994 



HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 



It was characteristic of the subcommittee to follow up through 

 oversight and "foresight" hearings on the legislation which was 

 passed or planned. Sometimes the subcommittee launched inquiries to 

 avoid the necessity for future legislation. 



After passage of the National Weather Modification Act of 1976, 

 the subcommittee followed closely the progress of the Weather Modi- 

 fication Advisory Board which the law established to recommend a 

 policy and research program. In October 1977, and again in May 1978, 

 the subcommittee held hearings to receive progress reports. The sub- 

 committee helped formulate legislation to focus and strengthen Fed- 

 eral leadership in the weather resources management area. Spensley 

 reported on his attendance at meetings of the Advisory Board in 

 Atlanta, Ga., and Aspen, Colo.: 



It is my opinion that the interest of the subcommittee in the deliberations of the 

 Advisory Board and the attendance of the subcommittee staff at the meetings has 

 added to the importance, effectiveness and timeliness of their efforts. 



PROGRESS IN RESOURCE RECOVERY 



In August 1978, the subcommittee published a report entitled 

 "The Status of Resource Recovery— A Report of Site Visits." The 

 report, prepared as a result of an investigation conducted jointly by 

 Dr. Byerly and staff of the Environment and Natural Resources Policy 

 Division of CRS, was based on visits to 12 resource recovery sites 

 around the country. In his letter of transmittal to Teague, Brown 

 termed the report a "snapshot" taken of the status of these resource 

 recovery experiments at the time of the visits. He added: 



I believe that in the future— in five or ten years— economics will favor resource 

 recovery and source separation much more than now. In large part this change will 

 occur because the closing of dumps and the upgrading of landfills (in response to the 

 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, P.L. 94-580, and other environ- 

 mental laws) along with citizen pressure will force communities to reevaluate their 

 solid waste management schemes to minimize disposal (i.e., burial or simple 

 incineration). 



Brown tempered the overoptimistic assessments of resource recovery 

 with a tinge of realistic warning, in concluding that "the technologies 

 for resource recovery need further development." Quite naturally, 

 those with an interest to promote were critical of the tone of the report, 

 while others praised it as "an honest job of reporting." Frank Kuchta, 

 Director of Public Works, City of Baltimore, Md., testified on Sep- 

 tember 20, 1979 that the report was "one of the clearest, most intuitive 

 analyses of the project." He termed it "probably one of the most useful 

 reports that any city or county could have in considering various exist- 

 ing technologies to reduce solid waste volume and produce energy. 



CRS also assisted in the preparation of a report on "Water Quality 

 Research," which the subcommittee published in January 1978. It 



