16 "(b) Any employee or a representative of employees who believes 17 that he has been discharged or otherwise discriminated against by any 18 person in violation of paragraph (1) of this subsection may within 19 thirty days after such violation secure, apply to the Secretary of Labor. 20 for a review of such alleged discharge or discrimination. A copy of the 21 application shall be sent to such person who shall be the respondent. 22 tipon receipt of such application, the Secretary of Labor shall cause 23 such-investigation to be made as be deems appropriate. Such investiga 24 tion shall provide an opportunity for a public hearing at the request25 of any party to enable the partics to present information relating te 26 such violation. The parties shall be given written notice of the turre 27 and place of the bearing at least five days prior to the bearing. Any 28 such hearing shall be of record and shall be subject to section-654-ef 29 title 5 of the United States Code. Upon receiving the report of such 30 investigation, the Secretary of Labor shall make findings of fact. If he finds that such violation did occur, he shall issue a decision, incorporal32 ing an order therein and his findings, requiring the party committing 33 such violation to take such affirmative action to abate the violation as the Secretary of Labor deems appropriate, including, but not limitedto, the rehiring or reinstatement of the employee or representative of 36 employees to his former position with compensation. If he finds that 37 there was no such violation, he shall issue an order denying the 38 application: Such order issued by the Secretary of Labor under this 39 subparagraph shall be subject to judicial review in the same manner as orders and decisions of the Administrator are subject to judicial review under this Act. Violations by any person of paragraph (1) of 42 this subsection shall be subject to the provisions of subsection (d) of 31 34 35 40 41 COMMENTS 15 "(e) In order to implement the purposes and policy of this Act to 16 protect and enhance the quality of the Nation's water, the President 17 sball, not more than one hundred and eighty days after enactment of 18 the National Water Quality Standards Act of 1971, cause to be issued 19 an order (1) requiring each Federal agency authorized to enter into 20 contracts and each Federal agency which is empowered to extend 21 Federal assistance by way of grant, loan, or contract to effectuate the 22 purpose and policy of this Act in such contracting or assistance 23 activities, and (2) setting forth procedures, sanctions, penalties, and 24 such other provisions, as the President determines necessary to carry 25 out such requirement. 36 39 GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE AND JUDICIAL REVIEW SEC. 509. (a) In connection with any determination, or for purposes 37 of obtaining information, under title III or IV of this Act, the Adminis38 trator may issue subpenas for the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of relevant papers, books, and documents, 40 and he may administer oaths. Except for effluent data, upon a showing 41 satisfactory to the Administrator by such owner or operator that such 42 papers, books, documents, or information or particular part thereof, 43 if made public, would divulge trade secrets or secret processes of 44 such owner or operator, the Administrator shall consider such record, 45 report, or information or particular portion thereof confidential in 46 accordance with the purposes of section 1905 of title 18 of the United 47 States Code, except that such paper, book, document, or information COMMENTS 1 2 3 4 6 STAFF PRINT may be disclosed to other officers, employees, or authorized representatives of the United States concerned with carrying out this Act, or when relevant in any proceeding under this Act. Witnesses summoned shall be paid the same fees and mileage that are paid witnesses 5 in the courts of the United States. In case of contumacy or refusal to obey a subpena served upon any person under this subparagraph, 7 the district court of the United States for any district in which such 8 person is found or resides or transacts business, upon application by 9 the United States and after notice to such person, shall have juris10 diction to issue an order requiring such person to appear and give 11 testimony before the Administrator, to appear and produce papers, 12 books, and documents before the Administrator, or both, and any 13 failure to obey such order of the court may be punished by such court as a contempt thereof. 14 15 19 "(b)(1) A petition for review of action of the Administrator in 16 promulgating any prohibition, effluent standard, or standard of per17 formance may be filed by any interested person only in the United 18 States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia A petition for review of the Administrator's action in approving or promulgating 20 any State or interstate water quality standards or implementation 21 plans including any effluent limitation or schedules for compliance 22 therein, may be filed by any interested person only in the United States court of appeals for the appropriate circuit Any such petition shall be within thirty days from the date of such promulgation or approval, 25 op alles such date if such petition is based solely on grounds arising 26 after such thirtieth day] 23 24 30 31 33 "(e) In any judicial proceeding in which review is sought of a determination under this Act required to be made on the record after notice 32 and opportunity for hearing, if any party applies to the court for leave to adduce additional evidence, and shows to the satisfaction of the 34 court that such additional evidence is material and that there were 35 reasonable grounds for the failure to adduce such evidence in the pro36 ceeding before the Administrator, the court may order such additional 37 evidence (and evidence in rebuttal thereof) to be taken before the 38 Administrator, in such manner and upon such terms and conditions 39 as the court may deem proper. The Administrator nay modify his 40 findings as to the facts, or make new findings, by reason of the addi41 tional evidence so taken and he shall file such modified or new findings, 42 and his recommendation, if any, for the modification or setting aside 43 of his original determination, with the return of such additional 44 evidence. HNSERT: COMMENTS "(a) Proceedings before the court under this peregraph take precedence over all the other causes of action on the docket and shall be assigned for bearing and decision at the earliest practicable date and expedited in every way. Judgment of the court shall be subject to review by the Sup Court of the United States upon certiorari or certification w provided in title 28, United States Code, section 1254. 60-223-71-13 25 27 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 ཁམ རྐུམས་ས་ལམཅནལུའུ LABOR STANDARDS SEC 26. Title V of the Federal Water Pollution Control as added 26 by this Act is further amended to add a new section 513 as follows: "See 513. The Administrator shall take such action as may be necessary to insure that all laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors on treatment works for which grants are made under this Act or by other contractors or grantees under this Act shall be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing for the same type of work on construction in the immediate locality, as determined by the Secretary of Labor, in accordance with the Act of March 3, 1931, as amended, known as the Davis-Bacon Act (46) Stat. 1494; 40 U.S.C., sec. 276s through 276a-5), and the Secretary of Labor shall establish effective safety standards for the protection of such laborers and mechanics. The Secretary of Labor shall have, with respect to the labor standards specified in this subsection, the 39 authority and functions set forth in Reorganization Plan Numbered 14 of 1950 (15 F.R. 3176) and section 2 of the Act of June 13, 1934, as amended (48 Stat. 948; 40 U.S.C. 276c)." 38 SEC. 27. (a) Section 26 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act is redesignated as Section 514. (b) Section 514, as redesignated, is further amended to read as follows: 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Sec. 514 (a) Within ninety days following the convening of each session of Congress, the Administrator shall submit to the Congress REPORTS TO CONGRESS NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT, July 19, 1971. Chairman, Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, Committee on Public Works, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. Hon. EDMUND S. MUSKIE, DEAR CHAIRMAN MUSKIE: We appreciated the opportunity to study the Staff Print of proposed amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and respectfully submit the following comments: 1. The Staff Print is so different substantively from the major bills on which hearings were held that further hearings should be held before the Subcommittee recommends any legislation along the lines of the Staff Print. 2. This appears to be especially true of Title IV which would establish a discharge permit system within the Environmental Protection Agency and empower the EPA Administrator to supersede any State certification. State water pollution control agencies, in particular, should have the opportunity to testify as to the impact of these provisions on their permit system programs. Title IV would appear to put them out of business for all practical purposes, and perhaps amounts to Federal preemption of the field even though possibly unintended. 3. We appreciate the fact that the Subcommittee is addressing the problems of dual regulation arising under the Refuse Act of 1899, as we urged in testimony by Mr. M. P. Venema on March 22, but merely transferring the permit system from one Federal agency to another does not solve these problems. The ultimate result is either wasteful duplication or Federal preemption, both undesirable. A far better solution would be to amend Section 13 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 so as to limit its application to considerations of anchorage and navigation as was its original intent. Title IV violates the declaration of policy in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to protect the primary rights and responsibilities of the States. 4. The Staff Print appears to reflect an effort to conform the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to the provisions of the Clean Air Act, which we do not believe is justifiable. Under the Water Quality Act of 1965, the States have al ready held public hearings and established water quality standards based on desired uses of interstate streams throughout the nation, along with implementation plans for achieving and maintaining these standards. Analogous progress had not been achieved under the Air Quality Act of 1967 at the time of passage of the Clean Air Amendments of 1970. Thus, the two situations are not at all comparable. If the Congress now authorizes national effluent standards and an ambiguous and totally impracticable national effluent standards and an ambiguous and totally impracticable national minimum water quality standard, all that has been achieved under the Water Quality Act of 1965 becomes academic. This appears to be a case of completely changing the rules of the ballgame without allowing legislation already on the books a chance to work. In addition, the Staff Print would establish impractical zero tolerances for certain substances and fails to provide for any economic evaluation of the implementation of its provisions. We strongly urge the Subcommittee to reject national standards as being inconsistent with the declaration of policy in the Act and as unsuited for achieving the highest cost/benefit ratios in water pollution control programs in the various river basins of the country. Respectfully submittted, DANIEL W. CANNON, Director of Environmental Affairs. |