regional planners. They have been drawn from the entire Nation, as well as from the Washington area, in order to combine an intimate knowledge of local problems with a wealth of expertise and experience gained in other metropolitan areas. This staff is already well established and on the job. It is graphically described in the staff organization chart which I am including with my written submittal to this committee, which I think you gentlemen have, and I would like to describe it to you briefly.

Our director of regional planning, who reports to the executive director, is Mr. Thomas H. Roberts, who supervised one of the outstanding regional planning programs in the Nation. A native of Ohio, Mr. Roberts was formerly with the Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission for 11 years, where he served as its planning director. This public agency has been effectively guiding Metropolitan Atlanta's growth for some 19 years, the longest such record in the Nation. Mr. Roberts is a graduate civil engineer and holds a master's degree in city and regional planning.

Chairman DAWSON. Is Mr. Roberts present?

Mr. LASTNER. Yes, Mr. Roberts is present and I will have our chairman introduce him.

His city, county, and metropolitan planning experience was gained in Cleveland and Youngstown, Ohio, and Charleston, S.C., as well as in Atlanta.

Reporting to the director of regional planning is Mr. Albert A. Grant, our transportation technical director, who until recently was in charge of the District of Columbia Highway Department's Office of Planning and Programing; Dr. Bruce Ď. McDowell, our assistant director for research and programing and Mr. Charles B. Carter, our assistant director for comprehensive planning. Each of these gentlemen is eminently qualified by advanced training and experience for the responsibilities which they have assumed, and they represent a rare blend of local as well as national experience.

Under these men is an experienced and competent staff of people skilled in such specialized fields as land use, transportation, recreation and open space, community facilities and public utilities, urban research, economics, and demography, and capital improvements planning. But what is equally and perhaps more important, they are working as a single team so that the various regional facilities can be planned in coordinated fashion. By working hand-in-hand with local officials and with the National Capital Planning Commission and the other well-staffed local planning agencies of our cities and counties, they can reflect local, practical problems in their regionwide work.

Working alongside this outstanding regional planning department, in the same office and reporting to the same executive director, are the council's departments of data systems, environmental health, public safety, public affairs, special projects, and health, education, and welfare. These activities have been the backbone of the long and successful record which the Council of Governments has established in various fields of intergovernmental cooperation.

By merging its efforts with these other departments, our regional planning team can blend long-range perspective on regional goals and policies with short-range attention to the immediate pressing prob

lems of making local governments responsive to the day-to-day needs of our citizens.

The fine past work of the Regional Planning Council, which has necessarily been limited by not being a creature of the governments it served, can now be carried forward, broadened, and harnessed directly to the elected officials who hold the power to carry out the plans.

In summary, speaking as an elected official and as an active member of both the Regional Planning Council and the Council of Governments, and as one who has long been actively engaged in local and metropolitan affairs, I can assure this committee that the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments is fully prepared to accept the regional planning responsibility which this Executive order of the President would impose upon it.

Mr. Chairman, I went through this rapidly. I did that because I knew that you all had copies of it, and in respect to your time, I wanted to do it as rapidly as possible.

(The outline of staff organization referred to appears on page 16.) Chairman DAWSON. Mr. Holifield?

Mr. HOLIFIELD. No questions.

Chairman DAWSON. Mr. Erlenborn?

Mr. ERLENBORN. I have one or two questions about your organization. I suppose it isn't really terribly pertinent to the question of the adoption of the Reorganization Plan No. 5, but looking at your staff organization chart that is attached to your testimony, I notice you have a Director of Environmental Health, and under that an air pollution engineer, laboratory technician, which shows your interest in air pollution. What about the question of water pollution?

Mr. LASTNER. This, too, Mr. Erlenborn, is being studied and, in 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 River Basin and have a particular interest in this. And the Council of Governments is exercising its ability to study this as well as air pollution.

Mr. ERLENBORN. The question I have really is, does the fact that you have an air pollution engineer in your organization chart indicate that you are putting more emphasis on that than you are on water pollution?

Mr. TUCHTAN. Not necessarily. Mr. Scheiber, I think, can discuss organization structure and facets of operation, if you don't mind. He can answer the question for you.

Mr. SCHEIBER. Very briefly, Mr. Erlenborn, our interest in these various aspects of the environment is roughly equal. You will note in some of the testimony submitted to you that several years ago we commissioned a study by several eminent engineers which resulted in the development of the first regionwide master sewerage plan for the Washington area. This is now regarded as the basic blueprint against which current pollution efforts are being measured.

We have underway at the present time three studies, one in the field of air pollution, which is administered by the people shown in the chart; one in the field of solid waste, that is, refuse collection and disposal, under a grant from the Public Health Service; and a third

one which is a water supply study. We consider the matter of water supply in this region as pressing as the matter of water pollution abatement.

This is a two-part study. The first segment of it is under contract to a board of eminent engineers. The cost to us is approximately $50,000. We are about to complete the first phase.

Under the second phase, we will detail the water supply needs of the Washington area and propose plans to the various jurisdictions for solving the water supply problems which face us.

Mr. ERLENBORN. I wonder if one of you gentlemen can give me an idea of the operating budget of the Council of Governments prior to your becoming qualified for Federal grants under the section 701 and your budget subsequent to your becoming qualified for those

grants.

Mr. TUCHTAN. I think Mr. Scheiber can give you the 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 Federal funds during fiscal 1966, Mr. Erlenborn. For that year our total budget was $307,000, of which $145,000 was in local contributions and the balance in various types of Federal grants from the Public Health Service and other Federal agencies.

For the current year, as Chairman Tuchtan indicated, our budget is $856,000, of which $230,000 represents the local contribution, and the balance represents estimated Federal assistance of various types, including HUD and HEW grants.

So that the local contribution between these 2 years has increased from $145,000 to $230,000. The total budget has increased from $307,000 to $856,000.

Mr. ERLENBORN. That is a considerable increase. How much of that is representative of increase in your permanent staff and how much is represented by work that is contracted out?

Mr. SCHEIBER. The work which is contracted out thus far has remained fairly constant. There has been an increase in our permanent staff from about 15 to 45 people. How much further work will be contracted out, we are not able to tell you at this time, because our planners are just getting the program underway.

Mr. ERLENBORN. One last question, again maybe somewhat off our subject matter here, but I would just be interested in knowing, How many municipalities in this area have primary sewage treatment. facilities and how many have tertiary treatment facilities?

Mr. SCHEIBER. We understand at this point, as soon as Arlington County sewage treatment plant's renovation is completed, roughly 96 to 98 percent of the effluent will be treated secondarily. There is virtually no primary treatment within the metropolitan area. Mr. ERLENBORN. Thank you.

Mr. TUCHTAN. Mr. Chairman, you did indicate a preference for the recognition of Mr. Roberts. He is the young man we think will be able to help us develop regional plans, something that we have all been aspiring to do. He is now building this organization to make this possible.

Chairman DAWSON. Do you want to make a statement?

Mr. ROBERTS. No, sir. I have no prepared statement. I will be happy to answer any specific questions.

Chairman DAWSON. Any questions?

Mr. ROSENTHAL. I have just one curious question: What concrete results do we have from all of this regional planning?

Mr. TUCHTAN. I would put it this way, that if we don't have it, you would have chaos. It has taken a period of time in which the local governments have come to the realization that they have to work together, so the common objectives of solving the problems can be solved. Mr. ROSENTHAL. Do you have a specific example of any projects that have come further along because of cooperation?

Mr. TUCHTAN. I think the cooperation we exercised in connection with the Dulles interceptor made this thing a reality. The studies that we have undertaken which are pointing the pathways along which we should be following from now on are also a very important contribution.

The Wise report, for example, setting up a planning process to guide us along these lines, I think, is a very important and vital document. Mr. ROSENTHAL. I gather quickly from the figures that we are spending about $600,000 a year in Federal funds, or at least that is projected.

Mr. TUCHTAN. That is true.

Mr. ROSENTHAL. And I was just curious as to what are the results of that expenditure.

Mr. TUCHTAN. We have a number of things which I set out in my statement which I did not read as to some of the actions we have undertaken.

Chairman DAWSON. You are filing your statement with us?

Mr. TUCHTAN. Yes. The statement is already available to you, sir. Chairman DAWSON. Mr. Reuss?

Mr. REUSS. I have just a couple of questions. I hope that the demise of the National Capital Regional Planning Council won't mean the demise of the excellent year 2000 plan, which they and the National Capital Planning Commission evolved, which President Kennedy and President Johnson have endorsed, and which presented the rational outlines of the plan for the whole metropolitan area. that hope of mine a valid one?

Is

Mr. TUCHTAN. It is a valid hope, Mr. Reuss, because the various governments and jurisdictions have adopted the year 2000 plan.

Mr. REUSS. Various others, however, have thumbed their noses at it. I am thinking of Fairfax County with its attempt to ruin the Potomac with Merrywood; Montgomery County with its attempt to ruin the Potomac with high-rise skyscrapers at Glen Echo.

At least the National Capital Planning Commission, and the National Capital Regional Planning Council protested vigorously. If the Metropolitan Council of Governments so much as uttered a peep against these outrageous violations of the plan, I wasn't aware of it. Did you?

Mr. TUCHTAN. No; we did not.

Mr. REUSS. Why didn't you?

Mr. TUCHTAN. It has been the case perhaps of a matter of crawling before we are able to stand up on our own two feet.

Mr. REUSS. You have been in business for 9 years.

Mr. LASTNER. Mr. Chairman, might I answer Mr. Reuss, and, in fact, we were not involved, the Regional Planning Council was then