TABLE B.-Principal Bureau of State Services (EH) interagency committee relationships, 1963-Continued Committee on Radiological Assistance Representatives. Maintains continuous liaison between representatives of Joint Advisory Committee on Removal of Radioactive Working Group of the Federal Radiation Council.. Subcommittee on Livestock Damage. various Federal agencies with respect to emergency To develop a feasible system for the removal of radioactive To advise their respective agencies with respect to radia- National Committee on Radiation Protection and Meas- To develop recommendations regarding radiation protec- tion standards and methods. Public Health Service, Atomic Energy Commission, U.S. Public Health Service and National Bureau of Standards, Public Health Servico, Agriculture, State, and Interior. Interagency Committee on Water Resources. To provide improved facilities and procedures for coordination of policies, programs, and activities in the field of water and related land resources. To coordinate agency activities in collection, analysis, and To formulate mutually acceptable principles and pro- To coordinate agency activities in collecting analysis and To plan coordinated national programs for expanded To conduct a survey of research and development programs Interagency Task Group on Water Resources Management. To coordinate emergency water functions as set forth in the To promote coordination of water supply and sewerage To prepare evaluation standards for economic analysis of To develop Government-wide long-range goals for a pro- Health, Education, and Welfare, Agriculture, Army, Labor, Interior, Commerce, and Federal Power Commission. Public Health Service, Agriculture, Interior, Defense, Public Health Service, Agriculture, Army, Commerce, Public Health Service, State, Navy, Air Force, Army, Public Health Service, Interior, Commerce, Army, Agri- 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 goes through. Why did you not specifically enumerate those in the legislation before the committee on 2410? Dr. TERRY. For the simple reason, Mr. Dingell, that I did not feel that it would be wise to do so. I think that from the operational standpoint, and the responsibility of the Secretary to conduct the affairs of the Department, it would be better not to have such a rigid 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. Mr. DINGELL. I see. Now, you also indicated to the committee that it was your expectation that you will set up certain activities within your Department 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 pollution 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 regard to the previous legislation? Is this legislation authorized to supersede that legislation? The Secretary still has the responsibility. I am indicating how, as long as the Secretary assigns these responsibilities to the Public Health Service, I would propose to organize them and operate them. Mr. DINGELL. Now, General Terry, you indicated that you expected certain organizational advances to occur in your agency if this bill is passed. Will you enumerate to the committee what substantive advances in 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 legislation with the exception of giving us a better organizational structure on which to develop. 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. 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. 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? Dr. TERRY. I do not have the figures immediately at hand. Dr. Anderson, do you know what would be the approximate operating 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. We have done our planning on the basis of what we would expect to have in the Center by the year 1968-69. Mr. DINGELL. What is the cost of this Center going to be? Dr. ANDERSON. Well, the developments that we have proposed to this point call for a physical plant to house the environmental activities of the Public Health Service. Mr. DINGELL. Five thousand? Dr. ANDERSON. No. What we have proposed in our budget proposal has been the development 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 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. This Center would involve all of the program areas we have mentioned 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. |