Reorganization Plan No. 5 of 1966: National Capital Regional Planning Council: Hearing Before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives, Eighty-ninth Congress, Second Session. August 9, 1966 |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 9
Page 7
... fact , often served to cloud the identity of NCPC as the spokesman for the Federal Government on planning matters . Thus , with the taking effect of this plan , we will have a situation where the two major parties at interest in the ...
... fact , often served to cloud the identity of NCPC as the spokesman for the Federal Government on planning matters . Thus , with the taking effect of this plan , we will have a situation where the two major parties at interest in the ...
Page 8
... fact that there is no longer any need for a Federal agency to carry on comprehensive planning for the development of the National Capital region , we urge that Reorganization Plan No. 5 of 1966 be allowed to take effect . Thank you , Mr ...
... fact that there is no longer any need for a Federal agency to carry on comprehensive planning for the development of the National Capital region , we urge that Reorganization Plan No. 5 of 1966 be allowed to take effect . Thank you , Mr ...
Page 15
... fact , we have a program where there is a study being made of water pollution as well as air pollution . We are particularly interested in the Potomac River , and , in fact , I serve on the Governor's Advisory Committee on the Potomac ...
... fact , we have a program where there is a study being made of water pollution as well as air pollution . We are particularly interested in the Potomac River , and , in fact , I serve on the Governor's Advisory Committee on the Potomac ...
Page 17
... facts . Suffice to say at this stage , we are somewhere around $ 856,000 , of which a large segment is the Federal contribution . But then Mr. Scheiber can go back into the history of it for you . Mr. SCHEIBER . We became eligible for ...
... facts . Suffice to say at this stage , we are somewhere around $ 856,000 , of which a large segment is the Federal contribution . But then Mr. Scheiber can go back into the history of it for you . Mr. SCHEIBER . We became eligible for ...
Page 18
... years . Mr. LASTNER . Mr. Chairman , might I answer Mr. Reuss , and , in fact , we were not involved , the Regional Planning Council was then the one that was involved in planning . Our planning 18 REORGANIZATION PLAN NO . 5 OF 1966.
... years . Mr. LASTNER . Mr. Chairman , might I answer Mr. Reuss , and , in fact , we were not involved , the Regional Planning Council was then the one that was involved in planning . Our planning 18 REORGANIZATION PLAN NO . 5 OF 1966.
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
abolished activities advisory air pollution amended areawide Arlington County ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Babson board of directors Bosley budget Bureau Capital Planning Act Capital Planning Commission Capital Region Transportation Capital Regional Planning carried Chairman DAWSON COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT comprehensive planning comprehensive regional planning Congress cooperative coordinated Council of Governments deputy executive director District of Columbia elected officials eligible environmental health ERLENBORN Fairfax County Federal agency Federal funds Federal Government Federal installations Federal interest gentlemen HENDERSON HOLIFIELD Housing and Urban jurisdictions LASTNER liaison function LOHMAN Maryland ments Metropolitan Council metropolitan planning Metropolitan Washington Council National Capital area National Capital Planning National Capital Regional NCPC politan prepared statement President question Region Transportation Planning regional planning agencies Regional Planning Council regional planning function reorganization plan representatives REUSS ROSENTHAL SCHEIBER SEIDMAN sewer staff suburbs tion Transportation Planning Board TUCHTAN Urban Development Act Washington area water pollution water supply