BACKGROUND In conjunction with Reorganization Plan No. 3, Federal responsibility for research on and management of Great Lakes fisheries was transferred from the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries (BCF) to BSFW. BCF (now NMFS) retained certain commercial fishery-oriented responsibilities, including the compilation of commercial catch statistics. For this purpose, they have retained a statistician and a clerical assistant at the BSFW Great Lakes Fishery Laboratory at Ann Arbor. BSFW provides space and the use of computer and other facilities. BSFW is responsible for a biological research program whose objective is to develop and maintain information forming the scientific basis for fishery management decisions. Information needed includes an up-to-date assessment of fishery stocks and this requires data on the removal of fish from the resource by sport and commercial fishermen. In FY 1972, BSFW will begin the development of a uniform method for the collection and evaluation of statistics on the sport fish catch. For maximum effectiveness, it is important that the two statistical compilations be compatible. AGREEMENT For the above reasons and also to prevent misunderstandings and costly duplication of effort, it is agreed: that BSFW will assume responsibility for the compilation of statistics on the commercial catch of fish in the Great Lakes; that BSFW will consult with, and gain concurrence of, NMFS before making any changes in methods which would effect their utility for NMFS purposes; and that the cost of providing these services will be shared by NMFS and BSFW. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, Hon. EDMUND S. MUSKIE, Chairman, Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, U.S. Senate, Committee on Public Works, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: In reply to your letter of May 14 concerning the National Environmental Laboratory Bill, S. 1113, I am please to supply the following information for use by the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, and for inclusion in the hearing record. I shall address myself to the questions posed in the order in which they appear in your letter; however, the activities of the two Academies in the environment are such that questions 5, 6, and 8 do not apply. (1) The National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering do not possess or operate laboratories or research installations. There are, however, currently in the National Research Council 26 boards and committees that deal either exclusively or partly with questions related to the environment. These committees, listed in an enclosure to this letter, are composed of experts from universities, industry, and government. They usually address themselves to questions posed by an agency of the Executive Branch of the Government. The Environmental Studies Board, a joint Board of the National Academy of Sciences/National Academy of Engineering, has overall cognizance of the environmental program in the National Research Council and in the two Academies. Three to four hundred scientists are members of these committees. They contribute their time without fee. (2) Members of our committees are drawn from a wide variety of disciplines, and they usually have the doctoral degree. Our mode of operation is such that we can call on appropriate scientists in any field required by the nature of the problem. (3) Expenditures in support of the environmentally related committees of the two Academies and the National Research Council will be approximately $1.8 million for the current fiscal year, amounting to about 18 percent of our total expenditures for advisory and special studies services. (4) The Academies and Research Council ordinarily do not produce new knowledge in the field of the environment; their role is rather to synthesize what is known, and to bring together experts in a variety of disciplines, who by virtue of their expertise are qualified to render advice and recommend state-of-the-art solutions to environmental questions. In many cases the integration of different kinds of knowledge results in new departures, and provides new solutions to old problems. About half the work done by our committees can be called technology assessment. (7) In the structure of the Academies and the National Research Council there are two operating mechanisms for identifying and addressing environmental questions. The first is in response to requests by federal agencies, both in the Legislative and the Executive Branch of the Government. When we are asked to provide advice on environmental matters, we usually do so by forming a committee which meets as frequently as necessary and produces a report to the requesting agency. When the problems are complex in nature, an intensive summer study is a useful mechanism for multidisciplinary assessment. In some cases a review of available information seems to be indicated; under those circumstances the Academies may convene symposia, workshops, or other meetings. The second mechanism employed to identify environmental questions is to rely on the members of the several committees and the Environmental Studies Board to point cut those areas which deserve special attention. Once a problem is identified in this way, we seek out agencies or foundations that might be interested in funding a study of the matter. Once funding is obtained we proceed in much the same manner as outlined above. (1252) Coordination of our work with the Environmental Protection Agency takes place largely through informal personal contact by our committee chairmen, committee members, Academy officials, and the senior staff. As the Environmental Protection Agency continues to evolve, our coordinating mechanisms also change. They are being strengthened even as I write this letter. Dr. Roger Revelle, a member of the National Academy of Sciences and of its Environmental Studies Board, has testified at the hearings on Senate Bill 1113. There he brought out the fact that in a study conducted by the Environmental Studies Board in the summer of 1969, the recommendation was made concerning the need for establishment of a national environmental laboratory to carry out systematic research on the environment as a whole. Nothing has happened since then that would change the conclusions reached in that study. Sincerely, PHILIP HANDLER, President. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES-NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL Environmental Studies Board. Committee on Engineering Aspects of Environmental Quality. Committee on Solid Waste Management. Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, Advisory to AEC. Committee on Biological Effects of Atmospheric Pollutants, Advisory to EPA. Committee on Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation, Advisory to NIH. Committee on Power Plant Siting. Committee on Agriculture and the Environment. Committee on Nitrate Accumulation. Committee on Animal Health and Nutrition. Committee on Food Protection. Committee on Hazardous Materials, Advisory to USCG. Committee on Atmospheric Sciences. Committee on Polar Research. Ocean Affairs Board. Marine Board. Committee on Advisory to NOAA. Committee on On-Site Solid Wastes Research, Advisory to PHS. Committee on Toxicology. Committee on Fire Research. Federal Construction Council. Highway Research Board. Maritime Transportation Research Board. Committee on Technological Aspects of Critical and Strategic Materials. Committee on Hearing, Bioacoustics, and Biomechanics. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION, Hon. EDMUND S. MUSKIE, Chairman, Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your letter of May 14, 1971, requesting certain information about active research programs in environmental science and technology. The mission of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration is to carry out space research and applications and the development of aeronautics and space technology. However, while NASA is not an environmental agency and does not carry out environmental research as such, some of the NASA mission programs and projects can have application to the monitoring, measuring, understanding, and perhaps even modification and control of the natural environment. Those activities we have so identified are: a. The Earth Resources Survey Program, which is developing the efficient application of remote sensing technologies from aircraft and spacecraft to the needs and problems of the user community-the federal, state, and local line organizations charged with earth resources responsibilities such as agriculture, forestry, hydrology, oceanography, land use planning, and environmental management. b. The Meteorology Program, which is developing the efficient application of aerospace technology to support the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in its responsibility for understanding the atmosphere, predicting weather, and establishing a basis for weather modification and climate control. c. The Earth Physics Program, involving the application of geodetic satellite and precision tracking astronomical techniques to measurements of the dynamics of the solid earth and oceans in support of NOAA, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Department of Defense. d. The Aeronomy Program, in which studies of the upper atmosphere using sounding rockets and satellites supports the NOAA activity. e. The Aircraft Noise Program, in which development of the technology for low-noise aircraft propulsion systems and research on the propagation of noise and its effect on humans, is carried out in support of the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency. f. The Aircraft Propulsion Program, which contains elements contributing to improved measurement of air pollutants, reduced emissions, and greater understanding of mixing and transport processes of gases. The foregoing program are funded at a total of about $175 million for Fiscal Year 1971, with the bulk of the funding in the Earth Resources Survey and Meteorology Programs. In addition, a number of other NASA activities may contribute to environmental research. Examples of these are: (1) the radio interference and propagation program, which provides greater understanding of these phenomena affecting communications; (2) the solar astronomy program, which contributes to the understanding of earth-sun relationships through measurements of solar activity; (3) the planetary atmospheres program, through which a better understanding of the earth's atmosphere may be acquired by studying the atmospheres of other planets; and (4) the manned spacecraft life support program, where the technology of closed cycle life support systems may eventually contribute to water and waste management systems technologies for units on earth. In all of these activities, NASA interferes directly with the user agencies through a number of formal and informal mechanisms. Examples of these are as follows: a. The Earth Resources Survey Program Review Committee (ERSPRC) has been established to review the total program and to provide advice and recom(1254) mendations including the establishment of user requirements. The member agencies are the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce (NOAA), Interior, Navy, and Army (Corps of Engineers). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will soon become a member of the Committee. b. NASA is providing facilities at the Mississippi Test Facility to support a number of activities of other Agencies, many of which deal with environmental considerations. These include projects of NOAA (the National Data Buoy Project, the National Marine Fisheries Remote Sensing Project, and instrumentation work), the U.S. Geological Survey (hydraulic research), and EPA (pesticide analysis and water quality studies). NASA has an earth resources survey analysis activity at MTF, and its proximity to the foregoing user programs should be highly beneficial to all parties. c. The Meteorological Satellite Program Review Board, with membership from NASA and NOAA, serves to ensure review of the NASA Meteorology Program by the prime user in a manner analogous to that of the ERSPRC. d. The Geodetic Satellite Program Board serves the same purpose for the Geodesy and Earth Physics Programs, with membership from NASA, NOAA, and the Department of Defense. e. Overall coordination with the DOD is effected through the Aeronautics and Astronautics Coordinating Board (AACB) and its various Panels in specific disciplines or systems areas. The Department of Transportation sits with the AACB as an observer. f. Overall coordination with the Department of Transportation in aeronautical research and development is effected through the NASA/FAA Coordinating Committee, where the Federal Aviation Administration represents the DOT. g. Specific coordination in the Aircraft Noise Program is afforded by the Noise Research Panel of the Interagency Aircraft Noise Abatement Program. A number of Federal Departments and Agencies are represented in this program. In summary, though NASA does not carry out environmental research as such, Agency activities in a number of areas can and have contributed to the environmental activities of the responsible Federal Agencies. NASA cooperates closely with these agencies and finds that the injection of NASA technology frequently serves as a catalyst to open new avenues to exploitation. Both formal and informal working relationships have been established to afford the necessary coordination, and they appear to be working. The specific programmatic details (funding levels, where funded, manpower, fields of specialization, etc.) can be developed if you so desire. However, they have not been submitted at this time because it appears they would not be gerinane to your survey. Sincerely yours, GEORGE M. Low, Deputy Administrator. |