962 



HISTORY OF THE COMMITTI 1 ( >N m II NC 1 AND TECHNOLOGY 



The second letter indicated that discussions had been held with 

 Brown, that Brown had agreed to accept the Jones amendment on 

 water pollution projects, and that further opposition to the rule on 

 the Science Committee bill was therefore withdrawn. Such is the 

 power of compromise, and an indication that Brown, rather than 

 encouraging confrontation and internecine warfare, preferred to "work 

 things out.'' The House passed the EPA authorization bill on July 10 

 by a vote of 383-15. Although the EPA authorization got hung up in 

 the Senate and was not finally passed until 1976, the President signed 

 it into law and after 1976 the Science Committee could legally proceed 

 with the annual authorizations which Brown's subcommittee had 

 first initiated. 



THE THREAT OF RADIATION AND SKIN CANCER 



With the completion of the ERDA and EPA authorizations in 

 1975, the Brown subcommittee turned its attention to what was 

 termed "inadvertent modification of the upper atmosphere" through 

 possible depletion of the ozone layer by halocarbons. The central pur- 

 pose of the effort was to determine the adequacy of R. & D., not only 

 to assess the factual nature of health threats but to form the basis for 

 necessary regulations. The health hazard of exposure to radiation, with 

 possible development of skin cancer, had been explored in prior hear- 

 ings by the Health Subcommittee of the Interstate and Foreign Com- 

 merce Committee chaired by Representative Paul G. Rogers (Democrat 

 of Florida). A bill introduced by Esch had been jointly referred to the 

 Brown subcommittee and the Rogers subcommittee, followed by fre- 

 quent staff liaison between the two subcommittees. Once the bill was 

 worked over, a joint meeting was held with the Rogers subcommittee 

 to agree on the basic text of the bill. 



While this process was going on, the Senate adopted an amendment 

 to the NASA authorization act in 1975, giving NASA authority to 

 conduct a comprehensive program of research, technology development, 

 and monitoring. Brown arranged for a June 9 colloquy with Fuqua, 

 chairman of the subcommittee handling NASA, when the conference 

 report was debated on the House floor. Brown quoted NASA's state- 

 ment in his subcommittee's hearings that NASA would turn over 

 "operational monitoring" of the upper atmosphere to another agency 

 like NOAA once the preliminary investigations were done. Brown 

 received an affirmative answer from Fuqua to his question that the 

 conference report "does not at all imply any son oi regulatory role 

 for NASA." Fuqua also confirmed the conclusion that NASA would 

 solicit the views of EPA in planning its research program. 



