PUBLIC WORKS FOR WATER, POLLUTION CONTROL, AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS FOR 78-251 O Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations PART 4, VOLUME 1 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1972 EX OFFICIO MEMBERS ON RIVERS AND HARBORS ITEMS JENNINGS RANDOLPH, West Virginia EX OFFICIO MEMBERS ON ATOMIC ENERGY ITEMS CLINTON P. ANDERSON, New Mexico GEORGE D. AIKEN, Vermont PROFESSIONAL STAFF (II) The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., in room 1114, New Senate Office Building, Hon. John C. Stennis (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Stennis, Bible, Young, Hruska, and Allott. NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES SUBCOMMITTEE PROCEDURE Senator HRUSKA. The subcommittee will come to order. The Chairman, Senator Stennis, has asked this Senator to preside over the meeting this morning. It is well known to all of you, I am sure, that Senator Stennis is one of the busiest and most important men in the Senate because of his tremendously large role, not only in appropriations but also as chairman of the Armed Services Committee. To what extent I can release him of a part of his duties and at the same time subserve the goal that both of us have in public works appropriations, I am happy to undertake the assignment that I have today. We have a very long list of witnesses this morning. We have a similarly long witness list for this afternoon. It will take some self-restraint on the part of witnesses and some self-restraint on the part of the committee members who will appear here in order to get this task accomplished and yet done fruitfully, even though it will have to be done somewhat speedily. Therefore, I am asking that wherever possible the statements, prepared statements, be submitted to the committee, together with a highlighting of the testimony of each witness. It is essential that the highlighting will be less extensive in point of time than the reading of the statement would involve because unless that is true we will have to impose a time limitation in order that we will be fair to those witnesses who will be called upon later in the day. I am informed the first witness will be Senator Curtis of Nebraska. He is first only because Senator Pearson, who was scheduled to be first, is on his way back from Kansas, where he has made public appearances in regard to the Regional Mental Health Meeting held in Newton, Kans. He asks that the witnesses from Kansas at this morning's session be informed to that effect, and to be informed that he has contacted Senator Stennis as well as myself. He regrets that he cannot be here in person. His prepared statement is quite extensive, and without objection being registered it will be submitted and in corporated into the record at this point. Copies are available for those who would like one. He expresses his regret that he cannot be here. Both Senators Pearson and Dole cordially invite each member of the Kansas group to come to their office and discuss specific questions with members of their staffs and this information is given to me by David Seaton who is the press secretary for Mr. Pearson. PREPARED STATEMENTS OF SENATORS PEARSON AND DOLE Therefore, this statement of Senator Pearson's will appear in the record at this point. Immediately following his statement will be the prepared statement of Senator Robert Dole dealing with the same subject matter. (The statements follows:) STATEMENT OF SENATOR JAMES B. PEARSON BALANCED GROWTH REQUIRES WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENTS Mr. Chairman, I appreciate having the opportunity again this year to testify in support of flood control and related water projects in my state. Since coming to the Senate in 1962, I have followed closely the development of water resources in Kansas. During that period, we have seen 23 new flood control projects authorized for construction by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, there have been 7 irrigation and drainage projects under the Bureau of Reclamation and 29 small watershed conservation projects. As a result of actions by the Appropriations Committee, a total of $374 million has been appropriated to carry out these projects. I cite these figures not with false pride, but to show the strength of our commitment to water resource development. This commitment remains strong. It is related to the growing national concern for the development of rural America. The President in his statement of February 1 on rural development, stated, "All Americans have a high stake in rural development, for the problems which many rural areas are now experiencing are directly linked to those of our cities and suburbs." Congress has adopted in the Agricultural Act of 1970 and the Rural Development Act of 1972 a similar commitment in law to improve the quality of life in rural America. A great deal remains undone. We must still seek to stem the migration from rural America into our already overcrowded cities. The creation of new employment opportunities in rural America is a challenge we must meet. It is estimated more than 50,000 new jobs a year will be needed to provide adequate employment opportunities to stem the outmigration from rural America. It is essential, Mr. Chairman, to approach this question of balanced national growth as between urban and rural America with a broad and comprehensive viewpoint. Employment opportunities are basic, but it is not sufficient to address ourselves to these alone. Among the other priorities, water resource development ranks very high. Anyone who flies from place to place in Kansas as I often do can testify that the very color of Kansas has been changed to reflect the blue and green hues of re-ervoirs and conservation ponds glittering in the sunlight. In fact, the development of our water resources has been one of the most successful achievements of government. Environmental Quality In this arca where the federal government has led in developing natural resources, it is important to recognize that as we make progress, we also create new challenges for ourselves. One of these is environmental quality. I think it is appropriate to note that the Rural Development Act adopted recently by the Senate provides greatly expanded authority to federal agencies for the abatement of pollution in agricultural areas. I think it is also appropriate to note that the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, in response to legitimate environmental concerns, has begun to study the application of its considerable technical and economic planning capabilities to plan for long range pollution control in metropolitan areas. I think it is appropriate, too, to note that the U. S. Soil Conservation Service has adopted a set of goals which include the use of its expertise in reducing land and property losses from flash flooding in urban communities. These are examples of the way in which the federal government is responding to the widespread concern for environmental quality. Congress should, in my judgment, consider with care the expanding economic costs of cleaning up our natural environment in taking its decisions on funding for cach public works agency for fiscal 1973. Federal-State-Local Cooperation I would like, Mr. Chairman, to express a strong and continuing interest in the important business of cooperation between our federal agencies and their counterparts at the state and local levels. Because of their size and the scope of their responsibilities, and because they work actively |