Water Pollution Control Administration's motto should be, "Every drop of effluent treated before being returned to the general public use. The Water Pollution Control Administration's creed should read, "No one has an inherent right to use our Nation's waterways as a sewer, and industry should recognize that the treatment of waste is a part of the cost of doing business."

I might add here, Mr. Chairman, that there are many ways in which industry can be encouraged to participate wholeheartedly in this program. A number of incentives have already been mentioned, but whether or not it is in the form of a tax writeoff or an effluent tax, in the final analysis it is the general public who is going to foot the bill, whether it be through the increased cost of the product that is manufactured, or whether it is paid by Federal aid through the income tax that he pays, or whether it is a bond issue where he pays more on his property tax. It is the individual that is going to pay for the program, and I repeat again for emphasis that our survey showed that 96 percent of the people are ready for that. So again it is a matter of procedure and not a matter of desire on the part of the American public. The people want clean water.

Second, we are confident that the public wants a strong, vigorous, and impartial administration of the Federal program. It is our contention that this can be achieved best through status of an Administration separate from other bureaus or offices. We should not like to see this Administration consolidated with Geological Survey, the Office of Water Resources Research, or any other agency.

Third, we believe that the national problem of water pollution is of such magnitude that it merits the undivided, full-time attention of an Assistant Secretary to whom the chief administering officer, the Commissioner, is responsible. We were pleased to hear Secretary Udall give Senator Muskie assurance that the work of this Assistant Secretary would not be diluted with other assignments. In fact, we are gratified that pollution control will be a matter of major personal interest for Secretary Udall, himself.

The President identified river basins as the naturally functioning units for considering the water pollution program. We are hopeful that our large seacoast urban areas will not be forgotten in the river basin plan, and that there might be some way to coordinate the urban and city problems with the river basin concept, and I was pleased to hear Secretary Udall this morning say that he planned to consider it as in the concept. We are aware that the Interior Department has responsibility for river basin planning and there is much logic for locating the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration in that Department, although we agree with what has already been expressed by the committee that a more propitious time could have been chosen for the transfer.

One other relevant matter comes to our attention the emphasis on public health. I should like to assure the subcommittee that our organization would not sanction any lessening of interest in public health aspects of pollution control. In our opinion, public health must be the first and foremost consideration wherever the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration is located. However, we do believe that the concern for public health does not go far enough in giving consideration to other uses of water. Water can be made safe to drink

even while still possessing undesirable qualities which destroy it for recreational uses. It is our conviction that the ultimate objective should be to develop clean water for all legitimate uses.

Mr. Chairman, in concluding these remarks, the subcommittee has done an admirable job in developing a comprehensive record about clarifying the intent of the Secretary of the Interior toward assignments in water research and the development of comprehensive plans. We also wonder about changes this reorganization plan may make in responsibilities of committees of the Congress. I should take the occasion to express our confidence in competence of the respective Committees on Public Works in this field. They have been able to give us leadership and direction and to obtain the necessary funds to keep this program moving ahead and give it the momentum that it has had to date, and I am hopeful that congressional leadership will see to it that because of the transfer this does not necessarily mean a change in committee assignment.

Senator MUSKIE. We will try to see to that.

Mr. KIMBALL. I am sure you will.

Senator RIBICOFF. I would say, with Senator Muskie on this committee, I imagine that will be assured.

Mr. KIMBALL. Fine, that concludes my remarks, Mr. Chairman, and I thank you for the opportunity.

Senator RIBICOFF. Mr. Kimball, thank you very much for your excellent statement. It is most helpful. I have no questions.

Senator MUSKIE. I would like to thank Mr. Kimball for his statement. I know that you and other conservation organizations have had questions about this reorganization plan, so I am interested in getting you reaction to the testimony as it has unfolded in the last 2 days. I take it that you have been reassured by what you have heard from the Secretary and other administration witnesses.

Mr. KIMBALL. We have had some of the same reservations that have been so ably expressed by you and Senator Ribicoff, as to the timing and maybe even some of the wisdom of the reorganization plan, but hearing the testimony, particularly from Secretary Udall, we are much more assured that at least as long as he directs the program, that the importance will not be minimized, and that if the reorganization does go through, we are looking forward to the continued interest on his part and a real program toward cleaning up the Nation's water supply.

Senator MUSKIE. Let me ask this question. In the event a resolution of disapproval were introduced, and I don't know whether it will be, and I don't intend to introduce it, would you support the plan or tend to support the resolution of disapproval?

Mr. KIMBALL. I would say that after hearing the testimony, we would tend to support the plan.

Senator MUSKIE. I thought it might be useful to have you on the record on this point because I don't know what is going to happen. As I say, I don't think the resolution will be introduced, but if it is, I think that your position and the position of other conservation organizations would be most pertinent.

Mr. KIMBALL. Prior to having heard the testimony these past 2 days, and in the House, we probably could not have made that statement, but having been reassured now by the committee and Secretary

Udall that the program's impetus will be kept going, I think perhaps we would not quarrel with the President as to where he desires his program to be, as long as it has the forceful direction that we intend it to have.

Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you very much, Mr. Kimball. You have been of great help.

Mr. Penfold, please.

Mr. PENFOLD. Mr. Chairman, Philip A. Douglas, executive secretary of the Sport Fishing Institute, who had planned to be here today, is ill and his office asked that I hand his statement in.

Senator RIBICOFF. Without objection it will be placed in the record at this point.

STATEMENT OF PHILIP A. DOUGLAS, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, SPORT FISHING INSTITUTE, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. Chairman and members of this committee, I am Philip A. Douglas, executive secretary of the Sport Fishing Institute, which is the only privately supported national fish conservation organization. We are staffed by professional aquatic biologists, competent and fully cognizant of the importance of recreating a pollution-free aquatic environment.

By means of Reorganization Plan No. 2, the President has invoked his rightful authority to organize the executive as he believes will increase administrative efficiency. Whether it will, remains to be seen. It is now up to us all, citizenry and politicians alike, to see to it that the Water Pollution Control Administration starts moving in a clearcut, identifiable pattern toward the ultimate objective-clean waters. Water pollution control has only recently been accorded adequate administrative status on paper. Previously, conservationists fought hard over many years to help raise the administrative stature of water pollution control to that of a major program activity where it could function in HEW undiluted by the major traditional emphasis in that Department on matters of human health. This troublesome aspect would obviously disappear if the program goes to Interior. Yet the obvious benefits to human health that will result from a pollution control program which improves the quality of the aquatic environment will by no means be lost by such transfer.

The institute's executive vice president, Richard H. Stroud, in this regard has provided a useful distinction between water pollutionnot necessarily a health hazard-and water contamination-unhealthy-in a talk before the American Society of Civil Engineers Water Resources Engineering Conference in Mobile, Ala., March 1965, entitled "What Is Pollution-To a Conservationist?" He said:

Water pollution is the specific impairment of water quality by domestic, industrial, or agricultural wastes [including thermal and atomic wastes] to a degree which has an adverse effect on beneficial use of water, yet which does not necessarily create an actual hazard to the public health.

He stated, further:

Water contamination is merely an aggravated impairment of water quality by those wastes to a degree which creates an actual hazard to the public health through poisoning or the spread of disease.

We are somewhat concerned whether, in the Department of the Interior, there may be an administrative tendency to overburden the water pollution control function with other more or less related water activities and thus dilute the long-sought needed emphasis on the primary mission to clean up the national water resource. Unfortunately, then, we would undoubtedly lose this singleness of purpose in water pollution control for which many conservationists have fought so hard for so long to achieve. We believe that water pollution control must be a single-minded goal within this new administration unit in Interior-as it would have been in HEW. In addition, intradepartment conflicts of interest should not be allowed to stall the program. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, my organization believes that the new Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Water Pollution Control, when appointed, must not be shackled with other diverse duties that would detract from or divert the mission of this vital Water Pollution Control Administration.

The Water Supply and Water Pollution Control Division, currently within HEW, is commencing to organize expanded water quality criteria research programs designed to protect the most sensitive species of aquatic life from continuous exposure to various forms of pollution. A fine cadre of professionals in hydrobiology, ecology, and other such specialized fields now comprises the skeleton of the WPCA professional staff needed to delineate water quality criteria essential for the protection and maintenance of aquatic life. They must be induced to continue with Interior under the President's Reorganization Plan No. 2.

The Sport Fishing Institute is, therefore, much concerned whether there will be ample financial incentive to retain these people and to attract new outstanding scientists upon whom America must rely to solve the problems of advanced waste treatment and to determine water quality criteria for various uses in order to achieve full water pollution abatement and control. Research budgets must be adequate, professional ratings liberal, and budgetary unity preserved. In this connection, we have not been favorably impressed by past performance on the part of the Department of the Interior in requesting adequate funds for vitally needed research programs, especially true where aquatic biological problems have been involved. Therefore, we are much concerned about the possible implications of what we view as a poor history of administrative and policy support, at top departmental levels, for research programs in aquatic biology, vis-a-vis such needs in the water pollution control program. We hope that the Congress will watch this aspect closely, as it could "make" or "break” the program, as we see it. Reorganization Plan No. 2 provides a starting point-but it must be properly implemented.

The main question, as we see it, is not so much whether the WPCA should be in HEW or in Interior. The important questions are whether, how soon, and how aggressively water pollution control will get underway. Water pollution control has been in a hiatus for several months, due to the uncertainty of its administrative affiliation. The President has made his move on that problem. The main task, now, is to get on with the job. Time and the pollution tide wait for nobody.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to present these views to your committee.

Senator RIBICOFF. You may proceed, Mr. Penfold.

STATEMENT OF J. W. PENFOLD, CONSERVATION DIRECTOR, IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA

Mr. PENFOLD. I am J. W. Penfold, conservation director of the Izaak Walton League of America. The league is a nationwide organization of citizens dedicated to the conservation and wise use of America's natural resource wealth-its soils, woods, waters, and wildlife. Since its founding nearly 45 years ago there has been no natural resource problem to which the league has given greater attention than to cleaning up and preventing the pollution of our lakes and

streams.

It can be truthfully stated that the league was organized because a small group of dedicated outdoorsmen became disgusted at the rate at which waters were being lost to human uses because of municipal and industrial dumping of wastes. They decided it was time to call a halt. It was just about 40 years ago that the league made the first nationwide survey of water pollution at the request of the Outdoor Recreation Commission established by President Coolidge. The findings were appalling. And local leadership in the Izaak Walton League helped develop public support for construction of some of the first modern municipal sewage treatment works in the Nation. Through the 1930's and 1940's the league, through its magazine and other educational materials, by speeches of its officers at hundreds of meetings and conferences, by appearances at public hearings called by committees of Congress, committees of State legislatures and municipal bodies, urged adopting of public policies and programs to abate pollution and achieve once again clean water. There were solid results, but it was a slow process.

The league supported the weak Taft-Hartley Act of 1948-but it was a beginning. The league vigorously supported Public Law 660 in 1956, and appropriations to implement it fully in subsequent years; it supported the acts to strengthen and make it more effective in 1961 and in 1965.

I cite these few items, among many others, not in any sense of selfapprobation-the condition of America's waters today permits none of us to feel smug-but to point out the keen interest and concern of the Izaak Walton League over the years in America's No. 1 natural resource problem-water pollution.

There seems little need to elaborate on the problem itself—it is ubiquitous, no section of the Nation has escaped it, no section of the Nation can, so to speak, sweep it under the rug and face the future with confidence. The leadership of the Nation has responded to the growing demand of the people, and has declared it to be national policy to enhance our lakes and streams, our estuaries and coastal waters. The Nation can no longer afford, if it ever could, to lose the usability of waters for all purposes because of filth.

Today, we proclaim our refusal to be strangled by the wastes of civilization. Said the President.

The President has now proposed that the Federal Water Pollution Control Agency as a unit be transferred from the Department of