(7) Authorized Federal grants of $50 million a year (up to an aggregate of $500 million) for the construction of municipal sewage treatment works, the amount for any one project not to exceed 30 percent of cost, or $250,000, whichever is smaller;

(8) Modified and simplified procedures governing Federal enforcement and abatement actions against interstate pollution which included conference, public hearing, administrative direction and finally, with the consent of the States involved, to request the Attorney General of the United States to bring suit on behalf of the United States.

(9) Established and authorized the appointment of a Water Pollution Advisory Board in the Public Health Service, composed of the Surgeon General or a sanitary engineer designated by him, who was to be Chairman, and nine members appointed by the President, none of whom were to be Federal officers or employees. The Board's function was to advise, consult with and make recommendations to the Surgeon General on matters of policy relating to his activities and functions under the act; and

(10) Authorized a cooperative program to control pollution from Federal installations.

FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1961

The 1961 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Public Law 87-88) represented an effort to provide a still more effective program of water pollution control and assigned to the Secretary and the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare the primary Federal responsibility for water pollution control. Its major provisions—

(1) Transferred all of the authority for administration of the various programs, functions and activities provided for in the act from the Surgeon General to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare;

(2) Established the nine-member Water Pollution Control Advisory Board in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, to be headed by the Secretary or his designee ;

(3) Extended Federal authority to enforcement abatement of interstate pollution of interstate, coastal or navigable waters, but required the permission of the State Governor before a Federal enforcement suit can be brought to stop pollution causing activities. It further expanded Federal authority by permitting the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, through the Justice Department, to bring court proceedings to require an offender to cease activities causing pollution in interstate waters without first obtaining the permission of the State government where the pollution was taking place;

(4) Increased the authorized annual $50 million Federal financial assistance to municipalities for construction of waste treatment works to $80 million in 1962, $90 million in 1963, and $100 million for each of the 4 following fiscal years 1964-67. In addition, it raised the single grant limitation from $250,000 to $600,000 and provided for grants to communities combining in a joint project up to a limit of $2,400,000;

(5) Intensified research toward more effective methods of pollution control; authorized for this purpose annual appropriations of $5 million up to an aggregate of $25 million; and authorized the establishment of field laboratory and research facilities in, among others, seven specified major areas of the Nation;

(6) Extended for 7 years until June 30, 1968, and increased Federal financial support of State and interstate water pollution control programs by raising the annual appropriations authorization from $3 million to $5 million; and

(7) Authorized the inclusion of storage for regulating streamflow for the purpose of water quality control in the survey and planning of Federal reservoirs and impoundments.

FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AMENDMENTS OF 1965 (WATER QUALITY ACT OF 1965)

The 1965 amendments, contained in the Water Quality Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-234), represented a further attempt to strengthen Federal water pollution control by (1) declaring as the purpose of the act the enhancement of the quality and value of water resources and establishment of a national policy for the prevention, control and abatement of water pollution; (2) establishing with

in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare a Federal Water Pollution Control Administration; (3) providing additional grants for research and development; (4) increasing the grants for construction of municipal sewage treatment works; and (5) authorizing the establishment of standards of water quality to aid in preventing, controlling and abating pollution of interstate waters.

Specifically, the 1965 amendments

(1) Authorized the establishment in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare of a new Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, and the appointment of an additional Assistant Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to supervise and direct the head of the Administration in administering the act, as well as all other functions of the Secretary related to water pollution; provided for the voluntary transfer of commissioned officers of the Public Health Service to the new Administration under civil service status, the protection of their benefits, coverage under the Civil Service Retirement Act and the Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance Act, with special compensation provisions to include all allowances earned in the Public Health Service, and an equalization factor with respect to previously tax-free allowances.

(2) Authorized additional appropriations of $20 million a year in fiscal years 1966-69 for Federal matching grants to States, municipalities, and interstate or intermunicipal agencies for research and development projects to develop improved methods of preventing untreated sewage and wastes from being discharged into bays, rivers, etc., from storm water sewers or from combined storm and sanitary sewers; and further authorized the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to contract with public or private agencies, organization or individuals for these purposes, to be financed from the $20 billion authorized for grants. Single grants or contracts were limited to 5 percent of the total authorization under the provisions for any one year. All contracts made under the section for 1 year may not exceed 25 percent of the total appropriated. State approval is required of a project for which a grant is to be made, and the Federal contribution to any project cannot exceed 50 percent of its costs.

(3) Increased the existing $100 million annual grant program for construction of community sewage treatment plants to $150 million, and required that the additional $50 million be allotted on the basis of the State's population; specified that grants from additional $50 million would not be subject to project limits which were imposed on grants from the first $100 million, providing that a State agreed to match equally all Federal grants made from the $50 million for projects in the State; within the $150 million program or grants for construction of sewage treatment plants, it permitted the maximum Federal grant for a single project to be 30 percent of the cost or $1.2 million, whichever is less (instead of 30 percent or $600,000 previously provided for); and for a joint project involving several communities, 30 percent or $4.8 million, whichever was less (instead of 30 percent or $2.4 million). Finally, it permitted the Secretary to increase the amount of grants for community sewage treatment construction by 10 percent where the project was part of a comprehensive metropolitan development plan.

(4) Directed each State to file with the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare a letter of intent within 1 year following the passage of the act, stating that it will, by June 30, 1967 (1) establish water quality standards for interstate waterways or portions thereof within the State and (2) adopt a plan for implementation and enforcement of standards. If a State fails to establish and enforce such standards, or if the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare or a State Governor desires a revision of such State standards, the Secretary can propose water quality standards for interstate waters within the State, following an informal conference with all parties concerned; such standards would not take effect until 6 months thereafter and during that period the State involved can establish its own standards, subject to the approval of the Secretary as being consistent with the statutory requirement for water quality standards-that they "protect the public health or welfare, enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes of the act." At any time within 30 days after the Secretary has promulgated such standards, the State can request a public hearing on the Federal standards, whereupon the Secretary is required to call such hearing before a hearing board sitting in or near one or more of the places where

the water quality standards will take effect. The board, which is appointed by the Secretary, must be composed of at least five members, including a representative of the State involved, the Department of Commerce, and other Federal departments or agencies affected; a majority of the board may not be from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The board is required to make findings and recommendations, based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, as to whether the standards by the Secretary promulgated should be approved or modified and transmit its findings to the Secretary. If the standards as promulgated by the Secretary are approved by the hearing board, they will become effective immediately upon receipt by the Secretary of the board's findings; if they are modified by the board, the Secretary must promulgate revised standards in accordance with the board's recommendations and they will become effective immediately upon promulgation. In either event, the standards promulgated will become those applicable to the interstate waters of the State.

In the event that matter is subsequently discharged into the waters involved which reduce the water quality below the standards established, the Secretary is authorized to use existing abatement procedures to halt the discharge. However, before abatement proceedings may begin, the Secretary must notify all persons involved and allow 180 days for voluntary compliance.

(5) Authorized the use of existing abatement procedures against pollution causing dirty shellfish, thereby preventing the marketing of shellfish and shellfish products in interstate commerce.

STATEMENTS OF HON. STEWART L. UDALL, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR; HON. JOHN GARDNER, SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE; HAROLD SEIDMAN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET; JAMES M. QUIGLEY, COMMISSIONER, WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE; AND DEAN W. COSTON, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Secretary UDALL. Mr. Chairman, may I direct myself immediately to this particular problem that troubles the chairman and the other members of the committee. This reorganization proposal I consider a very far-reaching one and a very wise one, and I think it does achieve the objective that the chairman has mentioned. But in terms of what the Congress itself did last year, after 3 years of argument and discussion, Senator Muskie was one of the leading architects if not the leading architect of this change, was to create a new Water Pollution Control Administration in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, that was largely divorced from the Public Health Service.

However, the committees of the Congress, and again I think this was a wise step, because I think where there are highly specialized functions that they should and can be left within a department without impairing the type of central authority and control that is also sound Government operation, the committees deliberately decided in the Water Control Act of 1965 to transfer all of the functions of the new Water Pollution Control Administration, the grant programs, the enforcement programs, the other traditional programs, the research programs connected with water pollution control, but they left a very small part but a highly specialized part of the program in the

Public Health Service in terms of health research, in terms of making certain findings with regard to the determinations that must be made. What the President's reorganization proposal does is to take the Water Pollution Control Administration just as the 1965 act created it, move it lock, stock, and barrel over to the Interior Department, but it leaves, just as the committees contemplated last year, these relatively narrow health functions and responsibilities in Public Health Service. Senator RIBICOFF. I understand, but you are dealing with people. In other words, how many people, Secretary Gardner, will remain in the Public Health Service after this transfer?

Secretary GARDNER. I missed the first part of the question.

Senator RIBICOFF. How many people will remain in HEW dealing with water, after this contemplated transfer?

Secretary GARDNER. I am sorry, I can't give you the answer. It is a fairly small number.

Senator RIBICOFF. How many are there now?

Secretary GARDNER. About 150 people now concerned with the health aspects of water scattered through

Senator RIBICOFF. If you have 150 people concerned basically with health aspects of water, and they are experts in that field, why couldn't those 150 people be transferred to Interior under the administration of the new Water Coordinator, if it is to be Secretary Quigley, or whoever it is going to be? This is what is bothering me. Secretary Gardner, is there any reason why these men can't be doing this function in Interior?

Secretary GARDNER. Yes, sir; I believe that there is. Our Department has a lot of interdepartmental connections. I have concluded that almost everything important is interdepartmental, and certainly health is an aspect of everything, education is an aspect of everything.

On the health front we are dealing all of the time with Agriculture on pesticides, we are taking care of the Peace Corp volunteers and the Federal prison inmates. We look after the health of the Indians. Our interdepartmental relationships are natural and ubiquitous, and we can never relinquish our concern for the health aspects. It doesn't matter what we transfer to anybody else.

Take a subject such as automotive safety. It may be that the highway safety aspects will be taken care of somewhere else. It may be that the engineering aspects will be taken care of in a new Department of Transportation. But we will never be able to relinquish our responsibility for the health aspects as long as the high rate of accidents continues.

So that we are never going to root out our concern for the health aspects of water. This just can't be done as long as we are concerned with public health.

It seems to me we have a very workable division of labor here. We know what we are supposed to do. We know the functions and I would be glad to describe them if you want me to. In fact, I have a two-page memo here which outlines them. They are highly professional. They are very closely related strictly to the health aspects of the water problem. Many of them we have been doing for years and years. Most of them remained in the Public Health Service after the creation of the Water Pollution Control Administration.

Senator MUSKIE. Mr. Secretary, when you speak of the health aspects you are speaking about drinking water, aren't you?

Secretary GARDNER. To a considerable degree, yes.

Senator MUSKIE. So that you are talking about one of the very important uses of water.

Secretary GARDNER. Yes, sir.

Senator MUSKIE. When we developed the water quality standards legislation last year, we developed it because we recognized the multiple uses of water, including public drinking supplies, as well as recreation, industrial purposes, agricultural purposes, et cetera. So this is one of several uses of water.

Now in the Department of HEW, although the health aspects were left in the Public Health Service, they were all in one department subject to coordination under the new Assistant Secretary of HEW, which was authorized by the Water Quality Act. So we had all of these uses of water under the supervision of one department.

Now we are leaving one of them behind in HEW, so that in that sense we are not unifying the program. We are splitting it off. Now the question is whether we gain enough by the transfer to Interior, to offset this splitting off, in addition to the fundamental question which Senator Ribicoff raised as to whether it ought to be split off at all, whether or not it ought not all be transferred?

Secretary GARDNER. May I comment just a bit further. First of all, I don't think anything will ever be completely unified in this complicated Government. I would have been delinquent in my duties if I had not pressed my health people very, very hard on this point at the time, at the final moment of decision when we were faced with going forward on the new plan.

Senator MUSKIE. Remember that your health people didn't even want the program moved from the Public Health Service to another place in HEW.

Secretary GARDNER. Well, I consulted them at this moment of decision. Specifically, I consulted with the Surgeon General and my Assistant Secretary for Health and Scientific Affairs, and I pressed them hard on whether we would be able to continue to carry forward our health functions, whether this was a workable plan, whether the health aspects of the total problem were so inseparable that it would make impossible such a transfer, and they flatly said that this was perfectly workable.

Senator MUSKIE. But the same people who felt it was not workable to transfer the program to another agency in HEW now find it would be workable to take it out of the Department altogether?

Secretary GARDNER. Philip Lee, the Assistant Secretary, was not in the Department at the time, and I don't know how much Surgeon General Stewart was involved in the transaction that you are talking about. He was not the Surgeon General at the time and I doubt that he was much involved.

Senator MUSKIE. I understand, of course, the reason that they objected to the transfer to the Public Health Service. They didn't like to see their empire breaking up. Now that the empire is broken up they have fewer reservations about getting rid of the whole program. That is about it, isn't it?

Secretary GARDNER. I would have more respect for the professional integrity of these two men than you would suggest.

Senator MUSKIE. This was a professional judgment and there is an inconsistency.