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
120359604
label
Katie McGinty Letters “H” [Folder 1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
120359604
contentType
document
title
Katie McGinty Letters “H” [Folder 1]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the Council on Environmental Quality (Clinton Administration)
Kathleen McGinty's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
120359604
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7432005-20120769F-Seg1-048-001-2017
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
961accd6b3b623e0
ocrText
FOIA Number: 2012-0769-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
Council on Environmental Quality
Series/Staff Member:
Kathleen (Katie) McGinty
Subseries:
[Correspondence]
OA/ID Number:
2885
FolderID:
Folder Title:
Katie McGinty Letters "H" [Folder 1]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
61
5
9
1
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 23, 1994
Dr. Anthony A. Herrmann
Vice President of Environmental Affairs
Johnson & Johnson
One Johnson & Johnson Plaza
New Brunswick, NJ 08933
Dear Dr. Herrmann:
Thank you for the information about Johnson & Johnson. I
appreciated receiving your environmental update.
This Administration has made the preservation and
restoration of the environment one of its top priorities.
Companies such as yours contribute a great deal to the
realization of our environmental goals. Human health and
environmental health are closely associated, and your programs
and practices will help promote both.
Again, thank you for the information, and thank you for your
commitment to the environment.
Sincerely,
Kathleen A. McGanty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/mmg
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 22, 1994
Mr. D. Hasselhoff
Environment Canada
Atmospheric Environmental Science
National Headquarters
4905 Dufferin
Downsview, Ontario
M3H 5T4
Canada
Dear Mr. Hasselhoff:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts about
global warming and fuel efficiency standards. It was good to
hear from you.
As you know, last October President Clinton released his
Climate Change Action Plan, which will reduce greenhouse gas
emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. This initiative is
comprised of approximately 46 individual actions which include
programs to increase energy efficiency. The President's Action
Plan is designed to reestablish the United States as a leader in
addressing such pressing environmental challenges.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me.
Statem Sincerely, A. G. McGinty Mart
Director, White Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/mmg
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 6, 1994
Ms. June E. Hebert
HC 74 Box 454
Hebert, LA 71436
Dear Ms. Hebert:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts about
the management of the Tongass National Forest in Southeast
Alaska. It was good to hear from you.
President Clinton and I are committed to the protection of
our valuable natural resources in a way that leads to strong and
sustainable economic growth. The U.S. Forest Service has
notified the Alaska Lumber and Paper (ALP) that they are in
breach of their contract. The administration is currently
reviewing ALP's proposed recommendations for future operations,
and a final decision will be forthcoming before April 15.
I certainly appreciate learning your views about the Tongass
National Forest and Sitka and the surrounding region's economy.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me.
Sincerely,
Kathlan MC Genty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/avl
June E. Hebert
HC 74 Box 454
Hebert, LA 71436
March 11, 1994
Vice President Al Gore
c/o Katie McGinty
Executive Office Building
Suite #274
Washington, DC 20501
Dear Vice President Gore:
This letter is in regards to the Tongass National
Forest. First of all, I would like to thank this
Administration's letter of intent to revoke the 50-year
contract with APC.
APC broke the contract by shutting down it's mill and
firing the mill employees, therefor it should be cancelled.
Attempts to modify and retain the contract must be
refused.
KPC's contract must also be cancelled and the forest
protected.
Subsidies that have supported the 50-year contracts
should be used to help the community transition from forest
exploitation to a sustainable forest dependent economy.
We have the opportunity now to do the right thing, and
bring back sustainable, environmentally sensitive industry
and employment to a region of irreplaceable beauty and
biological diversity. I am confident that I can continue to
count on your support.
Respectfully yours,
June E. Hebert
Name
me
Date
Peter Rundlet 3/16/00 Connsel
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 17, 1994
Dr. Stephen P. Hubbell
Chairman
Committee For the National
Institute For the Environment
730 11th Street, N.W.
Washington D.C. 20001-4521
Dear Mr. Hubbell:
Mack McLarty, Chief of Staff to the President, forwarded
your letter of February 24, 1994 and the enclosed recently
published article by Dr. Henry Howe. I apologize for the delay
in responding.
As you know, I share President Clinton's commitment to the
preservation of the global environment in a way that leads to
strong and sustainable economic growth. I appreciate your
interest in environmental R&D.
Again, thank you for sharing this information with me.
Sincerely,
Hathlus Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office
On Environmental Policy
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
March 15, 1994
Dr. Stephen P. Hubbell
Chairman
Committee For the National
Institute For the Environment
730 11th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001-4521
Dear Dr. Hubbell:
Thank you for writing and keeping me apprised of the ongoing
efforts of the Committee for the National Institute for the
Environment. I also appreciate your enclosing the newly
published article by Dr. Henry Howe, for my information.
I have taken the liberty of forwarding your letter and article to
Katie McGinty in the Environmental Policy Office for further
review. Again, thank you for writing.
Personally,
mal wishmon
Mack McLarty
Chief of Staff to the President
MAR
3
MAR
2
NIE
COMMITTEE FOR THE
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
730 11th Street NW
Washington, DC 20001-4521
202-628-4303
FAX 202-628-4311
Bitnet: AIBS@GWUVM
February 24, 1994
Mr. Thomas McLarty III
Chief of Staff
Executive Office of the President
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. McLarty,
In the past year, three major groups¹ have strongly criticized the way that the Federal
government supports and uses science related to the environment. They found a lack of leadership
and national planning, weak linkages between science and policy, neglect of long term research,
insufficient attention to data management, a tremendous need for improved education and training,
and underfunding of all sciences - particularly biological and social sciences, engineering, and
crossdisciplinary approaches. These deficiencies are especially troubling as the world's environmental
problems grow increasingly serious and expensive.
We have communicated with you previously about our proposal for the creation of a
National Institute for the Environment (NIE) as a way to help solve these problems. I am now
pleased to send you a newly published article by Committee for the NIE Vice-Chair Dr. Henry
Howe that compares the findings of these reports and the NIE proposal. Also included is a chart
that compares the key conclusions and recommendations of these groups. The chart has been
reviewed by individuals that were involved with each of the reports.
We are now finalizing a 115-page report that provides an agency-by-agency review of
environmental research and development programs of the Federal government. The report
concludes:
o
The federal government spent $3.1 billion on environmental R & D in FY 1992
(based on budget authority). This includes research in at least 24 different agencies.
¹National Commission on the Environment; Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and
Government; National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council Committee on Environmental
Research
Dr. Stephen P. Hubbell, Chairman
Dr. Henry F. Howe, Vice-Chairman
Dr. Peter D. Saundry, Executive Director
Dr. A. Karim Ahmed, Secretary- Treasurer
Another $1.4 billion was spent on development of environmental technologies, mostly
focused on environmental clean up and end-of-the pipe pollution control.
Total federal expenditures for environmental R & D were $72 billion in FY 1992.
The National Science Foundation ($543 million) was the largest supporter of
environmental research.
NASA ($826 million) was the largest supporter of environmental research and
development.
In all cases, the R&D serves the mission of the agency that funds it.
Very few programs effectively mesh long-term research with the needs of
decisionmakers
Effective coordination of R&D programs is the exception rather than the rule.
Some 70% of environmental research goes for the physical sciences.
If you would like a draft copy of this report, please contact our office at (202)-628-4303.
We hope that these reports will be useful as the Administration seeks to rationalize
environmental R&D through the new Committee on Environment and Natural Resources within the
National Science and Technology Council.
We would be more than delighted to meet with you to further discuss our findings and how
we believe a new National Institute for the Environment would help the government to use science
in a cost-effective manner to improve environmental decisionmaking. Please contact Dr. David
Blockstein at (202)-628-4303 to arrange for a meeting.
Best wishes in your important work.
Shphin Sincerely, P. Hubbull
Stephen P. Hubbell, Ph.D.
Chairman
730 11th Street NW
Washington. DC 20001-4521
NIE
202-628-4303
FAX 202-628-4311
COMMITTEE FOR THE
Bitnet: AIBS@GWUVM
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
Organization of Federal Environmental Research:
Key Findings of Four Reports
T
he following pages contain a table comparing, in
A Proposal for a National Institute for the Environ-
very simplified terms, the contents of four recent
ment: Need Rationale, and Structure, Committee for
critiques of the federal approach to environmental
the National Institute for the Environment (1993)
research and development. The four critiques are:
The four critiques note very similar problems and
Environmental Research and Development:
often recommend similar solutions. The report by
Strengthening the Federal Infrastructure, Carnegie
the National Commission on the Environment is dif-
Commission on Science, Technology, and Govern-
ferent from the other three, In that it focuses more
ment (1992).
on broad environmental policy and less on research.
Therefore, while most of the recommendations of
Research to Protect, Restore, and Manage the Envi-
the other three reports are contained in the follow-
ronment, Committee on Environmental Research,
ing comparison, only some of the recommendations
Commission on Life Sciences, National Research
made by the National Commission are included.
Council, National Academy Press (1993)
The statements concerning the non-CNIE reports
have been checked for accuracy by individuals
Choosing a Sustainable Future, National Commis-
closely involved with those reports.
sion on the Environment, Island Press (1993)
Non-Standard Acronyms for Appendix E
DoEnv Department of the Environment
EAC Environmental Assessment Center
EMA Environmental Monitoring Agency
ERI Environmental Research Institute
IEA Institute for Environmental Assessment
MPE Mission to Planet Earth
NCEI National Center for Environmental Information
NEC National Environmental Council
NEP National Environmental Plan
NIE National Institute for the Environment
OEQ Office of Environmental Quality
OSTP Office of Science and Technology Policy
Dr. Stephen P. Hubbell, Chairman
Dr. Henry F. Howe, Vice-Chairman
Dr. Peter D. Saundry, Executive Director
Dr. A. Karim Ahmed, Secretary-Treasurer
than to rearrange the existing mission-oriented agen-
cies and change their cultures for these tasks, espe-
cially because their own tasks must continue to be
addressed.
"NIE Is proposed as a new agency that does not
encompass or replace existing ones. The committee
believes that NIE, if not carefully monitored, could
duplicate the roles and missions of existing agencies
and engender "turf battles" as it competed for funds
and programs with existing agencies. For example,
NIE's first aim, basic understanding of the compo-
nents of the environment, might overlap with the
Department of the Interior's planned National Bio-
logical Survey and EPA's Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment Program, unless the roles of extra-
mural and intramural research were understood.
The differences between exploratory research ver-
sus management research, regulatory research, and
monitoring would have to be explored and carefully
delineated. To be successful, NIE would have to be
seen as a resource for EPA, DOI, and others.
"Although a strength of the NIE research-manage-
ment plan is its attempt to bring many constituen-
cies into research planning and priority-setting
through its advisory process, how this will work in
practice within a federal agency is not clear. The
various constituencies will have very different agen-
das. However, the NSF model of the National Science
Board for priority-setting suggests that success
could be achieved.
"The committee believes that the proposed NIE
would improve the nation's environmental research
effort but does not go far enough to solve all the
problems in environmental research that we have
identified."
0
NIE Proposal
83
NIE Proposal
Problem
Recommendations
Carnegie Commission
National Research Council
National Commission
Committee for the NIE
on the Environment
I. No clear
Strong Office of Environmental
National Environmental
Council on Environmental
Strong leadership and coordination
leadership
Quality (OEQ) within Executive
Council (NEC) within
Quality within the Executive
through OSTP and OEQ, with
Office of President and broader
Executive Office of President
Office of the White House
National Institute for the
environmental role for Office of
chaired by Vice-President
strengthened and revitalized
Environment (NIE) as lead
Science and Technology Policy
environmental research agency
(OSTP)
closely coordinated with other
federal agencies
2. No comprehensive
National Environmental
National Environmental Plan
National Environmental
Priority-setting within the NIE in
national
Strategy with an Environmental
(NEP) put together by NEC
Strategy to encourage the
cooperation with scientists,
environmental
Research and Monitoring
identifying national environmental
development and adoption of
knowledge users, other federal
research plan
Initiative guided by OEQ and
research agenda and responsibilities
technologies compatible with
agencies, and other
OSTP to create coherent R&D
of the individual agencies
sustainable development. Primarily
non-governmental stakeholders
plans for agencies. DOE, DOD,
focused on policies other than
such as NGO's and the private
and Dol noted as needing plans
research (e.g., taxes)
sector
for future roles
3. No comprehensive
Institute for Environmental
Environmental Assessment
Center for Environmental
think-tank exists
Assessment (IEA) reporting to
Center (EAC) independent of
Assessment within NIE
for assessing state
OEQ or the Secretary of a
other agencies
of knowledge and
DoEnv. Increased support for
Center for Integrative Studies
linking research
multidisciplinary policy studies
on the Environment within NIE
to policy over the
long term
NIE Proposal
Problem
Recommendations
Carnegie Commission
National Research Council
National Commission
Committee for the NIE
on the Environment
8. Need long-term
Environmental Monitoring
Interagency Environmental
Office of Long-Range
Ongoing assessments by Center
monitoring and
Agency (EMA)-combining
Status and Trends Program
Forecasting at EPA or DoEnv
for Environmental Assessment
assessment of
NOAA and USGS-as
coordinated by NEC and
within NIE
environmental
independent agency or part of
operated by DoEnv
5-and 10-year environmental
trends and
a DoEnv. EMA would have
quality goals from CEQ as well
consequences
close ties to NASA Mission
as reports on other objectives
to Planet Earth (MPE)
9. Insufficient
National Center for
Interagency National
Center for Environmental
National Library for the
attention to the
Environmental Information
Environmental Data and
Statistics within DoEnv
Environment to create an
collection and
(NCEI) within U.S. EMA as
Information System
working closely with CEQ
electronic infrastructure to provide
management
focal point for storage and
coordinated by NEC and
easy and effective access to wide
of data
retrieval of data from federal
operated by DoEnv
range of quality-controlled data and
and other sources
information; services to increase
its utility
10. Need improved
New and strengthened government
New programs established and
Development and adoption
Directorate for Education and
education and
and private sector programs,
existing programs expanded
of interdisciplinary environmental
Training providing extramural
training of
especially those which cross
to produce people broadly
curricula and activities to promote
funding for environmental sciences
people
disciplines, or are interdisciplinary
trained across and between
environmental literacy
and studies programs at universities
disciplines
and colleges
NIE Proposal
Problem
Recommendations
Carnegie Commission
National Research Council
National Commission
Committee for the NIE
on the Environment
12. Need closer
International consultative group
International system of regional
Focal point for cooperation with
linkages to the
for research on environment
centers to develop, disseminate, and
international organizations on
activities of
encourage use of environmentally
global environmental scientific issues
other nations
Closer ties between government
sustainable technologies.
agencies and foreign counterparts
U.S. should commit to support
Closer links between international
and increase funding to a
assessments and international
number of international
policies
environmental treaties
13. Need to improve
Closer ties between existing and
Government-industry
Representative stakeholders on
relationships and
new agencies/programs
partnerships to explore
NIE Board of Governors and
coordination
new and innovative
throughout NIE activities to
among different
Stronger environmental research
technologies that are
emphasize cooperation,
activities and
and policy-making linkages between
environmentally sound.
coordination, and consensus
stakeholders
federal agencies and non-governmental
building
organizations
Improved dialogue
between experts and
Environmental R&D programs
public on concept of
of federal government and industry
relative risk.
should be linked more closely. Use
incentives to encourage linkage
COMMENTARY
428
THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT:
COMPARISON WITH OTHER PROPOSALS
Henry F. Howe
University of Illinois at Chicago
Abstract. This paper compares proposals for reform of federal environmental research and development (R&D). Analysis is based on recent
reports by the Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government, the Commission on Environmental Research of the National
Research Council (NRC), the National Biological Survey (NBS), and the Committee for the National Institute for the Environment (CNIE).
All reports note similar deficiencies in federal R&D concerning the environment, including lack of coordination among 20 agencies, emphasis
on short-term solutions. and research driven by regulatory crises. The Carnegie Commission recommends new oversight bodies to ensure
proper assessment; it does not recommend major increases in funding. The NRC commission prefers substantial increases in funding and
placement of parts of existing executive departments into a research unit of a new Department of the Environment. The NBS is an internal
reorganization of biological research units within the Department of the Interior (DOI).
The NIE proposal would establish a new agency, either free-standing or within a new Department of the Environment, which would provide
assessments of what needs to be known, extramural peer-reviewed research to fill gaps, an electronic management function, and a strong
commitment to multidisciplinary higher education and training in environmental engineering, sciences, and humanities. The NIE would have
no regulatory function and would not require reorganization of existing programs.
INTRODUCTION
political will, and economic resources does not exist. Some-
how our scientific establishment, educational system, federal
A consensus is emerging that environmental change pro-
foundly affects the fortunes of all humans on earth and that
and state governments. and industries have failed to provide
environmental challenges to human well-being will become
a coherent understanding of the magnitude and details of
more insistent with time. Whether the particulars concern
environmental problems, a coherent process for assessing
environmental threats, and a coherent response to existing
population growth, energy consumption, food production, air
quality, clean water, solid waste, sustainable use of soil and
problems and future threats.
biological resources, toxic and radioactive waste disposal,
water table management. global climate change, economic
Within 5 years, 17 major reports have reached remarkably
similar conclusions about the scientific weakness, popular
viability, or the human values that sometimes cause change
and always negotiate response to change, no one on this
ignorance, political gridlock, and low economic priority of
federal efforts that becalm rational approaches to environ-
planet can escape the consequences of a dynamic environ-
mental challenges (CNIE, 1993a: 14). Through individual
ment.
efforts and public and private commissions, hundreds of
A second disturbing consensus about environmental chal-
distinguished natural and social scientists, decisionmakers,
lenge is that we are not up to it. Whether the issue is a nagging
and business leaders have analyzed the problem and recog-
well-defined troublemaker like industrial pollution or loom-
nized the need for 4 change in government priorities. Ele-
ments of most recommendations include funding commensu-
ing threats of ambiguous proportions like human population
rate with need, more coherence in federal programs, more and
growth or climate change, there is a sense that the required
integration of technical expertise, social comprehension,
better knowledge and training, and an effort to ensure that
both the educated public and decisionmakers know what has
to be done and understand the technical and social issues
involved. Success in reorganizing federal sponsorship of
environmental research and education would allow stable,
Henry F. Howe is vice chair of the Committee for the National
responsible regulatory environments, promote technologies
Institute for the Environment and is professor of biological sci-
ences (M/C 066), University of Illinois, 845 W. Taylor Street,
and methodologies that permit sustainable use of resources,
Chicago, IL 60607. He has written widely on tropical seed dispersal
and encourage foresight that permits proactive rather than
and tree reproduction, and now is conducting experiments in tallgrass
reactive environmental policies.
prairie restoration. Further discussion of issues considered here may
be found in the 4 November 1993 testimony before the Subcommit-
This paper compares similarities and differences of the pro-
tee on Technology, Environment and Aviation of the U.S. House
posal to establish a National Institute for the Environment
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. Readers who wish
(NIE) (CNIE, 1993a) with recommendations of the Carnegie
to receive more information about the NIE or participate in the NIE
informational network should contact him.
Commission on Science, Technology, and Government (CC,
THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL Volume 15 pp. 428-435 1993.
0191-5398/93 $3.00 + .00
Printed In the USA. All rights reserved.
Copyright © National Association of Environmental Professionals
PROPOSALS FOR AN NIE
429
1992) and the Commission on Environmental Research of the
social and cultural causes and responses. A strategic vision
National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academy
was necessary for a strategic challenge, and the vision had to
of Sciences (NRC, 1993a). Although of more limited objec-
be much broader than ecology.
tives, the National Biological Survey (NBS) of the Depart-
ment of the Interior (DOI) is close to reality and overlaps
Seeking wider advice, Hubbell secured funding from John-
enough with some of the NIE proposal to warrant discussion
son and Johnson for a meeting of 50 academics. environmen-
here (NRC, 1993b; NBS, 1993). Many issues introduced in
talists, congressional staff, and federal agency staff in Wash-
other reports have been incorporated in each of these recent
ington, D.C., on December 2, 1989. The charge for this
evaluations.
intense one-day seminar was to determine "what is needed"
and "how to do it," tempered by reality from veteran congres-
Readers should understand that I am an advocate of the NIE
sional staff Michael Rodemeyer from the House Science
process but that the complex goal of reorganizing national
Committee and Stephanie Clough from the Senate Environ-
science priorities has multiple possible solutions. What actu-
ment Committee. The group formalized the outline of a
ally transpires during the legislative process (including de-
proposal to secure an independent outside evaluation from
velopment of the first NIE bill, H.R. 2918, in this Congress)
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Friends arranged
will be a national debate on the merits and political exigencies
House and Senate hearings in March and April 1990, osten-
of some of those possible solutions. The purpose of this paper
sibly to secure authorization for an NAS study of environ-
is to provide readers with a sense of the NIE vision, of the
mental research. A key implicit agenda was to alert the
alternatives, and of the political process required to change
executive and legislative branches about the issues and the
the system.
need for "something new."
THE EVOLVING NIE VISION
The 1989 Washington workshop refined the original NIE
The NIE vision has grown since its inception, and even since
vision (Howe and Hubbell, 1990). First, the revision retained
it was last discussed here (Howe et al., 1990). A review is
the idea of an extramural granting agency patterned after NIH
instructive of both the process and the evolving result, which
but proposed semiautonomous institutes that would address
is sure to change further during the legislative process.
problems that had to be solved. No need was sccn for new
government laboratories, which would convert the NIE vi-
History
sion from public works (i.e., funds distributed to many
districts and all states) to pork barrel (i.e., funds distributed to
The seed for the NIE was planted by Joseph Frankel, a
centers in one or a few states), would duplicate existing
developmental biologist at the University of Iowa, who
efforts, would greatly enlarge the federal bureaucracy, and
stopped me in the hall in 1987 to suggest why our small
would continue to leave the environment a low priority in
ecology group could not convince the dean to fill vacancies:
universities. Second, broad problem areas spanned some
"The only real difference between ecology and the rest of
natural and social sciences but retained a disciplinary flavor
biology is NIH [National Institutes of Health]." His point was
(e.g., an Institute for Ecosystem Management, another for
that natural science departments are judged by the quantity
Human Environment). Third, the revision only indirectly
and quality of research funded by competitive federal grants,
supported higher education through faculty grants: Finally,
with indirect costs of 30 to 90 percent that pay for libraries,
the revised version included no obvious priórity-setting pro-
utilities, administration, computer systems, field stations,
cess or national communication function.
and facilities and release funds for English departments,
music programs, and student aid. The bottom line was that 7
Revised brochures, hearing testimonies, and a needs state-
billion dollars in support for biomedical sciences shaped
ment crafted by volunteers to describe the proposed institutes
university priorities, but 100 million dollars in grants for
framed the debate. The executive branch opposed funds for
environmental biology did not. As in other research univer-
an NAS study; under directions from the Office of Manage-
sities in which indirect costs comprise up to 35 percent of the
ment and the Budget, testifiers from the National Oceano-
total budget, key Iowa administrators had simply determined
graphic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Envi-
that they could not afford ecologists.
ronmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) argued in hearings that NIE
Shortly thereafter, Stephen Hubbell (about to take a chair at
would duplicate existing efforts. Executive branch opposi-
Princeton) and I discussed these issues. Recognizing that
tion was removed when the EPA and its friends in the House
NIH support in biological sciences was 100 times higher than
and Senate recognized that NIE would fill a very broad niche
NSF support for environmental biology, we realized that only
that no other agency could fill. Ultimately a 400,000-dollar
a grand initiative would both produce the science required to
earmark for an NAS study within the 1991 EPA budget,
address complex problems and give environmental issues a
augmented by 200,000 dollars from the National Science
high priority in higher education. Friends further pointed out
Foundation (NSF), DOI, and the Department of Energy
that even immense increases in ecological understanding
(POE), produced the NAS study (NRC, 1993a) discussed
would not solve pressing problems if biological knowledge
below.
was divorced from understanding of physical processes or
430
HOWE
In September 1990 the Committee for the NIE (CNIE)
dollars (CC, 1992). Compared with health research (8 billion
opened a Washington office, coordinated on a shoestring
dollars per year) or military R&D (45 billion dollars). neither
budget under the able leadership of Dr. David Blockstein.
is a large number. The most generous estimate is less than 7
The office embarked on a two-year effort to secure reaction
percent of the total federal budget is allocated to R&D and
and support, refine the proposal and needs statement, and
less than 0.5 percent of the federal budget for environmental
produce assessments of related topics. Vigorous efforts by
R&D (Figure 1).
Dr. Karim Ahmed, Blockstein, and other friends provided
foundation support to augment the limited help offered by the
Second, leadership is weak or nonexistent. Funding is distrib-
University of Illinois and Princeton and allowed the office to
uted among 20 agencies, with at least 8 major players (Figure
sponsor a national conference on the NIE in Bethesda, Mary-
2). Each agency has its own well-justified mandate and
land, in May 1992. Over 150 attendees representing biologi-
therefore its own research agenda. Most serve the regulatory
cal, physical, and social sciences and humanities, environ-
or management needs of the agency (e.g., DOI, EPA), are
mental groups, several federal agencies and congressional
organized along strictly disciplinary lines for support of basic
staffs, and business forced a complete revision of the NIE
science without regard to utility (NSF), or serve other special
concept.
needs that preclude a broad interdisciplinary perspective.
While other major priorities of the federal government have
The current NIE vision calls for the establishment of an
agencies devoted to their study or support (e.g., agriculture,
independent agency or a research arm of the proposed De-
health, environmental regulation, basic science, space, en-
partment of the Environment, with three problem-oriented
ergy, defense). environmental sciences have no lead agency.
research directorates, an assessment center, a state-of-the-art
The Federal Coordinating Committee on Science, Engineer-
data management and electronic library, and a directorate to
ing, and Technology (FCCSET) interagency consortium des-
promote environmental higher education and training. The
ignated to study global change (the Global Change Program
proposal retains the extramural, competitive, peer-reviewed
of 1 billion dollars) provides leadership on organizing re-
nature of earlier proposals, calls for a general increase in
search around a few issues, but its agenda primarily redirects
spending on environmental research with a new emphasis on
existing efforts toward one of five or six priorities.
biological. engineering, and social sciences and relevant
humanities, and emphasizes the need for multidisciplinary
Third, the research itself is often not as effective as it should
and interdisciplinary approaches to complex problems.
be. As the Carnegie Commission (CC. 1992: 13) puts it, much
of the research is "diffuse, reactive, and focused on short-
The Washington office and my office at the University of
range, end-of-the-pipe solutions." Much of the research spon-
Illinois coordinate an educational and legislative effort to
sored by the federal government is actually conducted by
promote debate through the legislative process. H.R. 2918
government scientists, is not competitively awarded, or is
calling for the establishment of the NIE, a conceptual bill
awarded through programs that are not as effective as com-
introduced by Representative George Brown (D-Calif.), chair
petitive peer review in NIH or NSF. In-house research swells
of the House Science Committee, and Representative Jim
the federal bureaucracy (a scientist at a National Laboratory
Saxton (R-N.J.), together with 61 cosponsors, will catalyze
costs 150,000 dollars per year, exclusive of direct research
discussion in the executive branch and House of Representa-
costs), does not make use of the entire scientific community,
tives and provide the grist for a companion measure in the
and fails to support graduate and undergraduate education in
Senate. A network of over 6,500 interested scientists. orga-
the relevant areas in colleges and universities. Whether
nized from Chicago by region, state, congressional district,
justified or not, in-house research within regulatory and
and institution, keeps interested individuals and institutions
management agencies is often suspect to industries or other
informed with periodic newsletters and weekly or biweekly
agencies. Uncompetitive or marginally competitive grant
mail, fax, and e-mail updates.
programs do not make the best use of national talent in state
agencies, academic institutions, environmental groups, or
INADEQUACIES OF FEDERALLY SUPPORTED
industry laboratories.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
The Carnegie Commission (CC, 1992). two NAS reports
Fourth, environmental research is heavily skewed toward
(NRC, 1993a. 1993b), and the Committee for the NIE (CNIE,
physical sciences, with insufficient resources devoted to
1993a) largely agree with each other and with previous
evaluation of the effects of changes in the physical system on
reports in their assessments of what is wrong with the federal
living systems, including people. In the Global Change
system for support of environmental research and education.
Program of 1.4 billion dollars for fiscal year 1993, for
Key points include the following.
instance, 17 percent of funding is for ecological systems. and
only 2 percent concerns human interactions (CEES, 1993).
First, funding is not commensurate with need. Depending on
Even in such apparently well-studied areas as ozone deple-
what is counted as environmental research, estimates range
tion and UV-B radiation, remarkably little support exists for
from 2.5 billion dollars, excluding most agricultural and
finding out how depletion will affect biological and human
military research (Mandula and Blockstein, 1992) to 5 billion
systems (CNIE, 1992). All reports note that remarkably little
PROPOSALS FOR AN NIE
431
Figure 1. Federal Budget for 1992
Environmental research and development is less than 0.5% of the total.
Payments & grants
$765
Net Interest
$206
Defense
$295
Other government
Environmental R&D
$216
$4
Source: Mandula and Blockstein (1992)
Figure 2. Environmental Research and Development Budget for 1992
The data Include biological, physical, and social aciences but exclude human
health, some energy research, most mitigation, and development.
1000
800
740
630
600
$ (millions)
400
320
250
230
200
120
110
0
NASA
NSF
NOAA
DOI
USDA
EPA
DOE
Agency
Source: Mandula and Blockstein (1992)
432
HOWE
support exists for evaluation of human attitudes that cause
In short, the crux of the Carnegie recommendation for provid-
environmental change or of human activities that are im-
ing coherence, assessment, and better science is lumping of
pacted by environmental change.
two large physical science agencies (EMA), consolidation of
research programs within EPA, addition of permanent or
Fifth, feedback between assessment of societal needs and
semipermanent research institutes in six universities or non-
research priorities is insufficient. As exemplified by the acid
profit organizations, addition of an assessment institute, and
rain program and many other efforts (Rubin et al., 1992).
addition of an office that will provide leadership (OEQ) in
good science is often irrelevant to the policymaking process.
cooperation with the existing OSTP. Dramatic increases in
Some means must be created by which proactive assessments
overall spending are not envisioned.
and credible but understandable information can be provided
to decisionmakers who need it when they need it.
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
THE CARNEGIE COMMISSION
The NRC Committee on Environmental Research sees a need
for both cultural and organizational change (NRC. 1993a).
The Carnegie Commission recommends reorganization of
Cultural change will require change in the way environmen-
existing agencies and creation of several mechanisms to
tal scientists think and do business. Organizational change
coordinate research and produce assessments (CC, 1992).
requires some overhaul of existing federal efforts, ranging
Finding that the budget for environmental R&D is already
from minimal enhancement of existing budgets to radical
large (five billion dollars, including substantial agricultural
reorganization of existing environmental agencies. The NRC
research, remedial cleanup, and military research), the com-
Committee identifies virtually the same weaknesses as does
mission limits recommendations for increased funding to
the Committee for the NIE.
augmentation for the National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences, with some added funding for the Depart-
Additions of several units would provide leadership and
ment of Agriculture (USDA). NSF, and some programs in
coordination. Leadership would fall to a National Environ-
DOI.
mental Council (NEC). Most assessment would be per-
formed by an Environmental Assessment Center indepen-
In addition, new or strengthened government programs in
dent of other agencies. Parallel to the Carnegie report, this
environmental education would be integrated with private
report calls for a National Environmental Plan created by the
sector programs, with an emphasis on programs that cross
NEC. An interagency National Environmental Status and
disciplines or are interdisciplinary. The Carnegie Commis-
Trends Program would fill the assessment function, while a
sion recommends creation of six Environmental Research
new interagency National Environmental Data and Informa-
Institutes within the EPA which would be located in aca-
tion System would manage and facilitate communication of
demic institutions and nongovernmental organizations. Ex-
data. The NRC Committee calls for increased funding, par-
tramural grants would be organized through these six
ticularly for biological, engineering, and social sciences.
institutes and through a consolidation of the existing twelve
Four means of organizing changes in research include the
EPA laboratories into four new laboratories.
following.
However, the core of the Carnegie recommendation is reor-
Framework A would increase budgets of existing programs.
ganization and addition of organizing mechanisms. Leader-
This minimal approach would retain disciplinary focus, re-
ship and coordination would be promoted by creation of a
tain "low-beam" research driven by regulatory and manage-
new Office of Environmental Quality (OEQ), plus a broader
ment needs at the expense of "high-beam" long-term per-
role for the present Office of Science and Technology Policy
spectives within existing agencies, retain and enlarge a largely
(OSTP). The two agencies would produce a national environ-
in-house federal research effort, and offer enhancement of the
mental strategy with coherent R&D plans for other agencies.
educational and training efforts through existing agencies
The Carnegie Commission suggests combining NOAA (now
that have strong extramural programs, such as NSF. Frame-
in the Department of Commerce) and the U.S. Geological
work A would tap the resources of the academic. nongovern-
Survey (USGS: now in DOI) into a new Environmental
mental organization, state government, and business commu-
Monitoring Agency (EMA) that could either be subsumed
nities to the degree that existing programs already do, except
under a new Department of the Environment or stand alone.
a little more.
The EMA would "have close ties" with NASA, but not be part
of it. Within the EMA would be a new National Center for
Framework B, creation of the NIE. is viewed by the NRC
Environmental Information. To help with assessment, a new
Committee as a credible proposal that converges with many
Institute for Environmental Assessment would be created,
of the NRC Committee views. The major criticism of an early
either under a new Office of Environmental Quality or under
NIE proposal of December 1992 is that it does not go far
a new Department of the Environment. The report also calls
enough and might duplicate existing programs.
for various efforts to coordinate existing and future programs.
PROPOSALS FOR AN NIE
433
Framework C, a National Institute for Environmental Re-
directorates: Environmental Resources. Environmental
search (NIER), would address protection, restoration, and
Systems. and Environmental Sustainability. The first would
management of resources. This framework differs from Frame-
sponsor research to answer the question "What do we have?"
work B in that it would consolidate EPA research. USGS,
including inventories, monitoring. and characterization of
NOAA, and NASA Mission to Planet Earth/Earth Observing
potential products. The second would address the question
System (MPE/EOS) into a new agency, which would also
"How does it work?" promoting research on mechanisms,
include a program on status and trends and a data center. The
processes, and effects of environmental phenomena. The
goal is to remove much of the science from existing agencies
third would address the question "How do we maintain it?"
and consolidate in-house and extramural science under one
emphasizing research on strategies, technologies, and solu-
administrative roof. Like the NIE. the NIER proposes to
tions.
target social and behavioral sciences and biological sciences
as well as physical sciences, although it is not clear how that
Each directorate identifies research that requires perspectives
would happen by consolidating physical science agencies.
from diverse biological, engineering. physical, and social
sciences and humanities to address problems as diverse as
Framework D, the NRC preferred option, would radically
characterization of medicinal plant products or inventories of
reorganize existing agencies by putting much of the federal
human understanding of environmental phenomena (Re-
research effort, including the EPA Office of Research and
sources), analysis of ecosy stem change or study of causes and
Development, NOAA, USGS. and parts of NASA, under a
consequences of environmental inequity (Systems), and cre-
research arm of a new Department of the Environment. The
ation of environmentally friendly solvents or product life-
Department of the Environment envisioned by the NRC
cycle analysis (Sustainability). Recognizing the need for
Committee would consist of three administratively coequal
interdisciplinary analysis of complex problems, directorates
units: Regulation (from EPA). Restoration Operations, and
are constructed so that no single academic discipline can
Research.
control the agenda. A fourth Directorate of Education and
Training would augment support of education through fac-
In short, the crux of this NRC report is an oversight body
ulty grants with direct support of environmental programs
within the office of the president, an independent assessment
and training grants in academic and other educational institu-
center, and increased funding through any of four possible
tions.
organizational plans, including the NIE. The preferred option
calls for consolidation of major agencies under a new pro-
The May 1992 conference forced academics to confront the
posed Department of the Environment quite distinct from that
failure of science divorced from societal needs. As demon-
under consideration by Congress at the time of writing. Two
strated by the acid rain program (Rubin et al., 1992), hundreds
new interagency units would coordinate efforts and manage
of millions of dollars worth of excellent problem-focused
data.
research may be irrelevant if scientists fail to understand what
decisionmakers need, how to conduct research in a timely
THE NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL SURVEY
fashion, or how to communicate key results to the people who
The NBS reorganizes research within DOI (NRC, 1993b;
actually write laws or issue regulations. The NIE would meet
NBS, 1993). It will: (1)perform research in support of bio-
these needs through an inclusive priority-setting process
logical resource management; (2)inventory, monitor, and
using an in-house Center for Environmental Assessment to
evaluate trends in biotic resources; and (3)communicate
organize task forces of outside experts and the National
results of research to managers. The NBS will transfer funds
Library for the Environment to manage and facilitate access
and personnel from DOI units (Fish and Wildlife Service.
to environmental information.
National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Miner-
als Management Service. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Geo-
CONTRASTS
logical Survey, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Contrasts among proposed solutions clarify the similarities
Enforcement, and Bureau of Mines) to a new free-standing
and differences in these proposals (CNIE, 1993a, 1993b.
bureau within the department.
1993c; Durrett, 1993). Like the Carnegie Commission and
the NRC Committee on Environmental Research, the NIE
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR THE
proposal attempts to establish a leadership agency that is not
ENVIRONMENT
controlled by immediate regulatory and management con-
The mission of the NIE is to improve the scientific basis for
cerns but that is responsive to societal needs. The NIE
making decisions on environmental issues through an
approach would include members of all relevant sectors of
integration of extramural, problem-focused research. proactive
society (academic, community groups, business, environ-
assessments, a national electronic library for the nvironment,
mental groups, federal agencies, state research units) and all
and strengthened higher education and training (Figure 3).
relevant disciplines (biological, engineering, physical, and
social sciences and humanities) on the Board of Governors
Rather than create a welter of semiindependent competing
and/or on task forces that advise the Board or undertake
institutes, the NIE proposal now calls for three research
assessments.
434
HOWE
Figure 3. The Proposed National Institute for the Environment
An Inclusive Board of Governora would advise the director, who would oversee an integrated
program of assessment, research, communication, and training. This diagram assumes a
free-standing agency with a director who reports to the president.
Environmental
Environmental
Systems
Environmental
Research Directorates
Director
Center for
and
National
Environmental
Board of
Library for the
Assessment
Governors
Environment
Directorate
of Education
and Training
Source: CNIE (1993a, 1993b)
Also resembling the above proposals. the NIE proposal notes
disciplinary disparities, enlarge emphasis on in-house federal
the need to promote multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary
research spending, and retain other distortions that belie the
research and training. Unlike others, the NIE proposal has a
NRC Commission on Environmental Research goal of chang-
clear mechanism for doing both through problem-focused
ing the culture of doing environmental research. Other NRC
research and training grants dispensed on a competitive basis
frameworks (including NIE) also call for substantial in-
by three interdisciplinary directorates and an education direc-
creases in funding; the NBS reorganizes existing DOI funds,
torate. The Carnegie Commission, the NRC Committee, and
and the Carnegie Commission advocates selective increases
the NBS proposals do not indicate how environmental re-
in a few agencies.
search is to be made interdisciplinary (integrating methods
and perspectives of different disciplines) or even
Unlike alternatives, the NIE proposal does not call for reor-
multidisciplinary (utilizing different disciplines). The
ganization, consolidation, or elimination of existing agen-
Carnegie and NRC (Frameworks A, C, and D) proposals lock
cios. Oversight of every environmental agency or function is
in physical science biases, while the NBS is a biological
compartmentalized in one or more subcommittees or com-
agency to serve the DOI.
mittees in the House and Senate. These do not yield control
easily, particularly if reorganization might actually disrupt
While NIE advocates believe that funding should be in-
agencies that appear to function well (e.g., NOAA and
creased in all well-justified environmental agencies, mar-
USGS). Consolidations and reorganizations called for in the
ginal increases in funding without the creation of a lead
Carnegie report (CC, 1992) and in Frameworks C and D of the
agency (Framework A of NRC) (NRC, 1993a) would make
NRC report (NRC, 1993a) that would take research functions
the world only a marginally safer place. It would lock in
out of one independent agency or cabinet department and put
PROPOSALS FOR AN NIE
435
them in another are usually not politically feasible. Even
Finally, the NIE is designed to set in motion an inclusive
intra-agency reorganizations are difficult, as Secretary Bab-
process that will both define needs and recommend resources
bitt has found with his NBS proposal. Attempts to link such
required for solutions. The Committee for the NIE makes no
reorganizations to elevation of the EPA to cabinet status
specific recommendations about funding, except to note that
could easily doom both reorganization and elevation.
the NIE could not be created overnight. At least a year or two
of planning, organization, and initial assessments would be
Also unlike alternatives, NIE proposes to make the best
required at nominal cost before any full-fledged grant pro-
possible use of talent in the entire national scientific commu-
grams could be up and running. The ultimate scope of NIE in
nity through competitive, peer-reviewed research. The Com-
five, ten, or fifteen years will depend on the strength of
mittee for the NIE, and relevant legislation (H.R. 2918), call
demand voiced through the pluralistic process of priority
for support of peer-reviewed or competitive contractual re-
setting, and the response of Congress to perceived needs
search by scientists in academic institutions, museums and
during appropriations cycles. All the Committee for the NIE
ZOOB, state and other local and regional governmental re-
can do is ensure that the debate is national, reaching into every
search units, existing national laboratories, qualified envi-
state and congressional district.
ronmental groups. and industries. The NIE would participate
in the FCCSET process and collaborate with other federal
REFERENCES
research units but would not enlarge the federal research
CC (Carnegie Commission). 1992. Environmental Research and
bureaucracy. Strict adherence to the principle of extramural
Development: Strengthening the Federal Infrastructure. A Report
research throughout society would bring staffing require-
of the Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Gov-
ments much closer to NSF than to other federal agencies.
ernment, New York.
CEES (Committee on Earth and Environmental Sciences). 1993.
Finally, alone among these proposals, the NIE would revolu-
Our Changing Planet: The FY 1993 U.S. Global Change Research
Program. National Science Foundation. Washington, DC.
tionize priorities in higher education. Rather than funnel
CNIE (Committee for the National Institute for the Environment).
funds into the federal bureaucracy, which educates no under-
1992. Environmental Effects of Stratospheric Ozone Depletion:
graduates and trains few professionals, the NIE would create
Research Priorities and Funding Needs. Committee for the Na-
the incentives for colleges and universities to hire active
tional Institute for the Environment, Washington, DC.
environmental scientists and specialists and promote inter-
CNIE (Committee for the National Institute for the Environment).
disciplinary programs that span anthropology and business to
1993a. A Proposal for the National Institute for the Environment:
Need, Rationale, and Structure. Committee for the National
sociology and zoology.
Institute for the Environment, Washington. DC.
CNIE (Committee for the National Institute for the Environment).
CONCLUSION
1993b. Structural Options for the Proposed National Institute for
In brief, credible solutions to environmental challenges are
the Environment. Committee for the National Institute for the
Environment, Washington, DC.
within reach. Perhaps because it has the benefit of written
CNIE (Committee for the National Institute for the Environment).
contributions, oral comments, and criticisms from over 1,000
1993c. NIE Network News. July. Committee for the National
natural and social scientists, environmentalists, business lead-
Institute for the Environment, Washington, DC.
ers. government officials, and interested citizens, the pro-
Durrett, D. 1993. Environmental Justice: Breaking New Ground.
posal for the National Institute for the Environment is one of
Unpublished Report to the Committee for the National Institute
the most viable options available. The NIE would not radi-
for the Environment, Washington. DC.
cally reorganize existing agencies, disrupt functional re-
Howe, HF., and S.P. Hubbell. 1990. Towards the National Institutes
for the Environment. Global Environment 1: 71-74.
search units, or increase the federal in-house research bureau-
Howe, H.F., S.P. Hubbell, and D.E. Blockstein. 1990. Rationale for
cracy. The NIE would provide balance between studying
the National Institutes for the Environment. The Environmental
physical processes and studying the effects of those processes
Professional 12: 360-363.
on ecological systems and people. Unlike alternatives, the
Mandula, B.B., and D.E. Blockstein, 1992. Federal Funding for
proposed NIE would explicitly bring all sectors of society
Environmental Research. Environmental Science and Technol-
into the priority-setting process, would provide a clearing-
ogy 26: 1496-1502.
house and data management system for all environmental
NBS (National Biological Survey). 1993. United States Department
of the Interior Budget Justifications, F.Y. 1994. Preprint for the
research, would assess the state of environmental under-
Department of the Interior. Washington, DC.
standing in all relevant fields, and would dramatically change
NRC (National Research Council). 1993a. Research to Protect,
the way environmental science is taught and conducted in the
Restore, and Manage the Environment. Committee on Environ-
nation's colleges, universities, and other educational institu-
mental Research, Commission on Life Sciences. National Re-
tions. The proposed NIE would also make use of the talent of
search Council. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
the entire scientific community-academia, business, envi-
NRC (National Research Council). 1993b. A Biological Survey for
the Nation. Committee on the Formation of the National Biologi-
ronmental groups, other federal agencies, and state govern-
cal Survey, Commission on the Formation of the National Bio-
ment research units-to set priorities and actually do the
logical Survey, National Research Council. National Academy
research.
Press, Washington, DC.
Rubin, E.S., L.B. Lave, and M.G. Morgan. 1992. Keeping Climate
Research Relevant. Issues in Science and Technology 8: 47-55.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 12, 1994
Ruth R. Harkin
Overseas Private Investment Corporation
1100 New York Ave. N.W.
Washington D.C.
20527
Dear Mr. Harkin:
Thank you for your letter dated March 14, 1994 and the
enclosed copy of your new annual report.
As you know, I share President Clinton's and Vice President
Gore's commitment to the preservation of our environment. I
appreciate learning about your work at the Overseas Private
Investment Corporation and your involvement in making American
businesses more competitive.
Again, thank you for sharing this information with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen McGinty
Director, Office on
Environmental Policy
OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20527, U.S.A.
OFFICE OF THE
PRESIDENT
March 14, 1994
Ms. Kathleen McGinty
Deputy Assistant to the President
and Director, Office of
Environmental Policy
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Katie,
Enclosed is a copy of our new annual report which describes some
of our accomplishments in the last fiscal year.
President Clinton has made opening new markets and assisting U.S.
businesses a cornerstone of his Administration. Since I arrived
at OPIC in mid-year, we have taken a number of steps to achieve
these goals. Over time, our efforts will help make American
businesses more competitive, create tens of thousands of jobs at
home and abroad, generate billions of dollars in American
exports, and further America's foreign policy goals and economic
interests.
I hope you will find this report useful. Please let me know if
we can provide you with further information.
Sincerely,
Ruth
Ruth R Harkin
President and
Chief Executive Officer
Enclosure
1100 NEW YORK AVE., N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20527 FAX (202) 408-9859 (202) 336-8400
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 17, 1994
Mr. Robert A. Hefner III
Chairman
The GHK Company
3030 Northwest Expressway
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
73112-5467
Dear Mr. Hefner:
Thank you for your letter dated March 17, 1994 and the
enclosed copy of New Thinking About Natural Gas. The article
was both useful and informative. I forwarded the publication to
the appropriate staff member.
I appreciate learning of your continued interest in
exploring the possibilities of utilizing natural gas.
Again, thank you for sharing this information with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen
Director, White House Office
On Environmental Policy
GHK
A NATURAL GAS EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION COMPANY
ROBERT A. HEFNER III, CHAIRMAN
DATE:
March 17, 1994
TO:
Kathleen McGinty, Environment Advisor, Office of the Vice President
FROM:
Robert A. Hefner III
Enclosed is a reprint of an article I have written entitled "New Thinking About
Natural Gas," which I trust may interest you. The article has recently been published by the
U.S. Geological Survey as part of its new look at The Future of Energy Gases.
The article is about opening our minds to the importance of natural gas, the
first step toward the "Era of Energy Gases." The paper argues:
That as we approach the 21st century humankind is in the process of developing new
energy technology based upon energy gases that for the first time will allow for
increasingly sustainable economic growth.
That natural gas, an energy technology distinctly separate from oil, is our first step.
That those economies first to accelerate the transition to energy gases will be the winners
in the 21st century global economy. (Natural gas use in Asia has increased 125% during
the last decade.)
That the undeveloped natural gas resource base in the U.S. is not only abundant at
reasonable prices but in all probability twice that of recent overly conservative estimates.
That proven developed producing natural gas reserves are arguably about twice the
current estimates.
Enclosure: "New Thinking About Natural Gas," from The Future of Energy Gases, U.S.
Geological Survey Professional Paper 1570
Janet Rains 03/17/94
USGSMAI2.DOC
THE GHK COMPANY
3030 NORTHWEST EXPRESSWAY LOWER LEVEL OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA 73112-5467 USA
TELEPHONE: 405 / 948-9800
TELEFAX: 405 / 948-9898
RECYCLED PAPER
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 17, 1994
Roger C. Herdman
Director
Office of Technology Assessment
600 Pennsylvania Avenue S.E.
Washington D.C. 20510-8025
Dear Mr. Herdman:
Thank you for your letter dated February 17, 1993 and the
enclosed Office of Technology Assessment's Report on, Industry,
Technology, and the Environment: Competitive Challenges and
Business Opportunities. I sincerely apologize for the delay in
my response. The information was both useful and informative.
I have passed this material on to the appropriate staff member.
Again, thank you for sending this information to me.
Sincerely,
Kathlen Kathleen U. A. MoGinty
Director, White House Office
On Environmental Policy
TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT BOARD
ROGER C. HERDMAN
DIRECTOR
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, MASSACHUSETTS, CHAIRMAN
DON SUNDQUIST, TENNESSEE, VICE CHAIRMAN
ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, SOUTH CAROLINA
GEORGE E. BROWN, CALIFORNIA
CLAIBORNE PELL. RHODE ISLAND
JOHN D. DINGELL, MICHIGAN
Congress of the United States
ORRIN G. HATCH, UTAH
JIM McDERMOTT, WASHINGTON
CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, IOWA
AMO HOUGHTON, NEW YORK
DAVE DURENBERGER, MINNESOTA
MICHAEL G. OXLEY, OHIO
OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
ROGER C. HERDMAN
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-8025
February 17, 1994
The Honorable Albert Gore, Jr.
The Vice President of the United States
Old Executive Office Building, N.W.
Washington, DC 20503
Dear Mr. Vice President:
I am pleased to enclose OTA's Report on, Industry, Technology, and the
Environment: Competitive Challenges and Business Opportunities, which has
just been released. This Report was prepared at the request of the Senate
Committee on Finance, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and the
House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
The Report discusses competitive challenges and opportunities for two
kinds of American industries that are affected by environmental regulations:
(1) environmental technology and services firms; and, (2) manufacturing firms.
It concludes that technology-- and policies that promote technological
innovation and efficiency--are key to resolving many pressing environmental
problems, to boosting the long term export potential of U.S. environmental
firms, and to making it less costly for manufacturing firms to comply with
environmental regulations.
The Report analyzes the growing world market for environmental
technologies and services, and the competition U.S. environmental firms face
from firms in Europe, Japan, and elsewhere. The Report also compares what it
costs U.S. manufacturers to comply with pollution abatement requirements with
compliance costs in other countries. It assesses the potential for
technological alternatives, such as pollution prevention and cleaner
production technologies, to lower compliance costs. The Report discusses the
pros and cons of over 30 policy options related to technology development and
diffusion, regulatory reform and innovation, export promotion, development
assistance, and interactions between environmental policy and trade policy.
The Report is the third and final publication in an OTA assessment of
American Industry and the Environment. The first publication, Trade and
Environment: Conflicts and Opportunities, was published in May 1992. The
second, Development Assistance, Export Promotion, and Environmental
Technology, was published in August 1993.
I hope you will find the Report useful and informative.
Sincerely,
Zz
Roger C. Herdman
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 12, 1994
Grace L. Hewell, Ed, M.S.P.H.
807 West 40th Street
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37410
Dear Dr. Hewell:
The Vice President asked that I respond to your February 10
letter regarding the Executive Order on environmental justice.
It was good to hear from you. I apologize for the delay in
responding.
The Executive Order will help ensure that governmental
policies and actions related to human health and the environment
do not have a disproportionately high and adverse impact on low-
income and minority Americans. The Executive Order recognizes
the important role that public health and education play in
reducing these disproportionately high impacts. As a result, the
Executive Order specifically requires data collection and
analysis, as well as public participation and access to
information to increase awareness about these issues. Consistent
with the Executive Order, the Office on Environmental Policy will
be working with all Federal agencies to implement the Executive
Order.
I share your enthusiasm for increased environmental literacy
both inside and outside traditional academic settings.
Sincerely,
Kathtun G. McDinte
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/avl
Feb 10, 1994
Vice President
The Hon. albert Yore, J
The white House
ATTN:Ms Kathleen A. Mc GiNTY
Washington, D.C.
Dear Vice President Gore:
& I may -d'd like to express the concerns below
brought recently to the attention of the staff working on
the Presidents Environmental Justice Executive Order
First, Minimal attention is directed to public health
issues. attached is a copy of the Public Health
Initiatives "presented by asst Secretary of Health
Phillip fee to the annual meeting of the
members of the American Public Health association, 1993
in San of sancisco. He stated that Mus Clinton
proposals. agreed to address them in the Health Care Reform
Stayf may also have a copy and made
use of the information.
A weakness, however, is the limited
focus is on health professionals. Health education
scope of education and training. Inditionally the
in general has forgotten of school youth (16 years
ofage and older), and the poor, illitivate and
underducated adult (5 years and older).
The Secretary of Education puhaps has not
provided information on this target population
group found in The communities where there is high
exposure totoxic chemicals and other pollutants.
-2-
SHered
Secondly, we are reaching my second concern that is the
adequate communication, computation and functions skills
"reduction ofjowironmental illitersey. "These people lagk
to understand andaddress environmental justice issues. They
also Need workplace literacy equal access to jobs through
gob training and education. again, they are being forgotten.
The Department of Education's and the Socational Education
and adult Education Bureau (adult Literacy Initiative) are
trying toreach this population group.
I he Governors of the Invelve Southern States have
given priority to the reduction of adult illiteracy for
deveral decades. The environmental curriculum can easily
be conceptualized and developed as an integral part of the Labove programs.
I am & asking to what extent and in what way has
Interagencys groupplicy-msking to he a member?
the Secretary of Education played a role on the white House
With the $500 million provided by ambassador
development of an "Eyveronmental Learning Center "for
Watter annewberg, I am already seeking funds for the
South Chattarioga. tederal/state funds would sustain its We
do Not have funds at this time for a building, and the area is
noted for inadequate faulities to house Needed programs and
services for the all ages. (Watter annewberg esa forgtime friend
are proposed to strengthen the peoposed
executive order (adult environmental literary to help
empower the people" living in the high impact areas as well as the
health/enveroumental specialists. This administration is seen more
and more as acliedren and youth centered one. This idea would
broaden marement. access and scope of the total environmental justice
Secondly, to incorporate "public health initiatives "of APHA.
-B-
Sen. Wellstone's "Public Health Equity act of 1994 is a step
available to to me for review, and splcifics cannot be addressed
in this direction. The proposals, homever, are Notcurrently
The American Public Health assn is also considering
an " Everonmental Justice plenary session to be held in
piecervill be helpful in creating awareness of public health
Washington, D.C. at their year's anmal meeting These
a longtering process
issuls in the environmental justice movement. But this is
Jhope that I am Not too late in bringing to
your attention the above concernsin an effort to further support
this initiative ofthe Quiton-Goreteam.
Respectfully submitted,
Genale L.Hevell, ED.D.;M.S.P.H.
3120 Apple Rd NE
(202)832-3954 Washing ton, DC. 20018
807 W. 40th St (I'm returning soon),
Chatta; JN37410 IN 37410
(615)821-7286
Smcl.
American Public Health Association I
ATMACHMENT (See
Hewell's Letter
2/10/94)
THE CLINTON
HEALTH CARE REFORM PLAN:
THE PUBLIC HEALTH
INITIATIVES
From: Grace fewell
2/10/94
American Public Health Association
W
hat follows are the public health provisions of the President's plan exactly as they appeared in the Sept. 7. 1993.
Administration Draft. Some public health programs are contained in other sections of the Administration's plan.
The Association has been in close contact with Administration officials and is working to ensure that a full range
of public health programs is included and is adequately funded.
2
Public Health Initiative
Authorizing a flexible pool of resources to
address priority health problems of regional
The public health system and the reformed
and national significance.
health care delivery system share a common
purpose: to improve the health of the American
Expanding federal support for unified data
population at an affordable cost.
systems, technical assistance and information
networks.
While health reform strengthens the personal
care delivery system. an enhanced public health
Because dealing effectively with public health
system also plays an essential role to:
problems requires the coordinated involvement
of multiple parties, the initiative is designed to
Protect Americans against preventable. com-
foster inter-agency collaboration and public-
municable diseases, exposure to toxic envi-
private partnerships. including close working
ronmental pollutants. harmful products and
relationships between public health, community
poor quality health care.
groups. alliances. and plans.
Identify and control outbreaks of infectious
disease and patterns of chronic disease and
Core Public Health Functions
injury.
Health reform clears the way for the emphasis of
Inform and educate consumers and health
public health activities to shift away from the
care providers about their roles in preventing
direct delivery of health services. It positions
and controlling disease and the appropriate
public health to maintain a strong defense
use of medical services.
against preventable diseases and conditions that
affect local communities and to work with the
Define and validate new prevention and con-
health delivery system to address them. The fol-
trol interventions.
lowing essential functions are supported:
The public health initiative builds on the capa-
Health-related data collection, surveil-
bility of health alliances and plans to reach out
lance, and outcomes monitoring-The
to their participants. providing them with infor-
basic tool for the health care system as a
mation about prevention and appropriate use of
whole. providing for regular collection and
medical services. The initiative promotes readi-
analysis of information on key dimensions to
ness and flexibility the public health system by
ensure timely awareness, decisions, and inter-
strengthening core functions at the local, state,
ventions related to epidemics. emerging pat-
and federal level. It also focuses attention on
terns of disease and injury, prevalence of risks
specific health problems of regional and national
to health, and outcomes of personal health
significance to consolidate categorical programs
services.
into an integrated health system. reducing
administrative burdens.
Protection of environment, housing, food,
and water-Enforcement functions related to
The public health initiative repairs, strengthens
air pollution (including indoor air). exposure
and consolidates essential federal. state and local
to high lead levels. water contamination, han-
public health functions through three approaches:
dling and preparation of food, sewage and
solid waste disposal. radiation exposure,
Improving the performance of the core func-
radon exposure. noise levels and abatement.
tions of public health.
consumer protection and safety.
American Public Health Association
Investigation and control of diseases and
Funds are distributed to states using a formula
injury-Identification. containment and pro-
based on three weighted factors that take into
vision of appropriate emergency and treat-
account population (one-third). poverty rate
ment resources for community-wide health
(one-third). and years of productive life lost
problems. including emergency preparedness
(one-third). No state receives an allocation less
and control of violence.
than the State's grant in the last year preceding
enactment of this initiative. To receive funds
Public information and education-The
under the formula. states are required to main-
mobilization of communities and motivation
tain their current level of support for public
of individuals to reduce risks to health, such
health and prevention activities at no less than
3
as tobacco use. abuse of alcohol and other
the average of the past two years' funding level.
drugs. sexual activity that increases vulnera-
bility to HIV infection and sexually transmit-
Funds are used to develop and strengthen public
ted diseases. inadequate nutrition, physical
health core functions at the state and local level.
inactivity, and childhood immunization.
including county. district and municipality lev-
els. Accountability for effective use of state for-
Accountability and quality assurance-
mula grant funds are monitored through report-
Enforcement functions to ensure that
ing progress in achieving health improvements
providers. clinics. hospitals. long-term care
using a common data set of health outcomes
facilities, laboratories. and allied health
developed as a part of the Healthy People 2000
providers meet established standards through
initiative.
licenser. certification. and inspection.
Laboratory services-The provision of indi-
Priority Health Problems of Regional and
vidual testing and pathology services. includ-
National Significance
ing the system of state laboratories that
screen for metabolic diseases in newborns.
Additional funds support a federal program to
provide toxicology assessments of blood lead
develop innovative strategies for addressing pri-
levels and other environmental toxins. diag-
ority health needs of regional and national sig-
nose sexually transmitted disease and tuber-
nificance. The purpose of this program is to
culosis requiring partner notification. test for
address specific issues in ways that are respon-
cholera and other infections or food-borne
sive to the needs of populations served by
diseases, and monitor the safety of water and
alliances and plans and that consolidate rather
food supplies.
than proliferate authorities. management struc-
tures. and funding and reporting requirement.
Training and education-Ensuring ade-
" litist"-
quate training with special emphasis on pub-
Congress establishes some priorities for funding
lic health professionals such as epidemiolo-
through dedicated appropriations. The Secretary
Refertomy suggestion
gists, biostatisticians, health educators, public
of the Department of Health and Human Services
health administrators. sanitarians, and labora-
identifies other areas of priorities relying on rec-
torians.
ommendations of a national advisory board repre-
senting the perspective of the Public Health Ser-
Leadership. policy development, and admin-
vice. states and local public health agencies, as
istration-Public health's responsibility to
well as regional health alliances and plans.
define health goals. standards. and policies that
affect the health of whole communities; to
The Secretary solicits proposals for innovative
define health issues of major importance and
interventions that link public health agencies
devise interventions to address them: to build
and the delivery system to achieve measurable
coalitions with related public sectors such as
reductions in the incidence of illness and injury.
housing. public transportation. and agriculture;
Grants are made through competitive awards to
and to ensure accountability for public
state and local government agencies, not-for-
resources devoted to health. Public health coor-
profit organizations and research institutions. As
dinates closely with the leadership of alliances
effective interventions from these projects are
and plans. mobilizing community support for
identified. information is disseminated to facili-
public health policies and initiatives.
tate their adoption in other communities.
American Public Health Association
The following are examples of the types of
Maternal. child health, and family plan-
regional and national priority health issues to be
ning-With continued special attention is
addressed:
needed to provide education and outreach to
prevent infant mortality and morbidity. In
Infectious diseases
addition. the persistent and intractable inci-
dence of adolescent and unwanted pregnancy
Immunization-Education and outreach to
calls for targeted education and outreach in
ensure the broadest possible immunization
support of family planning services. Closely
coverage against childhood vaccine-
linked to social services. interventions
preventable infectious diseases. as well as
include targeted public education. programs
4
influenza. pneumonia. hepatitis B. and
of home visiting. case management for chil-
tetanus among adults.
dren with special needs. and child and spouse
abuse services.
HIV/AIDS-Education for prevention. confi-
dential screening programs. and partner noti-
fication programs particularly in urban areas
with special focus on minorities. women,
Enhancement of Federal Capacity
children. and adolescents.
to Support Public Health
Tuberculosis-Case location, targeted edu-
In support of federal assistance for core public
cation. and training for providers regarding
health functions and categorical activities, addi-
treatment and control measures, with special
tional funds improve direct federal capacity,
attention to its spread among homeless
including:
people.
Federal surveillance and health statistics,
Chronic and environmentally related diseases
laboratories, and epidemiologic services—
Whether fighting the old diseases such as
Diabetes-Community-oriented diabetes
tuberculosis and cholera or newer ones such
education and control programs. directed
as Lyme disease or antimicrobial-resistant
especially to minority and low-income popu-
infections, public health's basic tools are data
lations at highest risk, appear to offer
collection and biostatistical analysis, labora-
economies of scale to complement individu-
tory capacity. and epidemiologic expertise.
ally provided medical services.
An effective and efficient central capacity at
the Federal level provides for economies of
Violence and injury control-The leading
scale in addressing many of these health
cause of years of potential life lost among
problems.
Americans and the leading cause of death
among children. adolescents. and young
An essential part of reinventing public health
adults this category requires close collabora-
is the consolidation of currently fragmented
tion among several systems, including law
public health data systems and the integration
enforcement. education. transportation and
of these systems with the regional and national
recreation and parks. It is linked to alcohol
data network described in the Information
misuse and requires an integrated multi-
Systems chapter. The need for separate public
faceted set of interventions.
health data systems is minimized to the extent
that the elements included in the regional and
Health-related behavior and other priority
national data network support public health
issues
functions. The unified health information sys-
tem provides timely information to support
Tobacco prevention-The increasing inci-
health policy development. budget formation,
dence of smoking among adolescents and
efficient program administration and general
women poses future risks for heart disease
improvement of the public's health and does
and cancer. as well as low-birthweight babies
so at the lowest cost and burden.
and infant morbidity.
Technical assistance and national health
Comprehensive school health-Furthering
information Networks-To support the
development of links between health and
refocus of public health at local, State. and
education in a nascent program of compre-
Federal levels and the application of findings
hensive school health program.
from priority health programs described
American Public Health Association I
above. technical assistance and information
networks are needed to link Federal. State.
and local public health agencies and various
grant-supported programs carried out by
State, local, and not-for-profit agencies.
Information from these networks and the
health data system provide the basis for regu-
lar reports to the President and the Congress
for purposes of monitoring the effectiveness
of this initiative.
5
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 11, 1994
Dr. Dennis Harper
P.O. Box 1061
320 Michigan Avenue
Orofino, ID 83544
Dear Dr. Harper:
Thank you for your recent letter. It
was good to hear from you again. I
apologize for the delay in responding.
I appreciate learning your views on
the pros and cons of transportation versus
spillings in our collective efforts at
salmon conservation. Both approaches will
clearly be essential components of any
long term solution.
Once again, I appreciate hearing from
you.
Sincerely,
Kathlum a. Digg
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office
on Environmental Policy
KAM/avl
March 15, 1994
Dr. Dennis Harper
P.O. Box 1061
OK, substance. ok'd
320 Michigan Avenue
Orofino, ID 83544
Dear Dr. Harper:
Thank you for your recent letter. It
was good to hear from you again.
I appreciate learning your views on
the pros and cons of transportation versus
spillings in our collective efforts at
salmon conservation. Both approaches will
clearly be essential components of any
long term solution.
Once again, I appreciate hearing from
you.
Sincerely,
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office
on Environmental Policy
KAM/avl
CR#a
March 1, 1994
Mr. Dennis Bakke
President and CEO
The AES Corporation
Suite 2000
1001 North 19th Street
Arlington VA 22209
Dear Mr. Bakke:
This is to notify you that I am in receipt of your February
4 letter to Mack McLarty regarding your thoughts about EPA's
regulation of power plants.
As you know, I share President Clinton's commitment to the
protection of our environment in a way that leads to strong and
sustainable economic growth. This Administration supports the
development of new and innovative technologies to address today's
difficult environmental challenges. I have taken the liberty of
sharing a copy of your letter with the group currently working on
this issue.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with us.
Sincerely,
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/avl
Who is this ?
I don't think a lane or wordy
letter is appropriate - he didn't
nec. expect a reply.
Note: he's a buddy of POTUS onainally
Suagestid Hazel O'Leary for DOE_
DENNIS HARPER CHIROPRACTIC CLINIC, INC.
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
P.O. BOX 1061
320 MICHIGAN AVE.
OROFINO, ID 83544
(208) 476-3158
will
Kathleen McGinty, Director
White House Office on Environmental Policy
pls advise
The White House
Room 360
Washington, DC 20501
Dear Director McGinty:
I would like to commend the efforts of the Clinton Administration, as well as the Snake
River Salmon Recovery Team in examining solutions for the extremely complex issue of
recovery of the listed Snake River salmon.
It appears though, that a majority of the work and recommendations of the Snake River
Salmon Recovery Team (SRSRT) is going to be ignored. The National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) draft Biological Opinion for the 1994-98 operation of the Federal Columbia
River Power System calls upon flow augmentation as the primary method for salmon
recovery in the near term. This proposed plan of operations is a complete contradiction of
the recommendations of the SRSRT.
The present priority in Snake River salmon recovery is to ensure a sound delivery system
for the smolts down river. The SRSRT plan states that, "Improved collection and transport
of smolts around most of the Snake and Columbia River is the alternative that would deliver
the maximum number of smolts to the lower Columbia River." Yet, even though the near
term and long term recommendations are for improved collection and transportation
measures, this is not the course chosen by NMFS.
NMFS acknowledges that increased spill reduces the number of fish guided into transport
systems. The increased flow will hamper the collection and transportation system
recommended by the SRSRT. Additionally, the gas supersaturation resulting from
increased spill has a negative impact on juvenile salmon, causing an increase in mortality
rates.
The utilization of Dworshak Reservoir as the primary source for flow augmentation will
have long term adverse effects on salmon recovery. The executive summary of the
Biological Assessment affirms that Dworshak is an inadequate water source. It is stated
that, "In addition to not meeting the flow objectives in most years, such an operation would
have a major impact on the resident fish and wildlife, recreation and other uses, as well as the
ability of Dworshak to provide flow augmentation in future years."
Kathleen McGinty, Director
White House Office on Environmental Policy
Page Two
It is inexcusable to ignore the recommendations of the SRSRT, as a tremendous amount
of work, study, and effort will be going to waste. One area that seems to be of secondary
concern in the salmon recovery are the effects of the plan on the people who live in the
region. I would encourage you to put more consideration on the economic ramifications
of the plan on local communities.
We in the Clearwater Valley are more than willing to do our share in the salmon recovery
effort, but the current plan of operations will have a devastating effect on our local
economy, which we are unwilling to sacrifice. Until the considerations of the local
communities are included in the plan, and solid science demonstrates flow augmentation is
superior to improved collection and transportation, I am adamantly opposed to the current
operations plan.
Sincerely,
In 276-De
cc: U.S. Senator Larry Craig, State of Idaho
U.S. Senator Dirk Kempthorne, State of Idaho
Congressman Larry LaRocco, State of Idaho, First Congressional District
Governor Cecil D. Andrus, State of Idaho
Lt. Col. James S. Weller, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Donald M. Bevin, Chairman, Snake River Salmon Recovery Team
1229
Mal Dr. How :
ThankSu freen ment letter I
appreciate health of your new of Nex and
Cous of transportation VKK spillar in
out Collecture efforts at Elmon CONSERVETION.
Booth approzehes will clearly for countial
Components of any 10m term Stution
Quex again. I apprtactz you
health the
nux nint to write
wice
AY 1cm
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 11, 1994
Ron E. Hall
President and Chief Executive Officer
CITGO Petroleum Corporation
Box 3758
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74102
Dear Mr. Hall:
On behalf of the Vice President, I would like to thank you
for your letter of March 24, 1994, providing me with your
thoughts on the "cleanliness" of gasoline supplied to the United
States by Venezuela's Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PDVSA). I
have forwarded your letter to the Environmental Protection Agency
for appropriate action.
Sincerely,
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office
On Environmental Policy
KAM/mmg
CC: Mary Nichols, EPA
Assistant Administrator For Air and Radiation
MAR 28 1994
R. E. HALL
CITGO Petroleum Corporation
President
Box 3758
Chief Executive Officer
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74102
March 24, 1994
Vice President Albert Gore, Jr.
Office of the Vice President
Old Executive Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20501
Dear Vice President Gore:
I would like to commend the Administration for its decision to
initiate rulemaking that allows Venezuela to continue participation in the
U.S. gasoline market. CITGO is the major buyer and seller of gasoline
from Venezuela. This issue is important because approximately 210
CITGO distributors in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states depend to
some extent on PDVSA gasoline. These distributors supply 5,200 retail
gasoline outlets that employ some 42,000 people. Our customers
appreciate the reliability of gasoline supply that CITGO maintains, and
become concerned when gasoline supply is constrained.
I would also like to clarify what I believe are some inaccuracies
contained in recent correspondence you have received regarding the
"cleanliness" of gasoline supplied to the United States by Venezuela's
Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PDVSA). Recent statements made by the
American Petroleum Institute (API) and the National Petroleum Refining
Association (NPRA) are in our opinion misleading. Both of these groups
recently sent you a letter implying that air quality standards would be
compromised should PDVSA be allowed to continue supplying gasoline
to the U.S market. I do not believe this to be the case.
I should point out that the average 1990 gasoline baseline so
often referred to is not one number, but 9 individual gasoline parameter
averages. Therefore, all domestic gasolines will be higher or lower on
some of these parameters depending on the particular refinery. While it
is true that PDVSA gasoline is higher in olefins and sulfur than average
1990 domestically refined gasoline parameters, other parameters,
particularly air toxics like benzene and aromatics, are lower than average
U.S. baseline parameters. Some domestically produced gasoline will also
be higher in olefins and sulfur than the average baseline, and indeed be
Vice President Albert Gore, Jr.
Page 2
March 24, 1994
very similar to Venezuelan gasoline. The agreement EPA and PDVSA
have reached should assure that PDVSA gasoline will be as clean as most
domestically refined gasoline, and thus should not detrimentally affect
U.S. air quality problems.
With reference to market concerns some companies may have, a
report dated September 2, 1993, by the Congressional Research Service
concluded the following:
In sum, it would appear that granting PDVSA its own 1990
baseline would not lead to a change in gasoline brand
market shares significantly larger than occurs regularly from
the mix of market forces at large. It would, however, reduce
slightly, in markets served by PDVSA, the pressure for
higher gasoline prices generated by the RFG program's
requirements.
I appreciate the opportunity to clarify this matter, and would be
happy to discuss it with you at your convenience.
Sincerely,
GaHall Ron E. Hall
President and Chief Executive Officer
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 22, 1994
Mr. Paul T. Howard
614 North Caravan
Travois Village
Missoula, MT 59802
Dear Mr. Howard:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts about
the management of the Tongass National Forest in Southeast
Alaska. It was good to hear from you.
President Clinton and I are committed to the protection of
our valuable natural resources in a way that leads to strong and
sustainable economic growth. The U.S. Forest Service has
notified the Alaska Lumber and Paper (ALP) that they are in
breach of their contract. The administration is currently
reviewing ALP's proposed recommendations for future operations,
and a final decision will be forthcoming before April 15.
I certainly appreciate learning your views about the Tongass
National Forest and Sitka and the surrounding region's economy.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen a. McMinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/avl
Dear Vice President Al Gore,
I hope I'm not too late in writing to you concerning the Tongass
Nat'l Forest of southeast Alaska. As with all old growth forests, this
one has been seriously damaged by massive clearcut practices in the past
by two corporate entities, the Alaska Pulp Corporation (APC) which is a
Japanese firm, and the Ketchican Pulp Company, both of which have had 50
year contracts which enabled them to monopolize timber harvest in the
Tongass area. These two companies have driven small operators out of the
area and conspired in defrauding the U.S. government out of $60-80 million
in the past. Despite many breaches of contract, the Reagan and Bush admin-
istrations failed to take action and allowed the same rampant pace of
cutting to continue. Recently the Clinton Administration sent a 30 day
notice of intent to revoke the 50 year contract which of course has re-
sulted in the two firms lobbying extensively despite the breaches of
contract that should nullify the contract. So here are my requests;
1) Since APC and KPC broke their contracts (mostly by mill closings
and not hiring workers from the area) and practice destructive
nonsustainable methods of timber harvest, the contracts should
absolutely cancelled.
2) Refuse any offers/attempts to modify and retain the contracts
and refuse any new contracts with either APC or KPC. APC and
KPC have had plenty of time to "clean up their act" by now and
this would enable small operators with a local employment force
to log the area (I favor this as small operators won't "cut
their own throat" with the same methods larger corporations use
to their own advantage at the disadvantage of the community and
forest).
3) Transfer subsidies that have supported the 50 year contract to
transition programs to enable sustainable forest-dependant econ-
omics to replace the former short term exploitive methods used.
Lastly I would like to thank the admisitration for issueing the
intent of cancellation and taking a stand on this issue.
Thank you very much,
Paul T. Howard
614 N. Caravan
(Travois Village)
Missoula, Montana 59802
Name
Date
leter Rundlet 3/16/00 Counsel
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 22, 1994
Henry P. Harris, Ph.D.
Vice President Business and Planning
North American Plastics
Central Mississippi Ind. Center
210 Ind. Drive
Madison, MS 39110
Dear Dr. Harris:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding your thoughts
about chlorine study and the Clean Water Act reauthorization. it
was good to hear from you.
Rest assured that neither the EPA nor this Administration
has made any decision in the reauthorization of the Clean Water
Act that would restrict or ban the use of chlorine or chlorinated
compounds. Because of the continuing rigorous public debate on
this matter, EPA has proposed a thorough and careful review of
the issues. I assure you that the proposed EPA study will be
conducted in a fair, objective and balanced fashion, using the
best available information and with the participation of all
interested parties.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me.
Sincerely,
Kathlun a. Girty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
AP
North American Plastics, Inc.
Central Mississippi Ind. Center
210 Ind. Drive
Madison, Mississippi 39110
(601) 856-8993
March 25, 1994
Ms. Kathleen McGinty
Deputy Asst. to the Pres. and Dir.
Office of Environmental Policy
Old Executive Office Bldg, Rm 360
17th St. & Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20501
Dear Ms. McGinty:
As Vice President for Business and Planning for North American Plastics, a
privately held company employing about 75 people and currently investing heavily for
capacity expansion for PVC compounds, I want to add my voice to those who oppose the
recent, indiscriminate move to substitute, reduce or prohibit chlorine and chlorinated
compounds.
Specifically, PVC, (Polyvinyl) Chloride, is about a 9 Billion pound per year plastic,
widely used in wire and cable and many other markets for its cost effectiveness. The Vinyl
Institute and suppliers of PVC resin have a wealth of information to support our
contention that there is no scientifically valid evidence to suggest manufacture or use of
PVC represents an environmental hazard. This side of the controversy must be heard in
addition to what Greenpeace would have you believe.
Even making the erroneous assumption that cost effective, functional substitute
polymers exist for PVC, it will take decades and billions of dollars in private investment to
replace the 9 billion pounds of production capacity now devoted to PVC. The
consequences to our economy of such huge expenditures are enormous. This factor must
be considered as well as the environmental issues.
Decisions on such major volume chemicals as chlorine and chlorine containing
compounds must not be made hastily and without input from all concerned parties,
including industry. EPA and the government should pursue a due-process approach based
on sound science and full assessment of chlorine's economic importance to our national
economy.
MAP
PVC Letter
March 25, 1994
Page 2
Thank you for giving this issue your most serious attention.
As Sincerely, RA
Henry P. Harris, Ph.D.
Vice President
Business and Planning
HPH/tlm
cc:
John Chew
Greg Bowen
David Chew
Jim Taylor
File
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 22, 1994
Mr. Thornton Hill
Vuce President, Sales
Huntsman Packaging Corporation
3575 Forest Lake Drive
Uniontown, OH 44685
Dear Mr. Hill:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding your thoughts
about chlorine study and the Clean Water Act reauthorization. it
was good to hear from you.
Rest assured that neither the EPA nor this Administration
has made any decision in the reauthorization of the Clean Water
Act that would restrict or ban the use of chlorine or chlorinated
compounds. Because of the continuing rigorous public debate on
this matter, EPA has proposed a thorough and careful review of
the issues. I assure you that the proposed EPA study will be
conducted in a fair, objective and balanced fashion, using the
best available information and with the participation of all
interested parties.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
HUNTSMAN
PACKAGING
CORPORATION
3575 Forest Lake Drive
Uniontown, OH
April 5, 1994
44685
phn: 216-896-6700
fax: 216-896-6733
Film Products Group
Ms Kathleen McGinty
Deputy Assistant to the President
and Director
Office of Environmental Policy
Old Executive Office Building
Room 360
17th Street & Pennsylvania, Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20501
Dear Ms McGinty:
It has been brought to our attention that the EPA is seriously considering an environmental
agenda that includes a total and complete ban on the use of chlorine and chlorine
compounds without regard to the risk of such an action. Such an arbitrary approach is
unwarranted, unsupported by science, and highly disruptive to society. In fact, quite
frankly, if this agenda is successful and carried to the worst possible conclusion, it could
mean the job loss for millions of U.S. employees. It has been our contention that good
science and common sense tells us that banning an element like chlorine, that is basic to
our natural environment, is nonsense. Taking it to the extreme - we would stop putting
salt in our food and salt on our roads in the winter simply because it contains chlorine.
We understand that the EPA developed and announced the clean water plan without any
prior notification or input from the chlorine industry. This action disagrees with fair and
inclusive process that our democratic government was founded on and that the Clinton
administration has pledged to follow. As an industry, chlorine is probably one of the most
regulated and safest in North America.
We protest this unilateral action taken by the EPA and encourage you to use your influence
to oversee a fair, democratic process in this important issue. Thank you for your
consideration.
Sincerely,
Heil
Thornton Hill
Vice President, Sales
\jaa
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 15, 1994
Mr. John C. Hoard
Member and Manager
Future Water of Indiana, LLC
Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse Systems
342 Massachusetts Avenue
Suite 100
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Dear Mr. Hoard:
Thank you for your letter and the information and videotape
you enclosed regarding your Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse
Systems. It was good to hear from you.
As you know, I am dedicated to the preservation of the
environment in a way that leads to strong and sustainable
economic growth. I appreciate learning of your efforts to
improve water quality and of the applications of your products in
irrigation and agriculture
I have taken the liberty of forwarding your information to
the United States Environmental Protection Agency's Office of
Water and the EPA Environmental Technology Initiative for their
reference.
Again, thank you for sharing this information with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen a. sinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
Future Water Indiana, LLC
Future
Water
Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse Systems
Indiana
342 Massachusetts Avenue, Suite 100, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
LLC
317-756-8517 fax: 317-756-8526
TM
show
you
February 23, 1994
Ms. Kathleen McGinty
Office of Environmental Policy
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Ms. McGinty:
We know you hear from a lot of people with good ideas. Once
in a while there's a great idea. Here Is A Great Idea.
Future Water Indiana and its affiliates with operations in
Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Europe offer a wastewater
reclamation and reuse process which allows odorless treatment of
wastewater at two-thirds (2/3) the cost of conventional treatment
plants. This process virtually eliminates sludge disposal or
burning, avoids non-point pollution and commercial fertilizers,
conserves and utilizes energy efficiently, promotes improved
water quality, open space land development, recreation and wild
life habitats. Believe it or not, it's not too good to be true.
Enclosed is our short video and brochure for your review.
We need to develop marketing networks for our technology. We
propose a government/private partnership utilizing the resources
of the White House, the EPA, Commerce and the USDA to get this
job done sooner rather than later.
The need for the United States to upgrade existing municipal
sewage plants, build new facilities and extend sewer lines is
ongoing and the cost is getting higher every day. Future Water
technology can save millions of dollars in this process by
helping cities and towns everywhere lower costs of construction
and operation of wastewater facilities.
National and regional solid waste experts reviewed the
performance of our technology at the city of Muskegon, Michigan
and Mercersburg, Pennsylvania. Both the Environmental Defense
Fund and Gregory K. Silver, Attorney At Law gave us supportive
opinions. (Copies enclosed).
The Future Water system holds the wastewater and aerates it
until the water exceeds EPA standards for discharge into rivers
and streams; however, the water is then stored for application to
printed on
recycled paper
crops, golf courses, football and soccer fields wherever green
plants are needed! Once treated, America's water is now a
reclaimed resource for application to flowers, corn, wheat and
soybeans with NO SLUDGE REMOVAL, NO WATER DISCHARGE, NO NPDES
PERMITS, NO AIR POLLUTION AND ABSOLUTELY NO ODOR.
Moreover, jobs are created for each project. Project size
is easily adaptable to summer camps as well as large municipal
systems. Power from utility companies to aerate the holding
cells may be used at night during non-peak times when "excess
energy" is often wasted.
This technology benefits the environment, the economy and
helps meet agricultural needs for water and nutrients. It
increases the property values of farmers who utilize the systems
because they have a constant source of nutrient rich water for
their irrigation systems. This is a CLOSED LOOP SYSTEM.
PLEASE HELP US bring this technology into the limelight.
Please forward the enclosed material to those you think can help
the advancement of this technology. If you need more materials,
we will send them to you. We offer you and the administration a
WIN-WIN-WIN opportunity for the economy and the environment.
We will have a representative of Future Water in Washington
D.C. from March 4 to March 8, 1994, to further discuss our
organization and the applications for the technology. Your
assistance in making his visit on behalf of Future Water more
productive is greatly appreciated. Please call or write me as
soon as you can.
Sincerely Yours,
John C. Hoard
Member and Manager
Future Water Indiana, LLC
Enclosures
CC: Hon. A1 Gore
Hon. Carol Browner
Hon. Ron Brown
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 6, 1994
Ms. Rebecca Hanson
1225 Sweetwater Avenue
Camarillo, CA 93010
Dear Ms. Hanson:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts on
sustainable development issues in Ecuador. As always, it was
good to hear from you.
As you know, President Clinton and I are committed to the
protection of our global natural resource base in a manner that
continues to allow sustainable economic growth. I appreciate
learning your insights into the Organization of Indigenous
Peoples of Pastaza and the Atlantic Richfield Company. Since my
return from Ecuador last fall, I have been contacted by and
consulted with a wide variety of interests involved in
sustainable development issues in the Andean region. Rest
assured that I understand your concerns.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me.
Sincerely,
kathlan a mcGinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
Katic McGinty Director
of office of Environmental
Policy, the white House,
Old ERCC- Office Bldg,
Room 360, washington
DC 20501
Dear Madame:
Enclosed incopycl
letter to CEO of
ARCO.
I
Rebecca Hanson
1225 Sweetwater Ave
Camardilo CA
03010
Feb 10, 1994
Lodwrick Cook, Charman of Board 3,CEC dAro
515 South Flower St
Los Angeles CA 90071-2256
Dear Sir:
Im very concemed about your involvement in
the RAMFOREST.
I hope you'll resume tacks with CPIP
and clark Ev- a sustainable enonomental
management in Pastaza-
Thankge
copy to Katie McGinty
Director of office of Environmental Policy
the white House
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 6, 1994
Mr. David Howenstein
2-28-29-101 Chero
Nakano-ku
Tokyo 164
JAPAN
Dear Mr. Howenstein:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts on
sustainable development issues in Ecuador. As always, it was
good to hear from you.
As you know, President Clinton and I are committed to the
protection of our global natural resource base in a manner that
continues to allow sustainable economic growth. I' appreciate
learning your insights into the Organization of Indigenous
Peoples of Pastaza and the Atlantic Richfield Company. Since my
return from Ecuador last fall, I have been contacted by and
consulted with a wide variety of interests involved in
sustainable development issues in the Andean region. Rest
assured that I understand your concerns.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen a. mc sinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
Dear cl Ms. Mc Ginty :
I
2/18/94
that sent a card to ARCO
d am writing to inform you
to resume a serious dialogue with
CEO, Lodwrich Cook, urging him
OP (Organzation of Indigenous
Peoples of Pastaga) and to work with
the indigenous organization toward a
plan for sustainable environmental
management in Pastaga.
Sincerely,
David Howensten
2-28-29-101 Chuo
Nakano-ku
Tokyo JAPAN 164
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
POSTCARD
Washington, D.C. 20501
Room 360
old Executive Office Building
The White House Policy
Director office of Environmental
Katie Mc Ginty
a
NIPPON
AIRMAIL
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 6, 1994
Hanazono
2 Choine 21-9
Aomuri Akiralto
JAPAN
Dear Dear Friend:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts on
sustainable development issues in Ecuador. As always, it was
good to hear from you.
As you know, President Clinton and I are committed to the
protection of our global natural resource base in a manner that
continues to allow sustainable economic growth. I appreciate
learning your insights into the Organization of Indigenous
Peoples of Pastaza and the Atlantic Richfield Company. Since my
return from Ecuador last fall, I have been contacted by and
consulted with a wide variety of interests involved in
sustainable development issues in the Andean region. Rest
assured that I understand your concerns.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen a. m (Minty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
NIPPON
-
:S
10
100
NIPPON
11.94.13
Katie McGinty
Director Office of
Environment Policy
ADDRESS ONLY
Mail
The White Flouse
Old Executive Office Building,
Room 360 Washington, C.20501
U.S.A
Dear
Sir, In order to maintain a good
circumstance in Ecundor, and
as one of Reace - making Japanese
falh here, I praclaim chat
Atlantic Richfield Company is officero
should resume a serious process
of dialogue with Indigenous
Peapler of Paotaza Sincerely yours
Hanazono 2 chome 21-9 Aomuri Japan
tabits 1
Akira Ito
PHOTOCOPY
VIEW OF THE MOVEMENT OF NEBOTA AT AOMORT CITY / NEBGTA
FESTIVAL
PRESERVATION
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
Mr. Ryan Henson, Executive Director
Northern Coast Range Biodiversity Project
2655 Portage Bay East, Suite 5
Davis, CA 95616
Dear Mr. Henson:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts about
President Clinton's Forest Management Plan. It was good to hear
from you.
As you know, President Clinton announced his Forest Plan for
a Sustainable Economy and a Sustainable Environment, based on the
analytical work of three working groups established at the Forest
Conference. This administration believes that the Forest Plan is
scientifically-sound and legally responsible and will provide a
sustainable harvest. This plan also includes a new economic
assistance program that helps local workers, businesses and
communities in strengthening the region's economy by creating
family-wage jobs, offering new economic opportunities, and
ensuring the region's long-term economic health.
After receiving over 100,000 comments on the proposed plan,
we are now working to refine it further and expect to submit the
final Record of Decision around March 31st. I appreciate
learning your views on this very important issue.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen a, mcsinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
Northern Coast Range Biodiversity Project
703 Valencia Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 (916) 4785
Please note our new address:
2655 Portage Bay East, Suite 5, Davis, CA 95616 (916) 758-0380
Fax: (916) 753-2935
March 15, 1994
Katie McGinty, Director of Environmental Policy
Old Executive Office Building
Washington, DC 20501
Dear Ms. McGinty:
The attached letter reflects our organization's deep concern over the effects Option 9
will have upon not only the Mendocino National Forest, but upon all federal lands
within the range of the northern spotted owl.
Though Option 9 has been improved significantly from its earlier draft, we feel that
further steps must be taken to insure that habitat connectivity is retained across the
landscape. This is what true "ecosystem management" is all about.
Sincerely,
Rya Henson
Ryan Henson
Executive Director
Northern Coast Range Biodiversity Project
703 Valencia Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 (916) 758 4785
Please note our new address:
2655 Portage Bay East, Suite 5, Davis, CA 95616 (916) 758-0380
Fax: (916) 753-2935
March 15, 1994
Robert T. Jacobs, Interagency SEIS Team Leader
P.O. Box 3623
Portland, OR 97208
Dear Mr. Jacobs:
I applaud your decision to further strengthen Alternative 9 so that it will provide for more
habitat connectivity and watershed protection across the landscape. Particularly welcome
2is the adoption of riparian reserve scenario 1 and the provision requiring that remnant old-
growth be left in watersheds containing less than fifteen percent late-successional forest.
However, several problems remain with Option 9, especially as it applies to the Mendocino
National Forest and the BLM's Arcata Resource Area, two areas of particular concern to
our organization. In our view, it is essential that the record of decision for the FSEIS make
the following changes in order to protect the Mendocino NF and the Arcata RA:
1. The Eel River below Scott Dam should be managed as a Tier 1 key watershed
due to its critically threatened stocks of fall-run chinook salmon, coho salmon, summer
steelhead trout, and winter steelhead trout. These stocks are imperiled by water diversions,
the presence of Van Arsdale and Scott dams, private logging and road construction, and
poaching. It is thus essential that the Mendocino NF's plans to log and construct additional
roads within this watershed be halted in light of these threats, and that extensive
rehabilitative efforts be initiated immediately.
2. The Eel River above Scott Dam should be managed as a Tier 2 key watershed
in order to maintain its high water quality. The water quality of Pillsbury Reservoir has
declined to the point that it pollutes the Eel River below the dam. In addition, exotic game
and bait fish from the reservoir have already made their way downstream, often feeding on
anadromous fish eggs and fingerlings. By protecting and restoring the quality of the water
entering the reservoir, especially its temperature and turbidity, the effects of the pollution
and exotic fish populations will be mitigated. In addition, the thousands of acres of old-
growth forest within this watershed left outside of reserves by the FSEIS will receive at least
some degree of protection.
3. Elk Creek, a tributary of the Middle Fork Eel River, should be managed as a Tier
1 key watershed. Elk Creek is an important nursery stream for fall-run chinook salmon and
winter-run steelhead trout. The extensive old-growth in its upper reaches is currently
threatened by USFS plans for logging and road construction. In addition, a large inholding
owned by a private timber firm in the watershed has been extensively clearcut and salvage
logged. The protection and rehabilitation of this watershed is essential.
4. The Middle Fork Eel River, a designated Tier 1 key watershed, should be
removed from the suitable timber base, or at least a late-successional reserve should be
created that protects the entire watershed outside of the Yolla Bolly-Middle Eel Wilderness.
As Forest Service records indicate, the Middle Fork Eel has the highest sediment load of
any river of comparable size in the United States. This instability is not entirely natural, for
it is also the result of more than thirty years of clearcutting, road construction, and over-
grazing. The Middle Fork Eel, in addition to hosting fall-run chinook, coho salmon, and
winter-run steelhead, also serves as a refuge for a full eighty percent of California's
remaining summer steelhead population. The watershed's renowned instability, the
importance of its critically threatened fish stocks, as well as the extensive clearcutting, road
construction, and over-grazing it has sustained, dictate that there is no margin for error in
its management, and hence, there is no room for commercial silviculture within its
boundaries.
5. All remnant old-growth stands on the Mendocino NF and the BLM's Arcata RA
should receive permanent protection. Especially important are the groves south of Goat
Mountain and those north of the Game Refuge within the Mendocino NF, as well as the
stands along the Middle Fork Eel River and main stem Eel River in the Arcata RA. These
small and scattered stands are the southernmost old-growth groves in the Pacific Northwest
(outside of the redwood region), are generally confined to north-facing slopes and steep
drainages, and are relics of a time when markedly different climatic regimes prevailed.
Several factors make these isolated groves worth preserving: the presence of endemic
species of plants and invertebrates, their critical role in providing the only connectivity
between populations of late-seral dependant or associated species in large portions of the
Mendocino NF and the Arcata RA, the extreme edge-effects and other ecological
disruptions that occur within these stands following logging and road construction, the
presence of springs and wetlands within these groves dependant upon the cool microclimates
they sustain (especially during the summer months), and lastly, the virtual impossibility of
regenerating these stands after logging due to competition from brush and hardwoods and
the permanent loss of the soil and climatic factors that allowed these stands to develop in
the first place.
Page 2 of 4
According to our calculations, the FSEIS' requirement that all old-growth be preserved in
watersheds whose forested area is composed of less than 15% old-growth will protect many
of these stands. However, we request that this provision be changed to require that all
ancient forest be retained in watersheds whose forested area is composed of less than 30%
old-growth. This provision would, according to our data, protect all of these relict stands.
If nothing else, this larger limit could be applied only to those areas generally lacking in
connectivity between late-successional habitat such as the southern Six Rivers NF, the
Mendocino NF, the southern Arcata RA, and the Lassen and Modoc NFs within the range
of the northern spotted owl.
If the above recommendation is not adopted, then further measures must be developed to
maintain connectivity in regions characterized by highly fragmented late-successional forests
such as the Mendocino NF and the southern Arcata RA. These measures may include more
specific requirements to retain isolated old-growth stands, longer rotation periods than those
allowed for in draft or existing management plans, the creation of additional late-
successional reserves, or other measures designed to preserve naturally isolated stands and
the tenuous connectivity they provide.
6. The Mendocino National Forest contains the only wilderness areas in the Pacific
Northwest not immediately adjacent to a substantial late-successional reserve network. It
is essential that either additional reserves be created, or that existing reserves be expanded
in order to compensate for this connectivity gap.
7. All inventoried roadless areas within the Mendocino National Forest should be set-
aside as reserves in order to help maintain habitat connectivity within this naturally
fragmented forest. Roadless areas are strongholds of biological diversity in a heavily
damaged landscape, and it would thus be a tragic irony if the roaded and largely cut-over
late-successional and riparian reserves were protected while the ecologically intact roadless
areas were destroyed. The benefits for watersheds and wildlife offered by these areas far
outweighs what little crude economic value they contain.
8. Lastly, it was highly irresponsible for the FSEIS to list a so-called "probable sale
quantity" (PSQ) of 20 MMBF for the Mendocino National Forest before the agency has
even finished examining the comments it has received on its draft LRMP or even begun to
fully assess the effects of Alternative 9 on its timber sale program. The Mendocino will
have to reexamine its entire timber sale program before it can project an ASQ--much less
a PSQ--and anything less will be the result of haste and rank sloppiness and will not
withstand either scientific or legal scrutiny. Putting this kind of pressure on Forest Service
officials is patently unfair and undermines the new commitment to ecosystem management
and scientific credibility called for in the FSEIS.
Please give careful consideration to the preceding points. Thank you for this opportunity
to comment on your work.
Page 3 of 4
Sincerely,
PyanM.Henson Par M.
Ryan Henson
Executive Director
CC:
Senator Barbara Boxer
Senator Dianne Feinstein
Representative Vic Fazio
Representative Dan Hamburg
George Frampton
Jim Lyons
Katie McGinty
Page 4 of 4
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
Ms. Hazel Hannell
11600 Hwy 66
Ashland, OR 97520
Dear Ms. Hannell:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts about
President Clinton's Forest Management Plan. It was good to hear
from you.
As you know, President Clinton announced his Forest Plan for
a Sustainable Economy and a Sustainable Environment, based on the
analytical work of three working groups established at the Forest
Conference. This administration believes that the Forest Plan is
scientifically-sound and legally responsible and will provide a
sustainable harvest. This plan also includes a new economic
assistance program that helps local workers, businesses and
communities in strengthening the region's economy by creating
family-wage jobs, offering new economic opportunities, and
ensuring the region's long-term economic health.
After receiving over 100,000 comments on the proposed plan,
we are now working to refine it further and expect to submit the
final Record of Decision around March 31st. I appreciate
learning your views on this very important issue.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen a. a.m.sinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
Dear Presulent Bill Clinton
8 march 1994
northwest he place greathesting your administration
that plague the TolestDervia
address many roblems
the Thank you forathemp Ting to
and these agencies and to conserve generations does protect these forests
for un present fortunately future your final draft notproted and forests counters
not spoted onl, suffeciently nor salmon stocked ment
to rotlect
other speaes the law requires the federal govern
Please P proted key land bridges between bioregions especially
The Soda Mountain Pilot Rook ridge needs inviotate
Reserve" status and protect all forest roadless areas
Sincerely HazelHamell 11600Hwy 66
ashland 97520
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
OR
PM
19
USA
9 MAR
/S9A
President Bill Clinton
White House Office of Environmental Policy
Yo Katy mc ginty / Will Stelle
Room 360 adExecutive Office Building
Cobb Hall
The Unive Througo
Washing ton DC. 20501
Centenned Year 1991-1992
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
Mr. Joseph C. Howell
680 SW Everett Court
Port St. Lucie, FL 34953
Dear Mr. Howell:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts about
President Clinton's Forest Management Plan. It was good to hear
from you.
As you know, President Clinton announced his Forest Plan for
a Sustainable Economy and a Sustainable Environment, based on the
analytical work of three working groups established at the Forest
Conference. This administration believes that the Forest Plan is
scientifically-sound and legally responsible and will provide a
sustainable harvest. This plan also includes a new economic
assistance program that helps local workers, businesses and
communities in strengthening the region's economy by creating
family-wage jobs, offering new economic opportunities, and
ensuring the region's long-term economic health.
After receiving over 100,000 comments on the proposed plan,
we are now working to refine it further and expect to submit the
final Record of Decision around March 31st. I appreciate
learning your views on this very important issue.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.
Sincerely,
Fathlun mcsurity
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
I
DEAR Miss Me GINTY,
PLEASE HELP!
THANKI, Joseph Howell
I
Joseph C. Howell
680 SW Everett Court
Port St. Lucie, Fl. 34953
March 15, 1994
L
President Bill Clinton
c/o Kathleen McGinty
Director, Office of Environmental Policy
Room 360, Old Executive Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20501
Dear President Clinton,
I am writing to you to object to the further depletion of
our Ancient Forests. It is a national disgrace to watch
the operation of the Forest Service and the give a way of
public resources to special interests in the lumber
industry. The Ancient Forests from the Atlantic Ocean to
the Pacific Ocean have been ravaged over the years by
special interests and now they are trying to finish the
job with the full cooperation of the Forest Service. It
is time to stop this madness and preserve all of the
remaining Ancient Forests.
I respectfully request that you use your Office to
immediately implement the following:
1. Protect all roadless areas in the Northwest. This to
include the Forest Reserves. No logging.
2. Protect the crucial Soda Mountain-Pilot Rock Ridge
corridor for plant & wildlife migration from the
Klamath-Siskiyous to the Cascades.
3. Stop all logging in the Key Watersheds.
4. Remove the Upper Applegate/Kangaroo Roadless Area on
the Rogue River National Forest, from the "Adaptive
Management Area".
5. Protect all of the North Kalmiopsis.
6. Protect all of the remaining Ancient Forests and
roadless area and permanently close them to logging.
7. Reauthorize and strengthen the Endangered Species Act
and support the Studd's bill HR 2043.
8. Require all timber to be processed in this country, to
save jobs and stop exporting shiploads of whole logs.
Respectfully, Joseph L. Samels
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
Ms. Phyllis Hughes
3721 Forest Creek Road
Jacksonville, OR 97530
Dear Ms. Hughes:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts about
President Clinton's Forest Management Plan. It was good to hear
from you.
As you know, President Clinton announced his Forest Plan for
a Sustainable Economy and a Sustainable Environment, based on the
analytical work of three working groups established at the Forest
Conference. This administration believes that the Forest Plan is
scientifically-sound and legally responsible and will provide a
sustainable harvest. This plan also includes a new economic
assistance program that helps local workers, businesses and
communities in strengthening the region's economy by creating
family-wage jobs, offering new economic opportunities, and
ensuring the region's long-term economic health.
After receiving over 100,000 comments on the proposed plan,
we are now working to refine it further and expect to submit the
final Record of Decision around March 31st. I appreciate
learning your views on this very important issue.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.
Sincerely,
Fathern a. m , sinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
President Bill Clinton
RE: PNW Forest Plan
c/o Katy McGinty/Will Stelle
FSEIS-ROD Changes
White House Office of Environmental Policy
Room 360, Old Executive Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20501
Dear President Clinton,
Thank you for attempting to address the many problems in forest
management that have plagued the Forest Service and BLM in the
Pacific Northwest. We place great trust in your administration
and these agencies to conserve and protect these forests not only
for present and future human generations, but also for hundreds
of forest plant and animal species we did not create and cannot
replace.
Unfortunately, your Final draft for management of spotted owl
forests in Washington, Oregon, and California not only does not
protect spotted owls sufficiently, as required by law, but
neither does it protect salmon, steelhead, and countless other
species the law requires the federal government to protect.
One of the best ways to protect threatened species at the least
cost to the timber industry is to protect all roadless areas
remaining on federal forest land. These are precious refuges of
biodiversity. They have still not been cut because their timber
value per acre is lowest and access to them is most difficult.
Specifically -- please protect key land bridges between
bioregions. A glaring error in your Final document is in the
Siskiyou Pass corridor east of Interstate 5 in Oregon north of
the California border. The Soda Mountain-Pilot Rock ridge needs
inviolate "Reserve" status. Every spotted owl study or recovery
plan to date regarded this area as critical connectivity habitat
between the Klamath/Siskiyous and Southern Cascades. Every
option but the politicized "Option 9" put this area in "Reserve."
It needs to be an inviolate "Reserve" when the Record of Decision
on this very significant plan is signed.
Please don't gamble with the forests of the present or future --
or the species which depend on them. At least protect all forest
roadless areas. And certainly PUT THE SODA MOUNTAIN-PILOT ROCK-
SISKIYOU PASS CORRIDOR IN INVIOLATE RESERVE.
Sincerely,
Name:
Phyllis Hughes
Phyllis Hughes
Address: 3721 Forest Crk.Rd
Date: 3/11/94
City/State/Zip: Jacksonville OR
97530
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
Ms. Valerie Hahn
5112 Calle Potros
Bonita, CA 91902
Dear Ms. Hahn:
Thank you for contacting me regarding your thoughts about
President Clinton's Forest Management Plan. It was good to hear
from you.
As you know, President Clinton announced his Forest Plan for
a Sustainable Economy and a Sustainable Environment, based on the
analytical work of three working groups established at the Forest
Conference. This administration believes that the Forest Plan is
scientifically-sound and legally responsible and will provide a
sustainable harvest. This plan also includes a new economic
assistance program that helps local workers, businesses and
communities in strengthening the region's economy by creating
family-wage jobs, offering new economic opportunities, and
ensuring the region's long-term economic health.
After receiving over 100,000 comments on the proposed plan,
we are now working to refine it further and expect to submit the
final Record of Decision around March 31st. I appreciate
learning your views on this very important issue.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.
Sincerely,
Fathleen a mc ginty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
Soda Mountain
Wilderness Council
P.O. Box 512
Ashland, Oregon 97520
President Bill Clinton
RE: PNW Forest Plan
c/o Katy McGinty/Will Stelle
FSEIS-ROD Changes
White House Office of Environmental Policy
Room 360, Old Executive Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20501
Dear President Clinton, Reserves must be inviolate!
Thank you for attempting to address the many problems in forest
management that have plagued the Forest Service and BLM in the
Pacific Northwest. We place great trust in your administration
and these agencies to conserve and protect these forests not only
for present and future human generations, but also for hundreds
of forest plant and animal species we did not create and cannot
replace.
Unfortunately, your Final draft for management of spotted owl
forests in Washington, Oregon, and California not only does not
protect spotted owls sufficiently, as required by law, but
neither does it protect salmon, steelhead, and countless other
species the law requires the federal government to protect.
One of the best ways to protect threatened species at the least
cost to the timber industry is to protect all roadless areas
remaining on federal forest land. These are precious refuges of
biodiversity. They have still not been cut because their timber
value per acre is lowest and access to them is most difficult.
Specifically -- please protect key land bridges between
bioregions. A glaring error in your Final document is in the
Siskiyou Pass corridor east of Interstate 5 in Oregon north of
the California border. The Soda Mountain-Pilot Rock ridge needs
"Reserve" status. Every spotted owl study or recovery plan to
date regarded this area as critical connectivity habitat between
the Klamath/Siskiyous and Southern Cascades. Every option but
the politicized "Option 9" put this area in "Reserve." It needs
to be a "Reserve" when the Record of Decision on this very
significant plan is signed.
Please don't gamble with the forests of the present or future --
or the species which depend on them. At least protect all forest
roadless areas. And certainly PUT THE SODA MOUNTAIN-PILOT ROCK-
SISKIYOU PASS CORRIDOR IN RESERVE.
Sincerely,
Name:
Valerie Hahn
Address:
5112 Calle Potros
Date: March 1993
City/State/Zip: Bonita Ca 9902
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
M.T. Hamill
Purchasing Supervisor
AT & T
Guilford Center
P.O. Box 25000
Greensboro, NC 27420-5000
Dear M.T. hamill:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding your thoughts
about chlorine study and the Clean Water Act reauthorization. it
was good to hear from you.
Rest assured that neither the EPA nor this Administration
has made any decision in the reauthorization of the Clean Water
Act that would restrict or ban the use of chlorine or chlorinated
compounds. Because of the continuing rigorous public debate on
this matter, EPA has proposed a thorough and careful review of
the issues. I assure you that the proposed EPA study will be
conducted in a fair, objective and balanced fashion, using the
best available information and with the participation of all
interested parties.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me.
Sincerely,
Kathlun a. mcGinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
AT&T
Contract Services Organization
Guilford Center
Purchasing and Transportation
P.O. Box 25000
Greensboro, NC 27420-5000
919 279-7000
March 8, 1994
Office of Environmental Policy
Deputy Asst. to the Pres. and Dir.
Kathleen McGinty
Old Executive Office Building
Room 360
17th St. & Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20501
Dear Ms. McGinty:
I am writing to express my concerns and strongly protest the recent actions by the U.S. EPA
to amend the Clean Water Act to reduce or prohibit the use of chlorine and chlorinated
products. I work for AT&T and am responsible for the purchase of plastics used by wire and
cable manufacturing facilities both domestically and internationally. As such, I am convinced
that if all the facts were taken into consideration prior to this proposal, this action would never
have occurred. By taking steps to eliminate chlorine usage, the US will jeopardize hundreds
of thousands of jobs, severely impacting our economy, and handicap our ability to compete on
an international basis. Chlorine is used in the manufacture of polyvinyl chloride compounds
and is used by virtually every industry including health care, communications, aerospace,
automotive, retail, textiles, construction, etc. To ban the use of PVC would negatively impact
all these industries.
The process used to arrive at the EPA's recommendations clearly did not take into account the
input of industry. Nor did it consider the fact that the PVC industry is fully regulated by the
EPA and reflects conformance to all laws, regulations, procedures, etc.
I am professionally and personally concerned with environmental affairs, and expect the EPA
to take action where necessary to ensure that our environment is protected. However, the
EPA's decisions should be made in a responsible manner, taking into account the impact of all
aspects of their decisions. I expect the EPA to use a scientific approach to determining policy,
using input from experts in science and industry. This approach has not been taken when it is
obvious that the only inputs to their recent actions against chlorine came from "single issue"
organizations such as Greenpeace, and excluded input from those most immediately effected,
specifically those in industry.
I ask that you oppose any amendment or provision that would authorize the EPA's recent
chlorine initiative.
M. I. Hamiel
M. T. Hamill
Purchasing Supervisor
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
Mr. Donald Harris
Plant Manager
Heartland Building Products
300 Park Place
P.O. Box 800
Bonneville, MS 38829
Dear Mr. Harris:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding your thoughts
about chlorine study and the Clean Water Act reauthorization. it
was good to hear from you.
Rest assured that neither the EPA nor this Administration
has made any decision in the reauthorization of the Clean Water
Act that would restrict or ban the use of chlorine or chlorinated
compounds. Because of the continuing rigorous public debate on
this matter, EPA has proposed a thorough and careful review of
the issues. I assure you that the proposed EPA study will be
conducted in a fair, objective and balanced fashion, using the
best available information and with the participation of all
interested parties.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me.
Sincerely,
Kathluna. Wrinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
Heartland
March 08, 1994
A New Generation of Building Products
Office of Environmental Policy
Deputy Asst. to the Pres. and Dir. Kathleen McGinty
Old Executive Office Building Room 360
17th St. & Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20501
Dear Director McGinty:
I am writing to express my concerns about the possible introduction of the
Greenpeace recommended legislation by the EPA that could arbitrarily reduce or
prohibit the use of chlorine compounds. My employer manufactures PVC products,
a major end use of chlorine; so my livelihood would be significantly impacted by this
initiative.
If what I read in the paper is accurate, it seems Ms. Browner and the EPA have
already made the decision to reduce or prohibit the use of chlorine and chlorinated
compounds. How can that happen without sufficient input or an objective process to
determine which compounds are good and necessary and which should be
controlled. I am urging you to insist that revisions to the Clean Water Act require an
evaluative process based on sound science and economics rather than emotional
pressure exerted by certain anti-growth activists. However, I question the need for a
new study by the EPA when sufficient initiatives are currently active on this issue. Ms.
Browner has already stated her position against chlorine. This would prevent EPA
from giving chlorine compounds a fair evaluation. This matter should fall under
something like TSCA (Toxic Substance Control Act) where regulations are set up to
determine if substances are toxic and then place restrictions on them if necessary -
after a fair evaluation.
Eliminating chlorine's use could result in economic disaster for me and tens of
thousands of us employed in the industry. It could trigger crippling economic
policies. It could force the disappearance of the valuable products we produce. All
this could occur without any tangible improvement to the environment.
I am in favor of protecting the environment whenever it is being threatened, but let's
make those decisions based upon facts, not emotion. We should evaluate the social
and economic considerations of chlorine derived products, as well as the alternatives.
All affected and interested parties should have a role in the process.
Heartland Building Products, Inc.
300 Park Place P.O. Box 880 Booneville, Mississippi 38829 Phone: 800-HEART-01 601-728-6261 FAX: 601-728-2194
Page Two
I am asking you to take a position for ecology and the economy by helping in
whatever ways you can to assure that good science, sound economics and common
sense are used to determine our environmental policy.
May I hear from you in response to my concerns?
Sincerely,
,Donald Harris
Donald Harris
Plant Manager
:bas
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
Ms. Joy B. Hutchison
4621 Congress
Midland, MI 48642
Dear Ms. Hutchison:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding your thoughts
about chlorine study and the Clean Water Act reauthorization. it
was good to hear from you.
Rest assured that neither the EPA nor this Administration
has made any decision in the reauthorization of the Clean Water
Act that would restrict or ban the use of chlorine or chlorinated
compounds. Because of the continuing rigorous public debate on
this matter, EPA has proposed a thorough and careful review of
the issues. I assure you that the proposed EPA study will be
conducted in a fair, objective and balanced fashion, using the
best available information and with the participation of all
interested parties.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me.
Sincerely,
Kathlun a. Ginty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
4621 Congress
Midland, MI 48642
March 16, 1994
Ms. Kathleen McGinty
Deputy Assistant to the President and
Director, Office of Environmental Policy
Old Executive Office Building, Room 360
17th Street & Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20501
Dear Ms. McGinty:
I am writing to you to express serious concern about the recent recommendation from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency for a study which would "develop a strategy to prohibit, reduce
or substitute the use of chlorine and chlorinated compounds" as part of the Clean Water Act
reauthorization.
I have worked as a communications manager on this issue for the past four years and have
personally and professionally invested much energy into reaching a viable solution regarding the
continued use of chlorine. As a former newspaper reporter, I see the value in maintaining an
objective view regardless of the fact that I am employed by The Dow Chemical Company. In fact,
I perceive an objective view to be the most beneficial to Dow and the environment in which we all
live.
What disappoints me about the recent move by the EPA is that they are failing to take an objective
view. Instead, they have made their decision (if you are to believe their Green Book
recommendations) and it comes down on the side of ultimately banning a chemical. A more
constructive approach would have been to develop a cooperative government/industry/
environmentalist analysis of this situation-letting independent science and economic information
lead the way.
Lest you think I am not interested in a clean environment, let me assure you that I have invested
heavily in retirement property on Crystal Lake in Northern Michigan and I work very hard to
maintain a pristine environment there and elsewhere. I want to enjoy our home and property there
for many more years and will continue efforts to maintain what is currently a very clean, healthy
lake. However, chlorine chemistry plays a vital role in being able to maintain that home and
environment, as well as providing me with the personal wherewithal and technology to enjoy and
protect the environment.
I would appreciate your attention on this issue and I will be closely following your actions. I
believe it is imperative that we all work together and I encourage you to contact me if you have
questions. I can be reached on (517) 636-1561 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. daily, or at (517) 631-
2333 any other time.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
Mr. Steve J. Holly
3444 Oakdale Drive
Birmingham, AL 35223
Dear Mr. Holly:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding your thoughts
about chlorine study and the Clean Water Act reauthorization. it
was good to hear from you.
Rest assured that neither the EPA nor this Administration
has made any decision in the reauthorization of the Clean Water
Act that would restrict or ban the use of chlorine or chlorinated
compounds. Because of the continuing rigorous public debate on
this matter, EPA has proposed a thorough and careful review of
the issues. I assure you that the proposed EPA study will be
conducted in a fair, objective and balanced fashion, using the
best available information and with the participation of all
interested parties.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen a. mcGinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
3444 Oakdale Drive
Birmingham, AL 35223
March 15, 1993
Ms. Kathleen McGinty
Deputy Asst. to the President
and Director
Office of Environmental Policy
Old Executive Office Building, Room 360
17th Street & Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20501
Dear Ms. McGinty:
I am requesting your consideration and assistance in a matter of extreme urgency to me and to all the
citizens of the United States. As you may know, the administration has proposed through the EPA
Administrator that chlorine and all of its derivative products be curtailed under the auspices of the reissued
Clean Water Act. This is, in my opinion, an outrageously irresponsible and misdirected policy.
Under the guise of protecting public health the administration is launching a major initiative that would
produce the opposite effect. Chlorine chemistry is essential to the health of the nation. Ninety-eight percent
of our drinking water is purified with chlorine. Eighty-five percent of medicines are made through chlorine
chemistry. Most crop-protection chemicals contain chlorine. Most of the plastic materials that we take for
granted are made from chlorine. Chlorine chemistry is vital to virtually every industry and plays a role in
many of the processes and products that allow people to enjoy healthy and productive lives.
A ban on chlorine would not only threaten the health of the nation; it would be disastrous to the economy.
More than 1.3 million U.S. jobs rely on chlorine. Products made from chlorine chemistry save consumers
more than $91 billion annually versus the cost of providing alternative products.
The notion of banning chlorine has begun to be seriously considered by congress. The Metzenbaum
amendment to the Clean Water Act is likely to be offered for inclusion in S. 1114 when the bill is considered
by the Senate in May or June, or in other bills brought forward in the coming months. 1 urge you to use your
influence to help defeat this kind of harmful legislation.
Ms. McGinty, I am proud to earn my living in the chemical industry. It is because of this association that I
am able to offer you this unique perspective. This nation has prospered because we have been able to make
science work for us. We must continue to rely on good science as we progress toward the lofty objective of
improving the environment. The "ban chlorine movement" is not based on good science; rather it is a
mockery of it. Please do not allow this unfounded hysteria to undermine our nation's health and economy.
Yours truly,
Steve J. Holly
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
Mr. Dallas E. Hamilton
2813 Dow Circle
Deer Park, TX 77536
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding your thoughts
about chlorine study and the Clean Water Act reauthorization. it
was good to hear from you.
Rest assured that neither the EPA nor this Administration
has made any decision in the reauthorization of the Clean Water
Act that would restrict or ban the use of chlorine or chlorinated
compounds. Because of the continuing rigorous public debate on
this matter, EPA has proposed a thorough and careful review of
the issues. I assure you that the proposed EPA study will be
conducted in a fair, objective and balanced fashion, using the
best available information and with the participation of all
interested parties.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me.
Sincerely,
Kathleen a. mcGinty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
Dallas E. Hamilton
2813 Dow Circle
Deer Park, Texas 77536
March 15, 1994
Ms. Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Ms. McGinty:
Thank you for responding to my letter of concern about the methodology and
product of the EPA's effort to "study" the chlorine issue.
You refer to a continuing "public debate" on this issue as the cause for the
EPA's request for this study.
You are in error -- closed door is the method that EPA used to develop this
"request". That is the problem!
This issue must be dropped until and unless there is a public debate on this or
any other issue. I am extremely opposed to the imperialistic and self-serving
attitude and position that the EPA and the Administration are taking.
I believe that the cleanup of the environment can best be served by an even-
handed, shared responsibility and economically sound process that involves all
concerned parties.
The United States is a great, beautiful and most generally clean and healthy
place to live. There are more than enough laws and regulations already in place
to result in a continual improvement if they are appropriately enforced. They
must be given time to work before piling on more.
Letter to Kathleen McGinty
March 15, 1994
Page
Please convey to the Administration and Staff my great concern. The
Democratic Party, because of its self-serving, anti-moral, anti-free enterprise
attitudes and its misplaced responsiveness to vocal minority interests is fast
causing the death of the United States as a country of freedom of choice,
economic stability and justifiable pride.
Wake Up! Your party is loosing contact with reality. Wake Up! While there
is still (maybe) time to return to the people of the United States the
responsibility for their own future, success, happiness and health. That is where
it must be.
The Democratic Party must stop trying to act like an all knowing God. It is
NOT. On the contrary, it is pulling this country away from its position of
fulfilling its position as being "Under God" a country of free people.
Sincerely,
D.E.Hamilton
Dallas E. Hamilton
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
April 1, 1994
Mrs. Jean L. Holman
4100 st. Johns Road
Greenville, IN 47124-9311
Dear Mrs. Holman:
Thank you for your recent letter regarding your thoughts
about chlorine study and the Clean Water Act reauthorization. it
was good to hear from you.
Rest assured that neither the EPA nor this Administration
has made any decision in the reauthorization of the Clean Water
Act that would restrict or ban the use of chlorine or chlorinated
compounds. Because of the continuing rigorous public debate on
this matter, EPA has proposed a thorough and careful review of
the issues. I assure you that the proposed EPA study will be
conducted in a fair, objective and balanced fashion, using the
best available information and with the participation of all
interested parties.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me.
Sincerely,
Fathlun a. , Ginty
Kathleen A. McGinty
Director, White House Office on
Environmental Policy
KAM/jdm
March 11, 1994
Office of Environmental Policy
Deputy Asst. to the Pres. and Dir.
Kathleen McGinty
Old Executive Office Building
Room 360
17th St. & Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Ms. McGinty;
As a retiree of the Geon Company, formerly a unit of BFGoodrich, I am greatly distressed at what seems to
be an EPA agenda to ban the commercial use of chlorine compounds. This would have disastrous
consequences for an industry in which chlorine is an essential manufacturing ingredient.
The vinyl industry operates within a global commercial environment which is unrelentlessly competitive, and
Geon is a relatively new company, the success of which is very important to its thousands of employees and
retirees. The vinyl industry and its direct customers provide jobs for about 100,000 people in the nation, as
well as providing many more jobs indirectly by companies supplying products dependent on vinyl as a raw
material.
No doubt there are some environmental questions caused by some few chlorine-based products, and these
should be studies, evaluated as to their impact, and banned if necessary. I believe that we should make
every effort possible to protect our environment without resorting to more extreme action than is called for--
should we go so far as to stop putting salt on our food and on winter roads? Surely some consideration must
be given to the impact extreme measures would have on ordinary people who must earn a living. Such
people have already paid a high price in the last decade or so as industry has sought to increase profits
through eliminating personnel. This segment of our society contributes greatly to our nation, and we surely
do not need to take unnecessarily extreme action that would rob it of jobs and, consequently, an acceptable
standard of living.
Having worked in the offices of top plant management, I know firsthand how regulated the vinyl industry is
and how conscientious my company, for one, was in meeting all regulatory requirements and providing a safe
environment. In view of the vinyl industry's established safety record, as well as the effect such a ban would
have on the industry, why were representatives of the industry denied input in the process used to arrive at
the U.S. EPA chlorine recommendation while such groups as Greenpeace were included? This surely is
unfair!
Such an arbitrary approach as the EPA has taken is not warranted, not supported by science, and highly
disruptive to society. Will you please give serious attention to this matter that is of great importance to so
many who would be adversely affected by the EPA recommendations.
Yours very truly,
Jean L. Holman
Mrs. Jean L. Holman
PHOTOCOPY
PRESERVATION
# AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION
Mrs. Robert A. Holman
4100 St. Johns Rd.
Greenville, IN 47124-9311
LOUISVILLE KY 40.3
:5 MAR
/994
I
Ms. Kathleen McGinty
Old Executive Office Building
Room 360
17th Street & Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500