Formal and informal advisory committees have long been used to furnish expert advice, ideas, and diverse opinions to the federal government.¹ Their utility depends upon the balance and institutional and financial ties of members, especially when their advice is rendered in confidence. For present purposes, "balance" can be defined as broadly representative of sectors of society interested in the subject matter of the committee. Problems of balanced representation of advisory committee viewpoints and interests and confidential communications are apt to be most acute in the environmental domain, for here industrial interests historically have dominated representation on committees.

Recognizing the difficulties inherent in unbalanced advisory committees, Congress conducted extensive hearings in 1970 and 1971² and finally enacted the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA),³ which, for the first time, required balanced advisory committee membership and insisted on public meetings. This Article describes and assesses the effectiveness of FACA as a means of ensuring balanced and accurate information supply from advisory committees.⁴