luted. He announced that the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare would undertake an intensive program to clean up the Nation's most polluted rivers. He expressed confidence that with the cooperation of States and cities, using the tools of regulation, grant, and incentives, we can bring the most serious river pollution under control. He recommended that new legislation be enacted to curb pollution.

It has been nearly 9 years since the Congress, with the enactment of Public Law 660, 84th Congress, established the first permanent national program for a comprehensive attack on water pollution. The Federal role was fixed as one of support for the activities of the States, interstate agencies, and localities. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act authorized financial assistance for construction of municipal waste-treatment works, comprehensive river basin programs for water pollution control, research, and enforcement. It provided, too, for technical assistance, the encouragement of interstate compacts and uniform State laws, grants for State programs, the appointment of a Federal Water Pollution Control Advisory Board, and a cooperative program for the control of pollution from Federal installations.

With the enactment of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1961, Public Law 87-88, the program was strengthened in several important respects. The appropriations authorization for waste-treatment works construction grants was increased, joint projects to serve two or more communities were encouraged, the dollar ceiling for a single project was raised from $250,000 to $600,000, and was set for a joint project at $2.4 million. The research function was strengthened, the appropriations authorization for State program grants increased, the principle of low-flow augmentation for water quality control was established in law, the administration of the program was vested in the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare (rather than the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service), and the enforcement authority was extended to navigable as well as interstate waters.

The impact of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act has been impressive. It has taken us in less than 9 years from a situation in which untrammeled pollution threatened to foul the Nation's waterways beyond hope of restoration, to a point where we are holding our own. But that is not enough. The familiar factors of population growth, urbanization, technological development, a higher standard of living are producing pollution at a fantastic rate. will take a much greater effort at all levels of government, and on the part of industry, agriculture, conservationists, civic groups and other voluntary organizations, and individual citizens to come to grips with the monumental problem of water pollution.

It

It was my privilege to introduce and to manage in the House of Representatives both the 1956 and the 1961 water pollution control legislation. The bill which I have introduced in this session, H.R. 3988, would implement recommendations of President Johnson for a stepped-up attack on pollution. It is similar to S. 4, introduced in the other body by Senator Muskie for himself and 31 other Senators, and capably managed by the Senator from Maine to passage in the other House on January 28 by a vote of 68 to 8. The distinguished chairman of this committee, the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Fallon, has introduced a bill identical to mine, H.R. 4627, and other Members are sponsoring identical or similar bills. There have also been introduced and referred to the Committee on Public Works bills dealing with particular aspects of the total pollution problem. I am certain that the testimony given in these hearings and the forthcoming committee deliberations in executive session will result in our report to the House of Representatives of a strong bill to press the fight for clean water.

H.R. 3988, the Water Quality Act of 1965, does not hold the key to the total problem of water pollution. It does hold the means for a more effective national program for the prevention, control, and abatement of pollution. I will make brief mention of some of its provisions.

First, the bill would add to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act a positive statement of the act's purpose to enhance the quality and value of our water resources and to establish a national policy for the prevention, control, and abatement of water pollution.

Second, it would give the national water pollution control program an organizational placement commensurate with its importance through the creation within the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. elevating the program from its present status as a division within a bureau within the Public Health Service.

Third, the bill would authorize a 4-year program of research and development on new and improved methods to cope with the overflow from combined storm and sanitary sewers, a complex pollution problem which has plagued particularly the older cities of the United States.

Fourth, H.R. 3988 would give more meaningful financial assistance to populous areas with critical unmet pollution problems by increasing the dollar ceilings for waste treatment works construction from $600,000 to $2 million for a single project, and from $2.4 to $6 million for a joint project, serving two or more communities, with the 30 percent of project cost limitation in the present law not affected.

Fifth, the bill would authorize the Secretary, calling on the judgments of the appropriate Federal, State, interstate, and local officials, of industry, and other affected interests, to fix water quality standards for interstate waters, to protect the public health and welfare and to raise the quality of these waters for public water supplies, fish and wildlife propagation, recreation, agriculture, industry, and other legitimate uses. He would promulgate standards only in the absence of satisfactory State or interstate standards for the waters involved. Sixth, H.R. 3988 would undergird the enforcement authority with subpena power by authorizing the Secretary to administer oaths and to compel the presence and testimony of witnesses and the production of any evidence that relates to any matter under investigation pursuant to the abatement section of the act. It is not expected that the power would be used except in rare instances. Indeed it may never be needed. But it would assure that investigations would not be hampered by a failure of cooperation on the part of any persons concerned. Clean water is a resource beyond price. The usual list of "legitimate uses" of water includes public water supplies, fish and wildlife propagation, recreation, agriculture, and industry, with navigation and power often given separate mention. We could lengthen the list with specific reference to drinking water and other domestic purposes, to the various delightful water-oriented sports, and to the intangible worth to a community-yes, to the needs of the individual spirit— of the sight of a shimmering lake or stream. Pollution has not spared the Great Lakes, the largest fresh water source on earth. The threat of pollution hangs over the cool, clean waters of the last large unspoiled river near a major population center in the Middle West.

Now is the time to take another stride forward in water pollution control legislation. The needs of 1965 are heavy. The far greater needs of the year 2000 demand that we act today to save the waters of America.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask unanimous consent that the bill, H.R. 3988, just be referred to in the report as identical to the one that is being considered, to save the cost of the printing.

Mr. BLATNIK. Without objection, it is so ordered.

We are very pleased and honored to have with us a gentleman who was a former member of this body, an able member, who is distinguishing himself in the field of conservation and resource use, and is eminently qualified in the field of water resources, the Honorable Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior.

Mr. Secretary, welcome this morning. We look forward with great interest to your presentation in these very important hearings.

STATEMENT OF HON. STEWART L. UDALL, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR

Secretary UDALL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

If I may, I have a prepared statement that is available and if this could appear in the record, then I could summarize the highlights. I would like to set an example of brevity for the committee, if I could, this morning.

Mr. BLATNIK. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Your prepared statement will be placed in the record at this point.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman, H.R. 3988 and S. 4 which are pending before this committee deal with matters basic to the conservation and utilization of water and our other natural resources and are of major concern to my Department. Protection of water quality from degradation is important alike for outdoor recreation and for mineral development, for communities, for industry, and for agriculture. Clean water is vitally important for the propagation of our Nation's fish and wildlife resource.

For too long, waterways have been used as sewers and dumps for wastes and refuse. For too long even so-called good waste disposal practice has been geared merely to the concept of limiting polllution loads to the assimilation capacity of streams. This is a negative approach. We must begin now to adopt a positive approach to insure clean water for these resources.

President Johnson, in his natural beauty message of last week, forcefully pointed out that pollution destroys the natural beauty, menaces the public health, reduces our efficiency and property values, and raises taxes. The President emphasized the need to act now to combat pollution in our waterways when he recommended that

"Enforcement authority must be strengthened to provide positive controls over the discharge of pollutants into our interstate or navigable waters. I recommended enactment of legislation to

"Provide, through the setting of effective water quality standards, combined with a swift and effective enforcement procedure, a national program to prevent water pollution at its source rather than attempting to cure pollution after it occurs.'

The bills before your committee will provide legislative authority for preventing the discharge of waste materials before they destroy or irreparably damage our natural resources, and menace our health and welfare. They provide for the preparation and promulgation of water quality standards by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare applicable to interstate waters, after consulting with this Department and other interested public and private agencies. These standards will be designed to protect the public health and welfare and enhance the quality and value of water resources. They will consider the use and value of these waters for public water supplies, propagation of fish and wildlife, outdoor recreation, and agricultural, industrial, and other legitimate uses. The objective is to keep the Nation's interstate waters as clean as practicable. We heartily endorse this objective.

Water, the indispensable requirement of all uses of natural resources, is becoming an increasing concern throughout much of the United States-not only in the Western States but even in many of the humid Eastern and North-Central States. There are present and prospective water shortages in the humid portions of the country, as well as in the dry portions, because water quality, as well as water quantity, is an important factor in meeting water use requirements.

Water shortages are in prospect for us not because our basic national supply is scant in relation to present and prospective population. On the contrary, the water of our lakes, rivers, and underground reservoirs, is abundant in relation to foreseeable requirements for many decades ahead-that is, it is abundant if we develop and use it wisely.

Substantial ad

One of the greatest wastes of water resources is pollution. vances in water resource conservation can be made by eliminating or, at least, substantially reducing the amount and concentration of waste materials discharged into our waterways, and also by reprocessing degraded waters to higher quality levels.

Protection of water quality requires careful and continuing attention to polluting substances that may be discharged into lakes and rivers. Implementing that requirement necessarily rests on the regulation of polluting discharges. It is the responsibility of the State and Federal Governments to establish reasonable and practicable standards of water quality which will insure clean water for future generations. These bills recognize this.

The task of setting water quality standards will not be easy. The formulation and application of water quality standards are complicated by important interrelated factors, both technical and economic.

Technically, pollution of a body of water generally is a complex of many variables including the volume and rate and turbulence of flow, the character of the body of water (that is, whether a reservoir, estuary, or surface stream) and the chemical and physical properties of the receiving waters, as well as like

variables in the waste materials discharged into it. The discharge of a given quantity of certain materials at one point along the river system may be seriously injurious to aquatic life and damaging to other users while the same quantity of the same material discharged at a different location or at a different time may have little, if any, injurious effects. The different results in such cases could be due to either the volume of flow of the receiving waters which dilute the waste material, or it could be the presence or absence of other materials dissolved or suspended in the receiving waters, or their temperature. These factors may intensify or ameliorate the injurious properties of individual contributions of wastes. Further, the quantities of certain materials that may be discharged into a water system may differ between surface or subsurface locations, or they may vary according to types of soil, or they may depend upon interactions between pollutants, or they may involve other complex factors.

To be practical, in many cases it may be necessary to formulate the standards in relation to the factors just mentioned; that is, such things as the rate and volume of flow and the chemical and physical characteristics of the receiving waters. In practice this could mean that often offending mateerials might have to be rigorously withheld during periods of low river flow, and perhaps they would be impounded or otherwise handled until river stages are high enough to provide safe dilution, or this could mean the allocation of discharge of offending materials between subsurface and surface streams.

The economic effects of pollution abatement requirements is another factor. For example, streamflow conditions in one mineral-producing area may necessitate more costly pollution abatement measures than might be required in another area producing the same minerals but with streamflow conditions that tolerate less rigorous and less costly measures. You can well realize that the consequent production cost differentials thus introduced into a competitive market might seriously disrupt an industry.

There is also a need to recognize that the application of water quality standards can be no better than water quality measurements. The measurements of water quality is not a simple task of taking samples. The entire program of sampling for water quality must be approached on a scientific network basis with full cognizance of the behavioral characteristics of the water systems that form the basis for sample locations, sample frequency, nature of instrumentation, sample interpretation, and similar questions.

Needless to say, this type of water quality surveillance generally requires an elaborate system of monitoring streamflow and subsurface flow. The Department of the Interior, through the Geological Survey, is responsible for the design and operation of the national network for acquiring data on the quantity and quality of surface and ground waters, including sediment load of streams. The network will meet the water quantity measurement requirements of all Federal agencies and will provide water quality measurements common to the needs of two or more agencies.

It is important to emphasize, however, that the promulgation of water quality standards is not enough. The standards themselves will not enhance the quality of waterways. They must be combined, as the President stated, with swift and effective enforcement procedures.

The present procedures in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act have proved to be inadequate. They are too cumbersome and time consuming. While these procedures are solwly being followed, the damaging pollution continues. Our natural resources and, in some cases, the public health and welfare are being menaced by this continuing pollution.

Legislation should be enacted and will be submitted by the administration to insure adequate and swift enforcement measures. An acceleration of the present enforcement proceedings is not only highly desirable, but is necessary to prevent serious and continuing damage to the health and welfare and to our natural resources from the discharge of excessive amounts of pollutants in our waterways.

The President has also recommended that the water quality standards should be applicable to navigable, as well as interstate water. The present abatement provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of both kinds of waters. These bills amend this act and to be adequate should provide that water quality standards apply to both navigable and interstate waters. They should not leave uncontrolled waterways that have been traditionally recognized by the act as being subject to control.

Subject to the consideration of these comments, we recommend the enactment of the Senate-passed bill, S. 4.

Secretary UDALL. This is retread legislation. I testified on it last year. I know how busy the committee is and I know how busy I am, and I would just like to hit the highlights here for a moment in the hope that I can help the committee move forward rapidly.

Mr. Chairman, I think that within recent weeks there has been an important new initiative, both with regard to conservation out of doors and with the regard to the resources of our country. The President 10 days ago sent up to the Congress a very wide-ranging message on natural beauty, which is an important first in the history of our country. He mentioned rivers in the state of the Union message and in his special message at great length. I think the American people are in the process really of rediscovering their rivers and their importance to all of us.

I am here this morning not because my Department has primary responsibility in pollution abatement-this is the responsibility of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare under this legislation-but because water is a very complex subject which affects our natural resources. I think we are just now perceiving its potential value for outdoor recreation; for example, if we cleaned up our rivers. The President's instruction to me is to head up a team. Secretary Quigley and I were talking this morning about our teamwork on it, his instructions to clean the Potomac River as an example to the country and keep it clean. I think we are going to be amazed at what happens, what tremendous benfits will flow from this if we can accomplish it. This is a special challenge that we are working on. But whether one talks about our fish and wildlife resources, about outdoor recreation, about irrigation in the western part of the country, or about the scenic aspects of rivers, I think the time is long overdue when the American people should take a deep interest with a followthrough stroke and do something about cleaning up and conserving

our rivers as a resource.

I think in our own time, one might say the big conservation scandal that originally aroused this country and a great President, Teddy Roosevelt, at the turn of the century, was a waste of our forests. We later waster the soil of this country. We did something about it in the thirties. I think the No. 1 conservation scandal of our time is the pollution of our rivers, and I think that this legislation is directed very pointedly at this problem.

President Johnson, in his natural beauty message of last week, forcibly pointed out that pollution destroys the natural beauty, menaces the public health, reduces our efficiency and our property values, and raises taxes. The President emphasized the need to act now to combat pollution in our waterways.

I am quoting now from page 2 of my statement:

Enforcement authority must be strengthened to provide positive controls over the discharge of pollutants into our interstate or navigable waters. I recommend enactment of legislation to provide, through the setting of effective water quality standards, combined with a swift and effective enforcement procedure, a national program to prevent water pollution at its source rather than attempting to cure pollution after it occurs.

I think one other thing this committee will be interested in that was mentioned in the President's message-ineed, there is in the executive branch, a team that will shortly begin to study this-is what can be