Regulations and Policies for Controlling the Drilling for Gas and Oil in the Great Lakes. Special studies, reviews and reports as appropriate. COMMISSION PROJECTS AND SERVICES In establishing the Commission, the states directed that it serve them as a fact-finding and advisory agency on developments relating to the water resources of the Great Lakes. In accordance with this mandate, the Commission obtains a wide range of information and statistics concerning subjects vitally affecting the states and localities in the region and subsequently analyzes the material and disseminates the findings through a variety of channels. These range from the reports on current developments in all aspects of Great Lakes water resources presented in the Commission bi-monthly news letter to advisory services to state agencies, university personnel, industry and news media. Water resources Spearheaded effort to have the problem of Great Lakes water levels referred to IJC (International Joint Commission)-Effected October 1964. Requested detailed study of proposed Lake Erie-Ohio River Canal project to assure no loss of water to the Great Lakes Basin. Recommended construction of engineering works to regulate water levels in lakes Michigan, Huron, and Erie-Corps of Engineers "Report on Lake Regulation," December 1965. Supported UNESCO's plans for International Hydrologic Decade (1965–75), and offered Great Lakes Commission support—Continuing. Assisted in formulation of and supported legislation on Federal Water Resources Planning Act-PL (Public Law) 89-80. Conducted Great Lakes Water Resource Conference. Urged amendment of the Flood Control Act of 1936 to allow use of federal funds to alleviate inundation problems on the Great Lakes-BOB (Bureau of the Budget) approved July 1959. Pollution control and abatement Spearheaded effort to have referred to IJC problem of pollution of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario and the international section of the St. Lawrence River— Effected October 1964. Supported passage of the Water Quality Act of 1965-PL 89-234. Urged development of Model Harbor Sanitation Code-Draft now in preparation by HEW (Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare). Urged USPHS (U.S. Public Health Service) to develop efficient sewage treatment process for removal of nutrients-USPHS Conference, Lake Erie Pollution. Pointed out the need for each port city on the Great Lakes to provide for the sanitary handling of refuse from pleasure craft and commercial ships-Continuing. Supported extension of Federal Oil Pollution Act of 1924 to the waters of the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River-Continuing. Requested funds for the USPHS Great Lakes regional water pollution control laboratory-Approved January 1963; bids for construction opened January 1966. Recommended federal and state financial incentives for construction of capital improvements to control water pollution-Continuing. Reviewed the multiplicity of agencies engaged in effecting pollution control and providing sewage facilities, and suggested necessity of municipal, state and federal coordination-Continuing. Encouraged the Surgeon General, USPHS, to publish amendments to the Interstate Quarantine Regulations relative to disposal of sewage and wastes from vessels operating on the Great Lakes-Continuing. Fisheries and wildlife Encouraged a uniform approach to state fishing regulations-Continuing. Gave early recognition to the need for funds to control the rapidly expanding alewife population in the Great Lakes. Supported efforts of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to control the sea lamprey and to rehabilitate the lake trout fishery. Endorsed implementation of the Convention with Canada on Great Lakes Fisheries-The Great Lakes Fisheries Act of 1956, PL 84-557. Maintained liaison with commercial and sports fishing interests Continuing. Shoreline use and recreation Served as forum for discussion on ownership of alluvial lands, laws and regulations pertaining to submerged lands, and regulations for use of shorelines-Continuing. Supported enactment of a model state boating act under the provisions of PL 85-911. Gained federal support for extension of shore protection legislation to include projects in the Great Lakes-BOB approved July 1959. Assisted in the shoreline survey program of the National Park Service "Our Fourth Shore," Report of the National Park Service. Encouraged federal assistance for flood plain information studies-River and Harbor and Flood Control Act of 1960. Endorsed action by all states to acquire lake shore lands for recreational programs. International relations Maintained contact with various Canadian agencies to effect international action on measures to control and abate pollution in Lakes Ontario and Erie and connecting channels, and to regulate the water levels of the Great Lakes-Two References to IJC. Presented views to Canadian Parliament on water resources matters. Held exploratory conferences with the Provinces of Ontario and Quebec concerning augmentation of water supply in the Great Lakes. Seaway, navigation and commerce Conducted a symposium on St. Lawrence Seaway-Seaway Institute, March 1964. Supported efforts to effect a more equitable share of military cargo movement through Great Lakes ports and the Seaway-Continuing. Recommended studies to determine the feasibility of extending the Great Lakes shipping season-PL 89-298. Supported appropriation of federal funds for harbor and channel development, and navigational aids-Continuing. Made recommendations incorporated in the federal pilotage bill for the Great Lakes-PL 86-555. Recommended dual locks on the Illinois waterway-Authorized PL 87-874. Contracted with the Bureau of Census for compilation of data on the overseas commerce of the Great Lakes ports-Continuing. Promoted increased use of Great Lakes ports for exporting surplus agricultural products under governmental assistance programs-Began July 1959. Recommended expanded traffic development program for the Seaway Development Corporation. Opposed tolls and user charges for all inland waterways in the United StatesContinuing. Participated in planning for national emergency operation of lake ports. Endorsed federal subsidies for U.S.-flag vessels operating on Great Lakes trade routes-Approved May 1958. Urged adoption of a free-time period on rail export cargo at Great Lakes ports equal to that of ocean ports. Urged federal support for Great Lakes shipping companies which make capital investments on vessels-Continuing. Sponsored symposium on Port Organization and Administration—November 1958. Urged Congress to provide funds for the construction of the St. Lawrence Seaway-Project completed. Supported the continuation and extension of U.S.-flag vessel developmental trade routes into the Great Lakes-Report, Maritime Administration, October 11, 1965, Great Lakes Foreign Trade Routes. Recommended review of freight rates for government cargo under Section 22, ICC Act-Continuing. Recommended enlargement of the new New Poe Lock at Sault Ste. Marie to accommodate 1000-foot ships-Now under construction. Requested greater utilization of the U.S. Great Lakes shipbuilding industry— Continuing. Maintained close liaison with Great Lakes port agencies—Continuing. COMMISSIONERS Dr. Harold G. Wilm, Vice Chairman Mr. Edgar D. Whitcomb, Chairman Illinois Mr. Albert J. Meserow, Chairman, Attorney at Law, Chicago. Dr. Harold B. Gotaas, Dean, Technological Institute, Northwestern University, Hon. Francis Loughran, Member of the House of Representatives. Mr. Milton F. Schaible, Libbey-Owens-Ford Glass Co., Ottawa. Michigan Hon. Frank J. Kelley, Chairman, Attorney General. Mr. William Heaton, Publisher, Birmingham. Dr. Ralph A. MacMullan, Director, Department of Conservation. Mr. Loring F. Oeming, Executive Secretary, Water Resources Commission. Dr. William E. Stirton, Vice President, and Director of the Dearborn Campus, University of Michigan. New York Dr. Harold G. Wilm, Chairman, Commissioner, Conservation Department. Mr. Edmund H. Brown, Trustee, Power Authority of the State of New York. Mr. Francis A. Pitkin, Chairman, Planning Consultant, Camp Hill. Hon. Paul W. Mahady, Member of the Senate. Mr. Joseph S. St. John, Erie Navigation Co., Erie. Indiana Mr. Clinton Green, Chairman, Klein and Kuhn, Indianapolis. Mr. Richard B. Falkiner, Transportation Consultant, Crown Point. Mr. Robert W. Kellum, Member, Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board. Mr. John W. Van Ness, Senate President Pro Tem Emeritus. Mr. Edgar Whitcomb, Attorney at Law, Seymour. Minnesota Hon. Gordon Rosenmeier, Chairman, Member of the Senate. Hon. Fred A. Cina, Member of the House of Representatives. Hon. Robert R. Dunlap, Member of the Senate. Hon. Roy E. Dunn, Member of the Senate. Hon. Lloyd L. Duxbury, Jr., Member of the House of Representatives. Mr. Fred E. Morr, Chairman, Director, Department of Natural Resources. Mr. Lee C. Howley, Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co., Cleveland. Hon. E. W. Lampson, Member of the House of Representatives. Mr. Louis C. Purdey, Executive Director, Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority. Hon. Robert Stockdale, Member of the Senate. Wisconsin Mr. George M. Epstein, Chairman, Kenosha. Mr. John T. Crawford, Materials Handling Consultant, Superior. Hon. Bronson C. La Follette, Attorney General. Mr. Reuben M. Tetzlaff, President, Brown County Board of Harbor Commissioners. Commission staff.-Leonard J. Goodsell, Executive Director; Larry Minock, Research Assistant; Albert G. Ballert, Director of Research; Olga Bilakos, Secretary. Mr. OLDS. Mr. Chairman, a letter is presently residing on the desk of Governor Romney of Michigan and I was told yesterday that as soon as they were able to secure his signature, it would be secured and dispatched as quickly as possible. (The letter from Governor Romney was subsequently received and follows:) Col. LEONARD J. GOODSELL, Executive Director, Great Lakes Commission, STATE OF MICHIGAN, DEAR COLONEL GOODSELL: In 1954 the State of Michigan joined with the other Great Lakes states in promoting the concept that the Great Lakes basin presented so many complex interstate problems that a permanent and continuing organism should be formed. This concept was finally consummated in 1955 by the States of Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana adopting a previously drafted Great Lakes Basin Compact. The Great Lakes Commission was organized in the fall of 1955, and since that time the States of Pennsylvania, New York and Ohio have become parties to this basin-wide interstate organization. Despite the fact that the Great Lakes Commission does not have regulatory powers and is only a consultatory and recommendatory body, nevertheless, it has served as an effective instrument working on behalf of the states of the Great Lakes region, totally financed by them, and by which they could consult with each other and make their collective voices known concerning matters affecting their regional interests. Through the years the Great Lakes states have sought to secure the consent of the Congress to their compact, and the necessity for such consent was made even more compelling when a few years ago the Attorney General of the United States ruled that such consent should be secured. Senate Bill 2922 sponsored by fourteen Senators of the Great Lakes basin states and House Resolutions 937, 12294 and five other House Resolutions identical to H.R. 12294 have been introduced in the Congress. All of these bills would grant the consent of Congress to the Great Lakes Basin Compact. Recently I initiated a request for the establishment of a federal river basin commission under Title II, Public Law 89-80, the Water Resources Planning Act, which will concern itself with the planning of water resources use and development of the Great Lakes basin. It is my belief that the Federal River Basin Commission will be effective in coordinating the federal agencies in their planning in this important basin and will permit the states and the Great Lakes Commission, when formally recognized by Congress, to have a bona fide voice in the planning effort. I would visualize that the Great Lakes Commission as presently constituted could perform a valuable function as complementary to the mission of the Basin Commission in identifying and programming solutions to the many complex problems that arise out of the multiple uses which the Great Lakes serve. Therefore, I am in full accord with your present efforts to obtain the consent of Congress to the Great Lakes Basin Compact. Very truly yours, GEORGE ROMNEY. (The following letter from the Governor of Pennsylvania was later received and also requested to be placed in the record:) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, Harrisburg, October 3, 1966. Mr. EDGAR D. WHITCOMB, DEAR MR. WHITCOMB: It is noted that Senate Bill 2922 sponsored by fourteen Senators of the Great Lakes Basin States, House Resolutions 937 and 12294 and various other resolutions have been introduced in the U.S. Congress which would give consent to the Great Lakes Basin Compact. Such consent is required in accordance with existing Federal statutes. 70-234-66--3 In accordance with the Act of the Pennsylvania Legislature of March 2 P.L. 1333, authority was given to enter into a compact between the State Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New York, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin and Pe vania for comprehensive development, use and conservation of the Great L Basin. The Great Lakes Commission was established in 1955. For the eleven years, the Commission has been active in promoting the orderly comprehensive development and conservation of water resources in the h Continuation of the Great Lakes Commission is necessary in order to coord State activities for the basin. Title II of the Water Resources Planning Act of 1965, Public Law 80 provides for the establishment of river basin commissions. We feel that objectives of the existing Great Lakes Commission are not in conflict with commission which would be established under the Water Resources Plar Act of 1965. In fact, it would appear that the Great Lakes Commission e complement the work which would be undertaken by a commission establis. in accordance with the Water Resources Planning Act. Consequently. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania supports pending Federal legislation which = give the consent of Congress to the Great Lakes Basin Compact. Most sincerely, Chairman MORGAN. Mr. Zablocki. Mr. ZABLOCKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. WILLIAM W. SCRANTON Is it not true, gentlemen, that this matter has been of great conce for many years? The bill which I introduced on January 4, 19 contained a number of provisions which can be improved upon. objections were met by modified versions of H.R. 937 introduce early in the second session by my colleagues from the Great Lake States and which the committee has before it. All of the bills include the text of the Great Lakes Basin compactarticles I through IX. In reference to the question that was asked with regard to article VI. where the Commission would have power to correlate, collect, inter pret,. and report; is it not true that the Commission has been doing this in the past? Mr. WHITCOMB. That is correct, and for Commission purposes only Mr. ZABLOCKI. And is it not, in fact, in the best interests of member States to have the data interpreted, thereby enabling the Commission to better assist the various entities? Mr. WHITCOMB. Yes. Mr. ZABLOCKI. This is not mandatory, but is simply a recommendation. The modifications in H.R. 937 reflected in the companion bills are primarily the deletion of section 3 in H.R. 937, which is no longer necessary as a result of the enactment of Public Law 89-80, 89th Congress, July 22, 1965, the Water Resources Planning Act, 1965, and the inclusion of assurances that the act in no way limits other agreements between participating States or between them and the Province of Ontario, as well as the deletion of the provisions relating to Federal examination of books. I might say all of these proposals were to meet objections which have been raised to the original compact. The real purpose of this legislation and the reason it should be enacted now is to permit the Great Lakes Commission to operate to carry out the purposes of the Great Lakes Basin compact more effectively; is that not true? Mr. WHITCOMB. That is true. Mr. ZABLOCKI. This legislation would eliminate some of the constitutional issues |