Page images
PDF
EPUB

a

Senator RIBICOFF. At that stage then you have two groups doing the same job. In other words, you run into something at Raritan Bay, and your people start trying to find out what it is all about. Then you do your research and then you call in the Surgeon General's office. Then he does his research too.

I am assuming if you are going to hire people over there, you are going to hire competent people. So now you have two groups. So it is a question of time elapsing while the two groups work together. It is two separate research efforts. It is duplication of cost, it is duplication of time. Now this is the thing that is bothering me.

Secretary GARDNER. May I comment and try to put in perspective what we will continue to be doing, because I think it will eliminate, to some degree, what you are talking about, and also show you how deeply rooted the health aspects are in other things that we are doing:

First, let me speak about the mode of coordination, the mechanisms of coordination. I will be a member of the Water Pollution Control Advisory Board, and I will be a member of the Water Resources

Senator RIBICOFF. John, let me ask you this. You are a member today of how many coordinating agencies?

Secretary GARDNER. May I continue?

Senator RIBICOFF. I say this out of knowledge. You must have many more now. You are a member of how many coordinating boards? As you say, you will be a member, but how many others have you got?

Secretary GARDNER. I think it runs to about 25.

Senator RIBICOFF. I think you are being very conservative, and basically you have got a lot of work to do, and it is going to be very hard for you to attend every meeting when the time comes to have a meeting. When it is Agriculture or Interior you will find you will probably be sending one of your assistants.

Senator MUSKIE. Mr. Chairman, the point you have made is very pertinent. What we are really involved in here and this was what we were involved in in the reorganization fight over the Water Quality Act of 1965 was to get some coordination, effective coordination below the Secretary. He can't give the time necessary. Now you are talking about the enforcement procedures. But I am interested also in the establishment of water quality standards.

The act of last year reads as follows: In establishing such standards, the Secretary, the hearing board or the appropriate State authorities shall take into consideration the use and value for public water supplies, propagation of fish and wildlife, recreational purposes, and agricultural, industrial, and other legitimate use.

Now to develop standards of this kind it seems to me requires the close cooperative effort of the experts in each of these fields that have been described at the working level and not on the consulting level of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Secretary of Interior.

Establishing water quality standards is a highly technical problem, and now you are going to take one member of that team, and it is going to involve a team of industrial people, of agricultural people, of wildlife people, of health people, of recreational people, in order to bring together and focus on a water quality problem of a particular stream.

You have got to bring them all together. Now one of these people is going to be in Health, Education, and Welfare and the other is going to be operating in the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration in the Interior.

How do you resolve that problem?

Secretary UDALL. Senator, may I address myself to this very problem, because one of the most serious difficulties with the present frag. mentation with regard to water, in the judgment of my people, and I think in the judgment of most conservation organizations in this country who are interested in fish and wildlife and outdoor recreation, is that as long as you have it fragmented, that they are out around the fringes, and if it is just treated as a public health problem, that you set your standards too low, and that you don't have every one at the table.

So this is the real fragmentation we are concerned about.

Now if we did this in a thorough going way that some of the members are suggesting here

Senator MUSKIE. Are you saying that the standards for public drinking water are lower than standards for industrial, agricultural, and recreational use?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Senator, if I can comment the answer is yes be

cause

a

Senator MUSKIE. I disagree, Mr. Secretary.

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, you can take not the water that you drink, but you can take water that is being stored for drinking purposes and treat it, and it will be absolutely safe for your consumption and mine, but it might not be of a quality that would be sufficiently high for some industrial purposes, and it might not be of a quality that certain fish life would be sustained in.

Senator MUSKIE. What you are talking about is the quality of water after it is treated compared to the quality of water before it is treated. Of course they are different.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, but you can't

Senator MUSKIE. You can take water out of the Potomac and treat it for drinking purposes and of course it is a higher quality than it is in the Potomac drawn on directly by industry.

Mr. QUIGLEY. And this has been the basic criticism that through the years as you know so well has been levied against the public health service.

Senator MUSKIE. The criticism has not been that people can drink dirtier water than paper mills use.

Mr. QUIGLEY. No.

Senator MUSKIE. The criticism has been that the Public Health Service did not take into consideration these other requirements.

Mr. QuiGLEY. Right, but in the stream to meet these other requirement, the standards are going to have to be higher in many instances.

Senator MUSKIE. They will have to be higher for drinking water. You and I were just over in Germany. We took a look at the Rhine. We were told by the Ambassador that a youngster taking a drink of water out of the Rhine a month before almost died because of it.

Mr. QUIGLEY. Right.

Senator MUSKIE. And yet that water is being used for industrial purposes. Are you telling me that drinking water can be of a lower quality than industrial water? Mr. QUIGLEY. No, but the water in the stream can be, Senator. Senator MUSKIE. We are talking about treating it. Mr. QUIGLEY. Yes, but we are talking about standards.

Senator MUSKIE. When we talk about standards of treatment we have got to take into consideration not only these other uses which are neglected by the Public Health Service as you and I agree, but health which is now going to be separated from it.

Mr. QUIGLEY. No, it really isn't, Senator. In setting the standards--if we stay in HEW-in setting the standards we obviously are going to have to consult with, on a daily basis in setting these standards, with people in Agriculture, with people in Fish and Wildlife, with people in Public Health, and if we go to Interior, the same kind of consultation without

Senator MUSKIE. If you can do this consultation so easily, then why not leave it in HEW

Mr. QUIGLEY. You are going to have to do it wherever it is.
Senator MUSKIE. Then why move it?

Mr. QUIGLEY. Because the basic point that has been made, that this is a step, perhaps the first step, but a step in bringing together the water oriented problem.

Senator MUSKIE. But you are not bringing them together. You are leaving Health. You are not touching the sewer system program in HUD. You are not touching the sewer system program in Agriculture. The only thing you are moving is 90 percent of the program in HEW to Interior.

Secretary UDALL. Senator, may I come back to this main question, because I think that the basic question the committee has raised here is a problem that exists whether the program is left in HEW or whether it is moved to Interior. That is, should the new water pollution control administration have its own health section.

If you do this, you fragmentize the Public Health Service. That is all that you do. So you would have another water pollution control administration under one assistant secretary with a public health section, and over here you would have the regular public health people acting.

In terms of administration and in terms of the way I see this problem, and the way I see that we can bring it all for the first time into focus, leaving the Public Health Service with making certain findings, leaving them with doing certain research, respects the integrity of their organization, would not, in terms of the normal day-today work that we have in water work now, be a serious obstacle at all in terms of running a smooth working program.

Senator MUSKIE. The thing that strikes me, Mr. Secretary, is that when you are defending the reorganization plan, the departmental lines are no obstacle at all to coordination.

But when you are examining the status quo of the current organization, then departmental lines suddenly become an obstacle.

If it is so easy, once this reorganization plan is implemented, and it undoubtedly will be, if it is so easy for you to coordinate your efforts with the health efforts of the Public Health Service, then why isn't the reverse equally easy, equally possible.

a

Secretary UDALL. Well, as an administrator, Senator, it has been my experience that the more you have centralization, the better, and the more you can have all the threads under one secretary, the more decisions can be made.

Senator MUSKIE. Let me ask you this. What functions in the field of water pollution does Interior now have?

Secretary UDALL. In terms of water pollution?
Senator MUSKIE. Yes.

Secretary UDALL. We have functions with regard to fish, wildlife, outdoor recreation, with regard to research on water quality and water pollution, the saline water program is pollution.

Senator MUSKIE. What operational programs in the field of water quality improvements do you have? I am not talking about research. What can you do about cleaning up a stream at the present time?

Secretary UDALL. In terms of the functions of the Water Pollution Control Administration, in terms of issuing orders, in terms of the enforcement powers, my department does not have such powers. In fact it is proposed to put the pollution clean up program under a Department that is already concerned with and has major responsibilities for a a whole range of water functions, from the standpoint of water planning, water quality research, fish and wildlife.

Senator MUSKIE. These are now in HEW. I am asking you what you have now.

Secretary UDALL. In terms of

Senator MUSKIE. You are concerned about water pollution, yes, because you are concerned with fish and wildlife. But what can you do, what authority do you have, what programs do you now have before this reorganization plan to clean up fish and wildlife, to clean it up for other things.

Secretary UDALL. I have very broad and wide ranging authority Senator, with regard to all of the public lands, for example. In fact, as far as the rivers in the West are concerned, already my department has the paramount responsibility even with regard to some aspects of pollution cleanup.

Senator MUSKIE. For doing what?

Secretary UDALL. I have problems on my desk right now with regard to heat pollution, with regard to acid mine drainage problems, so that we are not without responsibilities, but we do not have the enforcement powers that Congress put under the Water Pollution Control Act.

Senator MUSKIE. What authority do you have with respect to acid mine drainage.

Secretary UDALL. We have the main responsibility under the Appalachia program for the acid mine drainage part of the program, because of the thought that this is primarily concerned with fish and wildlife and outdoor recreation.

Senator MUSKIE. Do you have authority to clean it up?

Secretary UDALL. We have the only programs there are with regard to cleanup.

Senator MUSKIE. How effective are they?

Secretary UDALL. We are just in the early stages of deciding what demonstration projects and other programs should be carried out.

Senator MUSKIE. What authority do you have to clean up or abate or prohibit acid mine drainage ?

Secretary UDALL. We have authority to carry out programs to the extent that we have money to carry them out anywhere in the Appalachian region.

Senator MUSKIE. Do you have enforcement powers ?
Secretary UDALL. It isn't really an enforcement problem.
Senator MUSKIE. It is a demonstration.

Secretary UDALL. It is a problem of cleaning up a mess that has been made in the past.

Senator MUSKIE. What authority do you have to clean it up?

Secretary UDALL. Well, we have authority to take a particular area and to try to abate acid mine drainage.

Senator MUSKIE. What powers do you have to do that?

Secretary UDALL. We have the power to select areas, to carry out programs.

Senator MUSKIE. Assuming you have established a program, what can that program do?

Secretary UDALL. That program can abate and eliminate the acid mine drainage from particular areas that are treated.

Sentor MUSKIE. Can you force a mine owner to take certain steps to clean it up?

Secretary UDALL. No; because the authority to force someone to do something is under the Water Pollution Control Administration.

Senator MUSKIE. Exactly, and you have, in other words, a lot of interests as other departments do in cleaner water.

Of course you do. But when you are talking about combining in one department all of the programs that have to do with water pollution control and abatement, you are not consolidating the program at all with this reorganization plan?

Secretary UDALL. I think we are, Senator. Senator MUSKIE. You are consolidating your interests in water, but with respect to water pollution control and abatement, you have no enforcement powers now. You have no general authority with respect to that subject and that responsibility as I understand it.

Secretary UDALL. No; I think that

Senator MUSKIE. What you are talking about under this reorganization plan is bringing your other interests in water together with this interest in water, but you are not consolidating, under this reorganization plan, you are not consolidating programs dealing with water pollution control and abatement.

Secretary UDALL. I think that this reorganization would put in one department for the first time in the history of the country most of the water conservation, the water quality, water pollution control activities in the Federal Government, all of them in one department.

Senator MUSKIE. That is another question. My question is, "You are not consolidating or bringing together the water pollution control programs?"

Secretary UDALL. I think that the reorganization plan has that precise result.

Senator MUSKIE. You are not bringing in the HUD program, you are not bringing in the agriculture program, you are not bringing in all of HEW's proram, and you have none of your own to add to those

« PreviousContinue »