Committee Prints

2. "Federal Air Pollution Research and Development: An Interim Report on Sulfur Oxides Pollution Abatement R. & D." House Report No. 91-79, March 13, 1969. Second Report by the Committee on Government Operations.

(a) Summary.-This report reviews the overall Federal air pollution abatement research and development program. It discusses in detail the need and existing methods for, and the status of Federal research on, sulfur dioxide pollution abatement. It also summarizes. Federal air pollution R. & D. appropriations and obligations, including those for abatement of sulfur oxide pollution. The report concludes that current abatement technologies in this area are inadequate and will be even more inadequate in the future. The report recommends that the Federal sulfur oxide pollution research and development plan, adopted by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare with the concurrence of the Budget Bureau and Office of Science and Technology in 1968, be evaluated by Federal agencies and non-Federal experts and revised and updated on a continuing basis. It recommends that interagency coordination of sulfur oxides pollution abatement R. & D. be pursued vigorously through a formal mechanism of coordination, and that the R. & D. plan be expanded to include all participating agencies and then examined for balance, gaps, and duplications.

(b) Benefits.-Significant benefits-economic, public health, and esthetic-follow from effective sulfur dioxide control. It is not possible to estimate the dollar value of the committee's contribution.

3. "Disposal of Rights in Indian Tribal Lands Without Tribal Consent." House Report No. 91-78, March 13, 1969. Third Report by the Committee on Government Operations.

(a) Summary. This report describes the Interior Department's proposal to abolish the right of so-called unorganized Indian tribes to veto right-of-way grants made by the Interior Department across tribal lands. While existing statutes require tribal consent in such cases only where the tribe is organized under the Indian Reorganization Act or the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act, the Interior Department since 1951 has by regulation required such consent for rights of way over lands of every tribe. In April of 1967 the Department, despite opposition by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, published a notice of proposed rulemaking which would have reinstated the situation prevailing before 1951, thereby reversing the national policy to entrust the Indians with more, rather than less, responsibility to manage their own affairs.

The report points out that most of the Indians of the United States do not belong to tribes organized under the Indian Reorganization Act or the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act, and that tribes not so organized own more than half of all the tribal Indian land in the country. Most of the tribes not under the IRA or OIWA maintain organizations of their own creation, some of which are as strong as or stronger than IRA or OWIA organizations. The Interior Department proposal

would have denied approximately 250,000 Indians owning more than 19.7 million acres of tribal land the right to veto the granting by the Secretary of the Interior of unwanted rights-of-way over their property. Rights-of-way may be used not only to build transportation or communication facilities on Indian land-freeways, railroads, electric transmission lines, telephone cables, etc.-but also for dams, reservoirs, and thermal electric powerplants, without limit on the acreage or term of years of the right-of-way grant.

The report recommended that the present regulations be retained and that consideration be given to amending the present law so as to require tribal consent for all right-of-way grants of tribal land. The Interior Department withdrew the proposal to revise the regulations.

(b) Benefits. The preservation of the Indian consent requirement for rights-of-way grants across all tribal lands will result in definite. although not presently measurable, monetary benefits, since this requirement substantially strengthens the tribes' bargaining position with utility companies, highway departments, and others seeking rights-of-way across their lands. The benefits will redound not only to the tribes and their members, but also the Federal Treasury. Unconsented right-of-way grants would have given rise to Indian claims against the United States; whereas continued hard bargaining by the Indians with right-of-way applicants, made possible through retention of the consent requirement, will produce local tribal income to replace Federal financial assistance.

4. "The Permit for Landfill in Hunting Creek: A Debacle in Conservation." House Report No. 91-113, March 24, 1969. Fourth Report by the Committee on Government Operations.

(a) Summary. This report reviews the circumstances surrounding the issuance by the Corps of Engineers of a permit to fill in approximately 9.4 acres of submerged land in Hunting Creek, an area of the Potomac Estuary south of Alexandria, Va. The Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park Service, whose comments on the application for the fill permit were requested pursuant to the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, in 1964 recommended against the fill, and their recommendations were endorsed by the Secretary of the Interior. However, in 1967, an Assistant Secretary of the Interior withdrew the Fish and Wildlife Service objections, and his withdrawal was affirmed by the Under Secretary of the Interior, without regard to the surveys and investigations of the Fish and Wildlife Service. The Corps of Engineers and Department of the Army issued the fill permit because it would not interfere with navigation, and because they believed the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service had withdrawn their objections.

The committee concluded that the permit was issued in violation of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, which requires that the reports submitted by the Secretary of the Interior on proposals to modify waters under Federal jurisdiction be based on surveys and investigations of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The report recommended that the permit be revoked.

(b) Benefits.-On April 13, 1970, the Department of the Army revoked the Hunting Creek landfill permit. The committee's report, on

page 47, estimated that the permit, if allowed to remain in force, would have conferred on the permittee a windfall as high as $129,050 per acre, or a total of $1,213,070. The latter amount gives some indication of the public values which the committee's action was instrumental in saving. In addition, the report inspired the Secretary of the Interior to establish a new policy to protect the Potomac River from future fills, dredging, and other degradation. It motivated the Corps of Engineers to adopt its new policy of environmental protection, described more fully in item 7, below.

(c) Hearings.-Four days of hearings were held (June 24 and July 8 and 9, 1968, and March 10, 1969), and the transcripts were printed.

5. "The Rural Electrification Administration's Bulletin Inhibiting Political Activities by Its Borrowers and Their Employees. House Report No. 91-550, October 7, 1969. Ninth Report by the Committee on Government Operations.

(a) Summary.-On May 19, 1969, the Rural Electrification Administration issued a Bulletin "prohibiting" its borrowers from violating certain Federal clean election laws or engaging in "similar activities" in connection with State or local elections, whether or not specifically prohibited by State law. The bulletin stated REA loans contracts would contain provisions making violations of Federal and State laws against political activities acts of default under the loan contract and mortgage, and that such violation, in addition to other available. remedies, would give the REA the right to require the dismissal of any borrower's employee who knowingly participated in any such violation.

This report summarizes the circumstances surrounding issuance of the REA bulletin. It appears to have been issued as an administrative overreaction to one isolated case of possible violation of clean election laws by an REA borrower (a small telephone company owned by one individual). The report concluded that the bulletin was unwise and unlawful, in that the REA has no authority to enforce either Federal or State criminal law, or to prohibit acts permitted by State law in connection with State elections, or to add the penalties of accelerating the due date for repayment of the loan, mortgage foreclosure, and discharge of the borrower's employees, to the fines and imprisonments provided by Federal and State law for illicit political activities. During the course of the subcommittee investigation, REA modified the bulletin to state merely that "it is against the policy of REA for REA borrower corporations to engage in illegal political activities” and by dropping the prohibitory language and penalty clauses. REA witnesses at the subcommittee hearing, however, continued to claim the power to impose sanctions on borrowers violating REA policy.

The report recommended prompt rescission of the bulletin by REA, and if REA failed to act, by the Secretary of Agriculture. It also recommended that the Secretary of Agriculture examine the adequacy of legal advice furnished to the REA Administrator and take necessary action to improve it.

Pursuant to the committee's recommendations, the REA Administrator revoked the bulletin and the Secretary of Agriculture ordered a new system for review of legal opinions on important legal issues relating to the Rural Electrification Administration.

(b) Benefits. It is not possible to estimate the monetary benefits of the committee's report. However, the rescission of the Bulletin may prevent great financial harm to borrowers or their employees who might become involved in alleged illegal political activities. In any event, the rescission of the Bulletin has eased the fears of many borrowers that their involvement in political activities might cause financial loss to them. Furthermore, the institution of the new system of legal review of REA matters may save substantial moneys which might be wasted by poor or inadequate legal advice. Basically, the committee prevented ŘÊA from undermining the very concept of political freedom under law, which is basic to the American system of government, and which must be respected by administrators if the system is to function. The committee's report was extensively quoted and relied on in floor debate by Senators who succeeded in deleting from S. 3387 (a bill which would amend the Rural Electrification Act to provide additional financing for the rural telephone program) a provision which would, in effect, have enacted the REA Bulletin into law. 116 Congressional Record 4916-4925 (daily edition Apr. 2, 1970).

6. "Environmental Dangers of Open-Air Testing of Lethal Chemicals." House Report No. 91-633, November 12, 1969. Tenth Report by the Committee on Government Operations.

(a) Summary. In this report the committee describes the accidental killing and injury of 6,000 sheep as a result of accidental escape of VX nerve gas from Dugway Proving Grounds, Utah, during a test involving spraying of 320 gallons of this poison from an airplane. The inhalation of less than one milligram (one twenty-eight thousandth of an ounce) of nerve gas is sufficient to kill a human being. The report also describes the Army's subsequent denials of responsibility, the investigation, the payment of damages ($376,685 for the sheep and $198,309 for damage to land), and the Army's final acceptance of responsibility. The committee report recommends that there be no further open-air tests of lethal chemical warfare compounds by airplane sprays or in large quantities, that other open-air poison gas tests be monitored by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and that there be greatly expanded public disclosure of the dates and times of proposed tests, the substances to be tested, and their toxicity and antidotes.

(b) Benefits. After the committee's report the Army suspended outdoor tests of lethal chemical warfare compounds. Although the Army has refused to state that it will not conduct future outdoor testing of such lethal compounds by airplane spraying or in large quantities, it has not, so far as this committee is informed, done such testing since the committee's report. Elimination of open air tests of poison gas from airplanes or in large quantities will prevent recurrence of these hazards to life and resulting damage payments. Following the committee's hearings, Congress enacted section 409 of the Military Appropriations Authorization Act (Public Law 91-121) requiring (a) semi-annual reports from the Secretary of Defense to Congress on the amounts spent for research, development, testing, evaluation

and procurement of chemical and biological warfare agents, (b) restricting the transportation and testing of lethal chemical and biological warfare agents, (c) restricting deployment and storage outside the United States of such agents, and (d) prohibiting any testing, development, transportation, storage, or disposal of any lethal chemical or biological warfare agent outside the United States which the Secretary of State determines will violate international law.

On November 25, 1969, the President renounced any first use of chemical agents and any use at all by the United States of biological and bacteriological agents as weapons of war. On February 14, 1970, the President renounced "offensive preparations for the use of toxins as a method of warfare." On August 19, 1970, he resubmitted to the Senate, for ratification, the "Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous, or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, signed at Geneva June 17, 1925." The protocol was pending before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at the close of the 91st Congress.

7. "Unauthorized Bureau of Land Management Subpena Regulations." House Report No. 91-916, March 18, 1970, Twentieth Report by the Committee on Government Operations.

(a) Summary-The Department of the Interior amended its regulations to provide for use of subpenas duces tecum and subpenas for discovery depositions in connection with public land hearings, although Congress had never authorized subpenas for these purposes. The Conservation and Natural Resources Subcommittee informed the Secretary of the Interior of the apparent illegality. The Department agreed that the amendment was invalid and revoked it.

The report recommended that the Interior Department make a study of the experience of the Bureau of Land Management during the time the invalid amendment was in force and during an equivalent period immediately preceding that period, and advise the committee of whether it found any necessity for the use of subpenas duces tecum and subpenas for discovery.

(b) Benefits.-Revocation of the illegal regulations will help protect the liberties of the people against unlawful administrative conduct, and prevent unnecessary costs which may result from litigation challenging them. It is not feasible to estimate the monetary value of these benefits.

8. "Our Waters and Wetlands: How the Corps of Engineers Can Help Prevent Their Destruction and Pollution." House Report No. 91-917, March 18, 1970. Twenty-First Report by the Committee on Government Operations.

(a) Summary.-The Corps of Engineers is charged by Congress with the duty of protecting the Nation's navigable waters. The River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401, et seq.) forbids the creation of obstructions to the navigable capacity of any waters of the United States not affirmatively authorized by Congress and prohibits landfills,

« iepriekšējā Turpināt »

Grāmatas