Special Message to the Congress Proposing the 1971 Environmental Program

To the Congress of the United States:

Last August I sent to the Congress the first annual report on the state of the nation's environment. In my message of transmittal, I declared that the report "describes the principal problems we face now and can expect to face in the future, and it provides us with perceptive guidelines for meeting them .... They point the directions in which we must move as rapidly as circumstances permit."

The comprehensive and wide-ranging action program I propose today builds upon the 37-point program I submitted to the Congress a year ago. It builds upon the progress made in the past year, and draws upon the experience gained in the past year. It gives us the means to ensure that, as a nation, we maintain the initiative so vigorously begun in our shared campaign to save and enhance our surroundings. This program includes:

Measures to strengthen pollution control programs

--Charges on sulfur oxides and a tax on lead in gasoline to supplement regulatory controls on air pollution

--More effective control of water pollution through a $ 12 billion national program and strengthened standard setting and enforcement authorities

--Comprehensive improvement in pesticide control authority

--A Federal procurement program to encourage recycling of paper

Measures to control emerging problems

--Regulation of toxic substances

--Regulation of noise pollution

--Controls on ocean dumping

Measures to promote environmental quality in land use decisions

--A national land use policy

--A new and greatly expanded open space and recreation program, bringing parks to the people in urban areas

--Preservation of historic buildings through tax policy and other incentives

--Substantial expansion of the wilderness areas preservation system

--Advance public agency approval of power plant sites and transmission line routes

--Regulation of environmental effects of surface and underground mining

Further institutional improvement

--Establishment of an Environmental Institute to conduct studies and recommend policy alternatives

Toward a better world environment

--Expanded international cooperation

--A World Heritage Trust to preserve parks and areas of unique cultural value throughout the world

1970--A YEAR OF PROGRESS

The course of events in 1970 has intensified awareness of and concern about environmental problems. The news of more widespread mercury pollution, late summer smog alerts over much of the East Coast, repeated episodes of ocean dumping and oil spills, and unresolved controversy about important land use questions have dramatized with disturbing regularity the reality and extent of these problems. No part of the United States has been free from them, and all levels of government--Federal, State and local--have joined in the search for solutions. Indeed, there is a growing trend in other countries to view the severity and .complexity of environmental problems .much as we do.

There can be no doubt about our growing national commitment to find solutions. Last November voters approved several billion dollars in State and local bond issues for environmental purposes, and Federal funds for these purposes are at an all time high.

The program I am proposing today will require some adjustments by governments at all levels, by our industrial and business community, and by the public in order to meet this national commitment. But as we strive to expand our national effort, we must also keep in mind the greater cost of not pressing ahead. The battle for a better environment can be won, and we are winning it. With the program I am outlining in this message we can obtain new victories and prevent problems from reaching the crisis stage.

During 1970, two new organizations were established to provide Federal leadership for the Nation's campaign to improve the environment. The Council on Environmental Quality in the Executive Office of the President has provided essential policy analysis and advice on a broad range of environmental problems, developing many of our environmental initiatives and furnishing guidance in carrying out the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires all Federal agencies to devote specific attention to the environmental impact of their actions and proposals. Federal pollution control programs have been consolidated in the new Environmental Protection Agency. This new agency is already taking strong action to combat pollution in air and water and on land.

--I have requested in my 1972 budget $2.45 billion for the programs of the Environmental Protection Agency-nearly double the funds appropriated for these programs in 1971. These funds will provide for the expansion of air and water pollution, solid waste, radiation and pesticide control programs and for carrying out new programs.

In my special message on the Environment last February, I set forth a comprehensive program to improve existing laws on air and water pollution, to encourage recycling of materials and to provide greater recreational opportunities for our people. We have been able to institute some of these measures by executive branch action. While unfortunately there was no action on my water quality proposals, we moved ahead to make effective use of existing authorities through the Refuse Act water quality permit program announced in December. New air pollution control legislation, which I signed on the last day of 1970, embodies all of my recommendations and reflects strong bipartisan teamwork between the administration and the Congress--teamwork which will be needed again this year to permit action on the urgent environmental problems discussed in this message.

We must have action to meet the needs of today if we would have the kind of environment the nation demands for tomorrow.

I. STRENGTHENING POLLUTION

CONTROL PROGRAMS

The Clean Air Amendments of 1970 have greatly strengthened the Federal-State air quality program. We shall vigorously administer the new program, but propose to supplement it with measures designed to provide a strong economic stimulus to achieve the pollution reduction sought by the program.

AIR POLLUTION

Sulfur Oxides Emissions Charge

Sulfur oxides are among the most damaging air pollutants. High levels of sulfur oxides have been linked to increased incidence of diseases such as bronchitis and lung cancer. In terms of damage to human health, vegetation and property, sulfur oxide emissions cost society billions of dollars annually.

Last year in my State of the Union message I urged that the price of goods "should be made to include the cost of producing and disposing of them without damage to the environment." A charge on sulfur emitted into the atmosphere would be a major step in applying the principle that the costs of pollution should be included in the price of the product. A staff study underway indicates the feasibility of such a charge system.

--Accordingly, I have asked the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality and the Secretary of the Treasury to develop a Clean Air Emissions Charge on emissions of sulfur oxides. Legislation will be submitted to the Congress upon completion of the studies currently underway.

The funds generated by this charge would enable the Federal Government to expand programs to improve the quality of the environment. Special emphasis would be given to developing and demonstrating technology to reduce sulfur oxides emissions and programs to develop adequate clean energy supplies• My 1972 budget provides increased funds for these activities. They will continue to be emphasized in subsequent years.

These two measures--the sulfur oxides emissions charge and expanded environmental programs--provide both the incentive for improving the quality of our environment and the means of doing so.

Leaded Gasoline

Leaded gasolines interfere with effective emission control. Moreover, the lead particles are, themselves, a source of potentially harmful lead concentrations in the environment. The new air quality legislation provides authority, which I requested, to regulate fuel additives, and I have recently initiated a policy of using unleaded or low-lead gasoline in Federal vehicles whenever possible. But further incentives are needed. In 1970, I recommended a tax on lead used in gasoline to bring about a gradual transition to the use of unleaded gasoline. This transition is essential if the automobile emission control standards scheduled to come into effect for the 1975 model automobiles are to be met at reasonable cost.

--I shall again propose a special tax to make the price of unleaded gasoline lower than the price of leaded gasoline. Legislation will be submitted to the Congress upon completion of studies currently underway.

WATER QUALITY

We have the technology now to deal with most forms of water pollution. We must make sure that it is used.

In my February 1970 special message to the Congress on the Environment, I discussed our most important needs in the effort to control water pollution: adequate funds to ensure construction of municipal waste treatment facilities needed to meet water quality standards; more explicit standards, applicable to all navigable waters; more effective Federal enforcement authority to back up State efforts; and funds to help States build the necessary capability to participate in this joint endeavor.

Municipal Wastes

Adequate treatment of the large volume of commercial, industrial and domestic wastes that are discharged through municipal systems requires a great expenditure of funds for construction of necessary facilities. A thorough study by the Environmental Protection Agency completed in December 1970 revealed that $12 billion will be required by 1974 to correct the national waste treatment backlog. The urgency of this need, and the severe financial problems that face many communities, require that construction of waste treatment facilities be jointly funded by Federal, State, and local governments. We must also assure that adequate Federal funds are available to reimburse States that advanced the Federal share of project costs.

--I propose that $6 billion in Federal funds be authorized and appropriated over the next three years to provide the full Federal share of a $12 billion program of waste treatment facilities.

Some municipalities need help in overcoming the difficulties they face in selling bonds on reasonable terms to finance their share of construction costs. The availability of funds to finance a community's pollution control facilities should depend not on its credit rating or the vagaries of the municipal bond market, but on its waste disposal needs.

--I again propose the creation of an Environmental Financing Authority so that every municipality has an opportunity to sell its waste treatment plant construction bonds.

A number of administrative reforms which I announced last year to ensure that Federal construction grant funds are well invested have been initiated. To further this objective:

--I again propose that the present, rigid allocation formula be revised, so that special emphasis can be given to those areas where facilities are most needed and where the greatest improvements in water quality would result.

--I propose that provisions be added to the present law to induce communities to provide for expansion and replacement of treatment facilities on a reasonably self-sufficient basis.

--I propose that municipalities receiving Federal assistance in constructing treatment facilities be required to recover from industrial users the portion of project costs allocable to treatment of their wastes.

Standards and Enforcement

While no action was taken in the 91st Congress on my proposals to strengthen water pollution standard setting and enforcement, I initiated a program under the Refuse Act of 1899 to require permits for all industrial discharges into navigable waters, making maximum use of present authorities to secure compliance with water quality standards. However, the reforms I proposed in our water quality laws last year are still urgently needed.

Water quality standards now are often imprecise and unrelated to specific water quality needs. Even more important, they provide a poor basis for enforcement: without a precise effluent standard, it is often difficult to prove violations in court. Also, Federal-State water quality standards presently do not apply to many important waters.

--I again proposed that the Federal-State water quality program be extended to cover all navigable waters and their tributaries, ground waters and waters of the contiguous zone.

--I again propose that Federal-State water quality standards be revised to impose precise effluent limitations on both industrial and municipal sources.

--I also propose Federal standards to regulate the discharge of hazardous substances similar to those which I proposed and the Congress adopted in the Clean Air Amendments of

--I propose that standards require that the best practicable technology be used in new industrial facilities to ensure that water quality is preserved or enhanced.

--I propose that the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency be empowered to require prompt revision of standards when necessary.

We should strengthen and streamline Federal enforcement authority, to permit swift action against municipal as well as industrial and other violators of water quality standards. Existing authority under the Refuse Act generally does not apply to municipalities.

--I propose that the Administrator of EPA be authorized to issue abatement orders swiftly and to impose administrative fines of up to $25,000 per day for violation of water quality standards.

--I propose that violations of standards and abatement orders be made subject to court-imposed fines of up to $25,000 per day and up to $50,000 per day for repeated violations.

--I again propose that the Administrator be authorized to seek immediate injunctive relief in emergency situations in which severe water pollution constitutes an imminent danger to health, or threatens irreversible damage to water quality.

--I propose that the cumbersome and time-consuming enforcement conference and hearing mechanism in the current law be replaced by a provision for swift public hearings as a prelude to issuance of abatement orders or requiring a revision of standards.

--I propose an authorization for legal actions against violations of standards by private citizens, as in the new air quality legislation, in order to bolster State and Federal enforcement efforts.

--I propose that the Administrator be empowered to require reports by any person responsible for discharging effluents covered by water quality standards.

--I again propose that Federal grants to State pollution control enforcement agencies be tripled over the next [our years--from $10 million to $30 million--to assist these agencies in meeting their expanded pollution control responsibilities.

Control of Oil Spills

Last May I outlined to the Congress a number of measures that should be taken to reduce the risks of pollution from oil spills. Recent events have underlined the urgency of action on these proposals. At the outset of this present Congress I resubmitted the Ports and Waterways Safety Act and the legislation requiring the use of bridge-to-bridge radiotelephones for safety of navigation. Such legislation would have decreased the chances of the oil spill which occurred as a result of a tanker collision in San Francisco Bay.

--I have provided $25 million in next year's budget for development of better techniques to prevent and clean up oil spills and to provide more effective surveillance. 1 am asking the Council on Environmental Quality in conjunction with the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency to review what further measures can be developed to deal with the problem.

--I also am renewing my request that the Senate give its advice and consent on the two new international conventions on oil spills and the pending amendments to the 1954 Oil Spills Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil.

The Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO) is presently preparing a convention to establish an International Compensation Fund to supplement the 1969 Civil Liability Convention. Our ratification of the 1969 convention will be withheld until this supplementary convention can also be brought into force because both conventions are part of a comprehensive plan to provide compensation for damages caused by oil spills. In addition, we have taken the initiative in NATO's Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society and achieved wide international support for terminating all intentional discharges of oil and oily wastes from ships into the oceans by 1975, if possible, and no later than the end of this decade. We will continue to work on this matter to establish through IMCO an international convention on this subject.

PESTICIDES

Pesticides have provided important benefits by protecting man from disease and increasing his ability to produce food and fiber. However, the use and misuse of pesticides has become one of the major concerns of all who are interested in a better environment. The decline in numbers of several of our bird species is a signal of the potential hazards of pesticides to the environment. We are continuing a major research effort to develop nonchemical methods of pest control, but we must continue to rely on pesticides for the foreseeable future. The challenge is to institute the necessary mechanisms to prevent pesticides from harming human health and the environment.

Currently, Federal controls over pesticides consist of the registration and labeling requirements in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The administrative processes contained in the law are inordinately cumbersome and time-consuming, and there is no authority to deal with the actual use of pesticides. The labels approved under the Act specify the uses to which a pesticide may be put, but there is no way to insure that the label will be read or obeyed. A comprehensive strengthening of our pesticide control laws is needed.

--I propose that the use of pesticides be subject to control in appropriate circumstances, through a registration procedure which provides for designation of a pesticide for "general use," "restricted use," or "use by permit only." Pesticides designated for restricted use would be applied only by an approved pest control applicator. Pesticides designated for "use by permit only" would be made available only with the approval of an approved pest control consultant. This will help to ensure that pesticides which are safe when properly used will not be misused or applied in excessive quantities.

--I propose that the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency be authorized to permit the experimental use of pesticides under strict controls, when he needs additional information concerning a pesticide before deciding whether it should be registered.

--I propose that the procedures for cancellation of a registration be streamlined to permit more expeditious action.

--I propose that the Administrator be authorized to stop the sale or use of, and to seize, pesticides being distributed or held in violation of Federal law.

RECYCLING OF WASTES

The Nation's solid waste problem is both costly and damaging to the environment. Paper, which accounts for about one-half of all municipal solid waste, can be reprocessed to produce a high quality product. Yet the percentage the Nation recycles has been declining steadily.

To reverse this trend, the General Services Administration, working with the Council on Environmental Quality, has reviewed the Federal Government's purchasing policies. It found a substantial number of prohibitions against using paper with recycled content. Such prohibitions are no longer reasonable in light of the need to encourage recycling.

As a result of this review, the GSA has already changed its specifications to require a minimum of 3 to 50 percent recycled content, depending on the product, in over $35 million per year of paper purchases. GSA is currently revising other specifications to require recycled content in an additional $25 million of annual paper purchases. In total, this will amount to more than one-half of GSA's total paper products purchases. All remaining specifications will be reviewed to require recycled content in as many other paper products as possible. The regulations will be reviewed continually to increase the percentage of recycled paper required in each.

I have directed that the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality suggest to the Governors that they review State purchasing policies and where possible revise them to require recycled paper. To assist them, I have directed the Administrator of GSA to set up a technical liaison to provide States with the federally revised specifications as well as other important information on this new Federal program, which represents a significant first step toward a much broader use of Federal procurement policies to encourage recycling.

II. CONTROLLING EMERGING PROBLEMS

Environmental control efforts too often have been limited to cleaning up problems that have accumulated in the past. We must concentrate more on preventing the creation of new environmental problems and on dealing with emerging problems. We must, for example, prevent the harmful dumping of wastes into the ocean and the buildup of toxic materials throughout our environment. We must roll back increasingly annoying and hazardous levels of noise in our environment, particularly in the urban environment. Our goal in dealing with emerging environmental problems must be to ward them off before they become acute, not merely to undo the damage after it is done.

TOXIC SUBSTANCES

As we have become increasingly dependent on many chemicals and metals, we have become acutely aware of the potential toxicity of the materials entering our environment. Each year hundreds of new chemicals are commercially marketed and some of these chemicals may pose serious potential threats. Many existing chemicals and metals, such as PCB's (polychlorinated biphenyls) and mercury, also represent a hazard.

It is essential that we take steps to prevent chemical substances from becoming environmental hazards. Unless we develop better methods to assure adequate testing of chemicals, we will be inviting the environmental crises of the future.

--I propose that the Administrator of EPA be empowered to restrict the use or distribution of any substance which he finds is a hazard to human health or the environment.

--I propose that the Administrator be authorized to stop the sale or use of any substance that violates the provisions of the legislation and to seek immediate injunctive relief when use or distribution of a substance presents an imminent hazard to health or the environment.

--I propose that the Administrator be authorized to prescribe minimum standard tests to be performed on substances.

This legislation, coupled with the proposal on pesticides and other existing laws, will provide greater protection to humans and wildlife from introduction of toxic substances into the environment. What I propose is not to ban beneficial uses of chemicals, but rather to control the use of those that may be harmful.

OCEAN DUMPING

Last year, at my direction, the Council on Environmental Quality extensively examined the problem of ocean dumping. Its study indicated that ocean dumping is not a critical problem now, but it predicted that as municipalities and industries increasingly turned to the oceans as a convenient dumping ground, a vast new influx of wastes would occur. Once this happened, it would be difficult and costly to shift to land-based disposal.

Wastes dumped in the oceans have a number of harmful effects. Many are toxic to marine life, reduce populations of fish and other economic resources, jeopardize marine ecosystems, and impair aesthetic values. In most cases, feasible, economic, and more beneficial methods of disposal are available. Our national policy should be to ban unregulated ocean dumping of all wastes and to place strict limits on ocean disposal of harmful materials. Legislation is needed to assure that our oceans do not suffer the fate of so many of our inland waters, and to provide the authority needed to protect our coastal waters, beaches, and

estuaries.

--I recommend a national policy banning unregulated ocean dumping of all materials and placing strict limits on ocean disposal of any materials harmful to the environment.

--I recommend legislation that will require a permit from the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for any materials to be dumped into the oceans, estuaries, or Great Lakes and that will authorize the Administrator to ban dumping of wastes which are dangerous to the marine ecosystem.

The legislation would permit the Administrator to begin phasing out ocean dumping of harmful materials. It would provide the controls necessary to prevent further degradation of the oceans.

This would go far toward remedying this problem off our own shores. However, protection of the total marine environment from such pollution can only be assured if other nations adopt similar measures and enforce them.

--I am instructing the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Council on Environmental Quality, to develop and pursue international initiatives directed toward this objective.

NOISE

The American people have rightly become increasingly annoyed by the growing level of noise that assails them. Airplanes, trucks, construction equipment, and many other sources of noise interrupt sleep, disturb communication, create stress, and can produce deafness and other adverse health effects. The urban environment in particular is being degraded by steadily rising noise levels. The Federal Government has set and enforces standards for noise from aircraft, but it is now time that our efforts to deal with many other sources of noise be strengthened and expanded.

The primary responsibility for dealing with levels of noise in the general environment rests upon local governments. However, the products which produce the noise are usually marketed nationally, and it is by regulating the noise-generating characteristics of such products that the Federal Government can best assist the State and local governments in achieving a quieter environment.

--I propose comprehensive noise pollution control legislation that will authorize the Administrator of EPA to set noise standards on transportation, construction and other equipment and require labeling of noise characteristics of certain products.

Before establishing standards, the Administrator would be required to publish a report on the effects of noise on man, the major sources, and the control techniques available. The legislation would provide a method for measurably reducing major noise sources, while preserving to State and local governments the authority to deal with their particular noise problems.

III. PROMOTING ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

IN OUR LAND USE DECISIONS.

The use of our land not only affects the natural environment but shapes the pattern of our daily lives. Unfortunately, the sensible use of our land is often thwarted by the inability of the many competing and overlapping local units of government to control land use decisions which have regional significance.

While most land use decisions will continue to be made at the local level, we must draw upon the basic authority of State government to deal with land use issues which spill over local jurisdictional boundaries. The States are uniquely qualified to effect the institutional reform that is so badly needed, for they are closer to the local problems than is the Federal Government and yet removed enough from local tax and other pressures to represent the broader regional interests of the public. Federal programs which influence major land use decisions can thereby fit into a coherent pattern. In addition, we must begin to restructure economic incentives bearing upon land use to encourage wise and orderly decisions for preservation and development of land.

A NATIONAL LAND USE POLICY

We must reform the institutional framework in which land use decisions are made.

--I propose legislation to establish a National Land Use Policy which will encourage the States, in cooperation with local government, to plan for and regulate major developments affecting growth and the use of critical land areas. This should be done by establishing methods for protecting lands of critical environmental concern, methods for controlling large-scale development, and improving use of lands around key facilities and new communities.

One hundred million dollars in new funds would be authorized to assist the States in this effort--$20 million in each of the next five years--with priority given to the States of the coastal zone. Accordingly, this proposal will replace and expand my proposal submitted to the last Congress for coastal zone management, while still giving priority attention to this area of the country which is especially sensitive to development pressures. Steps will be taken to assure that federally-assisted programs are consistent with the approved State land use programs.

PUBLIC LANDS MANAGEMENT

The Federal public lands comprise approximately one-third of the Nation's land area. This vast domain contains land with spectacular scenery, mineral and timber resources, major wildlife habitat, ecological significance, and tremendous recreational importance. In a sense, it is the "breathing space" of the Nation.

The public lands belong to all Americans. They are part of the heritage and the birthright of every citizen. It is important, therefore, that these lands be managed wisely, that their environmental values be carefully safeguarded, and that we deal with these lands as trustees for the future. They have an important place in national land use considerations.

The Public Land Law Review Commission recently completed a study and report on Federal public land policy. This Administration will work closely with the Congress in evaluating the Commission's recommendations and in developing legislative and administrative programs to improve public land management.

The largest single block of Federal public land lies in the State of Alaska. Recent major oil discoveries suggest that the State is on the threshold of a major economic development. Such development can bring great benefits both to the State and to the Nation. It could also--if unplanned and unguided--despoil the last and greatest American wilderness.

We should act now, in close cooperation with the State of Alaska, to develop a comprehensive land use plan for the Federal lands in Alaska, giving priority to those north of the Yukon River. Such a plan should take account of the needs and aspirations of the native peoples, the importance of balanced economic development, and the special need for maintaining and protecting the unique natural heritage of Alaska. This can be accomplished through a system of parks, wilderness, recreation, and wildlife areas and through wise management of the Federal lands generally. I am asking the Secretary of the Interior to take the lead in this task, calling upon the other Federal agencies as appropriate.

Preserving Our Natural Environment

The demand for urban open space, recreation, wilderness and other natural areas continues to accelerate. In the face of rapid urban development, the acquisition and development of open space, recreational lands and natural areas accessible to urban centers is often thwarted by escalating land values and development pressures. I am submitting to the Congress several bills that will be part of a comprehensive effort to preserve our natural environment and to provide more open spaces and parks in urban areas where today they are often so scarce. In addition, I will be taking steps within the executive branch to assure that all agencies are using fully their existing legislative authority to these ends.

"Legacy of Parks"

Merely acquiring land for open space and recreation is not enough. We must bring parks to where the people are so that everyone has access to nearby recreational areas. In my budget for 1972, I have proposed a new "Legacy of Parks" program which will help States and local government provide parks and recreation areas, not just for today's Americans but for tomorrow's as well. Only if we set aside and develop such recreation areas now can we ensure that they will be available for future generations.

As part of this legacy, I have requested a $200 million appropriation to begin a new program for the acquisition and development of additional park lands in urban areas. To be administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, this would include provision for facilities such as swimming pools to add to the use and enjoyment of these parks.

Also, I have recommended in my 1972 budget that the appropriation for the Land and Water Conservation Fund be increased to $380 million, permitting the continued acquisition of Federal parks and recreation areas as well as an expanded State grant program. However, because of the way in which these State grant funds were allocated over the past five years, a relatively small percentage has been used for the purchase and development of recreational facilities in and near urban areas. The allocation formula should be changed to ensure that more parks will be developed in and near our urban areas.

--I am submitting legislation to reform the State grant program so that Federal grants for the purchase and development of recreation lands bear a closer relationship to the population distribution.

I am also proposing amendments to the Internal Revenue Code which should greatly expand the use of charitable land transfers for conservation purposes and thereby enlarge the role of private citizens in preserving the best of America's landscape.

Additional public parks will be created as a result of my program for examining the need for retention of real property owned by the Government. The Property Review Board, which I established last year, is continuing its review of individual properties as well as its evaluation of the Government's overall Federal real property program. Properties identified as suitable for park use and determined to be surplus can be conveyed to States and political subdivisions for park purposes without cost. The State or other political subdivision must prepare an acceptable park use plan and must agree to use the property as a park in perpetuity. More than 40 properties with high potential for park use have already been identified.

Five such properties are now available for conversion to public park use. One, Border Field, California, will be developed as a recreation area with the assistance of the department of the Interior. The other four will be conveyed to States or local units of government as soon as adequate guarantees can be obtained for their proper maintenance and operation. These four are: (1) part of the former Naval Training Devices Center on Long Island Sound, New York; (2) land at a Clinical research center in Fort Worth, Texas; (3) about ten miles of sand dunes and beach along the Atlantic Coast and Sandy Hook Bay, a part of Fort Hancock, New Jersey; and (4) a portion of Fort Lawton, Washington, a wooded, hilly area near the heart of Seattle. In addition, efforts are underway to open a significant stretch of Pacific Ocean Beach Front and Coastal Bluffs at Camp Pendleton, California.

Many parcels of federal real property are currently under-utilized because of the budgetary and procedural difficulties that are involved in transferring a Federal operation from the current site to a more suitable location.

--I am again proposing legislation to simplify relocation of federal installations that occupy properties that could be better used for other purposes.

This will allow conversion of many additional Federal real properties to a more beneficial public use. Lands now used for Federal operations but more suited to park and recreational uses will be given priority consideration for relocation procedures. The program will be self-financing and will provide new opportunities for improving the utilization of Federal lands.

Wilderness Areas

While there is clearly a need for greater efforts to provide neighborhood parks and other public recreation areas, there must still be places where nature thrives and man enters only as a visitor. These wilderness areas are an important part of a comprehensive open space system, in order to save for all time those magnificent areas of America where nature still predominates. Accordingly, in August last year I expressed my intention to improve our performance in the study and presentation of recommendations for new wilderness areas.

--I will soon be recommending to the Congress a number of specific proposals for a major enlargement of our wilderness preservation system by the addition of a wide spectrum of natural areas spread across the entire continent.

National Parks

While placing much greater emphasis on parks in urban areas and the designation of new wilderness areas, we must continue to expand our national park system. We are currently obligating substantial sums to acquire the privately owned land in units of the National Park System which have already been authorized by the Congress.

Last year, joint efforts of the administration and the Congress resulted in authorization of ten areas in the National Park System, including such outstanding sites as Voyageurs National Park in Minnesota, Apostle Islands National Lakeshore in Michigan, Gulf Islands National Seashore in Mississippi and Florida, and the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park in the District of Columbia, Maryland and West Virginia.

However, the job of filling out the National Park System is not complete. Other unique areas must still be preserved. Despite all our wealth and scientific knowledge, we cannot recreate these unspoiled areas once they are lost to the onrush of development. I am directing the Secretary of the Interior to review the outstanding opportunities for setting aside nationally significant natural and historic areas, and to develop priorities for their possible addition to the National Park System.

Power Plant Siting

The power shortage last summer and continuing disputes across the country over the siting of power plants and the routing of transmission lines highlight the need for longer-range planning by the producers of electric power to project their future needs and identify environmental concerns well in advance of construction deadlines. The growing number of confrontations also suggest the need for establishment of public agencies to assure public discussion of plans, proper resolution of environmental issues, and timely construction of facilities. Last fall, the Office of Science and Technology sponsored a study entitled "Electric Power and the Environment," which identified many of these issues. Only through involving the environmental protection agencies early in the planning of future power facilities can we avoid disputes which delay construction timetables. I believe that these two goals of adequacy of power supply and environmental protection are compatible if the proper framework is available.

--I propose a power plant siting law to provide for establishment within each State or region of a single agency with responsibility for assuring that environmental concerns are properly considered in the certification of specific power plant sites and transmission line routes.

Under this law, utilities would be required to identify needed power supply facilities ten years prior to construction of the required facilities. They would be required to identify the power plant sites and general transmission routes under consideration five years before construction and apply for certification for specific sites, facilities, and routes two years in advance of construction. Public hearings at which all interested parties could be heard without delaying construction timetables would be required.

Mined Area Protection

Surface and underground mining have scarred millions of acres of land and have caused environmental damages such as air and water pollution. Burning coal fires, subsidence, acid mine drainage which pollutes our streams and rivers and the destruction of aesthetic and recreational values frequently but unnecessarily accompany mining activities. These problems will worsen as the demand for fossil fuels and other raw materials continues to grow, unless such mining is subject to regulation requiring both preventive and restorative measures.

--I propose a Mined Area Protection Act to establish Federal requirements and guidelines for State programs to regulate the environmental consequences of surface and underground mining. In any State which does not enact the necessary regulations or enforce them properly, the Federal Government would be authorized to do so.

PRESERVING OUR ARCHITECTURAL AND HISTORIC HERITAGE

Too often we think of environment only as our natural surroundings. But for most of us, the urban environment is the one in which we spend our daily lives. America's cities, from Boston and Washington to Charleston, New Orleans, San Antonio, Denver, and San Francisco, reflect in the architecture of their buildings a uniqueness and character that is too rapidly disappearing under the bulldozer. Unfortunately, present Federal income tax policies provide much stronger incentives for demolition of older buildings than for their rehabilitation.

Particularly acute is the continued loss of many buildings of historic value. Since 1933 an estimated one-quarter of the buildings recorded by the Historic American Building Survey has been destroyed. Most lending institutions are unwilling to loan funds for the restoration and rehabilitation of historic buildings because of the age and often the location of such buildings. Finally, there are many historic buildings under Federal ownership for which inadequate provision has been made for restoration and preservation.

--I shall propose tax measures designed to overcome these present distortions and particularly to encourage the restoration of historic buildings.

--I shall propose new legislation to permit Federal insurance of home improvement loans for historic residential properties to a maximum of $15,000 per dwelling unit.

--I am recommending legislation to permit State and local governments more easily to maintain transferred Federal historic sites by allowing their use for revenue purposes and I am taking action to insure that no federally-owned property is demolished until its historic significance has first been reviewed.

IV. TOWARD A BETTER WORLD ENVIRONMENT

Environmental problems have a unique global dimension, for they afflict every nation, irrespective of its political institutions, economic system, or state of development. The United States stands ready to work and cooperate with all nations, individually or through international institutions, in the great task of building a better environment for man. A number of the proposals which I am submitting to Congress today have important international aspects, as in the case of ocean dumping. I hope that other nations will see the merit of the environmental goals which we have set for ourselves and will choose to share them with US.

At the same time, we need to develop more effective environmental efforts through appropriate regional and global organizations. The United States is participating closely in the initiatives of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), with its emphasis on the complex economic aspects of environmental controls, and of the Economic Commission for Europe (ECE), a U.N. regional organization which is the major forum for East-West cooperation on environmental problems.

Following a United States initiative in 1969, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has added a new dimension to its cooperative activities through its Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society.¹ CCMS has served to stimulate national and international action on many problems common to a modern technological society. For example, an important agreement was reached in Brussels recently to eliminate intentional discharges of oil and oily wastes by ships into the oceans by 1975 if possible or, at the latest, by the end of the decade. CCMS is functioning as an effective forum for reaching agreements on the development of pollution-free and safe automobiles. Work on mitigating the effects of floods and earthquakes is in progress. These innovative and specific actions are good examples of how efforts of many nations can be focused and coordinated in addressing serious environmental problems facing all nations.

¹ A White House announcement of the designation of Russell E. Train, Chairman, Council on Environmental Quality, as United States Representative to the Committee on the Challenges of Modern Society was released on January 13, 1971, and is printed in the Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents (vol. 7, P. 59).

The United Nations, whose specialized agencies have long done valuable work on many aspects of the environment, is sponsoring a landmark Conference on the Human Environment to be held in Stockholm in June 1972. This will, for the first time, bring together all member nations of the world community to discuss those environmental issues of most pressing common concern and to agree on a world-wide strategy and the basis for a cooperative program to reverse the fearful trend toward environmental degradation. I have pledged full support for this Conference, and the United States is actively participating in the preparatory work.

Direct bilateral consultations in this field are also most useful in jointly meeting the challenges of environmental problems. Thus, the United States and Canada have been working closely together preparing plans for action directed to the urgent task of cleaning up the Great Lakes, that priceless resource our two nations share. Over the past few months, ministerial level discussions with Japan have laid the basis for an expanded program of cooperation and technological exchange from which both nations will benefit.

It is my intention that we will develop a firm and effective fabric of cooperation among the nations of the world on these environmental issues.

WORLD HERITAGE TRUST

As the United States approaches the centennial celebration in 1972 of the establishment of Yellowstone National Park, it would be appropriate to mark this historic event by a new international initiative in the general field of parks. Yellowstone is the first national park to have been created in the modern world, and the national park concept has represented a major contribution to world culture. Similar systems have now been established throughout the world. The United Nations lists over 1,200 parks in 93 nations.

The national park concept is based upon the recognition that certain areas of natural, historical, or cultural significance have such unique and outstanding characteristics that they must be treated as belonging to the nation as a whole, as part of the nation's heritage.

It would be fitting by 1972 for the nations of the world to agree to the principle that there are certain areas of such unique worldwide value that they should be treated as part of the heritage of all mankind and accorded special recognition as part of a World Heritage Trust. Such an arrangement would impose no limitations on the sovereignty of those nations which choose to participate, but would extend special international recognition to the areas which qualify and would make available technical and other assistance where appropriate to assist in their protection and management. I believe that such an initiative can add a new dimension to international cooperation.

--I am directing the Secretary of the Interior, in coordination with the Council on Environmental Quality, and under the foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of State, to develop initiatives for presentation in appropriate international forums to further the objective of a World Heritage Trust.

Confronted with the pressures of population and development, and with the world's tremendously increased capacity for environmental modification, we must act together now to save for future generations the most outstanding natural areas as well as places of unique historical, archeological, architectural, and cultural value to mankind.

V. FURTHER INSTITUTIONAL IMPROVEMENT

The solutions to environmental and ecological problems are often complex and costly. If we are to develop sound policies and programs in the future and receive early warning on problems, we need to refine our analytical techniques and use the best intellectual talent that is available.

After thorough discussions with a number of private foundations, the Federal Government through the National Science Foundation and the Council on Environmental Quality will support the establishment of an Environmental Institute. I hope that this nonprofit institute will be supported not only by the Federal Government but also by private foundations. The Institute would conduct policy studies and analyses drawing upon the capabilities of our universities and experts in other sectors. It would provide new and alternative strategies for dealing with the whole spectrum of environmental problems.

VI. TOWARD A BETTER LIFE

Adoption of the proposals in this message will help us to clean up the problems of the past, to reduce the amount of waste which is disposed, and to deal creatively with problems of the future before they become critical. But action by government alone can never achieve the high quality environment we are seeking.

We must better understand how economic forces induce some forms of environmental degradation, and how we can create and change economic incentives to improve rather than degrade environmental quality. Economic incentives, such as the sulfur oxides charge and the lead tax, can create a strong impetus to reduce pollution levels. We must experiment with other economic incentives as a supplement to our regulatory efforts. Our goal must be to harness the powerful mechanisms of the marketplace, with its automatic incentives and restraints, to encourage improvement in the quality of life.

We must also recognize that the technological, regulatory, and economic measures we adopt to solve our environmental problems cannot succeed unless we enlist the active participation of the American people. Far beyond any legislative or administrative programs that may be suggested, the direct involvement of our citizens will be the critical test of whether we can indeed have the kind of environment we want for ourselves and for our children.

All across the country, our people are concerned about the environment--the quality of the air, of the water, of the open spaces that their children need. The question I hear everywhere is "What can I do?"

Fortunately, there is a great deal that each of us can do. The businessman in his every day decisions can take into account the effects on the environment of his alternatives and act in an environmentally responsible way. The housewife can make choices in the marketplace that will help discourage pollution. Young people can undertake projects in their schools and through other organizations to help build a better environment for their communities. Parents can work with the schools to help develop sound environmental teaching throughout our education system. Every community in the nation can encourage and promote concerned and responsible citizen involvement in environmental issues, an involvement which should be broadly representative of the life-styles and leadership of the community. Each of us can resolve to help keep his own neighborhood clean and attractive and to avoid careless, needless littering and polluting of his surroundings. These are examples of effective citizen participation; there are many others.

The building of a better environment will require in the long term a citizenry that is both deeply concerned and fully informed. Thus, I believe that our educational system, at all levels, has a critical role to play.

As our nation comes to grips with our environmental problems, we will find that difficult choices have to be made, that substantial costs have to be met, and that sacrifices have to be made. Environmental quality cannot be achieved cheaply or easily. But, I believe the American people are ready to do what is necessary.

This nation has met great challenges before. I believe we shall meet this challenge. I call upon all Americans to dedicate themselves during the decade of the seventies to the goal of restoring the environment and reclaiming the earth for ourselves and our posterity. And I invite all peoples everywhere to join us in this great endeavor. Together, we hold this good earth in trust. We must--and together we can--prove ourselves worthy of that trust.

RICHARD NIXON

The White House

February 8, 1971