Health, Education, and Welfare to the Department of the Interior. As a matter of principle, the league is less concerned about where the program is housed than about how vigorously and effectively it is administered. The objective must be to get our waters clean and keep them clean so that they may serve the wide range of legitimate uses to which an expanding population must put them. There can be no compromise with this objective. We can accept no philosophy which in effect calls for a limitation on the Nation's future by temporizing with the known problem because of convenience, selfishness, individual advantage or apathy. We will cooperate wholeheartedly with any administrative arrangement which serves this objective. I believe the league's attitude can be summed up in one sentence: "Let's get the show on the road." The league along with other conservation societies worked for several years to get the Federal water pollution control program out of the subbasement of HEW. The 1961 act provided an opportunity to accomplish this. Administratively, actions were taken to remove a few levels of overburden in the Public Health Service organization chart, but organizationally it was a grotesque arrangement. The 1965 act, however, in establishing the separate Administration, provided the opportunity for effective administration. Its establishment underscored the fact that water pollution is not just a matter of public health, important as that is. It stated, in effect, that the full public responsibility has not been discharged when a sign is posted advising that a water supply is unsafe, or a public beach is closed to swimming because of pollution. Both actions may serve to protect the public health, but neither contributes affirmatively to the wellbeing of present generations, let alone to those that will follow. Our waters should be made suitable for use by prevention of pollution, not abandoned to pollution. The 1965 act fixed in the Water Pollution Control Administration the primary Federal responsibility for water pollution abatement. The program is now visible; its accomplishments can be measured, its failures seen and corrected. It should now be able to recruit and hold the quality of administrative, legal, technical, and scientific personnel which a program of this importance must have without fail. We believe that the new Administration can function effectively in HEW. We believe it can function as well-and potentially more effectively-in Interior, for reasons set forth by the President in his reorganization message. We believe it is appropriate, as the transfer takes place, to suggest that the record be made clear as to the policies and basic administrative arrangements that are to guide the Secretary in his administration of the program. Everyone is, in general, for clean water. But pollution comes from specific outfalls; and each may pose a difficult legal or political or economic stumbling block. Getting clean water demands a Federal administrative structure which will move vigorously and effectively on its own motion against specific sources of pollution and which can be a consistent and unswerving ally of vigorous and effective State and community action programs against specific sources of pollution. If the Congress decides that the water pollution control program may move over to the Interior Department, we urge that there be some clear understandings: First, that there be a clear restatement of the positive policy of progressively enhancing the quality of the Nation's water resources for all the essential and legitimate uses which a burgeoning public will require. Second, that the program be held together as an integral unitadministration, grants, research, enforcement-and in no way dismembered or splintered. Third, that the program have a clear, unobstructed channel to the Secretary of Interior through its own Assistant Secretary. Fourth, that it not at this time have joined to it other operating water programs now located in Interior having primary objectives other than the abatement and prevention of pollution. Fifth, that there be enunciated a clear commitment to full and vigorous use of Federal enforcement authorities, including both the provisions of the 1965 act for the establishment of water quality standards, and the continuation of the present enforcement program while the standards are being developed. Sixth, that research be accelerated to achieve new knowledge and to encourage breakthroughs in waste treatment, the reclaiming of waters, and the recovery of wastes for useful purposes. Such firm attitudes and policies are essential if we truly mean to "get the show on the road." If that is not our purpose, it probably matters little whether or not the transfer is made. I would like to compliment the committee for the splendid record that it has made at these hearings which in many respects have answered the kinds of questions and apprehensions which we have had about this proposed transfer. This concludes my statement. I certainly appreciate the privilege of being here. Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you for your outstanding statement. I am always impressed with the constructive work done by all of the wildlife and conservation organizations. It has always been a source of satisfaction to me, whatever role I have had as a Congressman, as a Governor, as a Secretary, and now as a Senator, to have people such as Mr. Kimball and yourself, Mr. Poole and Mr. Douglas and all of these organizations come here. You are all on the side of the angels, and I know how discouraging it must have been over the years to see this uphill battle. Yet, I am sure that all of you are getting great satisfaction these days from seeing that we are, as a nation and as a people, working toward the same goals effectively and with some results. I think that great credit is due to you leaders and your organizations for the work that it sometimes seemed you were doing alone. But now you have help from the Senate, the House, the President, and members of the Cabinet, and I want to thank you very much for coming here. Mr. PENFOLD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We certainly are appreciative of the kind of leadership that the Congress has given in this and other natural resources fields in the last few years. Senator Muskie particularly, I would say, is on the side of the angels as far as we are concerned. Senator RIBICOFF. He always has been. Senator MUSKIE. May I express my appreciation to you, Mr. Penfold? Mr. PENFOLD. Thank you, sir. Senator MUSKIE. For the support you have given us all. These programs may be transferred in the executive branch and transfers may be threatened in the committee structure but your organization will go on forever. Mr. PENFOLD. We hope so. Senator RIBICOFF. Mr. Poole. STATEMENT OF DANIEL A. POOLE, SECRETARY, WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE Mr. POOLE. Mr. Chairman, I am Daniel A. Poole, secretary of the Wildlife Institute with headquarters in Washington, D.C. The institute is one of the older conservation organizations and its program has been devoted to the restoration and improved management of natural resources in the public interest for more than 50 years. I will not elaborate on the history and the development of the Federal Government's role in abating and preventing pollution of our Nation's waters. What has been done has the approval and the continuing support of millions of Americans. The Nation's conservationminded citizens believe that the Congress has acted wisely in defining national policy for water pollution control and in strengthening and expanding pollution abatement research, construction grants, law enforcement, State program and demonstration grants, and other phases of this essential work. The abatement of water pollution, with the objective of assuring adequate supplies of clean water for municipal, industrial, agricultural, recreational, and all other beneficial uses normally made of water, is one of the most critical resource challenges facing this Nation. The challenge is more acute in some regions than in others, but nowhere are our waters, even the best of them, safe from pollution of some kind. Some waters are so badly befouled with wastes that they cannot be used for constructive purposes even in an emergency. Witness the Hudson River, daily transporting millions of gallons of filthy water past New York City in the depths of a drought. In one way or another, every segment of the city's metropolitan complex is suffering from the shortage of clean water, while a potential supply of millions of gallons too filthy for use flows past the city. Population centers throughout the country face similar difficulty, if pollution abatement is not pressed vigorously. Conservationists are not interested in the semantics about which executive agency should have responsibility for administering the Federal water pollution control program. Our predominant interest is in the vigor and the enthusiasm with which the Federal Government gives leadership to and cooperates with State and local governments in the abatement and prevention of water pollution. Conservationists want full use made of the sound Water Pollution Act and the capable staff that has been assembled. It was this insistence, in fact, that led to the creation of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration as a separate agency in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The program could not function broadly under the orientation given by the U.S. Public Health Service. Water pollution abatement is a water resources prob lem, whereas public health is only one facet of that overall problem. Reorganization Plan No. 2 comes hard on the heels of last year's congressional action which created the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. Its theme is that water pollution is a conservation problem and that responsibility for it should be vested in the Department of the Interior which already administers a number of water resources programs. This viewpoint has logic and conservationists would hope that this transfer, if accomplished, would be the forerunner of several other transfers to the Interior Department of scattered water resources programs. It is hoped that reorganization messages on these programs are forthcoming promptly. These programs were brought out in the committee's questions. The conservationists' concern with the transfer of water pollution statement program responsibilities to the Department of the Interior centers on how vigorously the program will be administered and implemented in that agency. It is on familiar grounds in the HEW Department, close and continuing contacts have been established with State and local governments, and the operating system has been perfected over the years. A transfer to the Interior Department undoubtedly would necessitate many realinements, and conservationists want to be assured how these will be done. I should say frankly, too, that conservationists supported elevation of the program to administration status in HEW to free it of domination by interests having a parochial concept of water pollution abatement. They want to be assured that the administration will have the same independent status in the Interior Department, under the supervision of an Assistant Secretary, as it now has in HEW. There are indications that the Department of the Interior is contemplating some internal reorganization if the administration is transferred there. We want to know what the Department is planning, and we hope that this committee will insist on knowing, so that we can be assured that the pollution abatement program will not be dissipated or weakened. Conservationists are pleased that water pollution control has an Assistant Secretary to supervise it, and we do not want the effectiveness of the Assistant Secretary blunted by his assignment to supervise several other programs in addition. Secondly, there is apprehension about the vigor with which the program may be administered when it is housed in the same department with agencies handling oil and gas, mining, irrigation, and other activities that may contribute to the pollution of water. Law enforcement is a vital part of the national effort to abate and discourage water pollution. It must be pressed vigorously and impartially, as it is at present. We want assurance that law enforcement will not be softened, and that all required action will be supported fully on the basis of what is proper for the abatement and prevention of water pollution. Conservationists want assurance, too, that even though the standards of water quality required under the law may not have been established for all States that law enforcement will continue to proceed in every area where there is obvious and objectionable gross pollution. It is believed that these assurances, plus discussion of the Secretary of the Interior's plans for the program are important for two reasons. The first, of course, is that conservationists in Congress and across the Nation want to be assured that there will be no relaxation in the tremendous impetus that has been developed for the abatement and pre vention of water polluion. This program, like few others, have vigorous public support, and there will be no end of dissatisfaction if it is permitted to slow down. Also, an outstanding staff has been assembled at all levels during the years that the program has been in the Health, Education, and Welfare Department. These persons are highly skilled and dedicated professionals. They want and most certainly deserve_an_understanding of what is in store for the program in the Interior Department. They need assurance, too, that nothing will be done that will lessen their professional involvement in the program. Conservationists want these assurances, too, Mr. Chairman, and it is hoped that the committee will make every effort to clarify these and other points that will be raised. I do not believe that the point which I am about to make has been brought out before. Conservationists want assurance, too, even though the standards of water quality required under the law may not have been established for all States, that law enforcement will continue without letup in every area where there is obviously objectionable gross pollution. Finally, Senator, I wish to join with Mr. Kimball and others who have expressed the hope that the cognizance for the appropriations and also the substantive part of the program will remain with the present committees. The Nation, conservationists, and the Congress itself, I think have a tremendous investment in the talents and in the expertise of the gentlemen that are now handling the program, both on the congressional side as members as well as the committee staffs. Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you very much. Mr. POOLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator RIBICOFF. I think everyone who indicated a desire to be heard has been heard and anyone else who may like to file a statement certainly should feel free to do so. Thank you very much. (Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.) |