Page images
PDF
EPUB

TABLE B.-Principal Bureau of State Services (EH) interagency committee relationships, 1963Continued

DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Functions of committee

Agencies represented

Name of committee

Advisory Committee to the Silicosis Study in Metal

Miners.
Committee on Toxicology.

To direct administrative aspects of the joint Public Public Health Service, and interior.

Health Service-Bureau of Mines silicosis study.
To integrate available toxicologic knowledge on sub- | Public Health Service, and National Research Council.

stances of interest to the Armed Forces for their current
information.

DIVISION OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH

Federal Radiation Council.

To advise the President with respect to radiation matters, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Atomic

directly or indirectly affecting health, including guid Energy Commission, Labor, Department of Defense, ance for all Federal agencies in formulation of radiation Agriculture, and Commerce. standards and in the establishment and execution of

programs of cooperation, Joint Committee on Radiation Environment Studies at Coordinate interagency programs involved in collection Public Health Service, Atomic Energy Commission, U.S. Nevada Test Site.

and evaluation of radiation data resulting from nuclear Air Force (Department of Defense), and Commerce.

reactor test sites at the Nevada Test Site. Committee on Radiation Preservation of Food.

To achieve a high level of participation by Government Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Agricul

agencies and industry on research and development of ture, State, Interior, Army, Atomic Energy Commisfood processing with ionizing radiation,

sion, Small Business Administration, Agency for Inter

national Development, and Commerce. Committee on Radiological Assistance Representatives.. Maintains continuous llaison between representatives of Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Atomic

various Federal agencies with respect to emergency Energy Commission. Department of Defense, Comradiological assistance.

merce, Labor, Post Office, General Services Administra-
tion, Treasury, Interstate Commerce Commission,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and

Office of Civil Defense and Mobilization.
Joint Advisory Committee on Removal of Radioactive To develop a feasible system for the removal of radioactive Public Health Service, Atomic Energy Commission,
Nuclides From Milk.
nuclides from milk.

Agriculture, and Canadian Department of Agriculture.
Working Group of the Federal Radiation Council.

To advise their respective agencies with respect to radia- Health, Education, and Welfare, Atomic Energy Com-
tion matters directly or indirectly affecting health.

mission, Labor, Defense, Agriculture, and Commerce. Subcommittee on Livestock Damage

To provide advice on best procedure for assessing damage Health, Éducation, and Welfare, Atomic Energy Comto livestock from radioactive fallout.

mission, Agriculture, and Department of Defense National Committee on Radiation Protection and Meas To develop recommendations regarding radiation protec Public Health Service, National Bureau of Standards, urements. tion standards and methods.

Atomic Energy Commission, U.S. Air Force, Army,

and Navy. Subcommittee 15 of National Committee on Radiation To study problems of radiation hazards and protection in Public Health Service and National Bureau of Standards. Protection.

teaching institutions, Subcommittee on Use of Radioactive Standards.

To insure that users of radioactive standards use them Public Health Service, National Research Council, and
properly.

National Bureau of Standards.
Subcominftteo of V.8. Food and AB iculture Org nizatio
Interagency Committee.

To be responsible for any interagency cooperation that Public Health Service, Agriculture, State, and Interior.

may be necessary in arranging for International training courses on surveys for radionuclides in foods.

[graphic]
[blocks in formation]
[graphic]
[ocr errors]

ETH SZETTE

Mr. DINGELL. Then, you have no objection to the amendment reintrk -* quiring that there be no additional positions established by this reblar pas organization; is that correct ?

Dr. TERRY. I would have no objection to it. Publ Mr. DINGELL. All right. Now, let's go further. E. The bill indicates on page 3 that certain officers will rank as Assistant

Surgeons General; they will have the grade of Assistant Surgeons General.

How many of those will there be under this bill? rise Dr. TERRY. This bill has nothing to do with the number of Assistant bSurgeons General in the Public Health Service.

Mr. DINGELL. How many individuals are going to get the rank of Assistant Surgeon General under this legislation? E Dr. Terry. Insofar as I read the bill at the moment, Mr. Dingell, I

do not see that it will create any additional positions with the grade of - Assistant Surgeon General. 7 Mr. DINGELL. You don't believe there will be a new position.

Now, there are environmental health activities conducted in how many other agencies of the Government?

Dr. TERRY. We drew up a list of those, Mr. Dingell, and it is approximately 25 other agencies in the Federal Government.

Mr. DINGELL. Will you submit that list to the committee for the record ?

Dr. TERRY. I will be very happy to submit it.
(The information requested follows:)

PRINCIPAL BUREAU OF STATE SERVICES (ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH) INTERAGENCY

WORKING AND COMMITTEE RELATIONSHIPS (1963) Specific examples of interagency and intra-agency relationships are indicated in tables A and B which follow.

Table A indicates primary working relationships which are based upon formal and informal cooperative agreements between agencies and the Bureau of State Services (Environmental Health). In certain cases these relationships involve transfer of funds or reimbursement and represent basic segments of congressionally approved or continuing programs. These types of relationships make it possible for one agency to utilize the competency and resources of another agency, thus precluding the development of duplicate program efforts among agencies having overlapping or related program jurisdiction.

Table B indicates primary committee relationships between agencies and the Bureau of State Services (Environmental Health). These are formal relationships established by written agreements, in some cases by direction of the President or by the Congress. These relationships promote continued coordination between closely related programs of various agencies and provide a mechanism for the exchange of information pertinent to problems of national concern.

It should be pointed out that a great deal of interrelationships between agencies and the Bureau of State Services (Environmental Health) is of an informal, nonrecurring nature representing contacts between individuals of the same or related scientific disciplines or professions, or between offices having similar functions. The total effect of these types of interrelationships cannot be measured accurately, but unquestionably play a fundamental role in the development and progress of Government research operations.

32-692-64-30

[ocr errors]

of a

heali

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Mr. DINGELL. And, also, the amounts of money.

You indicate in your testimony that you expect that there will be a significant number of changes in your Department if this proposal

D goes through.

Why did you not specifically enumerate those in the legislation before the committee on 2410?

M Dr. TERRY. For the simple reason, Mr. Dingell, that I did not feel Inst that it would be wise to do so. I think that from the operational D standpoint, and the responsibility of the Secretary to conduct the affairs of the Department, it would be better not to have such a rigid plop statutory limitation as exists at the present time.

Mr. DINGELL. As a matter of fact, this legislation authorizes you or your successor to, in effect, completely reorganize the Department at any time you so choose; am I correct? Dr. TERRY. With the approval of the Secretary.

DI Mr. DINGELL. I see.

MC Now, you also indicated to the committee that it was your expecta

th tion that you will set up certain activities within your Department Tel with regard to water pollution.

The chairman today indicated that there was legislation enacted by this Congress during the past session which he was going to sponsor, and I am sure you recall it.

Dr. TERRY. Yes, sir; I do.
Mr. DINGELL. Which specifically sets certain statutes for water pol-

Su lution activities. Am I correct?

Dr. Terry. It assigns those responsibilities to the Secretary; yes, sir.

Mr. DINGELL. All right.

That being so, what is your interpretation of this legislation with T regard to the previous legislation?

Is this legislation authorized to supersede that legislation?
Dr. TERRY. No, sir; it certainly does not.
The Secretary still has the responsibility.

I am indicating how, as long as the Secretary assigns these re. sponsibilities to the Public Health Service, I would propose to orga D nize them and operate them. Mr. DINGELL. Now, General Terry, you indicated that you expected

D certain organizational advances to occur in your agency if this bill M is passed. Will you enumerate to the committee what substantive advances in

I terms of water pollution abatement and in terms of air pollution abatement will occur by result of enactment of this legislation?

} Dr. TERRY. I don't know of any specific advances in either of those programs that would be authorized or implemented by this legisla

I tion with the exception of giving us a better organizational structure on which to develop.

3 Mr. DINGELL. Your statement is, then, that you know of no substantive advances in the field of water pollution abatement or air pollution abatement which would occur by reason of enactment of this legislation: is that correct?

Dr. Terry. With the exception of giving a better organizational and operational framework in which to carry out these programs.

Mr. DINGELL. All right.

hisi tion

TH

[ocr errors]

tent

Now, in the event this legislation is passed, it will give impetus to the creation of an Institute of Environmental Health, will it not?

Dr. TERRY. Mr. Dingell, though it is not a part of the bill, I have indicated that if this legislation is passed, I will create, with the Secretary's approval, a Bureau of Environmental Health.

Mr. DINGELL. How many people do you propose to employ in this Institute of Environmental Health?

Dr. TERRY. I do not know the exact number, but this particular legislation would not determine the number of persons to be employed. It would be on the basis of the already existing and developing programs.

Mr. DINGELL. As a matter of fact, you have programed an increase
of approximately 500 people for that particular operation for the
coming fiscal year; have you not?

Dr. TERRY. For what operation ?
Mr. DINGELL. For the Institute of Environmental Health.

Dr. TERRY. I don't have immediately at hand the exact number that we have planned to increase in all of our areas of environmental health next year, but there is a proposed increase.

Mr. DINGELL. 1,614 positions.
Dr. TERRY. Are you talking of the water pollution program?

Mr. DINGELL. I am talking about an increase in environmental health.

Submit that for the record.

Dr. TERRY. I will be glad to submit it for the record, but let me make this clear, Mr. Dingell: That this legislation regarding our organization will not determine any increase in positions; it will be a question of program development.

(The information requested follows:) The 1964 budget includes a requested increase of 339 positions over 1963 for all environmental health programs.

Mr. DINGELL. Now, I understand, also, that your Institute of Environmental Health in its first phase contemplates approximately 4,500 to 5,000 positions; am I correct?

Dr. TERRY. No, sir; that is not correct.
Mr. DINGELL. How many positions?
Dr. TERRY. Let's get clear what we are talking about.

Mr. DINGELL. I am very clear what I am talking about, Doctor. I am talking about the Institute of Environmental Health.

Dr. TERRY. The thing that we specifically refer to, Mr. Dingell, is the Environmental Health Center.

Mr. DINGELL. The Environmental Health Center, then, is going to involve how many jobs and how many people?

Dr. Terry. In the early stages, it would involve something in the vicinity of 1,600 by 1968.

Mr. DINGELL. I see, but the first phase contemplates approximately 5,000 people; am I correct?

Dr. TERRY. No, sir. I was speaking of the first phase.

If it develops further, along the lines we feel that it may over a period of years, it may involve up to 5,000 persons.

Mr. DINGELL. All right.

Now, what will be the annual operating cost of that institution at the level of 5,000 employees?

[ocr errors]

mer

[ocr errors]

Mr. I

[ocr errors]

Dr. TERRY. I do not have the figures immediately at hand.

The D Dr. Anderson, do you know what would be the approximate opers they ating cost of the Environmental Health Center when it had the full development up to a projected employment of 5,000 persons ?

Dr. ANDERSON. I do not have that figure for the projected maximum potential of this center, Mr. Dingell.

MED We have done our planning on the basis of what we would expect

Hoe to have in the Center by the year 1968–69. Mr. DINGELL. What is the cost of this Center going to be?

Dr. T: Dr. ANDERSON. Well, the developments that we have proposed to this point call for a physical plant to house the environmental activities toura of the Public Health Service.

Mr. DINGELL. Five thousand ?
Dr. ANDERSON. No.

What we have proposed in our budget proposal has been the develop-
ment of a plant which would house about 1,600 people by 1969–70,
and the cost of that plant would be about $33 million.
Mr. DINGELL. The ultimate cost is expected to be $78 million; is that

Justi right?

Dr. ANDERSON. That would depend upon further developments in the budgetary area. Mr. DINGELL. An ultimate payroll of $45 million a year.

I am reporting from what was reported in the newspapers not long back.

I have been trying to get these figures, and I have to go to the daily newspaper to get them.

You indicate that you exepct a payroll of $45 million a year.

Now, the point I am trying to get: This is ultimately aiming at going into radiological health; am I correct? Dr. TERRY. No, sir.

T This Center would involve all of the program areas we have mere tioned in the field of environmental health.

Mr. DINGELL. Among them will be radiological health?
Dr. TERRY. Yes.

Mr. DINGELL. This will be duplication of what the Atomic Energy
Commission is doing in the field of radiological health.

Dr. TERRY. It will not.

Mr. DINGELL. The Atomic Energy Commission is engaged in this rather extensively.

Dr. TERRY. They certainly are, and we have also been since this responsibility was given to the Public Health Service.

Mr. DINGELL. Are you taking over their responsibility?
Dr. TERRY. No.
Mr. DINGELL. Then you are going to duplicate it?
Dr. TERRY. We are not.
Mr. DINGELL. You are not going to. All right.

Now, the National Institutes of Health presently does work in the field of environmental health, does it not, and makes grants for this purpose ? Dr. TERRY. During the past year, Mr. Dingell, those grant activities

, grant programs, which are clearly identified as in the field of environmental health, have been transferred to our Bureau of State Services.

Mr. DINGELL. All right.

lam

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »