Senator HILL. The full 5?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Yes, sir.

(3) Increase the jurisdiction and strength of Federal enforcement; (4) Give the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare specific responsibility for determining storage needs in Federal reservoirs to provide water for streamflow regulation for the purpose of water quality control;

(5) Direct intensified research on the principal deterrents to the repeated reuse of streamflow:

(6) Direct studies of the quality of the waters of the Great Lakes and of alternate means of solving pollution problems in these waters; and

(7) Direct establishment of seven or more field laboratories and research facilities, which will bring specialized scientific and technical resources closer to the sites of water pollution problems throughout the country.

The "Water supply and water pollution control" appropriation request for $23.6 million includes increases aggregating $4.7 million.

Of this increase, $1.6 million is for the Great Lakes-Illinois Waterway comprehensive water pollution control program. An increase of $823,000 is requested for research grants, and an increase of $121,000 is requested for the national water quality network.

The remaining $2,604,000 of the increase is requested for activities authorized by the Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, including grants for training, grants for State and interstate water pollution control agencies, and grants for demonstrations to help bridge the gap between research and broad application of research findings. Increases related to last year's legislation are also requested for direct operations in comprehensive programs for water pollution control, enforcement, research, and technical services.

COOPERATIVE PROGRAM

As we have suggested in earlier years, we believe that the Federal Water Pollution Control Act provides for a well-rounded FederalState cooperative program; and that a balanced and orderly implementation of all authorizations provided in the statute is necessary. The 1961 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act have extended and improved the act of 1956. These 1963 budget proposals would continue our progress.

Mr. Chairman, I shall be glad to give more details on any aspects of the budget that the committee may wish to discuss.

Senator HILL. I shall insert in the record this tabulation on the comprehensive water pollution control programs for the principal river basins of the United States.

(The table referred to follows:)

Comprehensive water pollution control programs for principal river basins of the

United States

Senator HILL. Mr. McCallum, I noticed in your statement that a balanced and orderly implementation of all authorization provided in the statute is necessary. Do you feel that this budget that we have before us for 1963 provides for that balanced and orderly implementation?

Mr. MCCALLUM. It does implement each of the authorizations. It begins implementation of them.

it?

Senator HILL. How about the balancing? How well balanced is

Mr. MCCALLUM. I think the balance is reasonable among the different aspects.

Senator HILL. You think it is reasonable?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Yes, sir. I don't think that one is particularly ahead of any other part.

AUTHORIZATION FOR 1963

Senator HILL. How much is this overall budget short of the amount as authorized for 1963 by the act?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Well, in grants, the grants that have a statutory ceiling, it does come up to the ceiling. The other amount mentioned in the act was for research.

Our re

The 1961 amendment authorized $5 million a year up to a total of $25 million for intramural research in three specified areas. quest to implement that, our increase, is for $264,000. Senator HILL. It would implement that?

Mr. McCALLUM. It would begin implementation of it; yes.

REGIONAL WATER QUALITY LABORATORIES

Senator HILL. How many of these laboratories did you contemplate under the act, the water laboratories? I am speaking of the new laboratories.

Mr. MCCALLUM. The act authorizes seven.

Senator HILL. Seven?

Mr. MCCALLUM. But it is not limited to seven. It specifies the different sections of the country in which they are to be located.

Senator HILL. The budget would provide for two; is that right? Mr. McCALLUM. For two; yes, sir.

SELECTION OF SITES FOR LABORATORIES

Senator HILL. One would be in Oregon and one would be in Oklahoma; is that correct?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Yes, sir; that is correct.

Senator HILL. What was the basis for the selection of these sites? How did you go about selecting these sites?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Well, first, the act stipulates that they shall be located in certain sections of the country. One is Northwest, one is in Southwest. It also provides that they shall be located where work can be carried on in collaboration with schools of higher learning in these fields. That indicates the general location. The distance from our main research and technical service center at Cincinnati, Ohio, is one of the considerations in locating facilities, and each of those parts of the country are distant from our research headquarters at Cincinnati.

So, those locations are where we need resources to carry on the work that we are doing in those general areas of the country.

Senator HILL. Last year didn't you request funds for all seven of the sites?

Mr. MCCALLUM. We requested funds for four sites.

FUNDS FOR SITE ACQUISITION AND PLANNING

Mr. KELLY. Last year, the Congress provided us with the funds for site acquisition and planning with respect to all seven of the laboratories. Although the 1963 budget calls for construction of the first two of them, we would expect to proceed with the site selection and the architectural planning of the remaining facilities in order that we would be in a position to proceed with constructon for those when funds could be requested in 1964.

Senator HILL. But you now have funds which the Congress gave you in the last session for the site acquisition for all seven of the laboratories; is that right?

Mr. KELLY. And the architectural planning.

Senator HILL. Both the acquisition of the sites and the planning for the laboratories?

Mr. KELLY. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.

NEED FOR LABORATORY FUNDS

Senator HILL. Mr. McCallum, I understand what you said about the distance from your center in Cincinnati, but there must have been other factors, too; weren't there?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Well, the immediate needs of the workload, that is, to do our own work. We have comprehensive programs in the Northwest and in the Southwest; in the Columbia River Basin in the Northwest and on the Arkansas and Red Rivers of the Southwest.

We have already been forced to develop temporary laboratory facilities to carry on those workloads. That is not a very satisfactory arrangement.

Senator HILL. As I recall the authorizing legislation which was submitted to the committee in the last session of the Congress, there was no reference in there about distance, was there?

Mr. MCCALLUM. No, sir.

Senator HILL. The only reference there if I recall, and if my recollection is not correct, please give me the correct picture, is that these laboratories were to be established in relation to, I believe was the word, a college or an educational institution; is that right?

Mr. MCCALLUM. That is right. That is specified in the act, and also the general geographical areas of the country. However, in providing the laboratories, in planning the laboratories, the two this year, we have been attempting to phase them in with the increases in other parts of the program.

INCREASE IN OTHER PHASES OF PROGRAM

Senator HILL. The increase in what?

Mr. MCCALLUM. The development of other parts of our program under the new legislation and the 1956 act. It will mean getting some new employees, some different types of employees, and undertaking work in different parts of the country in collaboration with the States, as we are now doing in the Northwest.

Senator HILL. Dr. Anderson, have you a comment?

Dr. ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman, with regard to these two regions, the Northwest and the Southwest areas of the country, we already have staff located in those areas, working on the comprehensive water quality control programs on the Columbia River in the Northwest and the Arkansas-Red in the Southwest.

Currently, the work of those staffs in those programs of the comprehensive program plans and studies, is hindered by the fact that we don't have facilities. So it was logical that we should start the first laboratories in the areas where we already have staff engaged in the work that the laboratories are to do.

Senator HILL. In other words, these staffs had been located there by the Public Health Service before even this act was passed authorizing the establishment of these laboratories?

Dr. ANDERSON. Yes, sir; they were located there working on the comprehensive water pollution control programing which the Congress had authorized in previous appropriation actions.

LOCATION OF REMAINING LABORATORIES

Senator HILL. As to these other five laboratories, have you made a recommendation as to their location?

Mr. MCCALLUM. No; not yet. We have a group of experts who are now going about the country looking at proposed sites, who will be ready to make a report to the Secretary very soon.

Senator HILL. Did you recommend these other two sites?

Mr. MCCALLUM. The sites were selected by the Secretary, and we have furnished technical information to the Secretary. The sites are actually selected by the Secretary under the act.

Senator HILL. But you didn't make any recommendations from your Bureau ?

Mr. MCCALLUM. We have furnished technical information on the feasibility of several sites. We are continuing to do that.

RECOMMENDATION OF SITES

Senator HILL. Wouldn't you ordinarily make a recommendation about a matter of this kind? Wouldn't he want your recommendations?

Dr. ANDERSON. Certainly, Mr. Chairman, he does desire a recommendation. In both of these instances, in the Oregon site and in the Oklahoma site, the sites are in association with universities, institutions of higher education, which are working in the general field of the sciences which fit the needs of the water pollution control program. As a matter of fact, in the instance of Corvallis, Oreg., we already had several people working at the university on special problems.

Senator HILL. Mr. McCallum, will you make a recommendation as to these other sites?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Yes; when our team of experts get finished, we will analyze each of the sites and make proposals as to which ones will meet the criteria of the act as we understand it, and of our own needs, our own program needs, which we have also done in these two instances. Senator HILL. Will you recommend as to which sites you think are the best sites?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Yes, sir.

Senator HILL. You will.

Are there any other divisions of the Public Health Service, any one connected with the Public Health Service, other than your Division, who has any say about this matter?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Yes. Dr. Anderson and our colleagues.
Senator HILL. He is the overall man, isn't he?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Well, we all discuss these things. We talk about them a great deal. As a matter of fact, this is a subject that we have had on our mind for years. It has been increasingly evident that with the amount of activity in the water resources field, with, for example, a billion and a half authorized in water resources Federal projects on the Columbia River, water quality is so important we must have resources and technical people closer to the problem than we could provide from Cincinnati, Ohio. This is borne out by the fact that we have already established a temporary laboratory in Portland, Oreg., in addition to our research people at Oregon State University. Senator HILL. When you and Dr. Anderson make your recommendations, where do your recommendations go then?