I would like to take these bills in the following order:

S. 2975, concerning eye protective devices; H.R. 12673, concerning blood banks in the District; H.R. 12671, concerning employment of minors; and, finally, S. 2820, relating to amendments to the Industrial Safety Act.

Before calling our first witness, I will submit for the record at this time a copy of the staff memorandum outlining these bills. (The staff memorandum referred to follows:)

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

DECEMBER 10, 1969.

Subject: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Public Health, Education, Welfare and Safety, Wednesday, December 10, 1969, on H.R. 12671, S. 2975, H.R. 12673 and S. 2820.

Three of the bills being heard by the Subcommittee have been approved by the House. They are as follows:

H.R. 12671, to encourage the employment of minors in the District of Columbia during the summer and other school vacation periods. Passed House July 28, 1969. S. 2975, to require the wearing of eye protective devices when participating in certain vocational industrial arts and chemical laboratory courses in District of Columbia schools. An identical bill, H.R. 9528, passed the House on November 24, 1969.

H.R. 12673, to authorize the transfer of certain blood products within the District of Columbia. Passed House October 27, 1969.

The fourth bill to be considered by the Subcommittee is S. 2820 which would amend the District of Columbia Industrial Safety Act to broaden protections and to increase penalties. This bill has not been considered by the House.

JACK W. LEWIS, Counsel.

Senator SPONG. There will be incorporated in the record at this point S. 2975.

(S. 2975 follows:)

91ST CONGRESS 1ST SESSION

S. 2975

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 30, 1969

Mr. SPONG introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia

A BILL

To require certain persons to wear approved eye protective devices when participating in certain vocational, industrial arts, and chemical-physical laboratory courses of instruction in the District of Columbia

1

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That every student, teacher, or other person participating in, 4 teaching, or observing any of the following courses of instruc5 tion in any school in the District of Columbia shall be required 6 to wear industrial quality eye protective devices during such 7 time as shall be prescribed by regulations issued by the Dis8 trict of Columbia Council in accordance with section 3 of this

9 Act

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

2

(1) vocational, technical, industrial arts, chemical,

or chemical-physical courses of instruction involving

exposure to (A) hot molten metals, or other molten materials; (B) milling, sawing, turning, shaping, cutting, grinding, or stamping of any solid materials; (C) heat treatment, tempering, or kiln firing of any metal or other material; (D) gas or electric arc welding, or other forms of welding processes; (E) repair or servicing of any vehicle; or (F) caustic or explosive materials; or

(2) chemical, physical, or combined chemical-physical laboratory courses of instruction involving caustic or explosive materials, hot liquids or solids, injurious radiations, or other hazards.

SEC. 2. The eye protective devices required by the first 15 section of this Act may be furnished to all students and 16 teachers, purchased and sold at cost to students and teachers, 17 or made available for a moderate rental fee, and shall be 18 furnished for all visitors to shops and laboratories wherein 19 such courses of instruction are held, for use by them in 20 accordance with the provisions of this Act. The devices required to be worn by this Act shall meet the standards of 22 the United States of America Standard Safety Code for

21

23 Head, Eye, and Respiratory Protection, Z87.1-1968, and

24

subsequent revisions thereof, approved by the United States 25 of America Standards Institute, Incorporated.

1

3

SEC. 3. The District of Columbia Council is authorized

2 to issue such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the

3 provisions of this Act.

4

5

any

SEC. 4. As used in this Act, the term "school" means

school under the control of the District of Columbia 6 Board of Education, any college, school, or other vocational

7

or educational facility under the control of the Board of 8 Higher Education, any private school, and any college, 9 university, or other vocational or educational institution or facility in the District of Columbia.

10

11

SEC. 5. This Act shall take effect upon the expiration

12 of ninety days following the date of its enactment.

Senator SPONG. Our first witness is Mr. William A. Robinson, Assistant Corporation Counsel of the District of Columbia. Good morning, Mr. Robinson.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM A. ROBINSON, ASSISTANT CORPORATION COUNSEL, GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Mr. ROBINSON. Good morning, Mr. Chairman.

I am William A. Robinson, Assistant Corporation Counsel, District of Columbia government.

In a letter dated December 9, 1969, the District government has set forth its position on the bill S. 2975 to require, in effect, the wearing of protective eye devices by students engaged in certain industrial and Vocational courses in all of the schools of the District of Columbia.

Senator SPONG. Would you like this letter admitted into the record in its entirety, Mr. Robinson?

Mr. ROBINSON. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman; we would like to have it included in the record.

Senator SPONG. We accept it.

(The letter referred to follows:)

GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

EXECUTIVE OFFICE,

Washington, D.C., December 9, 1969.

Hon. JOSEPH D. TYDINGS,

Chairman, Committee on the District of Columbia,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR TYDINGS: The Commissioner of the District of Columbia has for report S. 2975, a bill "To require certain persons to wear approved eye protective

devices when participating in certain vocational, industrial arts, and chemicalphysical laboratory courses of instruction in the District of Columbia."

The bill would provide that every student, teacher, or other person participating in, teaching, or observing certain specified courses of instruction in any school in the District of Columbia shall wear, in accordance with such regulations as the District of Columbia Council shall prescribe, industrial quality eye protective devices. The bill would also require that such protective devices be furnished without charge or at cost, or be made available for a moderate rental fee, to students and teachers. S. 2975 is generally patterned after the Model School Eye Safety Law.

Although the Commissioner of the District of Columbia fully endorses the highly desirable objectives of S. 2975, he recommends against the enactment of the bill in the belief it is unnecessary. The Commissioner is of the view that the District of Columbia Council presently possesses, under its general powers to adopt such police regulations as may be necessary for the protection of lives, limbs, health, comfort and quiet of persons within the District pursuant to the Joint Resolution approved February 26, 1892 (D.C. Code, sec. 1–266), sufficient authority to require the wearing of approved eye protective devices to the same extent as is authorized by the bill.

The District of Columbia Council concurs in the views expressed by the Commissioner in this report.

Sincerely yours,

THOMAS W. FLETCHER, Assistant to the Commissioner, For: WALTER E. WASHINGTON. Commissioner.

Mr. ROBINSON. I would like to point out, in the report which the District government has submitted, that the following statement is made:

The Commissioner fully endorses the highly desirable objectives of S. 2975 but he recommends against the enactment of the bill in the belief that it is unnecessary. The Commissioner is of the view that the District of Columbia Council presently possesses, under its general powers to adopt such police regulations as may be necessary for the protection of lives, limbs, health, comfort and quiet of persons within the District of Columbia, pursuant to the Joint Resolution of 1892, sufficient authority to require the wearing of approved eye protective devices to the same extent as is authorized by the bill.

I understand that statements by the District of Columbia Council and by our Industrial Safety Board have been submitted for the record, also.

Senator SPONG. Well, thank you, Mr. Robinson.

If the Council has the authority to require these safety devices, why has it not acted?

Mr. ROBINSON. I believe it is under study by the Council. As you know, a somewhat similar bill has passed the House; and while the Council has not definitively acted upon this bill, I believe that it is under consideration at the present time.

Senator SPONG. All right. Thank you.
Mr. O'Neil?

STATEMENT OF JAMES E. O'NEIL, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF INDUSTRIAL SERVICES, PREVENTION OF BLINDNESS SOCIETY

Mr. O'NEIL. Mr. Chairman, my name is James E. O'Neil.

I am director of industrial services with the National Society for the Prevention of Blindness in New York City.

I think it would be very important to briefly state at the outset here that neither the National Society nor its affiliates across the country gain or profit in any way from sales of safety eyewear. Our premise