promulgated hereunder,  or to add
  any substance to, or take any substance from, a pesticide in a
  manner that may defeat the purpose of this Act;
    (2) for any manufacturer,  distributor, dealer, carrier, or
  other person  to refuse, upon a request in writing specifying
  the nature or kind of pesticide or device to which such request
  relates, to furnish to or  permit any person designated by the
  Administrator to have access to and to copy such records as
  authorized by section 9 of this  Act, or to refuse to  permit
  entry, or inspection, or  taking of samples as  authorized by
  section 9 of this Act;
    (3) for any person to give a guaranty or undertaking pro-
  vided for in section 10 which is false in any particular, except
  that a person who receives and relies upon a guaranty author-
  ized under section 10 may give a guaranty to the same effect,
  which guaranty shall contain, in addition to his own name
  and address, the name and address of the person residing in
  the  United States from whom he received the  guaranty or
  undertaking;
    (4) for any person to sue for his  own advantage or to
  reveal, other than to the  Administrator, or officials or employ-

-------
2280          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    ees of the Environmental Protection Agency or other Federal
    executive agencies, or to the courts, or to physicians, pharma-
    cists and other  qualified persons,  needing such information
    for the performance of their duties, in accordance with such
    directions as the Administrator may prescribe, any informa-
    tion relative to formulas of products acquired by authority of
                                                       [p. 113]

    this Act; except that the Administrator may reveal data nec-
    essary to comply with provisions of section 4 (e) and (f);
       (5)  for any person  to fail  to maintain the records  pre-
    scribed by the Administrator pursuant to section 6 of this Act
    or for any person to refuse to  permit any person designated
    by  the Administrator  to have access to  and to copy such
    records;
       (6)  for any person to advertise a product registered under
    this Act without giving the  classification of the product as-
    signed to it under  section 4(d) ;  or to  advertise a product
    without indicating  that use  of the product is  authorized by
    law only if used in accordance with the label on the product;
       (7)  for any person to make available for use or to use a
    pesticide  classified under section 4 (d) of this Act other than
    in accordance with such classification or to use a pesticide for
    experimental use contrary to the provisions of a permit under
    section 4 (c) of this Act;
       (8)  for any person to fail to obey an order to recall prod-
    ucts in accordance with section 5(d) of this Act or to violate
    an order issued under section 7 (a) of this Act; and
       (9)  for any person to fail to file the report called  for in
    section 5 (a) of this Act or any other reports required by this
    Act or to provide any false or misleading information in such
    reports.

                         REGISTRATION

  Section 4.   (a) Every pesticide which is  distributed, sold, or
offered for sale in any State or which is shipped or delivered for
shipment from any State to any  other State  or which is received
from any foreign country shall be registered with the Administra-
tor: Provided, That  products which have the  same formula, are
manufactured by the same person, the labeling of which contains
the same claims, and the labels of which bear a designation identi-
fying the  product as the same pesticide may be registered  as a
single pesticide; and  additional names and labels shall be added by

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2281

supplemental statements. The applicant for registration shall file
with the Administrator a statement including—
       (1)  the name and address of the registrant and the name
    and address of the person whose name will appear on the
                                                       [P.114]

    label, if other than the registrant;
       (2)  the name of the pesticide;
       (3)  a complete copy of the labeling accompanying the pesti-
    cide and a statement of all  claims to be made for it, including
    the directions for use;
       (4)  if requested by the Administrator, a full description of
    the tests made and the results thereof upon which the claims
    are based, clearly marking any portions thereof which in the
    manufacturer's opinion are trade secrets or secret processes
    and submitting such marked documents separately from other
    material required to be submitted hereunder; and
       (5)  the complete formula of the pesticide.
  The Administrator shall publish in the Federal Register a notice
of each application for registration, which notice shall provide for
a period of at least 30 days in  which any Government agency or
other interested person may comment.
   (b) If it appears to the Administrator that  the composition of
the article  is such as to warrant the proposed claims for it and if
the article  and its labeling and  other material required to be sub-
mitted comply with the requirements of section 3 of this Act, he
shall register it.
   (c) The Administrator, whenever he considers further informa-
tion necessary before registering a pesticide, may issue a permit
for the experimental use of a pesticide for the purpose of collect-
ing such information  necessary for registration. Such experimen-
tal use shall be under such conditions as the Administrator  shall
prescribe in the permit and  under the strict  supervision of the
Administrator and shall be for a period of time specified by the
Administrator. Before issuing a permit for experimental use, the
Administrator is authorized  to establish a temporary tolerance
level for the residue of the experimental pesticide permissible in
food if the pesticide may reasonably be expected to result in resi-
dues in or on food. When a permit for experimental use is issued
for a  pesticide containing chemicals or combinations of chemicals
which have not been included in previously registered pesticides,
the Administrator may specify that the experimental period must

-------
2282          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

include studies designed to detect possible ill  effects in persons,
and the environment, exposed either directly or indirectly to the
                                                        [p. 115]

pesticide during the experimental period. All results of such stud-
ies must be reported to the Administrator and a pesticide shall not
be registered until such results are evaluated. The Administrator
may revoke a permit at  any time if he finds that the conditions
contained in the permit are not being complied  with or are inade-
quate to protect health and the environment or if the data devel-
oped under the permit clearly establish that the pesticide does not
meet the requirements of this Act.
   (d)  Upon registering a pesticide, the Administrator shall desig-
nate it as being for "general use", for "restricted use", or for "use
by permit only". A pesticide may be designated as for  restricted
use when  its use without such restriction can result in injury to
the applicator or when care is needed in its application  to protect
the environment. A pesticide may be designated as for permit use
only when the pattern of use of the pesticide without such permit
would  not protect health  and the environment. The Administrator
may designate a pesticide as being  for one use or combination of
uses in a  particular region or State and  for  a  different use or
combination of uses in another State or region if in his opinion
such action is necessary to fulfill the purposes of this Act because
of the conditions prevailing in the particular State or region.
       (1) Articles designated as  being for general use shall be
    used  and made available for use subject  only to  the other
    provisions of this Act and to restrictions  by State and  local
    governments.
       (2) Articles designated as being for restricted use shall be
    used  only  by or under  the  direct supervision of approved
    pesticide applicators. No approved pesticide applicator  shall
    use any pesticide required  to  be registered under this  Act
    unless such product is so registered,  and no approved pesti-
    cide applicator shall use any registered pesticide  except in
    accordance with the labeling accepted in connection with the
    registration. As used in this subsection, the term  'approved
    pesticide applicator'  means any person who uses any pesticide
    for any purpose specified in subsection 2 (a) of this Act and
     (a)  who has a license  issued  by  the State in which  such
                                                        [P. H6]

    operations are conducted upon the basis of a demonstration of
    his competence in the use and other handling and knowledge

-------
             GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2283

of the toxicity and antidotes of the pesticide involved, accord-
ing to standards approved or prescribed by the Administrator
as hereinafter provided, or (b) who is employed by a Federal,
State, or local governmental agency in pest control programs
or is engaged in research  concerning the development, evalua-
tion, or use of pesticides; and who meets such standards as
the Administrator shall approve or prescribe to assure  that
such person has  sufficient competence in the  handling and
knowledge  of the toxicity and antidotes of such pesticide to
avoid any hazard to the  public. The Administrator shall by
regulation promulgate such standards prescribed by him and
a list identifying any such standards approved by him. The
standards  prescribed by the Administrator  shall include,
when appropriate, provision for State surveillance and review
of the competence of approved pesticide applicators, and pro-
vision for the removal of  the license when an approved appli-
cator has been shown to lack the necessary competence.
   (3) Articles designated for use by permit only shall be used
or made available for use only with the approval, in writing,
for the amount and type of article for each particular applica-
tion, of an  approved pest management consultant. As used in
this subsection, the term  'approved pest management consult-
ant' means any person who has a license issued by a State or
who is a Federal  or State employee engaged in the perform-
ance of his official duties, and who meets such standards as
the Administrator shall approve or prescribe to assure  that
such person has sufficient knowledge of the uses, necessity for
application, methods of application,  and environmental and
health effects of pesticides to avoid any unnecessary hazard to
the public or to other parts of the environment. The Adminis-
trator  shall by regulation promulgate such standards  pre-
scribed  by him and a list identifying  any such standards
approved by him. The standards prescribed by the Adminis-
trator shall include, when appropriate, provisions  for State
surveillance and review of the competence of  approved  pest
                                                  [p. 117]

management consultants,  and provisions for the removal of a
license or certificate when an approved consultant has been
shown to lack the necessary competence.
   (4) The Administrator is authorized to cooperate with and
assist State agencies in developing and administering State
programs for training  and approval  of pesticide applicators

-------
2284          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    and pest management  consultants.  He may  establish by
    regulation,  and periodically review  compliance with,  such
    guidelines as are necessary to ensure that State programs are
    adequate for purposes of this section. Such guidelines shall in-
    clude, but not be limited to: provisions that applicants receive
    appropriate technical  and  other  training  before  approval;
    that there is a fair and non-discriminatory  system of testing
    of applicants, with provision for periodic retesting; that fees
    charged for licenses, permits or other approval of applicants
    are no greater than those reasonably calculated to cover the
    cost of the  licensing or permit program; and that no arbi-
    trary obstacles exist in the training and approval of  such
    persons.
       (5) The  Administrator may change the designation  of  a
    pesticide under this subsection at any time if he  finds  that
    such  action is  necessary to or  will adequately  protect health
    and the environment, but he shall publish such a proposed
    change in the Federal Register 30 days prior to making the
    change.  The decisions of the Administrator with respect to
    designation or a change in designation shall be subject to the
    same procedures of appeal contained in subsection (E) of this
    section. The Administrator may designate a  pesticide as being
    both for restricted use and for use by permit only. If a pesti-
    cide is designated for general use for some purposes but for
    restricted or permit  use for other purposes, there must be
    separate labeling and packaging for those items of the pesti-
    cide intended for general use.
       (6) No portion of this subsection, except with  regard to
    registration and designation of pesticides by the Administra-
    tor, shall become effective in any State until the Administra-
    tor publishes in the Federal Register a notice declaring the
    date on which it is to become effective and such notice shall be
    published at least 30 days before the effective date, Provided,
                                                       [p. H8]

    That the effective date for notices covering all portions of this
    subsection and all States shall  be within four years after the
    effective date of this Act.
   (e) If it does  not appear to the Administrator that the article is
such as to warrant the proposed claims for it or if the article and
its labeling and other material required  to  be  submitted do not
comply with the provisions of this  Act, he shall notify the appli-
cant for registration of the manner in which the article, labeling

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2285

or other material required to be submitted fails to comply with the
Act so as to afford the applicant for registration an opportunity to
make the corrections necessary. If, upon receipt of such notice, the
applicant for registration does not make the corrections, the Ad-
ministrator shall refuse to register the article. Whenever the Ad-
ministrator refuses registration of a pesticide he  shall notify the
applicant for registration of his action and the reasons therefor.
Whenever an application for registration is refused, the applicant,
within thirty days after service of notice of such refusal, may file
objections and request  a  public hearing in accordance with this
section. In the event a hearing is requested, the Administrator
shall, after due notice, hold such public hearing for the purpose of
receiving evidence relevant and material to the issues raised by
such  objections. As  soon as practicable after completion of the
hearing, but  not later than ninety days, the  Administrator shall
evaluate the data before him, act upon such objections and issue
an order granting or denying the registration or requiring modifi-
cation of the claims or the labeling. Such order shall be based only
on substantial evidence of record of such hearing, and shall set
forth detailed findings of fact  upon which the order is based. In
connection  with consideration of any application for registration
under this section, the Administrator may consult with any other
Federal agency or with any advisory committee appointed by him
for this purpose. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 3 (b)
(4),  information  relative to formulas of products  acquired by
authority of this section may be revealed, when necessary under
this section, to any Federal agency consulted, or at a public hear-
                                                        [p. 119]

ing,  or in  findings  of  fact  issued by the Administrator.  Final
orders of the Administrator under  this section shall be subject to
judicial review  in accordance  with the provisions of subsection
(g). In no  event shall registration  of an article be construed as a
defense for the commission of any offense prohibited under section
3 of  this  Act. The  Administrator shall reach a  decision  as to
whether to register a pesticide as expeditiously as possible.
   (f) Within 30 days after the Administrator registers or refuses
to register  a pesticide under this section he shall make available to
the public the data called for in subsection (l)-(5) of subsection
(A)  of this section together with such other scientific information
as he deems relevant to his decision; Provided, That the Adminis-
trator shall not make public information which contains or relates

-------
2286          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

to trade secrets or commercial or financial information obtained
from a person and privileged or confidential.
   (g)  In  a case of actual controversy as to the validity of any
order under this section, any person who will be adversely affected
by such order may obtain judicial review by filing in the United
States court of appeals for the circuit wherein such person resides
or has his principal place of business within sixty days after the
entry of such order, a petition praying that the order be set aside
in whole or in  part.  A copy  of  the petition shall be forthwith
transmitted by the clerk of the court to the Administrator, or any
officer designated by him for that  purpose, and  thereupon the
Administrator shall file in the court the record of the proceedings
on which he based his order, as provided in  section  2112 of title
28, United States Code. Upon  the filing of such petition the court
shall have  exclusive jurisdiction to affirm or set aside the  order
complained of in whole or in part. The findings of the Administra-
tor with respect to questions of fact shall  be sustained if sup-
ported by substantial evidence when  considered on the record as a
whole. If application is  made to  the court  for leave to adduce
additional evidence, the court may order  such additional evidence
to be taken before the Administrator, and to  be adduced upon the
hearing in such manner and upon such terms and conditions as to
the court seem proper if such evidence is material and there were
                                                       [p. 120]

reasonable grounds for failure to adduce such evidence in the
proceedings below. The Administrator may modify his findings as
to the facts and order  by reason of the additional evidence so
taken, and shall file with the court such modified  findings and
order. The judgment of the court affirming or setting aside, in
whole or in part, any order under this section shall be final, sub-
ject to review  by the Supreme Court of the United States upon
certiorari or certification as provided in section 1254 of title 28 of
the United States Code. The commencement of proceedings under
this section shall not operate as a stay of  an order.  The court shall
advance on the docket and expedite the  disposition  of  all causes
filed therein pursuant to this section.
   (h) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, registra-
tion is not required  in the case of a pesticide shipped  from one
establishment to another establishment operated by the same per-
son and used solely at such establishment as  a constituent part to
make a pesticide which is registered under this Act.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2287

                 CANCELLATION AND SUSPENSION

  Section 5.  (a)  The Administrator shall cancel the registration
of any pesticide at the end of a period of five years following the
initial registration of such pesticide or at the end of any five-year
period thereafter, unless the registrant, prior to the expiration of
each such period, requests in accordance with regulations issued
by the Administrator that such registration be continued in effect.
Three years after the initial registration, the registrant shall sub-
mit to the Administrator a report covering any information avail-
able to the registrant regarding environmental or health effects of
the registered pesticide which were not noted in the material sub-
mitted by the registrant at the time of initial registration.
   (b) The Administrator may cancel the registration of a pesti-
cide whenever it appears that the article or its labeling does not
comply with with the provisions of this Act.
   (c) Whenever the Administrator determines that registration
of a pesticide should be cancelled, he shall notify the registrant of
his action and the reasons therefor. A cancellation  of registration
shall  be effective thirty  days   after  service of  the  foregoing
                                                        [P. 121]

notice unless  within such  time  the registrant (1)  makes the
necessary corrections; or (2) files objections and requests a public
hearing. Requests for a public hearing shall be granted. The pro-
cedures for holding  a public hearing shall be the  same as those
outlined in section 4 (e). Final orders of the Administrator under
this subsection shall be subject to  judicial review in accordance
with the provisions  of section 4  (g). Concurrently with proceed-
ings taken under this subsection, if the Administrator makes the
finding  required  in  subsection (d) of this section, he may also
immediately suspend the registration of a pesticide under the pro-
visions of the aforesaid subsection (d).
   (d) The Administrator may by order, when he finds that such
action is necessary to prevent an imminent hazard to health or the
environment, suspend the registration of a pesticide immediately.
In such case,  he  shall give the registrant prompt  notice of such
action and any hearing  held under the provisions of section 5 (c)
and (e) to consider suspension and cancellation shall be held with
the utmost possible  expedition. The Administrator, when he sus-
pends registration of a pesticide  under the provisions of this
subsection, may also require that  stocks of the suspended pesticide
be recalled by the manufacturer  from wholesalers, retailers, and
other  distributors.

-------
2288          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   (e) Whenever the Administrator suspends the registration of a
pesticide under the provisions of subsection (d) of this section, he
shall at the same time initiate proceedings to cancel the registra-
tion of the pesticide. The suspension shall automatically be re-
voked if the Administrator decides not to cancel the registration
of the pesticide. If the Administrator cancels the registration  of
the pesticide,  any suspension of the registration shall remain  in
effect pending the outcome of any appeal under subsection (c)  of
this section.

                         ENFORCEMENT

   Section 6. (a) The Administrator (except as otherwise provided
in this section) is authorized to make rules and regulations for
carrying out the provisions  of this Act,  including the collection
and examination of samples of pesticides and devices subject to
                                                        [p. 122]

this Act  and the determination  and establishment of  suitable
names to be used in the ingredient statement. The Administrator
is, in addition, authorized after opportunity for hearing—
       (1) to declare a pest any form  of  plant or animal life,
     bacteria,  virus, or other micro-organisms (other than micro-
     organisms on or  in living  man  or other animals) which is
     injurious to health or the environment;
       (2) to determine pesticides, and quantities of substances
     contained in pesticides,  which are injurious to  health or the
     environment;
       (3) to determine standards of coloring or discoloring for
     pesticides, and  to subject pesticides to the requirements  of
     sections  (a)  (4) of this Act; and
        (4) to prescribe the records which shall be maintained by
     all or any class of persons engaged in manufacturing, prepar-
     ing, compounding, or processing any pesticides subject to this
     Act, with respect to such operations and the strength, quality,
     and purity of such pesticides: Provided, however, That the
     Administrator  may exempt any pesticide from such record
     requirements when he determines that such records are not
     necessary for the effective enforcement of this Act; provided
     further, that no records required by this subsection shall ex-
     tend to  (A)  financial data, (B) sales  data other than ship-
     ment data, (C) pricing  data, (D) personnel data (other than
     data as to the qualifications of technical and professional per-
     sonnel performing functions subject to this Act), and (E)

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2289

    research data (other than data relating to registered pesti-
    cides or to a pesticide for which an application for registra-
    tion has been filed).
       (5) to establish standards  with respect to  the package,
    other container, or wrapping in which a pesticide or device is
    enclosed for use or consumption, in order to protect children
    and adults from serious injury or illness resulting from acci-
    dental ingestion or contact with pesticides or devices regu-
    lated by this Act as well as to accomplish the other purposes
    of the Act, Provided that such standards are consistent with
    those established under the authority of the Poison Preven-
    tion Packaging Act (P.L. 91-601) ; and
       (6) to specify those classes of devices which shall be  sub-
    ject to the provisions set forth in subparagraphs 2(v) (2)
                                                       [p. 123]

    (C),  (D),  or (G),  of  this Act, upon his determination  that
    application of such provisions is necessary to effectuate the
    purposes of the Act.
   (b)  The Secretary of the Treasury,  in consultation with  the
Administrator, shall prescribe regulations for the enforcement of
section 14 of this Act.
   (c) The examination of pesticides or devices shall be made in
the Environmental Protection Agency or elsewhere as the Admin-
istrator may designate for the purpose  of determining from such
examination whether they comply with the requirements of this
Act, and if it shall appear from any such examination that they
fail to comply with the requirements of this Act, the Administra-
tor shall  cause notice to  be given to the person against whom
criminal or civil proceedings are contemplated. Any person so
notified shall be given an opportunity to present his views, either
orally or  in writing, with regard to such contemplated proceed-
ings, and if in the opinion of the Administrator it appears that the
provisions of this Act have been violated by such person, then the
Administrator shall certify the facts to the Attorney General, with
a copy of the results of the analysis or the examination  of such
article for the  institution  of a  criminal proceeding pursuant to
section 8  of this Act, or for the institution of  a civil  proceeding
under section 8 when the Administrator determines that such
action will be sufficient to effectuate the purposes of this Act:
Provided, That the notice of contemplated proceedings  and oppor-
tunity to present views set forth in this  subsection are not prereq-
uisites to the institution of any proceeding by the Attorney Gen-

-------
2290          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

eral; Provided, further, That  nothing in this Act shall be con-
strued as requiring the Administrator to report for prosecution or
for the institution of libel proceedings minor violations of this Act
whenever he believes that the public interest will be adequately
served by a suitable written notice of warning.
   (d) The District courts are vested with jurisdiction specifically
to enforce, and to prevent and restrain violations of, this Act.
   (e) The Administrator shall, by publication in such manner as
                                                        [p. 124]

he may prescribe, give notice of all judgments entered in actions
instituted under the authority of this Act.

                    STOP SALE AND SEIZURE

   Section 7. (a) Whenever any pesticide or device is found by the
Administrator upon any premises or in any means of conveyance
where it is held for purposes of, or during or after, distribution or
sale in any State, or in interstate or foreign commerce, and there
is reason to believe on the basis of inspections or tests that such
pesticide or device is  in  violation of any of the provisions of this
Act, or that such pesticide or device has been or is intended to be
distributed or sold in violation of any such provisions, or when the
registration of the pesticide or device has been cancelled, the Ad-
ministrator may issue a written or printed "stop sale,  use, or
removal"  order to the registrant, owner, and custodian thereof,
and after receipt of such order no person shall sell, use, or remove
the pesticide or device described in the order except in accordance
with the provisions of the order.
   (b) Whenever the Administrator, on the basis of inspections or
tests not considered in the course of registration proceedings, de-
termines that there is a substantial question as to the existence of
an imminent hazard of a product to health or the environment, he
is authorized to issue an order to stop the sale, use or removal of
such product for a period not to exceed ninety days, in the same
manner as set forth in subsection (a) of this section.
   (c) Any pesticide or device that is being transported or, having
been transported, remains unsold  or in  original  unbroken pack-
ages, or that  is sold  or  offered for sale  in any  State, or that  is
imported  from a foreign country, shall be  liable to be proceeded
against in any district court in the district where it is found and
seized for confiscation by a process in rem for condemnation—
       (1) in the case of a pesticide—
           (A) if it is adulterated or misbranded;

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2291

            (B) if it is not registered pursuant to the provisions of
         section 4 of this Act;
            (C) if it fails to bear on its label the  information
         required by this Act;
                                                        [p-125]

            (D) if it is not colored or discolored and if such color-
         ing or discoloring is required under this Act;
            (E) if any of the  claims  made for it or any of the
         directions for its use differ in substance from the repre-
         sentations made in connection with its registration; or
       (2) in the case of a device if it is misbranded.
   (d)  If the pesticide or device is condemned it shall, after entry
of the decree, be disposed of by  destruction or sale  as the court
may direct and the proceeds, if sold, less the court costs, shall be
paid into  the Treasury of the United States, but the article shall
not be sold contrary to the provisions of this Act or of the laws of
the jurisdiction in which it is sold; Provided, That upon the pay-
ments of the costs of the condemnation proceedings and the execu-
tion and delivery of a good and  sufficient bond conditioned that the
article shall not be sold or otherwise disposed  of contrary to the
provisions of the Act or the  laws of any State in  which sold, the
court may  direct that such articles be delivered to the owner
thereof. The proceedings  of such condemnation cases shall con-
form, as near as may be,  to the proceedings in  admiralty, except
that either party may demand trial by jury of any issue of fact
joined in any case, and all such proceedings shall be at the suit of
and in the name of the United States.
   (e)  When a  decree of condemnation is entered against the arti-
cle, court  costs and fees, storage, and other proper expenses shall
be awarded against the person, if any, intervening as claimant of
the article.

                          PENALTIES

  Section 8. (a) Any person who knowingly violates any provision
of this Act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall on convic-
tion be fined not more than $25,000, or imprisoned for not more
than one year, or both.
   (b)  Any person violating any provision of this Act shall  be
liable to a civil  penalty to the United States or a sum  which is not
more than $10,000 for each such violation. A request for assess-
ment of such civil penalty shall be referred to the Attorney  Gen-
                                                       [p. 126]

-------
2292          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

eral for appropriate action if the Administrator believes that ac-
tion under this subsection in lieu of action under subsection (a) of
this section will effectuate the purposes of this Act. Such  civil
penalty shall be recoverable in a civil suit brought in the name of
the United States.
   (c) When  construing and enforcing the provisions of this Act,
the act, omission, or failure, of any officer, agent, or other person
acting for or employed by any person  shall in  every case be also
deemed to be the act, omission, or failure  of such person as well as
that of the person employed.

 BOOKS AND RECORDS AND FACTORY INSPECTION AND REGISTRATION

  Section 9.  (a) For the purposes of enforcing the provisions of
this Act, any manufacturer, distributor, carrier, dealer, or any
other person who  sells or offers for sale, delivers, or offers for
delivery, or who receives or holds  any pesticide or device subject
to this Act, shall,  upon request of any employee of the Environ-
mental Protection  Agency or any employee of any State or politi-
cal subdivision, duly designated by the Administrator, furnish or
permit such person at  all reasonable times to have access to, and
to copy all records showing the delivery,  movement, or holding of
such pesticide or device, including the  quantity, the date of ship-
ment  and receipt,  and  the name of the consignor and consignee;
and in the event of the inability of any person to produce records
containing such information,  all other records and information re-
lating to such delivery, movement, or  holding of the pesticide or
device. Notwithstanding this provision, however, the specific evi-
dence obtained under this section or any evidence which is directly
or indirectly derived from such evidence shall not be used  in a
criminal prosecution of the person from  whom  obtained. The rec-
ords and information referred to in this subsection  shall not ex-
tend to (A)  financial  data, (B) sales data other than shipment
data,  (C) pricing data, (D)  personnel  data (other than data as to
the qualifications of technical and professional personnel perform-
ing functions subject to this Act), and (E)  research data  (other
                                                       [p-127]

than  data relating to  registered pesticides or  to a  pesticide for
which an application for registration has been filed).
   (b) Any person who on the date of enactment of this subsection
operates any establishment in any State  engaged in the manufac-
ture, preparation, compounding, propagating, or processing of any
pesticide or device subject to this Act shall, within one-hundred

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2293

and eighty days after such date, apply to the Administrator for
the registration of each such establishment, giving his name and
the address of each such establishment operated by  him. Any
person who proposes to begin operation of any such establishment
after such date shall, at least thirty days prior to beginning such
operation, similarly apply for registration with the Administrator.
Each establishment will be assigned an establishment number by
the Administrator at the time of registration.
   (c)  Any person  operating an establishment registered  under
section 9 (b)  of this Act shall inform the Administrator within 30
days of his being registered of the types  and amounts of such
pesticides or  devices  (1) which  he is currently manufacturing,
preparing, propagating, or compounding; (2) which he has manu-
factured during the past year; and  (3)  which he has sold or
distributed during the past year, and, when specifically requested
by the Administrator for the purpose of recalling a product, the
name of the recipient. The information required in this subsection
shall be kept current annually as required under such regulations
as the  Administrator may prescribe. The data obtained in accord-
ance with the  provisions of  this subsection shall be  considered
confidential.
   (d)  For purposes of enforcement of this Act, officers or employ-
ees duly designated by the Administrator, upon presenting appro-
priate  credentials to the owner, operator, or agent in charge, are
authorized  (1)  to enter, at reasonable times, any factory,  ware-
house,  or establishment in which pesticides or devices  are manu-
factured, processed, packed, or  held; and (2) to inspect, and ob-
tain  samples  of, any pesticides or devices,  whether  packaged or
unpackaged, and  samples of any containers or labeling for such
pesticides or  devices. Each such inspection shall be commenced
                                                       [p. 128]

and completed with reasonable  promptness. If the officer or em-
ployee  obtains any samples, prior to leaving the premises, he shall
give to the owner, operator, or agent in charge a receipt describ-
ing the samples obtained. If an analysis is made of such samples, a
copy of the results of such analysis shall be furnished promptly to
the owner, operator, or agent in charge.
   (e)  For purposes of enforcing the provisions of this Act and
upon a showing to  an officer or  court of competent jurisdiction
that there is reason to believe that the provisions of this Act have
been violated, officers or employees duly designated by the Admin-
istrator are empowered to obtain and to execute warrants author-

-------
2294          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

izing entry into and inspection of facilities, including, but not
limited to, facilities of manufacturers, wholesalers, dealers, and
distributors of pesticides,  and the seizure  of any pesticides or
devices, or the components thereof, whether packaged or unpack-
aged, and samples of any containers or labeling for such pesticides
or devices.

                         EXEMPTIONS
  Section 10. (a) The penalties provided for a violation of section
3. (a) of this Act shall not apply to—
       (1) any person who establishes a guaranty signed by, and
     containing the  name and address of, the registrant or person
     residing in  the United States from whom he purchased and
     received in good faith the article in the same unbroken pack-
     age, to the effect that the article was lawfully registered at
     the time of sale and delivery to him, and that it complies with
     the other requirements of this Act. In such case the guarantor
     shall be subject to the penalties which would otherwise attach
     to the person holding the guaranty under the provision of this
     Act;
       (2) any carrier while lawfully engaged in transporting a
     pesticide or device, if such carrier upon request by a person
     duly designated by the Administrator shall permit  such per-
     son to copy all  records showing the transactions in and move-
     ment of the articles;
       (3) public officials while engaged in the  performance of
     their official duties;
       (4) the manufacturer or shipper of a pesticide for experi-
                                                       [p. 129]

     mental use only by or under the supervision of any Federal or
     State agency authorized by  law to  conduct research in the
     field of pesticides; or by others if a permit has been obtained
     before shipment in accordance with  regulations promulgated
     by the Administrator.
   (b) The Administrator may, at his discretion, exempt any Fed-
eral agency from any provision of this Act if he determines that
such exemption would be consistent with the purposes of this Act
and would be in the public interest.

                DISPOSAL AND TRANSPORTATION

   Section 11.  (a)  The  Administrator,  after consultation with
other interested Federal agencies, shall establish procedures and

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2295

regulations for the disposal or storage of packages and containers
of pesticides and for disposal or storage of excess amounts of such
pesticides.
   (b)  The Administrator shall provide advice and assistance to
the Secretary  of Transportation with respect to his functions re-
lating to the transportation of hazardous materials under the De-
partment of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 1657), the Transpor-
tation of Explosives Act (18 U.S.C. 831-835), the Federal Avia-
tion Act of 1958  (49 U.S.C. 1421-1430, 1472h), and the Hazard-
ous Cargo Act (46 U.S.C. 375, 416, 170).
                    STATE AID AND TRAINING

  Section 12 The Administrator is authorized to  enter into  con-
tracts  with  Federal, State,  local or interstate agencies or with
non-profit organizations for the purpose of encouraging the train-
ing of  approved pesticide applicators and approved pest manage-
ment consultants, as defined  in subsection 4 (d).  This authority
shall expire June 30, 1975.

                  RESEARCH AND MONITORING

  Section 13.  (a)  The Administrator is authorized to undertake
such research, including research by grant or contract, as may be
necessary for the implementation of this Act. He shall take care to
insure  that such research does not duplicate research being under-
taken by other Federal departments and agencies.
   (b) The Administrator shall be responsible for formulating and
periodically revising, in cooperation  with other Federal, State, or
local agencies,  a national plan for monitoring pesticides covered
by this Act.
                                                       [p. 130]

   (c) The Administrator is authorized to undertake such monitor-
ing or surveillance activities,  including but not limited to monitor-
ing in air, soil, water, man, plants, and animals, as may be neces-
sary for the implementation  of this Act or of the national pesti-
cide monitoring plan. Such activities should be carried  out with
the cooperation of other Federal, State, and local agencies.

                     IMPORTS AND EXPORTS

  Section 14.  (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Act, no  article shall be deemed in violation of  this Act when
intended solely for export to any foreign country and prepared or
packed according to the specifications or directions of the foreign

-------
2296          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

purchaser and with respect to which a certification is obtained by
the exporter from the importer or consignee and filed with the
Administrator by the exporter prior to exportation of the article,
stating that the article is in compliance with the laws and regula-
tions of said foreign country.
   (b)  The Administrator  shall transmit through the State De-
partment copies of each notice of suspension or proposed cancella-
tion or other restrictions on pesticides under Federal law, to the
Governments of other countries and to appropriate international
agencies.
   (c)  The Secretary of the Treasury shall notify the Administra-
tor of the arrival of pesticides and devices and shall deliver to the
Administrator, upon his request, samples of pesticides or devices
which  are being imported into the United States, giving notice to
the owner or consignee, who may appear before the Administrator
and have the right to introduce testimony. If it appears from the
examination of a sample that it is adulterated, or misbranded or
otherwise violates the provisions set forth in this Act, or is other-
wise injurious to health or to the environment, the  said article
may be refused admission, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall
refuse delivery to the consignee and shall cause the destruction of
any goods refused  delivery which shall not be exported by the
consignee within 90 days from the date  of notice of such refusal
under  such regulations as the  Secretary of the Treasury may
prescribe: Provided,  That the Secretary  of the Treasury may de-
liver to the consignee such goods  pending examination and deci-
                                                       [p. 131]

sion in the matter or execution of bond for the amount of the full
invoice value of such goods, together with the duty thereon, and on
refusal to return such goods for any cause to the custody of the
Secretary of the Treasury, when demanded, for the purpose of
excluding them from the country, or for any other purpose, said
consignee shall forfeit the full amount of said bond: and provided
further, That all charges for storage, cartage, and labor on goods
which are  refused admission  or  delivery shall be paid by  the
owner or consignee, and in default of such payment shall consti-
tute a lien against any future importation made by such owner or
consignee.         x
   (c)  The  Administrator  shall, in cooperation  with  the Depart-
ment of State and other appropriate Federal agencies, participate
and cooperate in any  international  efforts to develop improved
pesticide research and regulations.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2297

               SOLICITATION OF PUBLIC COMMENTS

  Section 15.  (a)  In connection with the suspension or cancella-
tion of a pesticide registration or any other actions authorized
under  this Act,  the  Administrator may, at his  discretion,  solicit
the views of all interested persons, either orally or in writing, and
seek such advice from scientists and other qualified persons as he
deems proper.
   (b)  The authority contained in this section is  in addition to the
provisions contained elsewhere in this Act relating to public hear-
ings and solicitation of views, and shall not be interpreted to affect
such other provisions.
                 DELEGATION AND COOPERATION

  Section 16.  (a)  All authority vested in the Administrator  by
virtue of the provisions of this Act may with like force and effect
be executed by such employees of the Environmental Protection
Agency as the Administrator may designate for the purpose.
   (b)  The Administrator shall cooperate with the Secretaries of
Agriculture, Interior, Commerce, and Health, Education and Wel-
fare, and with any department or agency of the Federal Govern-
ment and with any official regulatory agency of any State, Terri-
tory, District, possession, or any political  subdivision thereof, in
                                                        [p. 132]

carrying out the provisions of this Act, and in securing uniformity
of regulations.
       AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS AND EXPENDITURES
  Section 17.  There is hereby authorized to be appropriated such
sums as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act.

                         SEPARABILITY
  Section 18.  If any provision of this Act is declared unconstitu-
tional, or the applicability thereof  to any person or circumstances
is held invalid, the constitutionality of the remainder of this Act
and the applicability thereof to other persons and circumstances
shall not be affected thereby.

                OTHER AUTHORITY NOT AFFECTED

  Section 19.  (a) This Act shall not be construed as superseding
or limiting the authorities and responsibilities,  under  any other
provision of  law,  of  the Administrator or  any other Federal
officer, department, or agency.

-------
2298          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  (b)  Any regulations issued and any  actions taken  or  legal
rights of action accrued under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act, prior to the effective date of this Act, shall
not be abrogated or negated by this Act or by the repeal of the
aforesaid Act, but  shall remain in effect unless modified or  re-
scinded pursuant to the provisions of this Act.
   (c) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as  limiting the au-
thority of a state or a political subdivision thereof to regulate the
sale or use of a pesticide within its jurisdiction in so far as such
regulation does not permit such sale or use as is prohibited under
the authority of this Act.
  Section 20. The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,  and Rodenticide
Act  (61  Stat. 163; 7 U.S.C. 135-135k),  as amended, is hereby
repealed, and all references thereto in other statutes, regulations,
and public records of the United States shall refer to the Federal
Environmental Pesticide Control Act.
  Section 21. Section 201 (r)  of the Federal  Food, Drug,  and Cos-
metic Act (21 U.S.C. 301-392)  is hereby amended by deleting the
period after the word "marketing" and adding "and tobacco".
                                                       [p. 133]

                 SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

  This analysis notes the major provisions of each section and the
major departures from  existing authority. It does not summarize
all the provisions of the bill.
  Section 1 designates the title  of the proposed Act as the Federal
Environmental Pesticide Control Act of 1971 and proposed appro-
priate findings.
  Section 2 defines certain terms used in the Act. It contains the
following major changes from existing authority:
   (1)  The term "pesticide" is substituted for the term "economic
poisons."
   (2)  The authorities contained in the bill  are given to the Ad-
ministrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
   (3) An article is considered misbranded if compliance with the
instructions on the label are not considered adequate for protec-
tion of health and the environment.
   (4)  An article is considered misbranded if when used as  di-
rected or in accordance with common practice it is  injurious  to
man or the environment. In determining whether  a pesticide is
injurious the Administrator is directed to  consider both the short-
term and long-term effects on man and the rest of the environment

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2299

and  the  pesticide's  persistence,  degradation, and potential  for
movement and accumulation in the environment.
   (5) Protection of health and the environment is defined to mean
protection against any injury to man and protection against any
substantial adverse  effects to environmental values, taking into
account the public interest. The term "public interest" means  a
weighing of  the probable benefits derived  from  the use  of  the
pesticide with the risks inherent in its usage.
   Section 3 denominates prohibited acts. It prohibits the delivery
or sale in interstate  commerce of any pesticide which is unregis-
tered,  not  labelled, mislabelled,  adulterated,  or   misbranded.
Among other prohibitions,  the  section prescribes advertising  a
pesticide without stating whether it is for general use, for restric-
ted use, or for use by prescription only.
   Section 4 requires that every pesticide which moves in inter-
state commerce must be registered. It permits the Administrator
                                                        [p. 134]

to issue  a registration for experimental use prior to issuing  a
regular registration. The use of a pesticide which is registered for
experimental use must be under the supervision of  the Adminis-
trator.
   When  registering  a pesticide, the Administrator is required to
designate it as belonging to one of three categories:  (1) for "gen-
eral  use"; (2)  for "restricted use"; or (3) for "use by  permit
only".  A pesticide designated for restricted use can be used only
by or under the  direct supervision of an approved  pesticide appli-
cator. Such an applicator must have obtained a State license based
upon a demonstration of competence, according to standards ap-
proved or prescribed by the Administrator. A pesticide designated
for use by permit only can be used only with the approval in
writing of an approved pest management consultant who has ob-
tained a State license meeting certain standards approved by the
Administrator. The approval of a consultant must  be obtained for
each application of a pesticide classified as for use  by permit only.
The  Administrator may change the designation of a pesticide at
any  time, subject to due notice  and an" appeals  procedure. The
Administrator is given up to four years to fully implement the
system of classifying pesticides, because the major burden of li-
censing approved pesticide applicators and pest management con-
sultants will fall on the States, and some time will be required for
the States to train and certify sufficient numbers of applicators

-------
2300          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

and consultants. Section 12 of the bill  provides for Federal con-
tracts to assist in such training.
  The appeals  procedure for an applicant whose registration is
refused is changed from current authority by deleting the oppor-
tunity for the applicant to take the matter to an advisory commit-
tee. The applicant may request a public  hearing on the matter and
may then appeal in the courts.
  Within 30 days after registering or refusing to register a pesti-
cide, the Administrator must make public the data submitted with
the registration and other scientific information he deems relevant
to his  decision, subject to the usual restrictions concerning pro-
prietary data.
  Section 5 provides authority for cancellation and suspension of
                                                        [p. 135]

the registration of pesticides. A  pesticide is registered  for  an
initial five-year period and for five-year periods thereafter. Three
years after the initial registration, the  registrant must submit to
the Administrator a report on any new findings on the environ-
mental or health effects of the registered pesticide.
  The Administrator may cancel the registration of a pesticide by
giving notice to the registrant. The cancellation is effective  30
days after notice is given unless the registrant corrects the rele-
vant deficiencies or objects to the cancellation and requests a pub-
lic hearing. A cancellation then does not become effective until the
appeals process has been exhausted.
  If it is necessary to prevent an imminent hazard to health or the
environment, the Administrator may suspend the registration of a
pesticide.  Such a suspension is effective immediately, but  is sub-
ject to the  same appeals process as a cancellation. If the Adminis-
trator suspends a pesticide, he must at the same  time initiate
proceedings to cancel the registration.
  Section 6 provides for enforcement of the provisions of the Act.
It authorizes the Administrator to prescribe the records  which
must be kept by manufacturers or processors of pesticides, and to
establish standards with respect  to the packaging  of  registered
pesticides.  The Administrator may certify violations of  the Act to
the Attorney General who  may then institute civil or criminal
proceedings as appropriate.
  Section 7 allows the Administrator to order a stop to the sale of
a pesticide if he believes that the pesticide is in violation of the
Act. He may also confiscate a pesticide if it  is adulterated, mis-
branded, mislabelled, or unregistered.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2301

  Under the terms of section 8 knowing violators of the Act are
subject to criminal penalties of no more than $25,000 or imprison-
ment for not more than one year or both. All violators are subject
to civil penalties of not more  than $10,000. The provision for civil
penalties is new, and the fine for criminal violation is increased.
  Section 9  specifies the records which must be kept by manufac-
turers, distributors, carriers, and dealers.  It requires  that  each
establishment manufacturing or processing  pesticides must regis-
                                                       [p. 136]

ter  with the Administrator, and must provide him with informa-
tion on the  types  and amounts of pesticides being produced, the
distribution or sale of such pesticides, and, when requested by the
Administrator for the purpose of recalling a product, the name of
each recipient of the product. The section  also contains provisions
regarding entry and inspection of factories registered  under the
Act.
  Section 10 exempts from the penalties for nonregistration, mis-
branding, or  mislabelling, purchasers who received a guaranty
from the  seller, carriers, public officials engaged in official duties,
and those using pesticides in an approved manner for experimen-
tal use.
  Section 11 authorizes the Administrator to establish procedures
and regulations for the disposal of pesticides and to provide advice
to the Secretary of Transportation  on regulation of the transpor-
tation of pesticides.
  Section 12 authorizes the Administrator to contract with States,
localities, or non-profit organizations to  assist them in training
approved pest control operators and consultants.
  Section 13 authorizes the  Administrator  to carry out research
and monitoring necessary to implement the Act.  The section also
requires the Administrator to  formulate and  publish a national
pesticide monitoring plan.
  Section 14  deals  with  imports  and exports. It requires that
exporters must file with the Administrator a certification that the
article exported is in compliance with the laws and regulations of
the foreign country to which it is being sent. The section also
provides for prohibiting the  sale of or confiscating imports which
do not meet the requirements of the Act, and establishes proce-
dures for the  Secretary of the Treasury and the Administrator to
implement controls over imports.
  Section 16 authorizes the Administrator to delegate his author-
ity  to EPA employees and further states that he shall cooperate

-------
2302          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

with the  Secretaries of Agriculture,  Interior,  Commerce, and
Health, Education, and Welfare in carrying out the provisions of
the Act. Insofar as such action is feasible, the Administrator will
                                                      [p. 137]

notify  appropriate heads of Federal departments and agencies of
relevant suspension and cancellation actions taken under this Act.
  Section 17 authorizes  appropriation of such sums  as may  be
necessary to administer the Act.
  Section 19 provides that the bill shall  not be construed as su-
perseding or limiting  other  Federal authorities.  Actions  taken
under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,  and Rodenticide Act, as
amended, remain in effect until modified pursuant to  this Act.
States  are not  precluded from  imposing stricter  standards  or
added  requirements, but they may not permit any sale  or use of
pesticide which is prohibited under the authority of this Act.
  Section 20 repeals the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Ro-
denticide Act, as amended, and provides that all references to that
Act in  other laws, regulations, and public records, shall henceforth
refer to the Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act.
   Section 21 adds tobacco to the definition  of "raw agricultural
commodity"  in  the Federal  Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act,  as
amended.
                                                       [p. 138]

                      RECYCLING WASTES

   The mounting increases in solid wastes present a major envi-
ronmental problem, resulting in unsightly open dumps and air and
water  pollution. Solid wastes are presently increasing at a much
higher rate than is our ability to dispose of them in a satisfactory
manner. Much of the growth  is due to more and more throwaway,
convenience products and decreases in the percentage  of material
that is reused or recycled.
   About one-half of municipal solid wastes are paper  products.
Consumption of paper and paper products in this country reached
58.3 million  tons in 1969, up almost 70 percent in less than 10
years, with an expected increase of  another 50 percent by 1980.
Average  annual per capita paper  consumption  in  the  United
States is 575 pounds, compared with a worldwide average of only
50 pounds. Although only 19  percent of our total paper production
is  recycled—down  from 27  percent 10  years ago—the amount
reaches  40  percent in some European  countries. Using  waste

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2303

paper in new paper products would ease pressures on overbur-
dened solid waste disposal facilities and transform a costly detri-
ment into a valuable asset.
  The Resource Recovery Act of 1970 recognizes the importance
of recycling. It provides authority to develop and demonstrate
recycling technology and provides for studies of  secondary mar-
kets and economics. But tangible results require that a demand for
recycled materials be created, a demand that often does not exist.

                   THE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL

  The President announced that the General Services Administra-
tion (GSA) is revising Federal procurement specifications to re-
quire the use of recycled paper by the Government as a stimulus
for further paper recycling. GSA has changed its  procurement
specifications to require the use of a minimum of 3 to 50 percent
of recycled material. Depending on the product, this would affect
paper purchases of over $35 million per year. GSA is revising its
other specifications to require recycled material involving an addi-
tional $25 million in annual Federal purchases. These two  actions
cover over one-half of the total paper products purchased by GSA.
  All remaining specifications will be reviewed to require the use
of recycled material in as many other paper products as possible.
                                                        [p. 140]

The regulations will be continually reviewed to increase  the re-
quired  percentage of  recycled content.  Specifications for other
products will also be reviewed to determine where other recycled
products could be used and to change Federal specifications wher-
ever possible.
  The  Governors  of the States have  been asked  to review their
purchasing policies and, where possible, to require the use of recy-
cled paper. To assist them, GSA has established a technical  liaison
program to provide the States with the revised Federal specifica-
tions and with other information on this new program.
  These measures should provide a much greater demand for re-
cycled  paper and  hence  should stimulate greater production.  It
should also demonstrate to the private sector that recycling is not
only desirable but is feasible and should thereby encourage  private
actions  to procure more products manufactured from waste mate-
rials.
                                                        [p. 141]

-------
 2304            LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

                                          Toxic SUBSTANCES,
                             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY,
                                                   Washington, D.C.
 HON. SPIRO T. AGNEW,
 President of the Senate,
 Washington, D.C.
 HON. CARL B. ALBERT,
 Speaker of the House of Representatives,
 Washington, D.C.
                                                             [p. 144]

   DEAR MR. [PRESIDENT/SPEAKER] :  There is transmitted herewith for the
 consideration of the Congress  a  draft bill "The Toxic Substances Control
 Act of  1971."  The bill is  drafted  as a separate title to the Hazardous
 Substances Act.
   The legislative proposal would authorize the Administrator of the Environ-
 mental Protection Agency to restrict or prohibit the use or distribution of a
 chemical substance if necessary to protect health and the environment. The
 Administrator is also authorized to prescribe standards for tests and  results
 of such tests which must be met  before a manufacturer can market a new
 product.  The  Administrator is required  to  consult with an independent
 board of scientists before proposing action to restrict a substance or before
 proposing standards for tests.
  The provisions  of the proposal would provide needed  protection  to  the
 American public and would greatly aid our efforts to improve environmental
 quality.
  The legislation  has been developed in  cooperation with the  Council on
 Environmental  Quality and  other  interested agencies.
  A similar letter is  being sent  to  the  [President of  the Senate/Speaker
 of the House].
  The Office of Management and Budget  advises that enactment of this
 proposed legislation would be in accord with the program of the  President.

                                                Sincerely yours,
                                          WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS.
                                                             [p. 145]


               THE Toxic SUBSTANCES ACT OF 1971

  A  BILL to amend the Federal  Hazaradous Substances  Act, as amended,
 and for  other purposes.

  Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
 United States of America in Congress  assembled,  That this Act
may be cited as the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1971.

Section 2.

  The Federal Hazardous Substances Act  is amended by inserting
before Section 1 of such Act  the following:  "Title I—Hazardous
Consumer Products."

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2305

Section 3.
   Such Act is further amended by adding after the aforesaid Title
I, i.e., after Section 18 of the Act, the following new Title:
                 "TITLE n—TOXIC SUBSTANCES

"Section 201. Policy
   "Whereas the American people are being exposed to  a large
number of chemical substances each year; and
   "Whereas among  the  many  new substances constantly being
developed are some which may be a danger to human health or the
environment; and
   "Whereas the effective regulation  of  interstate commerce in
such chemicals necessitates the  regulation of transactions in such
chemicals in intrastate commerce as well;
   "Therefore, it is the policy of the United States that new chemi-
cal substances should be adequately tested with respect to their
safety to man and the environment; and
   "That adequate  authority should  exist  to restrict the distribu-
tion and use of chemicals found to be toxic; and
   "That such authority  over chemicals  be  exercised in such a
manner as not  to  unduly impede technological innovation while
fulfilling the primary purpose  of this title to assure that such
innovation  and commerce does not endanger human health or the
environment.
Section 202. Definitions
                                                       [p.146]

   "(a) 'Administrator' means the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
   "(b) 'Chemical substance' means any organic or inorganic sub-
stance of a  particular molecular identity or any uncombined chem-
ical radical or element.
   "(c) 'Manufacturer' means any person engaged in the produc-
tion or manufacture of chemical substances for purposes of sale or
distribution in commercial quantities, or an importer thereof.
   " (d) 'Processor' means any person engaged in the preparation
of a chemical substance for distribution or use either in the form
in which it  is received or as part of another product, as defined by
regulations of the Administrator.
  "(e)  'Restrict  use or  distribution' means  to  prescribe  the
amount sold to given types of processors,  or to limit the type of
processor to whom a substance may be sold, or to prescribe  the

-------
2306          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

amount which may be utilized by a given type of processor.
  "(f) 'Byproduct' means a chemical substance produced  as a
direct  result of the production,  manufacture, or processing of
some other chemical substance which is subject to the provisions
of this title.
  "(g) 'Environment' includes water, air, land, all plants  and
animals living therein, and the interrelationships  which  exist
among these.
  "(h) 'Animal'  means all vertebrate and invertebrate species,
including but not limited to man and other mammals, birds, fish,
and shellfish.
  "(i) 'Protect health  and the environment' means  protection
against any injury to man and protection against any substantial
adverse effects on environmental values, taking  into account the
public interest.
  " (j) 'District Court of the United States' includes the District
Court of Guam, the District Court of the Virgin  Islands, the Dis-
trict Court of the Canal Zone, and in the case of American Samoa
and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, the District Court
of the United States for the District of Hawaii, which Court shall
have jurisdiction over actions arising under this title.
"Section 203. Restrictions on use or distribution
                                                       [P. 147]

               "PROPOSAL TO ADOPT RESTRICTIONS
  "(a) For any  chemical substance produced in  commercial
quantities, after evaluating all information developed by or other-
wise provided to or made available to him, and after referring the
matter to a committee in accordance with section 208, the Admin-
istrator may publish proposed regulations to:
       "(1)  restrict or prohibit  the use or distribution of the
    chemical substance to  the extent necessary  to protect health
    and the environment; and
       "(2)  require that any or all persons engaged in the distri-
    bution of the substance so regulated give notification to pur-
    chasers of the substance of such restriction in such form or
    manner as the Administrator deems advisable; and
       "(3)  require such other action as may  be necessary to
    carry out such restrictions including prohibiting or restrict-
    ing the sale, use, or removal of such substance or product.

           OBJECTIONS, NOTICE, HEARING, FINAL ORDER

  "(b) (1) On or before the thirtieth day after the day on which

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2307

the proposed regulations under subsection (a) are made public,
any person who will be adversely affected by such regulations if
placed in effect may file objections thereto with the Administrator
specifying with particularity the provisions  of  the  regulations
deemed objectionable, stating the grounds therefor, and request-
ing a public hearing upon such objections.
  "(2) After such request for a public hearing, the Administra-
tor, after due  notice, shall upon request by a manufacturer  or
processor, and may,  in  his discretion, upon request by any other
person adversely affected by such order, hold such a public hearing
for the purpose of receiving evidence relevant and material to the
issues  raised by such objections. At the hearing, any interested
person may be heard in person or by representative.
  "(3) As soon as practicable after the date for completion of the
filing of objections  and comments,  and the hearing, if any  such
hearing has been held, the  Administrator shall by order  act upon
such objections, if any, and make public an order promulgating,
modifying, or withdrawing the proposed regulations issued under
                                                       [p. 148]

paragraph (a) (1). Such order shall  be based only on the evidence
of record and shall set forth, as part  of the order, detailed findings
of fact on which the order imposing restrictions is based and the
relationship of such finding to the restrictions imposed. Such order
must  be based on the  Administrator's finding that such regula-
tions are necessary to protect health and the environment and that
the proposed action is necessary to carry out the objectives of this
title. In making such a finding the Administrator shall consider  all
relevant factors including: the  effects on human health and the
environment of the substance or its byproducts; the benefits to  be
derived from the use of the substance as compared with the risks;
the normal circumstances  of use; the degree to which release  of
the substance or byproducts to the  general environment is  con-
trolled; and the magnitude of exposure of humans and the envi-
ronment to the substance  or its byproducts. The Administrator
shall specify in the  order  the date on which it shall take effect,
except that it shall not be made to take effect prior to the  ninetieth
day after its publication.

                  MODIFICATION OR RESCISSION

  "(c) Manufacturers  or processors of a chemical substance af-
fected by final regulations issued pursuant to this section  may
petition the Administrator for  modification or rescission of the

-------
2308          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

regulation. The Administrator may at any time modify or rescind
such regulations. Proceedings respecting petitions from manufac-
turers or processors  or respecting  modifications  or rescissions
made by the Administrator shall be held in accordance with the
standards and procedures established by this section, except that
the Administrator may or may not, in his discretion, provide for a
hearing regarding such modifications or rescissions.

                       JUDICIAL REVIEW

  "(d) (1) Any person who will be adversely affected by an order
issued under subsection 203 (b)  or (c) if placed in effect may at
any time prior to the ninetieth day after such order is issued file a
petition with the United States court of appeals  for the circuit
wherein such person resides or has his principal place of business,
for a judicial review of such order. A copy of the petition shall be
                                                       [p-149]

forthwith transmitted by the clerk of the court to the Administra-
tor or other officer  designated by him for that purpose. The Ad-
ministrator thereupon shall file  in the court the record on which
he based his order, as provided  in section 2112 of  Title 28 of the
United States Code.
  "(2)  If the petitioner applies to the court for leave to adduce
additional evidence, and shows to the satisfaction of the court that
such additional evidence is material and that there were reasona-
ble grounds for the failure to adduce such evidence in the record
before the Administrator, the court may order  such additional
evidence (and evidence in rebuttal thereof) to be taken before the
Administrator  and  to be adduced upon the hearing, in such man-
ner and upon such terms and conditions as to the court may seem
proper. The Administrator may  modify  his  findings as to the
facts, or make new  findings by reason of the additional evidence so
taken, and he  shall file such  modified or new findings, and  his
recommendation, if any, for the modification  or setting aside of
his original order, with the return of such additional evidence.
   "(3)  Upon the filing of the petition referred to in subsection
 (d) (1), the court shall have jurisdiction to affirm  the order, or to
set it aside in whole or in part, temporarily or permanently. If the
order of the Administrator refuses  to issue, amend, or repeal  a
regulation and such order is not in accordance with law the court
shall by its judgment order the Administrator to take action, with
respect to such regulation, in accordance with law. The findings of

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2309

the Administrator as to the facts shall be sustained if based upon
substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole.
  "(4)  The judgment of the court affirming or setting aside, in
whole or in part, any such order  of  the Administrator shall be
final, subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States
upon certiorari or certification as provided in section 1254 of Title
28 of the United States Code.
"Section 204. Imminent hazard
  "(a)  An imminent hazard shall be considered to exist when the
                                                       [p. 1501

evidence is sufficient to show that a use or distribution of a chemi-
cal substance creates a hazard to human health or the environment
(1) that should be corrected immediately  to prevent injury to
health and (2) that should not be  permitted to continue while an
administrative hearing or other formal proceeding is being held.
  "(b)  If the  Administrator has reason to believe that an immi-
nent hazard exists he may request the Attorney General to peti-
tion an  appropriate district court of the United States to restrain
the uses or distribution of the chemical substance responsible for
the hazard. Upon the  filing of any  such petition the district court
shall have jurisdiction to grant such injunctive relief or tempo-
rary restraining order pending the outcome of proceedings pur-
suant to section 203 of this Act. Such proceedings shall be initi-
ated contemporaneously with the request of the Administrator to
take action under  this subsection.  Such  proceedings shall be
deemed to be initiated when he has referred the matter to a com-
mittee under section 208 (c).
  "(c)  The initiation of any proceedings or actions under section
203 shall  not  prevent the  Administrator from initiating  action
under this section if  he has reason to believe that an imminent
hazard exists.

"Section 205. Testing

  "As soon as practicable after enactment of the title and from
time to  time thereafter, the Administrator shall, after referral to
the Toxic Substances Board, for various classes and uses of chemi-
cal substances, prescribe by regulation standards  for test proto-
cols, and for the results to be achieved therefrom, as are necessary
to protect health and the environment. He shall afford opportunity
for submission of written comments, and  upon request  of any
affected person, a public hearing  with respect to any such pro-

-------
2310          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

posed regulation, and such regulation shall be based upon substan-
tial evidence of record in such proceeding.  He may supplement,
modify, or withdraw  any such regulation in  the same manner.
Regulations promulgated pursuant to this section shall be applica-
ble only to chemical substances which are first produced in com-
mercial quantities after the effective date of such regulations. The
                                                       [p. 151]

promulgation of regulations as to a particular chemical substance
under this section  shall  not preclude action  with respect to such
substance under section 203.
"Section 206. Reports

  "(a) The Administrator may by regulation  require any or all
manufacturers of chemical substances to report to him annually or
such more frequent times as the Administrator may reasonably
require as to any or all of the following:
       "(1) The names of any or all substances produced  by the
    manufacturer;
       "(2) The chemical identity and molecular structure of such
    substances;
       "(3) The categories of use of each such substance, insofar
    as they are known to him;
       "(4) Reasonable estimates of the amounts  of  each  sub-
    stance produced for each such category of use; and
       "(5) A  description of the byproducts,  if any,  resulting
    from the production of such substance, and, insofar as they
    are known  to him, from the use thereof.
  "(b) Whenever  the Administrator determines that such action
is necessary to accomplish the purposes of this title, he may direct
manufacturers  of a chemical substance to  provide, within a speci-
fied period of time not to be less than 30 days, the results of any
tests of the health  or environmental effects of the substance or its
byproducts, which have been performed by  or at the instance of
the manufacturer or such results as are otherwise known to him,
and any or all of the items of information listed in subsection (a).
  "(c) Whenever the Administrator determines that such action
would be  productive and desirable to allow  him to carry out his
responsibilities and authorities under this title, he may by publish-
ing a notice in the Federal Register invite and afford all interested
persons an opportunity to provide in writing information respect-
ing the health  or  environmental effects of  the substance or its
byproducts.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2311

"Section 207. Relationship to other laws
                                                       [p. 152]

  " (a) This title shall not apply to—
      "(1)  economic poisons  subject to the Federal Insecticide,
    Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, as amended, and chemical
    substances used solely  in  such poisons,  provided that if  a
    chemical substance which constitutes such a poison or such an
    ingredient is or may be used  for any purpose which is  not
    regulated by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenti-
    cide Act, as amended, this title shall apply to such other uses.
      " (2)  foods, food additives, drugs, and cosmetics subject to
    the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended, the
    Federal Meat Inspection  Act, and  the  Poultry  Products
    Inspection Act, and  chemical substances used  solely therein,
    and controlled substances  regulated pursuant to the Compre-
    hensive Drug Abuse Prevention and  Control Act of 1970,
    provided, that if such an item or substance is or may be used
    for any purpose which is not regulated by such acts this title
    shall apply to such other uses;
      " (3)  any source material, special  nuclear material, or by-
    product material as defined in the Atomic Energy  Act of
    1954, as amended, and regulations issued pursuant thereto by
    the Atomic Energy Commission.
      "(4)  The authority of the Secretary of  the Department of
    Transportation to establish  rules  and regulations  for  the
    transportation of hazardous materials.
  "(b) To the extent that such activities are subject to regulation
by  other  Federal  laws,  including  the Occupational  Health and
Safety Act of 1970 and Title I of this Act, the Administrator shall
not regulate the use or distribution  of a new or existing chemical
substance on the basis of any possible hazard to employees in their
place of employment, or the hazard directly to consumers resulting
from household use of marketed products which contain or might
contain the substance. If  it appears to the Administrator that any
such substance may pose a hazard when transported, or when used
on or in food  or as a drug or cosmetic, or may be a  hazard to
employees in their place of employment, or may pose  a  hazard
directly to consumers resulting from household use of marketed
                                                       [p. 153]

products which contain or might contain the substance, he shall
transmit any data  received from manufacturers or processors rel-

-------
2312          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

evant to such hazard to the Federal department or agency with
authority to take legal action if a hazard is found to exist.
  "(c) The Administrator shall coordinate actions taken under
this Act with actions taken to enforce the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act as amended and  the Clean Air Act as amended, and
shall, where  appropriate,  use the  authorities contained in those
Acts to regulate chemical substances.
  "(d) The Administrator shall  make  every effort to maintain
close coordination with the Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare and  other appropriate Federal agencies in administering
the provisions of this title.
  " (e) This title shall not be construed as superseding or impair-
ing the provisions of any other law or treaty of the United States.

"Section 208. Toxic substances board

  "(a) There shall be established in the Environmental Protection
Agency a Toxic Substances Board consisting of a reasonable num-
ber of scientifically qualified persons. The Administrator shall ap-
point as the members of the  board the persons nominated to him
by the National Academy of Sciences. One of the members may be
designated at any  time by the Director  of the National Academy
of Sciences to serve as Chairman of the Board.
  "(b) The National Academy of Sciences, in consultation with
the Board, shall establish, maintain, and publish a continuing list
of qualified scientists, including experts in the areas  likely to be
covered by this title. Such scientists  shall be consultants to the
Toxic Substances Board.
  " (c) Before proposing any regulations  under authority of sec-
tion 203 or 205 the Administrator shall refer his proposed action
and the available evidence to  a committee drawn from  members of
the Board and the list of consultants to the Board. The Adminis-
trator shall appoint as the members of the committee  the consult-
ants nominated to him by the Board. The committee  shall report
its  views, in writing, to the Administrator within a reasonable
time, not to be less than 45 days, specified by the Administrator. If
                                                       [p.154]

the committee fails to report  within the  specified time, the Admin-
istrator may proceed to take  action under this title. The report of
the committee  shall be considered as part of the record in any
proceeding taken with respect to the Administrator's action.
  "(d) The Administrator may, at his discretion, also request the
Board to convene a panel to consider other actions proposed to be

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2313

taken under this Act, including actions proposed to be taken under
section 204 (b).
  "(e) The Administrator is authorized to reimburse the National
Academy of Sciences for expenses incurred in carrying out this
section.
"Section 209. Research
  "The Administrator is authorized to conduct such research and
monitoring as is necessary to carry out his functions and responsi-
bilities under  this title. Such  research  and monitoring shall not
duplicate the efforts of other  Federal agencies. To this end, the
Administrator is authorized to establish research laboratories, in-
cluding the acquisition of necessary land, buildings, or facilities,
and to make contracts for such research and monitoring.
"Section 210. Administrative inspections and warrants
  "(a) (1)  For the purpose of inspecting, copying, and verifying
the correctness of records, reports, or other documents required to
be kept  or made under this title and otherwise facilitating the
carrying out of his functions under this title, the Administrator is
authorized, in accordance with this section, to enter any factory,
warehouse, or premises in which chemical substances  are manu-
factured, processed, or held and to conduct administrative inspec-
tions thereof, and of the things specified  in this section, relevant to
those functions.
  "(2)  Such entries and inspections shall be carried out through
officers  of employees (hereinafter referred to  as "inspectors")
designated by the Administrator. Any such inspector, upon stating
his purpose and presenting to the owner, operator, or agent  in
charge of such premises (A) appropriate credentials and  (B) his
administrative inspection warrant or a written notice of his other
inspection authority, shall have the right to enter  such premises
                                                       [p. 155]

and conduct such inspection at  reasonable times.
  "(3) Except when the owner,  operator,  or  agent in  charge  of
such premises so consents in writing, no inspection authorized by
this section shall extend to—
      "(A) financial data;
      " (B) sales data other than  shipment data;
      "(C) pricing data;
      " (D) personnel data; or
      "(E) research data (other than  data relating to the tests
    described in subsection 206 (b)).

-------
2314          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  "(b)  A warrant under this section shall not  be  required for
entries and administrative inspections (including seizures of prop-
erty)—
      "(1)  with the consent of the owner, operator, or agent in
    charge of such premises;
      "(2)  in situations presenting imminent danger to health or
    safety;
      "(3)  in any other exceptional or emergency circumstances
    where time or opportunity to apply for a warrant is lacking;
    or
      "(4)  in any other situations where a warrant is not consti-
    tutionally required.
  "(c) Issuance and execution of administrative inspection war-
rants shall be as follows :
      "(1)  Any judge of the United States or of a State court of
    record,  or any United States magistrate, may, within his ter-
    ritorial jurisdiction, and  upon proper oath or affirmation
    showing probable  cause, issue  warrants for the purpose of
    conducting administrative inspections authorized by this title
    or regulations thereunder, and  seizures of property appropri-
    ate to such inspections. For the purposes of this section, the
    term "probable  cause" means  a valid public interest  in the
    effective enforcement of this title or regulations thereunder
    sufficient to justify administrative  inspections  of the area,
    premises, building,  or contents thereof, in  the circumstances
    specified in the application for the warrant.
      "(2)  A warrant  shall  issue only upon an affidavit of an
    officer or employee  having knowledge of  the facts alleged,
    sworn to before the judge or magistrate and establishing the
                                                       [p. 156]

    grounds for issuing the warrant. If the judge or magistrate is
    satisfied that grounds for the application exist or that there is
    probable cause to believe they exist, he shall issue a warrant
    identifying the area, premises, or building, to be inspected,
    the purpose of such inspection, and, where appropriate, the
    type of property to be inspected,  if any.  The warrant shall
    identify the items or types of  property to be seized, if any.
    The warrant shall  be directed  to a person authorized under
    subsection  (a) (2) to execute it. The warrant shall state the
    grounds for its issuance and the name of the person or per-
    sons whose affidavit has  been taken in support thereof. It
    shall command the person to whom it is directed to inspect

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2315

    the area, premises,  or building, identified  for  the  purpose
    specified, and, where appropriate, shall direct the seizure of
    the property specified. The warrant  shall direct  that it be
    served during normal business hours. It shall designate the
    judge or magistrate to whom it shall be returned.
       "(3)  A warrant issued  pursuant to  this section must be
    executed and returned within ten days of its date unless, upon
    a showing by the United States of a need therefor, the judge
    or magistrate allows additional time in the warrant.  If prop-
    erty is seized pursuant to a warrant, the person executing the
    warrant shall give to the person from whom or from whose
    premises the property was  taken a copy of the warrant and a
    receipt  for  the property taken  or  shall leave the copy  and
    receipt at the place from which the property was taken. The
    return of the warrant shall be made promptly  and  shall be
    accompanied by a written  inventory  of any property taken.
    The inventory shall be made in  the presence of the person
    executing the warrant and of the person from whose posses-
    sion or premises the property was taken, if they are  present,
    or in the presence of at least one credible person other than
    the person making such inventory, and shall be verified by the
    person executing the warrant. The judge or magistrate, upon
    request,  shall deliver a copy of the inventory to the person
    from whom or from whose premises the property was taken
    and to the applicant for the warrant.
                                                       [p. 157]

       "(4)  The judge or magistrate who has issued  a warrant
    under this section shall attach to the warrant a copy of the
    return and all papers filed  in connection therewith and shall
    file them with  the clerk of the district court of the United
    States for the  judicial  district in which the inspection was
    made.

"Section 211. Exports and imports

  " (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, no sub-
stance  shall be deemed in violation of this title when intended
solely for export to any foreign country except if the Administra-
tor finds that as exported and  used  the substance, or particular
uses of the substance, will produce a significant direct or  indirect
hazard to human health or the environment in the United States.
  " (b) The  Secretary of  the Treasury shall refuse entry  into the
United States of any chemical substance or article containing such

-------
2316          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

substance offered for entry if it violates any of the provisions of
this title. If a substance or article is refused entry, the Secretary
of the Treasury shall refuse delivery to the consignee and shall
cause the disposal or storage of any substance or  article refused
delivery which has  not been exported by the consignee within
three months from the date of notice of such refusal under such
regulations as the Secretary of Treasury may prescribe: Provided,
that the Secretary of Treasury may deliver to the  consignee such
substance or article pending examination and decision in the mat-
ter on execution of bond for the amount of the full invoice value of
such substance or article, together with the duty thereon, and on
refusal to return such substance or article for any cause to the
custody of the Secretary of the Treasury, when demanded, for the
purpose of excluding them from the  country, or for any other
purpose, said consignee shall forfeit the full amount of said bond:
And provided further, that all charges for storage, cartage, and
labor  on substances or articles which are refused admission or
delivery shall be paid by the owner  or consignee, and in default of
such payment shall  constitute a lien against any future importa-
tion made by such owner or consignee.
   "(c) The Secretary of the Treasury,  in consultation with the
                                                        [p. 158]

Administrator,  shall issue regulations  for the  enforcement  of
subsection (b) above.
 "Section 212. Confidentiality
   "(a) The information obtained from any manufacturer or proc-
essor  shall be confidential to the extent that it comprises matters
 referred to in section 552 (b) (4) of Title 5 of the United States
 Code.
   "(b)  The Administrator may at his  own initiative or at the
 request of a manufacturer or processor issue a protection order
 respecting the confidentiality of information obtained from a man-
 ufacturer or processor pursuant to the provisions of this title, as
 he may deem appropriate to protect the manufacturer  or proces-
 sor from competitive injury.
   "(c) Information deemed to be confidential in accordance with
 the provisions of subsections (a) or (b) may be disclosed to other
 Federal officers or  employees  when necessary to accomplish the
 purposes of this title except that the provisions of section 1905 of
 Title 18 of the  United States Code shall continue to apply, and
 such information may be disclosed in camera when relevant in any

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2317

administrative or judicial proceeding under this title. In any such
proceeding,  the  administrative body, the  Administrator, or  the
court shall issue such orders as may be appropriate to protect  the
confidentiality of the materials designated as such by the aforego-
ing provisions.
"Section 213. Prohibited acts

  "The following acts and the causing thereof are prohibited—
  "(a)  The failure to comply with any final regulation  or order
issued by the Administrator pursuant to this title;
  "(b)  The failure or refusal to provide information or results of
tests as required by section 206 of this title;
  "(c)  The  sale,  distribution, or  importation into the United
States of a chemical substance subject to regulations promulgated
under section 205 for which the standards applicable thereto re-
quired by such regulations have not been met;
  "(d)  The  knowing or willful failure of any person who pur-
chases or receives a  substance and who is required to  be given
notice of  restrictions on use  or  distribution of such substance
                                                       [p. 159]

pursuant to paragraph 203 (a) (2),  to comply with such restric-
tions on use or distribution;
  "(e)  The failure to perform any other action required under
this title.

"Section 214. Penalties and remedies
  "(a)  Any person  willfully  violating subsections  213(a),  (b),
(c) or (d) shall on conviction be fined not more than  $25,000 or
imprisoned for not more than one year or both.
  "(b) (1) Any person violating subsections  213(a), (b), (c)  or
(d) shall be liable to a civil penalty to the United States  of a sum
which is not more than  $25,000 for each  day of violation, to be
assessed by the Administrator after notice and opportunity  for
hearing and after he has considered the  nature,  circumstances,
and extent of such violation, the practicability of compliance with
the provisions violated and any good faith efforts to comply with
such provisions.
  " (2)  Upon failure of the offending party to pay the penalty, the
Administrator may request the Attorney General to commence an
action in the appropriate district court of the United States  for
such relief as may be appropriate.
  "(c) The Attorney General or his delegate may bring an action

-------
2318          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

in the appropriate district court of the United States for equitable
relief to redress  a  violation by any person of any provision of
section  213 of this title,  and the district courts  of the United
States shall have jurisdiction to grant such relief as the equities of
the case may require.

"Section 215. Environmental prediction and assessment

   "The Environmental Protection Agency shall,  in  cooperation
with other Federal  agencies, develop the necessary personnel and
information resources to predict the introduction of new chemical
substances into the environment and assess the environmental con-
sequences of such introduction.

"Section 216. Use of Government facilities

   "The Administrator may use, by agreement, the personnel, serv-
ices, and facilities of other Federal departments, agencies, or in-
strumentalities, whether on a reimbursable or non-reimbursable
basis.
                                                       [p. 160]

"Section 217. Health and environmental data

   "The Council on Environmental Quality in consultation with the
Administrator, the  Secretary of Health,  Education, and Welfare,
the Secretary of  Commerce, and the heads of other  appropriate
departments or agencies, shall coordinate a study of the feasibility
of establishing (1)  a standard classification system for chemical
compounds and related substances, and (2) a standard means for
storing and for obtaining rapid access to information respecting
such materials.

"Section 218. State regulation

   "Nothing in this  title shall affect the authority of any State or
local government to restrict  the distibution or use of a chemical
substance or impose requirements of tests and test results  for a
chemical substance  except that  (1) if the Administrator has pub-
lished proposed regulations under section 203 with respect to lim-
iting particular uses of a particular substance a State or local
government may not thereafter impose restrictions  on  such uses of
such substance other than a total ban on such use  or  uses; (2)  if
the Administrator has published proposed regulations under sec-
tion 205 with  respect to tests for particular substances or uses, a
State or local government may not impose test protocols or results
to be achieved therefrom with respect to  such substances and uses

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2319

for the purposes similar to this title; and (3) if the Administrator
has published proposed regulations under section 203 with respect
to limiting particular  uses of a particular substance  or if  the
Administrator has published proposed regulations  under section
205 with respect to tests for particular substances or uses, a State
is not preempted from enforcing any restrictions or test protocols
and results to be achieved therefrom existing at the time any such
proposed regulation was published; provided that if the Adminis-
trator issues an order under section 203 (b) (3) restricting the use
of such substance or withdrawing a proposed regulation restrict-
ing a  use  of such substance,  or  if  the Administrator  issues an
order under section 205 prescribing tests or withdrawing a  pro-
posed  regulation for such  tests,  the State  may not enforce any
such restrictions,  test protocols,  or  results  to  be achieved there-
                                                         [p. 161]

from after the effective date of such order, other than a total ban
on such use or uses.

"Section 219. Regulations

  The Administrator is authorized to issue such regulations as he
may deem appropriate to carry out the purposes of this title and
to amend them at any time.

"Section 220. Authorization for appropriations

  There is hereby authorized  to be appropriated to the Environ-
mental Protection Agency such sums as may be necessary for the
purposes and administration of this Act."
                                                         [p. 162]

                                        OCEAN  DUMPING,
                           ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY,
                                               Washington, D.C.

HON. SPIRO T. AGNEW,
President of the Senate,
Washington, D.C.
HON. CARL B.  ALBERT,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
  DEAR MR. [PRESIDENT/SPEAKER] : Enclosed is a draft of a proposed bill
"to  regulate the  dumping  of  material in the oceans, coastal, and other
waters and for other purposes."
  We recommend that the bill be referred to the appropriate committee
for consideration and that it be enacted.
  The proposed  legislation would  implement the  recommendations of the
report "Ocean Dumping—A National Policy." That report, requested by the

-------
2320            LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

President in his April 15, 1970, message on waste disposal, was prepared
by the Council on Environmental Quality and made public by the President
on October 7, 1970.
  The report points out that there is  a critical need for a  national policy
on  ocean dumping. Many of the  wastes  now  being  dumped  are  heavily
concentrated and contain materials that have a number of adverse effects.
Many are toxic to human and marine life, deplete  oxygen  necessary  to
maintain  the  marine  ecosystem,  reduce  populations  of  fish  and  other
economic  resources, and  damage  esthetic values.  In some areas,  such  as
the  New  York Bight, the  environmental  conditions  created by ocean
disposal of wastes  are  serious.
  The Council study indicates that the volume of waste  materials  dumped
in the ocean is growing rapidly. Because the capacity of land-based waste
disposal  sites  is becoming exhausted  in  some  coastal cities, communities
are  looking  to  the  ocean as a dumping ground  for  their  wastes. Faced
with  higher water  quality standards, industries  may also look to the ocean
                                                                  [p. 164]

for disposal. The result could be a massive increase in the already growing
level  of  ocean  dumping.  If  this  occurs, environmental  deterioration  will
become widespread.
  In  most cases,  feasible and  economic land-based disposal  methods are
available  for wastes currently being dumped in the ocean.  In many cases,
alternatives to ocean dumping can be  applied positively for purposes  such
as land reclamation and recycling to recover  valuable waste components.
  Current regulatory activities  and authorities are not adequate to handle
the problem of ocean  dumping. States do not exercise  extensive  control
over  ocean  dumping,  and generally  their  authority  extends only within
the three-mile  territorial  sea. The  greater  part  of  current dumping occurs
outside these waters. The Army  Corps of Engineers  has regulatory authority
over  ocean  dumping but,  again, this  is largely confined  to the territorial
sea.  The  Corps also has responsibility to  facilitate navigation, chiefly by
dredging  navigation channels. As  such, it  is in the position of regulating
activities  over  which  it  also  has operational responsibility.  The Coast
Guard enforces several Federal laws regarding  pollution  but has no direct
authority to regulate ocean dumping. The  authority of the  Federal Water
Pollution  Control Act does not provide for issuance of  permits to control
ocean  dumping. And the  Atomic  Energy  Commission  has  authority  only
for  disposal  of radioactive  materials. The  Council  believes  that  new
legislative authority is necessary.
  Taken   together,  present responsibilities  are  dispersed and operational
agencies  exercise responsibility to regulate themselves and entities perform-
ing work  consistent with  their  primary mission. It is now  necessary  that
responsibility for ocean dumping  be centralized in an agency whose  chief
role is environmental control.  The enclosed bill would give  this responsibility
to the Environmental Protection  Agency.
                                                                  [p.  165]

  The proposed legislation would  bar  the transportation of  material for
dumping and  the actual dumping  itself in the oceans, coastal waters  and
Great Lakes, except as authorized  by permits issued by the Administrator

-------
                   GUIDELINES AND REPORTS              2321

of the Environmental Protection Agency. The  Administrator would  be
empowered  to ban  ocean dumping  of  certain  materials  and  to  designate
recommended safe sites for  disposal. Transportation for dumping  or dump-
ing without a permit would  be subject to civil and criminal penalties.
  This legislation would provide a comprehensive framework for regulating
the transportation and dumping of materials and forestalling pressures to
dispose of a vast new influx of wastes in the oceans, coastal waters and the
Great Lakes. Placing regulatory authority in the Environmental Protection
Agency should strengthen the refinement and implementation of a national
policy.
  A detailed section-by-section analysis  of the bill is enclosed.
  The bill is part of the President's environmental  program as announced
in his Environmental Message of February  8, 1971.  It will be  administered
by the Environmental Protection Agency and was developed in coordination
with  the Council on Environmental Quality.
  The  Office of  Management and Budget informs  me that enactment  of
this proposal is in accord with the program of the  President.

                                              Sincerely yours,
                                        WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS.
                                                           [p.166]

  A BILL To regulate the dumping of material in the oceans, coastal, and
other  waters and for other purposes.

  Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives  of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That: This
Act may be cited as the "Marine Protection Act of 1971."
Section 2. Finding, policy, and purposes
   (a) Unregulated dumping of material  into the oceans, coastal,
and other waters endangers human health, welfare, and amenities,
and  the marine environment, ecological  systems,  and economic
potentialities.
   (b) Congress declares that it is the  policy of the United States
to regulate the dumping of all types  of  material in the oceans,
coastal, and other waters and to prevent or vigorously limit the
dumping into the oceans, coastal, and other waters of any material
which could adversely affect human health, welfare, or amenities,
or the marine environment,  ecological systems, or economic poten-
tialities. To this end, it is the purpose of  this Act  to regulate the
transportation  of material  from the United States for dumping
into  the oceans, coastal,  and other waters, and the dumping  of
material by any person from any source if the dumping occurs  in
waters over which the United States has jurisdiction.

Section 3. Definitions
  For the purposes of this Act the term—

-------
2322          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

   (a) "Administrator" means the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency.
   (b) "Oceans, coastal, and other waters"  means oceans, gulfs,
bays, salt-water lagoons, salt-water harbors, other coastal waters
where the tide ebbs and flows, and the Great Lakes.
   (c) "Material" means matter of any kind or description, includ-
ing, but not limited to, dredge spoil, solid waste, garbage, sewage
sludge, munitions, chemical, biological,  and radiological warfare
agents,  radioactive materials, wrecked  or discarded equipment,
                                                       [p. 167]

rock, sand, cellar dirt, and industrial waste, provided, that it does
not  mean oil  within the meaning of section 11 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act or sewage from vessels within the
meaning of section 13 of said Act.
   (d) "United States" includes the several States, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Canal Zone, the
territories and possessions  of the United  States  and  the Trust
Territory of the Pacific Islands.
   (e) "Person" means any private person or entity, any employee,
agent,  department, agency, or instrumentality  of any State or
local unit  of government, or foreign government, and, except as to
the  provisions of section  6, any employee, agent, department,
agency, or instrumentality of the Federal Government.
   (f) "Dumping" means a disposition of material, provided, that
it does  not mean a disposition of any  effluent from any outfall
structure, or a routine discharge of effluent incidental to the pro-
pulsion of vessels, and provided further, that it does not mean the
intentional placement of any device in the oceans, coastal, or other
waters  or on  the submerged land beneath  such waters, for the
purpose of using such device there to produce an effect attributa-
ble to other than its mere physical presence.
   (g) "District Court of the United States" includes the District
Court of Guam, the District Court of the Virgin Islands, the Dis-
trict Court of the Canal Zone, and in the case of  American Samoa
and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, the District Court
of the United States for the District of Hawaii, which court shall
have jurisdiction over actions arising therein.

Section 4. Prohibited acts
   Except as such transportation or dumping or both may be au-
thorized in a permit issued by the Administrator.
   (a) No person shall transport material from the United States.

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2323

for the purpose of dumping it into  the oceans, coastal, and other
waters, and
   (b) No  person shall dump material (1) in that part of the
                                                       [p. 168]

oceans, coastal, and other waters which is within the territorial
jurisdiction of the United States, or, (2) in a zone contiguous to
the territorial sea of the United States, extending to  a  line 12
nautical miles seaward from the base line of the territorial sea as
provided in Article 24 of the Convention on the Territorial Sea
and the Contiguous  Zone, to the  extent that it may affect the
territorial sea or the territory of the United States.

Section 5. Permits

   (a) The Administrator may issue permits to transport material
for dumping into the oceans, coastal, and other waters, or to dump
material  into the waters described in subsection  4 (b), or  both,
where the applicant presents information respecting the proposed
activity which in the judgment of the Administrator indicates that
such transportation, or dumping, or both will not unreasonably
degrade or unreasonably endanger human  health, welfare, or
amenities,  or the marine environment, ecological systems, or eco-
nomic potentialities. The Administrator shall establish and apply
criteria for reviewing and evaluating such permit applications,
and, in establishing or revising such criteria, shall consider, but
not be limited in his consideration to, the following:
       (1)  the likely impact  of the proposed dumping on human
    health, welfare, and amenities, and on the marine environ-
    ment,  ecological systems, and economic potentialities, includ-
    ing an assessment of—
           (A) the possible persistence or permanence of the ef-
        fects of the proposed dumping.
           (B)  the volume  and concentration  of materials in-
        volved, and
           (C)  the location proposed for the dumping.
       (2)  alternative locations and methods of disposal, including
    land-based alternatives; the probable impact of requiring the
    use of such locations or methods of disposal on considerations
    affecting the public interest; and the probable  impact of issu-
    ing or denying permits on considerations affecting the public
    interest.
                                                       [p.169]

-------
2324          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  In establishing or revising such criteria, the Administrator shall
consult  with the Secretaries of Commerce, Interior,  State, De-
fense, Agriculture, Health, Education and Welfare, and Transpor-
tation, the Atomic Energy  Commission, and  other appropriate
Federal, State, and local officials. With respect to such criteria as
may affect the civil works  program of the Department of the
Army, the Administrator shall also consult  with the Secretary of
the Army. In reviewing applications for permits, the Administra-
tor shall  make such provision for  consultation with interested
Federal and State agencies as he deems useful or necessary. No
permit shall be issued for a dumping of material which will violate
applicable water quality standards.
   (b) (1)  The Administrator may establish  and issue various cat-
egories  of permits, including the  general  permits  described in
subsection (e).
   (2) The Administrator may require  an applicant for a permit
under subsection  (a) to provide such information as the Adminis-
trator  may  consider necessary to  review and evaluate such an
application.
   (c) Permits issued  under subsection (a) may designate and
include (1)  the type of material authorized to be transported for
dumping or to be dumped; (2) the amount of material authorized
to be transported for dumping or to be dumped; (3)  the location
where such transport for dumping will be terminated or where
such dumping will occur; (4) the length of time for which the
permits are valid and their  expiration date; and (5)  such other
matters as the Administrator deems appropriate.
   (d) The Administrator may prescribe such processing fees for
permits and such reporting requirements for  actions  taken pur-
suant to permits issued under subsection (a) as he deems appro-
priate.
   (e) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the Ad-
ministrator may issue general permits  for the transportation for
dumping,  or dumping, or  both, of classes of materials which he
determines  will have a minimal impact, considering the factors
stated in subsection (a).
   (f) The Administrator  may limit or deny the issuance of per-
                                                       [p. 170]

mits, or may alter or revoke partially or  entirely  the terms  of
permits issued by him under this Act,  for the transportation for
dumping, or the dumping, or both, of specified material, where he
finds that such material cannot be dumped consistently with the

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2325

criteria established pursuant to subsection (a) . No action shall be
taken under this subsection unless the affected person or permittee
shall have been given notice and opportunity for hearing on such
action as proposed.
   (g)  The  Administrator may,  considering the  criteria  estab-
lished pursuant to subsection (a),  designate recommended sites
for the dumping of specified materials.
   (h)  Nothing in this Act shall prohibit any transportation for
dumping or dumping of material where  such transportation or
dumping is necessary, in an emergency, to safeguard human life.
Such transportation or dumping shall be reported to the Adminis-
trator within such times and under such conditions as he may
prescribe by regulation.
Section 6. Penalties
   (a) A person who violates section 4 of this Act, or regulations
promulgated under this Act, or a permit issued under this Act by
the Administrator  shall be liable to a civil  penalty  of not more
than $50,000 for each violation to be assessed by the Administra-
tor.  No penalty shall be assessed until the person charged shall
have been given notice and an opportunity for a hearing on such
violation. Any such civil penalty may be compromised by the Ad-
ministrator. In determining the amount  of the penalty, or the
amount agreed upon in compromise, the gravity of the violation
and the demonstrated good faith of the person charged in attempt-
ing to achieve rapid compliance after  notification of a violation
shall be  considered by said Administrator.  Upon  failure of the
offending party to pay the penalty, the Administrator may request
the Attorney General to commence an action in the appropriate
district court of the United States for such relief as may be appro-
priate.
   (b)  In addition  to any action which may be brought  under
subsection  (a),  a  person who knowingly and  willfully  violates
                                                       [p.
section 4 of this Act, regulations promulgated under this Act, or a
permit issued under this Act by the Administrator shall be fined
not more than $50,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year,
or both.
   (c) For the  purpose  of imposing civil  penalties and criminal
fines under this section, each day of a continuing violation shall
constitute a separate offense.
   (d) The Attorney General or his delegate may bring actions for

-------
2326          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

equitable relief to redress a violation by any person of this Act,
regulations promulgated under this Act, and permits issued under
this  Act by  the  Administrator,  and the  district  courts of the
United States shall have jurisdiction to grant such relief as the
equities of the case may require.
   (e)  A vessel,  except a  public  vessel within the  meaning  of
subsection 13 (a)  (3) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
or other public property of a similar nature, used in a violation
shall be liable in rem for any civil penalty assessed or criminal fine
imposed and  may be proceeded against in any district court of the
United States having jurisdiction thereof, provided, that no vessel
shall be liable unless it  shall appear that the owner was at the time
of the violation a consenting party or privy to  such violation.
   (f) If the provisions of any permit issued under subsection (a)
of section 5 are violated, the Administrator may revoke the permit
or may suspend  the permit for a specified period of time. No
permit shall  be revoked or suspended unless the permittee  shall
have been given  notice and  opportunity for a hearing on  such
violation and proposed  suspension or revocation.

Section 7. Relationship to other laws
   (a) After  the effective date of this Act, all licenses, permits,  or
authorizations which have  been issued by any officer or employee
of the United States under authority of any other provision of law
shall be terminated and of no effect to the extent they authorize
any  activity regulated  by this  Act. Thereafter, except as hereafter
provided, no license, permit, or authority shall be  issued by any
                                                       [p. 172]

officer or employee of  the United States other than the Adminis-
trator which would authorize any activity regulated by this Act or
the regulations issued hereunder.
   (b)  Nothing in this Act shall abrogate or negate any existing
responsibility or authority contained in the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended, and section 4 and subsection 7 (a) of this Act
shall not apply to any activity regulated by that Act, provided, the
Atomic Energy Commission shall  consult with the Administrator
prior to issuing  a  permit  to  conduct any activity  which would
otherwise be regulated by this Act. In issuing any such permit, the
Atomic Energy Commission shall comply  with standards set  by
the Administrator respecting limits on radiation exposures or lev-
els,  or concentrations  or quantities of radioactive material.  In
setting such  standards for application to the oceans, coastal, and

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2327

other waters, or for specific portions of such waters, the Adminis-
trator shall consider the policy expressed in subsection 2(b) of
this  Act  and the factors stated  in  subsections 5(a)(l)  and
5 (a) (2) of this Act.
   (c) (1)  The  provisions of subsection (a) shall not apply to
actions taken before or after the  effective date of this Act under
the authority of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.1
       (2) Except as provided in subsection 11 (e), nothing in this
     Act shall be construed as abrogating or negating any existing
     responsibility or authority contained in the Rivers and Har-
     bors Act of 1899, provided, that after the effective date of this
     Act, no Federal license or permit shall be issued under the
     authority of  the Rivers and Harbors Act of  1899 to conduct
     any activity  otherwise regulated by section 4 of this Act and
     the regulations  issued hereunder, unless the Administrator
     has certified  that the activity proposed to be conducted is in
     conformity with the provisions of this Act and with the regu-
     lations issued hereunder.
       (3) Where a  license or permit to conduct an activity has
 1 33 U.S.C. §401 et seq.
                                                       [p.173]

     been  granted under the authority of subsections (c) (1)  and
     (c) (2) of this section and of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
     1899, no  separate  permit to  conduct such activity shall be
     required under this Act.
   (d)  Prior  to issuing any permit under this Act,  where it ap-
pears to the Administrator that the disposition of the material to
be transported for dumping may affect navigation in the navigable
waters of the United States or may create an artificial island on
the Outer Continental Shelf, the Administrator shall consult with
the Secretary of  the Army and no permit shall be issued if the
Secretary of the Army  determines that navigation will be unrea-
sonably impaired.
   (e) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as  preempting any
State, Federal Territory or Commonwealth, or subdivision thereof
from imposing any requirement or liability.
Section 8. Enforcement
   (a) The Administrator may, whenever appropriate, utilize by
agreement, the personnel, services, and facilities of other Federal
departments, agencies, and instrumentalities, or State agencies or
instrumentalities, whether on  a reimbursable or nonreimbursable
basis.

-------
2328          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  (b) The Administrator may delegate responsibility and author-
ity for reviewing and evaluating permit  applications, including
the decision as to whether a permit will be issued, to an officer of
the Environmental  Protection  Agency, or he may delegate,  by
agreement, such responsibility and authority to the heads of other
Federal departments  or agencies, whether on a reimbursable or
nonreimbursable basis.
   (c) The Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard
is operating shall conduct surveillance and other appropriate en-
forcement activity to prevent unlawful transportation of material
for dumping or dumping.

Section 9. Regulations

  In carrying out the responsibilities and authority conferred by
this Act, the Administrator is authorized to issue such regulations
as he may deem appropriate.
                                                       [p. 174]

Section 10. International cooperation

  The Secretary of State, in consultation with the Administrator,
shall seek effective international action and cooperation to ensure
protection of the marine environment, and may for this purpose,
formulate, present, or support specific proposals in the  United
Nations  and other competent  international organizations for the
development of appropriate international rules and regulations in
support of the policy of this Act.

Section 11. Repeal and supersession

   (a) The second proviso to the last paragraph of section 20 of
the  Act  of  March 3, 1899  (30 Stat. 1154), as amended,2 is re-
pealed.
   (b) Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the Act of June 29, 1888
 (25 Stat. 209), as amended,3 are repealed.
   (c) Section 2 of the Act of August 5, 1886  (24 Stat. 329) ,4 is
 repealed.
   (d) To the extent that it authorizes action  regulated  by this
 Act, section 4 of the Act of  March 3, 1905 (33 Stat. 1147) ,5 is
 superseded.
   (e) Section 13 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (30  Stat.
 1152), as amended,6  is superseded insofar as it applies to dump-
 ing, as denned  in subsection 3 (f)  of this Act, of material in the
 waters covered by subsection 4 (b) of this Act.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2329

Section 12. Effective date and savings provision
   (a) This Act shall take effect six months after its enactment.
   (b)  No legal action begun, or right of action accrued, prior to
the effective date of this Act shall be affected by any provision of
this Act.
Section 13. Authorization for appropriations
   There is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any mon-
eys in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sums as may
be necessary for the purposes and administration of this Act.
  2 33 U.S.C. §418.
  3 33 U.S.C. §§441-451b.
  < 33 U.S.C. §407a.
  6 33 U.S.C. §419.
  «33 U.S.C. §407.
                                                       [p. 175]

                SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

  The title of the proposed act is designated as the "Marine Pro-
tection Act of 1971."
  Section 2, drawing on the report of the Council on Environmen-
tal  Quality made public by the President October 7, 1970, makes a
finding by the Congress that unregulated dumping of material in
the oceans,  coastal, and other waters  endangers human health,
welfare, and amenities, and the marine  environment,  ecological
systems, and economic potentialities. It declares a federal policy of
regulating dumping of all types of material in the relevant waters
and of vigorously limiting the dumping of material which could
have an unfavorable effect.
  Section 3 defines certain terms used in the proposal. Subsection
3 (a) defines the responsible official for implementation of the leg-
islation as the  Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). Subsection 3(b)  provides that  the proposal ap-
plies to the oceans,  to gulfs, bays,  and  other similar salt waters,
other coastal areas where the tide ebbs and flows, and to the Great
Lakes.
  Subsection 3 (c)  defines material, the transportation for dump-
ing and dumping of which are regulated by the proposal, very
broadly as  "matter of any kind  or description",  and then, for
illustrative  purposes, but without limiting the comprehensive
scope of this initial definition, lists specific materials which are
included in the general definition. Oil  and sewage  from vessels,
discharges of which are covered by the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, are excluded from the scope of this Act.

-------
2330          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Subsection 3 (e)  defines "person" in such a way that all Federal,
State, and foreign governmental organizations, employees,  and
agents, along with private persons or entities, are included within
the prohibition on transportation for dumping  or  dumping  con-
tained in Section 4. Federal organizations, employees, and agents,
however, are excepted from the definition of "person" insofar as
section  6, providing  for penalties,  is concerned. Thus, Federal
organizations, employees, and agents must comply with the permit
and standard-setting provisions of  the Act, i.e., they would be
                                                       [p. 176]

required to obtain approval from the Administrator of EPA for
the transportation for dumping or the dumping of materials in the
relevant waters, but they are not  liable for or subject to the
penalty provisions.
  Subsection 3 (f) defines dumping for purposes of the Act as "a
disposition of material". Provisos make two important exceptions
to this general rule of applicability.  The first proviso excepts from
the Act's coverage disposition of effluents from any outfall struc-
ture or  routine discharges of effluents incidental to the propulsion
of vessels. Municipal sewage outfalls or industrial  waste outfalls
come within this proviso.  Discharges of  effluents other than se-
wage from  outfalls come  within the purview  of  standards set
pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and also will
be subject to the proposed permit program under the Refuse Act
 (33 U.S.C. § 407). Municipal sewage outfalls also come under the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act's standards and also are af-
fected by that Act's assistance programs.
  The second proviso could be called the  "lobster-pot" proviso. It
excepts intentional placement of devices in the relevant waters or
on  the  submerged lands beneath those  waters. Several federal
departments and agencies place testing,  monitoring, sensing,  or
surveillance  devices on the ocean floor. Under this proviso, the
placement of such items or their transportation for placement is
not within the coverage of the proposal. Private activities simi-
larly not within the proposal would include placing into the ocean
and other pertinent waters lobster  traps, off-shore drilling  plat-
forms,  pipelines, or cables. The latter portion of the proviso en-
sures that any excepted placement  of devices does not include
placement of material to produce an effect attributable only to the
physical presence of the material in the  ocean  or  other relevant
waters. Thus, if car bodies or other similar material were placed

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2331

in the ocean to serve as a shelter for fish, the effect from placing
the car bodies would be attributable only to the physical presence
of the car bodies in the ocean, and the placement would constitute
a dumping for which a permit would be required under the Act.
   Special note should also be made  of the fact that "dumping" as

                                                       [p. 177]
defined in subsection 3 (f) would not include an activity which has
as its primary purpose a result other than "a disposition of mate-
rial"  but which involves the incidental depositing of some debris
or other material  in the relevant waters. For example, material
from  missiles and  debris from  gun projectiles  and bombs ulti-
mately come to rest in  the protected waters. Such activities are
not covered by this Act.
   Except where the Administrator has issued a permit for such
activity, subsection 4(a) of the proposal prohibits transportation
of material from the United States  for the purpose of dumping it
in the oceans, coastal, and other waters. Similarly, except where a
permit has been granted, section 4(b) prohibits dumping of mate-
rial in that part of such waters which  is within the territorial
jurisdiction of the United States, or in the Contiguous Zone of the
United States  when the dumping  affects  the territorial sea or
territory of the United States.
   Section 5 places authority to grant transportation and dumping
permits in the Administrator of EPA, provides standards for his
use in acting on permit applications, and  governs the nature of
permits which may be issued.
   Section 5 (a) allows issuance  of  a permit  where the applicant
presents information which indicates that the transportation or
dumping or both will not unreasonably degrade or unreasonably
endanger human health, welfare, or amenities, or the marine envi-
ronment, ecological systems,  or  economic potentialities. The Ad-
ministrator  is directed to establish  and apply criteria for review-
ing and evaluating permit applications. In establishing or revising
the criteria, the Administrator is required to consider the likely
impact of the proposed  dumping along with  alternative locations
and methods of disposal, including those based on land, the proba-
ble impact of using such alternatives on considerations affecting
the public interest, and the probable impact of issuing or denying
permits on such considerations.  In establishing  or  revising cri-
teria, the Administrator is directed to consult with  the heads of
concerned departments and agencies.

-------
2332          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Subsection 5(b) authorizes the Administrator to establish and
issue various categories of permits. If he deems such a step to be
                                                       [p. 178]

desirable, the Administrator could set different procedures  for
handling applications in the various categories. Subsection (b)  (2)
allows the Administrator to require applicants for permits to pro-
vide necessary information. The Administrator could require dif-
fering amounts and types of information according to category.
  Subsections 5(c) and 5(d) set out the requirements which may
be incorporated into permits issued under the authority of subsec-
tion 5(a). They also allow the Administrator, as he deems appro-
priate, to state further requirements and actions, such as charges
for permits or reporting on actions taken under a permit.
  Subsection 5 (e) authorizes the Administrator to grant general
permits for the transportation for dumping or dumping of quanti-
ties and types of materials which he determines will have a mini-
mal  effect on the ocean. This provides flexibility to give general
permits  for  certain  types of  periodic or continuing activities
where the amounts dumped are minimal.
  Subsection 5(f) authorizes the  Administrator to limit or deny
the issuance  of permits involving  specified substances where  he
finds that the substances cannot be dumped consistently with  the
provisions of and criteria established under  subsection 5(a).  In
such cases the Administrator may also alter or revoke partially or
entirely the terms of existing permits.
  Subsection 5(g) allows the Administrator  to designate recom-
mended sites for dumping specified  materials. This would give
guidance to applicants and facilitate the Administrator's imple-
mentation of the control programs.
  Subsection 5 (h) establishes a very limited  exemption from  the
prohibition on transportation for  dumping or dumping where  no
permit has been granted. Such  transportation or dumping is  not
prohibited where it is necessary  in an emergency to  safeguard
human life. In such cases reports  of the excepted emergency ac-
tions must be made to the Administrator.
  Section 6 provides  for penalties. Under  subsection 6 (a)  the
Administrator could assess a civil penalty recoverable in federal
district court, of up to $50,000 for each violation. Subsection 6(b)
establishes, in addition, criminal sanctions for knowing and willful
                                                       [p. 179]

violations. The court could assess a fine of up to $50,000 or order

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2333

imprisonment for a period of up to one year, or both. For those
cases where violations  are  of a  continuing  nature, and for  the
purpose  of  imposing civil penalties  and criminal fines but  not
imprisonment, subsection 6(c) makes each day of such a violation
a separate offense. Under the provisions of subsection 6(d),  the
Attorney General is authorized to seek  equitable relief to redress
violations. 6(e) subjects vessels used in  violations to in rem liabil-
ity for any civil penalty assessed  or criminal fine imposed. Public
vessels within the meaning of subsection 13 (a) (3) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act and  other  public property of a simi-
lar nature would not be subject to the remedy authorized by this
provision. Subsection 6(f) adds authority for the Administrator
to revoke or suspend a permit issued under subsection 6 (a) if the
permit's provisions have been violated.
  Section 7  deals with the relationship of this legislation to other
laws. Generally, except  as provided in subsections 7(b) and 7(c),
it provides that after  the Act's effective date,  existing licenses,
permits, or authorizations would be terminated to the extent they
authorize activity covered by this  proposal, and that further licen-
ses,  permits, or authorizations of a similar  nature could not be
issued.
  Subsection 7(b) maintains present responsibility and authority
contained in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, and provides that the
provisions of Sections 4 and 7 (a)  of this proposal do not apply to
actions  taken under the  Act. However,  the  AEC must consult
with the Administrator before issuing  a permit to conduct any
activity otherwise regulated by this proposal. Moreover, the AEC
must comply with the radioactive-material standards  set by  the
Administrator, and the Administrator is directed to consider  the
policy expressed in subsection 2(b) of this proposal along with the
factors stated in subsections 5 (a)  (1)  and 5 (a) (2)  in setting such
standards for the waters covered by this proposal.
  Subsection 7(c)  relates to authorities contained in the Rivers
and  Harbors Act of 1899, respecting  dredging,  filling, harbor
works, and maintenance of navigability. The powers are exercised
for the most part by the Secretary of the Army  and the Chief of
                                                       [p. 180]

Engineers. Except for the limited supersession found in subsection
ll(e), the Rivers and Harbors Act authorities are not negated or
abrogated, nor  are existing licenses or  permits  issued under  the
Act terminated. Rather, in situations where this Act and the Act
of 1899 both apply to dumping of material  in connection with a

-------
2334          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

dredge, fill or other permit  issued by the  Corps of Engineers,
issuance of the permit requires a certification by the Administra-
tor of EPA that the activity is in conformity with this proposal
and any regulations issued under it. The Administrator will not
issue separate permits in such cases.
  After this Act becomes effective, the Department of the Army's
permit program under the Refuse Act, which is administered in
close  cooperation with EPA on all water quality  matters,  will
continue to regulate the disposition of any effluent covered by the
Refuse Act from any outfall structure regardless of the  waters
into which this disposition occurs, in addition to regulating all
depositing of material into other navigable waters of the  United
States not covered by subsection 4 (b) of this Act.
  Subsection 7(d)  provides for consultation by the Administrator
of EPA with the Secretary of the Army in cases where the Ad-
ministrator finds that the proposed activity may affect navigation
or create an artificial island on the Outer Continental Shelf.
  Subsection 7(e)  saves State or local laws from being preempted
by this proposal.
  Section 8 allows the Administrator to use, by agreement, re-
sources of other federal agencies, on either  a reimbursable or
non-reimbursable basis. In subsection 8(b)  the Administrator is
authorized to delegate responsibility for acting on permit applica-
tions to an officer of EPA or, by agreement, to the head of other
federal departments or agencies, such as the Commandant of the
Coast Guard. Subsection 8(c) directs that surveillance, and other
appropriate enforcement activity be conducted by the Secretary of
the department in which the Coast Guard is operating.
  Section 9 gives  the Administrator power to issue  appropriate
regulations in carrying out the responsibilities and authority con-
ferred by the Act.
                                                       [p-181]

  Section 10 directs the Secretary of State, in consultation  with
the Administrator, to seek appropriate international action and
cooperation to support the policy of this proposal.
  Subsections 11 (a)  and  11  (b) repeal  the  Supervisory Harbors
Act of 1888, as amended (33 U.S.C. §§ 441-451b), and the provi-
sion of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C.  §  418)
which preserved the Supervisory Harbors Act from supersession
by the 1899 Act. The Supervisory  Harbors Act provides a special
authority to control transit in and from the harbors of New York,
Baltimore, and Hampton Roads, Virginia. This authority has been

-------
                   GUIDELINES AND REPORTS              2335

used to regulate ocean dumping.  The proposed Act would replace
that authority. A portion of the Act of August 5, 1886 (33 U.S.C.
§ 407a), which pertains to  deposits of debris from  mines  and
stamp works, and which is covered by this bill or the Refuse Act,
is also repealed. A provision contained in the Rivers  and Harbors
Act of 1905  (33 U.S.C. § 419), which has been used to buttress the
Corps of Engineers' authority to regulate ocean dumping, is su-
perseded, insofar  as it authorizes action that would be regulated
by this proposal. Lastly, section 13 of the Rivers and Harbors Act
of 1899  (33  U.S.C. § 407),  commonly known as the Refuse Act, is
superseded,  but only insofar as it applies  to dumping of material
in the waters covered by subsection 4 (b) of this proposal.
  Section  12  provides  that this proposal shall  take  effect six
months after its enactment and further saves from being affected
by  this proposal  legal actions  begun or rights of  action accrued
prior to the proposal's effective date.
  Section 13 contains an authorization for appropriations to carry
out the purposes and administration of the proposal.

                                                            [p. 182]

                            ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY,
                                                 Washington, D.C.

HON. SPIRO T. AGNEW,
President of the Senate,
Washington, D.C.
HON. CARL B.  ALBERT,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.

  DEAR MR. [PRESIDENT/SPEAKER] : Enclosed is  a draft of a proposed bill
"to  control  the  generation and transmission of noise  detrimental to the
human environment,  and for other purposes."

  The proposed legislation  would expand and coordinate Federal efforts  to
control noise,  which  presents a growing threat  to the health and  welfare
of the American  people. Particularly  in congested urban  areas, the noise
produced  by the products of our advancing technology, and  in the manu-
facture of those products,  causes continual  annoyance  and  in  some  cases
serious physical harm. While the States  and localities have the responsi-
bility  to  deal with  many aspects of  noise, effective Federal action  is
essential with  respect to major  noise problems requiring national uniformity
of treatment.

  The proposed bill would achieve three primary functions. First, it would
establish, in the Environmental Protection Agency, authority to coordinate
existing Federal  noise  research  and  control programs,  and authority  to
publish criteria and control-technology documents relating  to  noise.  Second,
it would  supplement  existing  Federal  authority to regulate  the  noise

-------
2336           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

characteristics of articles that  are major  sources  of noise, and authorize
Federal noise labeling requirements for such articles. Third, it would direct
all Federal agencies to  administer their programs,  consistent with existing
authority, in  such a manner as to minimize noise.
  A detailed  section-by-section  analysis of the bill is enclosed. A similar
                                                          [p. 184]

letter is being sent to the  [President of the Senate/Speaker of the  House].
  The bill is  part of the  President's  environmental program as announced
in his Environmental Message of February 8,  1971. It will be administered
by the Environmental Protection Agency and was developed in coordination
with the Council on Environmental Quality.
  The Office  of  Management and Budget  advises  that enactment of  this
bill would be  in accord with the program of the President.
                                              Sincerely yours,
                                         WILLIAM B. RUCKELSHAUS.
                                                          [p. 185]

  A BILL To control the generation  and transmission of noise detrimental
to the human  environment, and for other  purposes.
  Be it enacted by the  Senate and House  of Representatives of the
United  States of America in Congress assembled,  That: This Act
may be cited as the "Noise Control Act of  1971."

Section 2. Findings and policy
  (a) The Congress finds—
       (1) that inadequately controlled noise presents a growing
     danger to the health  and welfare of the Nation's population,
    particularly in urban areas;
       (2) that the major sources of  noise include transportation
    vehicles and  equipment, machinery,  appliances, and  other
    manufactured articles that move in commerce; and
       (3) that,  while primary responsibility for  control of noise
     rests in many respects with the States and local governments,
     Federal action is essential to deal with major noise problems
    requiring national uniformity of treatment.
  (b)  The  Congress declares that it is  the  policy of the United
States to promote an  environment for all Americans free from
noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare. To that  end, it is
the purpose of this Act to  establish a means for effective coordina-
tion of Federal research and activities in noise control, to supple-
ment existing Federal authority  for  regulation of the noise char-
acteristics of articles moving in  commerce, and to authorize Fed-
eral noise labeling requirements  for such articles.  Nothing in this
Act is intended to diminish the responsibilities of State and local

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2337

governments to regulate other aspects of noise within their juris-
dictions.
Section 3. Definitions
  As used in this Act the term—
  (a)  "Administrator" means the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency;
  (b)  "person" means any private  person or entity, any  officer,
department, agency, or instrumentality of any State or local unit
of government, and, except with respect to the provisions  of sec-
                                                       [p. 186]

tion 12 (a), any officer, department,  agency, or instrumentality of
the Federal Government;
  (c)  "product" means any article or good manufactured for sale
in,  or  introduction into, commerce,  including but not  limited to
transportation vehicles and equipment, machinery, and appliances,
provided, that it  does not include (i) aircraft, aircraft engines,
propellers, or appliances that are covered by Title VI of the Fed-
eral Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C. Sees. 1421-32),  (ii) those
military aircraft,  weapons, or equipment that  are  designed  for
combat use; or (iii) those aircraft, rockets, or equipment that are
designed for research or experimental or  developmental work to
be performed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administra-
tion, or other machinery or equipment designed for use in experi-
mental work done by or for the Federal Government;
  (d)  "ultimate purchaser" means  the first person who in good
faith purchases a new product for purposes other than resale;
  (e)  "new product" means a product the equitable of legal title
to which has never been transferred to an ultimate purchaser;
  (f) "manufacturer" means any person engaged in the manufac-
turing or assembling of new products or who acts for,  and is
controlled by, any such person in connection with the distribution
of such products;
  (g)  "commerce" means trade, traffic, commerce, transportation,
or communication among the several States, or between a place in
a State and any place outside thereof, or within the District of
Columbia or a possession of the United States, or between points
in the same State but through a point outside thereof.
Section 4- Coordination and evaluation of federal programs
  (a)  The Administrator  shall promote coordination of the pro-
grams of all Federal departments and agencies relating to noise
research and noise control. Each Federal department  or agency

-------
2338          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

shall, upon request, furnish to the Administrator such information
as he may reasonably require to determine the nature, scope, and
                                                       [p. 187]

results of the noise-research and noise-control programs of  the
department or agency.
   (b) On the basis of  regular consultation with appropriate Fed-
eral departments and  agencies, the Administrator shall compile
and publish,  from time to time, a report on the status and  prog-
ress of Federal activities  relating  to noise research and  noise
control. This report shall  describe  the noise  programs of each
Federal department or agency and assess the contributions of
those programs to the Government's overall efforts to control
noise.
Section 5. Noise criteria and control technology
   (a) The Administrator shall, after consultation with appropri-
ate Federal departments and agencies, develop and publish such
criteria for  noise as in his judgment may be requisite for  the
protection of the  public health and welfare.  Such criteria shall
reflect the scientific knowledge most useful in indicating the kind
and extent of all identifiable effects on the public health or welfare
which may be expected from differing quantities and qualities of
noise. The Administrator shall confer  with the Secretaries of
Health, Education, and Welfare, and of Labor to assure consist-
ency between the criteria published  under this subsection and the
criteria and  standards for occupational  noise  exposure produced
under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.
   (b) The Administrator shall, after publication of the  initial
criteria pursuant to subsection  (a)  of this section and after con-
sultation  with appropriate  Federal departments and  agencies,
compile and publish a report or series of reports identifying  major
sources of noise and giving information on techniques for control
of noise from  such  sources. This information shall  include such
data as  are  available on the  technology,  costs,  and alternative
methods of noise control.
   (c) The Administrator shall from time  to time review and, as
appropriate, revise or supplement any criteria or information on
control techniques published pursuant to this section.
   (d) The publication or revision of any criteria or information
en control techniques  pursuant to this section shall be announced
in the Federal Register, and copies shall be made available  to the
                                                        [p. 188]
general public.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2339

Section 6. Noise-generation standards
   (a)  If the Administrator, in a report published pursuant to
section 5, identifies as a major source of noise any product or class
of products of one or more of the following types :
       (1) construction equipment,
       (2) transportation equipment (including recreational vehi-
    cles and related equipment), or
       (3) equipment powered by internal combustion engines,
he may, after consultation to the extent desirable with appropriate
Federal departments and agencies,  by regulation prescribe and
amend standards limiting the noise-generation characteristics (in-
cluding reasonable durability over the life of the product) of such
product or class of products. The standards so prescribed shall be
the standards that the Administrator determines, consistent with
criteria published pursuant to section 5, to be requisite to protect
the public health and welfare. In prescribing and amending such
standards the Administrator shall consider whether any proposed
standard is economically reasonable, technologically  practicable,
and appropriate for the particular products to which it will apply,
and whether the particular products can more  effectively be con-
trolled through Federal  regulation of  interstate  commerce or
through  State or local regulations.  Provided,  that no standards
prescribed under this section shall  apply  to products  manufac-
tured on or before the effective date of such standards.
   (b)  The  Administrator shall publish any standards  proposed
under  subsection  (a)  in  the Federal Register at least 60 days
prior to the time when such standards will take effect. In addition
to submissions of written views, any person who will be adversely
affected by  such proposed regulation may, within 45 days of the
date of publication  of the proposed regulation, or within such
other time period as the Administrator may prescribe, file objec-
tions  with the  Administrator and request a public hearing. Re-
quests for a public hearing made by a manufacturer of a product
covered by the proposed standards shall be granted. Requests for a
public hearing by other persons may be granted at the discretion
                                                        [p. 189]

of the Administrator. If a public hearing is held, final regulations
will not be promulgated by the Administrator until after the con-
clusion of such hearing.
   (c) Section 611 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C.
Sec. 1431) is amended as follows:

-------
2340          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

       (1)  In subsection (a), after "with the Secretary of Trans-
     portation'  'insert "and subject to the approval of the Admin-
     istrator of the Environmental Protection Agency".
       (2) At the end of subsection (a), insert "Standards, rules,
     and regulations prescribed and amended under this section
     shall become effective only upon approval by the Administra-
     tor of the  Environmental Protection Agency; provided, that,
     all standards, rules, and  regulations prescribed pursuant to
     this section prior to the  effective date of the Noise Control
     Act of 1971 shall remain in effect until amended or revoked
     by subsequent standards,  rules, or regulations prescribed and
     approved pursuant to this section."
       (3)  After subsection (a), insert the following new subsec-
     tions :
           "(b) The Administrator of the Federal  Aviation Ad-
         ministration shall not issue a type certificate under sec-
         tion 603 of this act for any aircraft, or for any aircraft
         engine, propeller, or appliance that affects significantly
         the noise or sonic  boom characteristics of  any aircraft,.
         unless he shall have prescribed standards, rules, and reg-
         ulations under this section that apply  to such aircraft,
         aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance.
           " (c) If at any time the Administrator of the Environ-
         mental Protection Agency has reason to believe that an
         existing standard,  rule,  or regulation under this section
         does not protect the  public from aircraft noise or sonic
         boom to the maximum extent that is  consistent with the
         consideration listed in subsection  (d) of this section, he
         may request the Administrator of the  Federal Aviation
         Administration to review and report to  him on the advis-
         ability of revising such standard, rule, or regulation. Any
         such request shall  be accompanied by  a detailed  state-
                                                       [p. 190]

         ment of the information on which it is based."
       (4)  Subsections (b) and  (c) are redesignated as (d) and
     (e).
   (d) No State or subdivision  thereof shall adopt or  enforce, with
respect to any product for which noise-generation standards have
been prescribed by the Administrator under subsection (a) of this
section, any standard limiting noise-generation characteristics dif-
ferent from the standards prescribed by the Administrator. Noth-
ing in  this  section  shall diminish or enhance the rights of any

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2341

State or subdivision thereof otherwise to control, regulate, or re-
strict the use, operation, or movement of such products.

Section 7. Labeling
   (a) The Administrator may by regulation designate products or
classes thereof:
       (1) that produce noise capable of adversely affecting the
     public health or welfare; or
       (2) that are sold wholly or  in part on the basis of their
     effectiveness in reducing noise.
   (b)  For each of  such products or classes the Administrator
may, after consultation to the extent  desirable with appropriate
Federal  departments and agencies,  by regulation require that a
notice  of the actual level  of noise  generation, or notice of the
actual effectiveness in reducing noise, be affixed to the product and
to the outside of its container at the time of its sale to the ultimate
purchaser. He shall prescribe the form of the notice and the meth-
ods and units of measurement to be used for this purpose.
   (c) Nothing in this section shall preclude or deny to any State
or subdivision thereof the right to regulate product labeling in any
way not in conflict with regulations  promulgated by the  Adminis-
trator under this section.

Section 8. Prohibited acts
   (a) The following acts or the causing thereof are prohibited:
       (1) in the  case of  a manufacturer of new products,  the
     sale, the offering for sale, or the introduction or  delivery for
     introduction into commerce  of any product manufactured
     after the effective date of regulations promulgated under sec-
     tion 6 (a) (respecting noise-generation characteristics) that
     are applicable to such product, unless it is in conformity with
                                                        [p.191]

     such regulations (except as  provided in subsection (b) of this
     section) ;
       (2) in the case of an owner or operator  of a product, the
     use in commerce of such product after the effective date  of
     regulations promulgated under section 6 (a) that  are applica-
     ble to such product, unless it is in conformity with such regu-
     lations (except as provided in subsection (b) of this section) ;
      (3) the removal or rendering inoperative  by  any person,
     other than for purposes of maintenance, repair, or replace-
    ment, of any device or element of design incorporated into

-------
2342          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    any  product in  compliance with  regulations promulgated
    under section 6(a),  prior to its sale or delivery  to the ulti-
    mate purchaser or during its term of use.
       (4)  in the case of a manufacturer  of new products, the
    sale, the offering for sale, or the introduction or delivery for
    introduction  into commerce of any product manufactured
    after the effective date of regulations promulgated under sec-
    tion 7  (respecting noise labeling) that  are applicable to such
    product, unless it is in conformity with such regulations (ex-
    cept as provided in subsection (b) of this section) ;
       (5)  the removal by any person of any notice  affixed to a
    product  or container pursuant to  regulations promulgated
    under section 7, prior to sale of the product to the ultimate
    purchaser;
       (6) the  importation into the United States by  any person
    of any product  in violation of regulations  promulgated under
    section 13 that are applicable to such product; and
       (7) the failure or refusal by any person to permit access to,
    or copying of, records or to make reports or provide informa-
    tion required under section 9.
   (b)  (1) The Administrator may exempt any product, or class
thereof, from paragraphs (1), (2), (4), and (6) of subsection
(a), upon such terms and conditions as  he  may find necessary to
protect the public health  or welfare, for the purpose of research,
investigations, studies, demonstrations, or training, or  for reasons
of national security.
                                                       [p.192]

   (2)  A product intended solely for export, and so labeled or
tagged on the outside of  the container and on the product itself,
shall not be subject to paragraph (1), (2), or (4) of subsection
(a).
Section 9. Records, reports, and information
   (a) Every manufacturer of a product for which applicable reg-
ulations have been  promulgated under section 6 (a) or  section 7
shall establish and maintain such records, make such reports, and
provide such information (which may include the availability of
products coming off the assembly line for testing by the Adminis-
trator)  as  the Administrator  may reasonably require to enable
him to determine whether such manufacturer has acted or is act-
ing in compliance with this Act and shall, upon request of an
officer or employee duly designated by the Administrator, permit

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2343

such officer or employee at reasonable times to have access to such
information and to copy such records.
   (b) All information obtained by the Administrator or his repre-
sentatives pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, which infor-
mation contains or relates to a trade secret  or other  matter  re-
ferred to in section 1905 of  title 18 of the United  States Code,
shall be  considered confidential for the purpose of  that  section,
except that  such  information may be disclosed to other  Federal
officers or employees, in whose possession it shall remain confiden-
tial, or when relevant in any  proceeding under  this Act.
   (c) This section shall apply only to manufacturers in the United
States.
Section 10. Federal programs
  The Congress authorizes and directs that all agencies of  the
Federal  Government  shall, to the fullest extent consistent with
existing  authority, administer the programs within their control
in such a manner as to further the policy declared in section 2
(b).
Section 11. Research, technical assistance, and public information
  In furtherance  of  his responsibilities under this Act and to
complement, as necessary, the noise-research programs  of other
Federal departments  and agencies,  the Administrator is author-
ized to:
   (a)  Conduct research, and finance research by contract with
                                                       [p.193]

other public and private bodies, on the effects,  measurement, and
control of noise, including but not limited to:
       (1) Investigation of the psychological and physiological ef-
    fects of noise on humans and the effects of noise on domestic
    animals, wildlife, and property, and determination  of accepta-
    ble levels of noise on the basis of such effects;
       (2) Development of improved methods and standards  for
    measurement and monitoring of noise, in  cooperation with
    the National Bureau of Standards, Department of Commerce;
    and
       (3) Determination  of the most  effective and practicable
    means of controlling noise generation, transmission,  and  re-
    ception ;
   (b) Provide technical assistance to State and local governments
to facilitate  their development and enforcement of ambient noise
standards, including but not limited to:

-------
2344          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

       (1)  Advice on training1 of noise-control personnel and on
    selection and operation of noise-abatement equipment; and
       (2)  Preparation of model State or local legislation for noise
    control; and
   (c)  Disseminate to the  public  information on the effects of
noise, acceptable noise levels, and techniques  for noise measure-
ment and control.

Section 12. Enforcement
   (a)  (1)  Any person who violates section 8 (a) of this Act shall
be subject to a  civil penalty of not more than $25,000  for each
violation,  which may be assessed  by the Administrator or by a
court in any action authorized by subsection  (b) or (c) of this
section.
       (2) In any proceeding by  the Administrator to  assess a
     civil penalty  under  this subsection, no penalty shall be as-
     sessed until the person charged shall have been given notice
     and an opportunity  for  a hearing on such charge. In deter-
     mining the amount of the penalty, or the amount agreed upon
     in compromise, the Administrator shall consider the gravity
     of the violation and the demonstrated good faith of the person
     charged in attempting to achieve rapid compliance after noti-
     fication by the Administrator of a violation. Upon failure of
                                                        [P- 194]

     the offending party to  pay any penalty assessed, the Adminis-
     trator may request the Attorney General to  commence an
     action in the appropriate district court for appropriate relief.
       (3) For the purpose of this subsection, the commission of
     any act prohibited by  paragraph  (1), (2), (3), (4),  (5), or
     (6)  of section 8 (a)  shall constitute a separate violation for
     each day or product involved.
   (b)  The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdic-
tion of actions brought by and in the name of the United  States to
restrain violations of this Act or to enforce civil penalties author-
ized by this Act. Any civil  action authorized to be brought by the
United States under this Act shall be referred to the  Attorney
General for appropriate action.
   (c)  By agreement with  any State, with or without reimburse-
ment,  the Administrator may authorize law enforcement officers
or other personnel of such State to enforce  the prohibitions of
section 8  (a) by bringing actions in the appropriate State courts.
When authorized by State law, the courts of such State may enter-

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2345

tain actions brought by such officers or personnel to restrain viola-
tions  of this  Act or to enforce civil penalties authorized by this
Act. In any action under this subsection, any civil penalty imposed
shall be payable one-half to the State and one-half to the United
States Treasury.

Section 13. Imports
   (a)  Products offered for importation shall be subject to the
same general standards and labeling requirements that are applied
to like domestic products. The Administrator shall by regulation
prescribe the procedures by which this will be accomplished with a
minimum detrimental  effect on domestic and international trade.
   (b)  The Secretary of the Treasury shall,  in consultation with
the Administrator, issue regulations to carry  out the provisions of
this Act with respect to products offered for importation.

Section 14. Appropriations
   There are  authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act
for Fiscal Year 1972 and for each fiscal year thereafter such sums
as are necessary.
                                                        [p-195]

Section 15. Report of noise study
   Section 402  (a)  of  the Clean Air Act is amended by deleting
everything before "a full and complete investigation" and insert-
ing in lieu thereof "The Administrator shall carry out".
                                                        [p. 196]

                 SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

   The title of the proposed act is designated as "The Noise Con-
trol Act of 1971."
   Section 2 contains a statement of congressional findings and
policy. Subsection 2 (a) states findings that noise, particularly in
urban areas,  presents  a growing danger to the public health and
welfare; that the major  sources  of noise include a  variety  of
manufactured articles  that move in commerce; and that the Fed-
eral Government bears a responsibility to deal with major noise
problems requiring national uniformity of treatment.  Subsection
2 (b) declares a Federal policy to promote an environment for all
Americans free from noise that jeopardizes  their health or wel-
fare. This subsection further states  that the purpose of the pro-
posed  act is  to establish a means for effective coordination  of
Federal noise programs, to supplement existing Federal authority

-------
2346          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

for regulation of the noise characteristics of articles moving in
commerce, and to authorize Federal noise labeling  requirements
for such articles. The Act is  not intended to relieve States and
localities of their responsibilities to control other aspects of noise
within their jurisdictions.
  Section 3 defines certain terms used in the proposal. Subsection
3 (a)  defines the official primarily responsible for implementing
the legislation as the Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA).  Subsection 3(b)  defines "person" in such a
way that all Federal, State, or local governmental organizations,
employees, and agents, along with private persons or entities, are
included within the enforcement provisions  of  section 12. How-
ever, Federal organizations, employees, and agents are excepted
from the definition of "person"  insofar as subsection 12(a), pro-
viding for civil penalties,  is concerned. Thus, Federal organiza-
tions, employees, and  agents must comply with the prohibitions of
section 8, but they  are not liable for or subject to the civil penal-
ties authorized in subsection 12(a).
  Subsection 3(c) defines "product" to include any article or good
manufactured for  sale in, or introduction  into, commerce  with
three general exclusions. "Product" does not include aircraft or
                                                        [p. 197]

aircraft components that are  covered  by  Title VI of the Federal
Aviation Act of 1958. The noise characteristics of these aircraft
and aircraft components are already subject to regulation under
that Act, which will continue in effect subject to the amendments
made by section 6 of the proposed legislation, discussed below.
  "Product" also excludes  any article that, although otherwise
within the broad definition, is designed for  military combat use.
National security requires that the responsible authorities be free
to determine to what extent noise control objectives must be sub-
ordinated to military necessities in the use of such articles. There-
fore, they are excluded from the definition of "product" to exempt
them entirely from the standard-setting ard labeling provisions of
sections 6 and 7 without regard to the  exercise by the Administra-
tor of his power under section 8(b) (1), discussed below, to grant
specific exemptions for national security reasons. The policy of the
proposed legislation will, however, dictate that all feasible steps be
taken to improve the noise characteristics of even these articles.
"Product" also excludes  equipment designed for use in experimen-
tal work done by or for the National  Aeronautics and Space Ad-
ministration or other  agencies of the Federal Government.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2347

  Subsection 3(d)  defines "ultimate purchaser" to be  the  first
person who purchases a new product for a use other than resale.
This excludes both those intermediaries who may handle the prod-
uct before sale to the first user, and subsequent users who  may
obtain the product  second-hand. Subsection 3(e)  defines "new
product" to mean a product the title to which  has not  yet  been
transferred to an ultimate purchaser.
  Subsection 3(f) defines "manufacturer" to include any person
who manufactures or assembles new products or  who  acts on
behalf of such a person in the distribution of new products. "Com-
merce" is defined in  subsection 3(g) to include all forms of inter-
change involving two or more States, or a State and a place out-
side thereof or  the  District  of  Columbia or a possession of the
United States.
  Section 4 entrusts to the Administrator of EPA the primary
                                                        [p. 198]

responsibility for promoting coordination of Federal  programs
relating to noise. To assist him in  exercising this  responsibility,
subsection 4 (a)  directs  each  other Federal agency to furnish him
with any information he may reasonably request about the agen-
cy's noise programs. Subsection 4(b)  directs the  Administrator,
on the basis of consultation with appropriate Federal agencies, to
publish a periodic report covering the noise-related activities of all
Federal agencies.  It is  intended that  this report will provide  a
means for assessing the overall  progress of Federal noise control
efforts.
  Section 5 gives the Administrator of EPA responsibility to de-
velop and publish  basic documents  on  noise  and its  control.
Subsection 5 (a) directs him to  develop criteria for noise, taking
into account up-to-date scientific knowledge on noise effects. These
criteria should  make clear what quantities and  qualities  of noise
are consistent with  protection of the public health and welfare
under differing  circumstances. The Administrator is  directed to
seek consistency between these criteria and the criteria and stand-
ards for occupational noise exposure produced by the  Secretaries
of Health, Education, and Welfare and Labor under the Occupa-
tional Safety and Health Act of 1970.
  Subsection 5(b) directs the Administrator, after initial publica-
tion of criteria under subsection 5(a),  to publish one or more
reports identifying  major sources  of  noise and discussing tech-
niques for controlling noise from such sources. It is not intended
that any single report published  under subsection 5 (b)  must cover

-------
2348          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

all or most major noise sources. Rather, as information becomes
available, the Administrator may publish individual reports iden-
tifying one or more major sources and outlining the noise control
technology applicable to each identified source. Subsection 5(c)
directs the Administrator to review and, when appropriate, revise
both the criteria and the control technology documents  published
under section 5, to  ensure that these reflect changes in available
knowledge. Subsection 5(d) requires announcement of each publi-
cation or revision of criteria or control technology documents in
the Federal Register and release of copies to the  public. This
                                                       [p. 199]

provision is intended to ensure adequate public knowledge of the
content of these publications.
  Subsection 6 (a) authorizes the  Administrator of EPA to pre-
scribe noise standards for construction equipment, transportation
equipment, and  equipment powered by internal combustion en-
gines that he has identified as a major source of noise and for
which he has discussed control technology in a report  published
pursuant to section 5. When the Administrator determines to im-
pose standards, subsection 6 (a) requires that they be set at the
level required, in light of the published criteria, to protect health
and welfare, taking into account the feasibility of such  a level of
control and  the appropriateness of Federal regulation. Standards
under subsection 6 (a)  shall not apply to products manufactured
on or before the effective date of the standards. Subsection 6(b)
alters the procedures under the Administrative Procedure Act by
granting a manufacturer the right to a public hearing on proposed
standards that would cover his products.
  Subsection 6(c)  amends section 611 of the Federal Aviation
Act, which  authorizes regulation  of the noise characteristics of
civil aircraft and aircraft components. Subsection 6(c)  provides
that standards, rules, and regulations prescribed by the  Federal
Aviation Administration under section 611  must be approved by
the Administrator of EPA, and  that  such  standards, rules, and
regulations  become effective  only upon such approval.  However,
subsection 6(c)  contains a saving clause which allows  all stand-
ards, rules,  and regulations prescribed under section 611 prior to
the effective date of the proposed legislation to continue in effect
until superseded by new standards,  rules, or regulations pre-
scribed in accordance with the proposed legislation.
   Subsection 6(c) further provides that after the effective date of
the proposed act the Federal Aviation Administrator shall  not

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2349

issue a type certificate for any  aircraft unless he has  already
prescribed standards, rules, and  regulations governing the noise
characteristics of that aircraft. This requirement also applies to
any  aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance that affects signifi-
cantly the noise characteristics of any aircraft in which it is to be
used. This provision will ensure that in the future the noise char-
                                                       [p.200]

acteristics of any new aircraft or aircraft component will be as-
certained and controlled prior to its introduction into air com-
merce or air transportation.
  Subsection 6(c) further provides  that if the  Administrator of
EPA has reason to believe that an existing standard, rule,  or
regulation prescribed under 611 of the Federal Aviation Act inad-
equately protects the public from noise, he may request the Fed-
eral  Aviation Administrator to review the standard, rule, or regu-
lation and report to him on  the  advisability of  revising  it.  Any
such request must be accompanied by a detailed  statement of the
reasons therefor. The Administrator of  EPA may invoke this pro-
vision with respect to a standard, rule, or  regulation prescribed
before or after the effective date of the proposed act.
  Subsection 6(d) provides that when the Administrator of EPA
has prescribed standards for any product under  subsection 6(a),
no State or subdivision thereof shall  adopt or enforce noise stand-
ards for that product different from the standards set by him.
Nothing in section  6 preempts any existing powers of the States
or localities to set noise standards for products for which  the
Administrator has not yet set standards under the proposed act, to
set State standards identical  to standards set by the Administra-
tor for the same product, or to regulate  the use, operation,  or
movement of products.
  Section 7 authorizes Federal noise labeling  requirements  for
products in commerce. Subsection 7 (a) authorizes the Adminis-
trator of EPA to designate classes of products that either produce
noise capable of adversely affecting  the public health or welfare,
or are sold at least in part on the basis of their effectiveness in
reducing noise. These  products need not be limited to those for
which noise standards have been set under section 6 or which have
been discussed in a control technology document under section 5.
Subsection  7(b) authorizes  the Administrator to prescribe  a
noise-generation or noise-reduction labeling requirement for any
product  designated under subsection 7(a). To  assure that such

-------
2350          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

notices are informative and useful in facilitating choices by buy-
ers in the marketplace, the Administrator is directed to prescribe
                                                       [p.201]

the form of the notice and the methods and units of measurement
used in its preparation. Subsection 7(c) leaves intact any existing
powers of the States to regulate product labeling, except that such
regulation may not conflict with regulations promulgated by the
Administrator under section 7.
  Subsection 8 (a) prohibits a number of acts in violation of the
proposed  legislation. Paragraph 8(a)(l) forbids any  manufac-
turer to  sell a product manufactured after the effective date of
noise-generation standards prescribed under subsection 6 (a) that
apply to the product, unless the product conforms with such stand-
ards. Paragraph 8 (a) (2) forbids any person who owns or oper-
ates a product to use it  in commerce after the effective date of
noise-generation standards prescribed under subsection 6 (a) that
apply to  it, unless the  product conforms with such  standards.
Paragraph 8(a) (3) forbids any person to remove or render inop-
erative, other than  for maintenance, repair, or replacement, any
device or element of design incorporated  into a product to make
the product comply with noise-generation standards  prescribed
under subsection 6(a). This prescription applies both prior to sale
of the product to the  ultimate purchaser  and during its term of
use.
  Paragraph 8 (a) (4) forbids any manufacturer to sell a product
manufactured after the effective date of labeling regulations pro-
mulgated under section 7 that apply to the product,  unless the
product conforms to such regulations. Paragraph 8 (a) (5) forbids
any person, prior to sale of a product to the ultimate purchaser, to
remove a notice affixed to the product or its container pursuant to
regulations promulgated under section 7. Paragraph 8 (a) (6) for-
bids the  importation into the United States of any products in
violation of regulations under section 13, discussed below, relating
to imports. Paragraph 8 (a) (7) forbids any person to fail to com-
ply with the provisions of section 9,  discussed below,  respecting
access to required records and reports.
  Subsection 8(b)  creates two exceptions to the prohibitions in
paragraphs 8(a) (1),  (2),  (4), and (6). First, the Administrator
is authorized to exempt any new product from those prohibitions,
upon such terms and conditions as he may find necessary to pro-
                                                       [p. 202]

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2351

tect the public health or welfare, for the purpose of research,
investigations, studies, demonstrations, or training, or for reasons
of national security. Second, subsection 8(b) provides that a prod-
uct produced  solely for export, and visibly labeled or  tagged to
that effect, is exempted  from the prohibitions  of paragraphs
8(a)(l), (2) and (4).
   Section 9 requires every manufacturer of a product covered by
noise regulation or labeling regulations under subsection 6 (a) or
section 7 to maintain such records, make  such reports, and provide
such information as the Administrator may reasonably require to
enable him to determine whether the manufacturer has acted or is
acting- in compliance with the proposed act. This may include the
availability of products coming off the assembly line for testing by
the Administrator. The manufacturer shall, on request, permit a
representative of the Administrator to  view  and copy such  rec-
ords. Any information obtained by the Administrator or his repre-
sentatives  pursuant to section 9, if  it  contains  or relates to a
matter referred to as confidential in section 1905 of title 18 of the
United States  Code, shall be protected from disclosure as provided
in that section, except that it may be disclosed to other Federal
employees or when relevant in any proceeding under the proposed
act.  Disclosure to  other Federal  employees or in  a proceeding
under the proposed act will not terminate the confidential status of
the information.
   Section 10 authorizes and directs all Federal agencies to admin-
ister the programs within their control in such a manner as to
further the policy of the proposed Act, to the fullest extent con-
sistent with the agencies' existing authority.
   Section 11 authorizes the Administrator of EPA, in furtherance
of his responsibilities under the proposed act, to conduct and as-
sist noise research, to provide technical assistance to  State  and
local governments, and to disseminate to the public information on
noise.  The  enumeration in  section 11  of particular  activities
within these categories is not intended to exclude other activities
but only to stress the importance of those enumerated. However, it
is not intended  that  the  activities of the Administrator under
                                                       [p.203]

section 11 will  duplicate activities carried on in other agencies.
  Section 12  provides  for  enforcement of  the prohibitions in
subsection 8 (a) of the proposed act. Subsection 12 (a) establishes
a civil penalty of not more than $25,000 for each violation of
subsection 8(a), and provides for imposition of this fine either by

-------
2352          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

the Administrator or by a court in a proceeding authorized by
subsection 12 (b)  or  (c), discussed  below. Subsection 12 (a)  fur-
ther provides that in any administrative proceeding for imposition
of such a civil penalty by the Administrator the person charged
must be given notice and an opportunity for a  hearing, and the
Administrator must, in determining the  penalty or the amount
accepted in compromise, consider the gravity of  the violation and
the efforts of the person charged to achieve rapid compliance after
notice  of the violation.  If the offending party  fails to  pay any
penalty assessed, the Administrator may request  the  Attorney
General to  sue  in the appropriate district court for appropriate
relief. For the purpose of imposing cumulative penalties,  the com-
mission of any  act prohibited by paragraph 8(a)  (1),  (2),  (3),
(4), (5), or (6) will be a  separate violation  for each day or
product involved. For example, sale of 10 identical products in
violation of noise-generation  or labeling regulations would consti-
tute 10 violations, punishable by a maximum cumulative fine of
$250,000.
  Subsection 12 (b)  gives jurisdiction to  the  Federal district
courts  to entertain actions brought by and in  the name of the
United  States to restrain violations of  the proposed act or to
enforce civil penalties authorized by it. This provision will  allow
the Administrator of EPA, by recommending that the Attorney
General bring suit,  to seek equitable relief or judicial imposition
of a civil penalty, or both, as an alternative to the administratively
imposed fine also authorized by section 12.
  Section 12 (c)  enables the Administrator to  enlist the aid of
State or local governments in the enforcement of the proposed act.
While  neither the executive nor the judicial bodies of any  State
will be required  to  participate, they  may do  so where this  is
authorized by State law and also by the Administrator of EPA in
an  agreement with the appropriate State authorities. Under this
                                                       [p. 204]

provision the Administrator may authorize State personnel to sue
in State court both to restrain violations and to impose civil penal-
ties ; he may not authorize State personnel to impose fines admin-
istratively. Any civil penalty  imposed under the proposed act by a
State court in a suit under subsection 12 (c) will be payable one-
half to the appropriate  State  authorities and one-half to the
United  States Treasury.
  Section 13 directs the Administrator and the Secretary of the
Treasury to issue regulations to apply to imports the same general

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2353

standards and labeling requirements that are applied to like do-
mestic products.
   Section 14 authorizes the appropriation for Fiscal Year  1972
and for each fiscal year thereafter such sums as  are necessary to
carry out the proposed act.
   Section 15 amends the Clean Air Act by deleting  the require-
ment that there by an Office of Noise Abatement and Control in
the Environmental Protection Agency.
                                                       [p. 205]

                             [pp. 206-219 not directly involving EPA]

4.1b  The President's 1972 Environmental Program,  compiled by
the Council on Environmental Quality, March 1972, pp. 1-75, 223.
I. THE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, FEBRUARY
                           8,1972.
                                                        [P. i]

To the Congress of the United States:
   From the very first, the American spirit has been one of self-re-
liance and confident action. Always we have been a people to say
with Henley "I am the master of my fate  . . . the captain of my
soul"—a people sure that man commands his own destiny. What
has dawned dramatically upon us in recent years,  though, is a new
recognition that to a significant extent man commands as well the
very destiny of this planet  where he lives, and the destiny of all
life upon it. We have even begun to see that these  destinies are not
many and separate at all—that in fact they are indivisibly one.
   This is the environmental awakening. It marks a new sensitiv-
ity of the American spirit and a new maturity of  American public
life. It is working a revolution in values, as commitment to respon-
sible partnership  with nature replaces  cavalier assumptions  that
we can play God with our surroundings and survive. It is leading
to broad reforms in action,  as individuals, corporations, govern-
ment, and civic groups mobilize to conserve resources, to control
pollution, to anticipate and prevent emerging environmental prob-
lems, to manage the land more wisely, and to preserve wildness.
  In messages to the Congress during 1970 and  1971 I proposed
comprehensive initiatives reflecting the  earliest and most visible
concerns of the environmental awakening. The  new cast of the
public mind had  to be translated into new legislation.  New in-
sights had to have new governmental forms and processes through
which to operate. Broadly-based problems—such  as air pollution,

-------
2354          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

water pollution and pesticide hazards—had to be dealt with first.
  The necessary first steps in each of these areas have now been
taken though in all of them the work is far from completed. Now,
as we press on with that work in 1972, we must also come to grips
with the basic factors which underlie our more obvious environ-
mental problems—factors  like the use of land and  the impact of
incentives or disincentives built into our economic system. We are
gaining an increasingly sophisticated understanding of the way
economic, institutional, and legal forces shape our surroundings
for good or ill; the next step is learning how to turn such forces to
environmental benefit.
  Primary responsibility for the actions that are needed to protect
and enhance  our environment rests with State and local govern-
ment, consumers, industry, and private  organizations of various
kinds—but the Federal Government must provide  leadership. On
the first day of this decade I stated that "it is literally now or
never" for true quality of life in America. Amid much encourag-
ing evidence  that it can and will be "now," we must not slacken
our pace but accelerate it. Environmental concern must crystallize
into  permanent patterns of thought and action. What began as
                                                        [p. 3]

environmental  awakening must mature finally into a new and
higher environmental way of life. If we flag in our dedication and
will, the problems themselves will not go away. Toward keeping
the momentum of awareness and action, I pledge my full support
and that of this Administration, and I urgently solicit the continu-
ing cooperation of the Congress and the American people.
                     Two YEARS' AGENDA
From Consideration to Action
   In my 1971 environmental message, just one year ago today, I
sent to  the Congress a comprehensive program designed to clean
up the problems of the past, and to deal with emerging problems
before they become critical. These proposals included:
   Regulation of toxic substances
   Comprehensive improvement in pesticide control authority
   Noise control
   Preservation of historic buildings
   Power plant siting
   Regulation of environmental effects of surface and underground
mining
   Ocean dumping regulation

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2355

  More effective control of water pollution through a greatly ex-
panded waste treatment grant program and strengthened stand-
ard-setting and enforcement authorities
  A National Land Use Policy Act
  Substantial expansion of the wilderness system
  Expanded international  cooperation
  To date, most of the legislation on this list has been the subject
of congressional hearings; most of it has attracted heartening
interest and support; but none of it has yet received final congres-
sional action. Last year was,  quite properly, a year of considera-
tion of these measures by  the Congress. I urge, however, that this
be a year of action on all  of them, so that we can move on from
intention to accomplishment in the important needs they address.
Passage of these measures and creation of  the unified Department
of Natural Resources which I also proposed in 1971—by this 92nd
Congress—will be essential if we are to have an adequate base for
improving environmental quality.

Building on the Base
  As that base is being established, we must move ahead to build
wisely and rapidly upon it. I shall outline  today a plan for doing
that, with initiatives and actions in the following areas:
  —Tightening pollution control
    A Toxic Wastes Disposal Control Act
    Legislation to  control  sediment from construction activities
    An emissions charge to reduce sulfur oxide air pollution
    Clean energy research and energy conservation measures
  —Making technology an environmental ally
    Integrated pest management
    Stepped-up research on noise control
    Stepped-up research on air pollution effects and measurement
  —Improving land use
    Expansion and strengthening of the National Land
    Use Policy Act
    Protection of wetlands
  —Protecting our natural heritage
    A ban on use  of poisons for predator  control on public lands
    A stronger law to protect endangered species of wildlife
    Big Cypress National  Fresh Water Reserve
    National Recreation Areas around New York Harbor and the
    Golden Gate
    Conversion of 20 additional Federal properties to recreational
    use

-------
2356          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

    18 new Wilderness Areas
    Regulation of off-road vehicles on Federal lands
  —Expanding international cooperation on the environment
    Establishment of a United Nations Fund for the Environ-
    ment
    Further measures to control marine pollution
  —Protecting children from lead-based paint
  —Enlisting the young
    President's Environmental Merit Awards Program for high
    schools
    Youth opportunities in the Department of Agriculture Field
    Scout program.

               TIGHTENING POLLUTION CONTROL

  The legislative framework for dealing with our major air pollu-
tion problems has  become law, and I  have made comprehensive
recommendations regarding water  pollution control. But  several
problems remain to be addressed which are difficult to deal with
under the general pollution control authorities.
                                                        [P. 4]

                  DISPOSAL OF TOXIC WASTES

  Increasingly  strict air and  water pollution  control laws  and
their more effective enforcement have led  to greater  reliance on
land—both surface and underground—for disposal of waste prod-
ucts from the toxic substances being used in ever greater  volume
and variety in our  society. Without adequate controls, such waste
disposal may cause contamination of underground and  surface
waters leading to direct health hazards.
  —I propose a Toxic Wastes Disposal Control Act, under which
the Environmental Protection Agency would  establish Federal
guidelines and requirements for State programs to regulate dis-
posal on or under the land of those toxic wastes  which  pose a
hazard to  health. The act would provide for Federal enforcement
action if a State should fail to establish its own program.
                     SEDIMENT CONTROL

  Sediment, small  particles of soil  which enter the water, is the
most pervasive water pollution problem which does not come pri-
marily from municipal or industrial sources. Heavy loads of sedi-
ment interfere with many beneficial uses of water, such as swim-
ming and water supply, and can change the entire character of an
aquatic environment. Many of our great waterways are afflicted

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2357

with this problem. In our urban areas,  a  significant amount of
sediment comes from construction.  However, if proper construc-
tion practices are followed, sediment runoff from this source can
be greatly reduced.
  —I  propose legislation calVng upon  the States to establish,
through appropriate local and regional agencies,  regulatory pro-
grams to control sediment affecting ivater quality from earth-mov-
ing activities such as building and road construction.
  The Environmental Protection  Agency,  together with  other
Federal agencies, would develop Federal  guidelines for appropri-
ate control  measures.  Federal  enforcement would take place in
situations where a State failed to implement such a program.

               SULFUR OXIDES EMISSIONS CHARGE

  In my 1971 Environmental Message, I announced plans to ask
for imposition of a charge on sulfur oxides emissions, one of the
air pollutants most damaging to human health and property, and
vegetation. The Council on Environmental  Quality, the Treasury
Department and the Environmental Protection Agency have now
completed their studies on this measure  and have developed the
details of an emission charge proposal.
  —/  propose  a charge  on sulfur  emitted into  the atmosphere
from combustion, refining, smelting,  and other processes.
  This charge would begin in 1976 and apply in all regions where
the air quality does not meet national standards for sulfur oxides
during 1975. The charge would be 150 per pound on sulfur emitted
in regions where the primary standards—-which are designed to be
protective of public health—have not been met within the deadline
for achievement prescribed in the Clean Air Act. In regions where
air quality met the  primary standard but exceeded the secondary
national standard—designed to protect property,  vegetation,  and
aesthetic values—a charge of $.10  per pound of sulfur  emitted
would  apply. Areas which reduce  emissions sufficiently to meet
both primary and  secondary air quality  standards would be ex-
empt from the emission charge.
  This charge is an application of the principle that the costs of
pollution should be included in the price of the product. Combined
with our  existing  regulatory authority, it would constitute a
strong economic incentive to achieve the  sulfur oxides standards
necessary to protect health, and then further to reduce emissions
to levels which protect welfare and aesthetics.

-------
2358          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

          CLEAN ENERGY GENERATION AND CONSERVATION

  Ours is an energy-based economy, and energy resources are the
basis for future economic progress. Yet the consumption of ener-
gy-producing fuels contributes to many of our most serious pollu-
tion problems. In order to have both environmental quality and an
improving standard of living we will  need to develop new clean
energy sources and to lean to use energy more efficiently.
  Our success in meeting energy needs while preventing adverse
environmental effects from energy generation and  transmission
will depend heavily on the state of available technology. In my
message  to the Congress on energy of last June, I  announced a
series of steps to increase research on clean and efficient energy
production. But further action is needed.
  —As part of my new commitment to augment Federal research
and development and target it more effectively on solving domestic
problems, I have requested in the 1973 budget an additional $88
million for development of a broad spectrum of new technologies
for producing clean energy.
  In addition to carrying forward the priority efforts I have al-
ready announced—the liquid metal fast  breeder reactor, pipeline
quality gas  from coal, and sulfur  oxide control technology—the
budget provides funds  for new or increased efforts on fusion
power, solar energy, magnetohydrodynamics, industrial gas from
coal, dry cooling towers for power plant waste heat, large energy
storage batteries and advanced underground electric transmission
lines. These new efforts relate to both our immediate and our
future energy problems,  and  are needed to assure adequate sup-
plies of clean energy.
  My message on energy also announced several steps that would
be taken by the Federal Government to use energy more efficiently
and with less  environmental harm. One of these steps was issu-
ance by  the Secretary  of  Housing and Urban  Development  of
revised standards for insulation in new  federally insured houses.
The new standards for single-family structures, which have now
been issued through the Federal Housing Administration, reduce
                                                        [P. 5]

the maximum permissible heat loss by about one-third for a typi-
cal home. The fuel savings  which will result from the application
of these  new standards will, in an average climate, exceed in one
year the cost of the additional insulation required.
  —/ am now directing the  Secretary of Housing and  Urban
Development to issue revised insulation standards for apartments

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2359

and other multifamily structures not covered by the  earlier revi-
sion. The new rules will cut maximum permissible heat loss  by
40%.
  The  savings  in  fuel costs after  a  5-year period  will on  the
average more than offset the additional construction costs occa-
sioned by these revised standards.
  These  stricter insulation  standards  are only one example of
administrative actions which can be taken  by the Federal Govern-
ment to  eliminate  wasteful  use of energy. The Federal Govern-
ment can and must provide leadership by  finding and implement-
ing additional ways of reducing such waste.
  —I have  therefore instnicted the Council  on Environmental
Quality and the Office of Science and Technology, working with
other Federal agencies, to conduct a survey to determine what
additional actions  might  be  taken to conserve energy in Federal
activities.
  This survey  will look  at  innovative ways to reduce wasteful
consumption of energy while also reducing total costs and undesir-
able environmental impact.

                         RECYCLING

  Recycling—the  technique which  treats many types of solid
wastes not  as  pollutants but as recoverable  and reusable "re-
sources out  of place"—is an important part of the answer  to the
Nation's solid waste burden. Last year, at my  direction, the Gen-
eral  Services Administration began reorienting government pro-
curement policies  to set a strong Federal example in the use of
recycled products.
  —Because Federal tax policy should also offer recycling  incen-
tives, the Treasury Department is clarifying the availability  of tax
exempt treatment  industrial revenue bond financing  for the con-
struction of recycling facilities built by private concerns to recycle
their own wastes.

               THE ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSITION

  Many  environmental problems are influenced by the way  our
economy operates. Conversely,  efforts to  improve  environmental
quality have an impact on the economy. Our national income ac-
counting does not  explicitly recognize the cost of pollution dam-
ages to health, materials, and aesthetics in the computation  of our
economic well-being. Many goods and services fail to bear the full
costs of  the damages they cause from pollution, and hence  are
underpriced.

-------
2360          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  Environmental quality requirements will  affect many of our
industries by imposing new costs on production.  We know that
these impacts fall unevenly on industries, new and old firms, and
on communities, but little concrete data has been  available. Con-
tract studies have recently  been  performed for the Council on
Environmental  Quality, the Environmental -Protection  Agency,
and the Department of Commerce, under the policy guidance of
the Council  of Economic Advisers. These initial studies suggest
that pollution control costs  will result in some  price increases,
competitive  trade  disadvantages,  and employment shifts.  The
major impact of these costs  will be on older, and usually smaller
plants.
  As long as we carefully set our environmental goals to assure
that the benefits we achieve are greater than the  social and eco-
nomic costs, the changes which will occur in our economy are
desirable, and we as a nation will benefit from them.

       MAKING TECHNOLOGY AN  ENVIRONMENTAL ALLY

  The time has come to increase the technological resources allo-
cated to the challenges of meeting high-priority domestic needs. In
my State of the Union Message last month, I announced an ex-
panded  Federal research and development commitment  for this
purpose. There is great potential for achievement through technol-
ogy in the fight against pollution and the larger  drive for quality
in our environment.
  The temptation to cast technology in the role  of ecological vil-
lain must  be resisted—for to do so is to deprive ourselves of a
vital tool available for enhancing environmental quality. As Peter
Drucker has said, "the environment is a problem of [the] success"
of technological society, by no means a proof of its failure. The
difficulties which some applications of technology have engendered
might indeed be rectified by turning our backs on the 20th century,
but only at a price in privation  which we do not want to pay and
do not have to pay. There is no need to throw out the baby with
the bath water. Technology can and must be wisely applied so that
it becomes environmentally  self-corrective.  This  is the  standard
for which we must aim.

                 INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT

  Chemical pesticides are a familiar example of a technological
innovation which  has provided important  benefits to  man but
which has  also produced unintended and unanticipated harm. New
technologies of integrated pest management must be developed so

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2361

that agricultural and forest productivity can be maintained to-
gether with, rather than at the expense of, environmental quality.
Integrated pest management means judicious  use  of selective
chemical pesticides in combination  with  nonchemical agents and
methods. It seeks to maximize reliance on such natural pest popu-
lation controls  as predators, sterilization, and pest diseases. The
following actions are being taken:
  —7 have directed the Department of Agriculture, the National
Science Foundation, and the Environmental Protection Agency to
launch  a  large-scale integrated pest management research and
                                                        [p. 6]

development program. This program will be conducted by a num-
ber of our leading universities.
  —/ have directed the Department of  Agriculture  to increase
field testing of  promising neiv methods of pest detection and con-
trol. Also, other existing Federal pesticide application programs
will be examined for the purpose of incorporating new pest man-
agement techniques.
  —I  have directed the Departments  of  Agriculture and  of
Health, Education,  and  Welfare to  encourage the development of
training and certification programs  at appropriate academic insti-
tutions  in order to provide  the large number of crop protection
specialists  that will be needed as  integrated pest management
becomes more fully utilized.
  —7 have authorized the Department of Agriculture to expand
its crop field scout demonstration program to cover nearly four
million  acres  under agricultural  production by  the upcoming
growing season.
  Through this program many unnecessary pesticide applications
can be eliminated, since the scouts will be used to determine when
pesticide applications are actually needed.
  In my message on the environment last February, I proposed a
comprehensive  revision  of our pesticide control  laws—a revision
which still awaits  final congressional action. Also essential to  a
sound national  pesticide policy are measures to ensure that agri-
cultural workers are protected from adverse exposures to these
chemicals.
  —7 am directing  the Departments of Labor and Health, Educa-
tion, and  Welfare  to develop standards  under the Occupational
Safety and Health Act to  protect  such  workers from pesticide
poisoning.

-------
2362          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

                   NOISE CONTROL RESEARCH

  Scientific findings increasingly confirm what few urban dwellers
or industrial workers need to be told—that excessive noise can
constitute a  significant threat to human well-being. The Congress
already has  before it a comprehensive noise control bill, which I
proposed a  year ago. A quieter environment cannot simply be
legislated into being. We shall also need to develop better methods
to achieve our goal.
  —/ have requested in my 1973 budget a $23 million increase in
research and development  funds for reducing noise from air-
planes. I have also requested new funds for  research and develop-
ment for reducing street traffic noise.

     RESEARCH ON AIR POLLUTION EFFECTS AND MEASUREMENT

  Our pollution control efforts are based largely on the establish-
ment of enforceable standards of environmental  quality.  Initial
standards have often been based on incomplete knowledge because
the necessary information has not been available. Also, the lack of
adequate instruments to measure pollution and of models of how
pollutants are dispersed has made it difficult to know exactly how
much pollution must be controlled in a particular area. We need
added research and  development to make more precise judgments
of what standards should be set and how we can most practically
achieve our goals.
  —/ have requested in my 1973 budget an  additional $12 million
to increase research on the health effects of air pollution, on re-
gional air pollution modeling,  and on improved pollution instru-
mentation and measurement.

                    IMPROVING LAND USE
  In recent  years we have come to view our land as a limited and
irreplaceable resource. No longer do we imagine  that there will
always be more of it over the horizon—more woodlands and shore-
lands and wetlands—if we neglect or overdevelop the land in view.
A new  maturity is  giving rise to a  land ethic which recognizes
that improper land use affects  the public interest and limits the
choices that we and our descendants will have.
  Now we must equip our institutions to carry out the responsibil-
ity implicit in this new outlook. We must create the administrative
and regulatory mechanisms necessary to assure wise land use and
to stop haphazard, wasteful, or environmentally damaging devel-
opment. Some States are moving ahead on their own to develop

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2363

stronger land-use institutions and controls. Federal programs can
and should reinforce this encouraging trend.
                NATIONAL LAND USE POLICY ACT

  The National  Land Use Policy Act, which I proposed to the
Congress last year, would provide Federal assistance to encourage
the States, in cooperation with local governments, to protect lands
which are of critical environmental concern and to control major
development. While not yet  enacted, this measure has been the
subject of much useful debate.
  —I propose amendments  to this  pending National Land  Use
Policy legislation which would require States to control the siting
of major transportation facilities, and impose sanctions  on  any
State which does not establish an adequate land use program.
  Under these amendments,  the State programs  established pur-
suant to the act would not  only have  to  embody methods for
controlling land use around  key  growth-inducing developments
such as highways, airports, and recreational facilities; the States
would also have to provide controls  over the actual siting of the
major highways and airports themselves. The change recognizes
the fact that these initial siting decisions, once made, can often
trigger runaway growth and adverse environmental effects.
  The amendments would further provide that any State that had
not established an acceptable land use program by 1975 would be
subject  to annual reductions  of certain Federal funds.  Seven per-
cent of the  funds allocated  under  sections  of the Airport  and
Airways Development Act, the Federal-Aid Highway Acts includ-
                                                        [p.V]

ing the  Highway Trust Fund, and the Land and Water Conserva-
tion  Fund, would be withheld in the first year.  An additional 7
percent would be withheld for each additional year that  a State
was without an approved land use program. Money thus withheld
from noncomplying States would be allocated among States which
did have acceptable programs.
  These strong  new amendments are necessary in view of the
significant effect that Federal programs, particularly transporta-
tion programs, have upon land use decisions.
                   PROTECTION OF WETLANDS

  The Nation's  coastal and  estuarine wetlands  are vital  to the
survival of  a wide variety  of  fish  and wildlife; they have an
important function in controlling floods and tidal  forces; and they

-------
2364          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

contain some of the most beautiful areas left on this continent.
These same lands, however, are often  some of the  most sought-
after for  development.  As a consequence, wetland acreage has
been declining as more and more areas are drained  and filled for
residential, commercial, and industrial projects.
  My National Land Use Policy Act would direct State attention
to these important areas by defining wetlands among  the "environ-
mentally critical areas" which it singles out for special protection,
and by giving priority attention to the coastal zones. I propose to
supplement these safeguards with  new economic disincentives to
further discourage unnecessary wetlands development.
  —/ propose legislation to limit applicability of certain Federal
tax benefits when development occurs in coastal wetlands.

                MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC LANDS

  During  1971, I acted  to strengthen the environmental require-
ments  relating to  management and use of the Nation's  vast
acreage of federally-owned public lands administered  by the De-
partment  of the Interior. I proposed new legislation to establish
an overall management policy for  these  public lands,  something
which we  have been without for far too long. This legislation, still
pending before the Congress, would direct the Secretary of the
Interior to manage  our public lands in  a  manner that  would pro-
tect their  environmental quality for present and future genera-
tions. The policy which it would establish  declares the retention of
the public lands to  be in the  national interest except  where dis-
posal of particular tracts would lead to a significant  improvement
in their management, or where the disposal would serve important
public objectives which cannot be achieved on non-public lands.

              PROTECTING OUR NATURAL HERITAGE

  Wild  places and wild things  constitute a treasure to be cher-
ished and protected for all time. The pleasure and refreshment
which they give man  confirm their value to society.  More impor-
tantly perhaps, the  wonder, beauty, and elemental force in which
the least  of  them  share  suggest  a higher right to  exist—not
granted them by man and not his to take away. In environmental
policy as anywhere else we cannot deal in absolutes. Yet we can at
least give considerations like these more relative weight in the
seventies,  and become a more civilized  people in a healthier land
because of it.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2365

                      PREDATOR CONTROL

   Americans today set high value on the preservation of wildlife.
 The old notion that "the only good predator is a dead one" is no
 longer acceptable as  we understand that even the  animals and
 birds which sometimes prey on domesticated  animals have their
 own value in maintaining the balance of nature.
   The widespread use of highly toxic poisons to kill coyotes and
 other predatory animals and birds is a practice which has been a
 source of increasing  concern to the American public  and  to the
 federal officials responsible for the public lands.
   Last year the  Council on Environmental Quality  and the De-
 partment of the Interior appointed an  Advisory Committee on
 Predator Control to  study  the entire question of predator and
 related animal control activities.  The Committee found that per-
 sistent poisons have been applied to range and forest lands with-
 out adequate knowledge  of  their effects on the ecology or their
 utility in preventing losses to livestock. The  large-scale use of
 poisons for control of predators and field rodents has resulted in
 unintended losses of other animals and in other harmful effects on
 natural ecosystems. The Committee concluded that necessary con-
 trol of coyotes and other predators  can be accomplished by meth-
 ods other than poisons.
   Certainly, predators can represent a threat to sheep and some
 other domesticated animals. But we must use more selective meth-
 ods of control that will preserve ecological values while continuing
 to protect livestock.
   —I am today issuing an  Executive  Order barring  the use of
 poisons for predator control on all public lands. (Exceptions will
 be made only for emergency situations.) I also propose legislation
 to shift the emphasis  of the current direct Federal predator con-
 trol program to one of research and technical and financial assist-
 ance to the States to  help them control predator populations  by
 means other than poisons.

                     ENDANGERED SPECIES

   It has only been in recent years that efforts have been under-
taken to list and protect those species of animals whose continued
existence is in jeopardy.  Starting with  our  national symbol, the
bald eagle,  we have expanded our concern over the extinction of
these  animals to  include the present list of over 100. We have
already found, however, that even the most  recent act to protect

-------
2366          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

endangered species, which dates only from 1969, simply does not
provide the kind of management tools needed to act early enough
                                                        [P. 8]

to save a vanishing species. In particular, existing laws do  not
generally allow the Federal Government to control shooting, trap-
ping, or other taking of endangered species.
  —I propose legislation to provide for early identification and
protection of endangered species. My new proposal would  make
the taking of endangered species a Federal offense for the first
time, and would permit protective measures to be undertaken be-
fore a species is so depleted that regeneration is difficult or impos-
sible.

                     MIGRATORY SPECIES

  The protection of migratory species, besides preserving wildlife
values,  exemplifies cooperative environmental effort among  the
United  States,  Canada,  and  Mexico.  By  treaties  entered into
among these three  countries, migratory species are protected. New
species may be added by common agreement between the United
States and Mexico.
  —7 have authorized the Secretary of State, in conjunction with
the Secretary of the Interior, to seek the agreement of the  Mexi-
can Government to add 33 new families of birds to the protected
list.
  Included in the  proposal are eagles, hawks, falcons,  owls, and
many of the most attractive species of wading birds. I am hopeful
that treaty protection can be accorded them in the near future.

          BIG CYPRESS NATIONAL FRESH WATER RESERVE

  After  careful review  of the environmental significance of the
Big Cypress Swamp in Florida, particularly of the need for  water
from this source to maintain the unique ecology of Everglades
National Park, I directed the Secretary of the Interior to prepare
legislation to create the Big Cypress National Fresh  Water  Re-
serve. This legislation, which has now been submitted to the Con-
gress, will empower the Federal Government to acquire the requi-
site legal interest in 547,000 acres of Big Cypress.

               NEW PARKLANDS AT THE GATEWAYS
  The need to provide breathing space and recreational opportun-
ities in our major urban centers is a major concern of this Admin-
istration. Two of the Nation's major gateways to the world—New

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2367

York City and San Francisco—have land nearby with exceptional
scenic and recreational potential, and we are moving to make that
land available for people to enjoy. In May of 1971, I proposed
legislation to authorize a Gateway National Recreation Area in
New York and New Jersey. This proposal would open to a metro-
politan region of more than 14 million people a National Recrea-
tion Area offering more than 23,000 acres of prime beaches, wild-
life preserves, and historical  attractions including  the nation's
oldest operating lighthouse.
  On our western shore lies another area uniquely appropriate for
making recreational and scenic values more accessible to a metro-
politan community.
  —I propose legislation to establish a Golden Gate National Rec-
reation Area in and around San Francisco Bay.
  This proposal would encompass a  number of existing parks,
military reservations, and private lands to provide a full range of
recreation experiences. Altogether,  the  area would encompass
some 24,000 acres of fine beaches, rugged coasts, and readily ac-
cessible urban parklands, extending approximately 30 miles along
some of America's most beautiful coastline  north and south of
Golden Gate Bridge. Angel and Alcatraz Islands in the  bay would
be within the boundaries of  the  National  Recreation Area,  as
would a number of properties on the mainland which afford mag-
nificent views of the city, the  bay  and the ocean. As part of this
plan, I am directing that the Presidio at San Francisco be opened
for dual military and civilian recreational uses.

           CONVERTING FEDERAL PROPERTIES TO PARKS

  Among the most important legacies that we  can pass on to
future generations is an endowment of parklands and recreational
areas that will enrich leisure opportunities and make the beauties
of the earth and sea accessible  to all Americans. This  is the object
of our Legacy of Parks program, initiated early in 1971. As part
of this program,  I directed the Property Review Board to give
priority to potential park and recreation areas in its  search for
alternative uses of federally held real property. The results of this
search so far have been  most encouraging. To  the original  40
properties which  I announced in my Environmental Message of
1971 as being well suited for park use, another 111 prospects have
been added. And from this total of 151 prospective parklands, 63
have already been made available.
  —Today I am  pleased to announce that  20  more  parcels of
Federal land are being made available for park and recreation use.

-------
2368          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  These  newest parcels, combined with those  which have been
announced over the past year, provide a legacy of 83 parklands for
America which comprise 14,585 acres in 31 States and Puerto
Rico. The estimated fair market value of these properties is over
$56 million. In the months to come, every effort will be made to
extend this legacy to all 50 States. The green spaces and natural
retreats that we tend to take for granted will not be available for
future enjoyment unless we act now to develop and protect them.

                      WILDERNESS AREAS
  One of the first environmental goals I set when I took office was
to stimulate the program to identify and recommend to the Con-
gress new wilderness areas.  Although this program was behind
schedule at that time, I am now able to report that the September,
                                                        [p. 9]

1974 statutory deadline for reviews can and will be met.
  The Wilderness Act of 1964 set aside 54 areas,  consisting of
about 9.1 million acres, as the  nucleus of our wilderness system.
Since then, 33 new areas totalling almost 1.2 million acres within
National Forests, National Parks,  and  National Wildlife Refuges
have been added  to the system. Thirty-one areas totalling about
3.6 million acres, including 18 areas submitted by this Administra-
tion, have been proposed to the Congress but have yet to be acted
upon. One of the most significant elements of this process has been
the active participation by the public in all of its phases. At public
wilderness hearings held all across the country, fair consideration
has  been given to all interests and points of view, with construc-
tive citizen involvement in the decision-making process.
  —I am today proposing 18 new wilderness areas which, when
approved, will add another  1.3 million acres  to the wilderness
system.
   Eight of these proposals are within  the National Forests, four
are  within National Park areas, and six are in National Wildlife
Refuges.
  Of these areas, 1.2 million  acres would be in  the following  Na-
tional  Forests: Blue  Range  National  Forest,  Arizona and New
Mexico; Agua Tibia and Emigrant National Forests, California;
Eagles Nest and Weminuche  National Forests, Colorado; Mission
Mountains National Forest, Montana; Aldo Leopold National For-
est, New Mexico; and Glacier National Forest, Wyoming.
  A total of 40,000 acres would be in our National Park system in
the  following locations: Black  Canyon of the Gunnison National

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2369

Monument, Colorado; Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah; Chiri-
cahua  National  Monument, Arizona;  Colorado  National Monu-
ment, Colorado.
  Finally, a total of 87,000 acres would be in areas administered
by the Fish and Wildlife Services of the Department of the Inte-
rior in the following locations: St.  Marks, National Wildlife Re-
fuge,  Florida; Wolf Island, National Wildlife Refuge, Georgia;
Moosehorn National Wildlife Refuge,  Maine;  San Juan Islands,
National Wildlife  Refuge,  Washington; Cape Romain, National
Wildlife Refuge, South Carolina; and Bosque del Apache, National
Wildlife Refuge, New Mexico.
  The year 1972 can bring some of the greatest accomplishment in
wilderness preservation since passage of  the Wilderness Act in
1964.1 urge prompt and systematic  consideration by the Congress
of these 18 new  proposals and of the 31 currently pending before
it. Approval of all 49 additions would bring the  system up to a
total of over 15 million acres.
  Unfortunately, few of these wilderness areas are within easy
access of the most  populous areas of the United States. The major
purpose of my Legacy of Parks program is to bring  recreation
opportunities closer to the people, and while wilderness is only one
such opportunity,  it is a very important one. A few of the areas
proposed today  or previously are in the eastern sections of the
country, but the great majority of wilderness areas are found in
the West.  This of course is where most of  our pristine wild areas
are. But a greater effort can still be made to see that wilderness
recreation values are preserved to the maximum  extent  possible,
in the regions where most of our people live.
  —/ am therefore directing the Secretaries of Agriculture  and
the Interior to accelerate the identification of areas in the Eastern
United States having wilderness potential.

                      OFF-ROAD VEHICLES
  A recent study by the Department of the Interior estimated that
Americans own more than 5 million off-road recreational vehicles
—motorcycles, minibikes, trail bikes, snowmobiles, dune-buggies,
all-terrain vehicles, and others.  The use of these vehicles is dra-
matically on the increase: data show a three-fold growth between
1967 and 1971 alone.
  As  the number of off-road vehicles has  increased, so has their
use on public lands. Too often the  land has suffered as  a result.
Increasingly, Federal recreational lands have become the focus of
conflict between the newer motorized recreationist and the tradi-

-------
2370          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

tional hiker, camper, and horseback rider. In the past, Federal
land-management agencies have used widely varying approaches
to dealing  with this conflict. The time has come for  a unified
Federal policy toward use of off-road vehicles on Federal lands.
  —/ have today signed an Executive Order directing the Secre-
taries of Agriculture, Interior, Army and the Board of Directors
of the Tennessee Valley Authority to develop regulations provid-
ing for control over the use of off-road vehicles on Federal lands.
  They will designate areas of use and non-use, specify  operating
conditions that will be necessary to minimize damage to the natu-
ral resources of the Federal lands, and ensure  compatibility with
other recreational  uses, taking into account noise and other fac-
tors.

EXPANDING INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ON THE ENVIRONMENT

  We are now growing accustomed to the view of our planet as
seen from space—a blue and brown disk shrouded  in white
patches of clouds. But we do not ponder often enough the striking
lesson it teaches about the global reach of environmental impera-
tives. No matter what else divides men and nations, this perspec-
tive should unite them. We must work harder to foster such world
environmental consciousness and shared purpose.

  UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

  To cope  with environmental questions that  are  truly interna-
tional, we and other nations look to the first world conference of
governments ever  convened on this subject: the United Nations
                                                       [P. 10]

Conference on the  Human Environment, to be  held in Stockholm,
Sweden, in June of this year. This should be a seminal event of the
international community's  attempt to cope with  these  serious,
shared problems of global concern that transcend political differ-
ences.
  But efforts to improve the global environment cannot go for-
ward without the means to act.
  —To help provide such means, I propose that a  voluntary
United Nations Fund for the Environment be established, with an
initial funding goal of $100 million for the first 5 years.
  This Fund would help to stimulate international cooperation on
environmental problems by supporting a centralized coordination
point for United Nations activities in this field. It would also help
to bring new resources to bear on the increasing number of world-

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2371

wide problems through activities such as monitoring and cleanup
of the oceans and atmosphere.
  —// such a Fund is established, I will recommend to the Con-
gress that the United States commit itself to provide its fair share
of the Fund on a matching basis over the first 5 years.
  This level of support would provide start-up assistance under
mutually agreed-upon terms. As these programs get underway, it
may well be that the member  nations will decide that additional
resources are required.  I invite other nations to join with us in
this commitment to meaningful action.

                CONTROL OF MARINE POLLUTION
  Ocean pollution is clearly  one of our major international envi-
ronmental problems. I am gratified that in the past year the Con-
gress has taken several steps to reduce the risks of oil spills on the
high seas. However, further congressional action  is needed  to rat-
ify several pending international conventions and to adopt imple-
menting legislation for the various oil-spill conventions  which
have been ratified or which are awaiting approval.
  Action on these recommendations will complete the first round
of international conventions to deal with marine pollution. We
have taken initiatives in three international forums to  develop a
second and more  sophisticated round of agreements in  this area.
We are preparing for a 1973  Intergovernmental Maritime Con-
sultative Organization (IMCO) Conference to draft a convention
barring intentional discharges to  the  sea of oil and hazardous
substances from ships.  In conjunction with the  Law of the Sea
Conference scheduled for  1973,  we are examining measures to
control the effects of developing undersea  resources. And,  in the
preparatory work for the 1972 U.N.  Conference on the Human
Environment, progress has been made on  an agreement to regu-
late the ocean dumping of shore-generated  wastes, and further
work in this  area has been scheduled by IMCO. We hope to con-
clude conventions in each of these areas by 1973.

        PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM LEAD-BASED PAINT

  To  many Americans, "environment" means  the city  streets
where they live and work. It is here that  a localized but acutely
dangerous type of "pollution" has appeared and stirred mounting
public concern.
  The victims are children:  the hazard is  lead-based paint. Such
paint was applied to the  walls  of most  dwellings  prior  to the
1950's. When the paint  chips and peels from the walls in  dilapi-

-------
2372          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

dated housing, it is frequently eaten by small children. This some-
times results in lead poisoning which can cause permanent mental
retardation and occasionally death. We can and must prevent un-
necessary loss of life and health from this hazard, which particu-
larly afflicts the poorest segments of our population.
  To help meet the lead-paint threat, the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare will administer grants and technical as-
sistance to initiate programs in over 50 communities to test chil-
dren in high-risk areas for lead concentrations. In addition, these
programs will support the development of community  organiza-
tion and public education to increase public awareness of this
hazard. Other Federal agencies are also active  in  the effort to
combat lead-based paint poisoning. ACTION and  other volunteers
will assist city governments to help alleviate lead paint hazards.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development is engaged
in research and other actions to detect and eliminate this hazard.
  The resources of  the private  sector should  also be utilized
through local laws requiring owners of housing wherever possible
to control lead paint hazards.
                    ENLISTING THE YOUNG

  The starting point  of environmental quality is in the hearts and
minds of the people. Unless the people have a deep commitment to
the new values and a  clear understanding of the new problems, all
our laws and programs and spending will avail little. The young,
quick to  commit and used to learning, are gaining the changed
outlook fastest of  all. Their  enthusiasm  about the environment
spreads with a healthy contagion: their energy in  its behalf can be
an impressive force for good.
  Four youth participation programs  of mutual benefit to the
young and the Nation are now planned or underway:
  Last October, I initiated the Environmental Merit Awards Pro-
gram.  This program, directed by the Environmental Protection
Agency in cooperation with the U.S. Office of Education, awards
national recognition to successful student projects leading to envi-
ronmental understanding or improvement. Qualifications for the
awards are determined by a local board consisting  of secondary
school  students, faculty, and representatives  of the local commu-
nity. Already more than 2,000 high schools, representing all fifty
States, have registered in the program.
  The Department of Agriculture's expanded field scout demon-
stration program, designed to permit more effective pest control
                                                       [P.ii]

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2373

with less reliance on chemical pesticides, will employ thousands of
high school and college students. These young people will be scout-
ing cotton and tobacco pests in the coming  growing season, and
the program will be expanded to other crops in future years.
  The Environmental Protection Agency has recently initiated in
its Seattle regional office a pilot program using young people to
assist the agency in many of its important tasks, including moni-
toring.  EPA is  working with  State and  local pollution control
agencies to  identify monitoring needs.  ACTION and the youth
training programs are providing  the manpower.  If this initial
program proves successful, the concept will be expanded.
  ACTION  volunteers and  young people  employed through  the
Neighborhood Youth Corps, Job  Corps, and college work-study
programs will work with city governments to help alleviate lead
paint hazards, gaining experience  in community health work as
they give urgently needed aid to  inner-city families.
  Young people working on environmental projects, learning the
skills necessary  for a particular job, must also understand how
their work relates to the environmental process as a whole.  Thus,
all of these activities must be supplemented by continued improve-
ment  in many aspects of environmental education to help  all of
our citizens, both young and old, develop  a better awareness of
man's  relation to his  environment. In  my  first Environmental
Quality Report,  I stressed the importance of improving the Na-
tion's "environmental literacy."  This goal remains as important as
ever, and our progress toward it must continue.

                        ONE DESTINY

  Our destiny is one: this  the environmental awakening has
taught America in these first years of the  seventies. Let us never
forget, though, that it is not a destiny of fear, but of promise. As I
stated last August in transmitting the Second Annual Report of
the Council on Environmental Quality: "The work of environmen-
tal improvement is a task for all our people . .  . The achievement
of that goal  will challenge the creativity of our science and tech-
nology,  the enterprise  and  adaptability  of our industry, the re-
sponsiveness and sense of balance of our political and legal institu-
tions,  and the resourcefulness and the capacity of this country to
honor those human values upon which the  quality of our national
life must  ultimately depend." We  shall  rise to the challenge  of
solving our environmental problems by enlisting the creative en-
ergy of all of our citizens in a cause truly worthy of the best that
each can bring to it.

-------
2374
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
  While we share our environmental problems with all the people
of the world, our industrial might, which has made us the leader
among nations in terms of material well-being, also gives us the
responsibility of dealing with environmental problems first among
the nations. We can be proud that our solutions and our perform-
ance  will become the measure for others climbing the ladder of
aspirations and difficulties; we can set our sights on a standard
that will lift their expectations of what man can do.
  The pursuit of environmental quality will require courage and
patience. Problems that have been building over many years will
not yield to facile solutions. But I do not doubt  that Americans
have  the wit and  the will to win—to fulfill our brightest vision of
what the future can be.
                                                RICHARD NIXON
The White House
   February 8,1972
                 II. THE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSALS
          Toxic WASTE DISPOSAL AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
                                                            [P. 12]
                                                            [p. 13]
                                                            [p. 15]
HON. SPIRO T. AGNEW,
President of the Senate,
Washington, D.C.
HON. CARL B. ALBERT,
Speaker of the House of
Representatives,
Washington, D.C.

  DEAR MR.  [PRESIDENT/SPEAKER] :
In  accordance  with  the President's
1972 Message to the Congress on the
Environment,   there  is transmitted
herewith a proposed bill  containing
The Sediment  Control Act and The
Toxic  Waste  Disposal  Control Act,
to be added as  Title II and III of the
Federal Water  Pollution Control Act.
They are being1 submitted together as
the Federal Water Pollution  Control
Act Amendments  of 1972.  The pro-
           ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,
                 Washington, D.C., February 8, 1972.

                  posed new  Titles  II and III are  in-
                  tended to strengthen the Act in areas
                  we believe  are inadequately covered
                  under  both  the existing legislation
                  and the extensive amendments of that
                  legislation  now pending  before  the
                  Congress.
                    The  proposed Title II, The Sedi-
                  ment Control Act,  would  supplement
                  both  the  Federal  Water  Pollution
                  Control Act,  which  does not deal
                  specifically  with sedimentation as a
                  water quality problem although sedi-
                  ment is the major pollutant of waters
                  by volume,  and various  authorities
                  of the Department of Agriculture for
                  technical and  financial  assistance to
                  control  sedimentation. The Act would
                  provide for controls over non-agri-

-------
                     GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
                              2375
cultural land-disturbing activities, pri-
marily building and road construction
activities. The  concentration of such
activities  in  urban-suburban   areas
and  their  substantial per-acre yield
of sediment often lead to particularly
severe water quality  problems.
  The Act calls upon States to imple-
ment a regulatory program, including
permits where  appropriate, with  re-
spect to sedimentation arising from
such   land-disturbing  activities   in
areas where they significantly  affect
water quality. Mining activities, sedi-
mentation from which would be regu-
lated under the President's proposed
Mined Area Protection Act of 1971,
are excluded from the Act, along with
agricultural and silvicultural  activi-
                              [p-17]


ties. Federal guidelines for State pro-
grams would be  promulgated by  the
Environmental Protection  Agency in
consultation with the Secretaries of
Housing  and  Urban Development,
Agriculture, and Transportation, with
other  appropriate  Federal  agencies
and with representatives of State  and
local  governments. States  would  be
given  flexibility  in  assigning,  pre-
sumably to counties  or  other local
governmental units in most cases, the
responsibility  for administering  the
permit  and general  regulatory pro-
gram. The bill encourages the  use of
existing regulatory mechanisms, such
as building and grading permits, for
providing the required sedimentation
controls.  Local  components  of  the
State's program  would be subject to
approval by the  State water quality
agency. Relevant Federal permit  and
a?sistance  programs   would be used
to assist States in achieving compli-
ance  with  approved  programs. The
Environmental   Protection   Agency
would be  authorized  to  promulgate
appropriate regulations for applica-
tion in States failing to  implement
approved   programs   and  would   be
empowered  to  enforce  State  regula-
tions where a State fails to do so.
  The  proposed Title III,  The Toxic
Waste  Disposal  Control  Act, would
provide for a nationwide  program to
regulate  land  and underground  dis-
posal of wastes toxic to human health.
  As  controls  over disposal of toxic
substances   directly   into   surface
waters are strengthened, the use  of
land or underground strata for such
disposal  can be expected to increase
significantly,  particularly  with   the
enactment of  needed  controls over
ocean  disposal, which the  President
has proposed.
  The program would be administered
by the States except in cases of State
failure  to  meet  guidelines  of   the
Environmental Protection Agency, in
which  event the  Agency would issue
necessary  regulations. The proposed
program  would  substitute  for   the
present inadequate  system of State
regulation a more orderly, nationwide
system that  would retain the best in
on-going  State programs  under Fed-
eral guidelines.
                             [p. 18]

  Both the sediment  and  toxic waste
disposal control provisions would sub-
stantially enhance the effectiveness of
the Federal-State water pollution con-
trol program  by  providing a struc-
tured  approach  to  two  significant
types   of  pollution.  In  addition,  the
toxic   waste  disposal  control   pro-
visions  would  help  to  provide  the
controls  over ground water contami-
nation which  the  President recom-
mended a year ago.
  Although  the   proposed  "Federal
Water Pollution Control Act  Amend-
ments  of 1972"  are  being recom-
mended as amendments to the present
law, we  are of course  aware of  the
extensive  amendments  to  the  law
already  pending  in  the  Congress.
Indeed, references in our bills to  the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
anticipate such  widely  agreed-upon

-------
2376
LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL
and expected reforms of the Act as
provision   for  effluent  limitations,
special standards for toxic pollutants,
and  strengthened  Federal  enforce-
ment authority that is not limited to
interstate pollution.
  I would point  out that  S. 2770,
which has passed the  Senate, con-
tains some general provisions for con-
trols over construction-related sources
of water pollution and for disposal of
pollutants on or under the land. How-
ever, we believe that the more specific
provisions  contained in  our proposed
amendments would establish  a more
effective framework for  action.
                   A similar letter is being sent to the
                 [President of the Senate/Speaker of
                 the House].
                   The  Office  of Management   and
                 Budget advises that enactment of this
                 proposed  legislation  would  be  in
                 accord  with  the  program of  the
                 President.

                        Sincerely,

                    WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS,
                                  Administrator.

                                           [p. 19]
         THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
                     AMENDMENTS OP 1972
  A BILL To amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
and for other purposes.
  Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States in Congress assembled, That this Act may be  cited
as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
Section 1.
  The Federal Water Pollution Control Act is amended by insert-
ing before Section 1 of such Act  the following: "Title I-Water
Pollution Prevention and Control.

Section 2.
  Such Act is further amended by adding after the aforesaid Title
I, i.e., after Section 27 of such Act, the following new Title:
             "TITLE  n—THE SEDIMENT CONTROL ACT
"Section 201. Purpose
  "It is the purpose of this Title  to reduce sedimentation  from
land-disturbing activities  consistent with applicable water quality
standards.
"Section 202. Definitions
  "For the purposes  of this Title—
  " (a) the term "Administrator" means the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency;
  "(b) the term "State"  means a State of the United States, the
District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico;

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2377

  "(c)  the term "sedimentation"  means the movement of soil,
rock, and mineral or other related  or similar matter, or particles
thereof, into waters subject to the standard-setting and enforce-
ment provisions of this Act.
"Section 203. Guidelines
  " (a)  Within one year after the enactment of this Title, the
Administrator shall in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553 et. seq. pro-
mulgate, and from time to time revise, guidelines for the effective
control  of sedimentation from land-disturbing  activities,  includ-
ing,  but not limited to clearing, grading, transporting, and filling
of land in connection with (1) the construction of both public and
private  buildings, roads, and highways, and (2), other activities
                                                         [P. 20]

excepting (A) uses of land for agricultural, silvicultural, ranching
or grazing purposes and  (B) activities subject to regulation under
the [proposed] Mined Area Protection Act [S. 993, H.R. 4704].
  "(b) Such guidelines shall include generally applicable informa-
tion concerning (1)  demonstrably feasible techniques of sediment
control, including information on related  costs; (2) effects likely
to result from failure to control sedimentation;  (3)  the extent of
control  achievable  by the techniques  described; and (4)  proce-
dures for evaluating the relative costs of attaining various levels
of sedimentation  control. Such guidelines shall also  prescribe ap-
propriate procedures to be followed by States in order to  comply
with this  Title. Such guidelines shall, to  the extent feasible and
appropriate differentiate among various types of soils, size of the
land area  being disturbed, land use patterns,  slopes, drainage con-
ditions,  rainfall patterns, proximate water bodies and their char-
acteristics (including but not limited to turbidity), and other rele-
vant factors. The guidelines shall prescribe categories of land-dis-
turbing activities for which (A) permits are required, (B) gen-
eral  regulation is required, or  (C) no regulation is required for
the purposes of sedimentation  control programs established pur-
suant to Section 204.
  " (c) The Administrator shall consult on a continuing basis with
the Secretaries of Housing and Urban Development, Agriculture,
Commerce, Transportation, with the heads of other appropriate
Federal agencies, and with appropriate representatives of State
and local governments, in developing and revising such guidelines.
"Section 204.. State programs
  " (a) Within one year after the enactment of this Title and from

-------
2378          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

time to time subsequently, as appropriate, each State shall survey
the waters within its jurisdiction and determine on the basis of
applicable water quality standards, areas of critical sedimentation
 (1) resulting in substantial part from activities subject to regula-
tion under this Title and (2) amenable to substantial attainment
of such water quality standards through controls over the activi-
ties subject to regulation under this Title either alone or in con-
junction with controls over  other sources of sedimentation.  Such
surveys shall be conducted in consultation and cooperation with
                                                        [p. 21]

the Environmental Protection Agency, the Departments of Agri-
culture, Commerce, and the Interior, and other appropriate Fed-
eral agencies and shall be submitted to the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency.
   " (b)  Within one year after the initial  promulgation of Federal
guidelines  under  Section 203, each State shall submit to the Ad-
ministrator for his approval a sedimentation control program for
the non-Federal lands within its jurisdiction that contribute or are
likely to contribute to the critical sedimentation problems identi-
fied  through  the survey described in subsection (a)  of this  Sec-
tion. Such program shall be: (1) consistent with the guidelines
promulgated pursuant to Section 203 and (2)  meet the following
criteria:
       "(A) In accordance with regulations to be promulgated by
the Administrator pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 et. seq., land-disturb-
ing activities other than those exempted from regulation by guide-
lines issued pursuant to Section 203 (b) may be conducted only (1)
in accordance with regulations adopted as part of or pursuant to
 an approved State program or  (2) after the  responsible individ-
 ual  or organization has submitted a sedimentation control  plan
 to an agency designated pursuant to subsection (c) of this Section
 and has received a permit from that agency;
       "(B)  Each sedimentation control plan shall  be  reviewed
 and evaluated by  a qualified public agency prior  to the issuance
 of any permit;
       "(C)  Any State, local or regional agency which has a per-
 mit issuing program approved by the State agency responsible for
 establishing and enforcing water pollution control standards may
 be designated to  issue permits under this title. To the extent
 possible, such permits  should be issued  (1) by agencies already
 engaged in related activities, or (2) as part of such other permits;
       "(D)  Adequate provision is made for monitoring by  an

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2379

appropriate agency or agencies of activities requiring permits 01
otherwise regulated under this Title to ensure that they are con-
ducted pursuant to and in compliance with applicable permits or
regulations. The  State water pollution control agency and such
other State, local or regional agencies as the State may designate
shall be empowered to enjoin activities conducted contrary to or
                                                         [p. 22]

in violation of this Title or permits issued pursuant thereto and
to assess appropriate penalties for such violations.
   "(c) Activities subject to this Title that are conducted on Fed-
eral lands shall be regulated, in accordance with the guidelines
issued pursuant to Section 203, by the agency with jurisdiction
over such land.

"Section 205. Federal enforcement

   "(a) Federal agencies providing financial assistance for  activi-
ties subject to this Title shall require the possession of any permit
required by this Act as a condition of such assistance.
   " (b) With respect  to activities subject to this Title, the  provi-
sions of section 21 (b) of this Act shall be construed as calling for
a certification of reasonable assurance of compliance with the pro-
visions of this Title.
   "(c) The Administrator is authorized to  enforce  the  require-
ments of  State programs approved by him pursuant  to this Title
and regulations promulgated pursuant to subsection  (d)  of this
Section in the  same manner as he is authorized under Title I of
this Act to enforce standards established pursuant to Title I of
this Act.
   "(d) With respect  to any State in which after the expiration of
30 months following  the date of enactment of this Title, there is
no program approved pursuant to this title or in which a program
has been disapproved, in whole or in part, by  the Administrator,
the Administrator may adopt, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 533 et.
seq., such regulations consistent with the provisions  of this Title
and with the guidelines issued pursuant to Section 203 of the Act
as may be required to control sedimentation resulting from  activi-
ties covered by that section.

"Section 3.
   "Such  Act is further amended by adding after Title II thereof
the following new Title:

-------
2380          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

       "TITLE in—THE TOXIC WASTE DISPOSAL CONTROL ACT

"Section 301 (a). Findings
  "The Congress finds—
  "(1) that increasingly strict and pervasive regulatory controls
over the disposal of wastes in the air, in surface waters, and in the
oceans is causing intensified use of land and underground strata as
                                                        [p. 23]

repositories for wastes;
  "(2)  that such  disposal  of  toxic wastes,  if insufficiently con-
trolled, may cause serious contamination  of the Nation's under-
ground and surface waters, including numerous interstate waters;
  "(3) that knowledge of the behavior of wastes in the subsurface
environment often is very limited; and
  "(4)  that the present controls  exercised by the States over
disposal of toxic wastes fail adequately to  protect the public from
human health hazards of such disposal.

"Section 301 (b). Purpose
  "Therefore, it is the purpose of this Title—to establish national
requirements for the regulation of  land and underground disposal
of toxic wastes, relying principally on State controls pursuant to
Federal guidelines.
"Section 302. Definitions
  "For the purposes of this Title—
  "(a) the term "toxic waste" means any substance or combina-
tion of substances, which, in the judgment of the Administrator,
may pose  a substantial  present or potential hazard to human
health because such substances are nondegradable or persistent in
nature, or  because they can be biologically magnified, or because
they can be lethal, or because they otherwise cause or tend to
cause detrimental cumulative effects;
  "(b) the term "disposal  of  toxic waste" means the discharge,
deposit, or injection  into subsurface strata or excavations  or the
ultimate disposition onto  the land of any toxic waste, where, in the
judgment of the Administrator, such actions could result in con-
tamination of ground waters  or surface waters, except for such
disposal of toxic waste as is regulated under Title I of this Act or
other Federal legislation;
  "(c) the term "surface waters" means all interstate waters and
navigable waters of the United States; the territorial sea; and the
contiguous zone, as established by Article  24 of the Convention of

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2381

the Territorial Sea  and the Contiguous Zone, over which the
United States has jurisdiction;
  "(d) the term "Administrator" means the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency;
  "(e) the term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior;
                                                        LP- 24]

  "(f) the term  "United  States"  means States  of  the United
States, the  District  of  Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, and those adjacent lands and strata under navigable waters,
the territorial sea and the contiguous zone as established by Arti-
cle 24 of the Convention of the Territorial Sea and  the Contiguous
Zone, over  which the United  States, any  State  of  the United
States, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico has jurisdiction;
  "(g) the term  "The State Agency" means the agency or agen-
cies  responsible within a State for regulating land  and under-
ground disposal of toxic wastes in accordance with this Title.

"Section 303. Policy
  "The Congress hereby declares that it is the policy of the United
States that the disposal of toxic wastes by any person or organiza-
tion (including  agencies and instrumentalities   of the United
States) in the  United States shall be in accordance  with the provi-
sions of this Title and that such disposal of waste may be permit-
ted,  taking  into account the feasibility and safety of alternative
locations and  methods of disposal,  provided  the State agency or
where  appropriate, the Administrator, has not determined  pur-
suant to this  Title that the proposed disposal  will endanger the
health of persons.

"Section 304. Federal regulations and guidelines
  " (a) The Administrator shall, after consultation with the Sec-
retary and the heads of other appropriate Federal agencies and in
accordance  with  5 U.S.C.  553 et.  seq.,  designate by  regulation
within one year after the date of enactment of this Title and from
time to time thereafter (1)  geographic areas and types of geologic
formations or  situations in which, because of substantial hazards
to human health  specified types of toxic wastes or combinations
thereof may not  be  disposed of in any quantity  or in  excess of
specified quantities;  and (2) substances or classes, categories or
quantities of  such substances,  that  he determines to  be  toxic
wastes for the purposes of  this Title. In  carrying out the provi-
sions of this subsection, the Administrator shall consult with the

-------
2382          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare with respect to the
public health aspects of the Administrator's determinations.
  "(b) For the purpose of advising States in adopting or revising
regulations governing  the disposal  of toxic wastes, the Adminis-
                                                        [p. 25]

trator shall, after consultation with the Secretary and heads of
other appropriate Federal  agencies  and  in accordance  with 5
U.S.C. 553 et seq., promulgate by regulation within one year after
the date of enactment of this Title and from time to time thereaf-
ter, guidelines for the regulation of disposal of toxic wastes. Such
guidelines  shall,  on  the basis of available scientific knowledge,
include information and recommendations with respect to geologi-
cal  and hydrological  testing  requirements, disposal  procedures,
performance standards related to subsurface waste disposal facili-
ties such as wells and  well casings,  distribution and proximity of
disposal or storage sites in specified geographic areas and types of
geologic formations  or situations,  and other  reasonably related
matters.  Such guidelines shall also set forth monitoring and re-
porting requirements to be included in State programs and shall
provide for regulation by permit with respect to types of toxic
waste, disposal locations or procedures, or a combination thereof,
for which  the Administrator  determines that advance review of
plans and case-by-case specification of conditions are required in
order to prevent substantial hazards to human health. For other
types of toxic waste, disposal locations or procedures,  or combina-
tions thereof, the guidelines  shall  provide for  controls through
generally applicable regulations.

"Section 305. State Programs
  "(a) Each State participating in the nationwide program estab-
lished by this Title  shall, after  public hearings and within one
year after the  initial  issuance of guidelines pursuant to Section
304, submit to the Administrator for review and approval or dis-
approval in accordance with this Section,  a program to regulate
disposal of toxic wastes on non-Federal lands within the State in
accordance with  the guidelines promulgated pursuant to Section
304. A State may at  any time thereafter submit a  program or
revisions of a program to the Administrator for  review and ap-
proval or disapproval in accordance with this Section.
  " (b) The Administrator shall approve the program or revisions
of such program submitted  to  him if, in consultation with the
Secretaries of Commerce and the Interior, he determines that:

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2383

      "(1)  For such  types of disposal of toxic wastes  as the
Administrators may specify in his guidelines pursuant to Section
                                                        [p. 26]

304, the program requires that there be obtained from the State
agency a permit (A) based on a plan describing the manner in
which disposal will be conducted and  (B) consistent with the
regulations described in paragraph  (2) of this subsection  and
with such other reasonably related conditions as may be specified
by the State agency;
      "(2)  The State agency  has issued  after public  hearings
such rules or regulations as may  be required to comply with the
regulations issued by the Administrator pursuant to Section 304;
      "(3)  The State  agency has authority substantially similar
to that possessed by the Administrator under Section 309  of this
Act;
      "(4)  The State agrees to  provide annual reports  to the
Administrator concerning the program and to furnish at such
reasonable times as the  Administrator may designate copies of
such permits issued as  the Administrator may request;
      "(5)  The State  agency has such regulatory and other au-
thorities as may be necessary to  carry out the purposes  of  this
Title, including but not limited to the authority to levy fines and
initiate  prompt  legal actions  for violations of applicable laws,
regulations, and permits;
      "(6)  Sufficient funding and adequately trained manpower
are or will be committed to the administration and enforcement
of the program to achieve the goals of this Title; and
      "(7) The program meets such additional reasonably  related
and generally applicable criteria  as the Administrator may by
regulation establish.
  " (c) As a further condition for approval by the Administrator,
each State program must provide a satisfactory mechanism for
promptly notifying each  State the public health of which may be
adversely affected by a toxic waste disposal activity for which a
permit will be issued.
  " (d) The Administrator may approve or disapprove in whole or
in part any program or portion thereof submitted pursuant to this
Title. In making such a determination, the Administrator shall
consult with interested  Federal agencies.
  "(e) If after the Administrator has approved a State program
                                                        [p. 27]

or revisions thereof, he determines that:

-------
2384          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

      "(1)  The State has failed to implement the program ade-
quately;
      " (2) The State's regulations require revision; or
      "(3)  The State has otherwise failed to comply with the
provisions or purposes of this Title; he shall notify the State and
request  appropriate action, remedies, or revisions to the regula-
tions, affording the State an opportunity for a hearing. If within
a reasonable time,  as determined by the Administrator, the State
has not taken appropriate action  as determined  by the  Admin-
istrator, the Administrator may withdraw in whole or in appro-
priate part his approval of the program and implement a program
for such State under subsection (f)  of this Section. After with-
drawal  of his  approval  and pending the implementation  of a
program under subsection (f), the  Administrator may administer
and enforce the State regulations and may  re-examine and modify
as he determines to be necessary to  prevent substantial  hazards
to human health any permits issued by the State within  90 days
prior to withdrawal of approval.
   " (f) If, after the expiration of one year following the issuance
of guidelines under Section 304, a State fails to submit a program
to regulate the disposal of toxic wastes or has submitted a pro-
gram which has been disapproved  and within such period as has
been set by the Administrator has  failed to submit a revised pro-
gram for approval, the Administrator shall, in accordance with
the procedures set forth in subsection 304 (b), issue regulations
and establish a permit program for such State to the extent neces-
sary to conform to the applicable requirements of subsection (b)
and (c)  of this Section.
   "(g)  Prior to approval  of a State program pursuant to this
Section, any person or organization desiring to engage in subsur-
face disposal of toxic wastes in a State that does not regulate such
activity shall comply with such interim regulations as the Admin-
istrator may prescribe to prevent  substantial hazards  to human
health.
   "(h)  Subsequent to taking action under subsections (c) or (f)
of this subsection,  the Administrator shall terminate such action
and restore  his  approval of a  State program whenever  a State
submits a program or revision  thereof meeting the requirements
                                                        [P- 28]

of this Section.
"Section 306. Administrative inspections and warrants
   "(a) (1) For the purpose of inspecting,  copying, and verifying

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2385

the correctness of records, reports, or other documents required by
a State or where appropriate,  the Administrator, to be kept or
made under this Title and otherwise facilitating the carrying out
of his functions under this Title, the Administrator is authorized,
in accordance with this Section, to enter any premises in which or
on which such documents are kept or toxic waste disposal activi-
ties  are conducted  and to conduct administrative  inspections
thereof, and of  the  things specified in this Section,  relevant to
those functions.
       "(2) Such entries and  inspections  shall be carried out
through officers or employees (hereinafter referred to as "inspec-
tors") designated by the Administrator. Any such inspector, upon
stating his purpose and presenting to the owner, operator, or agent
in charge of such premises (A) appropriate credentials and  (B)
his administrative inspection warrant or a  written notice  of his
other inspection  authority,  shall have the right to enter such
premises and conduct such inspection at reasonable times.
       "(3) Except when the owner, operator, or agent in charge
of such premises so consents in writing, no  inspection authorized
by this Section shall extend to
           "(A) financial data;
           " (B) sales data other than shipments;
           "(C) pricing data;
           " (D) personnel data; or
           "(E)  research data (other than data  resulting from
                tests conducted pursuant to Section 304 (b))
   "(b) A  warrant under this  Section shall not be  required for
entries and administrative inspection (including seizures of prop-
erty)—
       "(1) with the consent of the owner,  operator, or agent in
charge of such premises ;
       "(2) in situations presenting imminent danger to health or
safety;
       "(3) in any other exceptional or emergency circumstances
where time or opportunity to apply for a warrant is lacking; or
       " (4) in any other situations where a warrant is not consti-
tutionally required.
                                                        [p. 29]

   " (c)  Issuance and execution of administrative inspection war-
rants shall be as follows:
       "(1) Any judge of the United States or of a State court of
record, or any United States magistrate, may, within his territorial

-------
2386          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

jurisdiction, and upon proper oath or affirmation showing prob-
able cause issue warrants for the purpose  of conducting admin-
istrative inspections authorized by this Title or regulations there-
under, and seizures of property appropriate to such inspections.
For the purposes of this Section, the term "probable cause" means
a valid public interest in the  effective enforcement of this Title
or regulations thereunder sufficient to justify administrative in-
spections of the area, premises, building, or contents thereof, in
the circumstances specified  in the application for the warrant.
       "(2)  A  warrant shall issue  only upon an affidavit  of an
officer or employee having knowledge of the facts alleged, sworn
to before the judge or magistrate and establishing the grounds for
issuing the warrant. If the judge or magistrate is  satisfied that
grounds for the application exist or that there is probable cause
to believe they exist, he shall issue a warrant identifying the area,
premises, or buildings,  to be  inspected, the purpose of such in-
spection, and,  where appropriate,  the type  of property  to be
inspected, if any. The warrant shall identify the items or types
of property to be  seized, if any. The  warrant shall be directed
to a person authorized under subsection (a) (2) to execute it. The
warrant shall state the  grounds for its issuance and the name of
the person or persons whose affidavit has been taken in  support
thereof. It shall command  the person  to whom it is directed to
inspect the area, premises,  or building, identified for the  purpose
specified, and, where appropriate,  shall direct the seizure of the
property specified.  The warrant shall direct that it  be served
during normal business hours.  It shall  designate  the judge or
magistrate to whom  it shall be returned.
       "(3)  A  warrant issued pursuant to this section must be
executed and returned within ten days of its date unless, upon a
showing by the United States of a  need  therefor,  the judge or
magistrate allows additional  time in the  warrant.  If property is
seized pursuant to a warrant, the person executing the warrant
shall give to the person from whom or from  whose premises the
                                                        [p. 30]

property was taken a copy of the  warrant and a receipt for the
property taken or shall  leave the copy and receipt at the place for
which the property was taken. The return of the warrant shall be
made promptly and shall be accompanied by a written inventory
of any property taken. The inventory shall be made in the presence
of the person executing  the warrant and of the person from whose
possession or premises the property was taken, if they are present,

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2387

of in the presence of at least one credible person  other than the
person making such inventory, and shall be verified by the person
executing the warrant. The  judge  or magistrate, upon request,
shall deliver a copy of the inventory to the person from whom or
from whose premises the property was taken and to the applicant
for the warrant.
       "(4) The judge or magistrate who has issued a warrant
under this Section shall attach to the warrant a copy of the return
and all papers filed  in connection therewith and  shall file  them
with the clerk of the district court of the United States for the
judicial district in which the inspection was made.
  "(d) Any records,  reports, or information obtained under this
Section shall be available to the public except that upon a showing
satisfactory to the Administrator that records,  reports or infor-
mation, or a particular part  thereof, to which the Administrator
has access under this subsection constitute trade secrets or  other
matter referred to in  Section 1905 of Title 18 of the United States
Code,  the Administrator  shall consider such record, report, or
information or particular portion thereof confidential, except that
such record,  report,  or information may be disclosed  to  other
officers, employees, or authorized  representatives of the United
States concerned with carrying out this Act, and such information
may be disclosed in camera relevant in any proceeding under this
Act.

"Section 307. Federal enforcement
  " (a) At the request of the  Administrator, the Attorney General
may institute a civil action in the appropriate district court of the
United States for an injunction or other appropriate order  (1) to
prevent any person from engaging in toxic waste  disposal opera-
tions in violation of a  Federal regulatory program  instituted
under  subsection 305 (f)  of this Act, the requirements of subsec-
                                                        [P. 31]

tion 304 (a) of this Act, or State regulations which the Adminis-
trator is entitled to enforce under Section 305(e) of this Act; (2)
to enforce a warrant  issued under Section 306 of this Act; or (3)
to collect a penalty under Section 308 of this Act.
  "(b) If the Administrator determines  that a toxic waste dis-
posal operation  violates applicable State  regulations or a  State
permit, he may—
       "(1) request the State agency to bring an action to enjoin
such operations; and

-------
2388          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

      " (2) in the event of failure on the part of the State agency
to comply with the Administrator's request within a reasonable
time as determined by the Administrator, request the  Attorney
General to institute an action for an injunction or other appro-
priate order, and
      "(3) determine whether State failure to enforce its regula-
tions requires withdrawal of any approval given by the Admin-
istrator under subsection 305 (d)  of this Act.
"Section 308. Fines
  " (a) If any person responsible for a toxic waste disposal opera-
tion fails for more than 15 days after notification to comply with
any  regulation  or permit which the Administrator may enforce
under this Act the Administrator  may  order cessation of such
operation. Such person shall be liable for a civil penalty of not
more than $25,000 for each day of continued non-compliance after
said fifteen days, to be assessed after opportunity for hearing.
  "(b) Any person who knowingly violates any permit or regula-
tion issued pursuant to this Act shall, upon conviction, be guilty of
a misdemeanor and punished by a fine not exceeding $25,000 or by
imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both.
  "(c) The penalities prescribed in this  Section shall be in  addi-
tion to any other remedies afforded by this Act or by any other
law or regulation.
"Section 309. Imminent and substantial hazards
  "Whenever the Administrator determines that any toxic waste
disposal activity or an existing toxic waste disposal site or facility
presents an imminent and substantial hazard to human health, he
shall notify the appropriate State agency. If such agency fails to
take appropriate action within a reasonable time, the Administra-
                                                        [p. 32]

tor may issue an order directing appropriate remedial or correc-
tive measures to be taken. The recipient of any such order shall be
afforded an opportunity for a hearing. If  appropriate action is not
taken promptly,  the  Administrator shall request the  Attorney
General to bring a civil suit in the United States district court in
the district in which the site or facility  is located to  enforce the
Administrator's order.
"Section 310. Research
  The Administrator, in cooperation with the Departments of
Commerce and the Interior and other Federal agencies is author-

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2389

ized to conduct studies, undertake research, and promote the de-
velopment  of  new or improved procedures, methods,  and tech-
niques as may be required for the purposes of this Title.
"Section 311. Federal lands
  Federal agencies administering Federal lands shall issue regula-
tions governing the disposal of toxic wastes on or under the lands
under their jurisdiction. Such regulations shall be in accordance
with regulations  promulgated by the Administrator  pursuant to
Section 304 of this Act and shall be issued after consultation with
the State or States within which such Federal lands are located.
                                                        [p. 33]

                  SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

  Section 1 would designate the present Federal Water Pollution
Control Act (FWPCA) provisions as Title I of the Act.
  Section 2 adds a  new Title II  to the  FWPCA, the Sediment
Control Act.

              (TITLE n—SEDIMENT CONTROL ACT)

  Section 201 states the purpose of the Title, to reduce sedimenta-
tion from land-disturbing activities consistent with water quality
standards.

  Section 202 provides applicable definitions.
  Section 203 provides for the Administrator of EPA  (hereinaf-
ter, the Administrator) to issue within a year of the Title's enact-
ment guidelines for  effective control of sedimentation from land-
disturbing activities, such as road and building construction,  and
excluding agricultural and silvicultural activities and mining ac-
tivities that would be regulated  under the President's proposed
Mined Area Protection Act.
  Subsection (b)  provides that the guidelines shall include infor-
mation on  effects of uncontrolled sediment and  on the techniques
for control, including their costs and effectiveness. The guidelines
must also specify procedures to be followed by States  in establish-
ing control programs and designate categories of land-disturbing
activities for which, within program areas, permits, general regu-
lations, or no controls, respectively, are appropriate.
  Subsection  (c)  prescribes that the Administrator  will consult
with appropriate Federal, State and local agencies in developing
and revising the guidelines.
  Section 204 provides the requirements for State programs.  The

-------
2390          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

first is  a survey to be conducted, within a year  of the Title's
enactment to  subsequently as  appropriate, to determine on the
basis of water quality standards critical areas of  sedimentation
resulting in substantial part  from activities regulated under this
Title in which the standards  may be substantially achieved either
under this Title alone or in conjunction with  controls over other
sedimentation sources such as agricultural runoff.
  Within a year after initial Federal guidelines are issued (dur-
ing which time the survey is to have been completed), States are
expected to submit control programs,  consistent with the guide-
                                                         [p. 34]

lines, for the problem areas identified in the survey.
  Further provisions for such programs, specified in subsection
(b), include encouragement  of the use of State or local agencies
that already issue permits for land-disturbing activities, provided
their programs are acceptable to the State water quality agency. A
technically qualified agency must review to evaluate permits prior
to issuance, a requirement applicable only where the permit-issu-
ing agency itself lacks sufficient expertise. Adequate monitoring of
regulated activities and enforcement authority must be provided.
  Subsection (c) provides for Federal  agencies to regulate activi-
ties on lands within their jurisdiction.
  Section 205 provides for several aspects of Federal enforcement
of requirements under Title  II. First,  Federal agencies that pro-
vide financial assistance for  activities regulated under this Title
will require possession of any requisite permit under Title II as a
condition of assistance.
  Second, section 21 (b) of the FWPCA, which requires a State
certification of reasonable assurance  of compliance with  water
quality standards with respect to proposed activities for which a
Federal license or permit is sought, would be modified with respect
to activities  regulated under Title II  to require a certificate of
compliance with the specific  requirements imposed under Title II.
  Third, the  Administrator  would be authorized to enforce the
requirements  of State programs established under  Title II  in the
same manner as he may enforce standards established under Title
I, i.e., the present Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Here the
bill  is  drafted  in anticipation of pending  amendments of the
FWPCA that would basically authorize Federal administrative or
judicial enforcement of federally-approved State standards when
a State fails to do so.
   Finally, Section 205 provides for Federal establishment of and

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2391

enforcement of regulations in order to abate  violations of water
quality  standards if a  State had failed to adopt  an acceptable
sedimentation control program within six months after the time
specified for submission of such a program to the Administrator
for approval.
         (TITLE m—TOXIC WASTE DISPOSAL CONTROL ACT)
                                                        [p. 35]

  Section 3 adds to the FWPCA as  Title III  the Toxic Waste
Disposal Control Act.
  Section 301 states findings, to the effect that present regulatory
controls over the increasing use of land and  underground strata
for disposal  of toxic  wastes fail adequately to protect public
health,  and a purpose of establishing a nationwide  control pro-
gram relying principally on  State action  pursuant to  Federal
guidelines.
  Section  302 states  applicable definitions,  including those  of
"toxic waste" and of "disposal" of such waste.
  Section 303 states the policy of Title III,  to permit land and
underground disposal of toxic waste (hereinafter, disposal of toxic
waste)  after  alternative  disposal sites and  methods have  been
considered and if the appropriate State or Federal official has not
determined that disposal will endanger human  health.

  Section 304 provides for Federal regulations and guidelines for
State programs. Subsection (a)  provides for the Administrator to
issue, initially within a year from enactment  of the Title, regula-
tions designating locations or types of locations on or under the
land where certain quantities of specified toxic wastes or combina-
tions may not be disposed. He is also called upon to designate
specific substances or combinations thereof which he determines to
be toxic wastes.
   Subsection  (b)  calls upon the administrator to establish within
the same time guidelines  for State regulatory programs with re-
spect to locations where toxic waste disposal may be considered.
The guidelines will cover testing, monitoring,  reporting, perform-
ances standards, disposal procedures, and related  matters. They
also specify the circumstances in which case-by-case permits and
general regulations, respectively, are needed.
   Section 305 covers submission and approval of State programs
meeting the EPA guidelines. Subsection (a)  calls for submission
of such programs after public hearings and  within  a year after
initial issuance of the Federal guidelines. Subsection  (b)  enumer-

-------
2392          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

ates specific criteria for approval of State programs, such as pos-
session by the State of  adequate authority to enforce its regula-
tions, adequate funding and manpower, a mechanism  to notify
other States that may be affected  by issuance of a permit, and
                                                        [p. 36]

authority to take prompt action in cases of imminent and substan-
tial dangers to health.
  Subsections (e) and  (h)  cover withdrawal and  reinstatement
by the Administrator of his approval of a State program which is
not being enforced.
  Subsections (e) and  (f) provide for the issuance and enforce-
ment of regulations by the Administrator for a State in which a
toxic waste disposal program has not been approved and estab-
lished or for which approval has been withdrawn.
  Subsection (g) provides for the Administrator to establish in-
terim regulations for subsurface toxic waste disposal activities in
any State which  does not regulate such activity at the  time of
enactment of this Title, pending  development and approval of such
a program pursuant to this Title.
  Section 306 provides  for the  Administrator to conduct inspec-
tions, with appropriate warrants, to carry out his functions under
this Title, Subsection (d) provides for public availability of infor-
mation or documents so obtained,  except for  trade secrets and
material covered by 18 U.S.C. §1905.
  Section 307 provides for Federal  enforcement of applicable reg-
ulations  by initiation for a  civil action for injunctive or  other
relief. There is also provision for  Federal enforcement of State
regulations in any specific instance of State failure to act despite a
request of the Administrator to do so.
  Section 308 provides for the assessment of a civil penalty of up
to $25,000 per day beyond the 15th day after notification by the
Administrator of noncompliance  with  applicable  requirements
pursuant to this  Title,  and for criminal penalties  up to $25,000
and/or one year imprisonment for  knowing violations of applica-
ble permits or regulations.
  Section 309 authorizes the Administrator to request prompt ac-
tion by the Attorney General whenever a State fails  to act to
alleviate an imminent and substantial hazard to health from either
disposal activities or an  existing  disposal site or facility.
  Section 310 authorizes the Administrator, in cooperation with

-------
                    GUIDELINES AND REPORTS               2393

other Federal agencies, to conduct studies and research on proce-
dures, methods and techniques covered by this Title.
                                                                [p. 37]

  Section 311  provides for Federal agencies  to establish control
programs, as required under this Title, for lands under their juris-
diction.
                                                                [P. 38]

                 SULFUR OXIDES EMISSION CHARGE
                                                                [p. 39]

                       OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY,
                                  Washington, D.C., February 8, 1972.

HON.  SPIRO T. AGNEW,
President of the Senate,
Washington, D.C.
HON.  CARL B. ALBERT,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.

  DEAR  MR.  [PRESIDENT/SPEAKER] : There is transmitted herewith  a pro-
posed bill, "To promote the abatement of atmospheric sulphur pollution by
the imposition of a tax on the emission of sulphur into the atmosphere, and
for other purposes."
  In his Environmental Message of February 8, 1971, the President observed
that sulphur  oxides are among the most damaging  air pollutants,  costing
society billions of dollars  annually in terms  of human  health, vegetation,
and property. At that time the President stated  that a charge on emissions
of sulphur into  the  atmosphere would  be a major  step in  applying the
principle that the costs of pollution should be included in the  price of the
product.  The  President also stated that legislation to this  end would be
submitted to  the Congress upon the completion of studies underway in the
agencies  most directly concerned.  The Treasury  Department, the Council
on Environmental Quality, and  the Environmental Protection  Agency have
completed their studies  on this concept  and have developed  the details of
sulphur oxides emissions charge, incorporated in the enclosed draft.
  The proposed bill would provide  for a tax,  beginning with calendar year
1976,  on the  emissions of sulphur  into the atmosphere.  The tax would be
imposed directly on the sulphurous emissions of  those  sources  large  enough
to measure and monitor their  emissions. Small  emitters, who do not have
facilities to measure or monitor emissions, would pay tax on the  sulphur
content of their fuel  purchases.
  The tax  rate would  be  15 cents per pound of sulphur emitted into the
atmosphere, with  reductions in  or exemptions from the rate  applicable in
certain  sulphur tax  regions as  determined  by the Administrator  of the
                                                                [p. 41]

Environmental Protection Agency. The tax would be reduced  to 10 cents in
regions  where it was  demonstrated that  there was  no violation  of the

-------
2394           LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

national primary ambient sulphur oxide air standard on an average basis
during the preceding calendar year. There would be no tax in regions where
it was demonstrated on the same basis that there was no violation of either
national primary or secondary ambient sulphur  oxide air standards.
  Pursuant  to  the Clean  Air Amendments of  1970,  national  ambient
standards  have been set for  six  major  air  pollutants, including sulphur
oxides. States are required to develop implementation  plans to achieve these
standards  within  three  years. Enforcement  at  all  levels  of government
may be hampered by  debate  over  technical feasibility  and commercial
availability of control technology  for sulphur oxides. This sulphur  oxides
tax will stimulate  industry to  develop and install control  technology and
use cleaner fuels as quickly as possible in order to minimize the tax liability.
It  will stimulate  prompt compliance  with ambient standards and  reduce
the need for ad hoe enforcement actions.
  The sulphur oxides charge in no way compromises the air quality standards
of the Clean  Air  Act.  In all  cases, the development of  effective state
regulatory  programs  and  implementation plans  will  be  required,  and
where  the  charge  is  insufficient to  achieve  the standards,  regulatory
authority will assure that the standards  are met. Together, the sulphur
oxides  charge  and  existing  regulatory  authority  provide a  powerful
mechanism to achieve air quality objectives.
  A general explanation of the proposed bill and  its background  also are
enclosed.  A similar letter is being sent to the [President  of the Senate/
Speaker of the House].
  The  Department has  been  advised  by  the Office of  Management and
Budget that enactment of the  proposed legislation would be in accord with
the program of the President.
                                                               [p. 42]

                                                     Sincerely,
                                                 JOHN B. CONNALLY.
                                                               [p. 43]

  A BILL To promote  the abatement of atmospheric sulphur pollution by
the imposition of a tax on the emission of  sulphur into the atmosphere, and
for other purposes.

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

Section 1. Short title, etc.

   (a) Short Title.—This Act  may be cited as the "Pure Air Tax
Act of 1972".

   (b) Amendment of 1954 Code.—Except as otherwise  expressly
provided,  whenever in this Act an  amendment is expressed in
terms of an amendment to a section or other provision, the  refer-
ence shall be considered to be made to a section or other provision
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2395

Section  2. Tax on sulphur emissions and the sulphur content of
fuels

   (a)  Imposition of  Tax.—Chapter 39  (relating to regulatory
taxes) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new
subchapter:
  "Subchapter F—Environmental Quality Taxes.
  "Sec. 4891. Sale of sulphurous fuels.
  "Sec. 4892. Sulphur emissions by processors and registered tax-
payers.
  "Sec. 4893. Additional tax imposed upon sales of sulphurous
fuels and sulphur emissions.
  "Sec. 4894. Definitions, registration, and special rules.

"Section 4891. Sale of sulphurous fuels
  " (a)  Imposition of  Tax.—There is hereby imposed a tax at the
rate specified in subsection (b) upon each pound of sulphur con-
tained in a sulphurous fuel sold by a  registered taxpayer during
any calendar year beginning after 1975.
  "(b)  Rate of Tax.—
       "(1)  In general.—Except as provided in paragraph  (2),
the tax imposed  by subsection (a)  shall be 15 cents per pound
of sulphur contained in a sulphurous fuel.
       "(2)  Special rule.—With respect to the sulphur content of
any  sulphurous  fuel  sold during a  calendar year for ultimate
                                                       [p. 44]

use in a sulphur tax  region which is  determined by the Admin-
istrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to be a Class
II sulphur tax region for the preceding calendar year, the rate
of tax imposed by subsection  (a) shall be 10 cents per pound of
sulphur contained in a sulphurous fuel.
  "(c)  Exemptions.—No tax  shall  be imposed under subsection
 (a) in respect of:
       "(1)  Sale for use in certain sulphur tax regions.—Sulphur
contained in sulphurous fuel sold during a calendar year for ulti-
mate use in a  sulphur tax region  which is determined by the
Administrator of the Environmental  Protection Agency to  be a
Class III sulphur tax region for the preceding calendar year.
       "(2)  Sale to registered taxpayer.—Sulphur contained in a
sulphurous fuel sold to a person who is a registered taxpayer.
       "(3)  Sale for nonfuel use.—Sulphur contained in a sulphu-
rous  fuel sold for  a  nonfuel  use including,  in accordance  with

-------
2396          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

regulations  prescribed by the Secretary or  his delegate,  such
products derived from fuels  as are  customarily used for non-
fuel use.
       "(4)  Sulphurous fuels  exported.—Sulphur contained in a
sulphurous fuel sold for export or for resale by the purchaser for
export. This paragraph shall not apply to the sale of a sulphurous
fuel unless,  within 6 months  after the date of  the sale by the
registered taxpayer (or, if earlier, on the date  of shipment  by
the registered taxpayer), the  registered  taxpayer receives satis-
factory proof that the fuel has been exported.
       " (5)  Sale for use in motor vehicles.—Sulphur contained in
a sulphurous fuel sold for use  in a motor vehicle.
       "(6)  Sale for use as supplies for vessels or aircraft.—Sul-
phur contained in a sulphurous fuel sold for use by the purchaser
as supplies for vessels or aircraft.
  "(d) Floor Stocks Tax.—
       "(1)  In general.—There is hereby imposed a floor stocks
tax on the sulphur content of sulphurous fuel held by a person
who ceases to be a registered taxpayer. The tax shall be imposed
at the  rate which would  apply under subsection  (b) if the floor
stocks  were  sold by such person for ultimate  use in the sulphur
                                                        [p. 45]

tax region where they are located at the time he ceases to be a
registered taxpayer.
       "(2)  Special rules.—Paragraph (1)  shall not apply if the
sulphur content of sulphurous  fuel held by the person at the time
he ceases to be a registered taxpayer is less  than 2,000 pounds
of sulphur.
"Section  4892. Sulphur emissions  by processors  and  registered
taxpayers
  " (a) Imposition of Tax.—There is hereby imposed a tax at the
rate specified in subsection (b) upon each pound of sulphur emit-
ted into the atmosphere—
       " (1) by a registered taxpayer, or
       "(2)  by a processor (other than as the result of the com-
bustion or distillation of sulphurous fuel), during any calendar
year beginning after 1975.
  "(b) Rate of Tax.—
       "(1)  In general.—Except as provided  in  paragraph (2),
the rate  of tax imposed by subsection (a)  shall  be 15 cents per
pound  of sulphur emitted into  the atmosphere.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2397

       "(2) Special rule.—With respect to the sulphur emissions
during a calendar year in a sulphur tax region which is deter-
mined by  the Administrator of  the  Environmental  Protection
Agency to be a Class II sulphur tax  region  for the  preceding
calendar year, the rate of tax imposed by subsection (a) shall be
10 cents per pound of sulphur emitted into the atmosphere.
  "(c) Exemption.—No tax shall be imposed under subsection
 (a)  in respect of sulphur emissions during a calendar year in a
sulphur tax region which is determined by the Administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency to be a Class III sulphur
tax region for the preceding year.

"Section 4893. Additional tax imposed  upon sales of sulphurous
fuels and sulphur emissions
  " (a) Imposition of Tax.—In addition to the tax imposed under
sections 4891 and 4892, there is hereby imposed a tax at the rate
specified in subsection (b) upon—
       "(1) Registered taxpayers.—The number of pounds  by
which the sum of—
           "(A.) the pounds of sulphur contained in sulphurous
fuel sold by a registered taxpayer for ultimate use  in  a sulphur
                                                       [p. 46]

tax region, and
           "(B) the pounds of sulphur emitted into the atmos-
phere in such region  by such person, or
       "(2) Processors.—The number of pounds of sulphur emit-
ted into the atmosphere in a sulphur tax region by a  processor
 (other than as the result of the  combustion or distillation of a
sulphurous fuel), during any calendar year beginning after 1975,
which exceeds the net base pounds of sulphur of  such processor
or registered taxpayer for such sulphur tax region for the preced-
ing calendar year.  The amount determined under paragraph  (1)
(A)  shall not include pounds of sulphur contained in sulphurous
fuel sold by a registered taxpayer  to another registered  taxpayer.
  " (b) Rate of Tax.—The rate of tax imposed by subsection (a)
shall be—
       "(1) 5 cents per pound of sulphur contained in sulphurous
fuel  sold for ultimate use in, or emitted into the atmosphere in,
a sulphur  tax region which is a  Class  I sulphur  tax region for
the calendar year and was a Class II sulphur tax region for the
preceding calendar year,
       " (2) 10 cents per pound of sulphur contained in sulphurous

-------
2398          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

fuel sold for ultimate use in, or emitted into the atmosphere in,
a sulphur tax  region which  is a Class  II sulphur tax region for
the calendar year and was a Class III sulphur tax region for the
preceding calendar year, or
      "(3) 15 cents per pound of sulphur contained in sulphurous
fuel sold for ultimate use in, or emitted into the atmosphere in,
a sulphur tax  region which is a Class I sulphur tax region for
the calendar year and was a Class III sulphur tax region for the
preceding calendar year.
  " (c) Definitions.—For purposes of this section—
      "(1) Base Pounds of Sulphur.—The term 'base pounds of
sulphur' means the sum of  the pounds of sulphur contained in
sulphurous fuel sold for ultimate use in, and the pounds of sulphur
emitted into the atmosphere in, a particular sulphur tax region
during a calendar year by a processor or a registered taxpayer.
      "(2)  Net Base  Pounds of Sulphur.—The term 'net base
pounds  of sulphur' means the base  pounds of  sulphur  for the
                                                       [p. 47]

calendar year—
          "(A)  increased by transfers of such pounds to the
processor or registered taxpayer from  other processors and reg-
istered taxpayers in the same sulphur tax  region, and
          "(B)  decreased by transfers of such pounds by the
processor or  registered taxpayer to other  processors and reg-
istered taxpayers in the same sulphur tax  region.
Transfers of base pounds of sulphur shall  be made in accordance
with regulations prescribed by the Secretary or his delegate.

"Section 4894. Definitions, registration,  and special rules
  " (a) Definitions.—For purposes of this subchapter :
       "(1) Sulphurous fuel.—The term 'sulphurous fuel' means
any natural or manufactured  substance, in a raw state or after
processing, which is suitable for use as  a combustible fuel directly
or after processing, and which contains at least one-tenth of a
pound of sulphur, in elemental or  compound form, per million
BTU's of heat content.
       "(2)  Dealer in sulphurous fuel.—The term 'dealer in sul-
phurous fuel'  means any person who customarily purchases, pro-
duces or  imports sulphurous fuel in amounts exceeding 100,000
million  BTU's of heat content per year and customarily sells at
least 25 percent of such fuel. For purposes of this paragraph, the
production of a  fuel includes extraction  from  a mine,  well or

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2399

other natural deposit or the manufacture of any fuel using natural
or manufactured material.
      "(3)  Producer-User of sulphurous fuel.—The  term 'pro-
ducer-user of sulphurous fuel' means any person who customarily
produces or imports sulphurous fuel in amounts exceeding 100,000
million BTU's of heat content per year, at least 75  percent of
which is used by such person. For purposes of this paragraph, the
production  of a fuel includes extraction from a mine,  well or
other natural deposit or the manufacture of any fuel using natural
or manufactured material.
      " (4)  Emission source.—The term 'emission source' means
any  point source (as denned  by  regulations prescribed by the
Secretary or his delegate for purposes of this section in concur-
rence with the Administrator of  the Environmental  Protection
                                                       [P. 48]

Agency)  of sulphur oxides emissions.
      "(5)  Purchaser of  sulphurous fuel.—The term 'purchaser
of sulphurous fuel' means  any person  who customarily purchases
sulphurous fuel in amounts exceeding 100,000 million BTU's of
heat content per year, at least 75 percent of which is used by such
person.
      "(6)  Registered taxpayer.—The term 'registered taxpayer'
means a person who has registered  as provided under subsec-
tion  (b).
      "(7)  Processor.—The term 'processor' means an emission
source which would  not be classified as such solely  by reason of
its sulphur oxides emissions derived from the combustion or distil-
lation of sulphurous  fuel.
      "(8)  Sulphur tax region.—The term 'sulphur tax region'
means an air quality control region or a portion of an air quality
control region which is  subdivided in  accordance with the provi-
sions of subsection (d) (1).
      "(9)  Class I  sulphur tax region.—The term 'Class I sul-
phur tax region' means any sulphur tax region which is not certi-
fied to be a Class II or III sulphur tax region by the Administrator
of the Environmental Protection Agency.
      "(10) Class II sulphur tax region.—The term  'Class  II
sulphur tax region' means any sulphur tax region which is certi-
fied by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
to be a Class II sulphur tax region.
      "(11) Class III sulphur tax region.—The term 'Class III
sulphur tax region' means any sulphur tax region which is certi-

-------
2400          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

fied by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
to be Class III sulphur tax region.
      "(12) Air quality control region.—The term 'air quality
control region' means a region designated in accordance with the
provisions of section 107 of the Clean Air Act, as amended and
supplemented (42 U.S.C. 1857c-2).
      "(13) Nonfuel use.—The term 'nonfuel use' means a use of
a sulphurous fuel in which no product derived from such fuel is
released into the atmosphere.
                                                       [P. 49]

      "(14) Supplies for vessels or aircraft.—The term 'supplies
for vessels or aircraft' shall have the same meaning as set forth
in section 4221 (d) (3).
  "(b) Registration.—
      "(1)  Dealer in sulphurous fuel.—Any  person  who  is  a
dealer in sulphurous fuel shall be required to register (in accord-
ance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary or his delegate)
for a calendar year if, during any one of the five calendar years
preceding the taxable year, such person—
           " (A) purchased, imported or produced sulphurous fuel
containing more than 250,000 million BTU's of heat content, or
           "(B) emitted more than 1,000 tons of sulphur into the
atmosphere.
      "(2)  Producer-User of sulphurous fuel.—Any person who
is a producer-user of sulphurous fuel shall be required to reg:ster
(in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary or his
delegate).
      "(3)  Emission source.—Any person (other than a proces-
sor) who operates or maintains an emission source during any
calendar year beginning  after 1974, shall be required to register
(in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary  or
his delegate) on or before January 1 of the succeeding calendar
year.
      " (4)  Optional registration.—Any person who is a dealer in
sulphurous fuel or a purchaser of sulphurous fuel who establishes
(in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary or
his delegate) that he is capable of measuring the sulphur content
of sulphurous fuel sold or used by him, may register as a dealer
in or purchaser of sulphurous fuel.
  " (c) Attribution of Emissions.—For purposes of sections 4892
and 4893, emissions are taxable at the rate applicable to the sul-
phur tax region in which such emissions occur except that any

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2401

emission which is certified by the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection  Agency to contribute to a violation of the na-
tional ambient sulphur oxides air standards (as prescribed in ac-
cordance with the provisions of section 109 of the Clean Air Act,
as amended and supplemented (42 U.S.C. 1857c-4) in  another
sulphur tax region shall be treated as emitted in the other sulphur
tax region if the tax resulting from such treatment is greater.
                                                       [p. 50]

  "(d) Designation and Classification of Sulphur Tax Regions.—
For purposes of this subchapter—
      "(1) Designation.—
           "(A) General rule.—Except as provided in subpara-
graph (B), each air quality  control region shall be a sulphur tax
region.
           "(B) After consideration of petitions from the Gover-
nor of each State having territory within a particular air quality
control region,  the Administrator of the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency may divide such region into two or more sulphur tax
regions if he deems such division appropriate. Such petitions shall
be submitted in accordance with regulations  prescribed by  the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
      "(2) Classification of sulphur tax regions.—A sulphur tax
region shall be  designated by the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency for a calendar year as—
           " (A) a Class I sulphur tax region if such region is not
designated  a Class  II or III sulphur tax region,
           "(B) a Class  II sulphur tax region  if the Governor of
the State wherein such region is located demonstrates (in accord-
ance with  regulations prescribed by the Administrator of  the
Environmental  Protection Agency) that there was no violation
of the national primary ambient sulphur oxides air standard with-
in such region on an average basis during the calendar year, or
           "(C) a Class III  sulphur tax region if the Governor of
the State wherein such region is located demonstrates (in accord-
ance with  regulations prescribed by the Administrator of  the
Environmental  Protection Agency) that there was no violation
of the national primary or secondary ambient  sulphur oxides air
standards within such region  on an average  basis during  the
calendar year.
  "(e)  Measurement of Emissions.—For purposes of  sections
4892 and 4893, taxable emissions resulting from the combustion or
processing  of sulphurous fuels or the smelting of ores  may be

-------
2402          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

estimated in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secre-
tary or his delegate in consultation with the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
                                                       [p- 51]

  "(f) Controlled Group of Corporations.—For purposes of this
subchapter, a controlled group of corporations shall be treated as
a single  person and the  term 'controlled group of corporations'
shall have the same meaning assigned to such term by section 1563
(a)  except that 50% shall be in lieu of 80% wherever such per-
centage appears therein.
  " (g) Cross Reference.—For penalties and  other general admin-
istrative  provisions applicable to this subchapter,  see subtitle F."
  (b) Refunds of the Tax Imposed Upon the Sulphur Content of
Sulphurous Fuels.—Subchapter B of Chapter 65 (relating to rules
of special application)  is amended by  adding at the  end thereof
the following new section:

"Section  6428. Sulphur content of sulphurous fuels exported, sold
to a registered taxpayer or used for nonfuel  uses
  "(a) General Rule.—The tax paid under  section 4891 on the
sulphur content of a sulphurous fuel  shall  be deemed to be an
overpayment by  the person who paid such  tax  if such fuel  is
exported, sold to  a registered taxpayer, or used by the ultimate
purchaser for a nonfuel use. The amount deemed to be an overpay-
ment shall be based upon the sulphur content of such fuel at the
time the fuel is exported,  sold to a registered  taxpayer, or used for
a nonfuel use. The tax paid on the sulphur content  of a sulphurous
fuel which has been exported may be refunded to the exporter
thereof, if  the person who paid  the tax waives his claim to such
amount.
  "(b) Condition of Allowance.—No credit or refund  of any over-
payment to the person who paid the tax on the sulphur content of
a sulphurous fuel shall be  made unless such person establishes,
under regulations prescribed by the Secretary or his delegate, that
he—
       "(1) has not included the tax in the price of the fuel with
respect to which it was imposed and  has not collected the amount
of the tax from the person who purchased such fuel;
       " (2) has repaid or agreed to repay the amount of the tax to
the purchaser or exporter of the fuel; or
       " (3) has obtained  the written consent of such purchaser or
exporter to the allowance of the credit or the making of the refund.
                                                       [p- 52]

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2403

  "(c) Definitions.—
      "(1)  Sulphurous fuel.—As used in this section, the term
'sulphurous  fuel'  shall have the same meaning  as  set forth in
section 4894(a) (1).
      "(2)  Nonfuel use.—As used in  this section, the term 'non-
fuel use' shall have the meaning as set forth in section 4894 (a) (13).
      "(3)  Registered taxpayer.—As used in this  section, the
term 'registered taxpayer' shall have the same  meaning  as set
forth in section 4894 (a) (6).
  "(d) Credit Against Tax Imposed by Section  4891.—A credit
may be allowed against the tax imposed under section 4891, which
is due on any subsequent return, for an  amount  equal  to the
payment authorized under this section.
  "(e) Exempt Sales.—No amount shall be  payable under this
section with respect to the sulphur content of a sulphurous fuel
which the Secretary or his delegate determines was  exempt from
the tax imposed by section 4891.
  "(f) Regulations.—The Secretary or his delegate may by regu-
lations, not inconsistent with the provisions of this section, pre-
scribe the conditions under which payments may be made under
this section, the amount to which any person is entitled under this
section with respect to any period, or the amount which may be
treated by such person as an overpayment which may be credited
against the tax imposed by section 4891."
   (c) Clerical Amendments, etc.—
       (1) The table of subchapters for chapter 39 of subtitle D is
amended by adding at the end  thereof the following new sub-
chapter :
      "Subchapter F. Environmental Quality Taxes".
       (2) The table of sections for subchapter B of chapter 65 is
amended by adding  at the end thereof  the following:
  "Sec. 6428. Sulphur  content of sulphurous fuels exported, sold
to a registered taxpayer, or used for nonfuel uses."
Sec. 3. State taxation of sulphur  content of sulphurous fuels
  Nothing in this title or in any other law of the  United States
shall prevent the several States from taxing the sulphur content of
                                                       [p. 53]

sulphurous fuels.

Sec.  4. Effective date
  Except as otherwise expressly provided, the amendments made

-------
2404          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

by this Act shall take effect on the day after the date of enactment
of this Act.
                                                       [p. 54]

BACKGROUND AND DETAILED EXPLANATION—PURE AIR TAX ACT
                          OF 1972
                       I. BACKGROUND

A. The Problem of Sulphur Oxides
  Sulphur oxides have been identified as one of the major causes
of the health and property damage from air  pollution. The Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency estimates damages from sulphur ox-
ides  at present levels to be $8 billion annually or about 20 cents
per pound of sulphur, on average.
  Sulphur oxides result from the burning and distilling of coal
and oil, the smelting or ores, and other industrial processes. An
estimated 36.6 million tons of sulphur oxides are now emitted each
year. If uncontrolled, annual sulphur oxides emissions will nearly
quadruple, to an estimated 126 million tons by the year 2000. The
problem is serious now and will certainly become worse in the
absence of effective remedial action.

B. Strategies for Controlling Sulphur Oxides
  1.  Under the Clean Air Act and the 1970 Clean  Air Amend-
ments, the Environmental Protection Agency has set air quality
standards (referred to as "ambient" standards in the Clean Air
Act) for sulphur oxides: the national primary ambient air quality
standard is intended to protect health and the national secondary
ambient air quality standard to protect materials and vegetation.
  Guidelines have been issued to assist states  in developing imple-
mentation plans to meet all  national primary air quality stand-
ards, including the standard for sulphur  oxides.  Under the law,
each state must submit a plan to meet the national primary air
quality standards, and EPA  is receiving  such plans  which are
designed to achieve national primary air quality standards within
three years. Upon approval by EPA of the state plans, the states
must implement these plans by approximately mid-1975. Exemp-
tions from the three-year requirement can be  made by the Admin-
istrator of the Environmental Protection Agency  only is adequate
control methods are not commercially available or have not been
                                                       [p. 55]

available for a sufficient period of time.

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2405

   2. In his Environmental Message to Congress in 1971, President
Nixon stated:
       "Last year in my State of the Union message I urged that
     the price of goods 'should be made  to  include the cost of
     producing and disposing of them without damage to the envi-
     ronment.' A charge on sulfur emitted into the atmosphere
     would be a major step in applying the principle that the costs
     of pollution should be included in the price of the product. A
     staff study underway indicates the feasibility of such a charge
     system.
       "—Accordingly, I have  asked  the Chairman of the Council
     on Environmental Quality and the Secretary of the Treasury
     to develop a Clean Air Emissions Charge  on emissions of
     sulfur oxides. Legislation will be submitted to the Congress
     upon completion of the studies currently underway."
   The work requested by the President has now been completed,
and a bill "To promote the abatement of atmospheric  sulphur
pollution by the imposition of a tax on the emission  of sulphur
into the atmosphere, and for other purposes" is now being submit-
ted to the Congress.

C. The interaction of the Tax and Regulatory Authority

   1. A major role of the sulphur tax is as an aid to enforcement of
the implementation plans for achieving the national primary am-
bient air quality standard for  sulphur oxides  and as an incentive
to quickly meet the national  secondary ambient air quality stand-
ard  for sulphur oxides. Under a  regulatory  system without  the
tax, there may be enforcement problems.  If  there is  substantial
debate on technological feasibility or commercial  availability of
control equipment, the charge will minimize requests for variances
and lengthy court proceedings.
   The sulphur emissions tax reverses current incentives by mak-
ing emissions more expensive  than emission  control. Control de-
vices are  no longer  expensive and unprofitable items,  to  avoid
wherever  feasible  and to  use  as little  as  possible, but  are now
productive and profitable investments, to be sought out, developed,
and  utilized fully. There is less to  be gained  by delaying compli-
                                                        [p. 56]

ance with standards, and more profit in reducing emissions,  when
emissions are expensive. With the emitters' incentives reversed in
this  way,  the number of enforcement actions by regulatory  au-
thorities should be reduced,  as should the demand for variances

-------
2406          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

and delays since variances and delays will cost the emitters money.
The  tax will produce much more rapid decreases in emissions,
with much less regulation of individual decision, and  with much
less conflict and litigation.
  2.  A second major role of the tax is to assist in achieving the
national ambient air quality standards for  sulphur oxides  with
greater economic efficiency. In concept, the states could  achieve the
national ambient air quality standards at minimum  cost to the
society by  requiring greater emission reductions from emitters
whose costs of controlling emissions are low and lesser reductions
where control costs are high. (For example, a 75 percent reduction
in emissions may be achieved by requiring all  emitters to reduce
emissions  by 75 percent; but the same result may be achieved
more cheaply by having some emitters reduce emissions by only 60
percent and others—whose control costs are low—by 90 percent.)
This  advantage may very well  prove  to be more significant in
meeting the national ambient secondary air  quality standard for
sulphur oxides than in meeting the national  ambient primary air
quality standard for sulphur oxides.
  The difficulty with achieving this optimum outcome is that it is
impossible for a state to  know very much about the control costs
of individual emitters; and  even if the knowledge were readily
available,  there are problems of equity and enforcement. As a
consequence,  state implementation plans may require the same
percentage emission reduction from each source or, perhaps, the
use of low  sulphur fuels  only. Case studies indicate that this ap-
proach can double  or  triple the costs of meeting the ambient
standards.  These unnecessary costs, ultimately borne by consum-
ers, do nothing to improve air quality.
  But with the sulphur oxides tax in effect,  a lower cost solution
can be obtained. The tax encourages those firms with  low control
costs to reduce emissions  more, since they have the most to gain in
                                                       [p. 57]

tax savings.  Those with  higher  control costs will not make  such
large reductions in emissions,  but will pay high charges. Com-
pared with a requirement of an equal percentage reduction for all
emitters, the result should be a more efficient pattern  of emission
control, which can reduce the cost of meeting the standards.
  3. It is important to note that the tax in no way compromises or
vitiates the national ambient air quality standards of the Clean
Air Act. In all cases, the  development of effective state regulatory
programs and implementation plans pursuant to the Clean Air Act

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2407

will be required to assure that these standards are met. In some
regions, the addition of  the charge will obviate the need  for  a
large number of enforcement actions and ensure compliance with
national ambient air quality standards for sulphur oxides. In other
regions, the charge may  be insufficient and if lags in compliance
are encountered, enforcement actions  will be required and vigor-
ously pursued to meet the standards.
  The sulphur oxides emissions tax has been carefully designed to
complement and strengthen the Clean  Air Act and its amend-
ments. The tax does not come into effect until 1976, the year
following the deadline for meeting national primary ambient air
quality standards under the Clean Air Act. Similarly, the tax rate
varies according to the air quality  in the air quality control re-
gions defined by the  Environmental Protection Agency pursuant
to the Clean Air Act. In  regions where  the air  quality  standards
for sulphur oxides are met, no tax will be imposed. In regions
where—for whatever reason—air quality standards for  sulphur
oxides are not met, the tax will serve as  a continuous enforcement
mechanism which  will reinforce regulatory action to bring about
rapid compliance with those air quality standards. Together, the
Clean Air Act and the sulphur oxides  emissions tax constitute an
effective and efficient solution to  the  problem of pollution from
gulphur oxides.
II. OPERATION OP TAX ON EMISSIONS OF SULPHUR INTO THE ATMOS-
                           PHERE

A. Imposition of Basic Tax on Sales and Emissions
                        1. In General
                                                       [p. 58]

  The intention of the sulphur tax  is to impose a charge on  sul-
phur actually emitted into the atmosphere from the combustion of
fuels, smelting  of  ores, and other industrial processes in regions
which after 1975 fail to  meet national air quality standards for
sulphur oxides.
  As to fuels, the technique is to provide a tax on the  sulphur
content of  fuels intended for use in the designated regions. The
bill provides, however, that fuel sales  will be tax free to  a buyer
who is "registered." Registration requires, among  other things,
the ability  to measure sulphur oxides  emissions arising from use
of the fuel. Thus, an emitter who establishes that he can provide
measurements of sulphur oxides can  buy fuel  tax  free,  but be-
comes subject to tax on the sulphur that escapes into the atmos-

-------
2408          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

phere. If the buyer has equipment that removes 90 percent of the
sulphur content of the fuel, tax need be paid only on the remaining
10 percent.
  Ores always can be purchased tax free regardless of the sulphur
content. Processors of these ores  are liable  for tax on sulphur
emissions from processing of the ores on the same terms as regis-
tered fuel users.
  The rate of tax will depend upon the classification of the air
quality control region in which the emissions occur. Air  quality
control  regions are  classified as  Class I (violation of national
primary ambient  sulphur oxides air standard), Class II  (national
primary sulphur  oxides standard is met, but national secondary
sulphur oxides standard is violated), or Class III  (both national
primary and secondary sulphur oxides standards are met). Since
the quality of the air is lowest in Class I regions, higher in Class
II, and highest in Class III, the tax rate is highest in Class I (15
cents per pound), lower in Class II (10 cents per pound), and zero
in Class III. The  tax will be imposed on taxable sales and emis-
sions beginning with the calendar year 1976.

                   2. Sales of sulphurous fuel

   (a)  Taxable sales. The tax on  sales is imposed on sales of
"sulphurous fuels." This term is defined as any natural  or manu-
factured substance, in a raw state or after processing, which con-
tains at least  one-tenth of a pound of  sulphur  (in  elemental or
                                                       [p. 59]

compound form)  per million BTU's of heat content. Only sales by
persons who are "registered taxpayers" will be subject to the tax.
Under the bill, registration (with the Secretary of the Treasury or
his delegate) will be required of most dealers in sulphurous fuel,
all "producer-users" of sulphurous fuel, and all persons who oper-
ate,  during  1974  or  later  years, an emission source  which is de-
fined as a "point  source" of sulphur oxides emissions (within the
meaning of regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treas-
ury  or his delegate in concurrence with the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency).
  A dealer  in sulphurous fuel means a person who customarily
purchases, produces, or imports sulphurous  fuel in  amounts ex-
ceeding 100,000 million BTU's of heat content per year and cus-
tomarily sells  at  least 25 percent of such fuel.  (For all purposes
under the bill, production of a  fuel includes extraction  of fuel
from a natural deposit, as well as the manufacture  of a fuel using

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2409

natural or manufactured materials.) Such persons as oil well oper-
ators and coal mine operators would be included in this category,
i.e., persons who are primarily suppliers of sulphurous fuels. Even
though a purchaser, importer, or producer meets this definition of
a "dealer," registration is required only if the dealer, during any
one of the five calendar years immediately  preceding the current
calendar year, (i) purchased,  imported,  or produced sulphurous
fuel containing more than 250,000 million BTU's of heat content,
or (ii) emitted more  than 1,000 tons of sulphur into the atmos-
phere.
  A "producer-user of sulphurous fuel"  is defined in the bill as
any person who  customarily produces or imports sulphurous fuel
in amounts exceeding 100,000  million BTU's of heat content per
year, at least 75  percent of which is used by such person. Included
in this category  are companies or power plants which own their
own oil wells or  mines, or import sulphurous fuels, primarily for
their own use, but whose use is not sufficient to cause them to be
classified as emission sources. Persons in this category must regis-
ter since the fuel they use will not have been  previously taxed.
  In addition to these taxpayers who  are required to register
                                                        [p. 60]

under the bill, any other person who is a dealer in sulphurous fuel,
as defined above, or a "purchaser of sulphurous fuel"  (a person
who customarily purchases fuel in amounts  exceeding 100,000 mil-
lion BTU's of heat content per year and uses at least 75 percent of
such amount) may, at his option, register, provided that such a
dealer or purchaser establishes that he is capable of measuring the
sulphur content of sulphurous fuels sold or used by him. Presuma-
bly,  optional  registration  will be used by  persons whose use of
sulphurous fuels is too small to require registration,  but who will
remove sulphur from fuel prior to use or sale.
   (b)  Rate of tax. The rate imposed on sales of sulphurous fuels
is determined according to the "sulphur tax region"  in which the
fuel sold is destined for ultimate use. Initially,  the sulphur tax
regions will be the 247 air quality control regions already defined
by the Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to the Clean
Air Act. Recognizing that imposition of the  tax may be inequitable
if it can be demonstrated that one or a few emitters are responsi-
ble for the region's tax classification and that the ambient stand-
ards for sulphur oxides are violated in only  a portion of  that
region, the bill provides that the governor of a state having terri-
tory within a particular air quality control  region may petition to

-------
2410          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

have the region subdivided into two or more sulphur tax regions.
The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency will
make the determination on granting such petitions.
  The  Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
will be charged with the responsibility of classifying each sulphur
tax region for purposes of the tax. If he finds, on petition of the
governor, that there was no violation of the national primary or
secondary ambient sulphur oxides air standards (as prescribed in
accordance with the provision of section 109 of the Clean Air Act,
as amended and  supplemented  (42  U.S.C. 1857c-4))  within  a
region on an average basis during the calendar year, the region
will be classified as a Class III sulphur tax region. If the Adminis-
trator  finds there  was no violation of the  national primary am-
bient sulphur oxides air standard within such region on an  aver-
                                                        [p.61]

age basis during the calendar year, but there was violation of the
secondary standard, the region will be classified  as a Class II
region. If the Administrator finds  that both the national primary
and secondary  ambient sulphur oxides air standards  have been
violated within the region on an average basis during the calendar
year, the region will be classified as a Class I sulphur tax region.
  The rate of the  basic tax is determined by the classification of
the region for the year preceding the  year in which the taxable
sale takes place. With the air standards based upon annual  aver-
ages, the preceding year's classification is used so that taxpayers
will know the rate of tax being incurred on sales and  emissions
during the current year. Fuel sold for ultimate use in a sulphur
tax region classified as a Class I region for the preceding year will
be subject to a tax of 15  cents per pound of sulphur  contained
therein. Fuel sold for use in a region  classified as a Class II region
for the preceding year will be  taxed  at a rate of 10  cents per
pound  of sulphur contained therein. The basic tax is not imposed
on sulphurous fuel sold for ultimate use in  a region classified as a
Class III region for the preceding year.

   (c)  Exemptions. The primary exemption from the tax on sales
of sulphurous fuel is the exemption  for sales to other registered
taxpayers. This will permit deferral of the tax until the fuel  is
sold to an unregistered  taxpayer, or  is ultimately  used by the
registered taxpayer, at which time  the sulphur actually emitted
into the atmosphere will be taxed. Thus a registered taxpayer will
not be taxed on sulphur which he removes from fuel prior  to its

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2411

sale or use. Sales of fuel to unregistered taxpayers must be taxed
since such persons are users of relatively small quantities of sul-
phurous fuel and may be presumed not to have the facilities to
measure and monitor emissions.
  Exemptions from the tax on sales of sulphurous fuel  are also
provided for sales for non-fuel use, for use in motor vehicles, for
use as supplies in vessels or aircraft,  and sales for export. The
exemption for exports is granted only if the seller receives proof
that the fuel sold was in fact exported within six months after the
                                                        [p. 62]

date of the sale (or, if earlier, the date of shipment by the seller).

                       3. Floor stocks tax

  A floor stocks tax is imposed under the bill if a person ceases to
be a registered taxpayer. This tax is imposed on the sulphur con-
tent of sulphurous fuel held by such taxpayer on the date he ceases
to be  a registered taxpayer, providing that such content  exceeds
2,000 pounds. The rate of tax is determined as though he had sold
such floor stocks on such date for ultimate use in the sulphur tax
region where such floor stocks were then located.
  The floor stocks tax prevents a person who ceases to be a regis-
tered taxpayer from  using sulphurous fuel without incurring a
tax, since as a registered taxpayer the  fuel would have been pur-
chased tax free.

                     4. Sulphur Emissions

  Under the bill a tax  is imposed upon sulphur emitted into the
atmosphere by a registered taxpayer or a "processor." A "proces-
sor" is defined as an emission source which would not be classified
as such solely by reason of its sulphur oxides  emissions derived
from the combustion or distillation of sulphurous fuel. This would
generally include operations such  as smelters and sulphuric acid
plants.
  As in the case of the tax on sales of sulphurous fuel, the rate of
tax on emissions is dependent upon the classification of the sul-
phur tax region in which the emissions occur for the year preced-
ing the year in which the taxable emissions occur. The rate will be
15 cents per pound of sulphur emitted into the atmosphere in a
region which was a Class I region for the preceding year, and 10
cents per pound in a region which was a  Class II region for the
preceding year. The basic tax on sulphur emissions does not apply

-------
2412          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

to emissions in a region classified as a Class III region for the
preceding year.
  The bill provides that taxable emissions resulting from the com-
bustion or processing of sulphurous fuels or smelting of ores may
be estimated in accordance with regulations prescribed by the
Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate in consultation with the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
  Although the rate of tax on emissions (including the rate  under
                                                        [p.63]

the additional tax on sulphur emissions described below) is nor-
mally determined by the sulphur tax region in which the emissions
occur, the bill provides that the Administrator of the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency may certify that an emission contributes to
a violation of the national ambient sulphur oxides air standards in
another sulphur tax region. In the event of such a certification,
such sulphur emissions shall be taxed as though emitted in the
region designated by the Administrator if the tax resulting from
such treatment is greater than  the tax which would otherwise be
imposed under the bill.

B. Imposition of Additional Tax on Sales and Emissions

  In  addition to  the taxes on  sales  of sulphurous fuels and on
sulphur emissions, the bill  imposes a tax on increased sales  and
emissions by a taxpayer in a sulphur tax region  when such in-
crease is coupled with  increased sulphur pollution in that region
over the preceding year. This additional tax is designed to prevent
taxpayers from increasing sales of sulphurous fuels or sulphur
emissions secure in the knowledge that their tax would  be low (or
there would be no tax)  because the region carried a low sulphur
pollution classification during the preceding year, the rate of basic
tax on sales and  emissions being determined from the classifica-
tion of the region  in  such  preceding year.  In such a case the
additional tax would be applicable to increased sales and emissions
in the current year if the region's classification has deteriorated.
  The additional  tax is imposed on the increase in the  number of
pounds of sulphur contained in sulphurous fuel sold for  use in, and
emitted into the atmosphere in, a  sulphur tax region by a  regis-
tered taxpayer or a processor during any calendar year after 1975,
over the "net base pounds of sulphur" for the preceding year. The
term "base pounds of sulphur" is  defined as  the total  number of
pounds of sulphur contained in sulphurous fuels sold  for  use in
and emitted into the atmosphere in that sulphur tax region by that

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS             2413

taxpayer during a calendar year. The term "net base pounds of
sulphur" means the base pounds of sulphur, increased by transfers
of base pounds from and decreased by transfers of base pounds to
other taxpayers in the same region.
                                                        [p. 64]

   Since the additional tax applies only to increases in sales or use
in a given region, it is necessary for the bill to allow transfers of
base pounds (which operate as an exemption from the additional
tax) within a  given region to cover such  situations as  the merger
of two companies in that region or the sale by one company of its
business in that  region to another  company in  that region. In
these situations, it is appropriate to allow the exemption from the
additional tax to pass to the surviving company, while preventing
the other company from receiving that exemption. This is accom-
plished in the bill by allowing the purchasing or surviving com-
pany to increase  its own  base pounds by the selling of merged
company's base pounds, and requiring the selling or merged com-
pany to decrease its base pounds by the same amount.
   In addition, the allowance of transfers of base pounds permits a
company whose business may decline in that region for a particu-
lar year to transfer its base pounds to another company in that
region  whose  business might increase. This is appropriate since
the additional tax operates on the overall increase in sulphur ox-
ides pollution in a given region.
   The  rate of the additional tax is dependent upon the change in
classification of the particular sulphur tax region. Thus, the tax on
the increase is five cents per pound of sulphur contained in sulphu-
rous fuel sold  for ultimate use in, or emitted  into the atmosphere
in, a sulphur tax region which was a Class II sulphur tax region
for the preceding calendar year and is a Class I sulphur tax region
for the current calendar year (i.e., the year of sales or emissions).
The rate of tax  on  the increase is 10  cents per pound  if  the
sulphur tax region has  moved from a Class III region for  the
preceding calendar year to a Class II region for the current calen-
dar year. Finally, a rate of 15 cents per pound on the  increase is
imposed if the region has moved from a Class III sulphur  tax
region  for the preceding calendar year to a  Class I sulphur  tax
region for the current calendar year.

C. Refunds and Credits
  The  bill  contains provisions for  refund or credit  of the  tax
where,  following a taxable sale of sulphurous fuel, a non-taxable
                                                        [p. 65]

-------
2414          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

sale or use of the fuel occurs. Thus, the bill provides for a refund
or credit to the person who paid the tax if fuel is subsequently
exported,  sold to a registered taxpayer, or  used by the ultimate
purchaser for a non-fuel use. The amount of any overpayment is
based upon  the sulphur content of the fuel at the time of the
subsequent exportation, sale to a registered taxpayer, or use for a
non-fuel purpose.
  No refund or credit is available unless the person who paid the
tax establishes  one of three conditions: (1) that he has  not  in-
cluded the tax in the price of the fuel with respect to which it was
imposed, and has not collected  the  amount of the tax from the
person who purchased such fuel; (2) that he has repaid or agreed
to repay the amount of the tax to the purchaser or exporter of the
fuel; or (3) that he has obtained the written consent of the pur-
chaser or  exporter to the allowance of the credit or the making of
the refund.
                                                       [p. 66]

                     RECYCLING WASTES
                                                       [p. 67]

                     RECYCLING WASTES

  Solid wastes present a growing environmental problem, result-
ing in unsightly open dumps and air and water pollution. Much of
the growth is due to increased consumption while the  percentage
of material that is reused or recycled has decreased.
  The Resource Recovery  Act of 1970 recognizes the importance
of recycling. It provides authority to  develop and demonstrate
recycling  technology and provides for studies  of secondary mar-
kets and economics.  Studies to  date indicate that improved eco-
nomics is  a key element to increased recycling. Without improved
economics, dumping and burning will continue to be cheaper than
recycling, and waste  use will be more expensive than virgin mate-
rials  use.  In addition to improved economics, private sector  in-
volvement must be stimulated.  Recycling requires the operation
and management of sophisticated equipment and the efficient mar-
keting of the recovered wastes. The private sector's marketing and
management expertise must be effectively utilized if recycling is to
flourish.
                  THE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL

  The President announced that the Treasury Department is clar-
ifying the availability of tax exempt industrial  development bonds

-------
                  GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2415

for recycling  facilities. This will allow private firms to utilize
these bonds to finance facilities to recycle their own wastes and
municipal wastes.
  This clarification will assure that recycling is provided the same
incentive as the more  traditional disposal concepts. Most impor-
tant, it will allow more economic recycling operations and  offer an
economic incentive for industry to use its expertise to help solve
municipal solid waste disposal problems.
                                                        [P. 69]

                 Integrated Pest Management

                                                        [p. 71]

  Over the past several decades there has developed an increasing
reliance on the exclusive use of chemicals to control pests.  The use
of chemical pesticides has helped to alter farming practices,  to
increase agricultural and forest  production significantly, and  to
protect man from disease. Yet, it is becoming  ever more apparent
that adverse environmental effects often are associated with chem-
ical  pest  control  programs. These include  occupational health
problems, pest resistance, pesticide persistence, residue biomagni-
fication, secondary pest outbreaks,  and other ecological disrup-
tions.
  Recognizing these difficulties, the President in February 1971,
transmitted to the Congress a comprehensive proposal to  regulate
the use of chemical pesticides, the Federal Environmental Pesti-
cide Control Act of 1971.  The proposal still awaits final Congres-
sional approval, although the House has passed H.R. 10729, which
contains many of its essential features.
  The President is now initiating a series of actions to develop
and  implement alternative means of pest  control that will allow
sustained  high levels of crop productivity while minimizing the
adverse effects associated with use of chemical pest controls.  This
involves the  use of integrated pest management,  an approach
based on  the  maximum use of  natural  pest  population  controls
combined  with the judicious use of selective  chemical pesticides,
biological  controls, pest pathogens,  and  other pest control prac-
tices, as needed. The objective is control of pest population levels
rather than complete  pest eradication. Integrated pest manage-
ment offers the promise of improved agricultural production, more
effective  pest  control,  and minimum adverse  environmental im-
pact, all at significantly reduced costs.

-------
2416          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

                  The President's Proposals

  The President has  directed the Department of Agriculture, the
National Science Foundation, and the Environmental Protection
Agency to expand the present broad base of Federally sponsored
pest control research by initiating immediately a $3.5  million per
                                                       [p. 73]

year integrated pest  management research and  development pro-
gram. In the initial  years this innovative program will involve
extensive research by a number of universities to develop new field
applications of integrated pest management on six  major  crop
ecosystems: citrus, cotton, pine, pome and stone fruit, soybeans,
and alfalfa.
  The  President has directed the Department  of Agriculture to
conduct extensive field tests  of promising new methods of pest
detection and control. This will require $800,000 in the remainder
of the current fiscal  year  and $2.8 million per year beginning in
fiscal year 1973 to test the  feasibility of  ideas  resulting from
current research programs.
  The President has further ordered a review of all Federal pest
control programs to determine which may incorporate  or test new
pest management techniques.
  To stimulate  the use of integrated pest  management and  to
encourage the development of career opportunities in this field, the
President has directed the  Department of Agriculture, the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare, and other relevant agen-
cies to cooperate in the development of training programs at ap-
propriate academic institutions throughout the country. In addi-
tion, the Department of Agriculture has been instructed to estab-
lish guidelines  for State  certification of private  crop protection
specialists  offering  professional  pest management   services  to
farmers.
  The President has authorized the  Department of Agriculture to
expand its pilot crop field  scout program to cover nearly 4 million
acres under agricultural production in the coming growing season.
This program involves the training and employment of 2,000 high
school  and college students  to monitor  pest levels  on approxi-
mately  2,000 acres apiece throughout the  growing  season. The
scouts  will help determine when  pest  populations reach  levels
which require a pesticide  application to prevent economic damage
to the  crop.  Through this program many unnecessary pesticide
applications can be eliminated. USDA will carry out this program
                                                        [p. 74]

-------
                 GUIDELINES AND REPORTS            2417

on a cost-sharing basis for a 3-year period, whereupon it is ex-
pected that the program will be self-sufficient. This will allow new
crops to come under the program in the following years.
  To prevent hazardous exposures of agricultural workers to di-
rect  pesticide applications  or  contaminated surfaces,  such  as
sprayed foliage, the  President  has directed the Departments of
Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare to develop worker pro-
tection standards and regulations under the Occupational Safety
and Health Act.
                                                       [P- 75]

                            [pp. 76-222 not directly related to EPA]

         UNITED NATIONS FUND FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
                                                      [p. 221]

  The United  Nations Conference on the Human Environment, to
be held  in Stockholm, Sweden, in June of this year,  will mark an
important forward step in cooperative international efforts to deal
with environmental degradation in all parts of the world.
  Many aspects of international environmental problems will be
examined at the Conference, particularly problems that are inher-
ently international, such as monitoring and reducing pollutants in
the earth's oceans and atmosphere and dealing with the interna-
tional trade effects of national pollution  control programs.  The
Conference should lead to needed international  arrangements for
environmental protection programs and for coordination of efforts
among existing international organizations.

                  THE PRESIDENT'S PROPOSAL

  In order to help provide the United  Nations with  increased
capabilities for environmental protection activities  following the
Stockholm  Conference, the President has proposed  that a volun-
tary United Nations Fund for the Environment be established,
with an initial funding goal of $100 million for the first five years.
  As programs are undertaken, member nations may decide that
additional  resources are required. If such a Fund is established,
the President will recommend to the  Congress that the United
States commit itself to provide its fair share of the  fund over the
5-year period. The President has invited other nations to join the
United States  in this commitment to meaningful action.

-------
2418          LEGAL COMPILATION—GENERAL

  New machinery will be required within the United Nations to
accordinate  ongoing environmental activities and to administer
the Fund. The Stockholm Conference could make a recommenda-
tion as to the nature of such machinery to the United Nations
General Assembly for adoption at its 27th session in the fall of
1972.
                                                      [p. 223]
                       6U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1974 0—466-441

-------

-------
U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency
     r, V, Library
     c-outh Dearborn  Street ^.X
         Illinois  60504 x'

-------

-------
IS-J,

-------