The Syracuse University Research Corp. is interested in the availability of title II funds. The corporation has already done much work for the local government, for the State of New York, and for the Federal Government in water resources. It has the ability to draw upon the pool of scientific and technological manpower which exists in the universities in the area.

I shall conclude my remarks by saying that these local institutions have for a long time engaged in the training of professional water resource manpower. Access to funds under title II of the Water Resources Research Act will enable them to continue to draw and hold their share of the highest caliber graduate students.

Thank you very much.

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Hanley, and let the Chair say that I believe this is the first time you have appeared before this subcom

mittee.

Mr. HANLEY. This is true.

Mr. ROGERS. And I want to express the appreciation of the Chair, and I think I speak for other members of the subcommittee for this excellent statement and the manner in which you have presented it.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Aspinall, the chairman of the full committee.

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Aspinall). Mr. Chairman, I, too, wish to commend our colleague for his statement. It is a short statement and I think he has got his ideas pretty well incorporated therein. Questions which I have will be of a general nature, trying to see just where you find yourself in this research program.

What kind of research, Congressman Hanley, should the Federal Government engage in?

Mr. HANLEY. Forgive me, Mr. Chairman, I didn't hear your question.

The CHAIRMAN. What kind of research activities should the Federal Government engage in or finance?

Mr. HANLEY. This is a very broad aspect field with respect to research, and the Federal Government certainly engages in many areas of endeavor.

The CHAIRMAN. Should it engage in basic research alone, or should it engage in basic research and applied research or both of them? What is your idea as far as spending Federal money is concerned? Mr. HANLEY. I believe this should be determined by the degree of necessity, and I think we will all agree that we have a great problem with respect to water resources. We should pursue any avenue of research which is going to bring about a hoped-for cure to the problem that now confronts this Nation with respect to availability of water. The CHAIRMAN. How many individual contracts do you think the Federal Government can and should finance annually in a research program on a matter such as water?

Mr. HANLEY. Well, I look upon the water problem as important perhaps as our space program, and I think that if we can't cultivate the resources we have to allow this Nation the necessary water to provide for the needs of our industry and our economy, then we really can't move in any other direction.

The CHAIRMAN. I am in agreement with that. But I want to get into the record the number of contracts at the present time that are financed by the Federal Government in water research.

Mr. HANLEY. I am not in a position, not being a member of your committee, to answer your statement.

The CHAIRMAN. You made a very fine statement for Syracuse University. Of course your whole pitch is to give the university an opportunity to take part in this program.

Now, would you say that 250 contracts annually or 500 or a thousand or 1,500 or 2,000 would indicate sufficient participation by the Federal Government-that is, average sized contracts?

Mr. HANLEY. In recognition of budgetary restrictions, I think that we should go all out in this particular field. I don't profess to be an expert in this particular area, and I respect the judgment of your very fine committee, and I am sure that you are in a position to ascertain the number of programs that we can engage upon with respect to whatever budgetary restrictions exist. I can only say this: that I would earnestly request that you extend yourselves to the nth degree with respect to any number of programs that might bring about the elimination of this water problem which we are faced with.

The CHAIRMAN. There is a limit, though, isn't there?

Mr. HANLEY. Certainly there is.

The CHAIRMAN. Should that limit be determined by the welfare of the university establishing a new chair or a new activity in the university, or should that limit be determined by the adequacy of the present program or by the limitation of money?

Mr. HANLEY. I don't believe that the limit is to be determined by the welfare of the university and I don't believe that that is the point here this morning. I think the point is that we should take advantage of the professional know-how that exists within these institutions of learning, take advantage of the extent that our budget will allow. We are really not talking in terms of welfare to a particular university. We are talking about the talent that exists within many of the institutions of learning throughout this Nation. That would be somewhat restricted, due to the language of the material that we are discussing here this morning.

My only point is that we should take advantage of this expertise and this know-how that is at our disposal.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course you understand that perhaps equally important to this particular phase of the program is the training of the scientists in the realm of water studies. These two go together. What I have been trying to do is to find out whether or not if you were from some place other than a university area, like the university at Syracuse, whether you would be here for this legislation. That is what I am trying to find out, because there are five or six of our colleagues who have asked to testify and all of them come from university areas.

Mr. HANLEY. Be assured, Mr. Chairman, I am not here simply because I happen to be from an area that has a university.

The CHAIRMAN. You are fortunate to have a good university. Mr. HANLEY. Yes. This is purely coincidental, believe me, and I have the utmost respect for this particular institution of learning, and

I look upon it as an institution that could contribute so greatly to this cause. But my purpose here this morning is not to defend or submit the potential of this university in this problem. I am here this morning because of my great concern with the problem insofar as the Nation is concerned. I don't speak here in behalf of New York State or Iowa or Montana. I say that we should scan the Nation and take advantage of every opportunity that exists for us in any institution of learning throughout the Nation, and call upon them and support them financially, so that they might in turn assist our Nation in resolving this tremendous problem. I know that you are aware, when we talk, going back to New York State, you are aware of the tremendous problem in New York City. New York City, of course, is completely divorced from the area that I actually represent. But nevertheless I share great concern about the problem that has arisen there, and as we see it right now, we have no real program designed to effect a cure for a problem that can actually take water away from the drinking taps of the people of New York City. So I think that we are faced with a tremendous problem that we are way behind on.

As I say, I have great respect for the space program, but I say that if we don't have the basics such as water, we are really not going to progress in any other field.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course I am not going to take any more time. On this last matter I agree with you 100 percent and I am not in disagreement with you on the other. What bothers me is that we have spent such a small amount in regard to research for water, pure air, and such a large amount on some of the other matters.

On the other hand, may I say to you that there are other avenues to help your situation in New York City far more effective and far more expeditiously than anything that will come out of this program, in my opinion.

Thank you very much.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Baring?

Mr. BARING. Mr. Chairman, I have no questions. I want to welcome our colleague before the committee and say that I appreciate your presentation very much.

Mr. HANLEY. Thank you.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. White?

Mr. WHITE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I also wish to welcome my colleague before this committee. I have a couple of questions I would like to propound to you if I may.

On the first page of your explanation of the legislation as introduced, and I assume that it is copied after S. 22

Mr. HANLEY. Yes.

Mr. WHITE (Continuing). "4. It would remove the provisions for legislation committee review proposed grants contracts and other arrangements under title II."

Just why did you propose that in your legislation?

Mr. HANLEY. Because I believe that it could actually hold up a program that I think should be expedited, again on the basis of absolute necessity. I believe that it could deter the speed which is required if we are going to move in the direction of eliminating this great problem. Mr. WHITE. Are you familiar at all as to why this was placed in the legislation to start with, why it happens to be in the act as it is now written?

Mr. HANLEY. I have to say that I would look upon it as a deterrent to the expedient implementation of the bill.

It

Mr. WHITE. I assure you that the language in the act and in the previous legislation, that was not the purpose of that inclusion. has been to try and keep these research programs in focus so that we don't go off in a hundred different directions without any directing discipline here as to what is being done. I think that the chairman of the full committee agrees that the best interest in research and developing the type of things we need in the United States, whether it be in this field or in any other field, has taken the position that rather than have duplication of effort and research heaped upon top of research without any productivity, that it is better to keep some congressional oversight over this research, rather than just turning it loose without any direction. I don't say that this is what happens every time, but experience so far has indicated that this is of some necessity. I think that you should take a look at that before you make the broad statement that it will impede water resource research.

I think that you should also include in your statement, if I were to write your statement, in your next to the last paragraph on the first page, "The Northeastern United States is beginning to learn a lesson which the Southwest has already learned," I think there is a great lesson to be learned in what has been accomplished in all of the West as to reclamation and the proper use of water, and I will have to say that the West and particularly the Northwest probably has done a better job of water resource management than any other part of the United States, having the problem thrust upon them simply because of the very arid nature of the region.

I am hopeful that some day in the not too distant future, in fact in the near future, that we can apply this same type of thinking to the entire United States, and gain by the benefit of what was done in the Pacific Northwest.

Lastly, I would like to have you enlarge a little on your last paragraph.

At the time of the hearings on the original act, on the original legislation, one very significant thing was developed, and that was that there were not people being trained in universities in water resource management, and if you went out to look for faculty to expand programs or even to look for students to go into graduate area, they just didn't exist.

Now, you allude to the fact that your local institutions have "for a long time engaged in the training of professional water resource manpower."

I would like to have you tell me, if you can, just how many people have been graduated as undergraduates or how many are involved in graduate studies at Syracuse University or those universities that would actually be a nucleus or could go into the teaching area, into the graduate area or the research area. The testimony that was presented here last year showed that there was a great lack of people either involved in this activity, educational activity, there were no courses offered, there were limited research areas at the graduate level. I hope that what you say here is true, because I am afraid that a real close examination will show that it has been limited and that the students have been more interested in the area of physics,

nuclear research, and that there are not the people involved that you indicate that have taken a course in this type of study. Could you comment on that? Do you have some factual information as to what has happened at Syracuse in this area?

Mr. HANLEY. Well, with respect to Syracuse University, I amMr. WHITE. Or any other university that you have knowledge. Mr. HANLEY. Specifically Syracuse University, in view of its interest in community affairs and the central New York area, has for a long time engaged in a water research program that was designed to cure specific ills in that particular area. We have a number of lakes, and I point specifically to Onondaga Lake, and Lake Ontario. Syracuse University has for a long time engaged in research activities, hopeful that it might bring about a solution to the problems that exist within this somewhat localized area.

Mr. WHITE. Again, I would like to ask you how many people are engaged in this area? Do you have one professor and a couple of graduate students, or just what courses are offered in this particular discipline? Just what is being done at Syracuse?

Mr. HANLEY. I might say at this point that a little later in your hearing today, you will listen to the chancellor of this university. You will listen to a scientist who has been engaged for quite some time in this particular field at Syracuse University, and they are in a position, they will be in a position to point out quite emphatically and give you the numbers and whatever other specifics you desire with respect to the program at this university. I think that you will find that it has made a significant contribution in the area of water reSource research.

Mr. WHITE. I want to thank you for your statements. I think you have made an excellent presentation. I look forward to directing my questions to the people from the university. Thank you. Mr. HANLEY. Thank you, Mr. White.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. Roncalio?

Mr. RONCALIO. Thank you, Chairman Rogers.

I have no questions for my colleague, but may I make a statement that I think will be useful. I am grateful for this opportunity to welcome you, my colleague, Mr. Hanley, to this committee. We labor in the Veterans' Affairs Committee together and we share concern for institutions of higher learning and of veterans' care in both of our districts.

I hope that Syracuse does benefit from the legislation, particularly to the end that it can help remove some of the common problems of the provinces of Canada and of the States which border the frontiers of Canada, and particularly of those lakes that are common to both nations with which you are familiar, Mr. Hanley. So I am especially hopeful that the legislation will pass, and that your university as well as ours can benefit from this most vital legislation.

Thank you very much.

Mr. HANLEY. Thank you.

Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, Mr. Hanley.

Mr. HANLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROGERS. Mr. J. J. Pickle?

Mr. Pickle is a Member of Congress from the State of Texas.
We will hear you now.

59-468-66-2