"(6) established procedures to ensure that equitable consideration is given to all eligible pub lic or nonprofit institutions regardless of type of ownership. "Administration "Sec. 307. The Administrator is authorized to prescribe such rules as may be necessary in order to carry out the provisions of this part. "Authorization of Appropriations "Sec. 308. (a) For purposes of making grants pursuant to this part, there is authorized to be appropri ated not to exceed $300,000,000 for each fiscal year in the three consecutive fiscal year period ending September 30, 1980. "(b) For expenses of the Administrator in administering the provisions of this part, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this part for each fiscal year in the three consecutive fiscal year period ending September 30, 1980. "Nondiscrimination "Sec. 309. No person in the United States shall on the grounds of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity funded in whole or in part with funds made available under this part." Mr. BARDIN. The President's proposal on that second stage which requires capital funding is to authorize $300 million a year for 3 years, as your initial authorization, to provide grants covering 40 percent of the cost of certain capital improvements, improvements for insulation, for example, or improvements to add solar heating facilities, for achieving distinct fuel economies in the public school systems and the nonprofit sector, the nonpublic school systems, and in hospitals. The school systems of this country spent $1.5 billion in fuel in 1975. That was an increase of more than $500 million from 1972, and that is not even taking account of the kind of conditions we had in the extreme weather situation of last year. They need help. They need first analytic help. They need somebody to come in and tell them. Not every school district has the good fortune of having a top-notch engineer on the school board, and we think they need the kind of assistance that we are trying to reach out to them, to identify their problems. We do it through four programs, a computerized analysis of their energy use, to identify extraordinary high energy uses, a mini-audit which we developed in connection with the State of Minnesota Energy Agency, which includes a quick onsite inspection, a maxiaudit, which we developed in connection with the American Association of School Administrators, and that includes a thorough energy audit of the given building, plus a workshop program to get the message across to a large number of managers at one time. In my judgment, it would be wise to integrate all of these programs in one. You asked before about the advantages of direct grants through the Federal Government to the school district as contrasted to going through the governors, which I take to mean the governors using their State energy offices. One advantage that I think you ought to consider in using the governor and the State energy officers is the chance to integrate the grant for this kind of public works program with the ongoing program that has been started by FEA and is being worked on by ERDA, to identify the facts, give the school districts the benefit of the know-how that we can supply to them. In my experience, it takes time to make a public works program work, and many of our local governmental bodies are not ready for it. They have to hear that there is a grant, a very substantial grant program available. They have to have it explained. They have to review through their own processes whether it makes sense to put up the local match. I don't have to tell you the difficulties that you encounter on the local level, if it is done purely locally, or even on the State level, if the State assists with some funding, to raise the non-Federal share of these programs. We have got to get a very strong message across to thousands and thousands of school districts in America. The fact was put out dramatically in the statement by the school administrators before, about how we have been building school buildings in the days when energy was cheap and abundant, and we assumed there would be no problem. That has certainly been true in New Jersey too. For at least 10 years, really most of the last quarter century, we have been building buildings with a minimum of insulation and a maximum of spread, when it has been a question of how do you cut down the capital budget for school construction? Things like insulation are always easy to trim if you assume a low energy cost. Now we are trying to reverse that cycle. We are trying to retrofit. It is going to be a tough problem, a difficult one, which will take a very strong message from Washington, D.C., the Congress the executive branch, to thousands and thousands of school districts who have to get the job done. I think it is important that you see to it that they have the kind of technical assistance that I think can best be done by taking advantage of the programs we have already started, through previous congressional enactment under the Energy Production and Conservation Act. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would be happy to answer questions. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Schmidt, do you have anything additional to add? STATEMENT OF THOMAS C. SCHMIDT Mr. SCHMIDT. Mr. Chairman, my name is Thomas Schmidt. I am Commissioner of Education in the State of Rhode Island. I am here representing the State of Rhode Island, and also speaking for the Chief State School Officers of which I am a member, and also vice chairman of the Legislative Committee. With me is Mr. John Adams, who is the representative from the Chiefs who could answer any questions you might have that cover more details. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, your prepared statement will be inserted in the record. I would just like to ask one thing of the State superintendent of Rhode Island-and this is Senator Pell's State. Do you favor the approach that we are taking here or do you favor the approach recommended by the Administration? Mr. SCHMIDT. Mr. Chairman, I had the great pleasure to testify before Senator Pell on S. 701 about 3 weeks ago, the companion bill to yours. It is a pleasure to be here today. I am strongly in support of the kind of approach taken by these two bills. I would like to get into kind of a middle-of-the-road, coordinative approach to some of the issues with especially the grants, where it has to do with coordination of school districts and working with school districts in clusters rather than on a one-by-one basis. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have any further comments on that yourself? Mr. Cross. Mr. CROSS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One thing that has puzzled several of us in President Carter's proposal on energy in section 301, it includes provision for assistance to church-related and secondary schools. That would seem to fly in the face of Supreme Court decisions and constituted Federal policy and everything else, and I would wonder what your comments on that are, whether the constitutional issue was examined when the bill was drafted, and what your views are, and whether there is Justice Department memoranda supporting this assistance. Mr. BARDIN. I believe that the general question has been examined, and the conclusion reached by the Administration in drafting the bill was it would be incorrect to pay for insulating say the chapel in a parochial school, but that there is already precedent for limited aspects of assistance in the case of nonpublic parochial schools. I think you ought to remember that the context of the Administration bill is to reduce fuel consumption and help those nonprofit sectors of the economy to reduce their consumption, both for national interest, patriotic reasons, and to help save funds for their own budgets. This is not a bill that aims at establishment of religion or assisting any religious group as such. As to the Justice Department, I am not in a position to advise you one way or the other. Mr. CROSS. I think you will find the established precedent you speak of is in relation to colleges and universities in which there has been aid for construction and loans for construction. I think you will find it has not been true in elementary and secondary, and this is really a departure. I would like to ask that one of you go back and ask if there is any legal basis and if there is something that we could have for our hearing record. Mr. BARDIN. I will be happy, sir, to check into that and supply you with further information on the subject. Chairman PERKINS. I have a question for the gentleman from the Commerce Department. Could you provide us some information about the participation of schools in the public works program, because that includes a priority for energy conservation? Mr. STEPHAN. May I proceed with my statement and answer the counsel's statement? Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, your statement may be inserted in the record. [Statement of Edward Stephan follows:] ** INSERT K STATEMENT EDWARD STEPHAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, INDUSTRY/ASSOCIATION PROGRAMS DIVISION, OFFICE OF ENERGY PROGRAMS, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE CONCERNING H.R. 5996 TO AMEND THE ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT OF 1965 TO PROVIDE FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES IN ORDER TO ASSIST THEM IN MEETING THE EMERGENCY CAUSED BY THE HIGH COST OF FUEL SHORTAGES AND ADVERSE WHEATHER CONDITIONS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR MAY 3, 1977 |