553 



is Nationwide," the committee recommended a six-point program of 

 legislative action (summarized) : ^^ 



1. •'Thorough testing" of local-State-Federal cooperation for 

 abating pollution. 



2. Increase of previously "inadequate appropriations for the 

 effective discharge by the PHS of its functions under the act" and 

 for additional construction. 



3. Appropriation of funds for and development of water pol- 

 lution plans on the basis of comprehensive river basin develop- 

 ment. 



4. Study of and provision for funding of waste treatment plants 

 to enable reuse of wastes. 



5. If the existing pattern of control mechanism proves to be a 

 failure within 10 years — enactment of legislation to provide for 

 Federal enforcement without State consent. 



6. "Further research is required on industrial waste treatment 

 methods and dissemination of that knowledge throughout indus- 

 try," and a concentrated effort to educate the general public in the 

 hazards of pollution. 



The first legislative response to these recommendations did not take 

 place until 1956, and concerted action was delayed for a decade beyond 

 that. 



Resistance to amending legislation^ lOd^-lQoS 



In 1954, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare held 

 further discussions on the need for imjDroved water pollution control 

 legislation with 14 national associations representing professional, in- 

 dustrial and conservation interests, the Association of State and Terri- 

 torial Health Officers, and the Council of State Governments. A bill, 

 based upon compromises reached in the conference and additional com- 

 ments from Federal agencies, was drafted by the Department and later 

 introduced in Congress as S. 890.^° 

 It called for : 



Matching grants to States and interstate agencies for general 

 pollution activities ; 

 Expansion of research ; 



Revision of enforcement subject to a public hearing before the 

 Surgeon General ; also elimination of provisions for State consent 

 before instituting jDroceedings ; 



Development by States of Federal water quality standards for 

 interstate waters ; 



Expansion of the advisory board to include representatives of 

 the Atomic Energy Commission and National Science Founda- 

 tion as recommended by the Bureau of the Budget ; and 



Elimination of loans for construction of sewage treatment 

 plants. 

 The Izaak Walton League and other conservationist groups sup- 

 ported the bill but it found little support elsewhere. A poll reported in 

 the Engineering News Record, March 17, 1955, of State pollution offi- 

 cials, found that only one gave his unqualified endorsement. Industry 

 representatives objected primarily to the provisions relating to estab- 

 lisliment of quality standards and liberalized Federal court procedures. 



E» Ibid., p. 195. 



^ Introduced by Senator Martin (Pennsylvania), Feb. 1, 1955. 



99-044 — 69 24 



