Communications to the colloquium-Continued John S. Lagaris, president, Resources Research, Inc., and Air Page 185 Samuel Lenher, E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc.__. 189 Philip R. Lee, M.D., Assistant Secretary for Health and Scientific R. Buckminster Fuller.. 189 189 Alvin F. Meyer, Jr., Colonel, U.S. Air Force, Office of Assistant 203 Earl Finbar Murphy, professor, Temple University School of Law.. 207 207 S. Dillon Ripley, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution.. 209 215 E. J. Block, Deputy General Manager, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission... 218 G. M. Woodwell, Brookhaven National Laboratory....... Dr. Gerald F. Tape, Commissioner, Atomic Energy Commission. Edward Wenk, Jr., National Council on Marine Resources and En- 218 220 222 224 225 JOINT HOUSE-SENATE COLLOQUIUM TO DISCUSS A NATIONAL POLICY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT WEDNESDAY, JULY 17, 1968 U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, Washington, D.C. The House of Representatives Committee on Science and Astronautics and the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs met in joint session, pursuant to call, in room S-407, Capitol Building, Hon. Henry M. Jackson and Hon. George P. Miller presiding as cochairmen. Cochairman MILLER. The meeting will come to order. We welcome you here. This morning we begin a unique experiment in congressional procedure. Several committee and subcommittee chairmen of the House and Senate, together with other members, are joining me here in an informal study session on a subject of great importance to each of us. A major reason for this method is to obviate certain jurisdictional limitations of the committees we represent. We want to collaborate in a survey of policies for environmental management in order that all of the committees concerned might gain fuller knowledge and understanding of the requirements for effective legislation and overview in this field. It is our hope that subsequent to this meeting we will keep each other better informed of developments, programs, and activities of our respective committees. By doing so, unnecessary duplication of effort may be avoided in what we recognize as a frequently overworked committee system. Moreover, the Congress as a whole should do a better job of legislating on the vital topic under consideration. If we are successful, or even partially so, I think it is reasonable to assume that Congress will subsequently want to carry this procedural innovation forward in other legislative subject areas of equal complexity. Today we are fortunate to have with us distinguished Cabinet Secretaries and the President's science adviser. Each is involved with important environmental activities affecting the management of resources, urban and rural developments, science and technology programs, and human health. We also are very pleased to welcome Mr. Laurance Rockefeller, a leader in the quest for environmental quality. I doubt that there have been many times when such an able and experienced group has been gathered together with Senators and Representatives in the cause of policy planning for the environment. In convening this colloquium, it was our expectation that the basic outcome would be an identification of the elements of a national policy for the environment. We seek the advice and counsel of our panelists as well as invited guests. We want to discuss the directions environmental policy should take in the years ahead to make our physical surroundings more stable, more productive, more healthful, and more esthetically pleasing for all our citizens. This colloquium, we believe to be a necessary step in the expanding congressional concern with the problems of environmental decay and social distress. We are most grateful to all of you who have come here to participate, and we shall listen with great attention and interest to your presentation. I am quite honored to be able to turn this meeting over now to Senator Jackson, who came to Congress just a couple years before I did, but became my mentor when I arrived here. Cochairman JACKSON. Thank you, George. I'm delighted to cochair this colloquium this morning and this afternoon with you. In recent years growing concern has been expressed over the need to incorporate the concept of "environmental quality" into the decision-making process of government. This is a popular idea. As a generalization it has great appeal. It doesn't take much courage, for example, to come out four square in favor of a quality life in a quality environment for all Americans as long as we don't get too specific about what we mean. When we do get specific, when we attempt to define what we mean and apply it, however, we run into considerable conflict. For example: In 1966 in the Transportation Act Congress adopted, a policy of protecting our parks, recreation areas, wildlife refuges, and historic sites from invasion by our growing transportation systems. Now, however, this strong policy has run up against the hard realities and is in the process of being whittled away by weakening amendments. This year we succeeded in committing a minimum of $200 million a year to the land and water conservation fund to support the acquisition of outdoor areas. But, we had a close call in the Senate when the provision for the dedication of offshore oil revenues to these public purposes was defeated. It was subsequently restored in the House-Senate conference. Again, conflicting interests and desires came into play. Other examples involving both legislation and administration in the fields of air and water pollution, public health, urban and rural redevelopment, technology control, and many others could be given. The point to be made, however, is that in our efforts to formulate a national policy for the environment, we face large and increasingly complex problems which affect a wide range of public and private interests. We also face problems that are themselves constantly changing and evolving. Perhaps, as a result of today's discussions and future deliberations, we may find that the concept of environmental quality as a national goal is not transferable into rigid policy guidelines. In any event, I believe we have to do a great deal more toward defining what we want and how we are going to get it. Some obvious questions are: What does the concept of "environment" mean? Does it refer to the natural world alone or does it include everything that affects the physical and mental health of man? What are the criteria for a good quality environment? Who should decide this and who should bear the costs involved? What is an appropriate division of responsibilities between the private and public sectors for environmental quality management? The basic point which these and many other relevant questions raise is whether we can act as a government to guarantee a quality environment for future generations. Fortunately, we are raising these questions at a point in time when we still have options, choices, and alternatives. Today we have the opportunity to hear from the Nation's foremost practitioners in the field of environmental management and in the "art of the possible." I am especially grateful to you all for taking time from your busy schedules to participate in this occasion. Since this is a departure from the usual hearing practice, I think we should agree on ground rules. This morning we shall hear brief statements from each of our panelists, then turn to questions and debate among the panel and members. In the afternoon, Dean Don K. Price, of Harvard University's John Fitzgerald Kennedy School of Government will comment on the morning session and open a discussion. We invite the audience to participate by submitting questions on cards available from the staff. These will be handed to the chairman and, time permitting, we shall obtain replies from the panelists and also the members present. The record will be kept open for four weeks. Any of you who wish to submit statements or observations are most welcome to do so. By now I think all of you have received several background documents, two of which are committee prints. The first, "Managing Our Environment," was issued by the House Science and Astronautics Committee. The second entitled "A National Policy for the Environment" was recently issued by the Senate Interior Committee. Additional copies are available on request. Now, I would like first of all to introduce our colleagues here. On my left, Congressman Daddario from Connecticut, and next to him, Congressman Fulton from Pennsylvania. And, on my right, the able and distinguished Senator from Maine, Senator Muskie, who has taken a lead in determining the full scope of problems dealing with the quality of our environment and has done so much as chairman of the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the Public Works Committee of the U.S. Senate. I notice just coming into the room, Congressman Blatnik, who has done yeoman work in the same area as a member of the House Public Works Committee of the House of Representatives. We are delighted, John, that you could come. Then, Senator Thomas Kuchel, the ranking and distinguished minority member of the Senate Interior Committee, who is a cosponsor 1 See app. 1, p. 87. with me of the bill, S. 2085, and who has done a terrific job on that committee. Next is Congressman Brown, who has taken a very keen interest in the work preceding today's colloquium and has also been most interested in the whole area that is under discussion. We are delighted, Congressman, that you could be here. Likewise, Congressman Mosher, to his right. We are very pleased to welcome you here and have you participate, and we know of your very keen appreciation of the topic. I don't need to introduce Laurance Rockefeller. That would be entirely out of order. I merely call on him now to open the panel discussion. I thought, gentlemen, that we would defer questions of the panelists until they have all made their presentation. Mr. Rockefeller, we are delighted to welcome you once again to Capitol Hill. STATEMENT OF LAURANCE S. ROCKEFELLER Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen. It is a privilege for me as a citizen to participate in this meeting of distinguished Members of the Congress and to have the opportunity to discuss with you some of our environmental problems. This is an extraordinarily timely and useful undertaking. The American people are vitally concerned, as never before, about what is happening to their land, their water, and their air. They want action to preserve and enhance their environment. They are looking to political leadership from the city halls to the Congress to the White House for continued and accelerated progress. There has also been extraordinary progress, of which we may be proud. Congress has enacted landmark legislation for land and water conservation, the Field Wilderness Act, air and water pollution control, and has created a score of new national parks and recreation areas. There has been a dramatic surge of action in the States. Since Governor Rockefeller's pioneering open space bond issue in 1960, 20 of the States have enacted special programs for a better environment. President Johnson has sent messages to the Congress on natural beauty. There has been a White House Conference on Natural Beauty, and a special task force. Most important of all, there is a strong and deep-running spirit of citizen action and concern for a better environment. I believe that an outline of these developments would be helpful to the deliberations of this group. However, rather than take your time in reviewing this history now, I am submitting a brief résumé of it which is available to you. I'm also submitting separately for the files of this study a series of documents which describe this recent history in more detail. Now I would like to draw a series of conclusions from this brief outline and from the events which underlie them, based on my experience as an interested citizen who has had the opportunity to participate in some of these efforts over the past 10 years. First, there is a strong and deep-seated concern among the American people for a better environment. The quality of our surroundings is emerging as a major national social goal. Obviously, the political |