Water Pollution--Great Lakes

WATER POLLUTION-GREAT LAKES

(Part 1-Lake Ontario and Lake Erie)

FRIDAY, JULY 22, 1966

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

NATURAL RESOURCES AND POWER SUBCOMMITTEE

OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,

Rochester, N.Y.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:15 a.m., in the New York State Court of Claims chamber, Rochester, N.Y., Hon. Robert E. Jones (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Subcommittee members present: Representatives Robert E. Jones, J. Edward Roush, Frank Horton, and John N. Erlenborn.

Subcommittee staff present: Phineas Indritz, chief counsel; Harry V. Lerner, staff member; and J. P. Carlson, minority counsel.

Other members present: Representatives Richard D. McCarthy and Barber B. Conable, Jr.

Also present: William F. Dwyer, administrative assistant to Representative Horton.

Mr. JONES. The subcommittee will come to order.

This is a hearing by the Natural Resources and Power Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations of the House of Representatives. This hearing has been authorized by the chairman of the Committee on Government Operations, the Honorable William L. Dawson, who has directed that this subcommittee conduct an extensive inquiry to determine how effectively Government agencies and others are dealing with the growing problem of water pollution.

We are particularly pleased to be in Rochester, N.Y., because your Congressman, Frank Horton, is one of the most dedicated members of our subcommittee. He has been a tower of strength and a source of great comfort. Being associated with him in this work has been a great privilege, and his diligence and breadth of knowledge have been most helpful in all our endeavors. He has participated in all of our hearings and has accumulated a great wealth of information. I am Bob Jones of Alabama, chairman of the subcommittee. In addition to Congressman Horton and myself, the other members of the subcommittee present today are my associates, Congressman J. Edward Roush, of Indiana, who has served on the subcommittee for a number of years, and Congressman John Erlenborn, of Illinois. Also with us today are Congressman Richard D. McCarthy of Buffalo, N.Y., who is a member of the House Public Works Committee, which held the hearings on the Water Quality Act of 1965, and who has been an active participant in the discussions and deliberations of the Congress; and Congressman Barber Conable, of Alexander, N.Y., who is a member of the House Science and Astronautics Com

mittee, which initiated hearings the day before yesterday on the technical aspects of water quality problems. I am sure that the endeavors he will engage in during the next few months will be profitable to all of us.

As I said, our subcommittee has been engaged in extensive hearings and studies on water pollution control and abatement. We have already held hearings in many areas of the country, covering the Delaware River Basin, lower Lake Michigan, and the Fox Chain-O'Lakes, the rivers and coast of Connecticut, the State of Texas, the Pacific Northwest, the Tennessee Valley area, the Missouri River Basin, and other major streams in this country. At all these hearings, we have received splendid cooperation and valuable information and recommendations from Federal, State, interstate, and local government agencies and from representatives of industry, professional groups, civic and conservation organizations, and from many others. Our hearing today will concentrate on the water pollution problems of Lake Ontario, the eastern part of Lake Erie, and their drainage basins. The pollution of the waters of these two Great Lakes poses a grave threat to the well-being of millions of people who live near these magnificent bodies of fresh water. Massive discharges of municipal and industrial wastes into these waters endanger public health, interfere with municipal and industrial water supplies, damage their use for recreation, and imperil their fish and aquatic life. have been told that the waters around many communities, including Rochester, are increasingly beset by high coliform counts, chemicals, fecal matter, greaseballs, phosphate nutrients, huge amounts of inadequately treated waste discharges, overflows from combined sewers, and that these waters are becoming a growing morass of pollution.

Our purpose here today is to learn the facts from the water pollution experts and the citizens of this region, to consider your plans and to learn how, through a common endeavor, we can go about the business of preventing the further deterioration of the water quality of the Great Lakes and their tributaries.

We will have a series of hearings, as I explained earlier this morning, that will deal with all the waters of the Great Lakes.

I have a number of statements for insertion in the record, and without objection they will be included. Among these statements are a letter from the Governor of the State of New York, Mr. Rockefeller; statements from Senator Javits, Congressmen Thaddeus J. Dulski and Henry J. Smith, and a letter from Mr. Gordon Howe, county manager of the county of Monroe.

Also, without objection, the Chair will receive additional statements for insertion in the record at the conclusion of this hearing. (The documents referred to follow:)

STATE OF NEW YORK,
EXECUTIVE CHAMBER,
Albany, July 1, 1966.

Hon. ROBERT E. JONES,

House of Representatives,

Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. JONES: Thank you for your letter of June 27 concerning the forthcoming hearing in Rochester by the Subcommittee on Natural Resources and Power of the House Committee on Government Operations.

New York State is now well on its way in its $1.7 billion program to clean up all water pollution in the State within a 6-year period. This pioneering program

was made possible through the $1 billion bond issue overwhelmingly approved by the people of the State at the polls last November. A substantial portion of this program will be for prefinancing the Federal share of the cost of this pollution abatement program, which is estimated to be about $500 million.

I regret that I will be unable to be present at the subcommittee's hearing because I will be out of the country, but I have asked the commissioner of the New York State Health Department, Dr. Hollis S. Ingraham, to represent me as he is in charge of the program, including enforcement procedures, for the State. Accordingly, I have forwarded to him a copy of your letter together with the Committee on Government Operations' rules for witnesses.

Thank you for writing.
Sincerely,

NELSON A. ROCKEFELLER.

STATEMENT OF HON. JACOB K. JAVITS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

National interest has only recently focused on the vast social and economic problems caused by water pollution, inadequate sewage, and the resulting waste of America's water resources.

Legislation enacted during the recent year has begun to deal with this problem. We have made a significant beginning in our nationwide effort to end water pollution problems which were nearing crisis proportions.

Passage of the Water Quality Act of 1965 has been a fine start in the field of water pollution. Through this act and subsequent amendments, we have raised the appropriation limit for a single project from $600,000 to $1.2 million, and we have authorized the Federal Government to pay up to 30 percent of the cost of local sewage treatment facilities. The proposed Water Pollution Control Act of 1966 (which passed the Senate last Wednesday, July 13) will expand such programs to meet the urgent needs of the States. New York has a unique interest in fostering this legislation to expand the Federal role in controlling water pollution because New York has embarked on perhaps the most ambitious State program in this area.

The State voters recently approved a bond issue designed to raise the State's share of funds for a $1.7 billion water pollution control program. Under previous Federal allotments, New York could receive only $9.8 million as its share of Federal funds a meager sum far short of the 30 percent Federal financing we had hoped to achieve through the program. With passage of the 1966 act, however, a prefinancing provision, which I sponsored, will allow retroactive reimbursement for money already spent by the State on water pollution projects. Thus, New York and other States, with the foresight to act early and initiate emergency water pollution_control programs, can begin pollution projects now with the assurance that Federal aid will be forthcoming.

Along with prefinancing, the new Water Pollution Act will provide for a substantial increase in the aggregate of the Federal funds authorized and a lifting of the project money ceiling, which formerly made large projects so urgently needed in our urban centers, impossible. For that first time, Federal law will adequately compensate those States with large populations and concomitant large pollution problems.

New Federal programs, combined with the pace-setting New York plan, put our State well along the road to curbing the waste of our waterways. Let us continue along this path so that the beauty and power of all America's resources can be preserved.

STATEMENT OF HON. THADDEUS J. DULSKI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. Chairman, and esteemed members of the House Natural Resources and Power Subcommittee. I appreciate this opportunity to offer my statement on the urgent need for a workable solution to the water pollution problems in Lake Erie and the surrounding area.

Lake Erie water is truly the vital fluid that keeps one of the Nation's biggest industrial complexes alive. Without it the economy of the entire Lake Erie basin would wither and disappear. It is no exaggeration or vague prophecy that Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Erie, Buffalo, and Niagara Falls could stop producing, if the waters of Lake Erie dried up or became unfit for use.

We, in the Buffalo-Niagara Falls area, are no less concerned and even alarmed over the quality of Lake Erie than any industrial areas which literally exist, because they are on Lake Erie beaches. Every day we draw an estimated 4.5 billion gallons of water from the lake for industrial and human consumption.

Our western New York region is an industrial empire, the yearly production of which has reached $4 billion. It has every industry recognized by the Department of Commerce except 15. The 15 it lacks are dependent upon climatic and other conditions.

These vast industries are there for the simple reason that Lake Erie is there. Yet, Lake Erie, the fourth largest of the five Great Lakes, ranks first in suffering the effects of pollution. As the oldest, most southern, and the warmest and most shallow of the five lakes, it is also the most susceptible to manmade pollution. We have been told emphatically that D-Day has not only arrived, but the death of Lake Erie is imminent unless we rouse ourselves from the passive, apathetic attitudes that have prevailed for generations.

After 2 weeks of conferences held in Buffalo and Cleveland, at the call of the U.S. Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, on what must be done to revive a dying Lake Erie, the unanimous conclusion reached by our foremost experts was this:

"The main body of the lake has deteriorated in quality at a rate many times greater than its normal aging process, due to inputs of waste resulting from the activities of man."

One of the dramatic facts illustrating the decline of Lake Erie is the disappearance of the blue pike, long regarded as one of our most desirable fish. In 1956, Lake Erie produced 6,588,000 pounds. The catch was valued at $1,316,000. But 10 years later the blue pike catch was exactly 200 pounds worth $120. What happens to Lake Erie transcends local interest and a regional future. Its maritime trade in dollar value every year exceeds the value of all other ports in the world. What these fleets carry over the lakes and out the St. Lawrence Seaway represents a huge portion of our national export trade.

The military and defense of our country depends in a large degree on what is produced in western New York.

In summary, much of our national future rides on Lake Erie waters.

We can stop Lake Erie from dying. We have the techniques and the funds. All we need now is the will and determination to do it.

We do not know the cost yet. But whatever it is, we must make the expenditures. If we are to assure future generations the enjoyment of the esthetic and economic advantages of this heritage, we are the generation which must act. We can and must cease this wanton, reckless destruction. The alternative is disaster.

Only the Federal Government can coordinate the effort needed by the various States and enter into the international agreement with Canada to revive and restore Lake Erie.

I commend this subcommittee for its efforts. Although they may not appear glamorous or dramatic, the ultimate results of your efforts undoubtedly can be heroic. You are embarked on what is really a patriotic job.

STATEMENT OF HON. HENRY P. SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. Chairman, I was more than pleased to learn of the plans that had been made by the Subcommittee on Natural Resources and Power to conduct on-site hearings and aerial surveys of the water pollution problems in the Lake Erie and Lake Ontario drainage basin.

I believe that your hearings, and the findings that flow therefrom, will focus new and greater attention upon the gravity of the water pollution problem in the western New York area. I am deeply grateful to the members of the subcommittee for the active and enthusiastic interest which you have taken in our water pollution crisis.

I am sure that we are now all aware of the fact that we can no longer afford the luxury of time in coming to grips with the critical problems of water pollution. The problems are no longer local or statewide but are national in scope. The "death" of Lake Erie, for example, would most certainly touch many millions of Americans whose home States do not border the Great Lakes.

This national problem demands a national attack and a national solution. The preservation of "clean water" in the United States is an undertaking that requires

« Previous Continue »

Books

Water Pollution--Great Lakes: Hearing Before a Subcommittee ...