CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE
December 20, 1969
Page 40415
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969 -- CONFERENCE REPORT
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, I submit a report of the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the House to the bill (S. 1075) to establish a national policy for the environment; to authorize studies, surveys, and research relating to ecological systems, natural resources, and the quality of the human environment; and to establish a Board of Environmental Quality Advisers. I ask unanimous consent for the present consideration of the report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report will be read for the information of the Senate.
The assistant legislative clerk read the report.
(For conference report, see House proceedings of December 17, 1969, pp. 39701-39702, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the present consideration of the report?
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the report.
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, the House amended the bill as passed by the Senate by striking all after the enacting clause and substituting the text of a new bill. The House bill included provisions similar to those of title III of the Senate bill which would establish a Council on Environmental Quality. It also included a short policy statement, but it omitted most of the provisions of titles I and II of the Senate bill.
The conference report represents a sound compromise worked out in three meetings of the conferees. It is a strong measure which will be an important step toward evolving a sound program of environmental management for the Nation.
S. 1075, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, was passed by the Senate on July 10, 1969, had three major titles. Title I provides a "declaration of national environmental policy" which set national goals for environmental management and established supplementary operating procedures for all Federal agencies to follow in planning and decision making which have an impact on man's environment. Title II authorized certain research and data gathering functions. Title III authorized the creation of a three-member Board of Environmental Quality Advisers in the Executive Office of the President.
S. 1075 was amended and passed by the House of Representatives on September 23, 1969. As amended and passed by the House, S. 1075 consisted of one title which authorized the creation of
a five-member Council on Environmental Quality.
On October 8, 1969, the Senate disagreed to the amendments of the House of Representatives, agreed to the House's request for a conference, and authorized the Chair to appoint the conferees on the part of the Senate. Prior to the Senate's agreeing to the House's request for a conference on S. 1075, and in connection with debate on S. 7, the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1969, there was a discussion by members of the Senate Public Works Committee and the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee on the relationship between title II of S. 7 and the provisions of S. 1075 as passed by the Senate on July 10, 1969. As a result of that discussion, it was agreed that the Senate conferees on S. 7 and on S. 1075 would seek certain agreed upon changes in each measure in conference committee with the House of Representatives.
The purpose of the agreed upon changes in S. 7 and in S. 1075, which to some extent, dealt with similar subject matter are set out in the October 8, 1969, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD at pages 29050 through 29089.
It was understood during the discussion of this matter on October 8 that the Senate conferees on S. 1075 would make every possible effort to gain House agreement to the text of S. 1075 as passed by the Senate as well as to the agreed-upon changes discussed on the floor. This understanding was referred to in a motion offered by the chairman of the Interior Committee that the conferees on S. 1075 be instructed to insist upon the provisions of S. 1075 as passed by the Senate and as modified by the agreed-upon changes discussed in connection with debate on S. 7. As was stated on the floor in connection with this motion.
It is also understood, however, that the purpose of a conference committee is to compromise and adjust differences between the House and Senate passed bills, and that the final product of the conference committee will probably have to involve some changes in the language of both the House and Senate passed bills on S. 1075. It is, however, the hope and the intent of all concerned on the Senate side that these changes will not in any way affect the substance of what has been agreed upon. (October 8, 1969, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, page 29087.)
Mr. President, S. 1075 as agreed upon by the conference committee is very close to the bill as passed by the Senate. Most of the substantive provisions of the Senate passed bill have been retained. In addition, most of the substantive provisions of the agreed-upon changes which were discussed on October 8 were adopted in the report of the conference committee.
Mr. President, I might point out that during the conference, the junior Senator from Washington had an opportunity to work with the junior Senator from Maine, who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Works which is directly involved in the environmental area. It was agreed that certain statements should be adjusted in the statement of the Senate managers and this has been done. The junior Senator from Maine will comment on that in a moment.
The changes the conference committee made in S. 1075 as passed by the Senate and as agreed upon are reflected in the section-by-section analysis of the conference report accompanying the statement of the managers on the part of the Senate. The changes are also discussed in a separate attachment, titled "Major Changes in S. 1075 as Passed by the Senate."
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the major changes in S. 1075, as passed by the Senate, be printed at the conclusion of my remarks, together with a section-by-section analysis of the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. DODD in the chair). Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibits 1 and 2.)
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, it is my view that S. 1075 as passed by the Senate and now, as agreed upon by the conference committee, is the most important and far-reaching environmental and conservation measure ever enacted by the Congress.
Mr. President, it is my view that S. 1075 as passed by the Senate and now, as agreed upon by the conference committee, is the most important and far-reaching conservation-environmental measure ever acted upon by the Congress.
This measure is important because it provides four new approaches to dealing with environmental problems on a preventive and an anticipatory basis. As Members of the Senate are aware, too much of our past history of dealing with environmental problems has been focused on efforts to deal with "crises," and to "reclaim" our resources from past abuses.
First. The first new approach is the statement of national policy and the declaration of national goals found in section 101.
In many respects, the only precedent and parallel to what is proposed in S. 1075 is in the Full Employment Act of 1946, which declared an historic national policy on management of the economy and established the Council of Economic Advisers. It is my view that S. 1075 will provide an equally important national policy for the management of America's future environment.
A statement of environmental policy is more than a statement of what we believe as a people and as a nation. It establishes priorities and gives expression to our national goals and aspirations. It provides a statutory foundation to which administrators may refer to it for guidance in making decisions which find environmental values in conflict with other values.
What is involved is a congressional declaration that we do not intend, as a government or as a people, to initiate actions which endanger the continued existence or the health of mankind: That we will not intentionally initiate actions which will do irreparable damage to the air, land, and water which support life on earth.
An environmental policy is a policy for people. Its primary concern is with man and his future. The basic principle of the policy is that we must strive in all that we do, to achieve a standard of excellence in man's relationships to his physical surroundings. If there are to be departures from this standard of excellence they should be exceptions to the rule and the policy. And as exceptions, they will have to be justified in the light of public scrutiny as required by section 102.
Second. To insure that the policies and goals defined in this act are infused into the ongoing programs and actions of the Federal Government, the act also establishes some important "action-forcing" procedures. Section 102 authorizes and directs all Federal agencies, to the fullest extent possible, to administer their existing laws, regulations, and policies in conformance with the policies set forth in this act. It also directs all agencies to assure consideration of the environmental impact of their actions in decision making. It requires agencies which propose actions to consult with appropriate Federal and State agencies having jurisdiction or expertise in environmental matters and to include any comments made by those agencies which outline the environmental considerations involved with such proposals.
Taken together, the provisions of section 102 directs any Federal agency which takes action that it must take into account environmental management and environmental quality considerations.
Third. The act in title II establishes a Council on Environment Quality in the Executive Office of the President. This Council will provide an institution and an organizational focus at the highest level for the concerns of environmental management. It will provide the President with objective advice and a continuing and comprehensive overview of the fragmented and bewildering Federal jurisdiction involved in some way with the environment. The Council's activities in this area will be complemented by the support of the Office of Environmental Quality proposed in the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1969.
The Council also will establish a system for monitoring environmental indicators, and maintaining records on the status of the environment. The Council will insure that there will be complete and reliable data on environmental indicators available for the anticipation of emerging problems and trends. This data will provide a basis for sound management.
Fourth. Finally in section 201, S. 1075 requires the submission by the President to the Congress and to the American people of an annual environmental quality report. The purpose of this report is to provide a statement of progress, to establish some baselines, and to tell us how well -- or as some suspect how bad -- we are doing in managing the environment -- the Nation's life support system.
It is the clear intent of the Senate conferees that the annual report should be referred in the Senate to all committees which have exercised jurisdiction over any part of the subject matter contained therein. Absent specific language on the reference of the report, the report would be referred pursuant to the Senate rules. It is the committee's understanding that under the rules all relevant committees may be referred copies of the annual report.
This was the intent of the Senate when S. 1075 was passed. In the section-by-section analysis of section 303 of S. 1075 at page 26 of the committee report No. 91-296 it is expressly stated that:
It is anticipated that the annual report and the recommendations made by the President would be a vehicle for oversight hearings and hearings by the appropriate legislative committees of the Congress.
The Senate conferees intend that under the language of the conference report, the annual report would be referred to all appropriate committees of the Senate.
Mr. President, one of the provisions of the Senate passed bill which the conference committee agreed to change requires special comment. Section 101(b) of S. 1075 provided that:
(b) The Congress recognizes that each person has a fundamental and inalienable right to a healthful environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment.
The conference committee changed this provision so that it now reads: (b) The Congress recognizes that each person should enjoy a healthful environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment.
I opposed this change in conference committee because it is my belief that the language of the Senate passed bill reaffirmed what is already the law of this land; namely, that every person does have a fundamental and an inalienable right to a healthful environment. If this is not the law of this land, if an individual in this great country of ours cannot at the present time protect his right and the right of his family to a healthful environment, then it is my view that some fundamental changes are in order.
To dispell any doubts about the existence of this right, I intend to introduce an amendment to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as soon as it is signed by the President. This amendment will propose a detailed congressional declaration of a statutory bill of environmental right.
Another provision which should be brought to the attention of the Senate is section 102(e) of the conference report. This section directs all Federal agencies to:
Recognize the worldwide and long-range character of environmental problems and, where consistent with the foreign policy of the United States, lend appropriate support to initiatives, resolutions, and programs designed to maximize international cooperation in anticipating and preventing a decline in the quality of mankind's world environment.
This provision was added to the bill as an amendment I offered in the Senate Interior Committee in June. The purpose of the provision is to give statutory authority to all Federal agencies to participate in the development of a positive, forward looking program of international cooperation in dealing with the environmental problems all nations and all people share.
Cooperation in dealing with these problems is necessary, for the problems are urgent and serious.
Cooperation is also possible because the problems of the environment do not, for the most part, raise questions related to ideology, national security and the balance of world power.
We must seek solutions to environmental problems on an international level because they are international in origin and scope. The earth is a common resource, and cooperative effort will be necessary to protect it. Perhaps also, in the common cause of environmental management, the nations of the earth will find a little more sympathy and understanding for one another.
I am hopeful that the United Nations Conference in 1972 on "the Problems of the Human Environment" will unite leaders of nations throughout the world in the effort of achieving solutions to international environmental problems. I am, however, concerned that at the present time the Federal Government is not doing enough to plan and prepare for the 1972 U.N. Conference. Section 102 (E) of the conference report on S.1075 provides the Federal agencies and the administration with the authority to make a positive and a far-reaching contribution to this international effort to deal with this critical and growing international problem. I am hopeful that this authority will be utilized.
Mr. President, there is a new kind of revolutionary movement underway in this country. This movement is concerned with the integrity of man's life support system -- the human environment.
The stage for this movement is shifting from what had once been the exclusive province of a few conservation organizations to the campus, to the urban ghettos, and to the suburbs.
In recent months, the Nation's youth, in high schools, colleges, and universities across the country, have been taking up the banner of environmental awareness and have been seeking measures designed to control technology, and to develop new environmental policies which reflect the full range of diverse values and amenities which man seeks from his environment.
S. 1075 is a response by the Congress to the concerns the Nation's youth are expressing. It makes clear that Congress is responsive to the problems of the future. While the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 is not a panacea, it is a starting point. A great deal more, however, remains to be done by the Federal Government, both in the form of legislation and executive action, if mankind and human dignity are not to be ground down in the years ahead by the expansive and impersonal technology modern science has created.
Mr. President, the inadequacy of present knowledge, policies, and institutions for environmental management is reflected in our Nation's history, in our national attitudes, and in our contemporary life. It touches every aspect of man's existence. It threatens, it degrades, and destroys the quality life which all men seek.
We see increasing evidence of this inadequacy all around us: haphazard urban and suburban growth; crowding, congestion, and conditions within our central cities which result in civil unrest and detract from man's social and psychological well-being; the loss of valuable open spaces; inconsistent and often, incoherent rural and urban land-use policies; critical air and water pollution problems; diminishing recreational opportunity; continuing soil erosion; the degradation of unique ecosystems; needless deforestation; the decline and extinction of fish and wildlife species; faltering and poorly designed transportation systems; poor architectural design and ugliness in public and private structures; rising levels of noise; the continued proliferation of pesticides and chemicals without adequate consideration of the consequences; radiation hazards; thermal pollution; an increasingly ugly landscape cluttered with billboards, powerlines and junkyards; growing scarcity of essential resources; and many, many other environmental quality problems.
A primary function of Government is to improve the institutional policy and the legal framework for dealing with these problems. S. 1075 as agreed to by the conference committee is an important step toward this end.
There should be no doubt of our capability to cope with environmental problems. The historic success of Apollo 11 last month demonstrates that if we -- as a nation and as a people -- commit our talents and resources to a goal we can do the impossible.
If we can send men to the moon, we can clean our rivers and lakes, and if we can transmit television pictures from another planet, we can monitor and improve the quality of the air our children breathe and the open spaces they play in.
The needs and the aspirations of future generations make it our duty to build a sound and operable foundation of national objectives for the management of our resources for our children and their children. The future of succeeding generations in this country is in our hands. It will be shaped by the choices we make. We will not, and they cannot escape the consequences of our choices.
Mr. President, I believe that the bill agreed upon by the conferees is a sound measure. This measure will be an important step toward building a capability within the Federal Government to cope with present and impending environmental problems.
Problems of environmental management may well prove to be the most difficult and the most important problems we have ever faced. I urge the Senate to prepare the Federal Establishment to face them. I urge the approval of the conference report.
EXHIBIT 1
MAJOR CHANGES IN S. 1075 AS PASSED BY THE SENATE
TITLE
The title of S. 1075 as passed by the Senate was amended to reflect the major changes in the bill agreed to by the Conference Committee. These were the deletion of Title II and changing the name of the "Board" to "Council."
Section 1
No change was made in the "short title." Section 2
The statement of "purpose" is unchanged except that it was agreed that the new institution created in the Executive Office of the President would be designated as the "Council on Environmental Quality" rather than a "Board of Environmental Quality Advisors" as in the Senate passed bill. All other references to the "Board" were also changed to "Council."
TITLE I Section 101 (a)
Section 101(a) of the Senate passed bill was divided into subsection 101(a) and (b) and subsection (b) was redesignated as subsection (c).
Section 101(a) of the Conference Report combines language from Section 1 of the House passed bill and from Section 101 (a) of the Senate passed bill. As revised, this section declares that it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal government, in cooperation with state and local government and others to use all practical means to promote the general welfare and insure that man and nature exist in productive harmony.
Section 101 (b)
The new Section 101(b) with appropriate transitional language has been unchanged. This section declares national environmental goals and was taken from Section 101(a) of the Senate passed bill.
Section 101 (c)
This language was found in Section 101(b) of the Senate passed bill. The Conference Committee amended the language which read "each person has a fundamental and inalienable right to a healthful environment". Section 101(c) now reads "each person should enjoy a healthful environment".
Section 102
The language of the first paragraph of Section 102 of the Senate passed bill was modified by the Conference Committee so that the phrase "to the fullest extent possible" modifies both directives. The directives were also given number designations.
Section 102 (a)
In view of the changes in the first paragraph of Section 102, the phrase "to the fullest extent possible" was deleted from Section 102(x).
Section 102(b)
This section was modified by the adoption of language requiring all agencies to consult with the Council. In part, this was a language change which was discussed and agreed to on October 8, on the Senate floor.
Section 102(c)
This section, with two minor changes, is the language of Section 102(c) of S. 1075 as passed by the Senate and as discussed and agreed to on the Senate floor on October 8.
Section 102(d)
This section is identical to Section 102(d) as passed by the Senate and as agreed to on the Senate floor on October 8.
Section 102 (e)
This section is the same as Section 102(e) of S. 1075 as passed by the Senate except
that the phrase -- "where consistent with the foreign policy of the United States" was added.
Section 102(f)
This language is identical to Section 201 (d) of title II of the Senate passed bill. Title II of S. 1075 was deleted by the Conference Committee, but this and other provisions from this title were incorporated into title I and II of the bill reported by the Conferees.
Section 102(g)
This language is identical to Section 201 (e) of title II of the Senate passed bill. Section 102(h)
This language is a modification of language found in Section 201 (g) of title II of the Senate passed bill.
Section 102 in general
The conference substitute provides that the phrase "to the fullest extent possible" applies with respect to those actions which Congress authorizes and directs to be done under both clauses (1) and (2) of Section 102 (in the Senate passed bill, the phrase applied only to the directive in clause (1) ). In accepting this change to section 102 (and also to the provisions of Section 103), the conferees agreed to delete section 9 of the House amendment from the conference substitute.
Section 9 of the House amendment provided that "nothing in this Act shall increase, decrease or change any responsibility or authority of any Federal official or agency created by other provision of law." In making this change in favor of the less restrictive provision "to the fullest extent possible" the Senate conferees are of the view that the new language does not in any way limit the Congressional authorization and directive to all agencies of the Federal Government set out in subparagraphs (A) through (H) of clause (2) of Section 102. The purpose of the new language is to make it clear that each agency of the Federal Government shall comply with the directives set out in such subparagraphs (A) through (H) unless the existing law applicable to such agency's operations does not make compliance possible. If this is found to be the case, then compliance with the particular directive is not required but the provisions of Section 103 would apply.
However, as to other aspects of the activities of that agency, compliance with the provisions of this bill is expected. Thus, it is the intent of the conferees that the provision "to the fullest extent possible" shall not be used by any Federal agency as a means to avoiding compliance with the directives set out in Section 102. Rather, the language in Section 102 is intended to assure that all agencies of the Federal Government shall comply with the directives set out in said section "to the fullest extent possible" under their statutory authorizations and that no agency shall seek to construe its existing statutory authorizations in a manner designed to avoid compliance.
Many existing agencies such as the National Park Service, the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration and the National Aid Pollution Control Administration already have important responsibilities in the area of environmental control. The provision of Section 102 (as well as 103) are not designed to result in any change in the manner in which they carry out their environmental protection authority. This provision is, however, clearly designed to assure consideration of environmental matters by all agencies in their planning and decision making -- especially those agencies who now have little or no legislative authority to take environmental considerations into account.
Section 103
This section is based upon a provision of the Senate passed bill (Section 102(f)) not in the House amendment. This section as agreed to by the conferees, provides that all agencies of the Federal Government shall review their "present statutory authority, administrative regulations, and current policies and procedures to determine whether there are any deficiencies and inconsistencies therein which prohibit full compliance with the purpose and provisions" of the bill. If an agency finds such deficiencies or inconsistencies, it is required under this section to propose to the President not later than July 1, 1971 such measures as may be necessary to bring its authority and policies into conformity with the purposes and procedures of the bill. Section 103 thereby provides a mechanism which shall be utilized by all Federal agencies (1) to ascertain whether there is any provision of their statutory authority which precludes full compliance with any of the provisions of the bill, and (2) if any are found, to recommend changes in their statutory authority to the President, and, if recommended, to the appropriate Congressional Committees having jurisdiction. In conducting the review noted above, it is the understanding of the conferees that an agency shall not construe its existing authority in a manner which avoids full compliance with this Act. Rather, the intent of the conferees is that all Federal agencies shall comply with the provisions of Section 102.
It is not the intent of the Senate conferees that the review required by Section 103 would require existing environmental control agencies such as the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration and the National Air Pollution Control Administration to review their statutory authority and regulatory policies which are related to maintaining and enhancing the quality of the environment. This Section is aimed at those agencies which have little or no authority to consider environmental values.
Section 104
This language, with a minor reference change, is identical to language discussed and agreed to on the Senate floor on October 8 as a proposed Section 103 to S. 1075 when a conference with the House on S. 1075 was agreed to.
Section 105
This language is a modification of Section 103 of S. 1075 as passed by the Senate. As modified this section provides that the provisions of this Act are "supplementary to those set forth in existing authorizations of Federal agencies." The effect of this section is to give recognition to the fact that the bill is in addition to, but does not modify or repeal existing law. This section does not, however, obviate the requirement that the Federal agencies whose activities may have an adverse effect on the quality of the environment conduct their activities in accordance with the provisions of this bill unless to do so would violate their existing statutory authorizations.
TITLE II
Title II of S. 1075 as passed by the Senate was deleted. This title had authorized certain research and data gathering functions, a small grant-in-aid program, and the creation of a new position of Deputy Director in the Office of Science and Technology. The most important provisions of title II relating to research and data gathering were retained by the Conference Committee in Section 102 of title I and in Sections 204 and 205 of title II of the Conference Report.
Title II of the language agreed upon by the Conference Committee is largely from the House amendment to S. 1075 with a number of important substantive changes and exceptions. The language of the House amendment paralleled very closely the language of title III of S. 1075 as passed by the Senate. Major changes between the two provisions as well as substantive changes adopted by the Conference Committee are noted below.
Section 201
This section requires the President to transmit to the Congress an annual Environmental Quality Report. With minor word changes, this language was taken from Section 2 of the House amendment to S. 1075. The parallel language from the Senate passed bill is found in Section 303 of S. 1075.
On October 8, when the Senate disagreed to the House amendment and requested a conference it was agreed that the Senate conferees would seek to have language placed in the Conference Report which would provide that the annual Environmental Quality Report would be referred in whole or in part to the Committees of each House of the Congress which have exercised jurisdiction over the subject matter therein. This language would have been a new Section 303 (b) of the Senate passed bill. The Senate conferees made every possible effort to have this language made a part of the Conference Report. When agreement could not be reached, an effort was made to have language which applied only to reference of the Report in the Senate made a part of the Conference Report. Again, agreement was not reached.
It is the clear intent of the Senate conferees that the annual report should be referred in the Senate to all Committees which have exercised jurisdiction over any part of the subject matter contained therein. Absent specific language on the reference of the report, the report would be referred pursuant to the Senate rules. It is the Committee's understanding that under the rules all relevant Committees may be referred copies of the annual report.
This was the intent of the Senate when S. 1075 was passed. In the Section-by-Section analysis of Section 303 of S. 1075 at page 26 of the Committee Report No. 91-296 it is expressly stated that:
"It is anticipated that the annual report and the recommendations made by the President would be a vehicle for oversight hearings and hearings by the appropriate legislative committees of the Congress."
The Senate Conferees intend that under the language of the Conference Report, the annual report would be referred to all appropriate Committees of the Senate.
Section 202
Section 202 was drawn, in part, from Section 3 of the House amendment and, in part, from Section 301 (a) of the Senate passed bill. The conferees agreed that the Council should consist of "three" members and should be subject to Senate confirmation as provided in S. 1075 as passed by the Senate.
Section 203
This section, with minor reference changes, is the same language found in Section 4 of the House amendment. It is almost identical to Section 304 of the Senate passed bill.
In connection with the Senate's request for a conference on S. 1075 on October 8, it was agreed that the Senate conferees would seek to have language incorporated into the Conference Report authorizing the Council to establish advisory committees and to convene a biennial forum on environmental quality problems. The Senate conferees sought to have specific language of this nature incorporated into the Conference Report, but no agreement was reached. In large measure this was because of the fact that the language of Section 203 of the Conference Report, which authorizes the Council to employ experts and consultants, is broad enough to allow for the establishment of advisory committees and the convening of forums on environmental problems.
Section 204
This section. with minor language and reference changes, was drawn from Section 5 of the House amendment. In addition, Sections 201 (a) and (b) and Section 302 (a) (1) from titles II and III of the Senate passed bill were included by the Conference Committee as subsections 204 (5), (6) and (7).
Section 205
This section. with a couple of modifications, was drawn from Section 7 of the House amendment. Section 205(l) requires consultations with representatives of various groups and the Conference Committee added the Citizens Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality to those groups with which the Council should consult.
Section 205 (2) is designed to avoid duplication of expense and effort in connection with the Council's activities. The Conference Committee added new language, and language which the Senate had agreed to for Section 201 (a) in connection with the request for a conference on S. 1075. This language provides assurance that the Council's activities will not unnecessarily overlap or conflict with similar activities authorized by law and performed by established agencies.
Section 206
This section, sets forth the compensation of the Council members and is substantially the same as Section 301(b) of the Senate passed bill.
Section 207
The appropriation authorization language in this section was drawn from Section 10 of the House amendment. The appropriation authorization for fiscal year 1971 was, however, increased from $500.000 to $700,000.
EXHIBIT 2
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1
This section provides that this act may be cited as the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
Section 2
This section sets forth the purposes of the act. The purposes of the act are to declare a national environmental policy; to promote efforts to prevent environmental damage and to better the health and welfare of man; to enlarge and enrich man's understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nation; and to establish in the Executive Office of the President a Council of Environmental Quality Advisers.
TITLE I Section 101(a)
This section is a declaration by the Congress of a national environmental policy. The policy is based upon a recognition of man's impact upon the natural environment particularly the influences of population growth, urbanization, industrial expansion, resource exploitation, and technological development. The Congress further recognizes the importance to the welfare of man of restoring and maintaining the quality of the environment.
The continuing policy of the Federal Government is declared to be, in cooperation with State and local governments and concerned public and private organizations (such as professional and technical societies, conservation organizations. industry and labor organizations and resource development organizations), to use all practicable means end measures, including financial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans.
Section 101 (b)
The continuing policy and responsibility of the Federal Government is declared to be that, consistent with other essential considerations of national policy, the activities and resources of the Federal Government shall be improved and coordinated to the end that the Nation may attain certain broad national goals in the management of the environment. The broad national goals are as follows:
(1) Fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for future generations. It is recognized in this statement that each generation has a responsibility to improve, enhance, and maintain the quality of the environment to the greatest extent possible for the continued benefit of future generations.
(2) Assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings. The Federal Government, in its planning and programs, shall strive to protect and improve the quality of each citizen's surroundings both in regard to the preservation of the natural environment as well as in the planning, design, and construction of manmade structures. Each individual should be assured of safe, healthful. and productive surroundings in which to live and work and should be afforded the maximum possible opportunity to derive physical. esthetic, and cultural satisfaction from his immediate surroundings and from the environment he shares with the rest of humanity.
(3) Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences. The resources of the United States must be capable of supporting the larger populations and the increased demands upon limited resources which appear inevitable in the immediate future. To do so, it is essential that the widest and most efficient use of the environment be made to provide both the necessities and the amenities of life. In seeking intensified beneficial utilization of the earth's resources, the Federal Government must take care to avoid degradation and misuse of resources. risk to man's continued health and safety, and other undesirable and unintended consequences.
(4) Preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage, and maintain wherever possible an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice. The pace of urbanization coupled with population growth and man's increasing ability to work unprecedented changes in the natural environment makes it clear that one essential goal in a national environmental policy is the preservation of important aspects of our national heritage.
There are existing programs which are designed to achieve these goals, but many are single-purpose in nature. This subsection would make it clear that all agencies, in all of their activities, are to carry out their programs with a full appreciation of the importance of maintaining important aspects of our national heritage.
This subsection also emphasizes that an important aspect of national environmental policy is the maintenance of physical surroundings which provide present and future generations of American people with the widest possible opportunities for diversity and variety of experience and choice in cultural pursuits, in recreation endeavors, in esthetic appreciation and in living styles.
(5) Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's amenities. This subsection recognizes that populaton increases underlie many of the inter-related social and environmental problems which are being experienced in America. If the Nation's present high standards of living are to be made available to all of our citizens and if the general and growing desire of our people for greater participation in the physical and material benefits, in the amenities, and in the esthetic enjoyment afforded by a quality environment are to be satisfied, the Federal Government should – and it is hoped that State government and private enterprise will -- strive to maintain levels and a distribution of population which will not exceed the environment's capability to provide such benefits.
(6) Enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources. In recent years a great deal of the emphasis of legislative and executive action regarding environmental matters has concentrated upon the protection and improvement of the quality of the Nation's renewable resources such as air and water. It is vital that these efforts be continued and intensified because they are among the most visible, pressing, and immediate concerns of environmental management.
It is also essential, however, that means be sought and utilized to improve the effectiveness of recycling depletable resources such as fiber, chemicals, and metallic minerals. Improved material standards of living for greater numbers of people will place increased demands upon limited raw material. Furthermore, the disposal of wastes from the non-consumptive single use of manufactured goods is among our most critical pollution problems. Emphasis must be placed upon seeking innovative solutions through technology, better management, and, if necessary, governmental regulation.
Section 101 (c)
This subsection asserts congressional recognition that each person should enjoy a healthful environment. It is apparent that the guarantee of the continued enjoyment of any individual right is dependent upon individual health and safety. It is further apparent that deprivation of an individual's healthful environment will result in the deprivation of all of his rights.
The subsection also asserts congressional recognition of each individual's responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment. The enjoyment of individual rights requires respect and protection of the rights of others. The cumulative influence of each individual upon the environment is of such great significance that every effort to preserve environmental quality must depend upon the strong support and participation of the public.
Section 102
The policies and goals set forth in section 101 can be implemented if they are incorporated into the ongoing activities of the Federal Government in carrying out its other responsibilities to the public. In some areas of Federal action there is no body of experience or precedent to assure substantial and consistent consideration of environmental factors in decision making. In some areas of Federal activity, existing legislation does not provide clear authority to assure consideration of environmental factors which conflict with other Federal objectives.
To remedy present shortcomings in the legislative foundation of existing programs, and to establish action-forcing procedures which will help to insure that the policies enunciated in section 101 are implemented, section 102 authorizes and directs that the existing body of Federal law, regulation, and policy be interpreted and administered to the "fullest extent possible" in accordance with the policies set forth in this act. It further establishes a number of operating procedures to be followed by all Federal agencies as follows:
(A) Wherever planning is done or decisions are made which may have an impact on the quality of man's environment, the responsible agency or agencies are directed to utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary, team approach. Such planning and decisions should draw upon the broadest possible range of social and natural scientific knowledge and design arts. Many of the environmental controversies of recent years have, in large measure, been caused by the failure to consider all relevant points of view and all relevant values in the planning and conduct of Federal activities. Using an interdisciplinary approach that brings together the skills of landscape architect, the engineer, the ecologist, the economist, the sociologist and other relevant disciplines would result in better planning, better projects, and a better environment. Too often in the past planning has been the exclusive province of the engineer and cost analyst. And, as a consequence, too often the humanistic point of view, the relationship between man and his surroundings has been overlooked or purposely ignored.
(B) All agencies which undertake activities relating to environmental values, amenities, and aesthetic considerations, are authorized and directed, after consultation with the Council and other environmental control agencies, to make efforts to develop methods and procedures to incorporate those values in official planning and decision making. In the past, environmental factors have frequently been ignored and omitted from consideration in the early stages of planning because of the difficulty of evaluating them in comparison with economic and technical factors. As a result, unless the results of planning are radically revised at the policy level -- and this often means the Congress -- environmental enhancement opportunities may be forgone and unnecessary degradation incurred. A vital requisite of environmental management is the development of adequate methodology for evaluating the full environmental impacts and the full costs -- social, economic, and environmental -- of Federal actions.
(C) After consultation with, and obtaining the comments of Federal and State agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to any environment impact, each agency which proposes legislation and any other major Federal action shall make a detailed statement as to whether the proposal would have a significant effect upon the quality of the human environment. If the proposal is considered to have such a significant effect, then the recommendation or report on the proposal must include a detailed statement by the responsible official on:
(i) The environmental impact of the proposed action.
(ii) Any adverse impacts which cannot be avoided if the proposal is implemented.
(iii) The alternative ways of accomplishing the objectives of the proposed action and the results of not accomplishing the objectives.
(iv) The relationship between the local and short-term uses of environmental resources which are contemplated by the proposal and the general objective of maintaining and enhancing the long-term productivity of the environment.
(v) Any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented.
This section further provides that any Federal, State or local agency comments on the required statement shall thereafter be made available to the President, the Council, and the public under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act and shall accompany the proposal through the subsequent review process.
The committee does not intend that the requirements for comment by other agencies should unreasonably delay the processing of Federal proposals. The Committee anticipates that the President will promptly prepare and publish in the Federal Register a list of those appropriate agencies which have "jurisdiction by law" over various environmental matters and those appropriate agencies which he finds to have "special expertise" in various environmental matters.
With regard to State and local agencies, unless there is some more restrictive requirement of existing law or regulation, the opportunity for review may be restricted to those agencies which have established environmental jurisdiction within the geographical area which will or which may be affected by the proposed action. It is not the intention of the Committee to include those local agencies with only a remote interest and which are not primarily responsible for development and enforcement of environmental standards. The Committee believes that in some cases the requirement for State and local review may be satisfied by notice of proposed action in the Federal Register and by providing all necessary supplementary information to enable full public participation.
To prevent undue delay in the processing of Federal proposals, the Committee recommends that the President establish a time limitation for the receipt of comments (other than those comments required prior to making a detailed statement) from Federal, State, and local agencies similar to the 90-day review period presently established for comment upon Federal water resource development proposals.
(D) Wherever agencies of the Federal Government recommend courses of action which are known to involve unresolved conflicts over competing and incompatible uses of land, water, or air resources, it shall be the agency's responsibility to study, develop, and describe appropriate alternatives to the recommended course of action. The agency shall develop information and provide descriptions of the alternatives in adequate detail for subsequent reviewers and decision makers, both within the executive branch and in the Congress, to consider the alternatives along with the principal recommendation.
(E) In recognition of the fact that environmental problems are not confined by political boundaries, all agencies of the Federal Government which have international responsibilities are authorized and directed to lend support to appropriate international efforts to anticipate and prevent a decline in the quality of the worldwide environment. In doing so however, the agencies are constrained to act in a manner consistent with the foreign policy of the United States.
(F) All agencies of the Federal Government shall make such advice and information on environmental management as is available from their expertise and studies to State and local governments, non-governmental institutions, and individuals.
(G) All agencies of the Federal Government shall utilize ecological information in the planning and development of resource-oriented projects. Each agency which studies, proposes, constructs, or operates projects having resource management implications is authorized and directed to consider the effects upon ecological systems in connection with their activities and to study such effects as a part of its data collection.
(H) All agencies of the Federal Government shall, within their areas of expertise or responsibility, assist the Council on Environmental Quality established by this Act.
Section 103
All agencies of the Federal Government are directed to review their present statutory authority, administrative regulations, and current policies and procedures to determine whether existing law prohibits full compliance with the purposes of this act. The agencies will comply with the provisions of this act wherever possible. If, however, there are existing provisions of law, regulations, or policies which are beyond the authority of the particular agency to revise, and if these laws, regulations, or policies which prohibit the agency from acting in full compliance with the provisions of this Act, the agency is required by section 103 to recommend such measures as are necessary to make its authority consistent with this act. The agency must propose such measures to the President not later than July 1, 1971 and, if recommended, to the appropriate congressional committees.
Section 104
This section provides that nothing in sections 102 or 103 shall affect the specific statutory obligations of any Federal agency:
(1) To comply with environmental quality standards and criteria,
(2) To coordinate or consult with any other State or Federal agency, or
(3) To act or refrain from acting contingent upon the recommendations or certification of any other Federal or State agency. There are existing statutes and there may in the future be new statutes which prescribe specific criteria or standards of quality for environmental indicators, or which prescribe certain procedures for coordination or consultation with State or other Federal agencies, or which require recommendations or certification of other Federal agencies as a prerequisite to certain actions. It is not the intent of sections 102 or 103 of this Act to substitute less specific requirements for those which are established concerning particular actions or agencies. It is the intention that where there is no more effective procedure already established, the procedure of this act will be followed. In any event, no agency may substitute the procedures outlined in this Act for more restrictive and specific procedures established by law governing its activities.
Where an agency has such specific instructions governing only one aspect of its coordination activities, or where environmental quality standards and criteria are established for only one aspect of an agency's proposed activity, the agency is not relieved of its obligations to conform with the provisions of sections 102 and 103 which are beyond the sphere of the existing instructions, standards, or criteria.
Section 105
This section provides that the policies and goals set forth in this Act are supplementary to but do not modify, those set forth in existing authorizations of Federal agencies.
TITLE II
Section 201
This section provides that the President shall transmit to the Congress an annual environmental quality report. The first such report shall be transmitted on or before July 1, 1970. Subsequent reports shall be transmitted on or before July 1, in succeeding years.
The report is to include, but not be limited to, a current evaluation of the status and condition of the major environmental classes of the Nation. To the greatest extent possible, this information should be based upon measurements of environmental indicators relating quality and supply of land, water, air, and depletable resources to other factors such as environmental health, population distribution, and demands upon the environment for amenities such as outdoor recreation and wilderness. Significant current and developing environmental problems should be highlighted. Current and foreseeable environmental trends and evaluations of the effects of those trends upon the Nation's future social, economic, physical, and other requirements should be discussed.
It is the committee's strong view that the President's annual report should provide a considered statement of national environmental objectives, trends and problems. The report should provide the best judgment of the best people available on the Nation's environmental problems and the progress being made toward providing a quality environment for all Americans.
The report should summarize and bring together the major conclusions of the technical reports of other Federal agencies concerned with environmental management. Too often, these reports go unread and unevaluated. A succinct, readable summary and evaluation would be of great assistance to the Congress and the President.
It is anticipated that the annual report and the recommendations made by the President would be the vehicle for oversight hearings and hearings by the appropriate legislative committees of the Congress.
It is the clear intent of the Senate conferees that the annual report should be referred in the Senate to all Committees which have exercised jurisdiction over any part of the subject matter contained therein. Absent specific language on the reference of the report, the report would be referred pursuant to the Senate rules. It is the Committees' understanding that under the rules all relevant Committees may be referred copies of the annual report.
Section 202
This section creates in the Executive Office of the President a Council on Environmental Quality.
The Council shall be composed of three members appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate and who shall serve at the President's pleasure.
It is intended that the members of the Council shall be persons of broad experience and training with the competence and judgment to analyse and interpret trends and developing problems in the quality of the Nation's environment. The committee does not view the Council's functions as a purely scientific pursuit, but rather as one which rests upon scientific, economic, social, esthetic and cultural considerations. The members of the Council, therefore, should not necessarily be selected for depth of training or expertise in any specific discipline, but rather for the ability to grasp broad national issues, to render public service in the national interest, and to appreciate the significance of choosing among present alternatives in shaping the country's future environment.
The President shall designate one member of the Council as Chairman.
Section 203
This section provides the Council with general authority to employ staff and acquire the services of experts and consultants. This provision is designed to provide the Council with the necessary internal staff to assist members of the Council.
It is not intended that the Council will employ, pursuant to this section, a staff which would in any way conflict with the capabilities of the staff of the Office of Environmental Quality which would be created by Title II of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1969. It is understood that when the Office of Environmental Quality is established, it will mesh with the Council as an integrated agency in the Office of the President -- the Council operating on the policy level and Office of Environmental Quality on the staff level.
The professional staff of the Office will be available to the Council (as well as to the President) to assist in implementing existing environmental policy and the provisions of the legislation and to assist in forecasting future environmental problems, values and goals.
Section 204
This section sets forth the duties and functions of the Council as follows:
(1) The Council will assist and advise the President in the preparation of the annual
environmental quality report required by section 201. The committee assumes that the Council would have the primary responsibility for the preparation of the President's annual report. It could, in large measure, be based upon the Council's report to the President required by section 204.
(2) The Council will carry on continuing studies and analyses related to the status of the environment. The Council will seek to establish or cause to be established within the operating agencies of the Federal Government an effective system for monitoring environmental indicators, collecting data, and analyzing trends. It will further seek to relate trends in environmental conditions to short- and long-term national goals and aspirations.
(3) The Council shall review and appraise Federal programs, projects, activities, and policies which affect the quality of the environment. Based upon its review, the Council shall make recommendations to the President.
The committee does not view this direction to the Council as implying a project-by-project review and commentary on Federal programs. Rather, it is intended that the Council will periodically examine the general direction and impact of Federal programs in relation to environmental trends and problems and recommend general changes in direction or supplementation of such programs when they appear to be appropriate.
It is not the committee's intent that the Council be involved in the day-to-day decision making processes of the Federal Government or that it be involved in the resolution of particular conflicts between agencies and departments. These functions can best be performed by the Bureau of the Budget, the President's interagency Cabinet-level Council on the Environment or by the President himself. The committee does, however, strongly feel that the President needs impartial and objective advice which can provide him with an accurate overview of the Nation's environmental trends and problems and how these trends and problems affect the future material and social well-being of the American people.
The Council recommendations to the President are for his use alone. and his actions on their recommendations will depend on the confidence he places in the judgment of the persons he nominates to membership on the Council. Used properly, the Council review and appraisal of Federal activities which affect the quality of the environment can add a new dimension and provide the President with a new insight into the long-range needs and priorities of the country.
In the past, the executive agencies' views of National needs, goals, and priorities in the field of environmental management appears to have been so thoroughly subjugated to budgetary and fiscal considerations that the nature of the fundamental values at stake has been obscured. It is the committee's view that the values which are at stake in the environmental management decisions which lie ahead need to be brought to the fore and made the subject of official decision at the highest levels of Governments.
(4) The Council shall provide advice and assistance to the President in the formulation of national policies designed to foster and promote the improvement of the quality of the environment. The President is, of course, free to utilize the services of the Council in any manner in which he desires. The committee hopes, however, that the President would rely on the Council's impartial and objective advice in the execution and formulation of national environmental policies.
(5) The Council shall conduct investigations, studies, surveys, research, and analyses relating to ecological systems and environmental quality.
(6) The Council shall document and define changes in the natural environment, including the plant and animal systems, and to accumulate necessary data and other information for a continuing analysis of these changes or trends and an interpretation of their underlying causes. The information made available by the Council will provide a reliable planning base for Federal agencies, a source of indications of emerging environmental problems, and a source of reliable public information on controversial claims regarding the State of the environment.
(7) The Council shall report at least once each year to the President on the state and condition of the environment. This report should represent the Council's considered and impartial judgment. The Council's report would be useful to the President in the preparation of the annual environmental quality report which the President is required to transmit to the Congress by section 201.
(8) The Council shall make and furnish such studies, reports thereon, and recommendations with respect to matters of policy and legislation as the President may request.
Section 205
This section provides that the Council, in exercising its powers, functions, and duties under this Act shall
(1) consult with the Citizens' Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality, which has been established by Executive Order, and with representatives of such other non-Federal groups as the Council deems advisable.
(2) utilize to the fullest extent possible the services, facilities, and information relating to its functions which is already available from existing public and private organizations and individuals. It is the intent of this subsection to assure that duplication of effort and expense will be avoided and that the Council's activities will not conflict with similar activities authorized by law and being performed by other agencies. This section does not, however, preclude the Council from authorizing studies it deems necessary to ascertain the reliability of existing data. Neither does it preclude the Council from authorizing studies or collecting data in fields which are within the jurisdiction of other Federal agencies if the Council deems it necessary to validate or supplement such other agency's work.
Section 206
This subsection provides that the members of the Council shall serve full time. The compensation for the Chairman of the Council is set at level II of the Executive Schedule pay rates and at level IV for the other two members. These provisions parallel the compensation provisions established by law for the Chairman and the members of the Council of Economic Advisers.
Section 207
This section authorizes appropriations for the administrative expenses of the Council. The amounts of $300,000 for Fiscal Year 1970 and $700,000 for Fiscal Year 1971 are authorized to provide for the transition period in which the Council is organized. Thereafter an annual appropriation of $1 million is authorized. The committee chose the $1 million ceiling because it is comparable to the appropriations which have been required in recent years for the Council of Economic Advisers
Mr. ALLOTT. Mr. President, as a cosponsor of S. 1075 and as the ranking minority member of the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, I wish to associate myself generally with the remarks of our distinguished chairman, the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON). I congratulate him for his indefatigable efforts to achieve final congressional action on the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. This is a measure of particular significance in this era of ever degrading environment.
Mr. President, at this point, perhaps it would be appropriate to point out that while the explanatory statements relative to the interpretation of the conference report language, as provided by the chairman, are useful, they have not been reviewed, agreed upon, and signed by the other Senate conferees. Only the conference report itself was signed by all the Senate conferees, and therefore, only it was agreed upon and is binding. Unlike the House procedure, Senate rules do not provide for a coordinated and signed statement on the part of the managers for the Senate. Therefore, while I may agree with the chairman in most instances with regard to his statement, I must reserve the right to disagree with any part of his statement which I believe to be beyond the scope of the discussions and agreement of the conferees during the conference.
The vote to be taken here today will be upon the conference report alone. I presume other Senate Members of the conference committee will similarly reserve their rights. I, also, wish to make reference to my remarks of October 8, 1969, as they appear on page 29061 of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.
It has been accurately stated that by the enactment of this measure, the Congress is not giving the American people something, rather the Congress is responding to the demands of the American people. The observation that Congress is generally far behind the demands of the people is, for the most part, accurate; but, then, this is an observation that can be made of any representative democracy. The measure of any representative democracy is the lapse of time between the apparency of the will of the people and the positive action on the part of their government. In this case, government response cannot be too soon. We can only hope that it is not too late.
The concept of a high-level council on conservation, natural resources, and environment has had congressional expression for nearly a decade. It first found legislative support from a former chairman of the Senate Interior Committee, the late Senator Murray. In the 86th Congress, he introduced S. 2549, the Resources and Conservation Act, which would have established a high-level council of environmental advisers along with the first expression of a comprehensive environmental policy. While the bill was not enacted into law, the 4 days of hearings before the Senate Interior Committee still serve as a useful reference in this vital area. Bills of similar purpose were also introduced in the 89th and 90th Congresses.
A unique joint House-Senate colloquium was held on July 17, 1968, which was sponsored by the Senate Interior Committee and the House Science and Astronautics Committee. This colloquium provided a forum for Members of Congress and interested parties to meet and discuss these important issues.
During the 91st Congress, three bills were introduced and referred to the Senate Interior Committee. All three dealt with environmental policy and creation of new overview institutions.
Hearings were held and additional consultation and coordination with the administration ensued.
As a result, S. 1075 was reported by the committee and passed by the Senate in a form which would provide the President and the executive branch with effective machinery to help it provide the necessary leadership in reversing the deterioration of our environment. In addition, the bill will establish by statute a national environmental policy. I believe it is significant to point out that S. 1075 enjoys the sponsorship of every single member of the Senate Interior Committee.
The Senate Interior Committee has long had an interest in conservation and environmental matters. Recent examples include the establishment of many national parks and monuments, national seashores and lakeshores, national recreation areas, a national trails system, a wild and scenic rivers system, and a wilderness system. The Outdoors Recreation Resources Commission was a product of this committee. Much of this Nation's most precious heritage has been preserved and protected by legislation emanating from the Interior Committee. This committee has also passed upon legislation to establish the land and water conservation fund.
In the area of water resources, this committee has produced a myriad of legislation to provide for the conservation and wise use of it, including weather modification. The Water Resources Council, the National Water Commission, and the various river basin planning commissions all have their foundations in legislation acted upon by the Interior Committee. The reclamation program, which is under the jurisdiction of this committee, is an environmental program. One only needs to observe the "before" and the "after" with respect to a reclamation project to know this.
In 1964, we passed upon legislation to establish the Public Land Law Review Commission and its companion measure, the Multiple Use and Classification Act. This is truly landmark legislation since our public lands are an important feature of our environment and its quality.
In the field of mineral resources, this committee and the Senate approved a measure, which I have introduced in six successive Congresses, which would establish a national mining and minerals policy. The significance of this measure to environmental quality may not be apparent at first view, but the quality of our environment has a direct relationship to the availability of materials. In addition, during the hearings on this measure, there was a recognition of the need to better control mine waste products by all concerned. Also, technology and the discovery of new materials may lead to the solution of some of our most troublesome environmental problems.
Implicit in a national mining and minerals policy is the development of improved methods to recycle both industrial and other wastes and scrap back into the materials stream.
I have taken the time to mention just a few of the legislative achievements of the Interior Committee to demonstrate its long-standing interest and endeavors in the matter of environmental quality. Other committees have also displayed interest in the environmental field, and I do not intend to in any way diminish their achievements.
The President has expressed his concern over the degradation of our environment. Senators will recall that President Nixon had committed himself in the 1968 campaign to a policy of improving the environment in his October 18, 1968, radio address entitled: "A Strategy of Quality: Conservation in the Seventies." In that address, Candidate Nixon characterized our environmental dilemma in these words:
The battle for the quality of the American environment is a battle against neglect, mismanagement, poor planning and a piecemeal approach to problems of natural resources.
Acting upon that commitment, President Nixon established by Executive order the "Environmental Quality Council" in May of 1969. The Council is of the highest level. The President, himself, is Chairman, and its membership includes the Vice President and five cabinet members. The Council provides the action mechanism to implement environmental policy decisions.
S. 1075, as passed by the Senate and as reported from the conference is designed to complement the actions of the President and provide him with workable tools to get on with the task of repairing our damaged environment and preventing further detriment to it.
We can no longer afford to view the environmental problem on a basis of cleaning up our dirt.
We must approach it from the stand-point of prevention. Prevention will require planning -- long range planning -- and that planning must rest upon research and new technology. In the 89th and 90th Congresses, I introduced legislation which I believe would assist the Congress to participate in a meaningful way in determining the direction and emphasis of federally financed research. As Senators know, Federal expenditures for research and development approach an annual amount of $17 billion. The funds for this research and development effort are made available in 13 separate appropriations bills, and at no point does Congress have an opportunity to exercise an overview of our total research and development program. My proposal would provide for the establishment of a non-legislative joint House and Senate committee to review and report to the Congress on the effectiveness of our overall research and development program, based upon an annual report from the President. Such a mechanism, had it come into existence, could have helped the Congress to have made the necessary decisions with regard to research to have dealt with the many serious problems now facing us in the environmental area. I still hold the belief that some mechanism similar to the one proposed in my bill S. 1305 of the 90th Congress would prove to be useful and helpful.
In summary, the environment is the concern of us all. In some respect, nearly every department of the Government is or may be involved in decisions or actions which affect the environment. And, the jurisdiction of the various committees of Congress are similarly affected by environmental considerations. The environment is not the exclusive bailiwick of any committee of Congress nor department of Government. S. 1075 recognizes this fact, and therein lies its strength, appropriateness, and timeliness. This is truly landmark legislation in history of man and his efforts to protect and improve his environment, and I am proud to be associated with this measure.
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, I wish to express my appreciation at this point for the fine cooperation that we have had in trying to work out differences which occurred since the conferees met on S. 1075.
The junior Senator from Maine has been most cooperative. We would have had many unresolved problems had it not been for his cooperation.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I wish to express appreciation to the junior Senator from Washington for his cooperation in working out points of difference which otherwise might have been very difficult and could have led to difficulties on the floor of the Senate, which all of us wanted to avoid.
The basic objective of S. 1075 is one to which I think all members of the Committee on Public Works, as well as all members of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs subscribed, and that is the concept of developing an overall and total environmental improvement policy. We recognize that in order to do that we will be concerned with the work of many agencies in the executive branch of Government as well as with the work of many committees in Congress.
What we have undertaken to do in our cooperative effort on this bill and in S. 7, which is in conference between the two Houses, is to begin the process of developing a comprehensive review of our environmental policies as well as a comprehensive policy which we hope will emerge out of the work of these disparate executive agencies and eight Senate committees.
I do not intend to prolong my discussion of the bill, but I think the discussions which I have been privileged to have with the distinguished Senator from Washington and other members of the committee, as well as with members of the Committee on Public Works and the two staffs have raised some points of emphasis to which I should refer in this discussion.
I know my colleagues on the Committee on Public Works, the chairman, the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH), and the distinguished ranking Republican member (Mr. BOGGS), also might like to ask questions for points of emphasis.
One of the questions that primarily concerned us on the floor of the Senate on October 8, when we last had a discussion among those concerned, and one which concerned us in the discussion of the conference report, was the question of the relationship of this legislation to the established agencies of the executive branch. First of all, we were concerned with those which have an impact upon the environment, actual or potential, and second, we were concerned with those agencies which have responsibilities in the field of environmental improvement.
I would like to refer to some of the insertions in the RECORD made by the distinguished Senator from Washington. He has inserted three principal documents: First, his floor statement, as it is described, in the conference report; second, a section-by-section analysis of the report as amended in conference; and finally, a statement of major changes in S. 1075, as passed by the Senate and as changed by the conference report.
First, I should like to refer to page 4 of the major changes analysis. On page 4 he refers to that part of the discussion which is entitled "section 102 in general" and I should like to read it:
The conference substitute provides that the phrase "to the fullest, extent possible" applies with respect to thse actions which Congress authorizes and directs to be done under both clauses (1) and (2) of section 102 (in the Senate-passed bill, the phrase applied only to the directive in clause (1)).
Mr. President, what disturbed us about this language in the "major changes analysis" was the impact of the phrase "to the fullest extent possible" upon the executive agencies which have authority under other statutes with respect to the improvement of the quality of our environment, specifically such agencies as the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration and the National Air Pollution Control Administration. Both agencies are of special interest to the Senate Committee On Public Works. Each operates under basic legislation which has been written under the jurisdiction of the Senate Public Works Committee and which has become law. Legislation has been carefully developed over the past 7 or 8 years. We were concerned that S. 1075, through such language as that which I have just quoted, should not have the effect of changing the basic legislation governing the operation of the agencies such as those to which I have referred.
As a result of the discussions with the Senator from Washington and his staff, language was inserted on page 5 of the "major changes document" put into the RECORD by the Senator from Washington which clarifies this point.
That insertion reads:
Many existing agencies such as the National Park Service, the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, and the National Air Pollution Control Administration already have important responsibilities in the area of environmental control. The provisions of section 102 (as well as 103) are not designed to result in any change in the manner in which they carry out their environmental protection authority.
It is clear then, and this is the clear understanding of the Senator from Washington and his colleagues, and of those of us who serve on the Public Works Committee, that the agencies having authority in the environmental improvement field will continue to operate under their legislative mandates as previously established, and that those legislative mandates are not changed in any way by section 102-5.
The second section of the conference report which is of concern to us is section 103, for the very same reasons that I have discussed already. I shall read this portion of the discussion in the major changes analysis placed in the RECORD by the Senator from Washington.
This portion reads:
This section is based upon a provision of the Senate passed bill [section 102(f) ] not in the House amendment. This section, as agreed to by the conferees, provides that all agencies of the federal government shall review their "present statutory authority, administrative regulations, and current policies and procedures to determine whether there are any deficiencies and inconsistencies therein, which prohibit full compliance with the purpose of the provisions" of the bill. If an agency finds such deficiencies or inconsistencies, it is required under this section to propose to the President not later than July 1, 1971, such measures as may be necessary to bring its authority and policies into conformity with the purposes and procedures of the bill.
Now, Mr. President, in the discussion with the Senator from Washington and his staff, it developed that this language had different implications for different kinds of executive agencies, especially with respect to the agencies whose activities have an impact, potentially unfavorable, upon the environment. Obviously, it was the objective of this language to make such agencies environment conscious.
With respect to that objective, I was fully in accord with the Senator from Washington and his committee. However, the second set of executive agencies affected by that language are those agencies which have authority in the environmental improvement field; more specifically, insofar as the Public Works Committee is concerned, the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration and the National Air Pollution Control Administration.
We were concerned that the language which I have referred to should not have the effect of forcing the agencies over which we have jurisdiction to conform their basic legislative mandates to the provisions of S. 1075. This is made clear on page 7 of the major changes analysis, which was placed in the RECORD by the Senator from Washington.
I quote from it:
It is not the intent of the Senate conferees that the review required by section 103 would require existing environmental control agencies such as the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration and National Air Pollution Control Administration to review their statutory authority and regulatory policies which are related to maintaining and enhancing the quality of the environment. This section is aimed at those agencies which have little or no authority to consider environmental values.
This language in the "major changes analysis" document clarifies, with the full agreement of the Senator from Washington and his colleagues and myself, their understanding as to the implications of section 103 with respect to those executive agencies which have environmental improvement authority at the present time under already existing legislation.
The third point to which I should like to refer, for the purpose of emphasis, is the question of committee jurisdiction with respect to the various areas of environmental concern which are now involved in the jurisdictions of several Senate standing committees.
It was our concern on October 8, when we discussed this matter in the Senate last, and it is our concern now, that S. 1075 shall not have the effect of altering existing committee jurisdictions in this respect. Understandably, the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH), the Senator from Delaware (Mr. BOGGS), and I are especially concerned with the jurisdiction of the Public Works Committee of the Senate.
I think that in the "major changes analysis" document of the Senator from Washington this is again clarified in the following language, which I read from page 9:
It is the clear intent of the Senate conferees that the annual report would be referred in the Senate to all Committees which have exercised jurisdiction over any part of the subject matter contained therein. Absent specific language on the reference of the report, the report would be referred pursuant to the Senate rules. It is the committees' understanding that under the rules all relevant Committees may be referred copies of the annual report. This was the intent of the Senate when S. 1075 was passed. In the section-by-section analysis of Section 303 of S. 1075 at page 26 of the' committee report No. 91-296, it is expressly stated that,
"It is anticipated that the annual report and the recommendations made by the President would be a vehicle for oversight hearings and hearings by the appropriate legislative committees of the Congress."
Mr. President, as I say, this was clearly understood on October 8 when we last discussed it on the Senate floor. It was never at issue as between the Senator from Washington and myself. It think it is clearly understood today.
The legislative language which was included in S. 1075 on October 8 was stricken from the conference report because, under House rules, it was considered to be new matter which was subject to a point of order. So I think it is appropriate that on the Senate floor today we reemphasize that it is the intent of the Senate, and of the representatives of both committees, that when the annual reports of the Council on Environmental Control and its legislative recommendations, as they are developed, reach the floor, they shall be referred to the committees which have had traditional jurisdiction with respect to the subjects of such report and such legislative recommendations.
I want to make one final point, and for this I would like to refer to a document inserted in the RECORD by the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON) this afternoon, entitled "Section-by-Section Analysis." This point is important because, beginning on October 8, and a few days prior to that time, we undertook to do something new in legislative direction. We undertook to place in the Executive Office of the President a agency which was in part the product of S. 1075 and in part the product of S. 7, the Water Quality Improvement Act, which is still in conference between the House and the Senate and which is not likely to be acted on finally in this session of Congress, not because of the subject I am about to touch upon, but because of other matters in this bill which are not touched upon in S. 1075 at all.
The point I wish to raise with respect to the Council on Environmental Quality established by S. 1075 and the Office of Environmental Quality which would be established under title 3 of S. 7 is that on page 18 of the section-by-section analysis which was inserted in the RECORD by the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON) is found a discussion that clarifies the relationship of these two bodies.
On page 20 of the section-by-section analysis, in a discussion of section 203, is found the following:
SECTION 203
This section provides the Council with general authority to employ staff and acquire the services of experts and consultants. This provision is designed to provide the Council with the necessary internal staff to assist members of the Council.
It is not intended that the Council will employ, pursuant to this section, a staff which would in any way conflict with the capabilities of the staff of the Office of Environmental Quality which would be created by Title II of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1969. It is understood that when the Office of Environmental Quality is established, it will mesh with the Council as an integrated agency in the Office of the President -- the Council operating on the policy level and Office of Environment Quality on the staff level.
The professional staff of the Office will be available to the Council (as well as to the President) to assist in implementing existing environmental policy and the provisions of the legislation and to assist in forecasting future environmental problems, values and goals.
In conclusion, and before yielding to my colleagues on the Senate Public Works Committee, I would like to say that I agree with the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON) that S. 1075 can become landmark legislation in the field of environmental quality. Whether it does will depend upon the effectiveness and performance of the new Council on Environmental Quality which S. 1075 would create, the performance of the Office of Environmental Quality which would be established under S. 7, and the coordination and the cooperation of the various executive agencies which have an impact upon the environment and those other agencies which have at present the authority to improve the environment in one respect or another.
In addition to that, the landmark quality of S. 1075 will depend upon the continuing cooperation of the Senate committees -- at least seven or eight of them -- which have supervisory authority and jurisdiction with respect to executive agencies, such as the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, the Committee on Public Works, the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, the Banking and Currency Committee and its Subcommittee on Housing, the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, and many others. And so, in order to really achieve the high-minded objectives of S. 1075 which are crucial, I think, to the future health and welfare of our country, we must move in the direction of coordinating the work of the Congress in this field.
S. 1075 undertakes to take important steps in the direction of coordinating the efforts of the executive agencies. We must now go beyond that in the Congress of the United States to coordinate the work of the senatorial and House committees. The Senator from Washington, other members of our two committees and I have discussed this objective as well.
There is pending, for example, in the Committee on Government Operations, Senate Resolution 78, which I first introduced two Congresses ago, to create a Senate Select Committee on Technology and the Human Environment, whose objective is this kind of coordination.
The Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON), in the course of our discussions, indicated his preference for the Senate and the House to coordinate their work more closely in the environmental field. I concur with him that it would be preferable to create a non-legislative joint committee patterned on the basis of the select committee which I have proposed, and I am glad to join with him and interested Members on this side and in the House to undertake to create that kind of joint committee as early as possible in the next session of the Congress. We are agreed on that objective. We have in mind the kind of work which is envisaged in Senate Resolution 78.
So I would like to think that, notwithstanding the difficulties and the differences of opinion that the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON) and I have had with respect to S. 1075 and S. 7, out of the labor pains of this creation we have begun a period of cooperation and coordination in the Senate's work in the field of the improvement of environmental quality which will result in a wiser, more effective policy in this field.
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. MUSKIE. I yield.
Mr. JACKSON. I wish to express my concurrence in the comments made by the able Senator from Maine, with special reference to the need for a joint non-legislative committee on the environment. I would hope that would be the first order of business next year. I think we can move expeditiously in the Senate. If we can have similar cooperation in the House, we can have it enacted into law in the next session.
Mr. BOGGS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. MUSKIE. I yield to the Senator from Delaware.
Mr. BOGGS. Mr. President, as a member of the Public Works Committee of the Senate, I have a couple of questions I would like to ask the distinguished Senator from Maine.
Is my understanding correct that all reports and legislative proposals as a result of S. 1075 will be referred to all committees with established jurisdiction in the field? For example, any report or legislative proposal involving water pollution would be referred to the Committee on Public Works. Is that correct?
Mr. MUSKIE. Yes. That is the clear understanding of the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON), myself, and the two staffs. There is no fuzziness or doubt on that point at all.
Mr. BOGGS. Am I correct that the thrust of the directions contained in S. 1075 deals with what we might call the environmental impact agencies rather than the environmental enhancement agencies, such as the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration or National Air Pollution Control Administration?
Mr. MUSKIE. Yes. Sections 102 and 103, and I think section 105, contain language designed by the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs to apply strong pressures on those agencies that have an impact on the environment -- the Bureau of Public Roads, for example, the Atomic Energy Commission, and others. This strong language in that section is intended to bring pressure on those agencies to become environment conscious, to bring pressure upon them to respond to the needs of environmental quality, to bring pressure upon them to develop legislation to deal with those cases where their legislative authority does not enable them to respond to these values effectively, and to reorient them toward a consciousness of and sensitivity to the environment.
Of course this legislation does not impose a responsibility or an obligation on those environmental-impact agencies to make final decisions with respect to the nature and extent of the environmental impact of their activities. Rather than performing self-policing functions, I understand that the nature and extent of environmental impact will be determined by the environmental control agencies.
With regard to the environmental improvement agencies such as the Federal Water Improvement Administration and the Air Quality Administration, it is clearly understood that those agencies will operate on the basis of the legislative chanter that has been created and is not modified in any way by S. 1075.
Mr. BOGGS. I thank the Senator. Can he tell me how the staff of the Environmental Policy Council will mesh with the staff of the Office of Environmental Quality when it is established?
Mr. MUSKIE. As I indicated from the language I read from the section-by-section analysis put in the RECORD by the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON), the Office of Environmental Quality which would be created by title II of S. 7, would constitute the staff of the secretariat of the Council on Environmental Quality established by S. 1075, and the two would be meshed together in a way to produce a strong agency, strong at the board level and at the staff level, to begin the development of a coordinated Federal policy in the environmental field.
Mr. BOGGS. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from Maine for yielding, and for his answers to these questions. I take this opportunity to congratulate and commend him and
the distinguished Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON) for the excellent and outstanding work both have done in this field, and for their cooperation in working together and bringing forth a sound agreement on the language in this bill, including its legislative history.
I think this language protects the jurisdiction of other committees that have exercised jurisdiction in the environmental field, while preserving the basic intent of S. 1075.
Mr. MUSKIE. I thank the Senator. I am happy to yield now to the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Public Works, the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH). I appreciate the confidence he has shown in permitting me to conduct these negotiations with Senator JACKSON, and the confidence he has expressed in the results we have produced.
Mr. RANDOLPH. Mr. President, my knowledgeable colleagues, the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE), the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON), the Senator from Colorado (Mr. ALLOTT), and the Senator from Delaware (Mr. BOGGS) have discussed this legislation which is of concern, not only because of congressional committee jurisdiction, but to Congress and the people of the United States. Today, approximately 203 million persons, live in an area that is becoming increasingly confined. Because of the problems of urban development, mobility of people, and the methods by which products are moved from one point to another our society and our environment are constantly changing.
I wish to stress -- and do it very briefly, I hope -- what I believe has come out of the discussion today and prior conferences that have been held by members of the Public Works Committee and the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. There may have been some elements of misunderstanding. If there were, they have been resolved. If there were some elements of controversy, they have been dissipated.
I think that we have, through these deliberations, come closer together. This is important if we are to deal with environmental quality effectively. It is only of recent years, Mr. President, though environmental quality means so much to every facet of our society, that the Congress has given specific attention to this subject.
I serve not only as the chairman of the Senate Public Works Committee, but of our Subcommittee on Roads. We recognize, as my able colleague from Maine and others in this body have recognized, that in America, as we put down a mile of highway, no matter what type of road it is, we are not only placing cement or asphalt on the earth, but we are enabling people to move from one point to another.
So in 1968, it was my purpose, and the Senate and Congress agreed, that we would write into the Federal Aid Highway Act that year the first approach to this matter of relocation, bringing people into the conferences before an actual decision was made as to where a road would go, either by the State or Federal Government, or by an agreement of both agencies. The Federal Aid Highway Act is an example of how we are making the people a part of policy making, even though they, in a sense, are laymen rather than experts, that they would have a part in thinking these matters through.
The Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE) and other Senators who have followed these matters know that it is important that we take people into our confidence before the fact rather than after the fact, in order to provide the opportunity for discussion of the many approaches which can bring a catalyst into being. And so, in the 1968 act, we dealt with matters such as relocation. As the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON) knows, this is a matter of environmental quality for the people whose lives are affected by highways. We are facing up to our responsibility for the first time, to provide prompt compensation for those who are displaced in business and industry, or in their places of residence.
I use only this one legislative enactment of Congress to indicate that we are moving more broadly and more sufficiently to improve environmental quality. I could discuss, of course, the Corps of Engineers of the U.S. Army, and how now they are beginning to look at environmental matters as never before, because in the Congress of the United States, and the Committee on Public Works they have provided leadership and required them to consider environmental quality.
We find environmental quality interwoven with whatever we do. Whether it is building a road or constructing a bridge, whether it is in the impoundment of waters or constructing a building, we must realize that we are working not only with statistics and figures, but we are working with people. The lives of people are involved.
I think it is important for the RECORD to reflect that Senators have given their attention in recent weeks and days to this matter, have attempted to bring S. 1075 and S. 7 together to resolve jurisdictional problems and to lay down the ground rules that will guide us to doing a better job in the months and years ahead.
The stress has been here today on the coordination and the cooperation. I think this is a very real partnership among Senator JACKSON, Senator MUSKIE, Senator ALLOTT, and Senator BOGGS.
I think we are merging our efforts. We have arrived at an agreement. We must not fragment this effort. We must pool our efforts to assure for future generations an environment in which people can live and grow.
We must assure that consideration of legislation, which affects the environment in which people live, by people and committees who are dedicated to this very real task that lies before us. The resolution of differences between S. 1075 and S. 7, now H.R. 4148, provides this assurance.
As chairman of the Committee on Public Works, I congratulate all of those Senators who have carried on these negotiations. They were negotiations in the very best sense of the word.
Although all of the members of the Committee on Public Works did not engage in the various negotiations, they were kept completely informed of what the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE) was thinking and what his plans were. The Senator from Delaware (Mr. BOGGS), who well represents the viewpoint of the minority, although there is no minority within our committee, was present during most of those negotiations.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished chairman.
I have taken more time than I expected this afternon. However, this is an opportunity to make clear our understanding. The record is clear.
I express my appreciation to the Senator from Washington (Mr. JACKSON), the Senator from Colorado (Mr. ALLOTT) , and my colleagues on the Senate Public Works Committee.
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, I express my appreciation to the able chairman of the Public Works Committee, the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH), for the support and understanding we have received from all of our colleagues on both committees.
I express my appreciation also to the Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE), with whom I have worked very closely, the Senator from Delaware (Mr. BOGGS). and the Senator from Colorado (Mr. ALLOTT), and for the fine cooperation of the staff.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the conference report on S. 1075 be printed at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the report was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
CONFERENCE REPORT, REPT. NO. 91-765 [To accompany S. 1075]
The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the House to the bill (S. 1075), to establish a national policy for the environment; to authorize studies, surveys, and research relating to ecological systems, natural resources, and the quality of the human environment; and to establish a Board of Environmental Quality Advisers, having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:
That the Senate recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the House to the text of the bill and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the House amendment insert the following: That this Act may be cited as the
"National Environmental Policy Act of 1969".
PURPOSE
SEC. 2. The purposes of this Act are: To declare a national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nation; and to establish a Council on Environmental Quality.
TITLE I
DECLARATION OF NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
SEC. 101. (a) The Congress, recognizing the profound impact of man's activity on the interrelations of all components of the natural environment, particularly the profound influences of population growth, highdensity urbanization, industrial expansion, resource exploitation, and new and expanding technological advances and recognizing further the critical importance of restoring and maintaining environmental quality to the overall welfare and development of man, declares that it is the continuing policy of the Federal Government, in cooperation with State and local governments, and other concerned public and private organizations, to use all practicable means and measures, including financial and technical assistance, in a manner calculated to foster and promote the general welfare, to create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans.
(b) In order to carry out the policy set forth in this Act, it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal Government to use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of national policy, to improve and coordinate Federal plans, functions, programs, and resources to the end that the Nation may
(1) fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations;
(2) assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings;
(3) attain the widest range of beneficial uses o1 the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences;
(4) preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of individual choice;
(5) achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards of living and a wide sharing of life's amenities; and
(6) enhance the quality of renewable resources and approach the maximum attainable recycling of depletable resources. c) The Congress recognizes that each person should enjoy a healthful environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment.
SEC. 102. The Congress authorizes and directs that, to the fullest extent possible: (1) the policies, regulations, and public laws of the United States shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with the policies set forth in this Act, and (2) all agencies of the Federal Government shall
(A) utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which will insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and in decisionmaking which may have an impact on man's environment;
(B) identify and develop methods and procedures, in consultation with the Council on Environmental Quality established by title II of this Act, which will insure that presently unquantified environmental amenities and values may be given appropriate consideration in decision making along with economic and technical considerations;
(C) include in every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, a detailed statement by the responsible official on-
(i) the environmental impact of the proposed action,
(ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented,
(iii) alternatives to the proposed action,
(iv) the relationship between local short term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and
(v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented.
Prior to making any detailed statement, the responsible Federal official shall consult with and obtain the comments of any Federal agency which has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved. Copies of such statement and the comments and views of the appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies, which are authorized to develop and enforce environmental standards, shall be made available to the President, the Council on Environmental Quality and to the public as provided by section 552 of title 5, United States Code, and shall accompany the proposal through the existing agency review processes;
(D) study, develop, and describe appropriate alternatives to recommended courses of action in any proposal which involves unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources;
(E) recognize the worldwide and longrange character of environmental problems and, where consistent with the foreign policy of the United States, lend appropriate support to initiatives, resolutions, and programs designed to maximize international cooperation in anticipating and preventing a decline in the quality of mankind's world environment;
(F) make available to States, counties, municipalities, institutions, and individuals, advice and information useful in restoring, maintaining, and enhancing the quality of the environment:
(G) initiate and utilize ecological information in the planning and development of resource-oriented projects; and
(H) assist the Council on Environmental Quality established by title II of this Act. SEC. 103. All agencies of the Federal Government shall review their present statutory authority, administrative regulations, and current policies and procedures for the purpose of determining whether there are any deficiencies or inconsistencies therein which prohibit full compliance with the purposes and provisions of this Act and shall propose to the President not later than July I, 1971, such measures as may be necessary to bring their authority and policies into conformity with the intent, purposes, and procedures set forth in this Act.
SEC. 104. Nothing in Section 102 or 103 shall in any way affect the specific statutory obligations of any Federal agency (1) to comply with criteria or standards of environmental quality, (2) to coordinate or consult with any other Federal or State agency, or (3) to act, or refrain from acting contingent upon the recommendations or certification of any other Federal or State agency.
SEC. 105. The policies and goals Set forth in this Act are supplementary to those set forth in existing authorizations of Federal agencies.
TITLE II
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
SEC. 201. The President shall transmit to the Congress annually beginning July 1, 1970, an Environmental Quality Report (hereinafter referred to as the "report") which shall set forth (1) the status and condition of the major natural, manmade, or altered environmental classes of the Nation, including, but not limited to, the air, the aquatic, including marine, estuarine, and fresh water, and the terrestrial environment, including, but not limited to, the forest, dryland, wetland. range, urban, suburban, and rural environment; (2) current and foreseeable trends in the quality management and utilization of Such environments and the effects of those trends on the social, economic, and other requirements of the Nation; (3) the adequacy of available natural resources for fulfilling human and economic requirements of the Nation in the light of expected population pressures; (4) a review of the programs and activities (including regulatory activities) of the Federal Government, the State and local governments, and nongovernmental entities or individuals, with particular reference to their effect on the environment and on the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources; and (5) a program for remedying the deficiencies of existing programs and activities, together with recommendations for legislation.
SEC. 202. There is created in the Executive Office of the President a Council on Environmental Quality (hereinafter referred to as the "Council"). The Council shall be composed of three members who shall be appointed by the President to serve at his pleasure. by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The President shall designate one of the members of the Council to serve as Chairman. Each member shall be a person who, as a result of his training, experience, and attainments, is exceptionally well qualified to analyze and interpret environmental trends and information of all kinds; to appraise programs and activities of the Federal Government in the light of the policy set forth in title I of this Act; to be conscious of and responsive to the scientific, economic, social, esthetic, and cultural needs and interests of the Nation; and to formulate and recommend national policies to promote the improvement of the quality of the environment.
SEC. 203. The Council may employ such officers and employees as may be necessary to carry out its functions under this Act. In addition, the Council may employ and fix the compensation of such experts and consultants as may be necessary for the carrying out of its functions under this Act, in accordance with section 3109 of title 5, United States Code (but without regard to the last sentence thereof).
SEC. 204. It shall be the duty and function of the Council
(1) to assist and advise the President in the preparation of the Environmental Quality Report required by section 201;
(2) to gather timely and authoritative information concerning the conditions and trends in the quality of the environment both current and prospective, to analyze and interpret such information for the purpose of determining whether such conditions and trends are interfering, or are likely to interfere, with the achievement of the policy set forth in title I of this Act, and to compile and submit to the President studies relating to such conditions and trends;
(3) to review and appraise the various programs and activities of the Federal Government in the light of the policy set forth in title I of this Act for the purpose of determining the extent to which such programs and activities are contributing to the achievement of such policy, and to make recommendations to the President with respect thereto;
(4) to develop and recommend to the President national policies to foster and promote the improvement of environmental quality to meet the conservation, Social, economic, health, and other requirements and goals of the Nation;
(5) to conduct investigations, studies, surveys. research, and analyses relating to ecological systems and environmental quality;
(6) to document and define changes in the natural environment, including the plant and animal systems, and to accumulate necessary data and other information for a continuing analysis of these changes or trends and an interpretation of their underlying causes;
(7) to report at least once each year to the President on the state and condition of the environment; and
(8) to make and furnish such studies, reports thereon, and recommendations with respect to matters of policy and legislation as the President may request.
SEC. 205. In exercising its powers, functions and duties under this Act, the Council shall(1) consult with the Citizens' Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality established by Executive Order numbered 11472, dated May 29, 1969, and with such representatives of science, industry, agriculture, labor, conservation organizations, State and local governments, and other groups as it deems advisable; and
(2) utilize, to the fullest extent possible, the services, facilities, and information (including statistical information) of public and private agencies and organizations, and individuals, in order that duplication of effort and expense may be avoided, thus assuring that the Council's activities will not unnecessarily overlap or conflict with similar activities authorized by law and performed by established agencies.
SEC. 206. Members of the Council shall serve full time and the Chairman of the Council shall be compensated at the rate provided for Level II of the Executive Schedule Pay Rates (5 U.S.C. 5313). The other members of the Council shall be compensated at the rate provided for Level IV of the Executive Schedule Pay Rates (5 U.S.C. 5315).
Sec. 207. There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the provisions of this Act not to exceed $300,000 for fiscal year 1970, $700,000 for fiscal year 1971, and $1,000,000 for each fiscal year thereafter.
And the House agree to the same.
That the Senate recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the House to the title of the bill, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the amendment of the House to the title of the bill, insert the following: "An Act to establish a national policy for the environment, to provide for the establishment of a Council on Environmental Quality, and for other purposes."
And the House agree to the same.
EDWARD A. GARMATZ, JOHN D. DINGELL, WAYNE N. ASPINALL, W. S. MAILLIARD, JOHN P. SAYLOR,
Managers on the Part of the House.
HENRY M. JACKSON, FRANK CHURCH, GAYLORD NELSON, GORDON ALLOTT, LEN B. JORDAN,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, I move the adoption of the conference report.
The motion was agreed to.