continued implementation by the foreign country in which they are carried out." I think that is a very desirable requirement, and to the extent that it does go beyond NEPA, it is probably a good idea. But I wonder if we shouldn't drop that sentence out simply because it does in effect amend the substantive law.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I believe this matches very well the interest of the current administration in their efforts to bring about better lending practices by the World Bank and the other multilateral development banks.

Mr. SEIBERLING. Well, shouldn't we put that in the committee report, instead of trying to make it statutory language?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I would like to investigate that further. My preference would be to leave it in the language if we possibly could, but I would be willing to discuss that further with the committee. I think that we should not be giving money or expertise to projects which do not benefit the country on a sustainable long-term basis, and I think that should be the primary thrust of our activities overseas, just as the U.S. Government is trying to do with the multilateral developments banks in making their loan program environmentally sustainable.

Mr. SEIBERLING. Well, I certainly do agree, but I am trying to get a bill that isn't going to run into heavy opposition from the administration and still accomplishes our purpose. Maybe it would be better if we put it up in the preceding sentence somehow?

Mr. WILLIAMS. That might help.

Mr. SEIBERLING. We might be able to overcome their concern.
Mr. PRITCHARD. Mr. Chairman, if I might comment?

Mr. SEIBERLING. Yes, Mr. Pritchard.

Mr. PRITCHARD. I think the position that I heard Secretary Montoya express was that other nations don't, or we shouldn't force other nations to comply with standards that we hold for ourself, if I recall his rationale.

My experience has been in working with those nation representatives at the World Park Conference and other representatives, and I am sure Mr. Bohlen might be able to add to this, is that in fact, they are looking for us to bring about that sort of guidance, that they are looking for us not to have them invest in projects which later make them debtor nations.

So I think the concept of environmentally sustainable is a very logical one and well supported around the world. It may not be supported here in the United States, but it should be.

Mr. SEIBERLING. Well, I agree that it should be, but politics is the art of the possible, and I am trying to figure out whether there is a way to accomplish the thrust of our intent and at the same time not overload it to the point where we jeopardize the bill.

Mr. PRITCHARD. I fully agree. I think that last alternative that you identified, I would simply suggest that I think it would be difficult for anyone to document statements on the part of other nation's representatives saying that they don't want to do something. Mr. SEIBERLING. I think you could probably document it. I could personally document it, but that is really beside the point. If they want our help, then it seems to me they should have to accept the condition that we are not going to support projects that are environmentally destructive in any significant way.

Mr. Bohlen, do you want to comment on that?

Mr. BOHLEN. Well, I certainly support Mr. Pritchard's statements and if it can't be included in section 4, then I would hope the thrust of it could be included in section 1 in your congressional findings.

Mr. SEIBERLING. Well, somewhere we ought to get the idea across. I certainly agree with that. At the same time, we must avoid the claim that we are imposing more severe restrictions on other countries than we impose on actions within our own boundaries.

Frankly sometimes I think the restraints we impose on ourselves within our own boundaries are insufficient, but that is a battle that we will have to fight on a separate occasion.

I also think that we should try to accommodate the suggestions that you made, Mr. Williams, with respect to including the Forest Service and the Endangered Species Act. I think those are excellent suggestions.

The Three Gorges Project that you cite, was there an environmental impact statement prepared at any time on this?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Not to my knowledge, there never has been such a document prepared.

Mr. SEIBERLING. Obviously this would be a major Federal action if it were undertaken in this country, and if we are going to supply support for such an action, it seems to me that, the United States should be required to prepare an environmental impact statement if they really want to go ahead with it.

Of course, if they decide they are not going to do it, then obviously they don't need to have an environmental impact statement. But before going ahead, they should have one. And I think that is the intent of this bill and we will try to make it clear that we are not rewriting NEPA. We are merely saying it will apply.

I am advised that it is not necessarily a viewpoint held by members of this committee, but we will see if we can't get that implanted in the legislation.

All right. I don't have any other questions or comments. I want to thank you all for some excellent viewpoints here, and appreciate very much your coming and sharing your thoughts with us.

This hearing is now adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 12:03 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

APPENDIX I

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1985

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

STATEMENT OF RICHARD T. MONTOYA, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR FOR TERRITORIAL AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, BEFORE THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS, REGARDING ASSISTANCE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO OTHER COUNTRIES ON ENVIRONMENTAL, NATURAL, AND CULTURAL RESOURCE ISSUES, OCTOBER 8, 1985.

Good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee on Public Lands. It is a pleasure to appear before you again. Usually we meet to discuss issues involving the Trust Territory or Compact of Free Association. Today, however, I am here with reference to the second part of my title

-

international

and the subcommittee's interest in Interior's

assistance to other countries on environmental, natural, and

cultural resource issues.

International Authority

The Department of the Interior has long been involved in international work, most of it performed on a reimburseable basis. Interior's international activity is not based on any legislative grant of general authority to the Department.

-

Only three of our eight technical agencies the Geological
Survey (USGS), the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the

National Park Service (NPS)

-

perform international work under

modest grants of specific authority. Almost all of the Department's international work is currently performed for the Agency for

International Development or other agencies on a reimbursable basis under authority such as the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

Types of Assistance

There are four major reasons that the Department of the Interior enters the international sphere: (1) to conduct an international facet of a domestic program, (2) to implement international agreements, (3) to gain access to foreign technology, and (4) to implement United States foreign policy. Some or all of the activities in these four categories provide assistance to other nations. Some activities benefit the United States or the Interior Department.

Examples of areas where international work is a facet of a domestic program include migratory birds, endangered species, fuel and non-fuel minerals, and earthquake prediction.

Implementa

tion of international agreements includes, for example, the World Heritage Convention and the Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the Western Hemisphere. An example of

gaining access to foreign technology is acquisition of foreign research in long-wall mining. A current example of assisting United States foreign policy is employment of search and rescue teams from the National Park Service and the Bureau of Mines to locate earthquake victims in Mexico City.

I would like now to describe briefly some of the activities of the

Interior technical agencies engaged in international cooperation that assists other countries.

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (USGS)

Although it cooperates worldwide, the nation with which the USGS has had the most sizeable involvement over the last several years is Saudi Arabia. All program division s

-

National

Mapping, Water Resources, and Geologic have worked in

Saudi Arabia in activities fully reimbursed by the Kingdom as authorized by the Foreign Assistance Act. The USGS has provided, and continues to provide, assistance to Saudi Arabia in activities related to assessment, protection, and development of its geologic and water resources. The USGS has worked toward the goal of assisting the Kingdom in establishing modern earth science organizations by developing staff, facilities, and procedures;