Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
118566474
label
12/15/1981 (case file 051424) (2)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118566474
contentType
document
title
12/15/1981 (case file 051424) (2)
citationUrl
identifierLocal
439
collections
Records of the Office of the President (Reagan Administration)
Presidential Briefing Papers
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118566474
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1988-12-31
year
1988
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1981-01-01
year
1981
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
8e4e56b6b6d489d9
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual
collections.
Collection: President, Office of the: Presidential
Briefing Papers: Records, 1981-1989
Folder Title: 12/15/1981 (Case File: 051424)
(2)
Box: 11
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at:
[email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
BRIEFING MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT: BUDGET APPEAL RE EPA
Tuesday, December 15, 1981
10:30 a.m. (45 minutes)
The Cabinet Room
FROM:
RICHARD G. DARMAN
n.ws.
CRAIG L. FULLER
I.
PURPOSE
This is the second of the Presidential budget appeal
meetings. It deals exclusively with appeals involving
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
NOTE: Your briefing book (distributed separately)
includes both EPA and NASA appeals. The NASA appeals
have been settled since the briefing book was prepared.
A memo reporting on the NASA settlement has been provided
to you independently -- for your approval.
II. AGENDA/SEQUENCE
You should ask Ann Gorsuch to lead off. Dave Stockman
will follow. Then the meeting should proceed issue-by-
issue through the book.
III. PARTICIPANTS
The President
For EPA
The Vice President
Secretary Regan
Ann Gorsuch
David A. Stockman
Dr. John Hernandez
James A. Baker III
Michael K. Deaver
Martin Anderson
Richard G. Darman
Elizabeth Dole
Max L. Friedersdorf
Craig L. Fuller
David R. Gergen
Edwin Harper
Daniel J. Murphy
James W. Nance
Edward J. Rollins
Murray L. Weidenbaum
Richard Williamson
B
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENTIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON FEDERALISM
DATE:
December 15, 1981
LOCATION: Cabinet Room
TIME:
2:05 - 2:30 p.m.
FROM:
Richard S. Williamson
Rsw
I.
PURPOSE
To provide the President the opportunity to have a
dialogue with the members of the Presidential Advisory
Committee on Federalism.
II.
BACKGROUND
The Advisory Committee will have met in the morning
(8:30 - 11:30 a.m.) to discuss the "sorting out"
process and revenue source return. As you know, the
Governors have proposed that the Administration join
with them in a "sorting out" process to determine
appropriate areas of federal and state responsibility.
Prior to your meeting with the Advisory Committee,
Rich Williamson will brief you on the morning's
discussions.
III. PARTICIPANTS
See attached list.
IV.
PRESS PLAN
White House Photographer.
V.
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
1:50 p.m. - Vice President Bush administers the oath
to the Committee members
2:00
p.m. - President Reagan arrives
(Talking Points attached)
2:10 p.m. - President Reagan participates in a dialogue
with Committee members
2:30 p.m. - President Reagan departs
Attachments - (1) List of Participants
(2) Talking Points
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS IN DECEMBER 15, 1981, MEETING
Governor Matheson
Governor Alexander
Governor du Pont
Governor Snelling
Senator Domenici
Senator Boren
Senator Hollings
Senator Laxalt
Congressman Fountain
Congressman Brown
Congressman Horton
Congressman Brooks
Rep. Stivers
Chuck Hardwick
Rep. Cardin
Rep. Hainkel
Assemblyman Rhoads
Mayor Koch
Mayor Hudnut
Mayor Cisneros
Commissioner Orr
Supervisor Smoley
Mr. W. J. Murphy
Assembly Smith
C. D. Ward
Clifford Hansen
Clifton White
Robert Hawkins
Commissioner Conder (To be confirmed)
Supervisor Nestande
Senator Durenberger
Secretary Bell (To be confirmed)
Secretary Schweiker
Secretary Watt
Secretary Regan (To be confirmed)
James A. Baker, III
Robert Carleson
Richard Williamson
TALKING POINTS FOR PRESIDENT REAGAN
PRESIDENTIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON FEDERALISM
December 15, 1981
I want to thank Vice President Bush for administering your
oath of office and congratulate you on your commission.
Your participation on the Presidential Advisory Committee
on Federalism is public service of the highest order.
--
I understand that you have been meeting this morning
with Senator Laxalt and that the dialogue has been lively
and productive. I intend to keep my remarks short, so
that we can continue the dialogue. I believe that you
are in a far better position to know and understand the
needs of the people than officials at the national level.
I want to hear from you.
-- I don't need to tell you that these are not easy times
for state and local government. The transition of fiscal
policy will not be painless, but I hope we can work as
partners in solving our problems. By working together,
we can restore our government to its proper balance
A partnership among federal, state, and local government.
Last week before the detailed budget review began,
Richard Williamson sat down with me for an extensive
briefing on the present fiscal condition of state and
local governments and the impact the budget cuts have had
on you. I want to assure you that I am sensitive
2
to the impact of the budget cuts, and I would like to
take a moment and speak to you about the FY '83 budget.
-- The budget will not be balanced on the backs of
states and cities.
- - The consolidation of categorical grant programs
into a comprehensive system of block grants is an
important part of my program to return authority
and responsibility to state and local governments.
I do not intend to use present or future block
grants as a smokescreen for severe or excessive
cuts.
-- I recognize the importance of revenue sharing
to local governments and assure you that it will not
be phased out until alternative revenue sources are
identified and made available.
--
Finally, I know you were talking about Revenue Source
Return and the Sorting Out process this morning. I would
like to hear your thoughts now on these as well as other
subjects.
-- Call on Senator Laxalt to begin the discussion.
C
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
INTERVIEW WITH U.S. NEWS AND WORLD REPORT
DATE: Tuesday, December 15, 1981
TIME:
2:30 pm (45 minutes)
PLACE: Oval Office
s
FROM:
Larry Speakes/David Gergen
I. PURPOSE
To be interviewed by U.S. News and World Report for a year-
end piece reviewing the President's first year.
II. BACKGROUND
U.S. News and World Report will run an authorized i. )erview
with the President in Q&A form for their December 21 issue.
It will look at the President's first year in office, and gives
an opportunity to outline the accomplishments of the Administration.
You will recall that you also were interviewed by U.S. News and
World Report in July, for their piece on A Day in the Life of the
President.
III. PARTICIPANTS
The President
Lester Tanzer
Managing Editor
Bob Kittle
White House correspondent
Sara Fritz
White House correspondent
0
Gerald Parshall
Assistant Managing Editor
IV. PRESS PLAN
U.S. News will have a photographer to take pictures. The White
House photographer will also take pictures.
V.
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
After the picture taking, the interview will proceed.
D
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
MEETING WITH THE CABINET COUNCIL
ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT
DATE:
December 15, 1981
LOCATION:
Cabinet Room
TIME:
3:30 p.m. (90 min.)
FROM:
CRAIG L. FULLER
65
I.
PURPOSE
Review options for dismantling the Department of Energy.
II. BACKGROUND
For several weeks a working group and the CCNRE have
reviewed options for dismantling the Department of
Energy. During the process of reviewing dismantlement
otpions, the various individual functions of the Depart-
ment were analyzed. After reducing and eliminating
certain functions, you are left with the need to deter-
mine where the remaining functions will be transferred.
The attached decision memo and the Cabinet Council
meeting will address the following issues:
1. Federal role in energy (consensus reached)
supporting national defense needs
protect against energy supply disruption
support long-term high-risk research on
energy technology
perform specific governmental tasks as
authorized (i.e., Naval Petroleum Reserve,
Power Marketing Administration, regulation
of certain gas and electric functions.
2. Structure and Transfer of Functions
(consensus within cabinet council)
-- Interior
Would receive resource management and functional.
Power Marketing Administration
Naval Petroleum Reserve
Strategic Petroleum Reserve
2
-- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Should become independent.
--
Justice
Would pick up residual enforcement functions.
-- Energy Research and Technology Administration (ERTA)
The proposal being advanced would create this
organization and have it report to a Cabinet
officer. ERTA would perform the following:
Defense weapons program
Research and development (as now constituted
in Energy Department) in nuclear, non-nuclear,
environment, safety and health
-- "Designated Department" (agreement on concept,
disagreement on which department)
The Cabinet department designated to receive
ERTA would be responsible for:
ERTA oversight
energy policy planning, analysis
energy information
nuclear energy program
3. Dismantlement options
The decision memorandum indicates the two basic options
recommended by the Cabinet Council.
-- designate Commerce to receive ERTA and energy policy
-- designate Interior to receive ERTA and energy policy
III. PARTICIPANTS (principals only)
IV. PRESS PLAN (White House photographer only)
V.
SEQUENCE
Secretary Watt is the Chairman Pro Tempore of the Cabinet
Council. He will review their efforts and turn to
Secretary Edwards for a presentation.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 11, 1981
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
James Walt
FROM:
JAMES G. WATT, CHAIRMAN PRO TEMPORE
CABINET COUNCIL ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT
ISSUE:
What organizational functions should the President
propose to Congress to dismantle the Department of
Energy and carry on appropriate government energy
functions?
Background
President Reagan, during his campaign for President and
again in his televised address of September 24, 1981, announced
his intention to dismantle and abolish the Department of
Energy. The basic reason for this position is that the
Department as originally constituted represents a fundamentally
misguided view of the government's role in energy matters. Any
program for dismantling DOE must address this error, and
provide a new structure consistent with a proper understanding
of the government's role in energy.
There is general agreement in the Administration that such
a role should be limited to:
1) supporting national defense needs through civilian-
controlled capability for research, design, production and
testing in the field of nuclear weapons and devices;
2) protecting against energy supply disruption through
contingency planning capability and maintenance of a strategic
petroleum reserve;
3) supporting long-term high-risk, potentially
high-payoff basic research on energy technologies; and
4) performing specific governmental tasks, where
authorized, such as operation of the Naval Petroleum Reserve
and Power Marketing Administrations, governmental tasks in
connection with the nuclear fuel cycle, and regulation of
certain gas and electric functions.
The creation of a new Department of Energy in 1977 by
President Carter indicated that the government would go far
beyond these roles, and take over the control of energy in our
society. In dismantling the Department of Energy, we emphasize
that the government will now no longer exercise such control.
2
After a series of working group meetings to develop
options for carrying out the President's intentions to
dismantle the Department of Energy, the Cabinet Council met on
December 8, and discussed this issue extensively, leading to a
number of items of consensus and two major options.
Discussion
There is a consensus in the Cabinet Council on Natural
Resources and Environment on several aspects of dismantling the
Department of Energy:
1) Resources management functions, including the Power
Marketing Administrations, the Naval Petroleum
Reserve, and the operation of the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve, should be transferred to the Interior
Department.
2) The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission should
become independent.
3) Any residual enforcement functions should be
transferred to the Department of Justice.
4) There should be established an Energy Research and
Technology Administration (ERTA) which would
encompass the Defense weapons program, all of the
current research and development activities of the
Energy Department, both nuclear and non-nuclear, as
well as research in areas of environment, safety, and
health. ERTA should report to a Cabinet Officer.
Energy policy functions, such as planning and
analysis, energy information, and emergency
preparedness, should be transferred to the Department
with jurisdiction over ERTA.
5) Finally, it is agreed that nuclear energy should
remain part of the total energy program, rather than
being placed in a separate organization.
The remaining question is: To which Department should
ERTA and energy policy functions be transferred? The Cabinet
Council has developed two options -- the Commerce Option and
the Interior Option.
The decision as between the Commerce and Interior options
should be made bearing in mind the traditional mission of the
two Departments. Over the years, Commerce has been
responsible for fostering domestic and international business
and technological advancement in the private sector. Over the
years, Interior has been responsible for the stewardship,
preservation, and development of the nation's natural
resources.
3
THE COMMERCE OPTION
Under this option, ERTA and energy policy would be transferred
to the Department of Commerce.
The advantages of housing ERTA and energy policy in Commerce
are:
Recognizes that commercial energy development should be
driven by user requirements and market factors, rather than
by needs of resource developers.
Provides an opportunity to integrate more closely energy
policy with general economic policy.
2/3 of DOE consists of nuclear R&D and manufacturing.
This option puts these business type activities in the
Department most responsible for working closely with
business.
Meshes with Commerce's management experience as a
Department composed of a number of semi-independent
agencies.
Locates energy, an important international growth business,
in the Department most responsible for the promotion of
international business. Also, strengthens Department and
thereby enhances Secretary's ability to represent U.S.
private sector interests in the international arena.
The disadvantages are:
Separates energy research and development, as well as
policy functions, from the primary source of energy in
future years -- the public lands and resources of the
United States. This separation may hinder development
of a coherent energy policy.
Puts responsibility for nuclear weapons in a business-
oriented department, possibly raising old fears about a
"military-industrial complex."
Could provide too much practical, commercial emphasis in
place of scientific inquiry in research and development.
THE INTERIOR OPTION
Under this option, ERTA and energy policy functions would be
transferred to the Department of the Interior.
The advantages of this arrangement are:
Places all aspects of energy within one organization,
including research and technology, nuclear energy and the
4
energy resources of the public lands. This has the best
possibility of preserving all energy options by having them
balanced within one organization.
Research and development and policy functions would be
blended with the primary source of energy in the years
ahead -- the public lands and resources. The public lands
under Interior are believed to contain 85% of the nation's
oil, 40% of the natural gas, 40% of the uranium, 35% of the
coal, 85% of the tar sands, 80% of the oil shale, and 50%
of the geothermal resources.
The competing demands of development and conservation of
energy resources can best be balanced if all energy
aspects, including both government-owned energy sources and
future developments through R&D, are within one Department.
The disadvantages are:
Maintains a high-profile federal role in energy through
single planning organization for both government and
private energy resources, research and development.
Congress has in the past rejected similar arrangements, but
those proposals to consolidate government functions
involved controversial transfers not contemplated here,
such as transfer of the Forest Service from USDA to
Interior.
OTHER ASPECTS
Either option would both combine and separate preservation
and environmental interests on the one hand and development
interests on the other. In the case of Commerce, the
presence of the National Marine Fisheries Service and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration might serve
to retard energy development, but the same would be true of
the role of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National
Park Service in Interior. Placement of the energy
functions in Commerce would be strengthened by the other
private business activities of that Department, but the
other resource management activities in Interior would
similarly aid energy development there.
The Congressional Affairs office will be prepared to
discuss implications of both options for congressional
relations.
DECISION: PROCEED WITH
COMMERCE OPTION
INTERIOR OPTION
E
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
MEETING WITH GOVERNOR RICHARD SNELLING (R-VERMONT)
DATE:
Tuesday, December 15, 1981
LOCATION:
Oval Office
TIME:
4:45 - 5:00 p.m.
FROM:
Richard S. Williamson
Rob
I.
PURPOSE
(1) To discuss the Governor's ideas regarding the direction
of the Economic Recovery Plan and the "New Federalism."
(2) To express disappointment with the political rhetoric
recently used by Governor Snelling in his criticism
of Administration initiatives.
II. BACKGROUND
Governor-Snelling is Chairman of the National Governors'
Association. He is in his third term as Governor of Vermont
and has announced he will not be seeking re-election.
You should recall that Governor Snelling was highly critical
of you during the campaign and led the last-ditch effort to
draft Gerald Ford to enter the primaries. Governor Snelling
is bright and articulate, but fair men would say he is some-
what difficult to deal with.
While initially giving support to the Administration's
Economic Recovery Program, in recent weeks he has become
increasingly critical. He has stated:
(1) That he had been "shocked to the core" by some of the
President's "New Federalism" approaches;
(2) That "the President's programs are leading the country
to an economic Bay of Pigs;"
(3) That "the problem with this potpourri (the Administra-
tion's Economic Recovery Plan) is that it is, in fact,
not an economic policy."
2
The nation's Governors remain uneasy about the direction
the Administration may be taking with regard to federal
spending. Projections of large out year budget deficits
have caused many of them to believe that significant cuts
in federal grants to the states will be forthcoming.
While this meeting will not guarantee the continued
bipartisan support the the National Governors' Association,
it may neutralize some of Governor Snelling's criticism
and, thereby, reduce the likelihood of media reports of
an impending split between the Administration and the
nation's Governors.
III. PARTICIPANTS
Governor Richard Snelling
)
Richard S. Williamson
IV.
PRESS PLAN
White House Photographer
V.
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Rich Williamson will escort Governor Snelling to the
Oval Office. Governor Snelling will express his
concerns.
F
The President has seen
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
BILL SIGNING CEREMONY FOR H.J. RES. 370
(THE CONTINUING RESOLUTION
DATE:
December 15, 1981
LOCATION:
The Oval Office
TIME:
3:15 p.m. (15 minutes)
FROM:
Max L. Friedersdorf m.b.
I. PURPOSE
To sign the Continuing Resolution in ceremony, and to thank
the Republican Senate Majority Leader Howard Baker, House
Republican Leader Bob Michel, Senate Appropriations Chairman
Mark Hatfield, and Congressman Silvio Conte, ranking Republican
on the House Appropriations Committee for the leadership role
in this successful legislative strategy.
II. BACKGROUND
The House, by a vote of 222 - 194, and the Senate, by a vote
of 60 - 35, passed the Continuing Resolution providing for
spending at levels acceptable to the Administration. Senator
Baker and Hatfield and Congressmen Michel and Conte were the
principal negotiators for the package and architects of the
strategy of its successful implementation.
III. PARTICIPANTS
The President
The Vice President
Director of OMB Dave Stockman
Senator Howard Baker
Senator Mark Hatfield
Dob
Michel
Congressman Silvio Conte
Staff
Max Friedersdorf
Ken Duberstein
Powell Moore
Dick Darman
Jim Baker
IV. PRESS PLAN
Press and White House photographer
V. SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Participants enter Oval Office and are greeted by the
President. President makes statement, signs bill, and
present members with signing pens.
Attachment: Talking Points