PAGENO="0001" ADEQUACY OF TECKNO4OGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 273 ~ample of the interrelated con~plexity of many of these problems. In solid wastes in general, one of ~he thmgs we are doing at the moment is :making a nationwide survey to reveal the magnitude, location, and ~composition of all major taili~igs dumps. From these we are getting samples which will be examin~d for mmeral values and for ways and means of disposing of the was$. One of the things we are t ing to do is grow vegetation on various types of waste. If we can't o any thing else, possibly we can turn Tthese piles from gray to gree . They will at least be a little better looking from the standpoint of ppearance. Summarizing, it is believed t at much scientific information is avail- able on environmental polluti n for application toward limiting the amount of air, water, and lan pollutants which are a byproduct of our industrial system. However, there is a great 1 ck of engineering technology for suc- cessful abatement of many of he pollutants without putting an eco- nomic strain on the industry a public in general. We believe that through c tmued research and development it ~wil be possible to solve the p oblems confronting the Nation effec- tively and economically. How ver, such solutions must balance public need against economic consider tions. In other words, the economists are telling us to use the pm ple of minimizing total cost. Total .cost includes both economic cos and social costs and the commitment ~of resources costs. If cleaner ir, water, and land is to be attained without disrupting the econom ,increased efforts by both industry :and Government will be requi The conversion of waste ma erials into useful products will help minimize these economic burden. The Bureau recognizes its respon- sibilities in many areas of poll tion abatement and will continue to work for technically and econo ically feasible solutions to the pollu- .tion problems in these areas wh~ h confront our Nation. Mr. DADDARIO. Thank you ye much. We have asked you a numbe of questions as we have gone along and you were extremely helpful us. Mr. Roush, do you have any f her questions? Mr. ROUSH. No further questio s. Mr. DADDARTO. Mr. Chairman? Chairman Mur~R. No, I only ant to congratulate Dr. Hibbard for his very fine statement. I think ~t pinpoints much of the gaps in our technology as all of the statern nts have so far, but I think that's why we are having these hearin s-to try to pinpoint some of these gapa I am conscious of the fact that~to do many of these things is going to be costly. Who should pay fo~ them? Shonld the general public pay for them in the price of an ~i.utomobile? Should we include an increment to take care of the old~ car when it is run off the highway and has to be cut up ~ I can see ~vhere industry would complain, but some place these problems have l~o be solved and somebody has got to pay for .them~ I think this i~ one of the things we have got to begin to take a look at. We are in~erest~1 in one phase of the problem, but the economics of the whole ~ystem must be given very serious consideration, too. Thank you. PAGENO="0002" 274 ADEQUACY O~? TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. DADDARIO. . Vivian. Mr. VIvIAN. I ave several questions regarding mine drainage. Does mine drain last more or less indefinitely? After mines open, how long will the d inage continue to run? For a hundred years? Dr. }1IBBARD. As ong as water is flowing through the area, yes. Our problem is not wit the mines operating today, but with the mines that have been aba oned and water has been flowing through them for 40 to 50 or more rs. Chairman MILLER In the old times, this water found itself into other systems. Wh t the mines have done is to break the pipe and tap it. The water coming out now and there is no way of stop- ping it. Dr. HIBBARD. And this is why the first approach was to seal the mine. Hopefully th seal would prevent the water from getting into or out of the mine, t in many cases the situation is sueh that it is impossible with curre tly known means todo this. Mr. VIVIAN. Eve surface of a hill in a sense, is an open mine. So, presumably nato has been absorbing mine drainage for thou- sands of years, hund ds of thousands of years, and I presume what happens is that you h ye an accentuated rate of chemical contamina- tions in deep mines. I that the problem? Mr. Pinu~. The es that give you problems are those above drainage. If a deep e below drainage gets filled with water, then the problem disappea . There are three elements that are required to make acid mine dra nage. Ore is the pyrite, one is water, and one is air. If any one o these is eliminated then acid mine drainage stops so, over a long te , exposed sulfur compounds have been washed away and it is only by g where you open fresh surfaces contain- ing sulfur compounds hat can come in contact with air and water that you have acid fo ing again. Mr. VIVIAN. Is it p rticularly prevalent in the open strip mines which I see so often in t Alleghany area.? Mr. PERRY. It occurs crc, too, but better methods of control have been developed for strip Ones than for underground mines. Dr. HIBBARD. In fact, with existing mine operations and anticipat- ing the problem, you can uently handle it as you go. Mr. VIVIAN. I would 1 ke to ask about the subject of auto fuels again. What actual improveime ts has the Bureau of Mines been able to make in the treatment of auto ust? Mr. Pinm~v. The Bu u's research has been financed principally by Public Health Servic. Our work has been to identify the vari- ables that affect the kin of products that come out. The product from an auto exhaust is a product of unburned hydrocarbons, stuff that comes through unch , partially burned hydrocarbons; and mixtures of these. The r~i.u's role has been to actually try to iden- tify the individual compo nds and their relationship to fuel composi- tion because this is varia le depending upon the way you process it and the crude you made it cm. When an enØne is ace crating, decelerating, or idling, the condi- tifon of the engine, type of engine, all of these things affect the nature of the waste product. r role has been generally to identify the facts related to this so th abatement devices could be devised. PAGENO="0003" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOL~GY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 275 Chairman Muiui~. Isn't it ~rne that the condition of the engine has a good deal to do with it? I can't be critical because I have driven some old cars myself, but eve y once in a while you see a car going down the street that has loose mgs and there is a cloud of gas behind it. I think if we could get ri of some of those things that pollution would be reduced a great deal A car with a poor engine in it isn't consuming its gas. I would g Less that it gives out as much pollution as maybe a dozen good cars w th tight engines, isn't that right? * Dr. HuBBARD. I think this i one of the problems with the current devices which are being put oi the 1968 cars. They require adjust- ments of the carburetor in soi e cases or the maintenance of the en- gine; and if the public lets som of these adjustments go by the board, the abatement devices will b a lot less effective than they might otherwise be. Mr. VIVIAN. On the subject f auto exhaust as I understand it, your principal involvement is an au dysis of the exhaust gas problem, not the development of new devic s. lEave you spent any funds in the Bureau on the development of i ew control devices? Mr. P~y. The only work~ hat the Bureau has done on this was some afterburner catalyst wor]. One of the ways to eliminate pollu- tion from this source is to taki the unburned hydrocarbons and par- tially burned hydrocarbons an burn them in the exhaust pipe where they are changed to carbon di xide and water. We did some early work for the Public Health S rvice with respect to use of catalytic afterburners and the testing o a number of devices. We have also worked on the development of atalysts that might be useful for this purpose, particularly ones whi h would be not sensitive to the lead in the fuel, which is the real pr ~lem with these catalysts. However, with the announcement that the automobile industry had found a solu- *tion to this problem, other than the use of exhaust devices, the interest in this problem dec]ined, altho gh I think it will step up again now. We have not been working on us for the last 2 or 3 years, but prior to that we did work on this prob~1em. Mr. DADDARTO. We have anot~her witness and even though we have a number of other questions, I ~iope we might be able to submit them to you and get your answers foi~ the record. Thank you ever so much, all three of you, for coming. (Additional questions and a~lswers for the record may be found in vol. II.) (The biographical statement and complete prepared statement of Dr. Walter R. Hibba,rd follows ~) BIoGRAPHIcAl. STATEMENT ON Da. WALTER R. HIBBARD, JR. Dr. Walter R. Hibbard, Lr., one ~xf the Nation's outstanding metallurgists, became Director of the Bureau of M~nes on December 1, 1965, following earlier successes as an educator, researchei~ and as an industry manager of scientific and engineering research. Born in Bridgeport, Connecticut, ~Lanuary 20, 1918, Dr. Hibbard was grad- uated from Wesleyan University, ~Eiddletown, Connecticut, and received a Doctor of Engineering Degree fron~ Yale University in 1942. Following his military service in World War II as $tn officer in the Navy Department's Bureau of Ships, he joined the Yale faculty ~s an Assistant Professor and later became Associate Professor. Dr. Hibbard's growing reputation i~i teaching and research attracted industry, and in 1951 the General Electric Company enlisted him for its Research and PAGENO="0004" 276 ADEQUACY OF ECU~OLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Schenectady, New York. There he progressed to the etallnrgy and Ceramics Research, which he held until lie service by President Johnson as Director of the fields as the plastic deformation of metals and the d its alloys, Dr. Hibbard won wide recognition from ies. In 1950 he received the Raymond Award of the ining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers. From s a director of the Institute and is now its President- tion, Dr. Hibbard belongs to the British Institute of k Academy of Sciences, and is a fellow of both the ts and Sciences and the American Association for the He is a member of the National Academy of Engi- mber of the Materials Advisory Board of the National is currently its Chairman. lected to many honorary and professional fraternities, ~, Sigma Xi, Alpha Chi Sigma, and Gamma Alpha. han 70 scientific papers and has been widely recognized the science of metallurgy. tave three children and reside in Rockville, Maryland. PREPARED STATEMENT OF R. W~rrza R. HIBBARD, Js., DIRECTOR, BuissAu OF Mixas, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR INTRODUCTION I am pleased to have techñologie problems fat pollution. According to rt approximately 130 millic which is released Into t] 85 million tons result fro including trucks, buses, 23 million tons of sulfur from the combustion of: -operations such as the m bile exhaust and sulfur the total amount of con bustion. Because the ant fuel combustion constitu ~efforts in air pollution a problems. The wide diss severe effects of air poll -public demand for mere these sources. Mining, mineral proces -conducted for the purpose useless substances. Addi after varying periods of the least costly methods industries contribute a la accumulate in a manner i -waste disposal problems mining and proceSsing wa -problem of considerable ~serions loss of natural r useful products. The tee -conserved Is a problem of i The contamination of abandoned mines is a pr ularly in the Appalachian -questionable value for md -the problems of acid mini ~the present time and must the opportunity to appear before you to discuss th~ ng the nation In Its efforts to abate environmental table estimates, the combustion of fossil fuels produces tons per year of contaminants, the larger portion of ~- atmosphere. Of these contaminants, approximately 1 the combustion of fuel in all form of transportation ailroa~ls, and airlines. It is estimated also that over dioxide are discharged into the atmosphere annually iels for heat and power purposes a-nd from industrial fallurgical processing of sulfide ores. Thus, automo- ioxide pollution produce approximately 83 percent of tminants emitted to the atmosphere from fuels corn- mobile engine and the sulfur dioxide from conventional the principal source of pollution to the atmosphere, itement have been largely concentrated on these two nination of information on the subject and increasingly Ltion in highly industrialized areas have resulted in ed efforts to eliminate or control the pollution from Ing and refining of mineral substances are processes of separating a usable product from the accompanying Eonally, many initially useful products become waste se. Normally, the useless products are discarded by a the interests of economy. Thus, the mineral-based ge part of the waste products that in some instances consistent with public interest and welfare. Because nd practices vary widely, the rapid accumulation of to and metal scrap has become a social and economic tagnitude. In many cases these wastes represent a sources unless methods are found to reconvert into nology by which mineral wastes of all types can be rimary importance to the Bureau of Mines. ir water supplies by drainage from both active and blem of national importance. Many streams, partic- region, have become unfit for most aquatic life and of istrial use. However, practical solutions for many of drainage are either unknown or of doubtful - value at wait future developments: Development Center in position of Manager of he was beckoned to pi Bureau of Mines. As an expert in sue] metallurgy of copper a: many professional socle American Institute of I 1957 to 1961 he served Elect for 1966. In add Metals and the New Y4 American Academy of ~ Advancement of Scienci -neering. He also is a m Academy of Science, and Dr. Hibba-rd has been including Phi Beta Kap He is the author of more as a major contributor t Dr. and Mrs. Hibbard PAGENO="0005" THE ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT WEDNESDAY, J~ULY 20, 1966 HOUSE OF REPRES~NTATIyES, CoMMITmi~ ON SCIENCE AND ASTEONAUTICS, SUpc0MMITTEE ON ScIENCE, RESEARCH, AND DEv~w~oP~NT, Wa~hinqto~t, D.C. The committee met, at 10:10 a.n~., pursuant to notice in room 2325, Raybu~n House Office Building, Washington, D.C., Hon. Emilio Q. Daddaj~io (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. ~ADDARIO. The meeting will come to order. The ~estimony which the subcommittee will hear during the next 4 weeks ~vill concern the adequacy of technology for the abatement of enviroi~menta1 pollution. The problem of pollution represents the other bide of the bright coin of American civilization. On one side we see the benefits of the application of science and technology in our standa$ of living, our national security, our economic growth, and our prestige, among nations. But, on the reverse of The coin we must recognize the unexpected and unwanted consequences of a technical soeiety1-such as urban problems, transportation complexities and most ir~iportantly, the threat to the quality of the environment. I bel~eve at the outset that the question is not one of either curtailing industi~ial and economic progress or suffering the decline of air, water, and la~id quality. It seems clear that we should not, and need not, settle ~or anything less thau wise usage of all our resources for the optim~m benefit of the economy and all our citizens. This means that the restoration and preservation of air and water are a logical adjunct to the building of cities, the providing of electric power and person~iJ transportation, and the development of agricultural a~nd manuf~cturing businesses. Sth~r consideration of the waste-products problem is a responsi- bility ~f us all, but it is not an issue which should be treated in an atmosphere of crisis where blame is placed or ill-considered remedies hastily~ enforced. These hearings are designed to make clear to the Cong$ss the technological problems of pollutiou abatement and re- search needs. It must be realized that any definition of pollution is relativ~ to the specific use among various contending needs of society, to whi~h a particular stream or area is dedicated. Quality criteria and standards permit meaningful goals and timetables t~ be estab- lished find new technology to be developed for pollution abatement, These 1~iearings are designed to anticipate the problems of the future. One thing that is clear is that we will have to emphasize greater reuse of our ~resources in the future. PAGENO="0006" .2 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLWTION ABATEMENT Much significant legislation for control of environmental pollution has been passed. I am pleased that we will hear this morning from the leaders who have drafted these pace-setting laws. What remains `to be seen is how political, economic, and technical institutions can ~organize themselves for an efficient and equitable response to this `public purpose. I am convinced that the community of scientists and ~engineers which has brought about the high level of our industry- ~based society will also be able to solve the problems of waste manage- ment. These solutions must be solidly based on fact or our goals and the timetables for meeting them will not be achieved. In many cases the technology is now available to abate pollution-~-- and should be used to do so.' In other cases, the devices and techniques are inadequate or far too costly and more research must be done. The subcommittee has had valuable counsel from the Research Manage- ment Advisory Panel which has studied this problem for some time. The panel has indicated that abatement of pollution is a crucial area for study by this subcommittee. Such consideration is consistent with the statement by Chairman George P. Miller 3 years ago that one of the primary objectives of this subcommittee is "The achievement of the most effective utilization of the scientific and engineering resources of the United States in the effort to accomplish national goals which affect the lives of all Americans." Such national goals as pollution abatement are properly comparable with goals in military security or space exploration. Science and technology are not, however, parceled out among these goals on an arbitrary basis. Rather, the goals are assigned an importance and a corresponding priority within the entire Federal program. Then, those goals which require a high degree of support by research and development are provided funds accordingly. The priority of the pollution abatement effort is rising as knowledge increases and apathy is replaced by a call for action. These hearings will indicate whether there is an adequate Federal effort, as well as privately financed re- search and development, now going into pollution abatement to assure the attainment of appropriate and desirable national goals. Significant to this point are the results of a survey of 1,000 partici- pants by the magazine Industrial Research in its July 1966 issue. To the question "Is the Federal Government spending too much on B. & D. for space?", 46 percent responded "Yes" and 47 percent re- sponded "No." To the question "Is the Federal Government spending too little on B. & D. for pollution?", 67 percent responded "Yes." A direct example of the need for new technology is found in the recent announcement by President Johnson on the control of air pollu- tion originating from Federal installations. The President said that the most difficult problem encountered in writing the order directing Government agencies to lead the way toward clean air, was the lack of an economically feasible technology for controlling the emissions of sulfur. Thus, there is evidence that the technology to achieve our objec- tives of environmental quality and waste management is not yet ade- quate. In these hearings we will hear from scientists and `engineers who are engaged `on a day-to-day basis with this problem. I might say that environmental pollution is no stranger to us in Connecticut. For example, our most valuable cash crop, tobacco, can PAGENO="0007" ADEQEJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 3 be severely damaged by ozone originating in automobile exhausts. Several ozone-resistant strains of tobacco have been developed. How- ever, even these varieties are not immune, and will be damaged if the concentration. of ozone in the air becomes too high. What technology is available to protect this crop, or to reduce the exhaust emissions, and with what cost effectiveness? Can further research bring some new imaginative solutions to this conflict of agri- culture and transportation values? These are typical of the ques- tions these hearings will explore. Further, I believe that pollution is just one example of the need which we have for greater insight into the undesirable side effects of manmade changes in our world. Dr. Jerome Wiesner, a member of the Advisory Panel has used the phrase "early warning system~" As the growing population of the world brings human society to every geographical area and as the world becomes more industrialized, the potential of mankind to create worldwide problems such as radio- active fallout, spread of persistent pesticides, and a carbon dioxide imbalance in the atmosphere, also increases. Our ability to study and to predict the effects of these vast ecological manipulations before* they threaten our well-being has become crucial. This is indeed a challenge worthy of the best of our scientists and as exciting as the conquest of space. We must replace emotional response, which comes all too quickly in environmental pollution issues, with facts. We must replace an atmosphere of crisis, which is a poor one for decisionmaking, with confidence in cause and affect relationships. We must do our utmost in developing new waste management methods and in removing bar- riers to their application. We must also help define the problems through the formulation of realistic standards by which we can judge our current situation, our progress, and our needs. It will then be possible for continued economic growth to be accompanied by a hig~i level of quality in the air, water, and soil. I'm pleased that to begin our hearings our first witness will be Congressman John A. Blatnik, of Minnesota, who is chairman of the Subcommittee on Rivers and Harbors, Committee on Public Works. Mr. Blatnik is an old friend of mine. I have watched very care- fully and supported the work he has done in this whole area of pollu- tion. Over the course of many years he has been the instigator of a tremendous amount of activity which has been helpful to many of our States. Mr. Blatnik, we are happy to have you here and we are anxious to have you be our leadoff witness. STATEMENT' OP CONGRESSMAN JOHN A. BLATNIK, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON RIVERS AND HARBORS, CO1\~MITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS Mr. BLATNIK. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. I'm very privileged indeed to appear before the committee on the subject area of particular special interest and concern to me `for some years. I am certainly honored to be the leadoff witness. .` Exactly PAGENO="0008" 4 ADEQUACY OF TEChNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT what that means, I don't know. The man I am sitting with, my col- league and dear friend for 20 years, Mr. Robert E. Jones from Ala- bama, I say for the public record here not because he is here, but by far `he knows more `about all aspects of water utilization and preservation. than any other Member of the (k)ngress. I have a very brief statement, Mr. Chairman, `and I ask unanimous. consent to be permitted to extend and revise it. I am not `an ength~eer,. but my tmdcrgradu~te background was chemistry and physics. My dreams years ago was to `be a biochemical researcher, I do have a very keen interest in this problem. Your opening statement was `as pertinent, and concise as I have heard. It is an insult to the testimony of what I hoped to be able to say, which is not nearly as complete as your statement. A greatly expended research and development effort is needed if we are to solve our water pollution problems in an effective and eco- nomical manner. Our `best efforts with the limited funds available have done very little more than to assess the magnitude of the prob-. 1cm and to demonstrate the harmful effects of pollution. I think now we have at least an awareness across the country on the part' of the. people and a better understanding of the technical people and sanitation engineers and o'ther hydra~ulic engineers on the need for more work in this complex and complicated field of pollution. I think one reason we are in this situation is merely through inadvertent neglect to water in its original relatively abundant form was taken for granted as much as we take air next to us for granted. Yet, if you are deprived of air for a few minutes, you are dead. You can live a little bit longer without water, but water is more essential than food and you can get along without food more than you can without water. Because we have this carryover, we think water is abundant. We don't realize that we have to do something about it. Too, in other areas where shortages have occurred whether it be in gasolines or pro- pellants, fibers, food, `you name it, you have always found a substitute or synthetic, but we find out now we cannot do anything with water. You can't find a substitute for it. You can't do anything with this water. You can't squeeze a drop of water out of a glass of water, because we tried. We have one-half of all the peat in the States in my area. You can have cheap power if you can burn it, but you can't squeeze water out of it. The main problem is riot that we can't do anything about it and that we shouldn't. We know that we should and can. The main problem we have now been stimulated to an effort and we are approaching that point now, stimu- lated to a point to exert an all-out effort. Any research requires an all-out effort if you apply human ingenuity long enough, `and that means you can solve the problem of thermonuclear energy. You will solve the problems of space, or auto service mechanisms, complicated and fantastic `alloys that didn't exist a few years ago, heat resistant alloys. All the matters of which you committee members are far more, familiar with than we are. In water, we are using processes today-they are mechanical im-. provemeuts or refinements of basic processes of water pollution abate- ment. I am talking of municipal facilities for human waste, primarily. They are merely mechanical improvements in refinery or basic technics used half a century ago. PAGENO="0009" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 5 It is incredible that we let that long a lag develop in this area. We have pumps that pump more water at a faster rate per minute, more cubic feet per minute. We have filters that will filter faster and per- haps a little better but basically it would be as though you have a refined kerosene light or refined gasoline nac~tor. We are already working on thermonuclear powered motors as you well know, uelng water and steam like the old Stanley Steamer. It i5 more efficient and smoother than the internal combustion engine Let me give an example of what I mean, not only a `need for concentrated effort, but. new concepts of the situation. You have to have brains working to develop new ideas. In the field of iron and mining-and I mention * it because I see my friend from Michigan, Mr. Vivian, here who knows the problem in the Tipper Peninsula of his State-we had the exhaus- tion of ores over the years and they run out of natural ores. That sort of broke up the monopoly that our part of the country had in the world, but we went to work a few years ago in tagoui'te. It as one of the hardest rocks that exists, harder than granite. As long as man has drilled holes into rock or made beads, he had to uSe the prin- ciple of a harder substance wearing down a relatively softer substance, and over the years we developed what is called the diamond `drill. It is the hardest drill known, and that was a great achievement, but here we use mining the diamond drill for 50 years and we got a hold of this tagonite and it will take a whole clay to drill a 2-foot hole. Ob- viously we are stuck. Technology, the best available engineerin technology up to that time, 10 years ago had us right against the wal. We had this unlimited amount, billions of tons of tagonite, and we couldn't `drill holes `to blast it. Suddenly people in the Midwest who have been working with oxy- gen trying to sell more oxygen and then they developed a kerosene burner, simple `cheap fuel, utilizing oxygen with three flames, similar to the old stip water sprinkler. Yo'u remember the old-we `do, the older members, the three prong water sprinkler that we had that would sprinkle the lawn. They rotate this and it melts the rock at the rate of 20 feet 1 hour. It didn't have to grind it. It melts it just as smooth and effidiently and cheaply as anything that has ever been done. And, more than that, they found out that the rock being very hot, the core being hot, the rock would fracture by itself, and steam * pressure blew it out and cleaned the hole out. That's a little example of what has happened to literally put the processing or manufacturing of iron `ore over the threshold of economic feasibility as well as the technical feasibility. So, that's the type of thing we ought to be doing in water pollution, research in so many many areas. To give you an idea of the level of research just in the pollution control `agency, I know there was research done by other agencies of the Government, about 16 or 22 of them. I think 5' years ago o'ur committee authorized $5 million a year for-Mr. Waggonner was one Of the early supporters in our program for research in different `aspects of pollution abate- ment, but the appropriations came about first a million and then two and three and gradually last year it reached approximately $5 million which is far too low. We are now aiming in the current legislation around $50 million, and that in itself would not be enough, but if we utilize the knowledge that has been developed by the other agencies, PAGENO="0010" 6 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT space, NASA is one, and research, going out and coordinate' it, other agencies on the Federal level, uiuversities and industries, we can more efficiently utilize the research `going on in other areas rather than duplhmting inadvertently. We have to encourage new ap- proaches, new ideas, consistent and persistent and concentrated attack on this whole problem. I want' to list very quickly some of the major problem areas. First, municipal wastes. That's what I had in mind when I said we haven't changed anything in the last half century. You have industrial wastes, including thermopollution. There is storm and combined sewer wastes. To show you what a frustrating problem this was, we have now I believe $20 million for demonstrations to help solve this enormbus problem and we can't find anyone that will even apply f or it. I~thiffk we have two applica- tions for demonstration grants. One minor one was finally granted~ It will cost roughly $2 million for the primarily larger cities to solve their storm and combined sewer wastes. There is also wastes from boats and ships, household or isolated small system wastes; animal feed lot wastes and drainage. There is agricultural runoff, acid mine drainage, silt from construc- tion projects, quality changes in impoundments, and accelerated anct natural eutrophication. We were at that lake between Nevada and California-what is it 9 Mr~ WAGGONNER. Tahoe. Mr. BLATNTK~ Tahoe, and I think Mr. Jones was there 8 years ago when a highway system, interstate, running north of it from Reno to Donner Pass. We drove around it and we were back early this- year at the invitation of the California Congressmen, and we were shocked at what was happening to one of the only two Nation's lakes, or Alpine lakes as sometimes called, in the North American Continent. Perhaps there are only three in the world. Already the algae is beginning to grow and in a few years this deep, ice-cold, blue lake will become a mass of green and, when all the oxygen is gone, it will come a stinking mass of brown. It is already starting like it is in the early stage, and if anyone told me 10 years ago that recently when we first started with water pollution controls on rivers and harbors that one of the five Great Lakes, one of the largest bodies of water in the world, would become a dead lake and it is more than that now, I would say you are crazy. It will cost us about a billion dollars t~ undo the work that has been done there. The same thing with the Hudson River. The Congressman from New York knows the problem pretty well. There is plenty of water, but not a~ drop to drink, It `has been fouled up so we have a tremen- dous great job to be done. It will require the coordinated joint effort in the Federal, State, local and industry. I know this sounds like nice words. It sounds like sort of a passing away. But, it has been done, I am saying. It has been done in the highway program, the' largest public works program ever undertaken in `the history of man- kind. Largest multibjllion-doiiar peacetime tax program ever sus- tain~d, ever adopted by Congress and supported by the citizens of America. Today we come up with a highway bill running into a couple billion dollars on the floor of the House, and it almost passes by unanimous PAGENO="0011" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 7 consent. It shows the people will s~ipport a program of magnitude running in the order of billions of dollars and that program can worked out in a joint effort as has been done in the highway program. You have got to concentrate-I am trying to summarize very quickly. One more new process. Carbon is a very effective filter and although very expensive, they are reducing the cost now. Carbon will filter gases and the scieiitists will appear next week to find out whether finely powdered coal will work. Some of the new ideas, such as carbon absorption, the use of coal for filtration and absorption, new coagulants, sludge disposal in strip mine areas, electrodialysis and reverse osmosis should be subjected to field study as rapidly as possible. The Federal Government, through Inte- rior, is subsidizing on a larger scale than before, and what works v~q well in the laboratory will not necessarily work too well in the field. The solution of water pollution problems will require not only the development of adequate techniques, but also their application. Re- search and development activities generally progress through a series of steps ranging from exploratory to laboratory research to field evaluation and demonstration. Field evaluation and demonstration studies require that new type facilities be constructed and operated under actual field conditions, which is generally very expensive. I am not advocating this particular process, but in short, here is someone suggesting or attempting a new type of idea, merely using plain pul- verized coal in which you have an abundance and it has an economic need as the Appalachian program showed. They can skim off the contaminated top layer of coal and burn it up in a furnace and generate power and steam so municipality or industry will get its money out of coal or the organic material absorbed. So, Mr. Chairman, with the fund of knowledge we have today there is no reason and no excuse for permitting what is an absolute necessity, the water in abundance for effective and efilcient reuse of what water we do have, as you stated in your very fine opening remarks. Here we have today more than 95 percent of all the scientists that ever lived in the history of mankind alive today, and I think my interest in medical chemistry, I believe I am correct in using these figures, 75 percent of all the prescriptions used to date were not in existence at the close of World War II, about 20 years ago. Talking about the volume of knowledge that is being found today, a new communication concerning chemistry is published somewhere in the world every minute, a report on physics every 3 minutes, and a report on medicine, biology, and electronics every 5 minutes. To give an idea of the rate information is being made available, I read recently that if a man started at the first of the year to read everything new in chemistry as it was published, by the end of the year he would be 1Q years behind. To show you the availability of this knowledge around tis and it can be done systematically and effectively, using all the knowledge found in these different agencies, so I strongly urge this inquiry. I hope and know it will be a productive one. I strongly urge support to both the basic science and research and to the applied research and demonstration programs in the field of environmental problems, more particularly to water pollution. PAGENO="0012" 8 ADEQUACY OF. TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT The problem can be licked and will be licked-remember in the high- way program they said we couldn't afford it-and the economic savings will be $5 million a year on the program which the Federal Govern- `ment is putting about $4 billion, plus saving about 10,000 lives each year on the highways. In the last 2 weekends on Christmas and New Years combined we killed mere American people on our. streets and highways and byways at home than were killed the whole previous year ~` Vietnam in the war. We have that type of slaughter in 2 weeks. In Vietnam we would be ready to drop the atom bomb, there `would `be such a furor. Yet it happens at home and you are lucky to get 3 `inches of `space on your newspaper. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the patience of the members putting up with me, and the chairman for giving me this time. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Blatnik, you have given us a very exciting and helpful statement. I `wonder if you might comment on your trip to Germany this year when you accompanied the Secretary of the Interior. `I am particularly interested in the way the technology development is funded. Mr. Bx~PNIK.' Mr. `Chairman, Mr. Jones made that trip; although I was asked to go along at that time with him, I couldn't. Mr. DADDARIO. I know Mr. Jones was on the trip and I thought you were too. Mr. BLATNIK. No; Icouldn't make it. Mr. DADDARI0. Fine. We will wait to hear from him. Mr. BLATNIK. You were working with desalination on arid areas which `is extremely important, but at the same time we also ought to be working in these arid areas where we have an abundance of gas and petroleum on burning, you know, human waste which can be done very effectively. All you will have left is steam and dry ash that goes up into the air and here we are working at great expense to get water through desalination which is important and needed, but to use that expensively produced water as merely a conveyance to `carry away human waste and then build other plants in addition to remove that waste doesn't make sense. Getting back to this idea for needs of new concepts and breaking away from the old stereotypes is another matter I would like to men- tion. Mr. Mosiren. Mr. Blatnik, did I understand you to say your com- mittee is asking for $50 million? Mr. BLATNIK. It is not that our committee is asking for it. It is legislation before us and also has been before the other body that calls for that amount of money. Mr. MOSHER. How would this be administered? Mr. BLATNIK. Through the water pollution administrator which is now in the Department `of Interior. Mr. M0SHER. Is the Congress likely to appropriate $50 million for this purpose? Mr. BLATNIK. I hope. Speaking only for myself, I shall urge it, and I think we have good enough case to support it. Mr. Mosmai. How much h~s that agency been using in the past? How much is it using this year? Mr. BLATNIK. Under $5 million. It was authorized about 5 years ago, but your appropriations were at a low level `beginning at a million, PAGENO="0013" ADEQtACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 9 approximately. I will get the correct figures, but we authorized $1,' $2,~ and $3 million, and finally last year built up to $5 million. Mr. MOSHER. And, you are asking for $50 million now? Mr. BLATNIR. Right. Mr. MO5HER. That would be a very significant increase. A lot of work could be done for that amount of money. Mr. BLATNIK. That is right. Mr. DADDARIO. We will be having Dr. Weinberger, who was Assist~ and Commissioner for Research and Development for that program before us on the 27th of July and we can go into that program with him. Mr. MOsHER. One other clarification, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Blatnik alluded to one of the Great Lakes which he said ~was dying. I assume he is referring to Lake Erie. Mr. BLATNIK. Yes, sir. Mr. MosnER. Lake Erie is in my domain, and somehow I shudder at the use of the word, "dying." I think that is a little exaggeration~ Nevertheless, it is a serious problem and what is going on there is very bad. You said there is a rough estimate `that it would cost a billiom dollars to reverse that process in Lake Erie. Can you give me a specific reference to that estimate? Mr. BLATNIK. Yes. It would involve-these are preliminary, sort of somewhat speculative, but fairly accurate in dredging the sludge out of the bottom and getting the gook in fluid to settle to the bottom.. The gook is settling and slowly moving up and that's why it is dying,. and no oxygen-fresh water being lighter like milk being over cream merely floats like a saucer floating maybe 50 or 60 feet deep. So, the fresh water goes down into the Niagara and Ontario and so on, but whereas this gook getting higher and higher, inching up and over a few years you will have a dead lake on your hands. The process is getting worse year by year. Mr. MOSHEIt. It is a very serious matter. Can you give me a specific reference to someone who has proposed this means of cleaning up the lake that you suggested? Mr. BLATNIK. Yes. Mr. MOSHER. I would like to get that. Mr. BLATNIK. Mr. Jones tells me there is a survey resolution per- haps before this subcommittee, the resolution itself calling for a study* of the problem. The study itself will cost $5 million. We will also get you the sort of preliminary information and judgment available now from the Corps of Engineers, and water pollution abatement people. Mr. MosnEn. I'm going to ask the committee staff to get this infor- mation for me. There are several studies going on already as you know. (Information separately provided to Mr. Mosher.) Mr. DADDARIO. Any further questions, gentlemen? Mr. WA000NNER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank and cou- gratulate Mr. Blatnik for being our leadoff witness this morning. We are talking specifically now about water pollution in which he~is more than well informed. I think he has set the stage for us to think in big terms about pollution abatement. `I don't think anybody claims that we have the adequate technology now for the pollution PAGENO="0014" 10 ADEQUACY OP TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT abatement in the area of water pollution or any other particular area~ I completely agree with him that there is no reason or excuse to accept the status quo if we are going to even think about today much less tomorrow. He has certainly done more than his part to awaken people to the perils of. all kinds of pollution. His committee has finally, I think, awakened the Congress to the needs of the country in water pollution. I just have one comment and that is that we in Ooi~gress and the people in the country have accepted Federal and joint programs wherein we can build water resource projects and. watershed projects, but we have not given the proper attention to these God-given streams and lakes that have been ours through the years. We are more interest~d in developing new projects than we are in pr~serving and maintaining for future generations those which have been with us all the while. So, I think that Mr. Blatnik has brought to this committee the kadership he has been~ exercising in his~ own committee through the years. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. The gentleman from Minnesota has touched upon quite a number of items, some of very great interest in my own district. Lake Erie borders my district. The "deadest" part of Lake Erie lies just off of the shores in my district. The comment you made that the layers of water below the surface of Lake Erie are growing increasingly stagnant, is most pertinent. When strong winds blow in from the east toward the beaches in my district, the beaches become littered with various and sundry forms of marine growth and sludge from the lower levels of the lake. Even on quiet days, the water is turbid. Along the beaches signs are posted year after year saying "Not safe for swimming." Now the question which I really ~ant to get to is what will it cost to clean this vast lake and its neighbors, and how can we reduce that cost by~~ intelligent actions now? According to an estimate made for me by competent persons from Federal agencies, it will cost approxi- mately $5 billion over the next 20 years to clean up Lake Erie. Part of these funds will be used for replacement of wornout sewage treat- ment facilities, and part for installation of new facilities. Extended to all the Great Lakes, the estimate was some $20 billion; extended to the entire Nation, the estimate rose to about $100 billion, an enormous sum. But, as you pointed out, that amount is comparable to the $40 billion we have spent on roads in the last decade, so the total cost and the rate are not at all unreasonable7 in terms of our capabilities. Now, let me ask, is there any evidence available to your committee that this great sum could be reduced to a more nominal figure by any research now in progress? Such as, for example, the research under- way on the powdered coal sewage treatment process? I understand that the optimistic proponents of this process expect to reduce the cost of treatment of sewer wastes to about half; conversely, detractors dispute that claim, and argue that little or no money will be saved. ~Mr. BLATNIK. That is the expected gain, and the laboratory model suggests that reduction would be correct, but to prove it out, you have to build what we call demonstration or semicommercial or pilot models, larger models. You have a continuous flow and much larger PAGENO="0015" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 11 scale, then you can refine your figures as to cost more accurately and quite often they are quite a bit different than what happens on a lab- oratory model. Also, it just won't work on that large scale. But, you have to get into that expensive effort to prove out because anything can be a mas- sive program. You can't build highways or do thermonuclear stuif or space program oii a small scale, so this too will be a billion dollar scale. Mr. VIVIAN. One, of the communities in my district is very deeply interested in this powdered coal process. They and I have had many, many tall~s with engineers on the subject. The savings expected seem to grow less as the conversions go on. But, I think it is pertinent to point out that, considering that the potential cost of the total program will be something like $100 billion over the next generation, even a 10-percent savings through improvement such as the coal process may offer, could save us $10 billion, an amount enormously greater~ than the amount we are talking about for research. Let me turn to another question. Many of us are aware that much of the water used in the United States are used simply for transportation. It is a convenient fluid in which to move various materials,, from paper pulp to human waste. In coastal areas, conceivably we could use ocean water for many such purposes, rather than wasting river water, Has your committee given any consideration to installing supplementary salt water distribution lines in coastal areas? Mr. BLATNIK. Yes. I believe Mr. Jones of Alabama, who will fol- low me, will discuss that subject. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Ryan? Mr. RYAN. I would like to join with my colleagues in commending Mr. Biatnik for his very splendid statement before the committee this morning and his great, experience and devotion to this cause. , lie is certainly one of the leaders in the country in this whole question of pollution abatement. I believe with Congressman Vivian and Con- gressman Waggonner that we must recognize that this is an area where we must pooi our resources if we are to meet with this problem.. Con- gressman Blatnik has been one bringing this to public attention over a period of time. Mr. BLATNIK. Thank you. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Conable? Mr. CONABLE. I would like to thank Mr. Blatnik, too. I would like to follow up on some of the implications of what Mr. Vivian asked. As I see it, we have two problems. One is the problem of developing techniques and the other is the problem of investing the money in the necessary capitaJ equipment to carry out and to exploit these tech- niques. Now, apparently your committee feels that we need a substantially increased outlay on research at this point in the development of new techniques. Is there an implication that we should go a little slower in investing in the pollution hardware so to speak, before we are sure that we hav~ arrived at the best techniques available? I feel the American people want something done now. PAGENO="0016" T2. ADEQUAC~r `OF T~CHNOLOG~ FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT They are concerned about pollution as its exists right now, and yet apparently we have been neglecting the scientific aspects of pollution control and thought in terms only of existing techniques. Now, what about the time table on this? What about the priorities. Do you have from your prospective as chairman of your subcommittee, any words of advice for us on this? Are we ready to go ahead with a massive expenditure on water pollu- tion or should we make our massive expenditures in research first? Mr. BLATNIK. It won't be quite that precise. It won't be like start- nig a race where you shoot a pistol and you are off to the race of a massive program. No. 1, you are spending on municipal waste alone about three-quarters of a billion dollars a year now on some Federal grants and primarily municipal grants, so you are already in the bil- lion dollar range now and the spending will continue if nothing is done by the way of further research. For instance, you don't hold back from buying new automobiles this year because 3 years from now a new jet-type automobile might come out. See, the need is there, and with more and more en- forcement on the State and certainly the Federal level, whatever means are available for pollution abatement will have to be put into use. They may not be the best but they are the best we have, so the cur- rent facilities will be continued right along. We hope to greatly accelerate research and better refined methods on the continuing program. Mr. DADuARTO. The point yon made earlier is that increased public awareness would allow us to use some of the techniques available to us now which are not being used. Mr. BtA~r~i~. That is right. Mr. DADDARTO. And, you go from there into more so~histicate&areas of researôh over a period of time. Any further. questions, gentlemen? Mr. Blatnik, thank you. We arc pleased you took the time to come. Mr. Jones? - Our next witness is Congressman Robert E. Jones, Jr., from Ala- bama, who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Natural Resources and Power of the Government Operations Conunittee.- He is well known to our committee because he represents the Hunts- ville area and therefore has been extremely close to us over the course of years. lie has been in Connecticut as chairman of the Subcommittee on Natural Resources and Power, holding hearings on o~cas1on, call- ing attention to the people of my State of the importance of natural resources and power. We in Connecticut, are' appreciative, Mr. Jones, of the work you have done in that area and the help you have been to us and to the entire country. I am sure that Mr. Roush, who was on that subcommittee, would like to say `something further. Mr. Rotisii. Mr. Chairman, I would like to join in welcoming one of my other subcommittee chairman to this committee and as a partici- pant in these hearings. I feel very fortunate to have had the oppor- tunity for several years now to serve under the leadershiplof our col- league from Alabama, Mr. Jones. Those years, for the most part, have been devoted to one of the subjects we are dealing with here today, PAGENO="0017" ADEQUACY OF TECIINOLOOt POE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 13 namely, the question of water pollution. Under Mr. Jones' leader-, ship we have held hearings all over the country~ in such locations aa Seattle, Austin, Chicago, Trenton, Hartford, Muscle Shoals, and here in Washington. On. Friday of this week we go to Rochester, Toledo, and then to Syracuse. I'm sure that this committee will benefit greatly from the experience that Mr. Jones has had a~ the chairman of the subcommittee on Natural Resources and Power of the House Com- mittee on Government Operations. He is wise and knowledgeable on this subject, and I am delighted that he has voluntarily appeared before this committee to testify today. Mr. DADDAEIO. Thank you, Mr. Roush. Mr. JONES. Thank you. Mr. DADDARLO. Mr. Jones; please proceed. STATE1~IE.NT OP CONGRESSMAN ROBERT E. JOl~ES~ JR., CIAIWT,~ SUB~OMMITTE~ ON NATURAL ItESOUROtES .ILND POW&R, (.+OV-~ ERNMRNT OPERATIONS COM1VIIT'TEE Mr. JONES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Roush and Mr. Blat-~ nik, I don't believe a word that you said, but I would have been terri~ bly disappointed had you not said it. It's a little bit refreshing, Mr. Roush, when you said invited to this committee; an invitation is a command, I'll assure you, sir. As the chairman `has stated as long as t[untsville is involved in the space program to the extent it i~, and I feel like probably this statement is `sufficient and I should take my leave because I see with the interrogation that is taken place, people like Mr. Roush who are far more knowledgeable than I, are going to put me to task. I was pleased particularly, Mr. Chairman to hear your opening statement because it was exciting, it was a challenge to the committee, the subcommittee in exploring every possible potential of research and technical advancement in the water pollution field. I am `delighted to be here today' to discuss some of the problems of water pollution control and abatement with particular emphasis on the vital role of research and development. Your subcommittee, Mr. `Chairman, is performing a signal service for the Nation through its study of the application of science and technology to the national program of water pollution control and abatement problem. You are getting at the heart of the critical prob- lem which we face. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Natural Resources and, Power, I have been in close totich with developments in the water pollution field. Our Nation today faces a water shortage-a shortage of usable,, clean water. Water pollution has become `the Nation's single most de~perate natural resources problem. ihis pollution threatens the public health, jeopardizes our water supplies, destroys aquatic life, sullies our environment. Almost' all of our major streams and rivers and lakes are suffering from increasing pollution. Many of our rivers and lakes today are nothing but wet deserts. There is abundant water present `but it supports almost no life. 68-240-66-vol. 1-2 PAGENO="0018" 14 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT The increasing pollution of our waters is costing us dearly-dearly in dollars and cents. The economic loss is incalculable. Each and all of us is affected by this enormous loss and cost. In recent years we have mounted a national campaign aimed at water pollution control and abatement. The Federal Government, in cooperation with State and local governments, has launcbed a broad program for the construction of treatment plants. Federal funds have been provided for research and development in pollution abatement. The overall program is commendable and certainly a step in the right direction. We have madeprogress. But, unfortunately, our pace remains too slow. We are not keeping up with the growth and the enormous demand. I sometimes think we are trying to win the race with a Model T. For example, millions of dollars are being spent to construct con- ventional treatment plants which do not do the whole job. It is well known that conventional waste treatment processes fail to eliminate at least 10 percent or more of the suspended solid wastes and other organic matter and also fail to remove metallic salts and certain other chemical pollutants. In, addition, I want you to remember this figure, 1,940 cities in the United States have oombined sewers which commingle sewage and storm waters and permit untreated sewage to bypass treatment plants and discharge directly into our watercourses. These sewers flush about 65 billion gallons of raw sewage annually into receiving waters. It would cost `Mr. Blatnik about $30 billion to eliminate combined sewers in the United States. For instance, we go to Rochester, Mr. Conable, in your area in that city alone it would cost half a billion dollars to correct the situation of a combined storage sewage which w~s built i.n about 1900. Fortunately, the seriousness of the combined sewer problem was recognized in the `Water Quality Act of 1965. The act established a 4-year program of research and development grants to demonstrate new or improved methods to eradicate the combined sewer problem. For `this purpose, Congress voted an annual appropriation of $20 mil- lion for fiscal years 1966 through 1969. The Government Operations Committee recently issued a report `entitled "Separating Storm and Sanitary Sewers in Urban Renewal." The report was based on a study by the Subcommittee on Natural Re- sources and Power. Recommendation No.2 of the repOrt'states as follows: The combined sewers demonstration grants program should be expanded and accelerated, and increased emphasis should be given, through both laboratory and field research and engineering studies, to develop improved methods of con- trolling pollution resulting from the existing t~ombined sewer systems. If we are to make real headway in pollution control and abatement, it is imperative that we step up this research and development program. The same is true with other aspects of pollution control and, abate- `ment. It is becoming increasingly clear that conventional waste treatment processes are not doing the job. New processes, then, must be evolved through accel~rated'research `and development programs. In recent years, water pollution control and abatement has become recognized as a worthy and desirable national objective. But it still PAGENO="0019" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 15 has too low a priority in our national planning. We should raise this priority. In the national planning and its implementation, I firmly believe that Industry should be given a larger role. Industry is responsible, in part, for the existence of the pollution problem. At the same~ time it has done much to eliminate pollution. Industry is close to the problem and is knowledgeable in the wa:ter pollution field. I believe it should expand research and development programs and I believe the Federal Government should support this expansion in dollars and cents and technical services. We are barely nble to keep pace with water pollution problems as they arise at the present level of effort. Certainly, there is need and justification for at least tripling our research and development to ~ontain the pollution problems at hand. We may have to increase our present efforts tenfold if we are to make significant advances toward a final solution. It is abundantly clear that new ideas, new approaches are required in the field of waste collection and treatment to keep level with popu- lation and industrial growth. And this is why the Federal Govern- `ment can no longer be niggardly in underwriting research and development programs. At the same time we must push ahead with our present programs, particularly in the fields of treatment plant construction and in the field of enforcement. We must continue to fight with the tools we have until we have better tools. For example, I have pointed out that it would cost some $30 billion to separate the Nation's combined sewers. Obviously we have a cost barrier here, because we can't accumulate $30 billiOn to eliminate them on a crash program. So we are calling upon the researchers and the technologists to come up with a new ap- proach to the problem while recommending a standby partial solu- tion-bar construction of combined sewers in urban renewal areas. Incidentally, in the Rochester area you had this enormous problem. It was relieved to some degree by the construction of impounding basins, retarding dams, to reduce flow at the time when the treatment plants could accommodate the excessive flow, but notwithstanding all that, the problems are still enormous and, of course, a city like Chicago would require over $2 billion to eliminate the problem, it would be impossible to get sufficient drainage catch basins; we could construct layers of gravity flow sufficiently to eradicate that problem. So in answer to your question, Mr. Vivian, the great economies that will be perfected in this, can be perfected by your committee of even encour- `aging research and development to reduce this $30 billion in research planning down to a nominal figure that can be dealt with by the com- bined efforts of industry, local governments, and the Federal effort. Over the long term, however, we must raise our standards for treat- ment of waste waters of all kinds and if we are to do so we must evolve new and more effective waste treatment processes. What is the point of removing organic materials from sewage and `leaving minerals and other nutrients (such as phosphates, nitrates) in the effluent-to nourish growth of algae and other offensive orga- uisms in receiving waters? W~ have been doing just part of this in ~our treatment job. PAGENO="0020" 16 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTI0~& ABATEMENT Then there is theproblem created by `industrial wastes Some of which contain toxic, materials dangerous to aquatic life and even to man. Other industrial waStes contain mineral `substances which compli-~ cate the sewage treatment process when discharged' into municipal. sewage systems. Others contain large quantities ~f organic sub- stances that deplete oxygen in `receiving waters. Industry discharges huge volumes of heated water which raises the temperature of the receiving waters and thereby frequently destroy all but the hardiest. of organisms. . ` In addition, there is the problem created by drainage of new syn- thetic pesticides and phosphate and nitrate fertilizers. Excessive sedi- mentation is still another, major problem. Let us not overlook the economic involvement in an accelerated~ pollution control and abatement program. This is an expensive pro- gram for all concerned. As efforts are expanded and water quality standards are made more stringent the program will become even more expensive. I believe, then, that government at `all levels and industry must now' turn to the scientist, the researcher, the engineer to devise more ef- fective and more economical methods' of pollution control . and. abatement. .` . Research and `development programs 1~ave contributed. significantly to the national war on water pollution. But if `we are to achieve a real breakthrough in this war, these programs must be substantially expanded without delay. Increased Federal support' `will be required'. and should be granted. Mr. Chairman and members of the `subcommittee, this problem we face today is real and it is earnest. It won't go' away if we ignore it.. We must come up with new, effective and economical processes of pol- lution control and abatement. Otherwise, we w~n't win this war to clean up the Nation's waters. `Your subcommittee is helping to fulfill a national need, by focus- ing attention on the `need for better technoio~ical a~proach for water pollution abatement. `~ am sure your' hearings will help to evolve new solutions and to"advance the national effort `iii: dealing with the vast tasks of reducing the mounting level ~f environmental pollution. Mr. DADDARIO. Thank you, Mr. Jones. Mr. Roush? Mr. Rou~n. That was `a very fine statement, Mr. Chairman, and I think you very clearly `summarized the problem. I can well recall my' immediate response when I was informed `by my chairman `that this committee was gthng into the problem of pOllution. I asked him the q~uestion; How many committees of this Congress ,are going to study' the question of pollution? I was concerned `that there would be an overlapping and a useless `effort on the part of this committee. Do' I gather from your statement, Mr. Jones,'that you feel the undertaking' by this committee can serve a useful purpose and that it will not `necessarily duplicate the efforts.of your committee? Mr. JONES. I don't think so at all.' `And,, a'~ I said earlier, Mr.. Roush, this is a much-wanted and desirable `approach by this commit- tee `and certainly' I don't sense that it will trespass upon the sovereignty' or aims or objectives of any other committee of the House~ PAGENO="0021" ADEQUACY O~. TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 17 Mr. ROUSH. I have received several impressions over these last 2 or 3 years in working with your. subcommittee. As we went through the country we wem dealing with the means of physically handling waste in the larger cities and industrial areas of the country, of financ- ing these problems and of administering the programs. We also dealt with the initiation of. new buildings and with new means and new fa- cilities for treatment `qf waste. But, I always came back with the thought that the basic need was to find new technological and scientific means of handling this problem. Do you have that same view? Mr. JONES. Yes, I do. As Mr. Blatnik pointed out,, the antiquated schemes that are now generally used throughout the country are so enormously expensive that it threatens the whole effort of reducing these pollution problems with increased population. So, to relieve the problem we must come up with cheaper schemes or methods of handling the problems that inevitably come up in pollution treatment works. Mr. ROUSH. I would `agree, and I believe our committee would agree that there certainly `is a ~ieed for enhancement of the research program insofar as p'ollution is concerned whether it be of air, water, or ground. But, another impression I had in working with your committee was that there was a' need for a greater exchange of scientific and tech- .nological information relating to the research which is being done by various agencies of the Government, by industry, and by the States and their universities `and colleges throughout the country. Would you agree that there is a need for :a systematic exchange of informa- tion which might make available this information to `all researchers? Mr. JONES. Well, we will miss our true aim if we don't bring into play and to consultation one with the other, the various research pro- grams that are undertaken either by industry or by the local govern- ments or at every stage of research. There should be this interchange and understanding to avoid duplications and excessive cost in research programs. Mr. ROUSH. Another impression I had was that there was a need. to assess or evaluate the effectiveness `of our present programs as we prepare to finance them. Would you comment on that? Mr. JoNES. Would you state that again? Mr. RotrsH. Yes.' I had the impression that there `is `a need to `assess the effectiveness of our present research programs `and then relate that to the allocation of funds. Mr. JONES. Yes. Mr. RocrsH. In other words, I felt that tIn some areas we were per- haps spending too much money on an ineffective program while in another area we were not spending enough on a program which held greater promise. There has not been an effective evaluation of the programs we have underway insofar as research is concerned? Mr. JONES. That's true. I think Mr. Biatnik, in answering Mr. conable, went to the heart of that pcint, and. that is, that given pri- orities, it is very difficult to do, but I can think of one set of circum- stances. Take the acid mine drainage problem, which is `an enormous problem. It has been under study since 1933. We don't have the solution to it now. The cost of dealing in `that area alone would re- quire billions of dollars, so I think there are other aspects of the prob- PAGENO="0022" 18 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTiON AUATEMENT lern that are more acute ~nd more susceptibte of dealing with ancl finding better results than that'program. Mr. ROUSH. That's all the time for me, Mr. Chairman. I don't want to take any more time. Mr. DADDARIO. Following through on Mr. Roush's line of question- ing, Mr. Jones, one of the keys to this whole problem as I understand it from both you and Mr. Blatnik is that we raise the priorities of this~ effort in relation to other programs. And, if we do raise the pri- orities, we will have a better understanding of what needs to be done and there will be a greater transfer of infonnation and understanding of the problem. Mr. JoNEs. Yes, and the accumulation of `the information as to whop is doing what. Mr. DADDARTO. If we intensify our effort, it would help increase information transfer and public understanding. Mr. JONES. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Mosher? Mr. MOSHER. Mr. Chairman, we have been talking about inadequate technology today. Mr. Jones, from your vast experience and study in this field, do you feel that we have inadequate political arrange- ments to do the job? Mr. JONES. I'll give you an example. There is political inade- quacies because the State of New York on your Commission is to give the municipality, the city of Rochester, for instance, notice that it wasn't given the chlorination for 16 hours a day. The city of New York did not give the city of Rochester a cease and desist for 16-hour operation, but should have been in operation 24 hours a day. Then it was disclosed that the State of New York, in failing to give that notice to the city of Rochester, yet cited the city of Rochester that they were in noncompliance with the State orders. So, I mean these are political problems, in that sense. Mr. MOSHER. Let's talk about the Lake Erie area again,' for a moment. Very obviously, to `do the job in Lake Erie will require mobilizing' many political constituencies on a local, State, county, and interna- tional level. It seems to me there definitely is a need for greater in- terstate cooperation along with the help of the United States and the Canadian Governments. Have you had any new insights as to political compacts, interstate compacts or arrangements that might be used here? Do you think there is a need for new ideas? Mr, JONES. Well, I direct your examination to title I of the Flood' `Control Act of last year which set out the New England States, in particular, from the Potomac River north, as to make interchange of water from basin to basin, The only effeefive interstate cnmpa~t in the United States of which the compacting States contribute any sub- stantial amount of water is the Delaware Commission. If we `could develop and exchange a surplus streamfiow in the north-- em part of the outreaches of the Potomac River and make that water' deposit into the reservoir for the city of New York, then that would be a commendable `approach. We are going to have to do that whether we like it or not, `and it is expensive. But the streams peculiar to your PAGENO="0023" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 19 area are very small streams to commence with. They have a short dis- tance of flow and consequently you must be very careful in comnutting yourself to the extensive use that is required in the streams in the New England area. So, that gave it an opportunity to make an exchange provided, of course, that one stream was not given an advantage m the area where the ~water is being withdrawn in the exchange. Mr. M0SHER. Mr. Chairman, could I ask one more question? Mr. DADDARTO. Yes. Mr. M05HER. You referred to appropriations over a 2-year period at the rate of $20 million per year for demonstration projects. Did I understand you to suggest that there is a need to expand and accelerate that program? Mr. JONES. Yes. Mr. MosnEn. Did I understand Mr. Blatnik to say that some of this money is going begging-that there are few takers? Mr. JoNES. He is talking about a different program. He is not talking about the sewage mining demonstration program. Mr. MOSIIER. I thought Mr. Blatnik was talking about that. Mr. BLATNIK. Mr. Chairman, I will check on that. Mr. Jones is more up to date than I am, but as I recall as of 2~ months ago I believe only about three or four applications were before this J?articular agency and the other agencies that work on grants to municipalities for the combined storm sewer demonstration projects, and only one was granted. Mr. JONES. One was granted to the city of Milwaukee. The reason there was a delay in making those grants is, under the reorganization plan transferring the authority from HEW to the Department of the Interior, it required a time delay; so, therefore, administratively they couldn't have undertaken it at an earlier date anyhow. Mr. MOSHER. So, you don't fe~l this money is going to go begging? Mr. JoNES. No, sir. Mr. MOSHER. And, you feel that it warrants expansion? Mr. JONES. Yes, sir. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Waggonner? Mr. WA000NNER. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague from Alabama for highlighting the common interest in this area between Minnesota and Alabama and I doubt that any areas inbetween feel differently. Mr. Jones has demonstrated through the years his profound in- terest and knowledge of the needs of pollution abatement. I want to comment on one phase of his testimony this morning which certainly speaks for itself, and that is, his stated desire and interest in bringing `busmess into the picture to an extent greater than they participate today. I think he is exactly right, and I think this illustrates the point of concern which Mr. Roush expressed earlier. I think Mr. Roush's concern with the overlapping jurisdictions and duplication among the congressional committees is well placed,' but in this par- ticular instance I think he himself realizes that it is natural that a number of coimnittees should have an interest in pollution abatement. And, certainly this does involve many different interests. The Public Works Committee naturally is involved. The Government Opera- tions Committee which Mr. Jones represents this morning, is naturally PAGENO="0024" 20 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT involved, and the Ways~ and Means Committee~ represented by Mr. Vanik who is to appear nest, is also involved. It would appear to me that if industry istobe involved to a greater extent than before in order 1o utilize their technology and ability to do something about pollu- tion, we have to utilize the Ways an4 Means Committee to give these people something in the way of tax incentives to help accomplish our desired goals. Mr. JONES. There has been several bills introduced, Mr. Waggon- ner, going to that point. The subc9mmittee of which Mr. Roush and I served on have issued a report very recently on the desirability of the Governors of the States to receive tax reduction incentives. Mr. WA000NNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. DADThARIO. Mr. Conable 9 Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Chairman, you mentioned the figure of $30 bil- lion to eliminate joint sewage, and that it would cost the city of Rochester a half billion dollars to do that, and Chicago $2.3 `billion. Is there a pattern in the country as to the areas `which are particularly bad in this respect? Is it the Northeast generally because `the cities are older? Mr. JONES. In the older parts of the city, in the tremendous metro- politan areas of all, almost all of the cities in the eastern part of the United States. Mr. CONABIJE. Is there any part of the country that is creating new situations of this sort? Mr. JONES. No; I referred to the report we made. The Urban Renewal Administration was to give a grant to the city of Cleveland for the construction of a joint sewage and drainage so we interceded and as a result of our contention, the Department will now not make any loans to any city or grants for that purpose. They must be separate. Mr. CONABLE. Are there any pilot projects for the disposal of human waste other than those which use water as an agent? Mr. JONES. Well, there's lot of thought being given. Mr. ROUSH. You will recall the system used in Chicago where a burning process is employed. It is not a pilot project~ but their actual means of disposal. Mr. JONES. They have spent in the city of Chicago approximately $5 million on a process that they thought `they could produce gases and thereby with the solid waste or sludge, `burn the sludge all up and they wouldn't have the problem of sludge, because to accommodate the movement of sludge to the pits requires 80 cars a day to haul the ~sludge out and, of course, the city has to acquire additional land to deposit the sludge in a place where it wouldn't be odorous or offensive or a health hazard. But, unfortunately that has not worked out. T'here's other thoughts being given, trying to divide the solid waste. And, in Germany they have attempted the same type of operation. The city of Milwaukee followed the pattern of Sheffield, England, in making a fertilizer-the common trade name is Millnit&-with some degree of success, bu't iione of them so far have reached the expectations of the originators. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Brown? Mr. BROWN. No questions. PAGENO="0025" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 21 Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. I have several questions. I mentioned earlier the possible use in cities of multiple water dis- tribution networks, one say very pure water, and a second say ocean water. The ocean water could be used for cooling lair conditioners and flushing wastes. Has this proved to be economic? Mr. JONEs. No; it is too expensive to build separate distribution sys- tems and to reduce the type of water you refer to in your question of Mr. Blatnik, say in the New York area. You can't locate a sufficient quantity of brackish water or water with a low salt contei~t to make it inexpensive to operate. I have seen statements to the effect that it could be done, but I can't for the life of me conceive of the most ad- vanced type of operation such as we have in North Carolina and Texas could be located in the New York area with the high power costs that New York has, that a cost structure would justify that. Mr. VIvL&N. Some manufacturers object to the use of saline water for cooling purposes or flushing purposes because the pipes and tubes used in their plants or air conditioners would erode very quickly. Con- ceivably new technology could provide protection against erosion and. save some of that cost. Mr. JONES. Well, that's one of the problems that you create rather than resolve by getting a multiple type of operation. Where the savings are going to come about is to get combined systems and to make those combined systems both in the pollution and the distribution of water through an area development type program. Mr. VIVIAN. I would like to relate an example of the problem of combined sewage overflows that you just mentioned. Detroit has this problem. On days when the rain comes down heavily for a short period of time, the total Detroit sewage treatment plant is effectively put out of operation by the great flow of water through the plant, and the sewage from the city goes right into the river. Mr. JONES. They built that to take care of 21/3 of the normal stream- flow of the expected capacity in the year 1912. Now, when ~OU build all these parking lots, these apartment build- ings, and pave all the streets and sidewalks, then you get about six or seven times the amount of water which were constructed to accom- modate that. Mr. VIVIAN. I would like to remind the committee of a fact, Mr. Jones, that you well know, that this overflow problem doesn't bother Detroit very much because the overflow goes right down the river away from the city. However, it does bother my constituents, for the overflow ends up off my district shortly after. To turn to another question, I wanted to point out that costs of many types can be saved by even moderate improvements of pollution treatment systems., In my district, the Corps of Engineers is con- sidering proposing damming up of the headwaters of one* of the rivers to provide a water storage reservoir to control waterfiow in the river, to maintain a high waterfiow in the fall as well as the spring. The sewage treatment plants now along the river release sufficient effluent to cause troublesome pollution in the fall, during low water- flow, though not in the spring. Now, if we could raise the efficiency of those sewage treatment plants from say 92 percent to 96 percent, we might not have to build PAGENO="0026" 22 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT the very large storage reservoir facilities, which inundate a very large amount of land. Mr. JoNEs. I don't think yOU are going to get any kind of system, secondary, primary, or otherwise, that will get better than 95 percent. Mr. VIVIAN. You feel there is no hope of going in that direction? Mr. JONES. At the present time one of the purposes of this hearing today is to try to find out how we can get a hundred percent efficiency because these waters-for instance, take Cincinnati, Ohio. In the low-flow period where you normally accommodate 200,000 cubic feet per second, the water is being used as much as six times, so you are going to have to have these treatment plants, both in the heavy indus- trial section of the Ohio River, the Monongahela, and' the streams in the West Virginia area which has its confluence below on the Ohio, as to have a general pattern of stream abatement not only to make water available for use six times, but as much as nine times as you have in the Connecticut River. Mr. VIVIAN. The State of Michigan recently passed a tax benefit for firms that install pollution abatement equipment. I wonder if there is any uniformity of action on this approach across the country. Mr. JONES. No. Mr. VIvIAN. Has any model law been suggested or recommended? Mr. JONES. No. The only study I know is made by our subcommit- tee of Government Operations which I discussed with Mr. Waggotiner earlier. I will be glad to make available to you-and they have had wide distribution-but I don't think there is a general consensus of the Governors of the respective States how to go about it. Nor is there a demand of industry generally that I know anything about for such an arrangement. The industrial groups that came before our subcommittee last week and the Committee of Public Works did not seek that approach. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Ryan? Mr, RYAN. Mr. Chairman, I simply would like to thank Congress- man Jones for joining us this morning and sharing his vast knowledge of this subject with us. I'm sure the subcommittee will certainly bene- fit by your views and the expression of them this morning, Mr. Jones. I think you have shown us, as you have demonstrated in your service in Congress, that you have a great national outlook on this problem. I think this is one of the great. assets which you bring to the Congress, and which is reflected in the work of your subcommittee. I was interested in your statement about the failure of the State `of New York to provide advance notice to the city of Rochester. Could you elaborate on that? Was it made in a report of the Monroe County Grand Jury in December of 1965, which was reporting on the pollution investigation? Mr. Joi~s. Yes. Mr. RYAN. Well, we will follow it up from there. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Jones, I want to thank you. Mr. JONES. I would like to add one thought, Mr. Chairman. The question that has been discussed about Lake Erie and its enormous problem. Of course, Lake Erie has more natural pollution than any of the other lakes. The suggestion of those who advocate the expendi- tures of some billion. dollars for dredging, bar removals, and to cor- PAGENO="0027" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR rOLLUTION ABATEMENT 23 `rect the natural contaminants, I think real thought is going to have to be given to that. Since it is an international lake and body of water, considerable thought should be given to the acquiring the amount of water now flowing into Hudson Bay and St. James River. You have approximately 400,000 cubic feet per second. It flows in an area that is uninhabited. It is of no use to the area into which it flows. It has hydro potential that could `supply enough hydro to provide pumping stations to make sizable discharges in the Great Lakes which would, in the thoughts of some of the experts, remedy the Lake Erie situation more than any other scheme that could be employed, and I think it is worthwhile. Mr. VIVIAN. I am glad that your committee is interested in studying this subject and encouraging action on it. I hope you will include the study of what are known as the Grand and NAWAPA plans. Mr. JoNES. That aspect of the problem will be studied. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Jones, thank you. Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity of visit- ing you today. Mr. DADDARIO. This has been an excellent contribution and we are grateful to you. Our next witness `is Congressman Charles A. Vanik of Ohio. Mr. Vanik is a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Com- mittee and he comes from the same State as Mr. Mosher, although they happen to be in opposite camps. STATEMENT OP CONGRESSMAN CHARLES A. VANIK, COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS Mr. VANIK. Mr. Chairman, first of all I want to take this opportu- nity for thanking your committee for its great interest and gruve con- cern on air and water pollution abatement and technology. Your inquiry into the technology of pollution abatement rounds out the spectrum of what should be the Federal interest in the total problem of water pollution and air pollution. I am, of course, gratified with the progress of the water pollution control legislation under the leadership of my distinguished colleague, Congressman John A. Blatnik, chairman of the Subcommittee on Riv- ers and Harbors, Committee on Public Works. The work of the Sub- committee on Natural Resources and Power of the Government Opera- tions Committee, headed by my distinguished colleague, the Honorable Robert E. Jones, has made a very valuable contribution in `focusing ~ittention on the failure of the Federal Government to utilize its vast powers of regulation to bring about effective pollution control. My distinguished colleague~ Hon. John D. Dingell, as chairman of the Sub- committee on Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation, has focused na- tional attention on the destruction of our vital fish and wildlife re- sources through the damage of water pollution. Now, while all of these efforts are contributing immeasurably to the `solution of the water and air pollution problem, I join those who fear that the gap in pollution abatement technology constitutes one of the most critical problem's confronting our Nation. While we have made astonishingly technological gains in all fields, it seems as though we PAGENO="0028" 24 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT have made oniy minute, token advances in the technology of water pollution control and air pollution control. I live in a community which faces the problems of water pollution and air pollution in almost incredible concentrations. You have many times heard of the progressive, deterioration of Lake Erie which is. rapidly becoming a useless, dead water sea. Probably no city in Amer- ica `faces so critical a problem of air pollutioii as does, Cleveland, where the steel and petrochemical industries generate life and property de-. stroying pollution in a valley situated right in the `heart of the city.' The smokestacks which pour the polluted gases rise above the valley so that they pour their affluents at almost the same altitude as the adjoin- ing residential area. Year after year during the past 30 years of my recollection on this subject, there have been promises after promises that, the next year would be better. That the pollution of the lake would somehow be curtailed and that new devices would be controlling the pollution of the air. Three decades of fraud on this subject have almost convinced our people that relief will probably never come. Those who can afford it move away from the pollution of the air. Those who can afford it utilize other waters than Lake Erie for recrea- tion. Those who cannot afford it remain trapped in an atmosphere of polluted air along the shores of the lake which will soon have no more utilitarian value than providing a sunset v'iew in the early summer. The pollution of the water of Lake Erie is chargeable to ineffective or absence of water treatment by industrial users and to inadequate and sometimes `absence of treatment on the part o~ `public users. The pollution damage to our waters is therefore divisible; the responsibil- ity for pollution of our air, except for motor vehicle emission, is not divisible. `The muriatic acid which etches the windows of Cleveland homes can only have its origin in the steelmaking process. The graphite dust which `settles over vast residential areas during the quiet of the night can only come from industries which push it into the at- mosphere under great pressure. The yellow iron oxide dust which blankets large areas of the city with certain changes of the wind can only have its origin from industrial operations. The present programs of water pollution control will be helpful but will not provide the critical solutions to the water pollution problems of Lake Erie and the Great Lakes. The technology of water pollution control by industry in the Ohio River Valley and `the ether great river valleys of America is vastly and critically different from `the `crude and elementary technological processes in water pollution control utilized on the `Great Lakes. The downstream users of the Ohio Valley would not countenance for 1 hour the affluents of the steelmaking industry on Lake Erie' and Lake Michigan. As a matter of fact, until very recently there were prac- tically no efforts to clear up industrial waste water in the Great Lakes Basin. If we were to compare the steelmaking industry in the Great Lakes areas with the comparable steel industries in the Mahoning' and Ohio River Valley, we would find that the Great Lakes steelmaking indus- tries do not utilize any visible devices for the removal of mill scale, oil and grease, and that the Great Lakes steelmaking industries pro- PAGENO="0029" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 25 vide practically no treatment of spent pickling solutions and rinse water developed in the steelmakin.g process. The steel industries almost universally use these processes for water pollution control except where the steel industry is located on the Great Lakes or on the waters of rivers or bays that flow directly into the ocean. It is my hope that somehow or another Federal interest would center upon the technology of controlling industrial pollution of the air and of the water. For example, a steel mill wherever situated uses water in much the same way and discharges substantially the same kind of pollution into the air. Therefore, the treatment of water after use by a steel mill and the control of the pollution of the air by a steel mill `should be substantially the same whatever the water source and wherever a steel mill is situated. The same principle could be applied to various petrochemical industries. Standards for the abatement of air pollution and for the industrial use of water on an industry-by-industry basis would create a tiniform, nationwide ap- proach to the problem. No other industry in any particular place would be singled out for overhead expenses in air and water pollution control, not undertaken or experienced by its competitor. With the utilization of the same technology, no one plant would have a `competitive advantage over its counterpart in the same industry with respect to pollution con- trol devices. There are astonishingly different methods utilized for the treatment of water in the steel industry. For example, there are different approaches to the treatment of the so-called pickle liquors which are discharged in the steelmaking process. The Inland Steel Corp. of East Chicago md., proposes to solve this problem by draining off the spent acids into a 4,300-foot-deep well designed to dispose of 432,000 gallons per day of pickle liquors, the prime pollutant in the steel manufacturing process. On completion of the well, waste acids will be pumped into a 1,880-foot-thick stratum of porous sandstone called the Eau Clair and Mount Simon formations. Initially, 115,000 gallons a day, about 95 percent of the total now generated, will flow down the well. The balance will be used in the plant for other purposes. The Armco Steel Co. at its Ashland, Ky., plant utilizes giant clan- fiers to remove mill scale and employs a hydrochloric acid regenera- tion plant to eliminate spent picklino' solutions into the Ohio River. At Butler, Pa., the Armco Steel ~o. treats all pickle liquor with lime to make an iron hydroxido solution whióh is pumped into settling lagoons for permanent storage. In Cleveland, the Republic Steel Corp. plans the disposal of pickle liquor through the installation of a regeneration plant which would permit the reclamation and reuse of the spent acid. There is also a process known as the Du Pont process in which the waste sulfuric pickle liquor is neutralized with lime to produce mag- netic iron oxide, gypsum particles, and neutral water.' Both of the resulting solid materials may have byproduct value or, at `least, can be used for land fill. This is reported to be a reliable continuous pro- cess designed to operate in low-cost steel `equipment with minimum operator attention. PAGENO="0030" 26 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT And, it has just come to my attention that in Japan, the Kawasakii Steel Corp. of Tokyo has successfully completed another process aimed at economically meeting the problem of discharged pickling liquor from rolling mills. The Kawasaki process n~utralizes the wastes by ammonia gas anclL converts them into marketable byproducts of ammonium sulphate and magnetite iron oxide. The shocking fact is that no responsible Federal authority is cur- rently evaluating the efficiency of any of these alternate methods to determine whether they meet acceptable standards. In the case of the Republic Steel Corp. of my city we will have to wait until 1969' before the plant is in operation. Under these circumstances, the various steel producers are follow- ing different procedures in the treatment of pickle liquor developed in the steelmaking process. Certainly one of these processes is superior to the others, providing higher quality water after treatment. It is very likely one or more of these treatment methods is completely in- adequate and highly inefficient, returning semitreated water to our water systems. Is it prudent to permit the~ construction of costly sys- tems by private industry which may prove unsatisfactory? It seems to me that authority should be vested with an appropriate' staff in the Division of Air Pollution, Department of Health, Edu- cation, and Welfare, to study the various procedures for the abate- ment of air pollution for each specific industry and distinguish be. tween those which are acceptable and those which are not. It seems to me that authority should be vested with an appropriate' staff in the Division of Water Pollution Control of the Interior De- partment to study the various treatment procedures for each specific industry and recommend which are acceptable and which are not. The State and local communities are completely unequipped to make such a determination. These industries engage in interstate com- merce and fall clearly within the spectrum of Federal study and determination. In order to bring relief to the industrial communities of America. which live under almost intolerable conditions of water and air pol- lution, I hope that the technology for pollution abatement can be dramatically accelerated. In this connection, I will strive, as a mem- ber of the House Ways and Mean$ Cothmittee, to bring about tax incentives for the development of proper pollution control devices and procedures. As a matter of fact, accelerated depreciation for the construction of air and water pollution control devices should be contingent upon the approval by either the Water Pollution Control Division of the Department of the Interior or the Air Pollution Con- trol Division of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.. The tax writeoff should be granted only in those cases where a cer- `tificate of approval has been obtained to insure that the pollution control device will meet the requirements of the situation and that the extent of the expenditures designated for accelerated deprecia- tion will be limited to `that portion of the expense to industries which are directed toward the control of pollution. As long as the possibility of accelerated depreciation remains un- solved, my fear is that the industries will put off making large-scale PAGENO="0031" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 27 expenditures, which are necessary. For these reasons, I am urging my committee to proceed i~ito immediate hearings on this issue and either decide the question one way or another, either indicate that it is something we can consider this year or something that we can consider next year or provide at least a promise that any legislation *that can be drafted might have a retroactive effect so that it can urge and certainly stimulate industry to move forward at once. The Treasury effect, resulting from pollution control accelerated depreciation credits, would not be substantial for at least several years. But, the legislation would spearhead a pollution control pro- gram not otherwise probable. In the meanwhile, it is my hope that your committee will provide some effective machinery to develop and to judge air and water pol- lution control devices and procedures on a sound basis so that our Nation can overcome the critically technological gap in the science of waste control. Mr., DADDARIO. Mr. Vanik, that is an excellent statement. I'm en- couraged by the testimony given by Members of Congress who have appeared here today because it shows, without question, that people on important committees have a great deal of concern, have put their minds to the problem and have many suggestions as to what needs to be done. You have recognized that higher priorities must be de~ veloped, and the fact that you are taking such a leadership in tl~e Ways and Means Committee so that there can be -these incentives is extremely important. We have not had an opportunity to study, in great detail, such tax credits or incentives and their effects in other countries, but Canada has a particularly good system in which they give a tax credit when increased activity in pollution abatement can be shown over the years. Industries are given credits for any increaSes and this stimulant is extremely helpful. There is no question that this kind of legislation acts as an incentive to industry~ to increase its activity in the field of pollution abatement. - Your idea of giving each industry special consideration so that they can be understood and so that one industry does not have a competitive advantage over another is something that is- certainly-worth looking into, and I commend you for having given so much thought to this important aspect of pollution. It is very helpful. Mr. Mosher? Mr. MOSHER. Mr. Chairman, my Ohio colleague is very articulate. I expected from him a very stimulating and provocative statement, and that's what we got. I congratulate him. - - Mr. VANIK. I think you have a bill, do&t you have a tax credit bill inthefile? - Mr. Mosm~R. I hope that one of the important results of these hear- ings will be to demonstrate the advisability of- Federal tax incentives such as you suggest. I hope that- the hearings -in this committee will provide an even stronger basis for the fight you are making, and expect to make in your committee for that type of legislation. Mr. ROUSH. I have no questions. - Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Vanik, I was particularly interested in your com- ments proposing industry by industry effluent standards. I think it PAGENO="0032" 28 AD~QUACY OF TECH~NOL0GY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMEN~ is quite important that the standards be set industry by industry for the following reasons. We have in my district in the city of Monroe, bordering on Lake Erie a number of papermills. Second after sec- ond, they pour volumes of what can best be labeled as "goop" into the local waters which flow into the lake. The papermills do have fadil~ ities for cleaning the effluent from the mills. Now when the officials of the mills know I'm about to visit, these facilities are always oper- ating. But when I visit unannounced, they're shut off, Now I have talked at length with Public Health officials in the area. They tell me that they are reluctant to enforce the codes affecting these mills be cause they are afraid the mills will move from the area and relocate in some other location, such as some location bordering the ocean, or in some other State where the laws will not be enforced. The net result is, nothing happens. And Lake Erie cOntinues to be filled up with more of this goop. If nationwide industry-by-industry standards existed, there would be less incentive for papermills to move to other places, and there will be more reason for them to install better treatment equipment, and to operate it without lapse. Fortunately there is a distinct change in attitude in these industries in the last few years. The industries themselves are attempting to improve their ways. Tax incentives tied to performance could increase their pace. Mr. VANIK. I might say the paper industry is running, I saw, down at the Gulf of Mexico, a once-beautiful beach area that is now polluted. Mr. VIVIAN. You indicated that the steelmills anticipate pumping pickling acid waste into a thick stratum of porous sandstone. Mr. VANIK. That process has been indicated by a producer in Indiana. Mr. VrVIAN. Doesn't that create large holes in the ground? Mr. VANIK. I might give you one sentence and I have this from their announcement. They are going to pump 4~30O feet down into a strata of limestone and it is going to be able to take 115,000 gallons a day and as the affluent pickle liquor pours into the limestone, it de- velops a chemical reaction with the alkali and limestone and becomes neutralized and spent, and this bit of strata of limestone has the capacity to appareiitly treat the affluent so that it can continuously be poured in. Mr. VIVIAN. Doesn't the subsurface rock structure become weak- ened physically? `Can't it collapse like coal mint overburden oc- ~asionally does? Mr. VANIK. Well, it comes' into ~strrata of open areas. Limestone has caverns and open areas in it but what we are doing is pouring the affluent into open areas of strata of limestones. It was said that the same process would be workable in the `Cleveland area. We have the same limestone formations below Cleveland, but our industry is going to us~ what they call the hydrochloric acid regeneration system. They say this works at Gadsden and they say that it `works very suc- cessfully there, but I don't know whether this will take care of the total problem or not. This is one of"the questions I raise. I feel that as yocu do, we should have some research on these matters to determine PAGENO="0033" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 29 which process is going to be the one we will accept and which processes are going to do the job properly and adequately. Mr. DADDARIO. The question of disposal of waste materials in deep wells deserves a great deal of attention. As you have said, Mr. Vanik, it apparently will work but nobody is really sure. In developing a base of investigation, we have become familiar with this particular method of disposal, but we need to know more about it and come to some decision as to whether or not it will be effective. Mr. VANIK. There is one thing about it. Whatever it does, it puts the affluent away, which maybe if it can be safely put away from hu~ manity and from contaminating other sources of water, it is certainly superior to systems that are not efficient. They say it seals off the well, so there is no flow in or out and it becomes a sealed area. Inland Co. is the company doing this at East Chicago, and I think we ought to watch it very carefully. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Ryan? Mr. RYAN. I really want to commend our colleague, Mr. Vanik, for a very fine statement, and I agree that industry should play an im~ portent role in pollution abatement, and I think a tax incentive will go a long way toward solving this problem. Mr. DADDARIO. Thank you. Our hearings tomorrow will hear testimony from representatives of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The witnesses will be Mr. Wilbur Cohen, lJndersecretary; Mr. Arthur 0, Stern, As.~ sistant Chief, Division of Air Pollution, and Dr. Wesley E. Gilbert- son, Chief, Division of EnvironmentaJ Engineering and Food Pro- tection. This committee will adjourn until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock at this same place. (Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m. the committee adjourned until 10 a.m., Thursday, July 20, 1966.) 68-240-66-vol. 1-8 PAGENO="0034" 7 PAGENO="0035" THE ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ThURSDAY, rULY 21, 1966 HOnas or REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTED ON ScIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS,, Sooo~iITT~I~ ON SCIENcE, RES~AROH, AND DEVELOPMENT,' Waslving'ton, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10:08 a.m., in room 232~, I~aybum House Office Buildmg, Washington, 1) C , Hon Emiho Q. Daddario (chairman of the subcommittee), presiding. Mr. DADDARIO. This meeting will come to order. We are pleased this morning that our witnesses represent the De- partment of Health, Education, and Welfare. Secretary Wilbur Cohen, Mr. Stern, and Mr. Gilbertson. We are happy to' have you here, gentlemen. Having set forth the ideas of this committee's objectives yesterday, I need n~t repeat them today. You have been in touch with our staff and know what the purpose of' these `meetipgs are, so we can just continue. `T understand, Mr. Secretary, that you have another engagement later in the morning.. Mr. COHEN. I might say it has to do with nursing homes and I have a lot of Members' of Congress that seem to be interested in that aspect. Mr. DADDARIO. Proceed. STATEM~T. O~ NR, WILBUR J. OOItE~T, UNDER SECRETAtRY, DEPARTMENT OP ~4LTE, EDUC~TION, 4~D EL~'AU Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chairman, I thought i~ would `be best if E put my statement in the record and attached to it I am submitting for your consideration a document which the staff h~s prepared on the health hazards pf cotnmunity air pollution. I will then summarize `jnst~ briefly for you a few' pointS that I think are the highlights of my testimon.y if that is agreeable with you. Mr. DADDARIO. Yes, please. , ` `` Mr COHEN In my testimony I bring out the important economic facts that th,e best eStimates indicate that' the annual economic losses resulting from uncontrolled air pollution are estimated to be in the neighborhood o~1~ about $11 billion. This is `a very high cOst and we think that it indicates the need from an economic standpoint to do something about this important problem To me, in addition to the arguments about how air pollution inter- feres with visibility and imperils air ~nd highw,ay transportation ~nd pollutes soils and corrodes buildings and damages clothing and home furnishings,. one of the most pointed arguments about th~ effects of 31 PAGENO="0036" 32 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT pollution is that some of the buildings like the Parthenon and some of the monuments like Cleopatra's Needle have stood thousands of years in dry climates, but when they are brought into any polluted atmos- phere, the corrosion in 50 years is more than has occurred by natural elements in thousands of years. This is just an indication of the accumulation bf pollution that is occurring whith is going to have tragic consequences for health and for our economic conditions and our general state of the quality of our civilization. I also point out on page 6 of my statement som~thing which I'm sure all of you realize, and yet which succinctly summarizes the prob- lem with which we are faced; and that is, tks amount of air avail- able for our use remains constant and there is no wi~y to increase it. The only sensible recourse is to. control the sources of pollution. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Secretary, yesterday in my opening remarks I pointed out that in Connecticut our most valuable agricultural cash crop is tobacco. The agricultural experiment station in Oonnecticut has' had to develop, a~ ne~ strain of tobacco to resist the damage, of ozone. This points out, in a different way, the problems caused by an increase in atmospheric pollution. The damage done to buildings, `of course is one question of concern for the committee. We have no real in~orinati'bn `about the effect that air pollution can have not only on plant an&áu'imal life, but on human life too. The cumulative effect of this p'artinuk~r trend is also unclear and I'm pleased `that you point out thia problem in such a forceful way here this morning. Mr. COHEN. If you will refer to page 10 in my testimony where I take up the problem of motor vehicle pollution, I point out there that motor vehicle pollution affects more people across the entire country than does any `other single element in the total air pollution problem and it is both national in scope and growing in magnitude, and the impact of this upon agriculture and farming is frequently overlooked. It causes very widespread damage to farn~mg aud vegetation In the State of New Jersey in a recent year 38 vegetable, ornamental, grain, and fruit crops suffered damage, every county in the State was affected.' In Oalifornia, photocheimcal smog has made it impossible to raise crops in many areas where such activity was once profitable. Nationally, as long' ago as 1~)6~ evidence of damage to plants and material from motor vehiôle pollution had been observed in parts of ~7 States. I think we are making `some progress in this diredtion, but I don't think the economic impact to farm production and' farmers can be overemphasized in terms of the effect air pollution has in that area. Mr. ~ADDARIO. Mid, ~t is, `difUoult to keep pace' because you have shown that some areas of Cialifonua cannot grow crops that were once profitable Even though one can develop strains that can re~ist p01 lution, the `air becomes so polluted that even these,are not flumune. They are only immune to `a certain level of pollution. Mr. COHEN. `I would like to turn briefly now, after counting some o,f these problems in my testimony, ,t0, what `we in the Department bel~eve ~are the goals for aot19i~, that"are necessary for us to make ip. o~c1er to continue these ,majpr new' attacks on air pollution. In developing our staflh3g, and o~r budget aud our programing for the next few years-and this is important because I think we have PAGENO="0037" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 33 a long-range problem here, we have to look at what we are gping to do during the next decade or two, we have s~t a certain number of goaJs, and I would like to, go over `them briefly with you starting on page 1~. The first such goal is a 25 percent reduction in air pollution from industrial and munipical sources by 1975, and this applies primarily to manufacturing and processing activities and to such municipal activities as burning and incineration of refuse. I might say I have always felt strongly about this having lived in Ann Arbor, Congress~ man Vivian's district, and going to Willow Run Airport where the dump was always burning the refuse and you had to pass that twice a day. It was a concern always to me that this kind of pollution was allowed to continue to exist and I think we could make serious inroads in connection with this kind of problem. To accomplish this goal there must be a substantial expansion~of the State and local efforts and also of research and development activities both by government and industry. The Federal Government will clearly have to provide leadership and assistance in both of these areas. I would like to point out to the Members of the House that Senate bill 3112 which has just recently been passed by the Senate will be coming up for House consideration, will enable us to take a few fur- ther steps toward meeting this vital responsibility. This bill which you will be considering would authorize grants to State and local governments to assist them in maintai~iing effective control programs. This would be in addition to our present authority to award grants to create newprograms or `to improve existing programs. The proposed new activity will ena'ble the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to help State and local governments meet the need for sustained long-range efforts to deal with their air pollution problems. In addition, the bill proposes needed increases in authorized appro- priations for our air pollution activities for the current and the next 2 fiscal years. I might say the various successive enactments by Congress since 1955 have helped to strengthen' State and local activity. A lot has been done, but I think we must do a great deal more to help ~he States and localities deal with the problems that are within their purview I think this `means helping them to' train and retain adequate stafr, to undertake more effective regulatory activities, to help develop standards and to take leadership. I believe the Federal Governm~nt has a very important role in all of these activities, but without the full cooperation `of the States and localities we will,never be successful. Mr. DADDARIO. Referring to your concern about personnel,, you said the States needed heir in training and retaining adequate staff. What kind of shape are we in from that point of view at the momex$? How big a challenge is that? Mr COHEN I think we have only just begun to undertake the work in the training of `per~onnel. I think a very large restraint on expan- sion of present activities is that personnel is limited in thig field and in this area I think of ~the Federal Government as having a major role in providing training funds to the universities to help train personnel But then unless the States and localities are willing to take these peo- PAGENO="0038" 34 AI~3QUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOit~ ~ ~BA~MF~NT ~ple on their,Ahudgets and ply them~ adeqii~th ~es pf ~óurse the people are not going `to stay in the piaë~s *here th~y' are needed. Now, I might say, Mr. Chairman, this is a problem that we face in almost every single activity. I am now generalizing beyond air pollu- tion, beyond water pollution, nursing, nursing homes, hospitals-you take a~iything that we touch in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare that involves a new program, we find a tremendous shortage of personnel. The need for training and adequate salaries and then retention by the States and localities, I"think is almost a No. 1 problem in developing a program and getting the program more effectively implemented throughout the country. Mr. DADDARIO. I would agree that that's so. I think that we have to give due attention to our national problems ai~d this is certainly one of the greatest problems which exists. It comes to mind that over the course of time we have developed a rapport between the Congress and the scientific community. I think the Congress will continue to appropriate research and development funds and I think that these can be increased to meet such important challenges. I wonder if there should not be some kind of stimuli~s within the scientific and technological community to meet this challenge. What do we do to incite activity in this area? Mr. COHEN. Well, I wouldn't pretend to know the whole answer. My first reaction to you is, first the great universities of the country must in `their schools of public health, in their e~igineering faculties, in their sciences generally, begin to recognize these whole areas of environmental pollution as an important aspect of university training and development. From the Federal Government standpoint I think we will need to help them develop their staff and to train people and out of this will rome both the people who will be doing the control work and I hope some of the scientists who will be helping in technoTogical develop- me~it and scientific improvement which are neees~ary in this area. On the other hand, I think the relationship with industry is ex- tremely important and I would hope that both th~ Federal Govern- ment as well as the~ universities could work jointly together-the Federal' Go'~ternment, universities, and industries in common attack on this kind of a problem. Mr. DADDARIO. An article in this morning's New york Times was called to my attention., The article says that the Delaware River is to get a cleaning, and although it refers to v~ater, yOu can draw an analogy to the air problem. It stateS that the cos~ nf cleaning up this river will involve many millions of dollars. The article acknowledges that this costly project would requ~re u~e of waste' ti~eatment processes that are now of questionable technological value. The analogy is, that in the area of air poliution1cqnt~oi, `we ~re also using questionable technological means to meet tb.e `Challenge. This fits in with your manpower situation. There i~ a need for people to do the research which will bring the cOst down so that `we can have an effective program. Mr. COHEN. I think until the American people `ai~e galvanized into recognizing that the problems of environmental pollutipn are going to possibly engulf our children and `our grandchildren if not ourselves PAGENO="0039" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 35 before a few years, they are not going to be willing to invest, and I use the word "invest" advisedly, substantial sums of money that will be necessary in the allocation of scarce manpower resources in a con- certed nationwide attack on this problem. I think there is a great deal of public recognition; more than many people recognize, but I still think it is also necessary to bring to the attention of the American people the serioim consequences of this before we can reafly get them to feel that the tremendous economic and social cost of pollution can at least partially be offset if we undertake a vigorous program flOW. Mr. D~rnARIo. There's no question in your mind but that the studies made today show that the consequences will be serious. Mr. COHEN. Very serious. Mr. DADnARIO. This is just not a guess? Mr. COHEN. This is not a guess. When you read our report that we are submitting for the record on health implications of pollution, I think the impact of some of those on diseases and disability is just devastating and it is terrible calamity to think that, children and people are going to be adversely affected in their health by the poilutantsnow going into the air and water. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Roush? Mr. RousH. I think I take issue with Mr. Cohen when he says we must perpare the American people for the cost of such a program. I believe the American people are now prepared to meet the cost of such a program. I'm a practical politician and I find no resentment among the people of my constituency who are conservative about spending money on our water pollution problems and our air pollution problems. I think we have arrived at this point, and although I have comments and questions which I would like to make later, I feel that now our problem is to put the proper tools in the hands of our administrators so that they can use those tools in solving those problems. That's all. Mr. DADDARIO. I think that's what Dr. Cohen has in mind. I don't see anything in your statement which disagrees with what Mr. Roush has just said. Mr. COHEN. I am not only agreeing with him, but I am delighted to hear him make the statement and I think in many parts of the country public opinion is way ahead.,, way ahead of what we are now doing and willing to do, and I just hope that as a result of this we can go ahead faster. As you say, a large part of it is giving the people the tools with which to work. Mr. ROUSH. Maybe I misunderstood Mr. Cohen, but I thought he was saying he considered the biggest task now to be that of preparing people psychologically so that they would be prepared to mnke the nec- essary expenditures to meet this problem, and that this was a job that had to be done in. the universities, colleges, and in the local com- munities. I think that is behind us, and that the thrust of our efforts should be more practical now. . Mr. COnEN~ . Well~ I must say that while I agree with you, I always find that when I come before the appropriating comm:ittees, I find a little bit more difficulty than I find when I go out in the country. I don't mean to imply that the appropriating committees hav~ not been generous with us in helping us to finance these programs, but I do PAGENO="0040" 36 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT think that there is a problem in training thismanpower and inputtin~ the money into the scientific development. Scientific development and the roles of the'univer~ities, all need further push,'vigorous push if we are to get to these goals that I am describing. Mr. DADDARIO. There `are certain areas of pollution which have not, as yet, `been studied fully. You would not be able to come before the Congress and ask for funds for these `because you wouldn't know what to do with it. Mr. COHEN. That is correctS. And, there is another aspect, of course, if you said to me we are going to give you `all the money you want, it would still take a good deal of time not only to develop the various aspects but to train the manpower and develop the programs. It is just a matter of forward motion, `and that's why I'm' urging that we set our goals sufficiently `ahead `of time to see if `we can work toward them more effectively than we are doing at the present time. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Conable? Mr. CONAELE. I simply want to underscore this conservatism fur- ther. I represent a constituency that is conservative and most of my people don't think we are spending enough on air a~nd water pollution. But I feel we have to h'ang back at this point because we are not ready to make the investment intelligently. In. these hearings, we don"t' have to discuss the question of need. I have the impression that the Con- gress is quite `willing to be shown the way by the experts. The pur- pose of these hearings is to find out what the experts can tell us about where fun'ds would be best invested. Mr. COHEN. Well, we have two of our best experts here today that will go into that with you, and I `would just like to finish the three goal's that I think are important. Our second goal, which I have enumerated on page 13, concerns sul- fur oxide pollution from the burning of fossil fuels, primarily at such large installations as powerplants. This is one of the most im- portant air pollution problems for which control technology is still deficient; however, `several promising approaches have been developed and are ready for full-scale testing. Our goal is to `demonstrate the feasibility of `such techniques by 1970. But, because `sulfur oxide pollution is already a serious problem in many large urban areas, it is essential that interim measures `be adopted to keep the problem from worsening. In brief~ such meas~ ures involve greater consideration of air pollution problems in deci- sions on the allocation and use of fuels. We are already trying to en- courage greater use of low-sulfur fuels in areas where the sulfur oxide pollution is now serious. In addition, serious consideration must be given to modifying our national fuel import policies in order to give priority to low-sulfur fuels and to locating major new fuel-burning installations, primarily powerplants, outside urban areas. The third goal concerns motor vehicle pollution, which I have, al- ready discussed. Our objective here is a 25-percent reduction' in `this problem by 1975 and a 40-percent reduction by 1t~5. In our view these goals can be achieved by improvement in control technology ap- plicable to the internal combustion engine, but even the most effective technology we can envision will not be adequate to keep this problem PAGENO="0041" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 37 from worsenihg `in the face of projected future increases in our use of motor vehicles. More than 85 million motor vehicles are now in use in the United States, and this number increases every year. It is estimated there will be, if it is possible to get them on the road, some 120 million vehicles in use by 1980. Mr. Chairman, I think that very briefly summarizes some of the main points in my testimony, and I will be glad to answer any other questions that you have. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Secretary, on page 13 of your statement, in the last sentence of the first paragraph, you say: A sound regulatory program with uniform legal requirement's to insure equality of treatment among competing industries is an effective stimulus which en- courages industry efforts to improve and apply control technology. I wonder about that. My question is, will this work or might it not force hasty installation of technically inadequate equipment? Don't we need to institute some kind of Federal support for B. & D. or in- centives so that we can develop the necessary techniques before we apply the regulations? Yesterday Mr. Vivian made the point that when he visited a pulp plant in his area and the people knew he was coming, the pollution abatement apparatus was working. When he made an unannounced visit, it was not working. Obviously, the reason is that it is expensive to run and they were trying to avoid the cost. They have not yet found a technique which can properly fit the situation. Could you touch on that a bit? Mr. COHEN. Well, I would say in our Department our thought is one shouldn't take one aspect of what can be done and only do that. We should have a well-rounded program in the whole field that would consist of the research and development aspect of the program which should be encouraged vigorously, and also the element of the training of personnel, cooperative work with the universities and industry, work with the States; and then I think the point that perhaps you are touching on in addition to that is effective compliance. I think that we have a problem here that is vast in its dimensions. You pointed out quite well there are many unknowns. I am sure there will be a lot of changes in technology as it goes on. Many of these things are very costly and I think that what our goal is, is to develop a program on quite a number of fronts at the same time. One should not `be done to the exclusion of the other. Mr. DADDAEIO; Do you think there should be some degree of flex- ibility in administering these legal requirements? Mr. COHEN. Yes~ I think you have to be very sensible. You do have criteria and you do have standards and you do have a regulatory ap- proach to it. You can't expect to have everybody come into com- pliance overnight. I think you have to use good sense in your timing and the rapidity with which you achieve your objectiire, and also I think, although I am not an expert in this field, but in the field that I do know some- thing about,. I know that you constantly must be on guard not to assume that the science and technology of' today is going to* be the science and technology of tomorrow. You have to realize that what you think is good today, there may be something very radically better tomorrow. We have to have a PAGENO="0042" 38 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT philosophy and approach that does permit us to look forward to improvements. Mr. DADDARIO. I subscribe to that or otherwise wewould never get anything done. We will proceed and give the members an opportunity to ask some questions. Mr. Roush?. Mr. ROUSH. Mr. Chairman, I have been very restless this morning and not satisfied that we are getting exactly what this committee wants. There have been numerous committees of the Congress deal- ing with this problem. Now, I agree we have to think in terms of goals. I agree that we have to identify the problems. I agree that we have to stimulate the administrators into action. Yet I feel that this committee should play a particular role in the solution of this problem. I think my colleague, Mr. Conable, hit it right on the nose when he said we need to seek the guidance of the scientists and the man who is dealing with the technological problem. This is what I hope your people will be able to give us. Now, I think that we want to know what your researchers and sci- entists are doing to solve these problems. I think that we want to know what Chicago needs by way of scien- tific and technological information to solve the tremendous problem they have. What does the Potomac area need to solve its pollution problem? I think what we want to know is what are we doing scientifically? What are we doing from a technological standpoint? What in-house research are you conducting? Specifically which pollutant problems are you dealing with and specifically which pollutant problems are other people dealing with? What contracts do we have with colleges and universities who are dealing with this problem? What are the scientific problems? What are the techncdogieal problems? What can the Congress do in these areas to help solve these prob- lems? And, what are we doing to bring together, to correlate, and to make useful the various scientific endeavors which are being con- ducted all through this country to make them useful and to supply the scientist with information from another area of endeavor? It seems to me that this has to be the thrust of these hearings if we are going to be successful and meet the requirement whichthe chair- man set out yesterday in his statement when he said: These hearings are designed to make clear to the Congress the technological problems of pollution abatement and research needs. There are several questions here, Mr. Cohen, whose answers, I am sure, will be supplied as your people testify, but I did feel, Mr. Chair- man, that these are qiliestions which need answering. They will be the real thrust of our endeavor. Mr. COITEN. Could I say this: As you indicated, our experts are here under Mr. MacKenzie and will be glad to go into the questions you raised. If the committee would like, I would be glad to submit to the committee or put in"~ `the record so that the staff could review PAGENO="0043" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ao them, the list ~`of research grants that we are making, the training grants, and the contracts that we have in this field which would in some respect help you to analyze where the projects are and what we are doing in this area. I think they offer a basis for ~t least indicating where the areas of concern now are and whether there are any gaps in those areas. Mr IDADDARIO Recogrnzing the limitation that we have on time, the committee's practice has been to draw up a series of question~s* ~to fill in the gaps, in the testimony. Our staff will `be working with yours in order to do that. Mr. Rousu. That's all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. DADDARIO.~Mr. Conable? Mr. CONABLE. I wondered if you couldn't emphasize the need for `a coordinated approach to the problem of pollution? There must be tradeoffs between water pollution and air pollution. For instance, we could eliminate a large part of the water pollution problem if.we didn't use water to carry away human waste. Yet if we incinerated such waste, we might increase greatly the air pollution problem. This indicates, does it not, that we better not go overboard on water pollution or any other aspect of pollution without carefully coordinat- ing our approaches? Don't we have to apprpach the problem through a broad scientific program? Mr. COHEN. I'm not qualified to speak to that scientifically, al- though the thought I have given to it seems to confirm what you said; namely, that there are a lot of interrelations, and I speak mainly' on the health aspect where I know something about it, between all types of pollutants and pollution. Also I think that there is the aspect of the spin-off that occurs from various types of research, the longrun effects of which you can't immediately determine. So that I would tend from what' I thought myself to agree with what you say. Mr. CONABLE. But, on the other `hand, it doesn't necessarily require a broad geographical approach. We obviously are going to have areas of particular concern as we move toward the megalopolis concept across `the country. We are going to have large areas of the country where water pollution is not going to `be a very serious problem. Actually, in some regions it is a diminishing problem. Really, what we need' more than anything else are standards. Mr. COHEN. I would like to ask Mr. MacKenzie to comment on that. You would. be qualified to express an opinion on it. Mr. MACKENZIE. I think~ Mr. `Cönable, that you have a point here which is important to keep in mind always. There are interrelation- ships between the procedures that are used for contro1lin~ water pol- lution, air pollution, or pollution of the land ,as exemplified by the disposal of solid waste. In the field of air pollution as an example, one of the prime sources of concern with respect to polluting the air comes from the incinera- tion of solid waste. Obviously we must have satisfactory ways of disposing of the solid waste w'hich is generated in enormous quanti- ties in our urban communities. At the same time, we haye to be very careful that in following the procedures that are necessary that we do not. unnecessarily pollute the atmosphere or the water. PAGENO="0044" 40 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT So, there is a close tie here and the programs must be coordinated. The coordination relates not only to the activities, however, that are carried on on a Federal level, but importantly the activities that are carried on by the States and by the local governments. On the local government level, for instance, one of the troublesome things in administering these programs is to effect the appropriate coordination between the department of sanitation, if it is so labeled, that is charged with the responsibility of collecting and disposing of solid waste, and the air pollution control activity that may be con- ducted by the same or a parallel organization in a local government. We must incorporate in our administrative procedures the necessary coordination so that one does not unnecessarily interfere with the other. Mr. DADDARIO. Will the gentleman yield at this point? Mr. CONABLE. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I'm sOrry, I do have to leave. Mr. DADDARIO. You may feed this into your question. How is the coordination of water, air, and soild waste' problems handled now that the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration has been transferred to the Department. of the Interior from your Department? Mr. COHEN. Could I just say in answer, because perhaps you have to go, Mr., Conable, having been a member of the State board of health some years ago, I became quite Ooncerned about the problem that you are indicating,, that there had to be more effective coordination par- ticularly at the State level where the geographical problems of air and water sometimes differ. I mean, one community has a really serious water problem but not much of an air problem and another one has a very serious air problem and not much water, and some have both. And, with shortage of resources and funding at the State level, I think there; is a need at the State level for much more effective co- ordination. I'm not talking about the R. & D. aspects. I'm really talking about quality standards, enforcement, compliance, that sort of aspect. I think I would like to ask Mr. MacKenzie again to answer that question about the interrelationship between those threS aspects. Mr. MACKENZIE. We have not yet fully developed, in my opinion, the coordination that will be necessary between the Water Pollution Control Administration which has been transf erred ~to the Department of the Interior and the Department of Health, Education, and Wel- fare. There are discussions now gOing on between the `t~vo Depart- ments in order to effect this coordination. The responsibility for the health aspects of water pollution was not transferred to Interior. It remains in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and obviously there will be a need for continuing liaison and close co- operation in order that the interest of both Departments can be in- corporated in the actions that need to be taken. With respect to coordination between the other elements of pollution control, principally air pollution and solid waste handlm~ and dis- posal, there is a continuing coordination between the Di'vision of Air Pollution and the Office of Solid Wastes, both of which are currently operated in the Public Health Service under the `Department of Health, Education, and' Weif ai~e.' PAGENO="0045" ADEQUACY OF PECH~OLOGY FOR POLLUPION ABAPEMENT 41 There is practically day-to-day routine contact on these with inter- change of information on projects that arc underway with respect to how these should be handled, in what degree each of the two orga- nizational suboomponents should work together in each instance. Now, I anticipate that it will not be difficult to effect the: coordiha.~ tion on water pollution that I have referred to, hut because of the recent action and transferring the main activity on water pollution to the Department of. the Interior, the administrative arrangeiirents have not yet been fully consummated. Mr. DADDARIO~ Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIvIAN. Mr. Secretary, I would like to get some further infor~. mation; namely, what is the distribution of funding support among private industry, the State governments, and the Federal Govern- ment for research and development on pollution control? In my own district, for example, there are a number of firms engaged in provid- ing and selling pollution control devices and they are fairly successful, but I have no idea how well they serve the need. What is the amount of funds provided by the States for both research and training by the Federal GOvernment? Mr. STERN. To the best of . our understanding, the research and development in this area is funded some 60 to 70 percent with Federal funds at the present time. We don't have very good data on the research and development proj- ects that are being carried on in industry. We do, however, have, a study jointly with the Americaii Society of Mechanical Engineers which is by questionnaire attempting to determine the extent of the private industry involvement in research and development in this area. We expect to have data available sometime later this fall and will make it available to the committee at that time. Mr. VIVIAN. how about training in universities? My own uni~ versity has a fairly active group in this field and has for years. What is the relative split in training in universities? Mr. MACKENZIE. May I answer this, Mr. Vivian? Totally I think training is being supported almost entirely by the Federal Government in the air pollution field at any rate; and I can only answer for this aspect of the total problem. We arC currently budgeting in fiscal year 1967 approximately $3 million for support of training in the air pollution field. . Two million of this is~ available for grants to universities for the support of faculty, equipment, and for instruction and similar matters About half a million is used foir the support of feh1o~t~hi~s fot the support of individuals who attend universities other than~ these prj- manly which are receiving grants. And, ~tbout a hadf militoit dolla~e is used directly by the Division of Air Pollution in the Publ1b~Jealth Service for the conduct and support of short-term training courses to which employees of State and local governments and of industry can send their people for short-term technical course training of an intensive nature. Mr. VIVIAN. In other words, at the present time the Federal Gbv- ernment sponsors this activity. Is there any possibility that it will be carried on by the States? Mr. MACKENZIE. Well, it has not matured up to the present time. I would hesitate to make a forecast of what might happen in the future, PAGENO="0046" 42 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT but I see no evidence of the States picking up any significant part of the support for this activity. Mr. VIvIAN. On page 12 of your statement, Mr. Secretary, you refer to Senate bill 3112, which has also been sponsored in the House by a number of us. Do you feel that will have any significant effect in brmgrng up the level of research within the States by. cooperath~e ventures? Mr. CoHEN. Yes, I think it will, Congressman Vivian; however, I'm not so optimistic that I think with the passage of this bill, that's the end of all legislation in this field. This problem that I have men- tioned of getting the States, the localities, and the universities to ac- celerate work on this problem I think is going to be one of our con- tijiuingproblems during the next few years. Mr. VIVIAN. I would like to ask another question.. Yesterday Congressman Vanik of Ohio made a very able state- ment regarding the necessity for inthistry standards in pollution con- trol. He was referring particularly ;to water pollution .at the time, but it could be equally applied to air pollution and solids pollution. Por example, we have a number of firms in my own district which generates a great deal of air pollution and the surrounding communi- ties are most reluctant to enforce any standards. Certainly they may pass the laws, but they hate to enforce compliance because they are afraid these industries will then proceed to move away. I felt his request forindustry-by~-industry standards and compliance obligations were very reasonable requests. Have you any comments on this subject? Mr. CoHEN. Well,. I only heard about Mr. Vanik's suggestion last night, and I thought a good deal about it. I think it has some merit and ought to be considered I think that one would necessarily have to think of industrie~ in a broad spectrum to consider competitive problems iii industry because I think one of the problems that industry has is if it gets into any of these. areas, it has to consider what its cost impact is in a competitive situation. . And, there it would not neces- sarily, in my opinion, be what that particular industry is, but also what the competitive and alternative products were that they~ were really competing with. . . And, again, that's exactly what I had in mind when I replied to Mr. Conable's question a moment ago. My own experience when I was on the Board of Health, and that `was some 10 years ago, is this matter of compliance at the local level is exceedingly difficult. Local officials, no matter what the law is, don't want to drive an employer or an industry or a product out of their community. S They understand what his problem is and what his cost is and unless we can get some broad base in this, so that there aren't unfair corn- pletitive advantages or disadvantages, I don't think we are going to solve some of the most difficult problems. That~s one of the reasons I feel you have to look at this problem from a national point of view so that you eliminate this unfair competitive element. Mr. VIVIAN. Is there any research study being carried on within the Department regarding the sub j,ect of industry standards or related topics? PAGENO="0047" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 43 Mr. MAOKENZ~. Yes, there is. A good deal of study is being de- voted to this particular subject. We have under development within th~ Division of Air Pollution, as all example, what we have termed "codes of good practice" that would be applicable to various indus~ tries and various industrial processes. The purpose of this is to indicate what is feasible both technically and economically in the way of control of pollutant emissions from such activities and to make this available not only to all segments of industry, because we find in many instances that there are .a fair num.- ber of smaJl industrial concerns that are not really well informed about what dan be done with respect to their operations in this regard, but also to State and local air pollution control agencies for their guidance so that their actions can, be not ouly applicable to the existing prob- lem, but also reasonable frotn a technical and economic standpoint as to what actually is feasible of accomplishment. Mr. DADDARIO. You gave us a deadline, Mr. Secretary, and in the event there are further questions, we will see to it that you get them. We are very happy to have had you here. Mr, COHEN. Thank you. (The biographical statement and complete prepared statement of Wilbur J. Cohen follows:) BIOGRAPHICAL STATaMENT ON WILBUR `J~ COHEN Wilbur J. Cohen was appointed Under Secretary for Ilealth, Education, and Welfare on lune 1, 1965. He was previously Assistant 5ecretary for Legisla- tion, having been appointed to this post by President Kennedy in 1961. He was responsible for handling some 65 major legislative proposals which became law during the 4~/2 years he was Assistant Secretary for Legislation. He is on leave as Professor of Public Welfare Administration at the Uni- versity of Michigan where he taught from 1956 to 1961. Ele was Chairman of President Kennedy's Task Force on Health and Social Security in 1960 which recommended Methca~e and other health and social security proposals. *He was the research assistant to the Executive Director of President Roose- velt's Cabinet Committee on Economic Security from 1934 to 1985 which drafted the original Social security Act. He has been intimately connected with all of the legislative developments in the social security and public assistance pro~ grams since 1934 and has been closely associated with the recent medicare, medi- cal school, and education legislation. Mr. Cohen was born in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 1913. He is married to Eloise Bittel of Ingram, Texas, and is the father of three sons. He graduated from the University of Wisconsin in economics in 1934 and also received the honorary degree of Doctor of Laws in 1966. * He Is the author of several books and many articles in the social security, health and w'elfa~re field and is a recipient of a number of awards for dia. tinguished service In health, education, and welfare. PREPARED STATEMENT OF' WILBUR J. COHEN, UNDER SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT or HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WEU?ARE Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, It is a pleasure to participate In these important hearings on the problems of environmental pollution and their control. In all our cIties and towns, people are becoming increasingly concerned about the rising contamination of such environmental resources as air and water. They are becoming increasingly concerned about the very real and serious threat that such contamination poses to human health and welfare. I congratulate the Subcommittee on undertaking such a timely review of such a significant matter. You may be sure, Mr. Chairman, that we in `the Department of Health, Educa- tion, and Welfare share your concern `with the adequacy of technology for abate- PAGENO="0048" 44 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOll POLLUTION A~A~EMEN~ mont of environmental pollution, both~ now and In the future. :1 thInk it is im- portant to distinguish between the Nation's present and future needs in this area. On the one hand, we already have at our disposal enough~ technical know- how to achieve a significant degree of control of many of our most serious en- vironmental pollution problems. Our most immediate need, then, is to see that thl~ technology Is applied, and this is a challenge which clearl~r calls for the development of appropriate control programs at all `levels of ~overnment. Rut there can be no doubt that a need also exists' for better coi~'trbl technology to arm us agatnst future pollution problems. The search fot ñ1~rE? `eI~ectIve and more economical control techniques must `be an Integral part of any national attack on environmental contamination. Moreover, `to protect ourselves and fu- ture generations `against the projected growth of many poll~'tion problems, we will almost certainly need to find `ways of maintaining our high levels of economic and technological progress' without adding to our already substantial capacity for polluting the environment. These :tasks will, of course, require a continuation, Inde~d ei~panslon~ op~ent research and development activities in the field of environmental pôiiution~ ~i~dth Government and industry have a responsibility to share in this vital work. Those industries which are significant contributors to pollution as well as `others which have technical capabilities in pollution control have both a responsibility and a great opportunity to help the Nation fight pollution. Insofar as the Federal Government Is concerned, we in the Department of Health, Education, and Wel- fare have always felt that research and development constitute an essential part of our programs In environmental pollution~ Through our own research activities and through `support of research by non-Federal agencies and institutions, we a~e engaged in a constant.'effort to raise the level of the Nation's technical capability for controlling pollution in all its forms. In order to make an Informed appraisal of the present status of efforts to con- trol environmental pollution problems in this country and to provide a sound ba'~is for deciding on the scope and direction of future efforts, It is essential that we take a brief look at the roots from which these problems arose and the ways in ~vhlch they have grown and evolved. Environmental pollution problems are a by-product of many interrelated fac- tors in `the ~levelopment of our present way of life. To `deal wIth such problems intelligently, we thust place them in their social and historical ~erspeetive. It Is my lntêntlon~ 1~&r; Chairman, to discuss this subject In broad outline and then to look more ~losel~r at the specific problems `of air ~ollutlon and disposal of solid waste. In this century, our remarkable progress in `science `and `technology has given us an unprecedented capacity to alter man's environment-both t~y cholcO and by chance. We cOn and we are reshaping It by' deliberate choice' through the ap~li~ cation of our increasing scientific and technical knowledge. And for the most part, the results have been of immense benefit to all of manlçind., But there is another side to the coin of technological miracles-the `Side that has been tarrilshe,d `by some of the unplanned and' unforesk~en consequences of the ways in which the very same scientific and techneal knowledge has been used. The probleill of air pollution and the many problem's associated with disposal of solid wastes are among the most iniportant consequences o1~ our failure to antic!' pate and prevent environmental contamination arising' froh~ the heedleSs appli- cation of technical knowledge. This country has arrived very belatedly at Its present pOint of sharpened interest and activity in the field of environmental pollution control. We have just begun `to recognize that man's ability to contaminate his environment has ~ long since surpassed the essentially limited capacity of our air and water to purge themselves Of such contamination. And we are only beginning to see in all its complex ramifications the vital connection that exists between man's well- being and the quality of his environment. That we have been tardy in this respect Is not really surprising, for environmental contamination, in contrast to the immedLote short-term benefits of technological innovation, is essentially a slow and subtle process, and some of the most important health and welfare hazards of such contamination are not always readily apparent. Our under- standing' of these problems is still incomplete, but where our knowledge is not complete, the areas of uncertainty relate not to `whether environmental contanii- nation threatens public health and welfare-for that is not In doubt-but to the anestion of how best to deal with a serious problem before it reaches truly critical proportions. PAGENO="0049" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 45 The adverse effects of air pollution are already very serious. Mr poflution threatens the American people in many diverse ways. Its impact is felt directly or indirectly in virtually every part of the United States, in both large cities and small towns and in agricultural `and recreational as well as industrial areas. There are many important reasons why better control of air pollution is urgently needed now. Air pollution, by h~terfering with visibility, sometimes imperils air and highway transportation. Polluted air soils, corrodes, and other- wise damages property `and goods, including buildings `and ,monuments as well as clothing and home furnishings. In our large cities, buildings must be scrubbed to prevent them from deteriorating; the bill for cleaning a 50-story building can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Some of the damage caused by air pollution eanuot he repaired at any price. In many cities abroad, historic buildings and sculpture that withstood the ravages of time and weather for hundreds, sometimes thousands, of years are now crumbling under the onslaught of pollution. The magnificent Parthenon in Athens is just one of many irre- placeable structures that are under attack from corrosive air pollutants. No amount of money spent to clean up the filth left behind by air pollution will keep this sort of thing, from happening. Only an adequate investment in control action can `accomplish this. The damage done by air pollution is not limited to urban places, Mr. Chairman. Air pollution affects forests and farmlands and farmers as well. It causes hundreds of millions of dollars of damage to crops each year. It contributes to urban decay and deterioration of property values. In total, `the economic losses resulting from uncontrolled air pollution are estimated to be 11 billion dollars annually. And this figure, Mr. Chairman, represents only the price `of living with polluted air and, to some extent. cleaning up the dirt it leaves everywhere. Currently, then, the costs of inadequately controlled air pollution are measured in the billions of dollars annually, while the costs of control action are in the millions. Clearly, the cost to society as a whole for cleaner air would be con- siderably less than what we are now paying. `We need to keep this fact in mind when we try to assess the `true cost of controlling air pollution. Even if the problem of air pollution threatened only our pocketbooks, we would have ample reason to increase and accelerate our efforts to deal with it. But the fact is that we have an even more compelling reason, for `air pollution poses a very serious threat to the public health-to your health and mine. There is no doubt that air pollution contributes to the occurrence and worsen- ing of such chronic respiratory diseases as lung cancer, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, `and asthma. There is even some evidence that certain types of air pollution may contribute to the occurrence of `those upper respirato'ry disea sos known generally as the common cold. We know from tragic experience that ordinary air pollutants iii higher than ordinary concentrations have caused mass illness and death, both in European cities, notably London, . where thousands of people died in a 1952 air pollution disaster and to a lesser extent, in the United States. in such a relatively small community as Donora, Pennsylvania, as well as in such large cities `as New York, where at least two episo'des are known to have occurred. The harmful effects of air pollution a't the levels that are common- place in many American cities and towns are less obvious, but the accumulated evidence from epidemiological and statistical studies as well as laboratory and clinical investigations leaves no room for doubt as to the connection between long-term exposure to polluted air and the occurrence of illness and death from chronic respiratory disease. The threat to health is, in my view, the primary reason why, in the past,deca'de, the American people and their representatives in the Congress have called increasingly fo'r decisive action at all levels of Govern- ment to put an end to contamination of the air we breathe. Mr. Chairman, we have brought together a great deal of the existing scientific information on this problem in o'rder to make available documentation of the health hazai~ds of air pollution. I am submitting this report for the record. It is entitled "The Health Hazards of Community Air Pollution." All of the major trends that contribute to air pollution are rising. Our pro- duction and consumption of goods and services are increasing. The number of motor vehicles on our streets and highways i's increasing. Our demands for heat and electric power produced by the burning of fossil fuels' `are mounting. In addition, the onward rush of technology is continuing and is constantly adding, new and more complex dimensions to the air pollution problem. The impact of all these trends is magnified and reinforced `by the continuing trend toward greater concentration of people and sources' of air pollution In our 68-24O-6&--vo'l. 1-4 PAGENO="0050" 46 ADEQUACY OF `J~'CHNOLOG~ FOR POLLUTION ABAT~M'~NT urban areas. Today, more than one-half of the Nation's total population of some 190 million people lives on about 10 percent of our land area. Estimates are that by 1975, the population will reach 235 million with three-fourths of it con- centrated in the same small land area. In the face of these anticipated future rises in the trends that contribute to air pollution, we must recognize that the amount of air aiva'tlabZe for our use will' remain constant. There ia no `wg~j to increase it. Our only `sensible re- course is to control, the sourèes of pollution. We now know that we can no longer be content with control efforts which are focused almost entirely, on abatement of the most obvious' and bothersome' types of pollution. A more comprehensive and more sophistiCated effort is needed to deal with the air pollution probleth in its present `dimenslbns aM to prepare for, its expected future growth. While the control of the many sources of the problem Is clearly the only' practi- cal solution to air pollution, `this does not necessarily mean that the application of control devices or. pi~ocess changes represent the' only means of source control. Such matters as the proper selection of fuels, proper location of installations or facilities that can contribute to air pollution, a decision, to invest in mass transit facilities rather than in a new highway can also be means Of source control. These and similar co'nsid~rati~ns must be taken into account if we are to mount a really effective attack~ on air pollution in the secOnd half of the Twentieth Century. ` `` ` Our Department's experience in. this field makes it clear that `major reliance must be placed on measures designed to control the sources of pollution and that effective regulatory control programs at all levels of Government are the only really practical megns of achieving our goal. Those who seek an over- simplified, single, painless `solution to air pOllution are, in our opinion, refusing to face the technical, economic, and social facts that bear on the problem. The challenge that confronts uS, then, is twofold: first and most immediate, to find the means of insuring that existing control technology is applied to the fullest possible extent, and second, to find solutions to those technical problems which still stand in the way of `bringing air pollution under fully effective control. There can be no `doubt, Mr~ Chairman, that there is now a very sub- stantial body of technology for tI1~'control of air pollution. To be sure; tech- nical knowledge and skills In l~his area are continuing to expand and improve, but the fact remains that full application of what' is already availa~ile would produce a significant reduction in community air pOllution proble~ns. This is not to say that research and development to find new and better control tech- niques should not be pursued as vigorously as possible; `both Government and industry have Important responsibilities in this area. But at the same time; we must redouble our efforts to insure application now of the technlqties' and equipment available for reducing pollutant emissions from many of the most important sources of air pollution in our cities and towns. As a matter of fact these approaches are so interdependent that it can be misleading to view them separately. The application of existing technology stimulates the improvement of technology as no other single factor can. In return, the resulting improve- ment of technology enhances and faéilitates improvements in the' economic application, of contro'ls. The task of insuring wide application and im'procv~ment of technology for the control of air pollution is one which clearly calls for `action by all levels of Government and by industry. The need for such action was recognized by the Congress when it adopted the Clean Air Act in December 1968 and again' when it enacted major Amendments to the Clean Air Act in October 1965, including the Motor Vehicle Air POllutiOn Control Act and the Solid Waste Disposal Act. A major purpose of the activities which the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare is carrying' on under this legislation is to provide national leader- ship and assistance to State an'd local governmenth in seeking abatement of air pollution. The Federal air pollution program now includes research and training activi- ties, financial and technical assistance to State and local control agencies, action to abate Interstate air pollution problems, and the establishment and enforcement of national standards for the control of air pollutiofl frOm new motor vehicles. Mr. `Stern will describe many of these activities in greater detail, Mr. Chairman; I `want to discuss briefly some aspects of this program that are particularly germane to these hearings. PAGENO="0051" ADEQUACY OP PECHNOLOGt FOR POLLUTION ABATEME~ 47 In ~hé Clean Air Act, t~e Cohgress authorized a new ~ede~t activity which ivas clearly inten~Jed to stimulate .~tate and local control efforth. I am referring to a matching-grant prograuç~ under which we h~tve thus far awarded some $9 milUou~to State and lQcal, agencies to assist them in developthg or establishing new control programs or improving exlstin~ programs. `~e~à~i~e agerlcles'reeeiv- lug t1~ese grants are req~4red te lhcrease their own s~euthng for control activl~ tie~, the awards we have made~ to date have resulted iii an estimated inc1~ease of about 65 percent in the total amount of funds available f~r air pollutiOn control programs in our cities' and states. An' hicrea~e of such mag~nitude is unprecedented in this field. In many, of its other provisiOns, toO, the Clean Air `Act refi?cts the philosophy that regulatory control action is the most effective Waf of taking full advantage of the technical capability that exists for dealing with air pollution problems. A prime example is the authority that was provided for direct Federal action to abate Interstate air pollution problems. These problems arise in larae measure, Mr. Chairman, from air pollution sources that can be controlled but are not being controlled, primarily because the people whose health and welfare they endanger live in a State other than that in which the sourceS are located. In the Clean Air Act Amendments adOpted lOss than a year ago, the Congress again called for regulatory action to deal with an importhIlt air pollution source that ,i~ national in its impact-the motor vOhh~le. 13nier this~ legislation, Federal standards have been established by Secretary Gard~ér to WhiCh gasoline- powered vehicles will be required to comp1~, `beginning with the 19~38 model year. This is a very important step. Motor vehicle pollution affects more people across the country than does any other single segment of the total air pollution problem. It Is national in scope and of growing xnagni'tti4e. rts Impact on health and welfare has been extensively studied and is documented in reports to the Congress from our Department; I have copies of the reports with me, Mr. Chairman. To cite just one of, the ways in whiCh motor vehicle pollution is changing the environment, we know that it causes wldes~rOad. `damage to vegetation. In the State of New .Jersey, in a recent year4 88 regetable,' orna- mental, grain, and fruit crops si~iffered damage; every county in the State was affected. In California, photochemical smog has made it impbssible to raise crops in many areas where such activity was once prdfi'table. Nationally, as long ago as 1962, evidence of damage to plants and material from motor vehicle pollution had been observed in parts of 27 States. The evolution of efforts to control motor vehicle pollution illustrates the importance of regulatory control action in the air' pollution field. A little more than' a decade ago, when motor vehicle pollution was' first identified as a major factor In the occurrence of photochemical smog, appropriate control techniques were not available. The development of technology that haS since made, it possible to begin `controlling this problem nationally was clearly ~timu- lated and accelerated by the regulatory control legislation developed and passed by the Statø of California in 1959. To help take care of some `of th~ major unsolved problems i~i air pollution control, the Clean Air Act authorized an accelerated research, and development effect at the Federal level. In both the Clean Air Act and the recent Amend- ments, the Congress directed that particular emphasis be given to the develop~ ment of control technology for motor vehicle pollution and for sulfur oxide pollution arising from the combustion of fossil fuels'. Our research efforts 1w. elude both the activities of our own scientific staff and wo'rk being supported by grants to non-Federal institutions and organizations and contracts' with pri.~ rate industry.' Additional research Is being sponsored through project agree~ ments with other agendas of the Federal Government.' Mr. Stern will describe all of `thIs lxi much greater detail. I simply wa~rt to note at this point that we regard our research activities aS an integral part of the total Federal effort to bring air pollution under better control. , GOALS FOR ACTION Mr. `Chairman, in the Clean Air Act, the Congress paved the way for a major new attack `on air pollution. The response of State and local government~i has been encouraging, as I have already noted. The influence of the Clean Air Act Is' reflected importantly also in changing attitudes toward air pollution control on the part of science, industry, and the American public. But we must not be complacent about the present status' of efforts to deal with this deceptively subtle problem. The development of a truly comprehensive national effort to PAGENO="0052" 48 `4LDEQVACY OF TJ~CHNOLQGY FOR POLLUTION I~BATEMENT control air pollfltt4)fl Is still very xr~neb ~ goal rather than an a~cormpUsheU~fact. As Pr'es~dé~1t tdbnson has Doin~ted out, we have only b~gun our work. The great majorIty äf Amei4cans are still not serV~d b~t really e~ectlve State and local control prograu~s. T~or the niost ps~rt, the State and local agencies: charged with responsibility for preventing and contrQflthg air pollution do n~t yet have adequate budgets, manpower, or legal authority. To indicate the extent to which all levels of Governnient and industry must augment their efforts we have established goals in three important categ~r1es and a tim,etahle for reaching `them. In each instance, it is ~ppareut that reach- ing these objectives will requ1r~ wide ranghig efforts by Go~tnment as we1~l a~ industry. And often, it will be necessary to adopt interim: teef~sutes to keep specific problems from getting out of hand while we work `toward the deve1iop~ ment and. application of more permanent solutions. The first such goal is a 25 percent r~ductio~n in air polthfiio~ from Industrial and municipal sources by 1975; this applies primarily to manufacturing and processing activitIes and to such ixi:unicipal activities as' burning and Incineration of refuse. To accomplish this goal, there must.be a substantial expansion. of State and local control efforts and of research and development activities' both by Govern- ment `and industry. The Federal Government will clearly have to provide leadership and assistance in both of these areais. With respect to the Federal responsibility to support State and local control efforts, Senate Bill 3112, which has just recently been passed by the Senate, would enable us to take further steps toward meeting this vital responsibility. The Bill wonid authorize grauti to State and local governments' to assist them in maintaining effective control programs; this would be in addition to our present authority to award grants to stimulate the creation of new programs or the improvement of ex~st1ng programs. The proposed new activity will en- able the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to help State and local governments meet the need for sustained, long-range efforts to' deal with their air pollution problems. In addition, Senate. Bill 3112 proposes: needed increases. In authorized appropriations for our air pollution activities for the current and the next two Fiscal Years. To achieve a 25 percent reduction In air pollution from industrial sources, we must also seek ways of stimulating private investment in research and control efforts. Currently, non~Governmental effort in. this area is n~t at all commen- surate with the magnitude and seriousness of th~ problem. In large. measure, this reflects inadequate regulatory contrOl action in our cit~ and States. But it is also due in part to the lack of economle incentives. Slnceresearcl~ and control activity generally does not increase the efficiency of industrial operations or im- prove the quality of 1goods and services, such activity is often given a very low priority. The usual economic incentives of the free. market have not been in the past, and are not now,~n effectiye: stimulus to industry. efforts in the air pollu- tion control field. A sound regulatory program ,with uniform legal requirements to inSure equality of treatment. among competing industries is .an effective :stlmn- lus which en~our~ge~ industry effort~ to improve and e~pply control . technology. Our second goal concerns suI~pr~xide. pollutionfroni the burn~ng of fossil fuels, primarily at such 1~rge lnstal~stiOns as electri~ power plants. This is one of the most lmportaiitair pollution problen~ f~r which control technology is still deficient; however, several pro~ising approaehe~ jmve been. developed and are ready f~r full-Scale tes~ipg. . Our~.goa~ is to demonstrate the feasibility of such techniques by 1970. . :` . . But because salfu~ oxide. p~l1utten is `already a seriou~ problem in many large urban areas, it i54eseefltlal ti~at~intevim measures: be adopted to.1~eèp theproblem from worsening. In brief, such . measures involve greater consideratièn of air pollution problems in decisions on the allocation and use of fuels. We are already trying to encourage greater use of low-sulfur fuels in areas where the sulfur oxide pollution is now serious. In addition, serious consideration must be given to modifying our national fuel-import policies in order to give priority to low- sulfur fuels and to locating major new fuel~burning installations, primarily power plants, outside urban areas. The third goal ocncerns motor vehicle pollutiOn, which I have already dis- cussed briefly. Our objectives here are a 25 percent reduction ifl this problem by 1975 and a forty percent reduction by 1985. In our view, these goals can be achieved by improvementS In control technology applicable to the internal com- bustion engines. But even the most effective technology we can envision will PAGENO="0053" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 49 xiot be adequate to keep this problem from worsening in the face of projected iuture increases in our use of motor vehicles. More than 85 mIllion motor ve- hicles are now in use in the U.S. and this number increases every year. It is estimated there will be 120 million vehicles in use bV 1980. For the future, then, the development of alternate power sources with less inherent potential 1~or polluting the air is essential. ThetiecessarY research can- not be started too soon. To insure that such systems will be available in time to keep the motor vehicle problem from reaching critical proportions, prototype models must be available for testing by 1985. This major challenge will obviously require the combined research efforts of Government and industry. Our pending budget request, Mr. Chairman, includes funds with which we can begin planning our own efforts in this area and encouraging industry as well as private research instl!tutiAYrls to undertake similar work. The disposal of solid waste materials is a major factor in many of our most serious environmental contamination problems. The burning and incineration of refuse contributes to air pollution in all parts of the country. The growing piles of waste materials lying in and around countless American communities contribute to water and soil pollution. And heedless disposal of refuse is, of course, an Important cause of the ugliness that blights many of our fairest cities and towns and is increasingly spreading into, the countryside. In years to come, this problem can only worsen unless we make a conscious effort to bring it under control. As the economy moves upward, we not only produce a~d use more goods, we also discard more. As technical advances are translated into new products and materials, the character of what we throw sway becomes more varied and more complex. Moreover, since control of air and water pollution often yields solid waste material, our progress in these areas may also add to the growing waste disposal burden. To dispose of the mounting volume of solid waste withoi~t polluting ~tir, water, and soil, and thus threatening public health, i~ an incredil~ complex challenge, As yet, we are not now equipped as a Nation to meet it. B~t now, for the first `time, there is hope that we are on the road to fhiding the nece~sary capability~ Tinder the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965, the Dej)artm~nt o~ Health, Educa- tion, and Welfare is mounting a national program to deal With the waste disposal problem. The p~ogram includes research, technical assistance, and training ac- tivities, as well as pro~eets to demonstrate new and proxui~iug ways of mauagi~g solid waste problems and grants to States to assist them In surveys of refuse problems and planning of needed programs. I am pleased to note, Mr. Ohairman, that this program is getting underway very rapidly. Mr. Gill~ertson will report on this in greater detail, I just want to point ~ut that here, too, that Secretary Gardner and I are committed not to any single approach, but to full explorfition of all promising ways of dealing with the problem. Among the most important needs in this geld are a better understanding of the extent and control of such problems as the breeding of ~isease~caUsing organisms and eQatamination of ground waters by landfill operations and substantial technical improvements in both the opera~ tion of landfills and the design and operation of ineinerators. The possibilities of recapturing and using heat from incinerators and of converting rg~use to soil conditioners are also deserving of close attention. In. the long run, Mr. Chairman, it will not be sufficient merely to find better ways of' dispOsing of refuse, though this is surely an important objective. Wher- ever possible, we must also seek and apply ways of reducing the volume of mate- rials discarded from homes, offices, and factories, as well as ways of recovering materials which may be re-usable. The end result, if we are successful, will be a very important step toward a more beautiful and more healthful environment for all Americans. Mr Chairman, I have tried this morning to throw some light on the many complex ramifications of environmental contamination and to suggest the broad approach which `we in the Department of Health,, Education, and Welfare feel Is the most promising way of bringing these problems under effective control. In the course of these hearings, you will undoubtedly hear testimony from. many persons `whose views differ from ours with respect to the seriousness of many' environmental contamination problems and the relative merits of various ways of dealing with them. Such differences of opinion are to be expected when the subject is as complex as this one. I think It is important, however, that we assess these varying points of view in the full light of some basic facts about environmental contamination and our present understanding of its impact on society. PAGENO="0054" 50 ADEQUACY ~F TECHNQJ~OGX FOR POLbUTION ABAT~ENT In the rela~ively sjiort. time sinpe we in the United States began awakening~ to the threat of envirowneñtal contamination, we have been able to'reach only a broad and t~ntative understanding of its nature and effects on man. Our- present knowledge suggests that the many contaminants to which we are all exposed threaten our liea]~h and welfare in many devious and subtle ways. To judge the full magnitu~e and seriousness of the problem requires a great deal more than just a supe~l'cia1 look at its most obvIous consequences. In many respects, `our progress in understanding the problems of envirOn- mental contamipation. has l~een ~ineven. We have long since learned, for ex- ample, that, regulations' are needed to guard against the Ingestion of sn~Iil'i awounts of tox1~ subCt~pc~ in fOod and to insure the purity of drugs. In the area of~ o~cupàtionai health,there is broad understandtsg of the need to protect workers against many of the' most obvious hazards inherent in their d&ily job- activities. But we have only begun to develOp an awareness of the full `implb cations of con~rnh~ation `of the environment. That we have lagged In this respect is indeed tragic, for it is `contamination of the natural environment that has the greatest potential for affecting the total population, including infants and children as well as the elderly, the healthy as well as the ailing, and adults of all ages, regard'ess of their occup4tions. The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has a long experience In dealing with all of the ways jn which contaminants may reach man. Our expOrts pioneered in developing research and regulatory programs to protect the public health and welfare from food, drug `and water contaminants and from a host of communicable diseases which once caused death and disability In truly tragic proportions. By identif~ring the interrelationships that exist among all `of the various ways in' which man is exposed' to the toxic by-products of our tecbnm logically advanced `sOciOty, the Department assesses the overall dimensions of' the threat posed by e ironmental pollution. Mr. Chairman, this is very ithpor~ tant, because an adequate air pollution control program must take into considera- tion the other veOtor~'of disease and disability which compound its `effects. 1 said a few n~omènts a~o that we have just begun to recognize that man's ability to contaminate Ji~ environment has long since surpassed the essentially limlted capacity of o~r environment to purge itself of such contamination. I submit that the Clean Air Act `of 1963 and its Amendments' of 1965, and `the beginning we, have ipade toward Implementation of this Congressional mandate are flrni evidence that `this recognition is real and concrete. The several ap~ preaches t'oward control of the problem in which we `are now engaged-research and training activities, financial and technical assistance to' State and local con- trol agencies, and direct Federal abatement `action on problems `beyond the reach of other levels of government-offer a sound foundation on which future tin~ provements can be built. That we must, all of us, seek Improvements is a point on which there can'be no serious disagreement. The forces of growth and change which leave In their wake problems of environmental contamination continue to accelerate with each year th~at passes. The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare is pledgnd to cár~y out the Congi~essional mandate for a clean and healthy environment for all Aihericans. Mr. D~anDARIo.' Mr. Mn~Kenzie, please come forward. Mr. MACKENZIE. Thank you. Mr. D4DDARIO. As I understand, Mr. Stern will ghte the next statement, ` ` . Mr. STERN. Yes.' Mr. DADD4RIO, Proceed, please. STATEMENT OP MIL J~R'fltUR C'. STERN, ASSISTANT CIflEP, DIVI- SION OP AIR POLLTJPION, DEPARTMENT OP KEALT~H, EDUCATION, AN]) WZLPAR]~, . Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I -have submitted for the recOrd a rather lengthy statement of 78 pages and certa~nly I wouldti't biir~en ~ou, with that amount of ~e'aUizlg~ Ihav~ an abbreviated statement of 12 pages. If in your time schedule this PAGENO="0055" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 51 is too long; I can even ~bbreviate that further, but I would prefer to read it into the record. Mr. DADDARIO. I think a 12-page precis ~s all right. Mr. STERN. Than1~ yoh. I am pleased to have this opportunity. to appear before you and to review the adequacy of presen:t technology for controlling the prob- lem of air pollution in, this country. Air pollution, as recently as the early 1940's, was perceived as a relatively simple problem having to do with the emission of black smoke and cinders, and confined to a relatively few eastern and mid- western industrial cities. The technology for controlling this kind of air pollution consisted of improvements in combustion practices, restrictions on the kinds of fuel used, and in some cases, devices to control cinder emissions. When smoke became so intense in some cities as to bring on a public clamor for relief, this technology was applied and, with considerable help from the fortuitous change from steam to diesel powered locomotives and the substitution of gas an,d oil for coal in space heating, the atmospheres of these cities visibly improved. Today, Mr. Chairman, as you are well aware, the air pollution problem is known to be much more complex than this, and its effects are infinitely more serious than was once suspected. Moreover, these effects are felt daily in every region of the country. As Under Secretary Cohen has pointed out, there: are many cogent reasons why we must control air pollution. But by far the most compelling reason, the principal reason why `the American public and its representatives have demanded that we restore the atmosphere, is that air pollution contributes to illness and death. Just as our perception of the nature of the air pollution problem has changed drastically in the past few decades~ so has the problem changed, and so has our ability to deal with it changed. In 1955 when the Federal air pollution program was initiatç~d, there was little exact knowledge of `the kinds and quantities of pollutants in the air, or of the mechanisms by which they accumulate or are dispersed. The national air sampling network and the continuous air monitoring program, both operated by this Department haye since gathered exten- sive data on the amounts and chemical composition of particulates in the air, and the concentrations of such gaseo~is pollutants as nitro- gen dioxide, nitric oxide, carbon monoxide, oxidants, total hydro- carbons, and sulfur dioxide. Advances in meteorology have enabled us to gage the atmosphere's total mixing or absorptive capacity over a particular geographic region, and thus to estimate the degree of air pollution control needed for a given area. The technological means of controlling the sources of air pollution have also been rapidly developed in the past several years. Particu- late pollutants can be removed by devices which e~nploy principles of filtration, electrostatic precipitation, or centrifugal force. Gaseous pollutants can be taken out through liquid scrubbing, vapor recovery, combustion, and solid adsorption. Open burning, once widely em- ployed to dispose of a city's trash and to get rid of l~aves, upholstery in scrapped automobiles, battery cases, tires, and so forth, can and has been in some cases replaced by processes which do not pollute the PAGENO="0056" ~52 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT atmosphere. Smoke pollution from domestic, commercial, and in- dustrial incinerators, `boilers, and heating systems can be largely eliminated t,hrouoh improved fuel burning equipment and proper fir- ing practices. &rbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons dis- charged from the gasoline-powered motor vehicles have been brought under partial control. In fact, through control devices or through process modification most sources of air pollution in the United States today can be brought under control. None of this is to say that we can afford to be complacent about the presently available technology for controlling air~ pollution. There are some pollutants, like the nitrogen oxides, which today rarely, if ever, reach what are thought to be harmful levels in many regions of the country. We do not have adequate technology for controlling nitrogen oxides. There are some pollutants, like the sulfur oxides, which today almost constantly reach harmful levels in most of our metropolitan areas, and the increasing use of sulfur-bearing fuels for energy and other purposes will undoubtedly aggravate this problem in the years ahead. We have reached the prototype stage in one ap- proach to controlling the sulfur oxides, but for the. most part we can control sulfur pollution today only by using low-sulfur fuels. There are some sources of pollution, like the automobile, whose emissions we can today partially control, and the federally required national appli- cation of this control to n~w cars in the fall of next year will be a sig- nificant step in halting pollution fron~ the motor vehicle. But the rapidly increasing number of automobiles will in the next two decades wipe out the gain from today's partial controls. Further, Mr. Chair- man, we cannot be `complacent about the attractiveness of much of `the technology for controlling air pollution. Pollution controls gen- erafly do not increase the efficiency of industrial production or im- `prove the quality of the product. In fact, since in our marketplace the focus is on minimizing costs and maximizing returns, present-day pollution controls, which add to costs `and not to returns, are frequently considered an impediment by those w'ho operate the sources of pollu- tion. We can expect that this attitude will prevail as long as regula- `tion of pollution varies from place to place, or until the technology of pollution control is developed to the point where control is not con- sidered to be an economic impediment to industry. In the testimony I have submitted for the record, I have included detailed discussion of the technology for control of the major sources of pollution with which we are concerned nationally. These are: motor vehicles; stationary combustion sources, with particular em- phasis on the technology of sulfur removal from flue gas and fuels; `petroleum refineries; steel mills; the chemical industry, both organic and inorganic and including the fertilizer manufacturing industry; foundries; and pulpmills. I will, `therefore, skip over this portion of my testimony so as to use my remaining time to discuss with you `the systems approach to air pollution control and, in broad terms to outline the extent of `the Federal air pollution research and develop- ment program. This program is described in my written testimony in greater detail. The air resource management or systems ~pproach to air pollution control is most effective when coupled with `a regioual or what has PAGENO="0057" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 53 been termed an "air shed" program, with the air shed encompassing all pollution sources in an area and all communities exposed to the air polluted by these sources. The control program for a particular air shed is developed rationally. Standards of air quality are selected; from this baseline and from data on the natural characteristics of the area, standards for emissions from different sources are calculated; and on the basis of these emission limitations construction and process codes are developed. This approach is attractive and apparently simple. However, cer- tain fundamental problems must be solved before the approach can be fully implemented. The first of these is social. Air quality standards, if they are to be broadly applied, have to be acceptable not only to the scientists who must devise the means of achieving them, but must be acceptable to the public, who in the long run must pay for the benefits derived from their application. I do not believe, Mr. Chairman, that there is any question in anyone's mind but that air quality standards should be' vigorous enough to prevent adverse health effects in even the most sensitive of the human population. I believe that most of us would also' want standards sufficiently vigorous to prevent sensory irritation, injury to animals, and damage to ornamental plan~ts or agricultural crops. However, while it has been amply demonstrated that air pollu- tion at levels routinely found in community atmospheres is associated with these adverse effects on health and welfare, there is a vast amount. of research that must be conducted before we reach, if we ever reach, a perfect understanding of the cause-and-effect relationships between air pollution and the damage we now observe. Let me at this point, Mr. Chairman, identify some of the more im- portant areas in which we need to expand our knowledge of the effects of air pollution. I will limit myself to the effects of air pollution on health. A principal objective for research both now and in the future is to establish the cause-and-effect relationship between known dosages of air pollutants, singly or in combination,, and the health or welfare of man under known environmental conditions. This will require the acquisition of new information at all levels, from basic research to field investigation. The basic mechanisms of action of many agents are ill-defined or unknown, and we must understand them if we are to define capacities for physiologic and toxicologic actions, As you know, Mr. Chairman, in the Clean Air Act (the Congress recognized the need for yardsticks of air quality, calling upon the Secretary to publish criteria reflecting the latest scientific knowledge of the predictable effects of various pollutants in the atmosphere. This Department has prepared in preliminary form criteria for two prinei~al classes of pollutants, the sulfur oxides and the photochemi~ cal oxidan±s, and is working on criteria for two other classes, the nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide. It is hoped that these criteria will assist the `States and local go~rernments in establishing air quality standards. The second problem we thust solve if we ate to apply the rational approach to air pollution control is' technical. We do not have today PAGENO="0058" 54 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT fully developed methods of bridging the gap between air quality stand- ards and source emission standards. Our methods are particularly deficient for that very situation in which air pollution is most critical-the multiple source or urban situation. For suspended particulate matter we can approximate the transition using emission inventory techniques. The particulate matter emitted from each source in an area can be estimated, and from a comparison between the overall estimate and the air quality stand- ard a percentage reduction can be calculated~ For some gases and fine particles computer programs have been written to accommodate a large number of sources of different categories, to take into account varying times of maximum emissions, and to take into accOunt varying meteorological conditions. However, these programs require a wealth of data, and they have not been developed to the point where they will accommodate reactions between pollutants after they leave the source, such as the reactions which result in photocherrijcal smog, and they will not accommodate particulate matter that falls out, or nuisances, such as odors, which usually emanate from a single source. Mr. Chairman, this concludes my review of some of the problems associated with our present technology for controlling air pollution. I would like finally to briefly describe for you some of the forms and the extent of Federal Goirernment efforts to advance that technology. The functions of conducting and supporting research have been an integral part of our Department's air pollution activities ever since the establishment of the Federal air pollution program in 1955. In fiscal year 1966, which ended on June 30, about $14 million was in- vested in research activities. This sum represented some 55 percent of the funds appropriated for the air pollution program. For the current fiscal year, our budget requests includes about $18 million for research activities. Of the total for fiscal 1966, about 30 percent was allocated for re- search in our own facilities, mostly at the Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center in Cincinnati. About 10 percent was used to support research, by other Federal agencies-the Environmental Sciences Services Administration and the National Bureau of Stand- ards of the Department of Commerce, the Bureau of Mines of the Department of the Interior, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. Contracts with non-Federal institutions and agencies, including in- dustrial firms, account for 20 percent. The largest single portion, about 40 percent, was awarded to nonprofit institutions, mostly uni- versities, to support needed research projects. This research effort includes a broad range of investigations of the nature, extent, sources, effects, and control of :air pollution, and the scientific disciplines involved include many branches of the physical and biological sciences. Among the more important elements of the program are laboratory studies of the adverse effects of air pollutants on animals and clinical studies of effects `on man, epidemiological and statistical studies of the occurrence of illness and death in relation to various measurements of air pollution, field investigations of the ef- fects of pollutants on materials and structures, engineering investiga- tions of the nature and control of pollution `from such major sources as motor vehicles, fuel combustion, and manufacturing activities, and studies in the social sciences. PAGENO="0059" AD]tQTMCY 0F TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLT7tION ABATEMENT 55 other Federal agencies play an important role in our research ef- `forts. The Weather Bureau of the Environmental Sciences `Services Administration of the Department of Commerce has earned the major burden of meteorological studies. The Bureau of Mines of the De- partment of the Interior is engaged in numerous projects relating .to the nature and control of pollution from fuel combustion, primarily `sulfur oxide pollution from the combustion of fossil fuels. The Ten- ~iessee Valley Authority is active in meteorological and engineering ~studies relating to pollution from' large fuel4burning installations; the Agricultural Research Service and the Forest Service of the De- ~partment of Agriculture in studies of `air pollution effects on `plant life and the Bureau of Standards `of the Department of Commerce in studies of the basic chemistry and physics Of air pollution.. The Li- brary of Congress has been our principal bibliographical resource. Although not in contrast to the above noted agencies, recipients of air pollution research funds by transfer from this Department, the Office of Coal Research of the Department of the Interior, the Na~ tional Science Foundation, the National Space and Aeronautics Agency, the Atomic Energy Commission and th~ Department of De- fense have all sponsored research of great value to a better under- standing of air pollution, its effects and its control. I have given a rough indication, Mr. Chairman, of the extent of the air pollution research and development activities that are presently being carried out in the United States. I will be pleased to submit for the record a detailed breakdown Of our Department's activities in this area. Mr. Cohen has already given you some material. We will provide other material in addition. `Further, as I previously re- sponded to'Mr. Vivian's question to `Mr. Cohen, under an arrangement with the American Society of Mechanical Engineers we are currently gathering, detailed information on the air pollution research'and de- v~lopment activities being carried out under other than Federal aus- pices. This information should be complete sometime in the fall of this year, and I will be pleased to make it available to the committee. To conclude my remarks, Mr. Chairman, we have studied the report of the Research Management Advisory Panel to your committee, and we are in agreement, in `large part, with the fundamental findings `of `the `report. As the report indicates, the quality of life is to a large "extent" dependent upon the `quality of the environment.' But it is only iii recent years that we have begun to understand this relationship, and particularly to understand how dependent we are on our funda- mental resources of air, water, and land For the greater part of our historical `development our interest in the environment was primarily that of subduing nature ~o that she would serve man better. We had to convert many of our beautiful rivers and lakes into practically open sewers before we' concluded that we must conserve our water resources, and we had to experience the tragedy of Donora and the anguish of Lo~ Angeles `before we `began to realize' that the seemingly infinite ocean of air that surrounds this planet has decidedly finite capacities for diluting and dispersing the wastes we throw up from ourciviliza~ tion. In our single-minded devotion to achieving the benefits of sci- ence `and technology, we plunged ahead with the abt~ndantuiatenials at~hand, without a very precise nOtion of where we~ were going and PAGENO="0060" 56 ADEQLYACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT without serious attention to the possible side effects of our activities on the environment. Today, it is apparent that we can no longer with impunity discharge wastes indiscriminately to the environment. It is apparent today that we must :use our science and technology to control the byproduct problems of our industrialized society, as well as to produce the goods and services we all increasingly enjoy. And it is apparent that we are going to have to run very hard in the imme- diate years ahead just to keep pace with the problem. We must greatly expand our application of technology to the sources of pollution, and we must accelerate our efforts to further develop that technology. I am convinced, Mr. Chairman, that the attention focused on these needs by this committee will make a substantial contribution to our progress toward the control of environmentai pollution. Thank you. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Mosher? Mr. Mosmia. Mr. Stern, just a question concerning the Department's research activities. Page 14 of Secretary Cohen's prepared testimony has to do with motor vehicle pollution, and he says there, "but even the most effective technology we can envision will not be adequate." Is your Depart- ment funding research, either in-house or independently, which you might refer to as "far out"-that is, technology which, even though you can't envision it today, may become a reality tomorrow? Are you using some of your research funds independent of the automotive industry, looking for "breakthroughs" that will make this statement of Secretary Cohen no longer true? Mr. STERN. In our research plans for this fiscal year, we have al- located approximately a hundred thousand dollars for studies in the so- called far-out area that you are talking about-the electric battery- type automobile, the fuel cell-type automobile. We recognize that this is such a small sum that it can do no more than accumulate the necessary informatiçn on which to base a much more substantial pro-. gram that can be recommended at a later time. Mr. MosnEn. You are hoping, though, to put some people with crea-. tive capacity to~work on this? `Mr. S~rER~. Yes;~ we already have some people who are quite con- versant with the field, hate made a number of visits to places that are working in this techhology and asse~ubled a large amount of data, so that we are in' a positiOn at this time to get an appreciation of the nature of the work that has to be done in order to even start on in- vestigation~in this far-out technology. Mr. MOSTIER. `For example, I heard the other day about claims by a Professor Mehnán, of Columbia, concerning ideas `that he ha~ for reverting to steampower but using combtistion from fossil fuels in a way that would nOt pollute the atmosphere. Doe~ this committee have assurance.' that you folks `are~ considering `ideas like that even though they rna~~ `s:oi~d impr~ct~ical? Are you working on that sort of idea? Mr. Sm.nN.' We have no `veservatioiis on new ideas. We are orenared `to encothpass any `and all ideas in thi~~ fat-out technology because we recognize that when you are looking this far in the future, you can't draw a diagram as to juSt what the vehicle is going to look like. You have to accept' ideas which include the use of steam, the use of bat- PAGENO="0061" ADEQUACY OF TRCHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEM1~NT 57 teries, the use of fuel cells or, as I believe Professor Melman has also indicated, a vehicle that stores up energy in a rotating flywheel, ai~cI which occasionally stops at a place where an electric motor can re- supply energy to the flywheel. All of these ideas are grist for the mill. Mr. MosutE. That is all. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Brown? Mr. BROWN. No questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Ryan? Mr. RYAN. Mr. Chairman, I was concerned about a statethent' on page 12 of the Secretary's statement. lie stated that the first goal is a 25-percent reduction in air pollution from industrial and munici- pal sources by 1975. My question is, could we get a greater reduction if we spent more money? And, if not, why not? Mr. STERN. 1975 is quite close in terms of the time it takes to re- build any substantial part of our industrial establishment. Since we are talking here not essentially of new construction but things that have to be done to plants whioh exist at present, I think it would be a tremendous achievement if we even made this goal. Mr. MACKENZIE. May I comment on this further, sir. Mr. DADnARIO. Certainly. Mr. MACKENZIE. I think one of the impediments to making more rapid progress than has been indicated in Mr. Cohen's statement re- lates to the existence and scope of activity of State and local govern- ment regulatory control activities. I `would like to point out to the committee that not more than half of the urban areas which are in need of regulatory control programs~ for air pollution control now have them, and of these the majority of them are operated at an in- adequate level to do the kind of job that you are inferring might be looked for. On the State government level, it was only about .1~ years ago, in 1952, that the first State set up a State air pollution control law and started operating a significant air pollution control program. In the intervening period we now have about half the States that have significant laws on the books. But, only a handful of these are operating programs that are at an effective leveL So that I think what is lacking as related to this goal is not. so much the technology as it is the development of the control programs onthe State and local levels of government that would effectively: see that the available technology is employed. Mr. DADDAEIO. If that were to be done, what effect would it have on the percentage figures Mr. Ryan referred to? Mr. MACKENZIE. Well, of course, in any of these, as was indicated by Mr. Cohen, necessarily there is a time schedule that is involved in effecting a rollback of pollutant emissions. As an example, many of the major steel manufacturing centers in the country in the past several years have been confronted with the problem of controlling pollution from `steel manufacture, and in the main this has required looking at the feasible design and construction periods that could be incorporated in the scheduling in order to effect the necessary improvements. In the majority of these centers this has led to agreed-upon s~hcdules th~t would reduce the pollution from this source, which I am using solely as an example,~ over a'~period which varied `from 7 to 10 years generally. PAGENO="0062" 58 AIYEQrACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Now, this is significant progress but I think it needs to be' pqinted' ô~t that there isii't~ any valve that you can shut o~ that would stop the ~poHuti'~'n~ `in:'tlie mai~it ;takes ~a significant time period to a~ tually accomplish some degree of improvement As a furthei exam pie, in the field of pollution from automotive vehioi~s, we haite issued standards that are obligatory on the manufacturing industry begin- ning with the 1968 model year. Now, with something over SD million vehicles `already on the road, the incorporation of controls on the 9 or 10 million vehicles that `will come out in any one year is not going to result in a : rapid change. in the pollution emission picture from automobiles. .~ .: , This will be ä~ `gradual change for the better and is reficcted~1in the percentage improvement~figures that were cited by Secretary Cohen. These factors, sir, iimibwhat we think can beaccomplished reasonably.' We are hopeful `that these actions can actually be accomplished; and if they' come about, then I think we will be well on the road to signifi~ cant improvement.. I want to be not: only hopeful about what we can do, but also realistic about what it is possible to accomplish. Mr. RYAN. Well, `if the political institutions were more advanced,' I take it that technology could go ahead and develop the means to re- duce air pollution by more than 25 percent in the next 10 years, Mr. MAcKENzIE. Yes, I. think the limitation on our improvemeiit'is more of a political and social witure as of now, certainly with respect to pollution from statibnary sources, than it is technological with some important reservations. Th~sulfi1rp;ollution problem is one in which there is a real basic need for improvement in technology. Mr. MOSHER. Another major element certainly is the private in- vestment that wOuld be required. ~You are talking about steel plants. Isn't the capital investment- Mr. MACKENZIE. `Capital investment is relatively, high but in terms of percentage of the total investment in the manufacturing plant,, it is not great. Mr. DADDARIO.. Mr. Ryan? . Mr RYAN I would like to bring out one other point on this ques~ tion of pOlitical institutions. It refers to the matter of air shed~ and regional controL, How much thinking has been done in terms `of de~ veloping this ona nationwide grid pattern or something of that nature? Mr. MAcKENZIE. We have been endeavoring, to sell this concept sir. In the Clean Air Act there is provision for additional financial incentrve by grants'f~r program development to State and local agen- cies when the regional concept is incorporated in the applicant's plans. In this way, for e~ample,. on a program improvement prOject, the gmut, instead of~ providing $2 of Federal money as is usual for most projects, would be increased by 50 percent for a regional project to make it $3 for each.matohing doil~r byt'he applicant. In spite of this, I fiFankly am personally disappointed at the extent to v~hich this financial incentive has resulted in regional program'~s~ 1 do~ `t' think it has' been as. effective as I' had hoped that it might be. Mr. RYAN. There yon are leaving the initiative to the local govern- ments and the regions. Has your Department or any agency of gov-. ernment given any thought~to developing a national air shed grid so, to speak, which would then be something that you could present to the Congress? ` ` ` PAGENO="0063" ADEQTJACY OF TECHNOLOGY POE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 59 Mr. MACKENzIE. We have currently been operating on the directive that is included in the Clean Air Act that the primary responsibility for control of air pollution rests with the States and local govern- ments. We think we need to give this a ~ajr trial. If it does not result in the improvement that we think is desirable, we will come back and report so to the Congress and hope that the policy will then be changed. Mr. VIVIAN. Will the gentleman yield a rninute. I can appreciate his concern because I remember driving to his district, and by the time I got through the Holland Tunnel I was incapable of smelling anything. Mr. RYAN. How much time do you intend to give the local com- munities and governments before you come forward with something that is a more nationally oriented plan? Mr~ MAOKENZIE. Well, I wouldn't like to, set down a definite time scale for this, Mr. Ryan, at this point. Under the terms of the Clean Air Act, however, in certain regional areas which are interstate in character, we are making studies for the purpose of determining whether or not more direct Federal action may be called for. With respect to the New York City metropolitan area we have al- ready initiated a Federal abatement action involving pollution which flows either way across the State line from New York to New Jersey or vice versa from New Jersey to New York. We expect to hold the first formal conference in connection with this abatement action a little later this fall. Mr. DADDARIO. So the techniques are developing in this direction? Mr. MACKENZIE. Yes. Mr. DADDARI0. Not as fast as we would like, apparently. Mr. Brown? Mr. BROWN. Mr. Chairman, could I explore a slightly different aspect of this? Perhaps this was touched on by Secretary Cohen, but is there any scientific discipline which is primarily concerned with the development or the progress in the field of waste management or pollution control which could be assisted in the same fashion that we provide assistance to other scientific disciplines? Is there a develop- ing discipline in this single area? ~[ recognize the fact that many disciplines contribute to it but is there something more specific that could be encouraged? Mr. STERN. There is support provided by the Public Health Service both in the specific area of training for air pollution and in the more general area of environmental health which includes not only air but also aspects of land and water. . Support is thus being provided both at the level which looks at all of these disciplines as a unit, and at the separate discipline. In the particular area of air pollution we are supporting university training this year at 20 universities and in the coming fiscal year we expect to expand this to 38. This year we are supporting as either fellows, or by stipends from the university training grants, 159 fel- lows at university level air pollution training and this will be expanded this fiscal year to 268. And, at our own training facilities in Cin~hinati, where we have short-term training courses this past year we have trained about a PAGENO="0064" 60 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY ~OR POLLUTION ABATEMENT thousand people in 1- and s-week training courses and we will ex- pand this by 50 percent this year. Mr. BROWN. Well, I would like a little more information on this. I know that in California we have the State government enter into certain co~ntract5 to make use of aerospace technology, the so-called systems engineering ~groups. One of these was a waste management contract. It went to a company which had no prior experience in waste management per se, but was loaded with systems engineers. So, I presume they brought in the specialists that they needed and at- tempted to construct in the brief study that they made, some sort of approach based upon their particular expertise. But., there's a very real problem in developing a specific scientific skill directly related to this. I know when Los Angeles County set up their air pollution control district, they brought in chemists, civil engineers, all sorts of people that they thought would have a background related to this, but none of them really had experience in the total problem of how you control air pollution in the sense that you have been talking about it here. I think we need to encourage this sort of approach, and if necessary we need to look backward. It just occurred to me while you were talk- ing, that in this country we have had some examples of very skillful waste management in very prosaic ways. For example, the Dutch farmers in Pennsylvania used to and probably still do, carry on a very fine type of agriculture based upon the fact that they don't waste anything. They compost the manure, they do everything necessary to build a closed loop out of their agricultural operation. And, we need this sort of an approach to our whole scientific technology or in- dustrial technOlo~y today. I'm just wondering if we are making any approaches in this direction or if we need to encourage further ap- proaches to additional training drafts and things of that sort. Mr. STERN. This is the sort of approach that is being encouraged in these environmental health type of training grants which are being made to universities where the students are being given course work and do their research in an interdisciplinary area that unites and re~ lates all of these problems, one to the other. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Roush? Mr. Rousn. Mr. Chairman, although you indicated that the com- mittee would be getting this I want to restate my Own feeling that we should know the answer to several questions, pertaining particularly to specific information. For instance, we should know how much money is being spent by HEW to whom it is being allotted, how many people are involved, the nature of their skills, where the research is being done, a description of the work which is being done by HEW, by other Government agencies who are being financed with HEW funds, and by private institutions and nonprofit institutions carrying on work with HEW funds. Then, Mr. Chairman, I had a more specific question. I'm *ohdering how you bring together the informa- tion which is obtained by ~th~ various research prOject~ being financed by HEW and various other ~ôvernmental agencies. Is your office the clearinghouse for the bringing together of such information? (In- formation requested is contained in vol. II, under section for HEW.) Mr. STEEN. We have within our organization an Air Pollution Technical Information Center. This is the first of the governmental PAGENO="0065" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 61 type of technical information centers that are the result of the study by the Office of Science and Technology as to how governmental agen.- cies should develop a technical information resource. Through this activity we attempt to maintain a central source from which people can get information on what is going on not* only with governmental funding but also from any support, and to make it readily available to the public. We have had numerous publications and attempt as rapidly as information is obtainable to make it available by publica- tion either in the form of technical papers that are published by tech- nical societies, or of publication by our own agency. Mr. Rotxsn. I gather that industry is doing a great deal with the problem of air pollution. Is there a means of getting the results of their endeavors into this office so that it, too, might be made available to other industries and other users? Mr. STERN. In cooperation with the principal technical association in this field, the Air Pollution Control Association, we jointly support the publication of what are called APCA abstracts-Air Pollution Control Association abstracts~ We have contracted with the Library of Congress and with other agencies to obtain the basic literary rO- sources and make them available so that they can be published. This includes information from industry sources as well as from gov- eriunental sources that are published either by this technical associa- tion or elsewhere in the world. Mr. ROUSH. Is. there any way that an industry which has a particu- lar problem can direct its inquiry to you? They may say, "We are engaged in the manufacture of the following product and in the ~ourse of that manufacture we follow the following processes: We have an air pollution problem; and do you have information which would be helpful to us?" Can you answer that inquiry without send- ing them a pamphlet? Mr. STER~. We have in addition to this Air Pollution Technical In- formation Center a fairly large organization known as our Technical Assistance Branch. This organization which has its headquarters in Cincinnati has been set up primarily to provide :technical assistance to States, to cities, and to industry, and we have developed in this group expertise to answer most of the kinds of questions that cities, States, or industry ask with regard to air pollution. Mr. ROUSH. Just one more question, Mr. Chairman. In your testi- mony you mentioned that Germany and Japan were taking certain steps to solve their pollution problems. Do we have a program where- by we can definitely benefit from the research whióh is being con- ducted in other countries? Mr. MACKENZIE. Yes. Mr. ROUSH. Is it sufficient? Mr. MACKENZIE. I think we are fully cognizant of most of the significant work that is going on in the air pollution field elsewhere in the world. We have kept up on this by participation in a series of international organizations to the extent that we consider appro- priate, and also through bilateral arrangements with a number of countries as well. For example, we have cooperated with the World Health Organi- zation by participation in their expert committees. We have also 68-240-66-vol. 1-5 PAGENO="0066" 62 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT assigned to the World Health Organization an epidemiologist from our staff to assist it in getting data from various countries that would be of interest to us `~and to other countries. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, to which the United States. is a party, has a group which is fostering cooperative projects in the air pollution control field in which members of our staff participate. We have collaborated with the Economic Commission for Europe which~ is engaged in the development of certain types of standards relating to the control of air pollution. We have a bilateral arrangement with West Germany in connection with studies relating to the. control of air pollution,' particularly from automobiles and from fuel combustion. This is being developed further. We have a bilateral agreement with the Japan~se through the Science. Board which' has a specific Committee on Air Pollution. There is a severe air pollution problem in certain parts of Japan and there are cooperative research projects that have been inaugurated under these auspices. We have assigned an epidemiologist to the Tokyo-Yokohama area for collaborative work in studies of the so- called Yokohama asthma which has been very bothersome to military personnel assigned in this area and is a troublesome problem also in the local population. Mr. Rousri. I would like to be exposed to it for about a week. I think it might be very helpful right now. Go ahead. Mr. MACKENZIE. Well, I cite these as examples of our activities in the international field. They provide opportunities, in my opinion, that we should take advantage of in order to keep fully abreast of what is going on elsewhere in the world. Mr. Rousii. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. On the subject'of automobiles and pollution from auto- mobiles, I get the impression from the Secretary's testimony that you see no solution on the problem of automobiles and air pollution there- from except by replacement of the power system of automobiles by something other than an internal combustion engine. Is that a cor- rect statement, sir? Mr. STERN. I don't know as I would subscribe to that. I think there are opportunities for improvement in the internal combustion engine that we haven't fully explored. We really don't know the limits to which the present powerplant can be improved. We have some doubts as to whether it can be improved to the extent that we can double the number of automobiles without putting devices such as afterburners on cars. I wouldn't say at this time that we have written off the pres- ent form of engine as an impossible one for further improvement. Mr. VIvIAN. You regard the fuel cell as a possible alternative source of power? Mr. SITEN. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. And if you have fuel cells will you not almost totally eliminate the problem except in the generating plants which generate the power in the first place? Mr. STERN. We don't have enough experience with the exhaust prod- ucts from fuel `cells to know whether they might have objectionable PAGENO="0067" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 63 chemical substances in them which are manufactured in the fuel cell in the same way that the exhaust from an automobile `has chemical sub- stances manufactured in the combustion chamber. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. MacKenzie, you mentioned that these antipollu- tion devices for automobiles relate to new cars. We have, however, had some experience in California. How has this worked out? Has the device, which I understand costs $50, been accepted by people? Do people recognize its worth? Has it gained wide enough acceptance so that buyers could be enticed to make this extra expenditure even for a used car or for cars already on the road? Mr. MACKENZIE. The experience in California to date has not been as successful as the California authorities had hoped it would be with respect to the application of control devices to used cars. The `California law authorized a requirement for application of devices on used cars in accordance with standards and criteria that would be adopted by the California board authorities. Up to now, this has not been invoked except in a partial way about 2 years ago. That application involved a partial requirement for installation of pollution control devices on used automobiles specifically for the instal- lation of so-called blowby devices intended to take care o'f the emission from the crankcase of an engine by recirculating this back to the intake of the engine where the emission is then burned as its goes through the engine again. These devices are relatively inexpensive. They were estimated to cost not more than~perhaps $15 each when installed on a' used car. The experience in installation with them, however, through theprivate automobile dealers, the garage mechanics, and others that were in- volved, was not very happy-initially. Apparently almost everything that was possible to go wrong did, I guess. Consequently, the require- ment for installation of devices on used cars in California is not currently being applied. It is still being given consideration and I believe, under `the present law in California, if devices are certified by the board that will meet the State's standards and criteria, these can then be required on a schedule that would be set up by California authorities. To date, however, `this has not been done. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Stern, you touch on the very serious problem of air pollution as a cause of disease and ill health. if wonder what research is being done in developing devices to clean up the air imme- diately prior to inhalation, including such things as masks, home devices, and others. Mr. STERN. There is work going on in the area of development of improved respirators. This is not a charge of our Department. Res- pirator certification is and has been for some time a responsibility of the U.S. Bureau of Mines who set the standards for respirators. However, we have been supporting by research grant studies at I-Jar- yard of improvement in respirator design and studies that relate to the form and fit of face masks and to the ease or difficulty in using a respirator-how much effort the individual must expend in breathing through a respirator. In buildings, of course, air filters are used as part of the means of cleaning air entering the building. Here certi- fication methods have been developed by the U.S. Bureau of Stand- ards. We have not been involved in methods of development or testrng of air filters for buildings. PAGENO="0068" 6. ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. MACIcENZIE. May I comment on this, Mr. Chairman? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. Mr. MACKENZIE. We have considei~ed it proper that our prime focus should be on the control of air pollution and not on means of personal protection by people. We would far prefer to take the course of main- tainin~ the quality of the atmosphere s.o that it would be suitable for breathing purposes rather than resortingto and promoting any system by. which people would have to go around with masks on. I cannot .see this as a practical approach. Mr. DADDABIO. I recogni~e that, but it is good to know that support is 1~eing given to this area of consideration. (The biographical. statement and complete prepared statement of Arthur C. Stern, follows:) BIOGRAPHICAL STATEMEN~ ON ARPIIUR C. STERN Educate'4 `Steven~ Ltistltute ~f ~echnology, ,jloboken, New Jersey.. KB. 1930, M,S. 1933: As~istant ,Cbje~, ,:Piv~ion, pf Air Pollution, U.S Public IieaJth Service,' Was~ilngton, t).C~, 1961 tG present. Chief, Laboratory of E]nglneerhig and Physical' Sciences, ~ivIsk~n' of `Air `?ollutioh, Public Health `Service, Cincin- natt~ "Ohio, 1955-4961. Ass1sta~ñt Clinical Professor, University. of Cincinnati, 1959-1961. ChIef,. Engineering Unit, Division of IndUstrial Hygiene, New York `State. Department of La&~gr, 1942-1954. Directed ~ew York City air pollution survey 1935-~1938; Research for Smoke Abatement Resei~rch Endowment, Stevens Thstit~utë of Techilology, 1930~1933. Chairman, American Standards Association, Sectional Committee on Industrial Ventilation (Z9). Member, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (Committee on Air Pollution Oontrois); member, American Ir~du~trial I~ygjene Association (Air P'oll~ition Committee); member, Air Pollution Control Association (Editorial and. International Relations `Com- mittees). Diplomaté, Ame~1can Academy of Sanitary Engineers `and American Board' of Industrial Hygiene., Licensed Professional E~igineer in Ohio and New * Listed in Who's WhC in America, Who's Who in Engineering, and Amer- icaa Men of Science. Editor of "Air `PollutiOn" (2 Volumes), Academic PresS, 1i~62. _______ PREPARED STATEMENT BY ARTHUR C. STERN, AssIsTANT CHIEF, DIvISION OF AIR P0LLVTI0N,tJ.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUcATION, AND WELFARE Mr. Chairman and Members of `the Committee: I am pleased to have this opportunity `to appear before you and to review the adequacy of present technology for controlling the problem of air pollution in this country. Air pollution, as recently as the early 1940's, was perceived `as a relatively sim- ple problem having to do with the emisSion of black smoke and cinders, and confined to a relatively few Eastern and Midwestern industrial cities. The technology for controlling this kind of air pollution consisted of improvements in combustion practices, restrictions on the kinds of fuel used, and in some cases, devices to control cinder emissions. When smoke became so intense in some cities as to bring on a public clamor for relief, `this technology was applied and, with considerable help from the fortuitous change from steam to diesel powered locomotives and the substitution of gas and oil for coal in space heating, the atmospheres of these cities visibly impro'ved. Today, Mr. Chairman, `as you are well aware, the air pollution problem is known to be much more complex than this, and its effects are infinitely more serious than was once suspected. Moreover, these effects are felt daily in every region of the'country. One of the principal reasons the contemporary problem of air pollution must be controlled is tha't we know that it adversely effects human health. The tragic episodes of acute air pollution have made it clear that in high concentrations over very brief periods, of time air pollution can cause death and disability. In Donora, Pennsylvania, in October 1948, during a short period of temperature inversion and fog, approximately 6,000 persons became ill, out of a population of PAGENO="0069" A]~EQCACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 65 14,000, and 17 persons died, Those present in thO town during the periOd re- marked on the heaviness of the fog, and on the inteilsity of the familiar odor of sulfur dicedde coming in large part from a local zinc roasting plant. Autopsies were performed on five Of the dead; a common finding was acute irritative changes of the lungs. In London, in December of 1952, the weather produced a pea soup fog and for a period of four days stilled the atmosphere to bring about an accumulation of pollutants. A few months later, when mortality statistics were reviewed, it was discovered that the city had experienced 4,000 excess deaths in a 7 day period which started with the first of the fog. There have been other recorded episodes and some probably unrecorded. As recently as 1963, during a fifteen day period of acute air pollution in New York City, the average number of deaths exceeded the average number for correspond- ing periods in other years by 647. ~1?he combination of air pollution, cold weather, and influenza has been cited as the cause of the New York episode. I would like to point out here, Mr. Chairman, that we have today no foolproof scheme by which we can predict the potential for an air pollution episode and on the basis of such prediction take timely action to prevent an episode. Vir- tually all our metropolitan areas and a great many industrial towns have the potential for an air pollution episode. They have the sources of pollution, and they experience to some extent the meteorological stagnations that cause pollu- tants to accumulate. The degree to which we can predict an air pollution episode depends not only upon our assessment of what will be diseharged to the atmos- phcte some hours or days hence, but also upon the accuracy and reliability with which we can predict the weather at that time. Although the art of forecasting weather conditions conducive to the buildup of pollutants has been slowly but surely developing, this art has hardly been brought to the point where we can entrust it with our health and welfare. At the present time meteorologists from the Environmental Sciences Service Administration of the Department of Commerce, on assignment to the Division of Air Pollution, forecast air pollution potential advisories daily. The areas covered by the individual advisories are at least 75,000 square miles, which is roughly the size of Oklahoma; and the lines defining the advisory areas are roughly 100 miles wide. The micro~climatic conditions prevailing in any partic- ular communty depend upon a great many factors additional to those which produce these large scale anticyclones. While our Department, Mr. Chairman, has encouraged the States and local governments to use these air pollution ad- visories as one of the precautionary steps that can be taken to prevent mass tragedy, we consider this weather advisory activity only as supplementary to the control of air pollution. Of even greater concern to us than the episodes of high levels of air pollution and their immediate effects are the effects on human health of long term ex- posures to low levels of air pollution, levels that routinely occur In virtually all of our metropolitan areas and in countless industrial towns throughout the United States. I would like to clear up any possible confusion on this matter of the health effects of chronic exposures to ordinary levels of air pollution. We are still accustomed to thinking that a disease state is brought about by a single cause-a carryover from public health history when almost total emphasis was placed on the bacterial or viral agent that bad to be present before a particular communicable disease could be diagnosed. This postulate has served us well and continues to serve us well. However, the idea that one agent is wholly responsi~ ble for any one disease state cannot provide the solutions we need today in deal- ing with the increasing incidence of chronic disease. There is a considerable body of evidence which makes it unmistakably clear that air pollution is asso- ciated with chronic respiratory disease. Various studies have shown that death rates from cardiorespiratory causes correlate in general with air pollution levels. Other studies have shown that asthma attacks have correlated with variations in sulfate pollution and with the incomplete burning of refuse. One study demonstrated that persons living in a town where air pollution Is high displayed significant differences in average airway resistance when compared with persons living in a town where pollution levels were lower. The result of laboratory studies involving exposure of animals, and in some cases humans, to controlled concentrations of ozone and sulfur dioxide agree generally with the resulta of these epidemiological studies. One significant investigation resulted in the development of lung cancer in laboratory animals infected with Influenza virus PAGENO="0070" 66 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT and later exposed to inhalation of an artificial smog of ozonized gasoline. These are but a few highlights of investigations that have been carried on and which indicate conclusively that air pollution is associated with the important chronic respiratory diseases of lung cancer, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, and asthma. But this is not to say that air pollution is the cause or the agent which brings on any one or all of these diseases. There may be several agents. Chronic bronchitis, for example, which has been established in Great Britain as a specific disease entity, develops over a long period of time and may become crippling through a combination of many factors-~-air pollution, smoking, repeated bouts with infectious agents, occupational exposures-all affected, perhaps, by heredi- tary predisposition. The point is, Mr. Chairman, whether we call air pollution one of sveral causes or name it as a contributing factor, the evidence is abundantly clear that air pollution is a l~azard to health. As Undersecretary Cohen has pointed out, there are many cogent reasons why we must control air pollution. But by far the most compelling reason, the principal reason why the American public and its representatives have demanded that we restore the atmosphere, is that air pollution contributes to illness and death. Just as our perception of the nature of the air pollution problem has changed drastically in the past few decades, so has the problem changed, and so has our ability to deal with it changed.. In 1955 when the Federal air pollution program was initiated, there was little ~exact knowledge of the kinds and quantities of pollutants in the air, or of the mechanisms by which they accumulate or are dispersed. The National Air Sampling Network and the Continuous Air Mon- itoring Program, both operated by this Department have since gathered ex- tensive data on the amounts and chemical composition of particulates in the air, and the concentrations of such gaseotLs pollutants as nitrogen dioxide, nitric oxide, carbon monoxide, oxidants, total hydrocarbons, and sulfur dioxide Advances in meteorology have enabled us to gage the atmosphere's total mix- ing or absorptive capacity over a particular geographic region, and thus to estimate the degree of air pollution control needed for a given area. The technological means of controlling the sources of air pollution have also been rapidly developed in the past several years. Particulate pollutants can be removed by devices which employ principles of filtration, electrostatic precipita- tion, or centrifugal force. Gaseous pollutants can be taken out through liquid scrubbing, vapor recovery, combustion, and solid absorption. Open burning once widely employed to dispose of a city's trash and to get rid of leaves, upholstery in scraped automobiles, battery cases, tires, etc., can and has been in some cases replaced by processes which do not pollute the atmosphere. Smoke pollution from domestic, commercial and industrial incinerators, boilers, and heating systems. can be largely eliminated through improved fuel burning equipment and proper firing practices. Carbon monoxide and unburned hydro- carbons discharged from the gasoline powered motor vehicles have been brought under partial control. In fact, through control devices or through process mod!- fication most sources of air pollution in the United States today can be brought under control. It seems to me, then, Mr. Chairman, that we have two fundamental realities to face concerning the problem of air pollution in the United States today. First of all, air pollution is today a major problem in this country. It not only costs the country billions of dollars each year in agricultural losses, transpor- tation delays, and material and structural damage, it contributes in a very real way for most Americans to the incidence of disease and the premature occur- rence of death. Further, all the major trends of growth in our society-increas- ing population, increasing urbanization, increasing Industrialization, increas- ing use of fuels, increasing use of motor vehicles-all project a severely woi~sening air pollution problem in the near future. The 1965 population of 195 million is expected to swell to 250 million in 1980. A larger percentage of this larger population will be living on roughly the same land area presently occupied by our current urban population. The gross national product, probably the best indicator of our overall economic activity and therefore the best indicator of the demands on our environment, is expected to climb from the 1965 level of $650 billion to $1010 billion in 1980. Last year's fleet of 85 million motor vehicles is expected to climb to 120 million in 1980. And our present discharge to the atmosphere of the United States of roughly 24 million tons of sulfur dioxide will, if present trends continue, soar to almost double that amount, or 43.6 million tons by 1980. PAGENO="0071" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 67 The other reality we must face, Mr. Chairman, is that in spite of the fact that we presently have the technology for controlling most sources of air pollu- tion, we are not by any means applying that technology in adequate measure. The Clean Air Act and its amendments have stimulated an unprecedented expan- sion in the efforts to control air pollution in this country. Totally, including both Federal and non-Federal contributions, the funds available for State and local air pollution control programs have increased by about 65 percent since the adoption of the Act in 1963. On an annual basis, some $20 million is now being invested in State and local programs as compared with $12.7 million in 1963. As a direct result of Federal grants, efforts are now being made which, if successful, will bring a total of 70 new air pollution control programs into being. In addition, 40 existing agencies are improving their programs as a result of Federal grants. The Federal Government has initiated interstate abate- ment actions that will ultimately benefit millions of people; we have published standards which will bring all new automobiles under partial control commenc- ing with the 1968 model year; we have stepped up our research efforts and have progressed toward the control of gaseous pollutants that once were clearly beyond our reach. In all parts of the country the public Is demanding better control efforts at all levels of government, and there is no question that these demands will accelerate. But we have a very long way to go. Although 33 States now have air pollution programs, many of them have neither the authority nor the resources needed to carry on effective control activities. Only a half dozen State agencies engage in more than a nominal degree of abatement activity, and by far the great majority of States are not even serving those communities which are too small to operate their own local programs but are nonetheless affected by serious air pollution problems. For the most part, efforts at the local level are equally deficient. Our most recent estimate indicates that only 58 percent of the urban population of the United States is served by local air pollution pro- grams. On a per capita basis, annual spending for local programs has increased from a median figure of 10.8 cents to 15.2 cents. This increase is hardly adequate In the light of estimates that an effective control program for a middle-sized city requires an expenditure of at least 40 cents per capita. Mr. Chairman, I have presented this, perhaps long, introduction on the prob- 1cm of air pollution because I want to strip away any possible misconceptions of what our basic needs are in coming to grips wIth the problem. The problem of air pollution has grown so enormously in such a relatively short period of time that we have found ourselves rather suddenly confronted with, if you will, an~ enormous aid pollution gap. Let there be no mistake about lt~ that gap funda- mentally is the application of controls to the sources of air pollution. The activi- ties carried out under the Clean Air Act have stimulated all levels of government,' industry, and the public to exert greater efforts in bridging that gap. But we have, barely started. The problem .of air pollution continues to grow faster than the combined Federal, State, and local efforts to deal with it. President Jobnson~ ~ummed it up in his February message to the Congress on Preserving Our Natural Heritage: "The Clean Air Act of 1963 and its 19~5 Amendments have given us new tools to help attack the pollution tha't fouls the air we breathe. We have begun to counter air pollution by Increasing the tempo of effort at all levels of govern- ment.. . . I am heartened by the progress we ate making. But I am mindful that we have only begun our work." We recognize, Mr. Chairman, that the Federal Government must assume leader- ship in thIs field, but the Federal Government canmit alone do the job. State and local government and industry must assume additional responsibilities in con-, troll~ng air pollution, and the public must be more fully Informed of the very real hazards associated with air pollution. The pressure of public opinion must he brought to bear against the Indiscriminate discharge of pollution Into what is unmistakably In the public domain, the atmosphere. In short, Mr. Chairman, the course is clear. We must now and in the immediate years ahead greatly accelerate our efforts to cOntrol the sources of air pollution. We have very real social and economic Incentives, we have the governmental framework through which we can get at the problem, and we bare the technology with. which we can in large measure bring the problem under control. None of this is to say that we can afford to be complacent about the presently available technology for controlling air pollution. There are some pollutants, like the nitrogen oxides, which today, rarely, if ever reach what are thought to. PAGENO="0072" 68 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLoG~Y FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT be harniful levels in many ~ regions o~ the country. We do not have adequate technology for controlling nitrogen oxides. ~ ~ . There are spme pollutants, like the sulfur oxides, which today almost con- stantly reach harmful levels in most of our metropolitan areas, and the increas- ing use of sulfur bearing fuels for energy and other purposes will undoubtedly aggravate this problem in the years ahead. We have reached the prototype stage in one approach to controlling' the sulfur oxides, but for the most part we can control sulfur pollution today only by using low sulfur fuels. There are some sources of pollution, like the automobile, whose emissions we can today partially control, and the Federally required national application of this control to new cars In the fall of next year will be a significant step in halting pollution from the motor vehicle. But the. rapidly increasing number of auto. mobiles will in the next two decades wipe out the gain from today's partial con- trols. Further, Mr. Chairman, we can not be complacent about the attractive- ness of much of `the technology, for controlling air pollution. Pollution controls generally do not increase the effietency of industrial production or improve the quality of the product. in fact, since in our marketplace the focus is on minimizing costs and maximizing returns, present day pollution controls, which add to costs and not to returns, are frequently considered an impedliment by those who operate the sources of pollution. We can expect that this attitude will prevail a~ long as regulation of pollution varies from place to place, or until the technology of pollution control ls developed to the point where control is not considered to~ be an economic impediment by industry, I would like in the remainder of m.y statement, Mr., Chairman, to review in some detail the current adequacy of technology for controlling air pollution, and to describe the efforts the Federal Government is making to advance this technology. ~oroa vanictas Certainly one `of the major sources of air pollution. In `this coun.try `is the gasoline pOwered motor vehicle. Today's motel- vehicle discharges four' sig~ nificant pollutants to the atmosphere: carbon monoxide, which is a toxic gas;, hydrocarbons, which in the presence of sunlight react with nitrogen oxides to form photochemical smog, which in turn has been widely observed in Its damage to. plants and its irritating effects on the eyes; the nitrogen oxides, which not only contribute to smog hit which In high enough concentrations are hazardous themselves; and lead,, whIch is receiving Increasing attention by the Public Health Service of `this Department and ethers because of the possibility that, even in very .low concentrations in the environment, lead may have adverse effects on ce~~tain segments of the' population. Thee are four sources of emission in conventional motor vehicles: the tailpipe, which is the most Important source of hydrocarbons and the oniy significant source of nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and lead; the crankcase, which receives unburned hydrocarbons blown by the engine pistons and which until recent years vented to the atmosphere through a tube; and the gas tank' and carburetor, both of which permit hydrocarbons to evaporate to the atmosphere. Under the 1965 Amendments to the Clear Air Act Secretary Gardner has issued emission standards for all new gaso'llne~powered automobiles and light, trucks sold ~i the United States cemmencing with model year 1968 Thet~i standards require 100 percent control of crankcase emi~ion, and limit the concentrations of bydr~carbons and carbon monoxide that can be discharged from the tailpipe The standard~~ apply for.tbe li~e ~f the vehicle, which is defined as 100,000 miles. çJi~ankease bio*-by can be burned by returning it t~ the engine, intake system. This practice is not new to ~~uropean ca" makers .and~has beenused for year~ in Amqriea on certain special-purpose vehicles., There are variations in design: some return the blow-by to the dirty side of the air cleaner, others to the clean side, and still others to the intake manifold through a variable-orifice metering valve. A further variation, now required in California, consists of dual return paths of blow-by gases-to both the intake manifold and the air cleaner. The principal approach to controlling tailpipe emissions is through engine modification. In meeting the Federal standards on tailpipe emissions, all but one of the country's car makers is expected to us what has been termed manifold air oxidation. Air is Introduced under pressure to the exhaust manifotd near each exhaust valve. This additional air at this high temperature location oxides some of the unburned exhaust bydrocarbons~ and some carbob monoxide. The system is accompanied by minor changes in carburetlon. PAGENO="0073" ADEQIYACY OF TECI~NOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABA'rEM1~T 69 The other type of engine modification system is achieved by a combination of the following changes: (1) Leaner carburetor calibration under idle and road load conditions. The leaner fuel-air mixture promotes more complete combustion. (2) Slightly earlier choke release. Since time is reduced during which a rich fuel mixture is ted to an engine, the amount of unburned hydrocarbon exhausted is reduced. (3) Increased closed-throttle air flow. This provideS a leaner mixture while idling. (4) Retarded ignition at idle. This provides more complete combustion of the leaner Idle mixture and minimizes the effect of increased air flow on idle speed. (5) A vacuum advance control valve. Retarded ignitioti timing produces in- creased hydrocarbon emission during deceleration. The control valve senses the higher manifold vactium associated with deceleration and advances the tim- ing to normal. None `of these engine ntodtftcations decreases the emissions of oxides of nitro- gen. Some may even Increase them. `Complete combustion of the hydrocarbons produces higher combustion temperatures;, and the higher the combustion tem- perature, the greater the oxidation of the nitrogen in the combustion air. This Department is currently carrying on intensive research on the control of nitrogen oxides, and we expect that development of controls will progress so that nitrogen oxide emission standards can be established for 1970 model year vehicles. Two specific techniques now under study are exhaust gas recirculatlon and water injection, both of which reduce peak combustion temperatures. Another approach to automotive pollution control is through afterburners ~*hi~h oxidize the products discharged from the engine exhaust. Both catalytic and direct flame afterburners Were intensively developed primarily by auto- motive accessory manufacturers, to meet the 1959 CalifornIa standards for `emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide,. By June 1964 three catalytic afterburners were approved for use' on new cars in California and one direct flame afterburner was approved for use In both new cars and used cars. The approval* by the California Board of more than one afterburner for new cars triggered a requirement that the majority of 1966 model year cars sold in Oali- forum meet the standards adopted in 1959. Shortly after the standards were triggered, the automobile manufacturers announced that their high volume production 1966 cars to be sold in California would meet the standards through engiñé modificatiOns, and the new car market for afterburners In California was essentially' destroyed for the time being. This market situation for afterburners can be changed by any of several happenings. First, the approval by the California Board of a second after- burner for used cars would trigger the reQuirement for their installation on most used cars in the State. Second, the necessity of meeting more stringent exhaust standards than the present ones may cause `afterbtirners to become more competitively attractive to the auto makers, either in addition to or instead of engine modification. Third, the prospect, in the not too distant future, of standards for oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust should cause a second round of development of catalysts that will remove these oxides. If the ultimate route to oxides of nitrogen abatement is by catalytic reduction, it becomes more attractive to build oxidation catalysts for hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide removal into the same device. Lastly, the elimination of lead from gasoline could conceivably result in an afterburner which would last the life of the car or at least that of the other components of the engine exhaust assembly. A ~1evice which has this life, and which combines an oudde of nitrogen reducer `and a hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide afterburner, and which is attached to the exhaust manifold of an engine having modifications to reduce pollutant emissions, should continually provide an emission essentially free of all the principal exhaust pollutants. That would be a combination hard to beat. Fuel modification Is being studied as a means of lowering hydrocarbon emis- sions. HoWever, the only regulation of fuel composition in the United States intended to abate automotive emissions is a Los Angeles requirement that no gasoline may be tised which has a degree of unsaturatlon greater than Bromine Number 20. This limits the olefin content of gasolines; certain olefins are more active than other components in producing photochemical smug. The drawback to this regulation is that the automobile etigine cracks gasolines to proluce olefins even If olefins are not originally present in the fuel. PAGENO="0074" 70 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTT(ThT ARATEMENT Any change in fuel composition which would provide the required octane rat- ings without alkyl lead ndditive~ would make possible lead-free exhaust. There is no national regulation in the United States limiting the quantity of alkyl lead additives in gasoline. However, there is a voluntary `agreement between inanu- facturers of lead additives and the Public Health Service as to the maximum lead content of gasoline; this is at present 4.0 milliliters per gallon (TEL). Evaporative losses from gas tanks and carburet'ors occur because these cus- tomarily have vents to the atmosphere. Evaporative losses from the carburetor are of two types, vent losses during vehicle operation, and what are called "hot soak" losses, which occur after the engine has been turned off and the rise in temperature `of engine parts under the hood causes evaporation of gasoline stored in the carburetor bowl. Losses during vehicle operation have been sub- stantially reduced during the last several years by the elimination of external vents from most carburetors. Those carburetors that vent externally do so dur- ing closed throttle operation to facilitate hot starting `and t'o reduce fuel mixture enrichment during conditions' of high temperature. An experimental system for control of "h'ot soak" losses pumps the fuel remaining in the carburetor bowl `back to the gas tank after `the engine has stopped., Since the bowl is empty when one wants to restart the car, there is an objectionable delay in starting which has to be overcome before this approach to control becomes `acceptable. Such sys- tems `are not yet on production vehicles. If there were no vent to allow air to enter the gas tank as fuel is consumed, tanks of normal construction would collapse because of `the vacuum created inside; conversely, w'hen the engine is off, a temperature rise would cause an increase in tank pressure. Since this tank overpressure is small, compared ~o the previously mentioned tank vacuum, a solution i's the use of a one-way Wd~e, which will let `air into' the tank but prevent vapor outflow over a moderate range of tank pressurization. The valve opens as a safety valve in the event of an overpressure high enough `to impair the integri'ty of the tank. Such a valve, built as part of the gas tank filler cap, has been used experimentally and, in conjunction with insulation of the fuel tank, has been effective in reducing fuel tank evaporative losses. The safety, under accident conditions, of tanks so equipped has no't been evaluated. This system is not in us'e on any American cars. Another `approach to the control of evaporative losses is through the reduction of the volatile `components in the fueL Studies are presently underway to deter- mine the feasibility of this approach, both from the point of view of the effec- tiveness of control and of the effects on fuel characteristics. The `automotive pollu'tion control measures so far described, Mr. Ohairman. can `be `applied today or in the very near future. For the long haul, it would ap- pear that add-on devices and minor engine modifications will ultimately fall `short of the desired degree of abatement, so that research on fundamentally pollution free engines is also needed. One means to achieve lean-mixture operation which results in more complete combustion and, therefore, in less pollution, is through the use of stratified charge techniques, Stratified charge operation presents to the spark plug at its firing time a `small preliminary "starter dose" of rich fuel-air mixture which is easily ignited and propagates its flame to the rest of the fuel-air mixture, which might otherwise be too lean to `be ignited `by the spark plug. T'his method permits an excess of oxygen to be available for more complete combustion without affecting the efficiency of ignition. To achieve this type of operation, cylinder heads and combustion chambers would have to ~be redesigned. The gas turbine engine is one of several potential alternatives to the conven- tional piston engine as a power `source for motor vehicles. Chrysler Corpora- tion, which is conducting extensive research and development in this' field, made a prototype turbine car available for testing by the Public Health Service of this Department for a two-week period in April and May 1965. The tests were focused mainly on the most common and best `known classes of pollutants produced by internal combustion engines. They showed that hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide e'mlssions from the turbine car were far lower than those from a comparable piston-engine model. In terms of pounds `of pol- lutants per mile of driving, the turbine car emitted only 15 percent as much hydro- carbons and only 10 percent `as much carbon monoxide. Nitrogen oxide emiS- sions were also lower, but only slightly. A potentially important advantage of the turbine car, with respect to air pollution, is it's ability to burn low-grade, non-leaded, fuels, lncludthg kerosene. PAGENO="0075" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 71 From the standpoint `of air pollution, the only marked disadvantage noted In these tests was that the turbine engine, when it was fueled with kerosene, pro- duced an odor similar to that from diesel engines; however, the odor was not severe. It is important to note that these tests do not represent a full evacuation of the turbine engine's potential for contributing to communiy air pollution. As previously noted, only one vehicle was tested and the testing was focused on well known motor vehicle pollutants. No attempt was made to determine whether turbine engines produce significant amounts of lesser known or hitherto unknown classes of pollutants. Because there is often a substantial degree of variation in emissions from individual cars of the same general type, the fact that only one turbine car was tested must be kept in mind. The results are believed to be representative of this type of engine, but data to confirm this are not available. Insofar as can be determined from available information, the outlook for the use of turbine engines-at least in trucks and buses-is essentially the same as it was in 1962 when, in a report to the Congress, the `Surgeon General of the Public Health Service said: "There is no doubt that the turbine will find applica- tion for a number of purposes where its advantages are clear-cut. This includes fire engines and other emergency vehicles. For pulling one or several heavy trailers over turnpikes and interstate highways, turbines are unquestionably superior power plants." The prospects for using gas turbine engines in passenger cars have generally been considered less promising, pricipally because of their relatively high fuel consumption and their lag in providing acceleration from a standing start. In recent weeks, however, the Chrysler Corporation has taken a more hopeful view, at least in its statements to stockhoders and the public. On April 19, Chrysler announced development of a second-generation turbine engine which will serve as the basis for its future work in this area. The new model was said to overcome, to an unspecified degree, the disadvantages of the earlier prototype. Air pollution data for the new model have not been released. Chrysler is the only major automobile manufacturer known to be Involved, to any appreciable degree, in efforts to develop turbine powered passenger cars. Both Ford and General Motors are known to be actively engaged in the development of turbine powered trucks. The need to control emissions from diesel engines is still another important aspect of the problem of motor vehicle pollution. Although less than 0.5 percent of our vehicles are diesel powered, from the standpoint of someone driving behind a diesel bus or truck, the need to control diesel emissions may well seem the most important. I, suspect that no other aspect of the problem makes 50 many people so indignant or so uncomfortable on so many occasions. The smoke and odors that come from diesel engines are, by any standard, an obnoxious nuisance; moreover, diesel engines contribute to community air pollution in other less obvious ways, as well. In a diesel engine, tailpipe exhaust emissions comprise almost 100 percent of the total emission. Hydrocarbon emission amounts to about 2 percent of the supplied fuel. Both hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emission from diesels are well within the present Federal standards set for new gasoline powered vehicles. However, because the extremely high diesel exhaust flow rate offsets lower concentration values, the pounds per hour rate of hydrocarbon emission from a diesel is close to that from an equivalent gasoline engine. Evaporative losses are nil because diesels have a closed system of fuel injection and diesel fuel is less volatile than gasoline. Crankcase emission losses are zero for two- cycle engines because blow-by past the piston becomes mixed with the inlet air for the next stroke. On the four-cycle engine, crankcase emissions are not over 0.05 percent of the fuel or over 21/2 percent of tailpipe emissions. Nitro- gen oxides emissions are substantial and are comparable to those from gasoline engines. Catalytic afterburners and fuel additives for the control of diesel smoke and odor have undergone limited tests. Results indicate a worthwhile reduc- tion in these emissions but, before such devices and additives can be con- sidered on a broad scale, more comprehensive studies are required. The Amendments to the Clean Air Act provided authority under which the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare can establish national standards for the control of diesel emissions. A number of technical problems relating PAGENO="0076" 72 ADEQUACY OF TECENOLOG~ FOR* t'OLLUTION ABATEMENT to the control of dle~e1 emissions muSt be reSOlved before controls can be estab Ii~hed. Po this end; we are pursuing studies in the area of diesel control technolOgy and oh the establishment of appropriate control standards. Sjnce no let-up Is in sight in the worldwide increase in the number and use Of thôto~r vehicleS, we must Investigate all possible approaches to controlling the prOblem of vehicular emissions. l'hese may include possible replacement o1~ the Internal ~ombustioñ engine with alternative power sources, such as fuel cells or electric batteries; and alternative means and patterns of transporta- tion In and between our biggest cities, such as rapid transit lines. POLLtXPA~Th F5O~ SPAPXONA1~1' SOtYROES T have indh~ated, Mr. Ohairman, that the ubiquitous motor vehicle Is an im- ~ortant source of air pollution in the United States today~ Of no less im~ pe~~tance, of course, are those statiohary sources of pollution which multiply hr our cities ai~d towns to meet the ever Increasing demands for goods and services. In treating these stationary' souFces of pollution, I would like to review iii general the technology for controlling some of the more important classes of poIl~tants, and to review in more detail the status of control techniques in some of our larger thdustrie~. ~lmissions from Stationary sources can be conveniently separated Into two categories-particulate and gaseous emissions. ?roblems of particulate emissions readily lend themselves to control by the application of already proven techniques. Consequently, industry sponsored w~rk has been ~primarily `devoted to improving the efficiency of proprietary control equipment. Basic research and development is needed to improve both the efficiency and the capabifitlus of e~ist4ng devices through better understand.' ing of the principles Involved. In the area Of electrostatic precipitation, manufacturers are devoting their research and development almost exclusively to hardware development. The principal exception to this is work Which is being pursued to learn more about precipitation mechanisms at high temperatures and under high pressure. Stud- i~s of fabric filtration at the higher temperature ranges are also `being conducted. An area which has received some Industry-sponsored basic research attention, and an area in which research and development is' badly needed, is that of small particle agglomeration. For the most part, the industry efforts are aimed at the' development of proprietary devices which employ sonic or thermal `treat- ment, or condensation, to agglomerate submicroscopic particulate which can then be removed' by conventional collection equipment. Much of the Work Which has been done to date in the area of particulate con~ trol device development hits been confoun'ded by the lack of uniform criteria for data evaluation and~ equipment performance. Because of the variety of problems and the unique characterlsticsi of individual pollutants, the area of gaseous industrial emissions has presented a much more difficult control problem than that of particulates. Control of gaseous pollutants is typically effected through process improvement or through recovery `of gaseous emissions by chemical reaction. While control of most gaseous air pollutants Is possible, the economics of accomplishing the desired degree of control has generally been considered a problem. Recognition of this problem, plus the potentially more serious nature of gaseous pollution, has stimulated more research and development activity in this area than In the area of particulate controL In general, con~lderable work is needed On gaseous pollution control systems to close the economic gap `between possible and practical control techniques. Both basic research on systems and studies of operating variables are needed to reduce investment and o~p'erating costs before they can be practically applied. Of the presently available control equipment, the versatility `of wet scrubbers to cope with both particulate `and gaseous emissions places high priority on the need to develop chemical reaction processes for gaseous pollution control. This method has its greatest potential in low volume emissions. Proper control of industrial process variables has' been demonstrated as an important means f~r control of air pollution at the source of emissions. This Includes such processes as control of excess air and flame temperatures in com- bustion processes, and reactant ratios and concentrations' In chemical reactions. Additional research by both governmental and industrial agencies' is needed to exploit this approach for an air pollution control technique. PAGENO="0077" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 73 I would like at this point~ Mr. Chajrman, to focus speqifically on the wQbleU~ of pollution of the atmosphere by the oxides of sulfur. The presence o~ t~ie Oxides of sulfur in the atmos~hei~è and their deleterious effects on health ~.nd welfare can be detected In v1rtua~ly every part of the United States. In lhe next several years the problem can only worsen unless available means of aflevial~ng it are used to the fullest extent, while .at the same time the development and áp- plication of control teehnology are accelerated. The principal source of sulfurous pollution is In the cbmbu~tioñ of s~ilfur bearing fuels, and in the Clean Air Act the Congress has specifically called on our Department for research on the removal of sulfur from flue gas and `on removal of sulfur front fuels. Considerable worldwide effort has been devoted to the development of low cost techniques for removing sulfur from flue gases, and söipe progress has been made. In Germany, the emphasis i~ on ~ pro~ess that uses activated carbon to `adsorb the sulfur oxides from the flue gas. In, Japan, one process under developxpen~ first catalytically converts sulfur dioxide to sulfuric acid and then to ammonium sulfate; another process chemically reacts the sulfur oxides into a ,regeri~erable manganese sulfate. In Czechoslovakia, an ammoniacal washing pio'cess, which yields ammonium sulfate as the end product, is under consideration, Because of their immediate application to existing power plants, in all these couptrj~s and in the United States there is interest in processes which react. alkaline ma- terials with sulfur oxides to produce solids which can then be removed t~rough filtration or precipitation. The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has a contract with Battelle Memorial Institute to study sulfur fixation by lime and magnesia to elucidate the thermodynamics and kinetics of the reactions involved. Past efforts to remove SO2 from combustion gases by reacting the 502 with alkaline materials such as limestone and dolomite have b~en handi- capped by our inability to Inject these materials `into power boiler systems with assurance of good reaction efficiency. In the United States two processes have reached the pUot plant stage. The first of these is an alkalized alumina process for scrubbing sulfur dioxide from stack gases and recovering the sulfur in acid or elemental form. The Depai~t~ ment of liealth, Education, and WeLfare has transferred funds to the Bureau of Mines for the development of this process. In 1967, the operation of a larger, continuous alkalized alumina pilot plant will provide more reliable data on the performance and life of the absorbent and will reveal the parameters affect- tug SO~ removal over a prolonged, continuous period. Work will begin on the preparation of absorbents which will resist attrition and lead to longer life and cheaper operation. New and niore efficient methods ocf regenerating the ab- sorbent will be investigated. The second process to reach the pilQt plant stage in the United ~tat~s is a catalytic oxidation process which is being developed `by private industry, ~he key to economic operation of this process lies in the recovery of the scid 1~ a concentration of commercia' value and at ~ high enough temperature to pçreyertt corrosion of process e~ulpmei4. The feasibility o~ various bigh-temperatur~ acid recovery systems must be studied and related equipijnent~corrosion testing per- formed. Tn both the United States and Japan, processes employing manganese oxide as an absorbent are being eonsidered for removing sulfur oxides irom stack gases. The difference In the processes lies In the method of regeneration of the absorbent. In the 3apanese process, the absorbent is regenerate~ .eh~~lcaliy to form calcium sulfate. The American process regen~r~t~s the absorbent elec- trolytically and yields a. dilute sulfuric add. Both of, these pr~ducts are p~ lower commercial value in this country than other possible su1furo~ end products. Therefore, the economics of these processes ~rou)4. be improved l~ re~ generation systems were devi~ed to yield more desir~bie products at cost. A Department o~ iX~alth, Bducation, and WeIfa~e pro,ject for Fise~ rear 1967 Is designed to find such means of regeneration. Research into methods. f or d~sulfurizlng fuels has' been primarily coneqrned with residual oil and coal. The technology of the romQya~ of sulfur frc~m oil and gas Is well known',and extensively utWzad in product~ig, the almost-sulfur- free gas, gasolines, ~ubr1cating oPs, and light fuel oll~ that constitute the hulk of the products of the oil and gas industry the world over. Although an equivalent technology exists for desulfurizi~g residual fpel oil, its cost, as a percentage of the selling price of the product, has been so high as PAGENO="0078" 74 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT to discourage its employment. New American refineries avoid the problem by producing no residual fuel oil; they produce instead liquid and gaseous products in the almost-sulfur-free category, and a high-sulfur-content solid residue, petroleum coke. However, since this option Is not attractive to refiners in countries which lack our demand for gasoline and light fuel oil, and which ex- port high-sulfur residual fuel oil to the United States, and since older domestic refineries still produce this product, there is still need for research to develop lower-cost methods of desulfurizing heavy fuel oil. A start has been made with respect to this problem~. Under a contract, the Bechtel Corporation investigated the cost of reducing the sulfur content of certain residual fuel oils to one percent. The most important conclusion from this study was that the manufacture of low-sulfur residual fuel oil from high- sulfur crudes requires an incentive pricing of 40 to 65 cents per barrel above fuel oil produced without sulfur restriction. This cost is increased about 20 percent if applied to an existing refinery. Further alternatives in the refining operation are being explored to lower, as cheaply as possible, the sulfur content of residual oil to 0.5 percent. The technology of the removal of sulfur from coal is not well developed. It is known that coal-washing processes which lower the ash content of coal also lower its sulfur content to the extent that sulfur is associated with rela- tively large pieces of ash-substance. However, the bulk of the sulfur is more intimately associated with the coal substance and is released only by grinding and extraction processes which are presently relatively expensive. Research is needed both to lower the cost of these processes and to seek new ones. For years the needs for low-sulfur-content coal have been met from. naturally occurring low-sulfur-content seams. Incentives for the development of coal desulfurization processes are of recent origin, too recent for a significant re- search effort to have developed. However, studies of the forms and of the washability of sulfur in coal used in powerplants have been undertaken, and analyses of the ability of various commercial processes to remove sulfur from powerplant coals are being made. Preliminary studies of new processes for removing sulfur from coal have been made; they include air elutriation, *thermomagnetic or electrosta:tic forces, and corona discharge. Important as it is, Mr. Chairman, for us to vigorously pursue research and development of methods to remove sulfur from fuels and from combustion prod- ucts, we must bear in mind that there ~re other measures which can be taken now to alleviate the sulfur oxides problem. These measures involve increased use of fuels whose sulfur content is naturally low, or locating large fuel-burning installations, such as electric p'otvnrplants, at considerable distance from large cities, and using tall chimneys. There is rio doubt that low-sulfur fuels are available in this country, but it has been only recently that government and industry have begun to examine the extent to whiCh' such fuels might be channeled to urban areas where sulfur oxide pollution has already reached serious prQportions. The construction of very large electric generating stations adjacent to coal mines Is being stimulated by both economic considerations and air pollution factors. Unquestionably, construction of mine-mouth plants with very tall stacks in relatively sparsely populated areas helps to prevent the worsening of sulfur oxide pollution that wo~ild have resulted from their construction in urban areas. However, the very large size of mine-mouth plants, from which signifi- cant pollution may extend out 25 miles or more causes concern because of the possibilities of exposure of small communities and of causing extensive damage to vegetation. F~r such la~'ge installa~4ons, with stacks 800 to, 1,000 feet nigh, techiiiCalestinla~á ~f ~rbund-level póllut~on cpncentrattofls are subject to some uncertainty. Consequently, It is our present. opinion that such plants should be limited to about 2,000 megass~atts (when burning coal of about 2.5 percent sul- fur) until actual measurements can be made to assess the validity of such estimates. The increased, availability of natural gas-which is essentially sulfur-free- offers still another opportunity for reducing air pollution arising from, the com- bustion of high-sulfur fuels. The use of natural gas for domestic heating i~ already making a significant contributlon to coptrol of airpollution. Its in- creased use in electric powerplants In `places with' serious pollution problems could result in significant reductions In sulfur oxide pollution and In the seri- PAGENO="0079" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 75 ous threat that such pollution poses to public health and welfare. Such use, of course, must be considered in relation to the relative scarcity of natural gas as compared to other fossil fuels. TEOHNOLOGY OF CONTROL FOR INDIVIDUAL INDUSTRIES Mr. Chairman, I would like now to turn to the specific problems of individual industries. The first of these, petroleum refining, employs a wide variety of processes such as distillation, catalytic cracking and hydrogenation to produce gasoline, kero- sene, and fuel oil, etc., from crude oil. Currently supplying 72 percent of the Nation's fuel energy, the crude oil processed is expected to expand from 10 mil- lion barrels daily in 1960 to 14 million barrels daily in. 1975. Principal refinery pollutants include hydrocarbons, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, particula'tes and a host of odorous gases. Estimates made in 1963 place sulfur dioxide yearly emissions at 1,583,000 tons or nearly 7 percent of the total SO2 tonnage emitted to the United States atmosphere. For the most part, effective technology for refinery air pollution control exists today, having been developed largely in Los Angeles County to meet stringent air pollution control regulations. For example, injection of steam into flare lines has promoted complete, smokeless combustion of volatiles and vapors, re- placing the familiar black plume so often associated with refinery flares. Sulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide emissions have been reduced by sulfur recovery proee~ses that react the two gases to form elemental sulfur. The process yields salable recovered sulfur, which is then used for sulfuric acid manufacture. Through concerted control efforts, petroleum refineries in the Los Angeles area have achieved a reduction of better than 80 percent in hydrocarbons, sulfur dioxide and particulate emissions. Most of the nation's more than 300 refineries, however, do not approach the levels of control in Los Angeles County, largely because of their unwillingness to make comparable investments in air pollution control equipment elsewhere. To comply with Los Angeles regulations oilmen estimate it would add 5 to 10 percent to the cost of a new refinery. Some of this expenditure would be returned from the sale of valuable products recovered. Current control equipment expenditures represent $18 million annually, of which 44 percent is spent on the West Coast, Total capital expenditures for United States refineries are greater than $350 million yearly. The complexity of operations in a petroleum refinery creates many sources of pollutant emission. Tank vents, pulp glands, and leaking valves are sources throughout the refinery. Many industries can solve their air pollution problem by installing a simple collector on a single discharge gas stream. This is not so in a refinery. Effective control of pollution from a refinery must include proper housekeeping, process change, process control and emission control equip- ment. In a second major industry, iron and steel, generally speaking all new proccess equipment being installed, except coke ovens, provide reasonably effective par- ticulate emission controL High efficiency collectors such as electrostatic precipi- tators, venturi scrubbers and fabric filters a~e generally being installed on new potential major sources of pollutants. Such sources include sintering machines, blast furnaces, basic oxygen furnaces and electric furnaces. Some of the new equi.pment is replacing old equipment which, in the past, generated much air pollution. Although this method of bringing about a reduction in air pollu- tion is slow, it does promise to eventually eliminate pollution from Bessemer converters and open hearth furnaces since there are, generally speaking, i~o new units of these two types of equipment being installed, and existing units are being taken out of service. Exhaust gases from new and existing blast furnaces are used within the steel mills a~ fuel for other processes. By necessity these gases are cleaned prior to combustion so that in most installations few pollutants escape. Periodic, high rate emission resulting from "slips~" which were formally a source of consider- able pollution in blast furnace operation, have been minimized due to the use of sint~red and classified charges. The i~elatlvely satisfactory degree of air pollution control practiced on new equipment can be contraSted with the unsatisfactory degree of control generally employed on existing equipment. Many mills have, in addition to well controlled new equipment, old equipment with little if' any air pollution control. Such PAGENO="0080" 76 ADEQUACY OF T1~CHNOLQGY FOR, POI~LUTIO'N A]3J~TEMENT poorly equipped u~lts Include sintering plants, ~ oxygen, lanc~dopen. hearth fur-. naces, Besse~ner fur~iaces and ~leQtric ~ f*~zi~aces. ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ One of the knotty problems faced by the industry is that of cleaping pp or preventing emissions from by-product coke ovens. These emissions, consisting of smoke, dust, sulfur gases, :earb i mo'nQxide and a host of prganic compounds, are usually emitted when coal is charged to the oven and again when the coke is remoted from the oven and quenched with water. Control of these copious omissions has not yet been accomplished to any significant degree. Further effort by the industry ifl this regard is needed. It may be that a radically new method of making coke will be required. Some idea of the cost of controlling emissions from the steel industry can be obtained from the program underway in the Chicago Metropolitan Area. In March of 1965 the major steOl manufacturers in the area entered into a T-year agreement with the lOcal rOgulatory agency to prevent emission of some 88,000 tons of dust ahlnially. The total cost of the control program will be about $ 0,000,000. A similar program underway in Northwest Indiana will take 9 years to complete. When finished more than 186,000 tons per year or 29 percent of the potential' emission ia captured. A third major industry, Mr. Chairman, the inorganic chemicals industry, includes those industries engaged in the manufacture of nitric acid, phosphoric acid~ caustic, chlorine, and phosphate fertilizers. Pollutants include such well known compounds as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, gaseous fluorides, acid mists and many other lOss common inorganic gases, mists and dusts.. Control of emissions is normally effected by using wet collectors to remove pollutants from the discharged gases. The technological ability to control pollution from this class of industry is fairly well advanced but some difficult problems remain. This is illustrated by the phosphate fertilizer industry and its captive sulfuric and nitric acid plants~ Production of phosphates is increasing at a tremendous rate; an increase of 57 percent is predicted in thern next 5 years. Wet scrubbers to remove fluOrides can be designed for greater than 99 percent removal and dusts can be controlldd to a similar or better degree using wet collectors or bag-houses. Acid mists can be removed using fiber mist eliminators at efficiencies up to 99.9 percent depending on particle size and energy expended. Sulfur oxides from sulfuric~ acid plants are difficult and costl~ to remoVe from effluent gases, and can best be curtailed by process control through a high rate of conversion of sulfur dioxide to sulfur trioxide and hence, sulfuric acid. New plants approach and equal this high degree of control in many cases. Older plants seldom do. A particularly difficult problem j~ the fertilizer industry is the control of the continuous gaseous fluoride emission from fertilizer curing `and storage strue~ tures. Scrubbers With gas flow rates~ up to 400,000 cubic feet per~ininute are required. Extensive piping is required to adapt these structures to controL Installations may cost $1 to $3 per cubic foot of gas exhausted. Since there is no return on the investment, industry has been slow to provide controls on these buildings. A better means of controlling emissions~ is badly needed. ~`luoride scru'bbers are a continuous source of maintenance due to pluggage Industry has OverCome much of the corrosion problems' but~ with' no monetary~ return on the control equipment, thost companies are lax In maintenance of control equipment. Little research and development in' control ~techniques is conducted b~ industry since no salable product is recovered.' The rapid growth of this industry will neCessitate improvement in ahatOment efficiency just to maintain status quo on' total emissions, particularly Since they industry tends to cluster in a relatively Sthall area neSV existing phosphate rock' mining Opei~ations. A fourth major industry, which I will classify as nonsteel metaiiurg1cal~ includes pay iron foundries, `non-ferrous feundries, metal reclaiming Operations and smelters of all types ThO major pollutants are dusts, oil vapors metallic futhes, s~lfnr dio~ide anti nitrogen oxides. ` These 1ndu~tries contribute signiflcantly~ to the general air pollution of many of the 4~au ä1~Ocs of the country. Th~ metal casting industry, for OxamplC, ranks fifth among all manufacturing activities in the Onlted States. Oapi.tal ihvestmeht ~or new plant facilit1e~ elceed $12;000,000 per month. `in 1960, there were oVer ~l 000 fohndrlet employing about 425 000 people Control of pollutants f~o~'fomidi~ies M ~iart1cularly diffi~nit Since the exhaust gases are normall~ at high' teth~erntures and `much of the particulate is of extrethely s~ail size. PAGENO="0081" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 77 Most of the conventional high e$ciency air pollution control devices have been used more or less extensively on foundry emissions with some degree of success. Freq~ient1y, operating problems have been encountered. Electrostatic precipi- tator~ which have worked so well on other industries have not proved popular in the foundry industry. I~recipitators operate most efficiently on steady state conditions of flow, temperature, and humidity. Cupola furnace operation is not conducive to steady gas flow conditions. Bag filters have high efficiency but have temperature limitations and occasion- ally, encounter high maintenance costs because of severe operating conditions. For these reasons wet collectors are used by many foundries. Because of the high percentage of submicron material, high energy scrubbers which are costly to operate are required to achieve high collection efficiency. A seldom thought of expense is that of disposing of the collected material, which in the case of foundries is a. worthless item~ Cost of controls is also a `arge factor. Many cupolas are small job-shops and operate only a few hours a day, 5 days a week. The high efficiency control required to remove the fine particulate may equal the capital investment for the cupola itself. For example a bag collector for a 6 ton per hour cupola may cost $50,000. Due to the high temperature encountered, maintenance cost on `bag collectors is high, estimated by one. operator to be $1,000 per month. As an alternate small jpb~shop cupolas frequently prefer wet collectors. A favorite is a "wet cap" which essentially forces the exhaust gas through a curtain of water. This type of co1lec,t~r may cost $12,000 for a small cupola. Unfortunately this type of control will not effectively remove the fine particulate in cupola exhaust gases and is not adequate to meet the air pollution controls necessary today. There is an urgent need for control equipment at a cost the small foundry can afford to pay, which will operate at existing foundry process conditions and re- move submi'cron material. Since equipment of this type is not available, many foundries have had to replace cupolas with electric induction or reverberatory furnaces. These furnaces do not require expensive air pollution control equip- ment. Metal reclaiming and salvage Is another troublesome metallurgical operation. Recycling these metal products back to ~iseful products without creating a seri- ous air pollution problem seems at times to be an unsurmountable `task. A major area now being attacked is that of disposing of the mass of scrap automobile bodies. In the past, open burning was t;he most common method of removing paint, floor covering, un'dercoating and upholstery~ This created great clouds of dense black smoke. Essentially smokeless incinerators have been developed to do this job but their cost is beyond the reaçth of most salvage yards. Mechanical separation of desired scrap iron and steel from unwanted materials is being practiced in a few areas, but mechanical separation equipment is also very ex- pensive. Wire burning to salvage metal is another area creating pollution prob- lems. .Burning of the plastic coating now bei.ng used on wire results not only In ordors and particulate, but may result in the discharge of hydrogen chloride gag. Remote location Is probably the most commonly practiced method of keeping the pollution from metal salvage operation out of urban areas. A~ our society, grows this t~chnique will `be un~atisfnctory and further control will be essential. The fifth major industry of concern to us, Mr. Chairman, is the pulp and paper industry. Of the three major processes used in the pulp and paper industry, the sulfate or kraft proces's creates the most serious air pollution problems. While air pollution from this process is due to both particulate and odorous gas emis- sions, it is the odorous component of the pollution that Is the most objectionable and d1ffic~lt'to abate. Particulates are emitted pri~cipally from lime kilns, re- covery furnaces and, depending on the type of fuel' used and firing practices, the plant boilers. Odorous gases such as by~rogen sulfide, mercaptans, `and methyl *sulfides, are generated mainly hi the recovery furnaces, digesters,, and evapora- tors. The ~`degree of control practiced' from plant to plant varies widely. Control techniqnes are available `to reduCe particulate matter but methods of reducing Odors `need' to be further developed. ` maek1iquor~ oxida'tlo~i has been used since 1950 in western and northern mills to reduce OdorouS gaseotLs emissions. Methods were developed by, the Industry hi i06~ to overcome foaming prqblems encountered in black l~quor oxidation o~ southerh~ pulp. Although. black' Ilqnor oxidation reduces odorous emission's, its pOiltition uoñtroi advantages may' bu overshadowed if the recovery furnace is 68-240-66-voL 1----6 PAGENO="0082" 78 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT operated above its rated capacity, a widespread industry practice. Black liquor oxidation even if employed universally will not completely solve the industry's odor problem. To reduce or eliminate odorous emissions either a satisfactory method of scrubbing the vent gases from the recovery furnace and direct-contact evaporators must be developed or a process change must be introduced to prevent the formation of odorous compounds. Particulate emissions from black liquor recovery furnaces are controlled by two methods-scrubbers, using black liquor, or electrostatic precipitation. Scrubbing, in practice, has been only 85 percent effective in particulate removal. Electrostatic precipitation used in the industry is usually 85 to 95 percent effec- tive in particulate removal, Neither method will effectively reduce odors. De- signs are available by both techniques to achieve particulate removal in excess of 9 percent efficiency, but `at int~reased cost. For example, on a 550 ton per `day mill a 90 percent efficient precipitator will cost about $230,000 or only about one-tenth of the installed cost of the recovery furnace. To control particulate at the 99 percent level, the precipitator might cost about $300,000 and its cost might increase to about $340,000 for 99.5 percent control. The industry trend is toward larger and larger plants. While plants with a capacity of 200 tons per day were considered large in the past, new plants are being designed to produce 1,200 tons per day. The need for higher air pollu- tion collection efficiencies is therefore apparent. Generally speaking, new methods for controlling air pollutants have not been adopted at a rate comparable `to that with which the industry has expanded. Even in the case of newly installed kraft mills which were said to incorporate all the latest means for air pollution control, there have been numerous public complaints about odors from the mills. The sixth and last industry that I would like to discuss briefly, Mr. Chair- man, is the organic chemicals industry. The various industrial groupings in this category include the manufacturers of synthetic rubber, rubber-processing compounds, synthetic fibers, elastomers, resins, and intermediate chemicals such as phenols and anhydrides. Pollutants from these industries consist generally of dusts, mists and a variety of odorous organic vapors associated with the materials of the process. Control of these pollutants is effected by the use of gas scrubbers, adsorption on activated carbon, catalytic oxidation or incinera- tion. An exception `is the carbon black industry. Here the pollutants' are fine particles and the principal means of collection are cyclones followed by fabric filters and electrostatic precipitators. Our technology ,for controlling organic emissions is not as well developed as emission control in other areas. Water si~rubbing frequently does ` not reduce odors to acceptable levels. Some success has been achieved by using a scrubbing solution that reacts with the organics to form odorless products. Catalytic o~1dâtion ma~ fall because of poisoning of the catalyst by components of the gas stream. Direct flame afterburners have, in many cases, been the only method which successfully des'troy organic vapors. These afterburners are not only costly to operate because `of high fuel use rates but also add to emissions of nitrogen oxides, Odors are hard to destroy because certain chemicals have extremely low threshold levels of odor detection. Improved plant `maintenance and process changes are effective in reducing some odor problems. A typical industrial problem is the manufacture of paint and varnish. The primary pollutants are aldehycles and organic sulfur compounds which are given off during the cooking process. The most commonly used control method, al- though not the most effective, is scrubbing with a liquid such as water, oil, or alkaline or acid solution. The most effective methods are the use of direct flame and catalytic `afterburners to, completely oxidize the effluent vapors. Re~ moval efficiencies of 85 to 98 percent are reported for scrubbing and 100 percent for: incjitera~tiou. Plie cost `df' émi~siotL control' equipment for the organic chemical industry is not as great as that for some other industries. Sc~1~blng equipment~ which is the most common means of control, costs one-tenth `as much as high efficiency collectors such as electrostatic precipitators and fabric filters as are required by the metals and minerals industry. The organic chemical Industry has had an average production growth rate of 10 percent per year for the last 4 years and sales of $8 billion for 1964. This represents about one-fourth of the totai cheiflictal and allied products industry. The chemical industry capital spending was esti- PAGENO="0083" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 79 mated at $2.5 billion for 19t15 with $10 million of that earmarked for pollution equipment. The continued growth of the organic chemical industry and its capital spending outlay would seem to indicate its ability to afford air pollution control equipment. The rapid, continuing changes which occur in the number and kind of products made and the methods used for making products imposes par- ticularly great needs for continual attention to means for minimizing pollutant emissiotis in this `industry group. THE SYSTEMS APPROACH TO CONTROL In concluding my review of the technical adequacy of current air pollution control measures, Mr. Chairman, I would like to discuss briefly the air resource management or systems approach to air pollution control. This ideal approach to control is through a regional or what has been termed an "air shed" program, with the air shed encompassing all pollution sources in an area and all communi- ties exposed to the air polluted by these sources. The control program for a par- ticular air shed is developed rationally. Standards of air quality are selected; from this baseline and from data on the natural characteristics of the area, stand- ards for emissions from different sources are calculated; and on the basis of these emission limitations construction and process codes are developed. This approach Is attractive and apparently simple. However, certain funda- mental problems must be solved before the approach can be fully implemented. The first of these is social. Air quality standards, if they are to be broadly applied, have to be acceptable not only to the scientists who must devise the means of achieving them, but must be acceptable to the public, who in the long run must pay for the benefits derived from their application. I do not believe, Mr. Chairman, that there is any question in anyone's mind but that air quality standards should be vigorous enough to prevent adverse health effects in even the most sensitive of the human population. I believe that most of us would also want standards sufficiently vigorous to prevent sensory irritation, injury to animals, and damage to ornamental plants or agricultural crops. fl:owever, while it has been amply demonstrated that air pollution at levels routinely found in community atmospheres is associated with these adverse effects on health and welfare, there is a vast amount of research that must be conducted before we reach, if we ever reach, a peiiect understanding of the cause and effect relation- ships between air pollution and the damage we now observe. Let me at this point, Mr. Chairman, identify some of the more important areas in which we need to expand our knowledge of the effects of air pollution. I will limit myself to the effects of air pollution on health. A principal objective for research both now and in the future is to establish the cause-and-effect relationship between known dosages of air pollutants, singly or in combination, and the health or welfare of man under known environmental conditions. This will require the acquisition of new information at all levels, from basic research to field investigation. The basic mechanisms of action of many agents are ill-defined or unknown, and we must understand these if we are to define capacities for physiologic and toxicologic actions. Eye irritation, for example, is one common response not so defined. Major attention has been given the respiratory system. Direct or jndirect ef- fects upon other functional systems and tissues may assume greater importance under proper circumstances. The results of exposing animals to irradiated auto exhaust indicate that exposed parents have fewer offspring and that infant mortality is high in these offspring. This apparent effect upon reproduction should be clarified. Other promising areas for investigation would include blood chemistry and cells, the liver, the kidney, and the circulatory system. Knowledge of thepotentiatlon or synergism Qf,mlxtures of air pollution agents, or of ~geñtS plus othet'enivor ental';eOn~dtt4bhS or ~agents, will probably be more valuable to control efforts than the most intimate knoVvledge of a single agent. Mixtures of gases and particles require intensive, well-designed study. More adequate knowledge of the joint effects of agents and infectious disease is critically important concerning not only the acute infection but also the patho- genesis of chronic debilitating conditions, ventilatory diseases such as emphy- sema, and e~ncer of the lungs. The Immuno-chemistry of air pollutants has not been explored to a useful extent. The antigenie capacity of organic particulate matter in the air is of both PAGENO="0084" 80 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT occupational and general importance. The further pursuit of studies of this type may result in the evolution of general concepts applicable to the identifica- tion of susceptible individuals and protection of such individuals. The mi- muno-chemistry of gaseous agents should also be more extensively studied. Our present ability to detect changes in man may not be adequately sensitive. Either the rnetho4ology is too insensitive, the experimental design is not good, or the wrong responses are being investigated. New responses, Rn'd/or more sen- sitive detection methodology, appear to be promising avenues. Improved methods of odor detection and discrimination, of measuring eye irritation response, visual acuity definitio~~, and central nervous system response hopefully will provide new estimates of threshold values for human criteria. An increasingly important need in the realm of health effects is more adequate evaluation of the contribution of air pollution to accidents. For example, re~ duced visibility!, eye irritation, increased carboxyhemoglobin (with attendant mi- pairment of operating performance), and contribution to stress status, are readily itemized as potential dangers to air and ground traffic. More thorough evaluation of the potential effects of pollutants upon the eye and upper respiratory tract, both alone and in the presence of infectious agents, is desirable. Considerable losses in manpower due to absenteeism have been correlated to air pollution exposures, but the specific contribution of air pollution has not been clarified. As this partial list of some of our needs for research into the health effects of air pollution Indicates, Mr. Chairman, our knowledge is far from perfect. And since our knowledge is imperfect, there has been some reluctance on the part of the scientific community to develop air quality standards. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that we should get on with the job. Our knowledge of the effects of air pollution will in all likelihood never be perfect, and for that matter air quality standards will in all likelihood never be established purely on the basis of scientific knowledge. The health threshold for human exposure to radioactive substances is zero. Yet few of us would take the purist vie~Ir that the use of X-rays for medical purposes should be banned and that atomic energy plants should not be btiilt. To eliminate traffic fatalities completely we would need to eliminate motor vehicles, completely. Yet few of us would see the automobile destroyed. If we are to apply the rational approach to air pol- lution control, we must achieve a ~onsensus on what "clean air" should be, and we will achieve that consensus only by considering the relevant factors of envi- ronment-social, political, and economic, as well as scientific. As you know, Mr~ Chairman, in the Clean Air Act the Congress recognized the need for yardsticks of air quality!, calling upon the Secretary to publish criteria reflecting the latest scientific knowledge of the predictable effects of .various pollutants in the atmosphere. This Department has prepared in preliminary form criteria for two principal classes of pollutants, the sulfur oxides and, the photochemical o~idants, and is. `working on criteria for two other classes, the nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide. It is hoped that these criteria will assist `the* States and local governments in establishing air quality standards. The second problem `we must sOlve if we are to apply the rational approach to air pollution control is technical. We do not have today fully, developed methods of bridging the gap between air quality standards and source emission `stand- ards. Our methods are particularly deficient for that very situation in which air' pollution' is most~ critical-~-the `multiple. source of urban situation. For sus~' pended pa~rtjculate matter we `can approxniimate the transition using emission inventory ~tedhnlques. The particulate matter omitted from each source in an area can be estimated, and. from a comparison between the overall estimate and the air `quallt~y standard a percentage, reduction can be calculated. For sonie gases and fine particles computer progrtmms have been written to accommodate a large numbeic ~f'so~arces of different cetageries, to take into account varying times of maxitaum emissions, and to take into account varying meteorological condi- ti~ns. Howe~er,'the~e programs requite a wealth of `date, and they have not been developed to, the point where tber will accommodate reactions between pollutants after they leave the soli.rce;stLeh,.M tile reactions which result In photo. chemical smog, and they `will not' accomn~odate particulate matter that falls out, or nuisance~, such.. as odors, which usually .emax~ate from a single `source~ Mr. Chairman, this concludes my review of the adequacy .of `the present technology for controlling .air..poil,u.tion, I .wo~uid like finally to briefly describe for you some o'f the forms' an.d. the extent of Federal' Government efforts to' advance that technology. PAGENO="0085" ADEQTJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 81 ~EDEBAL RE5EAROE AND DEV]rLOPMnNT AOTIVIPInS The functions of conducting and supporting research have been an integral part of our Department's air pollution activities ever since the establishment of the Federal air pollution program in 1955. In Fiscal Year 1966, whIch ended on June 30, about $14 million was invested in research activities. This sum represented some 55 percent of the funds appropriated for the air pollution program. For the current Fiscal Year, our budget requests includes about $18 million for research activities. Of the total for Fiscal 1966, about 80 percent was allocated for research In our own facilities, mostly at the Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center in Cincinnati. About 10 percent was used to support research by other Federal agenclea-the Environmental Sciences Services Administration and the Na- tional Bureau of Standards of the Department of Commerce, the Bureau of Mines of the Department of the Interior, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. Contracts with non-Federal institutions and agencies, including industrial firms, accounted for 20 percent. The largest single portioE, about 40 percent, was awarded to non-profit institutions, mostly universities, to support needed research projects. This research effort includes a broad range of investigations of the nature, extent, sources, effects, and control of air pollution, and the scientific disciplines Involved include many branches of the physical and biological sciences. Among the more important elements of the program are laboratory studies of the adverse effects of air pollutants on animals and clinical studies of effects on man, epidemiological and statistical studies of the occurrence of illness and death in relation to various measurements of air pollutions, field investigations of the effects of pollutants on materials and structures, engineering investigations of the nature and control of pollution from such major sources as mOtor vehicles, fuel combustion, and manufacturing activities, and studies In the social sciences. I want to discuss some of these research areas briefly. In the areas of medicine and biology, studies are being conducted to determine the biological responses of laboratory animals living in ambient air in urban areas over a long portion of their life span as cOmpared with those living in cleaned air. In related laboratory studies, animals are being exposed to syn- thetically derived polluted atmospheres, e.g., irradiated and non-irradiated auto exhaust, mixtures of auto exhaust with added sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide, and various pure gases and particulates, singly and in combinations. Preliminary experiments suggest a lowering of fertility and infant survival of animals exposed to irradiated exhaust. Biochemical changes in the lungs and activation of spontaneous disease appear to result also from chronic exposure to irradiated exhaust. Other studies involve effects of potentialily cancer-producing materials de~ rived from combustion and industrial sources and found in polluted air; the potentiation of infectious disease (e.g., bacterial pneumonia) by exposure to air pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide or ozone; changes in electroencephelo- gram patterns in rats on exposure to air pollutants such as carbon monoxide and ozone; clinical studies to define more specifically the components in photo~ chemical smog that produce eye irritation and define the increased oxygen re- quirements of patients with pulmonary disease exposed to ambient or filtered air; and phytotoxic effects of pollutants such as auto exhaust, ozone, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide with a number of plant species and exposure condi- tions. Epidemiological studies are focused on the effects of air pollution on health, with emphasis on respiratory diseases. In field studies, some of the health effects that might be attributable to air pollution (and other environmental factors) are measured, as are the levels of air contaminants. In Nashville, effects on patients with asthma were correlated with atmospheric pollutants. These correlations indicated that the asthma nttack rate varied significantly on days of high and low concentrations of sulfur dioxide. In Seward and New Florence, Pennsylvania, statistically significant differences In average airway resistance were found in residents of the two communities which differ greatly in ambient air pollutant levels sulfur dioxide, dustfall, and soiling. In New Orleans, the incidence of asthma outbreaks has been studied in relation to wind speed and direction, types of pOllutants in the atmosphere, allergic reactions, and possible sources of pollutants. Results thus far show that sai~iples taken PAGENO="0086" 82 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT near grain elevators and from subterranean burning at a dump give most posi- tive results. Studies are also made on a post-episode basis by using available vital statistics to determine increased morbidity and mortality during such situa- tions. It is common to find hundreds of excess deaths as the result of an ex- tended period of high air pollution. With respect to effects of air pollution on the economy, our research include studies of damage to property, corrosion of metal and masonry structures, vegetation damage, including that occurring in forested areas, and deterioration of electrical contacts, power distribution lines and fabrics. In engineering and the physk~al sciences, investigatiOns are conducted in four major scientific areas: engineering, chemistry, physics, and meteorology. Most studies focus principally on the Nation's major air pollution problems: motor vehicle emissions, sulfur oxide pollution, and nitrogen oxides. With respect to motor vehicle pollution, our research Includes continuing efforts to investigate the practicability of various systems for controlling emis- sions and to develop test procedures for measuring emissions and evaluating the effectiveness of control devices. The national standards for crankcase ventilation and exhaust control systems, which are effective on 1968 model-year gasoline-powered vehicles, are only the beginning of controls in this area., Stand- ards for the control of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons from gasoline-powered trucks and buses, more restrictive standards for passenger vehicles, and regula- tions for diesel smoke and odor, fuel tank and carburetor evaporative lossesr and control of nitrogen oxides are being investigated. To help achieve control of the important problem of sulfur oxide pollution from combustion of~fossil' fuels, ~esearch is treing pursued on several fronts, including removal, of sulfur from coal arrdrestdual oil and removal of sulfur oxides from combustion effluents. Investigations are also under way on the control of other potentially harmful contaminants, such as nitrogen oxides from combustion sources, lead additives from motor fuels, rocket exhausts, incinerator effluents, and other types of combustion and industrial effluents. The chemistry of polluted atmospheres is still a largely unexplored area for research. Programs are under way to develop sampling and analytical tech- niques and to standardize them. Research is proceeding also on defining the photochemical processes that occur in the atmosphere, and the effects on these processes of the input mix (e.g., reactivity of the hydrocarbons involved) and of the ratio of the two principal ingredients, hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides. Effects of irradiation intensity and period of irradiation are also under study. The problem of selective controls on vehicles and their effect on the photo~- chemical process adds another continually changing variable to an already complex problem. A highly specialized program is the development of techniques by which meteorologists can study air movements over long distances in far greater detail than has been possible to date. These techniques entail the release of harmless compounds, e.g., sulfur hexafiuoride and other halogenated gases, followed by periodic collection and analysis by electron-capture gas chromatography. Pres- ent work indicates that measurements at concentrations as low as 1O~ ppm are practicable, and that sensitivity may be increased by several orders of magnitude by using concentration steps prior to analysis. Research on the physical characteristics of atmospheric pollutants includes studies in a number of areas: 1. The size distribution, form, specific composition, and other detailed characteristics of urban particulate's. These data are needed to help evaluate the toxicity of particulates and their role in corrosion, visibility reduction, atmospheric reactions, and potentiation of the effects of irritant gases. 2. The role of surface properties in effects associated with aerosols, which may be elucidated by a study of the thermodynamic and kinetics of gas-particulate systems. 3. The use of recent advances in the physical sciences in developing improved techniques for air pollution measurements, e.g., plume transmittance, remote infrared and laser monitoring, and remote temperature soundings. Meteorological studies constitute an `importan1t part of air pollution research. Meteorologists assigned to the Taft Center in Cincinnati maintain daily surveil- lance of national weather charts to forecast periods of sluggish air movement over extensive geographic areas-periods that are condticive to accumulation of air pollutanth. Re~eareh i~' irnth~r way to quantify the~o foro~a~t~, parti~tilar1y in terms of the large diurnal variation in air pollution potential, to' extend PAGENO="0087" ADEQUACY O~ TECW(OLQGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 83 them to the local situations, and to apply computer techniques to the forecasing operation. Mathematical models are being developed and tested to describe the individual and cumulative effects of pollutant sources on air quality in an urban area. These models range in complexity from simple graphical presentations to highly com- plex descriptions of sources and of air flow patterns. Tracer studies are being undertaken to investigate the variability of dispersion parameters as they per- tain to the roughness elements in the urban situation. To provide continuing information on major trends in air pollution, we oper- ate three air monitoring networks. One system of stations, the National Air Sampling Network (NASN), includes some 250 stations~ which sample for sus- pended particulate matter; 50 of these stations also sample for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. The stations obtain 24-hour integrated samples on a random schedule about once each two weeks. Stations of a Continuous Air Moni- toring Program (CAMP) are operated in Cincinnati, Chicago, Philadelphia, Den- ver, St. Louis, and Washington, D.C. At each CAMP station, a set of instru- ments automatically measures and continuously records the atmospheric levels of carbon monoxide, total hydrocarbons, nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and total oxidants. A surveillance network has recently been set up to assist In the evaluation of effects of pollution in urban areas extending across State boundaries. These stations in this Surveillance Network for Interstate Pollution Effects utilize an "effects package" to measure dustfall, particulate impingement, sulfation, corrosion, tarnishing of metals, and deterioration of textiles, dyes, and rubber. Plans are to establish about 60 stations of this type this year. Other Federal agencies play an important role in our research efforts. The Weather Bureau of the Environmental Sciences Services Administration of the Department of Commerce has carried the major burden of meteorological studies. The Bureau of Mines of the Department of the Interior is engaged in numerous projects relating to the nature and control of pollution from fuel combustion, primarily sulfur oxide pollution from the combustion of fossil fuels. The Tennessee Valley Authority is active in meteorological and engineer- ing studies relating to pollution from large fuel-burning installations; the Agri- cultural Research Service and the Forest Service of the Department of Agri- culture in studies of air pollution effects on plant life and the Bureau of Stand- ards of the Department of Commerce in studies of the basic chemistry and phys- ics of air pollution. The Library of Congress has been our principal biblio- graphical resource. Although not, in contrast to the above noted agencies, recipients of all pollu- tion research funds by transfer from this Department, the Office of Coal Research of the Department of the Inteilior, the National Science Foundation, the National Space and Aeronautics Agency, the Atomic Energy Commission and the Depart- ment of Defense have all sponsored research of great value to a better under- standing of air pollution, its effects and its control. I have given a rough indication, Mr. Chairman, of the extent of the air pollution research and development activities that are presently being carried out in the United States. I will be pleased to submit for the record a detailed breakdown of our Department's activities in this area. Further, under an arrangement with the Americal Society of Mechanical Engineers we are currently gathering de~ tailed information on the air pollution research and development activities being carried out under other than Federal auspices. This information should be complete sometime in the fall of this year, and I will also be pleased to make it available to the Committee. To conclude my remarks, Mr. Chairman, we have studied the report of the Research Management Advisory Panel to your Committee, and we are in agree~ mont in large part with the fundamental findings of the report. As the report indicates, the quality of life is to a large extent dependent upon the quality of the environment. But it is only In recent years that we have begun to under- stand this relationship, and particularly to understand how dependent we are on our fundamental resources of air, water, and land. For the greater part of our historical development our interest in the environment was primarily that of subduing nature so that she would serve man better. We had to convert many of our beautiful rivers and lakes into practically open sewers before we concluded that we must conserve our water resources, and we had to experience the tragedy of Donora and the anguish of Los Angeles before we began to realize PAGENO="0088" 84 AI~QVACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION AEATEME~T that the ~ee~ingly iu~nite ocean of air that surrounde this planet has decidedly unite capacities for diluting and dispersing the wastes we throw up~ from our elvilization. In our siug1~em1nded de~rotion tO achieving the benefits Of science and technology, we plunged ahoád with the abundant ma:terial~ at hand, without a very precise notion of where we were going and with~u't serious attention tO the possible side effeóts of our activities on the environment. Poday It is important that we can no longer with' iin~utnity discharge wastes Indiscriminately to the environment. It is apparent, today that we must use Our science and technology to control the by-product problems of our industrial- ized society as well' as to produce the goods and servicOs we all Increasingly enjoy. And It is apparent that we are going to have to run very hard in the ImmedIate years ahead just to keep pace with the problem. We must greatly expand our application Of technology to the sources of pollution, and we must accelerate our efforts to further develop that technology I am convinced Mr Chairman, that the attentiOn foc~sed on these needs by this Committee will make a substantial contribution to Out~ progress towaH. the control of Onvironmental pollution. We don't have much time and `I regret, Mr. Gilbertsoti, that we did not get to you soOner. We still have 10 to 15 minutes. Please go into your report. Mr. GILBEETSON. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman, I'll be very glad to. STATEMENT BY WESLEY E. GILBERTSON, CHIEF, OFFICE OP'SOLID WASTES, PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, U.S. HT~EN~ OP HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE Mr. GILBERTSON. in the interest of time, I will submit my state- ment for the record and then touch on a few highlights of it. This is a sort of status report on the adequacy of technology for solid waste pollution `abatement. I think that I could say without fear of over- statement that few problems of the environment need more work in the field of technology than does the solid waste area. It is, however, encouraging that the Federal Government has underway a national program to advance the techriolo~y of solid waste management under the Solid Waste Disposal Act which `was adopted by th~ Congress last October. The thrust of this legislation is basically a research, technical de- velopment, demonstration, and planning authorization for purposes of preventing and solving solid waste problems which contribute to health hazards, scenic blight, and environmental decay, through the application of technoiogy-~-which I will touch on-with reference to garbage, to trash, junk, and other solid wastes from municipalities, from industry, and from agriculture. It would be safe to say that the solid waste problem has reached major proportions during many years of public indifference and pro~ fessional neglect.' This is `true even though large sums of money are spent by public agencies and by private citizens and industries on disposal costs. They are `paying for this, we are all paying for it, without really getting done t~e job that we would like to have done. The history of the solid waste problem, which might be called the third side of the `~Ollution problem, is somewhat in contrast,. I think, wi'th what has happened in the other areas of environmental contam- ination and pollution almost down then to the present time. As .a matter of fact, up until about a year ago the total Federal expend- itures in this field were about $250;000 a year for Th & P. So' ~s a PAGENO="0089" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 85 result of this lack of attention, the solid waste technological void is certainly a great one and results in the fact that we must now be prepared for a long-term effort to take care of it. Our national program under the solid Waste Disposal Act calls for scientific research, training, field investigations, and demonstrations. We look at this problem not solely in terms of what the Federal Gov- ernment will do but also in terms of what local, State, and private agencies will undertake in coordinated fashion. Thus, a nationwide program is envisioned. I will only touch briefly on the health hazards involved. Certainly, it is well known that inadequate solid waste prac- tices and facilities are breeding places for insects and rodents which carry disease. Solid waste disposal frequently involves contributions or generation of air and water pollution; inadequate handling of solid waste also involves accident hazards and certainly also causes fire hazards. In this particular area, I think I should stress very strongly the area of interrelationship, the question of interrelationships which has already been touched on by two or three members of the committee. In no place perhaps do we come into a pollution area where the impact of one form of pollution: on the others is so evident cud so much a part of the daily considerations of the R. & D. effort which it is called on to solve it. The interrelationship therefore, really is part of the basicfacts that we must consider at every step we take. I should just like to leave the question of the size of the problem with a very brief reference to the fact that it is growing. The amount of solid waste generated per capita per day in the United States has risen from somewhere between 2 or 3 pounds to around four and a half pounds within a very short time. It is higher in some locations, 6 or 7 pounds in some cities, `and on a national average we project a na- tional average of between 5½ and 6 pounds per capita per day by 1980. This means then that we are dealing somewhere in the neighbor- hood of 800 million to a billion pounds of material a day that has to be handled in an adequate and safe way. And as has been brought out very effectively, I think, in the hearing this uiotning, as we moVe up our standards and' therefore our controls in the field of air pollu- tion and in the field of water pollution-this, then, automatically increases the solid waste problem. So the past quantities I think are far underestimated ~md so, in all probability, are pro)ections for the future. I should niso like to say that we See qualitative changes as' well as quantitative ones. I say this from several standpoints. First, our society's use of materials is changing. Our rising output and use of pesticides, solvents, household chemicals, "and industrial chem.- ical materials results in wastes that are known to be hazardous. And then `the removal' of contaminantS from air and water also results in qualitative changes as well as the quantitative ones~', Thus, a greater amount, of toxic chemicals, even cancer~producing ones, are being thrown into the "solid waste stream," if we can call it that. All of these things focus the public demand for a higher quality environment, and this then, coupled with the enactment of' the Solid Waste Dis- posal Act, does provide an opportunity and a challenge to move ahead PAGENO="0090" 86 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT with a program. I think~this is a very mature piece of. legislation, because it does specifically spell out the requirement that all of the pollution aspects must be taken into consideration when we look at the solid waste problem. In other words, in looking at the planning questions, in looking at the research and development questions, the legislation spells out the interrelationship that must be taken into consideration. Furthermore, we and the States and localities and industries in- volved, are expected to also take into consideration all the planning and development questions involved, and these~ I think, are very important ones that need to be taken into consideration. Another factor in what I have termed the maturity of approach, is that the act makes it clear that we are talking about solving the solid waste problem in terms not only of just simple disposal questions per Se, even though that may be safely done. Here we are looking at ways in which we can reduce the generation of wastes at their sources, to possibly recycle them back into production, to increase the salvage of useful items, and to convert these wastes then into beneficial uses for mankind. Then finally another aspect of the mature approach is one which has been touched on; namely, the need for somewhat larger scaled opera- tions in order to do a decent job. The tendencies toward fragmenta- tion of this problem among very small geographic or political units has been a deterrent, we believe, in the application of the technology that is now available; A very important part of the Federal pro- gram involves efforts to encourage a larger scale approach, a regional approach in some instances. In metropolitan areas which regionally approach the situation, a better planning job can be done, and im- proved technical resources can be brought to bear, because they are dealing with a larger operation. They can scale up the facilities and, therefore, obtain better economies, cost benefits, and so forth. These indicate some of the important points of maturity in the legislation itself. The Office of Solid Wastes was established in the Public Health Service only about 8 months ago, and since that time. as `you can ap- preciate we have been busy, engaged in establishing the fundamental program and the major areas of activity. I think I can report that we have successfully launched activities in the five major areas that were projected by the Congress in the act. We have initiated a research program through the grants and con- tracts mechanism, and we are tooling up our in-house research. We have initiated a program for demonstration of new and improved solid waste systems. Here we are talking primarily about shortening the time gap be- tween laboratory bench-scale types of ideas and their application on a community level. And this certainly is an important consideration when we try to work out the change or upgrading of technology in any field. Mention has been made earlier of the need for better pro- fessional trained manpower, and we have initiated four training pro~ grams at universities. We went to the limit of the funds this last year, and we have additional good applications which will be funded during the coming year. PAGENO="0091" ADEQTJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 87 In addition, we have initiated, admittedly so far on a small scale, the direct training activities of the type that was referred to earlier in the air pollution field. The question of professional development we think is very critical. As a matter of fact, I think it is fair to say that here we are faced with a particular problem because some people per- haps think it beneath their dignity to look at the solid waste problem. We have to get an attitude changed here. It needs technological input to it. There are tremendous costs to society, both health and aesthetic. Even before we had the advantages of the new act we had begun on a very small scale to bring together the researchers in this field, to iden- tify them, and to start working with them. We had a National Con- ference on Solid Waste Research. We have done a number of things through the technical and professional organizations to give solid waste research status, you might say, so that people would begin to give it the `attention that it deserves. We are very gratified that this change in point of view is taking place. Certainly the new act has been a major factor in this change. In terms of State activities it is safe to say that with perhaps a handful of exceptions that is very little going on at the State level in this field. There are a few States which have begun programs within the last year or two. Some States have enacted legislation and this,, of course, is a base for State activities. We awarded during the past fiscal year grants for statewide solid waste program activities in 14 States. This is for development of comprehensive solid waste plans for the immediate and long-range management problem of the State, including the factors I mentioned earlier such as relationship to water and air pollution, economic development, land use planning, and par- ticularly the advantages of regional solid waste management efforts. And then finally we have begun a program of technical services to provide the types of assistance `to State, local, and industry groups mentioned previously. Now, I think that it is pretty obvious that in a field like this where so little has been done and so much needs to be done, it is very neces- sary to very carefully select the kinds of activities which should be carried out. Mention has been made earlier in the hearing of the need for standards, criteria, and guidelines, and I'm glad to report to the committee that this is one of our major priority areas. That is, using technical information as it becomes available, building on what we have, which is little, enough, but adding to it, to develop the kinds of standards that can be applied not oniy by State and local govern- ments but also by industry in its development activities for its pol- lution problems and for abatement facilities and devices. In. other words, if they have something to design to or to work toward, this then gives them a better chance `for their own R. & D. effort. In particular I think it is fair to say that one of the key underlying philosophies which we believe the Congress intended and which we are trying to implement, is the injection of a spirit of innovation in this field. I think it is pretty obvious that in no area are there greater opportunities for innovations and new ideas. For this reason the opportunities for working with industry and with research groups is a wide one, and we believe that the basic methods of the research grant and the contract mechanism should be utilized to the fullest extent in the months to come. PAGENO="0092" 88 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATI~MENT One of the big problems here has been that we really have not had a tOtal national summary of where we are in this field. This is nec- essary, obviously for many purposes, basically for program plannrng and development. We believe that our working with the States over the long pull will be a very important factor in terms of getting to- gether some ideas about the extent of the problem, the trends and quality, of practices, and so forth. But this again will be spotty as long as many States have not been active in this field and they will take time to gear up. We have initiated, through a contract, a tech- nical-economic survey of practices and needs covering about 450 cities and 90 industries. We believe that this will be a satisfactorily large sample to give us an idea of where we are in this national picture. In the more technical field we have initiated a study through a contract for a series of state-of-the-art reports on various kinds of unit processes that could be applied in the solid waste field. Many of these will come directly out of industrial processes and have pre- viously never been applied to this field at all. We think this will be an important mechanism for transfer of technology from other fields into this field. Mr. Chairman. I would like to wind up rapidly here by commenting on a couple of points which are extremely important but will be very difficult, I am sure, to get hold of. The first of these is: how do we' reduce the burden by cutting down on waste generation at the source~ Now here we are getting into some questions that have long-range implications, because we are talking about the question of whether products can be designed so as to reduce the ultimate waste problem connected with them, or whether the products of manufacture can be designed iti such a way that they are more easily handled from the waste disposal point of view. I might inject a note of humor here, *sir. Somebody came up with a question to me the other day. Do you mean thn t you are now going to make beer cans out of pretzels ~ This might be an outlandish idea but it has a point here. We are talking about whether products themselves can be thought of in terms of their disposal, as well as in terms of the utility involved. Mr. DADDARI0. I got a sample of paper through the mail a day or two agO whièh dissolves when you place it in water. Mr. GTLBERTSON. This is a very good example. I agree with you. Mr. BROWN. If I might cite another example, it seems to me the principle is the same as buying ice cream in a cone. Mr. GTLBERTSON. Yes, sir; that is excellent. So, the whole idea of reducing waste at the source deserves a great deal of attention. Important also is the question of recovering and reusing wastes. There are some difficult questions here. There are certainly broad economic, questions that are involved, and I doubt very much whether substantial technical progress can be made in this area without a great deal of backing from the public and by the Government, in ad- dition to whatever economic forces that might be called to play here. The whole question then of recoverl7, ~ and salvage o~ valuable materials offers some promise as far as routes to modernization of the pollution problem. I might mention that one way of recovering certain values from waste~ could be more widely used, and that is the use of wastes for PAGENO="0093" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 89 land reclamation, where this can be done on a planned basis, perhaps with the use of new technology such as greater density and compac- tion, so that otherwise useless lands could be put into very productive uses. So far I have talked almost entirely about the question of treatment, processing and disposal. I would like to note that we are thinking now more about a series of processes, a treatment approach here rather than just a single action of disposal. I think this point is very im- portant. But I haven't mentioned the question of collection of waste, and here we are talking about an area which economically and from the standpoint of health and aesthetic questions is an important one. As a matter of fact, from the cost point of view some 60, 70, or 80 per- cent of the total cost of solid waste disposal is involved in the collec- tion, question, and here research, development and innovation hold a great deal of promise and certainly need to be worked on. I think that here we probably most effectively can carry out our activities in perhaps what you might call new communities or new towns. Per~ haps these facilities will require the same ki~nd of thinking, the same kind of early planning and development as we now have involved in the basic public utilities. So, our work here, will be directed pri- marily at innovations that can be incorporated in the completely new cities. And in connection with this, the use of systems management, beginning with the interrelationships among the waste systems sup- ports the fact that, if you move to a somewhat larger scale of opera- tions geographically, new potentials come into view. We recently have asked the newly established National A~cademy of Engineering to work with us in looking at some of the practical ways in which steps could be taken to apply some of the concepts that' we have been work- ing with. The National Academy of Engineering has agreed to do this. We also have held two or three national meetings, including a national conference on systems analysis and waste management earlier this year, and this I think developed further interest in the field. The Federal role in generating activities' in the private sector is worthy of brief comment. It seems to me that there are opportunities here for us to work with industry. There are several ways that indus- try can and undoubtedly will participate in the program. The infor- mation derived from the national IL & D. program will help industry to meet its own solid waste problems. Then, of course, we feel that industry will be looking toward the possibility of a significant expan- sion in the solid waste management industry itself. We have some specific examples of that already. We have developed certain Federal interagency relationships with reference to the solid waste planning question. We have developed a working understanding with the Department of Housing and Urban Development whereby the State solid waste planning activities and the so-called 701 planning activities of HUD will be coordinated through the State agencies concerned, and we have a working memo- randum of agreement with the Bureau of Mines of the Department of the Interior regarding the mutual and respective responsibilities under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, `and we will be glad to furnish that to the committee if it is desired. PAGENO="0094" 90 ADEQUACY OF ~I'ECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. DADDAEIO. i~ you would, please. Mr. GILBEET50N. Yes, sir; we will do that. (The memorandum requested follows:) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Rni~APIvE To IMPLEMENTATION OF TITLE II, THE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL AcT OF 1965 PUBLIc LAW 89-272 The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, and the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, each has an area of responsibility for implementing the provisions of Public Law 89-272, the Solid Waste Disposal Act, and are mutually desirous of developing a coordinated pro- gram toward the attainment of common objectives under the Act. The report of the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce (Report No. 899, page 27, lines 19 through 36), states that, under the provisions of the bill, sub- sequently enacted as Public Law 89-272, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare "would be responsible for administration of the Act, except that the Secretary of the Interior will be responsible for `solid waste resulting from the extraction, processing or utilization of minerals and fossil fuels where the generation, production, or reuse of such wastes is or may be controlled within the extraction, processing or utilization facility or facilities and where such control is a feature of the technology or economy of the operation of such fa- cility or facilities'. This arrangement would make the Secretary of Healths Education, and Welfare responsible for administration of `the Act with respect to solid waste problems of communities, including those problems which may affect the general environments of communities, and including those solid wastes or solid waste residues that result from business and industrial activi- ties and become part of the community's solid waste disposal system. The De- partment of the Interior, as above indicated, would be responsible for solving industrial solid waste problems within facilities engaged in extraction process~ lug, or utflizatioa' ~ fuels in `th? dpci~mstanees, ,above de- fined." To accomplish these thjectit~s, th~ Publi~ Tlealth Ser~vice and the Bureau of Mines have entered Into this Memorandum of Understanding in order to define and describe the principal areas of program interest of each agency and to clearly establish a mutually acceptable working relationship which insures proper coordination of all programs under Public Law 89-272. It is mutually agreed that: A. The Public Health Service and the Bureau of Mines will designate officials to act as the principal contacts and liaison officers at the program level in inter- agency matters pertaining to Public Law 89-272. B. In regard~ to aemo~st~-atiop grant applieatton~ under, Section 204 of Public Law 89-272, the Public H~alth Service will refer to the Bureau of Mines ~or necessary action, th&se ~e ctheiMtien~ gra~t'application~ pertaining primarily to mineral or fossil fuel solid waste problems as defined' under Section 203(1) of the Act; and the Bureau of Mines will refer to the Public Health Service for necessary action those demonstration grant applications pertaining to other solid waste problems. C. The Public Health Service will refer to the Bureau of Mines for review and comment those demonstration grant applications which give major emphasis to components involving mineral, metal, and fossil fuel solid waste problems as part of a broader solid waste disposal program; and the Bureau of Mines will refer to the Public Health Service for review and comment those demonstration grant applications in which the mineral and fossil fuel solid waste problem's have significant community implications. In the above cases, it is understood that any comments the reviewing agency wishes' to make will be forwarded within a period of fifteen (15) working days from the time o'f receipt. D. The Bureau of Mines and the Public Health Service may support, on a joint basi's, demonstration, research, or training projects which have implica- tions for disposal of solid wastes from minerals or fossil fuels and from com- munity sources. E. The Public Health Service and the Bureau of Mines will perform reimbursa- ble services for each other, when such `action is appropriate and feasible and mutually beneficial to the agencies. F. The Public Health Service and the Bureau of Mines will exchange infor- mation regarding program activities under Public Law 89-272. This will include information on grant awards and similar actions. PAGENO="0095" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATE]~ENT 91 G. The Public Health Service in carrying out its responsibilities for developing comprehensive State and local solid waste programsi, and in providing technical assistance to State and local agencies and industry, will need technical infor- mation from the Bureau of Mines. From time to time such information will be made available by the Bureau of Mines to the Public Health~Service. H. Since the processing and disposal of automobile and other metallic scrap involve problems of community environmental pollution, blight, and parallel resource problems in the technology of salvage and utilization, the Public Health Service and the Bureau of Mines may jointly conduct projects on broad phases of the junk and scrap auto problem, and individually on specific appropriate com- plementary segments. This Memorandum of Understanding shall become effective upon acceptance of both parties, and shall continue indefinitely, but may be modified at the re- quest of either of the cooperative agencies. This agreement may be terminated by either agency upon thirty (30) days notice in writing. June 7, 19G6. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Bunm~v OF MINnS, WALTER R. HIBBARD, Jr., Director. June 3, 19~6. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, WILLIAM H. STEWART, Sargeon General. Before closing, then, I think I would only like to summarize what we think the Federal Government can do under this new program. It can provide leadership and stimulation for innovation in solid waste management. It can supply some resources not elsewhere avail- able for research development and demonstration of improved tech- nology. It can help in disseminating information on new types ~tnd prototypes of solid waste programs which meet the requirements for the protection of health, prevention of water and air pollution, and improvement of the general environment. However, it is important to mention also that the national program can do no more than demonstrate the ways in which these new ap- proaches, the new technology can replace outmoded and inadequate systhm~ and practices. The final steps, of course, have to be taken by people in industry, in the communities and the States throughout the Nation, and we hope that we can help make that come about. This will conclude my summary of the statement. Mr. DADDARIO. We have come to the quorum call. I'm sorry we don't have an opportunity to ask you any questions, but we will submit some for the record as we have discussed earlier. I would like to an- nounce that on Tuesday next we have two important witnesses who will come before this committee: Dr. Tukey, who is the Chairman of the President's Science Advisory Committee on this subject; and Dr. Spilhaus who chaired the report on pollution for the National Acaci- emy of Science. We are pleased that they will be appearing here on the same day because we think they can make significant contribu- tions to these hearings. You have already done that. I'm extremely pleased with your par- ticipation. It has been helpful to us. We would like to supplement the record through questions which we will ask to make the reeord clearer. Mr. GILBERTSON. We will be very ha.ppy to do that and I take it that. some of the questions that were asked earlier about budget and train- ing and research and so forth in the air pollution field would probably apply equally in this area and if you wish we can furnish those figures. PAGENO="0096" 92 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT (Additional questions and answers for the record may `be found in vol. II.) Mr. t~ADDAIUO. Yes. We will have our staff get together with you so that we can fill in all of those gaps. I want to thank you all. and wish you would thank Dr. Cohen for having come this morning. This committee will adjourn until Tuesday' next, same place, at 10 a.m. (The prepared statement of Wesley .E. Gilbertson follows:) PREPARED STATEMENT BY WESLEY B. GILBEETSON, CHIEF, OFITCE OF SoLID WASTES, PUBLIC HEALTH SEDvICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE Mr. Chairman, I .weLcom~ the opportunity to `present here a status report on the adeqt~cy of technology for solid waste pollution abatement. Few probl6ms of environmental',health technology more greatly need the inter- est and conéern o1~ the Subcommittee and, indeed, of the entire Nation. The Federal Government now has under way a national program to advance the technology of solid waste inanakemen't' under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. This legislation was adopted by' the Congress last October to' provide the Nation with the means of preventing a crisis in, solid wastes in terms of health hazards, scenic disfigurement, and the physical enormity of the job of safely disposing o~ vast daily accumulations of garbage, trash,' junk, and other solid wastes from municipalities, industry, and agriculture. The solid wastes problem reached major proportions during many years of public lnçllfference. Mo'~t people had virtually no interest in solid wastes unless their refuse was no't regularly collected, or .they happened to live near an open dump with its hordes of disease-carrying iteects and rodents., `or `an overloaded incinerator with. its noxious stenches and smoke clouds.' Most people forgot about solid wa~tes the moment, they were out of sight. Although. huge amounts of public funds were spent fo'r waste collection and 4isposai, little public or private money was invested in those years of Indifference in solid waste research or even in such Improved disposal equipment as wa~ available.' So the history of solid wastes, in sharp contrast with what occurred in' other areas of environmental contamination, is a history of technological neglect down almost to the present time. Until the Federal Government committed itself to a national program, the annual expenditure for solid wastes research was about $250,000 as against multi-million-dollar outlays for research and development relating to air and water pollution abatement. Because of the lack of research and developmer~t, solid waste disposal methods common throughout the United States today represent little advancement be.yond the technology of the garbage pail, the trash can, the open dump, and the obsolete incinerator. The technological void which the national program was devised to fill is truly great. We must be prepared for a long-term effort to fill it. A problem which Jias been building up for decades cannot be solved easily or quickly, and its solution will depend on continuing public support for an effort requiring substantial funds over a long period of time. The national program calls for an assignment of public resources for scientific training and research and field-scale investigations and demonstrations in solid waste management. This resources assignment, moreover, is to be made not by the Federal Govern- ment alone, but by local, State, and private agencies as well. This means that support for the program not only must be sustained, it must be nationwide. Fortunately, the American people today are concerned as never before about the quality of their environment. I think we can count, therefore, on their support for a program which, in time, can fill our backlog of needs in solid wastes. Surely we can count on their support as people become more universally aware of the degree to which our 19th century solid waste disposal practices not only deprive them of aesthetic values in their environment, but threaten their health as well. In evaluating health hazards, it sometimes is necessary, and often wise, to follow the dictates of common sense or what the medical scientist might call diagnostic Intuition. PAGENO="0097" AD1~QU~CY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATt~N~ 93 The environmental threats to health are mo~t difficult to establish and fre- quently, when they are e~tahlisbed, turn out to be the ones we had suspected all along. But I sttbmit that we no not need to wait for sden~if1c proof of disease rela- tionships to sustain conviction about the seriousness of heai~th basards associated with the disposal of solid wastes, It is sufficient to know that more then 20 human diseases are carried by rats and insects proliferating in tens of thousands of open dumps. It is also sufficient to knqw that solid waste rontamEnation of the land usually results in healt~~threatoning air and water eqtandaatton. Gross pollntio~ of water is produce4 by cpen clnmpsor Improperly designed and operated landfills. Open burning or Inefficient incineration of solid wastes are major causes of air pollution in many cities. Since we are now committed In this country to control water and air pollution, It seems appropriate to make very clear the fact that, fundameutaUy, there is only one pollution-pollution of the earth. Air, water, and land are reservoirs, vast but not limitless, In which wastes may be stored. The reservoirs are inter- connected and interrelated. To pollute one may be to pollute all three. 4~nd this is preci~ely what we will continue to do unless we develop and apply tech- nology far more sophisticated lu solid wastes pollution abatement than anything we have used up to now. Tech~oiogically, solid waste management lags far behind air and water peNn- ti~n control. Furthermore, the physIcal burden ~f solid rw~~ ~ annually more rapidly than the population, and we are genepati~g more of the kinds of materials which are particularly difficttlt `to return s~ely t~ $he aft~, water, and land. But referring for just a moment to the future physical solid w~aate burden, I think estimates with which I am sure Subcommittee members are famNiar, are too low. They sbew the present rate of dnlly solid waste colleetion going from 4.5 pounds per person to around 5.6 pounds by 1980 to push the tetal yearly accumulation from 165 to 260 million tons during the same period. But It must be borne in mind that these are collection figures. We do not have, we badly need, and we are in the process of obtaining data which will give us an accurate picture of the amounts of waste being generated in this country, including those privately collected and disposed of, by municipalities, Industry, and agriculture. I feel certain that c~llèctlon figures do allow sufficiently foi~ additions t~ be made to solid wastes as more and more pollutants are extracted from air and water. Municipalities and power, petroleum, chemical, and many other 1nd~is- tries will add vast quantities of a large variety of waste materials. In sulphur and fly ash from fuel combustion alone the increase will be In the millions of `tons yearly. Without underestimating the size of the task of managing great new ~unounts of Solid wastes which our technological and population growth Will generate, it should be appreciated that the solid waste burden will change qualitatively as well a~ ~ju~ntltatively. ~or example, progressive' effectiveness in remoWng `harmful pollutants from waste streams leading to the air or to the water must and does Involve diverting these pollutants to `the solid waste stream. Many of these materials are nearly nondegradable, complex chemical compounds with varying degrees of toxicity for man, domestic animals, or wildlife. A few `are known cancer producers. Quite clearly, important future research under the national program must be ~dmed at meeting this new health challenge. Mr. Chairman, the solid wastes problem is huge, but It need not-Indeed It must not-overwhelm us. Tn fact, I think we can feel cautiously optimistic about,long-term prospects f~r success with th~ national program for two reasons. First `is the growing public demand' for a quality environment. And second Is the fact that ~bis demand has been translated into the Solid Waste Disposal Act, a most mature piece of legislation for Improvement of the environment. The Act, to begin with, recognize's the essential interrelationship of the three `segmenth of pol~lution `control. It specifically directs that in developing solu- tIons to solid waste problems, consideration be given to how the solutions may a~ect not only problems of water and air pollution, but urban and metropolitan development and land use planning. Th~ Act furthermore,, makes it clear that solid w~iste pollution control in- volves `a great deal more than disposing of solids, however safely that may be achieved. The law gives much needed emphasis to the urgency of developing 68_240-C6-VO1. 1-7 PAGENO="0098" 94 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABA'I'EMENT technologies which will make it possible to reduce the gcheration of wastes at the source, to recycle them back into production, to increase the salvage of useful materials, and to either use or convert into useful materials far more wastes than are used or cOnv~ei~ted today. There is at least one more feature of the law which marks its maturity. This is--the direction it gives Federal authorities to foster the establishment of waste di posal programs large enough to command resources adequate for the job. Fragmentation of waste disposal responsibilities among small political sub- divisions sometimes running to several score in a single county, is common throughout the country and a major reason for technological backwardness in solid wastes management. The Office of Solid Wastes was established in the Public Health Service to administer the Solid Waste Disposal Act only eight months ago. Since then, the national solid wastes program has been gotten under way in all five of the major areas of activity projected by Congress. Grants have been made and Work is being conducted on 24 researeli projects to lay a basis-of new knowledge for progress iii solid wastes technology. Nineteen projects to~ investigate or demonstrate new and imprOved solid waste disposal- systems also have received grantsr and work under them has been started. Several of these projects are expected to help merge small community waste disposal operations into county-wide or regional management districts. The demonstration projects are testing pilot- or operational scale methods and equipment. All work of this kind Is authorized to receive up to two-thirds ~F'ederal support. Public Health Service grants under the national program also are assisting four institutloija of higher learning in providing training for graduate engineers -In discipIine~ essential to solid waste- technology improvement. The present shortage of trained-manpower is critical and -an important factor in the tech- nologinal backwardness. - Administrative and operating-personnel are - being trained in Public Health Service- courses. . In addition, solid waste training course-s are being prepared under contract. with the American Public Works Association. - - - Statewide solid waste program-planning is now getting under way in 14 States tinder grants covering up to- 50 percent of the cost of the work. It . is this expanding activity which will help to develop comprehensive planning for the Immediate and long-range management of solid waste problems, planning that will give appropriate but often overlooked attention to - such factors -as the interrelationship of solid waste management with -air and water pollution abatement, urban growth trends, land use planning, a-n-d the economic and technological advantages of regional solid waste management efforts. In the fifth area of major activity under the national program, staff and other arrangements have been made in Washington headquarters and field offices to provide local and State agencies technical assistance with solid wastes problems. - Obviously, technological development must be aimed at achieving recognized goals. In the solid waste field., these goals have thus far been expressed in rather -general terms-improvement of environmental quality, protection of the public from health and welfare hazards, and improvement in the efficiency of disposal operations. These goals must be translated into solid waste manage- nient criteria which can be us-ed as guides by State and local governments for the adoption and enforcement of standards, and by industry for the develop- ment of equipment and techniques capable of meeting such standards. The Office of Solid Wastes will undertake the development of such criteria as a major aspect of its program. The national program intends to give solid waste technology in the United States a potent injection of the spirit of innovation. We want it in our search for new knowledge. And we want it, plus a sen-se of urgency, in the application of existing knowledge. As members of this Subcommittee no doubt realize, enough knowledge is available now to significantly advance solid waste management in this country. Some of it has been available for years, yet more than half of our cities of 2,500 or more inhabitants do not yet have sanitary, nuisance-free disposal sys- tems. All large municipalities lack, for example, incinerators incorporating available air pollution abatement technology. The principal retardation factor PAGENO="0099" ADEQUACY OP TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 95 has been financial inability eithei~ to buy new equipment or to risk public funds on facilities not yet wholly proven. A national picture of the current status of solid waste management problems and practices is patently needed at this time. And steps are being taken sys~ tematically to develop such a picture. Some of the work will be accomplished, of course, in the Statewide planning surveys. But several weeks ago, to obtain an across-the-country view of the problem, the Office of Solid Wastes awarded a research contract to an experienced engineering firm for a technical economic survey of solid waste disposal needs and practices covering 450 cities and 90 industries. We are optimistic that this project, which will involve the co'llectioiX and analysis of data from a very large sample of industrial and municipal sources, will be a valuable index of the total national solid waste picture. Another research contract recently signed with the private sector calls for the development of a series of state-of-the-art reports on unit processes of solid waste disposal which could have broad applicability toward better management of the national solid waste problem. Mention has already been made of the growing physical burden of solid wastesd The best way to lower this burden is to reduce waste generation at the source. One approach would be to design products so that the principal materials of which they are made may be recycled, or sent back, for reuse in manufacturing new products. Paper producing processes, of course, readily use wastes. And this industry could recycle considerably more wastes if solutions were. found to problems of economic separation of clean and otherwise usable waste. Recycling of iron and steel scrap is a basic part of steelmaking which should, similarly, be susceptible to expansion. The design Of products for recycling materials of manufacture is a more difficult challenge. It will, of course, be rewarding in terms of solid waste pollu- tion control. And authorities wh~ have carefully studied the problem are optimistic that substantial recycling technology can be developed if given suf- ficient resOarch attention. In some instances, industry is now applying sophisticated technology to re- cover and reuse process waste' materials that would otherwise find their way into the air, water, or land reservoirs as pollutants. Chemical solvents are being recovered and gases and vapors are being recycled by certain petroleum refinery and distribution facilities. And in the area of solid wastes, the lumber industry Is now making marketable products out of Wood scrap that would otherwise pose a very serious disposal problem. But industry's cost consciousness cannot always be counted on to help reduce the process waste burden. Experience has shown that substantial progress frequently results from the pressure of public opinion or action by goverilmerit, rather than from purely economic forces. Perhaps voluntary action on `the part of industry might occur more often if concern for potential operating economies were fortified by recognition of the fact that improper and unsanitary solid waste management costs the Nation far more than the $3 billion annually `spent for collection and disposal. Industry shares in this cost `burden just as surely as each citizen does. It would seem that industry, in its own interest, would recognize a much greater responsibility to develop and apply improved technology for solid waste handling in order to reduce this form of environmental contamination to the utinimum. To reduce waste production, at the source, it also seems clear that research resources ought to be devoted to the design of products which generate less waste. Making some of them more durable would be a s'tep in this direction. On the other hand, however, longevity in packaging increases the waste burden. The substitution of aluminum for steel in cans, for instance, has given us a waste item which can remain indefinitely in the environment. Many plastic containers are nearly nondegradable. We greatly need the development of paper and other packaging materials which, if they are not to be reused, are soluable or quickly 4egrade and can be harmlessly returned to the environment. The packaging industry has an opportunity to make `a dramatic contribution to solution of the waste management problem. In this connection, incidentally, anyone concerned about solid wastes cannç~t help being concerned about the apparent trend toward increased use of the non~ returnable container. Disposable bottles doubtless are a consumer convenience. but they also compound the solid waste management problem. Nonreturnable PAGENO="0100" 96 ADEQtACY OF TECENOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT may bepresurned to have econon~ic advantages for the beverage and other using industries. But a `trend back to bottles which can be reused might be in order on the theory that cost advantages to society also are worthy of consideration. The salvage of valuable materials and energy potentials from solid wastes offers a most promising route to moderation of the pollution problem. Obviously, solid waste salvage not only reduces the physical burden of them, but adds to the Nation's resources. Reeo~er1ng beat from solid waste Incineration has tremendous possibilities which have yet to be realized in the United States. One incinerator on the east coast has produced power for water desalination. The operation of power-gen- erating incinerators is fairly common, however, in Europe. Under the national solid wastes program, two demonstration grants are supporting experimentation with incinerator heat conversion. Meanwhile, one of the program's research projects is investigating the feasibility of producing gas for boiler fuel by heating waste. A major problem in salvage, as already has been suggested, is economic and fast zseparation of usable materials from un~alvageable waste. A west coast enter. prise appears to have developed an automatic separation process which efficiently iseparates glass, metals, and other marketable commodities. Small glass. particles thus salvaged can have a number of uses, including use as plastics and industrial fillers, and paint extenders. Ofeasionally, solid wastes can be used with little ~rocessing, as the incorporation of fly ash In buUding block and paving materials. But often salvage reqnlres fairly extensive processing to convert wastes into ~ttsabie products frequently different from the starting materials. Both. industry and the academic community are beginning to produce some interesting results in solid wastes conversion. Two research projects supported by: grants from the Office of Solid Wastes are studying conversiOn, through heating combustible wastes without the presence of oxygen, a process by which charcoal and coke have been made for generations. Marketable materials which may be obtained by this means Include almost pure carbon, combustible gas, heavy tars, acetic acid, and aeetones and alcohols. It is conceivable, incidentally, that carbon from conversion of solid wastes might be used to filter from water certain pollutants~ which cannot be removed in present water treatment systems. The use of s~iid wastes for land reclathailon, either directly, as in a sanitary landfill, or after incineration or other processing can be considered a mode of salvage or conversion. Often the reclaimed land becomes valuable for golf courses and other recreational areas and adjacent property values are Increased markedly. Three national program research projects and as mans demonstra- tion projects are directed at the development or testing of various methods of producing or using fill material from wastes without creating health hazards. Such projects would achieve, if successful, reductions in the volume of material and thus would Increase capacities for solid waste disposal at landfill sites which are becoming increasingly scarce. One such project offers the prospect of reducing landfill material from wastes to as little as one-tenth the original volume through high-pressure hydraulic compression. Another project will demon~trate a grinding process which would both reduce waste volume and so thoroughly mix the waste as to produce a fill unattractive to pests~ Composting, or the converslop of organic solid wastes into soil conditioning materials with fertilizer value, has been less widely attractive In this country than In Europe because of economic considerations and the competition of chem- ical fertilizers. But within the national program, composting is regarded as a promising route to solid waste disposal. The great accumulation of crop. and animal wastes in areas of agricultural concentration adjacent to localities of rapid urban growth justifies taking a good look at composting. : While' compost- lug may never prove to be a profitable commercial enterprise, it might produce ênoi~gh revenue to help offset disposal costs. And, of' course, we want to satisfy ourselves that composting will be acceptable from the standpoint of human health protection. One of our research grant projects is working on a method for' composting fruit and vegetable refuse, without endangering health or causing objectionable odors. Other Investigators are looking into possible health hazards from Inhecti- tide residhes In composted agricultural wastes. PAGENO="0101" ADEQtTACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 97 We also have under way a plant-size study of safely and economically cOrn- posting municipal refuse and raw sewage sludge. This is a joint undertaking of the Public Health Service's Office of Solid Wastes, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and Johnson City, Tennessee. TVA is designing and will construct and operate a plant to process Johnson City's daily output of about 60 tons of refuse and untreated sewage sludge. The plant is expected to be completed early next year at a cost of about $750,000 and will cost around $100,000 a year to operate. TVA has had long experience in soil conditioning and fertilizing and an effort will be made t~o lower the project cost by finding an economic use for the product. The Office of Solid Wastes Will cari7 Out detailed pathogen studies and other health-related projects in conjunction With the Johnson City operation. Another promising composting project has been launched under a demonstra- tion grant from the Office of Solid Wastes. This project will test a recently des veloped mechanical composting plant for disposing of solid wastes quickly and without environmental health hazards. The plant is to process about 130 tons a day of refuse, garbage, sewage solids, and other solid wastes from the City~ of Gainesville, Florida, the University of Florida, and Alachua County. This i~ a cooperative industry-government venture under a nonprofit Florida corporation on which the city government, the university, and a private firm are represented. The firm developed and will build and operate the plant for the nonprofit organi~ sation. Solid w~tstes technology needs improvement in at least one important area Which has not yet been discussed. This is collection. Taking solid wastes from home. or industry, or farm and bringing them to their fibal destination represents from 70 to 80 percent of total disposal costs. This obviously Is a segment of the management problem in which savings opportunities are very great. Aspects of the problem are being worked on under a research grant and as part of a demon- stration project. This is where bold and imaginative innovation certainly can pay off~, and we are looking at several promising ideas, including the so-called "dry sewers" for conveying solid wastes to disposal sites. It doubtless has occurred to members of this $ubcommittee that solid waste management is an extraordinarily complex problem. In fact It does not seem possible to exaggerate the complexity of Interrelated factors on Which judgnlents have to be made. Water and air pollution problems, urban and industrial develop- ment trends, recreational land use, administrative considerations, and political developments have to bO weighed. Values must be assigned sciefitific and engi~~ neering determinations In nearly all of the dlseiplhms. Recognition has to be given to social factors Involved and the needs and resources of local, State, aml Federal Governments and all eiem~nts of the private sector concerned with waste and related problems. Then there are the ~omple~it1es of waste streams and seasonal and regional variations In their content. And this does not con- clude the list of complications. Fortunately, a technology of decision-making has been developed in recent years with which this Subcommittee doubtless is familiar and which should have great usefulness in developing efficient, salutary, and comprehensive waste dis- posal systems. The technology is management science Or systems analysis, in- volving the use of automatic data processing, some sophisticated mathematics, and other intelligence tools, Up to now, however, despite consideraJle effort, It has not been possible to devise tangible inputs for systems analysis which will represent adequately some highly Intangible factors-the most crucial factors Of the entire equation. They may be described as social values-what the pUbLic has at stake in solid waste pollution abatement. These involve a complexity of community-wide human relationships which thus far have de~ed tangible e~- pression, through systems analysis. We have been seeking assistance in adapting systems analysis techniques to solid wastes systems development. A few months ago, for Instance, the First National Conference on Solid Wastes Management considered this problem under the joint sponsorship of the Public Health Service and the University of Cali- fornia at Davis. We also have a research project under way with the lint- versity of California at Berkeley which we expect will provide us with some answers. In addition, we have been' working with the National Aeadem~ of 1~nglneerIng to develop a meehai~Isin through which We can have the assistance of this highly competent technical organization. PAGENO="0102" 98 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT With systems analysis and many other aspects of the solid waste problem we would like very much to have-we greatly need, in fact-the assistance of industry. Certain industrial concerns have acquired extensive know-how In the use of systems analysis techniques. We also need the help of those seg- ments of industry which have been involved in the development of closed systems for recycling air and water in space craft. Industry experience with aerospace technology might well be used in the development of waste recycling systems, including solid waste systems, on earth. Industry also has competence, probably not available elsewhere, in many other areas where new solid wastes technology so' urgently needs to be developed. In problems associated with the reduction of wastes at the point of generation, for instance, industry should be able to make an outstanding contribution. Industry stands to gain when wastes are reduced, and we know that a number of companies today now incorporate waste control equipment into plant design for reasons ~f economies or public policy or both. Their number, unfortunately, is not yet great enough to represent a really substantial contribution to solution of the national solid wastes problem. The Federal role in the private sector, it seems clear, is to provide incentives for and otherwise to stimulate the spread in industry of practices for solid waste pollution abatement. The national program~ cannot directly underwrite the demonstration of industrial hardware or finance industry research. But the program can and will buy and its grant recipients can and have bought research and technological assistance by contract. The Gainesville, Florida composting project is a case in point. Here, it will be recalled, industry not only is represented in the nonprofit corporation set up to supervise the work but has the major role in the entire operation. There are several ways in which industry should find participation in the national solid wastes program either rewarding or desirable. Access to research and development findings stemming from the national program will be comrn pensatory, of course, particularly where the information is useful in helping industry meet its own waste management problems. The m'o:st tangible reward, however, might occur as a significant expansion of the waste management ln~ dustry. Solid wastes technology is going to advance as the program progresses. Bach advance will mean new business for industry. Government, of course, can help to accelerate the application of Improved solid waste technology by specification in the equipment it buys and the Instal- lations it builds. And as time goes on and the national program moves forward, public awareness of needs for high standards in waste management will increase and with this rise will come growing recognition by industry that it too must join more fully the national effort for solid waste pollution abatement. This Subcommittee has indicated a desire to be informed of the interdepart- mental cooperation engendered and necessitated `by passage of the Solid Waste Disposal Act. I should like to report that the Office of Solid Wastes has made arrangements with the Department of Housing and Urban Development whereby State solid waste planning activities and 701 planning grant activities will be coordinated through the State agencies primarily `concerned with each of these programs. We have signed a formal memorandum of agreement' with the De- partment of the Interior pertaining to our mutual responsibilities under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. I am prepared to submit a copy of this memorandum for the information o'f the Subcommittee. Before closing, Mr. Chairman, I want to `summarize what, it seems to me, the Federal Government ought to be expected to accomplish within the national solid wastes program as conceived by the Congress in the `Solid Waste Disposal Act. The government can provide leadership and stimulation for innovation in solid wastes management and it can supply resources, not elsewhere available, for research and demonstration of improved technology. The government can help, under the national program, in acquiring knowledge w'here needed. It can assist in showing that prototypes of new waste management systems can provide human health protection against solid waste pollution. The govern- ment also can assist communities and States in making the best use of existing technology for solid waste management. But the national `program authorized by the' Solid Waste' Disposal Act can do no more than help demonstrate the desirability, even necessity, of using PAGENO="0103" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 99 new knowledge and technology to replace outmoded and inadequate practices and systems. The final steps for abating solid waste pollution will have to be taken by the people in their villages and cities, their counties and States. Undue delay, for any reason, in taking advantage of proven opportunities for effective and salutary waste management will simply make a mockery of our professed aspirations for clean air, water, and land and a reasonble share of the natural beauty upon which the human spirit thrives. (Whereupon, the committee adjourned at 12:25 p.m., Thursday, July 21, 1966, to be reconvened on Tuesday, July 26, 1966.) PAGENO="0104" PAGENO="0105" THE ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT TUBS~AY, 3UIJZ 26, 1966 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Ot~rrr~ o~ SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, StmcoMMrrrEE ON SCI1~NOE, RESEARCH., AND DEVELOPMENT, Wa.~hington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10:05 a.m., in. ~oom 2325, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, I)~O., lion. Emilio Q. Daddario (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. DADDARI0. This meeting will come to order. We are pleased this morning to have with us as our witnesses two men who play an important role in this whole question of pollution abatement. We have Dr. John Tukey, from Princeton University and Dr. Atheistan Spiihaus, from the Institute of Technology at the Urn- versity of Minnesota who `are the authors of reports on "Restoring Ou~ Environment," which came out of the President's Science Advisory Qommittee, and "Waste Management and Control," which is the work of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences. We* have used these two works in our deliberations to this point. They have been extremely useful to us and we recognize that they ask many questions which are important to the society in which we live. I think that it would be helpful if you each made some opening state- ments and then we can ask you both some questions. Dr. Tukey, would you please start off? STATEMENT OP DR. JOHN W. TUKEY, PROFESSOR OP MATHEMATICS', PRINCETON UNIVERSITY Dr. Tuniny. Thank you very much. I must, I think, begin by dis- claiming complete responsibility for "Restoring Quality of Our En- vironment." I wish I could claim it, but this was the work of a panel and I can at least say I helped coordinate their efforts. Mr. DADDARIO. 1 should not have said that you were the authors but rather the chairmen of the committees which worked on both of these reports. Dr. TUKEY. I think the first message that I must bring~ from the panel's long deliberations is that the problems of pollution are ex- tremely diversified and notably interlinked. To speak of the problem of such-and~such pollution is almost an oversimplification. Problems in different places that go by the same name are often essentially dif- ~ferent, and problems at the same place that go by different names are 101 PAGENO="0106" 102 ADEQUACY OF TEC~INOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT often closely related. Answers, policies, or management guidelines that are well chosen for some problems are ill chosen for others. The field of pollution is very broad, inevitably complicated. The second message is that we are all pollutors. Pollution is not caused only by the other fellow. Office buildings, schools, and homes contribute to pollution just as do agriculture, animal raising, and all kinds of industry. Pollution is not something to be eliminated. Only extinguishing the human race would eliminate it. Pollution is some- thing to be managed, to be redirected, modified, adjusted, and lived with. Such management cannot be confined to the management of wastes, produced whether by processes or people, without consideration of the problems their production makes. What has to be managed in the long run is the unified conduct of a civilization that has long paid little heed to disposal in comparison with acquisition. A civilization that must take a progressively more and more balanced attitude toward its en- vironment. To discuss here all 104 recommendations of the PSAC panel's re- port would be out of the question. As it would be to respond even briefly to all of the 51 questions into which your panel sharpened the issues on which these hearings are to concentrate. Before turning to those of the 51 questions about which it seems most important for me to say something, I want to call attention to an important opportunity for industrial participation in pollution control that was not discussed in your panel's report. As the PSAC panel worked its way through the many and diverse forms of important pollution, it acquired an increasing belief in the importance of a form of pollution rarely mentioned yet, a form of great importance to all who live or work in cities or towns. I refer to pollution by noise. Our appreciation of its importance developed at too late a date for our report to give it the attention it deserves. Since the products of industry and processes of industry combine to make most of the noise there is, it would be most appropriate for industrial research laboratories to give substantial attention to the changes in products and processes that might do the most to quiet our cities and our lives. There is another aspect of private sector participation in guiding the management of pollution that should, I think, be mentioned here. The PSAC panel urged strongly in its recommendation B27 that the professional resources of all sectors, but most particularly the private sector, should be more deeply involved, throughout appropriate profes- sional societies, in the development of standards, particularly I would say, systems of alternative standards rather than single take-it-or- leave-it standards. It should be more deeply involved than has been the practice in this country. Turning now to the panel's questions, I should like to begin with question 18 from paragraph B('t): To what extent is air pollution a problem today because the technology of abatement failed to keep pace with industrial expansion? As I see the record, until a crisis was recognized, no adequate force pushed air pollution abatement technology to try to keep up with its challenges. And in many places these challenges have been chal- PAGENO="0107" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEM~NT 103 lenges of human expansion, it. seems to me, rather than industrial expansion. . The problems of air pollution are widely different in different places, not one and the same. In Los Angeles, the problem is now recognized to be mainly the automobile. In New York City, it is mainly stack emissions from heating and power generation. Throughout pollution, we must give more attention to the diversity of what seemed at first glance to be single problems. While I must defer to experts on the promise for the future of the present B. & D. program, I stress our panel's recommendations El and E2 which said, and I quote: We recommend that the Federal Government exert every effort to stimulate industry to develop and demonstrate means of powering automobiles and trucks that do not produce noxious effluents. We recommend that the Federal Government stimulate Industrial development of more economic processes for exclusion of sulfur compounds from stock effluents. Turning now to question 28, first question in paragraph C(S): What can be done to overcome the tendency of the present Federal agency organization to fragment research as to source or environmental sector? Problems of combined attention to different sources of pollution do not appear to me to be as crucial today as problems involving different environmental sectors. Management reorganizations alone will do little to affect the breaking up of research and thinking by environ- mental sector. We need more technical ties between related work and different sectors. There is no reason why we cannot now go ahead in the way that would be presently most effective-namely, `by attacking a certain number of key problems on an interseetor basis. This can be done effectively either by interagency cooperation. (see panel recommendations B8, B9, and F6 for examples) or by inter- disciplinary advisory studies (see panel recommendations 05, 06, and C7 for examples). Specific intersector studies are essential, but so, too, is a forum in which the Nation's scientific and engineering communities can inter- act with the Federal Government's senior technical and scientific administrators. It is only through considering the broader aspects of pollution at such a level and in such a breadth that we can have an adequate chance of being properly warned of the broader problems of pollution as they come into view. In strongly urging the setting up of such a forum, the PSAC panel proposed, in its recommendation Gi, a specific mechanism, interrelating the Federal Council of Science and Technology and the National Academy of Science. Today, our deficit is in the investigation and recognition of such problems, not in the willingness of workers in different fields to join together. There are specific intersectorial tasks that are ready to be undertaken. Turning now to questions 36 to 38- Mr. DADDARTO. On that point, Dr. Tukey, you say there is not a lack of willingness of workers to work at these problems but rather it is a deficit in the recognition of the problems. How about the number of workers available at all levels-do you consider this as part of the problem? Even though there may be a willingness to work, is there a deficit in compatibility? PAGENO="0108" 104 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE I'OLI~UTION ABATEMENT Dr. TUKEY. Well, the question of manpower is extremely serious across the whole field. l3ut I think it is clear that there are inter- sectorial problems of such importance that putting some of the effort there instead of other useful and important places would be recog- ruzed as good thinking. Mr. DADDARIO. And your point, then, is that although something needs to be done, you believe that there has developed a willingness to work so that we need not be as much concerned as some of us ap- parently are. Must we stimulate activity in this direction? Are you optimistic that concern has developed to the point where people do want to work in this field? Dr. Tui~r. Let me be more precise. At the technical level, I don't 1ici~w of any indication that there is not or has not been willingness. Clearly the PSAC panel felt need for stimulating activity in this area because it made a number of recommendations. We did not recom- mend, and I would not myself feel that `management reOrganizations are the way to get at this problem at the moment. I think we can stimulate intersectorial activities within the present organizational framework. Mr. MOSHER. Can I ask :for a more precise definition of intersecto- rial activity? Dr. TUKEY. My impression in your panel report was that this was meant to apply to air, water~ and land pollution as major sectors, and I was responding to the question in these terms. Mr. DADDARIO. That's a correct assumption. Dr. TUKEY. Fine. Turning next to questions 36 to 38 from paragraph D (5): What is required for ecology, as a science, to guide the stewardship of our environment? To what extent can ecological manipulation achieve a scientific and engineering basis? How can the value to society of our industrial economy be properly equated in ecological management? Ecology needs more research, much of it applied to harder prob- lems. This means more manpower-some trained in the most modern ecology, some trained' in the wide variety of interacting fields, a~1l willing to enter into collaborative work. This will require more money, both for training and for research support, and more public emphasis on the problems toward whose solution we all need progress. Ecology is often complex as are so many other scientific and `tech- nical fields. There is no indication that ecological problems cannot be understood. Quite the contrary. Accordingly, the question must be how fast will we develop a scientific and engineering basis for more ecological manipulation? As of today, we can clearly speed this process greatly by putting in much more effort-there are plenty of problems, ready for `effective attack. The third question `of D(5) with the su4dent shift to "ecological management" and a special place for "our industrial economy" rather baffles me. There seems to be an'nnd~rtone th"at the sorts, of modifica- tion's in products, processes~ and locations that the people n'~ay come to find worthwhile in order to restore and preserve the quality of our common' environment are likely in some unspecified way to destroy our PAGENO="0109" ADEQUACY O~' TEChNOLOGY FOE P~LLUTION ARATEMENT 105 industrial economy. There is neither historical warrant or an~ basis for prophecy that anything of this sort is likely, or even possible. We have used legislative meanS to modify our economy many times, both by prohibition and by economic forces. Controls related to m~ dustrial health and industrial minimum wages are obvious examples.. So long as we implement whatever decisions about the environment an informed public may demand, in ways that leave to our firms their traditional freedom of choosing how they operate within necessary constraints, I see no danger to our industrial economy, only a further change in its own evolving environment. Turning to questions 42 to 44 from paragraph E (7) Is the response' of humans the proper measnre in ecological management? flow can environmental quality options he made subject to market appraisal? To what extent can esthetic experience be quantified? Direct effects on humans are certainly not the only basis for deci~ sions and balances concerning environmental quality. If our environ- ment were much more inhospitable than it is, we would probably have to value the health of our food plants above all else, including hnman health. No rational environmental policy could give less than great importance to food and, fiber and to all the form's of life involved in their growth. I believe, and I am sure that the other members of the P'SAC Panel join me in believing, that civilization in this country is far enough above the level of bare subsistence for its people to look upon' the quality of their life as important and subject to improvement. This means that quite indirect effects on humans, either now or in the future, can properly contribute to judgments and decisions about the manage- ment of our environment and our economy. I am a firm believer in market appraisal wherever it can be given effective play. But we must be keenly aware that many of the most vital aspects of governmental activity are not given, and so far as we can see cannot be given, market appraisal. Health, education, high- ways, police protection, and national defense are not appraised in any market, though we are all concerned that judgments about them are made carefully and with the best possible guidance. I see no reason why our choices about our environment do not deserve similar at- tention. The valuation of esthetic experiences in monetary terms is obviously difficult. We are used to doing this indirectly, by making decisions and judgments whose consequences are those that would also flow from optimizing some expression in which these experiendes would have `certain monetary values, but this is far from actually valuing these `experiences in monetary terms, In my own judgement, it will be a long time before we can wisely shift to much more explicit valuation of esthetic experiences. For special, often unimportant purposes, it is, of course, easy to quantify certain esthetic experiences. Turning back now to questions 4 to 7 from paragraph A(2): How far can new technology development proceed without comprehensive waste management systems analyses as guides to the allocation of scientific resources? What are the limitations and opportunities for systems analysis'jn environmental management? i's there an adequate modeling technique? Are the input data available and accurate? PAGENO="0110" 106 ~DEQUACY. OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT I am unhappy with some of the attitudes implied by these four questions. The last three seem to ,suggest that we should begin by looking for model techniques and improving the input data. And only after nearly complete `success with these components should we start making system analyses~ On the contrary, it is quite clear that it is only by beginning some analysis in an admittedly exploratory way that we can find out enough about the true needs for techniques and input data to be able to attack their improvement effectively. Today's need is to begin to work on the job. Systems analysis can and should be valuable. They are not cure-alls. They require learning by doing. The words, "waste management systems analysis," as used in the first question of this paragraph can easily mean both too much and too little. Some would read it as meaning systems analyses covering all of waste management. Today that is too much, for our urgent need is for systems analyses of specific problem areas. In the very near future, it will be too little because there are many problems where the system's analysis need to extend beyond waste management into other related questions. The need for a unified study of sewage treatment and water purification is already such an example. Turning to question 13 from paragraph B (3): Is enough of the basic environmental quality research being done in industry `to establish necessary support for applied research and development? In view of the small overall costs of basic research as compared to development, I would urge that this question be rephrased thus: "As industry undertakes more development founded upon more applied research, how much basic research should it undertake ~" There are two very strong and important conflicting pressures in- volved in answering this question. On the one hand, we know that good basic research in the same organization will improve both applied research and development. On the other, we know that almost every sc1entific subfield important to pollution is in the throes of a severe manpower crisis, one whose end is not in sight. To deflect good basic researchers completely into industry away from the critical functions of graduate teaching and undergraduate stimulation would help a little now, but hurt much in the future. My own advice would be to so manage the industrial applied re- search and development program as to make it easy for industry to use basic research personnel effectively both as regularly visiting con- sultants and as summer or one-term full-time participants, and to encourage industry's employees to do some of their applied research at basic research centers with adequate financial compensation to these centers. It is important to us to eat our cake and still have it. We need to keep the good basic research men and women turning out students at the same time that they contribute to industry's R. & D. activities. B Turning now to question 15, the second question from paragraph How should industrial research be allocated between process changes* and effluent treatment? If the question means how should industry allocate that research on its own processes which it itself supports, there are two simple answers: First, since each industry faces different economic balances PAGENO="0111" ADIIQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 107 and technological opportunities, the ani~wer will vary, and is best administered by individual firms or industry research associations. Second, it will not be until effluent treatment is regarded as an integral part of each industrial process, so that the distinction made in the question disappears, that we will have adequate-and adequately bal- anced-considerãtion of industrial pollution. When that time comes, product changes will also be important. If the question is about Government-supported research in industry, then we must `add at least two more areas to those in question: (1) new and better monitoring and warning devices, and (2) deeper un- derstanding of the meteorological and hydrological phenomena as they occur in specific areas. I do not believe anyone can give a simple formula for making the resulting division into four parts. I am sure I cannot. I do question, however, in this time of increasing public arousal about pollution, the extent to which Federal financing of research on an industry's own problems is necessary. There are undoubtedly some industries where, for financial or historical reasons, the stimulus of Federal support will be needed, but this need not be true generally. There are enough needs associated with municipal and agricultural effluents, and with effluents from other industries, to make good use of Federal funds for industrial R. & D. related to pollution in sup- porting work for which the industry doing. the work has no obligation to do it on its own. Turning now to question 24, the second question from paragraph 0(3): How should the distribution of research and development effort among sources and types of pollution be balanced? While I am not prepared to speak about the question of detailed balancing between objectives, a matter that clearly deserves the best judgment we can muster, I must point out the major omissions in- herent in any subdivision into "biological effects, monitoring tech- niques and abatement." `Biological mechanisms are at' least as im- portant, and as poorly known, `as the biological effects themselves. Physical problems-meteorological, hydrological, and oceanographi- cal-are vital. Abatement must be interpreted as including the de- velopment of new ways to do things that now cause pollution. Turning to questions 25 and 26, the first two questions from para- graph 0(4): Should Federal funding of technology development stop at the proof of prin- ciple stage or extend on to hardware prototypes and demonstrations? Should cost sharing be required in such research contracts? In the area of municipal treatment systems there appears to be no sensible `alternative for very substantial Federal' support of novel demonstrations, though this `could perhaps be of somewhat more of an insurance character. As elected representatives, the members of this subcommittee will understand the position that city councils and other local authorities must take about major local expenditures on untried facilities and techniques. Progress beyond a snail's pace de- mand's collective risk taking through some form of Federal support, directed through the municipalities and other local governments. In going beyond research to development and then to hardware prototypes we should be clear that we have passed from "research eon- PAGENO="0112" 108 ~UACY `Or' TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT. tracts" to "development and prOtotype contracts," and that the dif- ference is substantial. Coming now to question 35 from paragraph D(4): What are the possibilities for establishing meaningful cause-and-effect rela- tionships In the environment when longtime lapses occur Iii 20 to 30 ~years;? The essential requirements that must be met now if we are to do a good job in the future of understanding delayed cause-and-effect re- lationships are two:* Collecting now adequate benchmark data in enough widely scattered emtironments, and' rapidly improving our kh~wledge of relevant mechanisms. On the biological side we can do much today in the way of useful benchmark measurements, though we have done very little. We could do much better soon if we work much more intensively bOth on how to make better measurements and on that better and deeper under- standing of population dynamics that is needed to guide both what we measure and how we interpret it. The physical example of the long-term changes in the 002 produced by burning coal, oil, and other fuel remains in the atmosphere illus~ trates the situation well. We are still unable to be sure what changes in climate will follow from this increase, though we expect to know soon, since the detailed mechanisms are being actively studied through computer simulation Mr. DADDARTO. flow soon do you expect we can come to some judg~ ment ~ Dr. TInCEY. I would not pretend to be an expert on this. What I have been told suggests that we will know very much more within the next year or two. We clearly know much more about mechanism prob- lems now than we did 2 years ago. We are making progress on thi~ Sort of scale. The essential feature is that, as is customary when you get into pollution., mechanism simulation is not simple. The investiga~ tion of models that treat only what happens in a vertical column of atmosphere has pretty clearly proved to be inadequate, both because the self-restoring properties `of the `atmosphere operate on larger scalds than this and because the effects of CO2 on the general motions of the atmosphere-on the so-called general circulation-may turn out to be the important ones. As a result, one ha~ to look at fairly complex models in order to get a satisfactory idea of what is likely to be going on., We at least now do know about the input and we also, I think, know enough about general atmospheric mechanisms so that what is being put together will give a pretty good answer. Mr. DADDARIO. And you believe that the establishment of bench- marks in this and other areas are important so that we can cOme to Some ~ judgment at the earliest possible date? ~ Dr. Tuicay. Yes, particularly, I think, in the biological area where it is not going'to be enough to know where species occur. One has got to know something about the population density and things of this sort, because it is not going to be enough to be able to say these ar~ the areas in which certain species have become extinct. This in many cases is almost too late or even too late. We have got to be able to follow the `biological phenomena that are involved in major changes in the pressures upon species, phenomena that are often, going to be reflected in changes in species numbers, rather than in PAGENO="0113" AD1~QUACt OF TEC~~OLOGY FOR POLLTJTION ABATEMENT 109 species presence or absence. Because of the tendency of life of self- compensation, we need to understand that varying levels of threats and pressure need not produce extremely noticeable changes in num- bers. To identify places that are getting close enough to danger points that we should begin to think hard about action, we will have to detect rather moderate changes in numbers. So we need not only the benchmarks but also deeper understanding of population dynamics and better ways to know how to get hold of the most helpful information, as well as understanding of what that infor- mation really means about how hard the natural populations are being pushed. I should perhaps make it clear that when I say population this means populations of anything from bacteria up to elephants and not just populations of large animals or birds. Mr. DADDARIO. You touch on that in your report when you say that abnormal changes in animal populations~ however small, must be considered. Dr. Ttu~. There i~ certainly no disagreement with this. That particular quotation from the report applies particularly to the situa-, tion where we don't have the benchmarks, and we don't have an ade- quate understanding of the populati&n dynamics. In general, we must take a very detective-like attitude of first trying to find any clue we can and then going on to worry about it. As we develop bench- marks-as we develop a better understanding of the dynamics-we. are going to be in a better position to know what specific indications. mean and thus, as a result, be able to manage things better. As it i~ now, when we see a suspicious sign, we may have to mobilize the equiv- alent of the National Guard.. If we knew more about what was going on, it might be that a much smaller effort would be adequate. Mr. DADDARIO. Thank you, Doctor. Dr. Ttrici~y. Turning to. questions 39 to 41 from paragraph D (6): Is there a normal population health beyond which protection is too costly? How should environmental quality criteria reflect the special concerns 1~or human health as to those who are allergic, sensitive, weak, sick, old, or young? Can human health e1~fects be accounted for through an illness equivalent con~ cept of environmental contaminants? We have long recognized, through the provision of special environ~ ments called hospitals and ~anatoriums, that the health of a certain small fraction of our population is inadequate for these people to re~ main in the general environment. We did not insist that the general environment be changed to meet the needs of all the sick. On th~ other hand, we are not prepared to treat all younger children or all older people in this way. The public would not support, I believe, a. program of environmental improvement that did not consider the. environment's effects on health and quality of life for people of all age groups. We will have to go far toward improving life for every- one, but we may well have to treat a few classes of people-numerically small classes of people with special problems-as exceptions requiring special environments. Until we know much more about environmental effects than we do. today, we will have to provide most of the protection for our more. sensitive nonspecial groups by maintaining decently large ratios be- tween intensities or concentrations that are regarded as acceptable and 68-24O-6~--vol. i-8 PAGENO="0114" 110 ADEQUACY `OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT those that have dethonstrably bad effects on people at large. The importance of biological variability in sensitivity has long been clear in so many instances that we shall have to plan to allow for it every- where where we are concerned with pollution. Tliere are, of course, exceptions where we already know enough to identify important sensitive groups, as in the production of methemo- globinemia in infants when drinking water contains too many nitrates (see p.180 of the PSAC report.). In speaking of an "illness equivalent" of environmental contami- nants, we must be very careful as to how we evaluate "illness." The clinical concept is clearly inadequate for many of our environmental problems. How sick is a man. who is continually bombarded by un- necessary noise? Physiological and performance tests will uncover some degradation of his performance, but they will probably grossly undervalue what such noise has done to the quality of his life. We can begin and make some useful progress with "illness equivalents" of pollution, but it will be important to keep the deficiencies of such a yardstick clearly in mind. Question 48 from paragraph E (3): Is area Industrial development distorted by a preference for clean industries over presently known or potential polluting in~lustries? I would be much more concerned over distortions of environmental quality caused by fears of displacement of industry to other competi- tive areas when I would about distortion of area industrial develop- ment by preferences for clean industries. Question 49 from paragraph E (4): To what extent should zoning or selected industrial location with respect to population be used to decrease the need for effluent treatment? The use of zoning in pollution is essential. The establishment of zones will have to be guided by differences in physical situation, dif- ferences in biological exposure, and by differences from place to place in the human purposes we want served. I would hate to see zoning regarded either as merely a means to decrease the need for effluent treatment or, at the other extreme, as only a m~~~ns for setting e~- tremely high standards almost everywhere. The purpose of polhi- tion zoning should be to let us make a much better balance between broad public needs for a generally improved environment and the costs of extremely thorough treatment of many necessary effluents. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Tukey, does that go back to one of your earlier references in which you refer to the development of a system of standards rather than a single standard? We ought not to be looking for zoning regulations which are stiff but rather those which would have some flexibility, depending upon our knowledge of the various standards and the goals that we were shooting for. Dr. TUKEY. I think I might go a little further with that. I have prepared some comments on some of the other questions that I did not mean to read here. Let me pass on to one of those. Mr. DADDARIO. Fine. Dr. TUKEY. This was a very incomplete answer to question 46, the second question of E (1) about- How can the training and equipping of local officials be coordinated with industrial pollution control personnel? PAGENO="0115" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 111 One need is a common language. I urge the development of a rela- tively fine-grained set of standard water and ai~ qualities, in which amounts of various contaminants and the frequencies and combina- tions in which they occur are all combined together-with some choice as to weighting. At the detailed level, there may be need to go over each of the locally important contaminants separately, but if we are to have effective intercomparison of standards, both proposed and in force, ~e are going to need some relatively simple way of handling the very many different contaminants that may be of importance. And let me `expand on this just a moment. I am sure an expert would quote higher figures but it seems to me clear that in a major river for example, it is very easy for `there to be one or two hundred different contaminants that are of some importance. Now, if we are going to have adequate discussion, and intercommunication, about the levels of, quality that are being required in one place as compared to those that are required in another, f think we have got to have a common language that is much simpler than saying: "Here is a list of 200 contaminants that we dreamed up for our particular river-here are the concentrations of each that we don't want exceeded more than so many times per month, per year or per decade" and find that the place we want to compare this with has a different list of contaminat- ing materials, has different key concentrations and has different fre- quencies with which they' appear. This is going to make the com- parison problem too difficult. I think it would, on the other hand, be an attempt to make it much too simple if we said we are going to have water qi~mlity grades 1 to 1 and prescribe just what these are for all the contaminants, epecially because the problem of making proper balances is going to be different in different parts of the coun- try where different considerations beconie important-possibly even in different rivers quite close together. The only way I can see to get on with this with probable effectiveness is to have a set of standard qualities of moderate complexity where you could not only go from higher to lower quality but you could move in various directions with regard to the relative importance of different kinds of contaminants. I think if we had a framework of this sort-and this is not something that can be established easily,' but it won't come about through stand- ing still-decisions at the local level, decisions at the congressional level, decisions by administrative agencies of all sorts would in the long run be much more easily made and much more likely to reflect what people really wanted to do. Mr. MOSHER. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Mosher? Mr. M0SHER. What' authority or agency or group or .industry `would take responsibility for doing this? Would it be the Bureau of Standards? Dr. Trnu~r. It seems to me this is something that is only going to be effective in the long run if it is done collaboratively. I would say myself, that Federal Government leadership, I think undoubtedly some Federal Government financial support-and the professional societies of all sorts, the engineers, the waterworks peo- ple, and the biologists who are concerned with water, just to pick `pp the water side. This is not a question of saying what shall be the PAGENO="0116" 112 AI~EQVACY OI~ T1~CTINOLOGY ~OR POLLUTION ABATEME~T rules in a particular place. This is the saying of how can. we codify~. alternative rules so that people can think and talk about them wi~hout having to be technical e~pert~ on how much of a particular pesticide you can afford to have in river water three tim~s a year. Mr. MOSHER. Somebody has to take the initiative if this is a good. idea. Are you suggesting that this subcommittee in its recommenda- tions might begin that initiative? Dr. TUKEY. I would be glad to see any compntthit body take the initiative on this, and I think that really pushing it forward is going~ to have to be a Federal initiative. The professional org~nizations have not had in this country the experience in participating in this sort of thing to the extent they have in other countries, notably Ger- many, and so we don't have a possibility, as far as I can see, of the initiative coming from there. That just leaves it in the Federal lap.. This is ~mething that would progress sio~vly, would certainly have to have much revision, but I think it could provide a framework in whith the actual decisions would be made more easily and better... I would like now to turn to question 50 from paragniph E(5) which~ is the last one I propose to respond to explicitly. now far should restoration of environmental quality be carried if cQsts and benefits cannot be appraised in a free market manner, not most hazards demon- strated th have j~nthlic health ef~ect~ As indicated in my respo~e to D~7) the 1a~est arid most expensive functions ~f government are carried out without free~-market a~~- praisal~; there seems to he no reason why environ~nental quality should be an exception. We should go as far in restoring environmental ~piulity as afi informed public is willin~ to he led; the Congress sho~ild take a strong leadership role. Thrning away from the questions for a moment, to mobilize the forces of the private sect.or it is not enough as I indicated earlier, to stimulate firms and research units. Innovations and insights `usually come from individuals. It is important to arrange for as many able individuals as possible to think about ways of reducing (pollution. This is one reason why serious consideration must be given to effluent charges. Once the discharge of pollutants becomes ~a regularly sched~ uled cost of doing business, proportional to the amount `discA~iar~ed, every technical employee can see how economically just~flèd reductions in pollution discharges can be of real advantage to his finn, and tb the technical reputation in the firm of the man who shows'how they can be made. Tax incentives are very much less broadly noticeable within a firm; moreover, they ordinarily apply to amuch less satisfactorymeasuro of depoliution, to the cost of attempting pollution reduction ratberthan to the degree of success in reducing pollution. Thank you for bearing with me. Mr. DAtDAiuo. Dr. Thkey,, your last statement i~ a very iii~po~rtant one because it reminds me of some work being done in the ~Departrnent of Defense in determining the benefits of some of the research funds. They were experiencing difficulty until somebody got the idea of going down to the basic level to consult with the fellow you are talking about-the one who really has to get the problem solved, and somehow solves it in an easier fashion than expected because he does have that PAGENO="0117" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOB POLLUTION ABATEMENT 113 ~basic knowledge and `works closely with the problem. I think that your idea of stimulating this type of person is a very good one. Dr. TtYKEY. It seemed to me on thinking things over that that' definitely came within the scope of the interest of your subcommittee ~and these hearings~ Mr. DADDARIO. You are not eliminating, however, the fa~t that other incentives should be explored? Dr. TTJIiEY. Not at all. Not at all. I'm just saying that this has to be considered too, and that, unless you point out this mechanism of working through the individual, I think you are likely to overlook the relationship `of this `sort of thing to the other ways of getting the pri~ vate sector more appropriately involved. Mr. DADDARTO. I think what we should do is proceed with Dr. Spil- haus and then we can take whatever time is left for additional questions by the committee. Dr. Spilhaus? STATEMENT OP DR. ATEELSTAN SPILH.AUS, TNSTITVTE OP TECHNOLO'G~, UNIVERSITY OP MI}ThtCSOTA Dr. SPILHAUS. Mr. Chairman, I apologize to you and members of the committee that I have not a prepared statement. I was a displaced person, displaced by the airline strike without secretarial help, and I rode a very antiquated transportation that rattled so I could neither think coherently ncr write legibly. Mr. DADDARIO. You wouldn't want to name that antiquated system? Dr. SPILITAUS. No, sir. Well, I, of course, reviewed Dr. Tukey's P.S.A.C. and I was involved in the National Academy report. I have read the special report on pollution to this committee by Abel Wolman, and also the report of `your own panel. I think these reports are all very helpful and they naturally overlap hut each has a different emphasis, so in my remarks ~ chose to pick out a few of the very difficult questions from these re- `ports and then try to suggest two practical technological frameworks which might help in solution of these questions. My remarks are not ~in any way comprehensive as answers to the ~multiplicity of questions that arise. First of all it has been remarked many times that legislation re- ~search and technology are all hampered by an almost complete lack of information about `the cost of pollution as separated from costs of dis- `posing or treatment or cleaning up, and they are hampered because ~we have flO measure whatever of how much people are willing to ~ay `for physical and esthetic cleanliness. And, no way of even judging `how much prevention would cost ifl comparison to what is spent on ~leanirig up afteroccurrence which is the way we do it now. `Housewives spend an awful' lot on suds and detergents and materials to keep their hduses indoors spic and span. One supposes that as public conscionsnes,~ grt~ws, people ~will bc willing to pay to keep the outdoors clean but we have absolutely no measure of it. And, I endorse thoroughly the idea emphasized by your own panel that we must involve private industry ifl this tremendous operation. How to do it is the question; because, as they say in the report, ma~ny of the problems and the solutions have their origin in our industrial PAGENO="0118" 114 ADEQUACY OF 2'ECHNOLOGY 1FOR POLLtTPIÔN ARATEM~NT practice It seems to me too that, while the public health aspects are important, they have been a1lö\v~d to dominate; Dr. Woimaii ~ thi~ in this way-he says it isnöt unlikely that aquatic organs and fish would be ha;riñed long before humans. Or, putting it. in another way the psychological distress of filth around us, including noise-which Dr. Tukey mentioned-may be more severe than the physiological stress. In other words, to put it in my terms, we might go nuts before we got physically sick. And, then there is finally this very difficult question of the need for market appraisals of environmental quality including esthetics. This is, very difficult. And, governmental bodies at whatever level, have not given much recognition to this. In the condemnation of land for highways for example, if the highway doesn't happen to go right through your home, but if it wrecks the view and your peace and quiet, by going along the edge of it, there is very seldom compensation for the esthetic devaluation of the property. So, we haven't begun to approach this. Dr. Tukey made a very important point in his comments which can be generalized a little more. The preservation of human rights is not subject to market appraisal and as has been said by some, a clean en- vironment, a luxury now perhaps, will become a human right in the future. Education was a luxury sothe years ago. It is a right today. And so as Dr. Tukey said this is not really subject to market appraisal. Well, the question is how do we go about it? Are there any practical ways we can go about this, and what I am going to say are just two pragmatic suggestions, but they may be two of many ways in which we might approach, get some data on these extremely difficult, less tangible questions. It has been remarked that legislation is directed to abatement after occurrence and not toward prevention of pollution. I think that has generally been true in the past. We have got to get away from that. It is also certainly true that the research and tech- nology in the past has been directed to treatment after occurrence and not prevention in general. Well, there are two things that I can suggest because I believe that your committee wanted to carve out some specific areas where some- thing could really be done in science and technology. One of the most important points is that up to the present time in all this discussion of pollution there isn't a clearly defined goal. There isn't an exciting goal. You talk about not being able to get workers into the field. You get workers into a field where they can see where they are going, not where there is a diffuse kind of an aim. We need to sharpen our goal. Now, when I say what the goal should be, I do not mean that we shouldn't continue to work on the basis that has gone on in the past, which is really on a crisis basis from day to day, but we need as well to have a long-term goal to work toward, on a noncrises basis toward an ultimate solution. I believe that the only goal of this kind is to aim toward recycling rather than the so-called consuming and throwing away. I think that a well defined goal is very important. For instance, in astronautics, if we had merely said we wanted to do science in PAGENO="0119" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 115 space, science wouldn't have got very far. But, when the goal was a catchy phrase like "man in space" which could involve the man in the street in the program, it got his support. We must have a goal in pollution prevention for the man in the street to understand, that industry consumes its own wastes and that everything is reconsumed and recycled. This is maybe, a far-off goal, but it can form the focus for work on a long-term basis. It can be the aim to design at the outset with a view to recycling. A total recycling of everything-I think this should be our goal. Of course, this needs entirely new legislative, business and marketing procedures, but because they have to be new doesn't mean that they are impossible and certainly does not mean that they are not compati- ble with our system of industry in the United States. If American genius can mass produce automobiles and devise the elaborate system of distributing them, then American genius should be able to think up means of mass collection, mass disassembly and reuse. And, actually this type of thing can be done in the total context of a free enterprise operation. It is very, hard to initiate this reuse and recycling in our old. cities. In our old overgrown, overloaded cities, it is hard to do anything brand new. So, that the second practical thing that I emphasize- and it was mentioned in the academy report very briefly-is that we need a massive place for experimentation of this kind, for totally new experiments. A broad goal like this, with huge potential benefits, justifies large experimentation, and a commensurate risk of capital. It is for this reason that I feel it is essential that we approach the idea of a new experimental city where we can really test the new technology of reuse, the symbiosis of industry, new transportation systems and many other things which can all be components in the elimination of pollution at the source. I believe that the experimental city idea would also excite people and the experimental city would stimulate industry's participation. There was some mention made of the ecology of pollution. We need an experiment in ecology and this is what the experimental city could give us. It would give us a model for systems analyses. It would give us a way, as Dr. Tukey said, of doing while we in a parallel fa~hion are investigating the scientific studies for the support of the problem. Perhaps the experimental city sounds like a somewhat fantastic idea; but it isn't. With population increasing at 3 million a year, we are essentially unwittingly building 12 cities of a quarter of a million each year in the United States, and unwittingly is right. We are not using our wits. We are just letting the cities spawn. And, while I have no figures (studies must be made on the economics), it would seem to me that it must be cheaper in the long run to build new, clean cities with new technology for these 3 million new people each year. it must be cheaper than to just allow the old ones to grow and thus multiply the old problems. An experimental city would also be the experimental place where you could attempt new institutional practices, legislative frameworks, and so forth which are absolutely essential if you are going to utilize the new research and technology toward this goal. PAGENO="0120" 1.16 A1Th~QUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLWTION A13ATEMEN~ The experimental city would need to have a certain freeing of ~tttitudes of Federal Go,ernment, local government, of industry and of labor so that it could be a total experiment where you could try various incentives. We argue about which incentive will work, hut we can argue until ~doomsday. Why don't we try and do the experimental approach? No engineer would mass produce anything without making an experi- mental model. Yet, we are mass producing cities in the United States -with no experimental model at all. These two pragmatic suggestions may, if they were to be explored, provide the framework in which we could answer some of the very difficult philosophical questions *which I cited in the preamble of my talk. So, I made my contribution, Mr. Chairinan~ I simply suggest -these two practical things as a framework of doing while we cOntinue -the framework of investigation, setting standards, and developing the -scientific basis that is also necessary. Mr. MOSnER. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes, Mr. Mosher? Mr. MOSIJER. The only Federal City is Washington, D.C. The ~Congress is the city council. You aren't suggesting that the District of Columbia could be used for this experimental city? * Mr. DADDARIO. You have to tear it down first. - Dr. SPILHAUS. Without mentioning present company like the city ~of Washington, I would say that most of the present cities, Wash- ington included, have gone too far in the wrong direction to be a really efficient experiment. I'm talking about a city, at a guess, of about a quarter of a million people. Mr. MosnER. When you talk about an experimental city, I assume that you are talking about scientific procedures, which imply controls -over human behavior and human life. You are biting off something that is pretty hard to chew, aren't you? You say this is a pragmatic suggestion. The pragmaticism of it seems a little bit difficult to comprehend. It is highly imaginative. Dr~ SPILHAU5. I don't understand. You mean this would give the impression of being too much of a controlled community and people wouldn't like it, perhaps? Mr. MOSIIER. Controlled community. Dr. SPILHAIr5. Controlled community. Well, I think, I have thought about that- Mr. MosnEn. Where can you get 250,000 people to subject them- -selves to what is implied in your proposal? Dr. SPILnAus. I think there must be 250,000 people who are sub- jected to such filthy conditions now that they would be delighted, to move to an ex~perimental city. Mr. Mosrn~n. `Well, OI~. Dr. SPIr3nArs. And, if the experimental city was a success at all, it would have to be such that pedple wanted to move there and weren't forced to move there. Mr. M05HER. But I think you are implying rather strict control over the lives of these people. Maybe I'm wrong. Dr. TUKEY. It seems to m~ these "controls" ought to be referred to in quotation marks; they would be very indirect. Garbage would be PAGENO="0121" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 117 handled in some entirely different manner, for example. Now, as long as the `garbage is taken care of, most people won't regard a different manner of handling it as a severe control on their personal privileges.. Mr. MOSHER. Well, it would require certain cooperation with the individuals. However, it seems to me that you would impose certain limitations on their freedom. Dr. TUI~EY. That I think would be mainly in terms of what serV- ices were available to him and how the city were zoned and that sort of thing. Now, these are limitations we are all used to facing when we live in any city or town. Dr. SPILHAUS. I think one of the problems in pollution is the re~ sponsibility of every individual has not been brought home to him and so perhaps what you call controls or what might be described as re- sponsibilities for the privilege of living in this clean city would bring' home his responsibility and would prove to him that they are not so on~rous,, that the rewä~rd~ are greater than the impositions. Mr. MOSHER. Bringing this `back to one of the main concerns of these hearings, would you have all the pollution abatement technolog~y appropriate to such an experimental city? Do you have the technology available today to begin your experiment tomorrow? Dr. SPILHAUS. I'm sure that all the teChnology is not available but as has been mentioned in more than one of these reports, there is a great deal of scientific knowledge and technology which is not being used today, and which would be the `start of the experimental city. The city could then `proceed in parallel with scientific and technological developments in all sections. Mr. M0SHER. One more que~tion~ Mr. Chair~nan. If you were given the job of setting up this experimental city, where would the present technology be:most deficient? `Dr. SPILHAUS. I think that the present technology that could `be used immediately would apply to reuse and pairing of industries. I think this could be done immediately. I think transportation would be one of the things that you could do rather immediately in a new cit~~, whereas it is very diffictdt to redo it in an older City. Mr. MOSHER. Where would technology be the most efficient? Where do we need the research? Dr. SPILHArTS. I'm not sure I can answer that question, In `fact,. I'm sure I can't. Mr. MosnEn, I think that's one of the crucial questions that this com- mittee has asked. Dr. SPILHArT5. Yes'; I simply think that if you have ~ place to e~ periment, even that question might be answered by experimentation better than by the best guess of the scientists involved in the field. Mr. DADDARTO. In' other words, we should use everything we know in this model city, such as recycling water. In this way people would become familiar with that particular idea? Dr. SPILHAUS. That is the general idea, yes. Mr. DADDARIO. And then you would be able to determine the gaps which would need to be filled. Dr. TtrKEY. Just the engineering and architectural' studies of this' sort of thing would tend to focus ~rery much attention on places where you needed more information even before you started building. PAGENO="0122" 118 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. CONABLE. Don't we have some experimental towns going up? What about Reston? This is, of course, a commercial enterprise. Are you implying that it would have to be a governmental experiment? Dr. SPILHAUS. Reston is a very good experiment as is Columbia. These are two private enterprises. There have also been governmental cities de novo, if you like, like Oakridge and the Advanced Space Center in Houston, but all of these have been rather specific. They haven't been real cities in the sense that they involve the typical cross section of activity that we think of in an American city. Mr. DADDARIO. If the gentleman would yield. Isn't it your idea that a city such as Reston gives demonstration projects support because it can be more progressive and imaginative than older cities? Take, for example, recycling of water. What sales effect would it have upon the people if they knew that they were going to use reconstituted water? What effect would this have? Would you not need support if it were done through private enterprise? Dr. SPILHAUS. I have no thought that this city should `be built by the Federal Government entirely. It ~hould be stimulated by the Federal Government. Mr. DADDARIO. With these problems in mind. Dr. SPILHAUS. And with normal industrial and private participa- tion in its building. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Tukey, you touched on this problem of protec- tion from noise, and you said that the work developed at too late a date for your panel to give it the proper attention, Would you toudh on that a bit, considering that the President announced, in his transpor- tation message, that Dr. Hornig would organize an Interdepartmental Committee on Noise and Abatement. The nucleus would be the FAA, and aircraft noises would be given high priority. There is some activity in the Congress, indicated `by several bills which `have been introduced for the establishment of an Office of Noise Abatement. We also have had some discussion in the House Science and Astronau- tics Committee on giving more funds `for research in the field of noise abatement. Considering all that, how would this fit into the program? What attention should we give it? Do you think that the action being taken is enough at the preseuttime? Dr. TUKEY. I think the point I was making `about our first approach to the importance of noise in the later phases of the Panel's work was that we did not have a chance to put in the study time in this area that would have been necessary to provide the sort of foundation that I ought to have to answer your question. And, I think I should not try to answer it. I will merely say that I think that this problem deserves study on a broader basis than crisis reaction to special problems-the aircraft noise problem is a crisis to some people. I do not know of any actually implemented attempt to take a look at noise as a whole. Where does it come from? Which sources of it could be easily reduced? And so on. Mr. DADDARIO. But, you do bring it up because in considering this field, we must be concerned with the effects of the environment on people, along with the problem of pollution? Dr. TUKEY. More than that, our first task of the Panel was try to formulate a definition of pollution that we could work with. The one PAGENO="0123" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 119 that we formulated-without any specific regard to noise-very defi- nitely placed noise among the other kinds of pollution. I agree with all the things you say, but I say both that if you try to define pollution in at all general terms, noise is there, and if you look at things that affect the quality of people's lives, noise is there too. Mr. DADDARIO. It creeps in even though you don't look at it scien- tifically. Dr. TUKEY. Even though you didn't expect it in the beginning. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Tukey, I would like to touch on two parts of your committee's report and ask you to talk about them. On page 3, in the third paragraph, in the second sentence, your report states "attempts to identify possible effects of ordinary urban air pollution on longevity or on the incidence of serious disease have been inconclusive." And then on page 14, in the fourth paragraph, your report states: "We now know that the full effects of environmental changes produced by pollution cannot be foreseen before judgments must be made. The responsible judgment, therefore, must be the conservative one. Trends and indications, as soundly based as possible, must provide the guide- lines; demonstration of disaster is not required." How do you read into all of this the fact that even though, in many areas, we have no con- clusive evidence to go on as to effects, that the approach must be con- servative with the idea that a demonstration of disaster is not required before we begin? Dr. TUKEY. No, I think this sort of thing, trying to bring such points together, is very desirable. As I take it, you are asking about the application of the rather general principles on page 14 to the specific question of long-term ex- posures to ordinary urban air pollution, how would I personally re- late them? The situation is approximately as follows: I think almost all the members of the Panel felt that there must be unfavorable effects from long-term exposures to urban air pollution, but were unable to find any solid evidence that this is in fact so. The question of doing statistical epidemiological studies as to. the effects of chronic influences on people is an extremely difficult one. You will still find a fair amount of discussion about the effect of ciga- rette smoking on human health, which is an effect that ought to be more easily measured than many pollution effects because it is caused by an individual activity. We all believe that such effects are due to the cigarettes an individual smokes and not the ones our neighbors smoke. To try to get at the effects of more pervasive, less individually attached influences such as pollution, is much more difficult. There has been a fair amount of effort in trying to make studies of this sort directed to urban air pollution. I think that one can clearly say that these studies have shown that the effects that appear to be associated with urban air pollution are not as large as the effects that appear to be associated with cigarette smoking. That doesn't mean that they aren't important. I would, myself, include a concern for the human health effects of urban air pollution in coming to judgments and decisions about what we are to do about it. I would not feel that there was evidence by PAGENO="0124" 120 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLVTION ABATEMENT which I had the right to convince somebody else that he had to be con- cerned. I think the situation is such that I would be glad to try t~ persuade him that he should be concerned. Now, I'm trying to make a distinction here between the attitudes we~ all have to take when we make judgments and decisions, and the at- titudes that some of us have to take when we are trying to stand on. scientific evidence. Mr. DADDARIO. Well, is this because. we are not doing enough? Is this one area where we have not reached the point where the publie can. get excited about supporting a program because they do not know its value? Dr. TTJKEY. I think that the real difficulty here is that it is extremely hard to do this sort of study, that when you deal with problems of chronic human health you have to deal with a serious interrelation of possible causes. There are many things that can influence it. About most of them we don't know nearly enough, and it is not clear how one could at the moment make a conclusive study of this problem. I think it should be a matter of concern that we do not know better how to do this and it is a reason for being concerned with the improvement of epidemiological techniques, getting to understand how to do such. things better. The actual problem of getting hold of this specific information was not one that we felt was ripe enough that we should make a specific recommendation, though we considered this. There has been quite a. lot of work done in many places, particularly in California. Cali- fornia State Health people have done and sponsored a fair amount of work to try to see what evidence there is about the effects of smog~ It has been very hard to tie these effects down. I'm sure the people concerned really join those a little further on the outside in believing there are some very real effects, but that's a very different thing from being able to get solid evidence. Mr. DADDARIO. But, it would certainly be a worthwhile goal even though it may be difficult. Dr. TUKEY. Yes, and probably the appropriate steps at this time- let's see if I can find the relevant recommendation. Yes. I would say that in terms of our thinking about this problem that our recom~ mendations G-5 and G-8 on pages 35 and 36 are the relevant ones. Under G-5 the text reads: "In particular, a variety of training grants should be provided to schools of medicine and schools of public health to support expanded programs in teaching of preventive medicine and its constituent disciplines." That is one more immediately on tooling up people. G-8 concerns long-term support of between 5 and 10 universities to establish interdepartmental research centers for environmental studies. I think at the moment we would feel that the place where we can do the most good with this problem is to try to strengthen the tools and~ the people who might later take hold of it. We did not have the feeling that the problem of health effects from urban air pollution was ripe for being seized in a large way and gone after. Good people hate worked with the present techniques and we know it would be extremely difficult to get concltisive results without better ones. . . PAGENO="0125" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 121 Mr. DADDARIO. We do not have much time left, and I do think that we will be called to the floor. The other members of the committee should have an opportunity to ask some questions. Mr. Brown? Mr. BROWN. Dr. Tukey, I have been fascinated by your testimony from a number of different standpoints. My questions are largely of a philosophical nature. Could you give me some indication of the extent to which ecological science is a discipline? Are there curri- culums in this field; is there training of particulars that applies to present technological societies? I would be interested to know more about this because of the emphasis that you put on the study of eco- logy. Dr. TUKEY. Well, this is a question that in the long run should be directed to an expert, to somebody who knows more about this than I do. Ecology at the moment combines being a discipline, and being an attitude. What I and the panel would like, is to See both of these aspects expanded; to see the concern about the interaction between living organisms and their environment, whether made up of other organisms of nonliving material, spread through more life science. A man can be a good ecologist and be concerned with problems of soils. He can be a good ecologist and be concerned with problems of insects. He can be a good ecologist and concerned with the problems of lakes and ponds, and many other things. It is not that there is a narrow field of study. It is that there are places where there are specifically oriented programs, and it is important to have them. But,~ it is also that there are people who have these interests and these com- petencies coMbined `with specializations in other directions. It is most important to have such people, to have more çf them, to widen this sort of interest among tl~ie specialisth in the wide variety of fields. Mr. BROWN. Well, I think that I would agree with you. It seems to rue that we need to encourage this and yet because I'm remote from thê~ academic field and particularly, this field, I'm interested in know- ing how and to what extent it co~Ud be encouraged. We have ha4 ~some discussions in connection with the National Science Foundation in providing greater financial support to basic research to certain non- physical sciences, such as anthropology. As far as I know, there has been little research in anthropology or ecology which has `been directed ~specifically to thç~ problem of an urban technological civilization; yet `it seems important that we should' have this kind of research. Would you agr~e with rue? Dr. Trnc~.*1Vell, Iknow~some anthropologists who have been work- ing on problems in urbane, civflization., I think it is fair, in responding "to the anthropology question, to say that anthropology has been grad- ~ually and steadily working up the scale from very primitive tribes, sand that a n~rnber Q~ the good people are now concerned with societies `that come much closer to our own, societies which are clearly urbanized civilizatiOn's. , ` There are not yet enough people who have, started to tackle the `problem of the sort of urbanized eivilization that we live in. But, this is `the next natural step in the evolution of the interest iti the fi~eld.' Things' are moving this way and should be encouraged. N~r: BRo1~rN. I raise thi's `line of questioning because of the fact that `this committee might do something to encourage greater support for PAGENO="0126" 122 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT this kind Qf approach. Whether it is for a specific individual dis- cipline or whether it is merely a way of looking at problems which spread through several disciplines, it needs to be encouraged and I think it should be. Getting back to ecology for a moment, it raises a question in my mind of whether or not you can draw any lines be- tween looking at the problems with pollution and waste management for example, and the certain broader problems which you inevitably seem to lead into, for example, conservation. Where do you draw a line between the management of a river basin, for example, in order to prevent the buildup of sedimentation, the forests being cut down, the mountains washing into the river and the problem of waste or pollution management control ~ Is there a dividing line or do you have to look at the total picture? Dr. TUKEY. Well, I think it would be a mistake to have a sharp dividing line. I think you can put some differential emphasis on one thing rather than the other. Mr. BROWN. You also have a host of political problems that you run into; for example, 3 or 4 years ago one of the big questions for political discussion was the matter of atmospheric tests and nuclear weapons. You could have looked at this pollution problem if you had wanted to, but at the same time you had a very large national defefise element involved. Both of these incidentally, were not capable of being measured by themarket appraisal approach.' How you weigh these sorts of problems"becomes rather important. Another interesting aspect o~f the trend of the testimony offered here by both of you is the degree to which it runs counter to the direc- tion of our culture. For example, we are a consuming culture. The consumption per capita in this country is increasing on almost a log- arithmic basis. This is the reason why we have waste. If we look at every process from the standpoint of how much can be recycled, it still flies in the face of the type of culture and the type of economy we have. It means, for example, that we won't produce as much because we will reuse certain products. We would also cut down on the `amount of profit that certain, enterprises would make because we would decrease volume. Has this type of analysis been considered by your panel? Mr. MOSHER. Will the gentleman yield at that point? Mr. BROWN. Surely. Mr. MOSHER. Getting back to the experimental city, wouldn't one of the considerations be whether the participating industries would be expected to operate on a normal profit basis or whether they would have to be subsidized? Dr. SPILHAUS. May I answer that question? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. Dr. SPILHAUS. No, I don't think you need to cut down the volume of what people "consume." People consume nothing. They consume nothing now and they will consume nothing in the foreseeable future. They just use it and transform it into something and then throw it away. The only difference in my system of recycling is that it would be collected up and reprocessed. They could use much more stuff and there would be much more reprocessing done, and this could be on a perfectly good profitmaking basis. But it does require more PAGENO="0127" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT .123 than a slight adjustment of marketing practices, distribution prac- tices, but it does not cut down on an increasing standard of living, the number of things that people use can still increase. They will not consume in increasing quantities. They will use increasing quan- tities of things. Mr. BROWN. I think I could take issue with that. Some of the earlier testimony indicated that perhaps the most productive ap- proach to the problem of waste is to cut down on production. We waste more than we need to because we produce more than we need to. For example, we could manufacture more durable articles so that they would last longer. Another example which always irks me is in newsprint production. I think that we don't need one-tenth of the ~volume of news pulp that we actually use, but if we took that ap- proach, we would be flying in the face of certain cultural attitudes. Dr. SPILHAUS. No, I thinkto cut down newsprint when people want this bulk of printing, would be flying in the face of the people, but to let them have as much newsprint as they want and find technologi- cally how to rub the ink off and use it again, might be a way to provide them with even more. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Tukey? Dr. TUKEY. I think I would like to make two points, if I may. In the first pJ~ace, .1 think .1 have to differ ~ith the comment about the trend. I, of course, agre~ with Dr. Spilhaus, that we `don't consume anything except the roughly 200 pounds that we keep in temporary storage until we are laid to rest. But, what is the trend of our civiliza- tion over the past few de~ades? It is the rise of the service industries. By and large the service industries are engaged in doing things for us which produce less waste than the other `types. Acco'rdin~iy, better waste mRn'agemen't is entirely compatible with the way our `civilization `has been evolving. `Going back to your questimi about ecology, I would like `to call at- tent~ozi to! recoñimendatiön G-1 in our panel report where `we recom- mend that every opportunity be seized to acquaint young `people wi'th careers in fields related to environmental pollution. I `think there is a real opportunity here for trying to find ways to spread acquaintance~ ship with the idea of ecology and the attitudes of ecology .through things that people can do a~s students, in particular thro'ugh allowing `them to participate in studiès' where `these ideas are essential. Here ~there are other ways to stimulate ecology. Mr. BROWN. I `have no further questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Mosher? Mr. MOSITER. No more questions. Mr. DADDARTO. Mr. `C'onable? Mr. CONABLE. I have a couple of specific questions. Dr. Spilhaus, quoting from your panel's report on "Waste Manage- ment and Control," on page 19: "In the case of water, the technology is now in han'd for removing suspended and dissolved solids, and for preventing increases in total BOD loading from municipal `wastes." Can we `take out a hundred percent of the BOD loading with the techniques we have now Dr. SPILHAUS. I `think we can take out substantially `a hundred per- cent at a certain cost. At `a rather great cost. PAGENO="0128" 124 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. CONABLE. Can we take `out a hundred percent of `the suspended and dissolved solids at a feasible cost? Dr. SPILHAUS. Theoretically, yes, the technology is there. Mr. CONABLE. Does `secondary treatment of sewage remove 90 percent of `the waste material? Dr. SPILIJAUS. T don't know. I think Dr. Wolman had better answer these question's. Mr. CONABLE. Let `me ask you the question, why ts that? Dr. SPILIJAUS. First for two reasons. The attention to complete burning in incinerators i's `a comparatively recent thing. Mr. (JONABLE. Is `this the trend of the future? Dr. SPILHALTS. TO get complete `burning? Mr. CONABLE. To do more incinerating and less `Carrying `away' of waste `wi'th water? Dr. SPILEAUS. I don't know whether it is a trend `or not, because it sim'j~ly transfers `waste from one seetion `of environment into another section of the environment. Mr. CONABLE. Is ut a trade off? ` ` Dr. SPILHAUS. It is just a trade off and in each particular case I sup- pose you have to figure out which is the worst. But, if you are going to put things into the atmosphere, the more complete combustion you can get, the better off you are., Mr. CONABLE. Doesn't this mean you need higher temperatures and that the failure to inèorporate the high temperature `ixiaterials is due to the economics of the problem'? Dr. SPILHAUS. Yes, and possibly the same `point that has been made ~everai tImes `by Dr. Tukey and others `that municipalities are not `able, under the framework under which they work as public bodies, to ex- periment. T'his comes back to the question of the need for large-scale experimentation, `Mr. CONABLE. Apart from demonstration cities, we do need'substan- tially increased research funds, don't we, on the' level of `the Federal Government? Could we then make' substantial advances? Dr. SPILHAVS. I `think in addition to the experimental city which is just one thing, any efforts that can `be made to enc'ourage'experimelita- ti'on and the use of novel technology in the redoing of existing so-called waste disposal facilities is most desirable. ` Any aid `that could be given `to municipalities to encourage them `tO, use the higher temperatures, better efficiencies, and incinerators would be a help. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Tukey? Dr. TUKEY. I would just like to stress that you `have got to support research, you have got to support development, `and you have got to support demonstration,' that `these are three pieces and we need all of them, even'though they are quite different in their detailed character. Mr. DADDARIO. At `this point, `just so it might be understood, `this committee is not overly concerned with `the idea of relating pollution abatement only `to cost. What Mr. Conable is talking about is that if more economical means were `found, they would be more attractive and therefore more cities would use them. Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Chairman, I'm concerned that there is a tremen- dous demand for water and air pollution abatement in this country PAGENO="0129" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 125 now. This is a very popular cause and it is considered a proper func- tion `of government. And yet, my limited knowledge ha~ led me to believe that we could spend a great deal of money in development in this area only to find everything was obsolete. It seems to me that we have a very specific research need right now, and one thing that I hope will come out of these hearings will be specific directions for this de- mand that can make the taxpayer's dollar go further toward accom- plishing the end we all deem desirable. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. I would like to ask a series of questions related to the topic you mentioned a minute ago; namely, the cost versus benefit problem. You have indicated, Dr. Spilhaus, that it is more desirable to prevent pollution than to clean up the pollution afterward. I think many people will concur with that. For example, I have often wondered whether we are wise to have as many disposable glass containers as we do as opposed to either plastic, paper, or other types of containers. Glass does n~t deteriorate and retains its use for many years. We do recover newsprint-we have sev- eral mills in my district-but when ~ve do the ink from the newsprint is generally sluiced off chemically and dumped into the stream. News- print ink, I might add, is considered to be a very difficult pollutant to handle. We even dump our waste from antipollution work. As we dig out channels, we dump waste into some other part of a lake-Erie, for example, and just transport the pollution problem elsewhere. You also mentioned noise pollution, which is a situation where perhaps it would be wiser not to create the noise than to clear up the illnesses that are generated by the noise. Do we have any kind of useful infor- mation on the cost-benefit characteristics of nonpollution versus pollu- tion treatment? Dr. SPILHAUS. No, I believe we don't. I believe that's one of the great gaps in our knowledge, and I mentioned that in the beginning of my statement that we simply are unable to get a comparison of cost of prevention versus cost of cleaning up. Or, the separation of even the cost of pollution from the cost of trying to keep things clean at the present time. They aren't separated out. Mr. VIVIAN. Do you think `we are getting this? Do you believe this should be information generated by our present' governmental or private activities, both research and development and operational? Dr. SPILHAUS. I believe a great deal more effort is needed on this problem if we want to get a;t this cost factor. Mr. VIVIAN. You would single this out as a specific area fir in- creased technical effort? Dr. SPILHAtTS. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. I think the area of ecology merits more attention so that we may better understand biological mechanisms themselves, the complex mechanisms involved in many of these processes, whether they involve lake pollution or underground stream problems, and the popu- ation dynamics related to the mechanisms themselves; that is, trans- formation of the knowledge of the mechanisms and dynamics of the populationS This is an enormous subject. There are a tremendous number of biological species with each species possessing great corn- 68-240--66--voL lr--4 PAGENO="0130" 126 ADEQUACY OT TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABJ~TEMENT plexity. I can understand and sympathize with the desire to increase our knowledge of ecology and we have some very active and able ecol- ogists in my district, however, it seems to me that any increased empha- sis in this area involves a vast expenditure of time and money. What kind of goals can one set in this enormous area? Dr. TuKEY. I see no reason to believe that there will not, in the long run, be a large degree of generalizibility in what we find out about ecology and about population dynamics. After all, if we take an~ other biological area for the moment, a very large amount of genetics has been done on the little fruit fly. You could have said in the be- ginning that there were very many species of insects, there are more species of other things. How were you ever going to get hold of genetics if you had to work with each of, these spores? The ecological situation is not as simple as the genetic one. Most but not all of life operates on roughly the same genetic pattern. (The yeasts and the molds do not use the same system as some other types of life.) We will not be as fortunate in ecology as we were in genetics to having to deal with one mechanism, but all we know about life sciences generally suggests that, if we come to understand a small number of mechanisms and how they interact, we are going to have knowledge that will be useful in a wide variety of situations. Mr. VIVIAN. I don't intend to dodge your comment about ecology. I happen to agree with you, but my question is what do we attack first? Where do we put a priority? Dr. TUKEY. I think that that ought to be controlled in a mixed way. And, by that I mean we ought to spend some effort in stimulating things that are directed toward specific missions and we ought to spend some effort in stimulating ecology ~s a whole, in letting the ecologists go where the problems seem ecologically important and ready for at- tack.' If we don't do both of these things, we aren't going to come out well. There are a lot of ecological problems related to pollution. A lot of these are ripe enough to be studied by present methods. If we were to emphasize ecology in the pollution direction it would be good, just so long as we. supported the scientifically guided expansion of ecology in other directions at the same time. Mr. VIVIAN. Do you suggest any particular strategy in regard to this question of ecology? Dr. TtTKEY. I think I would be glad to see more funds go into things which had some detectable relation to pollution as well as more funds generally. I think we can afford `a substantial piece of mission- oriented support if we make this orientation not too strong. I think if the money was there for this, that the fact that the public is so much more interested in pollution now than it was five years ago is going to help get good people into the area. People go where the problems are, both where problems are scien- tifically attractive and where problems are felt to be important. We are better off in recognized importance of pollution than we were a few years ago; we ought to take advantage of this, by providing more research money to go with the popular interest and concern. Mr. VIVIAN~ I would like to suggest one specific ecological goal or guideline. PAGENO="0131" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLt!~flON ABATEMEN1~ 127 We could try to reach the point where we have an on-line computer predicting the degree of pollution going down over Niagara Falls as a function of inputs and knowledge of ecology already available. I think it would be desirable to set up some of these on-line operations in ecology that can be tested against available reality. Dr. T[JKEY. By and large and on the whole, as a direction in which to move, this might be very interesting and helpful. I would feel that one ought to look for a much simpler system than all the waters up~ stream from Niagara as the place to begin. The thought of moving toward on-line checking in some places is one that I would heartily support. But if it is to be profitable, we have got to begin with situa- tions that are easy enough for us to learn from them how to do it well and then learn how to improve, and broaden and develop our tech- niques of on-line prediction. Mr. VIVIAN. Do you feel that there is a proper relationship between research and development and equipment and plant on a cost-benefit basis? Right now, as you may be aware, the Congress is considering putting another half billion dollars a year into pollution abatement. As a committee of Congress which deals with science policy, we were wondering about the amount of money we ought to put into research. Let's arbitrarily say we put a half billion dollars a year into abate- ment. What amount should we put into research and development? Dr. Tuici~y. There was a question about this, wasn't there? I don't know, I may not have written down comments on that. I think that one can give a qualitative reaction to this pretty well. If we think of dealing with pollution as an industry and say we are putting money into operating cost and new capital on the one hand, we are putting money into research on the other, what is the right ratio? I think the right ratio is about what it would turn out to be in those industries that are in the state of high innovation rate at the moment. ~[f you look at the industries who have tried to find an economic alance and the ones where innovation comes rapidly and ask what percentage do they put into research as against operation and capital improvement, then this is probably about what we should be doing n pollution, because pollution ought to be a highly innovating in- ustry for the next decade. Mr. VIVIAN. Do you have a number on that? Dr. TUKEY. I don't have an offhand number, but one can look at ome of the chemical industries, one can look at pharmaceuticals nd so on, and ask what people, who are trying to make money, are utting into research and development and see what would that come oif you brought it over into pollution. Mr. VIVIAN. I wonder if perhaps your colleague is informed on hat subject. Do you have any idea what that percentage ought to e, Dr. Spilhaus? Dr. SPILILrAUS. I can only give a guess that it is in the nature of a igh figure, perhaps 5 percent. Mr. VIVIAN. Department of Defense currently invests approxi- ately $5 billion in research and development and has a total operating udget of about $55 to $60 billion. That's about 8 or 9 percent. Dr. SPILHAUS. It might run as high as that in highly innovated ndustries. PAGENO="0132" 128 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. VIVIAN. The same percentage applied to roughly half a billion dollars a year under some recent water pollution bills suggests a figure of $50 million a year as a nominal amount that ought to be going into water pollution research. This is probably not enough. Dr. Tuicj~y. I think that is probably not nearly enough because these percentages ought to be on both capital improvements and oper- atmg costs. The operating costs for present water pollution facil- ities are substantial. Mr. VIVIAN. At the moment do you have any definite cost-benefit guidelines to use in deciding how much should go into R. & P.? Dr. TUKEY. No. Mr. VIVIAN. One would probably have to form his estimate, as you say, from the industries with heavy R. & D. orientation. Dr. TUKEY. Ind~istries in an area where innovation is proceeding at a high rate, and not the most extreme cases, but what happens in the high innovation industries in general. Mr. DADDARIO. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. VIVIAN. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Tukey, you are only sayingthat this is one way to come to an estimate. Dr. TUKEY. If I am asked to come to an estimate today, that is how I come to an estimate. At some other time I am sure other ways could be found. I think the situations are not all that different. Mr. `CONABLE. This assumes you have an adequate technology now which needs upgrading? Dr. TUKEY. No; I would- Mr. CONABLE. Well, no business would go into production unless it had an adequate technology to start with, would it? Dr. TUKEY. I don't think we should spend time discussing the word "adequate," and I think that's all we would get into. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. Supposing I skip for a moment to the subject of sup- port of R. & P. in terms of total quantity or in terms of distribution between Federal and private sources and then come back to just the FederaJ side. In environmental pollution activities, how can we better allocate our funds between in-house research and Government labora- tories and university research-nominally sponsored by the Federal Government in this case because it certainly is sponsored by other sources-as well as the question of public education, administrative controls and enforcement, and so forth. Do you have any strong feel- ings as to what changes should occur in distribution in research be- tween Government-performed and. Government-sponsored activity and the administrative structure that administers this research? Dr. TiJKEY. I think I will only respond. to a very small part of that question and say it seems to me-it seemed to us on the Panel when we were putting our recommendations together, that there were agen- cies in the Government that needed the stimulation of a stronger inter- action with the university and college community than they had. That not `only would they be able to get research done effectively and ef- ficiently by doing more contracting out, but that they would he able to get a better inflow of ideas and a better bringing of their problems to the attention of the generations of students as they come along, so PAGENO="0133" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 129 there are in our report some very specific recommendations about broader authority and by implication larger expenditures for this sort of thing. Mr. VIVIAN. Let me spell out what you are saying. You think it would be much wiser if the Government agencies spent more money for contract research at universities and other research organizations-private, profit, and otherwise-than at the Govern- ment laboratories? Dr. TUKEY. I don't think I said that. Mr. VIvIAN. I am trying to get you to say it. Dr. TUKEY. I think I said that there are specific Government agen- cies which have hot had the tradition of contract support and inter- action with the universities that some of the pollution agenciesr-for ex- ample, Health, Education, and Welfare have had. For these other agencies it will be particularly important to develop this tradition. Mr. VIVIAN. I want you to stop there before you weaken your argument. Dr. SPILIJAUS. Without distinguishing between in-house and out- house research, I think that where we need more Federal stimulus is what Mr. Conable was suggesting, and that is stimulus to utilize some of the better technologies that exist that are&t being utilized. This is quite apart from the research which is also necessary, of course. Mr. VIVIAN. To return to the subject of in-house versus out-house research in pollution, I would like to come back to pollution zoning. You are suggesting finely graduated quality standards which are to be used as generalized indicators of qualities, whether they pertain to water, air, or otherwise. This brings up the problem of industry-by- industry standards which was mentioned to us last week by Congress- man Vanik of the Clãeland area. Mr. DADDARIO. That is correct. Mr. VIVIAN. I felt much sympathy with his comments because I am well aware that industries in my own area will leave if we enforce the standards that we think we should enforce. They will go wherever the standards aren't enforced. Whether there are laws on the books or not, the question is whether they are being enforced. Do you see any conflict between what I call quality standards set by flexible codes, and industry-by-industry standards which are set on a nation~. wide basis rather than on a localized basis? Furthermore, do you see where we are tying this all in with a model code? ~ou say the Federal Government could put it together, and with the assistance of the States have it adopted nationally. How do you see this pollution control operating? Do you see it as a national~ local, or State operation? Dr. TUKEY. Let me take that in pieces, if I may. When I talking about a fine-grained set of alternative standards, that is a question of a language with which people can communicate with one another more conveniently; that is, something that is es- sential no matter how you attack the problem. I think I am clear that some form or other of zoning will in the long run be essential. Whether this be purely geographical or in some measure industry by industry is, I think, less important than that it come to pass in whatever way is found to be appropriate. I think that we are going PAGENO="0134" 130 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT to have to maintain a pluralistic responsibility in the area of pollu~. tion: there will have to be major local decisions, and there will have to be State and regional decisions, and there will have to be some Fed- eral decisions. Moreover, in some of these industrial problem areas, we may have, in the long run, to have Federal enforcement, if only to avoid geographic motion of industry for no other reason than local differences in pollution enforcement. It seems to me this is a very difficult problem. It involves all sorts of economic and political questions, and I think you gentlemen have my sympathy for having to try to deal with it. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman, may I make one very brief comment? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. To the extent to which industry-by-industry standards would be not only a guide, but also a goal to industry to stimulate re- search and development itself in order to minimize their cost of abat- ing pollution as well as an incentive to the installation and operation of pollution control equipment they would be beneficial. Pollution reporting today is in a very primitive state. We really have no hour- by-hour information from industries, or from any other source of pollution. I feel this is an area to which your panel might give some further attention. Mr. DADDARIO. There are a multitude of questions that come to mind which we have just not had time to ask and which we will send to you. I had meant, `when we started these hearings, Dr. Spilhaus, to con- gratulate you on the confirmation by the Senate yesterday of your appointment to the Science Board of the National Science Founda- tion. Dr. SPILHAUS. Thank you, sir. That's the first I knew of it. I was on the train. Mr. DADDARIO.' We are very pleased particularly because `this com- mittee has legislative jurisdiction over the National Science Founda- tion. I would like to state further that, as the witnesses from the Federal agencies appear before us, we intend to see how the Federal agencies plan to implement the recommendations included in the reports which you gentlemen have submitted through the committees you chaired. In the remaiuing minutes I would like to touch on another point. You both suggest in your testimony that we should `use the knowl- edge that is available while looking for better methods for the future. And, in your report, Dr. Spilhaus, you have touched on the desir-, ability of separating sanitary and storm sewers. The cost will be in the vicinity of $25 to $30 billion, and some people suggest that the benefits which would, result might not warrant the `expenditure of such large amount~. Perhaps we ought to do more research into this area before proceeding with the expenditures. ,Should we move ahead with such expenditures to separate sanitary and storm sewers, or should we do more research, or both? Dr. SPILHAUS. I think you should do a little bit of each. You need, as has been said, to have research and technological, large-scale experimentation going on in parallel; each one will support the other. Mr. DADDARIOI This is an area that we should study very carefully. PAGENO="0135" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 131 Dr. SPILHAUS. This question of division of the waters is one which I think you can't give an answer to for every place. It may be eco- nomical in certain places and thoroughly uneconomical in others. Mr. DADDARIO. We should not just assume that a standard has been established here by the separation of sanitary and storm sewers. A value judgment must be made in each instance where this is being proposed. Dr. SPILHAUS. I believe that is so. Dr. TUKEY. If I could respond to that. Mr. DADDARIO. Yes, Dr. Tukey. Dr. TUKEY. Our recommendation B (1) reads: We recommend an appropriate ad hoc group of Federal, state and local officials be established to determine how best to attack the problems caused by the out- moded combined sewage systems in great cities of the United States. This group should give particular attention to research development and demonstration- And so forth. Now, I think that it is a mistake to think of an antithesis of research on the one hand and let's go do it on the ~ther. I would say the combined sewer problem is in the middle somewhere. There is a real need for intensive study on a cooperative basis of the problem of where we are and of what we haven't pooled together that we know. When we do this-and it will not be easy-we will have a much better idea of where we want to go. Mr. DADDARIO. I wanted to bring this up during the course of the public hearings because it is one point around which there seems to have developed a feeling that we ought to do something immediately and we ought to expend these vast sums. A comparison with the highway system has been made. That is, the way you get it accomplished is by making expenditures and getting on with it. But, it is more complicated than that. You have reminded us of the recommendations you have made and I think that we should come to some better conclusions about this subject, taking into con- sideration what you just said, Dr. Spilhaus, and the report of your committee. Dr. TUKEY. Well, it is an area where demonstrations may turn out to be necessary, in part as experiments to find out what both the actual costs are and what the actual benefits are. You don't have to decide that you are going to have to do this in every city in the country in order to make it worthwhile to make what may be some very maj or trials. Mr. DADDARIO. But, demonstrations should certainly come before a vast program. Dr. SPILHAUS. Yes. Dr. TUKEY. That would be my feeling. Dr. SPILHAUS. Well, in the experimental city the storm water might might be so clean that you could drink it. Mr. DADDARIO. Thank you so much for your appearance here. It has been extremely helpful to the committee, and I know we will call on you with further questions as we go along. This committee will adjourn until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock at this same place. (Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m. the committee adjourned until Wed- nesday, July 27, 1966, at 10 a.m.) PAGENO="0136" PAGENO="0137" THE ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT WEDNESDAY, J~ULY 27, 1966 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT, Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, `at 10:10 a.m., in room 2325, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C., Hon. Emiho Q. Daddario (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. DADDARIO. This meeting will come to order. Our first witness this morning is Dr. Leon Weinberger who is Acting Assistant Com- missioner for Research and Development for the Federal Water Pol- lution Control Administration of the Department of Interior. Dr. Weinberger, we are happy to have you liere. I am sorry we are late. We will go right into your testimony. STATEMENT OP lYft. LEON W. W1tINBERGE1~, ACTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, FEDERAL WA~EN YOLLtJPION C0NT'fl~OL ADMINZSTRATION, U.S. D~PA~T- MENI' OP THE INTERIOR Dr. WEINEERGER. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am very pleased to appear before you to discuss research and develop- ment in water pollution control. Mr. Chairman, I have a statement and with your permission I will read parts of it. Mr. DADDARIO. We will appreciate that. Dr. WEINBERGER. In the U.S. Department of the Interior, the Fed- eral Water Pollution Control Administration carries out a program of scientific and engineering research broadly directed to: (1) ~e determination of the causes and effects of nollution of the Nation s ~eso~, ~ ~ ~~opr~ntion control measures pece~ss~r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ suitabi~ t~d~stic ~ sup- pT[i~, industrial and ç~ricuItura1 purposes,recreation, propagation of fish, aquatic life, and wildlife, and other beneficial uses. In carrying out our program, every effort is made to encourage and to cooperate with appropriate public, whether Federal, State, interstate, or local, authorities, agencies, institutions and individuals and private institu- tions. Many of the water pollution problems facing our Nation today can be alleviated by the application of existing technology. In fact dur- 133 PAGENO="0138" 134 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ing the next 5 years or so, the most significant forward strides in water pollution control will be made in this way. It is equally clear that, in addition to current problems for which there are no acceptable solu- tions, future population and industrial growth and concentration, changing land uses, and increased demands on our limited water re- sources create a situation where new technologies must be developed and applied. Problems result from the sheer mass of pollutants and from a whole host of new pollutants which are likely to be highly complex in composition and in their mode of effect. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Weinberger, if I might interrupt, when you say that many of the water pollution problems facing our Nation today can be alleviated by the application of existing technology, do you mean that it can be dOne efficiently, effectively, and within some rea- sonable price figure.? Dr. WEINnERGER. Yes, sir. What I have reference to is the situation where there are still a number of locations in the United States where available treatment technology has not been applied. In other words, there are locations where municipalities have not employed conventional primary and secondary treatment. These are processes well established and quite economical and efficient. This would apply equally well to the problem of sOme industrial waste where there is no treatment installed. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Conabie noted yesterday that there is still a great deal of work to be done in cities which already have treatment programs going. There was some question in his mind about why treatment wasn't a hundred percent effective. Is this because in this area the costs are prohibitive or is it simply an inadvertence on the part of people to do that much more? Dr. WEINBERGER. No, sir; I think this could be explained in this way: In terms ~of treatment, particularly with regard to municipal wastes, what has happened in the past is that we have removed only a percentage of the impurities. This was on, the basis that because the amount of impurities were small in proportion to the flow in streams, the streams could adequately dilute the residual waste and, therefore, not cause any harmful or deleterious effects within the stream. As our population has increased and industry has grown,. we find that those `techniques are no longer adequate, or if you will, we have overwhelmed the ability of ~treams to absorb these wastes. What has been developed, we called "complete" or secondary treat- ment which, at best, removes some 90 percent of the organic material fro~i waste. M1~MosHEn~ ~A~re you~emphas~izing ~that term~ "at best"?. Are y~ suggesting thatfrequently it doesn~t~do~th~t well? ~r. `WRI ~ROER.' It very seid~ittdoes, sir. We are talking abou~ reaching~the limit of the process~ . , Mr. Mosn~n. So instead of 90 percent it more likely 70 percent? Dr. WEINrn~nGER. I would say in certain cases, it would be `as low as 80 and could get lower than that, `sir. There are many places in the United States where we do have the best treatment, which now, would be biological secondary treatment which would remove 90 per- cent or 85 percent,, sir, or somewhat less, `of the organic materials and that these processes are inadequate at the present time because of the PAGENO="0139" AI~EQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLT3TION ~BAPEMENT 135 lack of adequate dilution in our streams. This is `~vhat I refer to by )ust increase in the amount of pollution. Perhaps another way of indicating this is that even with a process which is 90 percent effective, if we have a 50-percent increase in popu- lation, we are actually putting 50 percent more waste load into our streams. Mr. IDADDARIO. This fits in, doesn't it, with the idea that when you propose programs of this kind a complete program ought to be con- ceived rather than a 90-percent or an 80-percent or 70-percent one be~ cause the growth of population is eventually going to increase the quantity of pollutants if they are only partially treated. In a sense the funds expended can be categorized as a wasteful expenditure be- cause they have not done their job fully. If we continue to do this always on a 70-percent, 80-percent or 90-percent basis, will we ever solve this problem? Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Chairman, will you yield at that point? Actual- ly, we have to strike a balance. There is a possibility that we might be able to get better and more economical treatment later, but we have to assume that if we can reduce pollution by 50 percent with existing techniques, we should ~o ahead and do what we can now rather than waiting for a day which may never come. Isn't this generally the consideration that we have got to take as legislators? We can't allow ourselves to be paralyzed to the point where we do nothing just because we might have a better technique sometime in the future if we apply substantial sums for research now. Mr. DADDARIO. Recognizing the point Mr. Conable makes that we cannot always afford to wait, you would have to come to some judg- ments as to what areas need some treatnient right away and what areas could wait, wouldn't you? Dr. WEINBERGER. Well, let me try and answer the multiple question. One, there can be no question that we have got to have treatment tech- nologies available that would, as I point out, result in total pollution control. This is, frankly, approaching a 100-percent removal of the impurities which man adds to the waters. This will be required in many locations and this will be required increasingly as this country continues to grow. There are a number of processes which are available now upon which one can build. It is always a problem in terms Of engineering~ at what particular point one goes ahead with construction of facilities and certainly, the planning should be such that one can always add, on technology to provide answers which may be needed or solutions which may be needed in the future. Thus, one of the aspects of our research and development program is to develop additional processes *which may be added on to existing facilities. A process `that right now is quite promising would enable munici- palities to go from their current 85- or 90-percent removal to virtually 99-percent removal of organic contaminants by adding onto their existing facilities. Accordingly, there would be no loss of investment, by adding on to' that particular facility. Now, on the other hand, as you point out, Mr. Daddario, there are other ways of solving the prob- lem and that is entirely new systems fOr municipalities-looking into entirely new processes. PAGENO="0140" 136 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT So the use of primary and secondary treatment as currently de- veloped should not be held up pending the development of a more sophisticated or an alternate solution. These are quite economical and efficient for the removal of some of the impurities. But, on the other hand, we do have to have the techniq~ues to go beyond this. * Mr. MOSHER. But when you are suggesting the acceptance of tech- niques that are not quite adequate, you certainly are not including the old storm and sanitary sewers. You have gone beyond the point where you count those acceptable, haven't you? Dr. WEINBERGER. My comments have been directed toward the tech- nology for treatment plants. Mr. MOSHER. Just to answer that question, though, your Depart- ment no longer accepts as adequate the old combined storm and sani- tary sewers, do they? Dr. WEINBERGER. Our present policies are where new sewers are to be constructed, they should be separate. In other words, there should be a separation of combined wastes or the surface runoff from the community and the municipal waste. Mr. M05HER. They should be? Dr. WEINBERGER. They should be separate. Mr. MOSHER. Does this mean so far as any Federal support is con- cerned that they have to be? Dr. WEINBETiOflE. Sir, I don't know the answer to that. I would be very happy to find out whether there is any specific regulation or how that would come to play in terms of our own legislation. Mr. DADDARTO. Would you check on that? Dr. WEINBERGEE. Yes, sir. (The information requested isas follows:) Our present responsibility in the construction grants program is only related to sewage treatment works which is defined to include Intercepting sewers. Mr. VIVIAN. Would the chairman yield? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. I would be interested to know if you have given any grants or if any grants have been given to any combined system that was not forced to be uncombined through the mechanism of the grant. I have a second question I would like to ask, Mr. Ohairm'an, and that is, I am interested in knowing the nature of this process which you just referred to that you said would remove 99 percent of the organic waste. How much would it cost a day? Is that information avail- able? (The information requested is as follows:) If a new Interceptor Is to be constructed to serve an existing combined system, we would approve such a project if it conforms to normal engineering practice a's approved by the State water pollution control agency. Dr. WEINBERGER. This refers to carbon adsorption. Mr. CONABLE. Activated carbon? Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, `including regeneration of carbon. This has now gone through the pilot phase within our program `and the cur- rent estimated cost would be somewhat less than $100 a million gal- lons for treatment. Mr. VIVIAN. is that installation cost? PAGENO="0141" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 137 Dr. WEINBERGER. This would be complete unit operating cost, in- eluding amortization of the facilities. This would be $100 per mil- lion gallons of sewage treated. Mr. MosuElt. I thought we had some early testimony on that process which indicated that no one was sure that with actual use and in larger operating form, the results of these pilot programs would prove out. It seems to me there is some such testimony. Mr. DADDARIO. If there is a conflict, it will be up to us to clarify. Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Chairman, I have another question. Mr. Vivian asked you to find out if there were any grants given for combined sewer systems. As I recall, Congressman Jones testified before this subcommittee last week that it would cost $30 billion tO~ separate the storm sewers from the sanitary sewers in this country. I assume that we are making many grants to systems which have substantial portions of combined sewers. But I assume also that when additions are made to this system, they are of the separated form so as not to increase the size of the problem. I am sure we are making grants to combined systems, but I hope we are not making grants for extensions of combined sewer systems. I think that's the question we should ask. Dr. WEINBERGER.. Let me make a point here. The Water Pollution Control Administration in their construction grant program, where this would come up, provides for grants for the construction of sewage treatment plants and interceptor sewers. Our responsibility in the grant area, that is from the funds we administer, would be limited to the interceptor and the treatment plant itself. However, I'll see that such information as has been requested is made available and this point be clarified. Mr. CONABLE. It is unlikely, is it not, that we will develop tech- niques which would be suitable for use with the combined system under all circumstances. The sheer volume of water in a combined system is likely to result in a bypass of the treatment process in the event of a heavy rain or anything Of that sort~ Is it likely that we could ever develop a technique of sewage treat- ment which would be adequate for treatment of the flow in a combined system ~ Dr. WEINBERGER. Sir, I would say that we would look for such a solution. Since the question of combined sewers has come up, we are currently working on a program which was authorized and approved by Congress last year in trying to find other solutions to the problem of combined sewers other than through separation. As was pointed out, the cost of separation may very well run into $30 billion or more, ai~d accordingly Congress authorized funds for the exploration of alternate methods. This was in answer to Mr. Mosher's question. I indicated that at the present time the best solution of this problem is separation but we are conducting a research and development pro- gram to seek alternate ways, and one of the alternate ways would certainly be some new method of treatment or newly applied method of treatment which would enable us to treat the large volumes. Mr. CONABL~. This would be a great deal cheaper if you could do it. Dr. WEINBERGER. If one could do it and this, of course, is a role of research and development, PAGENO="0142" 138 ADEQUACY OP TEChNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. DADDARIO. This concludes the discussion we had earlier when Mr. Conable pointed out we should not wait until we have available to us all the technology. The converse, that we should not be spending money in areas where there is a chance that through research and de- velopment we can come up with a more practicable and less costly type ofprogram, also must be recognized. Dr. WEINBERGER. Sir, this is in any technological field a decision concerning at what point one moves ahead. Mr. DADDARIO. We sometimes give the impression that we are mov- ing ahead by spendi~ig money only because a program happens to be a popular one at the moment although the technology is not being advant~ed. Dr. WEINBERGER. I would certainly agree with that `and point out thwt when one moves ahead, one should plan the remedial facilities so they can be modified in the event there are some technological advances made. Whether it be in waste treatment or whether `it be in the. problem of combined sewers. . ` ` The `analytical tools, scientific knowledge, and engineering controls which were sufficient for the problems of the past ..are proving in- creasingly inadequate in dealing with present pollution problems and will become even more inadequate to cope with foreseeable future prob- lems. Thus, water pollution control research must develop an effective new technology while program administrators attempt to control pol- lution `with available knowledge. It `must `be pointed out that in addi- tion to research and development, `there are a number of other very important eIemen~bs in `an effective water pollutiOn control program, namely; competent manpower, adequate planning and `administration, economic resources to construct and operate pollution control facilities, and `a strong enforcement effort. The trend in needed research in water pollution is clear. We need or will need in the near future, an arsen'al of practical methods by which ~all man-tha.de or man-induced impurities can be kept from our water resources. Municipal, industrial, and. agricultural users of water may have to return water at a quality `at least as good as that of the water withdrawn. Land users will `have to modify their practices to insure no deleterious changes in the quality of runoff water. And natural processes, ~such `as erosion, whi'ch adversely affect water quality ~wiil have to be controlled.. The goal of water pollution control re- ~earch is to develop these methods. When `we can practice this total pollution control of municipal an'd industrial wastes, urban runoff, rural runoff resulting from man's activities, `and natural sources, con- tinual reuse of water will `be a reality, and except in those locations where there is a large consumptive use, water shortages need not occur. The following are some of the major practical problems and research need's in water pollution for `which current technology is not adequate. I have listed in my prepared statement, Mr. Chairman, a list of 4some 14 areas `where there is `further research `and development needs. The recent publication prepared by the Committee on Pollution, National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council "Waste Management and Control" is an excellent summary of the research need's `and the `status of teohnology for `water pollution control. `As Dr `S~ilhaus i'~ to b~ `one of your witnesses, I will not go into that PAGENO="0143" ADEQuACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLuTION ABATEMENT 139 Mr. DADDARIO. He was our witness yesterday. Dr. WEINBERGER. The need for more research has virtually the unan- imous concurrence of all of those concerned with water pollution con- trol. The highest priority of research is invariably the need to develop new and improved techniques for waste treatment and specifically to develop the technology to permit more waste water reuse. Present waste treatment methods were devised, generally, for the pollution problem's that existed 40 or more year~ ago. Although there have been improvements in these methods, they are proving to be increasingly inadequate for the concentrations and complexities of many of today's ~astes and the requirements being posed by the in- creased loads on receiving streams. In addition, no satisfactory meth- ods were ever devised for many industrial wastes and some of the impurities found in municipal wastes. Water supply and pollution trends `show that one of the most pressing problems in water quality management is the need to develop new treatment processes which will remove much more of the pollu- tional material from municipal `and industrial wastes than is possible by present biological' methods. The volume, strength, and com- plexity of future wastes cali only result in the discharge of larger and larger amounts of impurities int'o `badly needed `water resources if we continue to apply presently known treatment proCesses only. The sole currently available solution, in many cases, would be low flow aug- mentation, that is the provision of dilution water from upstream artificial impoundments. Each water-use adds increments of wastes that `are not removed'b'y biological treatment. If we are to meet our future ,water needs, as seems inevitable, through repeated reuse of our fresh water resource, much more of the impurities must be removed from waste `streams. To do this, new treatment processes are being developed, based, in some cases, on concepts and principles that will achieve complete conver- sion of waste waters to fresh waters. This will require a major research program and the best scientific minds in government, indus- try, and universities. It will require the utilization of physicists, physical chemists, chemical engineers, and virtually all other sçien- t~1ic resources' not yet fully broi~ght to bear on water pollution prob- I~ms~ ~Fhe Nation has already entered the water reuse phas~ but increasing' ids will require multiple reuse of the same waters, particularl-~ i~i the water-short Southwest and the Southwest-Pacific areas' and b~ the highly populated and industrialized areas of the Midwest, North~ ~st,~and MiddlleAtlantic. ` ` " ` ` `Multiple reuse of water will not be possible unless much more e~onomica1, effective, and efficient waste treatment processes are oped than those available now. These will need to be basically new~ j~ocesses,' probn~bly utilizing chemical and physical techniques. The object of our water purification and reuse program is to de' velop these new treatment processes-this has been referred to as advanced waste treatment. More broadly, the goal is to develop a new arsenal of treatment tools which will permit not only total pollu- tion control but also deliberate, controlled reuse of water. Reuse, greatly augmenting our natural fresh water supplies, will be possible PAGENO="0144" 140 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT through recharge of ground waters with treated waste effluents and, more directly, through the complete renovation of waste waters for deliberate recirculation in municipal or industrial water systems. More answers to more difficult pollution problems can be achieved through a successful water purification and reuse research program than through any other research. Answers are required now and more will be required soon in reach- ing decisions on the need for expenditures of billions of dollars on: (a) Design a~id construction of municipal and industrial waste treatment works. (b) Storage of water in Federal reservoirs for regulating stream flows for water quality control. (c) Storage of water in Federal reservoirs for municipal and industrial water supply purposes. (d) Source development for public water supplies; and (e) Importation of water from water-surplus to water-short areas. The development of a successful advanced waste treatment tech- nology would have a tremendous impact on our whole water resource problem. These techniques could conceivably allow the development of "dry" industries and municipal treatment plants from which ab- solutely no pollution would enter our surface or ground waters; these processes could completely change our present concepts of "adequate" waste treatment and could drastically reduce the otherwise necessary expenditure of multiple billions of dollars for provision of low flow augmentation dilution water to reduce pollution from presently un- treatable wastes; advanced waste treatment could allow continued economic growth and development in water-short areas of this coun- try whose future developable water supplies are presently limited. In short, a successful advanced waste treatment technology, by reno- vating waste waters for deliberate reuse, would simultaneously al- leviate two of our major `water resource problems-water pollution and water supply. The solution of water pollution problems will require the applica- tion of existing techniques, plus additional research and development for new and improved techniques. ~esearch and develonnient ge~ çrally goes t~ro~I'i a series of steps ran~ring from ex~q~a~orv ~ ~ough laboratory researc1~ field evaluation, and der~o~trat~. Iip the past, our efforts have been mainly in laboratory~ research aria ~e has b~en `~ reco~ized ~e~ciencv i& ~annl~ca~io~ 0 ~ ~he a~plica~on o~ rese~rc~ findings requires that someo~ ~d~hike tile eopstruption ~nd o~n~ration of new type ~ ~nft,e~ ~ry ~pe~siye and ~ are ~~cia~ed wit~a gr~er~~ ~_~i1m~ than with processes which are already praven inpra~ti~ T~ co~s~~ti~_of ~rernedial facilitjes in water pollution eoutr~~ V ~ ar c~idera~e extents of ~oca~ authorit~~w~ ~ hay~ li~d. fi~pucjal resource Qften these atitiiorities fe~1 that they cannot afford the risk associated with trying new methods. It may very well be. in the best. public interest for the Federal Govern- ment to design, construct, and operate full-scale facilities to cjevelop and demonstrate new ways of pollution control. Such. facilities could he built in cooperation with existing or new municipal installations or at Federal installations. PAGENO="0145" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 141. The competencies and expertise of private industry must be enlisted in the research and development programs for water pollution control. Legislation currently under consideration by the Coiigress would greatly facilitate our ability to utilize the industrial resources by authorizing suitable funds for contracting. We are very optimistic that our water pollution problems can be solved. In fact, we must be able to control pollution if we are to continue our national growth, prosperity, and well-being. ~ ~nait~ hu4~etary .a~d l~slativ~ suDVoIt total water po~u~ou cgnt~ become ~ reality 1on~ ke~ore the end pf t~ ce~ur~. ~i~r s~entifrc and t~cimip aii~w~rs can b vaila~1~ ~itlp~ a dec~~ Mr. Chairman, that completes my statement and 1~ will 1e very pleased to answer any additional questions. Mr. DADDARTO. Thank you. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. I would like to come back to the question which youL posed earlier; which I mentioned is repeated in your statement a num- ber of places. That is, there was a distinct tie between the methods of treat'ment and the extent to which augmentation would be required. Suppose a city which is now using a typical secondary treatment plant anywhere from a few years to 10 years, or 20 years, vintage desires to upgrade the quality of its effluents to avoid the search for the source~ of supplemental water at low flow portions of the year. What addi- tional cost would a cit~y incur and would there be any likelihood of significantly reducing it in the visible future rather than the unfore- seeable future? Dr. WEINBERGER. The treatment which could be added on, and our effort in the past has been directed primarily to improving existing facilities, by such a municipality would most likely make use of some- thing such as activated carbon. And the cost, which I previously indi- cated is our best estimate based upon our pilot plant work, of such facilities would be in the neighborhood of $100 a million gallons. To indicate what this means in magnitude, I might point out that the present sewage treatment cost for the conventional biological treatment would be between $50 and $200 a million gallons. Mr. VIVIAN. That is approximately doubling the cost of an existing facility? Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, sir. Mr. VIVIAN. The operating cost as well as the capital cost? Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, sir. Capital cost as well as operating cost. would be roughly doubled. I might point out that the figure for operating cost which I am giving includes amortization of the capital cost over a 20-year period of time which is what we normally figure. Mr. VIVIAN. However, is the result of doubling the cost, that the. residual wastes are reduced by a factor of about 20? In other words, say from 85 or 90 percent to roughly 99 percent? Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, sir. This is an extremely important concept that when one goes from 90 to 95 percent removal, although it ap- pears that there is only a 5-percent increase in efficiency, you actually have reduced by 50 percent the load which you are: putting on the~ stream, and if you go from the 90 to 99 percent, you are actually re- ducing the load on the stream by 90 percent. e8-240-66---voi. 1-1O PAGENO="0146" 142 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. CONABLE. Does this activated carbon process have any effect at all on the inorganic waste? Dr. WEINBERGER. No, sir. Mr. CONABLE. Do we have techniques for removing such things as phosphates and other chemicals dissolved in water? Dr. WEINBERGER. Sir, we do have some processes but again I must hasten to add as pointed out in my statement that with the funds ~wt4labieato date most of the Federal effort has been in the laboratory / ~id some in the pilot stage. There are processes which. we are inves~~ ~ ~gating for the removal .of-4norganic materials, Some of these. ar~ * ~ eooperation with the Office Gf Saline Water and some of the tech~ niques which they are developing we are interested in applying; such things as reverse osmosis, electrodyalisis. A problem is lowering the cost of the treatment facility. Mr. CONABLE. But this technique for instance would have no ap- preciable effect upon the algae problem in the Northeast; would it? Dr. WEINBERGER. No, sir, the removal of phosphates and nutrients would be not affected in the carbon adsorption. Mr. DADDARTO. You mentioned the figure of $5 million to be allocated for research purposes. Could you give us here or provide for the record the amount you have asked for fi~cal year 1967? Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, I would be very happy to provide that for the record. (The information requested is as -follows:) Fiscal year 1967 budget request is for $3,150,000. Mr. VIVIAN. I have no further questions at this time. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Conabie? Mr. CONABLE. I have no further questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Brown? Mr. BROWN. No further questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Mosher? Mr. MOSHER. The Governor of Ohio, Governor Rhodes, has recently indicated his impatience with the progress in our State in pollution control and has announced a proposal that he plans to submit to the legislature for the direct treatment of polluted streams within the streams themselves. He is talking about the State's instituting a pro- gram which would include aeration devices, neutralization equipment, oil skimmers, debris traps, and other such facilities for use in the strea ms. Would those devices be included in the technology that you suggest exists today and which should be applied? If the State of Ohio wanted to spend the money for these devices would it be well spent? Dr. WEINBERGER. Sir, I couldn't comment on the individual stream, but some of the techniques for example- Mr. MosnEn. You mentioned individual streams. As you know, in Ohio, there are many types of streams with different problems. Dr. WEINBERGER. What I am trying to get to here is some of the techniques that he refers to, for example, the actual cleaning up of debris, this, of course, is bound to be effective in performing its task. There are methods available -for in-stream aeration. These have met with limited success even though devices are available, and one would have to look at a particular situation in terms of the stream PAGENO="0147" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 143 velocity and flow and the amount of waste coming in. A technology is ~available-it is a question of its applicability in a particular situation. Mr. M0sHER. Aren't you really saying that each stream in an indi- vidual case? Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, sir. Mr. MOSHER. This goes all over the country. E'ach stream or river has to be considered as a separate case. You can't establish standards ~or techniques which would be applicable everywhere. Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, sir, and this has been the policy of the ad- ministration to recognize that this is so. * Mr. MOSHER. To go back to my original question, assuming that the ~State applied `these techniques judiciously and wisely on the basis of stream-by-stream studies, would these techniques be effective and would the State be wise in pursuing these measures? Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, sir. As a matter' of fact, one of the areas that I mentioned for which R. & D. is needed, is in my 12th point on' page 5-in-stream treatment. Now, again' I think there is a question here of alternates which must `be compared. Whether t'he in-stream treatmeii~t is more `suitable or ~effective than treatment at source. In other words, in-stream treatment assumes that we are unable to ~control the waste at the source or it is not economically feasible to do so. Therefore, what we do is take the entire stream and treat it in that way. This is why I say this would depend on an individual analysis as to what one is doing. Again, I might take one example of this. For such a pollutant or pollution from a diverse source like acid mine drainage, it might very well be that it would be more economical if, one could not cOntrol the waste at the source, to treat the entire `stream. Of course, it is always preferable, if the economics permit, to control at the source which would prevent the degradation of our streams. Mr. MosuEn. On page 3 of your statement you suggest that land `users will have to modify their practices to insure that there are no deleterious changes in the quality of runoff water. I'm told by `some people that one of the problems we have in Lake Erie-and that's the situation of particular interest to me-is the amount of nutrients that `run into the lake from heavily fertilized farmland. Apparently, the ~erosion of farmlands into the scores of streams and rivers that go into `Lake Erie cause the nutrients to be deposited there. You say, that land users will have to modify their practices. Is there much work being done along those lines'? Obviously land erosion has been a prob- lem that has been of interest and dealt with for years, but is there new `thought being given to it? Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, sir; there is. We have worked with the Department of Agriculture in teriñs of insuring that one does not apply fertilizers in excess. In terms of such things as pesticides for example, considerable progress as you know has been made in terms of application, to assure that the minimum required dose is applied `and the dose is applied effectively. Pesticides are not used in excess which would then end up in our streams. Mr. MOSHER. In other words, in this complicated and difficult prob- km of Lake Erie, one of the controls conceivably wOuld be the PAGENO="0148" 144 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATSIMENT regulation of the use of fertilizer. Is that true? Would you assume that the political authorities in their effort to cope with Lake Erie's problem ultimately would have to regulate the amount of fertilizer that the farmer puts on to his field? Dr. WEINBERGER. I haven't thought out the legislative procedures of effecting this type of operation, but in certain cases one is going to have to regulate erosion, nutrients, pesticides, and so forth. Now, how this is accomplished, Mr. Mother, I don't know. Mr. DADDARI0. Isn't research being conducted with new types of fertilizers and insecticides which wOuld decompose more readily and lessen stream pollution? S Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, sir; the idea of applying materials that would be retained in the soil so they would remain where they are needed. Obviously any of this material that runs off into the surface streams or the ground water streams or in the. lake is not doing the job it should. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Waggonner? Mr. WA000NNER. The primary work that the Government is doing now under Public Law 566, which the Department of Agriculture ad- ministers, involves small watershed projects. An integral part of this legislation includes a provision which takes into account the farmer's watershed on his land in the development of `any small watershed project. The experience they `are getting can be applied in a much bigger way to existing projects such as Lake Erie. The Goyemment is participating now in exactly this sort of thing under Public Law 566. This is one of the reasons that some of us op~ posed the conference report on watershed projects last week from the Department of the Interior. Since none of this was taken into account in giving authority to the Department of the Interior to usurp Public Law 566. 5 Mr. DADDARIO. I might add that you opposed it succesfully, Mr. Waggonner. Mr. WA000NNER. Yes, sir; and that doesn't happen too often. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Conable. S Mr. CONABLE. Dr. Weinberger, do you think that too much emphasis is being put upon organic materials in considering municipal waste control? Is there any statistical comparison available which would show the significance of inorganic and industrial waste in our water pollution problem? Because of the evolution in technology, our indus- trial processes are changing. Does this tend to pollute our streams with new inorganic material? Can't this be considered the great problem of the future and the one for which we are unprepared? Apparently most of our techniques of water treatment are designed to remove organic waste. Do you have any statistical comparison or any comments to make? Dr. WEINBERGER. Well, I would certainly agree, and again I must apologize for perhaps shortening my statement, but in terms of the development of new treatment techniques, on page 4 I indicated the classes of impurities, and, of course, one of the classes is certainly dis- solved inorganic substances. You are quite correct in pointing out ~that the major problem of the future is unquestionably going to be in' the area of dissolved substances, and particularly in dissolved inor- ganics and the persistent or nondegradable materials. PAGENO="0149" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 145 We have information related to what these might be in municipal wastes. We have paid very little attention in the past because there was no need to be concerned with the removal of the inorganic sub- stances in municipal sewage. Dissolved inorganic materials are becoming critical in some locations. Sir, I do not believe that statistics are available which would mdi- cate what is the magnitude of the industrial waste problem, whether it be organic or inorganic, but quite clearly you are correct that major emphasis must be placed on dissolved materials. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. I am interested in a statement you made in this regard. You have indicated that you have about $4 million worth of out- standing proposals which have not been funded. Do you have any estimate as to what fraction of these you would be happy to fund if you had the funds available at the present time? Dr. WEINBERGER. I would say at least half of these, and perhaps `even more would be the kind of projects that should be funded in a program that is trying to come up with answers during the next ~ to 10 years. Mr. VIVIAN. Would it be possible to expand present research activity by 50 percent without any growth of the profession itself? Dr. WEINBEIuWR. I would like to evade that and point out the reason for my making this particular point was that we think the prOgram ~can be expanded considerably more than 50 percent. These proposals have come to us with the people who are submitting proposals recog- nizing there are no funds or very limited funds available. We have not been in a position to fully utilize the industrial competeneies and the other contracting sources which one might go to. Mr. VIVIAN. What fraction of these proposals are from Govern- ment as opposed to Government laboratories? Dr. WEINBERGER. The $4 million are virtually all from industrial sources. Mr. VIVIAN. You are building new Government laboratories in var- ious parts of the country? Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes, sir. Mr. VIVIAN. One is being built in my own district. I would like to know what amount of additional money is needed. What are your operating costs? Mr. DADDARIO. You can provide that for the record. Dr. WEINBERGER. All right. (The information requested is as follows:) The Great Lakes Laboratory to be constructed at Ann Arbor is currently under ilesign. Two and one-half million dollars has been authorized and appropriated for the design and construction of that facility. Until designs are completed and bids and construction contracts are received, we shall not know whether any additional funds are needed for construction. The operating costs-when the laboratory is fully staffed (approximately 150 people), is estimated at two million dollars per year. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Brown? Mr. BROWN. Do your activities include the funding of what might be called engineering development for promising technologies which may have been discovered by independent inventors? PAGENO="0150" 146 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLI~IJTION ABATEMENT Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes. My responsibilities include our Division of Engineering Development, and in the prepared remarks I tried to indicate that this is going to be a very important part of our program, and, of course, is really the end point of research, and without this,, one has research findings which are not applied. It is this particular area in which the funds are required and which. the current legislation would enable us to do the engineering develop- ment and rely as we would expect to a considerable extent on industriaL contracts. Mr. BROWN. What is this current legislation that you refer to? Dr. WEINBERGER. This is the bill that has passed the Senate in the Public Works Committee, the one that Mr. Muskie introduced and the administration bill. The bill passed the Senate some 2 or 3 weeks ago. I don't have the number on it, sir, but it is the amendments tOM the Water Pollution Control Act. It is 2947. Senate 2947. The companion bill is H.R. 16076. Mr. BROWN. Is it anticipated that these bills will pass in the near future? Dr. WEINBERGER. The hearings are being held, sir, or they have been completed. Mr. DADDARIG. Mr. Davis? Mr. D~wis. I noticed on page 9 of your statement that you have itemized some answers that will be required and in B you say, "Storage of Water in Federal reservoirs," for one purpose, and C, "Storage of water in Federal reservoirs," for another purpose. I wonder if your conclusion was based upon an assumption or aM study of the matter indicated to you that the States and the municipali- ties would probably not be able to finance the construction of a reser- voir? Dr. WEINBERGER. I didn't have any implication here that the State or otherwise constructed reservoirs wouldn't also fall into this. It so happens that the responsibility of our administration is at the present time limited to Federal reservoirs. Mr. DAVIS. Have you ever studied the ability of a municipality or State to raise the required funds for the construction of reservoirs? Dr. WEINBERGER. Sir, I have not. Mr. DAVIS. I don't mean to overemphasize this point, but I think that the committee ought to look into it considering the political implications involved. Do you have any information concerning charges by a municipality or State upon an industry for polluting a stream? Have you had any contact with that practice? Dr. WEINBERGER. I have not, sir. Others in the administration might, but I have not in my research and development responsibilities. To our knowledge, no State has legislation which allows for the payment of a fee for the discharge or dumping of wastes into receiving bodies of water. There are a number of States which do have a permit system. (The statement concerning the treatment for phosphorous removal requested by the subcommittee i5 as follows:) The principal objectives in waste treatment practice have been the removal or destruction of suspended and floatable solids, dissolved degradable organic PAGENO="0151" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 147 material (the oxygen-demanding substances), and disease-producing micro- organisms. Existing treatment processes are only moderately successful in re- moving nitrogen and are generally ineffective or unreliable for the removal of phosphates. Nitrogen and phosphorus are nutrients for algae and the discharge of these substances can significantly contribute to the nuisance conditions asso- ciated with "algae blooms." A number of treatment methods for the removal of phosphates are under study. These methods include: 1. Chemical treatment for the precipitation of the phosphates. This method can be quite effective. Chemical costs are moderate but a sludge disposal problem is created. 2. Phosphate removal by deliberate growth of algae under controlled condi- tions. The problem here is separation and disposal of algae. 3. Ion exchange-still in laboratory stage. 4. Soil treatment-Certain soils can effectively remove phosphates. Labora- tory and pilot studies are underway. 5. Biological treatment-A number of investigators have reported that certain biological treatment plants are quite effective for the removal of phosphorus- the removal being considerably in excess of that to be expected from cell syn- thesis. A dramatic example of this phenomenon has been observed at the San Antonio, Texas, treatment plants. One plant here has a high removal of phos- phorus, one a low removal, and the third intermediate and variable removals. It appears that all plants treat sewage of generally the same composition. Investigators from the Federal Water Pollution control Administration have analyzed the situation and are now conducting research. Studies to date indi- cate that it may be possible to design and operate-what are otherwise conven- tional treatment plants-for effective removal of phosphates. Laboratory, pilot plant, and full-scale plant studies are currently being initiated to determine cqsts, potentials, and limitations of his method of phosphate removal. Research underway with potential for significant technological development in waste treatment within five years: 1. Granular carbon adsorption for removal of dissolved organic substances. 2. Powdered carbon adsorption for removal of dissolved organic substances~ 3. Phosphate removal by: (a) Chemical means (b) Algae (c) Ion exchange (d) Soil treatment (e) Biological treatment 4. Nitrogen removal by nitrification-denitrification. 5. Sludge disposal by spreading on and reclaiming of strip mine areas. 6. Polyelectrolytes for removal and concentration of suspended and colloidal solids. 7. Reverse osmosis for removal of inorganic pollutants. 8. Electrodialysis for remotal of inorganic pollutants. 9. Ion exchange for removal of selected impurities, e.g., inorganic nutrients. 10. Chemical oxidation for destruction or organic substances. Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, I think that this is an area that bears~ some scrutiny on the part of this committee. As the Chairman is aware, there has been increasing talk of user fees in many areas of government service, and I would think that sometime in the future it might be possible to exact a fee at the Federal level upon industries who do introduce pollutants into a stream. Mr. DADDAItIO. Following Mr. Davis' point on Federal reservoirs, would you eliminate either of the alternatives suggested here or the opportumty for States to act in concert? Dr. WEINBERGER. No, sir, my entire presentation here is directed to- ward the technical problem. Mr. DAVIS. I understand that. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Waggonner? PAGENO="0152" 148 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. WAGGONNER. Is the natural use of the term "Federal reser- voirs" a result of your responsibility in interstate work? Dr. WEINBERGER. Yes~ sir. Mr. WAGGONNER. It carries no special significance? Dr. WEINBERGER. None whatsoever. The question has appeared be- fore other committees of the Congress concerning the Federal role in State-financed reservoir construction. My reference was just limited to the fact that this is within our current act. Mr. DADDARIO. It is an important consideration, however, and I'm pleased that Mr. Davis has pointed it out. Mr. Roush? Mr. Rousn. Dr. Weinberger, one of the reasons for my excitement about the national space endeavor concerns the spinoff. We are very much aware that as we plan these trips to the Moon and other planets~ disposal of waste and the matter of clean air within the capsule is very important. We also know that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration is directing some of its attention to that particular problem. Has anything unusual come to your attention as a result of their technological endeavor in this regard? I imagine that someday we will have home devices as inexpensive and common as a garbage disposal which will take care of the home waste problem. Dr. WETNBEEGER. The only reason for hesitating was your question about whether anything unusual. There has been an ihterplay be- tween NASA and ourselves. As a matter of fact, we make use of their contract reports in terms of any possibilities of technology being devsioped. As you point out, there are obvious similarities in terms of a closed capsule, if you will. They are reusing and are actually treating water 1~o be reused. So whatever techniques they develOp there, not only in terms of treatment, but `analytical methods or sensors or any other ~technology, we are alert to. Some of their work is in biological systems which we have been working in concert. But, the concept you mention of taking hous& hold waste and perhaps treating them in o'ther ways, yes, this is clearly one of the approaches which an R. & D. effort in this very expensive, necessary program of pollution control ought to be engaged in. Mr. ROUSH. You have answered my next question which is, do you bave contact with the people engaged in this work within NASA? Dr. WEINBEUGRR. Yes, `sir. Mr. ROUSH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Weinberger, I hope we may be able to send some `questions down `to you or have some of our staff contact you. Dr. WEINBERGER. I would be very pleased to do that. (Additional `questions and answers for the record may be found in volume ItT). Mr. DADDAEIO. I `appreciate your coming here this morning. You have been extremely helpful. Dr. WEINBERGER. I appreciate the opportunity to be here. (The biographical statement and complete prepared statement of Dr. Leon W. Weinberger follows:) PAGENO="0153" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 149 BIOGRAPHICAL STATEMENT ON Da. LEON W. WEINBERGER Born and raised in New York City. BS, CE from the Cooper Union, MS and DSC from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Sanitary Engineering. Prof essionaZ affl~iations and honor societies Fellow, American Society of Engineers, Water Pollution Oontrol Federation, Member of Society of the Sigma XI American Water Works Association. Prof essiona2 history 1966-Present Assistant Commissioner, Reearch and Development, Federal Water Pollution Oontrol Administration, Department of the Interior. 1968-1966--Chief, Basic and Applied Sciences Branch, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control, De~hrtment of Health, Education and Welfare. 1957-1962-In charge of sanitary engineering program and Director of Be. search Laboratory at Case Institute of Technology. 1949-1962-Associate Professor of Civil and Sanitary Engineering at Case In- stitute of Technology. 1949-1962-Consultant in water supply, waste water disposal, and stream p01. lution to city, State and Federal Governments, and over 20 industries. Has authored more than 50 scientific papers. PREPARED STATEMENT OF Di~. LEON W. WEINBEEGER, ACTING ASSISTANT CoMMIs- SIONER, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AD- MINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am very pleased to appear be- fore you to discus's research and development in water pollution control. In the U.S. Department of the Interior, the Federal Water Pollution Con- trol Administration (FWPOA) carries out a progra~p of scientific and en- gineering research broadly `directed to: (1) The determination of the causes and effects of pollution of the Nation's water resources, and (2) The Develop~ ment of pollution prevention and control measures necessary to maintain the national water resources at a quality ~uitable for, domestic and municipal water supplies, industrial and `agricultural purposes, recreation, propagation of fish, aquatic life, and wildlife, and other beneficial uses. In carrying out our pro- gram, every effort is made to encourage and to cooperate with appr,opriate pub- lic (whether Federal, State, interstate, or local) authorities, agencies, Institu- tions, and individuals. My presentation is concerned mainly with research and development in the technological aspects of water pollution control. It is, of course, important to recognize the need for Scientific information on the Water quality require~ ments for all `water uses (the effects of pollution) and the economic and sociological aspects of water pollution control. Many of the water pollution problems facing our nation today can be al- leviated by the application `of existing `technology. In fact, during `the next five years or so, the most significant forward strides in water pollution control will be made in this way. It is equally clear that, in addition `to current prob- lems for which there are no acceptable solutions, future population `and in- dustrial growth and concentration, changing land uses, and increased demand's on our limited water resources' create a situation where new technologies must be developed an'd applied. Problems result from the sheer mass of pol- lutants and `from a whole host `of new pollutants which ar'e likely to be high- ly complex in `composition and in `their mode `of effect. The analytical tools, `scientific knowledge, and engineiering controls which were `sufficient for the problem's of the p'ast a're proving increasingly inadequate in dealing `with present pollution problems and will `becoihe even more inade- quate to dope with foreseeable `future problems. Thus, water pollution con- trol research must develop `an effective new technology while program `ad- ministrator's attempt to control pollution wi'th `available knowledge. It must be pointed o'ut `that in addition `to research and development, `there are a number `of `other very important elements in an effective water pollution con- trol program, namely: competent manpower, adequate planning and administra- tion, economic resources `to construct and operate pollution control facilities, and a strong enforcement effort. PAGENO="0154" 150 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Needed research The trend in needed research in water pollution is clear. We need or will need in the near future, an arsenal of practical methods by which all man- made or man-induced impurities can be kept from our water resources. Munic- ipal, industrial, and agricultural users of water may have to return water at a quality at least as good as that of the water withdrawn. Land users will have to modify their practices to insure no deleterious changes in the quality of run- off water. And natural processes, such as erosion, which adversely affect water quality will have to be controlled. The goal of water pollution control research is to develop these methods. When we can practice this total pollution control of municipal and industrial wastes, urban runoff, rural runoff resulting from man's activities, and natural sources, continual reuse of water will be a reality, and except in those locations where there is a large consumptive use, water shortages need not occur. The Committee on Water Resources Research of the Federal Council for Sc!- ence and Technology has established a number of categories for classifying re- search. The primary research effort of the 1l'ederal Water Pollution Control Administration is in Category V-Water Quality Management and Protection. The subcategories are: A. Identification of pollutants; B. Sources and fate of pollution; C. Effects of pollution; D. Waste treatment processes; E. Ultimate disposal of wastes; F. Water treatment; and `G. Water quality control. In addi- tion, research in water resources planning is carried out. The following are some of the major practical problems and `research needs in water pollution for which current technology is not adequate: 1. In treatment, new and improved processes, equipment, instruments, cheini- cals, and systems for all types of waste streams or sources to provide for: (a) Removal of suspended solids (b) Removal of dissolved organic substances (c) Removal of `dissolved inorganic substances (d) Complete disinfection of waste effluents (e) Waste water purification to qualities suitable for direct deliberate reuse (f) Disposal of impurities removed from waste stream's (g) More effective control and operation of `facilities 2. Treatment and control of storm and combined sewer discharges 3. Retardation and reversal of accelerated eutrophication (the over-fertiliza- tion of lakes and other waters which result's In nuisance organisms and vegeta- tion) 4. Improved analytical tools to identify and measure pollutant's 5. Methods to assess the effects, subtle and gross, chronic and acute, and eco- logical, of pollutants on all uses of water 6. Control of pollution from non-point sources for example: (a) Agricultural runoff including irrigation return flows (b) Acid mine drainage (c) Salt water intrusion (d) Construction activities 7. Methods to treat wastes in small or isolated disposal systems 8. Control of pollution from boats 9. Methods to measure and control the effects of impoundment of water on the water quality 10. Planning techniques for water pollution control systems 11. Assessment and evaluation of socio-economic factors In water pollution control 12. In-stream treatment 13. Methods for determining the fate of pollutants In lakes, streams, bays, estuaries, and ground water 14. Manufacturing and product changes to reduce pollution at source. The recent publication prepared by the Committee on Pollution, National Acad- emy of Sciences-National Research Council "Waste Management and Control" is an excellent summary of the research needs and the status of technology for `water pollution controL The need for more research has virtually the unanimous concurrence of all those concerned with water pollution, control 1] Federal, State, and local govern- ments, 2] scientists `and engineers, 3] conservationists, 4] industry, and 5] man- agers and operators of water and waste treatment facilities. The highest prior- PAGENO="0155" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 151 ity of research is invariably the need to develop new and improved techniques for waste treatment and specifically to develop the technology to permit moi~e waste water reuse. Waste treatment Present waste treatment methods were devised, generally, for the pollution problems that existed 40 or more years ago. Although there have been improve- ments in these methods, they are proving to be increasingly inadequate for the concentrations and complexities of many of today's wastes and the requirements being posed by the increased loads on receiving streams. In addition, no satis- factory methods were ever devised for many industrial wastes and some of the impurities found in municipal wastes. Water supply and pollution trends show that one of the most pressing problems in water quality management is the need to develop new treatment processes which will remove much more of the pollutional material from municipal and industrial wastes than is possible by present biological methods. The volume, strength, and complexity of future wastes can only result in the discharge of larger and larger amounts of impurities into badly needed water resources if we continue to apply presently known treatment processes only. The sole currently-available solution, in many cases, would be low flow augmentation, La., the provision of dilution water from upstream artificial impoundments. A good part of the municipal pollution problem may stem from the common. conception of today's "complete treatment." The use of the phrase has been very misleading to the taxpayer and perhaps even to the technician. What is accomplished by today's complete treatment? A fairly good job is done in removing oxygen-consuming materials, generally 75 to 90 percent re- movals are attained. About the same removal is accomplished with respect to suspended materials. In these removals another problem, not yet satisfactorily solved, is created: what should be done with the separated sludge? The algae nutrients, nitrogen and phosphorous, are removed to a very limited extent. Only a fraction of some of the dissolved organics is removed and essentially none of the increment of dissolved inorganics added to water during use is taken out. This has been called complete treatment and the receiving stream has been relied on to complete the job through dilution and so-called self-purification. Unfor- tunately, as water demands increase, dilution water becomes, proportionately, less available and self-purification mechanisms are largely ineffective against the very same classes of contaminants which have successfully resisted treatment. Each water-use adds increments of wastes that are not removed by biological treatment. If we are to meet our future water needs (as seems inevitable) through repeated reuse of our fresh water resource, much more of the impurities must be removed from waste streams. To do this, new treatment processes are being developed, based, in some cases, on concepts and principles that will achieve complete conversion of waste waters to fresh waters. This will require a major research program and the best scientific minds in government, industry, and universities. It will require the utilization of physicists, physical chemists, chemical engineers, and other scientific r~sources not yet fully' brought to bear on water pollution problems. The Nation has already entered the water reuse phase but Increasing needs will require multiple reuse of the same waters, particularly in the water-short Southwest and the Southwest-Pacific areas and in the highly populated and industrialized areas of the Midwest, Northeast, and Middle Atlantic. Multiple reuse of water will not be po'ssible unless much more economical, effective, and efficient waste treatment processes are developed than those available now. These will need to be basically new processes, probably utiliz- ing chemical and physical techniques. The objective of our Water Purification and Reuse Program is to develop these new treatment processes (Advanced Waste Treatment). More broadly, the goal is to develop a new arsenal of treatment tools which will permit not only total pollution control but also deliberate, controlled reuse of water~ Reuse, greatly augmenting our natural fresh water supplies, will be possible through recharge of ground waters with treated waste effluents and, more directly, through the complete renovation of waste waters for deliberate recirculation in municipal or industrial water systems. More answers to more difficult pollution problems can be achieved through a successful Water Purification and Reuse Research Program than through any ether research. PAGENO="0156" 152 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Answers are required now and more will be required soon in reaching decisions on the need for expenditures of billions of dollars on: a. Design and construction of municipal and industrial waste treatment works. b. Storage of water in Federal reservoirs for regulating stream flows for water quality control. c. Storage of water in Federal reservoirs for municipal and industrial water supply purposes. d. Source development for public water supplies. Importation of water from water-surplus to water-short areas. The development of a successful advanced waste treatment technology would have a tremendous impact on our whole water resource problem. AWT tech- niques could conceivably allow the development of "dry" industries and muni- cipal treatment plants from which absolutely no pollution would enter our sur- face or ground waters; AWT processes could completely change our present con- cepts of "adequate" waste treatment and could drastically reduce the other- wise necessary expenditure of multiple billions of dollars for provision of low flow augmentation (dilution) water to reduce pollution from presently untreat- able wastes; AWT could allow continued economic growth and development in water-short areas of this country whose future developable water supplies are presently limited. In short, a successful AWT technology, by renovating waste waters for deliberate reuse, would simultaneously alleviate two of our major water resource problems-water pollution and water supply. Although a greatly expanded research and development effort is planned, the total Federal expenditure for reSearch to develop new treatment te~hnology through FY 1966 has been less than $5 million. Under this funding, however~ it has been~ shown possible, at laboratory and pilot-scale plants to achieve any degree of. waste treatment desired and, in fact, to return a waste water to a quality at least as high as that of the water before use. Much research and development work remains to be done, however, before these degrees of treatment can be accomplished at any necessary location, under any necessary conditionsr and at the lowest practical cost. These efforts require resources-funds, facili- ties, personnel, and time. Even without any active solicitation of proposals for research projects in this area, a backlog of some $4,000,000 in proposed but unfunded projects now exists. This Illustrates, In some small measure, the high level of interest in this problem among Industrial, academic, and governmental research scientists aud engineers. An Increased rate of effort to completely develop presently known processes and also to explore and develop new processes and process modifications could be carried out. To the present time, aj~proxlmately 35 separation or ultimate disposal processes have been considered. Of these, approximately 10 or 12 have been rejected while the rest are at some stage of feasibility determination, engi- neering development, or process evaluation. It can well be expected that about 10 to 12 new approaches will be considered annually and that 3 or 4 of these will deserve Investigation to at least the engineering development stage. The `average cost of completely developing a process might be $9 to $10 million. These development costs, however, are not unreasonable in light of the annual costs of 1 to 2 billions of dollars spent in constructing municipal and industrial waste treatment plants and in the even greater amounts of low flow augmenta- tion costs and storm sewer separation costs which could be affected directly by these research findings. Our experience has demonstrated the great importance and efficiency of con- ducting simultaneous and complementary in-house and contract research projects. It has also shown that the over-all effectiveness of contract research can be very greatly enhanced through the Intensive application of technical direction,. coordination, and monitoring. A contract support staff of engineers, scien- tists, economists, and other professional personnel must provide continuing planning, data interpretation and analysis, and system optimization services to the program by using the most up-to-date techniques and principles, such as opera- tions research, critical path analysis, and cost engineering. This staff must also solicit the interest and ideas of the most competent scientific and engineer- ing minds in the Nation; encourage the submission of proposals In light of the over-all broad attack on the problem; monitor, direct, and coordinate projects in progress; and Interpret and evaluate results and recommend continuance, termination, or redirection of the work. The Staff must also conduct adequate liaison with other agencies and organizations, both within and without the Fed- PAGENO="0157" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 153 eral Government. For these reasons, we believe It to be of the utmost im~por- tance not to "cut corners" with respect to either numbers or competence of research staff. It has also been proven extremely valuable to use Cooperative Projects~ Agree'. ments with various local authorities to allow actual plant-site studies by both in-house and contract researchers. Such installations have been initiated at Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Lebanon, Ohio, at Lancaster, Pomona, and Whittier Narrows, California, and here at the District of Columbia. Other such field sites will be used when appropriate. Field ~Jvaluation, Demonstration, E~vperimental, and Model Plants rfhe solution of water pollution problems will require the application of exist- ing techniques, plus additional research and development for new and im- proved techniques. Research and development generally goes through a series of steps ranging from exploratory studies through laboratory research, field evaluation, and demonstration. In the past, our efforts have been mainly in laboratory research and there has been a recognized deficiency in the applica- tion of research findings. The application of research findings requires that someone undertake the construction and operation of a new type facility which is very often very expensive and which is associated with a greater risk of fail- ure than with processes which are already proven in practice. The construction of remedial facilities in water pollution control is the responsibility, to a con- siderable extent, of local authorities who may have limited financial resources. Often `these authorities feel that they cannot afford the risk associated with trying new methods. It may very well be in the best public interest for the Federal Government to design, construct, and operate full-scale f~Lcilitiest to develop and demonstrate new ways of pollution control. Such facilities could be built in cooperation with existing or new municipal installations or at Federal installations. Examples of full-scale projects which may have to be built or financed to assure an effective water pollution control program are: 1. Latest techniques of waste treatment. 2. Methods to control nitrates and phosphates which cause fertilization of lakes; included would be procedures for removing these nutrients from lakes and streams. 3. Methods for handling, conditioning, and disposal of impurities removed from waste streams. 4. Systems for waste waten purification and reuse including ground water recharge. 5. New processes for industrial waste treatment to serve as models to in- dustry and State regulatory authorities on how pollution can be reduced and controlled in an economical manner. 6. In-stream treatment methods. 7. New instruments for surveillance and operational control. 8 Methods for control of pollution from combined and storm sewers. 9. A total waste management program in a model community including con- struction of needed facilities. 10. Methods for water conservation. 11. Control of irrigation return flows. 12. Control of acid mine drainage. 13. Methods to prevent boat and ship pollution. 4cceleration of research There are a number of elements necessary to carry out a research program. These include: 1. Manpower 2. Facilities and equipment 3. Funds 4. Time It goes without saying that the most critical element is the manpower. Here, I am most concerned with the creativity aspect. A successful program depends on ideas and imaginative methods by which these ideas can be de~el- oped and applied. The role of funds, facilities, and equipment is perhaps the best understood, although it is well to point out that whereas funds are n~ces~ sary to carry out a program, an increase in funds does not necessarily result iii a proportional increase in output of results. The time necessary to accomplish PAGENO="0158" 154 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT a particular research objective can sometimes be shortened by increased funding but at a greater overall research cost. The acceleration of research into a crash program may be a necessity, and water pollution control research may fall into that category. Can the manpower be obtained to carry out an expanded water pollution control research program? Based on the evidence at hand, we can conclude- yes!. lvrany segments of industry have demonstrated a capacity and willingness to engage in contract research. University researchers are showing a greater in~ terest in conducting water pollution control research. The staffing of our laboratories has not been slowed by lack of qualified candidates (although at- tracting senior scientists and research administrators may become a problem in the future). An extremely important factor in attracting research interest has been the demonstration that water pollution control is a real, major problem for which we must have answers. The competencies and expertise of private industry must be enlisted in the research and development programs for water pollution control. Legislation. currently under consideration by the Congress would greatly facilitate our ability to utilize the industrial resources by authorizing suitable funds for contracting. We are very optimistic that our water pollution problems can be solved. In fact, we must be able to control pollution if we are to continue our national growth, prosperity, and well being. With adequate budgetary and legislative support, total water pollution control can become a reality long before the end of this century. Indeed, major scientific and technical answers can be available within a decade. Mr. DADDARIO. Our next witness is Coi. Alvin F. Meyer, Jr., ChairS man, Environmental Pollution Control Committee, Department of Defense. We welcome you here, Colonel Meyer, and I'm sure Mr. Waggonner would like to welcome you as a constituent and old friend. Mr. Waggonner? Mr. WAGGONNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I would like to extend my personal welcome to a longtime friend and constituent from Louisiana, Colonel Meyer. I don't know how many of the people have a copy of his statement, but I just noticed that the colonel was born in 1920 in Shreveport. Looks are deceiving at times. He looks a good bit older than I do, even though he isn't. Colonel Meyer is a very personal friend of mine and I want to emphasize to the committee that he is an example of a man who seeks to serve the needs of the military and his country in deference to per- sonal considerations. Colonel Meyer is a man who by no means finds it necessary to be employed by the Federal Government or any branch of the armed services because he has accumulated through his own efforts suffi~ cient means to provide for his personal needs. Because of the desire to serve his country he remains in the military. I think his record speaks for itself, and I think the testimony and statement he will give to us this morning will certainly explain what I mean. It is good to have you here with the committee. STATE]YJENP O~ COL. ALVIN P. MEYER, SR., CHAIRMAN, ENVIRON- MENTAL POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTE~, DEPARTMENT OP DE~NSE Colonel MErn~. Thank you, Mr. Waggonner, I appreciate your very flattering and complimentary remarks. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, staff, and visitors, the Department of Defense appreciates the opportunity to appear befor& PAGENO="0159" ADEQTJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 155 this committee, and to participate in its hearings on the adequacy of technology for pollution abatement, Sir, this morning I have with me in addition to my members of my DOD and Environmental Control Committee, some technical advis- ers who will be available to answer those questions which may come to the committee's mind which requires some technical information. With your permission, sir, I should like to at least cite the names of these people, although time is running short. There is Captain Riblett of the U.S. Navy. Lieutenant Colonel Taft of the Office of the Surgeon General, U.S. Army. Lieutenant Colonel Peterson, Office of the Surgeon General, U.S. Air Force, and Lieutenant Colonel Hippler from the Office, Deputy Chief of Staff, Research and Technology, U.S. Air Force. Lieutenant Commander Hernandez, who is representing the Sur- geon General of the Navy. Major Shaw of the Surgeon General's office of the Army. Mr. Kinney of the Department of the Navy, and Captain Chapman of the Surgeon General's Office, U.S. Air Force. These gentlemen are here, sir, not only to answer any questions which the committee might have which I feel would be better answered by technical experts, but also to somewhat serve as an evidence that the Department of Defense has a deep and abiding interest in this study. We have studied with much interest the report of the Research Man- agement Advisory Panel on this subject. As you know, we have pro- vided the committee with a résume of our observations on the "issues" enunciated in the Advisory Panel's report. That summary discusses those issues about which we have views as results of our experiences, and those on which, because of their implications to the military de- partments and agencies, we feel that our observations may be of value. It does seem appropriate, as a point of departure in this discussion, to emphasize that the military departments' concern for the preven- tion of adverse environmental effects is no new development, brought into being in the last few years. While it may not be necessary to re- iterate to this committee the leadership which military preventive medicine has exhibited in the past century, it is worthwhile for the sake of the record to point out that military leaders have long been concerned with the effects of preventable disease and injury on their military capability. Many current practices in civil environmental sanitation and public health are reflections of the innovations and leadership in applying the then available technology to the needs of military personnel in the field, aboard ship, and in garrison. Thanks to an awareness of the importance of proper waste disposal, maintenance of the best prac- ticable-and I stress practicable-level of environmental sanitation in adverse situations, combined with an application of immunology and the best clinical practices, the death rate from illness in World War II was actually lower than that of the civil population, being on the order of 1 per 140 persons on active duty, versus 1 per 100 in civilian population. Mr. Chairman, as an aside, I might point out that in the Civil War the ratio of illness and death to persons on both sides engaged was 1 to 11. PAGENO="0160" 156 ADEQUACY OF TECIINOI4OGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT This traditional awarenes of the importance of the environment has been vastly expanded since World War II. Modern technology has resulted in the evolution of complex military systems with a wide variety of potential hazards to the health and effectivenes of military personnel. The modern military community is a complex of indu~triai and technical facilities with all of the problems of civilian urban in- dustrialized areas. The military departments have an. abiding interest and responsibil- ity to insure that their operations do not result in a degradation of effectiveness, and that harm to adjacent civilian communities does not result. Careful perusal of the testimony given by Department of Defense witnesses appearing before various congressional committees over the past several years will provide an insight as to the depth of concern and scope of action taken. It is significant that departmental policy on this subject has been formalized in DOD directive 5100.50, "En- vironmental Pollution Control," which among other requirements specifies that environmental pollution control will be included in mili- tary system programs, and that appropriate research thereon will be undertaken. This directive provides policies and responsibilities re- lating to environmental pollution control at every level of the Defense Establishment. We have rather extensive experiences in matters concerning the more traditional problems of air and water pollution and solid waste disposal at military installations, and in approaching the problems of hazards associated with new systems. There are four primary areas having a bearing on the "issues" suggested in the Advisory Panel's report, upon which some comment in this summary appears to be appropriate. These are First, the matter of goal setting, and the resultant need for better approaches to the establishment of criteria, and the relation of both of these considerations to legislative and regulatory requirements; Second, the utility of the systems management and systems analysis concept tothe pollution problems; Third, the possibilities for adaptation of military and space technology to the environment of the future; and Fourth, the question of scientific basis for pollution policy. With regard to the first of these, it is in order to point out that the Department of Defense has more than an incidental interest. The military departments and agencies have a clear mandate to comply with local and State requirements as to air and water pollution, and are charged with the requirement of "exhibiting leadership" on these problems. Being thus subject to the necessity for developing programs involv- ing large-scale expenditures of public funds the Department is nat- urally concerned regarding the means by which the requirements in. this regard are to be specified. The beryllium rocket propellant pro- gram, shipboard waste disposal, and the disposal of waste from muni- tion manufacturing operations are typical cases where requirements have, had to be established, even without completely valid technical PAGENO="0161" ADEQIYACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLuTION ABATEMENT 157 bases.. In dealing with these we have accumulated considerable experi- ence in the role of technology in establishing environmental quality values. There is emerging a clear-cut need for better technology in resolving the complex socio-economic-political considerations affecting environ- mental quality requirements. It is easy to be "against air and water pollution," and demand that something be done regarding solid waste disposal. It is relatively more difficult to ascertain just what should be done in the wide variety of situations involved in the man-environ- mental relationship. the press for demonstrable progress, there may develop over- emphasis on enforcement of requirements which may not adequately provide for the future. There is a lack of knowledge or perhaps abil- ity, to quantify in rational terms the "metes and bounds" of acceptable environmental quality. Inherent in this problem is the fact that liv- ing organisms, including man, possess a wide range of adapability to environmental stress. In only a very few instances are there sharply delineated boundaries between truly harmful, and absolutely safe conditions. `This being so, when dealing with the problems of in- trusion into the environment of adverse physical, chemical or biologi- cal agents, there must also be given an accounting to the questions of the utility of the environment to various sociological ends. Some of these may have no bearing on health, or individual well-being but may be related to economic utility as `the case of effects on shellfish industries, or to satisfaction of esthetics as in the case of protection or preservation of natural beauty. Mr. DADDARIO. Do you believe we have done enough work to sharp- ly delineate these boundaries you mentioned `between truly harmful and absolutely safe conditions? I recognize we must take into con- sideration these `points you have put `before us `but I wonder if we know what the cumulative impact of some of these effects' in our environment will have on man and how do you `adapt this philosophy to the situation which confron'ts us? Colonel MEYER. Well, Mr. Chairman, there are extremes, of course, that you can define. One can truthfully state wh'at concentration of certain chemical substances will kill fish, for example. You can come up with that value. You can also find what concentration of cyanide in water will affect humaiibe:ings. Similarly in the `air situation you can indeed define what concentra- tion of carbon monoxide, if inhaled for a certain number of minutes will produce death or illness or demonstrable changes in the human body. But, below these upper limits, there are a wide range of changes which `the body can adapt to and accommodate to and it is in this area that we get in'to the problem of definition of environmental quality. This is `a very complex problem and one, sir, also which involves more than demonstrable physiologic damage. Later on in this discussion we touch a little bit upon the subject of cost versus benefits, and also in our prepared statement we have in the more detailed report some information on this subject of the need for considering these things. e8-24o--6:6-~o1. 1-il PAGENO="0162" 158 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. DADDARIO. When we were preparing ourselves for these hear- ing~ we met with certain scientists and industrial leaders, including Dr. Wiesner, and he pointed out that there were a few parts per mil- lion: of DDT in our bodies. This is not considered harmful and yet nobody has begun to develop a method of determining whether in fact it might become harmful if we accumulate more. Therefore, in order to establish ourselves properly within the criteriayou have placed before u~, we should not assume that the presence of DDT isn't harm- ful just becausewe aren't dying from its effects. Colonel MEYER. This, sir, is the thrust of these remarks that there is a need for greater exercise of research in this area. New, in the field of industrial toxicology as you know, there is a. considerable effort. Some of the things which we are doing in the space program with regard to environmental quality standards for space cabins involve extensive long-term chronic toxicity studies to undertake this very question because the human body dQes indeed have certain detoxification capability, certain adaptive capabjiities which we need to know more about. Mr. DADDARIO. Perhaps I am overly concerned with th~ emphasis you put on the word, "practicable." What you mean is that we ought to do everything we can now, but at the same time we must watch the danger signs and develop techniques which don't presently exist. Colonel MEYER. Yes, sir. Mr. DADDARIO. We ought not carry this question of being imprac- ticable too far. Colonel MEYER. I would agree with your statement, Mr. Chairman that what we are saying here is the following: That there are some things that we clearly can discern as being problems and that there may be techniques to approach the solution of those problems in a rational and carefully planned manner recognizing those areas about which you do not have adequate information. But, that in doing `this, and in our comments further regarding our approach to the systems analysis application, you identify those levels of knowledge that you have and where you need to expand your re- search effOrts, but being sufficiently flexible that you can indeed make the necessary changes in your larger program and in your techniques. One has to take a look-this has already been allucted to in some `other testimony before this committee also-to foreseeable changes. Now, Dr. Abel Wolman, who is one .of the profession which I belong to, a most distinguished person, is going to appear before this com- mittee and I recollect that approximately ~5 years ago Dr. Wolman published a paper as a result of investigations conducted by the Ameri- can Association of Railroads on the prthlems affecting disposal of human waste from railroads. As you know, the general procedures was and still is direct discharge onto the `tracks. As a result of considerable concern by the Public Health Service `and others as to possible contamination of water waste `by trains passing, over bridges `and also by effluents being discharged through the natural course of water running over,'the ground and into the receiving streams~ isa problem. . `, . ` " PAGENO="0163" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 159 This morning, sir, New York Central announced that it is stopping passenger service of over 200 miles. I suspect it would have been dif- ficult 25 years ago to have predicted that the technology of transporta- tion was going to completely eliminate a major area of concern over a large part of the United States which was of interest at that tune. Yet, as they move down the scheme or course of events, it has become evident in the last years that railroad traffic was diminishing. I cite this as a need for the flexibility of administrators, of scientists, and of political leaders in keeping pace with the development both in the situation with which they are concerned and also with the evolu- tic~n of technology. Mr. DADDARIO. When the Department of Defense needs some timely, available technology, it makes arrangements with industry to do cer- tain research and development. Should we ~o that far in a field such as pollution abatement? Should we require industry to come up with. some answers to some of these problems that you believe require solution? Colonel MEYER. Mr. Chairman, I believe so. I can only cite the experiences of this Department in that this question of both near-term. and long-term pollution control in all aspects, not just air or just water, but as an integrated system, is an essential part of our systems analysis, and our `systems program. I'm not sure that all of the techniques that are involved in systems programing can be utilized to come up with all of the answers to this very complex problem, but I'm sure that there is much to be learned and much utility in the application to this problem of these techniques, sir. Mr. DADDAIUO. Should we be more careful about making heavy ex- penditures before more work is done in the research field and re- searching the problem more thoroughly perhaps than we have at the moment? Colonel MEYER. I would concentrate, Mr. Chairman, on the clearly identifiable problems which are within our capability to identify and to assess what are the most economic methods of approaching those identifiable problem's. At the same time I would undertake to apply oth an analysis of what is needed in the way of improved technology and begin to estimate how this will fit into what I would consider to e the problem 5 and 10 years from now. Yes, sir. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Waggonner? Mr. WA000NNER. Aren't we getting back to Dr. Weinbergér's testi- ony concerning improved analytical tools? Can't we only do what ou suggest after we have developed with some degree of certainty hese improved analytical tools to measure these tolerances which you ~peak of? Mr. DADDARiO. It seems to me that this point is threading itself lirough these hearings, `Mr. Waggonner. Regarding the estimated xpenditure of $2~ to $30 billion for the separation of stOrm and saul- .ary sewers, it appears that we ought to be expending such funds but hat we ought to be doing in that area what we know is best and nalyze the problem so as to see if we can develop better techni4ues to ccomplish that. And, I expect that's really what you are saying. Colonel MEYER. Yes, sir. PAGENO="0164" 160 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. WAGGONNBR. But, only after we have the available technology. Mr. DADDARIO. The colonel has emphasized, however, that we should not hestita'te to apply available technology in those situations where it may be extremely helpful. Colonel MEreit. That is correct, sir. Mr. WA000NNER. For example, we passed legislation last year in the field of treatment devices for automobile exhausts. Perhaps we were a little early. I had the feeling It was something that needed doing but nobody demonstrated to us during the consideration of that legis~ lation that we had developed the capability at that point to provide effective devises for automobile exhausts. We felt that after a pern~d of time if we placed the burden on them, they would come up with solutions. Mr. DADDARIO. We will have an opportunity to look into and ex- amine the point you have just raised, Mr. Waggonner. Mr. MOSHER. Mr. Chairman? The colonel has just referred to identifiable problems. It is fre- quently alleged by people in my district that the Army Corps of Engineers is one of the worst polluters of Lake Erie. I am referring to the dredging of sludge from harbors and rivers and dumping it Into Lake Erie. I don't want to get into a discussion on it here, but I think it would be important, Mr. Chairman, to ask the Corps of Engineers or the Department of Defense to respond to that allegation. Can we request the Department of Defense to send us their views as to what extent they are polluters and what they might do about it? Mr. DADDARIO. I'm sure we can. I think that infoi~mation is and can be made available. Colonel Mi~'xiin. Mr. Chairman, this subject was brought up at hear- ings that Congressman Jones had last week, in Rochester. Rather than addressing myself to the answer to this question, I'll request that information for the record and the answer to your question, sir, will be furnished immediately. You will get it. (The information requested is as follows:) STATEMENT BY BRIG. G]sN. ROY T. DODGE, USA, Divisiox ENGINEER, 11.5. ARMY ENGINEER DIvIsIoN, NORTH CENTRAL Conrs OF ENGINEERS, CHICAGO, ILL. Mr. Chairman, I nra pleased to represent Lt. Genei~ai William F. Oassid~r, the Chief of `the Army Corps of Engineers, at this hearing on the subject of Water Pollution Control and Abatement. My area of the Corps' geographic respon~ sibility includes the United States' portions of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River System, together with the contiguous drainage areas thereto. Problems of water pollution are not strangers in the Corps', nor in my own North Central Division. Several years ago, iii response to Congressional au~ thorization and provision of construction funds, and based upon an investigation by the St. Paul Engineer District, the action program for low water regulation of the Red River of the North was completed to ameliorate pollution problems. In the 1962 omnibus bill, the Oakley Reservoir on the Sangabon River, Illinois, was authorized by the Congress for Corps' construction, with provision for low flow augmentation for pollution `abatement. Capacity to provide such required flows Is presently being designed into the reservoir. In the recent 1965 omnibus bill, the Ames Reservoir on the `Skunk River, Iowa, was authorized for Corp3 constvuctlon, with prOvision for loW water flow pollution abatethent. A vast ma- jority of current Corps of Engineers investigations, both in North Central Divi- sion and Corps-wide, are being conducted in close cooperation with the FWPCA with a view toward providing adequate water supplies for municipal and In- dustrial usage, together with augmented low water flows to reduce pollution PAGENO="0165" ADEQuACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 161 to an acceptable level after the fullest degree of treatment available to the riparian users of water in accordance with modern engineering standards. In the area of particular interest `to this hearing there are numerous' survey reports or investigations in which the Corps of Engineers has a congressio'nall~ assigned responsibility or interest which deal with more effecti'te water usage. Many of these reports include provision for pollution `control and abatement as a multi-purpose usage `of our water reso'nrces. Included among the Lake Eri~' Lake Ontario basin streams under study are the Ouyahoga, Buffalo', Sailduiskyf and Genesee `Rivers. Coordination or cooperation with other Federal, State, local and private water oriented agencies is either a requirement of `law or an agency established regulation. In accordance with established congressional directives and Corps' policies, the most effective water and related land re- source usage for all purposes is considered in all basin, sub-basin and action plan type of reports. In coordination with FWPCA, pollution eontr'ol `and abate- merit are treated as a prime water purpose in appropriate instances. For ready reference, the major engineering and economic study and investigation program of the Corps in `this area is appended hereto as lnclo'snre 1. Treatment to abate pollution, including estimates of `the costs and enforce- ment `thereof, is primarily the province of `the FWPCA of the Department of the Interior. The role of the Corps of Engineers in thi's field is to cooperate and coordinate to the fullest degree, and to' engineer to the maximum. practicable extent effective measures which are within the realm o'f practicable feasibility in those projects for which `the Corps has primary responsibility. Within the Corps' own establishments, aggressive step's have been taken to equip our floating plant and `shore installations with modern and effective pollution treatment facilities. In regard to the dumping of dredge spoil in the Great Lakes, the point has been made that this practice is no't in consonance with pollution c'o'ntrol objec- tives. The polluted material in the harbors, of course, does not originate with the Corps o'f Engineers. Our work consists of pioving the material from, one point in the lake, I.e. the harbor, to another-deep water. Thfls we believe that this practice does not add to the pollution of the lake waters. However, we enthusiastically support the need for positive and aggressive action to cure the pollution problem and are anxious `to' take any steps whic'h are feasible and practical which will contribute to the solution. With this in mind we have made a study recently on the merits `of placing the material in dike'd disposal areas as an `alternative to dumping in `the lake. This pre- liminary study considered 15 projects on Lake IDrie and the' results indicate that this will be an extremely costly procedure. The first cost o'f providing diked disposal areas with a ten year life wais estimated `to be about $110,000,000, which together with the added dredging costs would amount to' an annual charge of about $l6,0~X~,000 over and above the cost of disposal by present methods. This figure is for selected sites on Lake Erie alone and for the first ten years. Lack of suitable `space after the first ten years could conceivably increase this cost materially later. When all of `the Lake's are eon,~idered we are dealing in `tremendous additional costs. Also this is only a partial solution and has other unsatisfactory. aspects. It will not take care of polluted matter in solution or suspension and the disposal sites will not be very attractive areas on the lake front. The basic question then `is whether this additional expenditure is warranted and whether to spend the money for this purpo~e or `to apply it on eliminating pollution at the source. The economics of providing the diked disposal areas are now under consideration by the Fed'era~I Wa'ter Pollution Control Admin- istration of the Department of `the Interior. Another actio'n we are taking has to do with `the control `and removal `of float- lug debris as opposed to the chemical and bacteriological pollution which one normally thinks of. We are preparing such a study for Cleveland Harbor. Such a `study has been completed for Buffalo Harbor and Niagara River and Is pre~ently before `the Bureau of the Budget for consideration. The Corps of Engineers joins with other Federal, State and local agencies In concern over pollution problems such as in Lake Erie ~nd will continue to seek means to preserve our water resources. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to make this pres'entation to this ~u'beommittee. PAGENO="0166" 162 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Ss~~rvey t1westiga~tioGz8 iiwo~vin.g oon~sixleration of wa~ter ql4aJSty WEST END OF LAKE ERIE AND LAKE ONTARIO Location Cons!dered project Status of study Cattaraugus Creek, N.Y Cayuga, Buffalo, and Cazenovie Creeks, N.Y. Chittenango Creek, N.Y Basin study; however, local flood pro- tection for vi1la~e of Gowanda ap- pears only practical solution. Provision of multiple-purpose reser- voir on Buffalo Creek for flood con- trol and water supply, apd reservoirs on Cayuga and Cazenovia Creeks for flood control are being considered. The study considers channel improve- merits and multiple-purpose reser- voir for flood control and water Complete In fiscal year 1967. Complete in fall of 1966. Complete study in fall of 1966. Tonawanda Creek Basin, N.Y - Genesee River, N.Y supply. Local flood protection project and multiple-purpose reservoirfor recrea- tion and water quality Improvement is being considered. 4 reservoirs-l3elfast, Portageville, An. gelica, and Stannard-are being studied in detail. The considered Complete report in December 1966. Complete in 1967. North Atlantic region compre- bensive study. Northeast water supply study..~ State of New York program (sec. 214 of 1965 omnIbus bill). reservoirs may operate alone or as a system, and considered purpose in- cludes low flow regulation. Considers all water uses, including water quality. Oriented toward water supply, Includ- Ing quality. Considers all water uses where appro- priate. Study underway. Do. Corps participation authorized Mr. MOSHER. I greatly appreciate it. Colonel MEYER. Yes, Sir. Mr. Chairman, we have covered in re- sponse to some of these questions, down to about the middle of page 5 of this prepared statement. If you have no objection, I'll pick up where we start talking about the question of utility of systems analysis, if this is agreeable with you, sir. As I have indicated, we do have considerable expertise in the use of systems analysis and throughout the conceptual, definition, acquisi- tion, operational, and ultimate disposal phase of military system pro- grams, consideration is given to all of the elements of environmental pollution control. The great amount of effort exerted on air pollu- tion problems associated with rocket propellant programs and, in par- ticular, beryllium, is a specific case in point. It is possible that such techniques as we have followed can be applied to the problems of com- munities, and to those of a total industry. Unfortunately, what is often overlooked is that too heavy reliance on computer based tech- nology cannot provide valid results without proper inputs as to the parameters involved. As in the case of goal setting, there is an evident need here for greater interdisciplinary efforts, for improved tech- niques, and for an expansiOn of knowledge. As an outgrowth of our awareness of the complex problems of man- environmental relationships associated with military and space sys- tems development, an appreciation has been developing of their pos- sible application to civilian community problems. Some of the measures we have been developing for the microenvironment of space vehicles, and for the less restricted but nonetheless specialized environ- ments of missile launch control centers and nuclear-powered subma- rines, may have some adaptive potential for the civilian environment. The growing concentration of the American population into the restrictive confines of the major metropolitan areas makes it necessary PAGENO="0167" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 163 that there be a reappra~isal `of many current concepts and practices in regard to the `logistics of waste management. Over the years the traditional body of opinion in the sanitary engi- neering profession has been that individual waste treatment facilities such as septic tanks for homes or small complexes of buildings, were the least desirable method of approach. It well may be that `an alteration in this philosophy is needed if the problem of water quan- tity as well as environmental quality is to be solved. Even without the pollution problem, there is an increasing shortage of water to meet the demands arising from the crowding of approxi- mately 70 percent of the total U.S. population into the 212 standard metropolitan areas. The lessons the Department of Defense and NASA are learning in the waste management and water recovery systems of spacecraft may provide useful techniques and concepts which can be applied to these problems. It may he `possible to develop means and systems for recycle of water within large high-rise buildings. As in all questions relating to envi- ronmental pollution, the cost or risk versus the expected benefits must be carefully assessed, and not solely in relation to the specifics of the pollution attribute. As indicated in our remarks regarding "goal setting," there is `a pressing need for a better approach to' the establishment of the ra- tionale by which both policy and implementation are developed. The Department of Defense interest in this matter is evident, since the objectives and requirements have a profound influence on the pro- gram and actions of the military departments, and upon their budgets. it seems that there is a pressing need for `a reexamination of our con- cept of standards, and how they are derived. We are not only faced with some uncertainties regarding what constitutes adequate environ- mental quality, but also with the need for finding better means of ascertaining just which of several usages of the environment represent its highest and best utility to man. Some of the apporaches taken in developing permissible exposure limits for industrial operations may be useful, provided they include a spectrum of conditions' ranging from the minimum of sensory re- sponse to an emergency exposure. This infers a great deal more in- vestigative effort in the whole area of human environmental stress relationships. It should `be emphasized that the research and development activities undertaken on environmental pollution by elements of the Department of Defense are related to the military requirements. While there may be a fallout of benefit to the general national effort, these investiga- tions are not undertaken solely for the purpose of environmental pol- lution control. Because of the necessity for careful justification of programs and procedures, we have given considerable attention to the problems of scientific establishment of pollution control requirements. We have mentioned the activities undertaken in regard to rocket pro- pellants, to shipboard waste, and specialized munition manufacturing operations. In each of these `there has been a need for investigation of the exist- ing state of knowledge as to potentially `harmful effects to the environ- ment, on known means of `detection `and evaluation, and for possible preventive or control techniques. In each instance there has been a necessity for the most extensive coordination of effort with other Fed- PAGENO="0168" 164 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT eral departments and agencies, and with civilian industry and local authorities. We have learned that in some instances the most rigid requirements of the early phases of a development program can be relaxed, whereas in other cases even more stringent steps must be taken. One of the more serious situations in relation to the Defense Depart- ment's capability to deal with questions of environmental pollution is that relating to manpower. If we are going to be able accurately to define problems and develop effective yet economical solutions thereto, it is absolutely essential that we have available highly capable experts in the various disciplines necessary for a complete program. This matter affects not only the Department of Defense hut to a Targe meas- ure, other Federal agencies, and the national capability as well. Lastly, sir, based on our experiences, there are three areas in which definitive action can be undertaken now, which provide for evolution based on advancing knowledge and changed circumstances. These are: First, a. more systematic effort to marshal our current knowledge. This involves developing a better appreciation of what we know, what we don't know, and to what degree our current concepts have a valid base. Second, undertake the solution of identifiable problems, in a prac- tical and economical sense. This, sir, on the side, infers a better pro- gram definition and facing. Third, discern and define the problems of the future, and initiate those actions necessary to achieve their solution, in phase with the emergence of the problem. Insofar as our responsibilities are concerned, the Department of Defense will continue to give this matter major attention. Sir, I am ready for. any further questions that you or the committee have. Mr. DADDARIO. Colonel, would you go into this manpower problem? What is the nature of it? Is it a different problem in the military? Is it a matter of training more people or is it simply a matter of shift- ing around those who are assigned to other tasks? Colonel MEYER. Sir, it is basically a problem of procurement of new people as well as a problem of retaining the skilled people which we have. We have identified within the Defense Establishment the peo- ple who are with us who have the skills and in the main they are being used in this effort in one way or another. Our principal problem re- lates to the larger issue of training programs in the civilian educa- tional area of the development of the type of educational patterns to fit what is changing from what is a traditional sanitary engineering area of the past and then once having done this to also provide for something which is a problem affectin,g the entire Military Establish- ment of means of attracting and retaining these people in the military service. Now, in my responsibility as Chief of the Biomedical Sciences Corps of the Air F'orce, I have cognizance over all the allied health profes- sions and what I reflect here is what I know to be the case in the other services. Eighty percent of our people have less than 10 years service and yet we have had these types of people in the system for many many years. This reflects a serious problem as far as retaining these people are concerned. It is of interest to your committee also because it has to do with the general problem of' management of such facilities as PAGENO="0169" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTI~N ABA1~EMENT 165 the Naval Aeromedical Research activities, the tTSAF Aerospace Medicine Division and so on. In addition to that problem, of course, is the one that there has to be developed some specialized educational patterns. We have done a great deal of this, I might add, in the military with working with civilian educational institutions to develop tailored pat- terns, but this is a serious problem. The last information that I had in the sanitary engineering area alone and this is not the only area, we are talking about biologists, all sorts of social scientists, there are a lot of social sciences in this, legal people and so on, but in the sanitary engineering area alone the last figures by the Department of Labor showed 4,900 of these people iden- tified in the United States and oniy a hundred in training, and of this 4,900 if the figures I recollect are correct, about 65 percent are age 40 or over. We are developing national programs in the field of environmental pollution in all attributes, and yet we have got to have professionals, specialists ~ho are really capable of analyzing and developing and approaching these problems. Mr. DADDARTO. Mr. Waggonner? Mr. WAGGONNER. Mr. Chairman, it would appear to me that what the Colonel is saying about the manpower situation is that the de~ctel- opment of technology will have to wait until we get the personnel. It seems to be a major consideration here. I think this is extremely important. It is commendable that the DOD recognize that pollution abatement is not a simple matter and that it involves economic, social, and political considerations. I found quite interesting a recommendation that it might be possible to recycle water within large high-rise buildings. If it is possible for large high-rise buildings, wouldn't it also be feas- ible within the confines of a specific military installation for example? Colonel MEYER. This is possible, Mr. Waggonner, and this is one of the areas which as we approach these, getting the basic, immediate problems identified within the Defense Department which we are de- voting a lot of attention to, that certainly research and development actions as recommended by the President's Science Advisory ~1ommit~ tee, including pilot demonstrations very well might be r~ndertaken. It is one we have to gain with no excess cost to the Military Estab- lishment of undertaking this. Mr. WAGGONNER. Several times you referred to beryllium as a rocket propellant. You seemed to place a great deal of emphasis on beryl- lium. Is this a matter of special concern to the Department of De- fense, the Air Force, or the Public Health Service? Have you people had some problems with beryllium? Have you done anything about it yourself? Are you working with the Public Health Service to do anything about it? Colonel MEYER. Mr. Waggonner, the problem of beryllium is one that has attracted a lot of attention in the last several months. Perhaps the thread of interest reflected in this presentation is a reflec- tion of the concern which has been evidenced by some authorities regarding the use of beryllium as a rocket propellant or as an additive in the rocket propellant. That is the first thing we are talking about, additions of small quantities of this material. PAGENO="0170" 166 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT It of course is p~a~t of our national military and space program, the development of improved propellants, and we have some people with me who are quite conversant with the propellant program. As you will recollect, beryllium is :a very dangerous material. There is no question about this. In recognition of the fact that we were pro- posing to test and develop propellants in which this material would be used as an additive, we earlier recognized well over 11 years ago the fact that we didn't know all we ought to know about this subject and have undertaken a rather extensive research program on both the dispersion of the material in the atmosphere following propellant testing, the toxicology of the material, and all of the problems associated with detection and evaluation of the presehce of the. material in the environment. Our comments do reflect a sincere concern of a specialized problem which also might he typical of any industry which is undertaking to manufacture, produce or handle a material which is a potential toxi- cant or has potential environmental pollution characteristics. Now, specifically to answer the question, "Are we working with the U.S. Public Health Service?" We are indeed very closely working with the U.S. Public Health Service on this matter to arrive at an agreed-upon approach to the definition of acceptable environmental quality standards for the presence of a material which is needed for the national defense *but which possesses certain attributes which might make it harmful if present in too large a quantity. This is typical of this risk versus benefit and application of technol- ogy as to what you know now and what you need for the future. Mr. WA000NNER. That leads me to my last question. The chairman of this subcommittee, who is one of the most capable men I have ever known in my life, seized immediately upon your stress of the word "practicable" earlier during your prepared statement. I share some of his concern about your use of the word practicable. I had the feeling that you were trying to relate cost to benefit when you used the word practicable. Specifically what does the Air Force do in pollution abatement as they rel~te cost to benefit? Where do they draw that line of practicality ? Colonel MEYER. I think that I will have to answer this in two parts. In the first instance when we are talking about, and if I could address myse~lf to the question of practicality, there are several attributes of this problem. It would be completely feasible to pass legislation or to establish regulations which said there shall be zero emissions of a cer- tain material into the environment. I mean, this just takes the admin- istrative authorities' willingness to say that this is what is desired. This may be without the availability of means of reducing the dis- charge to zero. Or, again, coming into the cost versus benefit, that the costs would be so great in return for the benefits of not having zero discharge, the little bit of appreciation-and I have a chart here which has been used in one previous hearing which, if `the chairman would permit, I know time is running out, I would be happy to just show it, it shows the cost-versus-benefit problem, if it is permissible, sir. While he's bringing this up, the other aspect of the practical side to this is, can you measure the environment? You know `this business of requirements means that you have got to have some way to analyze the situation if you are going to enforce something, Mr. Chairman, and my eminent friend, Congressman Waggonner, you have got to be able to PAGENO="0171" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 167 find out whether you have zero, and maybe the means available of measuring this material in the environment won't let you get down tQ, determining the absolute absence of the material. Now, I have used this as an extreme example, but it relates to the test; of practicality. First, of course, is do you have the eligineering and. the financial means to achieve the end desire? Second, do you have some way of measuring to determine whether you have gotten there? And, of course, third, which gets into this cost-versus-benefit concept-which this one chart really shows, sir- whether there is, indeed, a cost of damage; and this applies to a lot of~ other things. For the record,the following copy of this chart is furnished. OF POLLUflON DAMAGE EFFECTIVE COST \ \~-..-- \ _ -p COST OF POLLUTI ON CONTROL DEGREE OF CONTROL PAGENO="0172" i68 ADEQUACY OP TECfl~OLOGY FOt~ POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. DADDARI0. I think it is in your statement. `Colonel MEYER. Yes. If this one isn't, we certainly will see that there is one. But, when there is a cost of damage, it may be dollar cost to the com- munity. It may be loss of efficiency of people. It may be loss of marketability of crops. There are a whole lot of things in this en- vironmental pollution thing just besides air and water. At some point you can find that the cost of controls as you apply controls, that you are reducing the cost of the damage. And, as long as the cost of the control is less than the cost of enduring it-and I'm not just talking about a dollar cost-then you hav~ an effective cost which is reasonable, but you may go beyond a point that you simply cannot, by applying incremental controls to, say, zero, fail to have an excess of expenditures over that which would have existed for damage alone. It may come back to the point that you are spending just as much as if you were willing to endure this damage. Now, Mr. Chairman and Congressman Waggonner, what I am not saying here is that we advocate pollution. Somebody could infer that from this. But, we are saying that you have to determine these ques- tions in arriving at what you are going to do. Mr. WAGGONNER. W:hat you are saying, in effect, is that we can re- duce air pollution from some industrial plant which destroys the paint on the homes in the neighborhood if the cost of reducing the air pollu- tion does not exceed the cost of repainting those homes at regular iii- tervals. This would be a co~t-benefit ratio that would be acceptable and practical. Colonel MEYER. Provided there are not also demonstrable hazards on health. This is a complex problem. You have got to take into account the fact that the loss of human efficiency resulting from the presence of these environmental pollutants also has to be taken into account. And, the cost- Mr. WA000NNER. That's all, Mr. Ohairman. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Waggonner raises a very good point, however. If you don't have an opportunity to test our new facilities to develop new criteria, you are going to be using old techniques, and you will never change that graph in any radical way. Colonel MEYER. That is correct, sir. Mr. DADDAEIO. And that's what you are pointing to, Mr. Waggonner. Mr. WA000NNER. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. I have a brief request. I would like to have submitted for the record, a breakdown `of `the amount of money spent a.nd num- ber of persons engaged in pollution control in the Department of Defense. Colonel MEYER. Very well, `we will get that to you. (The information requested is as follows:) STATEMENT ON DOD PoLLUTIoN ABATEMENT PERSONNEL AND ESTIMATED CosT OF ABATEMENT OPE1~APIONS It is diMeult to provide ~leta}l'ed information on the total personnel involved in ~ollu'ti'on abatement in the Military Departments. Similar problems exist with regard to the total annual expenditure funds for pollution abatement operations. Due to the nature `of the military organizational structure, `considerable numbers PAGENO="0173" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 169 ~f personnel are directly involved In environmental pollution detection and abate- ment activity for part `of the time incident `to their other military fnnctk~ns and duties. As an example, although there are numberS of Medich'l Service and Civil Engineering specialists working full time in environmental pollution work, many environmental engineering personnel (such as sanitary engineers and industrial hygienists of `the U.S. Army, industrial hygienists and sanitarians of the U.S. Navy, and bioenvironmen'tal engineers, U~SA'F) `are broadly trained and `because of `the scarcity `of such personnel, work on all aspects of the environmental health pro'blem not just restricting their work to environmental pollution abatement. The nature of their combined ~ngineeri'ng and health educations fit them for this type of activi'ty `and to accept the respon'slbiiity `of `supervising and managing technicians. Similarly in the civil engineering functions, while there are some personnel exclusively concerned with design, operation, and maintenance `of pol- lution abatement works, a considerable numler are involved in broader responsi- bilities. With increasing emphasis on air, water, and `solid wastes disposal prob- lems, a greater degree of full `time specialized effort and activity will be necessary. All `of the military `departments have currently pending program `change proposals for the first incremental increase's to meet these new responsibilities. Inf'orma- ti'on on the current full time equivalence of DOD environmental pollution contrGl personnel are `shown in Table I. TABLE I.-Averef/e maa-yeers-DOD env~tronme%tel pollution Control1 U.S. Army U.S. Navy U.S. Air Force Total military departmgnts Medical service: Professional - . Technicians Civil engineering 23 100 27 30 20 12 82 100 10 135 220 49 Total 150 62 199 404 I Does not include plant operators, or miscellaneous support personnel, whose salary costs are included In table II. The majority of the professional personnel of the three military Medical Serv- ices are commissioned officers, whereas the majority of the professional personnel for the Civil Engineering functions are civil servants. This reflects the tradi- tional requirement of the military medical departments for personnel who are competent in the field of environmental health and who can be utilized world wide in a military situation. The relatively larger number of such individuals cur- rently utilized by the U.S. Air Force reflects environmental pollution and control programs associated with the development and deployment of strategic missiles in the operation of the three regional environmental heal'th laboratories. In the case of cos't of pollution abatement, fairly precise information is avail- able regarding waste water disposal operations, on the general cost of environ- mental surveillance and as to construction which has been approved for waste water works. With regard to costs associated with systems development, toxicology, and some of the research and development programs, information is available although some of these costs are not directly identified with environ- mental pollution. In the case of air pollution, control procedures associated with industrial operation and for power plants, no specific identification has generally been made as to the cos't since these items are included as part of an overall building or facility design. Greater attention will be paid to these items as a result of the recent Executive Order on air pollution and the proposed implement- ing instructions regarding identification of problems and development of cost estimates for correction. Similar estimates will be developed with regard to cost of disposal of solid wastes which at the present time, due to the variation in disposal procedures and in Internal identification of costs therefore this subject is not included. A summary of typical expenditures for the most recent fiscal year is provided in Table II. The cost reflected therein should be expected to increase in view of the previously discussed need for additional personnel and as a reflection of the five "Phased and Orderly Plans" for histallation of waste' water treatment facilities now being studied by the Bure'au of the Budget and as a result of the plan for air pollution which will be submitted in 1067. The PAGENO="0174" 170 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT current level of expenditure of approximately 31 million dollars will probably increase by as much as 30 `to 40% in the next several years and possibly could exceed that figure. TABLE 11.-Estimated costs (million dollars) DOD environmental pollntion control, typical fiscal year U.S. Army U.S. Navy U.S. Air Force Total military departments Medical service laboratories and surveillance Civil engineer professors salaries Operation audmaintenance of works (incluçling operator salaries) Purchase of sewer services .Estimated fiscal year military construction project Total Research, development and test Total 1. 2 .33 5.25 .5 1.5 0 1 . 13 5.7 . 7 1.1 0.55 . 13 5.8 5 3.2 1.70 .59 16.75 1.7 5.7 8.75 7.63 10.25 26.4 4.5 30.9 I Exclusive of industrial process ventilation and similar operations. Mr. DADDARI0. Thank you very much, Colonel. We certaiiily appre- ~ciate it. Our third witness for today was to be Mr. Bertram C. Raynes~ vice president for applied research,, Rand Development Corp. He has driven in from Cleveland. We have requested that he ap- rear before us tomorrow since we only have one witness scheduled. Me has consented to stay and we certainly appreciate it. We will adjourn these meetings at this time until 10 o clock tomorrow morn- ing when we will hear from Mr. Raynes. BIOGRAPHICAL STATEMENT OF COL ALVIN F. MEYER, JR. Colonel Meyer is Chief of the Biomedical Sciences Corps, USA~, and Chair- man of the Department of Defense Environmental Pollution Control Committee. He was born in Shreveport, Louisiana, in 1920, received his engineering degree from the Virginia Military Institute, Lexington, Virginia, in 1941, and is a grad. nate of the resident course of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, June 1962. Colonel Meyer has received advanced education and training In bio~. environmental engineering. He has held increasingly respoa~sible positions In the USAF Medical Service, including duty as Chief Engineer in the Office of the Surgeons, Air Materiel Oommand and Strategic Air Command. He is a diplo~. mate of the American Board of Environmental Engineers, American Board of Industrial Hygiene, and is an associate fellow of the Aerospace Medical Associa- tion. He has served on numerous national professional society and Federal committees. Colonel Meyer is the author of a large number of publications in the field of environmental pollution. PREPARED STATEMENT DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PRESENTATION VIEWS ON THE ADEQUACY OF PECHNOLO~Y FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT DF.PAETMENT OF DuruNsu INTEREsT The Department of Defense and its subordinate activities are charged with responsibIlities to provide for environmental pollution abatement and to demon- strate leadership. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act and the Clean PAGENO="0175" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 171 Air Act, and Executive Orders, provide for a wide degree of involvement of the Department of Defense in mi~1imizing the effects of its operations that may pro~ duce pollution of the environment. The concern of the military departments and activities for pollution control, however, is not a new development. As has been pointed out by Departmental representatives in appearances before such committees of the Congress as the Senate Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution and the House Oom~ mittee on Interstate and Foreign Oommerce, there is' a long history of military leadership in the fields of environmental sanitation and military preventive medicine. As this Committee is well aware, military leaders have had to take into account the effects of disease on their combat capability. It does seem appropriate to point out that as there developed an increasing awareness of the relationship between environment and disease in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, military medical and engineering departments were in the forefront of application to practical problems. During and since World War IT the increasingly complex technology involved in military systems has resulted In a vastly expanded activity in relation to both protection of our own personnel and the avoidance of harm tot neighboring civilian communities. There are a number of serious problems affecting the Department of Defense arising from the need for continuing these activities, accelerating their pace to provide for Federal leadership, and at the same time ensure that our~ budgetary programs remain within manageable limits. All of the issues raised ~or the consideration of the Congress in the excellent report of the Research Manage- ment Advisory Panel are germane to the overriding consideration of the develop~ ment of improved national planning for long term solutions to the environ- mental quality problem. This is no easy task. It involves a ,definite need for the establishment of better communications and more formalized areas in the Federal establishment for the coordination of energy and effort~ In Section II of "The Adequacy of Technology for Pollution Abatement" there are com- ments regarding the comprehensive and complex nature of environmental pollu- tion. The interrelationship of the problem of domestic food waste to air pollution, soil pollution and water pollution is one which the Department of Defense well recognizes. The existence of this interrelationship highlights the importance of a coordinated planning effort. It is essential that the various separate interests somehow be brought to bear upon fundamental problems. In this manner we should achieve the result of better technical and economical programs. The following comments relate to some of the issues raised in the Report of the Research Management Advisory Panel, "The Adequacy of Technology for Pollution Abatement." These items are not necessarily discussed under the same heading as included in the Report, and have instead been included in a joint discussion with other subjects where this has been more appropriate to Department of Defense activities. GOAL SETTING AND RESEARCH STRATEGY Probably the most important problem insofar as the Department of Defense is concerned is the need for better understanding of just what we are trying to accomplish in relation to environmental pollution abatement. There are a wide variety of different requirements and interests which influence local, State, and Federal program definitions. It is not our desire to undertake an extensive discussion of the problems of definition of environmental pollution. Our ex- periences indicate that there is a growing need for greater attention to the questions of environmental quality requirements. The definition of environ- mental pollution established by the President's Science Advisory Committee is a useful statement of a general problem. Standing alone, however, this does not constitute a national goal. It defines the problem. Perhaps more realisti- cally, it states what the problem is about. From the practical viewpoint of those concerned with both near and long term program planning, it is evident that there will be greater attention given to better definition of environmental quality and a greater recognition as to just what level of environmental status is appro- priate for the various situations and conditions affecting the problem. The task of goal setting involves the issue of human health effects as being the measure of environmental quality. While there may be many differing interests which must be taken into account, the response of humans still must be the principal measure in ecological management. The situation is not really PAGENO="0176" 172 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT different from that which has concerned public health officials over the years. When deci~ions must be made as to allocation of funds and resources including the personnel element, some rank ordering of the projects a~cl programs must be made. Environmental Pollution abatement ought not to be considered as an end unto itself. There `are `other elements of ecology which are related to the larger needs for rOsource utilization. In the long range view, the degree of environmental quality established as `an objective `depends `upon the understanding `and desires of `the general `public. In `the case of tho'se situations where there is an obvious cause and effect relationship upon health, or `some desirable attribute o'f the environment, these desires may `be readily translated into either regulation or statute, or be achieved through voluntary action. In o'ther instances, this may be far more difficult. In `some situations, `because of a lack of full understand- ing, ~`the objectives and the rules by Which they are applied may be of such a nature a's to be economically unreasonable. `Those who are truly knowledgeable about ecology and the specialized considerations `therein have an increasing responsibility to ensure that there is an interchange `of information and knowl- edge with their colleagues in the various disciplines and `to the public. Doctor Barry Oommonner"s remarks several years ago on `another but related subject are pertinent `to `this: "What appears to trouble the public `is n'ot that political opponents disagree, but that `the opinion's of scientists have `been `marshalled on both sides of the debate. A natural `result has been confusion on the p'art of scientists, states- men, writers `and the public at large. Scientist's a's students and interpreter's of nature can explain to the public what consequences may result from a given si'tuat:ion. `They should not attempt t'o form public opinion on wisdom of endur- ing whatever these consequences areS'. .` .. Moral judgment is not the exclusive perogra'tive `of scientists, and `they cannot `claim any more competence than those of equally informed citizens on such values." The Department of Defense is aware ef `the need for making available lnform'a- tio'n derived as part of `its investigative effort's. Although sometimes' the require- ment's of military security necessitate prudence and care, action is taken to provide for an interchange of professional data with civilian colleagues; and through our information program. INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH Enforcement procedures More specific comment's on the question of enforcement legislation and regula- tions are contained in `the remarks under "The Scientific Basi's for Pollution Policy." Considerable attention is being given, in accordance with Executive Orders, to the question `as to what extent `the current requirement's `affecting the Federal establishments for pollution abatement can `be levied upon industrial contractors. It has been our experience `that m'any defense industries are a's concerned about the problems of pollution abatement arising fro'm specialized industrial activities as `are the military departments. It i's worthwhile to point ou't tha't in a number of instances such as in the propellant manufacturing pro- gram, contract provision's have included the necessity for compliance with ap- propriate environmental pollution abatement procedures an'd for the development of appropriate technology where there were known gaps in the sta'te of knowledge. Any regulatorY program is neces'snrily dependent upon some means of measure of compliance, and this in turn depends upon techniques for surveillance. Con- current with development of industrial processes, and waste control equipment's, there should~ be effort `t'o provide the necessary detection `and warning devices. Standardization of collection and analytical techniques ha's been found to be necessary, `if major differences between individual `agencies an'd industries are not to result. In the case of `the assessment çf ozone production associated with certain military test operations in the Los Angeles' area, a major effort was undertaken to ensure that the methodology used by the defense contractor involved was compatible with the regulations of the Air Pollution Control au- thority, and with the `technology utilized by that Department in their own mea surenients. Industry and public relations problems The DepaiHrnlent of Defense has had some degree of experie'nce in working with its contractor's in certain aspects o'f environmental pollution problems. In particular, we have had' some experiences in the West Coast area on the problems PAGENO="0177" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 173 of air pollution and missile and rocket propellant testing. It is true that in the initial phases there has been some reluctance on the part of certain industries to enter into negotiations with local or State pollution abatement atuborities to ensure that the programs developed under Department of Defense require- ments wore acceptable to the local or State authority. By patient, careful and conscientious efforts to ensure a better understanding of these requirements on, both sides, in the main, suitable and amicable arrangements have been effected. This requires determined efforts and intelligent leadership on the part of all concerned. It should be remembered that many times the industry knows more about the problem than those in the legislative and enforcement authority. This is particularly true when dealing with new processes or chemicals such as is often the case with Defeflse associated industry. Because of Departmeut of Defense policies and requirements that environmental pollution control proce- dures be incorporated into these developmental and producticn programs, it becomes incumbent upon us to ensure that consistent with the requirements of security, appropriate information is translated to the responsible abatement authorities. Our experiences in dealing with such material as unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine, nitrogen tetroxide and fluorine indicate that such coopera- tive actions can be taken. The recycle concept versus consumption pattern In a number of military situations, attention has had to be given to the questions of how to provide for what is in effect a closed ecological system. Members of this committee are obviously aware of the need for the recycle in recovery of essential elements from waste associated with the space program. Limitations on power, weight and cubage, as well as the unique characteristics of the space environment make it necessary to provide for water recovery from human wastes for human use and for long term space operations. Oonsideration of the interrelationship in the waste cycle for regeneration of oxygen and for production of food, in the completely closed ecological system, is not so much waste abatement as resource management. In the semi-closed ecological environment and ecological system associated with certain other military systems, such as the nuclear powered submarine and underground missile launch control centers and underground command posts winch may have to become for periods of time closed systems', similar if riot quite as extreme considerations and provisions must be made. While there may not be a direct translation from these unique environmental situations to those of urban communities, it does appear that there are some lessons which can be learned and that there are possibilities within tOday's technology and engineering capabilities which deserve further investigation. One of these to which some initial thought has been given relates to the possibility of water conservation and reuse associated with high-rise office buildings and living accommodations. While no formal proposals within the military establishment for such projects have yet been developed, some tentative evaluations In `this area are being considered. In areas of water shortage, such as in the East Coast multi-metro- politan areas, the problem is not only one of waste abatement and pollution control but also of water quantity. If suitable waste treatment methods can be devised and the necessary sociological accommodation to the utilization of recycled waters can be achieved, the twofold problem of relief of water demand and avoidance of pollution of the receiving streams might well be achieved. In this connection the cost and benefit factors must be carefully assessed. It may be difficult, if not impossible within existing structures to make the neces- sary alterations and operational costs of equipment may be of such an order that specialized tax or other benefits may have to be provided to encourage adop- tion of such measures. In the field of solid wastes, to a large extent the military departments now do indeed practice a recycle type of activity. The economic value of material no longer useful for the purpose intended has been recognized. Virtually every military installation has a classification, salvage and reclamation yard. Mate- rials which are recognized as having a utility in the civilian economy are offered for sale. Those which have a potential further military utility as a repair, maintenance or small commodity item are reclaimed and processed and only those which can neither be utilized in this manner nor sold for scrap ulti- mately are disposed of. The volume of the latter, of course, in the Departmei~t of Defense is not insignificant. Without this effort, the solid waste disposal p~ob- lems would be almost insurmountable. 68-240--66-vol. 1~-l2 PAGENO="0178" 174 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT The sanitary land fill system which has long been a part of military as well as municipal waste disposal methods is in itself a reclamation activity in that the fundamental philosophy is 01' using wastes to fill what would be normally un- usable land. Unfortunately, both misuse of the system by failing to operate it properly or to combine it with the so called burn and cover method, and the lack of available suitable land sites in the vicinity of metropolitan and large military complexes has tended to bring this system into disfavor. In a consumption economy it may be easier to dispose of waste materials even though having some utility or reuse value, rather than to experience the costs of collection, transportation, assembly and processing. In some instances, military departments have found it difficult to dispose of certain waste materials in spite of our classification, reclamation and salvage operations. Materials having relatively immediate usefulness may not find a ready market. An ex- ample is the case of waste red fuming nitric acid, utilized in the early stages of the missile propellant program. This material might be of use in fertilizer manufacturing, in metal processing, and In a number of other industrial opera- tions. Unfortunittely, the cost of removal of such hazardous materials and the additional precautions necessary in it~ transportation and handling are such that not only could the material not be sold, but it could not be given away. As a result, procedures for disposal in a safe and satisfactory manner bad to be developed. It is anticipated that similar problems may result during the phase- out of missile systems utilizing the storable propellants such as unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine. There have been some notable achievements in the development of reusable packages and containers for military material and equipment. The so-called Oonex packages for shipment of large items have already found an adaptation to civilian use as containerized packages which are placed on trucks, railroad cars, ships and aircraft. These reusable packages have) produced reduction in formerly generated packing and crating waste material. The improved handling methods have also resulted in better efficiency of operation. The problems of solid waste in the military establishment are of major concern and will be given increasing attention. As has been observed by some, increasing demand for petro chemicals makes petroleum of increasing importance as a raw material rather than as a source of energy. The possible use of the thermal potential in solid waste han been under investigation by some authorities. The interest in the Department of Defense in this is some- what incidental (since we feel that the primary responsibility rests in the civilian sector). These are obvious implications as to conservation of propul- sion fuels and the Interrelationship of the industrial economy with the mobiliza- tion base. The President's Science Advisory Oommittee recommended that the military departments give consideration to possible pilot studies in this area. It is contemplated that this matter will be given increasing attention as we achieve success in our current high priority endeavors to comply with various directives and legislation relating to development of programs and plans for water pollution and air pollution. Determination of costs of di$posal in initial planning There is some discussion later in this report regarding the systems analysis and systems engineering techniques which have been used to provide for environ- mental pollution controls in military system development. This approach has resulted in an early determination of pollution control requirements and an assessment of research needed to develop new procedures where existing state- of-the-art technology was not adequate. In the case of the Titan II system, it became evident quite early that there was a need for investigation as to the proper means of disposal of waste unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine. Con- current with the propellant testing program, studies were conducted by the 15.5. Air Force regional environmental health laboratory at Kelly AFB, Texas to determine based on the then available information what possible means of handling this problem were available, and what practical designs could be evolved. After the classic bench top and pilot plant investigation, a number of alternatives were proposed and a suitable design selected. Because the military departments do operate within strict budgetary and personnel allocations, most careful attention is being given end has been given to ensure that control measures or proposals for modification or Improvement of the environment are consistent with the requirementsi of economy and neces- sity. The approaches which are taken on this are In general the same in the PAGENO="0179" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 175 three departments with some variation. If these procedures are followed, it ought to be possible to ascertain at an early point in any community or environ- mental or industrial activity the anticipated requirements for maintenance of environmental control through pollution abatement. These involve tile fol- lowing: a. The most economical approach is the early involvement of the pollution abatement specialists in the planning and conceptual phases. b. There should be evaluation `of the process, operation, or situation with a view to substituting in the case of industrial operations less dangerous materials,, or the use of waste materials in a recycle basis as `a raw material or part of the process. c. The design of process controls to minimize the production of wastes; A classic example in this regard is the control of tricbloride ethylene vapors through proper use of a degreaser and the reduction of pullout of plating solutions by proper movement of the plated objects out of the plating tank. d. The design of the appropriate waste control or environmental pollution prevention devices. In arriving at ultimate recommendations, it is obviously necessary that there be thorough information on all aspects of the problem, that all possible means of achieving the desired result must be undertaken and the most suitable se- lected. Then `there must be examination and check of the efficacy of the final product. The military departments and agencies operate a large industrial com- plex. The effort to control pollution `at the source through application of the foregoing procedures results in a lessened cost insofar as abatement works and techniques are concerned. There are no clearly defined means of discerning which requires the most attention. Rather, the cost versus benefit approach must be taken here as in the case of the entire pollution abatement question. FEDERAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM $hort-term solutions vs. long-range remedies Department `of Defense Environmental Pollution Control Programs have been planned with a view toward long-range requirements. Those research, devel- opment, test and evaluation activities conducted under the auspices of the mili- tary departments have ranged, however, from consideration o'f problems having an immediate implication and demanding an urgent~ solution, to those providing information useful in the approach to the problems extending over a period of years. Several examples should be cited to provide better appreciation of this spectrum of interest and action. The case of investigations on air pollution from diesel motors `on tanks and their effect on both crews and nearby personnel, discussed in the testimony be- fore the Senate Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution in 1964, is typical of those projects undertaken to deal with a more urge'nt situation. As is the case with many other investigations of this sort, there is developed infor- mation which may be useful in attacking the long-range problems. Another typical case of an investigation conducted on a specific near-term situation is the extensive studies conducted for the Department of the Air Force on the problems associated with a suitable treatment method for plating pl'ant wastes at Patrick Air Force Base, Cape Kennedy, Florida. Here again, although directed toward a single problem, the information obtained has been useful in developing design criteria and guidance for similar projects~ The nature `of military development programs generally involves the develop- inent of hardware end items. While some research is conducted to ascertain principles, the majority of our efforts in relation to environmental pollution have an ultimate end product as a goal. Studies condu'cted under the `auspices of the Army Medical Research and Development Command on such subjects as water disinfection have as their objectives the determination of critical param- eters which may be utilized for definitive engineering design criteria. Another evidence of our `appreciation of the need for long-range considerations are the programs concerned with closed ecological systems. The Air Force and the Navy have have engaged in extensive research as previously indicated in this testimony, on this subject. The Navy's studies with regard to the nuclear submarine program contribute much in the way of knowledge as to permissible concentrations of `atmospheric contaminants. These, along with investigations conducted by the Air Force on space cabin problems, provide useful points in PAGENO="0180" 176 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT the broad spectrum of information necessary for the development of enviroumen.- tal quality criteria. The research and development programs of the Department of Defense which. ~iave environmental pollution implications are developed in accordance with our systems analyses and our recognition of problems having particular im- portance to military capability and military installation operation. A consciQus effort is being made to extract such information as it may be of use in the larger zLational problems. Increased attention, as recommended in the President's Sd- once Advisory Council's Report "Restoring the Quality of our Environment," will J~e given to the possibility of undertaking those pollution abatement investiga~ tions which can properly be conducted under Defense auspices. It is recognized. that as indicated in the President's Science Advisory Oouncil's Report, military bases do contain a mix of waste disposal problems characteristic of large popula- tion centers, and that they do afford an opportunity for examination of possible in- novations under controlled conditions. Any such projects, however, obviously must be conducted in such a manner as not significantly to increase the cost of~ the military establishment nor to produce substantial interference with baseS missions and activities. Prospects for application of ~n'iZitary space research and deDelopment technology~ In this report there have already been some comments regarding possible ap- plication of work done in military and space research and development programs. An extensive evaluation has been accomplished of human adaptation and accom- modation requirements. The more important potentials for application of the concepts utilized in these programs are those relating to systems analysis and systems engineering. The military departments have developed considerable~ experience In this regard. Departmental policies as outlined in the referenced. DOD Directive 5100.50 make it necessary that at the earliest point in system. development, cognizance be given to the potential problems of environmental pollution and there shall be necessary provisions therefore in the entire program. In effect, the systems analysis effort results in the treating of the environmental pollution problem as a subelement of the overall system. It will be recolleeted~ that systems program development Involves three general time phases. These are: the conceptual, the acquisition, and the operational. A summary of the considerations which must be examined in addressing the problems of the man- environment relationship is furnished in Table I. TABLE 1.-STEPS iN ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION SYSTEMS DEVnLOPMENT 1. Determination of potential hazards associated with research, development,. and pilot plant operations, and establishment of precautions for employees and. neighbors. 2. Participation in operatiion~l site selection surveys, so as to take into account health requirements of system personnel; and also possible dangers to adjacent civilian communities. 3. Establisbment of criteria for health protection and health promotion ot system operators and maintaliners, and advice on design of facilities, equipment, and procedures to meet the criteria. 4. Analyze and recommend regarding potential community environmental (air, water, land, livestock, etc.) contamination. 5. Provide for environmental health and medical aspects of accident or dis- aster situations~ 6. Prepare necessary biomedical and health education documents and pub- lications. 7. Participate in systems test programs, to assure adequacy of criteria and health considerations to meet same. 8. Continually maintain require.d environmental medical surveillance after the system has become operational. We are concerned with both the system-worker Interface and the system-com- munity interface. This technique provides a means whereby at the outset of~ planning, the need for further research can be established and an approximation of the anticipated costs of pollution abatement and attendant environniental surveillance can be developed. These procedures involve a highly integrated and multi-discipline effort. We are aware of the fact that some industrial organizations follow similar procedures in their new plant developments. The approach to inclusion of environmental pollution considerations in an actual systems development program can be cited as an example of the use PAGENO="0181" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEM~iNT 177 of this technique. In the hearings of the Senate Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution on missile and rocket propellants a number of details relating to the Titan II system were described. The following overview of the actual measures undertaken as part of this system engineering effort will be more useful when the schematic illustrations in Figures 1 and 2 are reviewed. During the conceptual phases of this system, authorities concerned with the operational program, in accordance with departmental regulations, presented information to the military medical services regarding the fuels proposed with a request that information be provided regarding possible effects on operator personnel and also any other harmful characteristics which should be considered. A review was made of the available toxicological and environmental health data in the light of the proposed deployment of the system. An analysis was made of the problems of production, installation and checkout and attendant main- tenance problems. Based upon these tentative evaluations there were incor- porated into the "system development plan" requirements for research on toxicology, on environmental detection devices, on environmental controls, and on occupational and environmental medical needs. Since the initial information indicated that there was a substantial body of knowledge regarding one of the propellants, nitrogen tetroxide, but relatively less regarding the other, unsymmetrical dimethyl bydrazine, preliminary pre- cautionary plans were developed. These pertained to work conducted in the contractor's facilities and those on defense bases. Interim technical orders and precautionary instructions were issued. The hazards research, including that relating to both air and water pollution, was implemented. Based on initial results, some modification of the initial precautionary procedures was possible. Since the possibility of catastrophic accident at an operational facility had to be taken into account and a need for providing for potenttal pollution control, these elements were included in the site surveys to determine where the facilities should be located. Assumptions had to be made as to the degree of effectiveness which could be provided in the pollution control system. It should `be noted that ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH & BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING TYPICAL SYSTEMS PROGRAM CONSIDERATIONS lecepten - Research, Oerelopmenl, Producton, nstaflaton -Operate & Ma~nto~e _.__~I_DisposaI-'~ FIGURE 1. Environmental health and biomedical engineering; typical systems program considerations. In systems programs there are generally three time phases (1) conceptual, (2) acquisition, and (3) operational. The effect of potential hazards must be considered as the summation of effects of the researcher, the builder, the production worker, and the user. Concurrently, consideration must be given to effect on the health of the community adjacent to the plant or site, or through which materials and components must be trans- ported. CONC~~'~~'L ACOU~$ITIO~'~ OPERATIONAL PAGENO="0182" 178 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT SYSTLM-COMMUNITY INTCR~ACC Surv.y~~~~ *Olia,t.r R.~dtneu SYSTEM-WORKER INTERFACE L CONCEPTUAL. I ACQUISITION OPERATIONAL Inception ~- -Rei,orch, Dnvelopment, Production, instnIInI--.. ---OWroto &M&nioIn *-..~ *DIcpocoI.~o4 F1osTRi~ 2. Typical considerations in systems analysis. In the analysis of the inpiant- worker, and the plant-community interfaces environmental health considerations must take into account the state of knowledge as to potential hazards, as soon as possible. Based on these evaluations requirements are developed for research to be accomplished along with development of the system. Tentative health precautions and plans based on present knowl~ edge are prepared. As results of research become available, health protection measures are finalized. Vigorous public information and worker health education measures are taken to reduce unwarranted apprehension. Once the system becomes operational, surveillance meas- urea become routine, and protective measures are modified as experience dictates. When the system becomes obsolete, disposal of hazardous components must be in a safe manner. at this point research was continuing on the development of environmental sensors and also on environmental pollution characteristics of the propeilants~ During this phase, extensive ecological investigations were undertaken at the two principal military test sites. These involved the conduct of studies and investigations including laboratory analyses to determine the existing state of the environment in order that a base line could be available against which to measure the effect of any accident or any slow buildup of contaminants. Less comprehensive studies were also initiated with regard to each of the operational sites. Since it was realized that the hazardou~ materials involved would have to be moved from the point of manufacture to test locations; would be involved in systems checkout at manufacturers' plants; and would have to be transported from the point of manufacture to operational locations (and ultimately from those operational locations to some point of disposition when the system became obsolete); a detailed systems transportation study was undertaken and appro- priate precautionary procedures to provide for the event of a transportation accident. As the facilities were built and the operational components of the systems produced as part of the program of installation and checkout there wan included evaluation and testing of the environmental surveillance devices and of the efficiency of the air and water pollution control measures. As operational readiness was achieved all of these elements relating to protec- tion of the environment were implemented. A necessary adjunct of the routine operations is the maintenance of environmental surveillance as well as a con- stant state of readiness to meet a possible accident or disaster. Throughout all of this effort there has been a conscious attention to the question of public rela- tions and public information. It is noteworthy that the plan for coping with accidents in the case of this system has been tested in an actual disaster situa- tion and found to be adequate, requiring only minor modification. In advance of PAGENO="0183" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 179 the time in which this system becomes obsolete, appropriate action is being taken to examine the question of disposal of large volumes of materials which have a major environmental pollution capability. Some appreciation of the time involved and the magnitude of effort can be obtained from the fact that the initial efforts described above occurred approxi- mately 70 months in advance of the operational capability. Directly concerned with the environmental pollution program were well over 100 military and civilian personnel of the Department of Defense. In this effort there were both detailed considerations of direct pollution problems and general studies in relation to other elements of the system including interior ventilation of facilities, the design of "hardware" and the general area of the operational sites. The systems methodology is really not unique insofar as hazard evaluation is concerned. Most professional specialists in the fields of industrial hygiene and public health are familiar with the procedural technique of acquiring information regarding the environmental situation, the numbers of personnel who may be affected, the predicted physiological and psychological effect, and the technique of developing controls or alternative procedures, followed by the establishment of something which is often overlooked; namely, the chocking and testing of effectiveness. It is not necessarily so that they can be literally applied to the general prob- lems of community environmental pollution. However, in conjunction with similar techniques, the complex socio-economic, legal and political considerations as well as those of purely technical importance, can be brought together. While we have evolved probably a more sophisticated approach to the problem of specific military systems, modifications certainly can be developed for both industry and community problems. * THE SCIENTIFIc BASIS FOR PoLLUTIoN PoLICY Science and regulatory requirements The most complex central problem with regard to pollution abatement is the~ translation of scientific knowledge into the program definition and the accom- panying legislative and administrative requirements. It is quite apparent that this is a complex sociological, economic and political problem as well as one in. the technical and scientific domain. Ecologically speaking, the environment is defined as the sum of the external conditions and influences affecting life and development of organisms. The human environment consists of biological, physical, and cultural influences. These are available techniques for determining the effects of physical, chemical and biological agents on isolated systems. The study of biological effects of environmental pollutants is susceptible to analysis In the fields of biology and engineering. On the other hand, there isi a lack of both factual information and concepts to approach the total problem of environ- mental stress relationships. Witness the controversy with regard to the facts. and opinions expressed in such books as Carson's "Silent Spring" and the wide variation of opinions relating to certain chemical and physical stress agents. As. pointed out in a recent issue of BioSciences, widely varying opinions regarding the environmental pollution problem have been expressed by responsible scientists. as follows: Example One: "The number of deaths caused every year by pesticides Is in- significant; smaller than the number caused by aspirin. Vital statistics do not reveal any increase in mortality that could be traced to the oxidant type of smog." Example Two: "Grave delayed pathological manifestations can result from. repeated exposure to concentrations of environmental pollutants so small that they do not cause obvious manifestation . . . The most serious effects of air pollutants may be those which are not detected at first and involve multi- response of the organisms." In this current period of great emphasis on the problems of environmental pollution, there is a tendency to overlook the fact that the human species, as all other biological organisms, possesses a remarkable degree of adaptability. Mankind in particular haS been able to. achieve adjust- ment to the widest variety of environmental and psychological stress situations. As shown in Figure 3, because of this adaptability in the majority of instances. there is no fine line between truly safe and absolutely harmful situations. In order to arrive at a truly scientific basis for environmental pollution abatement, or, more precisely, for the establishment of a more positive approach of mainte- nance of environmental quality, there must be a blending together of all of the elements involved. PAGENO="0184" 180 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT OL~J rCa. TIME FIGuRE 3 Legal and administrative requirements are an integral part of long-range as well as short-term plans for environmental pollution abatement. It is self- evident that legal methodology must proceed forward hand in hand with the scientific. The Department of Defense Is required to comply with a variety of legal and adminl~trative procedures. Our concern is that in this broad area, subject as it is to a variety of influences, there should be developed improved un- derstanding of the true complexity of the problem. Regardless of the approach taken in arriving at the legislative and administrative requirements, there are certain fundamentals which appear to be absolutely essential. These include: a. The necessity for determining whether or not the emphasis is to be upon performance standards or specific approval of equipment and practices. b. The need for flexibility to provide for the future. c. The recognition of the "test of practicality". This applies both to the feasi- bility of achieving what the law requires, and to the means of determination as to their achievement. There is a major difficulty affecting the establishment of programs for environ- mental pollution abatement arising from the problems which have been cited herein as to establishment of a true measure of the environmental quality de~ sired. Anyone who is familiar with the many difficulties inherent in the estab- lishment of allowable concéntration~ for industrial environmental exposures is aware of the differences of opinion regarding the significance of some of the number values utilized in such expressions as "maximum allowable concentra- tions," "threshold limit values," and "acceptable concentrations." Based on ex- perience in this realm of environmental exposure control, there is a need for better understanding of the difference between a standard and a criterion. As pointed out in the State of California's excellent publication "Water Quality Criteria" the term "standard" as used in an environmental sense applies to a definitive rule, principal or measure established by authority. The comments in that publication on criteria, objectives, requirements and standards are worthy of quoting here. The term "standard" applies to any definite rule, principle, or measure estab- lished by authority. The key words in this definition are definite and esta,blirhed PAGENO="0185" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 181 by as~~thority. The fact that a standard has been established by authority makes it quite rigid, official, or quasi-legal. An authoritative origin does not necessarily mean that the standard is fair, equitable, or based on sound scientific knowledge, for it may have been established somewhat arbitrarily on the basis of Inadequate technical data tempered by a cautious factory of safety. Where health Is in- volved and where scientific data are sparse, such arbitrary standards may be justified. There is a tendency, however, for regulatory authorities to promul- gate standards of questionable scientific justification to serve as a crutch that facilitates administrative action and enforcement. A far better word to describe an administrative decision by a regulatory body is "Requirement." It represents a requisite condition to fulfill a given mission. It does not necessarily have the connotation of scientific justification nor does It give an impression of immutability. Requirements are less likely to be as rigid or fixed as standards. In California, the regional water-pollution-control boards are directed to prescribe requirements for every existing or proposed discharge or sewage, or industrial waste, but such requirements may be revised from time to time (Section 13054 and 13054.1 of Division 7, CalIfornia Water Code). Indeed,. "No regional board, by prescribing requirements, shall be precluded thereafter from revising requirements relative to the same disposal area or receiving waters. A discharge pursuant to the prescribed requirements shall not create a vestect right to continue such discharge under the same requirements" (Section 13002, Division 7, California Water Code). Examples of requiremei~ts by California. WPO Boards are given in Chapter III. The word "objective" represents an aim or a goal toward which to strive, and It may represent an ideal condition that is difficult, if not impossible, of economic attainment. Most certainly, however, it does not imply strict adherence nor rigid enforcement by a regulatory agency. It is gaining favor among engineers on boards and commissions that strive to achieve water-pollution control by persuasive methods and cooperative action. It avoids the rigidity and author- itativeness of standards and it does not have the enforcement element of re- quirements. A "criterion" designates a means by which anything is tried in forming a correct judgment respecting it. Unlike a standard it carries no connotation of authority other than that of fairness and equity; nor does it imply an ideal con- dition. When scientific data are being accumulated to serve as yardsticks of water quality, without regard for legal authority, the term "criterion" is most applicable. For this reason, this repoi~t has been entitled "Water Quality Criteria." As a compendium of criteria, it should be useful in prescribing re- quirements in California, and it can be used as a guide by any agency that de- sires to establish standard's or objectives. To be useful, a criterion should `be capable of quantitative evaluation by ac- ceptable analytical procedures. Without numerical criteria, vague descriptive ciualitative terms are subject to legal interpretation or administrative decisions. A criterion should also be capable of definitive resolution, i.e., unaffected insofar as possible by synergism, antagonism, or other complicating factors. There is a tendency, which should `be avoided assiduously, to let criteria be- come rigid and perhaps ripen into standards. For this reason, every criterion should `be regarded as flexible information to be kept constantly under surveil- lance. Establishment of quality criteria The establishment of interim environmental quality criteria for those situations' where no requirements have been promulgated by locai, State, or Federal agencies is a function of the Medical Departments of the military services. In undertaking such tasks it has been recognized that in many instances the pace and progress of* biological science, and the tools of ecological management have not kept pace with the advances in the physical sciences. Often available facts are not sufficient to support or contradict in a conclusive manner preliminary data. There are many pitfalls in attempting to extrapolate to the operation, Or even to the `test environ- meirt results of what are essentially biological o'r bioenvironmental investigations.. Dr. Robert Kehoe, University of Cincinnati, in addressing the 2nd National Congress on Environmental Health at Ann Arbor, Michigan In Jttne 1961 observed that the height of absurdity was reached "when one finds oneself soberly ponder- ing the significance of a conventional mathematical expression of a borderline pos- sibility concerning the effect or lack of effect of a given experimental procedure as~ PAGENO="0186" 182 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT applied to white rats under the artificial conditions of the laboratory when the question is not what happens in the laboratory but what will be the effects in the variable conditions of life." Instead of finite limits and strict tiumerical values as indicators of environ- mental quality, what appears to be most useful are ranges of environmental con- ditions, which are expected to produce certain predictable results. These mill- tiple boundaries must be defined in such a manner that they can be measured. The method of measurement ought preferable to be applied to the environment, rather than to a biological response, although the effect can be quantified in such terms. Lest there be any misunderstanding, on this subject, nothing in the foregoing should be construed as a plea for delay pending development of better knowledge or improved technology. As shown in Figure 4, the passage of time and the in- crease of information from observations and experimentation will provide for changes in the state of knowledge. Initial concepts, and procedures, based on the then available appreciation of the situation may be either confirmed, found to be too conservative, or not stringent enough. Emergence of a whole new technology, or disappearance of some element of the problem may also alter the situation dras~ tically. The actions taken by the military departments in relation to several potential environmental pollution situations, for which well established rules or environmental quality standards were not available exemplify the approaches which can be taken to provide for the public welfare. GOOD NEW PLANE CURRENT STATE OF BAD TIME - FiGurm 4 Typical of these actions to meet the needs of environmental pollution control, even in the absence of guidelines and standards, are those taken with regard to shipboard waste disposal, and waste from munition manufacturing operations. These represent situations in which both interservice and interagency cooperation has been necessary to a high degree. The Navy, Army, and Air Force alike operate vessels, and the U.S. Corps of Engineer~ in its Civil Works functions has a number of boats and surface craft on rivers and harbors. The nature of design of military vessels present some problems, arid the needs of the dockside situation, as contrasted with open water operations are also different. Close cooperation is being achieved with the Federal Water Pollution Control Agency, and the U.S. Public Health Service to develop the necessary guidance as to performance and methodology. In the case of the munitions manufacturing waste problem, both the Army and Navy are concerned in their own facilities, and those which are contractor oper- PAGENO="0187" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 183 ated. Extensive investigations conducted by the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency have been reviewed by the National Academy of Sciences Ad- visory Center on Toxicology, and again cooperative efforts are being undertaken on an interagency basis to develop appropriate guidance as to permissible con- centrations of these materials in the environment, and to use these as the basis for engineering design of abatement works. Of special interest are the programs regarding environmental pollution asso- ciated with rocket and space propellants. Many of the materials which have a possible use in this program are known to possess toxic and hazardous properties. In some instances there is incomplete data even with regard to routine occupa- tional exposures. In other instances difficult situations are presented in attempt- ing to determine the environmental quality values for non-occupational off-site situations. A major effort has been undertaken within the Department of Defense to provide for adequate protection against air and general environ- mental pollution hazards arising from our research, development, test and evalua- tion programs. This matter has been of some concern in recent hearings of the Senate Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, and is a matter of major opinion by the military departments concerned. Considerable testimony regarding this subject was presented in the 1964 Senate Subcommittee hearings and in 1965 before the Subcommittee on Public Health and Welfare of the Com- mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce of the House of Representatives. A summary of information on the precautions associated with this material are included in `the report of the hearings on 5. 3112 before the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the Committee on Public Works, United States Senate (reference pages 443-453). It is worthwhile to point out in addition that here again, in the absence of definitive legislative or other regulatory requirements, initiative has been taken by the Department of Defense to provide to the extent consistent with available knowledge for the protection of the health of the population. The actions taken by the Air Force and the other military depart- ments involved have been based upon appreciation of the need for the most thorough evaluation of `the many facets of the problem. During the fotir year period of Fiscal Years 1964-1967, approximately $1,700,000 was expended in investigations on the atmospheric dispersion of beryllium particles from testing of rocket propellants; on testing and evaluation of sampling and analytical pro- cedures and on fundamental toxicological studies. The Department of the Air Force has maintained close coordination with the U.S. Public Health Service so as to provide for an exchange of information. We have recognized that the problem is one in which there are major epidemiological implications and are depending upon the U.S. Public Health Service to furnish us with `the necessary evaluations and guidance in that regard. Micrometeorological studies and in- vestigations on this and other rocket propellants provide information which may be useful in civilian industry and communities. It is generally agreed that the industrial occupational exposure limit values should not be used as a basis for establishment of air pollution quality values insofar as continuous exposures are concerned. The rocket propellant test oper- ations, on the other hand, represent air pollution situations generally discon- tinuous in nature and of extremely short duration. Some guidance as to permis- sible exposures can be obtained for on-site personnel from the industrial guide- lines. Careful scrutiny of epidemiological data, toxicological studies, and the application of value judgments on the industrial levels can be utilized while more precise information is being accumulated. The application of the science of micrometeorology is also involved in determining and assessing possible distri- bution of contaminants in the environment. A. summary of some of the more important air quality criteria for liquid propellants is provided in Figure 5, and for some other chemical substances in Figure 6. It is emphasized that these are not community air quality values, and are furnished only to give an appreciation of the difference in effects of various concentrations. There is a major possible contribution to knowledge and technology needed in air pollution resulting from this work. Among these are tl~e improvements in diffusion prediction methodology, environmental sampling techniques, and in the realm of administrative rule making. This last, in company with the experi- ence in interdepartmental coordination and industry cooperation may be of the greatest significance to the future. PAGENO="0188" 184 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT cOsine, in PPM * Utica. Othernion Outed) ty & incidino. ci nd. it, Onhalati (cAnnon but T~fl~.,uit, Unkecon, but ten pp. torn toe cinutee M0~ p~loTrio norton. ettec n. (3) Odor thrc.h- hold 10 O.0-l1ppio. (31(14) (90) Coo) (30) Ucknoon, but concentratinno robobly to P!ndOCe (At:l rocu to. Aikyl Oor,90.-lkin < 0.0 lt'0~ (tticsl-3,)ti?-3,001-3 AohhIno-Ohlo 0 0000TAMCU ~ Oygieeihtsodirdo ~~jy0cc Ok on 1 lnbok~ti0v ~ I p~ (I) `(WA Value. Volt.. occu~~oai bupouurn ,101is --~ ioe'HatvLy to Life . tnvz i~t,npy Occupitt iccul p Coponuto Tieo-Ojoiiteu 10 30 11 ~( 0.1 Unknown - 0 P 1,000 00 0.1 tnknown 10 lfootooie I lOg Chi0010s Tritluorid. Diboi~so 9tethyloootrina100 (oi'ra) Ithyl Alcohol Othy100. Odd. Ploorioo ~luorio. P.otsbro.td Purturyl Alcohol Mydraains-OkiM Mydroglo Mydroo.o P.rooide, I Inhibited Med Pk.iog Mitric Aoid.(IoPnA) Mooo,nthlbydrsoios (10co) - chin Ititrogno `(shroud. I Mitreseo `(rifinorid. Onygno Ooygon Difluoride Onoos Peotaborons (007-31 1. iiiCal-3 etfeelto. liiFol (hAlo pAn1 Oration in More of on induotrial heiar4 than lnholation) 1 0.1 canoe of t odency to nest poe.1 00 level. o.oore, It doe. not ritatleo I evident. 3,000 100 0.0 100 pr video en 0 0.1 0.3 0.01 10 1000 icbut ~ Uckcovo, but 1)00-160 for 1-hr cauo*n ncr Onus VTITPP&atcc. )~ir is ~turancd at 340. Uvkoovn, but 7 3 2 Tr0iTbo fat I o~;~t2) Ucknooc, but 100 for. too .060 to. any bØ ~I~un. (3) o.itieotioo. all eopoaure ount be reduced to ace good cayviog ~voonro. (12) Dun to tIn ion vapor eoraal neeperaturVo and little roepirotory the prieary hao0rd. (10) cc, bitt inpoa,ible to tolerate 2O,t~O.> Uokoonn, but conto injury or death likely at 37tPPOTor 1-h~', (lv) Utkccot, but I ~ 0 1 `U~7Ztd not(L) he tolerated Unkocon, but ato eopaned to 100 for &-br 21(277Toignlt cant sertality fran pul.ooary eden.. (3) Uoke000, but bncentratinno 10*0cc., of 1000, i02It~robabi be lethal after. too .ieuto,. 2no-7oo~~~ 30 20 10 es at pntnetiall doneernu. oroctorot 01' nakesit nbypor.nnn.I. 3n-.t. eight produce 1. rather volatile oo-ioo~31 (1 propnond) (2-4 propn.ed) bin A plilnonAry I) DOTA dooM eke poriac readily at 2) bonoitioatlon o,ooooono~2~3 300(11) (10 propooed) (10 propo.cd) (10 propocod) (10 prepo.od) or-warn log prepor Tb e entree. toni ioporatlVn to en (1 prnpo.cd) (0.1 propcn.d) (30 prnpv.cd) (2,000 prepn,ed) (30 proposed) 10 Dun-tonic 000 01 0.000 P.rohleryl fluoride 3 UP-i 100 Un.y.etrin.U Dinethyll. 0,0 hydraoioo 010tH-loin *PPIO - Part. of vapor or gas per aillioo part. of air by velnee at 21°C and 700 MI Og preceore FXGU1~E 5 PAGENO="0189" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 185 ASS QUALITY CaITUIA 700 OThER QIEM1CM~ S001TAIIC*0 (Valii.s 6* PP%1 0.105. Otboreiso holed) au.toeu(scclloated)' 1,000 (teacolaisated) (000) AERydrous 00*0005 00 e.eouoe(beusol)-Ski* ooryiitos(oucupotioeal) 0.002 ~ Oorylli000005'.ocOUP** 0.00001 .~/o tloaal) Soluble eos,pOuxds 0.0 2.00680000 200 (euthyl *tbylheto.e) Sutyl Metals 160. .Butyl Alcohol 100 (6.000*001) Carhos 010004. 5,000' Carlo. DIeultlde.$tia 20. Corbo. Moooolde Rorusi 80 Suetol Acuity 50 Corboo T.trachloriddr0hil 10 ~lori.. cbl0000r00051tb800 *00 (Methyl's. *11080 br.Md.) chior010ro (triohloro.otho60) o.Dichlorobe0000S .1,2 DiohlOrOstboi' .(.thyiees dichioride) 1,2 DloblOrOIthyl*0* 000 Dileobovyl 8.1.0* 50 itbyl Ac.t.t.(s.elie*tOd) 400 (uoaucil*ated) 200 Sibyl Alcohol 1,000. (Stheooi) $thyl Ither 400 Ithyisue Olycol Vapor-hazard Vorasidobyds Ossoliee 000 sporoge. 01600040' Exorg000y 2e.sdtatoly 000upoii008 yxpoeur. Uooordoue J.1~8te to Ix ours `71.. - etuotse ~`° i~ ~°~r'°~ 4,000 60000*0 - Olsiler to oily1 alcohol .ocept oor~oil5 2,000 "ITT" o..ehat grlat*r. 400(2) o,ooo.lo,ooo(3~0) - 10000) 3o,coo'~~ - 0,025 /.3tor - - - 430 Sb 0,0035 ~ for 30 .lO.t.O with a .6*1.01 L.t.rval of 3_w.ob.(h1) 0.05 .0/. fur 30 siouto. with a *1*4.01 iot.rval Of 3.w.ehs(h1) 600~0~14) Ucko000 - but probably ol0,000~~~ osrbod Irritat. TEj"~i'0p.rttos .10*14 pr.Vaot Ill offocte. Uohooos, hut rat. died he exposed for 8 hr. to 01rE~ed'air at 3,000.t141 Uob,oeo, bat eatoratod sir at GO°t has 0*0000*- TYITTlY of 6,200 wioro earbod oar.oete end lrritetlos be .op.rhoecad. ~OO,OOO~~~ 4~ai51fttOl in. 300 100 00 1200 000 400 6,0000) 1000 000 200 0*10050, but 1000.2000 for ~.1 hr resulted i. 1.000(2) - but probably but l4,00O;i*~1O0*ill coo.. rapid Uokoowa -but oaturated sir 0077°C hose canoes- I'i'E'IT1400u1 oaly 2,000. Uobaouo, but S cuocuatratioae probably required T1"~04i1uue I atal occult.; ERbeovo, bat rot coors aooetbotioed in 0 .4. at TU000"aod billed 10 4 hr.. Uokvove,hut irrltatiog propurtloo at 100 p oan rroo toleratod O~r euro tbaa a foe oio,~ Satur000d air uS 00 1 baa a ooaooutratboo oS 1,080. Uobooeo, hut 1.2% dao0ep000 Our short *opoauree.040 Unbooso, but 6,000 to 0,000 1* iotSi5ily iotolurs iilT"tY the aoouclialtOd aub~ect. Unbeoeo, but 31,000 e thetises is 3) e1a.~~ TO0'OOO eaybu fatal.t My~~o1; Ataodards Sbort Occupoti000i Iupouor. 2,000 1,000 100 20 300 200 400 200 300 400 200 20 70 1 4 400 000 00 200 50 200 100' 200 1,000 , 2,300 100 200 600 000 400 : 000 2,000 0,000 *xi.*sooly~ehoe'haadliO0 at.lcvoted tospuratures. Roturoted air at 17°C, is 131. 0.' Coooeotraiiues ohovo are highi gbject000able sad levels shove 50.l00.oycau.o .orious injury. 1 1,000- 2,000 UokooeO b I oneetbetic death probohl. *1 30,000. O - 10. l0004000~~~ 30 20 10 FIGURE 6 PAGENO="0190" 186 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT AIR QUALITY CRITERIA FOR OTHER CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES (Valuos So PPM° Untosu Othuroiuu Notod) SUNSTANCE Oygtoolc Stoodurdu Pai~yQocopati*ouI IohalO_(..(.Lw Short Iw.odlatoly Oucuputio,u,~puours I ZJi..L__.U Occuputlooat Huuordoua Llaulu V ~ Vt L Lit Eydrop.u CyasidooShts Sydrojua hound. Sydrog.a Suit ide Motbyl Cblor010nu (l,1,l-tricblorootbua.) $.tbyl Cblonidu (dioblorosotbuae) 10 3 . 10 ~ . 350 j 000 30 270(2) - .. - 0 8 Uobtuowo, but higheat 20 10 $ luu.tuia.utfl~for ~ ~o(~) Uoboooo, but 800 200 100 50 *71flr'1*,30stu14) ~ RiO 1,000 * 3O,000~~~ 200A~~~, 2000(~~ 2,000 Uubooco, b abort uipoaoru ubov. 10000 say ho 5~0Y0oa. > Sapbtbb (coal tar) 100 200 400 o * - - - $apbtba (p.trol.us) Penobloro.thyl.a. 500 I 100 ! J ~ 1,000 2000 200 400-800 ~(tfioj4~ui unouthotic death probable at 20,000. Noboooo, but 0 000 could only be tolerated for H~Olou iou, (3 lulpbur Diootd. Tolutas (toluol) loluoo. Diisocyaaute Srlobioro.thyl.o. S ~ 300 ~ ~ 100 . ; ~ 0,03 ~ 10 3oO~~~ 000(8) ~ ~ 200 400~~) Nobouoo, but 400-lAO 30 20 10 Yl'~l~r,dduogur_ tiobooco, but 8,000-12,000 rapidly fatal Eu aicu. ~3) 3lii~lY5uuro to 4,000 for I sit or luau till prebpbly allow colt-roacue with no irrovoruibie l,ujury,(A Uoboowo but 800 pp. for 8 bra Ia lethal to ~ Noboowo, but U cououatruttoas probably raquirad, Tnicblorotnlfluoro. *tbaaa (moos TI or .113) 1,000 ~ 1,000 10,000 Eobeooo, but autureted air concaotra tioau at il0V0 can cause alaus t lasodlat. iooapocitatioo, Eyl.ae (uplol) 100 300 400 Nobnoou - *PPM - Parts at vapor or gas p.r sautowu parts on sir ap veto.. at CI°C toM 780 as Hg pr.aauro, FIGURE O~-(Oentinued) ADMINISTRATIVE AND POLIcFT PROBLEMS The mairtpotver problem There is a current shortage of persons with the requisite skills in both the technical aspects of pollution abatement and in the broad abstract approach to maintaining and improving environmental quality. The expansion of knowl- edge in the technical areas has not been matched by an accompanying expansion in the numbers of persons skilled in the various bioenvironmental and science and engineering areas. Many observers are quite aware of the fact that to deal with the technical and sociological problems an interdisciplinary approach is required. There is `a need for both "generalistst' as well as specialists and con- siderable attention in developing what amounts to a new technology in this area is a major necessity. In 19G2 there were only 4,900 individuals listed by the National Science Foundation's National Roster of Scientific and Specialists Personnel as practic- ing "sanitary engineering." At that time there were `only 100 students in train- ing. Requirements in the fields of air and water pollution and solid waste disposal for the next several years obviously outstrip the current availability of personnel. The military, medical, and civil engineering departments are facing increasing difficulties in obtaining and retaini'ng qualified scientists and engineers to discharge our obligations under current directives. The increasing requirements in all of `the allied health professions are similarly affecting our abilities to maintain a capability in the various sciences necessary to staff and administer our programs. It is our view it is vital to the Federal interest that those personnel working for Federal departments concerned with pollution con- trol have equal or even better capabilities and technical know-how than those in industry or in the State and local administrative authorities. Without such capability neither the leadership desired in the Federal establishment can be pro- vided, nor can the departments such as the Department of Defense be in a posi- tion to develop the adequate and economical procedures and programs necessary to conform to environmental pollution abatement regulations. The situation affects, we might add, the total medical service capability, `as well as those re- lating to the problems of environmental pollution. At the present time, in the purely technical areas there are deficiencies in the output of the required engi- neers and scientists and `there are also needs for expansion of the scope of th& PAGENO="0191" ADEQTJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 187 educational programs for these individuals. Since this is a multi-discipline effort, there is also a pressing requirement for greater depth of knowledge and understanding on the part of all `of the disciplines involved, not merely those con- cerned with the physical and biological attributes of the environment. While much progress has been made in this regard, much remains to be done. In particular, if the Federal Government's departments and agencies are "to exert leadership" considerably greater attention must be given to the manpower and personnel policies designed to equip the individuals and agencies with the high- est level of professional talent. Insofar as the Department of Defense is concerned, there are nutnerous prob- lems with regard to personnel policy pay and compensation which are cur- rently being given extensive study. It is anticipated that these specialized task requirements will be given recognition in whatever recommendations are finally submited to the Ctngress. Loea~l and Federal cooperation~ Suggestions regarding division of responsibility for evaluation of pollution situations between local and Federal technical group's are more properly within *the province of the Division of Air Pollution, U.S. Public Health Service and the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration and the Solid Waste Division, U.S. Public Health Service. However, the subordinate activities of the Depart- ment of Defense are faced with the necessity as previously cited in this report for complying with both local and Federal regulations and enforcement au- thorities' requirements. Accordingly the department has a vested interest in this sphere of activity. Based on some of our experiences, some observations and recommendations are hereby submitted. a. There is an obligation on the part of the Federal departments and activities to work in consonance with local and other Federal agencies on those problem areas arising from new research and development programs. As indicated previously, often the agency responsible for the program or project has more knowledge about the subject than the administrative or regulatory authority. The efforts exerted by representatives of the U.S. Public Health Service, the Department of Army, Department of Air Force, and the State of Utah Public Health Department in dealing with propellant waste disposal problems in that State, as reported in last year's hearings on the Clean Air Act, exemplifies the type of cooperative effort which can be undertaken by the Federal Government, State and local authorities, and civilian industry. b. There is a manifest need for improving the paths of communication between the various professional disciplines involved in pollution and abatement in both the Federal and in local authorities and between the pollution expert and those concerned with the development of administrative regulations. The efforts currently being exerted within the Federal establishment to bring together the views of those in the departments affected by pollution abatement rules with the representatives of the enforcement agencies such as the U.S. Public Health Service and the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration give an indi- cation that such cooperative efforts can be fruitful and provide for a more rational approach as to who shall do what to whom and under what circumstances. There does exist a need for better education of State and local officialdom of the intricacies of the budgetary and appropriation procedures of the Federal Govern- ment. The necessary long and involved arrangements and the many steps between establishment of a project and ultimate approval by the Congress and appro- priations of the funds simply is not well understood. The military construc- tion program cycle normally requires something over two years from time of initiation of a project to allocation of funds for implementation. The Federttl departments and agencies under existing procedures may be less able to repsond promptly to local and State requirements than civil industry or municipalities. This situation is another cogent reason for the establishment of national plans for the Federal departments'. Cons~ideration of costs versus benefits A number of questions have' been raised in the Report of the Hesearch Man- agement Advisory Panel relating to humaà health as a measure of ecological management and as to the question of the cost o'f benefits to achieve "normal population health." The military departments have had to exert a considerable degree of effort in analyzing the economic implications of environmental pollu- tion control measures. Any measures concerned with the achievement of a PAGENO="0192" 188 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT particular desired environmental quality involves a series of economic judg- ments as well as those relating to the system's effectiveness or the desirability of adoption of a particular program or progress which involves a potential hazard to the environment. One of the first and most essential steps which must be taken is the assess- ment of the cost of pollution damage. Such costs may be extremely high in terms of effects on military operational capability or in terms of damage to adjacent persons and properties. With Increasing degree of controls there should be a reduction In the potential costs arising from the presence of the environmental pollutant. The costs of controls accordingly are offset by the savings In expenditures to compensate for the damage. On the other hand, at some point, very, very little return Is obtained for the incerased costs of control measures and the effective costs may approximate that which would have resulted had no effect to minimize or mitigate the pollution situation been taken. In regard to the problem of determining costs, the question must be ascer- tained as to what Is the uppermost and principal effect of the pollution situation. Human health must be recognized as being unquestionably the most important of the various categories of environmental pollution damage. This central re- quirement of consideration of effects of health of man cannot be overlooked. Department of Defense policy, as contained in the previously cited DoD DIrec~ tive 5100.50 establishes the following priorities of effort. a. To those situations which constitute a direct hazard to the health of man, b. To those having economic implications, c. Those which effec.t the recreational and aesthetic value of our natural resources. In applying these policies, consideration is given to nuisance and irritation to humans, to effects on livestock and wildlife, property damage, effects on land use, arid deterioration or alteration of desirable attributes of the environment. Summary The Department of Defense and its subordinate activities have recognized that the problem of environmental pollution require vigorous efforts as part of the total national program. Its efforts like those of the other Federal departments and agencies must be exerted as part of a coordination of public and private efforts at every' level of government and in every sector of our economy and society. As enunciated in the Report of the Research Manage- ment Advisory Panel to the Committee on Science and Astronautics, there are voids in our knowledge, opportunities for new technology, deficiences in the existing technology and a need for some new concepts. If a long term overall good is to be achieved, there is a need for: a. An assessment and marshalling of knowledge on the various elements of the pollution problem, b. The undertaking of those measures which will solve within existing capa- bility and technology the identifiable near term problems. c. Through proper forward looking efforts to anticipate and delineate the larger problems of the future, and d. The undertaking of research and coordinated effort so as to' develop the necessary level of understanding and knowledge of the subject, e. Provide a means for new designs and the development of interdisciplinary efforts to expand both knowledge and practice in the problems of ecology. Department of Defense activities will continue to cooperate toward meeting these needs by continued action thereon within its sphere of responsibility. (Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m. the subcommittee adjourned until Thursday, July ~8, 1966, at 10 a.m.) PAGENO="0193" THE ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT TliTJi{~SDAY, JULY 28, 1966 HOUSE OF REPm~SENTATIVES, COMMITrEE o±~ Son~wcE AN]) AS1~RONAUTIOS, SvEcoMMrr~E o~ SOmNCE, RESEARCH, AN]) DEVELOr1S~ENT, WaBliingtoit, D. C. The commjttee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10:08 a.m., in room 23.25, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C., Hon. Emilo Q. Daddario (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. DAThDARIO. This meeting will come to order. Our first witness this morning is Mr. Bertram C. Raynes, vice presi.. dent for applied research, Rand Development Corp. Would you please come forward, Mr. Raynes? We are pleased to have you here this morning,. Mr. Raynes, and we want both to apôlogizc for not having you here yesterday and to thank you for being kind enough to stay over for this morning's meeting Mr. RAYNRS. It was a pleasant evening for me yesterday. Mr. DADDARIO. Please proceed. STATEMENT OP BEItT1tAM C. RAYNES, VICE PRESIiYENT POlt APPIJED RESEARCH, RAND DEVELOP)~(EXT CORP. Mr. RAYNES. Mr. Chairman, gentlemen, thank you. It is an honor to i~ invited to make a statement before this com- mittee and to speak on the subject of the adequacy of present tech- nology for pollution abatement. My remarks are more personal than corporate, but they are, I believe and I hope, professional. lo the question: Is presently available science and technology ade- quate for pollution abatement? My answer is: No. The tephnology- the application of scientific knowledge to practical purposes-is ob- viously not adequate, for if it were, there would be less compelling reasons for these hearings ~ iiere~,a4equatg s~cience~i~ e~isil~ ~ 4 ~s ~or many 1ui~ids of contamination it is not J~ein~ a~, or .i~ ~j~ig applied pnly ~ Of. ~ourse, more `anc~ bett~r1 is n~eç~ed, e~pepially in the handling o~ certain çontai~ux~a~th~ ~it thc~ h~sf sc~i~nee remainS academic without a~ressive applications To the further question: What do we need to do to combat environ- mental pollution? My answer is: Apply now what science is known to rernove'those contaminants which can be removed and, handled, while si'thultaneously improving the technology and discovering th~ new scieilce needed. * In answering tbi~ way, 1 find myself somewhat at odds with-~-as only one example-the re~ort of the Research Management Advisoi~y 68-240-66-vol. 1-13 189 PAGENO="0194" 190 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Panel, submitted July 1, 1966, to this committee. I do agree that there is no good present technology for the treatment of certain pollutants; by good, one means both effective and reasonable in cost. But L dis- agree that our environment is being so increasingly polluted because of a technology gap; rather, it is because of a management gap. It is just unreasonable to accept as fact that those technicians who h~ve contrived to make our increasingly complex industrial technology economical cannot also devise means to deal with solid, gaseous, or liquid pollutants in the wastes from their processes. I do not agree that the future pace of pollution abatement must depend entirely upon new science or technology-certainly not its im- mediate future pace. The major soui~ces of polluted waters, ugly re- fuse heaps, and for a substantial part of pollution in the atmosphere, are in the management offices of. industrial and municipal. plants of all descriptions. It~imply is so much cheaper and so much less trou- ble to dump stuff or vent stuff than it is to take care of it, that produc- tion management will dump and vent just so long as it can get away with doing it. There are two ways to get production management to take action to dcaLwjth their wasi~es in the kind of workmanlike manner théy~pply to th~ii~ production problems: . The first is to make them want to. SomehOw get individuals whO have already coped with a long list, of responsibilities to. accept one more, a~4 to proceed to clean up their wastes because it is right and prop~r.' ?ossibly to get production management to acknowledge that they toO breathe the air, drink the water, take vacations, and that their own health and enjoyment are at stake. This approach hasn't worked at all in most instances, works poorly and ineff ecitively in others, and even when successful, it's generally too late. The second is to force them to take care of their wastes properly. Simply to require that the water they dump be pure, regardless of its condition when they receive it. That the gases they vent be. free of pollution. That their spoil doesn't in turn despoil other property or remain ugly, regardless of how poor the `area might.have been when they undertook their operations. On the assumption that it will be the latter case-i-that production management must be made to take care of it~ ~wn. wastes-it ~ be presumed that the Federal Government will provide the force, ~Locai and State governments haven't done the job. There will be some active dissent from production management. If `~o'U care to offer some relief; and you ~may, may I plead that it not ~e in th'e..form of extensions of time to pollute? Ifany "relief~ be ~&~ed, it should be in the pocketbook. Except where the technOlO~ ~tt1all3f doesn't exist for pollution cOntrOl,' wastes should be cieanël *,ip. . " This point brings me to the gap in `technology management. The way I see it, pollution abatement technological management spends almost all of its time in identifying problems, developing analytical techniques, and the like-and almost no time on solving pro~$~ms The result too often is a multitude of surveys and `tatniations `of data which have the effect of masking the problems, not illuminating them. PAGENO="0195" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 191 In' the water pOllution abatement, area, these surveys lead to con~ fusion and to very narrow viewpoints. A recent Cleveland, Ohio, newspaper item reported, in quotes, a statement which seems to swn~ marize the narrowness which a surfeit df surveys can bring about. Before an Ohio legislative subcommittee lookmg at pollution ehmina~ tion, testimony was given that "the crux of the pollution problem isn't the effluent, but what is happening in that river * * ~." I submit to you-and I hope this is actually the larger view-that the river is not at fault. Rivers are the victims, not the villains. That philosophy is wrong. That approach is wrong. The goals must not be to find out how much filth a stream can be made to accept, nor the limits on emissions into our air, nor the extent the land can be brutalized. Pollution abatement management-at every level, in public or private service-spends too much time in figuring out how much it can get away with, when it should be figuring out how properly to remove and handle as much of the pollution load as it can. The way matters stand now, both production management and also abate~ ment management are interested in getting the environment to, accept as much untreated or poorly treated contamination as it can. The environment doesn't stand a chance unless both of these managements change their approach. The most impressive science doesn~t stand a chance to become useful technology unless the philosophy be changed. The goal must be to clean up after Ourselves to the point that any escaping pollutants are the result of accidents, of naturally occurring phenomena, or because their cleanup is clearly still outside present science or technology. The goal must be clean air and clean water, not tolerances and limits, and not how much we can get away with for a while longer. Unless the philosophy and goals are reassessed, the brightest technological advances won't pay off any more than present practice is paying off in keeping our environment clean. have listed a few specific jobs that I might recommend. The' first is to get one or both' of the technological `and production man- agements to act forcefully to take care of their waste problems, not simply to catalog them. There are dust collectors and precipita- tors, chemical and bio-oxidation procedures, reclamation devices, shovels and rakes. Those can be put to use now, without waiting for anything new. Next, I urge the increasing~ use of pilot programs, demonstrations,. field evaluations, and similar efforts to bring developing `stñence, t)o~ commercialization as soon ~is possible. These' should `be relatively large-scale efforts examining wastes as they are generated or exist,. not laboratory simulations. The programs should be authorized to' have flexibility without penalty. If a fault be found ,in technique'S or equipment, it should be fixed and the work pushed to a successJ~ui conclusion if any way at all c'an be found; a fault should be considered an opportunity for improvement, not a process failure. The philoso.- phy in such programs should be that they will be made to work.~ Technological difficulties should not `be used as an excuse to eon.- tinue polluting. In essence, pollution abatement work shotild be un- dertaken in the same way that producti'on processes are undertaken; some product must be' attained ~tt the lowest ~o~t'~and th~ ,hj~li~s1~ ~f- ficiency. The payoff in pollution abatement should be on the same PAGENO="0196" 192 ADEQUACY OF PE~~OLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT basis and the product should be a clean effluent, `and a safe and non- polluting disposal or reuse of the removed wastes. Without increasing use of large-scale, broadly based, pilot programs, adoption of improvements in waste treatment will continue to `be too slow. Such programs must be encouraged at the Federal level, `and usefully at the State and local levels, as `well as in industry. Every project director must have the desire and the freedom to get working solutions t'o pollution problems, and not just to accumulate data. Since my own work has been `mostly in the `water pollution abate- ment area, I think mostly in terms of that particular problem area. I urge that the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration be `authorized to set up a trouble-shooting group composed of ex- periemced, practical men to help `sewage treatment plant operators out when they have operating problems. And they do h'ave problems. I have in mind a' group which can help get `a troubled plant back on stream quickly, `and this group to be financed so that it c~n~b~avel to the scene of difficulty. Sometimes there is a limited municipal budget for such travel, and help become's essentially unavailable. To help make `such an effort effective~ I urge that sewage treat~ ment plant operators be encouraged to disclose their difficulties, and not be penalized or ostracized for having them. A's one incidental comment, there's a fad today of calling a sewage treatment plant a "pollution control center." That doesn't clean up sewage; it doesn't even `cleanup the language. The subject before the committee is environmental pollution. It's a big topic, so wide ranging ideas shoul'd be appropriate. I therefore urge that consideration be given to upgrading the local zoning board concept, a concept `which makes intelligent control of environmental pollution difficult. Zoning controls should include ecological consider- ations as well as the tax duplicate. As an example homes or businesses should not be allowed to be built on flood plains, flooded out, and then to use their plight to push for the damming of free-flowing rivers. Natural drainage areas should not be automatically assigned as fill areas or garbage dumps and so forth. Whole riverfronts or lake- fronts should not be given over to industry and commerce w'ithout the resl?ite of green areas. Natural areas should not be abandoned to indiscriminate abuse of their land, water, and air-and simply there- after called the heavy industrial zone. A new approach is needed in this area. Antipollution programs should be designed to deal with as many pollutants at a time as possible, not just one where more are already recognized. Work to remove sulfur dioxide from stack gases is corn- , mendable, but programs' should be going on to get entirely clean effluents-cleansed Of all known or suspected pollutants. It should be accepted now that when the SO2 is gone there will be nitrogenous compounds;' let's work on them in this generation of ideas and men. `The same thought could be applied to the refuse problem. There's garbage, cans, bottles, cardboard, automobiles, sewage sludge, alu- minum foil, and industrial' residues of all kinds. There are pro~rarns for gar~ge, and programs for junk cars, and programs for residues. I' urge the situation be looked at as the refuse problem, and big solu- tio~ts lO~ked~for and found for the whole problem. That is w-h-o-i-e. It could be the big hole, h-o-l-e, problem, though. PAGENO="0197" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 193 On the subject of poisons such as the pesticides, a reversal of typical attitudes might be helpful. Instead oc~ comforting the public With statements to the effect that "there is no evidence that these pollutants have unfavorable effects upon humans," let's see some evidence that they are definitely not harmful. Sometimes the background to the statements which begin "there is no evidence that * * ~" really is thatthere is simply no evidence whatsoever. One way or the other. I submit that there should be less dialog on pesticides and more facts. Establishing how much poison an animal species can with~ stand by killing specimens off by varying their exposure to it, is still basically the same old how-muck-can-we-get-away-with approach. We should know how poisons kill, the mechanism by which they work, and then we could evaluate their long-range effect more intelli- gently. And, perhaps decide that some of them should no longer ever he used at all. Others have testified before you or will testify to additional areas where new technology is needed, on incentives of one sort or another, standards, and on policy in pollution abatement. My thesis is that pollution abatement philosophy should be to clean up all wastes and effluents to the maximum extent possible now, and with known means, while new science is being obtained. The goal should be to improve upon these methods to make them more economic and increasingly more effective. The aim should be to reduce the pollution loads on our waters, land, and atmosphere, not to force them to accept more. The standards should be fresh air, pleasant vistas, and clear, clean waters. The activity should be to put newly developed methods into use just as soon as they become available, and to do whatever is neces- sary to speed the development of improvements in these methods to make them increasingly more effective and economical. Thank you, sir. Mr. DADDARTO. Thank you. As we have proceeded with these hear- ings, Mr. Raynes, I can't remember anyone who has disagreed with your basic thesis that everything possible should be done now with what is available to us. We must also seek new methods of abatement. But I d:O think that even though we accept this thesis, there may be differing opinions as to how to get there. I wonder how you apply that to your own feeling about the wrong approach to the situation. On page 3 of your statement you say the goal must not be to find out how much filth a stream can be made to accept. Some people appear before us and say that we should apply standards and that we ought to find out what a river contains and what it can stand. Are they wrong in accumulating information of that kind so that they can develop a program which takes into consideration the situation around them. Isn't it true that you could not possibly begin to solve the problem unless you knew where you stood, how much time you had to correct it, and what the pressure of the environment around you was at that particular time? Don't you oversimplify the issue by saying that this is not something that ought to be done? Mr. RAYNES. That approach is one that I do not agree with, sir. Mr. DADDARIO. How do you get around it since it exists, sir? Mr. RAYNES. Well, I would suggest cleaning up the effluents and seeing what happens to that river. Instead of surv iiying and then PAGENO="0198" 194 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION AflATEMENT making an estimate of what might occur 5 years from~ now, simply clean up all the effluents and see what the river does. I. have witnessed a very contaminated river begin to recover itself in as short a period as 9 weeks when certain industrial effluents stopped being dumped ~mto it. `Mr. DADDARIO. Well,' let's take a big proposition which has been put before us-the expenditure of some $25 to $30 billion for separat- ing sanitary and storm sewers. Some people say we ought to begin this program immediately and make arrangements to spend this money. This is a big program which falls into this proposal of yours. Since a solution is available and we probably could. obtain the moneys to do it, ~hould we do it or should we in fact take a look at the environment ivithin which this whole program would be developed to see what the causes and effects of it might be ~ Mr. RAYNILS. Of course I don't think every survey is ill-consi4ered. Many of them are very worthwhile and should be carried out ahd used. Concerning this particular subject you are talking about, I particularly do think that all facets should be carefully thought out, both the separation and also the expenditure of such funds. But there are many other situations where it is quite obvious that cleaning up, for instance, an oily waste would be beneficial; that is the sort of individual situation I don't believe needs to be evaluated any further. Mr. DADDARIO. The reason I asked you that question was that I thought you had that in mind. It seems tO me that we ought' `to try to take `that perspective because there is so much' in what you say. Mr. RAYNES. I don't believe that surveys made so that intelligent decisions can be based on them are not worthwhile. They certainly are. But surveys to continue the license to pollute I disagree with. Mr. DADDARIO. On that particular point, somewhere in your report you talk about programs that' ought to be authorized and that ought to have some flexibility without penalty. Mr. RAYNES. Those are pilot programs; yes, sir. Mr. DADDARTO. You are taking into consideration that there are some problems. Mr. RAmS. Oh, sure. M~. DAnD~RIo. And that this must `be considered. Mr. RAYNE5. But I believe it is the same kind of problem any pro- duction process faces. Someone designs a production process and builds a plant. Take a chemical plant; he starts it up and maybe the product isn't quite' right the first week. Perhaps the yields are somewhat low or the costs are a little bit too high. He doesn't auto- matically abandon the whole idea. He goes ahead and works on his problems until he gets them fixed. I believe that pollution abate- ment technology today is available for many or most pollution prob- lems, but it is not being applied. Does that answer your question?' Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. As I understand your statement and as I un- derstand your philosophy about this, it boils down to the recognition of the `need to apply the technology which is available to us today which is not being used, and which could be done easily. You did, iii fact,' make a point about shovels and rakes and I quite' agree `with you, but I think that as we overcome those basic problems which can PAGENO="0199" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOB POLLUTION ABATEMENT 195 be taken `care of with information `available to us, we still do not overcome the great bulk of the pollution problem which stands before us. Yo~ direct your efforts and your thoughts to the solving of this through better management practices and througth these pilot pro- grams. * Mr. `R4YNES. Pilot programs to get the new science to the commer- cial stage as quickly as possible. Mr. DADDARIO. Using the example of the separation of sanitary and storm sewers, I would expect that that would be one area in which some pilot work might be helpful. Mr. RAYNES. Yes, sir. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Raynes, how do you think we should put together ~the. findings and evaluations of the pilot programs or demonstrations? ~Do you think this is a Federal responsibility alone or should we bring in. both industry and State governments? Mr. RAYNES. I think it has become a Federal responsibility since, in general, no one else has done it. I think it, would be very nice to encourage the participation of industry and of State governments and even of local governments. If you., could get it somehow, that would he' very, very helpful. But as, the matter stands now as I understand it, it is up to the Federal Government to provide not only the money hut the impetus. . Mr. DADDARIO. One of the suggestions you have, and I think it is a good one, is to set up a troubleshooting group composed of experience.d men. Do you make that suggestion because it would be possible, con- sidering the manpower situation, to put~ together teams of that kind whereas it would be extremely difficult to develop that kind of compe- tence at each level where work of this kind is needed?~ Mr~ `RAYNES. `No, 1 actually `made that suggestion beoause, in one of our projecfs we are carrying out in piy corppany for the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, we are attempting to find a `more economical and beneficial `disposal of sewage sludge .from existing conventional sewage treatment plants. The concept is to use the sludge `in the reclamation of areas which themselves pollute~ such as strip mine lands. When we go to a sewage ~treatment plant and' ask them if we can have some of their sewage sludge, the operators will be very, Yery pleased to let us have it because its disposal is the biggest headache in the treatment of sewage today. However, quite often these fellows say: "Well, you know, I'm having trouble with my digestor and it has been out of service a cOuple of months. I can't get it back on stream." And we inquired of many of them: "Why don't you get some help someplace?" The only thing they can do, really, is make a telephone call or write a letter.' They don't ha~e travel funds.' `A `small town can't afford to or won't send its sewage treatment plant operator here to `Washington or to Cincin- `naiti or wherever it `is required he go for help, and so the guy just has to stru~rle along. Sometimes the struggle might `take a half year, and during all that time the receiving water below `the sewage treatment plant is getting more polluted than it should be getting. Mr. DA'~AnIo. Thenrthis does get us back to manpower capability. .Yo~ hav~ people rnmulng some of thés~ plants who are not able to handle these problems themselves because they do nOt hare sufficient technical training. PAGENO="0200" 196 AflEQTJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTIO~t ABATEMENT Mr. RAYNES. Any good technical man will accept help when he has a problem, if he can fifl'd it. Mr. DADDARIO. The object is to make available the opportunity to go to a central source? Mr. RAYNES. Yes. Or to huve help come to him. Mr. DADnARIO. You don't eliminate the possibility of placing re- sponsibility on a State or local area as well? Mr. RAYNES. No indeed, sir. Mr. DADDAILTO. Have you any reason to believe that industry is be- coming interested enough in pollution abatement. to go to a company such as yours to have work done for them? Mr. BArNES. They have-yes, I see signs. Many companies are now beginning to look into water pollution. Industry is beginning to recognize, I think, that there are business oppoi~tunities there `for one thing. That incentive is plenty strong, very worthwhile, We do see it. Rand Development has not been approached as yet by any company to undertake research work. Contract research and development is the basis of my corporation's charter. We haven't had very much of that, but we have had people come and want to talk to us about the possibility of cooperating with us in the pollution abatement field. Mr. DADDARIO. You used the example of a man running into diffi- culty with his plant and having to spend 6 months waiting for help or working to get it back into shape instead of being able to go to a central place for immediate a.id. How about the problems of poor design and inadequate facilities which confront the people who run these plants? Don't they need to have some kind of advice available to them to supplement what they already have with new techniques? Mr. RAYNES. I think that would be a very worthwhile additiçn. As much help as they can get, as much frankness about the, probiem~ as they could give. Mr. DADDARIO. This falls within the category of unused potential which we already possess. Mr. BArNES. Yes, sir; I believe that. Mr. DADDARIO. `Mr. Conable? Mr. C0NAELE. I don't want to belabor this license to pollute point any more. I think I understand what you are saying. `We re~lly have a priority problem though, don't we ~ Assuming there is a limited ye source in this field-anc[ I am afraid we have to assume a limited re- source in every public field-we are going to have to decide where the pollutants are doing the most damage and `we are going `to have to con- `tinue to survey the practical matter regardless of what our ideal point of view would be. Mr. RAYNES. I hope not but I suppose that is the practicai side of the matter. I'd prefer to see it otherwise. `Mr. CONABL~. .1 understand your point and I think the how-tan-we- get-away-with point of view is a dominant one in the field. `Mr. BArNES. I am, afraid it is. Mr. CONABLE. I don't see any practical way to get away from it ~om~ pletely because we can't' just clean up every stream tonight. Mr. RA~NEs. No; I don't think it can be done by nightfall. ~ut we could get started by then. ` PAGENO="0201" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 197 Mr. DADDARIO. Could you yield just one matter there? Mr. CONABLE. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. I think Mr. Conable raises a good point. It can't be done overnight by any means. We have talked here in the last few days about Lake Erie and somebody has put. a price tag of $10 billion on cleaning it up. How do you think we ought to ~o aI~out it if we apply your philosophy? Should we spend the $10 billion? Mr. RAYNES. I think we ought to go about it the way the housewife goes about cleaning her house. She wants her house cleaned up. She ~esn't use surveys and she doesn't need standards. She knows what she means by a clean house and she goes ahe.ad and gets it clean. She may know that there is going to be an improved detergent to help her clean her dishes coming along in 6 months. In fact, it may even be be- ing market tested in her sister's home 150 miles away, but in the interim she has got to get her dishes clean. I think that the answer may be al- most as simple as, let's start cleaning up everything that goes into Lake Erie and then the lake will get clean. That's what I think. Mr. DADDARIO. Do as much as you can to prevent additional pol- .~ta$~ from contaminating further. Mr. RAYNES. And then when that promising new process comes along put it to use. Mr. DADDARIO. Taking into consideration what you eai~ afford to do during this period of time. Mr. RAYNES. The housewife may not be able to afford that dish- washer right away. In the meantime she still has to have clean dishes. Mr. DADDAEIO. Perhaps with the expenditure of x number of dollars, you could get Lake Erie to the point where the trend of this growth wb~çh is causing so much concern is at least reversed. Have you ap- plied standards in that sense~ The approadh to improve conditions back to a certain .point? Mr. RAYNES. I think that could work. My feeling is, I am obviously a cOtiservationist as well as ~ scientistr-that the people want to see their waters clean. You could perhaps adopt a standard that when the conservationists have stopped screaming about it, then it is clean enough. That might not be too acceptable a standard in certain places. But this is what happened in this country 60 years ago. All the rivers and basin harbors-I'm quoting a Presidential report-they began to stink so people began to complain and the present procedures for clean- ing up sewage wastes were put into practice. That was in the early 1900's. Well, now they are beginning to stink again. So .1 think we ought to~ clean them up to at least the point where they don't do that. Mr. DADDARTO. I think you could establish a standard by saying that streams are clean when people stop screaming, but I wonder if we couldn't reach the point where things get so bad people stop screaming and take it for granted. . Take your housewife. She might take a look at the dishes piled up and just walk out the front door and leave them there. Mr. CONABLE. The only other question I have relates to this trouble- shooting group which is such a good idea that I wonder if we are not already doing it. . . Mr BAYNE5 Well, in talku~g to these operators, they have told me that they can write to Cinciunati,where the Robert~A. Taft Sanitary PAGENO="0202" 198 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Center is or to their State. That is about the best they can do if they don't have a travel budget. But they don't often have achance to have someone come to their plant and spend a few days and say, Oh, yes~ what you should be doing is this and this, and try that and that. I do not know of the existence of such a group. Mr. CONABLE. This strikes a responsive chord, with me because we had some hearings of the Subcommittee on Natural Resources and Power of the Committee on Government Operations up .in Rochester this past week at which I was present because I happen to represent part of that area. The Eastman Kodak Co. was on the panel as well as others. Eastman has had primary treatment of its industrial waste for some time but they `have not gone to secondary `treatment.' They have plans for it and have been doing a lot of experimenting on it'. We discovered that they had requested health services from State and Federal sources to help `with some specific chemical problems tlte~r have. They were told to go ahead and experiment and to figure it out alone becanse they had a unique problem. `This put them in the pesi. tion of relying on their own research department again. I imagine this example is fairly typical in industry particularly `because each in~ dustry has really a different type of problem, many of which admit- tedly have techniques that can be addressed to them and many others of which probably don't. ` Mr. RAYNES. Yes; some still need work. ` , ` `Mr. CONAI~LE. Yesterday, in talking with the water pollutiorrpeo- pie we were advised that the best techniques `available now, primary and secondary treatment and the `activated carbon treatment beyond that, would not have `any effect'on dissolved chemicals. Mr. RAYNES. Inorganic chemicals. Mr. CONABLE. Inorganic chemicals, that is right. We apparently do still have some substantial technology problems.. It is not just as simple as saying, "Let's clean it all up tomorrow." Mr. RAYNES. If there weren't some additional problems I wouldn't be around talkingjarge-scale development programs. Mr. CONABLE. But you are not aware of any really substantial trou~ bleshooting group in the country. Mr. RAYNES. In my experience which is limited to about 3 ye*~r, I haven't found such' a group. There are water pollution agencies, scientific organizations that provide handbooks and this sort of thing, and these are personal contacts, but I don't know of any Federal group which is able to go out and help these fellows on the spot. Mr. CONABLE. I'm very much inclined to agree, Mr. Chairman, with Mr. Raynes' testimony that this is going to require the force of law to clear it up and it is also going to require the Federal Government in a large measure. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Raynes, I would look to ask just one questi'on~ before I turn the questioning over to Mr. Brown. I'm reminded that you touched upon the fact that industry is in- terested in pollution abatement devices because they see a market Pos- sibility. Do you have any estimate as to the size of this market?' What kind of incentive should we consider as we review this problem? Mr. RAYNES. The figure of $10 or $20 billion just for the Lake Erie watershed is one I've heard. I think it came from an HEW survey, PAGENO="0203" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 199 made by theY Public Health Service as I recall. It is just one indica- tion of a rather large business. That's, let's say, $10 billion to be expended in one part of the country hopefully in 10 years. That's a very large business and when you extend tha;t.to the entire country, I have heard figures as high as, I think,. $40 billion, sQmething of that sort. I think American industry picks up its ears when it hears $40 bil- lion in 10 years. Does that answer your question, sir? My understanding is that that is water pollution abatement work' alone, and does not take into account air pollution control and all the other environmental pollution problems~ ` There is something like a $2 billion chemical and equipment market per year right now just for existing sewage treatment facilities, not taking into account new facilities that are going to be put in. Mr. DADDARIO. I ask the question not because there is any precise answer that can be given to it, but because as we go through these hearings, it becomes clear that if we undertake to do the job we need to do there is every reason `for' industry to use its best efforts to particIpate. Mr. RAYNES. Yes, sir. Mr. DADDARIO. There will be some economic advantages to them. Mr. RAYNES. Yes, sir. Mr. VIVIAN. Will the chairman yield? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. On that particular point we just discussed, the infor- mation which I received from one of the agencies fairly recently mdi- rated that over the next 20 years approximately-I think we picked 20 years simply as an arbitrary time to allow, sufficient investment to take place and existing plants to wear out-on the order of $30 to $40 billion will be `spent for operation and installation by municipalities and such organizations if they followed the present.trends and bought present equipment. Mr. RAYNES. In just water? Mr. VIVIAN. Just in water-this represents approximately a billion and a half a year. This will, however, by no means meet the demand. This will lewve us with worse conditions than we now have. Accord- ing to the estimates made, if we tried to clean up all river systems to the secondary level and only a very limited number to a tertiary level, the cost would run to about 2½ times that amount, or $100 billion na- tionwide, of which roughly $20 billion would be ~in the Great Lakes, and roughly $5 billion in Lake Erie. An increment of about $40 to $60 billion is necessary to make a dent on the real problem rather than simply staying behind as we are now. I think that's approxi- mately the size of the market. Mr. DADDARIO. Does that make sense to you? Mr. RAYNES. Yes, sir. It is a big market. Mr. DADDARI0. You agree it is a big market. Mr. RAYNES. Yes, sir. Mr. DADDARI0. Mr. Brown? Mr. BROWN. I wanted to get some views from you on another aspect of the problem. We are holding these hearings primarily, of course, PAGENO="0204" 200 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT to determine the Federal role and you have made suggestions here. For example, you suggested that this troubleshooting group be avail- able through the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. On the other hand, you have also suggested the use of zoning as an instrument in the field of pollution control. This is a highly local operation generally, and I raise the question with you aa to the em- phasis which should be placed on local or regional versus Federal activity in this field. If I may just indicate a point of view, being from Los Angeles, I have some experience with the problem of pollution control in Los Angeles. We have, for example, an air pollution control district which covers the entire county. We have county sanitation districts which are combined under unified administration operation to operate the trunk sewage system, although there are local sewage systems also. We have a regional planning organization which controls the zoning in unincorporated areas, and there are local planning bodies within each of the 75 or 80 incorporated cities. Now, the air pollution control districts can take some steps and have, for example, prohibited backyard incinerators to control smog. What this did, of course, is force more grinding of garbage which puts more load on the county sanitation distriets. Or else it created greater loads of solid waste which in most cases are collected by pri- vate firms. The county regional zoning operation, by virtue of its power to control the location of industry, can determine the burden of pollu- tion in given areas and can also determine how pollution can be cor- rected by setting standards. I'm suggesting to you the complexity of the local problem. Might not one major effort be in the direction of putting more responsibility on local and regional organizations and at the same time compelling a more rational organization at this level? What is your reaction to this? Mr. RAYNES. I think the Federal Water Pollution Control Admin- istration, I always speak about that because I know more about water pollution than other forms, is talking about watershed management now rather than localized management. In watersheds the entire drainage system of a stream or lake is considered, and the coopera- tion of all the individual political entities is required. If they don't cooperate, of course, the thing doesn't work well. Your Los Angeles area, I think, is one of the ones that is always pointed out to as an example of how things should be done. It is almost unique in the country, is it not? Mr. BROWN. Well, to a certain extent, I think it is, but if it represents the acme which has been reached in this country, we are in real serious trouble. The Federal Government has begun to exercise leverage in terms of planning grants and this sort of thing to compel a rationalization of the governmental process at the local level. The point I'm raising here is, Don't we need to accelerate this a great deal more? Don't we need to use the Federal lever to compel a great deal thore coordination in the various types of pollution abate- PAGENO="0205" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 201 ment. efforts if we are to achieve any results? As in Los Angeles, for example, action in air pollution is frequently taken without consulting the sanitation control districts, without consulting the regional plan- ning agencies, and almost always results in putting additional burdens on these other bodies as well as on local government and. on private citizens. This is not the proper way to get results~ or to solve ~the problem in this area. Mr. DADDARIO. That comes under the heading of better management that you touched on. Mr. RAYNES. Yes, I think it would be preferable if they could. do it locally. But, if the local agencies won't do it, yet the people want it done, I think there is onlyone way it can be done. Mr. BROWN. The Federal way. Mr. RAYNES. Some Federal way. Mr. BROWN. I wish I could agree with you on that, but I almost am forced to the conclusion that if the problem is not being solved and can't be solved locally in a metropolitan region with 10 million people in it, a population which is greater than a large number of countries in the world, that all the Federal Government can do by direct action is prdbably to make the pr~blem worse. Now, maybe I'm pessimistic about this, but it seems to me that the step for the Federal Government to take and the role that it should exercise is that of compelling the local organization to rationalize itself so that it can solve the problem there. In Los Angeles we shouldn't have to send to Washington for experts. We have the experts in Los Angeles. Nevertheless we freqi~ent1y end up goinglto W~shington for them just because `we aren't organized to take advantage of what we have in Los Angeles. Mr. RAYNES. That's the management end. You `are now talking about a political problem which is outside of my sphere and in yours. Mr. BROWN. Thank you. Mr. DADDARI0. Mr. Brown does put the problem in the proper per- spective. Mr. RAYNES. He certainly does. Mr. DADDARIO. You are talking abopt a group of 10 million people with a problem that affects them personally. They certainly ought to be more concerned about it than `the Federal Government. It is hard to argue with your logic, Mr. Brown. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIvIAN. Mr. Raynes, I have about six points to cover here. I'll start off by saying that I hope that the Federal role in controlling ollution can be a strong and effective one. I have voted that way, but would not suggest that one be too hopeful. For example, we depend pon the voter for authority and that same voter doesn't wish to have osts imposed upon him by local property taxes and other taxes. It a question of when he should take out his anger and on what level. I think this is classically illustrated in the bill before us in Congress his week. We have a bill before us to establish civil rights in certain reas, one of which is housing. When the bill was first written, it was ore rigid than the existing legislation in my own municipality. At the first amendment, it `became less rigid, and less effective than he bill of my own municipality. I will predict that before it is passed PAGENO="0206" 202 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABAT~MENP it will be virtually innocuous so that the Federal role is not neces- sarily any stronger than the local role, depending upon the motivation of the voters in the area concerned. You have to motivate the voters to want results rather than simply rely upon the Federal legislators to tell the voter. To g~o beyond that, I would like to ~ask about the effective operating life of typical secondary treatment plants. Can you tell me what the wear-out time is for typical secondary treatment plants.? Mr. CONABLE. Is there such a thing as a typical secondary treat- ment plant? Mr. RAYNES. Ther~ are conventional ones. I think they are gen- erally amortized between 20 and 40 years, depending upon what the general municipality action is. I think 40 tends to be the average. There is a survey on that, on sewage treatment plant costs that I don't have with me. It was put out by the Public Health Service last year, about 9 months ago. The title of this publication is "Modern Sewage Treatment Plants; How Much Do They Cost ~" Public 1-Iealth Serv- ice publication No. 1229 (1964). Mr. VIVIAN. I'm interested in any information which is available on this subject for insertion in the record, Mr. Chairman, because I think it is going to show that research which might be started now or be partly along now which will lead to pilot plant' work ii~ the next few years and eventually to installation of plants in various cities, will come along at a time when it can replace a very large fraction of all operating treatment plants today. In `other words, we shouldn't assume that just becanse a city has a treatment plant now that that plant will not be replaced within the generation or perhaps even a decade. There are' often times when it is cheaper to replace large portions of a plant than to continue utilizing an out-of-date plant, and this trade-Off curve can be very shallow at times. ` Over a period of years it may be very difficult to see what the right year to drop an old plant may be, but usually there is merit to it, and of course, plants are also technologically displaced. If you come up with a cheaper plant, many cities say find a cheaper way and keep it because it will be in the long run cheaper. I would like to see more information on that subject if it is available. It can pace the R. & D. system to some extent. The next item is the subject of the powder coal treatment process in whièh your firm is involved. I understand that to date you have run tests on fairly large samples of a variety of effluents and are fairly~ convinced that the process works. I would like to know what you now know about the cost of this process as you project its application versus the cost of other treatment processes. Are you in a position to make any statement on that subject? Mr. RAYNES. I `can sa~ that we are convinced the process works. The appli~ability of coal in treating liquid wastes is established. It is a questiOii of economics that remains, thc~ economics and how good the effluent is. We. are `building a pilot plant in which the economic estimates we have made will either be proved or disapproved. Our present prediction is that coal `can treat sewage and remove more PAGENO="0207" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 203 contaminants than are presently being removed ifl conventional sec- ondary processes at something about 10 percent less cost than the pi~sø~t processes, e~i if one does not recover the thermal energy diiI' ~`eta,inedby the coal. Even on that basis. If one has a large enough plant or some place to recover that thermal energy, then the cost should go down quite substantially over that 10 percent reduction. Mr. VIVIAN. Can you tell me whether or not you have reached the point where any large-scale installation is being contemplated? 1 recognize that your reply might get into difficulty with corporate inf or- mation. Mr. RAYNES. Our pilot plant will be a quarter of a million gallons a `day, and that's the biggest operation we have got going now. Many people are talking to us about what is going to happen with the process assuming that it is successfuL We would like to see the coal-based process, and any new process that looks like it is going to help the pollution problem, get going as soon as possible. Mr. VIVIAN. I understand it is a proprietary process covered by patents, is that correct? Mr. RAYNES. No; the process belongs to the people. Mr. VIVIAN. Therefore, whether the process `is applied or not is principally a question of whether some firm will begin to make quotations and bids on specific plants and back them up with some form of guarantee? ` Mr. RAYN~S. Yes, sir.': Mr. VIvIAN. Can you ~compare the powdered-coal' process to the carbon-absorption process `which I presume is the principal estab~ lished process today? ` Mr. RAYNES.~ The carbon process is also in a pilot plant as I'under- stand it, except perhaps in one installation at Lake Tahoe, The powdered-coal process that we are developing is a process intended' to provide sewage treatment superior to present' secondary treatment' processes, whereas~ the carbon-absorption process is a tertiary treat- ment following conventional secondary treatment. When we get a chai~ce'~e will look at tertiary treatment using coal. We may be able to cut costs in tertiary treatment too, but right now there is no real competition between the processes. One is tertiary, the other, sepondary~ treatment. ` Mr. VIVIAN. I understand the carbon-absorption process uses finely pulverized pur~ carbon, is that right? Mr. RAYNES. Not too fine. The last technical paper I heard on this subject specified granules. , Mr. `VIVIAN. And, the' coal ~process uses `different material? Mr. RAYNES. Yes. Like table salt in size. Mr. VIVIAN. What difference is there between these materials? Mr. RAYNES.' Activated carbon is frequently produced by' charring coal, and in the process takes away from the coal some of its `volatile ingredients. The coal is as mined except for sizing. Mr. VIVIAN. The binder type of ingredients. In "other words, the two processes~ are' very similar except the extra stage of charring is used to get increased activity. ` Mr. RAYNES. There are similarities in the two processes. However, the activated carbon is regenerated by thermal-heating of a portion PAGENO="0208" 204 A~QUA~t OE ~ HNOLOGY FOR P0LLU'flO~ ABATEMRNT of it to reactivate It, and the ca~rbon is recycled with some loss.' In `the coal process the idea is to use thermal energy `because coal is sufficiently cheaper to make energy recovery economically attractive, audit also provides a disposal for the sewage solids and dissolved materials which have been removed. There are some other differences `too. Mr. `VIVIAN. Does the carbon-absorption process work on thinner effluents? `Mr. RAYNES. It depends on what basis one uses.' A pound of char- coal can take out more impurities than a pound of coal can, but if' you have no limit- ` ` , Mr. VIVIAN. Let me restate my question. Suppose you use the secondary plant which is a biological ~plant in part wi'th a carbon-absorption process, will you then provide some fuel to reprocess the carbon? Mr. RAYNES. Yes, if you use carbon. You have to put energy in to regeneration of the charcoal. Mr. VIVIAN. If you use a coal treatment plant and take the heat from the coal to regenerate the charcoal, you could have a combination of a secondary and tertiary plant with self-generated heat, is that correct? Mr. RAYNES. That is possible at least part of the energy requirement. Mr. VIVIAN. Is there any merit to using coal and. charcoal in the secondary stage? Mr. RAYNES. There very well may be. That's a ~ood idea. And I think also merit in considering using coal in combmation with some of the other processes Dr. Weinberger described yesterday, such as electro-osmosis and the like. Mr. VIVIAN. Are plants being developed which include multiple stages? Mr. BArNES. No. I don't know that a~ actual pilot plant would be necessary. I think one could couple~ the information from each. Mr. VIVIAN. On this whole subject of pilot plants which you men- tion on page 4 of your statement, I think the problem has been, and I think you probably will agree, that typical municipal systems have no margin for experimentation. Mr. RAYNES. That is correct. Mr. VIVIAN. Most communities are extremely reluctant to buy a plant which has any residual doubt about its operation. They would rather have a 90-percent plant that they are sure of than a 95-percent plant that might go wrong. Mr. BArNES. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. Is the Federal Government the only agency which is doing pilot plant research in volume? How `much work is being done by private, State, and municipal agencies to develop better plants? Mr. BArNES. You said the, only agency, in volume? I think that i~ correct. I think it is the only agency in volume. There are State programs but they are not generally pilot programs. I can't, sitting he're, recall of any. Mr. VIVIAN. Going down further, do you know of any municipal plants that are doing research and devoiopment on treatment plants? Mr. O0NAELE. `Chicagois, isn't it? PAGENO="0209" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 205 Mr. RAYN1~5. Yes; I think Chicago has or is contemplating one or thore, yes. Ithink there may be a few. Los Angeles? Mr. VIVIAN. The volume is not impressive. Mr. CoNAm~E. Will the gentleman yield for a minute? I aske the commissioner of pt~blic health for New York State last week ho much was being spent on research in New York State. They have billion dollar clean water program there that they are very proud of for which the people voted a billion dollar bond issue. He said, tha he didn't know, but maybe a couple hundred thousand was being spen on research-a very minimal State research program. * Mr. DADDARIO. One of the problems probably is that, although yo can finance the construction of a plant through bonding, you canno finance research and development work in that way and you mus use direct appropriation. It gets back to your original statement o the problems of obtaining tax dollars for these purposes. Mr. RAYNE5. Ther are sewage treatment plants for example, whic have grants to survey the phosphate situation now. Mr. VIVIAN. Grants from whom? Mr. RAYNES. Usually from the Federal Government. But that' not pilot plant work. Mr. VIVIAN, In the past, State governments have financed larg amounts of research in agriculture for their own State areas throng various universities in the States. Is there any cvidence that this is significant factor in the research? I gather from Mr. Conable's co: ments that this is not the case in New York, one of the biggest Stat Mr. RAYNES. Some 20 or 30 years ago Kansas used to do a lot o this, but I don't know about now. California does some. It is not very large factor in the situation. Mr. VIVIAN. For a market estimated in the tens of billions of dolla how much do you find being invested in research by private industry? Mr. RAYNES. I'm not able to answer that because I don't have enoug data, but I do know that we are getting increasingly more contact. know that some companies are starting to look at water pollution an air pollution abatement more than just casually, more than just sa ing: "Oh, there's a market, let's think about diversifying into it.' There are more people looking info it than there were 5 or 10 yea ~ ago, and with deeper comprehension. Mr. VIVIAN. I know that one firm in my own district is considerin setting up a pilot plant in conjunction with your own company. Th s is evidence of the interest of private industry. I think we should sti - ulate this interest because it is necessary before hardware can be bi upoi~ and quoted to municipalities. I think it would be well to have the Federal Government act in suc a way that it leads private firms to set up their own pilot operation You refer on page 5 of your statement to the zoning problem and I agree this is a very serious question because zoning boards, particular y the waiver boards, are usually given authority to scrap any laws f r the purposes of a single installation or industry. Mr. RAYNES. Yes. Mr. VIvIAN. You also point out that people are allowed to bui d on flood plains, and other areas that everybody knows in advance a e the wrong places to build. I don't imagine you have any answ r 68-24o-6a-vol. 1-14 PAGENO="0210" 206 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT to this question, but do you see any difference between regional orga- nizations, such as exist in Dade County in Florida, and other areas such as Detroit whose environs are chopped up into many small mimic- ipa4ities ~ Do you see any di~fereuce between the approa~ches being followed? Mr. RAYNES. I'm sorry, I don't know enough about that situation. I would like to read about it, but never have. Mr. VIVIAN. I think that's as much as I want to cover at the present time, Mr. Chairman. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Ryan? Mr. RYAN. I simply would like to commend you, Mr. Raynes, for your statement. I think it is an unusually fine presentation of the philosophy which we should be following in this area, particularly your point that we should not permit the lack of technology to prevent us from using what we have. I simply wonder if you have any specific suggestions for legislation which might be enacted at the Federal level which would force industry to use present technologies and present techniques to clear up environmental pollution. For instance, would you recommend industrywide standards? Have you any other thoughs as to specifics that we can deal with? Mr. RAYNES. I really don't know very much about ~your field, sir, political science. Mr. RYAN. I'm really asking ~wh'at the Federal Government could do in `the way of legislation. What could it say to industry `that would require industry to make full use of present technology in order to clear up waters and the air? Mr. RAYNES. Oh, well, speaking again ~erso'naliy, for a long time industry has, in general, said: "If you make us olean up here in the city X, we will take eir~rything and ~move It to city Y, and you will lose your tax base and:people will be threwn out of' work. Mr. RYAN. Isn't that a good argument for countrywide national standards? Mr. RAYNES. Yes. If `polluters couldn't go to city Y, if standards were the same all o~er. `the country, I think you could take `care of that particular excuse to keep on polluting. I `would like to see, in other words, the force of that argument taken away from industry wherever they are still using it. Many industries are,no longer using that ploy, by the way. They are statting to putt in pollution control measures that are required. But there are still some who resist. Mr. DADDARIO. To properly answer Mr. Ryan's questidn, you would have to take ~ survey of what in fact is being done in industry~ and not assume that in' every instance nothing is being done. Mr. RAYNES. That's right. `Plant surveys, not stream sui'veys. Mr. DADDAEIO. Then, using'the results of this `survey, w~ would have to decide if Federal intervention is necessary. ` Mr. RAYNES. `I recognized `when I use the word "industry," that I am being unfair to many individual corporations that `are cleaning up after themselves. But, on the other hand, usually when `the pollu- tors attack the conservationists, they `show little mercy, so I don't feel too badly. `Mr. RYAN. You say in your statement, ~production management will dump and vent just so long as it can get away with doing so. The PAGENO="0211" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 207 question really is: What can we do at this level to set standards whi h would apply industrywide and compel industry to measure up to th e standards? If they are doing more, fine. If they are already doi g it, then they wouldn't be aifected. Mr. RAYNES. I think t~t, is the enforcement part of the probie Federal enforcement very likely. Mr. RYAN. I know we have another witness. I think this* is interesting area to pursue, Mr. Chairman. Mr. DADDARIO. I don't know if you were `here, Mr. Ryan, when r. Vanik testified the,flrst day. `Mr.' RYAN. Yes. Mr. D~.DnARIO. This was a proposition which he put forth, and c r- tainly one which the committee has before it, and will consider. A I understand Mr. Raynes' position, he knows this job has got to be do e, but we shouldn't forget the work being done by certain industri s. There is a least common denominator problem. I know in Connec i.. ~ut they are doing a great deal of work in this field, but others are c n- tinuing to pollute so that the work, in fact, is not effective. Thank you very much, Mr. Raynes. We certainly appreciate yo r help, and I hope we might still have the opportunity to send so e questions to you and discuss some of these points with you furth r. Mr. RAYNES. I will be very happy to do whatever I can. (Additional questions and answers for the record will `be found in volume II.') `Mr. DADDARIO. Thank you ever so much. Our next witness is Mr. David 0. Knowlton. Would you pie se come forward, Mr. Knowlton. Mr. Knowlton is the president of Knowlton Bros., Inc.; chai' an of the board of governors of the Nationa~l Council for Stream Impro e- ment, and on the board of directors of `the America4 Paper Institi~te. I'm pleased to see, too, that he is an industry, member of the New Y~rk State Water Resources Commission and will probably be able, the~e- fore, to answer a couple of other qnestions which I noticed were ca s- iiig some Interest earlier. Mr. Knowlton, would you proceed, please? Would you identify or the record; ydur colleague, please'? ` STATEMENT OP DAVID 0. KNOWLTON, PRESIDENT, KNOWLT N, BROS.; ACCQMPANIED. BY DR. HARRY W. GERM, TECH1~IC~L DIIt~E0TOR ` , ,` , , .Mi~. KNO~VLTON. Thank you, Mr. Ohairman and members of ~he ccmmittee. I have accompanying m~, On my left, Dr. Harry W. Gel~im, whO is technical director of the National Council for Stream ImprOve- ment. ` `I ask Dr. Gehm to accompany me because it may be desirable to h~ive him participate in añ~wering some technical questions that would be beyond my ability. Before getting into my statement, I would like to say Mr. Dadda~io, that we are very much impressed with this' publication (Note: Witr~ess referred to Report of the Research Management Advisory P~nel through the Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Developn'~ent PAGENO="0212" 208 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT to the `Co~pnittec on Science a~id ~Astronautics, committee print en~ titled, "The Mequacy of Teeb~i&iogy for Polhition Abatement") anct the approach expressed therein. It raises what are to us some very searching questions that need to be answered, and we think this is the right approach to this broad problem. The pulp and paper industry, throngli the National Couneii for Stream Jmprovemen~, as well a~s the Suiphite Pulp Manufacturers' Research League and the Norfliwest Pulp& Paper .~.s~ociation, carries on intensivo investigations in the jleids of stream ecology, effluent treat- inent, and waste utilization. (Information provMed on this subject may be found in the committee files.) Also, the Institute of Paper Chemistry, conducts biological surveys and undertakesspecial projects for individual companies in fields related to stream improvement. The largest and broadeste~q~'t is that ~f the National Council f~r Streacm.~ Improvement, since the SuIphite Manufacturers' Research Lèagtxe deals mainly with byproduct recovery from spent sulfite liquor and the Northwest Pulp & Paper Association with surface water problems common to the Northwestern States. Both these latter organizations cooperate in the national council's activities participating from time to time in projects of mutual interest. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an informational question. I presume the council is supported totally by the pulp and paper industry. Is that correct? Mr. KNOWLTON. Yes, sir; it is. It is a noi~profit organization. sup- ported by about 85 to 90 percent of the establishments within the in- dustry. Its objectives are twofold. Research and engineering, añ~d' technical assistance. Mr. VIVIAN. Are contributions to the council considered tax deductible? Mr. KNOWLTON. Yes, sir; it is an operating expense. Mr. VIVIAN. Thank you. Mr. ENOWILI~N. The national council maintains five regional re~ search centers which are as follows: In N~w England, the Ne~ York region at Tufts University in Med- ford, Mass. In the South Central, Middle Atlai tic region, the Johns Hopkins University at Baltimore, Md. The Southern region, Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, La. The Central and Lake States region, at Western Michigan Univer- sity in Kalamazoo, Mich., and The West Coast region, Oregon State University, in Corvallis, Oreg. The work of these centers is from time to time supplemented by special projects 1o~ted at other insitutions when speciaiizM talents are required. Ar~ illustration of this is the one soon to get underway at Lehigh University's Surface and Coating Institute on the separation of water from hydrogeis. The purpose of this project is to suggest novel means for improving the dewatering of waste slurries produced by effluent treatment to permit more satisfactory disposal. Through these regional research centers, all of the waste disposal problems of the industry are, or have been, subjected to productive and continual investigation. PAGENO="0213" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 2~~9 The waste disposal problems of the pulp and paper industry a~e many and diverse. Different mills produce different wastes, and tl~e ~characteristics of the receiving waters vary substantially in assimil~i.~ ~tive capability depending on hydrology aiid other natural conditioi~s, usage and regulatory control. Thus, in a narrow sense, each situati*n ~constitutes a different problem. Through the years, however, ~n overall and broader concept of the basic problems has emerged. Und~r this concept, numerous individual problems are susceptible of cat~ gorization and solution under the following classifications: (1) Stream analysis and reoxygenation of rivers. (2) ~Suspended solids removal, clewatering, and disposal. (3) Aquatic biology. (4) Treatment of wastes for biochemical oxygen demand, (BO reduction. (5) Decolorization of wastes. The progress which has been made through industry research n each of these areas is summarized below. (1) Stream analysis and reoxygenation of rivers The pulp and paper industry was the first to employ stream analy is techniques on a wide scale, for formally analyzing the effects f effluents on receiving waters and for predicting the degree of treatme~it required to meet given water quality requirements. Through a tional council project, begun at Manhattan College and continui4ig to this time at the Uni~'ersity of Michigan, not Only was effecti~re use made of existing methods of analysis, but improved techniq4es were developed. For instance, in addition to forecasting thedissolved ~Qxyg~n sag curve resulting from the di.scb~rge of organic wast s, stor*~e requirements, and discharge schedules can nOw be preschedul ci for locations where runoff is highly seasonal and mill effluent must be impounded for long periods. Such forecasts are of vital importa ce as existing mills expand in size and new mills must be built in locati ns exhibiting extreme seasonal fluctuation inflow, especially when th re may be extended low flow periods. The stream analysis techniques developed are widely used for est b- hshing waste impoundment and release schedules. Several large i - poundments of this type are used where it is necessary to regul te waste discharge to wide changes in waste assimilation capacity cau ed by natural variation in runoff and dissolved oxygen content or by peaking operation of hydroelectric power stations. The basic fact of river reoxygenation is that replenishing of oxyg n- depleted water by absorption of oxygen from the air is relatively sl w. Restoration of dissolved oxygen removed by wastes through the e- composition of organic matter occurS only through adsorption fr ni the atmosphere. The rate at which it Occurs only depends upon m ny physical characteristics of the stream such as depth, surface a ea, temperature, rate of flow, and turbulence. For many years, the a- tional council has been prominent in evaluating and seeking me ns by which the rates of reoxygenation could be enhanced in sections of streams where critical conditions occur. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Knowlton, do you have any examples to si ow how this has worked out? Have you any successes as a result of reoxygenation work? PAGENO="0214" 210 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. KNOWLTON. I, think there is one, Mr. Daddario, near your'lo~a- tiOn in Connecticut, eastern Connecticut that was given a good deal of publicity~. through the Federal Paper Board where quite. some success was realized .in the mechanical agitation of a holding lagoon, and I think the results have been quite successful. Mr. DAD~~RIO. I think it would b~ helpful if ~oi~' êould supply `for ~he record some of the productive t~suits of this kind of activity. Mr~ KNOWLTON. I thin1~ .we can do that. We will he glad to, sir. (Information~prôvided on this subjec~t may be found in the com~ mittee files.) (~) Suspended solids remoDal, dewatering, and disposal The removal of suspended. solids from pulp and papermill effiuehts has probably received more ~ttention than any other phase of ,strea~m pollution control, since such solids may interfere with .downstre~m uses, reduce dissolved, oxygen levels; or float on the water surface. In addition, the ren~ioval of settleable solids is a necessary preliminary to further waste treatment. The first step taken by the industry toward'sus~ended solids reduc- tion in mill .eMu~nts was to remove bark.and other wood solids which could be screened from mill ~ffluents~ and dpied,biirned, or disposed of as landfill.' Following this, fiber recovery was an important additional objective. Ccupled with water reuse, the latter practice has proved to `be true conservation measure, since, by these means, water usage per ton of product has been cut to less than 50 percent of that formerly required,, substantial heat is saved and' about 1 million `tons' of fiber recovered annually.. , For many years, research has been directed toward improving the methods for suspended solids removal from various mill effluents. Four processes are now widely employed `for suspended solids redue- tion. These are sedimentation, contact reaction, flotation, and filtra- tion. All can do an effective job if properly applied under suitable conditions. Through the use of the above-mentioned processes, 95 percent removal of settleable solids and 70 to 90 percent removal of total suspended solids may be attained. In summarizing progress in the removal of suspended matter from mill elThients, it can be concluded that substantial progress has been made by the pulp and paper industry. Howe~er, problems still re- main, particularly with respect. to the dewatering' and final disposal of the large volumes of sludges resulting from clarification. Efforts to find a use for this material have been unavailing, and its disposal is both difficult and expensive. `The current practice is to concentrate the sludge to the smallest practical volume and finally dump the material on waste land. The sludge disposal problem is being investigated by the Federal Government, the pulp and paper industry, and equipment manufacturers. However, none of these suggested solutions is prac'- ticable, and tIi, ~cc~ntUation of tl~üs material taxes the ability of many plant owners to find disposal areas. This problem will be ,a~ggra~v~ted with increasing population density. (Information provided on this subject may be found in the commit- tee files.) PAGENO="0215" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 211 (3) Aquatic bioicgy A considerable portion of the national council's activities is directed to studies of aquatic biology. At the outset, a need was recognized for research in two directions; first, studies to determine the effect of various mill effluents on aquatic life, and second, studies designed to fill gaps in the basic knowledge of environmental requirements. The importance of recreation in our daily lives and the continuing use ~o our fisheries resources as a food source and means of hvehhood, hay prompted a number of pulp and paper companies to intensify their in- dividual and coordinated research activities in this field. Attentio has also been focused on the problem of organic enrichment of receiv ing waters, which may result in the occurrence of slime growths i streams. Many regulatory agencies have established blanket requirement calling for absence of nuisance growths in receiving waters, in addi tion to the maintenance of certain environmental conditions believe, conducive to propagation and successful development of aquatic life To the extent that the industry can, through research and field study develop valid information conceri~ing the interaction of mill effluent and aquatic life, it should be' able to devise effluent control method' reasonably `required to implement the multiple use philosophy fo water which is generally recognized as nec~ssary to an industrialize and urbanized society. A vast amount of research has been devoted to identifying th various constituents of pulp and paper mill waste which may affec the aquatic environment and in what concentrations these constituent alter the character of streams. La)boratory studies of factors affecting growth of sphaerotilus slime. in water receiving mill `effluents have been jn progress in the researel laboratories of several' paper companies, in additiOn to programs at Rutgers University, Johns Hopkins University, and Oregon Stat University. The influence of nutrient elements on the occurrence o slime growths has been demonstrated as well as the stream velocitie required for such growths to occur. The relative importance of variF ous sugars and of raw and treated sulfite and kraft' mill effluents i~ supporting' growth has been established, as have the effects of sanitary sewage, salinity, iron, sürfactants and microbial growth inhibitor~ The effectiveness of intermittent discharge as a growth contro method has been demonstrated on a laboratory and pilot scale. A full scale installation has been completed at one mill incorporating facili1 ties for spent sulfite liquor impoundment. (4) Treatment of wastes for biochemica7 oxygen demand reductio The oxygen-consuming characteristics of pulp and paper mill wast~ waters arise from the fact that wood, the basic raw material for pape~, is organic in nature. Although wood in its natural state is reaso - ably resistant to microbial attack, the residues from the chemical pul - ing processes as well as the various organic papermaking materials ar~ readily decomposed by micro-organisms. The oxygen required by back- teria for the breakdown of the organic matter is referred to as the biochemical oxygen demand, commonly known as BOD. The discharge of oxygen-demanding wastes to streams presen a problems for several reasons. The underlying cause of the difficult PAGENO="0216" 212 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT is that oxygen is only slightly soluble in water despite its abundance in the atmosphere. In pure water, only about eight parts of oxy- gen may be dissolved in a million parts of water at typical summer temperatures. If this low initial concentration is decreased by much more than about 60 percent, the aquatic~ environment may be affected. Under conditions of complete oxygen depletion, fish cannot live and anaerobic decomposition may occur. In view of these undesirable effects, it is necessary for the regulatory agencies to specify minimum dissolved oxygen requirements for a given stream. IJufortunately, the minimuw di~s~lved oxygen re- quirements set by `many States are somewhat `higher than authoritative aquatic biology research indicates is necessary. Unfortunately for the protection of aquatic life, `the treatment of pulp and paper mill wastes for the removal of suspended matter does not produce a proportionate reduction in the BOO of these effluents. Phi's is because 65 to 80 percent of the BOO is in a dissolved state and is unaffected by removal of suspended solid `materials. Chemical and physical techniques, such as ion exchange, dialysis, and electrical meth- ods to remove the BOO fra~ction, have' been tried and found either economically unfeasi'ble or mechanically impractical. Research con- ducted by the National Council and others in this field has indicated that the use of biological treatment methods is the most promising method for disposition of the BOD content of these wastes. Biological treatment may be of tw~ general types-aerobic and an- aerobic. Anaerobic digestion is decomposition of organic matter in the absence of free oxygen. In the aerobic treatment processes, bac.. terial and other micro-organisms oxidize the organic matter in the presence of dissolved oxygen. Oxygen is supplied to these aerobic treatment systems through either natural means, as in some oxidation lagoons, or mechanically in activated sludge plants and aerated ,sta~ bilization basins and trickling filters. One of the simpler forms of aerobic treatment is the oxidation lagoon, where the wastes are stored while `biological action reduces the BOD. In the Southern United States, substantial BOD removals are being obtained in storage periods as `short as a few weeks. ,The factors affecting the efficiency ~of this process, such as depth, detention time, temperature, and nutrient addition, were extensively studied by the National Council at Louisiana State University. These studies showed that the detention `time `to `accomplish BOO reduction is greatly decreased if the `oxygen transfer from the atmosphere is accelerated by `mechanical means. There is a growing tendency, therefore, to dif- fuse air into lagoon systems. Various techniques are used for this? including recirculation over concrete steps, diffused compressed ,`air, or mechanical aerators whic'h agitate the surface of the lagoon, thus enhancing oxygen `solution from the atmosphere. With this supple- mental aeration, it i's possible to obtain a substantial BOO reduction with 5 to 7 days' storage under summer conditions. Where large land areas are not available, and a rapid BOO rc- moval method is required, attention of the pulp and puper industry ha~ been focused on the trickling filter and activated sludge processes. In the former method, the wastes are sprayed on' bed's of stones or anothe~ filter medium, on which biological growth are developed.' The pas.. PAGENO="0217" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 213 sage of the wastes through the filter beds results in the partial oxida- tion of the wastes. The National Council has conducted extensive experimentation with the application of the trickling filter process to a wide variety of effluents, ranging from spent liquor thu paper machine overflows. While the results of this work show that the wastes tested were re- sponsive to this form of treatment, there still are difficult technical problems to be solved. As the BOD loadings possible with filters ar relatively low, high capital costs for the process are involved. The units also have a tendency to clog due to the fibrous nature of th wastes applied, as well as to the form of microbial growth on filte stone produced by papermill wastes. It is because of these limita tions that application of this process to pulp and paper mill waste has not been general. To date, the activated sludge process, and modifications thereof, i which the wastes are contacted with biologically active sludge in thank in the presence of oxygen have appeared to offer the best methods fo satisfying the oxygen demand of pulp and paper effluents where high degree of BOD reduction is required. The national council research project at Louisiana State Tjniversit first demonstrated that kraft mill effluents could be stabilized at greatl accelerated rates using this technique. Since this initial work on kra wastes, activated sludge experiments have been conducted on practi cally all types of pulp and paper effluents, it has been found tha substantial BOD removals are attainable with most wastes at deten tion periods of 4 hours or less. The rate of oxidation with the effluents is normally higher than with sanitary sewage because o the higher temperatures at which oxidation takes place and b'ecau of the improved aeration and sludge-effluent contacting method' employed. With respect to aerated lagoons, the national council project a Johns Hopkins has `been especially active in developing this techno - ogy. For locations where the limited requisite land area is availabl accelerated aeration in reasonably short periods, that is, 5 to 10 day retention, provides an effective means of oxidizing the waste. ROD reduction is adjusted to meet dissolved-oxygen conditions i the receiving stream.. Storage oxidation basins achieve in gener 1 from 30 to 80 percent BOD reduction, depending on storage tim season of the year and depth. Aerated stabilization basins are genera - ly designed to remove 60 to' 80 percent of the BOD, activated slud e units 80 to 85 percent, and trickling filters 40 to 60 percent. (5) Decolorization of wa.stes In the treatment of pulping wastes for suspended solids and BO removal, one characteristic; that is, color, usually remains unchange The brown color of pulping effluent is due to the presence of ligni s and tannins dissolved from the Wood during digestion and bleachin Persistence of color downstream in the receiving waters is due to t e resistance of these compounds to microbiological degradation. The importance of color, although largely aesthetic, also involv~ technical considerations in connection. with its. possible effects o water treatement for public water supplies and on process wat quality. PAGENO="0218" 214 APEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION `,BATEMENT In many sections of the country, particularly the coastal areas of the Southeast, swamp drainage imparts a natural high color `to' the rivers. This cOlor is chemically similar.to that of pulpmill effluents, both being derived from. the extraction of lignins and tannins from wood. In these regions thj3re is little or no objection to increased color of streams which are already naturally colored. However, in the cases of mills discharging to headwaters of other- wise lightly colored streams, particularly those serving as public water supply sources, the discharge of colored wastes may be obj.ection~ able. Insofar as fish life is concerned, all available information mdi- cates that the effects of these materials are negligible. Attempts Jiave been made to adapt biological tre&zrient proceeses to the oxidation of color bodies but these have nOt met with suoces~. The matter of `decolorization `of `colored pulping `wastes appears to need continuing `research, since at the presOnt time no practicable nieth'ods have been demonstrated. Turbidity, due largely to inorganic materials, can cause unsightly opalescence in receiving waters. Extensive research on clarifying su'c'h dispersions is conducted at the Western"Michigan. `Center. Removal of such turbidity from `some `wastes is readily, accomplished, but from others, results `of treatment is erratic and the coagulants required costly. A's previously stated, techniques have `been developed `and are now available to treat most industry `wastes. Future research activities by the paper industry will b'e devoted to developing more `sophisticated treatment methods. Increasing research `attention i's being given to the `treatment techniques devised for the purpose `of `reclaiming `waste water, so `t'ha't it may `be utilized `in an `ascending scale of uses, `b'oth in the mill `and `more generally as for municipal purposes. Research is also `being increased on `development work, through whi'ch methods developed in the laboratory are made available for actual mill use. I would `like to `continue from another `statement that isn't printed. Mr. DADDARIO. Please proceed. Mr. KNOWLTON. For the record, I think it is pertinent to state `that the national coUncil alone budgets in excess of $250,000 per year for research in the above-mentioned field. Beyond that `we `are making available `further funds for'ertensi'on of these.projecth~asopportuthties permit. As a matter of further interest, we `are currently negotiating with the Water Pollution `Control Administration a joint project on the sUbject `of decolorizati'on. I believe that `this join't approach may well be `the `most satisfactory way of `attacking many of our most difficult problems. Two weeks ago a `formal `statement `of the position `of the American Paper Institute was `presented by Mr. William R. Adams, chairman of the institute `and president of St. Regis Paper `Co., accompanied by Dr. Malcolm Taylor `of Union Camp Corp., `and Mr. `Charles `Hickey of West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co. `The `statement `was presented to the. `House. Committee `on Public Works. This atatement gave strong endorsement to t'he proposals and provisions `of H.'R. 16076 for grants and contracts for research `development and administration of `ad- PAGENO="0219" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGYFOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 215 ~vanced waste treatment `and water purification methods, as well 4s research for new and improved methods of joint treatment systems fc~r niunicipal `and industrial wastes. I fully agree that this is a mechanis~n that most probably will result in the earliest solution of som,e of oi~r most difficult problems. `Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Knowlton what part of your whole resear~h effort does this quarter of `a million dollars make up, what percent- age?' Mr. KNOWLTON. I think that would be a very difficult question i~o answer because it is the largest budget in this area of the industi~y associations mentioned, but as of the moment we have no means f knowing the magnitude of the `ind~idiial company r~se~rch `effo Do you have `any index of that, Mr. Gehuf~? Mr. DADDARIO. How does it relate itself to other research wo k being done in this joint way? How' much research is being done n this field separately `by any of the companies in the industry and ho does it relate. to the overall research effort for all purposes? Mr. KNOWLTON. Do you have any comment on that? Dr. GEHM. Yes. There is a large amount of money spent by in i. vidual industries on research and development. Some of it is spe t indirectly by our organization in cooperative work such as pilot pla t work where the mills build the pilot plants and we operate .them a d conduct the studies. As an educated guess, I'd estimate that five tim$us the total spent by the council is spent by individual companies. Mr. DADDARTO. I would appreciate if you would check this and make these comparisons because it would give us a good idea as to the magr~i~ tude of the effort and the way it looks as we take some kind of a b$d on the future. `Mr. Knowlton, this morning we have gotten divergent points pf view on `the multiple use of our environment. There is a confi~ct among users; there `are economic `voices versus conservation voic~s. Both positions are based somewhat on'scientific data available, and ~ve sit. here trying to get information `together so we can come up witl~ a political solution. As" a result we ~an probably classify ourselves `~as political scientists. Others are looking .to us. Those who are wo~k~ in~ `in industry, and those in the `cOnservation area offer their cxp4rt opinions and we must come to some kind of a balance between the tv~o, because they seem to.be somewhat in conffictwith each other. "Mr. KNOWLTON. I think from the' broad philosophical standpoi~t, Mr. Chairman, that there is in existence a mechanism to make a start on this problem; namely, coming `from New `York State I amqu te `familiar with the `approach to the total water resources planning t at is: currently `being undertaken there. Our approach is based o a stream' standards philosophy. Stream standards, of course, are si i- lar to land zoning. We feel that the use of streams for waste assimi a~ tion within this capaCity is `a legitimate. use of water, of our wa r resources, and this has to be qualified by the capabilities. The New York approach, the New York law provides for zoni g of the streams, assignment of standards by classification to the b st usageof the streams.. . Now, thi~ does not preclude future' upgrading and, as a matter~of fact, the State of New York is in the process of upgrading ail E PAGENO="0220" 216 ADEQUAdY bF TECI~OLOth~ ~ POLLUTION ABATE~tENT F streams to a minimum of D. No~w, we have a classification that goes from a double A down, to E and F, E and F are going to be eliminated. In 1965, the Congress enacted the amendments to the Water Qual- ity Act I think it was P.L. 89-234, which provided a. mechanism for the Federal. Government to stimulate the States that are not so far athrancedin this concept, to come.up with standards. In other words,, the Fed~ral Goveftment is putting a floor under the standard qualities and asking States to enact their own programs to equal or better that~ I think this mechanism is sound. I think that the best administration of the water resources can be handled at the local level, at the State level, but I think the Federal Government has a real role to play in stimulating the States to do this. Second, .1 think the Federal Government has a very real role in stimulating the training of manpower because as was brought out in. your discussion with Mr. Raynes, there is `a woeful shortage of man- power and no program is worth anything if you don't have the men to do it. I know, for example, in New York State that our own department of health is staffed at a level of somewhere 25 to 30 percent of the engineers authorized in ~tbeir table of organization. I think the Fed- eral Government through its broad educational interests can stimulate the training of more people in this fleid. A third area is that which we are concerned with here; namely, re- search. I think many times the Federal Government in conducting research on its own without reference to industrial applications is perhaps wasting time and money. On the other hand, as I pointed out in my concluding remarks, the approach to joint solution of problems is a very possible mechanism to attain these ends. The specific problem to which I had reference has to do with decolorization of wastes, and I think it was just within the last 2 days that Dr. Gehm sat down with Dr. Weinberger of the Water Pollution Control Administration to explore further the de- tails of the arrangement into which we are entering. Does that answer you somewhat? Mr. DADDATaO. Yes, I couldn't heap but bring up this point consid- ering the two papers' which have been presented to us. I'm pleased to see that Mr. Rayiies'hasn't left. I wonder if he might be willing to give us' his opinion on. this matter. Why don't you come forward, Mr. Raynes? ` Mr. RAY~n~s. Would you please restate'the question? Mr. DADDARI0. We have heard here today about multiple uses of our environment. `Would you comment on the, conflicts between uses be- tween the economic voices and the conservationist voices? Is there a balance or a meeting place which can `be of help to us as we approach a point where we have to make a political decision? Mr. RAYNES. Well, I hope to `be both a conservationist and a worker actually doing something about pollution. It' isn't enough, in my opinion, for industry just.tolsay, "We have a right to dump our waste," and it is not helpful for conservationists just to say, "stop."' I think som~one has to be working toward the soiution'to the problem. Every- one should'be workingat it. . ` ` ` PAGENO="0221" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 21~ Mr. DADDARIO. This is why I ask the question, because we have got 1~o certainly be pointing to some balance. Mr. RAYNES. I happen to disagree with the philosophy that strear4s are to be made to assimilate waste. I think that is a concept which is r~o longer valid. I tried to listen to your paper, Mr. Knowlton. Wh~n you talked about technical difficult~.es, you always seemed to come baqk to the fact that it costs too much. There are two different problems ~s I view it. One is a technical problem of can you treat the wast~s adequately and the other one is how much it is going to cost to treat ~t. What I am trying to do in my work is to make the cost as little as pop- sible, and I'm accepting tacitly it is going to have to be done. And, ~f industry were doing the same thing, I think we would come to reaso able solutions a lot quicker. Mr. KNOWLTON. I differ with you, sir. I think we are taking th~s approach, but you cannot separate the cost from the technology. Mr. CONABLE. You certainly can't separate the cost from the tec~ nology until there is some sort of subsidy available in the event the co~ exceeds the economics of the situation. We can't expect our industri to go out of business simply to have clean streams. Mr. KNOWLTON. May I inject at this point that, of course, this is o e reason why in a marginal area where it can be demonstrated that t e application of technology would put an individual enterprise out f business, this can often be worked out if given some time, and a willin - mess to work together. This can be best handled, I think, at the St e level rather than from the Federal Government level. Now, I would like to comment here on a situation in Monroe Coun1~y, in New York State, which Mr. Conable knows quite a bit about. Th*e is a very strong conservation movement within Monroe County th~t has resulted in some rather extreme positions being taken both by t e individuals involved and some of the State legislators. And, there has been a great deal of agitation to upgrade many of the classified strea s in the county. This subject became of such widespread interest in Monroe County, that a grand jury was convened this last winter a d spring and published a report in June. Mr. Conable, you may have seen that report. Mr. CONABLE. Yes, I have. Mr. KNOWLTON. And, they make to me what is a very sensible poi~it. Certainly it is desirable to constantly upgrade. And, they comme~d the public interest that is agitating for this objective. However, th~y say, "Let's come up to where ~we are supposed' to be now before ~ve talk about upgrading." In other words, the streams involved are not meeting the currqnt standards of classification. The sources of discharge are in proc~ss of developing treatment means, but let's get to that' point before ~e start talking about going further. And, I think this same philosop~iy can be applied on a nationwide basis. Let's come up to a reasonE4de level before we start talking about going further. Mr. DADDARIO. On page 5 of your statement, you said you are lo~k- ing for methods to improve the'removal of suspended solids from vatri~ ous mill effluents. You say efforts to find a use for this material l~as been unavailable and disposal is both difficult and expensive.' Wl~en we "find areas such as that where research has bCen ineffective, shoi~ld PAGENO="0222" 218 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT we not establish it as a goal to be acco~tnplished and make extra expendS- itures to solve the problems? Mr. KNOWLTON. There's no question about it, and it so happens that~ this is one of the two~p~oblems in which it was decided last fall to double otir research effortS within the national council organiz'ation~ this, and the decolorization as being the two most critical problem~ One of the problems here again comes back to manpower. The .statG of the art of sludge disposal dewatering is fairly advanced to th& point where there are only very, very few authorities in the country capable of carrying the work further. And, Dr. Gehm has spent some time during the winter and early spring exploring the available people to undertake this type of project. And, in fact, before we reach that point, we spent about 6 or 8 months tabulating and com- piling the known technology to date. This is now available and if it `would be of interest to your committee we will be glad to submit a copy of it toyou. (Information provided may be found in the committee file.) Mr. DADDARIO. It would be very helpful if you would. So that we can to a judgment as to what kind of problems there are in creating support for this kind of activity, do you find it difficult to get funds from your participating companies as you seek to increase your efforts in this area? Have you had resistance or not? Mr. KNOWLTON. Increasingly less resistance. Of course, m view of the current political climate and the interest in this subject over the ]ast 2 or 3 years, individual companies are more and more feeling the pressures both from the Federal level and from the local level ~ind recognize that where they don't have the solution to problems,. they are willing to cooperate and contribute in larger amounts to the joint efforts. I think that we~ are, as I say, spending in excess of a quarter million dollars this year. It is not practical to say: "Well, let's double that immediately because you have to implement it." And, I think, how~ ever, by next year that this sum will be quite significantly increased as the opportunities present themselves. Because, not only do you need the personnel, but you have to map out the direction in which you are going, and these projects are best undertaken at educational institutions where you have acknowledged and qualified scientific leadership along with the graduate students to do some of the leg- work. Have I put that aboutright, Dr. Gehm? Dr. GEHM. Very good. Mr. DADD4mO~ Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. You referred to Monroe County, N.Y., Mr. Oonable'a interest. I happen to have Monroe County, Mich., in my constituency and I would say that those who live there are most unhappy with the performance of the paper and pulp industry in terms of pollution of. streams and of Lake Erie. The local officials have been extremely reluctant to clamp down on obvious pollution because they feared the loss of the industries and therefore they have not used the authority whicliTheyha~u~idertiie law. On pages 5 and 10 of your statement, you quoted the figures on the performance of various types of abatement systems. On page 9, how~ PAGENO="0223" ADEQUAcY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMEN~1' 219 ever, you really have quoted the principal questions, and they are the following: High capital cost for the processes involved. And, the answer i~, "Some of the mills in my own district have not invested the caitntal," and second, even more important, next sentence, you say, "The units also have atendency .th clog due ~to the fibrous~ nature of the wastes applied," and so forth~ My experience has been that if I got down to those plants wh~n nobody knOws I am coming the treatment system is turned off and the flow goes directly from the mill to the river. When I go on a formal visit, everything is working and the watei~ is churning through. Some improvement is needed because the river basin which is the dumping point-and this flows directly into Lake Erie-is so bad that when you go through on a powerboat, the paper wastes float up to the top of the river and the smell is extremely offensive. In other words, there is no question about the pollution: There is no question about the level of trouble. There is no question about the fact that the BOD is out `of' sight. There is just simply no question about the fact that the papermills in that area have turned the river into a sewer. The question is, Who is going to do something about it? Part of the. ans*er concerns the subject of technology which we are all discussing today. The ~uestion I have is, Why do you try to concen- trate `these wastes either in water or on land instead of dispersing them over land? Water is, in a sense, a very poor place for treatment of chemical waste, particualrly when it is a stream or river. Why do you not dispose of this over acres of topsoil and let the natural biological work of the forest or farm take. care of the waste? Mr. KNOWLTON. Well, you pose several questions. Taking `your last one. first. Particularly in urban areas there aren't acres of ground ecessary. A lot of work has been done in spray irrigation. Mr. VIVIAN. You say in urban areas but the fact of the matter is there is no reason why you can't truck or pipe these wastes to nonurban areas. There's no necessity' to solve the problem in the amount of acres owned by the papermills at the persent moment. Mr. KNOWLTON. Perhaps if the land is available, but this touches again on the cost element. I think we must not lose site of the fact hat the disposal of wastes in streams has been something that has gone on ever since the beginning of man on this planet and it has been nly within the last 3 or 4 years that there has been this st~dden realiza- ion that this has to stop and you just can't turn around there in a urry. Now, going back to your individual case, the significance o he mill which all the valves were turned over. I know nothing about this. If this was a deliberate situation, nd no excuse whatsoever for it. On the other hand, no piece of me- hanical `equipment is going to operate 100 percent of the time, 365 ays of the year. Once in a while, something breaks. You may have been there a time when this happened. A second point you raise, why water is a poor medium to use-tha1~ ay be but water is the medium in which paper and pulp are made. I `s the basis `of the proeess,therefóre, you have not only the waste tha ~t carries but you have the water itself. PAGENO="0224" 220 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY `FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. VIVIAN. Excuse me. I have no objection to the use of water in papermaking processes. I do have objections to its use in the waste treatment process. Mr. KNOWLTON. Yes, but the water has to go somewhere and this is in the river. Efforts have been somewhat successful in reducing the amount of water that ~e are using in making a ton of paper. In fact, it has been more than cut in half in the last 20 to 25 years. Mr. VIvIaN. Has the amount of material dumped in the water gone down? Mr. KNOWLTON. Yes. I think there has been a reduction of 60 per- cent in the waste load contributed to our streams in the last 22 or 23 years, the duration of the council's existence in the face of an increase of production of two and a half times. We are making two and a half times as much paper now as we made in 1943 and the waste load con- tributed to our streams has been reduced by a factor of some 60 to 65 percent. So progress is being made. Now, insofar as the stuff that is brought to the surface as your motorboat goes by,. we can't deny the fact but there has been accumulation over many, many years of these sludges which we are now attempting to stop putting in but those that are already there, are going to take a long time to get rid of. Another point that you make and I think this is true in Michigan. Mr. VIVIAN. By the way, that river is dredged almost every year so you are physically removing the wastes. Mr. KNOWLTON. But this becomes another part of the sludge dis- posal problem, where do you put it? Mr. VIVIAN. Out in the lake obviously, where it is even more trouble. Mr. KNOWLTON. This isn't right either, but you are also going to run out of holes to put it in. But as far as' `the paper industry in Michigan is concerned, I believe that the mills in the area that you talk about have all signed agreements with the State authorities- Mr. VIVIAN. That is correct. Mr. KNowLToN. To understake abatement procedures. Now, these take time. There is manpower, available equipment, planning, design, and so forth. But I think progress is being made. Does this answer some of your questions, Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIaN. It answers some of my questions, but it does not soothe all of the irritations. I would like to comment further on this. I would like to ask if the use of the rivers and streams as places to vent chemical and biological wastes may be inappropriate as com- pared to large areas of land. It was said that there are not acres of land next to some of the mills. I think in my own case, there are thousands of acres available only short pipeline distances away. The question I come back to is over the long run, is it not better to use the surface of the ground which is extremely active rather than the streams? Dr. GE.HM. I would like to answer that. The paper industry has some 30 installations of this type, generally spray irrigation in operation at mills today. However, you can get rid of as a rule, of about 10,000 to 20,000 gal~ Ions per acre per day. Some of the large mills use 60 million gallons of water a day, so you can imagine the acreage that would be inVolved PAGENO="0225" ADEQUACY OF TECI~N0LOG~Y FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT :221 in their case, hence we feel it is not practical for larg~ mills but it i~ a very useful tool for many ~of our small ones and will be put to addi. tional use in the future. (Information provided on ±his subject may be found in~the corn mittee files.) Mr. VIvIAN. In other, words, you are actuallji~.maldag use processes ~ .* Dr. GEUM. That is right. . .~r. VIYIAN. Isthjain the Worth orin the Sotith~ : Dr. GEHM. Both. There is quite a number of them for examph on the Miarn~ Valley ~ti Ohio. Mr. VIVIAN. Now, if for. example~'the performance of the ~vari~ou~ :tr~atwent .pla~its is, around,7,0, or 80 percent-dam just remëmb~rin~ the figures on pages 5 and 10-and if the volume of paper producer rises as yoi~ say it is rising, this medns that the total amount of wast deposited in the stream may well go tip even though fairly good treat nient ~plants, are being used In other words, even a percentage lik 70 ~r SQ percent pnre, still iw~ans an enormous quantity in terms ô to1is being dumped in the streams When will you realistically b abl~tq se.tyonrs~U~ goals lik~i9 percent'? .` `~` Mr. KNOWLTON. Without answering your question &rectly'yet, M. Thian; Ithink: it is, true that vir;tually all of the new installation that are being built today an4 overthe recent few years, therëha&b~é no problem, the treatment plants have been built into the origina plans and the effl~~nts from these mills are'in pretty good ~hape. Tb real problem is how d~ we fix the old ones and bring them up toi lm Now, it has been estimated, and heic we are tossing big figure around, that it will cost industry something approximating a bilho doll~rs,'tq bring present installations `up to where we want them. ii *this is done over a period of 10 years, this is an average expenditure o n$~OO million ~a year. , But as Mr. Hickey o~f West Virginia pointe out in testimony before the Public, Work~ Com~nittee, `the total ~ro t picture of the paper'industry is somewhere in the neighborhood of $30 million a year, so what we are saying is that if we have to superim~o~ `;the .app1ica~ion of one4hird of the total profits of the indush~ int~ this problem, this is economically a pretty big job and it is proba'bljy not going to be practical. . . ` . Furtherinore, a large segment of this $300 million of profits coming from the newer plants that don't have the problem a~he~d them. Therefore, there may be cases where it would take the tot return, total profit of a mill applied over the next 2 or 3 years in ord io accomplish this result. Now, this is not consistent with our basic economic philosophy an $0 you have~ this problem and I come back to you again, you cairn t separate the technology from the cost. You have got to have the do - Jars to do it. Now, I know of an incident of a small marginal paper mill in Ne York State that has gone out of business. It was on a stream, to k the whole stream in one end of `the mill and put it out the other e d and it `was a mess. It was `a nuisance. The mill was a marginal mi 1. It was breaking even, It was faced with the cleanup and this, coupi d with other economic aspects, caused the ownership to decide f~ put t down. Os--24o--6c---vol, i-15 PAGENO="0226" `222 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY ~OE POLLtJTION~ ABA~I'EMENT Now~ they did no~ make the effort of cooperation.' They fought i all the ~vay `~through the courts and I think nobody "was ~orry' to s them go out of business `and it so happens that the indivithials wh were working in that plant now have Other occupation in the vicinity so there has been no loss from the employment `standpoint but this can happen, and I plead' that `where you have marginal operations, pro- grams can be `worked out but they have to take time. Otherwise, the communities involved might lose a major source of income, and thi is the real problem. It is not the big new mills. It is `the oidtimers that are causing this. Mr. DADDARIO. Gentlemen, I have got to advise yOu all that Mr. Knowlton has a 1 o'clock plane reservation. : Mr. KNOWLTON. Mr. Chairman, I'll stay just as long as you need me. Mr. DADDARIO. We can get further questions to you and I know how difficult' it is to get from one city to another these day~. `Mr. VIvIAN. Mr. Chairman, I have about 2 minutes `worth of ques- tioning in mind. The mills in my area happen to be `between 40 and 50 years old. Therefore, they have the problems of old mills. How- ever, they have accumulated profits over that time `and have amortized `their costs over 50 years. Mr. KNOWLTON. Excuse me. Section' 531 of the Internal Revenue Codedoes not permit you to accumulate profits. Mr. VIVIAN. They `have produced profits which could have cOme back into the business for pollution reduction. That code I totally agree with. Therefore, you are in a position of continuing improve-~ merits over the future as well as in the past~ Maybe 10 years o'f im~~ provement doesn't necessarily represent `10 years' of profits~ I point Out that the economics are nowhere near as bad as they seem fror~ th~ `comments you `just made. The second question I would like to ask you is, What requirements are being placed on the mills you have next to the ocean? Are you * being required to upgrade the quality of the effluents going directly intothe ocean?' ` ` ` ` , ` ` Mr. KNOWLTON. I think this is particula:rly true in the' Puget Sound area. Dr. GEHM. Yes, sir. Mr. VIVIAN. Is `it' true? Whe~e in Georgia, for example? Mr. KNOWLTON. In Savannah, agreeñients have just beenmade `for `treatment. Mn VIVIAN, I wOuld like to~ go into that su'bjec~t further in the record. What treatment is required for plants whose effluent flows directly into ~he sea?~ ` ` Mr. KNOWLTON. 1 would like' `to make this point that pro~ress is being made. `It is time consumi'ng. From all' the factors~ that we are talking about, in other words, there is no point in `saying, "All right, tomorrOw we will go out and spend a million dollars to do this." You have got to got the engineering clone and you have to have the basic surveys, Mr. Raynes, in adva~ice, in order to know what you are doing in order to apply the engineering and this all takes time. The New `York State program of pollution abatement involves a series of con- ferences with each source of discharge. These conferences attempt PAGENO="0227" ADEQVAC~ OF `~CHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 22~ to set up agreed upon timetable and in 90 percent of the cases to dat~ this has been done. The timetable of employment of a consultan~t if one isn't available already, the development of preliminary plan~, the approval of the plans, the development of final plans, and f1nall~T construction and operation, and these timetables stretch out into* matter of 3 or 4 years and I think if we take any given locality i this country, and we will lOok at the individual establishments in eac area, that they are better off today, they are farther along this tim table than they were a year ago or 2 years ago. Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Conable. Mr. CONABLE. Are there other industries that belong to th~ Nation 1 Council for Stream Improvement or is it just for the pulp and pap r industry? Mr. KNOWLTON. No; it is entirely pulp and paper. Mr. CONABLE. Do other industries, have similar organizations? F instance, do you know if the steel industry has any? Mr. KNOWLTON. I think they have these activities within the ove all trade assOciations. I don't believe there is another industry th has a research and engineering organization, or an organization d voted entirely to research and engineering. Mr. CONABLE. Does this situation exist because the pulp and pap r industry has a much more acute problem in the pollution area th n other indi~stries? Mr KNOWLTON I don't tl~ink so Would you say so, Doctor? Dr. GEHM. Not necessarily. Mr. KNOWLTON. But I know that manufacturing chemists and I believe iron and steel and petroleum participate in this activity' withn `the associations. Mr. DADDARIO. `Food producers? Mr. CONABLE. Are'we going t6'have afiyot]er industry represent tives during these hearings? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. Mr. CONABLE. Well, that's all, `then, except I would like to tha Mr. Knowlton for a very speèific statement. It has been' very hel ful, sir, and we appreciate your comments. Mr. KNOWLTON. Thank you and, Mr. Daddario, I would like~ say that we in the industry are completely in full cooperation wi what you are trying to do and we stand ready to be of any assistan we can. We will come down here again and give you facts and figur at any time. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Knowlton, we appreciate that and we certain y do intend to contact you further so that we may get answers to ad i- tional questions and help as we go along. (Additional questions and answers for the record may be found n vol. II.) Mr. DADDARIO. We are interested in an overall improvement of f- fort-that's well demonstrated in the record. The fact that we h~d you and Mr. Raynes here today is helpful, because even though the~e are some obvious conflicts in your testimonies, I think you can s~e a great deal to be pleased about insofar as direction and concern a~e PAGENO="0228" 224 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT at issue. We are pleased to have had you. and, we are sorry that you have to run off. So do we. We have just been called to the House. (Biographical, statement on David C. Knowlton foi1~ws:) BIOGUAPHICAL STATEMaNT' ON DAVID C. KNOWLTON Botu: February 8, 1910. Education: Hotchkiss S'chool-1927; Prirkcetou University, A.B-~~193~ (Phi I3eta Kappa) (Magna cum laude). Marital status: Ma~,ried Jane Elizabeth Lee, of Rochester, New York, 19~5; three children-two daughters, oile son. Home address: 341 Flower Avenue West, Watertown, New York. Business experience: Since 193.1 with Knowlton Brothers, northern New York's oldest industry with a history of over 150 years and the third oldest paper mill itt' continuous Oiierátion on the same `site in the U.S.A. Fourth generation of `Ktto~vltott Fapi44~' to be eoniiéeted with Knowlton' Brothers.' Elected secretary of the company in 1941, Vice-President In 1944 and In 1948 President attd Chi~f Executive, a position currently held. Industry affiliations: Past President of Specialty Paper & . Board Affiliates 1959-60'; IMrector, American' Paper `InStitute MOthber of Govei'nmént' Réla- tions and Air and Water Resources Ooth~n.ittees of American Paper Iüstitute~ Chairman, Board of Governors of National Council fo'r Stream'Improvement of the Pulp, Paper and Paperboard Industries, and `the Chairman c~f the Operatlzig Committee; Trustee, Institute of Paper Chemistry; Past President, Association of Putp Consumers (19~2-~53); Member, Joint TAPPI-APPA Advisory Com- mittee to Forest Products Laboratories; Director, Associated Industries of New Yo~k' `StCte~ Inc. . ` Other business affiliations Director, Marine Midland . Trust Company: of Northern New York; Trustee, Jefferson County Savings Bank; Director, `Beebee Island Corporation; Director, Conde Hardware Company.; Director, John Weeks & Son Compàn~. Government affiliations: Industry Advisory Member-N.Y. State Water Re- ~otti~Os Commission Member ~ Y State Health Department Industry Advn~ory Commlttee on Water Pollution control. , Community actlv1tie~: Trustee, Emma `Willard School, Troy, New York; Elder of the First Presbyterian Church; Trustee, House of the Good Samaritan; President and Trustee, Watertown Cemetery Association: Past Chairman, Jef- ferson. County lhapter~ Ainericaii Red Cross; Trustee, Citizens Public Expendi- ture Survey, Inc. This committee will adjourn until 10 on Wednesday next. (Whereupon, the committee adjourned at 12:25' p.m. to be recon- vened at 10 a.m., on Wednesday, August 3, 19~6.) PAGENO="0229" THE ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1966 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ScIENCE, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT, TVcü~ingto'n~, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10:10 a.m.; in room 2325, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C., Hon. Emllio Q. Daddario (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. DADDARIO. This meeting will come to order. Our witness this morning is Mr. William E. Warne, director of the Department of Water Resources, State of California, and I understand Mr. Warne, that Mr. Dillon is here with you. Mr. WARNE. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Tim Dillon is here with me. Mr. DADDARIO. Would you proceed, then, Mr. Warne. STATEMENT OP WILLIAM E. WARNE, DIRECTOR, DPARTM~NT OP WATER RESO1TRc~S, STATE OP cALIFORNIA; ACCOMPANI]~i) BY TIM DILLON Mr. WARNE. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my name is William E. Warne. I am the director of the water resources, State of California, a position which I have held under appointment of Gov. Edmund G. Brown since the 1st of January of 1961. I also am a member of the~ California State Water Quality Control Board, a board on which I have served for some 8 years, and a member of various other agencies of this sort in the State. I served one term on the President's Water Pollution Control Advisory Board, a 3-year term which terminated a year ago. My presentation today is divided into two parts. In the first part I will discuss areas where we feel inmprovements in technology are needed for a better understanding of pollution problems, and I will place particular emphasis on the pesticide and fertilizer pollution of lands in the San Joaquin Valley. Ii~ the second part I will discuss the administrative and policy problems encountered in applying technology at the State and local levels, as these subjects are listed in part E of section VI of the report of the Research Management Advisory Panel, "The Adequacy of Technology for Pollution Abatement." Although the subject of pollution abatement is broad and complex, my presentation will be limited, for the most part, to water-related matters. We all recognize that pollution mu~t be viewed as it relates 225 PAGENO="0230" 226 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT to the total environment-land, air, and water-rather than as it may affect just one of these resources. With the ever-increasing demand for water in California the size and complexity of our water developments have steadily increased. The reuse of water has become commonplace, and quality has emerged as an element as important as quantity. Now, after we have been developing these western water supplies for 110 years, in our State, the problem `of gradual deterioration of the quality of water through reuse is beooming critical. Downstream users `are in controversy with upstream users in many river basins of the irrig~ed west. In the future many more streams will be affected. Your committee should be commended for getting the quaTity prob- 1cm out where it can be studied and considered now, rather than waiting until it has grown to such proportion that it will be possible of resolution only b~ extended litigation. Major efforts are being made in California to evaluate the big- nifloance of the following water-quality-related factors which influ- ence the usability of our water resources: first, drainage wastes; sec- ond, nutrients; third, pesticides; fourth, detergents; fifth, waste rec- lamation; sixth, desalination brines; and seventh, solid wastes. The amount of salt which accumulates in root-zohe soils must be maintained at a fairly low level or crop growth can be inhibited. Ex- perience gained throughout the world has shown that irrigated lands in arid and semiarid regions of the world deteriorate unless adequate drainage is available. For the committee's information,, as a basic point, our California agriculture is about 95 percent irrigated agriculture. At least the values of the crops from irrigated lands run `about 95 percent of the total. We have about 81/2 million acres irrigated in the State and California has a' gross crop value plus livestock value of about $3,600 rn illion a year. We are* the leading producer `among the 50 States. The problem then of the care of the soil's under irrigation is partic- u1ar1y important to California, and it is also growing acute. `When the mineral content of drainage' waters rises to levels that make `it, no longer suitable for. reuse, even though the water may not be contaminated so far as health i~ concetined, it must be returned as directly as possible to the sea, Otherwise, it can poison the land `with its accumulated salts. Evidence of the progressive deterioration of water caused by continual reuse may first appear in critical degree in a single area downstream, but the probl~'m and its solution are not restricted to that immediate area and may be `basinwide or even inter- basin from the first. The `accumulation o'f salts in the soil profile, as well as the develop- ment of high water table conditions, has made `it impracticable tio farm extensive portions o'f the Indus River Valley in India and Pakistan as well as about 25 percent of the Delta of the Nile. Mr. VIvIAN. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. Aro you suggesting that these areas are recoverable? Mr. WARNE. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. In other words, wouldn't it be possible to increase the agricultural output of those nations by desalinating the soil? PAGENO="0231" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Z27 Mr. WARNE. Yes; that is. true and there are extensive programs underway at present, for e~ample, in Pakistan, with this as an objec. tive. Mr. VIVIAN. Do these programs have a good research base? Mr. WARNE. I think they have a pretty good research base. I don't know that one can say that they have been carried far enough so that you can demonstrate that they are going to be fully effective, but we believe they can be effective. . . Mr. VIVIAN.. It seems to me that it might be cheaper for us to assist them in this way than tQ supply them with foods that can be grown on their own soils. Mr. WARNE. We are assisting in part in this effort through our in- ternational aid program in Pakistan. Mr. DADDARIO. Aren't private foundations contributing also? Mr. WARNE. They are, and numbers of our contractors for example, general contractors are working in these areas. I think the World Bank is also participating. In our c~untry, as well as in foreign lands, we find examples of quality problems related to drainage. Coachella and Imperial Val- ieys.in California already have, recognized the need for drainage and have installed many miles of subsurface drainage lines to carry leach- ings from irrigation waters to the Salton Sea. The Imperial Valley landOwners have installed some 10,000 miles of subsurface tile drains. In addition, the imperial Irrigation District has constructed 1,400 miles of collector Canals to provide drainage for some 250,000 acres of land. The drainage problem in the San Joaquin Valley is just developing, but its solution is important to.the agricultural economy of the State and Nation. The significance of this statement can be recognized when one realizes that the agricultural income in 1965 for the 8 counties within the valley was greater than the. agricultural income .of all but 3. of the remaining 49 States, the exceptions being Iowa, Texas, and Illinois. We have recognized `the existing drainage problem in. the San Joaquin Valley and have been making studies to determine the de- gree to which the problem will be intensified by deliveries of water from the Federal-State joint project. I refer here to the San Luis division of the Central Valley project of the Bureau of Reclamation and the State water' project which will supply something like a million and a half acre-feet of water into the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley fOr irrigatiOn. We have a' cooperative undertaking in this particular joint development. We already have plans for constructing a drainage facility to convey and dispose of the drainage w.aters from the valley to the tidal' waters of the Sacramento-San Joaquin'River Delta. ` . Dr. Warren R. Schoonover of the University of California has made an independent study of the need for drainage in the San Joaquin Valley, and `in his report of April 1965 he pointed up the urgent need for building facilities to avoid development of a drainage problem in the San Joaquin Valley. He further reports that the drain can be built with a discharge at Antioch Bridge withOut any significant con- tribution to delta and bay pollution-I'm referring now to the San Francisco Bay-for a decade at least. PAGENO="0232" 228 A~EQtTACY OF TECHNOLOGY ~`O~ PO~LtTiON ABAPEMEI~T Studies made by.the department of water resOurces are in subet~n~ tial accord with Dr Schoonover's report, howe~rer~ somt~ of the agen~ cies located near the proposed point of discharge are worried about the possible effects of drainage waters dn their water supplies B'efo~'e the drainage ~astesiare discharged to t~dai eatimries, we ~re making intensive studies to measure preek~isting or `~baseline" quality conditions so that the influence:of the drain waters on the prevailing environment can be assessed. This aspect has r~sulted in numerous differences of opinion because of the lack of generally accepted meth- ods for defining "baseline" eondition~ for some of the materials ~hich may be carried `along with the drainage waters, particularly nutrients and pesticides,: These,latter materials wiil'be discussed in more detail later. r,,,, Financbi.g the p~óposed `San Joaquin ma~ter dmiñ is another matter which has `caused considerable concern~ ~eariy everydñe `agrees t~ the ueed for:drainage facilities; most disclaim responsibility to pa3~' fo~ them. We are now working on a repayment' plan which incOrporates~ the concept of apportioiimeut" of co,sts'both to specific and `to general benèfloiuries. Under this plan, wportion `of the costs would be repaid b~r the pei~son's' `who actually divert `drainage waters into `the drain.' rfheremainderUf the costs would be repaid by~ levying a' tax On all of the tributary lands within the basin. ` ` ` ` Mr~ DADnAmO. Mr. Warne, on page'4of your testimony you ref'Cr'to Dr. Sehoonover's indepei~derit study in whiCh he re~orth that, ~the dr&in ean be' built with a discharge in the Antioch Bridge withoutany significant contribution to delta and bay pollution for a' `decade at: leas~." The question'comes th mind, are We aceothpl'ishing anything if we are merely forestalling' aprobiem fOr another 10 `years? Mr. WARNE. We anticipatethe extension of the drain further west' as required and when required. We `already are endeavoring `to work out what we call' a regional waste disposal program whichwilI include the `delta, and the San Francisco Bay area aiid `Communities, all the drainage area of the San Francisco Bay. `The thought is that eventually `an `outfall, perhaps more than one, and `a ~ollector system will serve both the agriculture drain and~ the industrial and municipal drains' from `the bay ~ommunities, carrying the wastes clear `into the Pacific. ` " ` Now, this' doesn't seem to `be needed at the `moment, but the day will come, w'e feel certain, when `a; really extensive program of this sort which will combine the dispoeal of agriculture wastes `and of'municipal wastes likely will be needect ` ` The present discussion actually is not between a drain: with an out~ fall at Antioch Bridge and"the'ultimate disposal plant~ `but rathCr be~ tweena dra~iñ with' an outfall at Antioch Bridge':and one that might reach as far west as Port Chicago; which is downstream from `the Antioch Bridge. Mr. DADDARTO. However, can we continue to ad]ust to the amount of discharge which any stream or bay along the coast can take and then assume that sometime in the years ahead we can move into another area as the old one becomes contaminated to the point where it can no longer sustain such `,a discharge? ~ we need to get more to the source? For example, we have heard testimony before this committee PAGENO="0233" `AQ1~A~ OF ~CI~ØL~ i~O]t 1~OLLUTIOi~ `A~ATEi\~NT 229 `that `*~ must `riot try to ~tabii~h' a standard to determine how n~i~h waste material a river o~ `body' of water can sustain, but rather'~e should discourage the discharge of anything of a dero~atmg nature into any stream. . Mr. ,WARNE. Weil~ I agre~ I think, ?witlt the philosophy that there `i~ii't' any `right to pollute. That what we `need tO `do `Is to preserve the waters for all purposes, both at a quality' and `quantity that will satisfy `the needs ot a society that is using them and. I certainly would flat rnake any~exception of the San Fran~iso~ ~ay in this regard. It is a prime area M California. ` ` ` `` Th~ main consthtueut in the drainwatere from the San Joaquin Val- ley is going to `b&'ehiorid~, `and, ~of ~o~rse, the bay is already s~lty ~o that we aren't doing anything to the bay by putting more salt into it / This drain' waterwon~t beas salty as the' bay w'at~r that' rece~es it. `On the other hand, I don't thmk that we could possibly stop the accumu lation of waters' in the San JOaquin Valley that ar~ waste waters~nd ~inust need be disposed of.. Do you* see?" Our alternatives do nOt, it seems~to the, include either `to cease irrigating or to' destroy the bay. As a matter of fact, we can't stop the accumulation of salty `water without stopping the irrigation of the valley. So our real problem "i~ to' collect and manage th& disposal of t,he water in a way that will not damage the living conditions or the ecOnomy of'associated areas in the `State, the valley, or the bay. `` ` ` We believe that we can do this with the plarining' that' we presently `h~ve?'unde'i'way~ ` ` ` ` ` Now, lam anirHgationist. `That is, I think; my principal' specializa- tion. There are many irrigationists who contend that there is no iii- definite' life' ifi' an irrigatiOn area. `That all irHgation areas grow old and die. That's a'fate that we `don't look forward to in our State. We believe that we can extend indefinitely the life of the irrigated areas of the' State~ of California by proper mathg~einent, both' of the water put on the land and the water removed from it. I don't see that we have any other `alternative than to plan to `do ~o and to prbse- cute programs ~designed to achieve titese ends. Mr. DADDARIO. Thi~ is true, but on th~ ~the~ hand, you èa&t stop what~ you are~ doing, There needs to be `progress, and while yoit are maintaining this agricultural production level, discharges `will con- tinue with resulting problems. Mr. WARNE. There are some problems. / Mr. DADDARIO. One of them, of course, is convincing people not to disclaim responsibility to, pay. You must have the n~tOssary fufids .to carry out as quickly as possible some of these programs `you have mentioned. "Mr. WARNE. I `think problems in the political and soCiological a±enas are. just as diffioult'a~the ones'iIl the'teOhnical arena here. Ho~v do we get the larger community committed to programs that ar~ essen. tial actually to the life of the wholec community, but seeths to be re- stricted to theii~ initial impact? / ` Mr. DADDARIO. Do you see a growing tendency on the pa~'of the people, however, to recognize the problem and `to be willing to suppOrt the necessary expenditures? ` ` ` ` Mr.' WARNE. Yes, I see a tendency, but I wouldn't say that I'm con- fident at the moment that we can get a drainage district as large as the PAGENO="0234" 2~O £~PEQVACY OF TEC~{OLOGY FOR POLLUTION AB4TEMENT San Joaquin Valley adopted, though that ~ertain1y is what we belieye should be done and it is what we are trying to put forward. Mr. MOSTIER. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DAnDARIO. Yes, Mr. Mosher. Mr. Mos~ER. In. the last sentence on page 5 of your testimony, you mention tbe problem of taxes. Would this tax be in the form of a user tax or would it be a conventional real estate tax? Mr. WARNE. Wha~t we ~ctually had in mind and what we have pro- posed would be~n;ad valorem tax which would amount to maybe as much as 4 cents on a hundred dollars of valuation, and a user tax or a charge against the discharger who would put water into the drain so that you have two charges really; one on the discharger who would pay on a metered basis for the use of thedrain, and the other on the whole community which we believe would pay in accordance with the responsibility that it has for the creation of the drainage problem. Everybody within the basin contributes to the problem. Mr. MosHEn. This relates to your earlier testimony in which you referred to the apportionment of costs both to specific and to general beneficiaries. Mr. WARNE. Yes. Mr. MOSHER. But, in effect it would be :a user tax. You would'~be. paying for the privilege of discharging. Mr. WARNE. The one who had had immediate access to the drain would pay for the privilege of discharging waste waters into it. I think there is some thought that perhaps the problem is pervasive enough so that part of the cost ought to be carried by the general taxpayer. Mr. MosIn~R. This would be a tax based on real estate values. Mr. WARNE. Or from whatever the general taxing source was, yes, from the general fund source of the State. These are problems that have iot been resolved. I think at times drainage programs affecting irrigated lands in our State have been delayed until there have been ruinous situations created. Mr. MOSHER. Basically, these are political problems, aren't they? Mr. WARNE. Basically they are political problems. Mr. DADDARTO. You mentioned that part `of the problem of drain- age waste,'was the progressive deterioration of water due to continu- ous reuse. Mr. WARNE. Yes. Mr. DADDARTO. Are we doing enough to forestall this deterioration? Can we build up the reuse cycle over a period of time? Mr. WAENE. Let me `give you an example. I suppose it is the best we have in our State. The example. of Santa Ana River Basin `in south- em California which `at its very upstream edge has excellent water. In the head' waters of the' Bunker Hill Basin in San `Bernardino County, the uppermost reach of the Santa Ana River the waters are splendid. We have a situation in the Santa Ana River Basin in which the stream is intermittent, ground waters basins are the real repository of the water supply, and the whole valley has for years depended on pumping water from the ground water basins. There has not been sufficient water in the stream, naturally `collected, to sup- ply the needs of the people `who live there. Sb that as the water is PAGENO="0235" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 231 pumped, it is moved progressively downstream and reused for irriga- tion and other purposes, until down clOse to the Orange County shore of the Pacific where it become~ pretty heavily loaded with vari- ous minerals and depleted to the point actually where the sea water has intruded. You can't tell the difference in some of the wells be- tween the dregs of the lowest basin and the intruding sea. The wells have to be~ abandoned. So, what can be done about it: more water can be inserted into the basin and that of higher quality. In other words, a program can be effected to cut down the recycling effect and to manage the basin so that the new waters are mixed in a way that makes all the waters continuously usable. We are trying to do this, some of our local agencies in Orange County are doing a very fine job with this kind of program. How- ever, they are using Colorado River water in Orange County at the present time, and it is not of the best quality when it comes from the river. We have a real and continuing problem of managing the waters of the Santa Ana River Basin. Now, we have thought of, but have not yet put into practice, a means of actually reversing this trend; that would be to desalt, demineral- ize through one of the desalination processes, a portion of the water, put the utterly unusable brines into the sea, and put the purified water back into use through mixture with the waters that are naturally available in the basin. I think that this kind of program will be prac~ tical and will be adopted within another generation. Mr. DADDARIO. is there sufficient work going on in this area? Mr. WARNE. Our State and the Federal Government through the Office of Saline Waters of the Department of the Interior, have under.. taken a test center in San Diego County on the San Diego Bay. We had a demonstration desalting plant at Point Loma cooperatively, jointly constructed by the State and Federal Government. We are following this carefully and we are a full participant in it with the Interior Department. They are going to dedicate on the 10th of tWs month a second plant, the first one having been moved to Guantanamo Bay in Ouba. Our test center is not completed as yet, but it is underway. We hope to conduct certain experimental work there right along with the Federal Government, looking toward development of practical pro- gt~ams of the sort that I outlined to you a minute ago. Mr. MosnER. Mr. Warne, earlier in your testimony you said the reuse oJ~ water has become commonplace. However, a number of pre: vious witnesses have implied that it might not be commonplace at all but rather quite exotic. When you say reuse of water has become commonplace, I think you have to make clear that you are talking about it in a very limited sense, aren't' you? Aren~t there many possible reuses of water which haven~t `been developed at all? Mr. WARNE. Well, I will discuss that some, a little later, but I don't think I'm wrong when I say reuse of water is commonplace. In Cali- fornia I am sure that it is. It may no't be appreciated or understood or even recognized or admitted, hut it is surely happening inthe Santa Ana River Basin. Chairman MILLER. Would the gentleman yield? PAGENO="0236" 232 ADE~TJ~CY OF T~CI~NOLOG~ FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. MOSHER. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Chairman, we are pleased to have you here.. Chairman MILLER, Would ypu be willing to drink raw Potomac water which had been extracted from above the purification plant? Mr. MOSILER. Not I. Chairman MILLER. This water in front of us has been reconstituted. Sometimes we don'~t appreciate that fact and we get terribly disturbed when we talk about reconstituted water, But most of the water we use has to be filtered and treated with ~hiorine and then aerated and pumped back to us, and it's good quality water. Mr. MOSHER. The point I was making, however, was that there are still vast possibilities for the further technology in the recycling and reuse of water. Mr. WARNE. Oh, I don't doubt that. As a matter of f~ct, one plant at Whittier Narrows in Los Angeles County of the Los Angeles County Sanitation District presently is reclaiming water out of the trunk sewer; something like 10,000 acre$eet of water a year. The reclaimed water is being put on spreading grounds immediately below the Whittier Narrows Darn where it is percolated into the ground water basin and then is available for reuse by pumpers downstream. Downstream is only a space of a few miles before the Pacific Ocean is reached, but, ii~ this basin reclaimed water is so used. Now, this has been very carefully planned, very carefully operated, very carefully nionitoreci and we are sure that this water is good when it reaches the ground-water basin. We are also sure that 190,000 acre-feet additional water could be so reclaimed in the area of Los Angeles by this same process. The additional water is not being so reclaimed at the present time. While we have the technique a~nd the method, we do not as yet have the iro- gram to reclaim this large amount of water which is wasted to the sea. That water has* a great~ economic value in our State. It cer- tainly is worth an immense amount of money~ and to replace it costs great sums. Mr. DADDARIO. If you will proceed, Mr. Warne. Mr. WARNE. One of the most controversial factors influencing the development and utilization of water resources in California is that of nutrients. These are the materials that encourage or stimulate biological growths, particularly algae. r~e phenomenon 9f bio1ogi~al growths in natural waters is a ne~çs ~&Q~ th~ e~viro~me~t.; N~tVural purification ~yid~s~ ~- m~dous ~ erhetween Irnan~ th~uence and nature,~. balan~. * Algae and plankton co~thüte a very important ~shfood. With- out a substantial supply, stipported by nutrients, we would have no fisheries. It is in the area of exceSsive biological productivity that we en- counter undesirable problems such as unsightly growths or blooms where these microscopic plants become so numerous as to become aesthetically objectionable. In addition, upon decomposing, the plant material may actually pollute the water, utilizing excessive amounts of oxygen and often prodiicmg obnoxious odors. There is considerable speculation as to the significance of many materials with regard to the effect on algal growth. It is generally PAGENO="0237" ADEQtTACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 233 agreed, however, that nitrogen and pliospl~orus are peiliaps the most significant.. A number of the microscopic plants have the ability to utilize or fix atmospheric mtrogen, making it available to promote algal growth. Phosphorus, on the other hand, must be added to the water through the natural processes of decomposition of rocks and organic materials or be introduced as a waste pollutanìt. For this reason, phosphorus is recognized as a key factor in stimulating or limiting biological growth. in addition to natural sources, phosphorus reaches our water sup- plies through return flows from agricultural lands and through sewage discharges. Although phosphorus is an important ingredient in fertilizing mate- rials applied to agricultural lands, return flows do not show significant amounts of phosphorus being returned to our waterways. This prob- ably results from the utilization for crop development as well as from the chemical interaction with the soils which tends to retain the phosphorus. ]~nicinal wastes on the other I~ai~ up~,ar~o ~e~r mo~t th~i~ ça~ ~ qf ~ of This from the.. hn.ildeis u~eçl~ jn deter j~n~il Qt~1~Siiular.. (~leaLh1~ ~rnduct~ Processes are available for reducing the amount of phosphorus in our waste discharges. These processes currently are being used at Lake Tahoe where nitrogen and phosphorus have been found to pose a threat to the clarity of that unique lake. The phosphorus-removal process is very costly-about $100 per acre foot-for general applica- tion. rube urgent need to protect the pristine qniality of the waters of Lake Tahoe also requires a treatment method to remove nitrates from wastes which might be discharged to these nitrate~sensitive waters. While this is an immediate need, its applicability should extend far beyond this particular instance. Prolific algal growths have caused problems at Clear Lake and at the Salton Sea. These growths, resulting from excessive nutrients, have contributed to extensive fish kills and to odor problems in the areas wherebloorns have occurred. Recognizing that one of the major areas of concern regarding the San Joaqurn master drain relates to the possible effects of nutrients on the receiving waters, we are constructing a prepilot treatment plant to study various means to remove or strip nutrients from the drainage waters by inducing the growth of algae and then removing the aigae from the water, thereby removing the nutrients that were utilized in the ~gro~vth. We have submrntted an application for a demonstration project grant from the Federal Water Pollution Control Administra- tion to support a portion of our proposed studies. Another area needing additional study is th~ development Qf a method for determninin~ algal growth potential under various cotidi- tions. ~ p~s~t: ~ we are .l~ii~ hi ou~ capacity to ~redIct ~h1 ~y ~gr~e of ~~hii~ty t~e e;~nt of ~ ~ ç~c~ ~v~p ~1~ei~ of ~ff~r~pg te~i~ j I~i~4r ~ p~n~t~o~ pf ~ e~fl~a~ `r~c~ei ~ ~ W e~. ~t~y ~igE~1~a t~?cy~ ~ ~ ~ v~j~1~s ~ ~ gprw~l~ ~4g~~ah can ha ~a~4 Lellablyto field conthtio~ PAGENO="0238" 234 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DADDARTO. Yes, Mr. Vivian. Mr. VIvIAN. There `are three questions I would like to ask on the subject of algae. You mentioned that you expect to induce the growth of algae and then to remove it from the water. I presume this is pQssible because there is a inechathcal process available to do this. Mr. WARNE. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. You can assimilate the materials into organic material which then can be filtered out? Mr. WARNE. That's what we were thinking of doing in this pilot plant operation to discover whether in this manner we could reduce the dangers of introducing an excessive `amouut of nutrients from the San Joaquin drain into the estuaries of the `San Francisco Bay. Mr. VIVIAN, Has this process been used elsewhere? Mr. WARNE. Yes; it has been but I think on an inadequate basis for the demonstration we need here. Mr. VIVIAN. Are there large portions of the oceans which contain extensive `weed `area? Is this in any wa~y related to the problem in~the San Francisco area? ` ` ~ Mr. WARNE. I'm sure that `they do utilize the nutrients in, the seat I haven't thought of them as being on a par with this particular prob- lem, but the sea is `a `big piace~ Mr. VIVIAN. Is there `any likelihood that similar sea grasses or kelp could be utilized `for removing various types of pollutants? Mr. WARNE. It is `conceivable, but by the time you get the mixture in the sea itself, I think probably the problem is beyond our manage~ m~nt. Our fear is introducing these relatively iarge\ quantities of nutiiènts into shallow or confined waters where they. peak rather rapidly. Mr. ~VIVIAN. For example, between San Francisco and Sacramento Bay? Mr. WARNE. Yes; or in the San Francisco Bay itself. chairman Mu~u~ii. .1 believe that `there is a dillerence between the sea grasses or sea~eedsa~d `algae? Mr. `WARNE. `Yes, there is, though they are types of algae growth. Chairman Miu4r~ii. Seaweed is found on every coast throughout the world. In California, the collection `and production of `algae is an important industry.' For instance, algae is used as the fixation in cake icings to keep them from running, and is a very valuable product. The Japanese have long used sea algae as a food substance. Mr. WARNE. Well, actually, there's a possibility of using algae for stock feed and other feeds. Mr. VIVIAN. Are .there ~rowth~ processes such as with seaweeds whi~h ~`can be used ~in .. addition. to the, growth' of, algae to remove nutrients? ~. . ` Mr. WARNE. Well, we su~pect"that the algae would be the quickest one since it tends to peak first in the receiving waters. . I t~pnk the others do use the same nutrients, as a matter of fact, but these big *seaweèds are much slower growing. " ` . ` . . Chairman MILLER Incidentally, the seaweeds are very high n~ i~dine and certain `other elements. During the war the Japanesp t~ught their people who lived on the isolated islands how to supple-. inent their diets by using algae. ,~ . ` PAGENO="0239" ADEQUACY OP TECHNOLOGY POE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 235 Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Mosher? Mr. MOSHER. I assume the gentleman from Michigan is wondering whether there is any feasibility in this method for our own Great Lakes area. Mr. VIVIAN. Yes. I am trying to ascertain if we should start plant- ing certain weed growths. Mr. WARNE. I don't know enough about your particular problems in the Great Lakes to be certain, though~ I suspect that this general line of inquiry might have some applicability. Mr. VIVIAN. You indicate that yoti are constructing a prepilot treat~ ment plant. I presume you mean the State of California. Mr. WARNE. Yes, the State. / Mr. VIVIAN. Have you asked for funds from the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration? What is the general cost of this program? Mr. WARNE. It is in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars to con- duct this program. We spend $300,000 or $400,000 a year on prob- lems of this sort in the State related to the Suisun Bay and estuary. Mr. VIVIAN. I gather from your comments you have not yet re- ceived a grant in response to your request. Mr. WARNE. No. Mr. VIVIAN. While I am from a distant State, I would be happy to support your request. Mr. WARNE. Thank you. Mr. VIVIAN. At the same time you refer to the need for additional studies to determine the method of algae growth. What is the gen~ral cost and who is expected to support this kind of research? Mr. WARNE. Well, I thought I would leave that question with this committee. Mr. VIVIAN. I presume our staff will come to some conclusion on it. Mr. WARNE. We are interested in this in the State, but I think some of the~ research that is involved here has a far more general applica- bility than simply to our California problem, and I have raised here several questions as we go through that it would seem to me might be of interest to this committee to pursue somewhat further. Chairman MILLER. Mr. Chairman, I apologize to my old friend Mr. Warne for not being here when the committee opened. I was in a conference and couldn't get away, and I wanted to come here and jay my respects to him. We have long been fellow workers in the vine- yard. When I first came to Congress, Mr. Warne was Assistant Di- rector of the Bureau of Reclamation and then he became the Assistant Secretary of the Interior. Later. he went to Turkey to handle our important point 4 program and then to Korea wh~re he did an ~ut- standing job right after the Korean war. In 1961, the Governor of California. invited him hack to California to head our water resources depa~tment, and I'm happy to be here to say hello. Mr. WARNE. I might note, Mr. Chairman, that in. my first assign- ment back in California after the Governor invited me home from Korea, I was actually a successor to George Miller, though be preceded me by a good many years in that particular assignment. I w~a~' a director of our department of fish and game for. a short time and your chairman won part of his fame in California in directing the fish PAGENO="0240" 2a~: Q~3~QF~ ~ ThR I~TIO~ AiB*~EMEWT1 and game commission. We have a ver~go~o4~ be~i~v~ fiShV and game progra~mn~ q~it~ ~ and~m~h O~it i~ hih~ited cjire~tly f~orwbis effort. QJa~irn~an ~Mi1ierV has been a stuçjent of water probl~m8 and a supporter of our water projects. Governor Brown ~nd I 1~ave m~any t.i~e~ ~al~eci o'i hi~ wWiii~g ~nci eff~otive :~nterest~ W~ are made repeatedly grateful to him. V ~Ch~irVn~ar~ Mizi~. ~ou ~ ceiyV g~içrous. V VV V k~ayp yo~ i~a~r4 ~rqm~the~ ~p~rtm~nt V1~A ~te~ nor during these last fe~ r~è~ ~ a~ xew p~ces~ that Vthe~y~ave develQpe~, for alte~jng~1~e~ Qpera~tipp. o~ ordi~aary treatment ~piaiit~ ~to improve the pempv~alo~ p~osphates? V V V V V V `~V V V V Mr. WARNE. I have heard of it, but not ~ V ~ }~ peJ~p get: own there~and~ 1~alk to~ soi~of t1~cm today ~r, to~prrow. V V V Mr~ D~wpARIc.V So, ~ven thoi~igh it ha~ been awwunced, you l4ave not~ been given sufficient information enabling you to tell us hOWV~t n~ight apply Vt~oV any Q~ theworl~with ~1ijq1~you are eo~cerped such astlae algal' gr~wth1n l~es su~h as. ~a~o~L V~ `V V V V VV ,~ V `~V V V V ~ w ire hVire~te~nVit, ,a~d WehVQP~ to be able t~ cooper~te t~nii~ any 4emonstr~tion VQf its~ effective- ness. V ~ V\ V `V V V~ V V V V ~ V Much has been written and said about the haz~c1~ `of the só~called persi~tei~t pesUeicl~s., AetuVally, many a~pects of, the pesticide pic~ire are at best only partly known and even less understood. VV: VVV, ` In the first place, there does not seem to be ommoflVun~d~rstaru~ing ~ :the ~ieaning. of 1~l~et~r~ V~pest~c~c~. mV c'ali~rIUfl~, We ~ the flni~tion~f Our Statedepa~tn t~o~f agricu1tu~e, whi~VhVd~nes peS~, cidesas- VV VVVV~V VVVV :`~ VV `~, VV VVVVV~~ V ` ~ubstaie~orth~iSt1bs~ncea &flt~nkIhd tO~3~ ~IS~U 1~or ~GUt~Ofl1ng,V ~`e- venting, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest. The term is noj li~t~cj ~O V rn~ijt~rials higl~ly t~xic 1c bpman beings `or liy~ock which are. thougl~t ot. as pçis~ns 1~ut includes insectlci4es fungicides rodenticides hethicides vE~im1e;des dèfolirants, VWOV~ ~res~rvativès, prehar~est `d~~icáhts, r~eIlents, ~ant4fóWtng paiht~ u~d `mlldew~controllthg paints, a~ well as ~ubstances f~r euntrol of sriaits,V predatory animals, injurious birds, bacteria, a~g~e,' sell infecting n~emato~s, ~ otl~e~ undesirable for~ns Of plant and animal lire., V ,~ V V VV V V V V V' V V VV~ V tinder such a broad definition, substances~ such as salt, VVtetraborates,~ hy~pochlorites, and~ sulfui~a1re pla~ced' ~ the, highly toxic arsenical~ strychnihes~ and synthetic organiedusecticides. V V V V Calikrniaisa ma)ot~userVofpestPicides-~--- VV~V~ ~ V VV ~Mr. DAD1A~TO.. Do you~ineaiithat the Vdefiflitibn is tho broad? V ,V V, V Mr.~WA~N~. I mean~ths~t at1eastVpeopl~ sometimes n~ntfuse the t&ms. lath iiot ifl an~y~ `way underrating the probleM ~f pesth~des~ ibut' I ~ ~ Vthe cot~sid~Mtion V~f~lfur~in th&same category as strychnine under `a banner of lp~sti~ides ~mayV ~W~1s~ rnVor a1~arm ththi'is warranted. are a major user ~f pesticides ,d it has been esti- malted th~M We Vu~ab~ut one~fifth V~ the :tGtal! aMount of pesticides' use4 in the United States. V V V V V V V~' V: V~V ~: VV , V V V VV `V V V V ~`Id, I~ "w~uld~say tht~t the use ofVthese Vmateri~is, these agrI6kiltaithal ic~l~,i~ ~`rn~jor~O~tributing f~tor td the high prôdiiict~vit~r ~nV ft ~er acr a~{sf~ttr agriculture Out tI1t~t~. V V V V V VVV V V,V V V , `Rath* than beifi~ apprehehsive about pestIcides, at lea~t'us they are Øf~t~V ~ `that ou aj O(l~ei~n ~ r&1ya~bout the p~6~ nd~in~ectioid~ such `as DDT, DDE, endrin, di~idrin, rn~1a- thion, and so forth. V PAGENO="0241" AiDEQ~4CY QF, T EWQLP~ FOR ~OLLt~TI0N AB~TE~NT ?37 There a~re several variahle~ and complexities w~htjch c9mplicateev~lu- ation of the pesticide and insecticide situation. First, t1~e pest~cides and insecticides themselvesare highly variable. Next, collection pf a truly representative sample poses, a particular. and peculiar~~er~ies of interrelated problems. ~inall~y, analytical techniques are, exceedingly' co~uplex and still in the develop~nt stage. . . Commercially prepared pesticides and insecticides frequently are made from byproducts of other,industri~l activities, and, .~s ~uch, their composition has a tendency to vary with other portions of the QYerall production activity. . . . . Many of the more widely used insecticides: are `insp1uble~ or only slightly. soluble in wai~er~ SQ they usually a~e ~ organic solvents or other petroleum or coal tar. derivativesp.rior to ft~ld use, or they are applied as dusts mixed with in~rt:rnatériais. Thus, there is a definite possibility that ~. significant percentage of a particular insecticide applied to an area literally could be floated away as.a scum or oil slicl~. . ,,, , , , `~Again, when such an, insecticide enters, a ~aterway such as a canal, drain, or river, it could remain as a surface scum, or as a resultQf turbu~ lence and othermotion it could become suspended throiigiicv$ the entire cross section, . , . `` , A further complication is that many of the organic insecti3~ides ar~ heavier than water and have a, tendency to settle to the bottom and' in- termingle with bottom sediments. ` . , . ` ` ` `The aforementioned variables make it exceedingly'difficuit `tp deter- mine the true significance of insecticide measurements r~io~t~cl fton~ the laboratory. . .., , . . ` ` Additionally, problems which must be met within bhe~lahora~ory itself provide further reasons to view ihsecticide~ measuremetfts M7lth ext~eme cautIon. "Thei~e `are nuthe1Toi1~s `pithlls' in `the complex ~ai~a- lytical procedures. As time passes, however, we'.are m~kingprogres~ in developing more reiiabiemethods~ ` ` ` ~ One of the most' perplexiii~ difficulties, `howev&r, i~ that in~ec~icide solu~tions 1of standard strength orof known purityandcompositiQ~Ure diffièui~, if not impossiMe~ to obtain for tise' in calibrating the m~ur~ ing~ihstrumthits. A part of th~ difficulty can be related to the'cltem~a1 complexity and to variations in maiiufacture'amd~in ~r~iwmaterialsused to make various insecticides marketed under the sathe prodi~ct name, The ~omplexit~ies of in~erpretiiigt pe~ticidèanalysesare underscored by the fadt that `the.Adviso~y ~Cmnthitteeof'the TJ~S. Public UeMth Service, in establishing the 1962 drinking water standards, included the following statement in their report: ..` ~ ~o~i5id~erat~ionh `was jlve~ `~ ~iie mare comrnbn~ ehI&rinat~d~ h~4~O~arb9ii,~nd organophosphate insecticides, but the information available ~a~'~ot ~i~teht' to Ostablish speo1~&flim1ts for these chemicals. ` ` "~In'c~mmeii~ing on the `de~i~lOñ ,~o se~ aside ~doptio~ of pes~icid~ concentration limith for dri~king Water, experts ~ited twO basIcre~- sons first, the difficulties in establishing acceptable concentrations, ~rid' s~co~id, the lack ~f `simple' analytical teehni~s" for `identi~ing th~d measuring çoncentratfon~ Of t~i~se chemicals Although several `ye~s~ ha ~iáp~d ~ince e~Mblishm~ñt! of"the 1962 drinking water standards, and although much progress has been made 68-240-66-vol. 1-16 PAGENO="0242" 23S ADEQtIACY OF T1~CHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT since that time, we still need a simple analytical technique for measur- ing insecticides. Another factor worthy of additional study is the method of trans- port of insecticides from the time of their application, either through the soil or across the lands, until they re~join our water supplies. Many of the presently used insecticide materials are "refractory"; that is, they resist degradation with time andexposure to the elements. We need to. develop effective insecticides which will degrade rapidly following use. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DAThD~RIO. Mr. Vivian. Mr. VIVIAN. Who is doing the development that you refer to in the last paragraph? Where is the money being spent for developing less refractory insecticides? Mr. WARNE. Well, I can't tell you of planned programs along this line at the present time. Mr. VIVIAN. Suppose a commercial firm decided to invest some money ~n researching with degradable insecticides. Would they have any niotive to do so? Mr. WA~E. Well, I don't know for certain that they would have a motive. I mean, if they could do it cheaper they would have a mo- tive, but iii likelihood, they couldn't do it cheaper. Mr. VIVIAN. Suppose for example, we were to impose an excise tax on nondegradable refractory insecticides? Mr. WARNE. We think that would be practical only if you had biodegradable insecticides. Mr. VIVIAN. But, we won't have any biodegradable insecticides until somebody puts some money into research. Mr. WARNE. You have a vicious circle there. Mr. VIVIAN. It seems to me that is a very clear-cut chain which is unpleasant to. the users, I'm sure. Mr. WARNE. I think you have some resistance. Mr. VIVIAN. We have resistance on all matters in the Congress. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Warne, you mentioned that the transportation of insecticides was worthy of study. Could you expand on that? * Mr. WARNE. We find for example, traces of insecticides in places that we can'texplain how they got there. Mr. DADDARIO. My question goes beyond that. Would you add as another factor the study of effects of insecticides on the human beings? Mr. W~uiNL Yes, I think that not ~only on the human being, but on- Mr. DADDARIO. Animals? Mr. .WARNE. On fishes. and wildlife, domestic animals as well, we need this information. Chairman MILLER. I think it is well reeognized,isn't it, that some of the insecticides used in the Mississippi Valley, and which end tq~ in the riVer are having an adverse effect upon fish life, parti'culai~l~ on shriinpin the Gulf of Mexico. Mr. WARNE. There's no question.. We know for certain that at cer~ tam levels of concentration these. insecticides will kill. They will kill fish.' Theywill kill birds~ and in all likelihood they will kill people. PAGENO="0243" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 239 Chairman MIinm. Mr. Vivian, Michigan State University con- ducted some studies some time ago on the effect of insecticides upon robins. Are you familiar with that? Mr. VIvIAN. Yes. . Mr. WARNE. We have fj4i k~Jls in California *almost every year where, oh, for example, the waters from riceland is permitted to enter a stream without proper dilution. This kind of thing, and also the tendency for the food chain in the waters to concentrate the~poisons so that while they might be present in quantities that can't be detected or can just be barely detected, through the food chain they are con- centrated to the point where they appear, from time to time, in some of the fishes in pretty high concentrations. We found this to be true. We need to know more about this. We need to know how to control it., Chairman MILLER. Some of these poisons particularly affect shellfish more. than any other fish. Mr. WARNE. They will concentrate in the powers of 10's. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman, we no longer have any serious problem with insecticides poisoning certain fish in the Great Lakes because all the fish of that type are alrê'ad~ dead. Mr. WARNE. They have already poisoned them. Well, we have our problems in California, but sometimes I am happy that I don't have to worry about it in the same degree. of responsibility of the problems in Lake Erie, for example. But, we are trying our best to handle our situation out there in `the estuaries and basin lakes in a a way that will keep them from becoming stagnant wastes, and it is a difficult problem. During the past several years much publicity has been given to the detergent dilemma. Several years ago detergent foam was a common sight on streams receiving municipal wastes. This foam was related to the ABS used as the active ingredient in the detergent products of that time. In a massive, voluntary effort, the major manufacturers' of soaps and detergents developed a replacement product-~-a so-call~d bio- degradable d~tergent ~hi~h is' known"as LAS, ~ eliminated in sewage treatment plants, particularly those utilizing the activated sludge process for `secondary treatment. Studies show, however, that only about a quarter to a third of the Nation's sewage wastes have this degree of treatment. Since the changeover to LAS, the `technical journals have been filled with claims and counterclaims regarding the biodegradability of the new detergents. The manufacturers of the present .products insist that they have solved the problem. Their competitors contend not so and claim that a more degradable product, usually, coincident- ally, of a type they manufacture, will be needed as population in- cre~es and related waste. ~lc~4i~n~ eontui~ie to increase To determine ~ogr~s~ ~iii èhanging' M~r `fi~httl~eold ABS to `the new LAS, it is necessary for us to measure the amount present in our water supplies and the relative proportions or the ratio between the old and new products. As with insecticides, sampling and measure- ment is a series of `involved procedures, the last of which requires the use of a $15,000 infrared spectrophotometer for measuring the LAS/ABS ratio. Here again the problem of calibration standar4s PAGENO="0244" 2~ AD~TJAC~ ~. C~NOLOG~ ~FOR POLLUTION BAT~E~NT arises b~canse~of p.rodnclr variability. Each major manufacturer feels heniust have something different to offer. Thus., there. is now no single standard against which measurements can be. calibrated, so some type of compromise must be adopted. * We ti~eda~stai~dard def~rgent `so that all orgardzations~ean meMlire aiid~othpare resui~s~on the same yardstick. We aiso:need methods to thake rapid and~inexpensi~e differentiation between the old~ndthenewdetergents. Mr. VIv1A~. Mr~ Ch~arrn~n, who is ca.rryihg~on. the research to do thOse things which yOu mentioned in these last three paragraphs Mr. WARNE~. Well, I think the Federal Qovernme~t is doing some k oh it. We~ are doing `a little in our State. The industry is cerfthnlystill eontinuii~g its efforts. ~ME~ VIVIAN. Thanky~ni. Mr. WARNE. As I have indicated earlier, we in California already recognize that ~ë must r~use oUr waters if we ar~ tb meet the Con- tithi~liy gro~ing demand. At this point, I am ho~ suggesting that r~l~in~d' wators~ should~be used dire~tly~ focr domestiC consumption purposes, but there are many purposes for which such~ waters can be used. For example, ~ffl~nth from rnnM~ipal `waste treatment pIant~ air~Ady serv~'as supplemental water supplies for frrigation of certain crops `as well as for parks and golf courses~ for development of recre~5ional lake~, for industrial coding water, and for replenisk- ihent of~ound waterbasins. I am p~-oud~ to nbt~ th~t California is far in th~ fbrefro~t ~hert it comes tQ conserving our water resources, including the"rec1kim~g' of waste tei~for r~tise. A side~'beii~flt fr I4et~amatio~t th~t~ is ~ is that they t$atn1~ht of w~st~E t~ i~ieet pialit~r ~ii~nts~f~ reu:~e ~fteii eiininate~ or ~ubstantiaI1~ reduces the polhftioh burden which Otherwise would'be p1~cèd On oth~r adjoinipg water bodies. * * S~ine of the Cuxbsthnding exath~ples of w~as.tè ~ate1~ recTamation and r~*~e in Californiw are t~t Sahtee, which is in San Diego County, ~t Whittier Narrows, ih LOs Angeles Count~, and at Fontaiia, in Sa~ Bernardino County~-~all in southern C'a~forn'hi `wh~w~ter supj~liCs afe~parse. ; `* ~` * The~8anteepro'jCCt~iir 1Sen DiegOCoufityii~volves the reuse of hig'h~. ly treated ~io~nestic ;wastes which hauf~ p~PCola fl~hrough th~ ground to ~uppl~t watef~ for FeOteat~1onal l~ke~ u~d for piernekhtg, fishifig, and boating; fO~ irrig~tion Of a neurby gOlf ~cOui~se; ~id!~fot s*imnhi* During &rece~t T2~niprith p~r~od; `fle~rl~r 75,000 perspn.~ enjOyed the recreationaI~o~pOrtunities' at `thC ~antèe projC~t; nOne of which i~on1dhave'bOeh possible witho~W~r~ec~mation. Th~:Whittier N~rrows~ proj'é~et invOiv~ the use of hi~1il~ treated domestic wastes to replen~ishuhdergrOund'1~siirsth thO~ou~hty. This plant currently ~ * reclain~uing from `10 tO 15 million ~aflons Of water pe~da~ W1t~a re~ øly `l~o~ aLCoht~etit wh~Ch~has been ~th~h~tg~etjto spreading ba~ins'f~or $p1ønishMeh~ of the uhdergroim4 sn~pI&~ ~ * * ~` ~ * At the Fohtana ~pIai!rb bf K~is&~ Steel in TI Berhatdlnd (~u~ty water is used over and' over agarn nntil fiha~iy~ th~ last livocess is q~en~hing of sl'~g ~nd there l~no. wstet~ left~ `The~' litera4ly ~nse even the squeal, as we used to hear abou~t meatpacking plants. PAGENO="0245" AD~QTJAC~ OF TECHNOLOOY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 241 Varying uses, of `course, have varying quality requirements. Of tho~è pro)eots just mentioned, for example, each would have a dtf~ ferent criterion or quality stand~irdto ~be concerned about. At Santee the centent of bacteria'and'viruses is irnpo'rtant~, while mineral content is of little concern beyond'the requirements for irrigation. At Whittier Narrows the main interest is in maint~tin'ing a low mm- er~l content. Here the bacterial content is not tOo important because the' reclaimed water must filter down through many, feet ~;f unsatu~ rated soils where natural processes remove or destroy such org~nisrn. At Fontana the only criterion for quenching `slag is that the water bewet. Recognizing the broad spectrum of quality requirements for the numerous and varied uses involved, we are now studying the possible application of ~ystem~ analysis techniques developed by. the areo~ space industry to help us analyze the demands for water and determine the quality necessary for those uses. An analysis `of this. kind will per~nit placing into categories those uses having various levels of quality requirements. It will show how much of this water could come from `surface supplies,, how much from groun'd water sources, h'ow much reclaimed waste "water, what treatment is necessary to meet the various water quality need's for the anticipated uses, and how' much it `will cost. ` . . Mr. DADDARIO. I think it is `a. commendable thing that Governor Brown has issued contract awards in the systems analysis area. Do the leaders in the `aerospace industry know enough about the water problem to apply the systems analysis approach or will it be necessary for those people, such as yourself, who are the authoritie~ in pollution control to learn this approach? Mr. WARNE. Well, maybe both. Maybe we both have something to learn but I will say this: In several instances, in relation to the State water project for example, in which I am continuously engaged, we have used the techniques of the aerospace industry through North American, for example, and systems analysis of problems such as the transportation of water in a long canal, and we believe that they have something to offer us. We have given great study to Aerojet's waste disposal prografti suggestion. My department, experts in our `department are working in connection with this, and while I think the.Aerojet people did suffer some from lack of familiarity with the practical problems of water management, or drainage, many of their suggestions are going to prove very useful. We have committees in the State now from the action `departments `working on programs that grow directly out of `these studi'es and I think they are going to result in major advances. We hope so. Per- haps' both in techniques and in organization. Mr. VIVIAN. Having worked in' systems engineering for many y'aI~s, Mr. Warne, I am specifically interested to know what particular talents or attributes engineers in the aerospace industry contribute to the water pollution problem? Mr. WARNE. To the water pollution problem? Mr. VIVIAN. As to the overall water management problem? Mr. WARNE. They bring techniques by which we can establish im- provements on our models of percolation of ground waters for one. PAGENO="0246" 242 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT They bring techniques that assist us in computerizing our control f a- cilities in the acqueduct. We are trying to maintain this acqueduct in a unique manner. For example, endeavoring to keep it ever full be- cause otherwise it might require a 3-week delay to get water from this intake to the point where it is needed. We need this aqueduct operating on a split second basis. Just as though the water were within a pipe. This is theoretically possible. bp~,it hasn't been practically possible heretofore owing to the length of time required for cOmmunication and for sending a man out to refix the headgate, and this kind of thing. We are using the techniques of systems management in setting up a program here in combination with experienced engineers and busi- ness administration people that we think is going to make it possible to readjust gates instantly and keep the acqueduct full and at the same time prepare the bills for the water users so that it all comes out of the same operation. Mr. VIvIAN. Have your water reclamation people, who have been in business for years, found systems engineers of grea.t assistance? Mr. WARNE. I can't answer that. I think we are just now getting into areas where ~we~ believe they are going'to be `of great value' to us. I mean, .the~most complex we,ter program~ we~ have ~is the. one I have. just described to you. I know the metropolitan water district is thinking along some of these same lines. They are perhaps the next most complicated water operation in the State. Mr~ VIVIAN. The nature of my question is simply that there has been much opposition to the use of systems engineering for pollution abate- ment. I have no objection to it, but it is not altogether obvious that the clear-cut areas of value have been established. Mr. WARNE. We think that the kinds of controls that are going to be necessary in the future at least, to maintain acceptable water quality standards in the San Francisco Bay are apt to involve this; kind of thing. Mr. VIVIAN. Thank you. Mr. WARNE. There are a number of other apparent possibilities for use of waste water that, to my knowledge, have not been exploited to date. These include irrigation of shrubs and plants used for land- scaping freeways, washing gravel, compacting soils in construction projects, replenishing of underground strata from which oil has been removed, as well as secondary recovery of oil. The use of such sup~ plies is already feasible, particularly in water-deficient areas.. There is one area where technical knowledpe is less advanced than is desirable, and this iS in the understanding of disease-producing orgarnsms in water. For years water supply engineers judged the effectiveness of their treatment processes by studying changes in the density of coliform organisms. The presence of certain strains of these organisms can be related to such waterborne diseases as typhoid, dysentery, and other intestinal disorders. In more recent years we have learned that viruses are responsible for polio and hepatitis. To date, although we can identify a number of major groups of viruses, there are no generally applicable methods which can be utilized in routine pollution studies. PAGENO="0247" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 243 "Desalination" is a term which has been coined to encompass all of the methods and techniques available for removing and reducing the amount of salts dissolved in water. The term includes those proc~ esses for sea water conversion as well as those intended to reduce the salinity of brackish waters. We are extremely interested in desalinatioi~, California partici- pated with the Office of Saline Water in the construction of a saline * water conversion plant at Point Loma. We are again participating with the OSW in its San Diego Saline Water Test Facility. The plant will be constructed by the OSW, and the State will market the water. If financially feasible processes were available, we could use them to provide supplemental water to Los Angeles and other south-coastal metropolitan areas. Economical processes could reduce or perhaps even eliminate the problems of increasing salinity in the Saiton Sea which now threatens to become too salty for the ocean fishes that abound there at the present time. We also might be able to use these processes to remove* the salts from drainage waters in the San Joaquin Valley, thus adding to our water supply as well as decreasing the problem of drainage removal. Although numerous desalination methods are available, none of them are economical enough for general use at this time. Limitations of time and cost have forced us to proceed along more conventional lines in coming to grips with our immediate problems. In one San Joaquin Valley town, Coalinga, both electrodialysis and reverse osmosis processes are being used to demineralize brackish well waters to provide drinking water for the community. These processes, though costing about $100 to $150 per acre-foot, provide substantial savings when compared to the cost of the former method which in- volved the transportation of drinking water to the community in rail- road tank cars. Here again the use of available technology is limited by the costs involved. Cost, however, is not the only problem. There are other water quality factors which must be resolved in addition to breaking the cost barrier, a major one being what to do with the concentrated wastes. When desalination plants are located inland, the problem is to get rid of the concentrates without permitting them to reenter the water supply. The problem of brine disposal is also present when desalination plants are located along the coastline. There is insufficient knowledge of the ecology and currents in the ocean. For instance, it is believed that sections of the offshore waters are almost devoid of plant and animal life in contrast to their * great abundance elsewhere. There has never been a comprehensive survey of the coastal ecology and the horizontal and/or vertical currents. In order to provide a safe place in the ocean for deposit of hot concentrated brines, comprehensive surveys of the ecology and oceanography of the most likely section of the coast should be made. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes, Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. You have touched upon a subject of very great interest to me; of the ability of the ocean to absorb types of waste over long PAGENO="0248" 2~4 ADEQtACY O~ TEC~iNOLOOY FOn POLIJUTION ABA~tEME~ periods of thiie~, I~would anticipatO that the New York City area is surely going to have trou~bles. `iha~e n~ id~a how soon~nd what"~ types of trouble. The total vohthie of rnate1~ials flowing out~ of New York as you hio*, is'a*o~.ins~iring. I' gathei~'you~have sbih~ studies of the ecology of the PacIfic Ocean along the coast of `California. Mr. WAni~s. We have limited studies but they are. not nearly ex- tensive enough and I dotibt if they are going to get us enough answers in time. I think we need an additional concentration of this kind of effOrt. Mr. VIVIAN~ Is any of this work being conducthd with California funds? Mr WAR~E Yes, some through~ the TJniverslty of Ctthfornia, the Oce~inography Institute at La Jolla, and through our department of fish and game We ~re doing some of this, and we are pre~e~itly plan nine additional programs which we hope to bring forward in the next session of the l~gislature~ Chairman MILLER. The ocean is `a very big' place and people feel that you .`cah dump anything into it. But I think we have learned that this is a fallacy. Back about 1948, you might remember wehad some pretty lean water years in~ Oalif6rnia~ OnO chemical plant that prOduced' chlorine did so by using th d~inp power that was generated under normal conditions., Si~ice th~i~ surplus power wa~ not preseirt, they couldn't supply the chlorine that the ~ity of Los Angeles needed to sterilize its sewag~ This resulted in southern California beaches being posted and' no swimthing was allowed `because of `the cOfltnfmi- nation~ * Then again, `sha&~'ha~e appeared in waters off southei~n California where they fiever previously appeared, and the studies'made in'dicftted that the plight" rise in temperature through the disposal of `sewage changed, the ecology and caused the water to become s1iitab~ for the sharks to exist. These are the things `that `We don~t know very much about. We have just begun to scratch the surf ace,in `this field. Some years ago when the Atomic Energy Comm~'issi~n issu~ft a~repo'rt on the di~p''o'sal of atomic waste along the Atlantic and gulf `cOasts, the, Sub~ committee on Oceanography, which I then had the privilege to head, made some studies and wanted to publish' a study of the disposal of `these wastes on the Pacific coast. When the Atomic Energy `Com- mission was alerted, no such report was ever rendered. Is that correct? Mr. WARNE. I don't think so. Chairman Miu~rn. As `I understand `it, the people, in the threewést `coast States wanted to deposit `the atomic `waste in the ocean. It ~just didn't work out even though this ~w* *~ ~as' to be a very slight concentration. They were supposed to dump `the waste in a thousand fathoms of water. The material was deposited in' steel drums covered with con- crete and was supposed' to sink `to the bottom of the `ocean. The di~i.- sion of fish and game in California duplicated these drums, sunk them, and found that they were floating at 400, fathoms rather than a thousand. ` Off the shore of New Jersey two of these drums `had been supposedly dumped in a thou~and `fathoms `of water, but became snagged in the nets of some fishermen., This was very low level waste ai~d I presum~ did no damage, but what will happen if there is a high level of damage? PAGENO="0249" AJYEQVAC~ OF TECI~NOLOGY FOR' POLLUTION ABATEMENT 245 In England they pump waste into the North Sea, which affects the fisheries on the Grand Banks. The Japanese, hired the Pritchard Bros. to make some studies for them. They fowtd upwellings of water where they didn'te~pect them. They completely disassociated themselves from it and will not allow the deposits of wastes~ At this time no one knows how much of the ocean is c~mtamina~ed, but there is an indication that a great deal of work has to be done in this field. Mr. WAm~E. The ocean certainly requires ~dditional study. Mr. VIvIAN. Are there any Federal control water pollution labora- tories in California? I Mr. WARNE. No. Mr. VIVIAN. None as of yet. I thought there was one. Mr. WARNE. We would'iil~e1 to have one there~ Mr. VIVIAN. To the best of my knowledge there is an existing prorn. gram for the construction of Federal water pollution laboratories in se~reral areas o~ the. co~tntry. Mr. WARNE. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. We are anticipating . the construction of: one very shortly in my own home city. It éeems one of these laboratories would be concerned with the problems of the ocean. Mr. WARNE. We have thought that one oriented to the ocean and the coastal areas of our southern California would be a very valuable adjunct to the present p'rogram of the water pollution agency. There's one at Ada, Okia. ;There is one at~ Corvallis, Oreg. There is none in California. Gravel quarries'and borrow pits from which fill materials have been excavated can be used for disposal of certain types of solid wastes. When filled, these areas can be placed back into desirable use for golf courses, parks, and similar types of development. The effect of filling these quarries with decomposable materials, however, has given us some cause for alarm. We already have encountered ground water pollution problems resulting from the downward movement of gases from decomposing materials deposited in alluvial areas and the ad- sorption of these gases into the underground water. These a~e iu addition to the usual problems of differential settlement, gas, and odors associated with operations of this type. Problems of solid-waste disposal have become of great concern in California where mkich of our population virtually lives on the leaky roof of its own water supply.' Several years ago, at the request of Gov. Edmund 0. Brown, representatives of the aerospace industry were called upon to make a study and to report upon the problems of solid-waste disposal in California. The Governor recently. appointed an interdepartmental task force on waste management to consider th~ `recommendations made in the aerospace report, and to develop a lOng-range plan for solid-waste management. Thecommittee is now considering the various alterna- tives and is scheduled to report to the Governor in the near future. I suggest that your committee might' find the problems of solid- waste disposal a fruitful area fOr further study. And, in summary, during this, the first part of my presentation, I have brought to your attention a number of areas where we need more PAGENO="0250" 246 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT knowledge of factors affecting our énvironn~ient, whe.r~ we need bet- ter methods for measuring these factors, ~nd where ~Uher teeiinotogi~al breakthroughs are needed Although we h~ive com~ a long way in pollution a.hatemen~, wore effective water resources management can be achieved by giving at-~ tention t~ these troublesome areas. I suggest that this committee might assist in providing fQr increased: scientific effort directed toward the development of- 1.. Generally accè~ptable parameters to measure and deflr~c base- lifie' conditions in order. properly to assess co5t~ and benefits pf changes in environments;, 2. Economical processes for removing nutri~nts from waste water; 3. Methods for determining algal ~growth potential;~ 4. Simple and less costly methods to measure insecticide con- centrations in the environment; 5. A better understanding of the movement of insecticides after they have been applied; 6. Effective insecticides which degrade rapidly after use; 7*. A detergent standard against which measurements can be calibra~ed; . 8. Methods for measuring a~d interpreting the significance of viruses, occurring in water; `9. Methods.of assessing. and effects of the discharge of concen- trates froain' sea-water convetsion and other desalination plants; and `10.' Better methods. for the disposal of solid wastes. Mr. VIV~AN. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian?.. Mr. VIVIAN. I am very pleased to have Mr. Warne set forth this list of 10 items, all of which appear to me to be very reasonable and aU of which will be of great `assistance to `this committee. Mr. WARNE. Than.k you. Now, I have a' little more material on questions that the committee asked. The second part includes `specific answers to the administrative and policy problems listed in part E, section VI, of the Report of the Re- search Management Advisory Panel. The questions raised by the Panel probe areas `of concern to all who must wisely manage our resources. There are no single answers, but experience we have gained in pollution abatement in California pro- vides a basis upon. which we can `take a considered point of view. The first question was: What should be `done to define State and, local responsibilities in applying technology? In California the responsibility for water quality control is assigned to nine regional boards, generally one for each of the major drainage basins of the State. These regional boards are, in turn, `responsible administratively to the State water quality control board. TJntil very recently the regional boards were responsible only for the control of pollution, per Se. The boards did a good job of regu- lating municipal and industrial waste discharges, to which their re- sponsibilities were limited, `During 1965, however, the legislature changed them to water quality control boards and assigned them PAGENO="0251" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 247 broad powers to control any factor which adversely and uiireason- ably impairs the quality of the waters of the State for heneilcial use. Water quality control agencies are rather gingerly approaching their new assignment. For the most part, they have little experience with water supply and in water resources development. The boards to date have failed to recognize that water quality and water quantity cannot be viewed as separate avenues but instead con- stitute. closely interrelated segments of water resources development. The problem of water quality can no more be solved without reference to other aspects of water resources development than can the problems of water supply be met without reference to quality. Recommendations have been made regarding the reorganization of the State government by the so-called Litfle Hoover Commission which would help to eliminate this increasing dichotomy with regard tp wa- ter in California. The commission's recommendations with regard to water quality control on a statewide basis were as follows: * The dangers of the existing organizational separation of water quality con- trol from the other water programs of the State are, becoming more appareut with the implementation of the Water Plan. The existence of one central and lime regional bodies, each with its own staff and with standard.settlng. and de- cision-making authority In the quality of coordinated action. The problem has reached critical proportions~ particularly in the San F~an~isco Bay. and Delta areas. It is recommended that the State Wate.r Quality Control Board be merged with the California Water Commission. Water quality standards would be set, statewide and by river basin, by the Department of Water Resources subject to review by the Water Commission, which would hold needed public hearings In connection therewith. The Com- mission would assume the Water Quality Board's role in the approval of loans and grants for local projects and for research. At the Federal level we see already much of what the Little Hoover Commission proposed be done in California with `comparable State functions and agencies. In California we will need to work diligently to avoid granting inde- pendent power over quality maintenance on a regional basis to one group of boards and separate power over quality maintenance on a statewide basis to a different board. How can the training and equipping of local officials b~ coordinated `with industrial pollution control personnelY As' a part of the present procedures for establishing waste discharge requirements as providod. for in the California Water Quality Con- trol Act of 1965, it is necessary `for pollution control officials to meet and work closely with local officials so that they can understand the meaning of the requirements prior to their adoption by the control board involved. During the course of these meetings any needs for training or equipping local officials can be brought forward and appropriate measures taken to remedy them. In addition, local professional groups, mainly the California Water Pollution Control Federation, provide short courses, `technical meet- ings, and group seminars to provide training and exchange ideas in technical matters. This approach seems to work fairly well in the populous areas but needs improvement so far as the more remote or less populous areas are concerned. PAGENO="0252" 248 ADEQUACY OF T~CENOL0GY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT The second questioh raised~ in the report of the; Research Manage~ ment Advisory Panel was, Ho'u, ihould the evaluation of pollution he d~5id~d' betwe~n local and Fedeval technical yvOUpi? The evalu~ti~ix of pollution situations requires the efforts of both Federal and St~ite agencies. `Th~ States should takeresponsibility to make the: initial evsJu'ãtions. When, interstate wa:ters are involved, both Federal and State, tech'- nical groups should be encouraged through informal conferences to exchange viewpoints and to reexamine the available technical infor- mation. We hnve' sonje resetvatións about conducting discussions of a technical nature in the public arena where differing procedures and objectives tend to polarize affeètod interests to the point that mutual evaluation of `the `problems becomes difficult. The States must'iiicrease'their efforts `at pollution' abatement through more compreheithiire i'n~estigations and analysis. In `this ~ ibcal interests and needs ~an be pl~eed alongside th~ national interests, We believe the division of responsibility for evaluation of pollu- tion situations warrants close attention in `the coming months. Mr. DADDARIO., On this question ~f, yqur reser~ataOns, on conducting discussiozis of a technical nature in a public arena, do yoi~ believe that there are other ways in which we can get this information without hav- ing peopie assume positions only because they state them in public and then solidify' forces behind `those: positions? , , ` Mr WARNE I believe there is a possibility, at least, that thete is in o~ar `State:, of making a:' considerable:amount, of progress through less formal, more informal discussions. `Perh' then' folhn~'ed `by public hearing at which everybodyr can speak his piece I think the danger in polarizing a State, position' as opposed to' a Fedth~al position would be lessened if *e' did this; or' Of polarizing a local position as, differ- entiated from an iñteratate position. I think we are all learning and I hope that we can make additional,progress here. Mr. DADDARTO. 1 don't raise the question because I believe that everything originates with an open discussion. Mr. WARNI~ Well, certainly-, ` `` Mr. DADDARTO. I do have the feeling that, in problems of this `kind, where there is so much need to get people together `w'ho have: technical and a scientific competence, a~ great d~al of preliminary work ought to be done before you reach the st~ge, of presenting the problem to an open committee. ` Mr. WARNL Well, I think so, too. I think perhaps more general advance might be achieved that way. I'm strong for the educational effect of the public meeting and hearing and also for the educational effect on both State and Federal agencies' of having some represent~ atives of the public come in ai~d express their views. I think'this is essential, but, what we ought to aim at is to get a good result and I would hope th'at we could find ways of expressing all of these needs and getting a better result. : ` ` ` Is area industrial development distorted by a preference for `clean industries over `presently kno~wn or potentially polluting industriesf Application of the present procedures for establishing waste dig- charge requirements can and has `affected industrial' development in certain parts of `California through adoption of restrictive standards. PAGENO="0253" ADEQUAO~ OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 249 The effects, for the most part, have been to delay rather than forestall such development. For example, about 10 years ago a large ~aper concern had developed preliminary plans to construct a papermill on the upper reach of the Sacramento River but abandoi~ed its plans when the cost of providing .the degree of waste treatment to meet qtial- ity limits was recognized by itself. Today a papei~uull operated by a dij~erent concern is situated quite near the e~act site originally pro- posed. Thepresent plant, howeyer, utilizes a diflerent type of process than that originally proposed, one which produces a lesser amount of waste and wastes less costly to treat. I do not regard the deferment of industrial development as in tins case asa distortion of progress, but rather as a necessaryaction to pro- tect the quality of the environment. To what extent should toning or selected ind'uetrkt2 xd~io% with re- spect to population be w~ed to decrease the need/or èffletrtttreatmentt Procedures for the establishment of waste discharge requiremeilte as provided for in Oahfornia laws have had the practical effect of creat~ng industrial areas. Thes~ ~rocedürea require' the r~gi!d~ial water quality control boards to recognize beneficial uses when e~ttablishrng quality requirementh. A trend has de~reloped wl~reby ii~n~'~iiéav~ ~E~dt1stries ha*e been pushed to the ocean shores and to the bkys and estuaries rather than bear the additional treatment costs usually involved in locating inland For the mO~t pax~t however, we find tha~tthesê induCtries~e willing to pay the necessat~y~osts of treatrnei~tin~ order t6 locate in jn~oximity to the large population centers with a ready labor potential `ai*i reduced transportation coste. S * We all must recogmze that our waterways haye been and will oon- tinue to beused to carry aw~your wastes. There i~.a necessity, how- ever, to avoid degradation to the d~trimento~ other bene~cial uses. To, avoid such a consequence, both the Congress. .an4 the California Legislature adopted laws in 1965 which require adoption~of quality standards, to be maintained at various key points in our waterways, to protect these waters for beneficial use. We a~. establishing these stand~rcls in Califoruia~ 5, The next problem we expect to confront will arise when the concen. trations in our waterways begin to approach the ~dopted quality stand- ards, and consideration must be given to upgrading treatment processes to stay within the recognized standard. S S We do not believe that dischargers should be permitted to clajm a prescriptive right to pollute, but rather that all dischargers should bear a proportionate share of the costs of neeThd remedial measures We are facing these water pollution ~ontrol probleths in. the San `FranciscO Bay area. As waste-producing activities increase,. the ma~- ~nitude of the problems will expand In recognition of this, the legis lature authorized a comprehensive investigation of the effects of wa~e di~charge into the bay with the directive that a plan be developed fo~ the control of pollution. This iathapter 1351 of the Stfttutes of 1fi65~ An amount of $1,078,000 has been appropriated fQr the first of a 3-year investigation. Waste disehargers should not flee from the population centers in or- der to pollute other waters. Instead, the problems should be faced squarely and efforts made to solve them. PAGENO="0254" 2~O ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION `ABATEME~tT How far should restoration of ewv~iov'inentai quality be carried if costs and benefits c~znn ot be appraised i~m a free market manner, nor most ha~a'rds demonstrated to have public health effect? W0 do need to consider ~conomic costs of maintaining and, for the most part, restoring environmental quality. There are instances, however, where serious consideration should be given to upgrading en- viroiimental quality beyond benefits which can be appraised in a free market. Restoiatrnn also may go beyond those standards generally considered adequate to protect the public health. Although it is gen- erally possible to express. costs of restoration fairly accurately, it is difficult to convert certain types of benefits to monetary values. Such factors as aesthetics, public health, and other social values must be placed on the scales. Much of the final determination must' depend upon present and foreseeable beneficial uses, taking into account the trend for increased leisure time. Lake Tahoe is an example of a situation which warrants considera- tion of the type suggested. Renowned for its clarity and beautiful blue hue, this body of water remains as one of the three clearest lakes of `the world. Although the major dischargers of domestic sewage ~ithin the basin of the lake all provide for treatment of their wastes, one even providing tertiary treatment to reduce phosphate levels, it has been determined that all sewage effluent must be exported from the basin to prevent the lake from turning into a green pooi of algae. Here; the need ~ of. a. unique natural resource was rec- ognized and has required that monetary costs should not be the deter- mining factor. What techniques of social science can be used to establish public opinion and publ ic support in pollution abatement? I do not believe that any new techniques are needed to gain public understanding and support in pollution abatement matters. In Cali- fornia, there is a growing understanding and increased appreciation of the need for a clean environment. The public wants it. What re- mains to `be done i~ to implement `action programs necessary to pro- vide this environment. Mr. DADDARIO. Do you think the public understands the pollution problem well enough to be willing to pay for it? Mr. WARNE. I think in some instances they probably do not but. I don't think we need any new techniques. If someone came up with a new technique, I would not be adverse to employing if. I don't think the question of public imderstancling is the main problem that we have in this field today. ~s a Watter of fac~t ~ piThli~ ha~ pi i~~os~ of i~ repré~eñtatw~s i~ ~esire to1se~ ~m~thing c~one ~ c1eanin~ upI~ ~at~r~nd the ~ than ~ rel~~èir desi~s~o ththr , aoti~p~ ~ ~ajg~t ~ 5~t~ ~ ~triçt. Bu~ they a~ i~tereste~. in Mv~ig ~ ~~formed. . f ~ MF. Warne, sometimes they see or know or smell the problem, and they become quite vocal. They would treat the syniptorns of the disease and not ge~ at the basis of it. Mr. WARNE. Yes. PAGENO="0255" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR~POLLUTI0N ABATEMENT 251 Chairman Iii.izn. The fact is-that the people are aware of theprob- lem but wernnst do more to increase their `understanding. One'him- dred years ago, if you had' tried to sell the people of `CaiifOt'ui~' on spending'rnoney they do now in the field `of ~eciamation they would have laughed at you. We ha.ve spent a great `deal on, reclamation, but it ha~ paid off and will continue to~ pay off. There is a need `for more education, and I think this iS one of the places where we ôan be of `benefit. ` ` ` Mr. WARNE. It is possible `that our State'sinceit is asemi-~rid stat~, has a higher sensitivity involving water quality than in some other areas of the country. ` `Mr. DADDARIO. However, there are other- aspects of this' question which need to be considered. I am not-only concerned about `wbether or not there is public acceptance or public understanding of the prob' lem but also whether there is enough support for the expend~tu're of funds in certain areas where the technical knowledge is not presently available. We must convince the public that `such expenditures are necessary for the development of research techniques `so `that the job can be accomplished cheaper and more efficiently. This is Otie of the -principal questions in our report. Aren't we, in `fact, spending money in certain programs which are not as effective as they might be Shouldn't we hold- off until we develop better~ techniques -to overcome our prob1eip~? - - ` - Mr. WARNE. I certainly agree with you tha~t we -ne~d' the improved techniques and -we are endeavoring to develop those that seem emer~ gent to us in California and there is a problem of getthng them i~ecog- nized in time. I will give you better examples in some other fields than- in waste or pollution control at the mOment, but we are presently in several of our rivers building dams that will submerge nld dams -in tbeh'-re~ervoirs- by. reason of the-fact that we di-dn't- have~ the' tech~ niqnes~'to `-i~nciersthnd-whati `~he~fuli import of the problem was when the dams were built 30 or 40 years ago. So now we- are in~ effect having, to duplicate and waste certain of our earlier efforts. ~I presume that something like this may happen in the water pollution-abatement field, too. So, it is important that we get this public understanding- `ohan- nOled into the field of support, I think, of the research that is neces- sary. This, I agree with y6u- on. I certainly do. ` - -` -- - Mr. DADDARIO. BUt we `must have a better understthidin'g~ of `that which is available to u~ and is not being adequately utilized `at the moment. ` - - - Mr. WARNE. Yes, we needY-it makes me feel tired sOmetimes~ ;we need to rework this area almost every month.' ~Our-State i~ gi~owing. New people are coming. They don't bring with them ~n understand- ing of the local, problem, so it is necessary to educate, reeducate - all the time. Not only on an obvious problem `like water supply but all the more so on the more in-tricate problems of water quality. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. On page 28 of your testimony, Mr. Warne, you re- ferred to a papermill which was to be located in the upper region of the Sacramento region but abandoned its plans. I wonder if you could tell me where that paper plant eventually located. Mr. WARNE. I am not sure that particular one w'as ever located in California. But another company brought a mill in at this particular site but it was a different mill. PAGENO="0256" 252 ADEQXYAC1~ ~OF `rECHNOLO~1ff FOB 1~OLWTION ABATEMENT Mr. VxvIAN.~I' would p~reciateit,'Mr.Ohairman, if we could; find out if that company e~entually did locate on the ocean. Mr. WARNE. Th~ `particular plant eventually located in Virginia, I believe, but not on the ocean Another company brought a mill in at ~ nearby site on `the Sacramento River about 10 years later. The mills on our north coast area and the one on the Sacramento River are all pulp or so-called "kraft" mills. We did eventually have some locate on it, on `the ocean at that time, but th~y have had to boost their waste control standards a good deal even `there. Mr. VIVIAN. Can you tell me why they had to boost'their disposal ~tandards ~hen they 1ocated~on the ocean?.~. ~" ` Mr. WAni~E. Because the earlier standards seemed to, ~on~stitute a thrsat'tethe ecology of the rec~i~ring waters even in the ocean. Mr. VIVIAN. Are these California. plants? ~ ` ` `Mr. WARNE. Yes. ` " .`. Mr. V~IAN. Could we `identify those plants and the criteria used for the disposal of the effluent?' ~` `*` Mr~ WARNE~ I could. 1 would be glad to do that~ for. you. The waste d~s~harge requirements governing the plant on the upper Sacra m~nto "Ri,er~at;Anderson~ Calif., specify quite' a few'oonditions which rn~st not `be exceeded in the river.~ For instance~.'bhe waste ~cann~t cause dissolved oxygen `to drop by more than a half part p&r:millicn, and~'in no'ease~ is'it~to be decr~a dbeiow a~n~iinimuth of~ sev~n.'~arts per million. There' are stringent `limits: oii~the variou~physicaL sd chemical ciiustitueut5 in tI~ w~ste, on acidity, on'tethp~itture, and the disposal must not cause'a nuisance d~ieto odors `o~'nnsigbtlixies~.''The plant is' ~required' `to submit frequent reports of iaver and .waste disk charge thoditions to th~ water quality ~ontroi board. `The Sacramento River `is~ a~ very im~:ortant sftlmon'. and trout.'spawning area, and the requirements are' desigiied' primarily' to protect this use. "Plants looatted' in our north coastal"ar~a discl~ar~e their wastes to the ocean through submerged' outfalis. Requirements specify a' sthaii zdne of ~dllutiOn' around ,the~ `outfalls :in'whi.ch', the wa~te~' are allowed to diffuse. Outside thi'~ zone the requirements' are' designed to protect fish ~life b~ the maintenance `of adequate dissthed o'~ygen levels'. All ether constituents must' be maintained' belOw levels' `which may be harmful to `fish~. Nuisance conditions are' prohibited. Periodic moni- toring `repdrts from `the' plant are required `by the regional water quality control board there, also. In `generail the requirements for ocean disposal', are less stringent than for fresh water' disposal; and `~lants can take advantage of the greater dilution avrail'abie., ` ` ` Mr VIVIAN On the same page of your testimony, you referred to a `different type of process us~d;"in the' paper plant that was located there. Do you mean different manufacturing process? Mr. WARNE. A different manufacturing process. `The first `mill, the one th'at did not build, would have produced a cellulose product to be used by other plants to produce final paper products. The par- ticular process would have converted about 40 percent of the raw' ma~- terial, logs, into refined `cellulose, while the other 60 percent would have been discharged to the river as `waste. Some treatment of the PAGENO="0257" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMEN~ 253 waste., was proposed, but it was not sufficient. The second plant, the one that did build, produces finished paper products. The process actually uses about 60 percent of the log and wastes only 40 percent. Also, this 40 percent is much more amenable to treatment than the wastes from the first mill proposed. Mr. VIVIAN. Which made the disposal of the paper waste more readily possible? Mr. WARNE. Less difficult. Mr. VIVIAN. In my district we have a number of, paper plants and a very serious problem c~f pollution. I gather this was a new type of process. Mr. WARNE. I believe' it `was entirely new, yes, though it is not ne~ now. It is being used in `several places today. Mr. VIVIAN. On pages 29 and 30 of your testimony, you refer to the same `subject again. When you say a trend has developed where- by many heavy industries have been pushed to the ocean shores, bays, and estuaries rather than bear the additional cost of locating inland, can you indicate what types of business these have beeu? Mr. WARNE. Refineries, sugar mills, chemical plants, particularly. Mr. VIVIAN. Congressman Vanik of Ohio, who testified before this committee, proposed that there should be industry-by-ilidustry staud~ ards. Each industry, whether it was located in Nebraska or along the Atlantic or Pacific coast, for example, would have to reduce its effluent to acceptable nationwide and industrywide levels. If such standards were established plants could not locate in communities which either had no laws or refused to enforce the laws. Do you have any personal opinion on this `subject?' Mr. WARNE. Well, I would doubt where a national' standard as high as those we are imposing would be enforced and I think we might object to it. Mr. VIVIAN. Why would you object to it? *Mr. WARNE. Because we want the higher standard.' Mr. VIVIAN. Why would you object to a national standard which would be as high as your standards? Mr. WARNE. Oh, I say, no, I wouldn't object to that necessarily. It might be a feasible solution. It might be. In other woxds~ so' that someone wouldn't ge't an advantage by locating a mill in'apiace where you could produce it as cheap as possible without regard to con- sequences, I think in most' instances we found that the enforcement of higher standards have not really in the end been an economic deterrent. Lots of times, it is just an excuse"f or carelessness and not to have good standards. Mr. VIVIAN. What procedures do you' have availthle f or monitoring the effluent output of plants `and municipal treatment' systems in Cali- fornia? Mr. WARNE. These are monitored through the good offices of `our nine water quality control boards, regional board's, on a regular basis, `I beiieve~ ei~ry month. In addition, the department of fish and' game monitors waters that have importance for fishery-both offshore' and inland, and the department of water resources has ground water quality monitoring programs, very extensive throughout' th~ State~ and surface water quality monitoring. The programs of the depart- 65-24O-t~6-vo1. i-iT PAGENO="0258" 254 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT merit of water resources are not related directly to' effluent discharges but rather to general qnality trends and programs. Fish and game monitoring programs relate to the welfare of `the fishes and the pro- grams 0f the regional boards relate to the `drinking water and receiving waters from health standpoints and other quality requirements. Mr. VIVIAN. Do you maintain any continuing random time inspec- tion of water quality from, say, individual plants or individual areas? Mr. WARNE. This is done through the work of the regional boards and the'dep~rt,ment of health. Mr. VIVIAN.' Do you feel this provides a good assurance the people will riot casually turn off their pollution control abatement systems at moments when they don't expect to be inspected? Mr. WARNE.. We have had instances where there have been unex- pected fish kills.' I would say the department of fish and game prob- ably. has had as much success of training them not to turn off their treatment facilities as anybody else. The discharger doesn't like to be hauled into court on' that kind of a charge, that he caused fish to die in the wate~s~ I thhth we have `fairly good cooperation in our State. We do have- we have unregulated releases. Most of these are aècidentai. Some- times the facilities `that were good last year aren't big enough for this year, whether it be municipal outfall or something `else. It is necessary to `g~ through quite a procedure to get additional capacity built into the facilities. At times there is unwarranted pollution while this is in process. But, I would say that our program has been fairly effective. We are proud of the fact. We also have had cooperation, I think, from the general run of our dischargers. Mr. VIVIAN. The Federal Government has some very large instal- lations in California. Has the Federal Government been a good cooperator? Mr. WARNE. There was a time when the Federal Government was not a good cooperator. As a matter of fact, some of our worst sit~ia- tions were caused by some of the Federal installations but I believe this has been corrected now. It is in process of being corrected throughout. Chairman MILIEu. I think it is pretty well corrected now. There were times when they were the biggest offender. Mr. WARNE. We have had some trouble of ships, including naval ships, dumping stuff in bays, but we are after that, too, now and we are getting the cooperation from the Navy. Mr. VIVIAN. No further questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Chairman? Chairman MILLun. I am very happy to have you here, Bill, and I want to thank you for coming. I certainly enjoyed seeing you. Mr. IDADDARIO. Mr. Warne, the committee wants to commend you for what is certainly an excellent report. It is obvious that you applied yourself diligently `to our inquiries. The manner in which you have answered our questions here today is most exemplary and I know that every member of the committee appreciates it. You have added a great deal to the work that we are doing here. PAGENO="0259" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 255 Mr. WARNE. I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. I appreciate the opportunity to come. Mr. DADDA1UO. Thank you. (The biographical statement of William E. Warne follows:); BIoGRAPHIcAL STATEMENT OF WILLIAM E. WARNE William B. Warne, state, federal and International government official for more than 30 years, is the Director of the California State Department of Water Resources. His professional career has been concentrated on two resources fields. He has worked for the conservation and development of water and other natural re- sources in California and throughout the nation. He has directed resources and economic development in foreign countries on behalf of the United Nations and the United States. The civil service and appointive posts in which he has served since 1935 include the following: State of California: Director, Department of Water Resources (since January 3, 1961); first Administrator, Resources Agency of California (from beginning of Agency October 1, 1961, until January 6, 1963, while also Director of Water Resources) ; Director, Department of Agriculture (1960) ; Director, Department of Fish and Game (1959). International: Economic Coordinator, United Nations Command, Korea (1956-. 59); Mission Director, U.S. International Cooperation Administration, Brazil (1955-56), and Iran (1951-55). Federal: Member, Water Pollution Control Advisory Board (1962-65); As- sistant Secretary of the Interior (1947-51); Assistant Commissioner, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (1943-47); Chief of Staff, War Production Board (early World War II); special assignments to national resources, power and river basin Work and information and editorial positions in the Bureau of Reclamation (1935-42). Warne was raised on a farm in California's Imperial Valley. He was a newspaper and press service reporter and editor in California and Washington, D.C., for eight years after he graduated from the University of California In 1927. The United Nations, the United States and foreign countries have honored Warne for his work. Special awards to him included: United Nations Corn- mantEs Citation for Outstanding Service (1959); honorary degrees, Seoul Na- tional University and Yonsei University, Korea (1959); U.S. Foreign Operation Administration's Honor Award for Distinguished Public Service (1955); Shah of Iran's Order of the Crown (1955); U.S. Department of the Interior's Dis- tinguished Service Honor Award (1951). Warne is the author of "Mission for Peace", a book in which he relates his experiences in Iran as the administrator of the United States' first Point 4 Program. Warn&was born September 2, 1905, near Seafield, Indiana, and moved to Im- perial Valley with his family in 1914. He graduated from the Holtville (Cali- fornia) Union High School, Re and his wife, the former Edith Peterson of Pasadena, have three children: Jane Warne (Mrs. David C. Beeder of Decatur, Illinois) ; William Robert Warne, in the U.S. Foreign Service; and Margaret Warne, Cornell University graduate. He lives in Sacramento. He is a member of Sigma Delta Ohi, Lambda Chi Alpha, the National Press Club, Washington, D.C., the Commonwealth Club of California, and Los Angeles Town Hall. This committee will adjourn until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning at the same place. (Whereupon, the hearing in the hereinbefor~ entitled matter was adjourned at 12:10 p.m. to be reconvened at 10 a.m., Thursday, August 4, 1966.) PAGENO="0260" e~~a ~:~i (iti~ ~: PAGENO="0261" `IRE ADEQUACY OF TECIINOLO~Y FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT TE~JRSDAY, AUGUST 4, 1966 HousE or REPRESENTATIVES, CoMMrrmi~ or SOTENCE. AND ASTRONAUTICS, SuBcoMMIrn~E ON SCIENCE, RESEARCH, AND DEV~1LOPMENT, TVa$hington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment~ at 10:15 a.m., in room ~325, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C., Hon. Emiho Q. Daddario (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. DADDARIO. `This meeting will come to order. Our first witness this morning is Dr. Walter Hubbard, Director, Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of the Interior. Would you come forward, please, Dr. liibbard? I would like to have the members `of the con~mittee know that Dr. Hibbard and I were classmates at Wesleyan. lie is an old friend of mine and I was extremely pleased when he left private `industry to come to Government so he could find out what it is to work under these conditions. I can say that in my conferences with him I `havo learned that he found it is a much more difficult proposition than he e~pe~ted. We welcome you to the Government's ~work. Please come forward and start your statement. DR. WALTEB~ R. HIEBARD', IR., DIRECTOIt, BUflEAU OP 1VIIl~ES, U.S. DEPART1\~LI~T `OP TEE IflThRIOR Dr. HIBEAIiD.' May I introduce my colleagues? Mr, iTarry Perry, who is the Acting Director of Minerals Research, and Mr. Richard MOte, who is `Chief, Office of Program `C'oordination~ Mr. DADDARIO. We welcome you both. Dr. lilBilAim. If I may, I would like to summarize the written ver~ sion of the testimony emphasizing those things which I think are of particular importance. I am pleased to have `the opportunity to `appear before you totlis.. cuss the technologic problems facing' `the Nation in its efforts to abate environmental pollution. The introduction of our testimony sumniarizes the problem as it exists. I am sure you already know that there are millions of tons of contaminants every year produced from the combustion of fossil fuels, which pollute our atmosphere, streafris, and land. The problems of en~ vironmental pollution are to a degree a byproduct of our economic 5uc~ bess and inasmuch as adequate disposals of waste in general had no eco- 257 PAGENO="0262" 258 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT nomic return or incentives, the technology to handle such material has been largely neglected. I would like to discuss for a few moments the role of the Bureau of Mines in this area because I `think it is not as kwell known as it should be. The Bureau of Mines~ by its organic `act, is charged with the respon- sibility to conduct scientific and technologic investigations in the mining, preparation, treatment, and utilization of minerals and min- eral fuels with a view of improving health conditions, increasing safety and efficiency, and conserving our resources through prevention of waste. In accordance `with its initial congressional mandate, the Bureau has been engaged for more than 50 years in research investiga- tions designed to conserve our natural resources, and in many studies aimed at minimizing pollution, since pollution from wastes often represents inefficient use of our resources. In the water area these investigations have included acid mine drainage alleviation through mine sealing, economic means of utiliz- mg or disposing of mine wastes, and prevention of contamination by leaching of mine tailings. And while we have made progress in many of these areas, the problems have expanded much more rapidly than the solutions. In the field of air pollution abatement the Bureau is concerned `with engine exhaust fumes. It has also been active in research on the utilization of mineral fuels and in general with the minimization of pollution. Here again, our research has not been able to keep pace with the growth of the problem. The Bureau has had a longstanding interest in the reduction of sulfur oxides pollution resulting from the combustion of fossil fuels and from metallurgical operations. In these areas' we have worked on the cleaning of coal to remove sulfur-bearing waste; desulfuriza- tion of petroleum products.; improving combustion efficiency to con- serve fuel resources and produce less pollutants for a given energy production; and the removal of sulfur oxides from waste gases and conversion to useful products of commerce. Mr. DADDAIIIO. You talk about the lack of ability to keep up with the need and you state that this is largely due to lack of funds. Have you proposed programs which would definitely be of help but which have not been supported by funding? Or is it a problem which in- volves the amount of funds which would allow you to develop an adequate research effort? Dr. HBBARD. The answer to the first question is "Yes." We have proposed programs which have not been funded. The answer to the second question is also "Yes," because the problem has increased so rapidly almost' algebraically. Mr. DADDARTO. Could you go into that a bit, and perhaps submit for the record any details that may be necessary? `Mr. MosnEa. Mr. Chairman, I would especially like to know, when Dr. Hibbard says that programs have not been funded, where this decision has been made. Was it higher up than your own depart-~ ment, has it been a' Budget Bureau decision, or has it been made by Congress, the White House, or who? Dr. HIBBARD. I think I will ask Mr. Perry to answer that question because I have been in my post only 9 months. PAGENO="0263" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 259 Mr. DADDARIO. That was why I said the Bureau of Mines. In ad- clition to the points which Mr. Mosher just raised, would you talk about industry's role? How do they feel about it and what pressures have they put on you? What have they been willing to do themselves in the fields of research and technology? Mr. PERRY. In respect to the last point you made, I believe Dr. Hibbard will discuss cooperation of industry in the latter part of his testimony. With respect to the first point, it is a question of allocating the total resources properly and then for us to do something about the pollution problem which has really come on us only within the last 10 years in a great way. The Bureau started as early as 1915 on the problem of smoke abate- ment which is what air pollution was originally called. Working with the city of Pittsburgh and others, we have attempted to see what could be done with this problem, and, indeed, we have prepared more than 200 publications in the field. I would like to say with respect to the funding that it has been at all levels. Sometimes the decision was made internally, the choice of projects with respect to pollution put some other demands on us and we would have `to put the pollution aside for the time being because in the allocation of our resources at that particular time this was not as important as other things. I would have to say, however, that at every level there have been some financial restraints as there always are. Mr. MOSHER. Do you have any specific examples of an occasion when you urged additional funds to develop technology or to use for re- search and were turned down? Mr. PERRY. Yes, we can supply those, although I would like to say in general that since 1955 when the first Clean Air Act came in and HEW took the primary responsibility in the executive branch with respect to air pollution, we proposed those things that we felt needed to be supported. An.d again, within financial constraints, they have to make decisions with respect to our programs versus other needs and by and large, my recollection is that we feel we are quite well treated when about half of our proposals are funded. I think this is a prerty good batting average. Dr. HIBBARD. Could we supply something for the record? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes, if you could, but what concerns us isn't so much whether you have a good batting average or not. Under ordinary circumstances I would guess 50 percent would be good, but we are considering a program which might develop vital information con- cerning the pollution problem and Dr. Hibbard has pointed out that we haven't been keeping up with it. We know that somewhere along the line we have got to catch up and if we are only going to be able to do 50 percent of the research necessary, I suspect we never shall. If you could provide that for the record, it will be extremely helpful. BUREAU OF MINES POLLUTION ABATEMENT RESEARcH In accordance with your request at the hearing on "Adequacy of Technology for, Pollution Abatement," we are pleased to provide your committee with the following supplemental information on Bureau of Mtnes pollution abatement activities. PAGENO="0264" 260 ADE~UACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR P~tALUTIO~ ~(B~TEMENT Before the enactment of Public Law 159-84th Congress in 1955, the Bureau of Mines was the leading Federal agency in air pollution abatement. Even though the Buyeau. published almost 200 technical papers on air pollution between 1910 and 1950, the funds available for this work were gei1~rally very small and most of the research was performed under "conservation" and "health and safety" appropriations. The Bureau had an Office of Air and Stream Pollution about 1950, but funds were not available to expand this office into an effective air pollution agency. Limitations on budget requests were normally made in advance of such requests. These limitations came either from the Bureau of the Budget ~r by Departmental directive. As a result, only the most urgent prob- lems could he included in a budget presentation and stay within the limitations imposed,, Smoke control was the principal air pollution problem eliciting pu,blic support during this peliod and the Bureau did obtain limited funds for work in this field. Additionally, very limited funds for acid mine drainage and mine sealing were provided during the years preceding World War II. Public Law 159 provIded that the Surgeon General, in cooperation with other Federal agencies, should recommend and perform research on the prevention and abatement of air pollution. This law provided for appropriations to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare for the Federal air pollution program. The Bureau has cooperated fully with HEW through the use of funds transferred from that agency. In addition, the Bureau has used appropriated funds to perform research which has pollution abatement implications. The fol- lowing table shows the relationship between Bureau requests for air pollution project funding and the actual funds transferred from HEW. Fiscal year , Project funds requested Funds re- ceived 1956 - 1957 $300, 000 (1) 423, 290 481,490 463,790 485,690 467, 300 791,200 825,000 1,013,600 985,000 2, 116, 000 $98, 000 125,000 227, 000 227,000 243,000 300,000 350,000 450,000 500, 000 600,000 670,000 2 759, 000 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1Unknown. 2Estiniate. However, the table does not tell the entire story. As a rule, the Bureau requests funding on projects it believes, from discussions with PHS officials, may have a chance for approval. For this reason, less projects are proposed to PHS than are suggested by our field scientists. Incineration is another example where fiscal limitations have seriously re- stricted research efforts. In the mid-1950's, the Bureau cooperated with the Public Health Service in research aimed to develop engineering guidelines for Incineration. Although good progress was made, the work was terminated when funds for Bureau Work were no longer available. It has been estimated that the Bureau's efforts in abatement of air pollution at the source would need to be expanded by a factor of about 5 if it were to be in a positiQu to provide the lunch needed technologic information on the handling and use O1~ fossil fuels. Re8earch on solid wastes is presently funded at $4,300,000 per year, and this may ueed to be increased in the near future. Acid mine drainage work is performed principally in cooperation with the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration (FWPCA). The Bureau expects to expend approximately $450,000 on this work in FY 1907 in addition to contract work by private companies for direct assistance to the program. The contract work Is handled directly by FWPCA. Dr. HIB]~&RlY. I would. like to turn my t~ttentioii to certain of the specific questions which are rai~ed 4n chapter 6 of your report of the Research Management Advisory Panel. PAGENO="0265" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR ~POLLUTION ABATEMENT 261 With respect to question A (1), what should our basic goals and standards be? The standards set by the State, Federal, and local health agencies are based on factors such as effects on plants, animals, humans, and the general sociology of the area. The Bureau does advise, on the basis of our research, as to whether standards can be met with available resources; preferably at the lowest total cost to the public. If, for example, the public agency decides from a public health standpoint as to the maximum amount of sulfur compounds it should permit as emissions from fuel-burning appliances, the Bureau can advise them as to the impact of such a regulation on the availability of fuel resources. Our goal in general is to assure the Nation of an adequate supply of minerals and mineral fuels to support the growth of the national economy while maintaining or improving the quality of our environment. In response to question 2, and particularly with respect to waste management systems, we doubt very seriously whether new techno- logical developments can proceed without effective systems manage- ment development. We have applied this approach to our automobile exhaust studies, and we are convinced the rewards will be great, even though our investigations are concerned with only a smal part of the overall problem. Another example of the systems approach is the strip and surface mine study authorized in the Appalachian Regional Development. Act of 1965 where we are studying the entire national problem befo:re deciding on an approach to its solution. The preliminary interim report of this study is in the Government Printing Office and will be available about September 1. Mr. DADDARTO. Could you go into a little more detail as to how you used your systems management analyses in your automobile exhaust studies and as to why you believe it offers such a favorable prospect? Dr. E[IBBABD. This will be discussed a little bit later on in my testi~ mony. In general we believe that the total problem consists of looking at the fuel and the fuel utilization device; that is, the fuel utilization system, and not necessarily confining it say to an internal combustion engine as we know it today. The exhaust is effluent from the system in relation to the function of the device with respect to the transmission of power by conversion from liquid fuel to a mechanical device. In general we look at this total system with all the variables, and there are some 25 of them. For example, if you chang~ the carburetion Or change the fuel or change the additives in the fuel, it i~ probable that tJaere'~ill be interaction between variables, and you can't really look at each one independently. We believe that the second part of this input has to do with a itiore detailed kiiowledge of the harmful aspects of the engine exhaust effluent. We know, for example, that it consists of unburned hydrocarbons which in themselves are evidence of inefficient burning process in the engine and we know that improved efficiency of fuels combustion will help this situation. We know that we have carbon dioxide, carboh monoxide-carbon dioxide, because it is the product of complete combustion---and nitrogen PAGENO="0266" 262 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT oxides which are produced from air at the temperatures in the cylinders. If you look at all of these variables, you can then model a system and balance the input and the information output variables. From this we can learn what must be done in terms of the functional design of an engine or of fuels utilization devices to avoid these specific compounds which are harmful to health. And, I think from that approach you might end up designing the fuel or designing the fuel utilization system and designing an effluent control system which might well do the job of the existing internal combustion engine and may or may not look like it. To proceed with the next question, B (1), which asks whether or not research on pollution abatement sponsored by the private sector of the economy can be stimulated and can do the job. Basic research on pollution of all kinds has not usually been heavily supported by in- dustry inasmuch as the benefits that may accrue frequently can't be applied solely to the organization supporting the research and the monetary benefits and returns are not particularly rewarding. In general, this is known as nonproductive research. For this rea- son the Government will doubtless have to play a dominant role in pollution research, and institutions of higher learning in cooperation with the Federal agencies can make valuable contributions. In this connection, I would like to point out that air pollution is an international problem, and we are attempting to keep abreast of technology as it develops in laboratories throughout the world. The Interior Department has a working agreement with the Japanese Government on the development of natural resources, and Mr. Perry of my staff is chairman of the American panel on air pollution. This panel has met with their Japanese counterparts both in Japan and in the United States, and the results are most encouraging. Secretary Udall, accompanied by several pollution experts, recently visited Ger- many and a return visit by German investigators is being arranged for this fall. The possibility for cooperative research between the two countries is being explored at the present time. Likewise, close liaison between our officials and the British is providing a rapid exchange of information on all facets of the air pollution problem. Since the private sector is responsive to competitive factors and the setting by the Federal Government of new standards would tend to disturb existing markets, industry undoubtedly would make strong research efforts to meet Federal standards in order to retain its market strength if these economic implications were applied. With respect to question B (4), the Bureau of Mines does not have authority to contract with outside agencies. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian, would you like to ask a question? Mr. VIv~N. I was following your prepared testimony, and I noted you omitted the fact that the Bureau of Mine,s does not have the au- thority to contract with universities in most of its research areas. Dr. HIBBARD. That is correct, sir. Mr. VIVIAN. What is the nature of the restriction? Dr. HIBBARD. We have authority to contract in the area of solid waste disposal and in the area of our helium activity. In all other activities we do not have such authority. PAGENO="0267" ArEQUACY OF ThCHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION AEAT~M~'~ 263 Mr. VIVIAN. DO you require authority or is authority automatically ]rnphed? Dr. HIBBARD. Our solicitor has advised us that we do ~require au- thority. There are bills pending in both Houses of Congress now which if they are passed and signed into law will give the Secretary of Interior authority to contract for research in those programs which have been authorized by statute. This will help us no end if we can get this authority. Mr. VIVIAN. Would you be so kind as to identify these bills? Dr. }IIBBARD. Yes. They are H.R. 15316 and S. 3460. Mr. VIVIAN. Thank you. Dr. HuBBARD. You are welcome. Mr. MOSHER. Do you think it is possible that industry associations can be used to pool efforts and benefits? Dr. HIBBARD. I will discuss that later in the testimony. We do have some joint venture research contracts' with industrial associa- tions where we both contribute, use of equipment. These have been very useful and fruitful, particularly where we have identified a new area of technology which we would like to transplant into industrial practice. A joint ventur effort of this sort is a very effective method of transferring technology from a Federal research laboratory to in- dustrial technology. Mr. Mosni~. You will be discussing this later? Dr., HIBIiAIm. Yes. With respect to question B (6), `we believe that the opportunities are unlimited for approaching a recycle type of industrial society, one in' which materials are used over and over again. This is a very chal- lenging area and should involve again, a systems approach, such that a material and its use in a device are designed, not only for its primary function `but also for optimum recovery, recycling and reuse. We believe for example, that one can design alloys in such a way that they will have the same kinds of strength charpcteristics and yet not contain those kinds of alloying `additions which are difficult to remove during the recycling process. We believe that one can design various components, say of an auto- mobile, so that they could be readily disassembled in, the scrap yards and separated for reuse as scrap. In fact, we have a study aimed at this kind of `approach to the problem. We think it is very promising and in the long run it is going to be the long-range solution. With respect to question C (1) regarding the funding of, the balance between short-term and long-range problems, many of the problems concerned with pollution abatement have social connotations `and tend to Obscure definitive answers as to the comparative merits of short- or long-range remedies through research. It should be remembered that the time required for basic research necessary to the successful use of technology is often a 5 to 10 or 15 year span. Thus, if one is to start from a basic research approach, th~ start must be made well in advance of the need for solution to the problem. For example, we recognized and started to work on the junk auto- mobile problem 7 years ago when we noticed the metallurgical changes' which were going to result from the use of the basic oxygen furnaces and the use of hot metal instead of scrap. We are now' ready to build PAGENO="0268" 264 ADEQUACY OF ~IiNOI4OGY FOR POLLUTION ~BAT~MRNT a demonstr~tion plant beca~s~ ~ve anticipated this probleui~ One is being planned and has been funded and will be put in operation to work out the economiceof a press for recycling automobile scrap. Mr. Rousji, Where will that be located? Have you determined. that yet? Or. HIBBARD. The location,, I believe, hasn't been announced yet. This particular process involves presently unusable low-grade iron ore---nonmagnetic taconites from the Mesabi area-which are roasted with automobile scra?pto yield a magnetic form of easily recovered iron ore. The process n~t only reu~s the auto scrap, but it also gives value to a large reserve of iron-bearing material which hasn't been economic to treat heretofore. Mr. Ronsn. Does this appear to be an expensive process? Dr. HIBBARD. No, I believe it won't, but it must be tested on a large enough scale before one can be sure. The process is simple enough. It involves taking automobile scrap which has been cut into chunks of this size, and passing ~t through a suitable rotary kiln at a modest temperature, along with ~th~nonmagnetic taconi'tes and out the other end comes an enriched iron ore which i~ then very useful So, I would anticipate this to be ecopômically' very ~attractive. The major limita- tion will b~ the cost of transportation of junk automobiles. Mr. MOSHER. When you build a demonstration plant. such as this, is it operated completely by your own department, or is it done in conjunction with some industrial organization? Dr. TIInBA~m, This can be done several ways. In this particular case we are going to contract for the building of the plant but we will operate it ourselves. Mr. Mosn~R. Strictly for demonstration? Dr. HInBARn. Yes, sir., Th~ purpose here is to demonstrate success- fully the sound econ~rnics, ~f this process, and by so doing we believe that industry will pick. it up from there. So, this is solely a demon- stration. Mr. Mosusu. Before making that decision, did you consult with industry? Or. HIBBARD. Oh, yes. Mr. MOSHER, On the possibility that some concern would d~. this? Dr. HIB~ARD. Yes, sir., Mr. M0SHER, In cooperation with you? Dr. HIBBARD. In fact, this is the result of 7 years of research which we have reported to indu~try through our regular publications. We have in our laboratories at Minneapolis, our Twin Cities research laboratories, a laboratory~ scale.piiot plant. We brought people out to see it and get their advice and counsel and recommendations before we decided to proceed with the demonstration plant. 1)~Te then made the proposal to our appropriations people and they thought it was a good idea to proceed. Mr. MOSHER. But, no industry or industrial concern was willing to gamble on doing this on their own? Dr. HIBBARD. If this `had `been the case, our general policy is to pull out and give it to industry just as fast as they will take it. `Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman. , "Mr. DADDARIO. Yes;'Mr. Vivian? PAGENO="0269" ADE~AC~ OF T~CENOWOY FOE `POLLt!I O~ ABA1~1MENT 265 Mr. VI~rii~N. T would like to ask `a question ~ince we have large taco.~ nite ore supplies in my State of Michigan, and these supplies happen to be a long distance away from where the cars are made, used and fall apart. The question I have is, why ~s it advantageous to put the taconite Dr. HIBEARD. I am not hearing you. Mr. VIVIAN. Why is it advantageous to put the `tacom'te, which is found far away from where the autom'~biles are junked, together with the junked automobiles in one blast furnace or equivalent device `in- stead of putting them into separate fur~iaces at separate locations ath transporting less material around the country? Dr. HIBBARD. One of the things `that'We are doing is making `a junk automobile survey so we will know in whnt locatIons the population of junk cars are and what `the problems are with transporting them and other information of this sort. We believe that tim `solution to the problem is not going to be a single one; there must be a menu of solutions, sO to speak, so that you will have one that will fit the economics of each ar~a where there are large concentrations of cars. We believe the taconite approach is one Solution. Mr. VIVIAi~. Just a minuite. Before you say this is a solution, is thi~ s~ltttioii any better than melting down the cars in one place, preparing the taconite material some other place, and later mixing them in a furnace `some distance awa.y from both locations? What is the advanagte of this joint process? `Ohemically and technically? Dr. HIBBARD. I see what you mean. I think the logistics, the opti.. mization of logistics haven't been r~all~ w'oi~ked out. It might well be that `a different location of the plant thight be more fruitful. How- ever, in general, since the taconites are low in iron, you would tend to minimise the transportation of the lowest value raw material of the process, and that would be the nonma~ctic taconites themselves, so you w~nld "tend to minimize the trans~oi~tation"of low value material and maximize the transportation of the high value material. ,Follow- ing that principle you would put it near the taconites,. This may not be correct when we have all the economics. Mr. VIVIAN. I really have difficulty seeing `this. Michigan is a major `taconite State. But it seems strange to take the cars `which are junked' in Chicago or Detroit `and other places where the bulk of the population lies, put them aboard a i~ke freighci~ and haul them up to the northern part of the State which is, I suppose, 600 miles away by water, then mix them with taconite `derivitive materials obtained locally, and ship them all back down. It is not obvious to me that you have added any benefit to the furnaces that wa~ii't thei~e in the ~rst place4 Dr. HIBEARD. The furnaces ~s they now ekis't cannot just use the junk `automobile scrap because, with the `advent of the `basic oxygen furnace, these furnaces do not use No. .2 bundles which are the old automobiles. Secondly, the furnaces" cannot u~e the low-grade nonmagnetic taconites as they now exist beeau~e th~y are too low in iron. These `are tacoriit;es that are 20, 25 `percent h~on, large nmonnt of silicates and impurities. So, by combining `two things which the furnaces can- PAGENO="0270" 266 ~ :O~.TE~NOLQOY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT not now use and making out of them these metallized pellets, you end up with a material in the form which the furnaces can use. Chairman MILLER. In many instances, isn't the taconite prereftned near the mining place? Dr. HuBBARD. Yes. Chairman MILLER. And, it can be re~Ined there until it gets rid of the surplus materials, as I understand the process. Dr. HIBBARD. In general, the taconites that are used are magnetite which is magnetic, and in spme cases hematite, which are between 64, 65, and maybe 80 percent iron in their contents. These are pellet- ized and roasted and so-called metallized to the point where the ma~ terial increases in its iron content to maybe 80 to 90 percent. However, with the present economics, the so-called low-grade non- magnetic taconites are not used. These are taconites which have only 25 percent iron. Chairman MILLER.. I know; I was i~ Australia about a year ago and they have made some great discoveries. They are now shipping ~iconite to Japan,I believe. Dr. HIBBARD. In the western part of Australia as you know they have these tremendous mesas which are solid hematites. They are just beautiful. In fact, they are equivalent if not betterthan some of the Mesabi ores. We would. just love to have this in the United States. Mr. MOSHER. Are you saying, sir, that there is less bulk in the cothpresse~1 junk. automobile, than there is in the taconite and there~ fore it páystó ship the~es~ bulky ca~r junk to the taconite. Dr. HIeBARD. T~e~erc~pf~ge of iron per pound in the junk;'~iito mobiie as it is chopped u~ and shipped is much higher than the per centage of iron per poun4 inuthe~aconite. So, under normal circumstances you would move the jn~nk autos to the taconite and riot the taconite. to the junk autos. If I could move'on. there are some answers to other questions in the testimony. I move to quPstion C(S), the question of the f rag- mentatiOn of research. I think there are examples where research has been fragmented and where a piecemeal approach has been used to solveone problem while creating another. A good exam~ie. would be a use of aqueous scrubbing of flue gas to remove sulfur oxides. Th~~ might remove the sulfur oxides from the stack effluents but woul4~orm low-grade dilute sulfuric acid which would be very difficult to dispose of, either causing a stream pollution problem ora solid wastes pollution, problem to replace the atmospheric one. Again, we believe that the, systems approach can help here. I would like to also move to question E (1) regarding the FederaJ~ state, and locs~l. problems ,f applying technology. We have a good example of State-Federal cooperation. in our own area. The Appa- lachian ~egioual Development Act calls for demonstration projects concerning the alleviation of surface subsidence over mines, putting out of coal fires, and incidentally there are over200 coal beds in this coun- try. which are. burning right today. They are bellowing smoke and causing the ,los~,. of ,goqd eoai and are general problems in health and safoty. . PAGENO="0271" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 267 In the other area is strip mine reclamation. We have projects with the States on these subjects which are currently confined to pub- lic lands where the State proposes the demonstration work to be done and it is funded jointly on a 75 Federal, 25 State basis. We work together, working out the engineering and other details of the proj- ect and in reporting. I would like to turn quickly, if I may, now to the current status of pollution abatement technology, in my opinion. The scientific information on pollution information is for the most part more advanced than the engineering technology. There are theoretical chemical equations for handling many of the poi- ~Iutants from the standpoint of their formation and from the stand- point of their alle.viatioti. ~owever~ the problem is that the cot ~espondipg engineering teçJinolo~v either hasn't been developedoh you iiicjjide izi~ the definition of technolo~v the question ~of eco nomi~th~t~rnomips are u~f~vorable.~ This does not mean that we recommend no further basic research because, as a strong supporter of basic research, I believe that it is reasonable. to expect that a better understanding of the fundamental processes involved in pollution formation and prevention would lead to more feasible avenues for developing technologies. However, one would hope to use, wherever possible, existing tech- nology because of the timespan involved and, therefore, it is the technological area where ~ are. in short supply. One Qf the major reasons for this is because most pollutants are in a very low concentration in the environment and therefore the re- moving of relative.ly~sma11.awQunts of materials from very large vol- umes of harmful sub~tances is generally an economic problem. Incineration of combustible refuse is a good example of moderately adequate scientific inforina~ion but very inadequate engineering tech- nology. I state that the spi~ntific background is fairly well known because incineration is basically a combustion problem. Since in- cineration is a combu~tioñ process, it should be possible to design incinerators on the basis of the theory and practices of burning solid fuels such as coal. However, whether it is a small household or a large municipal incinerator, the design and operation is complicated by enormous variations in the quantity and composition of the refuse ~ed to the furnace.. These variations in the feed cause significant fluctuations in the temperature of the combustion chamber which creates serious problems in controlling the evolution of smoke, fly ash, and malodorous or noxious gases. In addition, combustion con- t~tol is complicated because the moisture content of the combustible refus~ m~y vary from almost zero to at least 80 percent. All too often, thunicipal incinerators are designed and built~ without a~1equate attention to the nature and volume of the. materials they must handle at the outset, let alone within the, next decade. Residential incinera- tors generally are inadequate for the job ~ñd ~tre operated by unskilled personnel. Unfortunately, basic and. applied research on the inci~era-' ti on process has been notably scanty. The Bureau of Mines and the Taft. En~ine.ering Center conducted limited iitvestigations on incinera~ tion in the 1950's, but the work was terminated long before comple- tion. Limited research has been conducted, in recent years by a num- PAGENO="0272" 268 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ber of organizations, notably, New York University, but the field is wide open `for systematic research on both ~the combustion and thi~ gas-cleaning phases of the incineration process. I would like to move from here to the sulfur oxides problem. The principal sources of sulfur oxides are from the combustion of ~ossil fuels and from the metallurgical processes involving sulfur- bearing ores. There is no industrially proven method presently avail- able for appreciably lowering the sulfur oxides released through corn- bustiôii proc~ss~s. There are in development and in pilot plant stages, however~ several ways of approaching this problem. It may be ap- proached in at least ~two ways. One would be to remove sulfur-bear- ing compounds from the fuels before burning, in coal, for exani~le, s~lfur~appears in two main forms-as discrete particles of pyrIte (iron ~tIfide) &nd in the organic structure of the coal itself. `There is' no~ presently known method for removing the organic sulfur without de~. stroying the coal molecules, bu4 the sulfur occurrin~ as pyrite can be' separathd mechanically. The reconstitution of coal, that is, dissolving the coal and reprecipitating it, leaving the sulfur behind is of course, a very expensive process, but it will remove organic sulfur. ~the pyrite can be separated by physical means. One must grind the coal to the point where the particle size is equivalent to the pyrite Size and then remove it magnetically or by other methods. The larger size particles can be removed by conventional cleaning methods. The situation with respect to removal of sulfur from petroleum and its products is somewhat more complicated. The American crude oils are generally low in sulfur, sufficiently so as to yield an end product which is not high `in sulfur. However, for economic reasons the~ per~ centage. of crude oil converted to residual oil is rapidly decreasing be- cause the price of residual is roughly half that of crude. Therefore you are not likely to rn~ake a low-valued product from a higher one, sO the economics are not good. As a result, the Eastern Seaboard States are increasingly dependen~ on overseas shipments and a large part of this imported residual oil is a high-sulfur product ranging from 2 to 3% percent sulfur. There are scientifically feasible methods known for the desulfurization of fuel oils. For example, hydrodesulfurization is scientifically possib~ but economically this would be very expensive. It would increase th1~ cost of residual fuel by at least 25 percent, and seriously affect its eco- nomic competitiveness. Another approach is to remove the sulfur oxide from waste gases re- sulting from the combustion. There are several methods for doing this. The wet method or scrubbing method is not practical because it reduces the temperature of the gases to the point where they don't~ float out in the atmosphere, but are inclined to crawl out of the smoke- stacks and settle back down on the surrounding environment. The other methods include an approach~ which is an absorption technique. The approach which we are following in the Bureau and which is sponsored by HEW is the use ~of alkalized alumina to absorb the SO2 from the effluent at high temperatures. This has the advantage that the absorbent will be regenerated, and we obtain sulfur from the. process. Sulfur is in short supply, so this process can be used eflee- tively as a conservation measure. PAGENO="0273" AD~QUACY~ OF~CENOLOGt ~`O1t ~0LLIJTION ABATEMENT 269 Another approa~Sh is to mix the fuel with certain materials, such as limestone or dolomite and other materials which combine with the sulfur in the fflrnace and form a sulfate which remains with the ash and can be removed from the effluent as a particulant. There are areas where this is possible. We believe there is no single approach to solve this problem. The reai/problem at this stage of the game is to determine the cost of th~se various methods and to see under what range of circumstances they are feasible. Our present program is, again, a systems approach, and the items involved here are to study the coal and oil resources in terms of their suifur content, develop selective mining operations for leaving behind the sulfur~.containing materials, the fixation of sulfur during combus- tion, or the desulfurization of the waste gases. With this combination I believe, when successful, we will have the tecimiques to help solve this problem. A second major area- Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman ~ Mr. DADDARIO. Yes, Mr. Vivian ~ Mr. VIVIAN. The question I ha~ve is this: What `iS the impact of having & large amount of sulfur oxide dis- persed into the atmosphere? Dr. HIBBAED. Our mission is technical in this case, and we are not competent in the health aspects of these effluents. We hate been working very closely with the Air Pollution Divisidn of the Public Health Service, coordinating our activities' and relying entirely upon them for the appraisal of the health aspects and the discussious which involve what are threshold amounts of sulfur &ide. They set the goals in effect and we arC trying to achieve the~n,. Mr. VIVIAN. I presume that some of the sulfur oxides wash out with rains and are deposited on the earth'S surface. Dr. HInBARD. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. Is there any observable reaction that result~ fromthis? Dr. HIBEARD. In general any combination of sulfur oxide in the presence of oxygen and water will result in some form of acid either sulfurous or sulfuric acid, and the concentration of this is dependent upon the particular situation involved. Mr. VIVTAN. I am trying to find out the impact. I take it that this Is a subject you people don't get into? Mr. PERRY. The conPerfl with sulfur oxides, relates only to health effects, and not with respect to the appearan~ of sulfuric acids. Those concentrations would be very low. Dr. HIBBARD. This i~ at breathing effect, or an interacti~n of plants. With respect to auto exhausts, this is a very serious problem because the approaches which are now being taken, and very ably so, are based on existing technology and will not solve the long-range problem of the mounting number of automobiles. W~ believe therefore, as we mentioned before, that there should be a systems approach to the long-range solution which will permit at minimum amount of harmful effluent. The problem should be looked at frOm the basic principles problem and not simply the conversipu of existing systems as they~ñow are used. 68-240-66-vol. 1--18 PAGENO="0274" 270 ADEQTJACY OF TRC~iNOLOGY FOR PO~LU~à~ ABATEMENT Mr. DADL~ARIO. Is there a conflict between your sta~ments as to your activities and those of the Department of HEW aM the fact that motorists will be spending about $50 for antipoiiuti~; devices for cars which, when multiplied by .10 million cars, amount~4o one-half billion dollars? You say that while many of the compouri~cis present in automobile exhaust are relatively inactive, only a few of these con- stituents of the exhaust are the primary cause of pollution. M~e we just doing this because it creates a pøsitive psychological effeèn the minds of people that something is being done when, in fact, ~. are spending all of this money just to get rid of a few of the eonstitu-\ ents of exhaust? Dr. HuBBARD. The problem is particularly with the unburned hydro- carbons which come out of an engine as automobile exhaust. There is a wide variety of these, and we. are systematically-and when I say "we," I mean the Federal Government as a whole-analyzing these compounds to find which of them are the harmful ones and which are not. The problems are so complex and so numerous that at the particular moment we don't know which of these are of most importance-well, we do know certain of them are bad actors, but we don't know that all of them ai~e, bad. actors; and we haven't yet sorted out the harmful ones from the nonharmful ones. In addition, as you know, there is still a controversy, even with re- spect to smog-whether this comes from the interaction of the nitrogen oxides with hydrocarbons-and how important this is', to the smog abatement pro~em. , We really don't know at the moment as, much as we should about the `characteristics of the engine exhaust effluents and their interaction with the variables of the fuel and the engine parameters of the auto- mobiles itself. These are' `the first things which we must obtain. HEW is pro- ceeding to get this kind of information; we are too. Mr. ~ADDARxo. Do we know enough about it so that we should im- pose on the public the burden of paying for this. $50 device? Is it worth it, or should we. revise our thinl~mg"about this ~ifUation and divert these expenditures so that they will' be more effective? Dr. HIBBARD. I believe that anyone who has been in the Los Angeles- San Francisco area during' the time when smog has been particularly bad-and I have been there in those times-I firmly believe that there is too much air pollution from engine exhaust. The kind of regulation which is now taking place is reducing this and I certainly believe it should be reduced. I don't think we are ready yet to say precisely to what extent it should be reduced and precisely how it should be reduced, but I think the kind of regulation we have is good., Mr DADDARIO This seems to fit into a category of problems about which we are usually given the following advice You can spend a bil- lion dollars, let's say, and it will achieve some benefits, but it will not obtain all of the benefits. There is some question that, after you have spent all this money the situation hasn't gone beyond the point where it was when you originally started only because you didn't ,know enough about it in order to impose this obligation such as tli~ $50 PAGENO="0275" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 271 device on the buying public in the first place. And, I would like to add to that if, in fact, the program doesn't achieve the most beneficial results, you break down the desire of the public to support future pro- grams. It~is on this support that we ultimately have to depend. Dr. Iji1~BARD. I believe in this case there will be beneficial results. The geiieral prognostication is that the engine exhai.ists or effluent will/acy decline with time as a result of the regulations which are nqw being considered and the technology which is now being devel- p~ed, but that it is the sheer number of automobiles which is going to /cause it to go up again and require eventually a longer range solution. Mr. DADDARTO. Maybe I can put it this way. If you had the half billion dollars to spend, would you spend it this way? Dr. HIBBARD. Gee,, that's. an awful hard question to answer. I suspect many of the things that are now being done I would do. Maybe not all of them. I don't know. Mr. DADDARTO. I'm talking about the $5.0 device. It comes to half of a billion dollars. You know what it is going to achieve. ,You have already said that there are problems the nature ,of which we don't presently understand., We are talking in the final analysis about half of a billion dollars in this one narrow area. Dr. HIBBARD. I believe that this research will-~-- Mr. DADDARIO. And, I'm reminded properly that we are not talking about a total of half of a billion dollars. We are talking, about half of a billion dollars every year in an area about which we know so little. Dr. HuBBARD. I believe, from what I' understand, that the general objectives of this device, is to provide information which is essential to the solution of the problem and it ~will in addition produce a short- range solution which will give us `time (8 to 10 years), to tackle the longrange problem. I think those are desirable `objectives. Now, from the standpoint of cost effectiveness, I really am not in a position to evaluate whether it is worth this kind of money. .Mr. DADDARIO. I don't mean, of course, to have you make a `snap decision on a situation such as this, but I would expect that you would support the general theory that we ought to know more about certain areas within w~iich we push expenditures of large sums of funds before we commit ourselves. Dr. HuBBARD. Yes. The only exception I would take to that is that frequently the engineer is faced with making a decision about a prob- lem before he has all the information needed t,o make a really sound decision. We may be in thiC kind of a situation now, and this happens many times. Mr. DADDARIO. Well, there is no question, that if we could .reacli the point where we could find an infallible solution to a complicated prob- lem such as this, we wouldn't be having these,meetings today. But,. as I have listened to testimony here and as we have prepared ourselves for this meeting,. there seem to, be ~t multitude of problems the solutions to wh~eh seem to be extremely hard to find.,, We ought to be able to sort these out and come to some understanding about where we stand and how, we can approach them. Dr. huBBARD. I quite agree with that. . , PAGENO="0276" N 272 AbEQUACY OF TECI1NOLOG~ FOE POLLtTTO~ ABATEMENT In other ~vords, I believe that by taking the t~t~l problem and looking at it on a systems basis, we cottld come to som~ kind of a dis tribution of the work to solve all of the problems involv~d. Mr. DADDARIO. You touch on mine drainage for exa~nple. Is it po~- sible that there is no solution? Acid drainage occurs naturally in some places. If we come to the conclusion that there is no solu~iQn and~ that~~,pollution from mine drainage is more of a natural phenomentt~thaia anything else, should we accept it and explain why it is? Dr. HuBBARD. No; I believe there is a solution to the problem. .&~.. the moment the solutions which are known are very expensive. It; ~ would cost, I would say, in the billion's of dollars to solve the prbblenii in Pennsylvania alone. Mr. DADDARIO. But, because this is such a big problem and because it raises such havoc in certain areas, it ought to be known that we are still groping with the problem. We ought not to paniebecause people are so disturbed about it and spend money only so as to give the appearance that something is being done. Dr. HIBBARD. I quite agree. This prob~.em can be solved. Tt can be solved economically, I believe. It is going to require a sensible research and development program. If we approach it in an orderly wa~y, it will be solved., Mr DADDARIO Mr Chairman ~ Chairman MIr3r~R We look at some of these problems and we see the immediate effect in our own areas We sometimes overlook them when they don't affect us directly. `I'm conscious of the. fact that' in California `when Shasta Dam was built they had', to seal off a number' of old copper mines. I have often wondered how long the seals of' these mines are going to last under heavy headsof wMer? What will~ happen if these seal~ break? `Dr. HIBBABD. I don't know, but it will be very unfortunate. I have touched briefly before on the sQl~id waste in the junk auto. program. I think `the two points I would like tQ emphasize, the extraction processing and utilization of mineral substanoes frequently is a cause of solid waste. When you think that an' or4in'ary coppery ore contains about half a percent of copper-this means that there are~ only 10 pounds of coppei for every 2,000 pounds of ore-you have a large amountof material to d!~po~e of. The Bureau has `been approaching the problem of minimizing or utilizing wastes and has concentrated on `areas of improving systems which would reduce the mineral losses and control the volume and' location `and products finally discarded. It has endeavored also to~ use waste to fill and support old mine openings. Again `here, the system approach appears to be essential. One example I would like to make `is the problem of burning culm banks. These are w'aste piles from coal `mines and consist of slag and 4ebris and some low-grade coal which has been piled out in, the dumps.. Frequently these have caught `fire for various reasons. There are four interrelated problems involved here. One is the air pollution~ from the smoke of the cuim fire. Another is the solid waste disposaF of the piles of debris. There is a problem of pollution from the run- off of rain water into the streams, and' there is the whole question of trying to conserve the coal in the piles. Therefore, this is' a good em.- PAGENO="0277" ADEQUACY OF~ TECIThIOLOGY FOt~ POLLTJTION ABATEMENT 277 The pr9bjems of envjronmental pollution axe, to a large dcgr~e, a bytroduci of om~ economlc,progress, as well as past neglect and apathy. Our scieiitlficktioM- edge of the causes and character of environmental pollution iS thore extensive than the technology to handle the waste byproducts of our industrial civiliza- tion. Because of our iallure to undertake adequate measures to prevent and treat pollution, `the American people have finally come to a general realization that the aix we t~reathe is laden with products foreign to the original environ- ment, our water supplies are contaminátèd by waste products, and oUr landscapes are being 4espoiled by waste materials for which `we have found nO good hiding places nov any feasible methods of utilizing or destroying them. The situation ~s becoming more critical each day `as the trend toward population concentration in urban centers continues. ROLE OF THE BUREAU OF MINES The Bureau of Mines, by its organic act, is charged with the responsibility to conduct scientific and technologic investigations in the mining, preparation, treatment and utilization of minerals and mineral fuels with a view of Improving health conditions, increasing safety and efficiency, and conserving our resources through prevention of waste. In accordance with its original Congressional mandate, the `Bureau has been engaged for more than 50 years in research in- vestigations designed to conserve our natural resources, and in many studies aimed at minimizing pollution. Over the years, much time and effort has been expended on investigations to decrease the amount of pollutants entering our water supplies as a direct, or indirect, result of mining operations. These in- vestigations include: acid mine drainage alleviation through mine sealing; eeo~ nomic means of utilizing or disposing Of mine wastes; and prevention of con- tamination by leaching of mine tailings. While we feel we have made progress In these endeavors, problems have been arising even more rapidly than the solutions. In the field of air pollution abatement, the Bureau of Mines has published over 200 treatises based on its work. For many years the Bureau has been a leader In. the battle for the elimination of smoke which tended to cover so many of our industrial centers, and has been active in Other aspects of smoke control. While this battle has not been completely won, industry and government have devci- o~ed economically feasible methods of controlling the largest proportion of the thnok~ resulting from the combustion of fossil fuels. Likewise, the Bureau in the early 1920's initIated research on fumes released by internal combustion engines, and has continued active investigations leading toward the use,of fUels with minimum pollution by motor vehicles. However, the Bureau's research and Investigations have not kept pace with the incremental growth of the prob- lems resulting in part from the tremendous increases In the number of automo- biles, trucks, and buses. Owing largely to `lack of sufficient funds, work on the technology for pollution control has not been sufficient to cope with the needs. The Bureau also has a l'ong~standing interest in the reduction of sulfur oxides pollution resulting primarily from thO combustion of fossil fuels and thetal- lurgical operations. Investigations of particular note which we have con- ducted, include: the cleaning of coal to remove sulfur-bearing waste; desul- ftrization of petroleum products; improving combustion efficiency to' conserve fuel resources and produce less pollutants for a given energy production; and the removal of sulfur oxides from waste gases and conversion to useful products of commerce. COMMENTS ON THE REPORr OF TIlE RESEARCH ADvISORY PANEL With this long-term background of scientific and technologic effort in the field~ of pollution abatement, the Bureau is most pleased to endorse much of the' report of your Research Management Ad'viso'ry Panel on this subject. In par- ticular, we wish to draw attention to the viewpoints expressed in the first para- graph of the section entitled, "The Need for Additional Technology." While It must be recognized that the environmental pollution problem is much broader than the samples cited In this section, the illustrations given are among the more pressing problems now confronting the Nation. Industry and Government' can, I am sure, develop eeeuomically feasible ways to Improve the environment in Which we live. The necessity for such improvement is only too apparent. PAGENO="0278" 278 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOI~OOY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Before discussing, in more detail, sipecific problems lii envicronmental pellu- tion and the research efforts underway In the Bureau of Mines in its search for solutions to these problems, I would like to address myself to some of the interesting questions designated In the report as issues worthy of cousideratieq by the Congress. Many of the Issues fall beyond the scope of Bureau involve- ment, but on others we do have definite ideas that I would like to present to you. While the Bureau of Mines has a significant role in pollution prevention, we do not set the standards which the public must comply with. Standards are set by Federal, State and local `agencies based on factors such as effects on plants, animals, and humans. The Bureau does advise, on the basis of our research, as to whether standards can be met with available resources and, preferably, at the lowest possible cost to the `public. In other words, if a public agency is undecided from a health standpoint as to the maximum amount of sulfur com- pounds, for example, it should permit as emissions from fuel-burning appliances, th~en we can advise as to the impact of any regulation on the availability of fuel resources. We doubt seriously whether new technological developments can proceed effec- tively without waste-management systems analyses. In fact, we view this ap- proach as indispensable in c~etermining significant "pay-off" areas to which the technological effort should be directed. The problems involved in pollutior~ abatement are national in character and technologically complex. To achieve success requires the utilization of the most sophisticated techniques available, We bave applied this approach to our automobile exhaust studies, and we are convinced that the rewards will be great, even though our investigations are con-., cerned with only a small part of the overall problem. Since the ptivate sector of the economy is highly responsive to competitive factors, the setting by the Federal Government of new standards wofil~ likely disturb existing markets fOr~fuels. Industry would undoubtedly. ~àke strong research efforts to meet these standards in order to retain or strengthen its markets. Basic research on pollution abatement of all kinds is usually not supported heavily by industry since the benefits that may accrue frequently cannot be applied solely to the organization supporting the research, and the monetary benefits are not particularly rewarding. For this reason, Government will doubtless have to continue to play a dominant role in this research area. Iri~ti- tutions of higher learning, in cooperation with Government agencies, also can make valuable contributions. Unfortunately, the Bureau does not have the authority to contract with universities in most of its research areas. We believe that the opportunities are unlimited for approaching a recycle type of industrial society-one in which materials are used over and over and over again. Many of the constituents in environmental pollutants are worth conserving, and since conservation Is a major role of the Bureau, we are alert to the possibilities. For example, the recovery of the sulfur from the sulfurous gases resulting from combustion of fossil fuels would solve the critically short supply of sulfur that now exists on a world-wide basis. Likewise, the scrap automobile and discarded, refrigerator that in abandoned, form blight the, land- scape contain many vainabie~ nietatstIa't~s1~ouldbe~reeov,eired amh4mt~to r~t~ewed use. The issues raised in the Advisory Panel Report having direct implications to the Federal Research and Development Program, especially those which apply to the Bureau of Mines, were carefully reviewed by us. Many 0f the problems concerned with pollution abatement have social `connotations that tend to obscure definitive answers as to the comparative merits of short- or long-range remedies through research. Under the present budget structure of the Bureau, we believe our research effort is properly balanced between those studies that lend them- selves to the application of previously developed techniques with the view toward an expeditious solution of the problem and those that require a more extensive investig'i tory period where ultimate success is more uncertain. The question whether the research effort is pronerly distributed among the various facets of a common problem is always difficult to assess, and the different sources and types of pollution represent a classic example of the task that con- fronts management in the effective direction of `a `iesearch"program. `We believe that the systems approach will provide material assistance in this area, and `it is one of the reasons that we so strongly endorse this method. The ultimate goal of the Federal research establishment in determining the appropriate stopping place as you move from basic or applied research into the PAGENO="0279" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 279 ~development stage, and eventually into engineering application, does not lend itself well to predetermined standards. For most engineering developments, the Bureau of Mines tends to stop short of the application stage. Once our research effort has advanced to a showing of feasibility and our results are made avail- able to the public through discussion and publication, our role becomes one of encouraging application by the private sector. At times, completion of the devel- opment work calls for close cooperation between the Bureau and industry by formal agreement. The public interest is always protected in arrangements of this type as the Bureau retains all publication and patent rights from such joint studies. It should be noted, however, that there may be certain important research and development areas where there is little or no incentive for the pri- vate sector to become engaged. If investigatory studies in these areas are in the national interest, ~s for example acid mind drainage from abandoned mines, Government has no ithoice other than to explore these fields to the extent needed and in the required depth. The question raised in the report with respect to a tendency to fragment research as to source or environment sector is particularly interesting. A good example of a piecemeal approach would be the use of aqueous scrubbing of flue gas to remove the sulfur oxides. This method might provide a satisfactory solu- tion for the cleaning of the stack effluent of sulfur dioxide, but the disposal of the acid formed might merely create a stream pollution problem to replace the atmospheric one. We are fully aware of the management problem that is involved here, and therefore are again looking to the systems approach to aid us. PRESENT STATE OF POLLUTION ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGY In addition to the views I have just expressed on the broader aspects of the prOblem, I believe your committee would be interested in our evaluation of the present status of scientific information and engineering technology, as it applies to air pollution abatement and the future needs in this field if an improved en- vironment is to be attained. As I indicated before, scientific information on pol- lution abatement is for the most part more advanced than is the engineering technology. There are theoretically sound ways to prevent the formation of many environmental pollutants, or ways of handling the pollutants after their formation but before their discharge into the atmosphere, into our water sources, or onto the land. For many pollutants, there is experimental information which can be applied to the solution of particular environmental problems. However, the corresponding engineering technology either has not been developed or the eco- nomics are unfavorable by today's standards. The costs of the remedies thus far are not considered to be worth the gains. This should not be interpreted to mean that we recommend no further `basic investigations regarding pollution abate- ment. On the contrary, it is reasonable to expect that a better understanding of the fundamental processes involved in preventing the formation of pollutants, or in disposing of the pollutants, would reveal more feasible methods for their re- moval by recognized engineering procedures. However, for most of the problems, there already , exists appreciable scientific information on which to base larger sCale work to improve engineering technology necessary for successful solution of the problems on an industrial scale. One reason for the large gap between scientific understanding and practical solutions is the fact that most pollutants released to the environment are present in low concentrations and require re- moval of small amounts of material from large volumes of harmless substances. Testing of prototype equipment or processes `thus can involve treatment of huge quantities of materials at substantial expense. SULFUR OXIDES `The problems encountered in lowering the amount of sulfur oxides which enter the ambient atmosphere offer a good example of the status of many of the prob- lems in environmental pollution. I will, therefore~ discuss this in more detail. The principal sources of sulfur `oxides pollution are from the combustion of fossil fuels and from the metallurgical processes involving sulfur-bearing ores. Of these the combustion of fossil fuels constitutes by far the largest source. How- ever, since fossil fuels are the basis for the production of the predominant share of the energy which keeps `our industrial economy going, `there is no way ito `elimi- nate completely `the ~use of sulfur-bearing fossil fuels wIthin the foreseeable future. PAGENO="0280" 280 ADE~UACj'~' ~i~' TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEME~P While specific ambieiit air quality requirements with respect to the effects Qt sulfur oxides on health are subject to ~outrQversy, the~'e i~ general agreement that the rapid increase in, the release of sulfur oxide~ to the atmosphere must be curbed, particularly in highly urbanized areas. On the otl~er hand, there is ~ Industrially proven method presently available for appreciably lowering the sui- fur oxides released through combustion processes. Nevertheless, much informa- tion on the subject is available. Even though technologie developments are pro- gressing rapidly, the solution to the problem may still be several years away. `The abatement of sulfur `oxides pollution from combustion processes can approached in two ways. One way, seemingly the most logical, would be to re- move sulfur~bearing compounds from the fuel before the' fuel, is burned. ~or~ example, ~ulfur occurs in coal in two principal `forms; that is, as discrete particles ~f pyrite and in the organic structure of the coal molecules. There is no pre~- ently known method for removing the organic sulfur withopt destroying the coal molecules, but the sulfur occurring as pyrite can be separated (at least thèoreti-~ cally), by physical methods. In most American coals, the iron pyrite occurs in a wide spectrum of particle sizes, the larger `of wldch can be removed by conven- tional cleaning method's. American coals range in sulfur con'tent from about 0.5 percent up to a maxi- mum of 6 or 8 percent. The United States does have an appreciable quantity of' low-sulfur coal (less than 1 percent sulfur), but much of this product is not readily available to the utility market, because most of, these low-sulfur coal mines-many of them so-called "captive" mines-are producing primarily for' steel-making and other metallurgical purposes. Although these reserves of low- sulfur coal might be used in an emergency to serve this market, any sudden large demand would require an nppreclable time period for development of new, addi- tional mines in known low-sulfur reserves. While the reserves for petroleum are much less than for coal, they still are extensive and do not represent a supply problem in the near future. For the generation of electric power, space heating and small manufacturing operations,, heating oils and residual fuel oils are the primary liquid petroleum products used. The situation with respect to the removal of sulfur from the petroleum and its prot'lnets is somewhat more complicated. Most American crude oils are sufilciently low in sulfur to produce an end product (residual fuel oil) which is not extremely high in sulfur. However, for economic reasons, the `percentage of crude oil which is `converted to residual fuel oil Is rapidly decreasing in the' United States. While ten years ago approximately 14 percent of the crude petroletini ended as resident fuel; today the figure is only about 7 percent. As a re- sult, the Eastern Seaboard States are increasingly dependent upon imports of residual fuel oil, and a large share of the imported residual oil is a high-sulfur product ranging from 2 to 3% percent sulfur. Scientifically feasible methods are known for the desulfurization of fuel oils, but these processes are not con~ sidered economically feasible at the present time. Recent estimates on the cost of dOSulfurization indicate that lowering the sulfur content to' below 1 percent' would probably increase the cost of residual oil by at least 25 percent. Whether economically more attractive processes can~ be developed cannot be stated with certainty, Many petroleum experts are pessimistic regarding the future of de- sulfurization, but since it is feasible scientifically there is need for increased efforts to find less costly processes. A'n~ther~approach to reduction of oxides of sulfur in the atmosphere is the desufur1zati~ of waste gases resulting from the combustioi~ of fossil fuels. Wet methods for the removal of oxides of splfur from stack gases have been' investigated for many years, but such methods have not proved successful. Present technologic efforts are directed toward absorption processes which can be used without cooling the waste gases. At least three or four processes look promising, b~t almost all of the engineering development work is yet to be done The magnjtude of the engineering problems which are encountered in this work can be `appreciated' from the fact that an 800 megawatt electric utility plant discharges over three million ~ubie feet per minute of hot gases from the smoke stack. If the fuel burned contains approximately 3 percent sulfur, the waste gases contain appro~drnately 0.2 percent sulfur oxides. The equipment required for the removal of these oxides from such a large volume of gas is very costly and ~vill occupy a relatively large space in or around a powerplant. It has been estimated that the capital cost Of equipment for removing sulfur oxides PAGENO="0281" ADU~C~A~ TEiIINO]~OGY FOR .POLWTION ABATEMENT 281 from the w,aste gases will run from 10 to 20 percent of the cost of the utility ~plant. Additionally, many existing plar~ts do not have sufficient space in which to place this added equipment. Also, the capital cost is so: high that it is ques- tionable whether these methods can be used by smaller space heating instai1a~ tions. In addition, to the waste gas absorption processes now under most active de- ~velopment, there are many less sophisticat~~ methods or systems that have been proposed which may prove to be more successful than those now under develop- meat. In any case, a partial solution to the problem w;Ul probably be found within the next few years and research now underway may provide more feasible methods for an overall solution to the sulfur oxides prol~ie'ms. An additional factor which the ~urean of Mines research baa taken into account ~s t~iat sulfur `or sulfuric acid, which could be recoy~red, is presently in world short supply. A third approach for the removal of sulfur oxides bears promise of providing a solution applicable to certain combustion processes. In this process, the oxides of sulfur are fixed during combustion by the use of an additive material such as powdered dolomite or liffiestone which are low in cost, and the resulting cal- cium or magnesium sulfate can later be removed as a. solid by methods similar to those used for removing particulate matter from gases. The information presently available is insufficient to assess the true potential of the process. However, it may prove of appreciable importance both for small installations which cannot afford the high capital expenditures for removing the sulfur oxides from the stack gases, and for existing large plants where there is insufficient space to Install the' largeamount~ of additional equipment. It has been shown that no single approach will solve the sulfur oxides pollution problem. For this reason, we believe a systems approach will prove most fruitful. A program is under study in the Bureau which will consider technologic develop- ment needs in terms of recognized air quality requirements. This systems approach will include: studies to. delineate our coal and oil resources in terms of their sulfur content; selective mining operations; desulfurization of the fuel before combustion; fixation of sulfur during the combustion process; and de- sulfurization of the waste gases before release to the atmospbere~ Interrelation- ships between process factors will be studied to assure the development of a method or combination of methods which will give the desired air quality at the lowest economic burden. AUTO EXhAUST The second major air pollution abatement problem concerns the reduction of pottutants produced by automobiles, trucks, and buses. These vehicular exhausts contain very large quantities of smog-producing constituents which are the major source of air pollution in certain areas. With the increasing populatIon growth and, the anticipated 3 to 4 percent a year increase in the number of automobiles on the highways, the Federal standards for auto exhausts, which will become effec~ tive with the 12968 model automobiles, will prove to be inadequate long before the end of, this century. Much progress has been made In our understanding of the types of pollutants that are emitted from automobile engines, but additional major engineering de- velopments will be required before our technology Is adequate. Although the re- quirements for all 1968 model cars will reduce the average level of emissIons per vehicle by approximate'y two-thirds, we still do not really know whether the constituents from the exhaust which are largely responsible for smog production will be eliminated. It Is believed that only a few of the constituents of the ex~ baust are the primary cause of the difficulty, while many of the other compounds present are relatively inactive. If abatement of automotive exhaust pollution is to be fully achieved, an overall systems approach should be employed which would Include not only study of the fuel, but also of the engine and the exhaust system. The development of an optimum design for the automotive system in- volves many new techniques that have not as yet been' developed. Many new engineering developments will doubtless be required before a better economic solution to the problem becomes available. A number of different approaches to the automotive exhaust problem have been proposed and should be invest~g~te~. These lnclude variations in fuel composl~ boa, radical changes in engine design, use of catalytic and noncatalytic after- burners, and many similar `avenues. PAGENO="0282" 282 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION A~A~M~T~ OTEER 4iR~ POLLUTANTS The polltttants I have discuss~d are reeet~ring primary attention at the present time. Moreover, many other materials entering the atmosphere as a result o~ industrial operations may require abatement action soon. These pollutants include: oxides of nitrogen and carbon; trace metallic substances and compouiids from cómbnstion of fossil fuels and metallurgical operations; polynuclear hydzo- carbons In waste combustion gases; fluorides from fertilizer plants; miscellaneous dusts from mining and industrial operations; and obnoxious Qdors. tinfortu- naitely, methods for removing some of these Industrial wasteS are unknown, while for others, studies on engineering technology are just starting. Of the pol- lutants specifically mentioned, oxides of nitroge~i are of special importance at present because they participate in the photochemical smog-formation reaction. Further, on a very long-range basis, even the increase in concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere may need to be controlled if a major change in the earth's weather pattern is to be avoided. ACID ~LINE WATER POLLDTION Acid mine water drainage Is an important source of pollution for which no uni- versally satisfactory engineering solution has yet been devised. Some scientific Information has been acquired withrespect to the method of acid formation in mine atmospheres and a number of engineering solutions have been proposed. Unfortunately, none of these proposed Solutions has proved completely satisfac~ tory under field cOnditions. Both active and abandoned `mines are potential sources of pollutants which ear' effectively ruin the quality Of neai~by wateii supplies. This is a ~artieularl~ `setlouS problem in the Appalachian coal fields w~here it has been found impossible to suc~ cessftlly seal off many abandoned mines. Much' additional development *~rkwiIl be required before this problem will be rèsoFved. It is clear that the develOpment of adequate technology will be extrethely difficult `In cooperation with other agencies in Interior, (Geological Survey, Bureau `Of i~iport Fisheries and Wildlife, Office of Saline Water, and the recently transferraci Federal Water' Pollution Control Administration), the Bureau of Mines is' dlte~t~ ing its engineering knowledge to demonstrating the effe~tiveness and `cOst of known methods for acid mine drainage control. At the same time, research and experimentation are being ~conducted on. the causative, factors for acid water formation in old abandoned mines, currently operating mines, and future mining operations.' Methods investigated include new air-sealing techniques, purlfieáttoü by reverse osmosis, neutralization and chemical reactions, in the hope of finding ways to prevent or abate this kind of stream pollution. As far back as 1924, the Bureau of Mines recognized a need for research in this area and started one `of thd first programs in the United States designed to de- velop fundamental information on the formation of acid in coal mines. In 1933 our people~ participated, in an extensive p~ine sealing program initiated by the Federal Government as~ a Works `P~Og±~ss Administration and Ctvil' Works Ad~, ministration projeét. Ho ~el',' .Pederal'~suppOrt `and~ interest in the~pt~blem waned, and a continuous research effort directed to an acceptable solution became impossible. Now that the public has become more aware o'f the needs for water quantity and quality-water 1~or industrial and domestic consumption and for recreational aesthetic purposes has made the problem one of national concern- and support for necessary research has therefore been manifested. The problem of acid mine water stems from both past and current methods of mining and from subsequent water drainage in geologic settings conduciveto acid formation. Any mine may be a source of acid water, but the problem is concen- trated in the eastern coal mining regions. Acid mine drainage may be classified as originating from three major sources: (1) deep mines, (2) strip mines, apd (3) refuse piles. Deep mines may be further classified as below drainage and above drainage. The immediate problem centers on strip mines and abandoned mines above drainage level. We know enough today to prevent acid mine water drainage from so-called open pit mines. The same is true for abandoned strip mines If provisions are made for proper reclamation, recontouring and water diversion. The problem is essentially one of cost and not technology. Deep mines present a different story, because most of the acid draining Into streams comes from abandoned underground mines above drainage. Present teeh- nology Is inadequate to correct this situation. This is worthy of emphasis', for PAGENO="0283" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 283 it is a commOn misconception that strip ~x1ines are the chief offenders in this matter. They are not; they contribute only an estimated 10 to 25 percent of the present acid water volume. There are an estimated 8,000 abandoned under- ground mines with a surface area involving in the neighborhood of about 8,000 square miles. Any rehabilitation effort will therefore require a massive effort. The Bureau~s acid mine water program is directed to investigation of the avail- able technology and demonstration of its effectiveness and the economics involved in its application to the immediate problems. This is being done through coopera- tion with Federal and State agencies by active demonstration projects on selected drainage areas where acid water pollution is a. major problem. The program in- cludes premonitoring'condifions at tb~ site, construction of remedial measures and post monitoring:to~ det~eththie effe~ti~renè~s of the installed remedies., To guide future action; we alsO are engaged in research to arrive at a better understanding of the principles involved. Our research incl~ides a limited amount of laboratory investigations on the physical, chemical and bacteriological actions involved in acid water formation in mines and a field investigation (tmnd~r care- fully montored conditions) of special sealing techniques related to mine condi tions. This should serve to resolve much of the controversy surrounding the ef- fectiveness and value of mine sealing. The present research effort is not, adequate, relative to the seriousness of the problem and the time in which we should obtain a solution. Expanded research in the following areas is necessary: 1. Mine hydrology, drainage and pumping research that will provide a guide to engineered designing ~f mine systems that would prevent formation of acid mine water. 2. Techniques of eliminating or controlling ground. subsidence so as to elimi- nate süi~fWce fr~cti~re~'wbieh permit water entry. 3. Discovery or development of an applled~ multipurpose coating that would provide a sealant for underground mine surface areas that would also be a dust Inhibitor and have ground support capability. 4. Develop the criteria for methods to divert, contain or direct underground water flow to eliminate inflow `to mine openings. 5. Continue and expand laboratory and field investigations on the formation of acid mine water. 6. Development of improved and new mining systems to minimize acid water formation. SOLID WASTES The disposaty' control, an~d reclamation of waste produrts resulting from the extraction, processing, and utilization of mineral substanceS are important technologic and economic factors in the effective conservation of mineral re- sources. The Bureau of Mines has j~or many years approached the problem of minimizing or utilizing waste from the standpoint of conservation. Specifically, it has concentrated on areas where improved recovery systems would reduce mineral losses `and; `tnejdeutally,' r~duee the volume of the products finally dis- carded; ~ has en~eavo~od to develop methods to recover valuable metals and mj~ls~ft"om variot±~ t~~o'f wa~td A major aspect of our research program on mining methods is the deve1op~ merit of mining systems that minimize minerals waste and, wherever possible, utilize waste to fill and support mine openings. In this way, with proper planning in advance of mining, operators can minimize the wastes that need to be disposed of and can .avoid the restoration work that is so often required at existing operations. The economic utilization of certain types of metallic scrap, such as automo- bile bodies, poses a problem which is becoming acute. Changes in the technology of iron- and steel-making have made this type of scrap less desirable for reuse than it formerly was. Approximately 6 million automobiles were scrapped last year and approximately 20 percent of these joined `the 25 to 40 million old auto- mobiles rusting away in auto graveyards, dumps, vacant lots and roadsides. The Bureau is concentrating much of its research in the field of solid waste recovery to the development of the new technology necessary `to allow the economic reuse of the millions of tons of ferrous and nonferrous metals. contained in these old automobiles. One Bureau-developed process, which has been successfully tested on a small scale, and which will soon be demonstrated in a large plant, will utilize both mining wastes and automobile scrap `to make a high-grade `iron ore for the use of industry. In this process, non-magnetic taconite, and abundant, presently use- PAGENO="0284" 284 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY ~FQR POLLUTION ABA'~EMENT less iron mineral is treated with low-grade iron arid steel scraiy under condi- tions which result in the conversion, of the iron content of both materials to magnetic iron oxide which can be concentrated to high-grade iron ore by pres- ently employed technology. Other research is devoted to the development of economic methods for removing the Impurities from low-grade scrap such as that from automobile bodies, refrigerators, stoves, `and washing machines, so that the metal content can be reused by Industry. The municipal wastes that are discarded each year contain approximately 6 million tons of metal, mostly Iron. Most of this metal is buried in land fill and thus permanently removed from the economic cycle. The five million tons of iron in tin cans alone represents a serious loss to our economy. The Bureau of Mines Is working on the development of new technology which will allow the recovery and reuse of these presently wasted metals, thus turning a liability into an asset. In addition to other work being performed on recovery of metals and minerals fr~ni scrap, projects are .underway to deal with other forms of solid wastes.' F~dr example, a survey is l~eiug conducted to reveal the location, magnitude, and composition of all of the major' ~olid waste disposal dumps in the country. Samples from the major problem areas will be submitted for laboratory investi- gation to determine if any valuable ç~QnstituentS can be recovered or If bulk use for the material can be found, Promising results will be followed' up in pilot plant scale and the process will be made `availal~le to industry. SUMMARY It has been shown that much basIc scientific information on environmental pollution is availabla foc app1l~atioti to~rard~llmitlng'the amount of air, Water, arid land pollutants which are a b3~prodnct of our Induatrial system. However, there is a great lack of engir~eering technology for the successful abatement of many ef the pollutants without putting an eeonomic' strain on indttstry and the public in general. We believe that through co~itlnued research' and' engineering development, it will be possible to solve the problems' confronting the Nation effectively and economically. However, ~nch solutiOns must balance public ~eeU~agM'n~t `economie,'considerutlons. If `cleaner air, water, .~and `land is to; be attained, without disrupting the economy, Increased efforts by both Industry and Government will be req~ired. The cunversiOn of waste ~naterials into useful products will help minimize these economic burdens. The Bureau of' Mines recognizes its responsibilities in many' areas of pollution abatement and will consistently work for technically and ecirncmically feasible solutions to the pollution problOms which óonfront our `Nati'o~i. `Mr. DADDARIO. Our next' witness~is Dr. Thomas Malone, vice presi- dent a~nd director of resea~'cth, tho Tr~tvelérs Insuran~e Cos., `from the city of hartford, in Coxmectiet&, , ` ` ` We are happy to welcome you here, Dr. Malone. I would also like to comment that Dr. Malone, as the chairmau knows, is on the scientific panel which works with the full committee, and has been of great help to us on `many occasions over these past several years. ` ,,, ` ` ,, `. . ` `We are happy to have' you here, Dr. Malone1 and we are waiting to hear `from you. Chairman MILLER. I would like t~o,say heis one of the outstandir~g members of that panel, and has dofle a great deal of work. STATEMENT OP DI THOMAS P. MALONE, VICE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTOR OP RESEARCH, TBE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COM- PANIJES Dr. MALONE. Thank you very much, Mr. Daddario and Mr. Chair- man. I responded with `alacrity tQ this invitation to testify before your cOmmittee for two reasons. One is to renew an association I found to be extremely pleasant. I think our meeting last January PAGENO="0285" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABAT]~MJ3~NT 285 ith Sir Charles Snow and Don Price was the highlight of this series. tecondly, I am persuaded that these hearings, the report of the ad- isory panel on which they are based, and what will follow from these earings, will constitute a significant step toward the development of a ational, well-conceived set of national policies for dealing with en- ironmental problems. Because of the availability of a great deal of iterature on pollution and the comprehensive listing of the issues m our report, I would restrict my comments to five points. The first wo are very general and the last three are specific. First-a very general comment-so obvious that the only reason for bringing it up is that it is so easily and so frequently overlooked. Amidst all the discussion of technological capabilities and inade- quacies, priorities, and strategies in scientific research, economic analysis of costs and benefits and institutional aspects, let us never forget that the problem we are discussing is-simply and funda- mentally-a human problem. Human intolerance of dirtiness; human desire for cleanliness. Instincts so deeply ingrained in the fabric of our American culture that there is a rising chorus of voices across the country, demanding that the human mastery over energy and matter which has soiled our air and water, while bringing within reach the good things of life, now be put to work to restore some reasonable degree of cleanliness to our environment. From some firsthand ex- perience with the grassroots hum'a~n demands for clean water in Connecticut, I can assure you that they will not be denied-even at a cost that would have constituted a significant impediment a few years ago. In answer to a question raised by Congressman Miller, these costs will be borne in two ways: An increased cost for the goods and services produced by a proposal which entails control of pollution and second-~as we have proposed in Connecticut-a major bond issue. My second comment is concerned with the report of your Research Management Advisory Panel. It is a superbly succinct and percep- tive document-and unerringly zeroes in on inadequacies in the tech- nology f or- Treatment of mine drainage or nitrogen oxide emissions; Removal of sulfur dioxide from stack gases; Control of the effluents from automobile exhausts. Emphasis on the need for basic and applied research is appropriate and timely and I would like to associate myself with the panel, with? out reservation, in their identification of the urgency and importance of the three examples cited. One might hope, however, that in the definitive report that may be presumed to follow this excellent exposi- tion of issues for the purposes of discussion the litany of inadequacies in technology will be accompanied by a listing of those pollution abatement problems for which the technology is adequate (for ex- `ample, the control of the emission of particulate matter in stack gases). Mr. Chairman, I flew across New York this morning at a distance of about 20 miles-you have done the same thing I know many times-.. and I couldn't even see Manhattan. This need not be~ This is not `a consequence of a technological inadequacy. It is the result `of what your report called "artificial barriers to application" in this particular instance. There are other problen~s where the technol~g~r `does have to be developed, and it would h~ a pity if any of the me~sures that ~ ~ 1-19 PAGENO="0286" 286 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT available and can be used to get at some of today's problems were de layed because of emphasis on getting on with the technology neede for tomorrow's problems. There are measures that can be taken abate several kinds of pollution now-with the technology that is hand. It would be a pity if any of these measure's were delayed, eve a year, because of `a mistaken impression that they should be deferre until an improved technology is developed. The Panel very correctly points out, "In fact, the future pace of pollution abatement will de pend more and more on new and improved technology as the artificia barriers'to application are removed." My plea is tha:t, even as we pla imaginatively for the future, we leave no stone unturned' now-in th present-to remoire those "artificial barriers to application" that con- stitute the major problei~i of the 1960's in pollution abatement. A excellent case in point is the control of pollution by municipal sewag and here, in particular, I would urge that an expanded report trea more fully and more specifically with those aspects of the problem fo, which the technology is at hand for successful abatement and those for which~ available technology makes possible only' partial alleviation. The thoughtful reader of the Panel report will recognize that the res- ervation probably applies to the matter of storm sewers. but the less informed reader might conclude that vigorous action on the municipal sewage probleni should be held in abeyance while waiting for further technological development. My remark about seeking balance between those things that we knih and should do today and those steps that must be taken to antici- pate e~nditions in the years~ and decades ahead brings me to my third point and the principal thrust of my prepared statement.' `It is the importance I `attach to the application `of scienific technique and technological advance~ to the diagnosis of the pollution problems and to the assessment of alternative courses of action as fundamental ele- ments in the process by which a community reaches' a decision on the specifics of an abatement program. I have in mind in particular the air pollution problem and the attractive prospects for combining the high-speed computer and mathematical and statistical technique in the construction of simulation models. I pause here to remark that mastery of information handling by the use of electronic computers may turn out to be a more profound and far-reaching techhoiogical revolution than the mastery of en~rgy `and of `matter over the past century or so. Of special relevance to `these hearings is the conviction some of us thare that the computer revolution may provide us with an important todl in air resource management. The development of simulation models thus becomes an important element in the national research strategy with which your snboommittee `is concei~ned~ Some amplification may be `desirah~e. First a word concerning "air resources management." It may seem like an nnnecessary sophis- `ticated way of saying "air pollution control," but it signifies much more ,than just "control." Air resources management recognizes the air as `an abundant natural resoi~rce that, in certain areas and at c&e~ tam times, is not of' the desired quality. Insuring the continuing availability of air of acceptable q~iality requires knowledgeable man-1 agerner~t ~f the air resource. PAGENO="0287" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 287 Comprehensive air resource management requires an appreciation of, among other things- The relationship between pollution sources and their effects; The relative importance of aesthetics as compared to' physically harmful effects; The very real costs of control measures as opposed to the less tangible economic losses resulting from uncontrolled pollution; and The intricate role of the atmosphere as a receiver and trans- porter of pollutants. A simplified way to examine air resources management is to think of it as a closed system. Sources discharge pollutants into the at- mosphere. The atmosphere's ability to assimilate the pollutants de- pends upon existing meteorological conditions. The combined effects of sources and the meteorology result in a certain air quality which may adversely affect some receptor. To achieve desired air quality requires that we control either the meteorology or pollutant sources. Because we cannot, at present, markedly change the meteorology, the only route open (short of making the receptor immune to pollutants) is to place controls on the sources. An additional problem often. en- countered here is that effective controls are hampered by technical and economic limitations, as well as by public acceptance of control meas- ures. Air resources management, therefore, requires a working knowledge of all of the elements of the air pollution system and an understand- ing of their interrelationships. Intelligently controlling air pollution at the preferred level requires the coordinated efforts of meteorolo- gists, air pollution control engineers, chemists, economists, and public administrators. Mathematical modeling of the system illustrated above offers hope for answering such questions as.: What pollutants must be controlled,~ and to what degree ~ Although the task is formidable and experienced judgment must be applied in determining inputs to such .a system, several of my colleagues are now at work on the problem. Now a word about simulation modeling. When an air pollutant is injected into the lower atmosphere, it's subsequent fate is determined by several factors. First, if the pollutant is a large or very heavy particle with a large settling velocity in air, it will fall out in the vicinity of the source. The pattern of deposition will depend upon wind speed and direction and `on the intensity of atmospheric turbu- lence, but the residence time in the atmosphere for such materials will be brief. On the other hand, if the pollutant is gaseous or very fine particu- late material, it may remain airborne for extended periods of time., During this `time it will be transported from its point of origin by the total `motion, or trajectory, of the air in which it is embedded. At the same time, the distribution of the pollutant will be altered by turbuler~t mixing into adjacent volumes of air. If the pollutant is conservative- that is, not subject to alteration by chemical reaction, radioactive decay, or biological attenua~tion-4t may be traced during its residence time in the atmQSpliere `from knowledge of the atmospheric trajectories and of the 4i~sive,or mixi~ig rate~of the atmosphere. I~ the pqllu- PAGENO="0288" 288 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT' taut is not conservative, either in its physical properties or due to loss by deposition on the ground, vegetation, water, and so forth; these modifying effects must be included in any attempt to predict the loca- tion and concentration of such airborne materials. Data from intensive studies of the transport and diffusion of gaseous materials in the lower atmosphere and for travel distances up to 20 to 30 miles are now available. Much less complete information is avail- able for travel distances of the order of hundreds of miles, but some studies and data show very clearly that the reduction in concentration of a pollutant from a single source is, on the average, well approxi- mated by mathematical equations. The equations provide the basic mathematical model for predicting the contribution of a single source to the concentration of a pollutant at any travel distance. Finally, it is important to determine the total concentration of a pollutant as a function of place and time. This concentration will generally rep- resent the sum of contributions from a number of sources. Such a summation is straightforward once we have solved the diffusion and trajectory equations for each source. The position and source strength for each of the sources will be required for this summation. As soon as a model has been developed which predicts with reasonable accuracy present air quality levels, projections can be made of air pollution emis- sions for 5, 10, and 20 years in the future, based on various assumed degrees of industrial air pollution control, expected population in- creases, changes in transportation-for example, rail transit systems in cities and more car travel in the country-changes in fuel for home heating, conversion of power generation from fossil to nuclear fuel, and so forth. These projections may be plugged into the model to permit prediction of future air quality based on various selected as- sumptions consistent with long-term growth estimates over an area. In sum, I would urge that the develOpment and perfection of s.imu~ latlon models be an essential ingredient of the national research strat- egy. I believe it is unnecessary to belabor the point that the ogre of computers making decisions need not be feared. The simulation models on computers are tools in the hands of human decision-makers and are not to be confused with the decision-makers themselves. My fourth point is related to the question raised with respect to the consequences of increasing the carbon dioxide content of the atmos- phere and is relevant to the issue concerned with the establishment of meaningful cause~and-effect relationships in the environment when long time lapses occur-far example, 20 to 30 years. The increased carbon dioxide, in effect, keeps the long wave radiation from going out into space while allowing the short wave radiation to come in. Increas- hig carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, again in effect, is similar to pro-. viding an "extra blanket" around the earth. The outiines of a techni- cal method for analysis of this problem and some preliminary results have been provided as a result of the elegant work of Dr. S. Man,abe and his collaborators in the Environmental Science Services Adminis- tration. They have examined the dependence of the temperature in the ~tmosphere as a consequence of increased carbon dioxide. The tech- mque is to employ a sophisticated mathematical model on a large scale high speed computer taking into account the complex interaction of the phy~ical processes governing atmospheric motion. The preliminary PAGENO="0289" ADEQUACY OP TEChNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 289 results suggest that the effect of the 10- to 15-percent increase in 1~l~e total amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere during the century has been to increase the temperature in the lower atmospherer-tha~t is, the troposphere-by about 0.2° 0 and to decrease the temperature~ in the upper atmosphere-that is, the stratosphere-by about 2° C. The significance of this work lies not so much in the prehminar~y results which have been obtained but in the existence of a scientific and technological development which will permit an assessment not only of the temperature changes over the balance of this century but also of the effect of these temperature changes on worldwide weather patterns. As an aside, it may be mentioned that the efficacy of countervailing measures that might appear to be feasible and required can also be assessed by the same method. The implication of this situation is related to the volume of water contained in the masses of ice in polar regions. If the earth is warmed, the ice melts and the sea level would be raised so high that, were it to happen, we would probably have to swim home from this building this morning. I would emphasize that this is not an immediate danger. We do not have a crisis. The problem is not one for this year or next year, but neither is it one that can be left unattended for 100 years. The degree of danger which exists from the warming of the earth is something we must resolve in a matter of decades. The situation could become serious by the end of the century. We do have the tools now to ascer- tain the effects of increasing the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and we should have these tools in pretty good working order by about 19Th. If we haven't sharpened these tools by that time, we will have been derelict. Incidentally, I am a little more optimistic than your panel about the possibility of countervailing measures. I do~i't know yet what they will be, but I return to the point that we now have a means of assessing the efficiency of any countervailing measures that may be proposed to counterbalance the effects of increasing 002. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Malone, you talk about our iookin~ ahead to 1975 or to the end of the century and you point out that if we doii't take certain steps now, we will be derelict in our duties. Should. we even look beyond that? We do have available to us `techniques that we can use to determine causes and effects over a long period of time. If you take these figures and extrapopolate them over this period, instead of having a .2° change, it could conceivably be 8° or 10°. What would that mean? Dr. MALONE. Yes, sir, I agree with you completely that we should. Mankind in. its present form has been around for about 40~000 years. We have a little responsibility even now to worry that far ahead, so you are absolutely right. The reason I picked the end of the century because it is rather difficult, and this is son~ething a computer will not do for us, rather difficult for us to anticipate the changes that may result. We may be using entirely different forms of energy after the turn of the century so that the initial conditions of our problems may be changed rather markedly. In broader~terms in the sense which you raise the question, yes, we can plug in different conditions and generate the consequences a thousand years down in the future. It would probably take a computer quite a bit larger than we pres- ently have but not so far beyond the state of technological ca~pabiity PAGENO="0290" 290 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT in the computer field that it couldn't be done. To make a k~mg ~thry short I agree with you. The fifth and final point I wish to make this mornin~ is intended to be responsive to the question raised by your panel, `What are the prospects for application of military-space research and development capability to sanitary engineering and environmental science?" Per- haps this question can be answered most directly by citing an actual example involving a subsidiary of one of our Connecticut aerospace companies, United Aircraft Corp. This work was done by United Technology, which is in Chairman Miller's State of California. The particular technological development was the design and fabrication of rocket casings for the solid propellant used in the strap-on boosters for the Titan Ill-C space system. These casings had a diameter of 120 inches and were made of Fiberglas which was very dense, very thick, very strong, very effective-and also very expensive. A young United Technology Corp. engineer, Dick Seymour, recognized that the manufacturing process could also be applied to earthbound uses. The civilian application involved was to identify a "filler" which would at once. increase the rigidity of the Fiberglas casing and lower its cost. Ordinary sand turned out to be effective on both counts. The result- ing product-a sample of which I hold in my hand-holds attractive promise as a material cheaper and better than traditional underground piping for the transport of water or disposal of sewage. Not only are prices competitive, even for small sizes, but for the same cost the fol- lowing advantages are obtained: Greater strength (and hence less breakage) Greater versatility from the standpoint of ease in drilling, shap- ing, etc. Smaller frictional coefficient Greater ease of coupling of sections (which reduces labor costs). Even more direct applications to the problems of pollution are envi- sioned. Preliminary design plans have been developed for an entire sewage treatment process within a long pipeline submerged under a river bed. Not only would these long subterranean pipelines with sewage treatment capabilities beeconomical to install, but it is believed that they would have distinct advantages in distributing the discharge of treated effluent over an extended range of the river body. Further development is obviously required, but I venture to predict that we will hear more about this particular space science "fallout" during the years ahead. In closing, I would suggest that these hearings are a significant step toward the development of rational, well-conceived national policies to deal with environmental problems. An additional step will be a reexamination of: The organizational struèture at the Federal level along the lines recommended by the President's Science Advisory Committee in a recent report, "Effective Use of the Sea," and the National Academy of Sciences in another report, "Weather and Climate Modification-Problems and Prospects," both of which stress the fundamental unity of the environmental sciences .and the need for a Federal effort of "critical" size in order to be effective. The decisionmaking mechanisms at the local, State, and regional levels with particular attention to the decentralization of decision- PAGENO="0291" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 291 making authority to the lowest feasible organizational entity. My experience with the Connecticut Clean Water Task Force leaves me persuaded tht~t new kinds of partnership between the Federal Government and the local government will be required. I believe that devising these organizational frameworks is a com- plementary step to the examination of technology. Chairman Mu~LEn. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately I have `to go. I am sorry that I can't remain. Before I go, I want to express my grati- tude to Dr. Malone for giving us this very stimulating paper here oday. I assure you that I shall read it. As a matter of fact, I intend to also give a copy to the man that I am going to meet in a few' min- utes because he is going to be very much interested in this subject. He is Harrison Brown. Dr. MALONE. Oh, give my regards, Mr. Chairman. That concludes my testimony. Mr. DADDARIO. In reference to your last point o~i the bringing to~ gether of local, State, and Federal efforts so that you can coordinate the resources and do a better job, how about the manpower situation? Can we overcome the shortage within a reasonable enough period of time so that we can have effective activity at the' local le~rel? Dr. MALONE. Yes, sir; I am optimistic that people like some of the engineers at United Aircraft, TJthted Technology, are worrying about this. They are getting into some of these problems that they wouldn't have thought about 5 years ago. I think `that we have brought together some very potent and effective groups in connection with our military space programs. Now, I can say this, the chairman has left, SO I can refer to California without embarrassing him or me; we are all familiar `with the systems studies that were sponsored by the State of California drawing upon this kind of competence. It is my obser- vation that the `same kind of talent which has proved so tremendously effective in our formidable space problems is eager to come to grips with some of these. I think that there is some virtue in bringing that acquired competence to bear on these matters rather than trying to develop through the traditional training programs the kind of coin- petence we need. In other words, there is an advantage in this transfer of training, laterally, rather than relying on a massive vertical development of the traditional skills. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Brown? Mr. BROWN. I have no questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIvIAN. I'm curious to know what you have in mind in terms of the organization which would build, say, a large-scale atmospheric model. You have discussed a computer model of air pollution flow. Where would you see that, in the Environmental Science Services Administration? Dr. MALONE. That is where the study I referred to was specifically done; yes, sir. Mr. VIVIAN. Would you see the model also being handled by that agency? Dr. `MALONE. Yes; it is already there. They have models. They .re the ones who made the assessment of the CO2 content. I don't PAGENO="0292" 292 AD]~tJACY OF TECtINOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT mean it should be there and nowhere else. I think we should have sorn divetsity For example, there is a major laboratory in Colorado, i Boulder, Cob., operated by a consortion `of universities with suppo from the National Science Foundation. They too are moving in th direction of these large models. I would even go one step further. Th kind of problem we are talking about in the CO2 is intrinsically international problem. We are now aiming at a concerted study o the global atmosphere in which there will `be `an international prograr in 1972 and it will hopefully provide precisely the kind of data o a worldwide basis which is necessary to crank up these models. Moreover~ it will, hopefully, initiate a pattern of international eo~ operation which will be helpful in anything you might have to do t counterbalance or control the 002 increase. Mr. VIVIAN. I would like to point out, `as was mentioned earlier today by previous witnesses, that at present we must choose whether to pollute water or air when we deal with sulfur oxides from stack gases. They can be leached out and put into the water systems or they can be heated up ~nd spread out into the air. We have had previous corn- m'ents of the same variety relating to disposal of other solid waste. There is an important question about the interchange of types of waste. Now, what part of the Federal Government decides which portion of our environment shall accept the waste? Is this the Environmental Science Services Administration or is' this some other agency? Dr. MALONE. This was a problem I was precisely trying to point out. I don't have an answer. I don't believe everything should be encom- passed into a single agency., This kind of competence is found in several places in the Federal Government. That is desirable as long as there is `at least one entity which is capable of mounting the, rather large efforts that are needed so that things don't fall between the cracks. Mr. DADDARTO. Dr. Hibbard, while you are here why don't you comment on that? Dr. HIBBARD. I guess I would say I wouldn't know where one would go for this overall decision. I think that this question needs attention and actually isn't solved. I'm `afraid I can't contribute much to that. Mr. VIVIAN. Where are the natural places in Government today where such activity would gravitate? Dr. MALbN~. I would say Interior, certainly, because they have so many of these programs. Commerce because they have the Weather Bureau, the Coast and Geodetic, and the Central Radio Propagation Laboratory. Agriculture certainly has many of these problems in it, and HEW is quite involved in this. The National Science Foundation is involved in a somewhat different way. It is not mission oriented in the way some of these other agencies are. The Atomic Energy Com- mission has concern with some of these. The Defense Department~ the Corps of Engineers. Well, you could go on and~ list this and about the only thing comes out of it is that you are persuaded it is a very com- plex problem. Mr. VIvIAN. The Weather Bureau is working on a massive atmos- pheric model which is probably more complex than the' smaller sized. one needed for handling pollution problems. Wouldn't any air pollu- tion model automatically run off of the atmospheric model that is usei for weather prediction? PAGENO="0293" ADEQUACY OF~TECiIN0LOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 293 Dr. MALONE. Let me answer that in two ways. First, certain kinds of pollution problem, yes; almost identically the same kind of model. The kind of simulation problem we are thinking about in Connecticut is not necessarily the same model, but I would take issue with the thought that it would be a simpler prob.. lem. The proper mathematical model for a single cloud, as far as its demands upon computer speeds and storage, is about the same as the global circulation in its demands on computer speed and storage capacity. On the other hand, you are qui~e correct in that the habit of thinking, the way of handling these problems are characterized by a certain unity even though they are different models and different parameters. Mr. VIVIAN. I am curious to know if the variety of Government agencies which handle pollution of all forms have a coordinating unit-~a single coordinating center which deals with the whole sub- ject of pollution. Dr. MALONE. I am sorry, I don't know. Mr. VIVIAN. I didn't expect you to know the answer to that ques~' tion but perhaps someone else here will know. Dr. MALONE. There is a PSAC Panel. Mr. VIVIAN. That would not normally deal with this. Mr. DADDARIO. Your questions are extremely important, Mr. Viv- ian, and I think we ought to keep them in mind when other witnesses who should be able to give us an answer come before tie. Mr. VIVIAN. I do have one brief observation to make and that is on the estimated cost of auto antipollution devices. You quoted a fig- ure of $500 million, I believe, Mr. Chairman. This represents ap- proximately one-tenth of 1 percent of our gross national product which does not seem very onerous. An estimated cost of wtLter and sewer pollution abatement activities for municipal purposes shows that we have about another tenth of a percent each in the operation of plants and in capital investment which suggests that our total figure in pollution reduction is not a very large figure. A few tenths of a percent of the gross national product is a pretty small figure-so we have a long way to go. Dr. MALONE. You will find an article in Fortune magazine in 1963 which takes very much this point of view. I think you will find it very interesting reading. They address themselves specific~.lly to this question. Can we afford air pollution? They answer very much in the terms you have now. M:r. DADDARIO. Mr. Fulton, we are happy to have you here. Mr. Fm~ToN. I come from Pittsburgh, Pa., where we are very in- terested in pollution amd the methods being used to clean it up. I liked the comment on page 3 of your statement that removing tho~e artificial barriers to the application of pollution control devices con~ti:fntes the maior problem of the 1960's in the field of pollution abatement. I think that that is an excellent statement, and with the chairman's permission I would like to have you expand your ideas on it because I believe that costs are not the only barriers. There are many other barriers and we should be looking at the methods of im- plementing controls. PAGENO="0294" 294 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT One final point is this: Pollution has been looked at as a problem of negligence and as an effect of a lack of knowledge. But even if we obtain the knowledge and the method of handling manmade pollution, it brings to mind that in the middle of the 19th century there was a voteano that erupted and polluted the atmosphere so that in the Northern Hemisphere it snowed in July and August. This is a climate change that would have immense strategic bearing. For example, the crops all failed in a certain band. Although there was no warning of this, it caused a complete crop failure. On the strategic iev~l I think some thought should be given to what could happen if certain ba~ids of the high atmosphere were polluted. We in Pittsburgh have met the problem of smoke pollution I think as well as any city in the country. The cleanup of Pittsburgh's air was achieved by a monumental bootstrap operation. It called for an unstinting cooperative effort by every element of the community. The limitation forbade all outside open fires, placed limits on the quality of the fuel sold, and generally put the emission of all types of airborne gases, vapors, and fumes, under regulatory control. For one city that was a tremendous change. That was one of Mr. Vivian's pOints. It' was a costly `change for every person there, but it has.been the greatest benefit that Pittsburgh ever had. I can say from our own experience that we in our area think that municipal and private expense as. well as corporate~ expense was tremendously worthwhile. , I want to congratulate you both on your excellent statements. Mr. DAIMMRIO. Thank you, Mr. Fulton. ` ~ * Mr. Wydler? Mr. WYDLER, I have no questions. ` Thank: you. . Mr. DADDARTO. `Dr. Malone, again I `wish to thank you and Dr. Hibbard and his colleagues. * It has been a very helpful morning for the committee. (The biographical statement of Dr. Thomas F. Malone follows:) BIOGRAPHICAL STATEMENT OF Da. THOMAS F. MALONE `Thomas F. Malone is Vice President and Director of Research for The Travelers Tnsuranèe Companies, Hartford, Connecticut. He also serves as: Chairman, Connecticut Clean Waiter Task Force (composed of 100 interested citizens from all . walks of life in Connecticut who responded to a request from Governor t)empsey to recommend `an action program to assttrè clean water for Connecti- cut); chairman, Committee on Atmospheric Sciences, National Aëademy of Sci- ences; chairman, TJ~S. National Commission for UNESCO; Secretary General, Committee on Atmospheric Sciences, International Council of Scientific Unions an'd International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics; member, Committee on Water, National Academy of Sciences; member, Connecticut Research Corn- mission. In the recent past, he has served as: Member of the Advisory Committee on Air Pollution to the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, member of the Special Commission on Weather and Climate Modification to the National Science Foundation; President of the Amgrican Geophysical Union; president of the American Meteorological Society. PAGENO="0295" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 295 A graduate in engineering from the South Dakota School of Mines and Teeb. nology, Dr. Malone received his Doctorate of Science in Meteorology from MIP in 1946. He spent fifteen years In research and teaching in the Department of Meteorology at MIT and was the Editor of The Compendium of Meteorology pub~ lished by the American Meteorological Society. A fellow of the American Asso~ clation for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society, Dr. Malone was the recipient of the Robert A. Losey Award of the Institute of Aerospace Sciences in 1960 and the Charles Franklin Brooks Award of the American Meteorological Society in 1963. Mr. DADDAEIO. This committee will adjourn until Tuesday next at 10 o'clock at the same place. (Whereupon, at 12:05 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned to reconvene at 10 a.m., Tuesday, August 9, 1966.) PAGENO="0296" Is ( PAGENO="0297" THE ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUPION ABATEMENT T~1ESDAY, ATJGttSP 9, 1G6~ tTotrsE ~ Th3PREsBNTATIv~s, : CoMMIm~E ON SCIE~CE AND ASTItONAVTICS,. SIIBCoMMIT1~EE ON SCIENCE, EE~EARCIT, AND LOMENT, 1T7asM~t~~tO~, i'.d. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10:10 a~m., in room 2325, Rayburn House Office Building, Washingi~on, D~C:; Hoh. Emiho Q. Daddario (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding: Mr. DADDARIO. This meeting will come to order. . Our first witnesses this morning are Mr. Gammeigard and Dr. Eckardt. Mr. Gammeigard is director of the Committee for Air and Water Conservation for the American Petroleum Institute and t~r. Eckardt is also with the American Petroleum Institute. If you two gentleman will come forward, please. We are very happy to have you here. Mr. GAMMELGARD. Thank you, sir. Mr. DADDA1UO. If you would, please, go right intO your statement. STATEMENT O~ P. N. GAMM~LGA~D, DtRECTOR OP C'O1~MTTTEE POR AIR AND WATER CO~TS~1WATION, AMERICAN P~TROLEi1M INSTITUTE Mr. G-AMMELOARD. My name is Nick Gammeigard and with me on my right is Dr. Eckardt. My background is engineering and adinin.. istration and Dr. Eckardt's background is medicine and toxicology. We appreciate the opportunity to discuss with you the adequacy of science and technology presently available for pollution abatement, and to consider the future course of research and development, with particular application to the oil industry. As background for our presentation, I might note that API and its supporting members have been engaged in research and practice in water conservation for nearly 40 years, and in air conservation re- search and practice for more than 10 years. During this period, the oil industry ha~ sponsored a variety of biological and engineering studies seeking answers to our pollution problems.. One project that might interest you. is our "Manual on Disposal of Refii~ery Wastes" which 1 have here with me. This is a continuing project, begun in the 1920's, and it now represents the cur- 297 PAGENO="0298" 298 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT rent state of conservation technology in oil refining operations. The manual is now in six volumes: two deal with water pollution, one with chemical wastes, two with air pollution, and the most recently issued deals with solid waste disposal. Literally tens of thousands of man-hours of effort have been devoted to the preparation and the revising of this manual. Altogether the manual consists of 546 pages. (A listing of the chapter headings and contents follows:) CHAPTEB HEADINGS OF AMERICA'S PETROLEUM INSTITUTE'S "MANUAL ON DISPoSAL OF REFINERY WASTES" (Six VOLUMES, 546 PAGES) VOLUME I. WASTE WATER CONTAINING OIL (SEVENTH EDITION, 1963, 104 PAGES) Chapter 1. General Considerations of Contamination of Water by Oil. ~apter 2. Gravity-Type Waste-Water Separators. Chapter 3. Secondary Treatment of Refinery Effluent. chapter 4. Treatment of Waste Emulsion. Chapter 5. Disposal of Ballast Water and Tank-Cleaning Emulsion From Tank- ers and Barges. Chapter 6. Measurement of Waste-Water Flow. Chapter 7. Dispersion of Refinery Effluents in Receiving Waters. Appendix I. Table of Oil-Density Variation with Temperature (15.0 to 35.0 DEG API). Appendix II. Jar Test Procedures. Appendix III. Chemicals and Compounds Which May Be Used in Co~ agulation Processes. AppendiE~ IV. Test To Evaluate Ponding Characteristics of Waste Water. Supplement. Supplement on Dispersion of Refinery Effluents in Re- ceiving Waters. August 1963. (Chapter 7.) VOLUME II. WASTE GASES AND PARTICULATE MATTER (FrsTH EDITION, 1957) Chapter 1. Possible Pollution of the Atmosphere by Gases and Particulate Matter. Chapter 2. Classification and Sources of Contaminating Gases and Particulate Matter. Chapter 3. Properties of Contaminating Gases and Particulate Matter. Chapter 4. Recommended Practices. Chapter 5. Collection and Treatment of Pollution Gases and Particulate Matter. Chapter 6. Disposal of Particulate Matter. Chapter 7. Combustion of Gases in Furnaces. Chapter 8. Smokeless Flares. Chapter 9. Dispersion of Gases from Stacks and Flares, Chapter 10. Air-Pollution Surveys. VOLUME IlL CHEMICAL WASTES (FotmTH EDITION, 1960, 93 PAGES) Chapter 1. Properties of Chemical Waste Waters. Chapter 2. Sources of Chemical Wastes. Chapter 3. Effect of Chemical Wastes on Natural Waters. Chapter 4. Waste Control. Chapter 5. Control af Waste Streams by Stripping. Chapter 6. Control of Phenolic Waste Water by Solvent Extraction. Chapter 7. Processes and Methods of Treating Waste Waters Biologically. Chapter 8. Processes and Methods of Treating Waste Waters Chemically. Chapter 9. Recommended Handllng of Specific Refinery Wastes. Chapter 10. Process Summaries. Supplements. Petrochemical Wastes (to be included as a new chapter of volume III, when It is reprinted). Biological Factors of Pollution as Affecting Receiving Waters (a section of the API "Manual on Disposal of Refinery Wastes"). PAGENO="0299" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 299 VOLUME IV. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF WASTE WATER (97 PAGES) Oontents: Collection and Preservation of Samples. Spot Samplers and Their Use. Automatic Compositing.Samplers. Absolute Density of Waste Water: Hydrometer Method. Absolute Viscosity of Waste Water: Glass Capillary Method. Acidity and Basicity of Refinery Waste Water. pH: Glass Electrode Method. Haydness. Solids: Total, Dissolved, Suspended, Settleable. Total and Dissolved Sulfides: Methylene Blue Colorimetric Method. Dissolved Hydrogen Sulfide: pH Method. Sulfide,s and Mercaptans: Electrometrie Titration, Total Sulfur: Bromine Oxidation Gravimetric Method. Alkyl Phenols: Colorimetric Nitrosophenol Method. ~bbnolic Materials: 4-~minoantipyrine Method. Phenolic Materials: Infrared Spectrometric Method. Color. Turbidity of Waste Waters: Jackson Candle Turbidimeter Method. Odor: Threshold Odor Number and Odor Quality. Dissolved Oxygen in Effluent: Manganous Reduction Method. Dissolved Oxygen: Alkaline lodide-Azide Method. Biochemical Oxygen Demand: U.S. Mean Dilution Water Method. Chemical Oxygen Demand: Dichromate Reflux Method. Immediate Oxygen Demand. Immediate Chlorine Demand. Volatile and Nonvolatile Oily Material: Refiux Distillation-ExtractiOn Method, ~çnvolatile Oily Material: Flocculation-Extraction U-Tube Method. Veiatile and Nonvolatile Oily Material: Infrared Spectrometric Method. Susceptibility to Oil Separation: STS Number. Ammonia Nitrogen: Nessier Reagent Method. Organic Nitrogen Kjeld!ahl Method. Clorides. Fluorides. Iron. Manganese. Total Lead in Water and Water-Bottom Deposits. VOLUME V. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF WASTE GASES AND PARTICULATE MATTER (72 PAGES) Contents: Collection of Samples. Hydrocarbon Evaporation Losses From Oil and Water Separation Proc- esses. Measurement of Gas Flow. Ia~rticu1ate Matter: Filtration Method. Particulate Matter: Impingement Method. Particulate Matter: Impaction Method. Aldebydes: Bisulfite Absorption Method. Ammonia: Kjeldahl and Nessler Reagent Methods. Carbon Monoxide and Carbon Dioxide: Absorption-Combustion Method. Hydrogen Cyanide and Oyanogen: Colorimetric Method. Hydrocarbons in the Atmosphere: Mass Spectrometer Freeze-Out Method. Hydrogen Chloride: Turbidimetric Method. Inorganic Fluorides: Absorption-Distillation Method. Nitrogen Oxides in Gaseous Combustion Products: Phenoldisulfonle Acid Method. Hydrogen Sulfide Tutweilér Apparatus Method. Hydrogen Sulfide: Amnioniacal Cadmium Chioride Method. Hydrogen Sulfide and Merea~t~ps Electrometric Titration Method Total Sulfur Oxides: Acldimetrlé Method. Sulfur Dioxide and Sulfur Trioaide: Acidimetric Method. Sulfur Dioxide in the Atmosphere: Disulfitomercurate Method. PAGENO="0300" 300 ADEQUAcY O~ TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT VOLUME VI. SOLID WASTnS (~IESP ETITION, 1063, 40 ?AGES) Chapter 1. SolId Wastes in Refinery Operations. Chapter 2. Solids in Niatural Waters. Chapter 3. Sludges Containing Water and Solids. Chapter 4. Sludges Containing Oil and Solids. Chapter 5. Sludges Containing Oil, Water, and SOlida. ChapterS. l3iologieal Preathaent:and San'ita~ Sewage Sludges. Chapter 7. Miscellaneous Solid Wastes. Chapter 8. Dewatering and Deoiling. Chapter 9. Biological Decomposition o~C Solid Wastes. Chapter 10. Incineration. Chapter 11. Land Diaposal. Chapter 12. Miscellaneous Disposal Procedures. Chapter 13. Solid Waste Disposal Plants. Index (pages 50 and SI), I have also biought a bib1iograpT~y of publications (this bibliogra phy may be found in. the committee file) which `have resulted from research conducted largely by oil company tec~uiolo'gists on the dis- posal of water borne wastes Plus tesearch covers the ye~trs 1929 through 1962. 1 thought you might wish to include tiii~ bibliography in the record. During the little more than 10 years that have elapsed since the Federal Clean Air Act was passed in 1955, industry expenditures on conservation research and pollution control equipment exceeded $220 million for air, and exceeded $150 million for water. During 1966, the oil industry increased its budget substantially, and will spend more than $43 million on air conservation alone. These are investment figures only; we do not have figures on operating costs, but they have been substantial. It is true, as your panel's report states, that technical and edOnomic limitations still face the Nation in its efforts to abate pollution. I would like to tell you about some of these limitations from `the stand- point of the oil industry. As far as water pollution abatement at oil industry facilities is concerned, technology and procedures are well advanced. Progress here will result more from steady capital investment than from research. In the producing area, the industry's record of brine disposal has been one of encouraging progress. This progress has been made as a result of long-term cooperative efforts between oil producers and State regulatory agencies. This is despite the fact that oil producers in the United States must dispose of 24 million barrels of brine every day. Put another way, an average of three barrels o1~ brine must be disposed of for every barrel of oil drawn from the ground. While some areas of the brine disposal problem are still n~t satis- factor~ly solved, particularly those involving marginally profitable producers, our problem today is mainly economic rather than technical. We were quite proud to hear Secretary Udall's ~tatement~ before the ~ational Petroleum Council last month, that in the area of water c~inservation, the petroleum industr~r "stIll has a way to go, but needs only to press to a conclusion th~ ex~ellent programs ~ * * under way." And at this point, I would like to call your attOntioh to an article that Senator Muskie had entered in last rriday'~ Congressional Record PAGENO="0301" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 301 in which it was noted that the Humble Oil .& Refining Co.'s Baytown refinery received the Honor Roll Award from the Izaak Walton League for it~ outstanding ~ir and water po1lutio~i control programs. The Baytown, Tex., refinery is one of the Nation's largest refineries. In the area of air poliution~ however, onr problem is more complex, for sci~uce and technology are not yet available to help us solve all of" our problems. While there is considerable agreement on criteria for water quality, wha~t' constitutes reasonable criteria for air quality has not yet been determined. . In fact, sometimes I think we are coming up with solutions to prob- lems that have not yet been defined. We believe there is a vast amount of research that must be conduct- ed before we can reach a sound understanding of the cause-and-effect relationship between air pollutants and their effects-au uudèrstand~ ing which must be reached if we are to provide the basis for good pollution control legislation. To help develop some of this understanding, API hasbudgeted some $2 million for 29 air conservation research projects that will be spon~ sored at various industrial laboratories, universities, engineering firms, a~d Government agencies in 1966. To save your time, I will file a separate list detailing the 29 API projects, covering the broad areas of technological and medical re-, search. (The list of API projects follows:) SUMMARY OT 1966 AIR CowsERvArIow RESEARCH PRO3ECTS OT TIlE AMEitICAI~ PETROLEUM INSTITUtE. 1. This study would determine the feasibility, cost, and effeetiveneas of' ~i API-proposed fixed-instrument air monitoring system that would alert a pbpiula- tion once sulfur oxide and particulate matter exceed certain levels. Contractor: Jackson & Moreland. 2. This study will evaluate air monitoring methods and meteorological fore- casting by providing for actual air monitoring, using mobile equipment, in New York City. Data will be compared with data from fixed Instruments. Project S-i. Contractor: New York University. 3. A study of oil companies, associated contractors, and petroleum-oriented development companies to learn past and present expenditures on research and development, facilities, etc. to reduce the sulfur content of fuels. Project 5-2.' Contractor: The Pace Company. 4. A study to learn the probable cost oi~ reducing the sulfur content of resldtial oil supplied to our Eastern seaboard from `the Caribbean area. Proje~t 5-3. Contractor: Bechtel Corporation. * `5. This study will evaluate the present "state of the art" on methods to re- move sulfur dioxide from stack gases. When this phase of the study Is com- pleted, a task force will attempt to cooperate with the Bureau of Mines and the coal industry on further research. Project S-4. 6. & 7. Two studies that will determine the' possible chronic and/or acute health effects of sulfur oxide~ and partictilates by correlating clincal data from health agencies with changing levels of these pollutitnis. ~hese~~studies Will require acceptable air monitoring systems. Projects' S-S and ~-8~ 8. A study to determine the possible chronic long-term effeet~ of low dosages of air pollution by exposing test animals to' controlled atmospheres. A cooi~Orative' project wtih five other organizations. Project 5-6. Contractor: Ind~ti~trtal Hygiene Fo~indat1on of America. ` ` ` . 9. Tbe project will study the effect on laboratory animals `of sulfur dioxide, sulfur dioxid~ ph~s partieulate~, nitrogen dioxide, and- nitrogen dioxide plus particulates, both singly and in combination. The purpose is to determine long-' 68-2~0-66-vol. 1-20 PAGENO="0302" 302 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT term, low-dose health effects, and the safe limits of air pollution from products of fuel combustion. Project 5-7. Contractor: University of North Carolina. 10. A study of the composition of the stack effluents that result when different types of coal and oil are burned. Special attention will be paid to sulfur com- pounds and particulate matter. A cooperative project involving API, Public Health Service, and Bituminous Coal Research. Pi~oject S-9. 11. To monitor lead levels in the ambient air and in the blood and urine of man, to permit early detection if any tendency toward lead accumulation occurs. A possible continuation of the "Tn-City" study. Project L-1. 12. This project will conduct medical studies that may determine (a) sub- clinical effects of lead in man, or (b) the effects of lead, if any, on well-estab- lished clinical conditions, e.g., respiratory diseases. Project L-2. 13. A study directed. tOward understanding the relationship between bone `lead and blood lead. Project L-4. 14. A study that will attempt to determine the relationship of bone lead to the~ total of lead in the body, and to determine how this relationship has changed with time. Project L-3.. 15. This study will `determine lead concentrations in soil and vegetátlOr~ at known distances from highways, to assess the significance of lead fall-out adja- cent to highways. Project L-5. Contractor: Rutgers University. 16. A study to determine the lowest level of atmospheric lead that will pro- duce a measurable change in blood lead. In cooperation with the Public Health Service, du Pont, Ethyl Corporation, and the Lead Industries Association. Project L-6. Contractor: I~ettering Laboratory, University of Cincinnati. 17. This study will determine what effect, if any, on evaporative and ex- baust emissions of automobiles would be brought about by varying fuel com- position and volatility, and by blending gasoline with and without lead. An effort will be made to determine the effect on the output of nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide resulting from variations hi' gasoline formulas. Project VL-1. Contractor: Bureau of Mines. 18. Using newly available techniques for evaluating the biological e~fects of lead, this study will involve long-term exposures of mice, rats, rabbits, dogs, and monkeys to lead acetate by feeding and other routes of administration. Special techniques employed will include electron microscopy; and enzyme, behavonial, and radiotracer studies. Project L-8. Contractor: Hazieton Lab~ oratories, Inc. 19. Cas,e studies of representative refineries throughout the United States to determine the incremental cost of making gasoline without lead alkyls. Project LV-9. Contractor: Bonner and Moore. 20. A, study to compare the lead burdens of laboratory animals exposed to heavy concentrations of automotive emissions. with others not exposed to these concentrations. Proj~et L-i0. Contractor: Wayne State~ University. 21. This study has two purposes: (a) to compare the present total environ- ment-land, air, and water-with the ancient environment by using the isotopic character of lead as' an environmental tracer; and (b) to discover the relative importance of varjous possible sources of lead, and to better understand the mechanisms of lead transfer. Project L-11. 22.' A study `to determine the effect of volatility changes on the performance of automobiles subjected to a wide range of temperatures. Project IT-4. Con- tractor: Esso Research and Engineering Company. 23. To study methods that industry can use to measure evaporation' `losses from fuel tanks and carburetors. Project CR-i. Sponsor: Coordinating Re- search Council of the Society of Automotive Engineers and the API.. 24. To determine how variables in fuels and vehicles affect automotive exhaust composition.. ~`Project CR-2. Sponsor: CRC. 25. TQ develop techniques for analyzing exhaust emission composition. A cooperative project with the Aptomobile Manufacturers Association and others. Project CR-& Contractor: Bureau of Mines. 26. To develop instruments that will provide meaningful measurement of the various hydrocarbons in automotive engine exhaust, Project CR-4. Spon- sor: CRC. 27. ThIs study will attempt to identify the components causing odor and eye irritations associated with diesel emissions, and to relate these components to en~ine~e'thi4L6ptratingcoñd4tlons. Project CR-S. Contractor: Scott Research Laboratories, Inc. PAGENO="0303" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 303 28. A study of the toxicity of aromatic hydrocarbons in the lung, with par~ ticular emphasis on the relationship of the physical characteristics of particles to carcinogenesis. Project ER-i. Contractor: The Chicago Medical School. 29. A study that will analyze ambient air samples of hydrocarbons covering a wide molecular range, and will compare, them to similar compounds from known ~ exhausts. The saiuples.~iil also be stud- ied to determine the rate of hydrocarbon disappearance when exposed to irridia- tion. Project BR-i. Contractor: University of California (Riverside). Mr. GAMMELGARD. Permit me, however, to review some of these projects so that you will understand the oil industry's views as to re- search and technology limitations that beset us today. We are presently concerned with two main areas. The first of these is sulfur oxide pollution resulting from the burning of some heavy or residual fuels. I should point out that, through advanced technology, the oil industry is now~ p~d'u~ing alp~ø~t,~sulfur-free gas, gasolines, lubricating oils, and light fuel oils that constitute the bilk of the products of the oil and gas industry," as was stated the other day at these hearings by Arthur Stern, Assistant Chief of HEW's Division of Air Pollution. However, there has been no comparable success in our quest for a technically feasible yet economic way to reduce the sulfur content of high sulful residual oil used in industrial plants, power stations, and other large facilities. A considerable amount of research is being carried on by individual oil companies to devise~ practical ways to attack the sulfur oxides problem. Since economics is a constant consideration in this sulfur matter, the API is currently sponsoring a study by the Bechtel Corp. to de- termine the feasibility and cost of reducing the sulfur content of re- sidual oil that is supplied to our eastern seaboard from the Caribbean area refineries such as those in Venezuela. Another A1~I-sponsored study is being conducted by the Pace Co. of Houston. It will provide factual information on how much past and present effort the oil industry has made to reduce the sulfur con- tent of its products. Since researchers have encountered difficulties while trying to reduce the sulfur content of high-sulfur residual oil, we are exploring another possibility. API is now conducting a state-of-the-art study regarding removal of sulfur oxides from the stack gases that result when fuel is burned. When this exloratory data is assembled, we will attempt to cooperate with other groups on further res~arch. Mr. DADDARIO. What other groups do you have in mind? The coal industry? Mr. GAMMELGARD. Yes, we are thinking of coal people. The Bu- reau of Mines have a process that they are currently researching with PHS funds. Others that are interested in this process will contribute in money and manpower. Mr. DADDARIO. Do you sense a desire to cooperate in this area with these other people? Mr. GAMMELGARD. Yes, sir. I think there are about four processes now that look like like they i~iight have promise but the economics yet do not look very good and research shóuid'~be clone in several of them to find out if ~~~etbirig ~ be brb~ight forth that can have good economics. PAGENO="0304" 304 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. CONAIiLE. How about steel, are they also interested in this field? Mr. `GAMMELGARI~. I ~ould think that primarily interest would come from the ~Øssii fuel suppliers and main users-big industrial users. Steel does, of course, come under that category. They might wish to contribute something. The second area of inadequacy to which increased attention is being paid by the ~il industry is that o~f emissions from gasoline engines. A $480,000 tèehnical project :thnt we are sponsoring is underway at `t'lto `~artlesv.ille, Ok1a~, laboratori~s of the Bureau of. Mines. Mr. DADDARIO. WhRt is `the `contribution of the Bureau of Mines in thi~ partioular. project? `Mr. GA'MMELGAItD. A's I understand it, Mr. "Chairman, `our money is `esseiltiully fin'~ncing this projeCt including the payment `of salary of Bureau' of Min~ee personnel at their salary rates plus `Some of their benefits. But things like the buildings and facilities that will be used. in. this proj~et that `ár~ ~h'e property of `the Bureau of Mines-we are `not paying anything for th~s~ This is sort'of `a contribution in kind that `they `are making. We `would have been perfectly `happy' if the `Bureau `of Mines would have'had half of ~the money to `cOntribute as their sha~ of it.' We weren't anxious to `pay for the entire projeot. `There Was no attempt on our pa~t by ~p'aiying thee~i'tire tab to maybe try to. control what comes out of this pr~ject. In fact, `we would be `happy to put in a `mihOr share of the money if it would make `the Gov~rnment happy. `Mr. DADDARIOS I am not insinua'ting that it might be `a directed study because you are paying `a major share of it. It seems to me that `as you have already `said, it `is' the `size of the program that is important. I was trying `to `determine `how much more money `over and `above. the $480,000 ~rifl be provided `by other sources. I am Certain your study `would be objective. Otherwise, I don't know ho'w we `could head. it under the term of research. Mr. `GAMMELGARD. `That is oorreet. I agree with you. I think there are some that don't `share your viewpoint, however. `Mr. DADDARIO. I assure you there is no bi'as. Mr. MOSHER. Mr. Chairman, what is `this criticism ~ You have iim plied that this Study has been criticized. Who is criticizing it? Mr. GAM~MELGA1m. The Senate `Committee on Public Works, in its~ report accompanying S. 3112, made the comment that this project raised `the issue' of the propriety, I believe, of industry financed fe- search in Government `faCilities'where the public `welfare was involved' or the common good. It is `pretty diffiCult `to get `away from `the `com- mon good not being involved in `a pollution problem s'o this in our' opiniOn `would mean `any project in the air `and water pollution `fields' would `Come under `the public welfare or domain. The committee reCommended projects such' as ours with the Bureau of `Mines shdul'd~ `be brought to `the C'ongress some 90 days before `they might `be signed' up as `an on-going prOject for review. In `my opinion, a procedure like that would effectively `build a wall between Government and industry' work Where industry paid `for research `in `a `Government `agency. I cant see nothing wrong `ma case like this `where `both parties think and believe that this is `an~e~cellent project.' Budget considerations in our mdustry association in the past have limited us to projects that will PAGENO="0305" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLVTION ABATEMENT~ 305 Start about `2 years hence. Last November we ~ut the red tape in API and `approved a budget in just 48 `hottrs of `several million `dollars. This is unusual for API and we are going to require about 6 months leadtime for approval of next year's projects. We recognize that research projects may come up on short notice and you shouldn't have to wait for an administrative budget pro- ced~re that doesn't get the project off the ground for 18 or 24 months. I think in this case the Bureau of Mines could probably dig up some money a year or two from now for this project and make possible new discoveries and proceed `along such new avenues as this research goes forward. We will be glad to come up `with manpower and money to explore promising avenues in this field. Mr. MOSHER. Mr. Chairman, I don't quarrel at all with Mr. Garn- melgard's point of view as just expressed but I assume this issue of propriety will be considered in our report. Mr. DADDARIO. Yes; I don't think there is any question about that, Mr. Mosher. We have looked into the standards established over the course of time by the Bureau of Mines in conducting programs of research such as this, and the results have indiëated that it has been an objective and proper type of `a cooperative venture. Mr. GAMMELGARD. Very much so. Mr. DADDAiuO. I do think we need to look at it and to sort of docu- ment the kind of programs that are carried out. Mr. Mosher's question to you and your explanation have added to the discussion and put us on the right road. Mr. GAMMELGARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The purpose of this research is to determine what effect, if any, on evaporative and exhaust emissions of automobiles would be brought about by varying fuel con~position and volatility, and'by blending gas- oline with and without lead. At least 2:5 passenger cars, selected to encompass a wide range of types~ will be employed in the tests. All vehicle' emissions will me meas- ured in terms of total quantity composition, and smog-forming poten- tial using the very best availa~ile scientific knowledge and equipment. In the tests an effort will. also be made to determine the effects of vari- ations in gasoline formula's on the output of nitrogen oxides and car- bon monoxide. When I mentioned evaporative and exhaust emissions, I think it might be worthwhile to say that up `until 1963 when positive crank~ case devices were voluntarily put on neW automobiles made in the United States, there were four "holes" in a car's fuel System. One is the vent in the fuel tank. You `have to have a vent or you *`ould eel. lapse the tank when you pump the gas out of it. There is a gasoline vapor loss as "breathing" ta'kOs place in th~ tank., Another one is the carburetor. After driving and then stopping your engine, the heat under the hood causes some of the gasoline that is in the bowl `to evaporate into the atmosphere. There are other minor losses from the carburetor. The third oiie was the crankcase vent where' from `20 to 35 percent of the gasoline lost from a car took place through the road draft tube. That was sealed off and by recirculating vapors back into the intake system that lOss was eliminated. ` PAGENO="0306" 306 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT The fourth and the major one is the tailpipe of the car. Some of the hydrocarbons are not completely burned in the engine and go out the tailpipe and it is some of `these hydrocarbons that mix with the oxides of nitrogen that also come out and together can form a smog problem under certain atmospheric conditions. It is quite possible that this research will produce no better gasoline, from an air pollution standpoint, than any gasoline produced and used. today. But we want to know what, if anything, can be accomplished by variations in gasoline formulas. Chairman MILLER. You say this research will not produce a better gasoline and then you speak of the variation of gasoline formulas. Don't all of the companies vary their gasoline and doesn't each com- pany have its own formula? At least that's what they tell us. These high-test gasolines are not all of the same formula, are they? Aren't they actually differences? If you do get a formula, will the gas com- panies be obligated to use it or will they continue to use the gasolines developed in their own laboratories? Can anything be gained in the marketplace with the proper formuia?~ Mr. GAMMELGARD. Well, that is a pretty good-sized question you have thrown there,. Mr. Miller. There are differences in gasoline, there is no question about that. In general, gasoline is a mixture of hydro- carbons that boil in the range from about 100° to 4000 F. Some might chop theirs at 885° because they think that is the right end point, others may exceed 4000. Other companies put in additives that they think are superior to other companies' additives.~ , .~ ` ` Chairman MILLEn. One company advertises a, pure gasoline with no additives. I believe additives were introduced about 30 years ago when we began `to put ethyl in the tank. ` This particular company claims that there will not be any sludge or carbon buildup. Mr. GAMMELEARD. I would venture to say that their gasoline con- tains other' additives-the;~ne that you say claims they have no addi- tives in it. Gasolines. may contain. antirust,' ailtiwear, antioxidaiit, antiicing additives, and others. But there are also differences in oc- tanes. The average today is 100 research octane number throughout the United States for premium grade fuels. There~ are some around 98, 9. There are some that are over 100, so there as `real quality differences.' The point in this research project where we are looking, in one phase, at the "front end" or the first 10 percent of the boiling range is to what can be done to modify the hydrocarbon types in "front. end" and the effect on evaporative losses from the fuel tank and car- buretor. This could result in a general change in gasoline formula- tion but still have individual company differences. There are four different general types of `hydrocarbons in gasoline-aromatics, naph- thenes, olefins, and parafins, and we might find that .a general change in a particular class would have an effect on automotive emissions as far as smog formation is concerned, and I think if this were found and' demonstrated, that various companies would change their blends to make a positive `contribution, but they would still have individual dif- ferences in their gasolines. In 1968, in response to Fe~eral emission standards, new automo- biles will have exhaust control systems which will reduce to a very PAGENO="0307" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 307 considerable extent the hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide exhaust en~iission levels, from automotive engines. Some technical people are concerned that `the exhaust control de- vices may result in accentuating the oxides of nitrogen problem while relieving the smog problem. While this is not a gen.erally held opin- ion, it does suggest that our technology in this area may not be as far advanced as we would like it to be. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Gammelgard, if the technology is not as far ad- vanced as we would like it to be, are we moving ahead in the proper way? Should we, in fact, be imposing on the public the obligation to pay an extra $50 for this device? We must consider that as we multi- ply this by the number of cars to be sold, it will cost the public nearly one-half billion dollars a year. Since there is so much that we don't know, should we take a sum of money of that proportion and apply it to research in order to come up with a more meaningful solution? Mr. GAM~ELGARD, Mr. Chairman, I do not really have the feel of what oil industry thinks would be an answer to your question. I have my own opinion for what it is worth. I feel that this step of requir- ing these devices or controls-the law doesn't really require a de- vice-it just says that what com~s out the tailpipe may not exceed certain standards for carbon monoxide and. for hydrocarbons-is a little premature. Currently, the 1966 Fords and Chev~olets being sold in California charge around $45 apiece for these exhaust control, de- vices, plus around $5 for the positive crankcase ventilation device. * In my opinion $5 for the ~positive crankcase ventilation device which would reduce by `shout 36 percent the hydrocarbon iossts is a very well worthwhile expenditure even though there are substantial geographical areas of this country where there is now no hydrocarbon air pollution problem. When it comes to paying $45 for an exhaust control device, I don't think there is `any question that in California this was a very proper `step to take in 1966. I think California has a problem of major proportions and even though you have technical people disagreeing as to whether these controls `are going to be effective or not-or even might accentuate a different problem such `as disoolora- `tion of `the atmosphere by more nitrogen dioxide in the air-I think `that California should have done what they did~ Now~ when it oomes to a nationwide `requirement for new cars, this' might `be considered, or I consider it possibly a little premature. It is a substantial suni of money when you are'adding'$45 to the `price `of a car. I should point out this figure is for Ford and GM. I understand Chrysler's device costs substantially less than that-I think it is in `the $18 to $20 range. There is an economic advantage there. If the price of these devices can be brought down `substantially and this is what Detroit's history has shown that they are capable of doing-bringing down costs of any item that goes in the car-it might be a little different. * Mr. DADDAEIO. If you had availaible one-half billion `dollars, would you spend it by buying these devices `and adding them to new oars, or would you spend it in another way? Mr. GAMMELGARD. Mr. Chairman, we couldn't come up with enough research projects to spend that type `of money, good research projects. Dr. Eckardt, do you agree with `that? You shake your head nega- tively, I don't know whether you agree. PAGENO="0308" 308 ADEQUACY OF TE~CUNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Dr. EOKARDT. I don't think we could. Mr. DADDARIO. There is a research problem. We are spending a half billion dollars to do something we are not certain about. Mr. GAMMELGARD. We know the system's will reduce the unburned hydrocarbons. We know they will substantially reduce hydrocarbons and substantially reduce carbon monoxide. Carbon monoxide is be- coming more and more of a problem in the city in heavy traffic. Not that it is a serious problem, but the carbon monoxide levels are going up at a rate where if they. continue that way for another 10 years, they will become uncomforteble. Mr. DADDARIG. I wouldn't want to impose on you or Dr. Eckardt to spend the half billion dollars. But could you spend a sum sub~ stantially less than that on research to accomplish more than we are now? Dr. EO~ARDT. I think so. Mr. DADDARIO. In what way would you proceed, Doctor, if you were to take an alternative route? Dr. EcKAn~T. Well, there are some areas that I'm interested in in the medical field which I intend to discuss later in my statement and I think there are areas in the technical'field where additional, perhaps novel methods of controlling exhaust might be worthwhile which would include also the control of the nitrogen-oxides. Mr. DADDARIO. Why don't we wait until we come to your statement to explore further this question. `Chairman MILLER. Mr. Chairman, we talk about these devices we are going to put on automobiles. In California some years ago we had to use certain accepted devices on cars. I realize that pollution is created by automobiles. I have no way of `measuring it, but it seems to me that one truck or bus diesel engine creates as much or more pollution than 10 automobile engines do. I have driven across the continent perhaps as much as any'man here; and many `times I have pulled over to the side of the road rather than follow one of these trucks. What are we going to do about it? I live on the fifth floor of the Methodist Building, and during the height of the tourist season, there are 20 or more buses parked around the Supreme Court Building. During the summer, they run their motors to keep the air conditioning on while people go in and out of the build- ing. Sometimes the pollution is so heavy in our apartment that we have to get out of it. What, are we going to do about this kind of pollution? Mr. GAMMELGARD. I think your order of 10 times is too high, Mr. Miller. The diesel engine is a very efficient engine and gets more power ont of a gallon of fuel than an automobile and this is why it is used. I couldn't help but agree with you that the odors coming out of a diesel engine are obnoxious but I don't think the odors coming out of a diesel engine have any adverse health effect. In that respect, I `think they have a cleaner bill of health than automo- biles. But what you do get is this very disagreeable odor and in some case~ smoke. Now, things can be done to improve `the smoking characteristics of diesels. The engines in general should be better maintained~ This would help the problem. There are additives which will reduce the~ PAGENO="0309" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 309 smoke coming out of a diesel and these additives are being used more and more. The engines too often are. run underpowered by the operators which contributes to the smoke problems. If they would upsize the engines a little bit and operate them at the right point rather than "pushing" them this would help the problem. This sounds sort of wishy-washy, I guess. I recognize the problem but what are we doing about it? There are some masking agents that some of the bus fleet operators are trying in their fuel to come up with a more desirable odor, and. come up with something you don't mind as much as the normal odor. There is research being sponsored by PHS and other organiza- tions on the diesel problems. It is going to be very difficult, I think, to completely get rid of this odor problem on diesels unless there is some technological breakthrough. This is the principal point against them, I think-just the odor-but I don't think there is any health problem with the diesel exhaust whatever-there is no control needed. from that viewpoint. Chairman MILLER. Thank you. Mr. VIVIAN, I have listened to questions on this and asked similar questions some days ago and I am still left with the question of why is it so bad? What is the cause of the problem? Mr. GAMMELGARD. I would presume that the primary reason for the problem is the formation of aldehydes in the exhaustr-in the com- bustion products that come out of the exhaust pipe. Do you agree with that, Dr. Eckardt? Dr. EGKARDT. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. These aldehydes are not formed in spark-ignited en- gines, is that right? Mr. GAMMELGARD. Not to the same extent. Mr. VIVIAN. Do they have any detrimental effect ~ Dr. ECKARDT. About 40 years ago, a study on' diesel engines was undertaken by the Bureau of Mines because they wanted to use them in mines where the ventilation was somewhat confined. Their study at that time indicated that the amount of exhaust coming out of a diesel, although obnoxious from an odor standpoint was not bad from a health standpoint and they permitted these diesels to be used. Mr. VIVIAN. Is API currently carrying on any research in this field? Mr. GA~MELGAUD. Not in the health field. I indicated they are in the technical area. Mr. VIVTA~. One of the purposes of the; environmental pollution research is not `only to make the atmosphere more capable for living but also more healthful. Chairman MILLER. I would like to see local authorities enforce the law prohibiting the' continued use of old `cars which emit incredible amounts of exhaust smoke and fumes. Mr. GAMMELGARD. I would like to discuss the question of industry- Government participation in abatement research and development. We certainly concur with the suggestion contained in your subcom- mittee's report that industry assume increasing responsibility for con- ducting much of the needed research, for this suggestion reflects your confidence in industry's capabilities and enlightened, self-interest. We PAGENO="0310" 310 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT also concur with Representative Robert S. Jones' testimony of July 20 before your subcommittee in which he recommended more, partici- pation by industry in research and. development programs in the water pollution field. I think we have already touched on what we cover in this next para- graph regarding Senate Report S. 3112. A~iother viewpoint ~v~as expressed in a recommendation. of the Senate Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution report of July 7 (R.ept. No. 1361) which questioned industry sponsorship of projects conducted by Federal agencies where "private economic interest as versus the general welfare are involved." The oil industry, in many of its research projects, has worked closely with Government agencies, and two of our 1~66 projects are being carried on jointly with the Public Health Service. Moreover, we look forward to more liaison and greater cooperation in jointly sponsored Government-industry research projects in the years to come. Currently, we are discussing the implementation of further projects with PHS. For our project on the effects of various gasolines on automotive emissions, we were fortunate to enlist the cooperation of the Bureau of Mines. I say this because of the excellence of the Bureau's facilities, the competence of its personnel, and its absolutely unbiased position. Industry would be criticized if it failed to sponsor work of the sort entailed in this project-and justly so. Government certainly could attempt such work independently. It is our view, however, that in- dustry's intimate knowledge of its own product and processes can make a meaningful contribution to the success of such research. I would like to say here that there are several of the larger oil company research organizations capable of conducting this study. We chose the Bureau of Mines be~ause we have full confidence in the Bureau- having worked with them over the years and whatever comes out of this research, we are ready to live with and I would hate to see any roadblocks thrown between Government and industry in this type of research. It is our position that Government and industry must work together if adequate, effective, and reasonable pollution abatement methods are to be found, simply because no Government agency or group of agen- cies has, or can attain, expertise in all things. One final point, gentlemen, regarding joint industry-Government research projects. A question was raised in hearings by the Senate Public Works Sub- committee on Air and Water Pollution as to one detail of the contract I previously discussed, between API and the Bureau of Mines. As originally written, the contract included a standard clause prohibiting release of "technically valid and useful data"-in other words, pre- liminary findings-during the course of the study without prior ap. proval of the other party. As provided in all API contracts, full disclosure is called for ~t the completion of the research. Full dis- closure and free use by arcvone of information develoned in API re- search has always been API policy, and it continues to be. On the basis, however, that the clause on preliminary disclosures might be interpreted as an attempt by a private interest to inhibit ac- PAGENO="0311" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 311 `tion by a public agency, API stated publicly, at the hearing that it would drop the clause.' Since the hearing the contract has been amended so that it no longer calls for API approval of release by the Bureau of Mines of preliminary findings. Mr. Chairman, I have read with great interest your opening re- marks given at the start of these hearings. You stated that "sober consideration of the waste-products problem is a responsibility of all of us." I hope we are demonstrating here today that we in the petroleum industry have accepted our share of the responsibility. As I have indicated, more `research' and, technology on pollution abatement are certainly needed. At the same time, steps should be `taken to insure that abatement action should be undertaken at no greater expense to the Nation than is necessary. To meet this requirement, Mr. Chairman, we must certainly follow your recommendation that this issue should not be treated in an "atmosphere of crisis" and that solutions' must be "solidly based on facts." If decisions taken in the areas of quality criteria, legislation, and research and technology are~ calmly considered, based on sound data, and participated in by both industry and government, we are opti~. mistic that our problems will be properly defined and that suitable solutions will be forthcoming. Gentlemen, I want to thank you for this opportunity to outline our record and suggest some scientific and technological opportunities for the future. For the record, I'd like to file a copy of our very brief API policy statement on air and water conservation. Dr. Eckardt is now prepared to outline some of Our medical and biological proj- ects that we believe will interest you. Mr. DADDARIO. Would you please proceed, Dr. Eckardt ~ Thank you. Dr. ECKARDT. I appreciate the opportunity to appear here today and outline some of the work for you which the petroleum industry has been sponsoring in the area' of medical research concerning air pollution. STATEMENT or a. E. ECKAR])T, IVL])., AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE Dr. ECKARDT. While the medical community is well aware of the acute damage which can be caused by high concentration of air p01- lr~tion such as occurred in Donora, Pa., and in London, it is sorely lacking in data concerning the long-term, low-dosage effects of breath- ing the air in our environment. Our medical research has, therefore, been directed toward both of these areas. Episodes are rare, as you know. But medical experts agree that m the few episodes that have occurred around the world, sulfur oxides, in combination with other pollutants, have beyond qeustion played a role. While awaiting a breakthrough on reduction of sulfur oxide emissions through either desulfurization of oil-and perhaps coal- or removal of sulfur oxides from stack gases, API feels that attentiQn must be directed toward the prevention of future "episodes." PAGENO="0312" 312 ADEQUACY OF TECHNQLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT The engineering firm of Jackson and Moreland is now conducting an API-sponsored study in New York City to determine the feasibility, cost, and effectiveness of the plan we propose. A similar study, also sponsored by API, and directed toward the ~prediction and prevention of episodes, and carried out by New York University, involves the evaluation of air monitoring methods and meteorological forecastin~'in the New York metropolitan area. We would like to submit for the record a short paper on how such. episodes might be controlled, written on behalf of the oil industry and delivered in June, at the Air Pollution Control Association meet~ ing by Mr. Curtis G. Cortelyou of the Mobil Oil Corp. Mr. t~ADDARIO. Without objection, that paper will be mcorporated.. (The information requested is as follows:) A Pa~onoAL `Mx~txs zEoa COMMUNITY AIR rOLLtrrION CorimoL1 (By C. G. Corteiyeu, Air and Water Conservation Coordinator, Mobil Oil Corporation, New York, New York) In national magazines, in newspaper articles, and in several books that have' come out in the past year or so, the promotion of the cause of pollution control has largely been based on the need to prevent air pollution incidents. The dra- matic stories of the Meuse Valley, of London, o1~ Donora have been told over' and over .becaus~ they emphatically point up pollution's hazards. Beyond doubt such episodes, with their effect on human life, are the most clear-cut pollution problems. There is no question here. The need to end their threat is not under debate in any quarter that I know of. Thus the e~lsode is a problem upon which all of us can join in the attack- without reservations. Perhaps, We can reasonably question in medical, techni- cal, and economic teri~ss the need for complex and costly control of very low levels of specific pollutants. But no such question and no delay can be justified when it comes to the principal problem that we face-the air pollution incident.. It wab in recognition of this that last year physicians and technical people working within the American Petroleum Institute developed what has come to be known as the API pollution incident control plan. It is, I believe, a con- structive contribution to the science of air pollution control. In studying the records of the health-damaging episodes most frequently cited, It Is clearly seen that elevated levels of sulfur dioxides were present during' eaCh of them. But physicians in and outside the oil industry have told us that sulfur diatide, although accused of being the villain of the piece, could not alone cause a health hazard at the levels recorded. Sulfur dioxide, the physicians tell us, is largely filtered out in the mouth, nose, and throat when inhaled alone, and only a very small fraction gets Into the lower respiratory tract. Thus, industrial workers have been exposed 5 days a week, 8 hours a day, year after year to sulfur dioxide levels of 5 parts per milllon-.-and even 10 and 20 parts per million-without bad effects. The in- du'strial standard is 5 ppm, a level many times higher than that reached' in any American community under the most adverse conditions. In working up the API plan, a close examination was made of available data on known air pollution incidents that have occurred around the world. While ,high levels are safely encountered in industrial situations, It was found that nulfur dioxide levels during known pollution episodes were sometimes in a range, of no more than 0.8 to 1 part per million. Obviously, something special happens In the `urban situation under adverse conditions-something not encountered in the industrial situation. The dif- ference was clearly, defined when top experts in the field from around the world gathered last year in New ilampsire at the Gordon conference on sulfur oxides and related compounds. Particulates, the expert's generally agreed, play a crucial role In causing the air pollution incident. Sulfur dioxide is absorbed 1 at the annual meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association, San Fran. cisco, C'alif., ~Iune 25, 1966. PAGENO="0313" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 313 onto particulates, which are then breathed deeply into tl~e respiratory tract. There the sulfur compounds can have a significant effect. Our studies of specific episodes showed that In each case sulfur dioxide and particulates went up together, and remained up together fur an extended pe- nod of time. The crucial point in devising the API plan, therefore, was to select some level of sulfur dioxide and some level of patticulates which, to- gether, would be safe. The development of a course of action to prevent those levels from being exceeded might then be attempted. The first part of the effort was a close analysis of the past air pollution mcii- dents in order to determine at what levels problems started. Our medical p00~ ple determined that no health effects had ever been demonstrated when the two pollutants were together at or below the values that we since have built into our suggested control system. These values are 0.3 ppm of sulfur oxides and 4 "coeffiecient of haze" (Cob) units for particulates. If a way were found to determine in advance when these levels would be exceeded for an extended period, then it might be possible to tailor a community plan to reduce emissions of these pollutants at such times. Industry technical people joined together to try to devise such a predictive system. They recommended that a network of air, monitoring stations be estab- lished by any community where a pollution incident might develop. There rec- ommendation called for the establishment of these units o~ a grid network of no more than five miles separation between units. While sulfur dioxide is the predominant sulfur compound in ambient air, they recognized that there are other higher "oxides of Sulfur also present. These higher oxides, the doctors state, can have adverse effects o~a health as well, be- cause they too, are adsorbed on particular matter and in~ialed. So our tech- nical people considered it preferable that the `test method used In the monitoring proposal detect total sulfation. The American Society foi~ Testing and Mate- rials Designation: D-l3~5-60, Method A, was reeommende4 as the appropriate procedure. It is a method that provides continuous measuireuient, through con- ductivity, of small concentrations of sulfur oxides. The standard method for determining soiling effects of smoke pollution-AST1~I Desig~i'ation: D-1704-~6l- was recommended as the procedure for determining ambient air particulate levels. In using `this method, an air sample is pulled through a filter paper. The opacity of the deposit provides the measurement of the particulate matter. Under the API control plan, whenever the average readIngs of the grid net- work show increasing levels of the tw'o monitored pollutants, weather reports would `be studied carefully. If the forecast indicates a period of stagnant `air that might last 8 or more hours-either brought about by inversion or some other cause-then an alert would be called before the pollutant values built into the system are reached. The object would be to keep the levels of sulfur oxides and particulates below these values-0.3 ppm, 802 and 4 Cob, Exactly what steps would be needed' to accompiislh this objective would have to be left for determination by the community Itself according to the local situation. The community would need to stfidy its various sources of emissions and design a series of steps to be required should an alert `be sounded. Among possible steps for consideration are a reduction of incineration and the halting of open `burning (if this hasn't already been completely prohibited by law). Other steps might include switching to lower sulfur content fuels temporarily in plants where burning of such alternate fuels could `be made possible; and, perhaps, the modification of certain industrial operations for a time in order to produce a net reduction in pollutant emissions. `The maximum levels for SO2 and particulates, in combInation, that have ~been built into our system are stringent. The record of past pollution incidents does not' show these levels to present health hazards. Yet action would be called for to cut emissions before spcb' levels are reached. Thus a considerable safety ftctor has been built into the plan. Even though the levels in the system are stringent, it is a fact that few cities ever reach these concentrations for extended periods. In a community where the combination of factors might be possible, it will usually occur at most no more than two or three times a year. This is a positive system to predict and prevent pollution Incidents. It can be established to supplement a program of reasonable year-round ambient' air objectives. But objectives alone~ calling for maximum levels of particular pollutants such-and-such percent of the time, cannot assure the avoidance o'f episodes. Whether year-round objectives are met can only be determined PAGENO="0314" 314 ADEQUACY OF. TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION' ABATEMENT after the fact. Our system, we believe, can predict episodes before they occur and make it possible to prevent them. The American Petroleum Institute is sponsoring a study of the feasibility, cost and effectiveness of this pollution incident control plan. The study is now underway in the most densely populated and most complex air shed in the nation, the New York metropolitan area. It is being conducted by Jackson and Moreland, a reputable, independent consulting engineering firm of Boston, Massachusetts. For several months Jackson and Moreland engineers have been gathering data from a wide variety of sources within New York City and out- side it. They have interviewed business executives, city officials, and other individuals who either have expertise in pollution control or are responsible' for particular pollution sources. They have contacted control officials and meteorologists, as well as experts from the academic world. Particular atten- tion is being given to checking the weather forecasting aspect of the plan. Dr. Leonard Grèenburg, former New York City Ootn'inissioner of Air Pollution Control, is serving as a `consultant to the engineers on this project. As you know, he is now chairman of the Department of Preventive and l~nvir'onmen'tai Medicine at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York. By the fall, Jackson `and Moreland is scheduled `to give us its judgment. I will not anticipate what that judgment will `be. The plan under study could only be implemented `at a cost-but we believe it will be a minimum cost `to accomplish what must be `accomplished, protection against the possibility of health-damaging air pollution incidents. That end, of course, could be achieved by the complete elimination of all pollu- tant sources-but this is impractical. What `we have put forward is a. plan that we feel `is achievable now and that meets `the `urgent need. The pollution incident control plan is not theY answer to all pollution problems.' It does ~not take i'nto `account other factors beyond health protection; it does not prevent corrosion, plant damage or soiling "of clOthing. Judgments on steps to take `to deal with `these latter effects `can 1e determined `on an economic balance- weighing v'alue to be `achieved against cost of achieving it. Our plan `is one solely dedicated to the elimination of the air pollution Incident which holds `the potential of health damage. We do not say: forget about the other effects of air pollution. We do say: let's get on with the job o'f eliminating this `one very clear threat of health damage, and do so without delay. In some cities year-round reduction of the total `pollution load must be achieved. But no one has yet found `a way to accomplish `this `overnight. No delay, `though, should be tolerated when it comes to dealing with the air pollution incident. Some `way must `be `found, `as we make our steady `progress toward the reduction of total pollution, to assure that under `adverse circum- stances pollution Incidents `will never again `occur in this country. If our plan or `some refinement of it is not the answer to the problem of the air pollution incident, one should certainly be found. And I `believe you would agree that sucb a plan should `be put Into effect as promptly as possible. A long- term schedule for `achievement of this goal is not reasonable. We are proposing, then, what we hope will be a practical answer to the air pollution Incident. ` ` The feasibility study on the plan is just one of many efforts being conducted within the petroleum industry in the air conservation area this year. Underway within the `API are air pollution research projects costing well over $1112 million In 1966 alone. Within individual companies of the Industry another $41 million is being dedicated this 3~ear to air conservation capital expenditures and research. An additional' $2~1O'million has been spent in those' areas by Oil companies in the last ten years. Knowing all that can be learned about Sulfur oxide pollution and any other pollution problem that might be asSociated with the industry's' operations or products is of very great concern to us. We are sincerely dedicated to' air conservation, and we will continue to seek in every way possible to work with others from withte industry, from within government, and from among the general public who are joined in the same cause. Dr. ECKARPT, Very fe~ jttrge epidemio1o~ica1 studies have - been undertaken because of their high costs and. because they contain so many variables includi*sW4tandáiyd food,'Musing, an~ cJoti~g. PAGENO="0315" AD~EQiJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 315 I have attempted to summarize some of these studies in a paper that was published in the Journal of Occupational Medicine in 1964 and I would like with your permission to enter a copy of this study into the record, (The paper follows:) [From the Journal of Occupational MedicIne, April 196,4] AIR POLLUTION, LUNG CANCER, AND CHRoNIc' LUNG DISEASE (By Robert' B. Eckardt, M.D., Ph. D., Linden, N.J.) Dr. Eckardt is Director, Medical Research Division, Ess'o Research & Engineering Company, Linden, N.J. In recent months an increasing amount of publicity has been given to the health effects of air pollution, so much so that Dr. F. Princi was moved to refer to this as "overwhelming, persuasive and deceptive propaganda~" in his Chairman's address to the Section on Preventive Medicine of the American Medical Association (1). Most of this publicity revolves around two condi- tions-namely, lung cancer and chronic pulmonary disease (chronic bronchitis, pulmonary fibrosis, and emphysema). Unfortunately, those who are convinced of the causal relations between air pollution and health effects are prone to ignore those reports that do not support their concepts. The purpose of this brief review is to point out a few reports which are often overlooked, yet which raise serious questions about the state of our knowledge. It is to be recognized that this re~iiew einphasi~es those reports which throw some doubt on. the causal relationships of air pollution and health' effeets~ It should not .be assumed, however, that I do not support air pollution control measures or the desirability of reducing general air pollution, or evenS that I take the view that there is no causal relationship between air pollution and health effects. Ilissen- tially the author believes that there is a strong suggestion of such causal rela- tionships, but that much more reseach is necessary to establish them. In the meantime, I believe reasonable and practical air pollution control measures should be applied wherever possible, if only to control the filth, plant damage, nuisance, and~ annoyance that air pollution can bring. This report . will be divided into two parts-one dealing with lung cancer and the other, with chronic pulmonary disease. . . LUNG CANCER In 1961 a most interesting, paper appeared by, Gifilam et, al.. (2) of the Field Investigations and Demonstrations Branch of the National . Oancer InstI- tute, U.S. Public Heaith Service. In this paper, mortality, rates' from lung cancer were carefully analyzed over the period 1930 tQ 1956~ They found that during this period there had been a steady and quite regular decrease in the rate of increase (prevalence) of lung cancer. In their discu~sion, with the basic assumption that these trends `continue, they state: "The general regularity since 1930 of the declining percentage increase in rates for all ages, particularly among the white population, suggests~ that the mOst' appropriate method of projection might be. to fit a straight line to these percentages of change. When this is done, the rate of Increase approaches 0% for the white female population in 1960 and for the male population in 1983. That is to say, then, that if present trends follow this .p~tterp,recorded lung cancer mortality must reach a peak about 1960 for the white female popu- lation and about 1983 among the white male population and then decline thereafter." Even though later, when analyzing the age-specific declines of rates of increase, they conclude that, "The peak would be delayed until about 90 years later and would be about 20 `times as high as that predicted by projection of all ages rate of change," nevertheless they add: "No matter what method of projection is employed, a peak with subsequent decline must follow' a declining rate of in- crease." (Emphasis theirs.) . . , The importance of this' concept `to present thinking lies in the fact `that many who believe there is it causal relationship betWeen ait pollution and lung cancer ha~e stated' `that, if air ~~ll1itlon is reduced and the ~ate~of tncre'ase of lung ~cancer declines, this'is' proof of the causal relationship between the, two. Gilliam PAGENO="0316" 316 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT and co-workers predict that the rate will go down even if we do not reduce air pollution, so that a simple decrease in rate is: no proof of causal relation- ships. Another possible interpretation of this data is that if air pollution and lung cancer have a causal relationship, whatever it is in the air that was re- sponsible for this has already begun to decrease. One could speculate that substitution of oil for coal, beginning about 1930 in significant amounts, has already begun to remove the lung carcinogens from the air. In 1958, 0. 0. S. B. Brooke of the Finsbury Health Center, London, examined carefully the statistics on lung cancer deaths for England and Wales for the 1932-1956 period (3). He interpreted the data as suggesting that cancer of the lung seen now may have been at least partly determined during the patient's teens. Further, an almost explosive increase in bronchocarcinogenic factors appears to have occurred early In the century, although some regression may have occurred since 1915. `In brief, his data support generally, if not In every detail, the data of Gilliam et al. quoted above. Beebe (4), in 1960, analyzed lung cancer deaths among World War I veterans, and concluded that lung cancer was slightly increased in those who had been subjected to mustard gas poisoning in 1918, although no such increase was observed In those who had pneumonia or wounds of the extremities. Barnes and Ratzenhofer (5) reviewed 26,546 autopsies at the University of 4)raz, Austria, finding 868 oases of lung cancer. Apparently lung cancer is far more prevalent than other malignancies as a cause `of death in persons having tuberculosis. Since the advent of modern chemotherapy for tuberculosis, more people survive tuberculosis `than previously, living on to develop lung cancer at a later date. `Confirming this, Herdan (6), of the University of Bristol, pointed out that certain apparently unrelated occupational groups showed a significantly `high or low ~tandardized mortality ratio `for respiratory tuberculosis in 1930, and these same groups now have a significantly `high or low ratio for lung cancer, with their tuberculosis mortality greatly reduced. It was' suggested `that sulfa drugs and antibiotics have reduced mortality due to epidemic and ~fl'ammatory lung disease, thus making way for the action of a disease of genetic origin. This would affect males more than females because males are more subject to reces- sive genes that transmit lethal conditions. In another statistical paper, Manos and Fisher `of the U.S. Public Ilealth Serv- ice found (7) high positive correlations of various indiee~ of air pollution that they developed with the following diseases: cancer `of the esophagus, stomach, trachea, bronchus, and lung; `arteriosclerotic heart disease, Including coronary disease; an'd chronic endocarditis not specified as rheumatic and other myo- oard~al degeneration. Although `there may be `some good rea'son for such correla- tions In some of these conditions, it is difficult to postulate `the rationale for others, such as' chronic endocarditi's. This suggests `the possibility of some third factor common to all `the diseases' and also to' an air pollution index. Kreyberg (8), of `the University of Oslo, found that the air in one gas works contained amounts of benzpyrene corresponding to some 5,000 cigarettes' daily for the 4O4iour week, `but only a moderate excess, if any, of lung cancer in t'he gas workers. It i's `po'ssib1~ that there may be no relationship at all between lung cancer~ `and benzpyrene. This `possibility Was also suggested by Hueper et aZ. `(9), who could find no correlation between reported lung cancer mortality and the amount of 3: 4-benspyrene or the carcinogenic potency (determined by injec- tion nuder the skin of mice) of particul'ates found in `the air of eight specially selected U.S. metropolitan areas. There has been a `tendency on the part of many air `pollution Investigators `to use benzpyrene content of the air as a measure of pollution, `and hence of the `hazard `of lung cancer. These data suggest that this cannot `be done. `Wynder (10), of the Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research, found that the lung cancer incidence In Venice, presumably with a very low "air pollution level, at least from auto exhausts (because of its canals), was no different from other Italian cities. This suggests tha't `the elimination of auto exhaust might not Influence lung cancer rateg. Perhaps `one very distressing `situation In regard to' lung cancer Is the lack of reliable statistical data on the Incidence of lung cancer In variou's'eities. Thus Manos (11), of the U.S Public Health Service, published a large volume' proW vl'ding mortality Indices for ~a'rietis causes of death, including lung cancer, In a series of `cities In, the Untied `States. `These, Indices presumably provide a measure of the ainoimt by ~chlch a given cancer rate in a glveu city~e~ceeds or PAGENO="0317" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 317 is less than the average for the country as a whole. Thu's an i.ndex of 0.80 indI- cates an incidence 80% `of the United States average, and an index of 1.20 indi- cates an Incidence `of 120% of the average. In studying Manes' data a series of cities with an index higher than normal, or representing a spread from less than normal to higher than normal, can be selected. Presumably, then, these can be related to some "index" of air pollution, be it by benzpyrene, ozo~e, hydrocarbons, or whatnot. HoWever, indices reported by Gilliam (12) for many of the same cities do iiot coincide; thus, cities with high indices for lung cancer on Mano's' list, may have normal or low indices on Gilliam's list. This then presents to the investigator the quandary as to which index to use in any air pollution correlation studies. In an, attempt to resolve this, I corresponded with both Manos and Gilliam. The result was further confusion, w'h'en Gilliam (13) indicated `that probably neither index was correct. This then throws consider- able doubt on *any conclusions drawn concerning the correlation between air pollution and lung cancer or any other disease. Finally, although this review is confined almost entirely to data fo'r human beings, one piece of animal data is worthy of mention. Mari~C'banez (14), a director of the Cancer Research Laboratories in Peru, compared the incidence of pulmonary tumors in Strain A mice kept at 14,900 ft. with those kept at se~ level. The incidence in the former was 61.4% and in the latter, 53.0%, which the author did not believe statistically ~igniflcant for the numbers of animals used (386). However, the animal's kept at high altitudes developed ~nore tumors greater than 4 mm. in size than those kept at sea level. It should be remem- bered that Strain A mice are `being widely used to test the "tuiuo'rigenicitY" or "carcinogenicity" of air pollutants. If such nonspecific effects as altitude can affect the incidence or size of such tumors, then it is not surprising that very high levels of "air pollutants," such as are used b'y experlmentallsts, might have a `similar nonspecific effect. CHRONIC LUNG DISEASE Goeke and Duffy (15), of the Seton Hall Medickl School, found a striking cortelation between smoking and chr'o~ic bronchitis. Just as in lung cancer, the association between chronic lung d~sease and smoking seems fair stronger than any association between chronic lung disease and air pollution. These observa~ tions have been confirmed by `Sc'ho'e'ttlin (16) In Los' Angeles. In a study of 3000 elderly males, be found a higher prevalence of chronic respiratory disease in certain selected occupations and in those who bad smoked more than 10 years. When matched for age and smoking, no significant correlations could be made between measures of weather, air pollution, and pollen, and o'bserva- tions o'f symptoms, physical signs, or pulmonary function in men with chronic respiratory disease and in controls. Again, this suggests that smoking is' a far more important factor than air pollution. Brinkman and Ooates (17) studied the influence on bronchitis of increasing age, dust exposure, and cigarette smoking in 1317 `men, aged 40-65. They found that smoking appeared to be the most aggravating factor. Another study which ha's received much `attention is that o'f Prindle et a~ (18). In this, the pulmOnary function of residents of two cities in Pennsyl- vania, Seward and New Florence, was studied. The cities, separated by a few miles, had a large power, plant between them. The prevailing wind was such that one town was polluted with the effluent o'f the power plant, while the other was not. It Was found that statistically significant differences In average height between the residents of the two cities were of a sufficient magnitude that aver- age airway resistance could be affected. Since airway resistance was one of the measures of pulmonary function that showed differences between the two towns, it is not certain whether these differences were due to the air pollution or to this height difference. At present, height differences `are not `receiving the emphasis that they should, although .the airway resistance differences are being suggested as resulting frOm the air pollution. Tn a later repo'rt of this data by Prindle et ol. (19) the authors state: "After adjustments are made for age and height in comparing the two com- munities, results for both sexes in New Florence in relation to both in Seward reveal a surprising similarity. This is evident for each pulmonary function measurement except for Average Airway Resistance and Airway Resistance X Volume. These were higher for Seward than for New Florence. The dif- 68-240-66-vol. 1-21 PAGENO="0318" 318 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ferences for each sex between the two communities for these two measurements could not be explained by differences in age or height. The differences may be due to difference in air pollution levels or to other variables which have not been examined thus far. * * * other variables in addition to age, sex, and height, which are assumed to have an effect on pulmonary function test results include weight, body surface area, smoking habits, occupation, and length of residence in the community. Each of these variables is being evaluated." Thus, it appears far too premature to single out air pollution as even the pos~ sible cause of the difference in these two pulmonary function measurements between the two towns. For instance, a review of smoking habits reveals 21% nonsmokers in New Florence males, but only 18% in Seward males. For fe~ males, the comparable figures were 75% and 63%. Most observers believe there is little doubt about the effect of smoking on pulmonary function, so it would seem that these differences in smoking habits would more likely be responsible for the* differences in pulmonary function than differencesi in air pollution. In the X-ray study, the proportion of pneurnoconiosis (dust disease of the lung, including silicosis) in Seward males was more than twice that for New Florence. It is speculated that this may result from the greater proportion of coal miners in Seward. Of the New Florence male group, 37.1% were "normal" on X-ray examination, whereas 36.4% of the Seward male X-ray examinations were so interpreted. However, the New Florence group shows a larger per- centage of males with emphysema. On the other hand, 6 of 10 X-ray examina- tions of females in Seward were reported "normal," whereas only 5 of 10 of those of females in New Florence were so reported. Dohan et aZ. (20) studied absences of 8 days or more from respiratory disease among female employees of the same company located in several cities. These absence rates were then correlated with various measures of air pollution. A correlation was found to exist between particulate sulfates in the air and this absence rate. However, for this study to have real meaning, respiratory ill- nesses causing absences of less than 8 days should also be studied, and absences from respiratory diseases among male employees of all durations should be studied. Additionally, looki~ig at Dohan's data, a positive correlation can also be found between the absence rates studied and atmospheric vanadium and nickel, and a reverse correlation can be found with zinc. Two conditions, possibly related but quite possibly distinct entities, are "Yokohama" asthma and "New Orleans" asthma. The first of these is found in U.S. servicemen stationed in the Tokyo-Yokohama region of Japan. It ap- pears that the only sure cure is return of the patient to the United States. Just what percentage of servicemen is involved is not certain, but it seems to be considerably less than 100%, perhaps as high as 10%. Phelps and Koike (21) found that It is more likely to occur in individuals who had a past history of bronchitis or who were heavy cigarette smokers. The second condition, "New Orleans" asthma, was studied by Lewis et al. (22) Their studies were con- fined to Negroes since Negroes constituted the major patient load at the hos- pital where their studies were done. They found that the condition seemed to be associated with incomplete combustion particles containing silica. They believed these particles to arise from abandoned city dumps which periodically burst into flame's. Certainly this could not be considered either an "industrial" pollutant or an automotive exhaust pollutant, yet there is a tendency for writers to relate the condition to ordinary general atmospheric pollutants. About the most that can be said at this time is that the exact causes of "Yokohama" or "New Orleans" asthma have not been c~mpletely worked out. Although perhaps ~elated to air pollution, this is a relatively circumscribed air pollution which does not affect the total population, but only those persons peculiarly susceptible to it. For instance, it is not known whether Japanese residents of Yokohama are affected in the same way as United States service troops stationed there, or whether white residents of N~w Orleans are affected similarly to the Negro. Zeidberg and Prindle (23) in summarizing their studies in Nashville state: "Pulmonary anthracosis appears to reflect an individual's exposure to environ- mental air polluted with coal dust. "No association was found between anthracosis and specific pulmonary or cardiac symptoms or pathology." Although no mention is made by the authors of sulfur dioxide, it must be presumed that, in a predominantly coal~burning town such as Nashville the atmospheric sulfur dioxide levels would increase at least directionally as the PAGENO="0319" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 319 environmental pollution with coal dust increased. Thus, this study presents presumptive data also that exposure to sulfur dioxide, at least at the levels found in air pollution, is not associated with specific pulmonary or cardiac symptoms or pathology. In previous studies in Nashville, Zeldberg et al. (24) found that the average asthma attack rates on the 30 days with the highest SO2 levels were significantly higher at the 5% level than the average attack rate on the 46 days with the lowest SO2 levels. If the daily data on asthmatic attacks were deferred one day to take account of possible delayed SO2 effects, the differences in rates were significant at the 1% level. However, even the authors acknowledged that asthma is not a very good disease to study in relation to single causes because "many factors have been listed as the cause of bronchial asthma," Including allergens, meteorologic and aerometric factors, emotional factors, and infections. Any clinician treating asthmatics knows that trades involving the breathing of nonspecific dusts must be avoided by their patients. These Nashville studies found inverse relationships between attack rates and wind velocities, thus suggesting that still, quiet days with high probability of inversion prevailed when SO2 was elevated. On such days, all pollutants including soiling, particu- lates, pollens, etc., as well as S02, would be increased. CONCLUSION As indicated in the opening paragraphs of this review, it is not the intent to imply that correlations between health effect~ and air pollution might not exist, but only to bring an awareness of frequently overlooked reports which suggest that the state of our knowledge at this moment is far from complete. Sugges- tions have been made which warrant further intensive investigation, but it is far to soon to draw any positive conclusions. It is to be hoped that those who are putting forth the "overwhelming, persuasive, and deceptive propaganda" will give pause to their efforts and take cognizance of these reports before they precipitate costly undertakings which may not be effective. REFERENCES 1. PnINCI, F. Medical perspective in atmospheric hygiene. Chairman's Ad- dress to Section on Preventive Medicine, AMA Annual Meeting, Chicago, Ill. June 25, 1962. 2. GILLIAM, A. R., MILMORE, B. K., and LLOYD, J. W. Trends of mortality attributed to cancer of the lung: The declining rate of increase. Cancer 14: 622, 1961. 3. Bnoouu, C. 0. S. B. The incidence of cancer of the lung, 1932-4956. Brit. J, Cancer 12:481, 1958. 4. BEEBE, G. W. Lung cancer in World War I veterans: Possible relation to mustard-gas injury and 1918 Influenza epidemic. J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 25:1231, 1960. 5. BARNES, B. 0., and RATZENHOFER, M. One factor in increase of bronchial carcinoma. J.A.M.A. 174:2229, 1960. 6. HERDAN, G. The increase in the mortality due to cancer of the lung in the light of the distribution of the disease among the different social classes and occupations. Brit. J. Cancer 12:492, 1958. 7. MANOS, N. B., and FISHER, G. F. An index of air pollution and its relation to health. J. Air Poll. Control Assn. 9:5, 1961. 8. KRJSYBERG, L. 3:4 Benzpyrene in industrial air pollution: Some reflexions. Brit. J. Cancer 13:618, 1959. 9. HuEPER, W. C., et al. Oarcinogeflic bioassays on air pollutants. Arch. Pathol. 74:89, 1962. 10. WYNDER, B. L. Lung cancer in Venice: An epidemiological study. Lancet 2:1347, 1961. 11. MA~os, N. B. Comparative Mortality Among MetropOlitcbfl Areas of the United States: 102 Causes of Death. Pub. Health Service Pub. No. 562, 1957. 12. GILLIAM, A. G. Mortality attributed to lung cancer in the large cities of the United States in 1948 and 1949. J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 15:1307, 1955. 13. GILLIAM, A. G. Personal communication dated July 8, 1960. 14. MARI-CHANER, P. Development of spontaneous pulmonary tumors at high altitude in Strain A mice. J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 28:55, 1962. PAGENO="0320" 320 ADEQUACT OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION AB'AT~MENT 15. Goo~n, T. M., and DTTh'FY, B. J. Epidemiology of chronic bronchitis in Jersey City. Ann. hit.. Med. 110:606, 1962. 16. SCIIOETTLIN, C. E~ Health effect of air pollution on elderly males. Am. Rev. Resp. his. 86:878, 1962. 17. BEIuKMAN, G. L., and COATES, E. 0., Ja. Prevalepce of bronchitis in in- dustrial~opulatlons~ Am. Rev. Resp. his. 86:47, 1962. 18. PRINDLE, R. A., et a'l. Comparisons of pulmonary function and other param- eters in two communities with widely different air pollution levels. Paper presented at Annual Meeting Am. Pub. Health Assoc., Detroit, Nov. 16, 1901. 19. PRINDLR, R. A., WRrGHT, G. W., MOCALDIN, B. 0., MARCIJ$, S. C., LLOYD, T, C., and B~n, W. E. Comparison of pulmonary function and other parameters Ia two communities with widely different air pollution levels. Am. J. Pub. Health 53:200, 1963. 20. D0HAN, F. C., et al. Väriaticsrn in air poll~tIo~i.and the incidence of respi- eatery" disease. J. Air Poll. Control Assoc. 12:418,1962. 21. PHnLPs, H. W., and K0IKE, 5. Tokyo-Yokohama asthma: Rapid develop- ment of respiratory distress presumably due to air pollution. Am. Rev. Rerp. -Di,s~. 86:55, 1962. 22. Luwis, R., et at. Air pollution and New Orleans asthma. Pub. Heaitlv Rep. 77:947, 1962. 23. ZEIBEIiG, L. D., and PRINDLE, B. A. The Nashville air pollution study. IX. Pulmonary anthracosis as an index of air pollution. Am. ,J. Pnb. Health, 53:185, 1963. 24. ZRIDBERG, L. D., PEt~mLn, R~ A., and LANDAU, E. Nashville air pollution study,. I. Sulfur dioxide a~d brOnchial asthma. Am. Rev. Resp. his. 8~:489, Dr. Eo~um~. To remedy to some extent the lack Of information about long-term effects of. air pollutants on our population, the API is now preparing to participate in a continuing epidemiological and clinical survey now being conducted in Chicago. The purpose of this study is to document the possible chronic and/or acute health effects of sulfur oxides and particulates by correlating clinical data from health agencies with changing le~ls of these pollutants. This pro- gram, which will require an acceptable air monitoring systeui, ~vil hopefully be carried out in oonjunction~ with the Air Quality Stand- ~ards Committee which ~erVe~ the Department of Air Pollution Control of the City of Chicago. Another related project involves the exposure of lahnratory animals to controlled atmospheres. This project, too, is designed to deter~ mine the possible effects of chronic long-term, low-dosage exposure to polluted atmospheres. The materials to be studied include sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, plus particulates, in various conthinations. This particular project is being carried out by the Industrial Hygiene Foundation, while another project quite simi~Ear is being sponsored by the API at the University of North Carolina. A number of research projects in which the petroleum industry is participating involve the study of lead in the environment. One project will conduct medical studies that may detect the sub- clinical effects on lead in man, or the ~ffëcts of lead, if any, on well- established clinical conditions-such as heart or kiduey diseases. For a severe test of lead effects, we are also sponsoring a project that will feed laboratory animals amounts of lead far above levels normally encountered, for a long period of time. This study will be conducted by Hazleton Laboratories. Another study at the Kettering Laboratory of the University of Cincinnati will be conducted to determine the lowest level of lead in the atmosphere that will produce a measurable change of lead in the blood. PAGENO="0321" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 321 Still another project, conducted for API and the Lead Industries Association by Wayne State University, is studying the lead burdens of laboratory animals exposed to heavy concentrations of automotive emissions with the lead burdens of other animals that have not been exposed to such concentrations. This study is a continuation of a major study begun by the Public Health Service. Although questions have been raised concerning the possible health hazards of lead, the API, on the basis of available medical data, does not believe that a hazard now exists or will exist in the immediate future. However, we are ready to carry forward the mandate of con- tinued surveillance that is implied in the report of the Environmental Pollution Panel, the proceedings of the symposium on lead of De- cember 1965, and the report on the tricity study itself. API would welcome the joint sponsorship by the Public Health Service of such a project. This concludes my statement and, gentlemen, I thank you for the opportunity of appearing here today. Mr. DADDARIO. I am somewhat confused, Doctor, about the meaning of your last paragraph. Are you conducting this research on the possible effects of lead under some kind of a compulsion which is not based on any real need? Dr. ECKARDT. No; the prediction has been made that if the auto- mobile population doubles by 1980 and if lead continues to be used in the gasoline during this period, then although there is not a hazard now, ultimately `a hazard might develop. We feel that we should continuously monitor the atmosphere for its lead concentration and the people, a representative sample of the population, in order to make sure that there has been no increase in either the lead in the atmos- phere or the lead in the people. I think our industry is perfectly pre- pared to take lead out of the gasoline or at least reduce its content if there is any evidence that this is occurring or this has been increasing. The thing that has interested u~ in this area is that in the city of Cincinnati which is one of the few cities that have good data because Dr. Kehoe has been doing work there since 1920, even though the automobile population tripled, the average concentration of lead in the atmosphere in that area has been going down, so we do not feel that necessarily there is a relationship between the automobile population ~ising lead and the lead in the atmosphere that people may be breath~ ing. Therefore, we feel that this type of survey should continue to make sure that nothing is going to happen in the future. Mr. DADDARIO. Wouldn't you emphasize the studies of the effect of lead in `animals and in humans on the premise that a `cumulative dosage over a long~perio'd of time could be harmful? Dr. ECI~ARDT. Well, this is certainly true. Let me say there is no question aibout the toxicity of lead. The question is the hazard and the hazard is related to the level of lead that people are exposed to~ In other words, if you take too much lead there is no question that it is toxic. Our position in the API is that people are not taking in too much lead and they are not being subjected to a hazard. Does this answer your question, sir? Mr. DADDARIO. Partially, but I am still ~oncerñed a)hout the overall problem. Because we have no way of measuring the potential harm. PAGENO="0322" 322 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOft POLLUTION ABATEMENT We don't seem to be conducting the necessary research to determine the long-range effect of lead pollution. We could find ourselves in a position where the health of the Nation was in fact periled only because we hadn't conducted the necessary research early enough to obtain an early warning. Dr. EOKARDT. I think the best measure of lead is the determination of lead in the blood and urine of humans. This is just what we in industry do to follow our lead workers and make sure they are not subjected to a health hazard and which we know from following these men that if their lead intake does not exceed a certain level, they do not accumulate it. There is a balance established between the intake and excretion `of lead and it is only when you raise this level :and change this balance that you may run into difficulties. Now, the levels of lead that the general population is exposed to in comparison with industrial workers is perhaps of the order of 20 times less than industrial workers. And, of course, having studied these industrial workers over many years we feel they have hot accumulated lead if they are not permitted to be exposed to a level in excess of a figure that has been set by the American Con~ ference of Governmental Industrial Hygienes. This is a stated work- mg level for workmen and I don~t know whether I have still an- swered your question. Mr. DADDARIO. You could argue, however, that that level that has been established is not in fact a proper level or that the research has not been adequate. Simply because people aren't keeling over and dropping deal does not mean that it may not be harmful. Dr. ECEARDT. These men have been examined since the 1920's with no measurable effect on their health that we can see. Mr. DADDA1iIO. We know that the human body is absorbing and accumulating certain amounts of certain substances such as `lead and insecticides. The point has not yet been reached where a proper determination `can be made to gage the effect on a human being over a long period of time of an accumulation of these types of substances. Dr. EOKARDT. You mean in combination? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. Dr. Eo~&i~r. This, I would agree but lead alonel think has been studied perhaps more than any metal we know. We know more about ]ead than perhaps `any other metal that we know anything about. Mr. DAtDARIO. Despite the fact that you don't believe any such cumulative effect now exists or will exist, do you agree that research should be conducted so that we do, in fact, come to a determination as to whether or not sudh an effect is possible? Dr. ECKARIYT. Absolutely. Mr. VIVIAN. I was curious about your statement indicating that the amount of lead in the air in Oincinnati has not increased or decreased over a period of 30 years. Is that because less lead `is used per gallon? Dr. EcxArixr. No, this is because coal burning in the Cincinnati area has decreased, and you have to remember that coal probably con- tributes about as much lead in the atmosphere as the lead from the automobiles. Mr. VIVIAN. Is this residual lead in the coal as opposed to added lead in the automobiles. PAGENO="0323" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 323 Dr. Ec~itnT. This is just natural lead. This is not added to coal. And it is Dr. Kehoe's belief, now I don't know whether he has absolute proof, that it has been the reduction in coal burning in the Oinciiinati area that has reduced the lead concentration in that city and even ~though the automobile population has tripled in that city, the air concentration is going down. Mr. GAMMELGARD. I would like to make one point, Mr. Chairman. We have a research problem to deterniiine for the industry the in- crernental cost of making today's quality gasoline without lead. At the Public Health Service sponsored symposium on lead in December last year, two companies o~tsi'de of the petrc~leum industry gave data. One indicated 1.1 cent per gallon, and the other gave 2.9' cents as the additional cost of making unleaded gasoline. We made the statement that we would develop our own study for the industry which ccr~ tainly seems reasonable and logical. (This study is underway.) I would like to point out that there are some 70 billion gallons of automotive gasoline sold in the United States in a year. A 1 cent per gallon increase is $700 million added animal cost to the motoring public. Two cents is $1,400 million, and the 3 cent figure which one of the companies gave would be over $2 billion. These are costs that we do not want to pass on to'the public unless there is good solid rea- son for doing it. And I also would like to make this statement. I drive a great deal, I drive on toll'ways, freeways, and in city traffic where the concentration of cars is heaviest. I am not personally the least bit concerned about the level of lead in the atmosphere today. If in our opinion the health of the people is truly involved-as Dr. Eckardt said there is no question what we would do, but we don't think we `should go ahead and make this move without a thoroughly good case for it because it would cost the public huge sums of money. Thank you, sir, for the time. Mr. DADDARIO. Gentlemen, because we have two further witnesses, I would like to send you further questionsfor the record. (Additional questions and answers for the record may be found in vol. II.) Mr. GAMMELGARD. Thank you. (The complete prepared statement of Dr. Robert E. Eckardt follows:) PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT B. EOKARDP, M.D. I am Dr. Robert B. Eckardt, medical adviser of the Committee for Air and Water Conservation of the American Petroleum Institute. I appreciate the op- portunity `to appear here today to outline for you some of the work which the petroleum indus'try has been sponsoring in the area of medical research con- cerning air pollution. By its very nature, air is a complex substance, and since we have until recently been attuned to the habit of taking for granted the air we breathe, we have de- voted little attention to investigating this resource and its effect upon the health of humans. Together with others in industry and in government, we are now attempting to' rectify this lack of knowledge, and a portion of the API's $2 million research budget is devoted to medical research. Some of the projects are being conducted in universities, government agencies, and in private research institutions. As with any medical research of value, various safeguards and controls have been established that explain our reluctance to accept quick answers and snap judgments. But certainly our increasing knowledge of health effect's will in- fluence the future course of technology for pollution abatement, and hopefully might influence the establishment of priorities. To indicate how this might be PAGENO="0324" 324 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT so, I would like to briefly describe some of our projects in this area, and discuss some medical research opportunities for the future. While the medical commu1iity-~and the API-is well aware of the physical damage which can be caused by high concentrations of air pollutants, such as have occurred in Donora, Pennslyvania, and in London, it is sorely lacking in data con- cerning the long-term, low-dosage effects of breathing the air In our environment. Our medical research has therefore been directed toward bOth of these areas. Episodes are rare, as you know. But medical experts agree that in the few episodes that have occurred around the world, sulfur oxides, in combination with other pollutants, have beyond question played a role. While awaiting a breakthrough on reduction of sulfur oxide emissions through either desulfuriza- tion of oil or removal of sulfur oxides from stack gases, API feels that attention must be directed toward the prevention of future "episodes." Sulfur dioxide, when inhaled as a single pollutant in ambient air, is largely filtered out of~ the respiratory tract in the mouth, nose and throat. But under episode conditions, with high levels of many pollutants in the air, significant amounts of sulfur o~~ddes can get down into the lungs. This happens. because sulfur oxides are absorbed onto particulate matter which has also undergone a buildup. When breathed deeply, extremely small particulates with adsorbed sulfur compounds are carried into the respiratory tract. In unusual concentra- tion, this combination can have a significant effect. API has made a study of past episodes and determined that if certain levels of these two pollutants, in combination, can be avodied, an episode probably would never occur. We would like to submit for the record a short paper on how this might be accomplished, written on behalf of the oil industry and read in June before the Air Pollution Control Association by Curtis G. Cortelyou of Mobil Oil Corporation. The engine~riug firm of Jackson and Moreland is now conducting an API~ sponsored study In New York City to determine the feasibility, cost, and effective- ness of the plan we propose. A similar study, also sponsored by API, and directed toward the prediction and prevention of episodes., and carried out by New York University, involves the evaluatiomi of air monitoring methods and meteorological forecasting in the New York metropolitan area. I mentioned medical research inadequacies about the effects of long-term, low- dosage effects of breathing the air in our environment. Very few such large- scale epidemiological studies have been undertaken because of their high cost and incorporation of so many variables, including sub~standard food, housing, and c1othii~g. Ibave attempted to summarize the history of such studies in a paper published In the Journal of Occupational Medicine in 1964 and I would, with your permission, like to enter a copy of this paper in the record. To remedy to some extent the lack of information ;about long-term effects of air pollutants on our population, the API is now preparing to participate in a continuing epidemiological and clinical survey now being conducted in Chicago. The purpose of this study is to document the possible chronic and/or acute health effects of sulfur oxides and particulates by correlating clinical data from health ageilcies with changing levels of these pollutants. This program, which will require an acceptable air monitoring system, will hopefully be carried out In conjunction with the Air Quality Standards Committee which serves the Department of Air Pollution Control of the City of Chicago. Another related project involves the exposure of laboratory animals to con- trolled atmospheres. This project, too, is designed to determine the possible effects of chronic long-term, low-dosage exposure to polluted atmospheres. The materials to be studied Include sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, and particu- lates, in various combinations. This particular project is being carried out by the Industrial Hygiene Foundation, while another project quite similar to this is being sponsored by the API at the University of North Carolina. A number of research projects In which the petroleum industry Is participating involve the study of lead in the environment. One project will conduct medical studies that may detect the sub-clinical effects of lead in man, or the effects of lead, if any, on well-established clinical con- ditions-such as respiratory diseases. For a severe test of lead effects, we are also sponsoring a project that will feed laboratory animals amounts of lead far above levels normally encountered, for a long period of time. This study is budgeted at $250,000 and will be conducted by Ilazleton Laboratories. PAGENO="0325" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 325 Another study is being carried on in cooperation with the Public Health Serv- ice, du Pont, Ethyl Corporation, and the Lead Industries Association, at the Kettering Laboratory of the University of Cincinnati. It is attempting to deter- mine the lowest level of lead in the atmosphere that will produce a measurable change of lead in the blood. Still another project, conducted for API and the Lead Industries Association by Wayne State University, is studying the lead burdens of laboratory animals exposed to heavy concentrations of automotive emissions with the lead burdens of other animals that have not been exposed to such concentrations. This study is a continuation of a major study begun by the Public Health Service~ Regarding future medical research on pollutants of particular interest to the oil industry, API proposes the following conclusions for the consideration of this Oommittee and the Congress. Although questions have been raised concerning the possible health hazards of lead, the API, on the basis of available medical data, does not believe that a hazard now exists or will exist in the immediate future. However, we are ready to carry forward the mandate of continued surveillance that Is implied in the report of the Environmental Pollution Panel, the proceedings of the Symposium on Lead of December 19e5, and the report on the Tn-City study itself. API would welcome the sponsorship by the Public Health Service of a project that would provide early detection if any tendency toward lead accumulation should occur' in the population. We would be indeed pleased to cooperate with the Public Health Service in such a study. This concludes my statement. Gentlemen, may I thank you again for the opportunity to appear here today. Mr. DADDARIO. Our next witness is Dr. Arthur M. Bueche, vice presi- dent of the research and development center, General Electric. STATEMENT OP DR. ARTHUR J~[. BUECHE, VICE PRESIDENT, RE- SEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER, G~N~RAL ELECTRIC CO. Dr. BUECHE. Mr. Chairman, with `your permission, I would like to have Mr. R. Ned Landon come and sit beside me. Mr. Chairman, the task which your committee has set for itself ranks in importance with the most pressing challenges of modern society. I believe I speak for industrial research people generally in saluting you-and thanking you-for your outstanding efforts on behalf of 1mprovin~ the quality of life in our Nation. As I will discuss later, it seems to me that the job of cleaning `air and purifying water will be completed most rapidly if attac1~ed on a competitive basis, seeking the most economic solutions and offering a profit incentive to those who learn how to do the job best. A~t the same time, it would be folly to suggest that private enter- prise alone can solve this massive national problem. There is an urgent need for cooperative action by governrnent-~at local, State, and National levels-to establish the permissible limits of pollutants and set the necessary goals and schedules for attaining a healthy- and aesthetically satisfying-environment. Unfortunately, no one is now in a position to establish permissible pollution limitations, or long-range goals and `schedules, because the problem is not sufficiently understood. Congress cannot effectively outlaw cancer, because no one yet knows what causes it. In somewhat the same way, you have this prob- lem with pollution. We know a good deal, but not enough, about what pollutants are in the air, water, and ground. We know a good deal, but not enough, about how they got there. We know very little, and nowhere near enough, about the actual effects of these so- PAGENO="0326" 326 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT called pollutants on either inanimate materials or living plants and bodies. Research-lots of research-is urgently needed. In what areas of science? Who is going to do it? Who is going to pay for it? I should like to explore these questions briefly, and I am taking the liberty of condensing the text of my ätatemenit which was submitted to you yesterday. Let me interject that I speak from a background of industrial sci- ence and the management of industrial research and development. I certainly `claim no great expertise on the social, economic, and polit- ical aspects of the problem you are investigating. For `that matter, it is apparent that the technical aspects of the problem are so broad that no single person can begin to be knowledgeable in all of them. I shall be pleased to try to answer any questions which you may have with the help of Mr. Landon, but I trust you will consider an honest "I don't know" to be the best answer when there are major technical uncertainties or where I have insufficient firsthand knowledge. So, based on research-particularly industrial research-with which I am familiar, I should like to list, some of the areas where I think there are good potential opportunities for finding new knowledge that should be helpful. DECIDING WHAT THE PROBLEM IS The continuing interaction of biology, medicine, and other life sciences with chemistry, physics, mathematics, and other physical sci- ences should help us to define better the true problems of environ- mental pollution before we spend too much time and energy on the wrong solutions. For example, I think the time is ripe for some "closed loop" experi- ments on a large scale. Some of my associates have suggested studies in which constant monitoring of pollutants and suspected pollutants is done over a large populated area. Information from such monitor- ing would be fed into a large computerized information system. Simultaneously, the computer would be given all possible information about the times and reasons for hospital admissions, reports from medical specialists about the number and severity of cases involving a specific list of diseases and disorders, statistics on absenteeism in school and industry, industrial productivity figures, death and accident rates. We all know the difficulties of establishing cause-and-effect relationships, but certainly if patterns and correlations could be estab- lished from such studies, we would have information vital for deter- mining the direction of future research. NEW MONITORING AND MEASURING TECHNIQUES Although great progress has been made in building machines that will "sniff" the air and "taste" the water, there is still much to be done. For example, we don't know enough about the extremely tiny par- ticles that contaminate the air around us. I refer to particles in the general range of a few millionths of an inch in diameter, or less. The surprising fact is that although the particles in air larger than a tenth PAGENO="0327" ADEQUACY OF\ TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 327 of a micron, that's one 250,000th of an inch, constitute some 95 percent of the total weight of all the particles, those smaller than a 10th of a micron constitute some 95 percent of the total number of all particles. More important, the total surface area of these small particles at least equals the surface area of the larger particles. It is on the surface of such particulate matter that waste gases are absorbed, and the fact is that we know little or nothing about how, what kind, or how much gas is absorbed by these tiny particles. Remember, too, that the smaller the particles the more likely they are to get into our nostrils and lungs, and then discharge their contaminants into our bloodstreams. On the basis of their recent work, some of my associates suspect that these mysterious tiny particles may have played an important role in tragic instances of air poisoning such as those in London and Donora, Pa~ Surely, we must learn more about them. SYSTEMS ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT The experience gained by the aerospace and electric utility indus- tries in recent years has produced a new competence in handling multi~. faceted problems and optimizing systems. The same kind of approach is now beginning to be applied to water-management problems. These certainly can and will be expanded to include a variety of other situa- tions now affecting our environment. IMPROVED ENERGY CONVERSION AND ENERGY STOEAGE SYSTEMS The U.S. Public Health Service has pointed out that of the "aerial garbage" dumped into the Nation's atmosphere each year, an estimated 85 million tons come from sources under the general heading of trans- portation. One possible solution to th~ problem of the iüternal- combustion engine is, of course, td keep on improving it, with greater emphasis on more complete combustion and cleaner exhausts. You are familiar with efforts in this direction, although it is generally acknowl- edged that even with the best of luck it may only be possible to keep the present situation from getting worse. In the long run, I believe we must look toward other ways to convert chemical-or other kinds of energy-into mechanical energy. You have specifically suggested that I discuss the fuel cell in this context. As you know, the fuel cell is a device that converts chemical energy directly into electrical energy, without moving parts a~id with inher- ently high efficiency, since it does not have the Carnot-cycle limitations which put a ceiling on the efficiency of ordinary heat engines. The fuel cell was invented in England, way back in 1839, but it did not have its first practical application until a year ago this month, in the Gemini V spaceflight. Of course, the success of fuel cells on four Gemini flights hardly means they are ready for automobiles or trucks. At present costs, fuel cell automobiles are economically out of the question. However, we should not overlook the pace of recent progress in fuel cell research. For over a hundred years there was only spasmodic interest in fuel cells, and virtually no scientific progress. But in the past decade all this has changed. Now, there are literally thousands of scientists and engineers around the world working on fuel cell tech- PAGENO="0328" ~328 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT nology. A very great deal has been learned, especially since Govern- ment-funded programs have accelerated the pace of research and devel- opment. If the pace of discovery continues, we must consider that- in the long run-the fuel cell may be a major source of portable power. Fuel cells have a number of inherent advantages. First they have high theoretical efficiency, which could mean conservation, of fuel re- sources. They are quiet. Most important, from the standpoint of pollution abatement, it is conceivable that fuel cells can be developed that will have no noxious exhaust at all. What are the problems with fuel cells? As noted, they now cost too much. Some of the most efficient fuel cells work only with hydro- gen, an expensive fuel. Then, there is the matter of weight and size- present fuel cells tend to take up more space than we would like. So, I'll anticipate your question, "When will we have fuel cell automobiles?" And I'll give the answer I promised I might give to some of your questions: "I don't know." I don't know when, and I'm not really sure if. All I can say is: On the basis of what we know now, fu~l cells might someday be very attractive for vehicles because they might not give off any appreciable noxious exhaust, and they might be developed to fit into compact portable packages, and they might be made inex- pensively enough for general use in vehicles. It's a mighty long list of "mights." But fuel cell research has great momentum. The need for alleviating pollution from vehicles is very great. The `accomplishments of man, when he puts his mind to it, are being dramatically demonstrated in today's world. Iii our own company, we feel that fuel cells are extremely promising for both long-range research and more immediate development work. We're spending a lot of our ow~n money `on it, and I don't hesitate to recommend fuel cell research and development to others----including a continuation of support by the Federal Government. Incidentally, we should not let the glamor and potential of fuel-. cell research cause us to overlook the tremendous opportunities for improving electrical storage batteries. An improvement in the ef- ficiency, weight, and cost of storage batteries could have substantial. impact on electric vehicular transportation long before fuel cells. WATER Th1~ATMENT There is no shortage of ideas in this area. Finding economic solu- tions is quite another matter. However, I am quite optimistic that intensified effort will produce significant results in the near future. Of utmost importance here, I believe, is that we view the various clean-water problems in proper perspective. Preuse cleaning and afteruse cleaning of water `are two substantially different subjects, and there also is a `considerable `differencebetween the problems of in- dustrial waste and community waste. Each of these is different technologically as well as economically. A wide variety of solutions will be required. AIR GLEANING Also, of course, there is a difference between air conditioning and air cleaning. We believe that new ideas in the electrostatic precipi- tation of particles, and for removing other contaminants from air, in PAGENO="0329" ADEQtTACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 329 eonibination with more conventional air conditioning, can add to the human comforts now achieved by cooling the inside of buildings; at best, however, such interior air cleaning is only an intermediate step toward the ultimate objective of keeping the outside air clean. POLLUTION FROM INSECT CONTROL METITOtS Without getting into that argument about "changing the balance of nature," I should like to point out that chemistry is such a versatile and adaptable science that an intensified effort in insect-control re- search should permit us, in effect, to have our cake and eat it, too. A recent example of a successful chemical effort to eliminate the bad while keeping the good was the solving of the detergent problem: using new chemistry to create the new soft detergents without in any way diminishing their unique cleaning powers. I have every con- fidence that, with sufficient research effort, it will be possible to im- prove substantially our health environment through improved "soft" insecticides and alternative methods of insect control. SEWAGE DISPOSAL One of the most intriguing ideas stemming from recent research in microbiology is the prospect of using biological processes to convert domestic sewage into two valuable products: water pure enough for drinking, and a high-protein feed for animals. Extensive funda- mental research must be accomplished before this prospect becomes practical reality. COMBUSTION RESEARCH Unburned fuels are part of our aerial garbage, along with unwanted combustion products. There are opportunities in the areas of altering and improving the fuels used, not only in automobiles, but also in powerplants and countless other industrial and domestic coal- and oil- burning sources of combustion pollutants. New knowledge about basic combustion processes is giving us new 1~ope for simultaneously improving efficiently and reducing unwanted effluents. In our own company, of course, we are highly interested in central station electric power generating plants of `all types: hydro, fossil fuel, and nuclear. Although we do not manufacture the part `of the equip- ment in a coal-burning station which involves combustion products, as major contributors to the total station-through turbines and gen- erators and other equipment-we are naturally concerned about alle- viating the pollution potential of the total system. Thus, we have been actively engaged in combustion research for many years, and we are actively seeking ways to reduce unwanted effluents from the fossil-fuel plants which are the mainstay of today's electric power system in this country. These problems are extremely difficult and complex; much progress has been made over the years, and recently built stations are far superior to older powerpl'ants. Ad- ditional pt~ogress should be possible, but the economic aspects must not be und~restimated. It is only natural, when faced with the problems inherent in fossil fuels, to think about other energy sources. Hydroelectric power is PAGENO="0330" 330 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT wonderfully clean and efficient, although there are sometimes differ- ences of opinion about the environmental aspect~ of building dams, regardless of the cleanliness of the electric generating process in- volved. There still remain a significant number of opportunities to install more hydroelectric generation facilities in the United States-i- and in a manner supporting the objectives of conservationists. But the matter of greatest interest to those worried about pollution is the news about nuclear power. First of all, economic nuclear power has come of age much quicker than earlier predictions. Nuclear sta.- tions are being installed at a rate far ahead of even the most optimistic predictions of a few years ago. It is difficult to overstate the scope and importance of the revolution in power generation we are ex- periencing right now. The nuclear news is especially interesting for those concerned with pollution because the cleanliness of nuclear powerplants also has ex- ceeded expectations. There are, of course, no combustion products at all. And the amount of radioactire material emanating from these plants is so small that it is even less than the very tiny amounts. of radioactive waste emitted by conventional coal-burning powerplants as the result of radio nuclides occurring naturally in coal. Well, with a few digressions, I have mentioned nine specific areas of technology where I believe there are opportunities for research that may help in the job of pollution abatement. Certainly, there are many additional opportunities. for research to help improve our envôrinment. Those I have mentioned seem par- ticularly important to me because I am aware of research progress in all of them. Success in many of them-if not all of them-seems in- evitable. But I am not at all satisfied that. enough research is being done in any of these areas. Which brings us to those two difficult questions: Who is going to do it? And who is going to pay for it? I should like to make some comments on these questions, but I cer- tainly don't want to suggest that I have all the answers. It may be helpful to divide, the kinds of research opportunities I have been discussing into a smaller number of classifications. We need research aimed at giving us better ways to find out what pol- lutants are in the air and water-and when-and how they ~ot there. We need research aimed at learning the effects of these pollutants- especially on people. We need research aimed at keeping certain poi- lutants out of our environment in the first place. We need research aimed at removing pollutants from our environment. Research in these various classifications of "monitoring," "causes," "effects," "preventive regulation," "preventive technology," and "re- moval" can be further consolidated, for purposes of this discussion, into two categories: One, research that will produce information useful for establish- ing standards, determining necessary regulations, enacting appropri- ate laws, and suggesting methods; and Two, research that will produce information useful in developing hardware and system than can be manufactured and sold. In the first category is much of the needed exploration about the causes, effects, and preventive regulations of pollution. PAGENO="0331" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 331 In the second category is most of the research that should be done in the areas of improved sensing and monitoring techniques, preven- tion systems and devices, and methods of removing pollutants that can't he kept out of the air and water in the first place. Government, university, and industrial laboratories can all con- tribute in all of these areas. But it might seem logical to assign the bulk of the responsibility in the first category to the Government, since much of it concerns very large-scale public health matters, since it is going to be more effective for the Government to coordinate and con- duct many of the massive experiments involving large areas of large numbers of people, and since the initial predominant impact of this part of the work will be, bythe definition I have used, on the establish- ment of necessary laws, regulations, and recommendations. Obviously, university laboratories-with Governn~ient support-can make important contributions in much of this work. In spite of the Government's basic responsibility in this category of the work, the special skills of industrial research can be extremely helpful. Further, the early involvement of industry in all aspects of the pollution problem is essential to pave the way for prompt ac- tion once the goals have been set. And, of course, since private indus- try wants to contribute its knowledge and viewpoints abOut proposed regulations to combat pollution-especially in regard to the techno- logical and economic feasibility of such proposals-the early and con- tinued involvement of industrial research should be helpful to all concerned. Industry itself should assume the major responsibility for the re- search which will lead to hardware and systems needed to monitor pol- lutants, plus that related to the technology of prevention and removal. The market for sensing and monitoring equipment should grow sub- stantially in the near future, and I believe industry will be missing an opportunity if it does not substantially increase its research effort here at once. I know one company that is doing so. In the area of technology for prevention and removal, industry probably will not be. motivated to a truly large-scale effort until the "monitoring," "causes," and "effects" research makes it possible to identify the guilty pollutants and quantify the objectives in remov- ing them. Thus, Government will have to carry proportionately more of the research burden in the early stage of this fight than in the latter stages. Once the necessary rules, objectives, and timetables are es- tablished, industry will know better how to channel its efforts. But even as this is being done, and even as the problems are being defined, we should continually remind ourselves that the most desir~ble even- tual solutions will come most rapidly if attacked on a competitive basis. The most economic solutions will be diligently sought by pri- vate enterprise, and a profit incentive for those who learn how to do the job best will produce the desired results far quicker than any other approach. As to who will pay for this research, the same sort of pattern seems appropriate. Industry has opportunities it should explore with its own funds in helping develop the kind of monitoring techniques that obviously are needed now. Similarly, industry should be willing to PAGENO="0332" 332 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT invest more right now in the areas of prevention and removal tech- nology where there is no doubt of the eventual need. But the big surge in industrial research expenditures probably can't be expected until the needed "ground rules" are better established. Thus, we would look forward to a pattern of increased research ex- penditure by both Government and industry, with the early predomi- nant role of Government tapering off and industry's contribution rising rapidly as the objectives become clearly defined. I assure you that the company I represent will study the findnigs of this committee with great care, and we will work vigorously on behalf of thaking the best contributions we can toward improving the quality of life by protecting and improving the environment in which we work and live. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Miller. Chairman MILLER. I have no questions. It was an excellent state- inent. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Mosher? Mr. MOSHER. It is One of the most interesting statements we have had, and I have no question~ at the moment. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. I would like to ask some questions but I know we have another witness coming before us but I hope Dr. Bueche will stay for a few moments to answer questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Conable? Mr. CONABLE. No question, Mr. Chairman. It is a very fine state- merit. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Bueche, on page 11 where you refer to the radio- active materials emanating from the nuclear plants, could you give us a reference as to who was involved in this work? Dr. BUECHE. Yes. It is the `work of Merril ~isenbud. and Henry G. Petrow referred to in Science, April ~T, 1964. These two gentlemen were employed by the Institute of Industrial Medicine at the New York University Medical `Center at that time. Mr. DADDARIO. On page 15 o'f the Report of the Research Manage- ment Advisory Panel, `there is a reference to industrial research.,. Question Bi reads; To what extent can research on pollution abate-. ment sponsored by the private sector of the economy be stimulated by probable markets established by Federal', standards? Does the en- forcement legislation necessarily depend ~n previously available tech-. nology? You have given us some guidelines. How do feé~l about how' these questions fit in with your concept of the problem? Dr. BUSOHE. First, let me say that I have found this report to be very interesting and very provocative. It. has an awful lot of good sense in it. I have considered this question,' all the questions as a matter of fact, in some detail and tried to be responsive to them in what I just read. I think that one of the great stimulants to industrial research or "research sponsored by the private sector of the economy" as it says here, will be the winning of knowledge and the establishment of goals and standards by the Federal Government. I shouldn't restrict this to the Federal Government I mean Federal, State, .and local govern- ments. Pointing up the problem clearly will give the industrial people' an assurance that there will be a market. This will bring the corn- PAGENO="0333" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 333~ petitive aspect forward and I think that the private sector of the econ-' omy will do its job once it sees a potential market. Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Chairman, if we have time, I wonder if Mr.. Bueche could say a bit more about item 8 on page 9 of his statement which concerns the prospects for radically improved conversion of domestic sewage to useful products through research in microbiology. Dr. BUECHE. In this area, I am slightly out of my field, but let me~ say that we do have a number of biologists and chemists working in the General Electric Co. on this, and they have surveyed for me the~ various possibilities of treating sewage and have actually started ex- periments on this. Mr. CONABLPJ. Do you have somepilot plants? Dr. BU~CHE. I wouldn't dignity them by the description "~ilot plants," but they have done small-scale experiments. Of course, (xefl- eral Electric is not unique in this. I am aware of a number of others who are also pursuing these lines. Mr. CONABLE. Do you feel there is a possibility of a breakthrough which would be economically feasible? Dr. BUECHE. I believe it is possible, yes. Chairman MILLER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. CONABLE. Yes. Chairman MILLER. Isn't much of this being done indirectlyin parts~ of the United States today where reconditioned water is being used? Dr. BURCHE. I believe it is, sir. Chairman MILu~ai. When I told a very distinguished scientist about the plans of the Army for pumping polluted water out to sea in Cali- fornia, he commented that this seemed to be a backward approach. He said that it is time to teach the American people that they have got to~ use and reuse water. I thir~k this is true even though it may seem dis- tasteful to think about. But it is being done in one of your own planta rind I have sampled some of this reconstituted water. Dr. BUECHE. Sohave I. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Bueche, you obviously feel that we do have avail- able to us means to solve many: of these problems. You have touehed~ on a point which many other witnesses have also mentioned concerning the availability of computers which can be used in these systems auct models which you have talked about and which will give us a great impetus. We ought to take advantage of it. We must begin to combine the efforts of our society. Is there' any~ question in your mind that a great deal needs to be done, even though. there is available to us much to do the job with? Dr. BUECHE. Yes; I think that is correct. Mr. DADDARIO. From the standpoint of the research that does need:' to be done, do you believe that our present level of effort is inadequate? Dr. BuEcm~. Yes, sir. That is correct. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Bueche, we recognize how busy yon are but we would like to be able to send you some, questions for later reply. (Ad- ditional questions and answers for the record may be found in vol. II.) (The biographical statement of Dr. Arthur M. Bueche fOllows:) BIoGRAPHIcAL STATEMENT Or 0R. ARTHUR M. BUECHE Dr. Arhur M. Bueche is vice president in charge of the General Eleci~rfc Re- search and Development Center. He directs the research and~ dbvelipment ac- tivthies of a total staff of more than 1800 men and women, includftig some 700 08-240--66---vol. 1-22 PAGENO="0334" 334 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT scientists and engineers. Dr. Bueche was elected to his present assignment in 1965, when the General Electric Research Laboratory and the company's Advanced Technology Laboratories were combined into a single organization. Born in Flushing, Michigan, in 1920, Dr. Bueche received his' Bachelor of Science degree in chemistry from the University of Michigan in 1943, attended Ohio State University, and was awarded. his Ph. D. in physical chemistry from Cornell University in 1947. ~After serving as a research associate at Cornell for three7ears, he joined the staff of the General Electric Research Laboratory in 1950. He was appointed manager of Polymer and Interface Studies in 1953 and manager of Chemistry Research in 1961. As a working scientist, Dr. Bueche became widely known for his work on the physics and chemistry of polymers and the effects of high-energy radiation on plastic materials. As manager of Chemistry Research, he contributed to the success of many scientific projects ranging from improved Man-Made diamonds to selective membranes that behave much like human lung tissue, and from important new kinds of fuel cells to a completely new basic chemical technique called "oxidative coupling". Author of several dozen technical papers, principally in the area of polymer research, Dr. Bueche also has been awarded 11 patents in this field. He waS elected a fellow of the American Physical Society in 1963 and is a member and past chairman of the executive committee of the Division of High Polymer Physics. He is a member of the board of directors of the American Chemical Society and has held numerous other ACS posts, including chairmanship of the Kendall Award Symposium (1957), vice-chaIrmanship of the Division of Polymer Chemistry (1962), and chairmanship of that division (1963). Dr. Bueche Is a council member of the Gordon Research Conferences, was recently named chairman-elect of the Board of Trustees, and is past chairman of the Elastomer Conference. He recently was elected by the Cornell University Board of Trustees to a one-year term as a member of the Council for the College of Engineering. He also is a member of the National Academy of Sciences-Na- tional Research Council Committee on Macromolecular Chemistry, a member of the Metals Properties Council of the Engineering Foundation, a member-at- large (Chemistry and Chemical Technology) of the National Research Council, and a member of the Research and Development Planning Council of the Ameti~ can Management Association. * Dr. Bueche's other professional and honorary society affiliation include the National Society of Professional Engineers, Americ'ar( Association for th~ Advancement of Science, Alpha Chi Sigma, Gamma Alpha, Phi Kappa Phi, Phi Lambda Upsilon, and Sigma Xl. He Is a member of St. 3o'hn the Evangelist Church, the Mohawk Golf Club, and the Mohawk Club in Schenectady, New York. He also is a member of the Susquehanna Valley Country Club, Sunbury, Pennsyl- vania, Among his hobbles are skiing, golf, and photography. Dr. Bueche was married December 27, 1945, to Margaret L. Bassier, formerly of Sunbury, Pennsylvania. Dr. and Mrs. Bueche and their four children reside at 1065 Avon Road, Schenectady, New York. Mr. DADDARTO. Our next witness is Dr. Charles A. Bishop, director of chemteal processing and engineering developmeilt, United States Steel Corp., and he will be speaking in behalf of the American Iron & Steel Institute. Dr. Bishop, you may proceed with your statement. STATEMENT OP DR. CBARLES A. BISROP, DIRECTOR, CIIEMIOAL ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT~ APPLIED RESL(RCK, t~NITE]) STATES STEEL CORP. Dr. BIsHoP. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, members of the House Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Development, I am Charles A. Bishop, director of chemi- cal engineering development, applied research, United States Steel Corp.; chairman of United States Steel's Air and Stream Pollution Committee; and chairman of the American Iron & Steel Institute's PAGENO="0335" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 335 Committee on Air and Water Pollution Abatement. I am past chair- man of the Steel Industry Action Committee of the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitary Commission. While I appear before you today as a representative of United States Steel Corp., I have been authorized by various other member corn-, panies of the American Iron & Steel Institute to make the present statement in their behalf as well. These combined member companies represent approximately 97 percent of the 1965 domestic steel pro- duction. I am submitting a list of these companies (see p. 342). The July 1, 1966, publication of this subcommittee was reviewed in preparing this discussion on the adequacy of technology for pollution, ~ibatement, with special reference. to the steel industry. The subcom- mittee is to be congratulated on the breadth of understanding of the pollution abatement field; Your report, which succinctly expressed many of the views held by the steel industry on the need for new technology, states that: Pollution abatement, and' indeed waste disposal, costs are a net loss to the gross national product. Greater economy and cost-beneñt improvement will often be desirable, even after methods are found which make initial treatment efforts acceptable or economically feasible. Pollution abatement research and development can also reveal cheaper methods of waste disposal. Industrial and consumer product re~yc1es, which are developed to lessen pollu- tion, will be important ~teps in conserving natural resources. Pollution abatement research and development require an interdisciplinary approach. Industrial research and development laboratories have already made signifi- cant contributions in remedying internal pollution problems. We also concur that there are areas where additional technology will be required. Your report mentions the gross treatment of `mine drain- age, control of nitrogen oxide emissions, and sulfnr dioxide removal from stack gases. Research and development efforts have been carried out by individ- ual companies, by groups of companies who find they have a common goal in an area of control, and by sponsorship of the American Iron and Steel Institute. While I will stress the research sponsored by the AIST, due credit must be given to the individual steel companies which have been active in the ~evelopment and evaluation of new and improved processes for pollution control for many years. Mr. DADDARIO. Is there any effort being made to combine the work in this field rather than to have it dispersed to individual companies? Dr. BISHOP. Yes; we have always had very good liaison in the steel industry on our pollution abatement matters, not only in meetings but additionally there is a good deal of visiting back and forth between various steel people. We see each other, I would `say on the average of at least once a month throughout the year, and I can assure you that by working together this way we have managed to save ourselves a good deal of time. Mr. DADDARIO. The reason I ask the question is both because of your statement and because, as I understand it, there is a difference of opin- ion among steel producers on how to handle pollution. The Fontana plant in California and other independent plants seem to be going down different road's. Is this because they are satisfied that they have the solution, or do they feel they accomplish more this way? PAGENO="0336" 336 ADEQUACY OP TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Dr. BISHOP. Companies are familiar with what other people are doing in the field and the different results come about because of dif- ferent circumstances. The plant was built in Fontana during the war by the Federal Gov- ernment. This is an area where there is very little water so they went to extreme measures to conserve water. Most steel plants previously to that had been built in areas that had lots of water. This is nor- mally one of the criteria laid down for building a big steel mill, so the Fontana plant led to a different philosophy. Senator Muskie one time asked, for example, why Fontana were using a dry precipitator for their basic steelmaking plant while we in the Chicago area were going to use wet cleaners. The answer of course again was that we have lots of water in Gary and Chicago, and can use wet cleaners. In California, with limited water they favor a. dry unit. Both will perform with equal effectiveness and I think that is the important point. When we clean an open hearth for example, the steel industry uses precipitators, wet scrubbers, and one has a bag house. What we try to do is qualify different pieces of control equipment and they compete for service in a particular instance. Mr. DADDARIO. Aren't these production techniques rather than means to lessen pollution! Dr. BISHOP. The three I mentioned are cleaning devices that could be used on a given open hearth. Mr. DADDARIO. Do you believe they are equally effective in the cli- mate under which they are used? Dr. BISHOP. In one instance you may have a land problem and SO, this excludes a particular type of unit, or you may have high power' costs or some other major factor. The task is choosing the one that is: economically superior to do a given job. Mr. DADDARIO. I am interested in your remark that because we have had a previous suggestion that one possibility would be to establish an industrywide standard. You now point out that this would be a very' difficult thing to do because you.are operating under conditions that are so different that you must have flexibility as well as objectivity in the standards which are applied. Dr. BISHOP. That is right, and I feel we have actually made faster' progress. As the previous speaker said competition is the. spice of life. If you have two or three different methods being developed as possible solutions to a problem you undoubtedly have a much better chance of' coming up with an optimum solution. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the statement made by' the previous speaker, which I concur with, is that if there are no indus- trywide standards, each industry will determine its own. industry standards might keep steel mills on the Great Lakes in my own area' from paying no attention to the creation of pollution, whereas they' may be forced to pay attention to pollution in some other areas. Dr. BISHOP. You are talking about national standards? Mr. VIVIAN. National standards for each industry or subdivision. Dr. BISHOP. Well, it is very difficult, as I say, with the various equip-. ment that has been put in over a period of many years to really come: up- PAGENO="0337" ADEQUACY OF TECIThTOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 337 Mr. VIVIAN. Our point is that equipment put in over many years has not been very adequate and therefore national standards will prob- ably be necessary. I would hope that your industry will contribute to make wise and objective standards. Dr. Bisuop. I have worked, as I point out later in the paper, on the technical committee to the conferees on Lake Michigan in setting up standards there, and I think our industry people have worked along with others in the water quality and air quality criteria. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Bueche, I think it would be helpful since you are here if you could also answer Mr. Vivian's question. Dr. BUECHE. I think I heard the question, but if Mr. Vivian would care to address the part of the question that he thinks might be appli- cable, it would be helpful. Mr. VIVIAN. The question is how can we best use the capabilities of private and industrial research to construct pilot projects and to create the equipment that will eliminate pollution? It seems to me the best way is to set standards which everyone can work toward in creating the least expensive means of meetIng such standards. The question is not to establish standards for New York State, Schenectady, Lake Erie, or Michigan, as you have mentioned, or the ferrous mills at Trenton, but to set a nationwide standard for the minimum amount of. effluents that are produced for two reasons: First, it will prevent industry from moving to where enforcement is the least, irrespective of the law; and, second, it will provide those ~who are designing equipment a more effective market so that they ~will produce the same quality for different situations. Mr. DADDARIO. This matter of standards is important because, as I understand Dr. Bueche, one of the important points raised is that once you establish the standards then you do begin to put in proper perspective, the competitive angle without which you cannot accom- plish your end objectives. Mr. VIVIAN. Yes; I agree with that wholeheartedly. Dr. Bi:n~crn~. I will go a little bit further, and I don't disagree with either statement here; that is, rather than call them standards at the early stages one should call them goals or "suggested standards." Then we can see if we can meet these things economically and if we can achieve these goals. Once we find that we can get there, perhaps they should be dignified by the word "standards." But it is quite right; if this is done on a purely local basis, the incentive for industry to con- tribute will be somewhat lessened. Am I responsive? Mr. `DADDARIO. That's fine. Dr. Bisnor. The major i~dust.rial contributions to the abatement program lie in the industry's ability and willingness to experiment ~with commerical-scale plant equipment. You can be assured that the first few installations of control equipment on a process bring many headaches and a few heartaches for the companies involved. How- ~ver, there is an excellent exchange of information on the operation of control equipment among members of the steel industry, and we learn from each other's mistakes and successes. The steel industry has been willing to publish the results of its ef- forts so that other industries can also benefit frQrn our endeavors in PAGENO="0338" 338 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT pollution abatement. Also, the steel industry continues to be alert to pollution abatement advances made in foreign countries. Let us now examine the projects sponsored by AISI. First, in air pollution abatement. As Max Howell of AISI reVorted to the National Conference on Air Pollution in 1958, the institute sponsored work on air-pollution abatement at the Industrial Hygiene Foundation at Mellon Institute for several years starting in 1950. At that time, it was difficult even to define the problem to be solved, inasmuch as simple, effective, and inexpensive instruments which could take a sample which was truly representative `of either `the ambient atmosphere or of stack gases had not been developed. Therefore, the Mellon Institute group set out to develop instruments and techniques whiôii would be useful in these fields. Among the instruments developed was an automatic smoke filter which samples the atmosphere for successive short time periods, meas~ ured in hours, and permits the tracing `of the variations in smoke in- tensity, largely due to weather, making possible comparisons between different districts, and between different seasons. A hydrogen sulfide sampler which continuously monitors the atmo'~- phere and an instrument for measuring hourly dust-fall rates with a high degree of precision were also developed. Coupled with the work on the instruments `was the development of the techniques required for their utilization. The production and sale of the instruments were undertaken `by `a commercial instrument maker and, to date, several thousand have been put into use. At the same time a development program on stack sampling which included the evaluation `of techniques for measuring particle size dis- tribution of the recovered dust was conducted. A training school to which `the various members o'f the AISI sent men to be trained in the techniques used in air-pollution studies was established. The courses ran fo'r 3 months and comprised formal and informal seminars, literature assignments, plant visits, and laborato'iy work. In addition to these studies, existing cleaning equipment was criti- cally examined with a view to'ward classifying it into groups `of opti- mum usefulness. No single device was found which conid do `all the things necessary to meet air cleanliness requirements. Therefore, it was decided that an attempt should be made `to develop a new `type of filter device which, hopefully, would fit hiito the metal- lurgi'cal stack gas `cleaning program somewhat better than did the conventional cleaning devices. To implement this idea, a research project which is still in operation `was set up at the Harvard School of Public Health in 1953, under `the late. Dr. Silverman. Studies of various filtering devi'ces were made `and `a new type of continuous self- forming filter made from slag wool was devised. Three pilot filters were built and teSted at `an eastern steel mill. Unfortunately, this cleaner turned `out not to have advantages `over commercially `available units, and the Harvard group began the. de- velopment of an instrument for automatically measuring amounts of dust in stack gases. Final field testing of the uni't was `conducted this year, `and the unit `appears to work `sa'tisfa~torily with `the degree of reliability necessary for commercial `applicati'on. PAGENO="0339" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 33~ Since the instrument tested was hand built by the Harvard per- sonnel, commercial production of the monitor is the next stage of the development. The policy of the American Iron & Steel Institute is to publish on such instrument development. Any interested company can then proceed with the manufacturing. It is hoped that the instru- ment will be referred to as an AISI monitor as the others have been. The present assignment for the Harvard group is to examine broadly the problem of nitrogen oxides in stack gases. Battelle Memorial Institute was asked in 1958 to study the mech- anism by which fumes are formed in a metallurgical operation and to evaluate possible methods for ameliorating fume formation. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Bishop, do I understand that the three pilot filters that were built and tested, but didn't have economic feasibility led to the development of this instrument to automatically measure amounts of stack dust? You still haven't been able to develop a pilot filter? Dr. BISHoP. That is right, we have given up the filter development. While it looked promising for a long while it finally was shown not to `be an acceptable unit. In working with the unit as a cleaner we be- came involved in `a great deal of sampling and so, as an offshoot of our work, we asked the Harvard group to continue their development work on an automatic monitoring unit, which they have done. Mr. DADDARIO. Are you still continuing research with the filter? Dr. BISHOP. No; the filter work has been dropped as being unwork- able. We published our results and dropped it at that point. By chemical and physical measurements and high-speed photog- raphy, success was attained in discovering the mechanism, of fume formation when using oxygen in a lance in refining steel. It appeared that the inclusion of a reducing chemical with the oxygen might pre-' vent fume formation. In the laboratory, additions of methane, hydro- gen, and steam to the oxygen showed considerable promise for suppressing fume formation. However, commercial trials of methane and steam demonstrated that the additives were not very effective and that their use could not be considered as an alternate to the installation of cleaning equipment. Battelle has now been asked to study the mechanism of formation of hydrogen sulfide from blast furnace slags. When blast furnace slags come in contact with water, they react to form hydrogen sulfide. This is true when cold slag piled in the open comes in contact with moist air or rain. Because hydrogen sulfide is detectable at very low concentrations, it may create a community problem. It is the object of this research to identify the exact reaction mechanisms in- volved, and then to explore possible ways of economically suppressing" the formation of the hydrogen sulfide. In the water pollution abatement, the American Iron & S'teel~ Institute has sponsored a research project on water pollution abate- ment at Mellon Institute since 1938 with Dr. R. D. Hoak as a~lminis- trative head. Emphasis in the program has always been ~h reoted toward the accumulation of scientific data that would increase knowl- edge about the causes of pollution and the measures that could be' taken to overcome their effects. A large amount of data on these~ problems has been accumulated over the past 28 years. Only a few PAGENO="0340" ~34O ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT * examples of specific accomplishments can be given here, but they will serve to illustrate the scope of the project. * Recovery of mill scale from flume water has always been a problem in the industry because the finer particles tend to escape capture. Investigation showed that poor recoveries were caused primarily by inadequate design of equipment. Research led to the development of more efficient settling basins. This improved design has been adopted by mill engineers. Extremely low concentrations of organic compounds can cause flavors in drinking water. It is necessary to identify these substances so that proper steps can be taken to eliminate them. The minute amounts present require that they be concentrated 1,000-fold to obtain enough material for analysis. Highly sophisticated analytical meth- ~ods are being used to characterize these compounds and to devise ways to overcome their effects. Accidental spills and pipeline breaks are unpredictable causes of ~pollution. It is obviously essential that such occurrences be cor- rected promptly. An electronic monitor has been developed that will signal supervisory personnel whenever there is a marked change in composition so that corrective action can be taken at once. The control of water pollution is generally a complex problem be- ~cause of the variety of substances that can be present. One solution is to conduct analytical surveys to identify the sources of the effects in the receiving waters in order to develop appropriate treatment. This is usually a matter of some difficulty because of the large areas involved. Nevertheless, it has been found that highly useful inf or- mation can be obtained by confining surveys to one limited area at a time and studying that area intensively. Full and free exchange of technical data is an important feature of water pollution research. This can lead to unexpected bonuses. It has been the experience of the AISI project that results from its re- search have often become equally applicable to other industries. Co- operation, however, is the key to constructive and responsible research. This can be achiev~ed through candid conferences and punctual pub- lication of scientific findings. In the early 1950's ORSANCO sponsored a project at the Kettering Laboratory in the Department of Preventive Medicine & Industrial Health, College of Medicine, University of Cincinnati, for the as- sembly and critical evaluation of information on the undesirable effects of chemical pollutants in water as they relate to man and domestic animals. To assist in the study, the American Iron & Steel Institute contributed to Kettering both money and an abstract service under the direction of Dr. Hoak at the Mellon Institute. The summary tab- ulations from the ORSANCO-Kettering project have been most helpful. ADDITIONAL RESEARCH NEEDS Th~following areas are those in which the steel industry visual- izes the need for additional technological advances over those that hopefully will result from research already underway. In air pollution abatement it is believed that the work to date on removal of sulfur dioxide from stack gas, though carried out in a competent manner, requires further escalation. In the same cate- PAGENO="0341" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 341 gory are studies on the formation of hydrogen sulfide from the action of moisture on blast furnace slags. We concur with this subcommittee that no technology is available to deal with nitrogen oxides, if in the future that proves necessary. Research on the control of emission from coke ovens is being acceler- ated by the steel industry. It appears that most of this experimenta- tion will have to be done on plant equipment. The first step is to confine the escaping gases and then to clean them.. The program consists of an engineering evaluation of industry and suppliers' ideas, installation of devices on commercial equipment, fol- lowed by evaluation of the good and bad features as well as the effec- tiveness of the devices. Further changes are then made as indicated. In water pollution abatement technical advances would be most welcome in the treatment of mine acid discharges and in the develop- ment of methods for slowing down or stopping the formation of the constituents found in mine water discharge. As you know, the control of ammonia and other nitrogen compounds is often discussed in dealing with excess nutrients going to receiving waters. The steel industry is faced with large volumes of plant dis- charges containing a few parts per million of ammonia. No economi- cally practical system for treating such wastes is known. A particularly thorny problem arises when chlorides are discussed. smce no practical method for removing them is known. I served on the Technical Committee to the Conferees of Lake Michi- gan to recommend water quality criteria. Research needs are listed. in the report of this committee. The first is to obtain a better under~ standing of the causes of eutrophication. While it appears to many that a limitation on the phosphate con- tent holds the best promise for reducing the rate of eutrophication, actual limits are in doubt. Although the Conference dealt mainly with protecting Lake Michigan waters, many streams suffer from eutrophi- cation. In a recent paper by McDonnell and Koutz, "Algal Respira. tion in a Eutrophic Environment," JWPCF, 38, 841 (1966), linear regression analysis was used to determine the primary factors affect- ing the dissolved oxygen resources in Spring Creek. `I~his stream in central Pennsylvania is characterized by excessive plant and algal growth. The waters of Spring Creek receive the completely treated effluent from the sewage plant serving Penn State University and the surrounding community. Several fish kills and the gradual deteriora- tion of reaches of the upper stream prompted an investigation of the ability of Spring Creek to assimilate organic pollutants imposed by the sewage plant effluent. It was demonstrated that the biological oxygen demand (BOD) remaining in the treatment plant effluent had little if any effect on the depletion of dissolved oxygen at the critical stream sag point. Excessive algae are evidently the culprits. The authors believe the solution lies in the removal of nitrogen and phosphorus from the effluent. For Spring Creek further investigation is required to answer the question of how much removal of nitrogen and phosphate is necessary. Is it possible that control of phosphate alone would solve the problem? I feel certain that many streams should be studied in a similar manner to Spring Creek in order that the correct control measures may be applied. PAGENO="0342" :342 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT The Lake Michigan Technical Committee report also stated that the area dealing with threshold odors needs intensive research. It is the belief of the steel industry, based on laboratory and waterworks data, that phenol has too often been blamed for threshold odor prob- lems caused by other constituents. Last July, as a result of my work with the Lake Michigan Technical Committee, I recommended a joint research program between personnel of HEW and the AISI research group under Dr. Hoak at Mellon Institute to investigate the forma- tion of chlorophenols from chlorine and phenols in the very low con- centrations that occur in sources of water supply. This joint research program has not been started because of administrative changes in forming the new Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. The final area covered by the technical committee is the need for epidemiological studies on bacterial pollution. The relation of bac- terial contamination to incidence of diseases among bathers never has been established scientifically. Research on a vast scale would be required to provide such a scientific basis. As a matter of fact, a British publication came along some years ago and said it was safe to swim in sewage plants. I trust that the foregoing has summarized the research being spon- sored by the American Iron & Steel Institute, the type of activities being undertaken by the individual steel companies and the research needs as they can presently be visualized. As water quality criteria are announced by the various States, additional areas for technological imorovement and advance will be evident. (`The list of companies on whose behalf the testimony is presented is as follows:) COMPANIES ON WHOSE BEHALP THE TESTIMONY Is PRESENTED * Alan Wood Steel Co. * Allegheny Ludlum Steel Corp. Armco Steel Corp. Atlantic Steel Co. Bethlehem Steel Corp. `OF&I Steel Corp. Columbia Tool Steel Co. Crucible Steel Co. of America Erie Forge & Steel Corp. A. Finkl & Sons Co. * Florida Steel Corp. Granite City Steel Co. The Hanna Mining Co. Harrisburg Steel Co. Inland Steel Co. Interlake Iron Corp. ~Jessop Steel Co. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. Kaiser Steel Corp. Keystone Steel & Wire Co. Laclede Steel Co. Latrobe Steel Co. *Lukens Steel Co. ~tcLouth Steel Corp. National Steel Corp. Northwestern Steel & Wire Co. Oglebay Norton Co. Fickands Mather & Co. Pittsburgh Steel Co. Republic Steel Corp. Sawhill Tubular Products, Inc. Sharon Steel Corp. Shenango, I~ic. Southern Electric Steel Co. United States Steel Corp. Valley Mould & Iron Corp. Washington Steel Corp. Wheeling Steel Corp. Wyckoff Steel Co., Division of Screw & Bolt Corp. of America The Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. Mr. DADDARIO. What is the total amount invested in research each year? Dr. BISHOP. I really don't know. Our AISI work varies depending on projects, at about $400,000 per year. The company research is very difficult to estimate. There is a gamble on trying out some new PAGENO="0343" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 343 ideas. We have precipitators that have lasted 4 months before they had to be taken out of service and destroyed, so I think it is a very difficult number to come up with. Mr. DADDARIO. Do you think you could come up with an estimated figure, considering all of the companies listed? Dr. Bisiior. We will certainly be glad to do that. Mr. DADDARIO. So we might be able to come to some judgment about overall effort. Dr. BISHOP. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian. Mr. VIVIAN. I would like to ask that those figures be broken down as to on-going research and the nonrecurring type. (The only estimate available as to the information requested is as follows:) [Extract from p. 3, the U.S. Steel Quarterly, Aug. 196&] An estimated $200 million out of some $5 billion that U.S. Steel has invested in new facilities during the past 15 years has been committed to the installation of devices for the abatement of air and water pollution-devices that in some cases tower nine and 10 stories high, in others occupy tracts the size of a city block, and in most cases involve operating and maintenance costs of no mean proportions. The new facilities encompassed in the corporation's current program, which calls for average annual expenditures in excess of $600 million during the three-year period 1966-68, will incorporate, as part of their basic design, the latest air and water quality-protection equipment devised by modern technology. Tihe outlays, past and prosp~ctive, for the apparatus of air and water quality- management are in pursuance of U.S. Steel's continuing objective in `this field: T~o strive to cu'rtai~ the `impairment of air a~d water that is inherent in the cor- poration's operations and that affects the wsefulness of `these resources by the pZa~nt-comin'u'n~ty neighbors of U.~S. Steei. Mr. Chairman, I have a number of questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Why don't we take about 5 minutes, Mr. Vivian. Mr. VIVIAN. How do you decide specifications for new steel mills? What specifications are provided by the Government for steel mills in the treatment of pollution? Dr. BISHOP. For new steel mills you normally have a regulatory `agency that you work under. In the case of water, it is the State agency. In the case `of air, it is either the State or local agency. They normally set up the criteria that are going `to be required for the opera- tion of the water and air pollution facility for the new mill. Mr. VIVIAN. Does this take into account enforcement? I find that standards and enforcement are `two separate w'ords. Do you find dif- ferences in enforcement throughout the country? Dr. BISHOP. We are all human beings so I think the answer is that there would `be some differences, but the water pollution group, for example, are at least beginning to get `together as a result of the 1965 Water Act, w'hich calls for the States to' set up water quality `criteria, I believe between now and next July. I think this is going to bring more uniform requirements1 Frankly, we find regulatory people are interested in their enforce- ment programs and they are interested in getting pollution cleanup done. We have large equipment. We can't move-you mentioned the pos- sibility earlier, from one area of the country to another. I think that PAGENO="0344" 344 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT most big industries just couldn't do it, so this is not a factor in our consideration. Mr. VIVIAN. How about rebuilding old mills? Many a steel mill `is quite old. There is a tremendous capital investment involved. I can remember several that I have been through that have been unchanged for 50 years. What do you do with these mills? Do you bring these up to date by applying new standards for replacement of the old mill? Dr. BISHOP. In most instances we have been able to replace old facil- ities with new facilities in a given area. In cases where like open hearths that even though they may be 30 years old, we intend to use them another 20 years and we put cleaning equipment on those. If the open hearths are very old, we may replace the whole shop with a new basic oxygen steelmaking shop, so each case must be figured on its merits. Mr. VIVIAN. Your comments about Spring `Creek were very perti- nent. To simply raise `the question is very useful in itself. Dr. BISH~P. Fine. Thank, you, I thought it was a most interesting piece of research, which broadens the 1925 work of Streeter. Life is, becoming more complicated now and the old work is still good, but new ideas have to be added to it. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Bueche a ques- tion regarding the storage battery situation. There are some now used in space vehicles. Can they be used in conventional automobiles? Dr. B1IECITE. I think electric power will certainly be used in the future for some vehicles, but not all. 9~he difficulties with the batter- ies we have today are matters of cost, size, weight, and cycle life.. They just don't last long enough for the day-to-day use that you would' like to put them to. So the answer to your direct question is no, w& won't. use the ones we are now using in space vehicles' for vehicular transportation in the near future. On the other hand, there are many opportunities for improving the performance of batteries using different systems~-for getting lower' cost, lighter weight, and longer cycle life. I am personally very ex- cited by this. Mr. VIVIAN. If we were to raise the gasoline tax in order to reduce' the amountof pollution, would this increase the use of batteries? Dr. BtJECHE. I think it would in commercial vehicle~-milk clehv- ery trucks and things o'f this sort. I doubt that it would have very' much effect on private transportation, but you are a better judge of' that than I am. Mr. VIVIAN. You mentioned new electrostatic air conditioners. Are there significant new changes being made to clean up the air coming into the home? Do you see a massive change in the utilization of these devices so that it' will affect the whole pollution pattern? Dr. B1IECHE. Perhaps I should say "no" on the scale that your state- ment implies. But we hope that there will be considerable market for these devices. PAGENO="0345" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 345 (A brief biographical statement of Dr. Charles A. Bishop follows:) BIoonL~PnIo~r~ S~APEMENT OF Dn. C1~AELES A. BIsHoP Charles A. Bishop: B.S. Chemical Engineering, University of Kansas (1t~36); Ph. D. Chemical Engineering, University of Pittsburgh (1942); Mellon Institute Fellow (1936-1941) ; Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering, University of Pittsburgh (1941-1946); Director, Chemical Engineering Development, United States Steel Corporation (1946-date). Mr. DADDAiu0. I want to thank all the witnesses today for their ex- cellent presentations. This committee will adjourn until 10 o'clock in the morning at this same place. (Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m:, the committee was adjourned to recon- vene at 10 a.m., Wednesday, August 10, 1966, at the same place.) PAGENO="0346" PAGENO="0347" THE ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1966 HousE oi~' REPRESENTATIVES, CoMMrniE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, SuEcoMMrn~m ON SCIENCE, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT, Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10:08 a.m., in room 2325, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C., Hon. George E. Brown, Jr., presiding. Mr. BROWN. The subcommittee will come to order. In the absence of Mr. Daddario, I have had thrust upon me the honor of opening the meeting here this morning. We will call the first witness, Dr. MacLeod, Deputy Director, Office of Science and Technology. Dr. MacLeod, we are happy to have you here this morning. You may proceed at your pleasure. STATEMENT OP DR. COLIN N. MacLEOD, DEPUTY NB)ECTOR~ O~TICE OP `ScIENcE AND TECHNOLOGY Dr. MAOLEOD. Thank you. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I'm very pleased to' be given the opportunity to testify before this committee this morning on some of the questions that relate to pollution of the environment. I have provided a statement to the committee and for that reason I shall confine my remarks to a `brief summary of some of its contents and a few additional obser\rations in amplification of some of the observations contained in the submission. This committee has had extended testimony by various people who are concerned with problems of pollution. It is now apparent that almost all segments of our society are concerned with the ill effects of pollution and that there is a growing national determination to restore damage that has already occurred to our natural environ- ment as well as to prevent further degradation. We shall never restore the primeval wilderness that our forefathers saw and we shouldn't expect to, but we can prevent further encroach- ment and restore much of the damage that has been done. However, we must all remember that this is going to be exceedingly costly. To understand the magnitude of the problem we should recall that the production of solid wastes per city dweller per year is about 1,600 pounds and this does not include the great variety of other wastes such as sewage, automotive effluents and industrial and agricultural 347 PAGENO="0348" 348 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT wastes. Any increase in the standard of living has as a concomitant, increase in waste production. One of the measures of the quality of. our civilization must be our concern about preserving and restoring the quality of our environ- ment, not only for our own benefit, but because we are the dominant biological species. We have a clear responsibility to damage nature no more than is necessary for our material and spiritual progress. I'm very pleased by the change of attitudes toward problems of pollution in the last few years. We have taken the first steps in the br.oad awareness of its undesirability. We have not faced up yet, sir, to the tremendous costs involved in abatement and restoration ~ior to how these costs are to be paid. Some of the costs arc for the general introduction of well-known principles and practices of sewage treatment so that we don't further damage our streams, our lakes, our estuaries and even the oceans themselves. Great progress can be made with what is now known. However, we need greatly improved methods of tertiary treatment for sewage and this will cost a great deal in terms of research, development, demonstration, and widescale use. We also need improved methods for the removal and prevention of industrial byproducts now dis- charged into streams and into the atmosphere. Likewise, we know, a great deal about how to reduce the noxious effluents from motor vehicles, but we must go much further in the design and development of alternative methods of vehicular propul.. sion if a long-term solution is to be found. One of our consultants, in disc~issing the new standards for autOmotive effluents in the State of California, particularly in the Los Angeles region, has pointed out that~-even with reduction in effluents that will come about as a result of new standards that have been introduced-with the increase in the number of motor vehicles that is projected we will be by the year 1980 about as badly off as we are now. We need to develop new pesticides that are much more degradable than many of those that are in use. We need to know a great deal more about the toxicity of chemical substances that we are exposed to in low dosage over long periods of time in the normal course of our lives before we can set reasonable standards to govern our exposure to them. We need to develop much more sensitive automatic devices to moni- tor pollutants of all kinds so that we can have current awareness of what is going on. Most of the problems of pollution are extremely complex and require a systems approach for their solution. It is necessary, therefore, to employ all the modern means of systems analysis, including auto- matic data processing, in order to have a' proper understanding of how a particular question should be tackled and how it should be solved. We must understand also how modern industrial man i~ changing the total environment of the earth, not only for himself, but for all living things whether they be plant or animal. We must remember the slowness of the genetic mechanisms to accommodate to th~ changes that we introduce into nature. PAGENO="0349" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 349 In my prepared statement, I have referred to some of the major ecological changes that are in process flOW because of human activities. A notable example is the projected increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide due to the consumption of fossil fuels that were deposited millions of years ago. Here we deal as well with the depletion of irreplaceable natural resources. At our present and projected rate of burning of fossil fuels-coal, oil, and natural gas-during the next 35 years, it seems possible that there will be a buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere sufficient to cause a modest but significant rise in atmospheric temperatures over the whole earth. This is the so-called greenhouse effect. This modest rise in temperature could cause very large changes in vegetation. It might cause melting of the polar ice caps, with the levels of the oceans rising and unprecedented effects on all living things. A great deal of research on this is necessary to understand what changes might occur and also how they might be prevented. It might also be suggested that we avoid the possibility of these changes in the future by the vigorous development of other sources of energy such as nuclear power, solar energy, and the gravitation energy of the tides. At the same time, over the long term, we would be preserving these precious hydrocarbon resources for what may be their highest use as industrial raw materials. It is apparent, I believe, that large scale imaginative B. & D. efforts are required and that the total system needs to be examined, ~not just segments of it. Lately, concern has also been expressed about the stability of the oxygen in our atmosphere. The oxygen in the atmos- phere is derived from the photosynthetic processes of green plants, on land and in the oceans. The latter source, which consists of the mi- nute green plants called phytoplankton, contributes a significant amount of the atmospheric oxygen that we breathe, variously estimated as equal to or as much as 10 times as much as that produced by the terrestrial plants. Concern has recently been expressed that the dumping of poisonous substances into the seas such as insecticides, herbicides, and industrial wastes may diminish plankton population and hence oxygen procluc~ tion. If this were to occur-and I should emphasize that we. don't know yet whether this is a real threat-there would occur a gradual decline of oxygen in the atmosphere with drastic effect on all living things. This would be over a time span which is long in terms of man's life but short in terms of geological time. The oxygen lifetime in the atmosphere is around 2,000 years. I must emphasize again that the reality of this threat is not known but we must understand its implications. This will require a good deal of investigation, including an understanding of the effects of toxic chemicals on the green plants of the sea, the phytoplankton, and the long-range accurate monitoring of the oxygen in the atmosphere. While increased expenditures are necessary to apply what we al- ready know to pollution abatement, it is also apparent that we need to develop a great deal of new knowledge. I have indicated some of the areas, only a few of them, where new knowledge is required. This 68-240-66-vol. i-23 PAGENO="0350" 350 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT will involve new expenditures for research and important emphasis on the training and education of the men and women who are needed to tackle the ever-increasing problem of pollution and its effects. In the last approximately page and a half of my prepared state- ment, I have summarized some of the activities of the Office of Science and Technology that are concerned with problems of pollution,. and I invite you to turn to page i4. Since its. establishment in 1962, the Office of Science and Technology has been concerned actively with pollution problems. The President's Science Advisory Committee re- port on "Use of Pesticides" was published in 1963, and since then our Office has assisted in the development and in the activities of the Fed- ,eral Committee on Pest Control. There are also related reports: that on "Cotton Insects" of 1965 and on "The Handling of Toxicological Information" in 196~. The Federal Council for Science and Tech- nology's Committee on Water Resources Research has devoted con- siderable' attention to water pollution. The recent report of the Presi- dent's ,Science Advisory Advisory Committee entitled "Effective Use of the Sea" includes attention to marine pollution problems. The re- cent report of the President's Science Advisory Committee,, "Restoring the Quality of our Environment," which `was published early last winter, is devoted broadly and extensively to the subject of pollution. It includesnumerous specific recommendations that pertain to control. An assessment of the responses of the various agencies to that report has just been completed and plans are actively afoot for further imple- mentation, including, where necessary, coordination of related ac- tivities in Federal agencies. Pollution problems, as I really need not remind you, are closely related to our national concern for the preservation of natural beauty. The Office of Science and Technology and Bureau of the Budget are now completing a study of how the Federal Government can best `help' to advance our understanding of natural plant and animal com- munities and thefr i~teractions'with man. The results of this study, we believe, will contribute information and recommendations which should be useful to support an advanced .program needed for pollu- tion control. There are a number of other activities of an on-going nature which our office is intimately concerned with, such as the Fed- eral Radiation Council. In the future, the Office of Science and Technology will continue to provide leadership and to conduct evaluation and coordinating actions among the Federal agencies to develop policies and programs which are aimed at improving the control of pollution of the land, in the air and in the water; which will advancc our capability to restore degrading environments, and protect important natural systems which have not been yet spoiled by man. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That concludes my testimony and I will be pleased to attempt to answer your questions. Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Dr. MacLeod. Your testimony has been extremely useful. Mr. MO5HER. Dr. MacLeod, on page 7 of your statement, you say that we do not have sufficient information to develop methods to con- trol overfertilization of our waters, and lower on that same page you refer to the necessity to develop tertiary sewager treatment systems. PAGENO="0351" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 351 Because of the loca~tion of my district, I happen to have a special interest in Lake Erie. Dr. MACLEOD. Yes, sir. Mr. Mosrn~. On August 3, Mr. William Warne, director of the California Department of Water Resources, testified that his State is constructing a prepilot trestment plant to study ways to remove excess nutrients in the runoff of fertilizer from agricultural lands and in sewer wastes. I think that in the Lake Erie area this runoff from fertilized a~ri- cultural land is an important and critical matter. In this prepilot p]~ant, they hope to extract the nutrients from the drainage waters by growing algae in the water and then removing this algae from the water, thereby removing the nutrients that were utilized in the growth. In California they are developing this prepilot plant to try to solve the problem that way. Do you think that this process has a possibility of application in an area as large as the Lake Erie area? Would you see practical possibilities there? Dr. MACLEOD. Part of the problem with Lake Erie, Mr. Mosher, is due to runoff from agricultural lands but a great deal of it is due to the dumping of raw sewage, sewage that has only had primary treatment, and sewage that has had secondary treatment into the lake. Mr. M05HER. I'm sure that's correct. Dr. MACLEOn. This, has been verified, sir. I should think that the first steps would be to have adequate treatment of sewage in all the communities that border Lake Erie, both on the United States and the Canadian sides. As a part of that treatment, one would hope that we would be able to develop efficient methods of tertiary treat- ment, of which the one that Mr. Warne cited for you is an example. It is probably a very good example because the algae in the course of their growth do take up these soluble nutrients-the phosphates, potassium and nitrogen that are in soluble form in se*age and which, of course, run from the land. And if algae can be grown efficiently and harvested, this should be one of the methods that could be effi- ciently applied to tertiary sewage treatment. It is in the development stage as you have said, but the principles I think are understood. We need to devote a good deal of further effort to completing the develop- ment and demonstration of the processes. It is possible there are other methods that could be used-methods that, for example, one might apply to the removal of salt from saline waters might also be thought of in this matter. I think there has to be an approach not from just one avenue but more than one. * Mr. MosnEn. What about the correction of some of the damage that has already been done; for instance, the overgrowth of algae that exists? What practical possibilities are there for its removal in a body of water as large as Lake Erie? Dr. MACLEOn. I am afraid I can't answer you, sir. I can't answer you directly but I think if we can prevent overfertilization of the lake, and if fish and other livin~ things can survive in the numbers in which they formerly existed, in terms of their consumption of the foods that are there now and the fishing from the lake, then in the PAGENO="0352" 352 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT course of time one might be able to restore partially at least the quality of Lake Erie. Mr. MOSHER. To whom would I go for the best possible current answers to these questions? If you have any suggestions, it will be helpful. Dr. MACLEOD. I believe the people to whom you should go are the Federal Water Pollution Control Agency, now in the Department of the Interior, but formerly in Health, Education, and Welfare. Chairman MILLER. I was just going to make an observation. We brought part of this problem on ourselves because we were unable to keep up with some of the problems that presented themselves. In my estimate, Congress itself is partially responsible because we al- lowed a single problem to be broken up among many of the committees of Congress and then it became departmentalized even further. Each fellow had his jcth to do and he did his job but we didn't look to see what the connections between the various areas were. I remember when we passed bills to appropriate money for sewage disposal we said, "This is a great thing-look at the strides we are making," but we failed to take care of the effluents. Now, we are paying for it. I'm conscious of the fact that a powerplant in the State of Wash- ington is using water from the Columbia River as a coolant. The water was not contaminated, but its temperature was raised a little over 2° and the salmon beds were destroyed in that part of the river. So, one of the things we are interested in is to see how we can develop the coordination that will eliminate some of these abuses. While we are talking about contamination, I must mention the fact that we are using the sea as a great sewer and a place to get rid of all our refuse. I had the privilege of being chairman of the first Subcommittee on Oceanography. We made up a report on the disposal of atomic waste on the Atlantic and gulf coasts. We studied this report and made some rather deep comments on it. They never have succeeded in get- ting a report filed for the Pacific coast, because by the time we got into this, the interested agencies, particularly the conservation agen- cies in Oregon, Washington, and California, began to protest. Then in California, the division of fish and game reproduced the con- tainers that the Atomic Energy Commission planned to use to dispose of the waste. It was supposed to be disposed of in a thousand fathoms of water but it turned out that these containers caved in at about 400 futhoms. Sooner or later, we are going to have to harvest the sea instead of contaminating it. Shouldn't we be looking now to see what the effects of these things are going to be in the sea? While we are trying to correct the conditions that exist in the inland waters, we have to look beyond that. I'm conscious of the fact and perhaps you are, that the British Government is dumping some pretty high level atomic waste into the North Sea. There's a countercurrent under the Gulf Stream. What will happen to the shellfish if enough of this gets into the sea and runs on to our own northern coast? The Japanese did some research work. They hired the Picards to make a study for them and found up-wellings of sea water where they didn't expect to. This caused them to make some specific changes in PAGENO="0353" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 353 plans that they had for certain atomic developments because of this waste problem. So I think it is fine to do these things. I think we have to work harder on these problems than we have in the past. Many people knew and saw these things coming but they were voices in the wilderness. I think right now the very fact that we are interested in Lake Erie, or I'm interested in the pollution of the inland waters of California, is a good thing because others will become more conscious of the problem. I would like to make that c~bservation and see whether you agree with it or not. Dr. MAOLEOD. Chairman Miller, indeed I do agree with what you said. In the examples of very large scale effects that may be occurring, I did not choose the sea, but I might just as well have. The examples I used concerning the production of carbon dioxide and the raising of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the possible depletion of oxygen from the atmosphere could just as well have been exchanged for the oceans the~nselves. We don't have an understanding of what wer are doing when we are dumping wastes of all kinds into them and they are not the inexhaustible sink that used to be thought of. We know that, particularly in the estuaries and in the coastal regions, there is extensive contamination. We don't know yet how significant this is in the broader reaches of the ocean. However, I should recall that penguins in the Antarctic are already demonstrated to have had it in their fat. How it got there we don't know, but the fact of its presence seems to be incontrovertible. This seems to indicate some very widespread contamination in crea- tures, with the same biochemicals. Mr. BROWN. Mr. Conable? Mr. COWABLE. I would like to ask a few questions about carbon dioxide level in the air. Does this result in the striking of a new bal- ance? Does it encourage the growth of new green plants in which photosynthesis can occur? Is this one of the reasons we get the sO- called greenhouse effect? Dr. MACLEOD. I will attempt to answer those, sir. With an increase of cathon dioxide in the atmosphere, there will be some increase in photosynthesis with uptake of carbon dioxide. How- ever, the increase in carbon dioxide uptake by the photosynthetic plants might not be nearly enough to compensate for the great increase that has been put into the atmosphere. Now, as to the greenhouse effect, if I might explain that very briefly. The sun's radiation falling on the earth comes through a blanket of carbon dioxide and the visible light comes through very easily. However, carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has a very definite effect on holding down the infrared radiation-the heat radiation that goes back up-so that if you increase the content of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere you prevent the dissipation of heat from the earth's sur- face. Therefore, the heat rises, and this is why it is called a greenhouse effect. Mr. CONABLE. Is there already a demonstrable increase in the car- bon dioxide content of our atmosphere? Dr. MACLEOD. There have been some studies that indicate it. I wish that the information were better than it is, but the problem is PAGENO="0354" 354 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT that accurate measurements have not been available over a long enough period of time so that one can really say there is a trend that is unmis- takable. Mr. CONABLE. Other things remaining constant, then, we don't nec- essarily strike a new balance' by increased plant growth. The carbon dioxide content could get far ahead of the increased photosynthetic capability of our foliage. There are other factors that might be at work in this such as the urbanization of our society which causes a great deal of our landscaping to go back to forest and this, therefore, increases the amount of photosynthesis actually going on. Is that a fact? Dr. MACLEOn. I don't know in quantitative terms how much that amounts to. I think one should remember, however, that the larg,est sink, if I can use the word, for carbon dioxide is the oceans. The phytoplankton, `the small green plants that grow there, also take up carbon dioxide and carbon dioxide is also removed by the weathering of rocks and release of salt such as calcium and magnesium which combine with it and then are washed into the seas. Mr. CONABLE. Could the increase in the carbon dioxide content in the ocean add to the atmospheric content? Dr. MACLEOn. The solubility of carbon dioxide in sea water is not enough, sir; I don't think, to make a significant difference. Mr. CONABLE. It would not be likely to have secondary atmospheric effects? Dr. MAOLEOD. I don't think so. Mr. RotrsH. This discussion concerning carbon dioxide reminds me of an experience I had last fall. I was in Ethiopia and I visited a class being conducted by a Peace Corps teacher, named Mrs. Miller, who was very vivacious and imaginative. It was a class in science and Mrs. Miller was teaching seventh graders about protons and electrons. She drew a picture of two rooms on the board. There was a door between the rooms, but she emphasized the fact that the door was closed. She said, "Supposing we put 200 people in one room and in the other room we put no people, what would happen?" There was a look of amazement on these bright-eyed youngsters and, finally, one little boy dared to raise his hand and he said there would be much carbon dioxide and they would all die. Do you think there is a danger that there will be so much carbon dioxide that we will all die someday? Dr. MACLEOn. No, sir; I don't believe so. The amount that could be produced from the consumption of the fossil fuels coupled with the rate of removal is not enough so that we would all die, but the accumu- lation in the atmosphere could very well have these undesirable effects which I referred to here and which I discussed with Mr. Conable. Mr. Rousu. In your statement, you emphasize the fact that we have no long-term plans to deal with the problem's associated with carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere. You go on to say it is time that our Nation began to work diligently toward a goal of recycling fuels and of utilizing natural energies. It would seem to me that even if this Nation did this, the carbon dioxide problem is one that confronts the entire world since the atmosphere i's involved. Do you know of any other nations which might be directing their thought and energies toward this problem'? PAGENO="0355" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 355 Dr. MACLEOD. Well, Mr. Roush, the contribution of the United States, for example to carbon dioxide output, is a very large one indeed because of the size of our country and because of our enormous consumption of power.. Other countries, particularly the other industrialized ones, submit their share also but ours is by far the largest sino'le contribution. I am not aware of any concerted national ef~'orts of this kind in other countries nor am I aware of any international efforts. There could be and I would not know of them, sir. Mr. ROUSH. Is there any organization which might make possible an interchange of ideas about the problem? Dr. MACLEOn. Yes, sir. Talking about particularly the advanced industrialized nations or some of them, through the Organization for Economic Coopera- tion and Development which is headquartered in Paris, one has 22 of the advanced nations that are members. That Organization has in the last 3 years taken a much greater interest not only in the prob- lems of science itself, but is also beginning to have an interest in prob- lems of pollution. Dr. Buckley, who is here from the Department of the Interior, for example recently attended a conference in Paris on problems of pesticides and their inadvertent escape into the environment. So there is a beginning interest, but I must emphasize that it's early as far as this organization is concerned. Mr. ROUSH. Is this a permanent organization with a permanent staff and permanent participating members from various nations? Dr. MACLEOn. Yes, sir; it is a permanent organization. Mr. ROUSH. And whom from the United States, or maybe I should say what agencies, are members of this Organization? Dr. MACLEOD. Well, as far as the total organization is concerned, there are representatives from many of our agencies depending upon the subject-whether it be agricultural policy or monetary policy or whatever. In the science policy activities of OECD, for example, I have been the representative from the Office of Science and Technology. And Mr. David Beckler, also from our Office, has been the representative to a Committee on Research Cooperation. These activities are moving forward, but I think there is a long way to go and I could not give you an optimistic statement about how long it is going to take to do this. Chairman MILLER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. ROUSH. Yes. Chairman MILLER. Isn't cognizance of this problem stimulated partly through scientific attach~s we have in these countries? Aren't they in contact with foreign experts who ajre interested in this problem? I was in Europe for a meeting of the Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space recently and came back through Bonn where I had an hour's discussion with Dr. Stoltenberg. We didn't talk to him about these things, but in talking before I sensed that the Germans are beginning to take co~nizance of some of these pressing problems. After offhand conversations with our people there, I believe they PAGENO="0356" 356 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT are becoming particularly concerned with the pollution of the Rhine River and are studying this rather carefully, are they not? Dr. MAOLEOD. Yes, sir; they have been under study for really quite a long time. Perhaps on some tributaries of the Rhine as effectively as any studies have been carried out on the problem. I don't want to go into the details of it at the present time, but they have even had in operation for quite some time a system of effluent charges for those who pollute.. Those who pollute pay in proportion to their pollution of the river. Chairman MIr~LER. This might be something that we should consider in regard to most of our rivers and the people who pollute them. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Fulton? Mr. FULTON. Your comments about excess carbon dioxide make me wonder whether we shouldn't look at the effects of different quantities of various materials, chemicals, and elements in the ecological process so that we can get a process approach rather than a static time or dumping approach. I understand it took man a million years to at- tain a population of 1 billion people. The second billion took 15 years. The third billion took 10. It is taking us about 7 years for the fourth bil1i~n. We could reach a point where we get instant billions of peo- ple-where there would be another billion every 90 days or every month. Now, that brings up the question of a process and of how the human race can best exist in an ecological process and environ- ment. Maybe we should be looking for the uses of the extra carbon dioxide. Or maybe we should look at the waste as source material in a process rather than an end result. Would you comment shortly on that? Dr. MACLEOD. Yes. I am in total agreement with you on the point of a dynamic versus a static approach to these problems. I think one should go a little fur~ ther and say we need to take a total systems approach. Mr. FULTON, That is what I am talking about, a process. Dr. MACLEOD. Not just the pieces of it but the whole process, and not only what influences cause it but what we can do instead to prevent it. I believe fully that we have to have this total systems approach to these problems of the environment and the ecology. As far as using up more. of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to take care of the increasing population, I don't think that will be a very significant consideration, sir. I think we had better perhaps look for other meth- ods of control. Mr. FULTON. What I really mean is couldn't you get products from carbon dioxide that would be very useful ~ Carbon and oxygen are m most of the materials that we use. Wouldn't that be possible? Couldn't we put the elements carbon and oxygen to constructive use rather than just considering them waste material? That's my point. Dr. MACLEOD. This is being done through the process of nature all the time, sir, and really remarkably efficiently. We use just these elements, of course, in chemical synthesis of one sort or another. Nature, however, provides to date the most effective and cheapest method of putting these elements together and making products out of them that are useful for our survival. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Brown? PAGENO="0357" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 357 Mr. BROWN. I have no questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. MacLeod, it is nice to have you here and I regret that I had a meeting that went past 10 o'clock so I didn't have a chance to be here for your full hearing. I would like to have, you describe the coordination of pollution research and development among the Fed- eral agencies. How does it look to you at the moment? Are we doing a good job or do we need to do more? Should the Department of the interior take over more of these responsibilities? Is it going to be the lead agency? Should we look to it for guidance and control over these coordinating problems, if any exist? Dr. MAOLEOD. Mr. Daddario, our activities in the Office of Science and Technology, as I mentioned earlier, go back a. number of years and I suppose have been in part guided by not only our increasing aware- ness of the magnitude of the problem and what needed to be done but the general awareness of these needs. I think perhaps in the last 2 or 3 years, for the first time, one has the feeling that we are going to mobilize the resources that are going to be necessary in order to abate and restore-abate pollution and restore the environment. As I ~m sure you know, activities that are concerned with prc~blems of pollu- tion are diffused through many, many of the agencies of Government and are really closely related to their missions. For example, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has serious concerns about the problem of pollution in human health. The Department of Agriculture is very seriously concerned, and so forth. The Atomic Energy Commission is concerned, Interior is con- cerned. And I believe that each of those agencies must continue its concern and increase it in the future. There is a real problem in co- ordination. We have attempted to do this in a number of ways. One is through the preparation of reports on the broad problems, in which one gets together with the representatives of the numerous outside agencies-consultants-for a long period of time. During the course of this process there is a good deal of education and coordination that goes on simply because of the process itself. We have also been concerned about the followup to what has been developed in the course of these studies, and have attempted to do this as best we could. For example, in the case of the most recent and most extensive of our reports on pollution problems, "Restoring the Quality of Our Environment," we have obtained from all of the agencies a summary of the actions that they feel they should take, and of the places where they feel that there is maybe overlap or where there isn't enough effort. We are in the process now of analyzing this and will work with the individual agency, and where necessary with more than one agency, to follow along on these questions. Mr. DADDARTO. Do you mean that even though you are satisfied that the agencies are working with this problem, we must be careful and see to it that there is better coordination between them? Dr. MA0LE0D. I believe very strongly that in the future we must bring the comp'etences of the individual agencies together on these problems, because in practically none of them as I see it is the com- petence of a single agency capable of handling the problem. Unless we do get the various agencies coming together for their solution, I don't think we will `accomplish a solution within a reasonable period of time. PAGENO="0358" 358 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. MacLeod, as we have been holding these hearings we have been told constantly that we ought not to hold off doing things both because there is available technology which can solve some of our problems and also because we ought not to wait for a perfect solution. But I would like your opinion as to what we ought to be doing about these great expenditures which are presently before us. We have been told it will cost $25 to $30 billion to separate sanitary and storm sewers. We also are told we ought not to make these expenditures until we dosome research which will cut down the cost as well as reducing the cost of the estimated one-half billion dollars per year required to purchase automobile exhaust devices for about 10 million cars a year. Are we paying proper attention to the area of research? Are we making the effort that needs to be made in these areas? We must remember that if we don't, we may make expendi- tures that do not result in the problem `being solved. Dr. MACLEOD. Mr. Daddario, in the case of the first example you used, of the combined sewers, there has been strong advocacy of very large expenditures for the separation of the storm and sani- tary sewers. That figure which you gave, $20 to $25 billion, is com- monly quoted, arid I have no doubt, if one had to dig up all our cities and separate the sewers; that this figure is not: too large. One must pause, however, in proceeding forthwith to try to find this amount of money; because as it turns out in the storm runoff in cities such as New York there is an enormous amount of organic material- wastes of one kind or another which one doesn't want to see dumped into the harbor any more than you want to see the sewers dumped directly into the harbor or into the Long Island Sound. I don't think that this is as simple a problem-and I wish I were more of an expert on it-as merely separating the sewers. I think it has been emphasized by some of the people who have studied it that there is once again a systems approach that one has to take to this. One has to try through multiple means to prevent these, shall I call them, catastrophic runoffs that occur at times of great rain storms. If the water could be stored on rooftops, for example, and I'm not sure if this is practical, or if runoff could be minimized, then one might be able to divert this water more slowly into the regular sewage sys- tems. But this has to be thoroughly studied from a systems point of view, and to my knowledge it has not been. My information could be deficient on this, but 2 years ago when we were looking at the problem with the pollution panel, while it was apparent that a systems approach was needed, it wasn't apparent that it had been done then. As for the auto exhausts, Mr. Chairman, I quoted from one of ~our consultants, perhaps before you came in, re- garding the situation as it may obtain in the Los Angeles area where new standards for exhaust emission have already been put into effect- that is, in the whole State of California. The estimate is that even though one can reduce the amount of effluent to the level stated in the standards, the increase in automotive traffic, in the burning of hydro- carbon fuels, is such that in about 15 years we will be just about back to where we are now. In other words, unless there are very radical developments in the complete combustion of the hydrocarbon fuels that are used in auto- PAGENO="0359" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 35~ mobiles, we are going to ameliorate the problem for some time but inevitably it will grow up again. This is unless alternative means: of automotive propulsion that are reasonably efficient can be developed. The usual examples are to improve storage batteries and also to develop fuel cells so that they are lighter in weight and more economi- cal. Either one of these would accomplish that. My understanding is that at the present time, with present technology, one couldn't intro- duce these other methods of propulsion; and probably, unless there is a good deal of public acceptance of the need, based on pollution and based on the eventual exhaustion of our resourc~es of fossil fuels- unless the public becomes thoroughly aware of this-it will be very difficult indeed to introduce these even though they are much better technologically than they are now. Mr. DADDARIO. This seems to be an area where we are making expenditures which are causing some gain in the fight against pollu- tion. If you, yourself, were in a position to choose between spending half of a billion dollars on a device to cut down pollution from auto- mobile exhaust and using the money for some other antipollution program, would you spend it on the device? Dr. MACLEOD. I think we have two kinds o~ problems here. One is the short-range problem. I think we have seen in enough modern cities over the last few years an increase in noxious hydrocarbon products in the atmosphere so that we realize, I think naturally, that we must do something about them over the short range. I think over* the short range, since the automobile is the greatest producer of these pollutants, that we have got to try to do something about the auto- mobile reasonably promptly. Over the longer range we must develop, I believe, alternative meth- ods of propulsion. This is going to require a good deal of research and perhaps more development money, which is where the largest cost is as I'm sure you know in the introduction of anything new in the commercial world. So I think we have two problems. One, to abate over the short range, and two, to develop alternative methods to pre- vent in the longer range picture. Mr. BROWN. Mr. Chairman, would you yield at that point? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes, Mr. Brown. Mr. BROWN. I'm interested in this discussion because in Los Angeles at least 15 years ago there was a lot of pressure for the development of some sort of smog ~ontrol device for automobiles. Ten years ago the pressures were great enough to ask the automobile industry to engage in the research necessary to develop this. The State agencies have not engaged in any research whatsoever with regard to smog control de- vices in California. They have attempted to set standards, but the law in California is that the standards cannot become applicable until the industry develops two alternative devices. It just wasn't done. This is something which in my mind should be relatively simple technically, at least it is simple compared with developing a new form of propul- sive power such as the fuel cell or battery-powered automobile. In 15 years the industry failed to devote sufficient funds to this relatively simple problem because it was insufficiently motivated. The question that I have is, do you think there is any likelihood that industry, be- cause of the major changes itwould mean in its whole method of opera- PAGENO="0360" 360 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT tion, perhaps its merchandising philosophy, is likely in, say, the next 50 years, to devote enough of its own research funds to come up with an alternative type of propulsion to the internal combustion engine? Dr. MACLEOn. That would be very much of a personal opinion and I suppose from that point of view it is no better than that of anyone else, and perhaps not as good as many others. I believe that if we do bring to the attention of the people at large the magnitude of the prob- lem and the kinds of solutions that are necessary and if we do set stand- ards which will require new technology in order to market, that one can h~we a profound effect on the kinds of instruments that are developed. In the case of the battery powered vehicle or the fuel cell powered vehicle, I don't believe that up until this time the public has been so convinced that this will be significantly better than the improved autos with less amount of effluent from the exhaust, that the public is really convinced that we need to push for it. I know that some of the battery companies are working on improved batteries and certain of the large electric companies are working on fuel cells. I don't know really whether they could be working harder and that they could bring the day closer. I just don't know whether the magnitude of effort could be increased to accomplish this. Mr. BROWN. The point that I'm making, is that in California where this exhaust effluent problem is~the most serious, the public was well aware and eager for action 20 years ago and still no action was taken. When we decided that we needed fuel cells for the lunar program, the public didn't care whether we used fuel cells or not, but the needs of the project and the compulsion of the program resulted in their de- velopment. What I'm leading to is, Is it not l?ossible that we are go- ing to make rapid advances in this field only if the Federal Govern- ment takes a considerable amount of leadership in encouraging the necessary research and not rely on either the' public or the industry? Dr. MACLEOn. Yes, I believe, sir, the Federal Government must take leadership. I don't know how much in the way of resources the Federal Government needs to put into, for example, these two develop- ments that we have been talking about, but I think this should be looked at, definitely. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. MacLeod, I hope we might have the opportunity' to send some further questions to you. We have other witnesses today, but we hope you might provide us `answers for the record. (Addi- tional questions and answers for the record may be found in volume II.) Dr. MACLEOD. I shall be very glad to. Mr. DADDARIO. We certainly appreciate your being here. (The complete prepared statement of Dr. Colii~ M. MacLeod fol- lows:) PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. COLIN M. MACLEOD, DEPUTY DIItECTOR, OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Mr. Olmirman and members of the committee, although knowledge of the damaging effects of pollution has existed for a long time, particularly in idus- trialized societies, the impulse to do something about it has been slow in coming. While there are multiple reasons why this has been so, perhaps the most im- portant have been first, the slow appreciation by the public that human sewage PAGENO="0361" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 361 contains a variety of disease-producing microbes. Secondly, there has been a deep feeling, stemming from our frontier history, that the resources of this Continent are well-nigh inexhaustible, including the resources of water, air and land in which to dump our waste products. Finally, there is the strongly-held opinion that nature quickly purifies the man-contaminated environment, be it air, water or soil. While the last is true to a degree, we have overestimated badly the capacity of natural forces to restore the environment's quality, whether the contaminant be human sewage, industrial wastes, automotive effluents, pesticides or animal dejecta~ An increasing standard of living generates an increasing burden of wastes, so that the most affluent society has the capac~ty to produce the widest variety of pollutants in the largest amount. Surely it should be a measure of the quality of our civilization that while we improve living standards through increased per capita income arid other re- sources, at the same time we see to it that we don't foul our own nest, or if we have fouled it that we devote sufficient resources to clean it up and prevent further damage caused by our indifference and greed. During the past few years, attitudes have been changing. The magnitude of the problem is now more generally appreciated by the public, the Congress and the Executive Branch, and a number of very important steps have been taken. Despite this favorable change in attitude, I question most seriously whether problems of pollution have been given the high priority they deserve; I question whether we are yet in the frame of mind to commit to their abatement the very large resources of brains and dollars that are going to be necessary in order to push back the flood, and to restore our natural habitat to something approach- ing its pristine state of great natural beauty. As I have indicated, at the present time much of our populace is aware of some of our Nation's pollution problems. A few classical examples, such as the pollution of Lake Erie and the smog and pesticide problems, have been popular subjects for lay writers. Likewise, many persons in our population have been subjected to discomfort, losses, or disgusting sights and odors caused by pollution. Many of us have observed a once sparkling, clear trout stream that is now devoid of fish, with its waters odoriferous and green with noxious algae, or we have become aware that birds or other kinds of animal life which were once common to an area are now rare or gone. It is these kinds of obvious degradations and catastrophic changes which have finally awakened the public. Now the protest~ against pollution no longer come from a few in our population. At all levels in our society, concern is being increasingly expressed about the deterioration of our environment and there has arisen a determination to do something about it. The concern I expressed above is whether this determination is strong enough. Although they appreciate a few facets of the problem, few people are award of its scope and seriousness or of what is required to abSte the tide of pollu- tion. Likewise, few of us are aware of the multitude of changes and effects upon other forms of life and upon ecological processes which have accompanied each of the changes that we have viewed. In fact, scientific knowledge is sparse in this area-and badly needed. It should be remembered that ecological change is not a new happening in the history of the earth, and its inhabitants. The earth's surface has been under- going physical changes for eons of time. The results have lncluddd the very formation of our atmosphere through biological action, topographic alterations such as the formation of mountain ranges, the origin and death of lakes and rivers, the rising of land masses from beneath the sea, and sometimes the sink- ing of terrestrial environmersis. Except for catastrophic events, such as are associated with volcanic activity and earthquakes, major modifications of the earth's crust have occurred slowly. There have been also been gradual but extensive changes in the properties of the air, waters, and land. The quantitative chemical composition and tem- perature of the air and surface waters have changed. The oceans and certain lakes have increased in salinity. Soils have been formed and deposited in some areas and removed from other areas by *ater and wind erosions. Levels of nu- clear radiation from natural sources have decreased with time, due to radioac- tive decay of radioactive minerals in the eartb'~ surfce and because of changes in the atmosphere. PAGENO="0362" 362 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT The blota of the earth has also gradually changed with time due to such evolutionary processes as biological adaption to environmental changes by genet- ic alterations and natural selection. Wonderful as the genetic mechanisms are for ensuring diversity and aclapta- bility to changes in our physical environment, it is important to remember that their response is relatively slow, especially for the highly `organized forms of life. Evolutionary changes are geared to long spans of `time-thousands and even millions of years. Although species of organisms may become adapted to living under diff~rent environmental conditions by evolutionary processes which are entirely beyond their control and which occur only over very long periods of time, man has ac- quired the `ability to intentionally and grossly change. the environment to `meet his desires. One of civilized man's chief goals has been to alter `his environ- ment to make his way of life easier and more secure, apd to satisfy his am- bitions to acquire possessions and prestige. Not only has man changed his own environment but he has changed or is changing `the physical environment for essentially all other creatures that live on earth. Since life evolved `on earth, there has never been a biological influ- ence that `has so altered the environment. The `stresses and changes that man has caused to the natural communities on earth compare in magnitude to those caused by the ice ages-and the long-term effects can `be expected to be more severe unless `man acts promptly `to find and correct his errors. Biological alter- ation's have never before `occurred so rapidly and the speed of changes resulting from man's activities is accelerating. The tremendous quantities of man's wastes which are poured into fresh waters, into the air, onto the land, and into the oceans constitutes one of the dominant abuses imposed on nature by man. Marked changes have taken place In many of our streams, lakes, estuaries, and coastal waters because of their misuse. Many streams throughout the Eastern United States which once flourished with fish are now barren due to pollution from industrial and domestic sources. Valuable commercial species of fish, such as salmon and shad, have disappeared from great rivers. There are many serious problems from overenrichment of slow-flowing and impounded inland waters and estuaries from domestic and agricultural wastes. Large areas of oyster beds which were an important source of food In former times and which once represented an important part of our commercial oystbr fishery have either been contaminated by infectious microbes from sewage during recent years or conditions for growth have been so degraded that productivity Is much less than it used to be. Well-known examples of lakes that have become seriously degraded by pollu- tion include Lake's Washington, Tahoe, and Erie; the Potomac is a classical example among rivers; the tidal waters of the Sacramento River are an example of a polluted estuary; and a good example of a degraded marine environment is the coastal waters of Long Island. Domestic wastes, tim excrement from farm anhna~s, surface runoff from some agricultural lands, and certain industrial wastes contain materials which are nutrients for plants. When such materials are discharged Into surface waters, they stimulate the growth of aquatic plants. Ovevenrichment may cai~se un- sightly algae blooms to develop and the oxygen content of the water may be- come depleted until many or all forms of aquatic animal life perish. In addi- tion to loss of fishery resourtes, overenriehment limits or destroys recreational values of an area, and in the case of lakes it causes premature and speeded aging. As yet we do not have sufficient information to develop methods for controlling over-fertilization of our waters, simply because we have not done enough re- search and development on the subject. We do not know whbther it will be possible or feasible to reverse or to stop advanced case,s of eutrophication or over-fertilization in lakes. The problem is complex and likely will be very expansive to solve. It will require new techniques for treating sewage becaush our current methods are designed primarily for the removal or destruction of disease-producing microorganisms. By present methods, primary treatment removes the large particulates. In secondary treatment, microbiological proc- esses break down complex organic materials to simple, soluble compounds which form a rich nutrient brew that flows into the natural water systems where 1st nurtures the mas,s growth of noxious plants. It is clear that tertiary sewage PAGENO="0363" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 363 treatment systems must be developed and adopted widely for the removal of the soluble nutrients if we are to preserve some of our most precious natural resourc~s of water. Air pollutants include many potentially hazardous materialS ~uch as wastes from the combustion of fossil fuels, pesticides, radioactive materials from nu- clear detonation, and various industrial effluents. Irritation of the eyes and respiratory tract from polluted air has been com- mon for many years in Lo~ Angeles because of the geographic and climatic pecularities of that area. Los Angeles no longer is unique In this respect. Many other American cities, Including New York and even non-industrial Wash- ington, D.C., have experienced episodes in which the atmospheric concentration of automotive effluents reached irritating levels-and this will get worse before it gets better because every day there are more automobiles, burning more gaso- line which crowd into the centers of our cities. Up to the present time, except for a very few catastrophic episodes, ther~ is little proof that the levels of air pollutants which accumulate in the air over our cities adversely affect the health of normal people, evOn though the pollutants may cause irritation. This does not mean that there are no detriniental effects on health, but `only that by our present methods we are unable to detect or assess the effects of low levels of toxic compounds over long periods of time. In making these assessmentS It will be necessary to conduct detailed epidemiologleal studies on the young and healthy segment of the population but, probably more significantly, on the aged and infirm and `those who suffer from cardiac or pulmonary ailments. Because of our judgment that smog may be' harmful to human health and to the quality of living for city dwellers, we have embarked upon a program to reduce the concentration of pollutants from automotive exhausts. This is only "stop gap" action, however. Much research and devel- opment, and probably some major changes in transportation, will be required to ultimately control the problem. One of the most intriguing and potentially significant changes that Is taking place in our environment Is the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from the tremendous consumption of fossil fuels. At the present and projected rates of coal, oil, and natural gas eonsmnptlon, there Is good reason to believe that the carbon dioxide level in `the earth's atmosphere will Increase to an extent which could cause a significant rise in the air temperature of the earth by the time year 2000 is reached. If this occurs, the communities of natural vegetation can be expected to change, which would effect changes of correspond- ing magnitude in the natural populations of terrestrial animals. Glaciers would melt and ultimately even the temperature of the oceans would rise. Melting of the Ice caps would cause rising of the ocean levels, or if the increase resulted in increased rates of precipitation in the polar regions, the ice caps might grow. At this time, we can only theorize what might happen if the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere continues to increase. Our understanding is insuffi- cient to predict with confidence what will happen to the plants and animals and to the rest of our physical environment. Pollution of our soils originates from many sources but at the present time the most important are related mainly to agricultural practices. The pollutants include such materials as pesticides, increased alkalinity or salinity due to Irrigation practices, and In some areas wastes from domestic animals. Solid wastes, Including discarded packaging and junk automobiles, which so obviously degrade our landscape, constitute `another aspect `of our pollution problem which is in dire need of action. Of equal importance to the unsightli- ness of such materials is the waste and loss of the materials that they contain as well as the distressing propensity to destroy valuable natural resources such as marshes by dumping this junk into them. Under natural conditions many species tend to live together in communities. This complex of species and the interrelationship's that they share functions to maintain a stability which is commonly referred to as a "balance of nature." These ecological systems have been `developed by the slow process of evolution, by each species finding its niche in a particular environment. As the environ- ment becomes more harsh, the diversity of species decreases. Many of the activities of man have resulted in the reduction of species. As the concentration of pollutants in a particular natural environment Increases, the number of species decreases' until finally all life there may be destroyed. Another interesting correlation may be found in the results of intentional alterations of the bloenvironment to meet Increased immediate needs for human PAGENO="0364" 364 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT food. Farms have become more specialized in the types of products that they produce and the sizes of areas devoted to single types of crops have consistently increased. This tends to reduce natural stability and man must become in- creasingly diligent to protect his crops from catastropbies such as infestations by plant pathogens or by population bursts of injurious insects. This necessity has supported rapid advancement in production and usage of various kinds of pesticides. These materials are used not only on most of our cultivated crops but also on large areas of forests and grazing lands. They are also used to con- trol insects which spread human diseases and to control pests in our houses and yards and pests of our domestic animals. In the early days of insect control, persistence of the insecticide was con- sidered an important virtue because the residual activity provided control over an extended period of time. This characteristic is undesirable under many con- ditions because the persistent toxin can. cause death or damage to desirable species even though tl~ey may be at great distances from where the pesticide was applied. The classical examples are so well known that I do not need to refer you to them. It is of great significance that during the past 3 or 4 years there has been a large shift toward pesticides that are more readily degradable and a market shift in emphasis by Federal agencies, particularly USDA, toward other methods of pest control. A considerable increase in effort, however, is desirable. I have indicated a few of the pollution problems which need more research and some where we can apply what we know already. Actually, we do not have adequate understanding of many of the basic processes of the bioenvironmen.t; we do not adequately understand the interrelationships between various species of plants and animals, and we have very little knowledge of the effects of en- vironmental stresses upon natural populations and communities of organisms. We are particularly deficient in our knowledge of the chronic effects on man, plant and animal species, and ecological systems from long-term exposures to low levels of pollutants and other environmental stresses. This basic informa- tion is essential to enable us to assess the biological hazards of pollutants, to enable us to establish more meaningful tolerance levels of pollutants, and to assist in the improvement of methods of pollution control. To achieve the needed advancements of scientific knowledge and technology, it will be necessary to attract many more highly qualified scientists and engineers to the many aspects of the broad problem. It is of particular importance to devote adequate attention to the advancement of basic knowledge. These requirements indicate the need for increased Federal support of training and research through the various responsible agencies. Continued effort should be devoted to improve intramural research and development programs but at the same time more effort should be directed to utilizing the much greater pool of talent outside Government by increasing sound research, grant and contract programs with universities, non-profit research organizations and industry. As a nation we have no really long-term plans to deal with either the problems associated with the carbon dioxide buildup In `the atmosphere or the eventual ex- haustion of our valuable fossil fuel supplies. Concerning the supplies of fossil fuel, there is no answer for the long term except for the development of new sources of energy such as nuclear power or solar or tidal energy. Nuclear power carries its burden of environmental hazards, but in the light of what we now know, the hazards from controlled nuclear energy may be less troublesome to manage than the use of fossil fuels with their attended buildup of atmospheric carbon dioxide. It is time that our nation begins to work diligently toward the goal of efficiently recycling materials and utilizing natural energies for our power requirements. A concentrated effort devoted to developing methods and policies to effect the recycling of used materials back into the production of new products would result in both conserving our wealth of natural resources and materials which we must import, and it would contribute greatly to the alleviation of pollution. Our dis- appearing fossil fuels could perhaps serve their highest use as raw materials rather than being lost forever by burning them as sources of power. Our present usage of fossil fuels is much more serious than the exploitation of the forests by our ancestors because the supply that we are depleting does not represent the crop of one year or one century but the crop of many hundreds of thousands, indeed millions, of years. The loss cannot be redeemed by any of the powers of man. PAGENO="0365" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 365 Increasingly power requirements must be met by efficient usage of nuclear energy, and other sources should be utilized such as solar energy, the tides, and perhaps the heat of the earth's core. Since it was established in 1962, the Office of Science and Technology has been actively concerned with pollution problems. The President's Science Advisory Committee Report, Use of Pesticides, was published in 1963 and since then the Office has assisted in the development and in the activities of the Federal Com- mittee on Pest Control. The Federal Council for Science and Technology's Committee on Water Resources Research has devoted considerable attention to water pollution. The recent PSAC Report, Effective Use of t1~e Sea, includes attention to marine pollution problems. The recent Report of PSAC, Restoring th~e Quality of Our Enviroivn'~ent, which was published last winter is devoted broadly and extensively to the subject of pollution. It includes numerous specific recommendations that pertain to control. An assessment of the various agencies' responses to that Report has just been completed and plans are actively afoot for further implementation including coordination of activities by Federal agencies. The pollution problem is closely related to our national concern for preserva- tion of natural beauty. The Office of Science and Technology and the Bureau of the Budget are now completing a study of how the Federal Government can best help to advance our understanding of natural plant and animal communities and their interactions with man. The results of this study will contribute information and recommendations which should be useful to support and advance programs needed for pollution control. In the future the Office of Science and Technology will Continue to provide leadership and to conduct evaluations and coordinating actions among the Federal agencies to develop policies and programs which will improve the control of pollution on land, in the air, and in the water; which will advance the restoration of degraded environments, and protect important natural systems which have not yet been spoiled by man. Mr. DADDARTO. Our next witness is Dr. John L. Buckley, Assistant to the Science Adviser of the Departme4t of the Interior. Dr. Buckley, good morning. We are happy to have you here and I think we will go right into your statement. STATEMENT OP DR. JOHN L. BD~CI~LEY, OFFICE 01? ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH COORDINATOR, THE SCIENCE ADVISER, US, DEPART- MENT OP THE INTERIOR Dr. BUCKLEY. In the interest of time, Mr. Chairman, I will dispense with most of what I have provided in the written statement. I assume my prepared statement will be printed in the record. I know that your committee does its homework. I'm sure that many of you have already looked at what I intended to say. It seems to me that the lines of questioning that have been pursued this morning are particularly fruitful ones and I welcome a chance to discuss some of these matters with you. The tenor of the questioning and also my statement is that we live in a world which we are able to modify and in fact have modified to a very considerable extent. We have certain choices in modification. In at least limited environments, such as in a spaceship, we are able io provide the needs of life at least for a relatively short span of time. I suppose it is conceivable that we might be able to manage the earth as a whole in somewhat near this fashion. I'm not sure that I would care to live here if we were to do this, but that may be nothing other than a matter of personal choice. At the other extreme there are those of us who would prefer to see things as untouched as possible, 68-240-66-vol. 1-24 PAGENO="0366" 366 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT and yet that is clearly not the way in which we are going to live in the future. So we are really faced with a problem of understanding enough about our environment, its physical side and its biologicai side, so that we can most efficiently use the resources that are available to us. Philosophically it seems to me that we have considered all of these resources as essentially "free" in the past and there were no constraints against the dumping of waste-and by wastes I mean those things that are not useful to us at a particular point in time or in a particular concentration or in a particular place or in a particular forui-wher- ever was most convenient. With certain very toxic materials, we now have changed this philosophy so that it is very much the other way around. In the handling of pesticides, for example, the responsibility rests with industry or the proponent of a particular use, to demonstrate that the use will be both advantageous for the purpose for which it is intended and equally that it will not be disadvantageous to other uses of resources. We have not yet expanded this philosophy to many other pollutants. The nuclear energy business is one other example. Here there were all sorts of possibilities of escapes of materials into the en- vironment and we could foresee enough difficulty that we exercised, relatively speaking, extreme care in the way we handled it. The re- sult has been that we have learned to handle nuclear energy so as to achieve maximum benefits with a minimum of disadvantages. One of the issues raised by your Research Management Advisory Panel relates to the appropriateness of considering direct effects on people as the principal measure of pollution. I submit that it is inappropriate. I think suite clearly that man is the center of the universe and all our activities are oriented around him. But it isn't just the physical needs-the need for food and oxygen and water and these sorts of things we must be concerned with. Rather it is all of the things that man needs, directly and indirectly. It is conceivable that we might be able eventually to take the separate elements that occur in the universe and combine them into substances which we can use for human food by some means other than using green plants as the basic mechanism. At the present time, however, we totally depend upon green plants for serving this need. The first thing they do is capture energy from the sun and convert this into plant materials. In the process, they release oxygen, take up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, take up minerals from the soil and so on. These plants in turn are fed on by other living organisms, or if they die without having been eaten by an animal of some sort, then some of the micro- organisms in turn break them down into smaller pieces and eventually the nutrients are put back into the cycle. It seems to me that we depend on these services and we best be sure that those things we do to the environment do not seriously disrupt these functions. There are some other things living organisms do that concern me. From our point of view they are sort of inadvertent things that we would really prefer that they not do. In the process of cycling both energy and nutrients they also are able to, and in fact do, pick up some of the heavy metals, some of the relatively persistent and resist- ant organic compounds and pass these on-in some cases with no changes and in some cases with extensive changes through metabolic PAGENO="0367" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 367 processes-so that when one organism feeds on another it in turn tends to accumulate these. What I am really saying is that it seems to me we are going to live in the world that we have now. One of the things that we need to do in managing this world is to get rid of wastes `that are disadvantageous to us. But in the process of doing so we need to make sure that, while we utilize fully the capacity of the environment to assimilate them, we do not overburden this capacity to the point that we seriously upset the way in which the system functions. You can take this and twist it the other way around and make an emotional pitch that we don't `want to see things changed `or we must conserve this or that. But basic to this is a biological need on the part of man that won't be met if we disrupt these processeS too extremely. `So, I would lead them to the point that it seems to me, I don't really wish to talk about the ade- quacy of technology. I wish to talk about `our lack of basic under- standing of the processes that take place in these systems and even such obvious things as present distribution patterns of living organisms, of abundances of them in different places, the rates at which they are capable of adapting `as individuals, the rates at which they are able to genetically change with time. All these understandings are necessary as a solid base on which we can decide how much of what material we can put at what part of `the environment. I think without belaboring the~point further, sir, I would rather respond to questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. I have no questions now. Mr. DADDLtnlo. Mr. Conaible? Mr. CONABLE. Do you have any comments `about some of the qu~s- tions which we asked earlier? Would you be in `disagreement with any of the general statements that the earlier witness made in re~ sponse to questions? We have gone over thoroughly the ground that you are primarily interested in. Dr. BUCKLEY. No, I think for the most part I agree with the com- ments that my friend, Dr. MacLeo'd, has made. He `and I very seldom have any violent disagreements. Mr. CONABLE. Are you `satisfied with the coordination that is going on in this area within the Federal Government itself? Dr. BUCKLEY. Well, if we `are talking about the field that I have specifically addressed myself to, I'm not especially concerned about the problem of coordination. I'm concerned about the problem of quantity of work that is going on which I think is grossly inadequate to meeting `these needs. Secondly, I would point out that the agencies th'at are now for the most part concerned with this subject have a rather special concern. Within `the Dep'artment of the Interior, for example, in our water pollution `control `agency we `have a concern with these kinds ~f prdblems but only if they are in the vicinity `of water. If we consider the Fish and Wildlife `Service, they `too have a concern. It is not limited geographically, `but the concern is centered around economically valuable forms of fish `and wildlife and those things that influence them. Or if we take the Public Health Service, their concern is with these same kinds of problems but only as they directly affect man. We do have a segmentation this way. Mr. CONABLE. Apparently you are concerned about the quantity of research going on that is directed toward the general problem of PAGENO="0368" 368 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT research-understanding what is involved in these various physical processes and understanding more about our environment itself rather than any specific research problems. Dr. BUCKLEY. Yes, I think this is generally so. I would say that there are some opportunities for synthesis of knowledge now available that have up until now been overlooked. I think we have, for example, information on distributions, changes and things of this sort hidden away in minds of men that ought to be extracted and put to use. One of our problems in talking about pollution always is that we sort of imply that pollution is in fact disadvantageous change. Then you are faced with the problem, change compared to what? And even in such an important area to us as San Francisco Bay, if you want to go back and look at what San Francisco Bay was like chemically, biologically 10 or 20 years ago, quantitative evidence i's very scarce. You end up with the recollections of a fisherman who remembers that he used to catch x number of fish and now he catches x minus number of fish. But you don't know whether he really caught that number of fish before or whether he forgot the days when the fishing wasn't so good-you don't know whether distance in time has dulled his recollection. There are very real problems here, it seems to me, in just this matter of assessing change. The next point that I should comment `on is the statement by the Research Management Advisory Panel that change of an abnormal nature in animal populations may be considered as a sort of warning of things that may happen to man. Again, I would raise the question of what constitutes "normal" and, therefore, what is "abnormal." For most wild population we don't really have any good idea how great the change may usually be without the pressures of man- from one place to another, from one year to another. We do know that such changes are very considerable in some cases. The third point related to this is that these animals don't live by "averages," yet the numbers one often ends up with are monthly averages of dissolved oxygen for example. It doesn't do a fish much good to have dissolved oxygen that is totally adequate for 30 days in a 31-day month, and have essentially no oxygen on the 31st day. The average figure `will provide you with information about changes in time, or permit comparisons of one place with another but it won't help the organism a great deal. Mr. DADDARIO. How do we get this information? We aren't get- ting it now since there is no way of distinguishing the normal from the `abnormal. Senator Nelson has introduced a bill which would establish a De- partment of Ecology. Do you think we ought to centralize in this way or how `do you suggest we go `about it? Dr. BUCKLEY. Well, you put `me in `somewhat of a spot, sir. Sen- at'or Nelson's bill has not been either favorably reported upon or un- favorably reported upon. Mr. DADDARTO. I understand and I bring it up not because I sup- port it or don't support it, but rather because you raise this question in such an interesting w;ay. You remind this committee that we need certainly to know more thout this area where you say ~ great deal of work needs `to be done. PAGENO="0369" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 369 Dr. BUCKLEY. Yes, I think some additional work is necessary wheth- er it is a result of Senator Nelson's bill or something along this line, and without discussing whether it ought to be in the Department of the Interior or some other place. Clearly, I think it ought to he in the Department of the Interior or I wouldn't have returned to that Department `to attempt to strengthen its work in ecology. So, laying my biases out in front of you, yes, I think this kind of thing is necessary on `a rather vastly expanded scale. On the other hand, when we are `talking about money for this sort of thing, it need not be the kind of money we `are talking about in space programs. We really are starting from a different base and some `of the basic ecology that seem's to `be necessary and some of the `survey information is something that would represent, I sup- pose, an investment of a few tens of millions `of dollars rather than hundreds of millions of dollars or more on an annual ba'~is. I sin- cerely believe that we need an assembly of the information that we now have-and I don't `see the mechanism for doing this-a survey of what now is present and what is happening to it, and certainly an increase in basic research that `tells us more `about the basic proc- esses that are at work in these environments. Mr. DADDARIO. You said that our ability to detect change is not good because our experience ha's not been long. Harmful effects may well be occurring. Various life processes and cycles are in delicate balance so that if you upset one you may affect o'thers, too. If we ig- riore this and if `changes continue, it can h'ave a disastrous effect throughout the `whole life system. Dr. BUCKLEY. Yes, I don't want to sound `lik~ a prophet of doom and I don't personally feel th'at this is that kind of problem. On the other hand, I'm `a `strong believer in foresight rather than hindsight whenever it can be exercised. Let's take the case of the o~yster, not because the oyster is neces- sarily so important and not with any intent to' influence its market- ability or anything of this sort. The oyster processes a large quantity of water `an hour. It takes in up to 40 liters of water in an hour so it is a remarkably effective filtering system. It `has the capability of removing from the environment materials that `are present in a very dilute way. There are some data which suggest that they have the ability of concentrating some pollutants by a factor of 10,000. The question, It seems to me, that one needs to go to from that is- ~re there levels of these substances that are low enough in the environ- ment that the oyster is not able to pick them up ~ And again I have very little information to offer on that. I do know that if you go to levels of DDT of 1 in 1014, that is one part of DDT in a hundred thousand billion, then the oyster in at least a period of 20 days acquires no detectable amount of DDT. I know that at about one part in a hundred billion, the oyster in 2 weeks w~ill pick up quantities that you do detect. This is not to `say that the oyster is damaged by that level. It is simply to say that he has the capacity to Bxtract at that level. Other organisms, including man, feed on oysters. It is conceivable that the oyster will store away quantities of these in sufficiently high concentration to be harmful to man if he eat's them. PAGENO="0370" 370 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT We have moniltoring programs that are aimed at detecting the levels that are now present; we have regulations that prohibit ship- ment of these interstate if they have any substantial levels and so on. But, again, one other point that this opens up, and that I might have commented on, ~s that a great deal of our work in pollution or in relation to pesticides has really been aimed at sort of statin,~ how bad the situation is. It seems to me that this is the wrong point of view. Rather, what we really need to know, because surely we are going to have some levels of pollutants in the environment, are what levels we can have Without detriment to the environment. The research may be done in the same way, bitt the results will be much more useful to us, in fact, if they are phrased in such a way that they tell us that this is allowable and that It will have no effect insofar as we can judge now, rather than the other way around. Mr. DADDARIO. So, you need to have a better idea of what you must accomplish. Dr. BtrolwaY. Yes; it seems too much effort up until now has been in trying to demonstrate to people such as you and to the general public and me that there is really a valid problem that we ought to be concerned about. Shucks, I'm convinced. What I want to know is, "What are we going to do about this problem?" We are going to have wastes of some sort or another, and we are going to have to segregate these into some part of the environment where they won't be disadvantageous to us. We need to have sufficient knowledge that we can do this without damage-so we can have our cake and eat it, too.. We ~may use the oceans to dispose of some of these wastes. In a natural world, they were sinks-almost everything eventually ran into the oceans. Today we tend to treat them as though they would do this for all sorts of artificial products as well as natural ones, and no doubt, with sufficient knowledge, we can afford to use them deliber- ately for this purpose. But even the oceans are not inexhaustible resources, and do not have a capacity to absorb unlimited quantities of wastes. And the difficulty is intensified because we usually place these waste materials in fairly localized areas, usually quite close to shore where they are subject to recycling. This suggests to me that in the estuaries, we may need to come around soon to a kind of landscaping zoning, a decision that for the estuaries the principle of multiple use won't work. An estuary can be used either for this purpose or for something else. Carrying it to an extreme, clearly if one dredges and builds industrial sites, this is one valuable use for an estuary. At the same time, you can't expect the shallow waters along the edge of it to serve as a nursery ground for shrimp and other aquatic resources. This is a choice that you have to make and it seems to me that a zoning concept is the way to make it. Can we afford to fill or pollute all of them since they are so very important to us in terms of marine products? I don't think we can. At the moment, there isn't any way of saying that you can't do it to this estuary but it is all right to do it to that one. Mr. DADDARIO. Do we have enough ecologists available to make a solid beginning in this area? If we don't, how do we get them? PAGENO="0371" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 371 Dr. BUCKLEY. Well, let me comment for just a moment on that. I'm not sure what an ecologist is, but it doesn't seem to me that one sets out necessarily to train an ecologist. It seems more than anything else that ecology is a point of view, a recognition of the interactions that take place, so it doesn't mean to me that you have to have a man who goes through a set period of training and at the end of this comes out an ecologist. He may do this and there are a dozen or so institutions around the country that do offer graduate training and do produce people with these capabilities and many of them are first-rate people. But there are many other first-rate ecologists who were trained as fishery people or foresters or almost any kind of field biologist. I think for my purpose, I would restrict this to the biological field rather than others, but this is not necessarily so because I can think of some people who are trained in physical science who are also first-rate ecologists. How do we get them? It seems to me that we get them as we need them. In the first place, this hasn't been an attractive field to go into. It has been been attractive intellectually, but the employment pos- sibilities have been, if not nil, not very striking, and while I might say that money alone will not cure this sort of thing, it seems to me that at least a sufficient amount of money in the sense of available jobs and so on is one of the requirements without which this will not happen. I think that it is sort of a chicken-and-egg thing. I am not suggesting that a large amount of money would suddenly produce ecologists, but I am saying that without a relatively large amount of money we are not likely to be able to stimulate an additional number of people into the field. Mr. DADDAIUo. Is ecology sufficiently attractive intellectually so that, if there were programs which had direction, purpose, and force behind them, people would be attracted to it? Dr. BUCKLEY. Yes, I would sayso-both in terms of an intellectual challenge and problems which are subject to actual solution. Beyond this, I think solution of such problems have a social impor- tance, and most scientists will ultimately admit that, in addition to basic curiosity, they are interested in the well-being and contributing to the well-being of the world. Mr. BROWN. Mr. Chairman. Mr. DADDAEIO, Mr. Brown. Mr. BROWN. Might I suggest that we could solve the problem of providing additional funding and carrier opportunities if we retitled these ecologists as biological systems engineers and let the DOD finance them. Dr. BUCKLEY. May I make only one disparaging comment on sys- tems analysis, but it seems to me this is sort of an organized common- sense in the way that I like to think of it in regard to environment. It has some very sophisticated practitioners and some requirements for highly skilled methodology. Basically it really lets us apply common- sense in the best possible manner to the solution of a particular problem and lets us eliminate many of the constraints that traditional thinking imposes. I'm not saying systems analysis is not a highly worthwhile thing. I firmly believe that it is. Just as I feel that computer modeling in PAGENO="0372" 372 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT regard to problems is particularly useful in my field to enable us to point out what we need to know. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. I'm tempted to begin with a defense of the concept of systems engineering. It is true that it is often called, organized com- monsense and it is meant to be, but it is marked in the modern world by the use of mathematical models which are the key. Ecologists have been using this tool for a good many years. I re- member that on the first occasion I had to use an electronic computer I discovered that the problem I was trying to solve had already been solved by an ecologist who was working on the population problem. Ecologists have, in a sense, been systems engineers for a long time. Secondly, I notice that you are willing to use computers to solve problems and to propose possible solutions, so I feel that for one group to run down another is a little bit inappropriate. They are doing different things with the same tool. I would like to ask a serious question now. Do we have a bio- degradable DDT yet or don't we? Dr. BUCKLEY. It is by some organisms and not by others and it is a matter of degree. You and I take in DDT and transform this into a variety of compounds gradually removing the chiorines from it. We store a certain amount of it in our fat without change. Some other parts, we eliminate primarily through the urine. We just gradually break this down. In that sense, it is degradable. It is not like some of the materials which are totally nondegradable. Biodegradability in relation to pesticides seems to me to offer some very real problems. First of all, some of these need a certain length of time in residence in order to accomplish a certain end. I don't know where you would draw the line on degradability. Mr. VIVIAN. I think you will agree that the DDT we have been using remains active far beyond its intended valuable life. Dr. BUCKLEY. I think there is no question about this, and if one wishes to pursue DDT sort of to the end point here I can't think of specific uses of DDT that ought to be prohibited and in the long run if we come to a bona fide need to reduce the amount of DDT or pre- vent further buildups of it, then I think we are faced with overall decisions on it, not piecemeal decisions. Mr. VIVIAN. I understand that. The question I am trying to get to is whether we are working fast enough and ambitiously enough on types of insecticides which might replace DDT and which would have a much more controlled lifetime. Is there enough work on that subject? Dr. BUCKLEY. I don't think there is ever enough work, but I think there has been a very great increase in work by industry as well as in agencies of Government and I think the regulatory patterns have stimulated this very greatly. When I make these remarks, I restrict them largely to application within the United States, not to the world as a whole, though. Mr. VIVIAN. Why should an individual farmer be concerned with using something other than DDT, particularly something that might cost more? Dr. BTTCKLEY. Why should he? Mr. VIVIAN. Yes. PAGENO="0373" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 373 Dr. BUCKLEY. I don't think he should. As an individual. Mr. VIVIAN. What, then, will cause the chemical industry to produce chemicals which the farmer probably won't buy? Dr. BUCKLEY. The regulatory pattern that we use with insecticides and pesticides in general is that they must be approved by the Depart- ment of Agriculture on the basis of their effectiveness and, second, on the basis of lack of adverse effect within their approved use. If there is a whole series of compounds available for a particular use, then we turn next to the recommending procedures. Again the Department of Agriculture has a fairly elaJborate system through the State experiment stations, and so forth, for making recommendations. It seems to me that you have a whole series of pressures that urge the farmer to use the safest compound. If at the same time, he is given a tool which is as effective as the one he formerly used, I think you have some hope in moving in this direction. I don't see this as an open and shut situation with the present regulatory systems. Mr. VIVIAN. But we will all agree that there is too much DDT in the world's "circulatory" system. Dr. BUCKLEY. We certainly know that it is very widespread. What we really don't know is how much of a disadvantage it really is in those places where it is present. Mr. VIvIAN. Is it increasing? Dr. BUCKLEY. In the United States its use is decreasing. In the world as a whole, its use is increasing. Mr. VIVIAN. And there is evidence it will last for many, many years, is that right? Dr. BUCKLEY. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. So even if we continue the same rate of usage, the total will undoubtedly increase throughout the world. Dr. BUCKLEY. Yes; although if you take again the human being in the United States (this relates to that matter of change, again), if you go back to the early 1950's, I think the evidence is that there is no increase in the quantity of DDT and metabolates present in the human population of the United States. The sample numbers are very small, but there is nothing there to suggest a very marked increase and in fact they suggest a leveling off. Recent intake may have been somewhat lower than before. I'm not sure but what we have reached some static point with excretion balanc- ing intake, and with this point hopefully below a point of biological damage. Mr. VIVIAN. Have we developed anything that might be called a sweep-up chemical? In other words, if you have an excess of acid in a stream, you dump in some base to react with it and in some respect change the chemical ~tructure. Do we have chemicals which can re- duce the DDT present? Dr. BUCKLEY. To my knowledge we do not. We did face a problem with benzen~hexaohloride a number of years ago when it was used on potato fields and it made potatoes taste musty. People did at that time try putting activated carbon on the fields and they were able to reduce uptake by potatoes. PAGENO="0374" 374 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. VIVIAN. We have not developed any chemicals for minimizing or reducing the concentration? Dr. BUCKLEY. No; although clearly we can do this in the laboratory by fairly extreme `change in the `chemical environment. Mr. VIVIAN. Leit me ask a question which I think is probably some- what secondary. You indicate that oysters are effective in concentrat- ing DD'T. What `happens if you raise oysters in a bed? Can you use these as a means of removing DDT from effluents or can't you? Dr. BUCKLEY. This is one of those system's problems that we both would agree is important. I don't know the volume of flow that goes through this bed. I don~t know the total amount of DDT in it. I don't know the effective amount that the individual oyster would ex- tract from this. Mr. VIVIAN. You talked about a problem in California where DDT concentration increased as it went from water to `plankton to fish `to `a bird. Finally, `the bird died from an overconcentration. Have you found any way of breaking `that chain? Mr. DADDARIO. That's what we are talking about,, we have got `to find out how to break that chain. Dr. BUCKLEY. Gradually in the passing of time DDT is no longer present in the environment in sufficient quantity and `there is a de- creasing amount present in plankton and decreasing amount present in fish and the end result is that the problem is no longer present there. Of course, `having this recognized problem, we did not `add any more DDT to Clear Lake, Calif. We used other chemicals which were more degradable for the control of the gnat. Mr. VIv~N. How did you enforce use of the other chemicals? Dr. BUCKLEY. In that particular case, it was a State-sponsored pro- gram for the control of the `Clear Lake gnat and `there `were no `prob- lems. People knew `there `was a severe problem and one they felt they didn't want to have. Mr. VIVIAN. In the discussion you have had with the chairman on the subject of how many ecologists there are and how many persons trained in related fields, you refer to the complexity of ecological prob- lem's. It seems to me that the task of learning even a single specie is quite large. `To learn the ecological background of the thousands and thou- sands of insects, birds, fish, is really an enormous task. Then to try to reduce this to some sort of solution-isn't this a task that is two or three orders of magnitude `beyond the capabilities of the people in this field in the United States? Aren't we a long way from having any extensive knowledge, really?. Dr. BUCKLEY. Yes, `we are. I wouldn't propose that we will in a short time `have answers to these questions. It seems to me that we can do very much better than we now do with the available people and by a systemization of the knowledge that we now have. Secondly, I don't think, at least I have high hopes that it isn't necessary to understand all about each species, but rather one can look at certain environments and hopefully understand the processes that take place in them. Now, it may be different `species that are present in each one, but they fill the same ecological role-they may transfer nutrients from PAGENO="0375" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 375 one level to another or they may break down organic matter, or they may perform some other biological function. A whole host of dif- ferent organisms may be involved in different places, but it seems to me an understanding of the rates at which these processes take place and the pressures which there are and their effects on these processes are im~portant to understand. I think these are much more likely sus- ceptible to understanding than is a total understanding of the role and behavior of each of these separate species. I think one has to study the community of organisms rather than individuals. Mr. VIVIAN. In reference to measurements of these characteristics, you mention the environment which is a subject certainly receiving at- tention these days. Are you actively monitoring pollution in various places in the United States? Specifically, is there any active on-line monitoring going on at the present? Dr. BUCKLEY. Yes; the first that I know of was in the Ohio River Valley, the Ohio River Valley Sanitary Committee, and it also is done to a limited extent in quite a number of other places. Mr. VIVIAN. What is done in the Ohio River Valley? Dr. BUCKLEY. I am not sure of the number of stations and even the variables that are measured, but temperature and oxygen and light and a series of these things which in the aggregate tell you a large amount about the quality. Mr. VIVIAN. Do you do this downstream from major polluters? Dr. BUCKLEY. Yes, in some cases. Mr. VIVIAN. Do you have any plan to monitor and relay back the information? Dr. BUCKLEY. May I say I only report this to you as something which I don't do nor does the Department of the Interior on the Ohio River. This is a cooperative venture of some 14 States with some cooperation of the Federal Government. I think that the answer to that is probably "No" so far as individual sources, all individual sources. I think one can certainly do this in terms of stretches of the river in understanding what changes there are from place to place. I would point out that aside from that, there are some possibilities of using some of the satellites at least for temperature changes, things of this sort in the ocean, also the possible use of infrared sensors for picking up differences in photosynthesis which in turn is a measure of total energy output of a particular environment and you can do this in remote areas where you can't get at it in other ways. At a practical level yet, I think the answer is `~No." Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions for Dr. Buckley. I wonder if Dr. MacLeod is here. Mr. DADDARIO. He has left, but if you have some questions we can get them to him. Dr. BUCKLEY. Mr. Chairman, may I point out that I felt a little re- gretful that Mr. Vivian hadn't had a chance to ask questions and I was sure if I made a comment about systems analysis Mr. Vivian would take the opportunity to ask questions, so I feel that I pulled your leg a little bit. Mr. DADDARIO. Well, you certainly got him to rise. I have been in- terested in the dialog that has developed between you two and I hate to break up the rapport, but we must proceed to another witness. PAGENO="0376" 376 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT May we send you some questions? Dr. BUCKLEY. Yes. (Additional questions and answers for the record may be found in vol.11.) (The complete prepared statement of Dr. John L. Buckley follows:) PREPA1uD STATEMENT OF DR. JOHN L. BuCKLEY, ECOLOUCAL RESEARCH Co- ORDINATOR, OFFICE OF TH1~ `SCIENCE ADVISER, U.S. DEPARThtENT OF THE INTERIOR Chairman fladdario, members of the subcommittee, I am delighted to have the opportunity to discuss with you the "adequacy of `technology for pollution abate- ment." Your committee is certainly to be commended for its effort to stimulate creative thinking about environmental protection as a whole. The Research Management Advisory Panel report is itself a perceptive document that will stimulate creative thought in attempts to face up to the issues it raises. We all recognize that pollution is a matter of serious concern, and I shall not dwell on how bad the situation is. Many of the witnesses who `have ap- peared before you have discussed in detail needed `hardware and instrumenta- tion and integrated systems for effective control of pollution. I plan to confine my remarks largely to the inadequacies in basic knowledge rather than to tech- nology and my personal interest is greatest In understanding the "risk" side of the benefit-risk equation. Of course, I agree with the statement of the panel "* * * it appears obvious that the basic issue in the field of environmental pollution relates to the defini- tion of goals. The definition must be specific enough to form a basis for policy formulation. Answers are needed to questions such as: How clean should this stream be? What limits should be placed on emissions Into the atmosphere here? To what extent can this land assimiliate man-made wastes or other products ?" While we can probably all agree that as a general goal, we want an environ- ,ment of a quality truly fit to live in and pass on with pride to future generations, we have not yet agreed on the environmental quality standards that we must specify to meet this goal. A suitable environment will fulfill not only our bio- logical needs, but also our demands for recreation, esthetic gratification and happiness. We cannot yet specify with precision our biological needs and we do even less well with the others. We can consider the kinds of worlds we might have that would meet our needs a~ a spectrum extending from the completely "natural" to the totally arti- ficial. At one end of the spectrum would be a world in which the influence of man is essentially nil, and where he makes do with what is present. For millen- nia we lived just thus-the existence of man as a species is evidence that man, at least in limited numbers, can survive in such a natural world. Even if we could, few of us would exchange our modern comforts and `standards of living for the vagaries and uncertainties of a world in which we passively accepted what was present. At the other end of the spectrum is a totally controlled environment in which each of the requirements of man is provided In just the right amount at the right time. We do this now in the controlled environment of a space ship. Perhaps in the future we may be able to do so for the earth as a whole. But the spaceship environment still requires inputs of energy and materials gathered from the earth. At this point in time it is not self-sustaining; moreover we don't expect it~ occupants to live out their lives in its confines. Even though we might accept such an artificial environment, we have far to go before we can replace the materials and services provided by the natural world. So the real world in which we live is somewhere between these two extremes, and our goal must be to manipulate it in such a way as to meet our needs. Man, though comparatively adaptable, has certain biologically fixed require- ments and limitations. He must have oxygen to' `breathe, water to drink, certain kinds of nutrients. Beyond these basic essentials are certain aesthetic require- ments which we cannot yet quantitatively specify-but which are none the less real. We cannot yet meet these biological needs without certain services rendered to us by living organisms. We depend on green plants to capture energy from the sun, and combine it in organic compounds where it is stored in a form PAGENO="0377" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 377 we can draw on. In the process plants remove carbon dioxide from the surround- ings and return oxygen to the atmosphere, The efficiency in energy capture is low, but the scale is vast. Other living organisms break down organic matter into smaller pieces; others ultimately return it to a mineral form in which it can again be used. Still others convert plants into other more favored forms of food. But just as nutrients and energy move from one level to another in these food chains, so too do other compounds including such disadvantageous sub- stances as radionuelides, heavy metals, and persistent organic compounds. The living organisms that perform these functions are aggregated into com- munities, the members of which are determined by their common ability to tolerate the physical conditions of the site and interactions with the other members of the community. The relationship is not passive for the organisms in turn interact with and may change the site. Their tolerance levels are not necessarily identical, but they overlap in the range of conditions present on the site. As conditions change, new organisms with tolerances that fall within the new ranges may become a part of the community; some of those originally present may be eliminated. The less rigorous the conditions of the site, the greater will be the variety of the inhabitants. It is clear that man can affect two variables, in these dynamic systems. He can deliberately select and favor organisms that directly suit his needs as he does in agriculture-in fact he can manipulate them genetically to make them better suit his needs. Second, he can alter the characteristics of the site-physically or chemically. Again he does this deliberately in agriculture by addition of fertilizers, by plowing, etc. He may also alter both variables unwittingly. Pollution is one of the ways by which we change the quality of a site. So long as a pollutant does not exceed the limitations of the organisms present, there will be no profound change. As the alteration in conditions becomes greater, changes in species will be greater-but there will not necessarily be changes in the basic processes that take place or in the value of these to man. All of which is to say that change per se is not necessarily bad. On the other hand, when changes reach such a magnitude that the functioning `of the com- munity is impaired, then there is reason for concern. So much for my comments on ecology. It seems clear to me that environmental management must consider not only the direct response of man to pollutants, but rather must consider the effects on all the living resources be requires or uses. And because each of these living organisms in turn depends on others, our concern must extend to most of the living world. There are two general sources of man caused pollution: wastes that we de- liberately dispose of, and material's that enter the environment by inadvertence or accident such as by-products of combustion or products of normal wear or pesticides that linger on after they have served their intended use. The strate- gies for managing these two categories of pollutants may be very different. For the deliberate wastes there are point sources, and we can act either to change the character of the waste so that it is not detrimental, or we can try to segr& gate it in a part of the environment where it will not be harmful. Much of the discussion before this committee has dealt with technology for handling these problems. We have so far to go In handling such wastes that it may be academic to worry about getting our environment "too clean." It is possible to remove the wrong things because we do not understand troublesome processes like eutrophication. And it is at least theoretically possible to return sewage effluents to our waterways essentially ion-free, which, carried to an extreme in intensively used rivers, could reduce or eliminate fish and aquatic life. More to the point, it would be economically wasteful. Our real problem with these wastes is to strike a balance that will utilize fully the capacity of the environment to assimi- late them, but will no't so overburden the environment as to lessen its useful- ness. The inadvertent or accidental pollutants are a different matter. Many of these compounds are new to the biological world, and in some instances they resist degradation by physical and biological means. The processes that have evolved over the millenia for returning "dust to dust" do not work with some of these compounds. Some of these compounds are washed into our streams, are carried into the arn~sphere, are picked up by living organisms and carried in their bodies. Some of them, because of their persistence, travel vast distances. From the lead added to gasolines, we have increased the amount of lead iii urban PAGENO="0378" 378 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT areas, in areas close to highways, in the surface waters of the oceans, appar- ently even in the bodies of men. Some Itisecticides, such as DDT, have been found (usually in very small amounts) in fishes far at sea, in penguins and seals in the Antarctic, in snow and rain, and in the atmosphere. Some of these com- pounds, in relatively small amounts, are toxic to some forms of life-for example, to shrimp at less than 1 part lu a billion parts of water. (Considering that shrimp, and crabs and lobsters too, are biologically much closer to the insects than to the vertebrates, it is not surprising that they are especially sensitive to choral- cals designed to kill insects.) For the most part, we have not seen obvious Ill effects from the quantities present in our environment. But our ability to detect change is not good, our experience has not been long, and effects there may well be. Living systems pass on these material's from one level of life to another, often concentrating them at each `successive stage. Oysters for example are able to extract DDT from water containing less than 1 part in 10,000,000,000 and con- centrate it to 0.6 part in 1,000,000 in their bodies in 15 days. At slightly `higher environmental levels, the concentration factor may reach 70,000 times. Even though apparently not harmed themselves, they can pass on these substances to other organisms that feed on them, which in turn accumulate still more. The best documented case of the effects of such `accumulation was at Clear `Lake, `California, where lake waters containing 1 part of DDD in 50,000,000 parts of water produced plankton containing 5 parts per million. Fish feeding on the plankton contained fat with hundreds of parts per million; grebes that fed on the fish died. Similar concentration phenomena have been observed `in terres- trial environments:. Waste generation will continue and despite greater attention to recycling and reduction in waste production, there will continue to be a need to dispose of wastes. To dispose of wastes in the' "best" manner requires that we learn, and use, the capacity of the environment to assimilate wastes. Thus, we need to learn enough a'bout the physical structure and processes within our environment-air, land and water-to make suitable judgments as to rates and methods of movement, capability to retain wastes segregated from the rest of `the environment, effects of wastes on physical and chemical characteristics. We also need to learn enough about the biosphere to both utilize its capabilities and protect it from damage. ,Today opr knowledge is not complete for any single ecosystem, though we know much more about some than about others. There is need for a great deal of hard, grubby work-an extension of the natural history of the last century, using present-day `techniques, to provide us with knowledge of just what species are where-and beyond this a refinement that quantifies their relationship; that elucidates the dynamics of the population. Such knowledge, for at least representative ecosystems. would provide us with ecological baselines against which change can be measured. Most studies to date have dealt with effects of single pollutants, yet pollutants occur in innumerable combinations and concentrations in nature, some of which react synergistically. Most studies have dealt with short periods of time, yet some' of these are nearly constant low-level presences; most studies have dealt with healthy organisms, yet wild populations are made up of young and old, healthy and ill, and almost always they are under some stress or another which may make them more susceptible to pollutants. Waste disposal, and control of other pollutants too, must eventually be based on a knowledge of what happens with what concentration of `what pollution where, a judgment of what we can accept in environmental damage, and infor- mation on the costs "of control. Eventually "on-line" computers programmed with suitable models and fed with appropriate environmental data, perhaps gathered by remote sensing techniques, may well direct our actions. In the meantime, construction of models will help us select proper priorities for our research efforts. A number of Bureaus in the Department of `the Interior are conducting re- search and `acquiring data, and developing methods, including simulation and modeling, that will provide necessary information for sound environmental management. The appended `statement of `the Geological Survey illustrates such activities related to `the physical environment. Both Bureaus of the Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration have research underway on `the biological effects of pollutants. Some of the problems they face are severe: PAGENO="0379" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 379 Which of the thousands of pollutants should be tested first? What com- binations? For how long a time? At what concentrations? Is there a thresh- old below which there is no effect, or no uptake? What species? At what stage in the life history? If oysters containing X parts per million of pollutant "A" are safe for man to eat, are these levels harpiless to the oyster? These questions relate largely to effects on individuals. But the same ques- tions apply, and answers are needed, to populations and to ecological systems as well. It may well be here that our Ignorance is greatest, and our needs most intense. Thank you for your attention. I should be glad to attempt to answer ques- tions. APPENDIX 1 (To statement by J. L. Buckley before Committee on Science and Astronautics) ACTIVITIES OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY RELATED TO POLLUTION ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGY Better knowledge of scienti~c laws, basic principles, and environmental proc- esses must form the basis of improved understanding and better control of our environment, including pollution abatement and all other conservation measures. A great variety of basic data must be collected to improve knowledge of our en- vironment. Also, research must be done continuously to understand better the processes which control the complex responses of environmental elements to the stresses of nature and man. In the field of water resources, the TLS. Geological Survey is the nation's prin- cipal basic data collector, and currently is increasing its efforts to collect the data most likely to serve the needs of those who are trying to improve our environment. It also is the principal Federal agency concerned with re- search on water resources, as such. This entire research effort is aimed at better understanding of fundamental processes which must be controlled or lived with to cope with environmental problems. BASIC DATA INPUT TO POLLUTION COETROL For many years water data have been collected primarily for planners rather than for water managers faced with rapidly changing problems. Therefore, they have been collected carefully, but by rather time-consuming methods. To cope with today's water problems, one must have data essentially on a daily basis in order to predict critical situations, and to deal with them before irrepar- able damage occurs. The Survey is placing great emphasis on automatic moni- toring, better water resources coverage, computer processing of data, and a variety of rapid methods of information release. Achievements in data service will permit Increased efficiency in the control of pollution. THE BEARING OF PROCESS RESEARCH ON POLLUTION ABATEMENT Failure to cope with certain serious pollution problems, such as algal bloom, often can be traced to lack of knowledge of the controlling scientific principle or process. For example, biological stoichiometry (balance of aquatic organisms) now is known to be the key to blooms of this kind, and it is thought that the basic "law of the minimum" determines whether or not undesirable growths will occur. Unfortunately, analytical methods still are so deficient, and knowledge of biological processes so uncertain, that one cannot predict accurately exactly what set of circumstances will cause algal bloom. Therefore, he cannot devise preventive treatment which is applicable in all cases. Research by the Geological Survey on nutrient cycling processes, solutions geochemistry, and analytical pro- cedures are aimed at filling gaps of this kind. SIGNIFICANCE OF HYDRAULICS IN QUALITY CONTROL It generally is conceded that practicable water quality standards are a first step toward improving our water resources. But to set such standards requires knowledge of extremely complex Interactions between hydrodynamics and water quality factors. Until this relationship is properly understood, it will be im- possible to set any completely satisfactory standards. The Survey Is placing PAGENO="0380" 380 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT great emphasis on relationships of flow, seasonal changes, and water quality in an effort to provide this knowledge. GEOCHEMICAL RESEARCH AS RELATED TO POLLUTION Ground-water systems, impounded water, and estuaries are subject to unwhole- some quantities directly related to a variety of biological, chemical, and geo- chemical processes. Some of these processes could be inhibited or counteracted if they were properly understood. The Survey has a considerable research pro- gram aimed at understanding such subjects as the solution chemistry of sedi- ment-water interfaces in lakes, and acid-producing processes in mines. Mine acid and accompanying serious iron contamination result from reversal of a massive process of nature originally responsible for pyrite deposits, which now are primarily responsible for the mine problems. It is not known whether these processes occur in both aerobic and anaerobic environments, nor whether it is possible to inhibit or reverse the process by proper catalysis, bacterial seeding, or other encouragement. Geochemists of the Survey are working to understand such processes and to demonstrate, by pilot applications, what might be done, to reduce related pollution. REMOTE SENSING POSSIBILITIES The massive expansion In population, industry, and urbanization, and the at- tendant waste disposal problems, mean that much information must be collected on a large and relatively inexpensive scale of we are to keep up with the rate of problem development. Remote sensing of pertinent environmental factors is the only answer to this situation. The Survey's Remote Sensing Hydrologic Ap- plications Program has an extensive plan for surveillance of lakes, hydrodynamic studies of estuaries, and other subjects, which well could result in breakthroughs of understanding of environmental phenomena. APPENDIX 2 COMMENTS ON ISSUE P (2) or "Issuns FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE CONGRESS," PAGES 15-17, "REVORT OF THE RESEARCH MANAGEMENT ADVISORY PANEL" "D. The Scientific Basis for Pollution Policy. "(2) What do we need to know about movement of ground water to permit deep well disposal of wastes? Similarly, do we know enough about oceanic circulation and marine ecology to permit deep sea disposal of wastes?" DEEP-wELL DISPOSAL OF WASTES Until the utopian goals of waste management are realized-complete and productive re-use of waste products or total removal of wastes from man's environment-compromises must be acceptable. This means reduction of waste volumes to the maximum practicable extent and discharge into those parts of the environment that are farthest from the biosphere. The fluid-filled void space of the geologic subsurface contains storage reservoirs for liquid wastes that have been out of direct contact with surface processes for millions of years. iiljection of liquid wastes into this inner space provides the opportunity to remove noxious materials from contact with man almost indefinitely. Deep injection of wastes is a useful alternative to disposal into surface or near-surface potable or usable waters. It is not a panacea and is presently an expensive and often uncertain alternative. Although the general methods are well known and are based on proven engineering concepts, confidence in feasi- bility judgments and long-term acceptability at a given site requires information in a degree of detail that is seldom readily available. This includes (1) a knowledge of the subsurface rocks and their contained fluids, (2) the dynamics of the flow system of which all subsurface fluids are a part, and (3) possible adverse geochemical. interactions among waste fluids, native water, and reser- voir rock, dangerous hydraulic fracturing and possible adverse effects of waste fluids on geologic processes such as movement in faulting zones. Considerable geologic and hydrologic research is required to provide a better basis for evaluating underground waste disposal sites. Geologic and hydro- logic research, data collection, and analysis activities of the Geological Survey must make major contributions to attaining the necessary information. Expan- sion of some activities, particularly in the areas of age dating of deep ground PAGENO="0381" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLIJTION ABATEMENT 381 waters, the geochemistry of deep flow systems and fluid mixing systems, and effects of deep disposal on the hydrodynamics of saline water systems, would improve prediction of long range effects of deep disposal, particularl~r In the gene~,al area of adverse effects on water and other miner~tl r.est~tirces' of possible futute importance. INJECTION OF GASES INTO TIlE GROUND The storage of natural gas in man-made or natural subsurface reservoirs is an established practice. The methodology developed, as well as the scientific principles learned from research on the behavior of gases in porous media, mdi- ~ate that major breakthroughs in reducing air pollution at some localities might be posSible by injection of low volume waste gas streams into the ground. Dis- posal might be at shallow depth into unsaturated void space (principally In arid regions of the west) or at greater depth into reservoirs that would depend on creation of a gasbubble. Shallow disposal into air-filled void space between the land surface and the ~oile of saturation would depend not only on the presence of an impermeable layer iiear or at the surface, below which gases could be injected, but would also re- quite detailed analysis of gas migration rates in the permeable reservoir rock as well as through the confining layer. The attractiveness of the method stems principally from the fact that rates of transport of gases injected into the ground are much lower than rates of transport in the air and that decontamination may result from adsorption of gaseous contaminants on the solid matrix of the dis- ~posal reservoir or by filtration of particulate matter. Deep disposal would be closely analogous to methods for storing natural gas, using a depleted structttral or stratigraphic natural gas reservoir or locating a barren Structure by drilling and testing, which could be used as a disposal reservoir. The energy requirements for such a system are high, but for gases that pre- sent problems of cleanup by filtratlon or other conventional treatment, and that can be segregated into a concehtrated loW4oltLme stream, the method has great -potential for alleviating critical air pollution problems. A great deal of research is necessary in order to develop the method, particu- larly on the interaction of waste-gas materials and earth materials (including -water) and detailed information on any proposed site is necessary to determine feasibility. Current research on the physics Of flow of gases a~id liquffis lii the unsaturated zone above t%ie water table Will contribute to an understanding ~of the problems underlying shallow disposal. The resiearch areas that are im- portant to deep disposal of liquids are also important to gas disposal. OCEAN DISPOSAL OF WASTES Our knowledge of ocean circulation is far from complete. Yet We know enough -to say that under present circumstances the open ocean is a much more suitable -waste treatment basin than the rivers and estuaries. However, costs are higher, and we should npt repeat past mistakes by aSsuming that indisicriminate dis- poal of wastes in the open sea is a final answer. If it is necessary to continue to view wastes in the negative sense, as useless material which must be discarded, then the ocean can be used safely to dump large amounts of wastes provided that this is done under adequate control. Eventually, it seems that we must find imaginative new ways of waste treatment based as far as possible on the concept -of recycling and. re-use. Mr. DADIARIO. Our next witness is Mr. Henry W. Riecken of the Social Science Research Council. £~ATEMENT OP MR. HENRY W. RIECKEN OP THE SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARC~t COUNCIL Mr. ErsckEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to have a chance to talk to the committee. T speak for myself as a social scientist rather than as the Vice President of the Social Science Re- search Council making an official statement~ I'm glad to speak to 68_24fi-~6IG---vol. 1-25 PAGENO="0382" 382 ADEQUACY ~F TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATE]~~fl~NT the question of whether the social sciences can usefully contribute to the abatement of pollution and what ways they might do so. I do not have a prepared. statement but I prefer to work from notes, Mr. Daddario, if that will be acceptable to you, and I shall try to be brief. I know that the committee has sat for many days and listened to much testimony. It has sat. a long time this morning and probably would welcome brevity. Furthermore, I think that the social sciences have not as yet done very much to contribute to the solution of pollution problems and hence there is perhaps not much for me to say. I'm reminded ~f the words that General Eaker had to say when he landed the first con- tingent of B-17's in a small English village in 1942 and was asked to make a speech to the inhabitants. He thanked the local people very much for their warm welcome, and added: "When we have done sOme fighting, we will do some more talking." Then he sat down. I am not an expert on pollution, Mr. Chairman, but I have tried to follow some of the studies of the subject and to give some thought as to how social sciences might help to make recommendations for the abatement of pollution. We haven't found a fully satisfactory role for social sciences as yet. A~ my first suggestion, Mr. Chairman, I would recommend that a good way to get social sciences involved and thinking about these problems would be to get social scientists appointed to advisory boards and study committees that have looked into pollution problems. I notice, for example, no social scientists named on the PSAC En- vironrnental Pollution Panel or on the subpanels thereof. There are only one or two among the participants in the discussions conducted under the auspices of NAS-NRC Committee on Pollution. The effective participation of social and behavioral scientists in efforts to abate pollution require development of a body of knowledge. The development of a body of knowledge, a body of interested people who are aware of the problems and the techniques of pollution con~ trol, is essential so that social scientists can both learn about where they can be useful as well as suggest ways of formulating the problems. In other words, I think you learn about a problem by participating in groups that are working on the problem. I think it is essential to have social scientists participating. I would suggest that there are at least four ways in which social science may contribute to the study of pollution and its abatement. Let me briefly enumerate them and then I will go into some detail on each. The first way is by the analysis of the economic, social, and human context in which pollution occurs, and by clariflca~tion of the forces that produce pollution or allow it to occur. The second way is through the assessment of popular understanding of pollution and its causes, and asessment of popular acceptance of measures for its abatement. Third, I think that social scientists can contribute through the invention of institutional devices for effective control of pollution, and, fourth, they can contribute through the invention of techniques for community education and action. Let me take up these points separately. The first one in the matter of the analysis of the economic, social and human context in which PAGENO="0383" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY rOn POLLUTION ABATEMENT 383 pollution occurs and a clarification of the forces that produce pollu- tion or allow it to occur. Now, social scientists are not particularly god at biochemistry or combustion engineering and ought not to work bn the physical aspects of pollution per se. What they ought to be thinking about is the sociological context in which pollution takes place. What are the human attitudes, interests, inhibitions, habits, beliefs, and so on that affect the processes of handling air, water, waste, containers, food, and the like. Let me take as an example one that comes through some publie health experience that I happened to have had. Qne of the most serious problems in underdeveloped countries is a disease called wean~ ling diarrhea, which affects children from 6 months to 3 or 4 years of age. In addition to malnutrition, retarded physical and mental growth, increased susceptibility to respiratory diseases, and other in- fections are the symptoms of this enteric affliction. It often termi- nates in death. The origin, transmission and behavior of this disease are being studied and there are a good many open possibilities. It might be a dietary deficiency, a virus infection, bacterial infection, or other causes. An interesting question is how this disease moves about among the population. It was a behavioral study that showed an intimate association between the prevalence of diarrhea and the availability of water. Now, if water is available within a hundred meters of the home, the* prevalence of the diarrhea is remarkably less than if the water is more than 100 meters away. This finding comes from a study done in Costa Rica by the Louisiana State University School of Medicine. There is not much difference in prevalence whether the water is piped into the individual house or available in a public spigot or even at a well as long as it is near the house. It is distance from the home that counts. This suggests very strongly that the mode of transmission is hand to mouth in a very literal sense. That is, the cleanliness of the mother and child are greajer if water is available so that they can keep themselves clean, and therefore keep the infants' food and toys and other things that children put into their mouths clean. Now, it is probably failure of personal hygiene through the lack of water that is one of the major means of transmitting whatever the causative agent of this disease may he. Behavioral study suggests very clear clues as to how the disease is transmitted, and maybe how it can be partially controlled. Now I want to take another example of soci~l science research and show its possible contribution to the study of pollution. Much at- tention has been paid to the possibility of reducing air pollution in urban areas by altering commuter habits, especially by shifting peo.. plc from private automobile to public transportation and particularly from vehicles propelled by internal combustion engines to some other kind, preferably electrical. Now, economists have been doing some thinking about some of these problems and doing some research, examining the value of time, the attractiveness of mode of transportation and questions of subsidy or cost of alternative modes of transportation. PAGENO="0384" 384 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POI4AY2IQN ABATEM~N~ The private auto as I'm sure the con~mittee knows from personal experience, is a very attractive mode of transportation for its con- vernence. A study in Chicago, for example, showed that about 30 per- cent of the automobile commuters walked one block or less from the place they parked to the place where they worked, and 40 percent more walked less than three blocks. That leaves only 30 percent of the commuters walking any sizable distance from where they leave. their cars. Buses, streetcars, trains, have to be very convenient or cheap, or rapid, or in sonie other way superior to compete with cars. No doubt technology can make more rapid buses:, streetcars, trains, monorails, given time and investment and superior speed might compensate for some of the attractiveness of automobiles. But, let me cite one study done in Chicago by Leon Moses and Harold Williamson. They analyzed interviews with a sample of com- muters in the Chicago area by the Cook County Highway Depart- ment. Their analysis concentrated on a subsample of commuters; namely, those who preferred automobile commuting to other modes of transportation. Moses and Williamson used their data to estimate the amoun~t of money by which cost of auto trips would have to be increased in order to divert 50 percent of the commuters to an alter- native mode of transportation. They also estimated the converse, the amount by which the cost of the other modes of transportation would have to be reduced in order to divert 50 percent of the motorists to them-i.e., to common carriers. I won't try to reproduce the data in detail, but just summarize their findings. Essentially the question is: What would it cost to induce half of the auto commuters to shift to a common carrier? What subsidy would you have to provide for. the public transportation system that would reduce fares to an attrac- tive enough level to produce this impact on automobile traffic? I would like to read part of the conclusion of the study: "It is evi- dent that negative prices would be necessary on all modes of public transportation in order to divert at least 50 percent of those currently making the trip to work by car." In other words, they estimated that it would be necessary to pay auto commuters about 40 or 50 cents per "el" or bus trip in order to get them to use common carriers, and therefore reasonably conclude that: "the possibility of reducing significantly auto congestion by reasonable reductions in the price of public transportation appears slight." Now, what do these authors think would happen if public trans- portation were free? They say their results suggest that if such an experiment were carried out in Chicago, less than one-fifth of the auto commuters would be diverted to common carriers. Would that be a worthwhile reduction? Well, on this point the social scientist turns back to the engineer and asks how effective a reduction of 15 or 20 percent in the number of cars each day in down- town Chicago might be. I might say also that the social scientists also tend to turn toward Detroit to ask what would be the effect of reduction of this sizC in the demand for automobiles in the Chicago area? : An alternative to lowering the price of public transportation is, of course, raising the price of auto transportation through various means PAGENO="0385" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 385 such as selectively higher toll charges during the morning and evening rush hours; higher parking charges; greater gasoline taxes; or mile- age meters like taximeters, which would have to be used in particular zones of the city which were most crowded or most polluted. Such meters would be designed to register the number of miles traveled by the vehicle; they would have to be used in certain prescribed down- town areas; and would in effect be computing the bill for the driver who wanted to take his car (or truck) downtown. Similar discrimi- natory taxing and pricing measures designed to decrease the concen- tration of automobiles in crowded downtown areas are entirely conceivable. They are, of course, not likely to be terribly popular, Mr. Chairman, with the traveling public, but this is one of the things I think we have to face if we want to talk about how we control pollution. One of the ways to control pollution is to price it out of the market. I would like to note in this connection that the results that I have reported on the Chicago study of commuters are based on the assump- tion that the common carrier, the competitive common carrier trans- portation would not be substantially improved over what it presently is. Now, of course, the results would change if there were more rapid, more convenient, more attractive somehow, more competitive com- mon carrier transport for at least Chicago, and indeed other major cities. Let me move on now, Mr. Chairman, and turn to the contribution I think that the social sciences can make in the asessment of popular understanding of the causes and results of pollution, and popular reaction to measures proposed for the relief of pollution. Public opinion polling techniques can be used to get the answers to such questions as: Does the public at large know the extent of and the nature of pollu- tion in its various forms now? Do people understand the causes of pollution or have theories about its causes or prevention? Sometimes people do have clear, but not always correct, ideas `of causes and consequences. It is wise to know about these "vested ideas," which sometimes have to be corrected before effective action can be taken. How much do people care about various kinds of pollution? Do they worry about health, about the appearance of the environment? What kinds of pollution bother people most? Perhaps the popular appreciation of water pollution or air pollution is much less than the understanding of it is in Congress or among scientists and engineers. Do people worry about the effects of pollution on health? Are they `concerned about costs and other economic effects of pollution or of measures for abatement? How much popular support is there for moves to eliminate or modify any sort of pollution? Leaders in Congress and the scientific and engineering professions may not always `accurately reflect the opinion of the majority of the population in the appreciation of the importance, or the size and seriousness of pollution problems. I would say in fact, it is quite likely that the leadership of the Nation is way out ahead of popular understanding and appreciation of these problems. That is, after all, the job of leadership. PAGENO="0386" 386 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Leaders may attach greater importance to some problems than most people do. It is useful for leaders to `know where they stand when they try `to mobilize popular support for efforts to change a situation. Polls can measure the readiness of people to accept the inconveni- ence or costs of abating pollution. How much are people willing to pay for clean air, or rkther how much are they willing to pay for not contributing to dirtying the air through their house furnaces or their cars? It is also possible, I think, for polls to measure possible attitudes to- ward the products of an improved pollution-abatement technology, and here we may encounter some very fundamental negative attitudes. I mean, Mr. Chairman, attitudes toward waste materials; for ex- ample, how willing would people be to accept reprocessed waste ma- terials in various forms, for example, as drinking water? Not every- body has the same objectivity toward such material as astronauts have. `I'm sure that pollution abatement measures are going to run into some quite interesting and, as I say, fundamental human attitudes. I think these poll results can be used as bases for educational cam- paigns, for anticipating and perhaps warding off difficulties in the acceptance of new technological devices for pollution control. I would advise against using public-opinion polling as a means of inventing techniques for the control of pollution. I think general experience is that the majority of the American public, are very good as critics, very good in reacting to the ideas of others. But, since they have not had the opportunity to give detailed, informed thought to a problem, are not as good at inventing things as experts are. The pub- lic is better at criticism than they are at design. A third kind of contribution that social science can make is the in- vention of msititutions and administrative arrangements for the regu- lation of pollution. Air and water pollution do not conform to political boundaries. Existing types of jurisdiction cannot always deal effectively with pol- lution problems. It has often been said that, in order to control pollu- tion effectively we need new kinds of intergovernmental agreements and very possibly new regulatory agencies or new powers for existing agencies. In this area social scientists have already made some con- tributions for they were influential years ago in pointing out the need for better coordination of responsibilities among the different levels of government: Federal, State, county, municipal and so forth. And as a result, the Congress established in 1959 the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. This is a permanent, bipartisan, national agency charged with studying and making recommendations on means for coordinating and making more effective the actions of these several levels of governmental authority. The Commission is made up of Federal legislators, Cabinet officers, State Governors, county officers, mayors and representatives of the public at large. This Commission has already been active in the pollution field. In 1962 it issued a report entitled "Intergovernmental responsibilities for water supply and sewage disposal in metropolitan areas", which identified the problems of State and local relationships involved in planning and operating water supply and sewage disposal systems. it PAGENO="0387" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 387 suggested several institutional innovations. For example, the idea of vesting responsibility for all water resource planning in a single State agency and in giving urban communities in that State representation in the agency. Another innovation was the establishment of areawide sewer and water authority for metropolitan areas. A third was legislation to provide for State regulation of individual wells and septic tanks in urbanizing areas. The Commission came to the conclusion that this latter was a very important source of pollution as the suburbs ex- panded faster than municipal water and sewage systems did. The Commission also recommended that there should be an evalua- tion of Federal regulatory authority and incentives for reducing indus- trial pollution. On the basis of this recommendation, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare did contract with the Institute for Public Administration to do a report in industrial incentives for water pollution abatement, which report was issued in February of 1965. Mr. Chairman, the work of this Commission seems to me to exemplify but not to exhaust, the contribution that social scientists can make in this area. I simply cite these activities as a concrete instance of how the procedural and institu~ionai framework for regulating pollution can be improved. A fourth ~ay in which I think social scientists may contribute is to devise new and improved techniques of popular education on problems of pollution and ways for reconciling opposed views or disagreements, ways of reducing tensions and promoting community harmony as well as the will to work at the task of abatement. Mr. Chairman, these will not be easy things to accomplish. I do not wish to forecast trouble unduly, but I'm struck by the similarities be- tween the techniques for reducing certain kinds of pollution and some of the problems encountered in public health practice, specifically and especially in adding fluorides to drinking water. This is a matter which public health officers and social scien~tists together have had con- siderable experience in the late 1940's and in the 1950's. This committee may be well aware that fluoridation encountered sharp, vigorous and effective resistance in many communities. Fluoridation was often de- feated the first time it was brought up and is still not used in some communities. Resistance to it was not always well informed, but the advocates of fluoridation sometimes made a serious mistake when they assumed that everybody who resisted fluoridation was ignorant, superstitious, re- adtionary, or just plain crazy. Now, that was far from true. There were some, and there still are some, people who simply are prudent and curious about the long-term effects of fluoridation. Still others were resistant because they resented the air of superiority assumed by some engineers, scientists, and public health workers. Other people objected to being experimented on. Still others were genuinely ignorant (not stupid) about fluoridation and they wanted to know how the process worked and whether there were safeguards against error in it. I think it is the job of applied socia1 scientists to devise better ways of explaining innovations to the affected communities; to help to recon- PAGENO="0388" 388 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT cue people who are disaffected for the wrong reasons; and to help insure that those with legitimate complaints, reservations and hesi- tations have a chance to be heard and to affedt the outcome. In this respect, I can say that there are a few groups of applied social scientists working on problems of community organization and trying to invent and improve methods of representing truly the will of the people as well as dealing with fears, concerns2 hostility and disaffection. In particular I mention work of the National Training Laboratories in developing techniques of community organization and action. Finally., by way of an educational innovation, I suggest that perhaps there might be created a new social role. Mine is not a brandnew suggestion, I'm sure. But I am not sure it has been made before in connection with pollution abatement. The role is that of "neighbor- hood agent," s~ to speak, comparable to that of the county agent in rural areas, who would act as a direct contact between pollution con- trol agencies and those who pollute. He would visit individual house- holders or tenants and bring them advice, techni~al help, refer them to further sources of information or help, answer their questions, help to motivate them to keep their environment clean. This is a necessary role, I think, especially in parts of cities where the physical environ- ment is not beautiful, neat or clean to begin with; and when such neighborhood work is combined with the control of industrial ani municipal pollution, local efforts can have a great deal of immediacy and personal meaning to neighborhood residents. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that I see some similarities as I have implied before, between problems of pollution abatement. and some of the problems of public health that have been worked on successfully for the last three or four decades. In the first place, many public health problems were and still are pollution problems, especially those of various waterborne enteric diseases, often associated with management of human and animal wastes. Contagious diseases such as smallpox, tuberculosis are a second example, and, infectious diseases with nonhuman reservoirs such as typhus, malaria, hookworm and some others still not under control~ These problems seem to me have yielded to a combination of methods and means rather than to a single technique, a single science, or single means of control. Hookworm, for example, has virtually disappeared because of im- proved sanitation and disposal of fecal matter, better diet and the more widespread wearing of shoes, the latter being partially an eco- nomic matter and partially customary. Smallpox has been virtually eradicated because of effective research on immunization, the development of vaccination, the gradual public education of most of the Nation and the establishment oc~ legal require- ments on those entering the country. Typhoid fever has disappeared because of better management of water supplies, because of investment in water storage, purification and distribution systems, because of improved management of wastes, and because of research `of method of transmission of the diseases. Milk, which was so often in the earlier centuries a means of trans- mitting enteric diseases, now is a safe and wholesome product because PAGENO="0389" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 389 of a combination of many facto'r~. Research `and technological devel- opments on pasteurization; the legislation of standards for the han- dung of fresh milk `and testing of cattle; the education of farmers and milk producers in correct techniques in handling; the organiza~ tion of means for carrying out dairy herd inspection through tech- nicians and provision o'f testing services; investment in apparatus and machinery for keeping `milk clean; and finally enforcement of stand- ards through regulatory agencies. Progress `in public health, Mr. `Chairman, ha~ been made through research, through the development of technology, through the educa- tion of the public, through investment in apparatus, machinery, and labor time needed to do the job right, through legislation of standards or tules and through enforcement through regulatory agencies. And, I think it is going to be a combined attack of this sort, a varied attack employing many different means that will help us to solutions for pollution problems as `well. Finally, Mr. Chairman, I `want to thank you again for the oppor- tunity to make these remarks and, speaking as a citizen, I would like to commend this committee for its `foresighted concern and its serious and dedicated interest `in the problems of pollution o'f our environ- ment. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Riecken, I'm extremely happy that you have come here because your statement certainly gives us ~ome guidelines to go by. It will be helpful to us as we further analyze the problem of pollution after the testimony is all in. You have shown us the steps we must take to accomplish our end objectives, but I wonder what you might sug'gest as to bringing public opinion to bear on tho'se parts of the pollution problem for which availa'ble technology could be applied now? Dr. Thomae Malone~ who comes from my own city of Hartford, said that when he fiew'over the city of New York he could hardly see it because of the air pollution. He made the observation that we did have available to us the means to eliminate a great deal of this if we only had the `desire and if we could get support from the public. In some cases, then, we have already gone throtigh the research and development steps. We are just not able to bring together the. catalytic forces necessary to have the public decide that we have had enough of this. Mr. RIECKEN. Mr. Chairman, I'm sure that the work of this com- mittee and the publicizing of it through newspaper stories and through other mass media will in itself be a great deal of effect in edu- `eating the public and calling attention to the problem. I'm sure that the long-term education of our growing population of young people is something that ought to be begun at once. I'm not going to suggest special courses in pollution, but I suggest strongly that there be incorporated in elementary and high school instruction in such subjects as gebgraph~, biology, and social studies some atten- tion to the relationship of man to his natural eiwironment and the change in that relationship as population density increases and as urbanization ificreases. This is a subject that could be given a great deal of attention. I'm sure tht~t the resources of education~id television for selected programs on pollution abatement would be of enormous assistance in adult education. PAGENO="0390" 390 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTI~~N ABATEMENT Now, I think in addition to that, Mr. Chairman, you have to look at where you can do most with the least effort. And, here I proceed with great tentativeness because I am not that well acquainted with~ the facts. Let me make a hypothetical case that a large share of the pollution of New York City air, which I too have noticed in the good old days when you could easily fly to New York, the pollution of N~w York City air may be caused by a relatively small number of po~1lutants. If that is true, it would be more effective to work with regulatory or economic sanctions; that is, laws about pollution abate- ment or fines, or other economic sanctions for pollution. If the num- ber of sources of pollution are few and concentrated, a widespread educational campaign hardlyseems necessary. Popular education, I think, is an important component of pollution control, but it is a long-term component, and I think we ought not expect fast, big results from it. I think we are going to get faster, bigger results from some other measures such as better enforcement of present regulations on economic sanctions against massive pollution. Mr. DADDARTO. And, the cost factor which you touched on `before does, of course, enter into the public acceptance of this solution. Mr. RIECEEN. I might go back to a question Mr. Vivian asked and I found very interesting. I'm sorry he isn't here. He asked Dr. Buck- ley the following question: Suppose there were a better insecticide than DDT or one more readily degradable but it cost more, what would induce farmers to use it? I think it is a very reasonable question. It seems to me there are only limited number of ways in which you would go about dealing with this problem. One is, I think, to per- suade manufacturers not to make a nondegradable insecticide. This would be voluntary compliance by the source of the pollutant. I think something like this has been done in, the nonsudsiflg detergent development. You get action by going to the source of the polluting material rather than to the ultimate user. Now, if you have to go to the ultimate user, if you can't somehow get control through producers, it seems all you can do is either to have laws restricting the use of nondegradable insecticides; or else you can have economic solutions, such as subsidies to reduce the price of degradable insecticides, or taxes to increase the cost of nondegradable insecticides. That seems to me to be the range of solutions possible for us to adopt in the kind of society that we have. Mr. DADDARrO. I regret that we have tried to crowd three witnesses into our schedule today `and have gotten to the point where we have a quorum call which forces us to close this hearing. There are a num- ber of questions I would like to pursue further, and we will, if we can take advantage of you by sending them to you. If that is not satis- factory, we might have a chance to sit down with you on an informal basis before we conclude our hearings. Mr. RTECKEN. I will be more than glad to do that. Mr. DADDARIO. This committee will adjourn until 10 o'clock to- morrow. (Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m. the committee adjourned until 10 a.m., Thursday, August 11, 1966, same place.) PAGENO="0391" THE ADEQUACY OF TEChNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT THURSDAY, AUGUST 11, 1966 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITPEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, SuBCOMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT, Wa.shington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10:17 a.m., in room 2325, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C., Hon. Emiho Q. Daddario (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. ROUSH. The committee will be in order. Mr. Daddario will join us shortly. He is meeting briefly with the chairman of the full committee. Our first witness this morning is Mr. John 0. Logan, executive vice president of the Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., who is speaking on behalf of the Manufacturing Chemists Association. Do you have some associates you would like to introduce to the committee, Mr. Logan ~ Mr. LOGAN. Yes; I will, Mr. Chairman, as part of my comments. Mr. ROUSH. You may proceed. Mr. LOGAN. Thank you. STATEMENT OP IOHN 0. LOGAN ON BEHALP OP THE MANUPAC~ TURING CHEMISTS ASSOCIATION Mr. LOGAN. As the chairman has mentioned, my name is John 0. Logan. I am appearing on behalf of the Manufacturing Chemists Association, hereafter referred to as MCA, a nonprofit trade associa- tion of 190 11.5. corporations, large and small, that collectively repre- sent more than 90 percent of the productive capacity of the basic chemical manufacturing industry in this country. I am executive vice president, corporate, Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., and cur- rently am chairman of the executive committee of the association's board of directors. Accompanying me are three technical specialists who are full-time employees of three other member companies. On my immediate right, Mr. James H. Rook, director of industrial hygiene, American Cynamid Co., who is currently vice chairman of the MCA Water Resources Committee. On my left, Mr. Jerome Wilkenf old, manager of environmental, health, Hooker Chemical Corp., who is a past chairman of the water resources committee and presently chairman of the MCA Air Quality Committee. 391 PAGENO="0392" ~392 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT And on my far right, Dr. John A. Zapp, director, Haskell Labora- tory for Toxicology & Industrial Medicine, E. I. du Pont de Nemours ~& Co., who is past chairman of the MOA Environment Health Ad- visory Committee. Before addressing the subject of the hearing directly, I would like to develop some perspective on "chemicals" in relation to the en- vironment. All too often we are prone to overlook the fact that the natural environment itself is made up of a wonderful array of chem- icals to which life as we now know it has become adapted. This chemical environment, entirely apart from manmade contributions, is far from being uniform and constant from time to time and from place to place. Our need is to maintain the variations in the environ- ment so that by either type or degree they are not injurious to our various purposes and normal desirable life patterns will be sustained. Many manmade chemicals simply duplicate those found in nature, while others are the product of human invention. Many are com- paratively simple combinations Of the elements, while others are highly complex, rivaling in complexity some of the chemical com- ponents of the human body. Relative simplicity or complexity of chemical structure has no cor- relation with the potential impact of a chemical substance on the en- vironment. None is toxic per se, and yet none is wholly without po- tential for adverse effect. Chemicals numbering in the thousands have been cleared for use as food additives after exhaustive testing, some with limitations carefully prescribed, yet an excessive portion of common table salt can be lethal to anyone. In dealing with the problems of environmental controls, our great- est lack is an adequate understanding of acceptable quality levels. The average person might think it strange, but specialists in air and water chemistry would be the first to admit an inability to define "clean air" and "clean water" in precise terms. Thus it is vitally important to bear in mind that the mere presence of any particular chemical substance in the environment should not automatically be regarded as undesirable. Water containing fluoride from natural sources led to the discovery of dental caries prevention and ensuing fluoridation of water supplies. There have been recent observations that water hardness; that is, water containing calcium and magnesium salts, may lessen the likelihood of cardiovascular de~ terioration. Of course, there must be a definition of how much is ben- eficial, or where benefit may be lacking, how much may be tolerated without adverse effect. This leads to a simplified concept of pollution as being a condition where "too much" is present. It is greatly to be hoped that in our extensive programs of pollution abatement and control, the objective will always be to prevent or eliminate that increment which results in there being "too much," as contrasted with working toward the irre- ducible minimum. Although it may not be currently a wholly pop- ular concept, the capacity of our environment to accept waste re- leases-below the too-much level-is itself an exceedingly valuable iu~tural resource. It would be technically unsound and economically wasteful not to make proper-and I want to emphasize "proper"-use. of it. It is my firm conviction, and that of the industry I represent, that society cannot afford the cost of control for control's sake. PAGENO="0393" ADEQtTACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 393 Certainly we should not compromise with health protection, but many of our most objectionable environmental conditions are not health matters. In such cases, the remedial needs differ widely from place to place. Although administrative convenience might be served by having uniform requirements on discharges of similar charter, this, too, would be economically wasteful as a general policy. The resultant quality of the environment for its continuing beneficial use is what's important. Premised on the foregoing philosophy, let me now go to the question of the adequacy o~ technology for pollution abatement and control. Earlier I referred to lack of definition of environmental quality. Ob- viously, this complicates judging the adequacy of applicable tech- nology, for it means we really do not know what we ought to shoot for. Be that as it may, we can tackle gross problems and undertake what obviously needs doing, and learn more about ultimate refinements as we go along. While there may be some gaps in existing technology to deal with even the grosser aspects of pollution, we believe that much progress can be made with a stern application of what we now know. Although we shall always be interested in decreasing the cost, this is much more likely to come about gradually by evolutionary develop- ment from a combination of operating experience and constant re- search attention than by massive research effort scattered along a broad front. In order that the remedial cost burden not be unnecessarily great, it will be helpful to set interim objectives at conservative levels, with subsequent tightening as scientific evidence and expert opinion provide justification. Also, as reuse and recycling of resources are in- creased, levels corresponding to "too much" may be expected to become progressively lower. While the chemical manufacturing industry certainly has further contributions to make to added progress, it has a substantial record of past attention to environmental controls. A 1962 survey brought out that 125 member companies of MCA had invested $212 million in air pollution control facilities and $263 million in water pollution control facilities, and was spending $64 million annually to operate them. Projected additional investment for such facilities over the ensuing 5 years was $119 million. More than 95 percent of the nearly 10-billion gallon daily waste water volume from the 875 reporting plants met the public agency requirements in effect at that time. MCA has had an organized Water Resources Committee active for 30 years, and an Air Quality Committee active for more than 15 years. They have prepared technical manuals that have had widespread dis- tribution. They have planned seven educational 1-day workshops within the past year, and arranged for 4 week-long seminars providing instruction in the most up-to-date techniques for chemical waste treat- ment, with six additional seminars scheduled for the coming year. The workshop programs are designed to encourage participation by, and interchange with, public agency personnel; and the regular meetings of the two committees are purposely held in various States so as to receive and confer with State and local agency officials. Inasmuch as environmental controls by the chemical industry are but extensions of applied chemical engineering, it should not be sur- prising that we are confident of being able to devise and use adequate PAGENO="0394" 394 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT waste treatment and control methods, although the immediate cost of doingso may not always be favorable. Often this calls for particular adaptation of general techniques, illustrations of which were given in MCA testimony before the Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, Senate Public Works Committee, on June 24, 1965. I will not repeat those details at this time. The industry survey referred to above revealed that those same companies were spending more than $8 million annually on air and water pollution control research. In the recent past MCA underwrote a 5-year research project, now concluded, at the Franklin Institute on taste and odor in water, and is now in its third year of sponsorship of a 4-year program at Washington University in St. Louis on the behavior of organic chemicals in the aquatic environment. Also, MCA Ihas joined with several other trade associations in sponsoring research on emphysema by the Industrial Hygiene Foundation. From these references it is self-evident that we see the need of continuing research. Indeed, in MCA's expanded environmental health program announced about 2 months ago, a considerable portion ~of the projected funds are being planned for greater research effort on behalf of the chemical industry. In appearances before congres- thonal committees, our witnesses have supported Federal research in this field, and we fully expect to Continue to do so. A valuable divi- dend from research activity is the development and training of tech- :nically qualified personnel, already insufficient in supply to carry on these vItal programs. Because of its usefulness to everyone, research efforts on determining environmental criteria would seem to be a prime area for Federal research attention. Another relates to developments which are most needful for use at publicly owned and operated facilities, for example municipal treatment works, and which may not readily lend them- selves to commercial interests. The greatest stimulus for research by industry and the private sector is the potentiality for capitalizing on the outcome of research endeavors, whether it be directed toward cost reduction in relation to a company's internal operations or marketing of technology to others. Especially in the latter, patent protection ~an be a vital qualification for inducing research interest; lack of it may actually hamper new developments. A new idea equally avail- able to everyone may suffer lack of attention because of the unpro- tected risk involved in reducing it to practice. Except in programs of giant proportions, such as your own space exploration program, it is our impression that greater opportunity for industry to engage in research supported by Government contract would not generally be a substantial stimulus to progress. On the other hand, there may be additional opportunities where; Government- industry coop~rative investigation will be helpful. MCA presently has one such activity in working with the Division of Air Pollution of the Public Health Service in gathering data on atmospheric emis- sions from selected chemical manufacturing processes. This nroject operates under a formal memorandum of understanding, with each party defraying the expenses of its respective part in the effort. I have here a copy of one of the early reports from this study which is available to the public generally. (Copy provided may be found in the committee files.) PAGENO="0395" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 395 In this brief statement I have given some indication of our philos- ophy of approach to environmental controls and our general feeling about the status of technology now available to cppe with current problems, including also some illustrations of the chemical industry's stewardship. In doing so, we have sought to relate these views to some of the salient issues raised in the report by your Research Management Advisory Panel. Let me assure you that we are in full concord with a studied deter- mination to recover and maintain air, water, and soil resources so that they will be of such quality to serve appropriately for the health, recreational, and industrial needs of the Nation. A formal declaration of this attitude, titled "The Chemical Industry and Environmental Health," was made by our association's board of directors on Septem- ber 15, 1965, a copy of which is appended to this statement. Because of the almost unending diversity of the chemical. industry, I have not attempted to cover any particular technical aspects of chemical industry involvement, it seemed that the available time might be better served by leaving this to your questioning. But before questioning, I would like to sum up our thinking with the following three points: First, in the short range, timewise, major problems of disposal and pollution control can be handled by broader application of present tech- nology and its constantly evolving byproducts. Assistance in certain fundamental research areas such as testing techniques, toxicology and hazard techniques will be most useful to industries involved in pollu- tion problems. Second, longer range, we need to start now with a massive systems analysis attack on all factors related to waste disposal, leading to a cost- benefit definition of pollution as it applies to each set of circumstances. Third, we must obviously apply present and newly deveioping tech- nology to the specific problems defined by the systems analysis. In these efforts you will find the chemical industry ready, willing and able. Thank you very much. Mr. Rousu. Thank you, Mr.. Logan. Unless there is objection, the paper you referred to entitled "The Chemical Industry and Environ- mental Health," will be made a part of the record, and if you have copies of the various documents or pamphlets which you referred to, we will receive those for the files. (The document referred to follows:) THE CHEMICAL INrnJSTRY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH I. THE PROBLEM FACING OuR NATION; ITS SCOPE Environmental health encompasses the total impact of the environment on man's health and well-being, relating both qualitatively and quantitatively to the effect of the environment on man and to the effect of man's activities on his environment. Environment means wore than soil, air and water; it includes everything in this world-plants and animals, raw materials, food, wastes, space for work and play, as well as other needs for all of man's activities. Man's well-being means more than bare sfubsistence needs, it includes man~s general level of health, security, comfort, leisure time, recreation and prosperity. Man's environment, while being the reservoir for all his material needs, must also serve as the acceptor for all his wastes. In many ways, however, the en- vironment is hostile, for it is from the environment that two of the traditional PAGENO="0396" 396 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABA1~EMENT regulators of man's numbers, famine and pestilence, have arisen. Man has learned to control and subdue these hostile ~lemetits effectively, largely through vigilance and technological advances. His numbers are increasing. He is liv- ing longer. His st~ndards of living are improving in direct relationship to his utilization of these advances. In modlfyin~g his environment, man has made tremendous gains in his well- being, but these gains have been accompanied by some unfavorable aspects While gains have vastly outweighed losses, there is still need to deal effectively with the residual unfavorable aspects and to strive for products and activities with a more favorable gain-to-loss ratio. Oontinued real progress can be made by the best tise of available technology to reduce or erase unfavorable factors, man-made or otherwise.; and by constant efforts to attain, treater knowledge, better understanding and improved means for still further improvements in environmental health. Perfect environment and perfect well-being are not attainable though \ve atrive toward continued improvement. We do what we can with what we have now. The involvement of all society and the. limitations of m~u's present capa- bility create apecific problems within the overall area of environmental health.. Principal among these are: Technical Problems-Despite our advanced science and technology, man does not know all the answers or even know all the questions to ask. Technical problems demand full use of present knowledge and continuing research toward extension of that knowledge. Social Problems-Since every segment of our society is involved., both as it is affected by and as it affects environmental health, every segment feels its interests must receive full consideration in any solution. These interests are r~umerous, varied, diverse, overlapping, contradictory, and unequal. The recon- cilation of these interests and acceptance of any step to imi~rove conditions re- quire a weighing and balancing of the gains and sacrifices. Economic Problems-Increased costs of raw materials, productive capacity, manpower, talent, time, goods, services, and taxes enter into the price of gain in environmental health, Again, all of our society is involved, this time In eco- nomic roles as consumers or taxpayers. These added costs must be evaluated in the hnadling of each particular problem. A practical balance of gain with cost is critically important. Organizational Problems-Steps to alleviate the environmental health prob- lem will require action by all society. Specific actions must be taken by in- dividuals and by groups, yet each must be an integral part of an effective and equitable total. A need thus exists for an accepted public policy which is based on and which encourages constr~ictive action by individuals and groups. Fur- thermore, self-initiated action based on responsibilities accepted voluntarily by individuals and groups of our society has always been more effective than action imposed solely by regulation. The chemical industry of the United States has direct Identification with several aspects of thern nation's environmental health problem as a contributor of materials and services favorable to man's well-being and because these mate- rials and services also entail some concurrent unfavorable aspects. Industry must therefore assess and act in accord with its responsibilities. IL THIS CHEMICAL INDUSTRI'S RESPONSISILITTES The chemical industry's responsibilities in environmental health matters de- rive from the nature and use of Its products, from its research and production activities, and from its role as a segment of the economy and society. Effective action requires a high level of individual and corporate responsibility, and a continuing effort: 1. To advance knowledge and increase competence to deal with these responsi- bilities withinthe total problem of environmental health. 2. To assure the fitness and appropriateness of its products in relation to man's environment by best use of present scientific knowledge and by continuing to improve fltnes~ and appropriateness as growing knowledge permits. 3. To plan and carry out production operations so that they: (a) conserve health and safety of all those employed in the production of chemicals; (b) conserve environmental resources, particularly by controlling and limiting emission and disposal of industrial wastes. PAGENO="0397" ADEQUACY OF TECENOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 397 4. To assure the fitness and appropriateness in the use of the Industry's products by: (a) research and study aimed at broader and deeper scientific knowledge of the handling, application, and ultimate fate of chemical products; (b) education of those who sell, handle, and use chemical products by clear instruction in all aspects of handling, use, and disposal, recognizing the need for change with the accumulation `of further knowledge. 5. To promote a high degree of intra-industry cooperation, beginning with the promotion of full and free interchange, within lawful limits, of ittformation and technology pertinent to environmental health. 6, To promote. cooperation with all other segments of society in mutual effort toward solution of the total problem `of environmental health, `by: (a) offering knowledge and technology for application wherever It may apply to the problem; (b) accepting leadership responsibility in those aspects and areas where the chemical Industry's experience may be of value; (c) encouraging action by others throughout society, particularly In Industry; (d) cooperating as may be appropriate in any study or action undertaken by others in the scientific community, in academic cIrcles, in public agencies and elsewhere. Adopted by the Board of Directors, Manufacturing Chemists' Association, Inc., September 15, 1964. Mr. ROnSH. Mr. Brown? Mr. BROWN. No questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Mosher? Mr. MOSHER. Thank yOU, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Logan, on page 4 :~f your testimony you stated that although administrative convenience might be served by having uniform re- quirements on discharges, et cetera, this `would be economically waste- ful as a general policy. Would you cite one or two practical examples that would illustrate this philosophy? Mr. LOGAN. Yes, I think I can, Mr. Mosher. From my own experience in our company, we operate a plant which manufactures certain products. There are about 15 similar plants in the country operated by 6' or 7 other companies. A uniform set of standards applicable to the discharge from these plants would create a chaotic condition in the industry and in the sup- ply picture, because the conditions under which discharges from these plants are made are so totally different, one from the other. This is the essence of what I am getting at. So a specific standard applied across the industry might be less than desirable in one location, but force another location completely out of operation. Mr. MOSHER. To go a little further, can you say why? Can you give some specific illustrations? Mr. LOGAN. Yes. The specific problem I am relating this to is well known in the industry and governmental circles. We have a plant on the Holston River in Virginia. This, in effect, competes with plants on the Ohio and the Mississippi, for example. Now, the problem of discharging 1 ton of waste on the North Fork of the Holston River is very substantially different than it is on the Mississippi or the Ohio. And in the one case, the requirements- Mr. MOSHEE. You mean because of the volume of water? Mr. LOGAN. That is right. Therefore, in the one case a standard might require little or no effort on the part of one plant facility where 68-24O-~66----vo1. 1-26 PAGENO="0398" 398 At~EQ1JACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT in another case it would be technically and economically impossible to comply, and hence that operation would be required to be shut down with consequent economic effect on the whole area. Mr. MOSHER. Yet, from the public interest standpoint, it might be argued that it is important that the quality of the water in your river as compared to the Ohio River should be essentially the same. Mr. LOGAN. Well, I think it is a matter of public interest, and I. am perfectly willing to let the public decide. That is what we are saying. In the case of the operation on the Hoiston River, maybe the public would decide that it was in their interest to continue the operation of the plant. This is one of the complexities that I referred to that probably has. to be subjected to a rather broad scale systems analysis to take into account factors other than mere discharge problems. Mr. RYAN. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. MOSHER. Yes. Mr. RYAN. If each plant, wherever it was located, was required to apply the same methods to handle the pollution, why would there be a competitive disadvantage? Mr. LOGAN. As a matter of fact, each plant is applying essentially the same disposal techniques today. Mr. MOSHER. But the result is different. Mr. RYAN. I understand that. But suppose you did not have the water in which to discharge it? Mr. LOGAN. Based on the present status of technology and the economics associated therewith, the plant would shut down. This conclusion has been stated in hearing reports that have covered this subject over a number of years. Mr. WILKENFELD. There are two points under consideration here, and I think it would be well if we recognize these. One is basing control on the quality requirement in the stream itself, and the other is basing control on effluent quality requirement, and this sometimes gets confused in discussions such as this. If the water usage of the stream is such and the waterfiow in the stream is such that they are comparable, then the quality requirements in the stream should be the same. I don't think anyone questions this. On the other hand, if the volume of water available to carry the dis- charges away and/or the usages of the stream differ, there is no reason why the discharge quality should have to be the, same. Now why put both companies on an equal economic footing? In a competitive economy no two plants are ever on the same footing. One has different wage scales; one has slightly different distribution costs; the cost of bringing in equipment may vary. All sorts of factors enter into it, including the differences in the processes themselves. So I don't think we have every attempted in the United States to make sure everybody spends exactly the same amount of money to produce something, and I don't think any two producers ever do. You will find that profit margins vary between companies and I find it hard to see why in pollution abatement everyone should suddenly pay the exact same amount of money for treatment. This means that everybody would have to be on the lowest possible basis of discharge to take into account the man on the smaller stream, und can only result in increases iii costs beyond that that is required. PAGENO="0399" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 399 Mr. MosnEn. I doubt that many people would disagree with what you are saying, and yet certainly the ultimate quality of the water is what we are primarily interested in. This may be a philosophical matter which the Congress may ulti- ~niate1y have to consider. You are probably saying that quality stand- ~ards can be adjusted from stream to stream and one body of water to another, depending on the public interest in those particular streams and the uses to which those streams are to be put. Mr. WILKENFELD. Mind you, there is one thing we have to recog- ~nize: There are certain minimum base-level quality requirements that all streams must meet. At least the industry feels this way, and I'm sure the public agencies do too. And this is the protection of health, the avoidance of obvious nuisances, the degradation of aesthetics severely. These things must be protected on. all streams as a minimum. Then how far beyond that you want to go will depend on the best interest of the community, and in many cases should be decided by the people themselves as it has been in the past. Mr. MOSHER. I think it would be impossible for the Federal Gov- ~rnment to set a single standard for every stream because obviously the flow and the volume of water and the nature of the fields and foliage and everything else along the stream is an influencing factor. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Ryan. Mr. RYAN. The other factor which is incapable of control is what other plants are discharging along that stream. So why not attack the discharge itself and then we eliminate this other problem of de~ termining the quality of the stream? Mr. WILKENFELD. This is exactly the role of Government in deter- mining what quality level should be maintained in the stream, assess- ing how much should be put in and how this should be parceled out among the various contributors; it is a very difficult question. Mr. RYAN. And it could require an interstate system to do this? Mr. WILKENFELD. It could, and this is why we think the systems approach should be considered here, because it is so complex and must weio~h in so many different factors. I\~Ir. CONABLE. Mr. Logan, I would like to know if the problem of your industry isn't probably inorganic waste? Certainly the organic part of your waste is readily controllable, as organic waste generally is, but don't we have some very serious special problems of inorganic waste with respect to your industry in particular? Mr. LOGAN. I think we have some problems of inorganic wastes, yes. The organic chemical part of the industry has grown at a much faster pace than the inorganic, and I think there are problems in the organic area. We have had the detergent problem, and basically the detergent problem was related to organic compounds. I will defer to one of my technical experts to make a comparison, but I feel there are problems in both areas of the industry, Mr. Conable. Mr. CONABLE. Are we making any progress in the inorganic field? A lot of the testimony here before this committee has been to the effect that it is possible to control the disposalS of human waste by tertiary means. But have there been successful attempts to eliminate the in- organic chemicals, the phosphates, and so forth? PAGENO="0400" 400 ~A~~1Y~OY O~ ~ECH~OLOGT FOR ?OLLUTION ARATEM~NT Mr. LOGAN. Let me answer your question about progress in the inor- game area, with two examples. I referred earlier to the problem on the river in Virginia. This has been `substantially minimized by adcli- tional impounding facilities, by additional control of wastein the plant and by improved discharge 0± waste in relation to `siream conditions.. This has resulted in substantial improvement in terms of the waste content of the water. In regard to air pollution, this report that the Public Health Service and MOA ~omtly developed is a survey of operating techniques in sulfuric acid plants. Sulfuric acid is the largest inorganic chemical produced today, that is, the largest in terms of tonnage. It is the bellwether of the industry; it is an indicator of general economic and industrial activity. Now, this report shows that various types of operations, indeed par- ticular plants, are attaining certain results with regard `to the dis- charge of sulfur oxides into the atmosphere. This information ~S: already known now by every operator of a plant, and I can only pre- sume that each and every operator is now attempting to solve his own. problems in `terms of the information that has been made available as a result of this study. To the extent that it can be accomplished, this~ may represent substantial improvement in, any particular case, in, regard to air pollution control. Mr. WILRENr~u. May I interject this point? This whole matter of in-process control is a very important one in pollution abatement. To get back to differentiation between inorganic and organic wastes. from industrial operations, there was a tendency to slide over organicr waste disposal' for industrial operations because this is the same as other secondary and tertiary treatments. This isn't necessarily so because industrial organic materials can be handled in many. ways. In many organic processes, you may be able to correct the problem in many cases by going back into the process as you cannot do in domes- tic sewage; changes .can be made to reduce quite considerably the~ amount of material that is discharged, and this has been done in many .cases; and a large share of the funds spent by the chemical industry has been for this type of control. In many instances it isn't necessary to install secondary treatment to further reduce organic wastes be- cause of the considerable reduction made over the years in in-house modifications. To be specific- Mr. CONABLE. This makes it difficult to pin down your statistics,,, doesn't it? Mr. WILKENPELD. That is right, it is very difficult to decide where to draw the line on what is an expenditure for pollution control. Mr. CONABLE. And what is a salvage operation? Mr. WILKENFELD. Yes; but this is the best type of control if you never generate a waste, but this has to be recogmzed as a legitimate method of control. Mr. LOGAN. I think the economic pressures of competition are forcing constantly what we call in the mdustry tight systems, closed,, cycles. Now this is practiced to a much greater degree in the organic busi- ness. ~ou are generally working with higher unit value matenals~ PAGENO="0401" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION 4BATEMENT 401 ~and the processes lend themselves to closed-cycle operation with a minimum of byproducts or waste product throwo~ff. But there is con- stant pressure to reduce costs and this is one of the best ways to reduce cost, to close the cycle. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Roush? Mr. ROUSH. Mr. Chairman, as I heard this testimony, I had the very distinct impression that the chemical industry is very conserva- tive in its approach to the solution of this problem. Over the past 2 or 3 years, I have sat on another committee of this Congress study- ing the pollution problems as they relate to water and it has been my consistent impression that the chemical industry is one of the greatest polluters of our streams. As a matter of fact, I sat in a meeting in Rochester, N.Y., when this gentleman was testifying as to what the chemical industry had done. We found that the Hooker Chemical ~Co. was among the polluters of the streams. This conservative atti- *tude in approaching a problem which the industry has imposed on *the public doesn't really go down too well with me. You state that you are spending $8 million annually on air and water pollution control research. I'm wondering what percentage of your total research and development budget that figure represents. Mr. LOGAN. Let me clear the record. The specific statement was that -a survey made in 1962 showed that people were spending at that rate- this is date of about 1960. I personally feel that it may be double -that today. I don't have any more recent data, so I think we must recognize that the $8 million figure is out of date. Mr. DADDARTO. It would be helpful, Mr. Logan, if you could get for the record a more up-to-date figure which would reflect the change which has taken place in your industries since that $8 million figure was determined. (Information provided regarding this request is as follows:) Respe~ting the chemical industry's expenditures for research on wastes treat- inent and air and water pollution control, we reported 125 companies were spending more than $8 million annually as of 1962, of which $5.5 million related to water pollution and $2.8 million related to air pollution. Comparable cur- rent figures are not readily available. We will request such Information again from our member co1npa~ile~ in Implementing our expanded ~ro~ram hi environ- mental health but It will take several months to compile It since companies must -gather it internally from a considerable number of sourcea When the informa- tion has been compiled, we shall be pleased to furnish It to you and the Sub- -committee. Mr. LOGAN. One of the efforts that we recognize that is currently needed is an up-to-date survey of our industry in terms of what it is -doing in pollution abatement, what it is doing in pollution abatement research, and also what it is discharging in the way of waste, and this is a part of our current forward program hut we do not have such data -other than the 1962 survey at hand. Going back to Mr. Roush's remarks-one of the difficulties is with the general use of the term "chemical." You go along a stream and you see an unusual color or sediment of some sort and yOu say, "Well that's some chemical." This may have had absolutely no connection with the chemical industry but the term "chemical" covers practically ~all of the science-based industries. It can cover petroleum industry wastes; it- can cover p~per industry wastes; it covers the detergent industry problems.. So I think when we PAGENO="0402" 402 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT talk about chemicals, this is one thing, and chemicals do not neces- sarily mean the chemical industry per se. I would disagree with your opinion that the chemical industry aa such has been a major or the major contributor to pollution. We do have serious problems, however, no question about it. Mr. Rousn. Mr. Logan, let me challenge another one of your state- ments and then hear your comments. On page 8 of your testimony, you state: Excej~t in programs o1~ giant proportions such as space exploration, It is our impression that greater opportunities ~or industry to engage in research sup- ported by Government contract would not generally be a substantial stimulus to progress. Now, I am under the impression that most pollution is chemical in its nature. It would seem to me that within the chemical industry there would be great scientific talent which the Government could~ look to in its attempt to solve this problem and perhaps through this~ type of arrangement arrive at solutions which would benefit this country of ours. I don't understand why you would make this statement. Mr. LOOAN. Let me see if I can ç~larify that point. I agree with you that-and I believe this was your remark-that most wastes or most pollution is chemical. Actually, all things are chemical and we must distinguish the chemical industry and chemical things. You and I are~ chemical. This glass is a chemical. The industry is basically, there~ fore, fundamental to all other industries, and it is fundamental to all aspects of the solution of the pollution problems. The industry has a number of companies, a number of the members of MCA where the chief business, the primary business of these companies is in the treat- ment of water for various purposes. Sometimes it is the treatment of boiler feed water or it is the treat- ment of municipal wastes, but there is a large segment of the chemical industry that is devoting 100 percent of its attention to problems of water. There is a vast supply of technical ability in our industry that can be directed to the solution of these problems. The specific state- ment we made tried to convey the fact that we do not believe the best approach is to engage a specific member of industry or a specific section of the industry in a Government program. We do feel that the industry, through the MCA or through the technical groups of the industry should be allowed to contribute, should be allowed to review and participate in ~the formulation of programs designed to minimize waste disposal problems. This was not a statement that we did not wish to do so. It meant to imply that we did not think research engaged in under Government supervision in a specific plant or company was the best approach to the problem. Now, maybe I have not answered your question. Maybe I have~ confused you. Mr. Rousii. I understand that this response is based on an apparent oonservative philosophy concerning Government participation and Government solution of problems. That's the way I would view it. I believe that's all, Mr. Chairman, Mr. DADDARI0. Mr. Vivian ~ PAGENO="0403" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 403 Mr. VIVIAN. I would like to say to you that I think the chemical industry as such is not the worst polluter. I think some of the worst polluters are those companies which buy equipment and turn it on and pay no attention to how it works. But it is certainly true that the chemical industry produces some materials that are exceedingly dangerous. On page 5 of your testimony are some figures for a 1962 survey. You indicate that 125 members invested approximately $500 million in pollution control facilities and approximately $64 million annually to operate these facilities. Do you mean per year or for what period of time? Mr. LOGAN. Prior to that time. Mr. VIVIAN. Total prior investment? Mr. LOGAN. Yes, now let me give you another figure if you would like to have it. We cannot absolutely confirm this. It is in the form of estimates by qualified people in the industry to the effect that the industry currently is spending somewhere between 2 and 5 percent of its total capital investment for facilities related strictly to waste disposal or pollution control. In other words, out of every hundred million dollars spent, $2 to $5 million-and this will vary from place to place. But, since the industry has been spending capital at approximately $3 billion a year, 2 percent means $60 million per year and 5 percent means $15G million per year. I think this range is much closer to the current figure than the figure cited as of the amount that had been expended until the date of the survey. Mr. VIVIAN. About a hundred million dollars a year is your best estimate? Mr. LOGAN. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. If I were to take this $500 million which you indicated as a prior investment and prorate it over a 10-year period, it would probably come out somewhere between $50 and $100 million a year as your estimated cost for capital. Mr. LOGAN. I would expect it is on the higher side and moving up both as a percentage and as an actual amount all the time. Mr. VIVIAN. You indicated $60 million as operating expenses. Sup- pose we round that off to a hundred million dollars. That would be an estimate of approximately $200 million capital and operation cost. What's the total sales volume in the industry? Mr. LOGAN. Between $25 arid $30 billion a year. Mr. VIVIAN. So, we are talking about $200 million out of $25 bil- lion, right? Mr. LOGAN. It is on the order of 1 percent. Mr. VIVIAN. One percent. As a matter of fact, that corresponds quite well to some estimates made for me by some others who are present in the room. It seems that 1 percent is a pretty small fraction of the product cost, although I recognize it is a significant portion of profit. Mr. LOGAN. Yes, that is 1 percent of the ultimate sales basis. It is ~ubstantially larger in terms of the product cost. It is a higher per- centage in relation to the product cost and much higher percentage in relation to the profit. PAGENO="0404" 404 AtEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. VIVIAN. I don't think product cost is necessarily the right word to use, but it is still a very small fraction of your total sales cost. If yOu were to double your efforts in pollution abatement, this would be approximately another I- or 2-percent factor of product cost. It could affect your profits slightly more than that, but those would be differential profits across the industry. They would not be necessarily affected very much at all. So, there is much room left in the industry for pollution abatement. I think you will agree with me. Mr. LOGAN. No question; and your arithmetic is correct; yes. Mr. VIVIAN. Now, the next question I have is related to the study of massive research. On page 5 of your testimony you refer to the need for evolutionary development from a combination of operating experience and constant research attention. I would agree with that. This is the only way in which most work progresses. But what do you mean by a massive research effort scattered on a broad front? What horrible image did you have here that you were trying to knock down? Mr. LOGAN. I think the term "massive" was more with reference to a systems-analysis approach. We feel that it is not in all cases in the best interest of society to proceed to carry to the ultimate the control of waste disposal and pollution by existing techniques and by decisions made without the benefit of an analysis that incorporates many factors beyond our control: social, economic, transportation, and so forth. Therefore, we suggest that a systems-analysis approach incorporating not only the factors over which we in the chemical industry have control but other factors-cli~matic conditions, labor conditions, market conditions, unemployment-a thousand and one. These are the criteria that have to be subjected to an overall attack in order to come up with the best cost-benefit solution to waste dis- posal. In the long run that will best serve the public interest. We are prepared to provide our contribution to that kind of an attack but we cannot do that ourselves because it involves factors outside our knowledge and outside our control. Mr. VIVIAN. Are you suggesting then that the Government should carry on what I will call the massive research effort related to a cost-benefit analysis, or are you suggesting that you don't want in- dustry to carry it on? I'm trying to find out what these words mean. Mr. LOGAN. I'm suggesting that this has to be done, and that since in our opinion it cannot be done by us as an industry, it will be diffi- cult to be done by any other industry involved. Therefore, maybe this is an area where the Government could move forward. Mr. VIVIAN. On page 5 of your statement, you point out that 95 percent of the daily waste water volume met the public agencies' requirements in effect at that time. Does that suggest that the re- maining 5 percent was in violation of the law? Mr. LOGAN. Either that they were in violation and were working on the problem or that there were no public regulations applicable. Mr. VIVIAN. I couldn't read the words as meaning that there were no regulations applicable. It sound~ as though the 5 percent was in violation of the law. Mr. LOGAN-. I can't answer the details of that question. I'm nOt ~certain of that. PAGENO="0405" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 4O~ Mr. V~VIAN. The reason I bring up the point is, I think there has been a serious laxity in enforcement of the laws. The laws exist and the public health officials are aware of them, but because of the apprehension that the plants might move away, the laws are ignored.. I have very specific knowledge of that subject in my own (listrict. Mr. ROUSH. Would the gentleman yield? ~ Mr. VIVIAN. Yes. Mr. Rotrsu. In addition to this matter of fear of plants moving away, I want to ask this related question: Is there any inclination on the part of members of your industry to move to those areas where there is no control? Mr. LOGAN. My answer to that is "No." Mr. Roush, I have oper- ated production facilities in our company and I would say that our' policy certainly does not decide the location of a facility on that basis. Every request for capital coming to our company at the mo- ment has to be certified with complete information as to the prob- lems of disposal that are involved in the particular installation. The decisions regarding location are made on other bases; raw materials,. markets, and transportation. Mr. ROUSH. This is not even a small factor? Mr. LOGAN. No, sir; I didn't say that it isn't one little factor because I am not privy to the reasoning used by everybody who makes a deci- sion on a plant location, but as a general matter, the matters of raw materials, markets, and transportation are so significant that theser become controlling factors. I would assume that if we looked, we could find specific instances where someone said, I will l?ut a plant at location A because the pollu- tion regulations are less vigorously enforced than they are at loca- tion B. But, as a general matter, I don't think this is significant. Mr. Ronsil. Thank you, Mr. Vivian. Mr. FULTON. Would you yield, Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Fulton? Mr. FUIJPON. I~ 95 percent of the 10 billion gallon daily waste water is in accordance with the law of those reporting, obviously one-twentieth of it is not. That is 500 million gallons a day of waste water that are violating the law from the 875 companie~ who reported, and we would assume that o~ily the best would report because they have the best records. The bad ones wouldn't report. Would you comment on that? Mr. LOGAN. Yes. Several comments. Mr. CONABLE. Excuse me. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. FULTON. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Conable? Mr. CONABLE. I assume there must be a number of municipal cor- porations that are in rather serious violation of the law also, isn't that so? Mr. FULTON. On that point, might I say that the Federal Govern- ment in Pittsburgh, in none other than the Fulton Building, was paying sewage disposal charges to the Allegheny County sewage dis- posal unit, but at the same time they were not using it. They were dumping the sewage directly into the Monongahela River, and had PAGENO="0406" 406 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ~been doing it over many years. Would you comment on my point, though~ to the extent of the pollution by the daily discharge of waste water? Thank you. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. LOGAN. Yes. The 500 million gallons is a small quantity, ac- tually, in terms of the volumes of water that we talk about in this country both for private usage and industrial usage. The chemical industry itself is not basically a large consumer of water. So, point 1, the 500 million gallons is not large in terms of water usage, and it is ~small in relation to the fact that it is spread over a great many locations. With regard to the matter of reporting, I can't answer the question of whether there was any selectivity in the reporting. Maybe I can get an indication of the total number of plants in our membership at the moment. Do either one of you know that? Mr. FULTON. I would assume that your membership are all "good :guys"? Mr. DADDARIO. You could supply a more ~oeurate number for the record, Mr. Logan, rather than find out now. Mr. LOGAN. Yes; I think the reporting at that time was roughly 85 ~percent of the total number of plants. I don't know which type or `where. Mr. FULTON. For Mr. Vivian, Mr. Roush, and myself will you sub- ~nit a statement? (Information provided regarding this request is as follows:) With reference to the total number of chemical plants represented in MCA menthership at the time of the 19~2 survey mentioned in our `prepared statement, we estimate this to have been in the vicinity of 1100. While it may seem odd to give an inexact figure, active growth in the chemical manufacturing industry has been such that new plants are constantly being built, while occasionally ohi ones `are discontinued. Thus the number of plants engaged in production of ~hemicals is continuously changing. Mr. WIL~ENFELD. There is one other point on this. That `is that half of the remaining 5 percent indicated that they were under a pro- gram approved by their local agency leading to compliance with exist- ing regulations. Mr. VIVrAN. Mr. Chairman? Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. I should say to the gentleman I suspect that a number of the industries involved were under tolerance agreements and I want to point out that 95 percent is not an advertising factor. You refer `to industry standards both in your written statement and oral com- ments. It is apparently your desire that industry standards not be `applied on that industry-by-industry criteria should not apply to all plants of a given type. You said that would cause chaotic results. Perhaps it would. You say, for example, that it would perhaps be to1er~ible in one place in view' of the market conditions that exist, but that it would completely force a plant out of operation in some other part of the country. I want to refer to `a plant which is out of opera- tion in my district. The plant happens to be a bathing beach. The reason it is out of operation is th~ t the total accumulated flow of waste ~ioming down, the Detroit River is so enormous that the bathing beach is posted as not fit for swimming. PAGENO="0407" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 407 If you go up to the River Rouge, which flows through the main manufacturing area of Detroit, you would find that it wouldn't make any difference there because there is no public interest left in the River Rouge other than to get as far away from it as possible. The public interest could be served `by dumping waste material into the River Rouge,but the River Rouge dumps it into the Detroit River; and the Detroit River dumps it into my district, and we do not go for that. We also have industries that threaten to move away from my district if we enforce pollution standards. We do not look upon this as favorable, particularly when they move to some other portion of the State where the laws are not as tight as ours. They pollute some other river and eventually it goes into the sea. It would seem to me that we do have a hazard. If we begin to enforce reasonably tight pollution standards, we will cause factories to move to the ocean shores, where many have already moved, and they will proceed to ~dump into the oceans where there is no one downstream to argue with them. Now, I regard that as a pretty insensible approach to the problem. Mr. LOGAN. Let me come back to your question. I agree with much of what you said and I have no doubt that there may be plants in the chemical industry that should be shut down and moved. But these situations generally involve factors other than the matter of waste ~disposal. I have been, in my discussions, suggesting the movement of plants for other reasons. To close clown and move a plant today with all the problems you get into is a pretty tough proposition. I think there are some plants, where that needs to be carefully considered, but this should involve the area or the locality, and some method of analysis which takes into account factors other than purely the prob- lem of the plant itself. Mr. VIVIAN. Earlier, I got you to agree that you were spending ~about 1 percent of your sales volume on pollution abatement. Then I find plants saying they are going to move if we enforce the laws. Now, what that means to me is that these plants possess a wonderful ~lub to use on local communities, `but one which is not necessarily valid i~ viewed by an economist dealing with the total product cost. Mr. LOGAN. You are averaging out. The 1 percent might be 25 or ~O percent in one case and zero in a number of others. You cannot average that out. Mr. VIVIAN. I agree. Mr. LOGAN. Now, let's get back to the point of moving to the oceans. Mr. VIVIAN. Go ahead. Mr. LoGAN. If you plotted the weight of the chemical industry throughout the country, I think you would find that it is heavily located along the gulf or coastal areas or on navigable waters. This is not brought about by the desire to avoid pollution control. It is brought about by raw materials, transportation, and markets. There may be the isolated case where the waste disposal problem is a con- tributrng factor in the decision, but basically the chemical industry is located on the navigable waterways. This facilitates the movement of raw materials. Also it facilitates the movement of finished prod- PAGENO="0408" 408 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABA~EMEN1~ ucts to the market, and that means that you are largely related to' the ocean, to the gulf and the main river bodies. Mr. VIVIAN. As you have pointed out, that tends to be the gulf coast, the east coast, and the Great Lakes. I'm omitting the west coast because there does nolt seem to be a dispute there. No one has yet succeeded in saturating the gulf or the Atlantic coasts that we~ know of, but the Great Lakes, are being saturated and1 th~t has occurred in the last genei~ation. Therefore there is a trend toward. plants moving away from the Great Lakes. I happen to have a dis- trict on the Great Lakes which has something to do with my question.~ Now the question I have is: "If we set industry-by-industry standards on ef~luent control, why would this be dangerous to industry?" You say that it intermixes with other factors in the market equation and could cause plant relocations. Presumably it would cost unfair amounts at some seacoast locations. That's the only interpretation L can place on your statement. Mr. LOGAN. Not in most cases I think, and I'm not familiar with~ the specific plants in your locality, although I know sorn~ of them. pretty well, I think in many cases if the decision regarding plant locations were made today, those people would not have put the plants where they have put them in your territory. Mr. Vw~&N. That's another worry. Go ahead. Mr. L0OAN. That is right. So, a part of the problem is relaAtecl to that factor and is not at all a reflection of waite disposal problems. We talked about organic chemicals a few moments ago. Actually the organic chemical business is based on hydrocarbon raw materials,, gas or oil. These are essentially gulf coast or port based situations.. This ~s largely why you have the tremendous development along the gulf coast. It is a matter of raw material and fuel. Itis not related to pollution per se. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Wilkenfeld would like to comment on one of Mr. Roush's remarks wiith respect to the situation in New York State~ Mr. WILKENFELD. I think you will be very interested in what dc- velo'ped after the Rochester hearing in which the question was raised about the quantity of biochemical oxygen demands being discharged by one of our Hooker plants. At that time the report which Oóngress- man Jones had indicated there was 22,000 pounds per day being dis- charged. He felt this was an extremely large figure and questioned it, and I said I would go back and investigate it further. I discussed the matter with the Director of the Federal Water Pollution Study on Lake Ontario immediately afterward. He agreed that he would find out the basis for this number. He didn't know offhand and I have written him formally requesting this, and haven't had a reply yet. I also went back and checked on some data developed on samples taken by the Federal water pollution agencies for the Internat~onal Joint Commission in the spring or late winter last year. I think it was December or January. Their results indicated that there were only 1,600 pounds a day of biochemical oxygen demand, not ~,0OO, and the concentration-.-which I tried to indicate was an important fact, not just total pOunds-at two discharge points to the river was 2 ~nd Darts per million, which are well within what the Federal water pollu- tion agency has indicated they felt discharges to the Great Lakes and~ PAGENO="0409" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 409 Detroit River should be limited to. They talk of 20 parts per million :as what they would like to see municipal plants and industries meet ~in their discharges. So, our discharges were within this, and this was iwhy I was so unsure. I remembered these figures, but not precisely and didn't want to get too involved before I made certain. So I think it is important to set the record straight. Now, the other aspect that bears on this whole question is that if you calculate the effect of this particular plant's discharge on the Niagara River and assume that you have only 10 percent of the flow :available for distribution-and I select 10 percent of the flow of the Niagara River because this is the flow in the American channel-this becomes less than two-tenths of a part per million of biochemical oxygen demand in the stream. Now, I haven't looked up what the normal biochemical oxygen de- mand in that stream is, but I think it is well over two-tenths of a part `per million, and under one part per million is considered reasonable in a stream. So there are these things that arise and sometimes misinter- `pretations can be placed on figures. Other times in attempting to develop information, things can be looked at in manners that aren't ~exactly a complete picture. Mr. ROUSH. I want to make it clear that my first statement that the chemical industry is one `of the greater polluters of our streams ~was not based on that particular figure. Mr. WILREN~w. Well, as you realize, I'm sensitive about this particular point. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. I have a very brief question, but if he wishes to respond to a previous question, I will be glad to wait. Mr. WILI~ENFELD. There is one other point I should make. This reduction or discharge of 1,600 pounds a day-to cite a specific case~- resulted from a great deal of effort over 10 years to reduce waste loadings by inprocess modifications, and inprocess changes, and in- process treatment of a chemical engineering nature which does not ~correspond to secondary treatment. This is a plant that produces a lot of organic chemicals, and this is why we feel so strongly. On the other point of this whole business of research, I would like to make one other comment here. To our mind the concept of a systems approach and a major effort at developing new approaches to `pollution `abatement is radical rather than conservative. It is our feeling that we have to find completely new ways for the future. The currently accepted techniques, if we applied them completely to all our effluents, both domestic and industrial, would probably bring the waters back `to an acceptable quality. But, looking ahead 10, 20 years, I think we recognize that this is not going to be enough and this is why we feel so strongly that it is "necessary to find completely new approaches, not necessarily only treatment, but new ways of doing things. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman, I recognize that time is passing but I `would like to make a brief comment.' The statements you make on the bottom of page 7 of your statement `that continues over to page 8 regarding the relative roles of organiza- tions is a very pertinent one. You suggest that the Federal Govern- PAGENO="0410" 410 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATE1~tE~1' ment can play a role in determiuing criteria, knowledge~ of the science to establish criteria, and in participating and improving the operation and design of municipal treatment works, and other similar functions in which there is no industrial role. The stimulus for research by industry and the private sector is a force whereby your own funds and capitalization can be used to develop new technologies and change your processes to minimize cost. I think these are all very pertinent. Do you find any place where joint spon- sorship is desirable between the Federal Government and industry,. such as pilot plant operations? Let that be a question for the record. rather than one to be answered here. (The reply to this question may be found in vol. II.) Mr. DADDARIO. Yes, because we do have another witness, and we are~ running out of time, so if you could keep what you want to say short, Mr. Logan. Mr. LOGAN. Mr. Chairman, we have not talked much and none of the questions have borne on the hazard of toxicity. I wonder if Dr~ Zapp could comment on that. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Bell has a question first. Mr. BELL. Mr. Logan, being from Los Angeles, my questions will be on air pollution. From .a technical viewpoint do you honestly feel that existing air pollution research in chemical plants has been ade- quate enough to reach an understanding about the effect it will have on human beings? Mr. LOGAN. I can't answer your questions specifically. I think Dr.. Zapp is going to comment on this type of thing. In general we find that the people who work in our plants are less subject to hazards than when they get home and out on the streets. This leads us to believe that there is a technology here that if applied broadly could drastically improve the situation. We can take care of our people as long as they are under our control. It is when they get out on the streets and get home is when they are in trouble. And, this comes back to knowing more about what are the critical limits that people can be exposed to~ and what is the degree of hazard and maybe Dr. Zapp can take 1 mm- ute and then we will move on. Mr. BELL. Do you want to comment on this? Dr. ZAPP. I will, sir. This is not a prepared statement and I will try to make it very brief but I think what Mr. Logan is getting at is~ that the toxicologist, which is one who is concerned with the toxic actions of materials, is concerned with two things: With toxicology itself, or the toxicity of material, which is the inherent ability to pro- duce injury or death; and also is concerned with hazards which is the probability that injury will occur under a given set of circumstances of use. In the chemical industry we deal with chemicals of all grades of toxicity, from the extremely toxic to the practically nontoxic. We~ handle the extremely toxic materials with the hazard in mind; that is, can we do it under such circumstances that the probability of injury will be very little? We set criteria which are applicable for the, say the atmospheric concentration of chemicals in the atmosphere. Now,. these are not zero, and experience has indicated that it is not neces- sary, or perhaps even desirable to get them entirely out of the air,,. PAGENO="0411" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 411 The desirable thing is to keep them at a level where they will do no~ harm. I feel that in this instance we have to keep our eyes on the~ desired goal, which is to protect the quality of the environment and as long as that can be maintained, it may be desirable for many reasons to admit certain wastes into these natural resources, under controlled, conditions and in controlled amounts. Because ultimately we must dispose of all waste into some natural resource. Mr. DADDARIO. I believe Mr. `Fulton has `a question that fails in this, category. `Mr. FULTON. The question comes up as to what the environment, originally was. To me it is a natural resource. Your philosophy does not accept this as a starting point and I think .this injurious' point that we are speaking of is `along this line. For example, on page 2 of your statement, you `speak of injuries to `the very purposes and normal de-. sirable life patterns which should be sustained. We can look `at it from t~ conservation point of view and feel th'at we must maintain a happy, pleasant environment `that keeps the natural resources~ land,, water, `and `air that we have inherited. Now, your organization looks' at it the other way. It is the laissez-faire approach. For example, on page 3, you say that pollution abatement means reducing `the injury after it has occurred and that prevention means keeping the injury in control. My position is different from that. I think we should have `the con- trol to keep it to the minimum. The capacity of our environment to accept waste is an extraordinary valuable natural resource. `But, you, say it is the firm conviction of. the chemical industry `that society can- not afford the cost of control. Maybe your industry can't but `society' or this Government should. You see, it is a different concept. One last' point: You ~say that many of our most objectionable en~ vironmen'tal conditions are not health matters. This may be true, but they m'ay `be depriving us of something that we originally had that we want. I don"t make the distinction solely on the `basis that it does not harm my health and, therefore, I will let every industry admit all the waste into the atmosphere, the lakes, `the rivers, the streams and the, oceans that they will hold. The last part of this question is this: On page 5 of your testimony you state that: Although we shall always be interested in decreasing the cost, this is much more~ likely to come about gradually by evolutionary development from a combination, of operating experience and constant research attention than by massive researcb. effort scattered along a `bruad front. I disagree `with th'at strongly `because `that is saying, "Go as far as you can and then gradually cu't down the waste when it becomes in~ jurious." And in `the next sentence, of course, you `want to set interim objectives at conservative levels with subsequent tightening. `That mBans to me after the damage has occurred. As scientific and expert opinion provides justification, why not set the `controls `and enforce the abatement for everybody `with uniform rules? Mr. DADDARIO. Keeping `that question in mind, I think probably we should have Mr. Bell `ask another question. Mr. FULTON, Put it `in the record. (This material may `be found in vol.11.) PAGENO="0412" 412 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. BELL. You spoke a few moments ago about keeping this toxic smoke emission down to a low level. What studies have you made based on the long-range, low-level type of operation as to what effect it will have in the long rune say 20 to 30 years? I would like to have ~ou tie your answer to your experience or knowledge of the situation in Los Angeles if you could. Mr. ZAPP. I think, sir, there are two kinds of answers we can give to that. For many citizens, there is historical experience, such as with silica-many things of this type `that have been with us for centuries. With others, with the newer, particularly organic chemicals~ ex- perience begins with the discovery of the compound. Now, my own laboratory has been in existence for. more than 30 years so that on some things we have at least 30 years of human ex- perience backing up the laboratory work. The Food and Drug Admin- istration of the United States has been making judgments of safe levels of food additives, pesticides, and so forth, based in large part on animal experimentation, and then confirmed by careful observation of human population. We are doing the same thing. I think that the animal data give us a good basis for making estimates in respect to human safety, realizing that these must be confirmed by survey, epidemiologi- ~al type studies as time goes on. Mr. BELL. You include, in your studies, Los Angeles, too? Mr. ZAFF. I have no studies in Los Angeles in particular, no. Mr. BELL. But you are familiar with that situation? Mr. ZAPP. I'm familiar with that situation; yes, sir. Mr. BELL. That's all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Logan, I regret that even though we have taken up a great part of the morning, we can't continue because we have a whole series of questions still to be answered and we hope we might send them to you and have your cooperation in answering them. (Ad- ditionál questions and answers for the record may be found in vol. II.) We appreciate you and the other gentlemen coming. Mr, LOGAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. (The biographical statement of John 0.' Logan follows:) BIOGRAPHICAL STATEMENT OP JouN 0. LOGAN, ExEc.tTTlva Vica PBESIDENT~ COslolwrn, OLIN MArnnrsox CHEMIcAL CoiuoRATIoN John 0. Logan is executive vice president responsible for such corporate staff functions as law, patent, marketing services, engineering and construction, per- sonnel, Internal communications and Olin's Washington office. He also serves as chairman of the Capital Appropriations Committee. He was appointed to his present post in September, 1965, and in October bec4me a member of the board of directors. He joined Mathieson Alkali Works in 1981 as an assistant' In the research department at Niagara Falls, N.Y., and his 35-year chemical career has covered research, sales and administration. tipon the merger of Mathieson Chemical Corporation with Olin Industries, Inc., in 1954 to form Olin Mathleson Chemical Corporation, he was named vice president and general manager `of Industrial Chemicals. He became a cQrporate vice president In 1960 arid the following year was put in charge of the Chemicals Division. tn August, 1964, he was named executive vice president for chemicals, responsible for both the Chemicals and the Agricultural Divisions. Mr. Logan was born on December 7, 1910, in Alton, Ill. lie received his B.S. degree in chemistry and mathematics from Shurtieff O'ollege in 1961. He is chairman of the board of directors of SunOlin Chemical Company and Nilo Barge Line, Inc.; chairman of the executive committee and a director PAGENO="0413" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 413 of the Manufacturing Chemists' Association; and a director of Penn-Olin Chemical Company (jointly owned by Pennsalt Chemicals Oorporation and Olin), the National Agricultural Oliemicals Association, the Chlorine Institute and the ~ational 4-H Service Committee. He also is a memJ~er of the Chemists' Club, the American, Association of Textile Ohemists and Colorists, and the Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry. Mr. Logan holds several U. S. patents on pulp bleaching and generation of chlorine dioxide. Mr. DADDARIO. Our next witness is Mr. A. J. Wagner, Chairman of the Tennessee Valley Authority. He is accompanied by Mr. F. E. Gartrell. We would appreciate if you gentlemen would come forward. STATE1VLENT BY A. J. WAGNER, CHAIRMAN, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Mr. WAGNER. We greatly appreciate this opportunity to describe for your committee TVA's experience in the field of air pollution control. TVA has long been concerned with this problem. Like clean water, clean air is an important environmental factor affecting a region's capacity for growth and development. As a regional resource de- velopment agency we are, therefore, interested in any condition or situation which impinges on air quality in the Tennessee Valley area. TVA also has some direct responsibility for air quality control be- cause we operate a number of large coal-fired, steam-electric generat- ing plants which currently burn from 20 to 25 million tons of coal per year. We have a further direct responsibility because of our chemical plant operations at the Muscle Shoals fertilizer and munitions research and production facility. We understand that the subcommittee is particularly interested in our experience in dealing with air pollution control at our steam-elec- tric generating plants. Our serious studies of this problem began when we undertook construction of our first post-World War II plant at Johnsonville, in west Tennessee~ in 1949. We located this plant and have since located others in rural areas. This has enabled us to generate electricity essential to the region's progress without adding to air pollution problems in large population centers, In fact,. the growing use of electricity for heating homes and factories and oMces and for cooking in our cities has reduced the smoke and pollution which would otherwise have resulted from stoves and furnaces in the cities themselves. Heat transmitted by wire from rural generating stations to our region's cities has helped to keep their air clean. In addition to this location factor, we have for the past 15 years conducted a continuous program of study and research in steamplant air pollution control. Its purpose is to insure that, even in rural areas, the operation of our plants is carried out to hold undesirable discharges into the air within acceptable limits. This program has been under the direction of our Division of Health and Safety, and we have expended some $2,700,000 to date in conduct- ing it. We have used the results of these studies to improve the design of new plants and, in some cases, to modify existing plants. In gen- eral this has meant increased stack heights in our newer plants to re- 08-240--6fl-vol. i-27 PAGENO="0414" 414 ADEQUACY ~F TECHNOLOGY FOE ?OLLUTION ABATEMENT duce the o~n~entrations of stack gases; and the installation of electrd- static precipitators to althost completely eliminate the discharge of fly ash. ` Mr. DAIDARIO. What stack heights are you talking about in this in- stance? Mr*. WAGNER. The highest we have built today is 800 feet, Mr. Chair- ~ma~i. Mr. DADDARTO. Are they any indicatipns that the stacks must be much higher to really answer this problem, or do you feel that the `preseht heights are sufficient? Mr. WAGNER. I think we are about right. TherG may be some pos~ sibility for higher stacks; Mr. BELL. May I interject a question, Mr. Ch~drman? Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. Mr. BELL. Would the height of a stack make a difference in Los Angel~s? Mr. WAGNER. Let me say I have with me Dr. Frank Gartrell of our Division of Health and Safety who has been closely associated with this progi~am of air pollution control, and I would like to ask him ~to respond to that question. Dr. GARTRELL. With regard to the ultimate height to which stacks might go, I think a lot depends on the particular `ar~a in whi~ch you might be operating a plant. In some `ar~as you might conceivably go higher than 800 feet where you `are in a deep ravine or valley situation. `I believe 800 feet is about as high as we would need to go with the powerplants in the Tennessee Valley in dealing with `the situations that we have `there. Mr. DADDARIO. Getting back to Mr. Bell's question, could the stacks be built to such a height in Los Angeles that they would be helpful? Mr. BELL. In Los Angeles there are mountains more than a thousand feet high, right behind the city and winds from the ocean bring the smoke in. Dr. GARTRELL. I really have no't had personal experience with your situation in Los Angeles or the way high stacks perform in that ares. Mr. DADDARIO. But this seems to be a good technique. `Dr. GARTRELL. It serves a very useful purpose, and we are just now getting a body of experience which will allow us to find out hokv beneficial high stacks in the order of 600 to 800 feet really are in `*dealing with air pollution problems. Mr. CONABLE. What is the difference between fly ash and smoke? Dr. GARTRELL. The usual distinction made between smoke and fly ash is that smoke consists of combustion gases containing appreciable amounts of unburned c;arbon particles. Fly ash is the solid waste materials in stack gases from furnaces, stich a's those at modern powet- "plant~, where practically complete combustion of the fuel is obtained. Mr. CONABLE. They are both tiny particles in the' air, aren't they? Dr~ GARTRELL. Yes. Mr. WAGNER. Between 1953 and 1956, we performed extensive re- search and built a pilot plant to extract sulfur dioxide, or SO2, fr~m stack gases, `spending nearly $350,000 on this project. But the process `was èumbersome and uneconomic and we dropped it. At the same time, it must be recognized that the discovery and adoption of a process for extracting sulfur from the coal or from PAGENO="0415" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 415 the stack gases is much needed. It would contribute greatly to air pollution aibatement all across the Nation; equally significant, it would help to conserve an important but exhaustible natural resource. Sulfur is basic in the production of fertilizers, and it is becoming important as a plant nutrient. Commercially available sulfur is in short; supply, and newcomers in the fertilizer production field are having great difficulty in contracting for adequate amounts of sulfur on a long4erm basis. At a time when we are plagued with world food shortages and when chemical fertilizers can help to alleviate them, there is this added urgency and reason for finding a way to extract sulfur dioxide from stack gases. We are currently assessi~ng present technology in this field and will undertake new research to help find a solution. I would like to mention also that we are engaged in an extensive clean air program at our chemical fertilizer facility at Muscle Shoals. This facility dates from World War I, with some s~Ibsequent improve~ ments. We now have underway a $3 million air pollution control program to bring air quality at the facility up to present-day standards. As I indicated this morning, here with me are Dr. F. E. Gartrell of our Health and Safety Division and Mr. A. B. Phillips of our Office of Agricultural and Chemical Development. With the com- mittee's permission, I should like to ask Dr. Gartrell to describe in greater detail our study program in air pollution control at our electric generating plants. Then, if the committee has questions about the tech- nical aspects of research in the extraction of sulfur from stack gases, or about the control program at our chemical plant, Mr. Phillips can respond to them. Mr. DADDARIO. We will proceed with Dr. Gartrell and then see how much time we have. Mr. WAGNER. Mr. Chairman, you have a copy of Dr. Gartrell's statement. It may take longer to present the entire statement than you desire, and if you prefer, he can give you an abbreviated version of it. Mr. DADDARIO. Any savings in time will be looked upon favorably. Mr. WAGNER. Then Dr. Gartrell will give you an abstract. STATEMENT OP DR. F. E. GARTRELL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIVI- SION OP HEALTH AND SAFETY, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORfliY Dr. GARTRELL. The following comments will be an abstract of the more detailed statement. Prior to the construction of the Johnsonville plant in 1949~53, the only thermal powerplants in the TVA system were relatively small plants which did not present any special air pollution problems. Dur- ing the past 15 years TVA has added 53 coal-fired, steam-electric gen- erating units to its power production facilities. These units range in size from 125 to 950 megawatts, and are located in 9 plants with total rated plant capacities running from 823 to 1,978 megawatts. The number of units at each plant ranges from 1 to 10. The addition of 1,150 megawatts now being installed at the two- unit Paradise plant will increase total capacity of that plant to2.~58 PAGENO="0416" 416 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT megawatts, making it one of the largest plants in the world. TVA powerplants burn about 23 million tons of coal annually. Sulfur in the coal ranges from slightly less than 1 percent to more than 5 per- cent by weight and averages approximately 3 percent. Ash content varies between 5 and 15 percent. As planning for the Johnsonville plant advanced, TITA recogmzed that stack emissions from a plant of the ultimate size contemplated at the site would present a potential air pollution problem. Collectors were available that would provide desired removal of fly ash from stack gases; hence control of particulate emissions did not appear to offer any special problems. However, this was not the case with sulfur dioxide. Becanse of the many uncertainties at that time in assessing the potential problem in the SO2 emissions and in plannmg control measures, TVA initiated a broad-scope air pollution study program. The objectives of the program were to define the problem and investi- gate practical steps that might be taken if special control measures were indicated. Principal elements of the air pollution study program are (1) moni- toring of SO2 concentrations in the vicinity of each plant, (2) collec- tion and analysis of on-site meteorological data, (3) biological studies to determine effects of plant emissions on vegetation in special experi- mental gardens and in surrounding areas, (4) full-scale studies of stack gas dispersion, (5) investigations of possible means for reducing emissions through the modification of plant operations during periods when meteorological conditions are unfavorable for dispersion, and (6) research on processes for removal of SO2 from stack gases. Beginning with the Johnsonville plant, preoperational and post- operational air pollution studies have been conducted at each plant. Experience has been used in planning air pollution control at succeed- mg plants and for additions to existing plants. Stack performance: Data obtained from routine monitoring and from full-scale disper- sion studies have been utilized in estimating stack height requirements for TVA powerplants. Postoperational monitoring data for each plant have been used to check stack performance and indicated adjust- ments have been made in stack height calculations for new plants. Until the recent completion of our full-scale dispersion study, prin- cipal reliance in stack height calculations was upon formulas derived empirically from monitoring data. Planning for air pollution control at the Johnsonville plant in- cluded computing ~taek performance by procedures commonly used at the time. Experience after the plant was put into operation was much more favorable than was predicted on the basis of the earlier computations. Even *ith improvements subsequently made in methods for computing stack performance, as unit sizes ~nd stack heights have increased, experience has continued to be more favorable than predictions based on calculations, thongh the margin of difference now is much less than it, used to be. A comparison of ground.~. level concentrations of stack gases from the Johnsonville plant with those from Paradise, one of the newer large plants, provides ah interesting measure of the progress that has been made in~ control of air ~oUution from powerplants by dispersion from h]gh stacks. The original Johnsonville plant was constructed PAGENO="0417" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 417 during the period 1949-53 and consisted of six 112.5-megawatt units with 170-foot stacks, subsequently raised to 270 feet. Continuous monitoring for SO2 was conducted at locations in the vicinity of the plant where maximum concentrations were expected to occur. From analyses of SO2 records before the stacks were raised, the maximum 30-minute average concentration of SO2 was 3.8 parts per million. After the stacks were raised, it was only 0.6 part per million. The Paradise plant with two 704-megawatt units was placed in com- mercial operation in 1963. This plant has two 600-foot stacks. De- spite the fact that average daily 502 emission is double that of the original Johnsonviile plant, the maximum 30-minute average concen- tration of 502 recorded thus far by the five-autometer network around the Paradise plant has. been 0.4 part per million. In terms of com- parison, this represents at least a threefold improvement over the Johnsonville plant, even after the stacks had been raised to 210 feet. A comparison such as this emphasizes the importance of utilizing the best current information in evaluating air pollution potential and in planning air pollution control fOr large modern powerplants. Frequency distribution of SO2 concentrations: While the maximum ground level concentratiOn of SO2 that oan be expected in the vicinity of a large powerplant is essential to assess- roent of its air pollution potential, an almost equally important factor is the frequency of occurrence of various ground level concentrations of SO2 in the area around the plant. Satisfactory methods for cal- culating frequencies from operational and meteorological data have riot yet been devised. However, from analysis of the TVA monitor- ing data, a certain pattern of frequency distribution has been observed which affords a means for arriving at reasonably good approxima- tions. This has provided a means in cases of limited operational experience for estimating situations beyond the range of actual data;" for comparing air pollution experience at different powerpl'ants, and for relating powerplant air pollution potential to air quality stand- ards employing frequency criteria. It has also been useful in show- ing the difference between pollution patterns of powerplants and those of urban area's with multiple sources of pollution emitted at or near ground level. The frequency of SO2 registration at a fixed point in the vicinity of a remote power station is strikingly different from that of a single point in an urban area with multiple sourceS `of SO2 emitted at or near ground level. The frequency distribution of SO2 concentrations measured by a recording instrument at a point where maximum con- centrations occurred in the vicinity of `one of our modern plants with 500-foot stacks was compared with similar data obtained from an air pollution study by the Public Health Service in Nashville, Tenn. Although estimated SO2 emissions in the urban area were only approximately half those of the pow'erplant, the frequency of 502 registrations in the urban area (for example at the 0.2 part per million, 30-minute average level) was approximately 35 times that in the powerplant area. Pollution potential of po'werpiants under air stagnation `eonditions~ Air pollution control plans developed for the Kingston steam- plant, until recently the largest pTant in the TVA system, gave special PAGENO="0418" 418, .ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT attention to a potential problem likely to be associated with periods of atmospheric stagnation. The plant is located in the floor of an Appalachian valley. The local topography is characterized by paral- lel, ridges rismg from 400 to 1,000 feet above the valley floor. When meteorological forecasts are `for conditions that might result in `build- up of pollution levels in the vicinity of the plant~ `control plans provide for use of low-sulfur coal until the `alert `period is ended. Also, dur- ing such' periods `supplementary `air monitoring is `conducted. While a number of alert periods have occurred since this procedure was initiated in 1954, at no time has significant buildup' `of pollution occurred. It `appears that for air pollution potential forecasts, powerplants should be viewed as a special case for which the meteorological criteria normally used may not be applicable. For example, general air stagnation conditions prevailed in the Kingston plant area for a 3-day period in the fall of 1964. TVA was alerted by the U.S. Weather Bureau at the beginning of the period and precautionary air pollution control measures were initiated. Autorneters were checked at regular intervals. Special helicopter and mobile sampling were conducted during the 3-day period. Frequency and concentrations o'f ~O2 recorded at ground level were no higher than during normal atmospheric conditions. Under such condition's air pollution does build `up in urban areas, `as is evidenced by the abnormally high pollu- tion levels which developed in large urban areas during a long period of `air stagnation over much of the Eastern United States in November and D~cember 1962. Operational controls: The limited special use of low-sulfur coal as mentioned previously is the only operational control that T'VA has used so far for air pollution control at its `plants. However, there are a number of other potentially useful operational controls which might be used singly or in combination to reduce emissions, enhance dispersion, or both, during periods when ground level concentrations of stack emissions might be expected to exceed desired control levels Among these are load reduction, chemical removal o'f SO2 by limestone injection, and rais- ing the temperature of stack gases to increase plume rise. In addition to the `obvious operational problems and costs involved in application of measures such as these, there is the problem of forecasting air pollu- tion potential far enough in advance to permit effective application of the controls and accurately enough to limit their us'e so far as possible to periods when they actually are needed. Intensive dispersion studies at the Paradise plant are expected. to lead to better use of meteorolog- ical and operational d'ata in predicting significant ground concen- trations. In addition, the studies are expected to result in further improvement in formulas fo'r dispersion of emissions from large powerplants. Eesearch on removal of SO2 from po'werplant st'ack gases: As Mr. Wagner mentioned, early in its air pollution studies TVA directed attention to possible processes for removal of SO2 from power- plant stack gases. TVA's interest in development o'f a practical p~oeess was twofold: for use, if needed, as an air pollution control measure, and also as a possible source of sulfur for fertilizer produc- tion and other purposes. PAGENO="0419" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 419 in 1953 TVA initiated research and pilot plant work toward this end at its fertilizer development laboratories. Research on SO2 removal was suspended in 1956 when it was con- cluded that it was highly improbable that a practical process could be developed in any reasonable period of time that might serve as a practicable air pollution control measure or compete successfully with other sources of sulfur. Also, other studies strongly indicated, and experience has confirmed, that satisfactory control for projected additions to the system could be achieved by dispersion from high stacks. Mr. DADDARIO. Do you think that was a sufficient reason for havin discontinued studies-because it could not be competitive? Shoul we not have continued to try to find a solution to this problem? Mr. Bell raises the question that high stacks may be the answer in some places and not in other areas. Mr. WAGNER. Mr. Chairman, may I respond to that question? This particular process that we were working on was dropped. We have not dropped the idea, and as I indicated very briefly and I think Dr. Gartrell will go further, we think research is urgently needed to try to find ways to get this sulfur out, and we are currently assessing the present state of technology, examining what has been done and what is being experimented with around the world. And we plan to get into some new research, but involving different processes. Mr. DADDARIO. You indicated in your opening statement that this was so, and I did want to wait until the point came up again in the present statement. But it does seem to me that the hiatus is im- portant here. The fact is that you did drop it after all this period of time knowing that it still was a problem and that nothing has been done about it. I wonder if this is wise. The reason I ask it is that because we have noticed time and time again through these hearings that a problem may be dropped because it is too difficult or expensive. Mr. WAGNER. This particular process that we tried proved to be not a good one. Now the problem still needs to he attacked. In the meantime. I should recall that we were working in a period when there really was no information available as to the extent of pollution that you would get from a plant like this, or the effects of it, and we were learning as we went. We found that the high stacks would for our area and at the present time provide an acceptable sollution. Perhaps we should have pursued other research at that time, but you have to have an idea before you can pursue research, and we are picking that up. Mr. DADDARIO. I am just trying to find out why expenditures were made on an important project and then stopped. Are you starting again because there isadditional interest, because you can get support for it or because you were being criticized for having spent this money without any particular positive results? Mr. WAGNER. Well, the fact, as I indicated, that sulfur is an ex- haustible resource for which there is great use, and it ought to be* conserved, has been in the back of our minds. Increases in the use of electricity everywhere also makes it more urgent that the problem be solved now; and there have been advances in technology in variouS PAGENO="0420" 420 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLuTION ABATEMENT fields that contribute, we believe, to the better possibility of a solution now. I am not a technologist, and perhaps I should be letting Dr. Gartrell answer the question, but I did want to make the point that we recog- nized this was a problem that required solution, and we do as a policy matter intend to do whatever we can about it. Dr. GARTRELL. Although we suspended actual research in the field, we have maintained our interest in the subject and have kept alert to possible breakthroughs in technology that might provide a practical answer, but the facts in the case were that the power system was ex- panding rapidly and we needed to have answers at the time, and we realized that the development of practical methods for removal of SO2 from stack gases was a long-term proposition. And meanwhile, our experience with the higher stacks, as I indicated before, was then and has continued from plant to plant to be very favorable. Mr. BELL. How much of the sulfur dioxide, which i~ emitted into the air through the high stacks is washed out of the air and how much of it stays there? Do you have any idea on that? Dr.~GARTRELL. There have been some efforts to try to make an inven- tory of sulfur compounds in the worldwide atmosphere, and according to the best calculations that we know about there is no indication of any buildup, of sulfur compounds or SO2 in the atmosphere, indicating that the processes for removal are balancing out even the increased emissions. Mr. BELL. Mr. Chairman, I have another question a little slightly differeiit from this, on the pollution problem, Some of your plants use coal, and somO use oil, or gas. Which fuel represents the largest pollution problem? Dr. GARTRELL. My experience has been limited to coal-fired power- plants. Gas is a relatively clean fuel. It has the least sulfur in it of any fossil fuel that is available. The sulfur content in oil varies as widely as it does in coal. Mr. BELL. Yes; I understand that. But I assumed you would use the lightest type that has less sulfur in it. One other question, Mr. Chairman. I understand you are consider- ing the use of nuclear power in your plants. Is that correct? Mr. WAO~ER. That is correct. We have contracted for a nuclear plant. Mr. BELL. DOes that represent a problem in this area? Mr. WAGNER. Not a problem in air pollution, no, sir. Mr. BELL. Would there be a sizable waste problem? Mr. WAGi~ER.' No waste problems that aren't solvable. `Let me ask you, Frank, to respond further. Dr. GARTRELL. With regard to nuclear powerplants and the nuclear industry in general, that is one instance in which the technology for handling the waste products, both liquid and atmospheric waste products-that technology was developed concurrently with the de.. velopment of the basic technology. The developers recognized that they had a material that had to be handled with great care, so from the very beginning the work in the nuclear field has included attention to problems of Waste disposal. Mr. BELL. Then you would say that more of your plants will be using nuclear energy in `the future. Is that what we should look forward to? PAGENO="0421" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION AflATEMENT 4Z1 Mr. WAGNER. When TVA's decision was made to build a nuclear plant, this was the most economical source of energy available to us' and we will continue to analyze the situation when we make each addi- tion to our capacity. I am confident that there will be more nuclear plants built. I don't think that means there will be none of the other kinds built. Mr. BELL. But this will have some effect on pollution. Dr. GARPRELL. Our planning with regard to the preoperational and postoperational studies for any, effects on the environment will carry through the same regime of study with nuclear powerpl'ants as with coal powerplan~s. So as time gáes on we will have a body of knowl- edge and experience there to guide us that we can make available to others. The fact that all of the safety features are there does not mean that we are not going to give as much attention to that facility as we `are to others that are burning coal. Mr. DADDARIO. Let's please proceed with your statement. Dr. GARTRELL. Some progress is being made and with the worldwide research effort currently being directed to the problem, practical processes for removal of SO2 from fossil-fuel-fired powerplant stack gases and economic recovery of sulfur for useful purposes probably will be developed. However, `at present we know `of no' generally applicable process that has been sufficiently proved to be relied upon, as a primary method of controlling SO2 air pollution from a large power- plant. Thus, at least for the next few years, SO2 air pollution control for new fossil-fuel powerplants and additions to existing plants where low sulfur fuels are `not reasonably available, will have to be planned with principal reliance upon dispersion from high stacks, with pos~ sible supplementary control. That concludes my statement. Mr. DADDARTO. We had a very intriguing proposition put before us when Dr. Spilhaus was l'ere. He was the chairman of one of the studies which was made on the subject of pollution.. He proposed that we somehow establish an ~experimental city through which we would try to solve all these problems, not only pollution problems, but. also transportation health and education problems. The experimental city would be used as a means to develop new concepts, materials and architecture. If we were `to develop such a city, and the government were to.~ar-, ticipate and using the technology which exists today, could you supply power under conditions where there would be absolutely no pollution ~ Mr. WAGNER. We `could supply power so that there would be, no appreciable resulting pollution in that city, but we would not `sup-' ply `it from a plant in that city. We don't put our generating plants in cities. When you say absolutely no pollution, you have established' a pretty high criterion and I believe Dr. Gartrell would agree that you couldn't fully meet it. For instance, you pollute the atmosphere when you breathe, and so when you say absolutely uone~ you are setting a very high- Mr. DADDARIO. Let's qualify,* it. Considering that we have to breathe, let us take intO consideration pollution in the sense of those things that we add to our environmelit through th~ process of de- veloping energy, such as the case of TVA, PAGENO="0422" 422 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. WAGNER. I would be interested in taking a flier at that, Mr. Chairman. I think you would have to-well, we have no pollution from our hydro plants, at least virtually none. You may get some ozone created, but I think it would have to be a plant, in the present state of the art that would avoid the use of fossil fuels; is that correct, Frank? Dr. GARTEELL. Yes.. * Mr. WAGNER. I think you would come awfully close to it by using it with a nuclear plant. Mr. DADDARIO. As I understand it, the principle is that we have the chance to investigate some of these problems as a whole instead of in bits and pieces. Mr. WAGNER. I would be much interested in taking a flier at that not only from the standpoint of air pollution but from a wider view- point which I understand was presented: A city designed for com- fortable and pleasant living in a modern industrial society. It is a very challenging idea. Dr. GARTRELL. One of the more difficult things would be that of handling the solid waste. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Spilhaus included this in his proposal. * Dr. GARTRELL. You would have to have electric automobiles, which we would like. Mr. VIVIAN. I wonder if I could ask some questions and have the answers submitted for the record. You refer to a sludge project being administered by the Public Health Service and TYA on page 1 of your testimony, Dr. Gartrèl1~ I wasn't aware that the TVA was engaged in this kind of work, but I would like to have some information on this project. Mr. WAGNER. We can give you a very brief explanation. Mr. DADDARIO. Let's have a brief answer and then you can supple. ment it. Dr. GARTREIJL. This is a full-scale demonstration process for corn- posting municipal refuse and garbage and raw sewage sludge. The plant under construction is being built at Johnson City, Tenn. It is a demonstration project under the new Solid Waste Act that the Public Health Service has responsibility for administering. Mr. VIVIAN. What is the total cost of that project? Dr. GARTRELL. We have a rather detailed report on the project with a description of the plan and background, and we will be glad. to supply it. (The report is as follows:) OoNoius'~r AND DESIGN OF THE JOINT U.S. PUBLIC Hia<H SEEvIoE-TENNEssr~ VALLEY AUTHORITY CoMrosrrnG PROJECT, JOHNSON CITY, TENNESSEE (By JOhn S. Wiley,1 F. E. Gartrell,2 and H. Gray SmIth8) PRESENTED AT T~IE FIFTH ANNUAL SANITARY AND WATER RRSOUItCES ENGINEERING CONFERENCE, VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY, NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, JUNE 3, 1966 About 25 years agp Eurqpear~s, le~ by the Dutch, began d~velopment of modern *composting plants for the disposal and utilization of urbali solid wastes. At first the objective was to produce compost for use as a soil builder or conditioner; later, the objective was primarily to provide a sanitary method of waste disposal 1 Project Engineer, Office of Solia Wastes, Public Health Service, Chattanooga, Tennessee. 2 Assistant Director of Health, Tennessee valley Authority, Chattanooga, Tennessee. ~ Mechanical Engineer, Mechanical Design Branch, Division of Engineering Design, Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee. PAGENO="0423" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 423 and secondarily to utilize the resulting compost. While there were many corn- posting processes, two types of plants predominated: the rasping system-windrow composting plants developed by the Dutch N. V. Vuilafvoer Maatschappii (VAM) and the Dano biostabilizer plants developed by the Dano Works in Denmark. In the United States, Waksman and his associates conducted research during 1926-1941 on aerobic decomposition of plant residues and manures. The firsi basic studies on aerobic composting of community solid wastes were conducted by the University of California, Sanitary Engineering Research Project (1), during 1950-1952. One conclusion of this work was that composting should be considered as a means of disposal and reclamation for municipal refuse. Gotaats (2) later prepared a comprehensive text on this subject for the World Health Organization. From 153 to 1962 Wiley and others (3) (4) of the Public Health Service, Communicable Disease Center, conducted laboratory studies at Savannah, Geor- gia, and pilot plant studies at Chandler, Arizona. These studies indicated that composting of municipal refuse, with or without sewage sludge, is a feasible and sanitary method of treatment. However, at that time funds were not available for large-scale municipal demonstrations. At about the same time, Gartrell first proposed a full.scale conipostiIig project to be jointly sponsored by the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Public Health Service, and a municipality in the Tennessee Valley area. Both TVA and PHS are interested in sanitary methods of disposal of municipal solid wastes without creating problems of health hazards, nuisance, and water, land, or air pollution. Composting appeared to present a satisfactory method of waste disposal and at the same time to produce a marketable material useful in soil Improvement. Marketability of the compost produced greatl~ affects the economy of a corn- posting operation and may determine whether the process is competitive with other sanitary methods of solid waste disposal. TVA operates the National Fertilizer Development Center at Muscle Shoals, Alabama, one of the world's largest fertilizer research and development institu~ tions. As a part of its agricultural research and development program, TVA has resources to test and demonstrate the value of compost as a soil amendment and to study marketing opportunities. While the nutrient contents (N, P205, K20) of compost are relatively low, tests may reveal benefits from fortifying compost with nutrients to produce an organic-base fertilizer. Most American composting plants built in recent years have relied on the sale of compost and salvaged materials for their primary income, while there was only a nominal payment by the municipality for disposal. Wiley and Kochtitzky (5) concluded that the inability to dispose of large quantities of compost at a favorable price was probably a major factor in the closing of six of nine plants during the period 1962-1964. Nevertheless, interest in cOmpost- ing is increasing, and half a dozen plants have recently been completed or are under construction. There will be nine distinct composting processes repre- sented in the fifteen American plants, each undergoing modification and im- provement. Reliable cost data are not available, but the industry has found it necessary at the newer plants to increase charges for disposal and to place less reliance on income from sales of compost to meet processing costs. Processing raw sewage sludge with solid wastes at a composting plant rather than at the sewage treatment plant should greatly improve the economics of coniposting. Normal sludge digestion and air drying account for an appreciable portion of the cost of wastewater treatment and produce only a low-value prod- uct that may contain pathogens and undesirable viable seeds. Since moisture must be added to mixed refuse for optimum composting, sludge can be used to provide moisture along with other benefits. The nutrients in raw sludge will enhance the decomposition of refuse and augment both structure and nutrient content of the compost. However, sludge thickening is required when all sludge and refuse from the same contributory population are combined. There are several relatively inexpensive means of concentrating or dewatering sewage sludge. In normal composting, the aerobic thermophilic decomposition produces tem- peratures of 140 degrees F or higher for several hours or even days. Such time-temperature is believed to be adequate to destroy most, if not all, pathogens. Reports by Knoll (6), Wiley (7), and Krige (8) on European and South African studies have consistently indicated the safety of composts produced by a number of processes. Several reports have indicated than anti-microbial substances are produced during composting and that their action may be as important as time-temperature in destroying pathogens. It appears obvious that compost PAGENO="0424" 424 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT produced from refuse-sludge mixtures `is less apt to contain viable pathogens and seeds than normally digested sewage sludge. However, few studies of these factors have been made `iii the United States. PITS is interested in the public health aspects of solid wastes composting and of the use of finished compost in various applications. PITS proposes to study plant operation and sanitation methods toavoid production of odors, propagation of flies and rodeftts, and d1s~ase hazards to the workers and visitors. PITS also will dire~t studies on'the sur~thTal of pathog~ns and indicator organisms through- out the composting and curing periods. This is `particularly important when raw sludge is used in the process. Imp~ementation of the project During 1900-1964, TVA-PHS eonference~ were held in Savannah and Atlanta, Georgia; Knoxville, Tennessee; Washington, D.C.; and Muscle Shoals, Alabama. PITS and TVA agreed in August 1964 to undertake a joint research and demon- stration project on solid wastes composting. Engineers of TVA, with state and local health .department representatives, surveyed refuse and sewage sludge disposal at six cities in the Tennessee Valley area. Agricultural specialists of TVA made surveys of the, use of chemical and organic fertilizers in the same six `areas. Johnson City, Tennessee, was selected as the preferred site for `the proposed `research-demonstration coinposting plant and it agreed to join PITS and PITA in the project. The TVA Division of Agricultural Development initiated a project on "The Use of Municipal and Industrial Organic Wastes in the Production of Soil Amendments and Fertilizers" in March 1963. A continuing study of the dis~ posal of organic municipal and industrial wastes as soil amendments consists of surveys in various sections of the United States to determine' the scope and ,nature of the problem and the current status of research and development in this field. Studies are being conducted on economical means of converting corn- posts Into forms suitable fbr large-scale disposal and to determine the agronomie values of such products. TVA will conduct experiments on the preparation of acceptable composted products, In testing and demonstrating their value and effect, and In' `determining the mkrket potential for various uses, directed speci~lcal1y to the operation of the `demonstration plant after its completion, Wiley was transferred in November 1964 to the PITA Division of Health aild safety' in Chattanooga to collaborate with PITA in detailed planning of the proj- ect.' Later, he will move to Johnson `City ~o provide technical guidance in plant operation and to coordinate research activities. A cooperative project agree- `mont cai the "Joint U.S. Public Health Service-Tennessee Valley Authority Composting Project, Johnson City, Tennessee," was signed on February 15, 1966, by representatives ~f the two Federal agencies and Johnson City. Under the agreem~nt PITA will design, construct, and operate the plant with technical guidance frøm the PITS and will be reimbursed by PITS for expenses of the project. The city will be reimbursed for services and expenses above normal as a rosuit of the operation of the research-demonstration compos'ting project. Compost plaflt deeign The compOsting plant will be constructed on a site provided by Johnson City adjacent to its sewage treatment plant. Phe compost plant will be of the wind- row type capable of treating all mixed refuse and raw sewage sludge from the city of 33,000 poçpulatlon. Certain commercial and industrial oi~ganic wastes also may be treated. The plant is designed to operate 51/2 days a week, single shift, and is expected to process an average of 58.5 tons a day of mixed refuse with a maximum of 70 tons a day and sludge quantities of 9,100- 13,200 gallons a day (five percent solids) or 3,800-5,500 pounds a day of dry sludge solids, Refuse processing equipment is designed to handle 10 tons ,~n hour. `The accompanying flow diagram and perspective view show the processing ~,~teps and lay'o~t of the plant. ~Refuse will be delivered to the plant in 53-cubic- ~ard compaction trailers. All incoming refuse, discarded wastes, and compost will be weighed. on truck scales adjacent to the office and `laboratory building. The receiving hopper has a capacity of about 3,500 cubic feet or about one-half day's collection. A 6-foot-wide plate conveyor, moving about one foot a minute, carrIes the refuse past a vertical leveler and drops it onto a 3-foot-wide ole- vating and sorting belt conveyor traveling at right angles to the plate conveyor. The receiving building will be roofed and enclosed on three sides. The belt con- veyor will be enclosed between receiving and processing buildings. PAGENO="0425" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 425 I- 2 8 4 ~1 ~L~J U 0 CD C L~ L I PAGENO="0426" 426 A~I~QUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT I I ( 1 PAGENO="0427" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 42~ The processing buiding will be 40 feet by 60 feet in plan and will ho~ise allot the refuse processing operations, the sludge thickener, and the refuse-aludg~ mixer. Bulky paper, rags, metals, glass, and other noncompqstable,miateriai, about 25 percent of the incoming refuse, will be removed by hand sorting aM magnetic separation and hauled to the Johnson City sanitary landfill for dis- posal. Two types of grinders, a rasping machine and a hammermill, each with a design capacity of about 8 tons an hour, are so placed that they can be used alternatively for comparison of efficiency and costs of operation and mainte- nance. The refuse at about 35' percent moisture content, after sorting and grind- ing, will be mixed with thickened sludge and water as needed to increase mois- ture to 50-60 percent for the windrow composting. Initially digested sludge will be pumped from one of the two digesiters for thick- ening and composting with the refuse. As more sludge is removed than received, the digesters gradually will be converted to concentrating tanks until essentially raw sludge is being pumped. Sludge will be thickened in a Perm~tit DOG Solids Concentrator to a moisture content of about 85-88 percent. Filtrate from the sludge thickener, along with wastewater from the compost plant, will be returned to the sewage treatment plant for processing. The refuse-sludge mixture will be composted on a 5-acre area graded and stabi~ lized with crushed rock. Windrows, deposited by dump truck, will be about 7 feet wide by 5 feet high and up to 230 feet long. The active composting time in windrows will be 30-35 days with a maximum of 44 days. During this time the refuse-sludge mixture will be turned 5-10 times with a self-propelled loader. To maintain 50-.60 percent moisture content in the composting mixture, water will be added as needed during the turning operation. It is planned to use a portable shredder and rotary screen unit as the compost is loaded for transfer to the storage shed. The storage shed will be 00 feet by 200 feet in plan and will provide shelter for curing, air drying, and storing the compost. After compostiug, at least two weeks of curing in windrows will be provided during which the moisture content of the compost is expected to drop to about 25 percent. The estimated average daily production of compost is about 25 tons or 42 percent of the weight of Incoming refuse. `I~bant operation and researC7~ studies The plant operation will be completely coordinated with municipal activities concerned with refuse co~lectlon `and disposal and sewage treatment. The city will maintain its present sanitary landfill and sewage sludge treatipent, facilities for use as needed. The full-scale plant Is planned to demonstrate a windrow method of corn- posting solid wastes which may have appli~ation for other communities of pos- sibly 100,000 population or `less. One of the objectives of the project Is to study `the economics of the process. Complete construction and operating cost data will be obtained and economic evaluation of the process will be made. Various methods of "cleaning up" the compost will be tried to remove bits of glass, metal, stones, rubber, leather, plastics, and similar noncompostable materials. Processing methods and duration of composting and curing will be varied with the findings of the two major research studies: pathogen survival in the compost and market uses and value of the product in an effort to speed up decomposition and thus reduce operating costs. Based on the pilot-plant studies by 1~HS at Chandler, Arizona, it is expected that 30-day windrow composting will decompose 35-40 percent of the volatile solids. During this time the peak temperature at 10-inch depth in the wlndrow is expected to be 160-168 degrees F and a temperature of 150 degrees F or more will be maintained for 16 to 22 days. However, temperatures in the outer and bottom layers (possibly 2-4 inches thick) are. expected to be less than 140 de- grees F most of the time. Routine analyses will be made on samples of raw wastes and compost for total solids, volatile solids, moisture, and pH. These measurements mill serve both in plant control and in plant performance studies. Temperature, moisture, oxygen, and pH measurements will be taken routinely in the composting wind- rows so that turning schedules' and moisture additions may be regulated. Multi- point temperature recording will be employed' In an attempt to correlate time- temperature with pathogen destruction. Certain chemical tests, principally, for nitrogen, phosphate, and potash, will ~be performed periodIcally to assess the nutrient value of the compost. The value PAGENO="0428" ~428 ADEQUACY OF TECH~OLOOt FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENP of ~higb nutrient wastes and of chemical fertilizermaterlals added to the corn- ~ost1ng zn1~ture will be determined as they affect both the composting process and the nnt~~ient valii~ of the ñnal eom~óst. Small special windrows of differ- ehi thixtu1~esof wastes *rliL be prepared and tested ifr connection with both the pathogen ~urvival Studies and the studies oO market e~ra1nation & the compost. Po dsteetan~i permit the correction of any'lieaith Or safety hazards: or nuisance conditloOs, close observations of odors, dnst~ noise, fiie~, and rodents will be made throughout the plant, The extensive studies of pathogen survival probably will ~be conducted undei, a PHS contract with an eduOatlonal institution starting soon after plant completion next spring, These studies will involvetlie direct enu- meratio~ of those indicator organisms and pathogens normally occurring in ~efuse and Sludge in the raw wastes and after various periods of decomposition lu thO composting and curing processes. Selected ~atbogens, not normally oc- curring inmeastirable ~n~mber~in the raw wastes, will be ins~rted in the wind- rOWs in, porotis ~ontalnOrs for `deterinipfrtion of aurvirul rates. Microorganisms will include vegetat~ve and epor~-ferthing bo~ter1a~ fin t,~ii tozOa,~ viruses, and ~el~inthS~i4Ielücffi~ scnh~Of ~ The açronomie studies of contp~t ~Ch tOdby!1~tA *iTh Include g4~eeithouse ~kpcriments and test dOitlonstrktions inpldt5 of the a~pj~lieatioti of compost for ~s~rldtiS ~nirposes; aM the dev~lo~ment o~ thar1~Oting potentials for the compost. Tests will be c~nduc:ted ~n b:arearO~s St~eh as: hi~hway cuthand strt~ mine spoil banks to àsseu~ the value of cO1nl~ost inpreventiiig soil erOsion and aiding revege- tation on süc~ slopes, While tile principal use of compo~t is expected to be as a soil builder or con- ditionOr tests also will lie made with compost fortified ~4th nutrients to create an organic-base fertilizer. Large~scale use of compost on farm and pasture land i~ not àinc~pated, hut appreciable a~iplicailons eh gardens; perks, lawns, golf courses, and truc~k or s~ec1alty fai~ms th~y be petentisi outlets. Other tises will be ~Ou~ht,s~cli as c~thpöst utilizatibli as pouItt~litter. ~hOdbthonstration eoinpOstin~lauit oiOratian Is sehe4hile~t'to ~nntmnue throtigh fj~ehi ~ 1972. : ~ 1. "Reclamation of Municipal Refuse by C~znpostiug.?' U~iver.~i~y of CaZifornis, Sanitary Rngineering Research Projetit, Tech. Bull. No. 9, ~ei~ies 87, June 19.53. - 2. Gota~s, Ilarold B., "Connposting-Sa~1tary Dls~osal ahd flOclaniátion of Or- ganic Wàstes~" WOrki tlëaitlv OrgSnizatWh,, Mono. Series No. 31, 1956. 3, Wiley, Jo~hn S., and George W. Pearce, "A Prel~mlnary Sttidy of Righ-Rate Oom~ost1hg." P~'oceedings-Anw~'*jan SOoicty of Oivil Rnginesr~, 81, P~er N~oL. g46, Decei~iber 1955. ` 4. Wiley, John S., and Janet T.H Spillane; "Re~use-Siudge Q~i~pbstlng In Wind- rOws and B~5 `Jo'us-nai of ~he ~amthfry E~g*eet~inp Dnn~rz~On American Society of Chill Bngmeers 87 ~A5 September 19~1 5. Wi1e~i, John S.,and 0. W. x1~tltaky, "Comj~Osfth~ Dc &~~tehts in the United States." CrYnipost Science,~,2 Sumnier 1965. 6. I~no1l, K. Ii., "Public HekIth and Reftise Disposal." ~Yo~hpost Science, 2; 1, Spring 1961: 7. Wiley, John S., "Pathogen Survival In Com~ostlng Municipal Wastes." Journal Water Pollution Control Federation; 34, 80, Jánna1~ 1962. 8. Krige, P. R., "The Utilization of Municipal Wastes." Conncit for Scientific and Indu~trjal Research, Pretoria, South Africa, Eeport No. 211, 1964. Mr. VIvL~N. What is the totaj~cost involved? . Dr. GARThELL. The total cqst of the p~ant is around $`T50,000 f~r the initial plant installàtioh. It is being sp ally d~signed to me~t ~some research needs so that~ we can study the e~ects of the ~roeess on pathogenic organisms. It is both a demonstration and a research project. Mx'. \7M~N.. let me switch to the n~xt. que~tion. ~`ou indicated that you intend to begin research again. Can you tell me how much money ~~ou expect to spend in the netct few years? Mr. W~o~a. There are continuing activities such a!s ~r. Gartrell has déscrib~d ~ind~r ~hë program on ~vhich we have spend $2,7O0;OOO PAGENO="0429" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 429 to date. What we intend to start up' again is an effort to see if we ~an find a way to get sulfur out of the stack gases'that would be a part of the total program. We can supply you our best estimates, although right at the present moment weare assessing the current state of tech- nology and we won't know what kind of projects we want to propose until we get that done. (The information requested follows:) , , TVA is currently spending a total of abOut $475.000 a year~ for air pollution control research, arid is presently estimati~ig an inc~rease in this level of cx- penditures to an average of about $675,000 per year over the next several years. A. considerable part of this research. effort will be directed .tc~ the j~roblem of extracting SO2 frQW stack gases; and ii~ TVA's research uncovers procc~sses for solving this problem which appear promising, it may want to g~ into a crash program which will increase the level of its research expenditures in this field substantially. , Mr. VIVIAN. Next question. When you startecj this work or~ air pollution, `abatemerit~ in' 1949 as I remember from your testimnohy, didi~?t yoi~ obtain a grMt deal of information frQni others who, had `built' th~u~sänds of th'~u~a~ds of megawatts of ~power installations up to that point t Dr. GARTRELL,. Stran~ly enough there wa~ very little information available to us. Phe imtiai designs' of `our pqwer stations were based on the. best engineering practices at the tint~. But the thing that brought the air pollution question into focus was'th~ size of the plants that we were expecting to build ai~d the size ~f'the units.' The eco- nomiôs of power ge~ieratioñindidated.the trend woul'd'be toward larger units and more uñit~ at indi'vidua~l sites. . So, it was the much greater mass of'cothbu's1~ion products that ~p~ed the problem. Mr. VIVIAN.. I]~as the comavi,ercml p'bwe~ iñdtistry done `very miieli oil the subject? ` .` , , Dr. GARTEEI~I~. Not up' td that time. ,` ` , ~Mr. VIVIAN~ `Why. did TVA go, into this fWd'? Wa~ it,, beCause you' are in one `of the .least `populous `parts' ~f the United States? Dr. GARTRELL. Beca~u~ we had an identifiable problem a(nd felt that we should deal with it in the interest ofthe valley. Mr. VIVIAN. suppose the plant that you tried to build lia4 worked successfully. What percentage of the s~1es cost `of power would that have represeut~d? , When you ainQrtized that cost through the sale of pow~,, what' `fraction of the cost would that `r~pi~sent? Mr. WAONJtR. `I believe, Mr Vi~trian, we did not oarry the experi- ment to that point~ We developed the fact' `that it would be `a rather expensive plant, a 1arge,'plant~' . ` ` One of the problem~ was that it would cool the `staok gases so much that it would pethà~ps create ah even greater air pollution ~roblem be- cause the stack gases wouldn't rise and the' remaining pollutant~ in them `would nOt be dispersed as effectively in the' atmosphere a~s the hot gases. It was jrtst `one `of those exp~rinients that *as tri~d~, th~t didn't `work, `and we didn't carry it to the point of ctdctdatiiig it~ e~ffect onc~sts. , . ` ` ` , ` , Mr. VIVIAN. You could do it with blbwe~'s run b~ add~tion~l power. if you ~ere trying to recover sulfur, yo~i rni~h~ have done"it by other ,mea,us,,,but.,I am trying to get s~me'idea Qf, t~he economics of recovering ~sulfur in terms of a percentage Of the sa~ies cost of eleetricity~ 68-240-6'6--vol. 1-28 PAGENO="0430" 430 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. WAGNER. It would be rather difficult to get a meaningful figure because this process made a product, not sulfur, but a sulfur-containin. product that would have to be marketed, and its marketability an price would depend on how widely the process was applied. If it were quite widely used the larger quantities of material produced would have quite an effect on its market price and upon its cost effects. Mr. VIVIAN. What I am looking for is any index at all of how much it would ~cost, in terms of the sale price of electricity, for example in New York, to have the power generating plants in New York which are now on coal, equipped with sulfur-removal equipment. I gather the results of your experience do not tell us very much. Mr PHILLIPS Well, the process we were examining would have been quite expensive. Mr. VIVIAN. I wonder, Mr. Chairman, if our staff could inquire into that4 Mr. DADDARIO. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. You indicated you had burned about 23 million tons of coal a year in your system, with about 3 percent average sulfur content. That's approximately a million tons of sulfur a year going up the stack. How much does a million tons of sulfur represent in terms of total usage of sulfur per year? Mr. PmLLIPS. The current production of sulfur in the United States isabout, 8 million long tons per year. Mr. VIVIAN. Does the TVA plant system represent 2 percent of the total coal-steam plant capacity in' the United States? Mr. WAGNER. Closer to 10 percent. Mr. VIVIAN. 10 percent. That's far more than I thought. Mr. WAGNER. It is close to that. Mr. BELL. Mr. Wagner, from what I have heard this morning, I believe you could come to the conclusion that we do have some tech- nology to eliminate some of the pollution problems but that many of the methods are so expensive and so difficult that the technology is not being applied as much as possible. WQulcl you agree with that conclusion? Mr. WAGNER. I think that is not quite correct, but perhaps Dr. Gartrell can answer more precisely. Dr. GARTRELL. I have recently had occasion to talk with many people doing research on different SO2 removal processes. There have been many economic studies made and we recently had occasion to review with the Public Health Service the latest developments and different processes under research. The primary purpose of the reviews was to try to. see if enough.information was available to pro- vide design factors required for building large scale pilot plants for some of the rnore.promising processes. . Quite surprisingly, the technology for many processes upon which much research has been done is still deficient even for designing a large-scale pilot plant. However, at the present tinie, several large- scale pilot plants are in various stages of design and construction which will begin to produce soon the kinds;çf information needed to go to full-scale plant design.. ,. , , . . Mr Bi~ Then what you are saving in effect is that we do have to develop some new technology Th~s i~ the area we are going to PAGENO="0431" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 431 apply ourselves, develop new technology, and pay the price to get it done. Mr. WAGNER. Yes; that is correct. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman, I have another question. You indicated that you produce fertilizer in the Muscle Shoals area. Is this fertilizer sold competitively in the open market? Mr. WAGNER. No; not competitively, sir. The fertilizer that we produce is all used in research and educational demonstration pro- grams. Some of it is sold but it is sold widely across the country and confined by contracts with the fertilizer companies and cooperatives that distribute it to uses which are new, which need promotion accord- :ing to the views of the agricultural colleges and so on. So we do not Tegard it as competitive with the fertilizer industry. Mr. VIVIAN. Does the fertilizer plant itself produce a polluting effluent? Mr. WAGNER. Mr. Phillips is connected with the operation of that plant. Let me ask him to respond. Mr. Puu~r1ni's. It certainly does potentially, and as Mr. Wagner has indicated, we have had quite a program going to solve the problems that we had in the control of this effluent. Mr. VIvIAN. Do you feel that the effluent produced by this particular plant is comparable with the effluent produced by other commercially owned fertilizer plants? Mr. PmILns. In some ways it is and in some ways it is not because our particular type of operation there is quite experimental, and also we have some other responsibilities related to national defense which make our operation somewhat different. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Gartrell, in your nuclear plants, have you solved the thermonuclear problems of waste heat that flows into the water? Dr. GARTRELL. There is morewaste heat per kilowatt of generation which has to be dissipated in some way, either discharged into a receiv- ing body of water or handled by cooling towers. We consider this as just another design factor that enters into the design of the condensers and the location of the plant and the provision of adequate cooling water supply. Mr. DADDATRIO. Considering the water into which you can discharge `this heat, have you figured out what effect it may have on fish and plant life? Dr. GARTRELL. We don't anticipate any particular problem at this location. We are aware of the importance of limiting temperatures in streams. Mr. VIVIAN. Suppose you generated the same amount of power by either nuclear- or coal-fired systems. How much difference would it make in the temperature downstream? Dr. GARTRELL. We would design the plant in both cases to meet the same temperature control criteria. Mr. VIVIAN. You say you get the same waste heat for the same amount? Mr. DADDARIO. No; you dissipate about 50 percent of the fossil fuel heat through the stacks as I understand it; so you are already in a better position with fossil fuels in this particular area. Dr. GARTRELL. I don't have the exact figures, but it is somethingrn the order of 20 percent more heat which goes to the receiving streams. PAGENO="0432" 432 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. VIvIAN. For which ones? Dr. GARTEELL. It is more for the nuclear stations. Mr. WAGNER. The point is that for virtually all of ~ur plants we have our large reservoirs, available for cooling. This nuclear plant will be located on the Wheeler Reservoir at a point where it averages a mile or more in width, the depth of the water at the plant site is perhaps 30 feet, so that we will have no problem with heat dissipation. We have one plant where there was not this volume of water available and, we are installing cooling towers there. I think Dr. Gartreil's point is that we would design a plant so that the heat dissipation does not constitute a problem. Just as an interesting- Mr. VIVIAN. You are transferring all the heat to the air som~where in the vicinity of the pian~ Mr. WAGNER. That is' right. The water temperature at) any sig- nificant distance downstream from our plant is not increased much. Mr. `DADDAIO. I hope' that the confidence you have' in being able to take care of this problem is going to be evidenced by. the complete a~ce~tance by the local community to the idea of putting nuclear heat into the stream, even though you say it is not going to do any harm. Mr. WAGNER. The local community-and I was there yesterday and spoke to a group-is most enthusiastic about this plant. And, as a matter of fact, the discharges from some of our existing plants are helpful at times. In the wintertime the water in the lakes. is quite cold. ` The fish prefer warmer temperatures than naturally occur so they concentrate around the discharge areas. Fishing. there ~s ex- ceptionally good and ~the fishermen don't regard that as pollution, I assure you. ,, , Mr. DADDARIO. So, yofl sa~ti5fy the fish population. Mr. WAGNER. We have, in many instances. As I say, if the dis- sipation of heat into the stream would be a problem as it will be with the coming unit at our Paradise plant, we would build cooling towers. Mr. DADm~1~Io. We have a whole series of questions that we would like to send to you, but I would like to ask Dr. G~rtreli a question concerning the connection between meteorology and the emission process in your stacks. You touched on the necessity of improving this te~hnique. How successful have you been in solving the emission problem with present weather information available to you ~ How would you theorize that `such an improved weather reading' technique could help in an area such `as Los Angeles? ` Dr. `~ARTRELL. Well, of course, in studying any air pollution prob- lem, meteorology is a basic source of information that you have to go to, and for large powerplants you deal principally with what is referred teas micrometeoroiogy,.that is, meteorology inthe immediate pl'ar~t area as it affects, normal dispersion processes.. S:o, we estab- lished at each of our pow~r ~tations a `meteorological station wi)th a tower instrumented to provide continuous records of wind velo~ity and direction, temp~rature, et cetera. We routinely analyze collecI~ed d'ata along. `with our SQ2 monitoring data to determine the meteorological regithes under whiàh `significant `ground level concentrations of' :502 occur. The `fixed station monitoring is stippleinented with mobile sampling We have a specially instrumented helicopter and auto mobile for this purpose, so for any special meteorological model that PAGENO="0433" AT~EQtACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 433 `we are interested `in we are able to carry intensive sampling. It usually turns out that"fo'r a particular piaiit there is one meteorological model that gives the highest concentration. That's the one that we give themajor emphasis in calculating what the maximum concentration is likely to be for the plant and for other plants of similar design and operating conditions. With regard to use of the dispersion equa- tions, the higher the stack, the more data you hate to have. on wind and temperature conditions aloft. The wind and temperature con- ditions determine how high the hot gases will rise above the stacks, which is a factor of great importance in dispersion. We have just completed specialized studies on plume rise itself. In summary, basic formulas have long been available that theoretically describe the dis- persion process quite well for various conditions, `but they contaift-as most formulas do-some coefficients' that have to be determined with experimental data.' Much of our work has been in the realm of taking the theoretical formulas and actu'ail~ measuring the dispersion that occurs in the atmosphere to develop coefficients required in dispersion computations. Mr. DADDARIO. As you deveolped your methodology in this instance have you come to the point where you have become confident in its use? Dr. GARTEELL. Yes. We have great confidence in our computations of what the maximum concentrations are likely to `be, but we still haven't figured out a way to compute the frequency with `which these various concentrations will occur. Mr. DADDARIO. How do the private producers feel about this? Do they come to you to ask your advise~? Are they working with this same process? Dr. GARTRFLL. Within the past 3 or 4 years we have seen a great interest on the part of the private power companies in doing similar studies of `the kind that we `are doing. We have made available to them the results of our dispersion and `plum.e rise and other studies. If they are contemplating building a plant of comparable' size t~ one of ours, we have actual data on plume rise and dispersion which they can use. I think, in general, they are approaching the thing in much the same way that we are. Certainly there is a free exchange of in- formation and they know about our dispersion studies and we know what they are doing. All of our dispersion work has' been carried out in close collaboration with meteorological ~roups.in other organizations engaged in dispersion studies. The Public Health Service Air Pollu- ti()n Division has a meteorology research group at the Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering `Center. Our full-scale dispersion and plume- rise s'tudies are actually cooperative research `projects in which that staff participates also. We feel like we have developed a great `body of information that is extremely useful to others as well to ourselves, It is made generally available to any who want to avail themselves of the technology that we have. Mr. DADDARtO. In talking to people aibout this as a possible solution to the problem in certain `areas of the country, the idea comes up that we can contemplate stacks of much greater height than the ones you have at TVA. Do you have any information about this? PAGENO="0434" 434 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Dr. GARTEELL. No, I really don't. I'm `familiar with some figures.. As a matter of possible interest to the committee, `when our first con-' sultant meteorologist came in and we told him about the size of th~ plant that we were talking about building he ran through some esti- mates of how high the stacks should be and gave us some 1,200, 1,500,. 1,600 feet heights. As my previous comments have indicated, satis- factory dispersion has been achieved with stacks much lower than these values. Certainly we aren't in a position now to extrapolate beyond where we are to any grent extent. We are just now getting a body of experience with 600-foot stacks and we will soon have some on 800-foot stacks. But, we `are seeing that the dispersion patterns are somewhat different `for the higher stacks. The maximum concentrations occur under meteorological con- ditions that are different than for lower stacks. So, 200 feet at a time is about as far as we feel we should go under our conditions. Mr. BEU4. Mr. Chairman, that is about 300 feet higher than the Washington Monument. Mr. WAGNER. I would just like to add to what Dr. Gartrell has said. We have felt that we had a responsibility to keep the air clean, and he and `his people used as indicators of air quality some of the most sensitive plants that `we could find in the area. We set for our- selves the goal of being sure that we don't even harm those, and they are much more sensitive than human beings. I think in ,the `long run the answer to pollution problems should be to try to find ways `to do something with our wastes other than push' them into ~`the air or flow `them into our streams. Mr. DADDARIO. Since the TVA is a Government operation, shouldn't this be the area of an extensive and intensive effort? Mr. WAGNER. Yes, sir; I think so. Mr. DADDARI0. We must recognize that the cost for certain of the private utilities is great. If we can develop means to accomplish this end objective in an efficient manner from a cost `standpoint, then we could make this' `information available to industry. Our goal should be the ultimate removal Of all harmful pollution rather than the lessening of its effects in certain scattered areas. Mr. WAGNER. I agree with that. I think that is consistent with `TVA's responsibility-serving as a pilot plant or testing ground for new ideas. It is important in this instance because as I indicated earlier, what happens to air, the quality of the air and' the quality ,of the water in any area has a tremendous effect on that area's `ca- pacity for growth and development, and for sustaining the kind of `pleasant life that I believe it was Dr. Spilhaus who' said we ought. to look for; and because `of our responsibility for resource development we are interested in this problem of pollution, and `I agree with you,. Mr. Chairman. Mr. DADDARTO. When you `consider the total capital investment of TVA, the extra expenditures for these purposes would be extremely small, wouldn't they? Mr. WAGNER. They would be small in relation to the total invest- ment, but I think it is even more significant that the possible successful solution is so important to the Nation as a whole that somebody ought to be working pretty hard at it. PAGENO="0435" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 435 Mr. DADDARIO. Thank you, gentlemen. We appreciate your coming and We will be sending you further questions. (Additional questions and answers for the record may be found in vol. II. Mr. WAGNER. Thank you very much. We will be glad to assist you in any way, that we can. Mr. DADDARIO. Fine. (The complete prepared statement of Dr. F. E. Gar:trell follows:) PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. F. E. GARTRELL, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF HEALTH AND SAFETY, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY TVA appreciates the opportunity to participate in the hearings of this Sub~ committee since we have a great interest in the subject under study-"Tiie Adequacy of Technology for Pollution Abatement." TVA has long been actively concerned with the control of air and water poui*ion and in recent years has joined the U. S. Public Health Service in a research and demonstration project for treatment and disposal of municipal solid wastes and sewage sludge. Our statement, however, oii the basis of discussion with the Subcommittee sta~, will be limited to PVA interests and experience in air. pollution control_more specifically, control of air pollution from large coal-fired power . plants. Prior to construction of our fohnsonville Plant in 1949-1953, the only thermal power plants in the TVA system were relatively small plants which did net present any special air pollution problems. However, during the past fifteen years TVA has added 53 coal-fired steam-electric generating units to its power production facilities, ranging in size from 125 megawatts to 950 megawatts. These units are located in nine plants with total rated plant capacities which run from 823 megawatts to 1,978 megawatts. Plant and unit data are presented in Table 1. TABLE 1.-Major TVA .s~tea~p~ants . Name First unit in operation or scheduled . Unit numbers Rated capacity ~ Per unit Total plant (megawatts) (megawatts) height of stileks (feet) Bull Run . Paradise 1 Gallatin Colbert rohn Sevier * Kingston ~ Shawnee , , Widows Creek ~ . ~rohnsonvills `Watts Bar 1966 1963 1956 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 . 1951 1942 1 1-2 1-2 3_4 1-3 4 5 1 2-4 1-4 5-9 1 2-7 8 9 10' 1-~ ~- 1-~. 5-6 7-10 1-4 950.0 704.0 300.0 327. 6 200. 0 223.0 550.0 223.0 200.0 175.0 200.0 150. 0 175.0 150.0 175.0 150.0 140. 6 150.0 140.6 140.6 575.0 550.0 125.0 147.0 173.0 60.0 9,50 1,408 1,255 1,373 823 1,700 1, 675 1,978 - 1,485 240 800 soe 2 500 2 500 300 ~ 500 2 350 2350 250 300 250 250 250 250 250 170 170 170 270 500 500 270 270 2 400 150 I Unit 3 under construction, 1,150 megawatts. 2 1 stack serves 2 units. NOTE-In addition to th~ above-named st~amplants, TVA operatesunderlease arrangement the Tboma~ II. Allen plant (three 330-megawatt units with three 400-foot stacks) at Memphis, Penn. PAGENO="0436" 436 AD~IQtACY OF `TECHNOLOGY FOR ~POLLtYDION ABATEMENT * The addition o~ 1,150 mega~watts now being inst~Ued at the 2~untt Paradise Plant will inérease total capacity of thal nlant to 2,5~8~ megaw~thts, making it one of the largest plants in the world. TVA power plants burn about 2~ nuillofl toths of coal annually. StUfur in the conl ranges from slightly less th&n 1% to more than 5% by weight and averages approxImately 3%. Ash content varies between 5% and 15% As planning for our first major thermal plant `at Jobnsonville advanced in the early `SOs, TVA recognized that stack emissions from a plant of the ultimate `size contemplated at the site would present a potential air pollution problem. Col- lectors were available that wOuld provide desired removal of fly ash from stack gases; hence control of particulate enlissions did not appear to offer any special problems. ~H~We~er, this was not the ~a~e with sulfttr dioxide (SO2).. Because of the many ~uncertalntles at that thne'in assessing the potential problem i~ l~lie 502 emissions and in planning control measures, TVA in 1951 Initiated a bi~oad-~cope air pollution study progrdtn, The objectives of the program were to reach a better understanding ~f the pPoblem and to develop practicable steps which might be taken if Special `control n~ea~sures were indièated. From 1952 through fiscal year 19~6, TVA has expended approximately $2,700,000 on thermal power plant air pollution control studies. )~rincipa1 elements of the study program are (1) monitorIng of SO2 concen- trations in the vicinity of each' plant, (2) collectio~ii and analysis of on-site meteorological data, (3) biological studies to determine effects of plant emis- sions on vegetation in special ei4erlmental gardens and In surrounding areas, (4) full-seale studies of' stack gas dispersicii, (5) InvestIgations of possible means for reducing e~nlssions through modification of plant operations during periods when meeorologh~al eopditions are unfavorable for dispersion, and (~) research on processes for removal of 502 from stack gases. Beginning with the .Tohnsmiville Plant; pi~e- and post-operational air pollis- tion studies have been conducted at each pinnt. Experience has been used in planning air pollution control at succeeding plants `and for additions to existing plants. pRn~oPuRApIor~AL erusins Pre-operational studies are `conducted to establish baseline information for comparison with data to be obtained aftOr the plant js put into operation and for use in planning post-operational studies. The pre-operatioila'l phase covers a period of about t~o years before plant operation. `During this period, on-site meteorological `data are' collected to supplement regional meteorological data available from U.S. Weather Bureau records; biological surveys are conducted to Obtain information on agriculture and forestry in the area; and, as `local conditions in~hicate, dustfall and other air poli~ition data are collected. The biological surveys include sampling and chemical' analysis of selected species of vegetation. PosP-oPIrRAPIoNAL spmnns Ax~ SURV1nLLAN01!~ Post-operational `studies include air pollution monitoring in the vicinity of the plant; analysis of data on plant generation and stack emission; analyses of nieteoro'logical data and correlation with monitoring data; biological surveys, `and special dtspersion studies. For SO2 mOnitoring, we have relied principally upon continuous SO2 analyzer- recorders (Thomas autometer) to provide the desired data. The number of 502 recorders used at individual planfs lia~ varied from 1 to 11, depending on size of plant, topography, and other factors. Limited use has `been made of the so-called sulfur candle `or lead peroxide method. Extensive use has been made, of mobile sampling equipment utilizing specially instrumental automobile and helicopter. Standard dustfall measurements have been made in the vicinity of the plants' by use of dustfall jars. High volume air samplers have been used for measuring suspended particulates. In planning the biological phases of the studies, TVA drew heavily on the vast amount of information available from consultants and from the technical literature on the effects of SO2 emissions from smelters on vegetation. By means of special studies using field exposures of specially prepared experimental gardens, and `studies using controlled exposure of plants to stack gases as well as to diluted pure ~O2~ rel~th~ tolerances of native species of vegetation were de- termined. Species identified as sensitive which occur generally in the area PAGENO="0437" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 437 were selected as indicator plants. Information thus developed was used by the biologists in periodic surveys and special studies of the effect of plant emissions oii vegetation. Surveys were supplemented by uhemical anal3rses of foliage to measure any elevation of sulfate whicb might hare occurred. Soon `after our dispersion studies were initiated at the Johnsonville Plant, it became apparent that conventional sampling methods wutild not be practicable, primarily because of limitations of mobility. To overcome this limitation, TVA developed a technique for use of a helicopter for measuring SO2 concentrations, both aloft and near ground elevation. The technique was subsequently refined to permit accurate measurements of plume rise above the top of the stacks and of plume 502 concentrations and geometry at various `distances from the plant. The technique was used in the recently completed PITA-Public Health Service cooperative research project which included a full-scale study of dispersion of power plant gases. Since the TVA plants generally are located in areas remote from other sources of SO2, our findings from our air pollution studies uhould be representative of the stack gas distribution pattern for modern coal-fired power plants. In view of this, a brief review `of air pollution experience at PVA power' plants as docu- mented by extensive monitoring experience may he of special interest. STACK PEEFORMANCE Data obtained from routine monitoring and from. full-scale dispersion studies have been ~tllized in estimating stack height reqtiirements for TVA power plants. Post-operational monitoring data for each plant have been used to check stack performance and indicated adjustments have been made in stack height c'alcu- lakions for new plants. Until the recent completion o'f our ful1~seale dispersion study, principal reliance in stack height calculations' was' upon formulas derived empirically from monitoring data.' Dispersion coefficients determined by the ~VA full-scale dispersion studies and plume rise dalta deceived from extensive field measurements have improved our ability to estimate stack performance for large `thermal power stations. 1~'stimated maximum ground level concentration Of SO~ as computed by pro- cedures presently used is not an absolute maximum., but rather a value which PITA experience indicates will not be equaled or exceeded at any one point in the vicinity of the plant (assuming no' other 802 sources) more than 0.01 percent of the time-that is, approximately two 30-minute periods a year. When ex- ceeded, it would not be by more than 25 tO 30 percent. Planning for air pollution control at the Johnsonville Plant included com- puting stack performance by procedures commonly used at the time. Experience after the plant was put inito operation was much more `favorable than was pre- dicted on the basis of the earlier computations. Even with improvements sub- sequently made in methods for computing stack~ performance, as unit sizes and stack heights have increased, experience has cor~t1nued to `be more favorable than predictions based on calculations, thoogh the margin of difference now is much less than it used to be. COMPARISON-GROtSD LEVEL CONCENPRAPTONS OF STACE GASES FROM 5MALL OU) PLANTS AN]) LARGE NEW `PLANTS A comparison `of ground level concentrations o'f stack gases from the Johnson- ville Plant with those from Paradise one of the newer large plants, provides an interesting measure of the prOgress that has been made in control of air pollu- tion from power plants by dispersion from high stacks. The original Johnson- yule Plant was constructed during the period 1949-1958 and consisted of six 112.5-mw units with 170-foot stacks. 502 monitorhig ~was Initiated in 1951 when the first unlt~ were placed In operaillion. To overcome downwash due to build- ing turbulence and to improve dispersion, the Stacks were subsequently raised to 270 feet. Continuous monitoring foe SO2 was ~onducted at locatiOnS in the vicinity of the plant where maximum concentrations wore expected to occur. Prom analyses of 502 records before the stacks were raised, the maximum 80- minute avers ge concentration of 502 was 3.8 ppm. After the stacks were raised, it was only 0.G ppm. The Paradise Plant with two 704-mw units was placed in commercial operation hi 19~3. This plant has two 0(10-foot stacks. Despite the fact that average daily 5O~ emission is double that of the original Johnsonville Plant, the maximum 30- PAGENO="0438" 438 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT minute average concentration of SO2 recorded thus far by. the 5-autometer net- work around the Pa~yadlse Plant has been 0.4 ppm. In terms of comparison, this represents at least a threefold improvement o~r~r the Johnsonviile Plant, even after the stacks at that plant had been raised from 170 to 270 feet. A comparison such as this emphasizes the importance of utilizing the best available and most current information i~ evalua'ting air poiltition potential and in planning air pollution control for large modern power plants. FELnQUJINOY DISTIUBTJTION OF SO~ cONCENTRATIONS While determinations Qf,the maximum ground level concentration of 502 that can be expected in the vjeinity of a large power plant is essential to assessment of it~ air pollution potential, an almost equally Important factor is the frequency of occurrence of various ground level concentrations of SO2 in the area. Satl~- factory methods for calculating frequencies from operational and meteorological data have not yet been devised, However, from analysis of the PITA SO2 moni- toring data, a certain pattern of frequency distribution has been observed which affords a means for arriving at reasonably good approximations. This has provided a means in cases: of limited operational experience for estimating situations beyond the range Of actual data, for comparing air pollution experi- ence at different power plants, and for relating power plant air pollution potential to air qttality standards employing frequency criteria. It has also been useful `In showing the `difference between pollution patterns of power plants' and those of urban areas with multiple sources of pollution emitted at or near ground level. The frequency of SO~ registration at a fixed point in the vicinity of a remote power station is strikingly different from that of a single point in an urban area with multtple sources of 502 emitted at or near ground leveL The frequency distribution of 502 concentrations measured by a recording instrument at a point where maximum concentrations occurred in the vicinity of one of our modern plants with 500' stacks was compared with similar data obtained from an air pollution study by: the Public Health Service in Nashville, Tennessee. ~`or the period of record at the power plant, approximately 19 months, the bighest concentration recorded was 0.6 ppm for three 30-minute periods:. 502 concentrations were 0.2 ppm or above for only eighty-four 30-minute periods, or approximately 0.40 percent of the time. While the maximum 502 concentration recorded in the Nashville study was only approximately 0.3 ppm, 502 concen- trations were 0.2 ppm or above slightly over 14.1 percent of the time. Estimated total SO2 emissions in the urban area were approximately half the total emissjons of the power plant. The higher concentrations of pollution In urban areas tend to occur during periods of low wind speed and temperature inversion. In contrast, higher levels from large power plants tend to occur during moderate to high wind and neutral stability conditions. Since none, of the PVA plants is located in a large urban area, TVA data do not provide a direct quantitative measure of the contribution of a large power plant to an urban pollution problem. However, .analysis of data from a recording instrument located in a small town near one of the large TVA power plants showed that SO2 in dntectable amounts' was present 14 percent of the time, but for over 70 percent of the time that SO~ was present, wind direction was such that stack emissions from the plant could not have been carried to the instrument in town. All the readings, without regard to wind direction, were quite loW. POLLVTION POTENTIAt 05' POWER PLANTS UNDER AIR STACNATION CONDITIONS Air pollution control `plans developed for the Kingston Steam Plant, until recently the largest plant in the PITA system, gave special attention to a poteti- tial problem likely to be associated with periods of atmospheric stagnation. The plant is located in the floor of an Appalachian valley. The local topography is characterized by parallel ridges rising from 400 to 1,000 feet above the valley floor. In 1954 arrangements were made for special forecasts for this area `by the Knoxville station of the U.S. Weather Bureau during fall when air stagnation. conditions are most likely to occur. Since 1960, special national forecasts of air pollution potential by the U.s. Weather Bureau Research Station at the Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engin~ering Center, Public Health Service, have been available to supplement local forecas:ts~ When forecasts are for conditions that might' result in' buildup of pollution levels.in the vicinity of the plant, control plans PAGENO="0439" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 439 provide for a switch to low-sulfur coal until the alert period is ended. Also, during such periods supplementary air monitoring activities are conducted. While a number of alert periods i~ave occurred since this procedure was initiated, at no time has significant buildup of pollution occured. It appears that for air pollution potential forecasts, power plapts should be viewed as a special case for which the meteorological criteria normally used may not be applicable. For example, general air stagnation conditions prevailed in the Kingston Plant area for a 3-day period in the fall of 1964. TVA was alerted by the U.S. Weather Bureau at the beginning of the period and pre- cautionary air pollution control measures were initiated. SO2 autometers were checked at regular intervals. Special helicopter and mobile sample were con- ducted `during the 3-day period. However, as' it turned out frequency and concentrations of SO2 recorded at ground level were no higher than during normal atmospheric conditions. Absence of SO2 buildup was attributed to penetration of the low-level inversion by the hot stack gases and transport of the plume from the area by light, persistent winds. Under such conditions air pollution does build up in urban areas, as is evidenced by the abnormally high pollution levels which developed in large urban areas during a long period of air stagnation over much of the Eastern United States in November and December 1962. OPERATIONAL CONTROLS The limited special use of low-sulfur coal at the Kingston Plant is' the only operational control that TVA has used so far for air pollution control at its plants. However, there are a number of other potentially useful operational controls which might be used singly or in combination to redu~e emissions, enhance dispersion, or both, during p'eriods when ground level concentrations of stack emissions might be expected to exceed desired control levels. Among these are load reduction, chemical removal of SO2 by limestone injection, and raising the temperature of stack gases to increase plume rise~ In addition to the obvious operational problems and costs involved in application of measures such as these, there is the problem of forecasting air pollution potential far enough in advance to permit effective application of the controls and accurately enough to limit their use so far as possible to periods when they actually are needed. Intensive dispersion studies at the Paradise Plant are expected to lead to better use of meteorological and operational data in predicting significant ground concentrations. In addition, the studies are expected to result in further improvement in formulas for dispersion of emissions from large power plants with high stacks. RESEARCH ON REMOVAL OF 502 FROM POWER PLANT STACK GASES Early in its air pollution studies TVA directed attention to possible processes for removal of SO2 from power plant stack gases. TVA's interest in develop- inent of a practical process was twofold: for use, if needed, as an air pollution measure, and also as a possible source of sulfur for fertilizer production and other purposes. In 1953 TVA initiated research and pilot plant work toward this end at its fertilize~r development laboratories. The work consisted of the following: (1) an extensive review of the literature and other available information on the recovery of sulfur dioxide, (2) pilot-plant development of an ammonia- scrubbing process for removal of sulfur dioxide from the stack gases, (3) tests of methods for recovering sulfuric acid, ammonium sulfate, and elemental sulfur from the scrubber solution, (4) preparation of investment and operating cost estimates for the process, and (5) small-scale resea'rch studies and ex- ploratory pilot plant tes'ts of several alternate methods for removal of sulfur ~1ioxide. Among the alternate methods of SO2 removal which we studied were (1) absorption by activated carbon, (2) absorption by a slurry of steam plant ash, (3) vapor phase reaction with ammonia, (4) scrubbing with a suspension of limestone, (5) catalytic oxidation to yield sulfuric acid, (G) catalytic oxidation in the presence of ammonia to yield ammonium sulfate, (7) absorption and oxidation by a slurry of regenerated manganese oxide, with further processing to yield sulfuric acid, (8) absorption by a slurry of rock phosphate to render the phosphate soluble, and (9) injection of pulverized limestone into the exhaust gases. PAGENO="0440" 440 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Research on SO2 removal was suspended in 1956 when it was concluded that it was highly improbable that a practical process could be developed in any reasonable period of time that might compete successfully with Other sources of sulfur. Also, other s~tudlee strongly indicated, and experience has confirmed, that satisfactory control for projected additions to the system could be achieved by dispersion from high stacks. The world sulfur outlook has changed greatly since that time. Today, there is such a sulfur shortage that newcomers to the fertilizer field (which uses 50 percent of all sulfur consumed in the United States) find it impossible to contract for an adequate supply of sulfur. The price of sulfur is increasing rapidly and reserves of elemental sulfur which can be recovered at low cost are decreasing. Further, during the past few years, increased attention, both nationally and internationally, has been directed to reduction In SO2 emissions from all sources, including large thermal power stations. For these reasons, TVA has renewed Its interest In research on processes for removal of SO2 from power plant stack gases. We have collaborated with the rubuc Health Service in exploring possibilities for large scale pilot plant testing In TVA power plants of some of the more promising processes in advanced stages' of development. We are planning to resume research in this field. We are making an extensive survey of current research on SO2 removal processes. Results of the survey will be used as a guide in the selection and planning of Investigations to be included in the research program. Some progress is being made and with the worldwide research effort currently being directed to the problem, practical processes for removal of 502 from fossil-fuel-fired power plant stack gases and economic recovery of sulfur for useful purposes probably will be developed. However, at present we know of no generally applicable process that has been sufficiently proved to be relied upon as a primary method; of. 50, air pollution control from a large poWer plant. Thus, at least for tbo next feW years, SO2 air pollution control for new fossil-fuel power plants and additions to existing plants where low sulfur fuels are not reasonably available, will have to be planned with principal reliance upon dispersion from high stacks, with possible supplementary control. S~M~MARY We have attempted In this statement to revIew TVA experience In the meas- urement and control of air pollution from large coal fired power plants. Progress that has been made in technology for evaluating the potential magnitude of the problem and the demonstrated effectiveness of high stacks for control of air pollution from TVA thermal power plants have been described. We hope that this résumé will be useful to the Subcommittee in its assessment of the tech- nology for Oontroi of air pollution from large fossil-fuel-fired power plants. This committee will adjourn until Wednesday next at 10 o'clock. (Whereupon, at 12:45 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned until 10 am. Wednesday, August 17, 1966.) PAGENO="0441" THE ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1966 HousE o~ R&~rRE's1~wrAtrIvEs, COMMIrFEE ON SCIENCE AND A&rRDNAtJ~rICS, SUBCOMMIPrEE ON SCIENCE, RESEARCH, AND DEvELOPMENT, Wa$hingto~m, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10' :17 a.m., in room 2325, Rayburn House Office Buiidhng, Hon. Emi'lio Q. Dadd~ario (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. DADDAIUO. This meeting will come to order. Our witness today is Dr. Abel Wolman, professor emeritus, the Johns Hopkins University. Will you come forward, please, Dr. Wolman ~ Dr. Wo]man has been of invaluabie asthstance to this committee since it began its work on this subject of they adequacy of technology for pollution ahatement. We have consulted with him and so has our Research Management Advisory Panel. We have purposely kept Dr. Wolman until the last day of our hearings so that we might get the benefit of the work he has done during the bearings and so that we might get some inter- preitation from him of `the testimony and projects which have been proposed here. We are pleased to have you here, Dr. Wolman. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes, sir. Mr. DADDARIO. I noticed that during the course of the hearings you were in attendance on several occasions and I appreciate your interest. STATEIYLENT OF DR ABEL WOLMAN, PROFESSOR EMERITUS, THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. For `the benefit of the committee, Mr. Chair- man, I have listened to perhaps a third of the testimony `and by this morning have read all of it, in fact have read those portions that I had listened to. I am Abel Wolman, for the record, of Baltimore, Md. It occurred to me that it might be useful to the committee if I prefaced my summary by a few recordings of past experience in order to indicate to the committee the background which I bring to bear on the concluelons which come out of the hearings. Although I hesitate to comment on this fact, it has been about 50- some years since I served on the first pollution survey. This was in 113, and etrangely enoug~h it w'a~ on the Potomac River, a survey 441 PAGENO="0442" 442 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT made at that time by the U.S. Public Health Service. I was a minor laboratory and field worker on that survey. Mr. CONABLE. Have yo'u noticed much improvement since then, Doctor? Dr. WOLMAN. Well, I do want to comment later on, Mr. Conabie, on very serious evolutions since that time, because as you know there have been a number of surveys since that time, on some of which I have, again, served during the period of years, and perhaps for the rest of my life I may continue to review it periodically. For a period of about 17 years I was chief engineer of the State Board of Health in Maryland. At one time for about 7 years I was Chairman of the National Board of Water Resources, which some of you may recall in President Roosevelt's period was responsible for mosl of the Federal water developments in the United States, in irrigat~on and stream pollution abatement, in power and flood control and i~ae like. Thereafter, I was chairman of the Maryland State Planning Com- mission, chairman for about 10 years of the Maryland State Water Resources Commission. I have had the good fortune to act as con- sultant to the Atomic Energy Commission, the Public Health Service, the Corps of Engineers-well, virtually almost every Federal agency that has some concern with water resources and in general pollution abatement. I have been and still am consultant to the city of Baltimore, to the Detroit metropolitan area, Seattle, Portland, Oreg., Richmond, the State of New Jersey, the State of Pennsylvania, New York City, for several decades, the Washington metropolitan area, and a series of those. In addition, I have been in consultation with many foreign countries, on similar sets of problems. I list these not in order to burden you with them but simply to illustrate that a considerable part of my own life has been spent in connection with the materials and the subjects with which you have been dealing during the past several weeks. I intend, Mr. Chairman, to divide my comments into two main cate- gories. One is to list for you to the best of my knowledge what ap- peared to me to be a series of areas of agreement which come out of the hearings. These are some five or six in nature. They establish a setting for the second part of my comments, which will deal with what I call the areas for future exploration. In the areas of agreement, let me list them very briefly without a tremendous amount of comment. No. 1. I think it is generally agreed by almost all the witnesses that the public wants clean water, clean air, and clean land. No. 2 stems from that fact, that when we go to policy and practice, however, we must proceed to translate these absolutes into quantitative goals or objectives, most of which, of course, become relative in nature. They are a natural result in any society where you already have a guide and a precept, but then the problem `becomes one of how does one trans- late those into policy and action. No. 3. The guiding principles for these objectives covered a very broad spectrum from those who felt that all discharges into water, PAGENO="0443" ADEQIJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLiJTION ABATEMENT 443 into air, and into land, should be zero in extent. in the opposite ex- treme, suggested by several of the witnesses, these discharges must be the result of wise and logical management of the water, ~iir, and land. In other words, one must use these resources, but with wisdom and with safety. The evolution which will result I am quite sure, as to which of these extremes will prevail, will probably be somewhere in between. It will be the result of negotiations throughout the United States on all of the governmental levels. Out of these continuing deliberations will come, as has always come, a series of compromises related to money, to functional uses, related to natural resourcesas they may prevail. The No. 4 area of agreement, and this I want to stress because it does concern a great many Members of Congress in various capacities: It is quite clear that technology to' accomplish many of the objectives, no matter how defined, is available. In other words, the testimony is 9uite clear that one does not have to stop tomorrow morning and wait for research and development on all fronts. A technology is now available which could be put into play in a series of declining priority. I put the declining priority somewhat in this order. There is a great deal of technology available which canbe continued to be used on the municipal waste level, in discharges into water. It is true that we would continue to search for `cheaper, more rapid methods of municipal waste treatment, but one need not delay a great many improvements throughout the United States which can rest on present technology. This technology, incidentally, has had a lo'ng evo'- lution which rested on a very `sensible set of precepts. The engineers in this field have used natural purification procedures in most artificial treatment plants which happen to be far the cheapest ones we have and which do the job quite well. When one speaks of extending the degree of treatment of munici- pal wastes I think we have both the time `and the opportunity to ex- plore that in far greater detail. It is not obvious that tertiary treat- ment of municipal waste is going to be universally necessary or ap- plicable, but if `it becomes so it is possible to develop it while we con- tinue current activity. In second prio'rity, in a declining direction, we know how to do `a great many things in the cleaning o'f air, such as, the removal of par- ticulate matter, the removal of certain `other kinds o'f objectionable materials in the air with present technology. As will appear later, however, there are significant aspects of discharges into the air on which research and technology are seriously lacking. In still further declining priority we have a vast area of industrial wastes in which solutions are not too obvious or in which solutions are too expensive or in which there is a slow rate of correction. In other words, in summary with respect to the technology of today, much can be done with what we already kno'w. The rate o'f correc- tion rests upon the selection of the goal, the purposes for which we want to do it, and it rests, of course, upon dollars, as well as available manpower, although ~ do not stress this latter too heavily. I think manpower appears as necessity demands. The rate depends also, of course, on the development of institutional structure, largely of re- gional nature or &f river basin areas. PAGENO="0444" 444 ADEQUACY OF TECI~NOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Now let me come to No. 5. A number of significant correctives, however, do wait upon increased knowledge and these will require strenuous research and `development on a variety of fronts, in a com- bination of governmental and private fronts. They will not be re- solved to my own mind from the testimony by one or the other, but by both. These do cover, as you will see in a moment, areas of exploration of great significance and should be undertaken as promptly as possible. No. 6, in the areas of agreement: These hearings essentially are directed to shed light on a simple basic equation which someone has phrased, that if society spends on a program "X" or a series of proj- ects which I call "X" a number of "Z" dollars, will it accomplish the purposes o~ our objective "Y." Now, let me go to the areas for explorati~n. These are not given in any order of priority. All of them lend themselves to available time for exploration. In other words, they cannot be resolved on a crisis basis. And may I add that there is time to do research and development in these areas for exploration. And I list them as I say not in order of any priority. No. 1 is the behavior of estuaries. That could be on the Delaware, on San Francisco Bay, on the estuary of the Potomac River. The reason many witnesses listed this is that it turns out that our under- standing of the biological behavior of estuaries, which will and do now receive the wastes from great metropolitan areas, is not very well understood. May I illustrate this by reference to one of the f~w examples which has already been accomplished over the last several years; namely, the study of `the Delaware River estuary, costing somewhere between $1 and $2 million. This study was reported upon `to the Delaware River Commission about 2 weeks ago. It is the first example that I know of' where systems analysis, the use of mathematical models, highly computerized observations, were made over several years in order to determine what effect various policy decisions would have on the behavior and quality of the estuary. In oversimplification, it at- tempts to answer, and I think does answer very well, what happens if you decide that the estuary should have three parts per million of oxygen instead of four parts per million, or five instead of four parts per million; that is~ what are the implications for the rest of the river, implications `incidentally which would require a tremendous amount of expenditure~ The findings indicate that one may have a choh~e of expenditures running from $30 to $40 million to something a little short `of $500 million, depending upon which parameter or parameters your official agency decides shall control the quality of the estuary. Now I mention this because this is ai~ example of what remains to `be done in a series of estuaries throughout the Ijnited States, no two `of which probably bthave the same way. `Mr. DADDARTO. Dr. Wolman, what is the danger of putting the lower `price tag and therefore the lower quality in these proposals as the figure around which `public opinion would rally? `Dr. WOLMAN. Well, they. do not try to do this. They merely try to answer the question that everyone asks: What are the choices that one would be confronted with, say, in the Delaware estuary if your PAGENO="0445" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 445 policymakers decide that you wanted 6 or S or 4 parts per million of dissolved oxygen. Not only do they give you a finding with respect to money that would be involved if you used any of those levels, but they also disclose a number of other choices as to the functions which the Delaware River may perform. And I want to mention that because there is a rather general understanding or assumption that all functions of the Delaware River are compatible with each other. The findings may indicate that there is a degree of incompatibility, and you will have to make choices, somebody will, whether they are made on the Federal level or whether they are made in the river basin authority or whether they' are made by the relative States engaged in that particular basin. This study for the first time as far as I know has used all of the modern tools of systems analysis and models in order to spell out for the policymaker what alternative choices are available. The study indicates you would want 6 parts per million if you want to support the continuing existence of sport fisheries. As has been pointed out in the testimony here, fish which die on the worst day, even when the average is 4 parts per million, die just the same. It turns out, however, that if you want 6 parts per million at all times for the lowest hour, the lowest day, in the lowest cycle of water hydrology, which may be the lowest in 10 or 20 years, you have to pay not only a dollar price for this but you have to pay, a low flow release price for this. The low flow release in this actual example turned out to be somewhere between 10,000 and 11,000 cubic feet per second, which would have to be let down for ~t least 30 days in order to avoid an instantaneous mortality that might occur under that very unusual circumstance of a dry day or a dry 6 hours. Now the incompatibility rests on the fact that that is the very time when that large volume of water ought to be retained for the use of the municipal and industrial water supply necessities of that area. These aggregate something of the order of some 16 to 18 million people. In other words you are posed with a realistic choice. Would you choose to release it for the protection of fish for that particular situation. Because it is only in the dry spells that these other alterna- tive uses become dominant.' The example of course is quite clear, that this is a source of water you may remember partly for the New York metropolitan area, which services 12 million people, and of course for the whole Philadelphia-Trenton area, which services another 5 to 6 million people. So, regardless of what your theor~tical view might be, the Delaware River Commission at some time or other is going to be confronted with that kind of a choice. This study illuminates the choices. This is the purpose of that 2-year detailed analysis, which I would say is not only an exceedingly unusual one, and we will need more of them, but one which I think is of high technical validity, very competently done. May I turn to the Potomac and remind you that the `Corps of Engi- neers program on the Potomac with its systems of reservoirs is some- thing of the order of $550 million. About 40 percent of that is neces- sary or was thought to `be necessary in order to provide low-flow aug- mentation in the POtomac River. That adds up to a great deal of money. 68-240-66-vol. 1-29 PAGENO="0446" 446 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Now, it turns out in the Delaware study that low-flow augmentation for the improvement of the estuary, to the extent of 3,000 or 4,000 cubic feet per second, would have very little value. Yet that is the basis for the designed releases on the Potomac River. The Potomac estuary at the present has been reviewed at my own university, by a group of oceanographers, biologists, sanitary engi- neers, and geographers. A report has been made to this area indicating that the. understanding of the behavior of the estauary is so poor that it would be very unwise to proceed toward very elaborate low-flow release structures or very elaborate tertiary treatments because it is not at all clear what their impact would b~. These investigators have pro- posed, and this is within this year, after 1 year of inquiry, that a de- tailed series of studies be made similar to those which were made in the Delaware. This will take 2 or 3 years to do and would require something on the order of $600,000 or $700,000 a year for investiga- tion. I would add to that, as you probably know, Congress has appro- priated something on the order of a little short of $2 million for a similar inquiry on San Francisco Bay, which is even more compli- cated. So I list the behavior of estuaries as one of the areas that needs detailed investigation before very large and unusual amounts of money are put into this. Mr. CONABLE. Dr. Wolman, this is just so we will know what other choices are open inthe Potomac estuary. Dr. WOLMAN. Let us discuss this choice on the Potomac. It has similar implications in all of the other estuaries, such as the San Fran- cisco Bay and the Delaware. We have all been interested in how to stop the total algae growth, say, in the Potomac. The general assumption so far has been that, if we could remove phosphorus and nitrogen, particularly from the metropolitan complexes, largely municipalities and groups of munici- palities, we would not only defer but we would eliminate that problem. The study discloses that this is not clear and is not guaranteed in any sense. The reason for it is that you may have enough natural phosphorus and nitrogen in all of the estuaries, and you may end up with no particualr improvement from that point of view. And this, of course, is a very important aspect. Mr. MosuEn. Dr. Wolman, does what you just said apply also to the Lake Erie area Dr. WOLMAN. I want to come to Lake Erie as a special problem, because the lakes,, again, are different from the estuaries. I do want to comment on that, with some observations which I have been able to make in Europe where lakes are not older geologically but where they have been settled longer than ours. The fact is that a group representing what I would call a total ecological look at the estuaries has the feeling that we need a great deal more understanding of their behavior. And here I come back to the 1913 survey, curiously enough, on this same river, in which as I say I was engaged as a minor assistant. One would recall, if one re- reads that report, that th~ greatest asset in this area was then con- sidered to be the algae growth on the flats in the vicinity of the Wash- PAGENO="0447" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 447 ington area, as the great purifiers for the discharges of'the Washington metropolitan sewage.. Now in that intervening period of a little over a half century, two things have happened. The flats have disappeared because you have done what every growing area has done, that is, you have excavated the flats and made airports and roads and everything else. The flats are now nonexistent, and the algae growths accompanying them have been moved, of course, downstream, through natural and artificial actions. Now we turn up half a century later and are very much concerned about how to prevent the estuarial growth of algae, their death, their use of oxygen and the consequent destruction of fish. And there is another aspect of this behavior which turns up in vir- tually all of the tidal areas. The great problem on the Potomac as you may know, of course, is sediment-that is, suspended matter. The feeling of the group that reviewed this over the last year was that, if you succeed in removing the sediment, and there are certain projects proposed for doing so, you may increase the algae growth rather than decrease it, because you offer a greater opportunity for the penetration of light. Now these are considerations which, as I say, do not bar you from, proceeding technologically in many directions, but there are certain areas which need exploration, and they need them badly before we run too fast and spend too much. The second, which I will comment on very briefly, is the whole ques~ tion of combined sewers which has been commented on in the testi- mony. I think it is salutary that Congress itself has decided to invest now some $20 million in the exploration of this area. From my point of view they did it for very good reasons. The primary reason is that there are alternatives to complete separation of sanitary and storm runoff. The problem is not only money in separation in all the older cities in the United States, because as you know the estimates run anywhere from $20 to $30 billion, although I am not aware where the estimate comes from, though I am aware of the costs in areas such as in the District of Columbia or in the Detroit area. The Detroit estimate for separation, even if it were physically pos- sible, is about $1% billion and that is, $1.75 billion. But the real inquiry that I think HEW and Interior would be now sponsoring is a study of what the alternatives are and how do you reduce the impact of this particular combination of circumstances. And the alterna- tives are quite `a few and they must be explored. One of the reasons why it is necessary to explore them is that if you were successful in separation completely in the old cities, in sepa~ ration in `all new cities and developments, the accompanying impact on the quality of the receiving bodies of waters through the country as `a whole would probably be quite small. In other words, this comes back to the original equation as to whether or not the money would be wisely spent to accomplish a relatively small objective. No. 3, and again these are not in order of priority: I know the com- mittee was perhaps as impressed and I think in a sense disappointed as I was in the testimony on automobile emissions and the country- wide assumptions and decisions that have been made with respect to PAGENO="0448" 448 ADE~1JACY OJ~ `TE~OENOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT it. I list it here as an area for exploration, because one detects that the ruling or the desire for a universal set of additions to the internal combustion engine would not accomplish the total purpose which all of us have in mind, and that in fact the nitrogen-oxide problem may turn out to be more significant. I do believe that it is important to call attention again, which is in the record, that I think all agreed, certainly in the southern Cali- fornia area, that the requirement was in the light of present knowledge a wise one. But on the decision that the universalizing of it through- out the whole United States, there is some indication that this requires a great deal more exploration and one which may later indicate that this may not be a wise universal decision. Aside from automc~bile emissions, when we come to the general problem of air pollution abatement, the translation of the Los Angeles and southern California experience to the rest of the United States is considered by many workers to be `a mistake. The conditions are ~ot comparable and there is no tremendous evidence tO indicate that the episodic Situation inLos Angeles and obviously the ones in London and in Donora to warrant easy extrapolation to the whole of the United States. We may return to that in a moment. My No. 4, Mr. Mosher, deals with Lake Erie. One thing is obvious, that Lake Erie is aging. Secondly, there are phenomena associated with that aging that are highly objectionable. A number of cor- rectives, both above Lake Erie and in Erie itself, should be carried forward in the reasonable future and at a rapid pace. It is also clear, however, that major expenditures-there has been some testimony that it may be somethinr of the order of a billion dollars-need to be spelled out in order t~at those things that ought to be' done should be selectively pulled out of it to be done. Still other proposals should be deferred while research is rapidly pursued in determining what the impact on Lake Erie such measures would have. Lake Erie has been under a kind of desultory investigation from the standpoint of aging to my knowledge for a little over 100 years. Unfortunately, it has been very sporadic and from a scientific stand- point very limited, although the quality of investigation has been good. But it needs very, very much more elaborate inquiry. The time has arrived, I would say today, where the research aspect ought to be pursued in parallel with a number of the correctives which as I repeat could be carried forward now. It should be remembered likewise that Lake Erie is the oldest and* the shallowest of the series, of lakes. It has been aging mOre rapidly than all the other lakes in that stream. I might point out that the success, or at least apparent success, of re- capturing some of the lakes from increased aging which has happened in Europe, which has had a longer experience with this, has resulted in Lake Zurich primarily and not in Lale Geneva, and in the Bavarian Lakes. But this was accomplished in fact by intercepting all of the industrial and municipal wastes in those areas and taking them com- pletely out of the lake systems and discharging below them. Now I mention this because such an inquiry in the Lake Erie area is one which obviously you may want to make, I would not dare suggest, PAGENO="0449" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 449 largely because of very limited study of the possibility, whether that has any physical potential. I have not any idea. But I do want to point out that the successful experiences up to the present moment- and they have only been. a matter of a few years-of interrupting the aging process has been by interception and by literal physical removal from the area. In Lake Erie, of course, you are dealing with rather heroic sets of problems. You have the Detroit River coming in which from my own estimate of several years of inquiry is the natural route whereby your treated effluents are bound to continue. Our estimate for 1990 is about 6 million people in the Detroit metropolitan area. And then of course you have the accretions on the lake itself from both sides of the inter- national boundary. So this kind of a look needs to be taken, not again as a suggestion that you stop improving the quality of the discharges into the lake, but that simultaneously you stop, look, and listen as to your further inquiries and, decisions. Mr. MOSHER. Are you suggesting that we might just take all of this waste, route it around Lake Erie, and put in Lake Ontario? Mr. CONABLE. No, thank you. Dr. WOLMAN. You see, what I am saying is that a physical effort of that nature has no counterpart for the moment. It was possible for the sewage and industrial wastes of the Zurich area to be bypassed. Now, of course, it creates a different kind of situation below. I separated, you may remember, the lakes from the estuaries, for the simple reason that the lakes demonstrate curious biological behaviors. They have the misfortune of not being in tremendous motion. They have some considerable depth, all of them including `Erie. You have new water added in very large amounts, but you do not have the kind of continuous flow, even where we run into the tidal situations in the estuaries. Mr. MOSHER. This would mean, then, that the cycle of changing depths that seems to appear in Lake Erie depends on the amount of water in the lake. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. Mr. MOSHER. It would have a great impact on this situation? Dr. WOLMAN. Indeed. Mr. MOSHER. The more water the less- Mr. CONABLE. The less aging. Mr. MOSIJER. The less aging. Dr. W0LMAN. And you may have greater "sweeping," if I may use the term. Mr. MOSHER. Yes. Dr. WOLMAN. Now the problem of course as you know arises on Lake Michigan, particularly on which the Corps of Engineers at the moment is authorized to engage in detailed studies: You want two things on the lakes and they are two different and perhaps competing things depending on what your hydrologic cycles are. When you are in the dry cycle you want more water. We have just cone through that in the Great Lakes, all of them, and everybody pleads for doing something upstream where you could release more water. PAGENO="0450" 450 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT When you are in the wet cycle, which I have lived through on the Great Lakes, everybody wanted less water because you were flooding out harbors and recreational areas. The Corps is reviewing this now, for the next 2 to 3 years, to deter- ~nine how one extricates oneself hydrologically from the dilemmas created by the natural cycles, moving from high floodwater runoffs for a long period of time and then such a period as we have gone through from 1962-65. It is going to be very interesting to see what in general may be suggested. Mr. MOSHER. I have a constituent who argues that there is a need for much greater ëontrol at the point where the water runs out. Dr. WOLMAN. At the lower ends? Mr. MOSHER. At the lower end; yes. `Dr. WOLMAN. NOw there are differences of opinion where you would do it, whether you would do it upstream or downstream, running all the way from Superior and St. Clair and Erie and down the river. Mr. MOSHER. Are there studies available on the possibility of con- trolling the downstream flow? :or. WOLMAN. Yes. Now these need to be looked at seriously enough in relation to the problem that we are talking about; namely, of trying to recapture not only Erie but to avoid the degradation of Lake Michigan. Here again you have competitive forces, and you want to return to Lake Michigan for only a moment.. You have the recent Supreme Court hearings-by recent, they have been going on for the last 5 years, and ultimately will reach Congress. But they have a competition which is not easily resolvable, where the people objecting to diversion from Lake Michigan into the Illinois River, want the waste discharges (with treatment) of the Chicago metropolitan area to go back into the lake. This is interesting, as to that particular group. I am not passing on the relative merits of either, because the case isn't closed yet. But their ~nsistence is that you should not divert that amount of liquid into the Illinois, because it ought to stay in the Michigan. The people in the Chicago area who oppose this say "Well, now, look, what are you doing, you are going to increase tremendously the aging of Lake Michigan because you will be turning back tremendous amourts of organic materials, tremendous amounts of nitrogen or phosphorus, or you will have to take them all out at tremendous cost." This issue is one that remains and it is an issue which I do not believe we cart escape, no matter what the fiat may be. It will have to be resolved. It is another example where your general total uses have no compatibilities. The decision finally has to be made either by the courts or by your policymakers, either by Congress or by your basin river authorities, as to which one you choose to do. It is not that you choose to degrade it or to lift it up, but you are really making a choice as between functional uses of your water resource. We need to be reminded that those choices are inescapable in a country that is rapidly approaching 200 million people and all. the activity that goes with it. I might say that having the 200 million people is not an unmixed blessing from the, standpoint of my professional operations, but they are there, and they do manufacture, and they do produce, and they PAGENO="0451" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 451 do have wastes. As one of your witnesses has pointed out, everything we do results in wastes, everything we do. The trick is going to be in how do we reconcile them, whether in water or air or land. You have already had much testimony to show that the three are materially interrelated. There was no getting around it. Now, let me just comment on the fifth one, which is the carbon dioxide and greenhouse effect. Without belaboring it, practically every report on air that I have read in the last 10 years refers to the greenhouse effect, generally to the extent of two sentences. When one inquires as to what you are talking about, as you did, Mr. Conable, and what are its implications, you have roughly the kind of reporting that you got out of Dr. McCloud. It is an explanation of what the greenhouse effect is and what its potentials are. I was glad to see that following that Dr. Malone pointed out that by 1975~ with the continuation of present research, you should have some quantitative global picture of the CO2 issue. But more impor- tant than that, you may remember that he said he has a far greater optimistic view about countervailing measures that may be simul- taneously instituted so that the concern about CO2 may be less than the one or two sentences normally disclose. This is all I want to say on the testimony on the greenhouse effect. It is well to recall that it is under study and that it will disclose what the probabilities will be, but more, it may also disclose what one may be able to do about it. No. 6: I come to thermal pollution. This is largely pollution ~om- ing out of powerplant activities through cooling water, getting into either the water or alternatively into the air. I say alternatively because the conclusion that if you take it out of the water you have disposed of the problem is not true, because then you have a heat problem, if all of them do it, in the atmosphere. This has been pointed out before at other congressional committee hearings by Dr. Reve'lle. I merely want to state for the record that again my own institution has been engaged in a countrywide study `of thermal pollution, roughly at about $500,000 `a year, which we have contracted with the Edison Institute. We have now 15 major power- plants under study throughout the T5nited States on rivers, laltes, and oceans. In `order to `do what ~ It is strange at `this late date that we must now find out what the `physical impact of cooling water discharge is on all of these receiving bodies of water, what `their hydrologic be- havior is, `and what their biological `consequences are, all three of which incidentally `are unknown at `this time. Our Department has selected jointly with the institute `some 15 major powerplants. N'ow you may have heard in the TVA `testimony' that thermal `dis- charge i's objectionable `at som~ `times and valuable at others. The `TVA testimony indicated that at some `of their thermal discharges fishing was materially improved. This hap,pens to be the case on the thermal discharges on the lower Patuxent,' which has just been completed. After 2 years of detailed investigation biologically, it took a great deal of hydrologic adjustment of their discharge and where it is discharged into the river ~n order to `accomplish nonobjectionaible results. T'his is one of the areas that needs exploration. It is getting it and positive answers in maybe 2 to 4 years should be available for ultimate guides. PAGENO="0452" 452 ADEQTJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATE~[ENT Let me call the attention of the committee, however, to another point. It has been said that if we move rapidly into nuclear fission power much of our problems would disappear. This is not so. I sim- ply recall to you that nuclear powerplants must `have cooling and we do not dispose of the thermal pollution problem if we move away from fossil fu~l power. Nor incidentally `do we dispose of `any of the waste problems, whether gaseous, liquids, or solids. The Atomic Energy Commission has done a superb job in restrict- ing `the discharges, not eliminating them. `Gaseous waStes from nu- clear powerplant operations are very, very heavily monitored and very heavily controlled, as `are the liquid and the solid wa~stes. The corn- nxittee should understand that these `are not wasteless operations. `They `will require a degree `of monitoring and supervision which in many respects may be greater than you would have with a fossil fuel burning plant, even though those have `difficulties. Mr. CONABLE. Doctor, why should there `be gaseous wastes? Dr. WOL~rAN. There `are because `they are gaseous productions and `they do oo~ne out, in minor `amount. In `the chemical processing `of nu- clear fuel rods, gaseous wastes are highly important. Low-level liquid waste is `monitored very, very carefully from all the existhig nuclear powerplants, and as I say, very `well managed. But you have them. And. yo'u also have, of course, `solid waste. ,~ `Mr. `CONABLE. But gaseous waste is not the result of `the thermal conditions? Dr. WOLiS~tAN. No. They are pi'ckups in a sense in production. In the proc'essing of nuclear fuel after use-as you know, this is done in centers throughout the United States-it is' not being done and probably `will not be done for quite some years at the location of power producing units, largely because it is a difficult operation. The wastes from those operations are very high in radiation. The Atomic Energy Commission in this instance has done `au exceedingly good job, bu't by Simply holding it. In other words, we know of no disposal or treat- ment process for the wastes from the chemical processing of nuclear fuel. It is completely unlike any other waste with which `we have so far dealt, where time of a very limited nature is on our side. But time is not very useful in the wastes fro'm chemical processing of nuclear fuel because we run in terms of not 30 days or 2 weeks or 6 weeks but in terms of hundreds of years. Mr. VIVIAN. Are you referring to' `half-lives ? Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. Much `of the plutonium is taken out, which is the longer half-life, but the strontiu'ms and the cesiums persist for a very long time. Mr. CONABLE. Dr. Wolman, you are suggesting that as we move more into the area `of nuclear power, then, `we are likely to have a sharply accelerating set of problems there? `Dr. WOLMAN. We have two sets of problems. One is met now essentially by holding. I say essentially, the waste is held `at various, not too many, spots, in very carefully monitored tanks, underground, of very special fabrication, with air conditioning in fact, because they are `also thermally productive. We hold them. Experimentation is now on in reducing their volume `and `transferring some o'f that to' salt mines for long4enn retention. Salt mines have the merit of being PAGENO="0453" ADEQUACY OF TECIINOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 453 relatively devoid of moisture, so that the movement of ground water which worried us a good deal, is at a minimum. We have, however, as your nuclear powerplants expand, an increas- ing problem with low-level liquids, or we will have, because of the sheer multiplication of their volume. For the moment those are re- leased to the environment with great care, with continuous monitoring, and I would say, from my own point of view, with safety. But they will be multiplied, obviously, manifold. And this poses a problem, again of regulatory management. It is a management issue. I come to No. 7-I am a little slow in this, Mr. Chairman, but I think the detail is warranted from the testimony. No. 7 is the disposal of inorganic wastes. This includes inorganic wastes from industry, from the demineralization now being proposed for irrigation waters, from the iemineralization of brackish waters, and the byproducts of the desalting of sea water. I put all of these in the total complex of demineralization of the waste resulting from current and emerging processes. The testimony indicates very clearly, particularly in the case of Mr. Warne from California, that very little is said about this problem, largely because nobody knows what to say about it, because nobody knows where to put it. If you were to take a brief measurement of the amount of salt to be removed from irrigation water, where you are ~dealing as you know in tremendous quantities of water, quite unlike anything else that you deal with in municipal waste, you surround yourself with tons and tons-well literally thousands of tons of salt. Then the dilemma becomes one of where do you put it? The new 150-million-gallon-a-day, sea water desalting plant for southern California, which will be removing something of the order of 35,000 parts per million of salt, will result in~ a massive tonnage of salt thus taken out. Mr. Warne points out, it must then be discharged somewhere, in hot brine. This led him to the suggestion that the amount of research on the coastal behavior of the oceans is almost nil. If we are to proceed with many of these demineralizations, many of which of course ultimately would be on the ocean fronts, we should begin to find out what is to be said or done with these waste products. For example, even the minor salt accumulation in the demineralization of brackish water, by brackish I mean something less than 5,000 parts per million-there are long controversies as to where you put that. Obviously, the State engineers have objected to putting it back into somebody's well, because you are trying to get it out. He does not like you to carry it by pipeline into some surface body of water. What I am merely recording from the testimony is this emerging issue of tremendous research implications. Bound up with it is de- tailed inquiry into the whole ecology of the ocean front, where most of these wastes would be likely to find their destination. Removal of salts from irrigation water which carries a great deal, and incidentally on the Colorado is getting worse year by year-as you go downstream the drainage from th~ irrigated farm picks up the salts. By the time you get down to Imperial Valley the record indi- cates clearly an increased concentration of sodium and magnesium chlorides and sulfates. PAGENO="0454" 454 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT This salt problem is the concern throughout the world, as Mr. Warne pointed out, in Pakistan and elsewhere. He points out, and I merely confirm the fact, that you have to deal with it. No. 8 is the removal of sulfur oxides. The dilemma you are in whether you take it out from the stacks or you take it out from the fuels, either from the coal, from the oils, or from the gas. The British at one of their powerplants tried to take it out from the stack by scrub- bing. They ended with a dilute sulfuric acid which was worse than what they had before, except that it was in another effluent. All the testimony indicates that we do not have at the moment a significant economical removal method either from the fuel or from the stack. One can remove particulate material from stacks and it should be. Such processes are valuable, efficient, and reasonably economical. I would remind the group I asked Chairman Lilienthal of the Atomic Energy Commission many, many years ago, approximately 15 to 16 years ago, where I was serving then as the Chairman of the Stack Gas Committee of the Atomic Energy Commission, the question which your committee has asked from each witness: What kind of a quantitative standard or criterion should we have for stack gases in all of the AEC operations. He said, "Zero." Of course, he then hastened to add that this was not only improbable but impossible ~nd, of course, it has turned out to be both improbable and impossible. What it did do, however-because his request was to keep it down to the absolute minimum-it resulted in an improvement in industrial filtration systems for stack gases of extraordinary character in a period of 2 or 3 years. But here you had an interesting situation where you had one Fed- eral agency, covering all the plants, whose criterion could control all and which, incidentally, had a great deal of money. But it did result in the fabrication and the development of air-cleaning devices for minute quantities of particulate matter and dissolved matter and very, very small-sized matter which had never been heard of before. This I think is a significant thing, that if your criterion can be good and can be necessary, you push industrial process developers, as it did in that case, into highly improved technology. Now, on disposal of solid wastes, I merely want to remind you that one of the very heartening pieces of testimony was the testimony of the Chief of the Bureau of Mines on the potential of the elimination of one of our greatest difficulties; namely, the automobile junkyard. How this will evolve as time. goes on and whether these pilot plant opera- tions with low-grade taconite does pan out is still an open question. It was one of the few indications, however, that we would be able to handle the solid-waste problem, particularly on the junk side. And that would cover not only the automobile, but the washing machine, the refrigerator, and all that now is disposed of only by taking it from the consumer when it has been finally made obsolete and giving it to me. I say giving it to me, when I mean depositing it on the shores of Lake Erie or on the estuary of the Hudson or in my parks and the like, and say, "Well, now, you do something with it." More than that is required, of course, as the Bureau of Mines witness indicated. PAGENO="0455" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 455 There is another side of this shield, however, which is a little more attractive. In 30 years the nature of our solid-waste problem has changed, aside from these discarded beer bottles and containers and the like. Our refuse used to be 65 percent organic and 35 percent in- organic-not inorganic, but burnable, combustible material. Today it is the other way around. It is 35 percent organic. This is entirely due to the introduction `of refrigeration and packaging. In other words, we do not throw away the food we used to throw away and which was our problem. So there is a good side to this. However, it does make the salvaging of organic material' practically unwar- ranted from an economic standpoint. The piggeries of Los Angeles, which used' to be the largest in the world, went out of business, having been originally paid $3 or $4 a ton for Los Angeles garbage. In the course of time gradually Los Angeles had to pay them, and later they decided to have not much of a piggery, because the supplementary food necessary in addition to garbage was too costly. Let me go to standards and criteria in the testimony for waste or re- ceiving water and air. There are two things which appear from the testimony. One, that the official agencies ~re engaged now under congressional acts in establishing throughout the country over the next year standards for stream quality and ultimately standards for air quality. This I think wisely is being done on a regional basis, because again there are differences between the rivers, the lakes, and the oceans. And this is being actively pressed with all the States and with the Federal GOvernment. Standards for wastes themselves or waste discharges generally have not been formulated on any official basis. But since Mr. Vivian has been very much interested in this, it should be pointed out that, first of all, such standards if made would probably be minimum require- ments and, secondly, again, ought to be on a geographical or regional basis. I call his attention to the fact that in the Ohio Valley, through Orsanco they have what they call the four freedoms, rather aptly named. Their standards for discharges are as follows Freedom from suspended matter, in order to avoid the sludge deposit: Freedom from materials which will float; namely, those which give you slick or even uprising sludge deposit; Freedom from color, and Freedom from toxic materials. These are the prevailing four freedoms in the Ohio Valley. I might say in checking with them yesterday that they feel that a great deal has been nccomplished by and with such waste discharge minimum requirements, those which apparently they were successful in selling `to industry and municipalities. Mr. MOSTIER. Dr. Wolman, should not you indicate for the record what you are talking about when you say Orsanco? This is an inter- state compact? Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. This is the Ohio River Sanitation Commission and it is a compact group between the States in the whole Ohio River PAGENO="0456" 456 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Basin. it has less ~ow6rs under congressional sanction than the Dela- ware River Commjssion~ which has powers of execution, powers of design and construction~and finance. Orsanco has poweis~ primarily of guidance and of advice. The record ought to show that they have accomplished ~ great deal. Their own feeling is that they have a good deal more to accomplish. They have spent via the municipalities and the industries something of the order of $1 billion in the last 20 years. As a Federal representative on the original Ohio River Board, which reviewed the whole Ohio River for 3 years, from 1934 to 1937, the terminology we used then has been quoted ever since and erro- neously. We described the Ohio River at that time as "an open sewer." And I see that phrase appearing in 1966 newspapers. It is no longer so. Mr. RYAN. Dr. Woiman, they used that to describe the Hudson at times. Dr. WOLMAN. It is not true of the Hudson. It is true of parts of the Hudson. In attending the Delaware River Commission hearing on the es- tuary research, I read the opening statement in the printed summary. The first sentence stated that "The Delaware was a dirty river." Then the chief ~engineer of the Commission made his report and indi- cated that 90 percent of the river is of excellent quality, which I think is true. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Ryan, did you want to follow that up further? Mr. RYAN. No, I don't want to interrupt further at this point. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Conable. Mr. CONABLE. I just wondered if you meant to imply that there are no suspended solids going into the Ohio river? Dr. WOLMAN. No. Mr. CONABLE. Is that the standard they are seeking? Dr. WOLMAN. The foua~freedoms that they seek. I said, and I want to repeat, that they themselves feel that a good deal more needs to be accomplished in order to get these four freedoms, even though as I Say about a billion ~oUars ha~ been spent. Mr. CONABLE. Well, this would imply secondary treatment at least. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. Mr. CONABLE. In all the cities along the Ohio. Dr. WOLMAN. Well, it implies secondary treatment certainly on some of them, It implies also a greater degree of industrial action. Mr. CONABLE. If you had secondary treatment, wouldn't you still be getting 10 percent of the solids dumped into the rivers? Dr. WOLMAN. Yes, but their eI~ect or their physical impact may not be too important. But it remains to be seen, in turn, whether, say, Cincinnati, f or example, would have to go to tertiary treatment. I said almost at the beginning of this testimony that such decisions will have to be made forever because first of all your total use of the river is increasing. Mr. CONABLE. A standard adopted by Orsanco must be much more complex than just no suspended solids in the water. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. As a matter of fact, I don't want to quote it because I am not sure it is public yet, they have already formulated and forwarded to Interior their proposed standards for the Ohio, in compliance with the Federal act, PAGENO="0457" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATE]~'XENT 457 Mr. MOSHER. Dr. Wolman, I think we have to recognize that the success of this compact required a great deal of political effort. I happen to have been in the Ohio Senate at the time Ohio ratified `this venture and participated in some of the proceedings. It required a lot of effort on the part of various State legislatures to put this to- gether. For many of the regional compacts which we need, we are going to need a similar amount of political effort. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. As you know, having been present at the cre- ation of the Ohio compact and having something to do with its f or- mulation and language, we were perfectly aware of the fact that you are dealing with people, you are dealing with money, and you are dealing incidentally with alternative necessities for money. Of course, it is interesting and striking in this particular docmnen- tation-there is no suggestion on the part of any witness that first of all there is a limitation to money and there is no limitation or neces- sity for public expenditure. This is one of the problems with which we necessarily always have to deal. We have again in the total field of our society alternative choices to make. I realize that when we go to our own legislature, for exam- ple, which is a party to the Potomac compact, which I would say has even less powers than the Ohio, but does areasonable job. The legislative assembly asks very promptly what are our commitments to it? Usually, of course, there are two: money, and the conversion of their State power to an external agency.. Matiy of them are very jealous of that. I cannot say much more on the questions Of standards and criteria, excepting to say that if I were to take the Lake Erie area one might very well say that you have two things to do; one of which you are already doing under the Federal impact, and that is establish the standards that you want Lake Erie to have as a receiving body of water. The second is to look hard at whether you want to establish minimum requirements for the waste discharges. I say look hard at it, because I would not be prepared to say that this is what. you would promptly want to do, except on a minimum basis. That you may want to do. . The universalizing over the entire country of~the same criteria for waste discharge I think would be a mistake, simply because it is a vast country with a variety of situations, natural and man made. I think it was Mr. Wagner of TVA who pointed out that there is a tremendous difference between what you should do and can do, main- taining high quality, on the Holston, and what you would do on the Mississippi. Two plants in both in~tances of similar character and of similar production would not be warranted in exercising exactly the same degree of waste control. There are many reasons why we would be, in fact,. making an un- economic use of the resources of the country.: My own inclination is that we use those resources, again, as wisely as we know how, rather than normalizing them. These efforts to have what was called the postage stamp idea for all criteria is not tenable. There is a difference after all between the deep harbor off of Seattle and the nonexistent harbor off of Spokane. We do not wipe out easily these natural differences by simply saying all of them should be alike. PAGENO="0458" 458 ADEQUACY OF' TECHNOLOGY. FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT `Mr. DADDARIO. That is included in your prophecy that institutional, sectional, `and regional standards `will have to be developed. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. To take care of this problem. Dr. WOIJMAN. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. A standard would apply within these areas rather than cut across all of the sections. Dr. WOIMAN. Yes. Because I think not only will it be untenable,, but it would `be unwise. The use of Puget Sound for the docking of the `deepest draft ships we beve is a reality. Spokane may feel that geographically it has been "gypped," but I know of no way in which one can equalize that. An'd yet the feeling that has been expressed by some that all munici- pal waste, for example, in the United `States should have tertiary treat- ment, I do not believe has either wisdom or logic. The policy sh'oul'd be one of definitive resolving of issues in ea'ch case, the Delaware River, Lake Erie, Lake Michigan, and `the like. You may have `a series of common objectives in the whole lake system. That may be possible. But' I doubt very much whether that system criteria `would be the same you `would have, say, on the Mississippi, the Missouri, or the Columbia. A number of other areas of exploration appear in the testimony' and I am `afraid I shall not be able to cover `them, Mr. Chairman. But I do w'ant to add one here which seems to me to be very badly lacking in incjuiry. It ha's `been commented on by `a number of the witnesses. It is what I call the environmental determinants of. disease. In less fancy phraseology, it, directs itself toward the comments `made by Dr. Tukey, Dr. MacLeod, Dr. Buckley, and by Colonel Meyer, that so far the impact of environmental insults on man has not demonstrated any very significant deleterious effects. This statement is somewhat inconsistent with the statements of several of the agency witne~'ses, `who said th'at illness and death caused by air pollution is one of the great dishonors of this country. I am paraphrasing it. One must agree that the evidence on this needs to be very heavily explored. Even `though there is a bit of an inconsistency, which you called attention to, Mr. `Chairman, even in the Tukey report, it still remains a valid statement in their report that this impact, if it exists, is not detectable. We then come to the"question, which I think you also~ raised, what guarantee does that. give us that these insults for the long term may nQt have secondary"~ and important disease implications? Here re- search is very, very badly needed, and incidentally very badly ne- glected. Mr. DADDARI0. We worry "about that conclusion, not so much' be. cause the effects can't ,be'de'termined, but because, as we understand it, no effort has been made to' determine them. So the fact that little re- search has been done in this area is only because the problems are not visible on the surface, and no intensive study has been made to even~corne to the cpuclusion that research is necessary. Dr. WoL~AN. No. `I think it is a little better than that, on the'~ present. situation. There have been a number of studies made, particu- larly of the group of respiratory diseases. ` PAGENO="0459" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 459 Mr. DADDARIO. I am not talking about the effects in all instances. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. But in some cases we are~ just making assumptions and there has been no study whatever made. Dr. WOLMAN. I think this is true. This is why I stressed the fact that these studies, difficult as they are, should be pursued. Each of your witnesses pointed out that this kind of an epidemiological look ~s not only time-consuming and expensive, but professionally very difficult to do. Mr. DADDARTO. But it ought not to be passed over only because it is difficult. Dr. WOLMAN. No. I say it is an area that needs tremendous em- phasis if for no other reason than either you assixme that it has no impact or you assume it won't have. Either reason is a valid reason for explorino' it. It is statel', for example, that the rise in emphysema in our country is due to air pollution. However, it is also stated by competent medical profession that their evidence indicates the contrary, that two things have happened, that emphysema has increased tremendously in paral- lel with increased smoking by women and greatly with men because smoking has not yet been materially reduced. However, if one talks to the British, as I have again this past June, they feel that emphysema in England is very closely related to air pollution. They point out that people on the Continent, the rest o~ the industrialized Europe, do not have the same disease situations that London, Birmingham, and Manchester areas have. This dis- ease is known as "the English disease." It does not occur in large numbers anywhere else in Europe. This is a very interesting thing. It is another example where the extrapolation from London to the rest of the United States or to the rest of Europe may not be warranted. But this is a simple explana- tion of what I still think needs a very, very detailed look. The next problem is the question which comes up again and again on systems analysis, models, and computers. I think, Mr. Vivian, you came in after I had described what I considered to be the first fine study in the Delaware estuary. It was an exemplification of the tremendous value of systems analysis over the last ~ years in the use of mathematical models and, of course, the computerized valuesthat went with it. It would not have been possible to have disclosed the alternatives presented by these more modern procedures. They were used, at least in this field, extremely carefully and extensively, and incidentally very intelligently. This provided a policymaking group with almost dozens of answers that you normally would not have been able to do anything more than guess at and probably guess at erroneously. This kind of study needs to be done on a very much wider basis geographically thi~ôughout the United States and in many, many directions aside from estuaries. Because we have dozens of choices, this was one of the few times that you could plug them in and really find out what their impact on your answers were to be. Reuse of waste, which is No. 13. I want to~ call the committee's attention to the fact that in 1960 there was supplied to the Kerr select PAGENO="0460" 4(30 ADEQUACY OF ~TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT committee, the Senate select committee, a document,' inthdentally-~-.f or which my own associates and I were responsible-on the present and prospective. we~ns for improved reuse of `water. It is Committee Print No. 30. It has a listiitg of' all the existing reuses and a listing of all the potential ones, and some discussion ~s' to what those poten- tial uses'may be~ I call your attention to it because reuse of water is very old. Reuse of waste is quite old, I happen to come from an area in which we have the gr~atest reuse of sewage treatment effluent in the world, namely at the Bethlehem Steel Co. plant at Sparrows Point. They take the* entire sewage from the City of Baltimore for industrial purposes after `treatment by the city and by them. It is the largest one' in the world. The. use `last month was about 125 million gallons a day.' Now, one can do this if geographical juxtaposition is favorable. In other words, the Baltimore City treatment plant and `the largest integrated steel' plant in the world are 26,000 feet apart and two major pipelines connect them. They pay the city for waste water which we were having some difficulty of getting rid of in a little creelc. I say, `this is the largest reuse of water. It is one of many. Whether one reuses waste water or river water or lake water is not that you do it for fun, but it is that you explore whether it is worth your doing it. And this again is not a universally applicable system. It is one which is adapted to the particular and peculiar circumstances of a given situation. `All of these are enumerated in Committee Print No. 30, which was the result again of a request of Senator Kerr. The question was raised in the testimony, `and here too I think we should have some record of it, as to why you cannot do `a great many things, say, with municipal'sewage, even of a profitable `nature. And we have searched for that a great many years. For simplicity's sake I will `simply mention this one fact. It is not the same as being able to manufacture beer or bourbon or the like. Sewage has a peculiar characteristic' in modern systems. As we all know, it is a water carriage system. So what we are treating is water which has been sullied by one-tenth of 1 percent of its total. In other words, we are fooling with 99.8 and 99.9 percent water which we brought in in the first place. Using the poetic term we sullied `it, and then we turned around and tried to take out of it what we put in. But we are trying to take out one-tenth to two-tenths of 1 percent of something, and this is no mean trick. We have `attempted, for example, to borrow from the brewery in- dustry, how could we sterilize this whole' volume, then add a yeast or a bacterial system or something which would do the job more cheaply and more efficiently for us. Of course, such a method would drive us out of the business because we cannot sell a bottle of water for the price of a bottle of beer. It is a cheap commodity. The committee ought to bear this in mind, that we are dealing with a rather extraordinary complex, due to the tremendous advance made in the sanitation of the world by the water carriage system. This system now turns out to be a plague to us and we will and should put sOme money into finding out what to do. PAGENO="0461" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 461 I have four or five others, but I shall not give them to you. Your time has disappeared. I do want to be subject to, whatever questions you may have that may disclose some of the remaining ones here. Perhaps I should add the acid mine waste problem. The total prob- lem of mines-the slag pile, the acid mine waste--is where I came in 35 years ago. We sat on a board, a regional board for the coal-pro- ducing States, what we now loosely include in Appalachia, and we spent, from memory, about $20 million at that time. We did not suc- ceed and the Bureau of Mines Director pointed out that they have no real solution to acid mine wastes. Here is an area where deep-seated and prompt research is absolutely essential. We have let it ride for a period of about a third of a cen- tury, but there it is, and it never stops. Mr. DADDARIO. You would not subscribe to the idea that because it has been said that nothing can be done about mine drainage, we ought to consider it to be a natural phenomena and forget about it? Dr. WOLMAN. No. I do not think it ought to be left that way, be- cause it does do a great deal of damage in many ways. To be confronted with something unresolved for the rest of our lives does not sit well with me. Research on a multifaceted area needs to be pushed and sponsored. There is no question about it. Some years ago, a group at the Johns Hopkins University did work on this for 2 or 3 years. It was thought, maybe overoptimisti- cally, that a way of curbing it had been found. This turned out to be a biological phenomenon in the abandoned mines, the unworked mines, and it was approached from that standpoint. It meant in essence that one would have to go back into these mines and paint the exposed walls, which were the sources of sulfuric acid and the like. It never got anywhere. I have the feeling that it ought to be reopened and other procedures isolated and determined if possible. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Wolman, we don't have much time, but I would like you to touch on a point that we have talked about informally. I do think it is important to have your thoughts on the record. Related to the question of separating sanitary and storm sewers is the possible expenditure of some twenty-five to thirty billion of dollars to accomplish certain end objectives. `What would it and what would it not accomplish? What is your feeling generally about this part of the problem and its relationship to pollution generally? The expendi- ture on separate sewers is one of the largest put before us. Mr. MOSIIER. Mr. Chairman, he touched on this while you were out. Mr. DADDARIO. Oh? Dr. WOLMAN. May I resume it or simply summarize it very briefly? I am opposed to a heroic expenditure on the assumption, first, that it can be done, but more important that if it were done it would be worth anything like that amount of money from the standpoint of the quality of the receiving body of water. Now there are alternatives to that kind of a separation, that would cost very much less and which incidentally have already been put into practice in the last 4 or 5 years, at least in the State of Michigan, and probably in several other States. They require that, if you put in the combined system, storage tanks must be constructed. Every rainfall exceeding the minimum amount 68-24i0-e&--vol. 1r-~3O PAGENO="0462" 462 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT which is built into the system going into the treatment plant, brings the storage tanks into play. They hOld those rainwater flood dis- charges, later releasing them, at a low rate, intothe sewer that goes to the treatment plant. In other words, their assumption is that barring a catastrophic runoff, which the tanks might be too small to retain, you would catch about 85 percent of your normal rains, which normally would have gone overboard into the nearest tributary. With such storage the liquid is ultimately released at a low rate to the treatment plant. Mr. MOSHER. Where are they doing this? Dr. WOLMAN. In the State of Michigan. I think their require- ment dates back 4 or 5 years, and they have been building them. I could summarize this very quickly. To get it into your record, by reference to the recent paper by Mr. Reed of the Public Health Service on the very question you raise. The paper spells out, and spells out very maturely, the alternatives to complete separation. Mr. DADDARIO. I use this only as an example, merely to show that we ought to be thinking about alternate propositions in many instances. The matter of automobile exhausts and the $50 gadget is an example I think where the public will be expending about half of a~ billion dollars and no one really knows if the problem will be solved or not. We must also recognize that if the device does not remove all of the effluent, the absolute amount of effluent will eventually increase. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. What are your thoughts, Dr. Wolman, about the effects local pollution will have on the entire country? Take, for example, all of the pollution activity in New York City. Doesn't this affect all of us rather than just New York City itself? Shouldn't we be thinking about some proposal which would direct us toward the al- leviation of pollution blights of this kind as a general way to get rid of a problem which in fact affects all of us, even though it emanates from one small section of the country? Dr. WOLMAN. Well, let's first make this comment. New York City has spent until now something ~f the order of $1 billion on sewage treatment. It has not resolved all of its problems. The estimate on the additional amount that it needs to spend may be something of the order of another half a billion. It has done a job of protecting a very large series of its recreational areas very successfully. Its beaches have had most of the sewage removed. It has, because it is an old city, in all of its boroughs the combined system. It has therefore begun at considerable expense the actual installation of the tanks that I speak of, because they could not tear up all of Brooklyn, all of the Bronx, and all of Manhattan. I would say it would `be physically impossible. They have turned to the alternative of trying to put these floodwater tanks at the terminals of their systems. Now it would be to the advantage not only of New York but of Chi- cago, where the conditions are entirely different--it would be to the advantage of all of them if there were improved technology of, mu- nicipal waste treatment. There is no question about that. The search for this has not been either too intensive or too revealing. Within reason perhaps the search moved particularly on the Federal PAGENO="0463" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLtTION ABATEMENT 463 level largely toward determining the merits, the costs, and the meth- odology of tertiary treatment, which as I said before is not quite what I think the answer will be. It will be a valuable additional answer where needed, but it does not; resolve the central question, because I think one of your witnesses testified that if you `subjected all sewages to tertiary treatment it would double to quadruple total cost, in capital, operation, and main- tenance. I believe this is so. And I believe you could do it. You could do it today pretty much. But my own search would be for procedures which are needed in a number of instances that are different from what we now do that are not mere repetitions of our orthodox procedures, and hope- fully would be both cheaper and better. On this exploration, we are still fairly short. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Mosher? Dr. WOLMAN. I do not want to close my own comments without making one general observation on industrial waste, but simply be- cause I would like it in the record. A great deal has been done with industrial waste. If I were pressed for one sentence of conclusion, however, it would be that I think their pace of correction is too slow. Now my industrial friends wduld `probably shoot me when I leave the room, but I think it is too slow. I am aware of the reasons why it is possibly too slow. Some re- straint is obviously due to obsolete plants, in which the economic cost is high; obviously a dollar spent in process brings a far greater return to industry than a dollar spent on wastes. My own feeling, my own hope would be, that much of the research in industry would go into in~house process adjustment and not into external treatment. I do not like to be confronted forever with having materials discharged that you haye not found a use for and then try to do something with them. I would even say to industry, as I have, I hope you will aim at a closed cycle. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Mosher? Mr. MOSHER. No further questions. Mr. DADDARIO. Mr. Vivian. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman. I have listened with considerable interest today to the many topics you have covered. I think perhaps I sense a lesser interest in pro- gressing rapidly than I would like. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes? Mr. VIVIAN. And I think perhaps my reasons for it are that I think there is a great tendency to let the ocean solve a lot of problems. I am not at all sure that this is any wiser than the attitude we had a hundred years ago when we said let the streams solve the problems, or 50 years ago when we said-for example, in my own area, let Lake Erie solve the problems. My reaction tends to be that I would dispute with you the many comments you hate made that we need to slow down,' that we need to lean back. Dr. WOLMAN. May I interrupt, Mr. Vivian? Mr. VIVIAN. Yes. PAGENO="0464" 464 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Dr. WOLMAN. You came in after I said we need not slow down, after I pointed out explicit1y-~ Mr. VIVIAN. It was probably well I came in after that point, beqause from listening to the details I concluded you meant that. Dr. WOLMAN. No, I think you did me an injustice. Mr. VIVIAN. I will be glad to correct that. Dr. WOLMAN. I feel that is important, because I stated in my memorandums on "areas of agreement" that come out of the testi- mony that there is no reason to stop correctives because of nonexistent technology. We have enough existing technology to proceed apace. Then your witnesses proceeded to carve out-and this is the part that you got-carve out the "areas of exploration." But my first state- ment, and I think the chairman would bear me out, was an insistence on the fact that absence of technology need not stop our operations. Mr. DADDARIO. I have a quote from you, where you say "So we need not stop." That was your earlier statement. Dr. WOLMAN. I think, Mr. Vivian, it is important that I try to ad~ just, because what I .was talking about when you came in was truly areas-what I would describe~-of relative ignorance, and these ought to be clarified, investigated and stopped. And obviously you might then get :the impression, I am quite sure, that, I was saying we do not know this and we do not know that. These statements cannot be sepa- rated from what I said we did know. Mr. DADDARI0. It might be helpful if Mr. Vivian would take an ex- ample or two~ where he believes we should be going ahead further and see what you think about it. Dr~ WOL~rAN. All right. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. All right. You mentioned quite a number of areas. For example, you men- tioned the subject of power technology, generation of power from atomic energy, and you quoted `a number of problems which you felt would impede the progress in this area. However, whatever those problems may be, there is no evidence that I know of tha,t they will be any worse than the present problems. In fact, they will be less troublesome than the problem of commercial or conventional fossil fuel technologies. These are in trouble for two or three reasons, one of which is pollution, another of which is resources, and the third of which is international distribution of resources. Dr.WoT~AN. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. I realized that you would not be appreciative of my comment. The reason for my making it is that I think it is important we make it clear that when the issue lies between holding back and going ahead we should go ahead. I think experience shows that very few pollution abatement systems or processes have exceeded their need, just as very few highways have exceeded their need over the past gen- eration. We are growing so rapidly in both population and tech- nology that what we once thought were the marginal problems become the central problems and what we thought were the far-out problems became the day-by-day problems. I am quite concerned `about slow- ing down. I wish to shift to a completely different subject area. This being the conclusion of the present series of hearings, it seems to me that 4F~ ~ PAGENO="0465" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 465 an essential step at this point is to ask the old simple questions of what, when, why, how, who and where, as regards progress in this field. For example, many particular problems have been brought up in water pollution, in air pollution, in solids pollution, in thermal pol- lution, in radioactivity pollution, or in noise pollution-and I am sure 1 have left off a few. What I don't see in this whole sequence, and this is in no way a reflection on yourself, sir, is an understand- ing of how our own Government is progressing in an organized way to attack at least the technological basis of the problem. Now, for example, there is in the Department of Interior today the Water Pollution Control Administration. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. I am certain it doesn't cover all aspects of water pollu- tion control. For example, I doubt that it covers thermal pollution of waters. Dr. WOLMAN. I would suspect that it could. Mr. VIVIAN. It could, but I bet it doesn't. Dr. WOLMAN. I say I would suspect it could. Mr. VIVIAN. Yes. Then, for example, on air pollution control, I believe that activity remains in Health, Education, and Welfare. Dr. WOLMAN. Yes. Mr. VIVIAN. And on solids, disposal of solids, there is a group in- Dr. WOLMAN. HEW. Mr. VIVIAN. In HEW, but there also happens to be the mine waste problem, which is half solid and half liquid. I am not quite sure where that lies in relationship to the Department of Interior's water pollution and/or HEW's air pollution and solids pollution activities. Mr. DADDARIO. If the gentleman would yield for a moment. Mr. VIVIAN. Yes. Mr. DADDARIO. Part of the staff activity which is going on is an investigation into each of these departments so that part of our record will show where everything is. We will be able to find out what they are doing and perhaps how each of them could be expanded. Mr. VIVIAN. This is the nature of my present concern: As the prob- lem has grown in consequence, which it certainly has, and as it has grown in expense, which it certainly has, responsibility is shifting slowly from a local area handled by local contractors with local offi- cials, to one in which the States play a role. But the States' resources are inadequate and the Federal Government is now playing a much more important role. Regional organizations are playing a ~ole, but the need for the Federal Government to handle the problem by itself has increased. It would seem to me that one of the concerns that we need to pay attention to is which of the specific problems that we have run across need attention and what is being done to solve them. Second, what kind of time schedule can we set for each one of these specifics, and why have we set these goals? Beyond that we will very quickly come to the questions of how and who and where, and we will immediately come back to the Federal Government. We may need some reeom-~ mendations as to how and why these different organizations tie to- gether, and what goals and guidelines should be set for them to live by. I am particularly concerned because I don't think any of these orga- PAGENO="0466" 466 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT nizations are concerned with the pollution of the sea. I am not aware of any one of them which pays any significant attention to the pol- lution of the. sea. Dr. WOLMAN. There is a new one just created, that is your Ocean- ographic Council. And I would like to comment not only on it, Mr. Vivian. My Nos. 15 and 16 in "areas for exploration," where I was the victim of time and I did not reach-No. 15 was interagency com- munication and coordination, and 16 may surprise you, was communi- cation and coordination on the congressional level, which I would incidentally rate as of high importance. And I hope you will forgive me for mentioning it. But I did want to point out in interagency operations that we have a whole series of recently created councils. We have the Federal Council on Water. We have the OST Office, which is supposed to keep an eye on the total research operations and perhaps even have some suggestion as to where it ought to be allocated and, incidentally, how much and how fast. We have the new Ocean- ographic Council, which I understand has just been created and will be in operation. As a long participant in governmental actions, even on the Fed- eral level, I gave up long ago, Mr. Vivian, ever hoping that we were going to have a simplified structure in the Federal operation. So what I do as an individual is try to design and strengthen the lines of communication, which I know is in your own mind. But I do not know of any substitute for it, because we have myriads of agencies to struggle with, sometimes on the same subjects as you point out. When I listed Nos. 15 and 16, I would make a plea that somewhere or other we have some kind of meshing. I am not so much interested in elim- inating competition in research, because I think there are values in that, but I do wish that we could keep them from falling over each ~other and also from seeing that some of these necessities do not fall in between the cracks and nobody does them. Mr. VIVIAN. Can I ask you if the Oceanographic Council intends to look into the subject of pollution of sea? is that a major interest of the Council? Dr. WOLMAN. I would say offhand that it probably was not, and I will do my part to see that it becomes so, because I rate it very high. The reason I say it probably does not, I would simply recall to you that in the earlier work in Los Angeles and New York City the whole tremendous problem of sewage disposal, in which as you know millions and millions of dollars were spent for correction, the amount of money spent initially on oceanographic inquiry I think was much less than $100,000. The amount of money spent on corrections, which, inci- dentally, have since been modified and spent again, was of course run- ning into the tens of millions of dollars. And oceanographers them- selves were critical of the fact that you were going out into ~the ocean without any understanding of the ocean behavior. A good deal of that is being corrected, but not enough. Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman, I would agree with ,a number of the comments made a few moments ago by Dr. Wolman'. He brought up the point of congressional committee coordination which I myself find to be an exasperating subject. I think because there is no clear-cut place in the administration that I personally could find, which shows PAGENO="0467" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 467 any broad scope interest in polluting control, this perhaps is a place where the Congress through this committee could make a more ag- gressive attack than is possible within the administration at this mo- ment. For that reason, I would suggest to the chairman, as I have previously, that, in addition to using its own staff resources and in addi- tion to using individual consultants who are acquired for specific guid- ance, this committee might desire to initiate study contracts with some major research firms in the Nation for the purpose of coming up with comprehensive and detailed reports on a great many topics. I know the chairman has given some thought to that matter and I do not ask him for any opinion at this time, but I would like to pose this for the benefit of my other colleagues who are present. Mr. DADDARIO. You know that I am favorably inclined toward the suggestion that you have made, Mr. Vivian. I think it has a great deal of merit and certainly will be considered as we begin putting the mass of this information together. From the standpoint of the congressional interaction, this committee has for a time directed some of our efforts toward advising the committees which have operational authority, and they have followed our advice. So we have done really what you have said-we have strengthened lines of communication. That seems to me to be a favorable development and one which we will keep in mind as we begin making recommendations in our report. Mr. Conable? Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Chairman, I don't have any questions for Dr. Wolman, but I would like to say to him that I think he has given us a very illuminating morning. We have every reason for gratitude for not only your having been here this morning but also for your having been able to comment on the testimony of many of the other witnesses who appeared before this committee. I think your testimony has been an extremely valuable addition, not only of our own knowledge but also of your thoughts on the points that have been expressed by these other men. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask now where we go from here. We presumably will have a report which I trust will draw together much of this testimony as Dr. Wolman has done. This will be used as a piece of source material for the Congress-part of the process Mr. Vivian was talking about. I am wondering what our plans are for the immediate future, this being the last day of the hearing? Mr. DADDARIO. Even though this is the last day of these hearings, it does not mean that we are not going to continue taking testimony. Many people are continuing to show an interest and we will allow them the opportunity of submitting information for the record. We have numerous questions going out to witnesses who have appeared and to others who wish to participate in this way. We must hear from the agencies. `This committee will not recess permanently when we recess today, but will be meeting again when new information is received in the weeks ahead. Mr. MOISHER. Do you have any date as a target date for a report? Mr. DADDARTO. We would have hope that we could have this done by December 1. Mr. MosnEn. December 1. PAGENO="0468" 468 ADEQUACY OF TEC}~NOLOGY FOR~ POLLTJTION ABATEMENT Mr. DADDARIO. December 1 is the target date I had in mind, Mr. Mosher, but one which will necessarily be flexible in the eveflt we find the task so great that we can't put it together in this period. The fact that we have closed our formal hearings here does not mean that we do not intend to take further information and to follow some of the channels which have opened up tous. I think there is a mass of material to be gathered and a number of unusual opportunities for this committee to make a positive contribution in this whole area. Mr. CONABLE. Are you planning, Mr. Chairman, to have any execu- tive sessions of the committee and meetings with the staff to discuss the hearings while they are still fresh in our minds and perhaps to chart future events, or do you think we should wait for the report? Mr. DADDARIO. Oh no. We will be having executive sessions. We will be sitting down with the staff and with some consultants as we get the pieces and the parts of the information together. It will entail considerable activity and work on the part of the committee. I would like to have unanimous consent from the committee that the report on pollution which Dr. Wolman previously made for the Re- search Management Advisory Panel of this committee be placed in the record following Dr. Wolman's testimony this morning. If there is no objection, it shall be done. (The document referred to follows:) PAGENO="0469" REPORT ON POLLUTION TO THE RESEARCH MANAGEMENT ADVISORY PANEL OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BY DR. ABEL WOLMAN THIE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY GENERAL SUMMARY A review of the present status of water, air, and land pollution and proposals for abatement thereof makes reasonably clear that corrective legislation has quite well outrun both factual bases for action and smooth machinery for development and regulation. One need not belabor the interesting question as to how these "crisis" laws appeared so, prolifically, except to note that they were presumably sparked by sudden awakenings of social consciousness. As time passes, the health implications of many of the underlying justifications for speedy action will become clearer. It is evident, however, that some exaggerations in this area will be dampened. That society wishes cleaner water, air, and soil is abundantly clear. Whether it is willing and able to pay for them remains to be demon- strated. Throughout the inquiry, it is manifest that the objectives need to be defined, if only in general terms, in legislative directives and in administrative rule. The wide spectrum of ultimate purposes now prevailing provides little guidance and much confusion. A more specific and less propagandistic factual basis should be developed for abatement guidance. The blanket tabulations now in print are designed for gross alarm rather than for detailed isolation of problem. We are badly in need of information on the pres~nt condition of water, air, and land-as base lines for intelligent action in the future. 0 In the field of economics, information on local capacity to pay is singularly deficient. It may be universally true that, as one observer puts it: "the problems are in the municipalities and the money is in Washington." The documentation on this presumed axiom is missing. With the growth of Federal grants-in-aid, in this field alone, over 30 were operative in 1965. A search for alternatives to these pro1ifera~ 469 PAGENO="0470" 470 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT tions via a blanket tax return to State and local governments or some other simple device may reduce rising Federal administrative costs and complicated grant machinery. The participation by private industry in research, development, and correction is very limited and too frequently ignored. This deficiency needs careful review, since many of the problems and the solutions have their origin in industrial practice. An assessment is needed of the present state of science and tech- nology in the abatement field. What and where have the research grants-in-aid produced fruitful results? An analysis of the experience to date, difficult and hazardous as this may be, should be periodically explored. Great special problems remain to be resolved, e.g., behavior of estuaries and rivers, eutrophication of lakes, storm water dis- charges, agricultural land runoff, stack gas dispersion, SO2 removal, and 002 cumulative effects. It is not surprising that, in the desire to accomplish multiple results in such varied activities as air, water and land pollution, coordination should be deficient on both the legis'ative and executive levels. It is not presumptious to suggest that in this category of action, real values of interrelationship might be discovered and implemented. At the risk of undue reiteration, the following brief suggestions for consideration are specifically noted: Legislative Seek policy clarification on goal of pollution-control endeavors. Foster establishment of such instrumentalities as conservancy dis- tricts and watershed authorities for designing, financing, and operating regional quality-management programs-include financial incentives toward this end. Invite consideration of extending the corporation tax investment- credit privilege (now 7 percent applicable to expenditures for pro- duction facilities) to stimulate waste-control installations with credit rates up to 30 percent for this type of investment. Administrative Explore means for relieving tensions in relationships with the States, particularly by substituting consultation conferences for present adversary-type proceedings. Assign by contract with the U.S. Geological Survey the task of monitoring, quality conditions and thus be armed with independent assessment of situations that may lay claim for enforcement actions. Review justification for long-term, multimillion dollar comprehen- sive basin studies of pollution and examine alternative procedures for prompt identification of problem areas and planning of corrective mlasure. Institute, in collaboration with States, periodic aerial and boat surveillance of selected areas to expedite detection and correction of visual evidences of pollution. Create procedures for handling citizen complaints that would relay such reports to States, request reply on action taken or contemplated, advise complainant of referral to State agencies, and provide follow through on disposition of matter. Fiscal Determine if congressional appropriations for municipal sewage- plant construction are realistically geared to achievement of national PAGENO="0471" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 471 aspirations. Analyze inequities in present methods of State alloca- tions. Seek an increase in grants to States for enhancing their adminis- trative capabilities, with the proviso that the States must increase their appropriations to be eligible for such aid. Research and development Assess relative effectiveness of intramural and extramural research programs as a basis for realinement of future budget allocations. Emphasize research on physiological aspects of water and air quality with respect to man. Evaluate productivity of research grants awarded to academic insti- tutions, to industry contractors, and other extramural agencies, as contrasted with in-house results. Encourage practical application of promising research findings by offering developmental grants to equipment manufacturers and others INTRODUCTION THE QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT In the last 10 years the Congress of the United States has increas- ingly interested itself in the impact of population growth, urbaniza- tion and industrialization upon the water, air and soil environment. This interest is manifested in an increasing number of legislative acts emanating from several committees in both the House and the Senate. Administrative implementations resulting from these legislative directives have now had cumulative experiences running from 10 years to less than 1 year. Sufficient activity, however~ has been engaged in to warrant a review of where we now stand in relation to the objectives originally formulated. The present document attempts ~uch a review, with full recognition of the difficulties and limitations in any effort to assess both national policy and resultant effects in fields as broad as water, air and soil pollution. Although each of these areas of interest has similar philosophical implications, they differ significantly in quantitative aspects, in geographic extent, in responsiveness to public, and private * decision and in financial loads imposed upon offenders and values upon beneficiaries. Waste output, for example, measured in gross terms of tons per day for an assumed urban unit of 1 iuihion people, has relative order of magnitude, as follows: (a) Sewage: 500,000. (b) Refuse (solid wastes): 2,000. (e) Discharges into atmosphere: 1,000. (i) Particles: 150. (ii) SO2: 150. * (iii) `Nitrogen oxides: 100. (`iv) Hydrocarbons: 100. (v) Carbon dioxide: 500. Water pollution has been chosen for major elaboration in the text which follows largely because its legislative history on the 1~ederal level is largest, the record of implementation is more extensive, the magni- tude of waste discharge is greatest, and administrative experience in PAGENO="0472" ~72 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ~ontrol and prevention `is likewise most elaborate. The problem in water pollution abatement atid the attempts at nationwide resolution thereof have, how~vcr, many analogies with those increasingly ap- parent in air and soil pollution, to which less space has been devoted in the present review. In the exposition which follows, the primary desire has been to determine- (a) What the national objectives in fact are; (b) The factual basis upon which action has been delineated; namely, the impacts of pollution upon man and upon nature in general; (c) The nature and/or the universality of standards of environ- mental quality.; (d) ~fh~ economic or money benefits resident in costs; (e) The significance of geographical diversity; (f~ Th.e validity or invalidity of crisis action; and (g) The identification of underpinning (research and develop- ment) required for more effective action and more verification of deleterious effects, if any. These purposes have been recently translated into realistic congres- sional values by Congressman Daddario in the following terms: (1) To improve judgment of alternative actions and timetables in pollution abatement legislation; (2) To assess the responsiveness of executive( agency admin- istrative action to the intent of Congress; (3) To improve the analysis of costs and benefits to the Nation in areas of subjective judgment, such as aesthetic considerations; (4) To prevent waste of funds in hasty and ill-considered implementation of pollution laws; (5) To establish baseline definitions of environmental quality, forecast future pollution loads, Sand assess the results of abatement activities; and (6) To arrange for the optimum participation of Federal, State, and local governments,, and the private sector in developing and employing advanced techniques for pollution abatement. THE NATURE OF WATER POLLUTION Pollution is an unnatural and undesirable change in either the visible or invisible characteristics of a body of water. Pollution may thus be regarded as a condition often traceable to the activities of man and subject to his control. `Hence, it is a condition deemed unsuitable at ~ given time and place for a given use. W,hcre Nature alone is responsible fgr variations in water gii~i~y~ ~ to de~ç~j~ ~ ç~s~s ~yj~c~ ~ ~ ~~j~ç~thQ c~pge~ may ~e ~ ~ener~y t ~y are po~ ~us~e~ ~ t~ cont~o~ ~y m~n who must eith~r limit ~ use oL~uçh Wate~~ ~tberwise adapt to the situation. Thus we find swampland waters used for sources of domestic sup~y whose natural acidity would cause these waters to be classified as polluted and rejected as unsuitable in other areas where waters normally are alkaline. People living along rivers that drain the flatlands of the prairie accept as a matter of course that these sluggish waterways are naturally destined to be PAGENO="0473" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 473 turbid and therefore not polluted simply because they lack the sparkle of mountain brooks that tumble across rocky beds free of any sediment. 4 simple but~us~u1 cor~cept, therefor~, i~ tç regar~I.poll~tion as ~sencçin w~er of "too much" of something~dded bvman~ To~ ~i~~so tha~ th~wate~ isdepreèia~ ~ ~ab1e ~ us~ or agriciultpral. r~gujr~rnsni~s. To~1niid~-sn that it h~s e~i~i~ ~isa~isfactorv for n~ain1aining agnatic life ~ for r~eresijomiLpiirsnits~ The mcre addition of something to a body of water does not neces. sarily constitute pollution. It is the injury caused by "too much" that gives rise to concern. From a purely technical standpoint the exercise of control consists of (1) establishing limiting concentrations on substances that are prejudicial to desired uses of the water; and (2) securing compliance with means to prevent those concentrations from being exceeded. TYPES OF POLLUTANTS The discharge of any materials into waterways that offend the aesthetic senses of sight and smell may be tagged as universally un- desirable, and therefore, classified as pollutants. Other substances potentially capable of causing undesirable changes may be broadly classified into two groups: (1) Persistent (refractory) materials.-Those whose detrimental influence is mitigated only by dilution once they are permitted to enter a body of water; and (2) Die-away (decay) substances.-Those that are capable of / being assimilated or otherwise converted to an innocuous state by biological purification processes that occur naturally in waterways. ~ong ~he per~s~ent types of pollutants would b~ incJu~ed~n~ ~ materials smth as chlorides ~nd sulfates .fr9m bri~ne nrocessrng ~n4 irrigation drainage, metallic salts, and other kinds of mineral j~idues. ~n recent years, new types of synthetically compounder çf1en~jcaJQJ~ave been added to this list. Among these, until the formulation was changed only recently, were so-called hard deterae.~s. And now there are a galaxy of p.~ticicl~s. a~ complex agriculturar chemicals that are being washed from the land into waterways. A ,~mon çh ct~j~tic ~f all o.t these substances is th~t wben~t~L ~Io~ get into a waterway thQir n~desirabJe e~ects o~~yater qu~i~ ~in be ~it~g~ited only by dilution, because either they are unaffected 1?~hrnlcgwfll th~~cay pr they ~reJngh1v ~~tant to si~~ in~u~ic~' Jn fio~ying stream~ j~he~r ~q~içen1~ratiou will build uuring~ro~i~' conditions; in i&~es they simnly accumulate without change~ ~e se~ond gr~p of pollutants are those of an organic nature~~t ~ su~c~ptihle t~ hrea own_hr d~structio~ by. ~at~ra~ ~iologic~ j~ctiçn. `~Sbwag~, for example, is quite unstable in a flowing stream,; and so are residues, from cannery operations, as well as organic indus- trial compounds such as phenols. However, as these materials are converted into simpler, inoffensive constituents this self~puriflcation process makes a demand upon the oxygen resources in the water. This may result in the depletion of oxygen levels below those suitable for the maintenance of fish life, and if the organic loading completely exhausts the available oxygen septic conditions will result. Further- more, where conversion of these organic materials produces nitrates PAGENO="0474" 474 AI~EQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT and phosphates these byproducts have a fertilizing effect on the waters with a resu~Itant proliferation of undesirable aquatic growths; notably taste- and odor.producing algae. ~Nöt all potential pollutants lend themselves to such a neat an~l `~tfhiYle clas~ification. Radioactivity, for example, does have die~away ~h~t~äcteristics; but with some radioisotopes this decay is so slow That they might moi~e properly be re~garded as a persistent form ~ `pOllution. The same might be said about certain toxic compounds. Furthermore, some substances exert synergistic effects; that is, they combine in the presence of each other to multiply their individual pollutional potential. This is the case with compounds that impart taste and odor characteristics. Phenolic materials exhibit this tendency. Some of them alone in rather high concentrations cause relatively little taste and odor difficulties; but in association with even the most minute quantities of chlorine or organic materials their undesirable effect is markedly multiplied. The conclusion to be drawn from this brief outline of the nature of pollution is that we are dealing with an exceedingly complex array of materials and of reactions. This is not to suggest, however, that. technical measures have not or cannot be contrived to cope with the situation. It does call attention tO the need for professional compe- tence of a high order to~ diagnose conditions and to prescribe appro- priate remedial measures. IMPACT AND SIGNIFICANCE O13~ POLLUTION The impact and significance of water pol1utio~n may manifest itself in different ways. As a consequence the "pollution problem" means different things to different people. ~To the public at large, pollution asserts itself in terms of offensiv~. ~ghts or smells in a river or lake, or by the evidence of an unnatux~J~ ta~ste or odor in the drinking supply. The ~utdoor enthu~iast identj~ fies pollution as any abnormal condition that interferes wjth fishing, swimming, or boating. An industriai plant manager cata~og~ pollu- ~i~$ri~ ~ somethThg that degrades the quality of water required for processing, cooling, or'steam genei~ation. And to health authorities. pollution is anything that may be classified as contamination and"~, ~otential'tbreat to public health and safety. .. `~~ecause of these multiple points of view there is an elusiveness to~ ~lre definition of pollution. Presumably they all seek, to express th.~ ~ tiotion; namely, t~at pollution is .an i~pair~ment of .aualitvt~ ~~j~4jçjal to th~ sm~~ilitv of water ~f~rAeJ1i~e~ i~es. Howeve~,3 this is no't at all apparent in the proposals relative to policy an~.pr~c-. t~'~for the control of pollution. . ` . , , "4 `Contr6l"of pollution has been historicall~.identified' as an environ-~ rtiental sanitation measure. However, it encompasses much more than this. It is much more meaningful to delineate the pollution problem as the quality-management element of a water resources program. Today it would be a narrow view, indeed, to conceive of pollution-control efforts designed only with regard to sanitation significance. `, Economic and social consequences of water quality degradation compel attention to, control measures that are referenced to goals. PAGENO="0475" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 475 beyond those associated with public health alone. For example, con- sider the limitations imposed on chloride-ion (salt) levels in waters to be ~used for drinking water. Here a concentration value up to 250 parts per million would be acceptable so far as potability is concerned. But from the standpoint of suitability for industrial purposes a waterY supply with a concentration of salt exceeding even 100 parts pe~ million may lead to accelerated corrosion of piping and equipment and be rejected for steam generation. Thus control of salt content' referenced only to consideration of drinking water standards could be criticized for not giving cognizance to the economic consequences of industrial-water suitability. Another example relates to the control of discharges containing certain metallic ions, such as copper or zinc. If limitations were drafted solely with regard to public health considerations, it is not unlikely that aquatic organisms and fish would be harmed long before the permitted concentrations in the water should present a potential hazard to humans. Without deemphasizing its public health connotations, the fact is that pollution control may be more favorably administered under arrangements that emphasize evaluation of the impact and significance of all aspects of water quality variations. This concept has been gaining acceptance in State pollution-control practice. At the present time at least 20 States have established independent agencies outside of their health departments for administration of comprehensive control programs; 10 others have created specific agencies for this purpose although they are linked organizationally with the health department. Similar motivation must be attributed to the 1965 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act which, among other things, transferred administrative authority for execution of this functioii from the Public Health Service to a new and separate agency in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.' While these changes provide administrative recognition to the inipact an~ significance of pollution control in the social consciousp~s~ and political fabr~c' of the Nation, ~much remains to be done to coñvert concepts into practice. The term "water quality management" has been advanced as a ~more precise and positive description of the goal of pollution-control practice. But notions of what it should encompass and how it mighf be implemented have lacked definition, and structure. Equall~ elusive has been ~a~i understanding of how economic analysis and optimization techniques might be applied in the design of compre- h~nsive waste-management systems. ` ` ` ` ~Méahtime, it should be no~e4, th~t,a major objective in tbe~196~ a~nendrnent to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act is the estab~ lishment of quality "standards" on all interstate rivers. Among other things, this would seem to reflect the, assumption that an adequate basis `exists for an evaluation of benefit-cost relationships in setting such standards. Such a presumption has no basis in fact. Indeed, it would appear that even the scientific basis for standard setting is inadequate because in 1963 Congress was persuaded to ~ In 19&6, many of these functions have been transferred to the Department of the Interior. PAGENO="0476" 476 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATE1\~tENP appropriate $4 million `for the creation of two national research laboratories "to establish reliable water quality standards." (See p. 64 "A Staff Report to the Committee on Public Works, U.S. Senate," 88th Cong., 1st sess.) These laboratories currently are in the desigR ~tage and presumably will soon be under construction. Nevertheless, the 1965 amendments specify that unless the States have established standards by June 30, 1967, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare will do so. Presumably this will leave little for the two new "standards-research" laboratories to contribute after they are built, if decisioumaking on standards matches the deadlines set forth in the new legislation. There is enough visible evidence in waterways of the Nation-or at least in sections of them-to demonstrate the necessity for aggres- sive action in halting gross and obvious degradation of water re- sources. Public indignation is aimed primarily at this manifestation of pollution. The data at hand are not at all convincing, however, that the current situation is one of national crisis or that gross degra- * dation is universal. Certainly, no epidemics of waterborne disease have occurred. While there is reason to believe the depreciation of water quality is producing, in some instances, undesirable economic con- sequences, the assessment of such effects has not yet been sufficiently advanced to make meaningful' estimates of benefits versus the cost of appropriate control measures. STATUS OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY The evils of water pollution have been with us a long time. But so have the means to ameliorate most of these evils. There are no t~chnological obstacles, for example, in halting gross and obvious ppllution. If raw sewage is being discharged from a community, or if cyanides. and phenols are reaching a waterway from an industrial operation, the resulting pollution cannot be attributed to a lack of scientific acumen or technical tools .f or dealing with it. The abu~ ~terways~ represents a lack Qf soci~ re~ponsib~jty. ~`I[n ~`rief, and by way of preface to these comments on the status of science and technology, it can be asserted that we already know much more than we are actually applying to improve the condition of our waterways. This is not to suggest, however, that basic re- search and the development of techniques of water quality manage- thent should' not command vigorous attention. The question is: `Are we addressing our talents most creatively and advantageously? With respect to scientific matters, not of least interest is a better u~d~standi~g ~ the.. ~p~viq~ .o~~.ter~ay~ under v~v~g ~p~ç~s ~p91lutionJoadin2~ aqd the ~evelo.pn~ep~t of "mo4els" for .predic~j~ ~jthanae~ ,Jresent empirical formulas and the translation of results from experiments in laboratory bottles fall short of providmg the kinds of information that are needed for more economical design of control measures. ~` `~ Equally challenging is the conduct of a comprehensive inquiry' into the physiological aspects of water quality~. The major objective of such an investigation would be to determine' if unsuspected public health hazards may exist as a result of trace constituents from indus- trial and other' waste discharges that may `find their ~way into water- PAGENO="0477" ADEQUACY OFTECENOLOGY FOit POLLUTIO~N ABATEMENT 477 ways. Principal attention thus far has been focused on the gross toxicity created by certain compounds. Questions relating to the possible subtle physiologiöal effects of small quantities of metallic ions, chemical compounds and certain natural-occurring substances in water have not been answered. Concerning the public health implications of water quality it would also be desirable to intensify research on disinfection techniquee. With good reason, heavy reliance has been placed on the employment of chlorine for this purpose in the United States. Its virtues as a bactericide are well established. But the same cannot be said con- cerning the effectiveness of chlorine as a virucide. Present concern with virus infections that may be transmitted through water carriage (hepatitis, for example) would seem to justify emphasis on the e~plora- tion of techniques applicable to virus disinfection. Technological developments Fundamental principles for the purification of waste waters dev~el- oped a century ago-gravity settling of solids, chemical precipitation and biological oxidation-continue to be applied to this day. But this is no reason to presume that technology has been static or that current practices are outmoded or inadequate. Significant advances have been made in design of components and in operating techniques. And it can be said that increasing advantage is being taken of new developments in physics, chemistry, electronics, mechanical engi- neering, and allied technologies. For example, recent discoveries associated with the performance of polymer chemicals known as polyelectrolytes is already finding appli- cation for the improvement of coagulation practice in waste treatment~ Use of chemicals for treatment of sewage is an old art and was widely exploited in England in the 1880's and shortly thereafter in theUnited States. Current experimentation with the use of polymers suggests that we are on the threshold of a new era in the employment of flocculation techniques for pollution control. Meantime, under the leadership of the Public Health Service a host of so-called advanced waste-treatment processes are being investigated. This program is oriented primarily to long-range needs for safeguarding water quality, when conventional methods of waste treatment, coupled with reliance upon the assimilative capacity of streams, may not prove adequate to meet ultimate requirements for multiple reuse of water. However, the work has short-range implica- tions as well in providing means for removal of so-called refractory pollutants. Basic objectives of the program are to develop processes for treating waste effluents in such fashion as to (1) concentrate the contaminants and provide for their permanent disposal; and (2) produce purified effluents of such quality that it is suitable for direct reuse. Among the possibilities for accomplishing these obj ectives are techniques employing principles of adsorption, electrodialysis, emulsion separation, evaporation, extraction with solvents, foaming, freezing, hydration with gas, ion exchange, and oxidation. From the standpoint of technological adequacy this research pro- gram is believed to be "doomed for success," because some of the processes already show capability of meeting the obj ectives. The c5-~24;O--~6&--vo1. 1-÷----31 PAGENO="0478" 478 AQUACY~OF T~ NQIQG~.POB POLLUTION ABATEMENT meas~irc of success will be based not only. on effective removal of substances, but on whether the cost is worth the benefits. For every situatior~ this determination will be unique, depending on the character of the wastes to be treated, on geographical and logistical factors and on the intensity of water reuse that is desired. Science and technology are not static in water pollution control. Processes an4 equipment are being made available effectively with current problen~s and for those that are foreseeable in the near future .IBSI~T~T~NG KEY ISS~LYES Water ~Qllutjo Emerging ~f~oi~ the cu~rentrev'iew are several ke~ issues relevnnt to~ national policy,. For purp¼~es of discussion they may be classified into four categories_-.iegjsl.gtj~;.fiscai, institutional, and technological. (1) Legislative issues Neijthe~ the original Federal legislation on control of water pollution nor its newly' amended version can be regarded as explicit with respect. to the national gqal. ~Nowhere is pollution defined. The prea~nble of original legislation concerned itself primarily with the exercise of )urisdiction declarmg it "~ * * to be the policy of the Congress to recognize, preserve, and protect the primary respon- sibilities and rights of the States in preventing and, controlling water pollution * * Amended legislation signed by the President on October 3, 1965, presumably attempts to clarify matters by inserting an introductory sentence to the existing preamble that says: "The purpose of this act is to enhance the quality and value of our water resources and to establish a national policy for the prevention, control, and abatement of water pollution." But, again what is meant by the term "pollu-. tion"?. Defining pollution.-For the execution of a program of control-for giving meaningful direction to the attainment of a national goal- there is need to reach understanding as to what constitutes pollution. Is it the discharge of anything in our waterways? Or is it the dis-. charge of "too much" of something? If so, how much is too much? Is pristine purity the goal we are seeking? Or do we settle for some.. thing less, such as maintenance of quality conditions that avoid a nuisance-that satisfy water supply needs-that are hospitable to fish life-that are suitable for recreational purposes? Should the objective be an efficient adjustment to the attainment of water quality that will take into account the benefits and costs of alterna- tive accommodations? Should the objective be the same throughout the Nation? In fact, is it practicable or even possible for the ob- jective to be universally the same? Until agreement is reached on what we are aiming for, the admin-. istration of pollution control will continue to be-as it is now-en- veloped in confusion with respect to ultimate objective. It serves, no useful purpose to asseverate, as has one of our highest officials in the Federal service, the following viewpoint on the objective: There are still some who hold to the belief that the utilization of a stream as a receptacle of waste is a legitimate use of water, consistent with water pollution control policy. * * * Whatever may have been acceptable or unavoidable in PAGENO="0479" A~EQVACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR ~OLLtTION ABATEMENT 479 years past, however, it is clear that our goal now and in the years ahead, in an age of vast ixldustrial expansion and rapid urbanization, must be to prevent any sort of water pollution.2 While one might agree philosophically with the conclusion, there still remains the question of what kind and what amount of "waste" constitutes pollution. In brief, pollution is a relative matter. For all practical purposes, as previously noted, pollution of water is an alteration of quality prejudicial to the suitability of the water for defined uses. If the addition of a waste effluent does not adversely affect desired uses, such waters might well not be considered as polluted. No clue may be found in Federal legislation, nor in the pronounce~ ments or practices that pertain to its application, that provides enlight~' enment on how pollution should b~ defined. It might be noted~ however, that in drafting a Suggested State Water Pollution Control Act based on the experiences of successful State agencies, the Federal Department .of Health, Education, and Welfare punctiliously asserts: "The most important definition in the act is the definition of pollution." While the Federal agency saw ,merit in laying down a detailed guideline for the States it has seeii no virtue thus far in adopting a similar guideline, for its own conduct, Meantime, the Congress and the public are barraged with~ state~ ments from the U.S. Public Health Service that stream pollution is increasing and that "billions" Of dollars will be needed for corrective measures. So long as the Federal authorities sidestep the issue of defining what is meant by "pollution" there is reason to question the validity of appraisals of the magnitude of the problem and the esti~. mates of costs associated with remedial action. Who is in charge?--Ano'ther key issue with respect to legislative intent relates to the question: Who is in charge? This involves the sensitive area of relationships between Federal and State authorities and those who are subj ect to regulation. Laid to rest in 1948 with the passage of the first Federal Water Pollution Control Act-but only after years of prolonged debate- was the matter of whether or not the National Government should assert a direct role in stream cleanup efforts. The decision was yes. But in reaching this conclusion in Congress envisioned a partnership wherein Federal actions would be designed to abet and supplement State efforts, but not to supersede them unless a State actually defaulted in meeting its obligations. Three sections of the original and recently amended Federal Water Pollution Control Act are positive with respect to congressional intent. One of these is the preamble, which declares it to be national policy to recognize, preserve, and protect the primary responsibilities and right of the States in preventing and controlling water pollution. 2 ~ M. Quigley, .~ss1stant Secretary of flEW, i~ ~ 1961 ad~lresa before the Izaak Walton League In Chicago. 8 As set forth In the May 1965 revisIon of the act we read: "`Pollution' means such contamination, or other alteration of the physical, chemical, or biological properties, of any waters of the State, Inciudi g change in temperature, taste, color, turbidity, or odor of the waters, or such discharge of any liquid, gaseous, solid, radioactive, or other substance into any waters of the State as will or is likely to create a nuisance or render such waters harmful, detrimental, or injurious to public health, safety, or welfare, or to dOmestic, comrner. cial industrial agricultural recreatlohal or other legitimate beneficial uses or to livestock wild anlm,sls binis, fish, or other aquatic ~iife." PAGENO="0480" 480 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Another section, relating to interstate matters, calls upon the Federal authorities to "encourage compacts between States for the prevention and control of water pollution." Finally, in that section of the act dealing with Federal enforcement, ths procedures outlined are designed to stimulate and not attempt to emasculate the exercise of State responsibilities. These sections of the act in particular, and other provisions in general, would seem to leave no doubt that it was the intention of the Congress for the Federal Government to employ its resources to act in concert and not in competition with State efforts. There is reason to question, however, that the conduct of several components. of Federal activity are achieving this purpose. Perhaps the major departure from the intent of the Congress has occurred in the conduct of relationships on enforcement. Originally, the act provided for a four-step procedure in situations where a Gov- ernor may request intervention on interstate pollution, or when the Secretary of HEW believesthat such pollution may exist. The first step is the calling of a conference of such State and inter~ state agencies that may be involved for the purpose of exchanging views and examining evidence relating to the alleged conditions. The second step is a determination by the Secretary, based on the evidence, as to what, if any, remedial measures should be undertaken by the appropriate State agency; 6 months were allowed for the State to initiate corrective action. If at the end of this 6-month period the Secretary was not satisfied that appropriate action has been taken he is empowered to call a public hearing. Based on findings of the hearing board a formal notice and schedule for compliance would then be issued to those persons (public or private) who are causing pollution. This consti~ tuted the third step in procedures spelled out in the act. The fourth and final step open to the Secretary, if compliance. lagged behind the established schedule, was to refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney General for prosecution. What has troubled the States is that these carefully drawn proce- dures, designed to encourage the exercise of their responsibilities and to provide backup support, have been bastardized in a manner that does exactly the opposite. What has occurred is this: The Federal authorities have not sought to confer with the State agencies in the sense that the parties concerned are brought together for an intimate exchange of facts and viewpoints. Instead, the so-called conference is conducted virtually as a public hearing, generally in the ballroom of a large hotel and with advance publicity guaranteed to generate the attendance of hundreds of people. These meetings have been shrouded with the atmosphere of an ad- versary proceeding. Formal presentations of the Federal authorities often leave no alternative for the States than to adopt a defensive attitude. Conditions are hardly conducive for dispassionate.. appraisal of the issues involved and their resolution. Quite to the contrary the ~ State conferees are confronted with "recommendations and findings" that are normally formulated in advance of the conference by the Federal authorities and therefore not necessarily reflective of sub- sequent State evidence. 4) The amendments to the Federal act, which were signed into law only on October 3, 1965, call for a fresh approach to Federal enforcement PAGENO="0481" ADEQUAC~ OF TECIINOLOOY FOE POLLVTION ABAPEMENT 481 ventures through the promulgation of water-quality s~tandards. The States are given the initiative. However, it remains to be seen if the proceedings so carefully spelled out for this purpose will be executed in accord with their intent. Here again the act specifies that a confer- ence be conducted among State and Federal agencies as a first step in the resolution of differences. And only after this step is it ordained that a public hearing be undertaken. Apparently sensitive to the dissatisfaction previously registered with the Congress by the States because of violation of the style and sub- stance of so-called conferences, Congressman John A. Blatnik, one of the authors of the amendments, carefully stressed that the first step to be taken by the Secretary of HEW in a matter under dispute, was the conduct of "an informal conference with all parties concerned." Unfortunately the bill itself does not contain the word "informal." With respect to that section of the act calling for encouragement of the formation of compacts among States for the control of interstate pollution there has been no apparent diligence displayed by the Federal administrators in furthering this. At the present time eight interstate agencies are recognized by the Public Health Service as eligible for Federal aid because of this probable identification with some aspect of water pollution control. All of them owe their existence solely to the initiative of the States involved; and the four that are concerned ex- clusively with pollution abatement came into existence prior to enact- ment of the Federal act in 1948. If the Federal authorities have sought to encourage compacts, the results have not yet manifested themselves. (~) Fiscal iss~'ues The once-traditional notion that installation of municipal sewage- treatment facilities is solely a local responsibility to be paid for with community funds no longer is valid. Beginning in 1956 the Congress established the pattern of appropriating annual sums to furnish Federal financial assistance to communities for this purpose. For the first 5 years the annual total was $50 million; but this has been gradually increased and for fiscal 1966 the amount is $91 million. Originally intended to stimulate sewage-treatment undertakings in the smaller, financially distressed communities, a grant of Federal funds is now regarded as a prerequisite by virtually all communities before such projects are initiated. Originally the size of a project grant was limited to 30 percent of the cost, but in no case to exceed $600,000; the latter limit has now been raised to $1,200,000 for a single project. Multicommunity projects are eligible for as much as $4,800,000 or double the amount previously authorized. A few States also provide limited financial assistance. In Pennsyl- vania a unique plan was inaugurated in 1956. It provides that every community upon completion of sewage treatment is eligible for an annual State subsidy of up to 2 percent of the cost of the project. The amounts made available for distribution each year is dependent upon legislative appropriations. In November 1965 the New York State electorate supported overwhelmingly a bond issue of $1 billion. The proceeds will permit the State to allot to a community a 30-p~rcent share of the construction cost and prefinance a 30-percent Federal share, later reimbursable to the State by the Federal Government. PAGENO="0482" 482 AP~QUACY O~ TECHNOLOGY `FOR POIALt7TION ABATEMENT Taken together the State ~and Federal grants in New York State are intended to defray up to 60 percent of t~e cost of local projects. The estimated cost of the 6~year program is $1.7 billion. While there have been doubts that communities are incapable of financing sewage disposal requirements (for example, using revenue bonds retire4 from sewer service charges), the principle is now well established that a substantial share of this burden should be carried by the Federal Government. And it appears to be only a matter of time before similar convictions will arise with respect to supplemental funds from the State. All of this has evolved without any documen- tation anywhere to demonstrate capacity or inability to pay yia local service charges. Disposition of Federal funds.-With respect to Federal expenditures for implementing the Water Pollution Control Act two key issues may be identified: (1) How much money should be appropriated; and (2) for what specific purposes shall it be allocated? In discussing these issues an examination of the appropriations for fiscal 1966 is illuminating. Here we find that $91 million is allocated for construction grants, an increase of only 1 percent over the previous budget. For all other purposes (planning, research, enforcement, training, etc.), the operating budget is $44.5 million, an increase of 27~ percent over last year. If the national goal is to expedite the abatement of pollution-and a major route to accomplish this is by constructing adequate control facilities at sources of pollution-then it would appear that the Federal amounts allocated for this purpose are out of balance with the funds made available for Federal administration. And if budget allocations and percentage increases may be regarded as appropriate criteria of where emphasis is being placed, it would appear that con~ struction funds hardly ranked in importance with the emphasis placed on research, planning, and administration. Another aspect of budgetary decision that claims scrutiny is the relative weighing accorded to appropriations for Federal enforcement with tho~e allocated~for strengthening State administration of control. here we find $4' million for Federal activities. However, only $5 million is earmarked for distribution among 54 State and territorial ~ageticies and 8 interstate agencies Incidentally, it might also be not~d that while funds for Federal enforcement activities were increased 8 perbent, there was no increase in the total allotment for the States. Among the conclusitns that might be drawn is that Fe4eral money is being harbored to broaden Federal control at the ~xpense of strengthening the role of the States. This, of course, is contrary to the expressed declaration of the act. * Construction grants program .-T he adoption of grants-in-aid may be regarded as an acknowledgment that Federal enforcement action could not be any more effective than State efforts in obtaining mumci- pal compliance ~unless it was accompanied by infUsions of financial ~ubsidy. This is a point to be kept in mind when assessments are `made of th~, relative merits of Federal versus State performance in dealing with the complexities of stream pollution. Lacking the sugar of subsidy to sweeten public attitudes toward compliance the evidence suggests that during the first' 8 years of its trial the Federal impact added little to what was already being accom- plished by many of the States. PAGENO="0483" AtEQUACY O~' TEC~OLOG~ FOR POLLtJTION A:BAPEMENP 483 In 1956 the Congress made the first appropriation for subsidies to municipalities. The amount allocated to each State for distribution to municipalities was, and still is, proportioned to a formula based on a ratio of population coupled with per capita income of that State to the entire United States. However well this may satisfy equitable distribution from a political standpoint, it has not been' well suited to meeting pollution-abatement needs. A recent amendment wifi seek to remedy this in part by providing that, when funds should be appro- priated in excess of current authorization, the excess will be allotted on the basis of population. Under the prevailing allocation scheme it turns out that States whose sewered population is quite high may not be eligible for much more Federal aid to stimulate treatment plant construction than are, for example, the Virgin Islands or the island of Guam. Each of the latter are eligible for about $1,500,000. Yet, a State like Indiana receives only $2 million. Since few municipalities now show any dis- position to build treatment works without a Federal grant, the resàlt is that State prograflis are geared to the amount of Federal money allocated for distribution among municipal claimants. It may well be concluded that consideration should be given to a more rational procedure for allocating Federal funds to municipalities. Up to and including 1965, over 30 Federal grant-in-aid authorizations for State and local subsidy have been provided. In each instance, elaborate administrative machinery had to be established to handle these in accordance with legislative intent and with maximum equity~ Such machinery normally requires at all levels of Government, in- creasing numbers of advisory groups, fiscal reviewers, auditors, and post-checkers. It is about time to reconsider this whole procedure and hopefully evolve a blanket tax return to local areas to be used for the purposes intended. When it is recognized that, in addition to the grants in the pollution abatement category, myriads of other grants have been initiated, it is no surprise .that many officials are appalled by the labyrinth of Federal supplements through which he must now wander. The search for a simpler fiscal relationship does not denigrate the leadership fuiIction of the Federal Government or the unevenness of correctives in the Nation. The general grant, sometimes used in the depression thirties, was attractively simple in contrast to today's increasingly intricate web of Federal grants. Unfortunately, the flexible general grant has declined, while the closely controlled cate- gorical grants have multiplied greatly. Quite aside from exploring possibilities of a more rational formula for allocating Federal aid-but allied to it-is a recommendation that an appudsal be made of the merits and shortcomings of the se~vage-disposal grant program. Ten years of experience have been accumulated on this relatively new form of Federal aid. How effec.- tive has it been? Are appropriations realistically geared to aspira- tions? What can be learned from the experiences of various States who have acted as "middlemen" in the distribution of funds? These questions are merely illustrative of what it would be useful to know, in further development of national policy. A similar inquiry would be justified in connection with Federal aid made available to the States for administrative purposes. PAGENO="0484" `484 v~ci' o~ T~cHNOLOGY FOES PO~T4~TJTLON ~(BAT~MENT Incentives for industrial waste control.-Not the least of fiscal policy issues relating .to pollution abatement has been the question of pro- viding incentives for industrial establishments. More than a quarter century has elapsed since the National Resources Planning Board, in response to a request from President Roosevelt for recommenda- tions on national policy for pollution abatement, suggested that eonsideration be given to providing grants to municipalities and loans to industry as a means for accelerating stream cleanup. Grants-in-aid to municipalities became an established policy in 1956. However, little sentiment has been crystallized for providing construction loans or any other form of subsidy to industry. The prevailing view has been that the private sector of the economy must recognize the burden of preventing pollution as an element of its production costs. At various times proposals have been suggested in the Congress to offer industries the privilege of accelerated depreciation on capital investments made for pollution abatement. The Treasury Depart- ment has not favored this special-classification proposal. Industries have had mixed feelings regarding the virtues of this type of rapid writeoff of corporation taxes. Large corporations, for example, have pointed out that they find it of dubious benefit as to whether they pay required taxes sooner or later. They point out rapid tax amorti- zation is hardly an incentive; it does nothing more than provide some flexibility with respect to payments. Several States (such as Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Oregon, Idaho, Wisconsin, North Carolina, and New York) do offer a subsidy to industry in the form of property-tax exemptions for land and equipment devoted to air or water pollution abatement purposes. The resulting tax benefits appear to be `minimal. It is questionable whether this incentive can be credited with having much of an impact on the, decision of an industry to undertake a pollution a~hatement program. An incentiv,e proposal receiving increased attention is the imposition of a sliding scale of charges related to the quality and quantity charac- teristics of industrial effluents contributed to streams. The smaller `the amount of polluting material contributed the lower would be the charge imposed. Advocates for the adoption of this policy see this as a means for furnishing every polluter with an. immediate and well- defined incentive to minimize his liability and the automatic result would be cleaner streams. Not so clear, however, is what would happen to the condition of streams where contributors of pollution might find it more convenient to pay the chsrges rather than take measures to reduce the pollution. And not yet ifiuminated is the matter of who could collect the charges (the State in which the water is located or the Federal Government?) and for what purpose it is intended that the acquired revenues be used. At the 1965 White House Conference on Natural Beauty, one speaker envisioned possibilities of the Federal Government collecting such a tax to sustain a revolving fund of several billion dollars, which would be available for beautification purposes. The virtues associated with employment of "effluent charges" as an industrial waste control incentive seem to have originated from a misinterpretation of practices in the Ruhr Valley of Germany. Here PAGENO="0485" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 485 a group of watershed associations-organized as cooperative under- takings, the membership of which includes municipalities, industries, recreation interests, and other quasi-public and private constituencies with a stake in water use-provide a variety of services to insure optimum use of the resources. Among other things, these associations offer a choice to its members of treating their wastes individually to a required standard or to utilize centralized treatment facilities built by the association. In- dustries that elect to satisfy their waste effluent control requirements in full or in part by utilizing association operated treatment facilities pay a charge based on the quality and quantity characteristics of their waste. But it is to be noted that this charge is made for a service rendered; namely, the treatment or modification of a waste- water effluent. Furthermore, the judgments made with respect to maintaining certain quality conditions in a stream, based on decisions that reflect a weighing of benefits and costs, is not made by a regula- tory agency remote from the region, but by the members of the asso- ciation who represent the various interests in the valley and are assessed for their share of this cooperative undertaking. The attempt to transpose the Ruhr Valley practice of "effluent charges". as an incentive device for control of pollution, without giving recognition to institutional arrangements through which such charges might be made effective for their intended purpose, represent a grave misunderstanding of the procedure. Actually, the effluent-charge philosophy employed in Germany should be regarded as representing nothing more nor less than the application to an entire river system of the principle of municipality imposed waste-load surcharges. The latter practice has won increas- ing favor in the United States since its introduction at the turn of the century, as an equitable means for sharing costs of treatment facilities among industrial users of a community provided service and f or encouraging reduction of pollution loads at their source. Here again it should be reiterated that the incentive is not a tax, it is for a service rendered and the decision to utilize this service or to provide alternate means is optional upon the producer of the waste. What is to be emphasized is that the entity imposing the surcharge- in this case a municipality or metropolitan sewerage authority-~ear- marks and employs this revenue for building and operating facilities to satisfy a specific and universal requirement. To apply this principle to a river watershed or original area requires a type of institutional arrangement that has not received much attention in the United States. What this involves will be discussed later. Incentives to industry may also stimulate undue emphasis upon waste treatment, rather than upon "in-house" reduction or even elimination of wastes. The private sector of our economy has not been entirely deprived of governmental aid in coping with industrial pollution control. A sub- stantial amount of industrial waste (perhaps as much as half of the total produced) is already being handled in municipal sewage treat- ment works. These municipal facilities are eligible for Federal sub~, sidies amounting to at least 30 percent of their cost. In addition, several States provide some form of limited financial aid to communities for treatment facilities. Therefore, wherever industries pay .a pro rata PAGENO="0486" 4~6. ADEQUACY OF TECI~NOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT share for the use of municipal facilities their costs are reduced in proportion to the subsidies already received by the municipality from Federal and State funds. Furthermore, while industry has regarded it a dubious blessing that Government research may develop solutions to industrial waste con-j trol problems, which heretofore may have been conveniently cataloged as technologically unsolvable, the fact is that as insistence mounts for correction of these problems industry may benefit from findings that have emanated from Government supported research. In terms of dollar expenditures, federally sponsored research is not insignificant, In fiscal 1966, for example, the budget of the Public Health Service, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control, has allocated $6 million for research grants (an increase of 44 percent) for in-house research, technical, and training activities. Industry must regard itself as one of the beneficiaries of whatever these in- vestigations contribute to the art and technology of pollution control. (3) Institutional issues With respect to institutional arrangements the issues that have dminated public debate are: (1) On what level of go'~ernment,-Federal or State-should primary relia~ice be pThced for the `~dministration of pollution cøntrol~ and*~ (2) *here in the Federal Establishment among the several agencies engaged with water resources activities is it appropriate to lodge responsibilities for pollution control? Preoccupation with these issues has submerged attention to the potentialities of other institutional arrangements for effectuating pollution control. Considering the billions of dollars that are esti- mated to be spent for this purpose, and taking into account short- comings inherent in both State and Federal regulatory approaches, it would be in the national interest to explore the potentialities of various instrumentalities that could be suited to the management of river quality. The conservancy' district' procedures pioneered in Ohio and the recently enacted legislation in Michigan to promote establishment of watershed councils and river district management agencies are illus- trative of institutional devices that claim attentiOn in the search for more effective solutions to the "pollution" problem than are currently employed. In this connection, who can say that the potentialities of the inter- state compact have been adequately proved? This device has unique capabilities, a number of which have not yet been exploited in water resources management. ` ` More on this matter of institutional arrangement will be discussed in the section of,this report dealing with mechanisms for the imple- mCntation of policy. Something further needs to be said at this point about the two issues that have captured primary attention. Issue No. 1.-As matters now stand, it appears destined that water pollution control affairs will be increasingly dominated by activities and actions on. the Federal level of Government. Along with similar tendencies in other Federal-State `relationships, the central fact is that in pollutiOn control: State prerogatives are being attenuated rather than strengthened. PAGENO="0487" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 487 While it must be acknowledged that administration of pollution abatement in some States may in the past have left a good deal to be desired, this can hardly be accepted as evidence that Federal control must be thrust upon all States. Yet this view is being aggressively promoted. As a result two things are happening. State agencies instead of being inspired to put forth their best efforts are either being em- broiled in jurisdictional matters and thus rendered less effective, or they are being diverted from matters they regard as having priority in order to accommodate to Federal edicts. The Federal bureaucracy is swelled in manpower (often by stripping the best from State agen~. cies) and financial resources to undertake what the States are being handicapped in doing. Those who understand the intricacies-technical, economic, and social-of pollution-control endeavors, question the propriety and the desirability of the National Government assuming the central role for ~ecisionmaking and responsibility. Among other things, they point to the fact that contrary to undocumented pronouncements of those who have recently "discovered" the pollution problem, the record of many State agencies has been outstanding in dealing with it. The record shows, for example, that long before pollution became a high-pitched political issue-and with only modest outlays for administration and with no subsidies available to municipalities- substantial progress was being made by the States in advancing water pollution control. In this connection one might scrutinize accomplish- ment prior to 1956 in such States as Illinois, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, Iowa, California, and Pennsylvania, to name some of those with outstanding records. (In Illinois, for example, less than 2 percent of the population had sewage treatment in 1929; by 1964 the percentage had increased to 98.6. Other States have equally impres- sive gains.) Some 30 years ago, as revealed in testimony before a congressional hearing, ships in Philadelphia could not embark passengers on the evening before sailing because the stench of the Delaware River was unbearable; such a condition does not prevail today. Reports of the Chicago Sanitary Commission a half century ago show that the streams in that metropolitan area were so grossly polluted with sewage solids that chickens, dogs, and cats could scurry back and forth across the scum-encrusted surface. Not many years later Chicago began the construction of sewage-treatment facilities that today are acclaimed as one of the "seven wonders of the engineer- ing world." These examples are cited not to suggest that everything is well in the control of water pollution. But they might serve as documenta~ tion that solutions to the problem were being effectively advanced somewhat antecedent to the last few years and at places in the Nation rather remote from Washington. What is still lacking is a realistie documentation of the present 4uality of our waters and of the public and private waste treatment plants actually built over the last 5 to 10 years. Issue No ~ -An assessment of the appropriate place within the Pederal establishment to lodge responsibilities for pollution control calls for a bit of background. PAGENO="0488" 488 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT The current formal transfer of these responsibilities from a division within the Public Health Service to a separate division within the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, is heralded by its proponents as an "upgrading" of this activity. Other observers interpret this move as leading to an estrangement of cooperative relationships in technical aid and services between the Federal Government and the States, which had long been fostered under the auspices of the Public Health Service. Beginning in 1912 that agency created a Streams Investigation Station in Cincinnati, the purpose of which was to conduct funda- mental researchon water pollution and to assist the States in advancing their programs. Over the years this modest venture produced the richest dividends. Cincinnati became the Mecca, not only for State personnel, but for people throughout the world who sought knowledge on pollution control techniques. It was an acknowledgment of the competence and capabilities of the Public Health Service in the field of water pollution that led to designation of this agency as the appropriate one to administer the Water Pollution Control Act, first passed in 1948. The act was designed to strengthen State administration and specifically cited the intention to provide Federal technical aid and services toward this end. In this area of endeavor the PHS not only excelled,' but had developed a nice sense of rapport among the States. Conservation groups who h~d fought for the passage of legislation that would have supplanted State control with Federal control, not only were dissatisfied with the act, but also with the fact that by tradition the PHS was more scientifically oriented than regulatory minded. Thus what might have pleased the States in terms of a partnership relationship was not at all acceptable to those who favored aggressive Federal control. When the act was amended in 1956 to strengthen enforcement provisions under the auspices of the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, the designation of .the Surgeon General of the PHS to administer the act was continued. But in 1961 when further changes were made to emphasize enforcement the administrative respon- sibilities were given solely and directly to the Secretary of HEW. Although throughout these changes the Secretary continued to use the PHS for conduct of the program, it gradually became apparent to the States that they were actually dealing with two different entities in PIIS-a new group intent only on enforcement aspects and the original component that now retained only those duties related to the technical and grant-in-aid elements of the program. As time went on the pace of intervention in matters relating to enforcement `increased and it became quite obvious that the dominant thrust of PHS activity was to be in the direction of compliance proceedings. The 1965 amended version of the previously twice amended act establishes a Water Pollution Control Administration in the Depart.~ ment of Health, Education, and Welfare. Thus the Public Health Service has been formally stripped of all administrative concern with pollution control. Whether or not this event represents an "upgrading" of the status of water pollution affairs in the Federal hierarchy remains to be seen. Some observers believe that this is only an interim step. To give PAGENO="0489" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 489 substance to this view is the introduction of a bill in the Congress by Senator Frank Moss (S. 2435 submitted on August 19, 1965) to redesignate the Department of the Interior as the Department of Natural Resources and to transfer certain agencies to the Department. Among the activities recommended for transfer are the water-pollution control functions of the Secretary of HEW.4 The arguments supporting such a change follow this line of reason- ing: Pollution of water has an impact on the economy of the Nation that goes beyond considerations of health. Hence, the administration of control measures should be centered in an agency that has broad experience in matters relating to water resources. The Interior De- partment would appear to qualify in this respect by virtue of the fact that several of its component units-such as the Geological Survey, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Reclamation Service-have long been identified with varied aspects of water uses and develop- ment. Furthermore, its Bureau of Mines is a logical unit for assign- ment to mine-acid drainage control. What the future holds in the area of relocation of administration of Federal policy is difficult to prophesy. (4) Technological issues Any discussion on technological issues should be prefaced with some comment on the state of the art. It is not uncommon to hear it said that nothing new has been added to sewage-treatment tech- nology for a half a century. 1~t is true that no spectacular innovations have occurred with te~ect to basic ~roçessing components, This may be regarded a~ ~ib~te to~e engineers and sciç~j~ts who ~~onee~ed ~t~e art. They were so thorough in uncovering fundamentaF principles a~ so in- genious in applying them to practice that j~atter-dav coribition~. ~y be regarded primarily as refinements of comppnent design an~ ~perating~ techniques _But this is no cause for belief that metho4s ~ri~outmoded or inadequate; they may not be fully employed, b1~t are available. The technologicaT issue that does command attention is a tardiness in the application of a system-design concept in the planning and operation of stream pollution control endeavors. The challenge here is to devise and apply a combination of measures to attain desired quality at the least cost. The traditional approach to pollution control has relied primarily upon the installation of treatment facilities at points of waste d~s- charge. Actually there are a variety of methods for mitigating pollutional effects and enhancing the quality of waters. Among them may be cited low-flow augmentation, a proposition that is currently being promoted by interests allied to the construc- tion of multiple-purpose reservoirs. Operationally, the practice of augmentation has not yet been effectively geared to quality control requirements. Another alternative is the mechanical reaeration of streams. This technique has not yet been given the consideration that it should un- doubtedly command in view of the progress made in the development of aeration equipment. ~ This was accomplished by Presidential Order in 1966. PAGENO="0490" 490 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION AEATEMENT Still another technical alternative is the storage of waste-water effluents and scheduling of their release in accord with variations of streamfiow. This practice is creatively suited to take advantage of hydrologic variability in the management of river quality. These are but a sampling of technological methods that may be used separately or in combination to optimize pollution control endeavors. The opportunity of applying them is hindered, however, because Gov- ernment policy and the existing laws and institutions for its imple- mentation are wedded almost exclusively to the exercise of regulatory functions; namely, the promulgation of prohibitions and their enforce- ment. tTnder these circumstances conditions are not compatible for the exploitation of the new tools and techniques for systems design and operation in the management of river quality. Among other technological matters that lay claim for attention from the standpoint of public policy, there are three that deserve comment: Storm-sewer separation, deep-well disposal of wastes, and mine-acid drainage control. Storm-sewer separation.-On the basis of what must be regarded as incomplete evidence of benefits to be derived the Federal panic button has been pushed concerning the pollution of rivers caused by overflow from community sewers during, storm periods. The Congrese has been told that cities must be equipped with two separate sewer sys- ,tems-tbe existing network modified to e~c1ude the eittry Qf anything but sewage and a new one added for the e,colusive purpose of cond~içt- in~ rain runoff directly to the river The cost-to be financed~by substantial Federal grants-is estimated to amount' `tp'1'2&' `to'l&O billion, or even more. (See "Pollution Effects of Stormwater and Overflows From Conthined Sewer Systems," U.S. Department of ~Heulth, Education, and Welfare, Public `Health' Service Publicatinif No. 1246; November 1964.) `~V'ith commefid~ble prudence the Congress has not yet committe~t itself to wholehearted acceptance of this proposal. ~` `But `it did pr~' `vide in the 1965 amendment to the Water Pollution Control Act its authorization of $20 .miliioi~ annually for the next 3 years `for the purpose of assisting demonstration projects related to methods for con- trolling discharge of inadequately treated wastes from sewers that parry storm water. The issue is this: If storm water runoff is segregated will the bene- fits be commensurate with the investment required? ,All we know is that storm overflows bypassed by sewage-treatment plants. may con- tribute-at the most-about 2 percent of the total pollution load .entering the Nation's streams. Those who are advocating storm- `sewer separation might be challenged on another point,: Simply to .segregate such flow for direct diversion into a stream would seem to have dubious value because storm water, at least in its first flushing, ca~rries a'considerable amount of pollution originating from debris on streets aiid roofs. Deep-well disposal of wastes.-Searching for ways to minimize the cost of keeping difficult-to-treat liquid wastes, out of streams, `indus- trial enterprises are evidencing a lively interest in using deep wells for this purpose. This practice was pioneered by oil-well operators and PAGENO="0491" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ASATEMENT 491 later by processors of brine deposits. In both cases the extraction through weliholes of either oil or brine liquors left the processors with the problem of getting rid of large quantities of unwanted salt water. When State regulatory authorities called a halt to the discharge of this salt water into streams the processors took the obvious step of re.- turning this liquid back into the earth via disposal well~ The relative ease and economy of this pra~~W ~Tias captured the attention of other industries with a liquid waste disposal problem. As a result such wastes as spent ~iëid are being pumped underground. While this may solve the immediate problem of preventing stream pollution it raises the question if adequate safeguards are being em- ployed to the prevention of ground-water pollution. According to the U.S. Geological Survey there is a paucity of knowledge about the movement of underground water. The public policy issue presented is this: Do our State and Federal regulatory agencies currently possess sufficient knowledge to provide assurance that present and proposed deep-well waste disposal installa- tions will not ultimately produce irreparable quality deterioration of ground-water resources? If the answer is "No," then prudence would suggest that governmental authorities discourag~ this practice. Mine acid drainage con~trol.-Efforts to devise and apply measures for the control of acid drainage from abandoned and active coal mines, with only a few exceptions, represent, until recently, a dismal record of frustration and ineffectiveness. Pragmatic approaches toward amelioration of mine acid pollution had their origin in the 1930's when air sealing of mines was recom- mended by the Public Health Service to provide unemployment re- lief during the economic depression of that period. Following this, the States of Pennsylvania and Indiana encouraged application of various empirical measures, such as strip mine submergence, chemical neutralization and drainage diversion in efforts to minimize the adverse effects of mine acid. More recently the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (Orsanco) promulgated control measures in the eight-State area under its jurisdiction based on an elaboration of the empirical practices that were found to be effective in Pennsylvania and Indiana. If it did no~hing more, this action by Orsanco dispelled the psychol- ogy of defeatism which has shrouded attempts to deal with the problem. It brought forth an acknowledgment frQm the coal industry that practical means did, in fact, exist to ameliorate mine drainage pollution. This prompted State legislatures to remove the legal exemption from control obligations that heretofore had been enjoyed by the coal industry. Quite recently, several Federal agencies have displayed an unusual amount of interest in the mine acid problem, among them the Public Health Service, the Bureau of Mines, and the Geological Survey. The availability of research funds-supplemented with Appalachia moneys-has resulted in a host of surveys, investigations, and demonstration proj ects. It now appears that competition for identification with mine drainage control rather than appraisal of opportunities for coordin~téd effort is the distinguishing characteristic of these endeavors. (Jon- PAGENO="0492" 492 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT sidering that the amounts being spent are not small-one investigation project is budgeted at a million dollars and several others of similar scope are being planned by the same agency-it would appear appro- priate that attention be focused on the disposition of Federal funds for mine acid control with reference to the relative utility of current undertakings and duplication of effort. Substantial sums are being devoted to rather detailed and long-term survey and research projects. In view of the fact that certain empiri- `cal practices have already been proven to he efficacious in minimizing ~acid mine drainage, the public interest may be better served if a greater portion of the Federal funds were employed at this time in an effort to secure immediate benefits. For example, experience sug- gests that the construction of diversion ditches to exclude the entry of surface water into ábandone4 mine workings would yield benefits in acid reduction., GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR FUr1~URE NATIONAL, STATE, AND LOCAL POLICIES Basic policy questions that confront the Nation today are not unlike those posed 30 years ago when the Congress and the Executive Office of the President riveted serious attention on water pollution control. The debate then, as now, centered on- (1) How clean should a stream be, and (2) Which level of government should exercise what respon- sibilities for the abatement of pollution. However similar the policy questions, a great difference prevails today in the social, economic, and political climate within which ,the debate is carried on. Socially, there is a mounting `pressure to hasten the cleanup of streams. Economically, the affluence of the Nation is such as to dismiss any question that this desire cannot be satisfied. Politically, proponents of Federal control have come a long way in advancing the concept that this is the "painless," if not the preferred way of dealing with the situation. Therefore' under conditions that exist today it is no longer realistic to assert that the States can maintain their traditional posture of individually discharging primary responsibility for all aspects of water pollution control. `This does not imply, however, that the States `should be supine in' determining the goals to' be sought nor should they lessen' their efforts `in bringing about achievement' of desired goals. WHAT LEVEL 011' GOVERNMENT? In seeking accommo,dation to the circumstances that now exist, it would be appropriate to reassess and delineate the respective roles of Federal, State, and local entities in this common task of water quality management. Responsibilities' have become blurred, with the inevitable result that contentiousness between the Federal and State bureaucracies have hindered both cooperation and coordination. The initiative, as well as the authority, of the States has suffered from erosion by statements and actions calculated to enhance Federal control. As a, guiding principle for making an accommodation that is com- patible with circumstances and needs, this philosophy might be PAGENO="0493" `ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 493 asserted: Only that which cannot be done effectively at the lowest echelon of government should become the responsibility of succes- sively higher authorities. An analogy presents itself in the accom- modation devised for the administration of justice. Except under special circumstances grievances are not brought before the purview of the U.S. Supreme Court without first seeking adjudication in the lower courts. It is submitted that if the present trend of Federal intervention with respect, to pollution control continues every facet of this complex undertaking will have to be brought to Washington for decision. Grassroots responsibility Several guidelines for delineation of responsibility suggest them- selves. With respect to promoting exercise of responsibility at the grassroots level, neither State nor Federal Governments have been distinguished in giving leadership to the establishment of watershed or regional institutions through which the solution of pollution prob- lems might be more intimately harnessed to the interests of those upon whom the burdens and benefits should fall. Yet ~t is within the framework of such institutions-authorized to plan, flnance~ design, and operate facilities to satisfy local needs--that perhaps the greatest opportunity may lie for implementing optimum quality-control measures as well as for freeing the State and Federal regulatory agencies of detailed administrative supervision. National policy might not only declare that instrumentalities of this kind are to be fostered, but also provide incentives for their creation and administration. One form of such an instrumentality might find expression through an interstate compact-with broader responsibilities and pow~rs, however, than those associated with existing compacts on water pollution. In this connection attention is invited to the compact establishing the Port of New York Authority and to the manner in which this agency is organized to perform a specialized regional service and does so on a self-liquidating project basis without making inroads on the taxing base of the signatory States or the Federal Government. Serious consideration of such a structure is desirable, even with the awareness that it brings with it political problems of what controls the electorate forfeit. Another type of institutional arrangement-P--and one which is specifically adapted to a watershed or portions thereof-is a conserv- ancy district. So far as is known the employment of such an agency in the United States for water pollution control has,not been given adequate trial, although such agencies have demonstrated effectives ness in dealing with flood control and other aspects of water-resources management. Perhaps the most sophisticated form of local-entity management of pollution control is to be found in the operation of the cooperative water boards of the Ruhr Valley of Germany. Although they are subject to the broad purview of both the state and Federal Govern- ments these boards are otherwise independent and self-supporting institutions with a record of performance dating back in some cases for half a century. 68-240-S6-vol. 1-32 PAGENO="0494" 494 ~ADE~UACY OF TECUNOLOG~ FO1~ POLLUTION ABATEMENT These examples simply illustrate a range of institutional devices that may be judged applicable to the purposes of engendering effective actionon the local and regional levels Of government. In California, a st~d~ is being initiated to provide the legislature of that State with a review of possibilities for implementing a region.. wide waste-water collection and disposal system and other means for maintaining water quality levels in the San Francisco Bay-Delta area. What is significant about this study is that it is specifically aimed toward analyzing the potentialities of a regional institution that will have the authority and capability to integrate the financing, construction, and operation of a complete physical system. The study is designed also to illuminate procedures to be employed for optimizing water-quality control measures and the methods for allocating costs to beneficiaries. State re$ponsibihties State regulation of pollution control has never been favored with budgetary resources commensurate with the responsibilities that it has involved. Furthermore, the effectiveness of State regulation has been in large measure contingent upon persuasiveness in generat- ing response from local entities. After all, it is the municipalities and industries who must aOtually finance the construction of control facilities and their operation. This important detail may not be fully appreciated by those who kave presumed that Federal fiat has a special kind of magic. Federal fiat lacks: vitality without substantial infu~ions of Federal subsidy. The American Municipal Association made this quite plain in l95~ in testimony before the Congress some 8 years after the first Federal Water Pollution Control Act was passed and dissatisfaction had mounted with respect to lack of accomplishment. Association spokesmen representing millions of citizens in thousands of local communities in effect said this: "If you expect municipalities to comply with Federal edicts to build sewage-treatment plants, then the Congress has the obligation to provide Federal funds for their construction." These things are mentioned simply to place in perspective the nature of the problem with which State agencies have been confronted -and thus provide a basis for assessing their role in the advancement of pollution control objectives. It is doubtful that the States can make available sufficient financial resources to satisfy with any promptness the demands resulting from social pressures and the exprescions of Federal concern for stream cleanup. In fact, it must be acknowledged that State budgets have long been less than adequate to cope with urgent current necessities to say nothing of laying the groundwork for more sophisticated endeavors. It would appear, `therefore, that the discharge of State i~e~ponsi- bilities in pollution control should be concentrated on improving capability in the conduct of routine, but vital, day-by-day operations associated with securing compliance with existing regulations. Pro- moting the installation of control facilities is basic to this end. But there is something more than this involved. Perhaps the greatest deficiency in administration of pollution control to which the public can be exposed is failure to deal with the obvious. PAGENO="0495" ADIDQiJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLtTIO]~ ABATEMENT 495 rfhe public is concerned with a different-and more pragmatic-set of values than most professional workers when it comes to gaging ef. fectiveness of control efforts. It matters little to a citizen, for example, to be informed of progress being made in conducting research and in drafting comprehensive plans if year after year he sees no diminution of paunch manure being discharged from an abattoir or oil from a steel mill. Distressing as it may be to shift efforts from systematic investiga- tions and preparation of reports to the more mundane tasks of field inspection and prompt challenging of violations, the fact is that no function of a regulatory agency is more vital-or neglected today- than such activities. Small wonder, therefore, that the public fails to comprehend exactly what it is that control agencies are doing. In brief, there is a policing job to be done. Aside from the virtues that this holds in furthering abatement of obvious pollution, it en- hances opportunities to assure a proper return from the huge invest- tuents already made for the construction of treatment facilities. It is common knowledge that these plants, in the absence of routine in- spection, often fail to produce results they are designed to achieve. Unless the States do make the choice of improving their capability to carry on day-by-day operating responsibilities there would seem to be no alternative but that this burden be shouldered by the Federal authorities. Let it be noted that the Federal Government has already initiated in a few States routine "performance audits" of those municipal sewage-treatment plants that have been built with the aid of a Federal grant. If the States had been adequately handling this basic regulatory function there would be small reason for Federal inspectors. In connection with both the Lake Michigan and Lake Erie Federal enforcement conferences, it was made quite clear that, if the States involved lacked the capability for establishing and maintaining sur- veillance of discharges from entities under their jurisdiction, the Federal authorities would be prepared to do so. All of this suggests there is a vital area wherein the States can unqualifiedly find room to assert and exercise responsibilities. Federal role The philosophy and wording of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act rather nicely conforms to the view that ~t should be the policy of the National Government to supplement-not supersede- the responsibilities of the States. It is in the execution of this act from which evidence continues to multiply indicating that the author- ity, if not the existence, of the State agencies may be jeopardized. Such situations command candid examination, in view of the increasing evidence of conffict on what constitutes appropriate Federal responsibilities. They should not be lightly disposed of as simply "politically motivated." The opportunities presented to the National Government to supplement and abet local and State efforts are enunciated in the Water Pollution Control Act. They include financial support to municipalities for construction of sewage treatment facilities; grants-in-aid to States. for upgrading administration; conduct of research and training activities; and the development of comprehensive river basin studies. PAGENO="0496" 496 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT However, there can be. some question as to whether these programs are `being adequately implemented. As discussed earlier the formula for allocation of construction funds to the States leaves something to be desired insofar as matching `available money to needs. Any decision to increase the grants substantially should undoubtedly be preceded by an objective analysis of the impact of past grants upon both the rate of correction, and the absolute amount of construction compared with previous years. Concerning grants-in-aid to' States for improvement of administra- tion it would be desirable for the Federal authorities in consultation with the States .to undertake an evaluation of the use and effective- ness of these expenditures. Where are such funds being channeled: Into research? Into river quality monitoring? For the employment of inspectors? For the conduct of public education programs? For the purchase of laboratory equipment? Choices for the use of these funds are rather bewildering. Condi- tions in each State agency will differ regarding matters that should command priority. On the basis of 8 years of experience among so many agencies undoubtedly there are some common denominators for guidance in making choices. For example, what has been the nature and scope of State research efforts and how productive has this been in realization of the objectives of the agency? Some observers express the view that,, if a State agency is already laboring to keep abreast of its regulatory functions, it is folly to invite the diversion' of manpower and funds for research. From an historical standpoint the use of grants-in-aid is regarded as one of the most effective devices available to a central govern- ment for stimulating better performance on the part of ,State and local levels of goveñirnent, What needs to be examined is whether current implementation of this princip.le as applied to the admiñistra.. tion of State water. pollution control programs is effectively oriented. National policy is also committed to the principle that Federal responsibility embraces the conduct of research and technical training. Such activities have now proliferated to the point where' current appropriations (fiscal 1966) total $`15,900,000-an increase of 44 percent over the year preceding.' This is in addition to more than $9 million allocated for extramural research and training grants. These substantial and increasing' expenditures lay claim to the. establishment of guidelines by which their validity may be examined and justified. HOW CLEAN SHOULD A STREAM BE? Thirty years of debate on national policy relating to pollution control-from which Federal legislation, thrice amended, has evolved-has not been distinguished in. providing a practical definition of the goal to be sought. The unresolved question. is: How clean should a stream be? This matter dominated deliberations at the 1960 White House Conference on Water Pollution and produced contradictory recom- mendations. The first asserted that "users of public waters have a. responsibility of returning them as nearly clean as is technically possible." This was followed by the declaration that- There is need for a more systematic approach' to the evaluation of `the water pollution problems to include health, aesthetic and market values. A framework PAGENO="0497" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 497 of analysis must be developed which will provide a relatively precise understanding of benefit cost and which will form the basis for the design of public policies and programs for effective water quality management. The first recommendation means literally that pristine purity should be the objective, regardless of what costs or benefits may be associated with pursuit of this goal. The second proposes that the objective of pollution control efforts should be the management of river quality conditions so as to yield the greatest overall net benefits from water resources. At least partial recognition of this latter concept had previously found expression in national legislation, if it can be presumed that the section of the act calling for development of comprehensive river basin programs embraced the notion of identification of costs and benefits. In fact, studies and reports related to comprehensive planning projects account for the expenditure already of many millions of dollars. However, in the conduct of Federal enforcement conferences it is not at all apparent that findings from these comprehensive program studies are being weighed in the pronouncement of conclusions, Quite to the contrary, the central thrust of the decisions appears to be that all municipalities and industries should provide the maximum degree of treatment technically available regardless of physical, hydrologic, and economic characteristics of the basin. The anomaly of dedicating substantial sums of money for prepara- tion of comprehensive plans and then not giving them appropriate consideration in formulating action programs at enforcement hearings illustrates the inconsistency that exists with respect to Federal pollution control obj ectives. The most recent attempt to develop a meaningful approach to deter~ mination of how clean should a stream be, is to be found in the 1965 amendments to the Water Pollution Control Act. A section has been added dealing with adoption of water quality criteria applicable to interstate waters followed by the promulgation of standards for their achievement. The original intent of the Senate version of the act called for establishment of national standards. The compromise measure that was passed offers the option to the States to undertake this assignment. However, should a State not comply and complete this work within 1% years (June 30, 1967), then the Secretary is author- ized to call a conference of the interested parties following which he will promulgate standards. If a Governor of a State is not satisfied with these standards then the Secretary shall convene a public hearing before a board of five or more persons appointed by the Secretary. Decision of the hearing board will be final. With respect to guidelines to the States and to the Secretary for establishing standards, the act furnishes these clues: "Standards shall be such as to protect the public health or welfare, enhance the quality of water and serve the purposes of this Act." [Emphasis added.} Note carefully the italicized phrase. Does this mean that regardless of the uses of a stream or the natural condition with which it may have been endowed that the standard must he establhhed to "enhance" quality? If this is the objective, then it would appear to be negated in a following section of that ~ct setting forth these guidelines upon which PAGENO="0498" ADEQUACY OF TEChNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ~Jcia1 review shall be based. Should an alleged violator of the stand-.. ards seek to challenge their validity or applicability, the court is instructed to make "a determination as follows: The court, giving due consideration to the practicability and the physicat and economic feasibility of complying with such standards, shall have jurisdiction to enter such judgment and order enforcing such judgment as the public interest and the equities of the case may require. [Emphasis added.] These instructions, it should be pointed out, command considera~. tion of a number of factors other than enhancement of quality. In fact, they spell out rather precisely the considerations that have been inherent in virtually all prior court determinations relating to pollw' tion. Furthermore, these are the considerations that have been stated,, or at least implied, in State legislation and which have served as' a basis for administrative decisions made by State regulatory agencies. At this point it is relevant to comment on a frequent criticism that State' r~gutatory agencies spend "too. much time" in reaching deter-. minatAons .of pollution-control requirements. Apparently what is overlooked `is that in these endeavors the agencies have been thor~~ oughly aware of how the cOurts will analyze such requirements~ They earnestly seek to resolve such complex: issues as practicability, physical and economic feasibility, the public interest and the equities involved prior .to the formulation of regulations. As a result they have been quite. successful in minimizing the need for judicial review and court determination of their aotAons. Long ago State> `agencies learned that resort to court `a'ction is not only a costly `procedure but a far slower process than is generally realized. It has not been unusual for legal proceedings to stretch ~ut over a period of a decade-and in the meantime nothing is accom- plished in actually' curbing pollution. The promulgation of s'tandards-without some cognizance of factors other than `the dictum of "enhancing'the quality of water"-may dis- appoint the hopes of those who believe that this may speed up pro-. cedures for controlling pollution. Nor can it be said that the recent amendments to `the Federal law have as yet furnished a basis for a clear-cut understanding of the `goal `or objective of national policy in water pollu'tion~control'. `nEGIONAL AND `BASIN APPROACHES Many problems of pollution abatement, transcend the political boundaries~ of municipality, county, and State. Many encompass more than a single stretch or e,v'en multiple stretches of a river and its tributaries. Examples of institutional attempts, many successful and some only partial in function, abound in the United States and else-. where. They evolved historically to meet acute issues. They rarely appeared full blown' in order to meet nonexistent ,or even faintly discernible future problems. Almost everywhere, the regional or basin machinery came into play because' of acute problems or threats of obvious emerging hazard The history of these institutional ap- proaches is one of pragmatic response to challenge-sometimes belated, occasionally with real foresight. Some selected examples of these approaches are bri'efly reviewed here. They may be contrasted with simpler, but experienced, efforts PAGENO="0499" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 499 on a basinwide scale on the Potomac River. Here development has been slow and control has been elementary via the Potomac River Interstate Commission, with its severely limited powers. Contrary to much hostile publicity, however, the river in much of its total length is of good quality. Basin development is at its beginning and machin.. ery for its growth and its functions will undoubtedly evolve. The Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission This is an interstate compact agency created jointly in 1948 by the States of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, New York, Pennsylvania, Yirginia, West Virginia, and Ohio, with approval of the Congress of the United States. The purpose of the agency was to abate existing pollution and prevent new pollution by motivating communities and industries to finance and build sewage and waste control facilities. For the most part, the accomplishments herein noted were the result largely of persuasion and rarely of compulsion. The coordination of these activities took place via the agency known as Orsanco. The district for which it assumed responsibility embraces portions of the 8 States, within the Ohio River Basin, covering an area of 154,000 square miles and a sewered population of 11,400,000. It is drained by the 981-mile Ohio River and 1' major tributaries. In the 17 years since the creation of Orsanco, $370 million has been spent for treatment on the main river and another $748 million by the communities on the tributaries. Local funds have financed nine- tenths of this capital outlay. Federal grants-in-aid, not available until 1956, account for the remaining one-tenth. Expenditures by industries for pollution abatement are not a matter of public record. The States report, however, that 1,560 of the 1,723 establishments discharging effluents to streams have installed control facilities. The local expenditures of more than a billion dollars have resulted in providing sewage treatment for 93 percent of the sewered population in the valley, half with secondary treatment and another quarter with intermediate processing. In the commission's current program two deficiencies appear. Some 10 percent of the industries still are delinquent in compliance. The second deficiency, in spite of accomplishments, is the limited capability of the State regulatory agencies to keep up with their in~ creasing responsibilities. The agencies require more staff and greater operating budgets. A considerable part of the activity of Orsanco is pursued through a series of industry and advisory committees. These meet frequently with the commission members and the staff and are often responsible for assistance in developing criteria for stream quality and for provid- ing public education and corporate understanding. Such committees have covered problems of aquatic life, the chemical, coal, metal furnishing, petroleum, pulp and paper, and steel industries, and of water users in general. The Delaware River Basiri~ The Delaware River has been the subject of control and develop.. ment management for over three decades. For most of this period, an institution known as Incodel-the Interstate Commission on the PAGENO="0500" 500 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Delaware River-performed an active, although limited, basin func- tion. Its concern was dominantly with upgrading the quality of the river for all-purpose use. It had to its credit, with virtually only a skeleton full-time staff, the creation of many quality standards reason- ably and generally enforced by the participating States of Delaware, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. This early commission had legislative sanction, limited authority, other than investigative and education, and an even more limited budget. Its basin coverage was some 12,000 square miles. Increasing dissatisfaction, primarily with the rate of development of the Delaware River and Valley, led to the drafting in 1961 of a new interstate-Federal compact. It was submitted to the Congress of the United States and to the legislatures of the four States for approval and ratification. This was accomplished and a new regional agency is now in existence. Its central assignment is to administer compre- liensively all aspects of water use and development in the valley and. to promote sound practices of watershed management. Implicit in the creation of the agency was . a strong affirmation of acceptence of local responsibility, no doubt accompanied by an equally strong intent to tap existing and future sources of Federal money. A mechanism is now available for determining policies and their implementation according to the desires of the people of the valley.. Simultaneously, detailed provision is made for the coordination of existing Federal agency interests-some 25 in all. In the philosophy underlying the. institution the Federal Government is a full voting partner, but not necessarily the sole arbiter of destiny oi~ ~the source of all funds. The Delaware River Basin Commission has relatively broad powers. Among other functions, it may- Plan, design, acquire, construct, reconstruct, complete, own, improve, extend, develop, operate, and maintain any and all projects, facilities, properties, activities, and services determined by the commission to be necessary, convenient, or useful for the purposes of the compact. Negotiate for such loans, services, or other aids as may be lawfully available from public or private sources to finance or assist in effectuating any of the purposes of the êompact; and to receive and accept such aid upon such terms and conditions, and subject to such provisions for repayment, as may be required by Federal or State law or the commission may deem necessary or desirable. From time to time, after public notice and hearing, fix, alter, and revise rates, rentals, charges, and tolls and classifications thereof, for the use of facilities which it may own or operate and f or products and services rendered thereby, without regulation or contrQl by any department, office, or agency of any signatory party. The life and the activities of this commission have been too limited. to assess, as yet, the accomplishments versus the hopes. In any event, the machinery for action, reflective of local, State, and Federal partnership, is now available. There is every reason to anticipate that successful develoj~ment on a coordinated front should ensue over the near future. Total water management, with an appropriate major ingredient of pollution abatement, will undoubtedly be demon-. strated as within the capabilities of a regional entity. PAGENO="0501" ADEQUACY OF `TECHNOLOGY FOR `POLLUTION ABATEMENT 501 The Ruhr district The Ruhr district comprises six river basins each under the control of a water authority, the genossenschaft. From south to north on the right bank of the Rhine, the basins are those of the Wupper, Ruhr (itself), Emseher, and Lippe. More or less parallel to the left bank lies a district of small streams tributary to the Rhine, and next the River Niers, which spills across the Dutch border into the Meuse. The whole Ruhr district has an area of 4,200 square miles (compared with the Ohio River Basin of 154,000 square miles). It is slightly smaller than the State of Connecticut. The largest community is Essen, with about three-quarters of a million inhabitants. The total population is some 7.5 million. The first special act created the Emscher Genossenschaft in 1904. The term "genossensehaft" literally means "fellowship" or a close association for common benefit. The creation of this institution was the result of mounting abuses of the stream, accompanied by court actions by downstream complainants. The same concepts of asso- ciation for a common purpose were subsequently given full expression in the organization and mandates of all six river basin authorities of the Ruhr area. All of these were ratified by the appropriate legisla- tive councils and the chambers of parliament in the period between 1904 and 1930. The special law establishing the Emscher Genossen- schaft was so well drafted that in substance it was the pattern for all succeeding river basin authorities administratively responsible for pollution abatement and water management in general. The legal structure of these "associations" was designed to. let them `investigate, plan, design, construct, operate, maintain, repair, and re- place all necessary installations or engineering works for `the abate- ment of the basin's waters. The task was to be accomplished in cooperation and codetermination with all public and private cQrpo- rations or persons that were themselves polluters or drew benefits from proposed improvements. Financing took the form of public loans for capital improvements and internal allocation of operating expenses to the members of~ the association, insofar as expenses were not covered by income. The administrative machinery consists of three groups: (1) The assembly, (2) the board of directors, and (3) the board of appeals. Two categories of membership are recognized: associates or fellows, and participants. Associates are the municipal and rural adminis- trative districts that empty all or part of their waters into the rivers. The participants are mines, other industrial enterprises, railroads, and the like, and public administrative bodies other than the municipal and rural districts, principally communes. Modifications of these compositions of membership are to be found in some of the districts, where special conditions prevail. For example, in the Lippeverband, special associates are the Federal Republic, the proprietor of the barge canals; the state, responsible for the upkeep of riverbanks; and the waterworks and levee associa- tions. The governing organ is the assembly. Its delegates are in propor- tion to annual financial contribution. No single membership category, no matter how large its proportionate contribution, may out-vote the others. The board of directors is the active manager of the business. PAGENO="0502" ~O2 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT The board is the lawful representative of the association, its legal competence being certified to by the. supervisory public authority or Ministry, such as the Ministries of Food, Agriculture, and Forestry. Protests against the decisions of the bOard of directors can be car- ried to a board of appeals, on which members of the board of directors may not sit. Nine members compose the board of appeals in the Emscher Association, three appointed by the public authorities and six elected by the assembly. Until the past decade no recourse was available to the courts from the decisions of the board of appeals. All decisions were final. Today, the courts hold that the door should be left open for an appeal to the courts after all other means of adjust- ment have been exhausted. Let us look briefly at the results of these administrative instruments and practices In spite of their current favor in discussions outside of Germany, no significant emulation of these institutions has occurred in the past decades elsewhere within' Germany. Since all of the rivers listed in the six districts are small, and the population densities very high, dilution of wastes even after. treatment is meager. Many of the stretches of the rivers, therefore, would not meet the quality standards usually acceptable in the United States. In fact, the oldest control system-namely, on the Emscher-has only been able, under most severe loads, to maintain at this time a river which is essentially an open sewer.. This situation has forced the association `to construct a giant settling piant~ in which the ~entire dry-weather flow of the Emscher. is clarified. More recently, artificial aeration of the entire river has been undertaken to attempt to alleviate the untoward results of a necessary and inescapable overuse of a stringently limited, water resource. AIR POLLUTIoN With air, as with water pollution, the issue posed above all others i's whether the real goal is to remove at all times all contaminants at the source. This goal is implied in much official and unofficial dis-. cussion. Yet it is obviously untenable. Apart from being imprac- ticable, this uncompromising approach, as in the parallel case of waters receiving wastes, ignores the fact ~1aat the atmosphere normally has a great capacity for accepting and dispelling pollutants without causing objectionable conditions. In general, the practical problem * of abatement is normally limited to relatively shoi~t periods of time and areas of limited extent. In many heavily industrialized regions, however, natural ventilation is so sluggish. that objectionable or even critical conditions may be frequent. In a few such areas a more or less permanent pollution problem exists. To insist on clean air, therefore, has . little meaning, unless one defines how clean,, at what coat and for what purpose. In the Clean Air Acts of 1963 and 1965 none Of these questions are either specifically posed or resolved. It may be assumed that they have been relegated to moving administrative regulations .and decisions. If this is so then congressional committees must accept the responsibility of frequent reassessments of both national policy and' of fiscal and regulatory implementation. Implicit in much of the debate is the assumption that conditions in Los Angeles, Donora, and London are characteristic of all the PAGENO="0503" ADEQUAcY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUT~ON ASA']~MENT 503 areas of the Nation. This is far from the case. It has also been assumed that air pollution and disease go hand in hand. The evidence for this assumption is still limited. The response of the individual to varying levels of SO2 is not too clear. Air pollution is suspect as an etiological factor in the production of chronic bronchitis, but it is ~difficult to indict it with certainty "since it is but one of many noxious factors in urban life." The same guarded conclusion may be made with respect to* emphysema. It is still less than clear that polluted air has any significant impact upon this disease. If anything, the correlation with smoking is far more impressive. Continued and intensive exploration of the biological effects of prolonged exposure to ordinary urban air pollution is certainly to be emphasized. The present situation is fairly and wisely stated most recently in the Tukey report (PSAC) in the following terms: While we all fear, and many believe, that long continued exposure to low levels of pollution is having unfavorable effects on human health, It is heartening to know that careful study has so far failed to produce evidence that this is so, and that such effects, if present, must be markedly less noticeable thau those asso- ciated with cigarette smoking. Attempts to identify possible effects of ordinary urban air pollution on longevity or on the incidence of serious disease have, been inconclusive. Special attention has been focused on lung cancer, which is known to be closely associated with tobacco smoking, and with the inhalation of i~adon, other radioactive materials, nickel carbonyl, chromates, asbestos, and other chemicals. There are consistent findings of a greater incidence of lung cancer in the cities than in the country, and it is possible that urban air pollution is a contributory factor in this disease. But its role is uncertain except in special situations, such as proximity to industrial plants that handle kno~rn carcinogenic materials. Regardless of current looseness of definition of problem,, of place and of effects of air pollution, certain quantitative aspects for the predictable future are important. Almost all projections of social and economic activity between 1960 and 2000 indicate that residues dis- charged into the air wifi multiply manifold, due to great increases in population and resulting industrial, domestic, and automotive activi- ties. Electric power production, on all prophecies, will be multiplied threefold or fourfold. Probably two-thirds of this power will still be from fossil fuels. Motor vehicle population, if current public policy is continued, will mount by some fourfold by 2000. In the motor vehicle and in power production lies the bulk of the air emission problem, via motor fuel and coal, oil, and natural gas. Between them, they account for a major part of the problems with particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, and carbon dioxide. Congressional discussions give due recognition to two pressing issues: the control of hydrocarbon emissions from motor vehicles and the development of low-cost techniqpes to reduce emis- sions of oxides of sulfur in the combustion of sulfur-containing fuel. In both of these areas, economics and technology play significant roles. The primary questions as to the Clean Air Act of 1965 are whether its regulatory and research assignments to `the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and the Department of the Interior are best calculated' to produce the results earnestly desired by Congress. Unless the agency activities are geared more closely to private corpo- rate developments than is indicated in the recent record with other pollution abatement efforts, the successes are likely to be slOw and disappointing. PAGENO="0504" 504 ADEQUAQ~ OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Certain fundamental questions should be resolved in this as well as in water and land pollution. The magic words of "accelerated re- search programs" which appear in all the legislation on pollution abatement endow the Federal agencies with a responsibility for de~ veloping expertise in dozens of industrial complexes from the com- bustion engine to the synthetic chemical fibers. In the absence of real and enthusiastic industrial participation, possible only in a climate of joint understanding, such agency expertness in science and technology will be most difficult, if not impossible, to create. A second dilemma in the air pollution effort should be recognized. The drive toward controls for internal combustion engines to reduce noxious effluents adequately may fall short of present promise and hopes. More important, however, is that the enforcement agency, in the drive, not lose ~igiit* of possible more desirable alternatives. In essence, what is required is a radical new approach to the problem of motive power for transportation. Conceivably, the electric powered automobile for many metropolitan uses, the return of metro transit and the creation of more efficient combustion equipment should be explored intensively. The accomplishment of such departures from the installation of devices on existing motive power units requires an integration of effort among a number of Federal agencies as well as with industry. Machinery for such integration is not only lacking; but interage~icy comity still leaves something to be desired. An analogous situation prevails with respect to ultimate correctives in the power industry. Fly ash and: suifur dioxide removal is con~ tingent upon the availability of equipment, upon variation in chosen fuels, upon powerplant location, and upon economic feasibility. In these objectives again multiple agency impact and private industry cooperation l~ld the keys to success. Is such joint implementation by hEW implicit either in legislation or in administrative behavior? It must be reiterated that, despite widespread concern with the problem, little or nothing appears in most hearings and only limited study has been given to the engineering and economic aspects of pro- posed performance levels for combustion equipment in relation to air pollution. Physiological tolerances vis-a-vis capital investment costs to attain acceptable levels are rarely discussed or presented. The Building Research Advisory Board of NAS-NRC recently re- viewed this gap in its study for FRA of flue-fed apartment house incinerators. Some 60,000 of these units are operated in the United States. A theoretical ideal goal was the production of no more than 0.65 pound of particulate emission per 1,000 pounds of flue gas. however, a level of 0.85 was recommended by the ad hoc committee as an immediate goal, with 0.65 for some future attainment. Even this more lenient first goal would entail an average investment of $2,500 per unit. A performance level of 0.65 apparently would re- quire electrostatic precipitators at some $8,000 to $12,000 apiece. jn additi~oii, they are complex tø maintain on such small installations. In any event, immediate complete compliance with 0.65 would necessitate capital investments from $480 to $720 million. For the lower limit, some $150 million would be entailed. Performance levels hence should be closely related to practicable and economical equipment commensurate with physiologic and aesthetic necessities or desire. PAGENO="0505" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 505 The experience of the Tennessee Valley Authority with its massive coal burning powerplants (perhaps the largest in the world) makes clear the same interlocking of many forces. None of these lend themselves too easily to any generalized legislative requirement. Over at least 10 years TVA has struggled with air pollution j~reven- tion. The three basic methods have dealt with devices to control or reduce stack emissions, the elevation of stack-emitted plumes, and actual curtailment of operation or the use of lower sulfuf content coal in extreme and infrequent periods of inadequate atmbspheric ventilation. So far plant scale removal and recovery of SO2 for com- mercial purposes have not been demonstrated as successful. The experience with stack heights has been illuminating. Pro- gressively the heights have risen from relatively low levels to 170, 400, 500, 600, and 800 feet (Bull Run plant). All the operations are accompained by ~emiweekly statements known as "stagnation trend advisories." These on occasion give way to "stagnation alert bulletins." On rare situations, the "extreme local stagnation warning" is issued. In such episodes, operations in fact are curtailed or shut down. These details are recorded to illustrate the importance of local, regional, or even single plant regulation to create the most satisfactory equilibrium between weather, fuel, and general operating regime. The air pollution abatement program, therefore, requires (a) the determination of whether a real problem exists and where, (b) definition of what the problem is, (c) the demonstration that economical and effective methods for correction are available, (d) *the selection of alternatives to compulsion, (e) where compulsion is indicated, the provision of wise and fair administration, and (f) the placement of administration as close to problem location as possible, often within the. municipality or the metropolitan region. During the preparation of this document, the American Association for the Advancement of Science issued, in 1965, the report of the Air Conservation Commission (Publication No. 80). The Commission made four basic assumptions essential for rational consideration of the problem of air pollution. These are: (1) Air is in the public domain; (2) air pollution is an inevitable concomitant of modern life; (~3) scientific knowledge can be applied to the shaping of public policy; and (4) methods to reduce air pollution must not increase pollution in other sectors of man's environment. Once more a careful study by an eminent group results in a reitera- tion of basic principles in its list of recommendations. These are few in number, of obvious validity, and rest upon sane administrative practice, tempered by time to assess and to identify problem and solution. In brief, the Commission recommends that- (1) Scientists in all disciplines become familiar with the avail- able information about air pollution, and they play active roles in informing both the public and public policy bodies of the facts and .their significance. . . . (2) Decisions on what to do about the facts-the actual weighing of risks versus benefits-should be a~ responsibility of the entire community, including scientists (special emphasis is placed upon the care which must be exercised in the development PAGENO="0506" 506 ADEQVACY OF `TE~HNOLOQY. FOR PQ'~LUTION ABATEMENT of standards for ambient air quaiity by the conscientious use and documentation of all.available scientific information). (3) Air pollution be viewed as a problem that transcends polit~ ical boundaries and as one that has, global significance. .~4), Communities, metropolitan areas, States, and appropriate Fe4e~a1~. agencies should give special consideration not only to the ;eiixnination or reduction of air pollution, but also to `air conservation planning. This Qommission, as well as' all other students of the~ problem, agree that metropolitan air polluttion essentially stems from motor vehicles, pQwe~ ~tations, assorted industries, `and.; householders~ Strangely enoug1~, individual cit~sens, by their use of cars, by their increasing demands for electric power, and by the running of their homes, are the principal~ oontributors. Their understanding wilL .be~ imp.~oved by sound.monitoririg programs, identification of sources and effeet, advice of e~pei~ts,.regulatio~is' based on sound. scientific. data, and enforcement of such regulations. ` SOLID WASTES In discussing the amendments to the Clean Air Act o~ 1963, Mr Harris (Arkansas) presented to the `House on September 24, 1965, certain pertment comments on title Il-which deals with the problem of the disposal of solid waste.. He stated (p. 24145, Congressional RecOrd, House): . There are those who feel that this is an unnecessary invasion and interference by the Government into a problem that should be primairly local. If we accepted the viewpoint of those who j'eel that the Federal Government is gOing to assume the responsibility and the obligation of disposing of garbage and all soli4 waste of municipalities all over the country, then they would be right, but I want to make it abundantly clear here and now that this is not the purpose of the program. The purpose of tins program is research, investigations, experiments, training, surveys, studies, and demonstrations, relating to the operation of, financing, and otherwise disposing of this solid waste product. That is what this program involves. Thus Mr. Harris sucOinctly and accurately describes the issues `involved in this area of public activity. The Clean Air Act of 1.965, as passed and signed, includes title II. By this step, under the guise of facilitating solid waste disposal and reducing air pollution, the Federal Government in fact moves into another area of local responsi- bility. By a simple declaration of national interest, one local or regional function after another succumbs to the transfer of duties. to the Central Government. If this reasoning is valid, it is difficult to discover any local function which is not of national interest or' import. In reality, solid waste disposal, as all, other municipal functions, poses a fiscal problem, as well as a significant technologic problem. Some communities handle the function well, others poorly. Gen- erally, cheapest methods are used first-the open burning dump. Then the community moves to controlled landfill, then to incineration and the like. The progress is `clear, slow, and dollar motivated. Whether the intrusion of Washington will engender a permanent increase in local resident consciousness and conscience remains to be~ PAGENO="0507" ADEQUACY OF `TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 507 demonstrated. Whether it will produce more rapid technologic answers than those normally developed in the past likewise remains to be shown. At any rate, it is worth trying this additional route for research and development if for no other reason than to rescue this field of activity frorn low public interest and equally low teciano- logic progress. Of the major contributors to air and water pollution, solid wastes are proportionately the least significant. Present methods of disposal of the solid wastes of society are too often aesthetically objectionable. or undesirable. Present legislative acts are c~tlculated to upgrade public opinion and official behavior, by providing more for research and development in science, and technology. As in the other pollution issnes hitherto discussed, the same un~ vei~if1ed assumption is made in the present category of problem as* in~ the previous or~es, namely: This is a challenge which State and Dci~l `~overnments cannot meet without assistance from the Federal Governtncnt. The handling and disposal of solid wastes are costly operations that strain the resources of State and local agencies (refer to coaimittee report on clean air of 1965, p. 7, 1965). No evidence to justify this broad statement appears in any of the testimony. Thousands of public. disposal units in the United States are locally financed and operated. That more do not exist or are not improved is due to local acceptance of the status quo, to disinterest in aesthetic values, to lethargy, and to the normal behavior of officials and citizens pressed for many other public expenditures. Are all these to be cured by Federal legislative fiat and money? Or are we warranted in assuming that research in solid waste disposal under Federal stimulation and aid will disclose better and more economical procedures and practices than we now have? Let us look at the nature of the problem, The annual output of urban solid wastes, containing such things as paper, grass and brush cuttings, garbage, ashes, metal, and glass has been estimated as 1,600 pounds per capita or over 125 million tons each year. The collection and disposal costs approximate be- tween $2.5 and $3 billion a year. No easy answer to either collection or disposal has so far appeared. Early efforts at salvage or recovery of materials have gradually given way to high-temperature destruction, as organic constituents of garbage were drastically reduced by refrigeration and modern packaging and as markets dwindled for grease, low-grade fertilizers, mixed metals, and glass. Easy answers in composting have not materialized sufficiently to offer simple and economical solutions to most urban areas, where increasingly long-haul collection costs to central disposal points are becoming prohibitive. Most of these problems wait for solution upon scientific and techno- logic inquiry, by the combined forces of public and private agencies. rrhe delusion that urban solid wastes represent a hidden "gold mine" of recoverable materials still awaits realistic demonstration. A similar lack of realism characterizes the current solution of regionalizing solid waste collection and disposal-as if this were purely a semantic rather than an economic problem. In many instances, handling the issue upon a regional basis becomes a corn- PAGENO="0508" 508 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR rOLtUTION ABATEMENT pletely uneconomical solution because of excessive transportation costs. In any event, simple answers wholly unrelated to any factual demonstration should not blind us to the complex task confronting us ~rith urban solid wastes. The deep-seated problem of these wastes lies in the fact that the producers of consumer goods, as far as is apparent, have rarely if ever given a thought to the residual wastes which their products inevitably create. The time has arrived, when this linkage between producer and disposer must be forged-or else society will be submerged in. the byproducts of all tb~.' attractive materials, foods, and equipment' which it now only partially consumes. The rest `is conaigned to the* public official, to the nearest roadside heap, swamp, park, valley, or. highway borrow pit. The listing of theae byproducts of~ modern living are impressive. Each of them should pose a challenge to the' producer. The official responsible for disposal should not'. be left alone "holding the bag" literally and figuratively. Scrap iron and steel are generated at a rate of 12 to 15 million tons. a year. About a third of this is in derelict automobiles. The amount* of these being recovered is declining substantially. Salvage of' other'* metals is still relatively high. Paper products reaching the market: annually are of the order of 30 million tons. About a third of this is salvaged to make new paper. Some 15 percent only of rubber'products are reclaimed-approximately 2260,000 tons. The case of plastics poses `an increasing problem in disposal. Of the 8 billion pounds produced each year; only 10 percent is recovered. To these astronomical amounts we must add each year 48 billion cars, 26 billion bottles and jars, 65 billion metal and plastic caps, and `a vast array of other packaging materials-virtually all of which, after use, lands in the lap of the refuse collector. In searching for escapes from this dilemma of society, several avenues of' attack must be opened. Some effcrt' must" be expended to match the technology and imagination of theproducer of the sources of urban wastes in the area of disposal. . Secondly, the producer must devote increasing attention to the disposal implications of the long list of things he sells. Thirdly, more satisfactory and economical processes for disposal and recovery must be developed. One does not often include the farm in discussion of solid waste problems. Yet, the accumulation of the excreta of farm animals has become an acute issue in many areas. The mass production of poultry and waste resulting from the large `feedlot finishing of beef cattle are additional examples of situations, where it `is sometimes assumed that rural areas are free from was'te difficulties. In similar fashion, mining presents solid waste disposal issues of great magnitude. One estimate indicates that in 1963 more than 3.3 billion tons of waste rock* and mill tailings were discarded near mine sites. In other collateral operations, mountains of slag, ash and other waste materials attest to the industrial activity `of our country as well as to unresolved problems of waste disposal management. It should be reasonably clear that not all of these solid wastes can be either collected, disposed of or salvaged in the same way.. Their amounts, their diverse character, their potential value and their places PAGENO="0509" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEME~T 509 of orig~in indicate the wide spectrum of problem and the co~equent necessity for broadly based research and development. Sul~idy for collection and disposal will not provide the long-term answers so universally missing. REPORT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION PNEL (THE TUKEY REPORT) (President's Science Advisory Committee) In November 1965, the White House issued the above report. It is the most recent documentation of the problems and proposals in the general field of pollution of the environment. Its title reveals the temper and objective of the committee responsible for its prepara- tion "Restoring the Quality of Our Environment." The environmental pollution panel was headed by John W. Tukey. The list of its mem- bership and its advisers is a veritable who's who of distinguished and experienced scientists and technologists. The report is perhaps the best exposition now available of the problems, the solutions and the unknowns in the pollution field. It is orderly in treatment, matured in judgment and surprisingly free of propagandistic "crisis and alarm." The basic definition upon which the document is predicated is long overdue, namely, that "Environ- mental pollution is the unfavorable alteration of our surroundings, wholly or largely as a byproduct of man's actions, through direct or indirect effects of changes in energy patterns, radiation levels, chemical and physical constitution, and abundances of organisms." Ingredients of the definition may well be spelled out in the objectives in abat~ement of pollution of water, air, and soil both in legislation and in administra- tion. The declared position of the Panel is best stated in its own words: Present levels of pollution of air, water, soils, and living organisms are for the most part below the levels that have been demonstrated to cause disease or death in people. * * * Prudence and self-interest dictate that we exert ourselves not only to prevent further building of pollutants, but to reduce present burdens of pollution in our air, our waters, and our land. The volume carries an abundance of earthy wisdom as to what we do and do not know, as to the complexities of control procedures at various levels of government, as to what standards we are shooting for, at what price, and what intelligent and imaginative management will require in all kinds of skilled manpower. The report should be read from cover to cover. Full recognition of the clarity of reason and statement will be best fulfilled by such a reading. The recommendations, covering principles, actions, co- ordination and systems studies, baseline measurement programs, development and demonstration, research, and manpower, should be required homework for congressional committees, administrative agencies, and policymakers. They should serve as a sourcebook for national activity for probably the next 5 years. Little significant exception may be taken to most of what is encompassed within pages 16 to 38, inclusive. Specifically, little is said in the report regarding either money or current Federal administrative policy and practice-issues which are 68-240-----6e---vol. [-33 PAGENO="0510" 510 ADEQ'tJACY !OF TECHNOLOGY'FOR POLLtTTION ABATEMENT distingtiished hi almost all, other documents, as well as in this one, by their absence. It may well be that the Panel chose to disregard these two problems as outside their purview. On the more positive side, one should underline the three recom- mendations: B-~26-Ef1orts be increased' to' establish the' scientific bases upon which standards of environmental,quality can be set. C-i-The ~stablishmentby. the National Academy of Sciences- National' Research Council of ati "Environmental Pollution Board." ` D-t1~ie establ~signent. of baseline measurement programs. Mr. DnDAitlo. And 1, `wQuld also like `unanimous cpnsent. that a st,atememt ~ had p~ep~eU ~to e~oiie thes~ hearings also be placed in the record. If there is no objection, that `will be done. (The statement referred to follows:) REMARKS OF CO~GRESSMA'N EMILIO Q. DADDARIO AT CONCLUDING HEA~ING IN WASHINGTON ON SUBCOMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, EESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT ON PoLr.urioN ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGY Today's testimony concludes this phase of the subcommittee's inquiry. I be- lieve `these hearings have accomplished our objective of illuminating the level of development in pollution abatement technology. I appreciate `the contributions of our many excellent witnesses and the interest and diligence of subcommittee members. The record requires careful and thoughtful study as to its implication's' for further research and de~relo'pme'nt and also as to the time table for mnstalla- tion of presently available processes `and equipment. Certain `preliminary con- clusions are apparent to me a't this time. First, we have `heard that the lack `of information on comp'lex relationship among living things with their demandings makes it extremely difficult to set goal's for the quality of the environment. In many cases, the risk to our welfare, if no't also `to our health, cannot be adequately evaluated in com- paris'o'n to the benefits of using air and wat'e~ways for wasite disposal. These uncertainties are barriers to progress in pollution abatement and increased knowledge through research could do' much to remove them,. Second, the cost of catching up in pollution abatement, and of keeping waste management up to date, will be in the order of $100 billion spread over the next 10 to 20 years. Continuing costs o'f operating treatment plants and devices' will run to several billion dollars each year. We have seen a recognition and accept- ance of these costs which have been absent before in the United States. These large expenses suggest an immediate opportunity for research and development on a more economical means of abatement. The need for more efficient technology is urgent because in many instances we cannot and. should not delay in corrective action.' To some extent, it may be wise to divert a por- tion of expenditures from implementation of present technology to the develop- merit of better technology. Third, the science and engineering resources of private industry will be nec- essary in developing new and improved technical approaches to pollution con- trol; both to solve internal waste management problems and to serve a growing market for abatement equipment. The private sector laboratories are more likely to contribute meaningful and timely results if the Government can move forward in setting realistic criteria for air and water quality. But we see that this leads' us In a full circle back to the ecological uncertainties which I men- tioned as a firs.t poin't. Thus, it is clear that the persent research effort in environmental pollution is inadequate. To guide us beyond the immediate abatement of gross and obvious contamination, we must seek every means of accelerating the acquisition of more knowledge. It seems `to me that our national go.~l is really twofold. These cio'sely related objectives are concisely phrased in the title's of the landmark reports which we PAGENO="0511" ADEQUACY OF TEQHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 511 have learned so much about in the past few weeks. I can think of no better words for the goals than "Restoring the Quality of Our ~lnv1romnent" and "Waste Management and Control". There is a great challenge to the scientific and engineering community in these phrases. I urge all of us to be imaginative and bold in meeting this challenge. Mr. DADDARIO. Dr. Wolman, I thank you for a very thoughtful presentation. Again I want to call to everyone's attention how help- ful you have been to us, and second Mr. Conable's request that you will be working with us as we proceed'~from this point. Dr. WOLMAN. Thank you, sir. Mr. DADDARIO. This committee will adjourn to a time and place to be determined by the Chair. (Whereupon, at 12:17 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.) PAGENO="0512" t+%~4 art rM'~ rrr ~g 4 PAGENO="0513" THE ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 1966 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITrEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, RESEARCH, AND DEVELoPMENT~ Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 a.m,~ in th~ auditorium, Old State Building, 217 West First Street, Los Angeles, Calif., the Hon. George E. Brown, Jr. (acting chairman of the sub- committee), presiding. Mr. BROWN. This is a special meeting of the Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Development of the House Committee on Sri- ence and Astronautics. We are here this morning to hear a previously, scheduled witness and, if we have time, further witnesses who may choose to appear or submit statements. This morning we have Dr. Haagen-Smit, Mr. Louis Fuller, from the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District, Mr. Eric Grant, from the State Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board, and Mr. W. L. Rogers from the Aerojet-General Corp. Before we call Dr. Haagen-Smit, I have a brief opening statement which I will read, and then we will proceed with the testimony of the witnesses. I am pleased, along with my colleague, Mr. Bell, to bring this field hearing of the Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Development of the House Science and Astronautics Committee to Los Angeles. Our chairman, Mr. Daddario, was most anxious that th~ record include testimony from today's witnesses which was not available to us in Washington because of the recent airlines strike and lin'4it~tiOns of time there. The thrust of these hearings is to review the state of the a'~ in pollution abatement technology. We want to know where the com~e- tence is available to move ahead with capital investment and alsp where our present ignorance dictates the diversion of funds to mpve research and development. Several committees of the Congress have been instrumental in im~p1~c- menting the growing public consensus for action in restoring the quality of our environment. The activities of our committee are corn- plementary in that we want to make sure that American science and engineering are supporting the newly expressed goals and timetables~. So far, our studies have shown that the key to pollution abatement is proper waste management. In other words, our~ society is a using, 518 PAGENO="0514" M4 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT not a consuming, system and we have only recently recognized that there are no free or even cheap disposal routes for wastes and byprod- ucts. Some pollutants must be eliminated at the source. Others must be recycled for further use. Still others must be safely conveyed to ocean depths, deep wells, or similar perpetual storage. Los Angeles represents a unique and illustrative focal point of our hearings. The air pollution problem has equaled the cinema and orange grove in spreading our name. But also, this area is recognized as the greatest concentration of scientific and technical resources in the world. These resources are essential to practical pollution abate- ment, even more so than institutional and economic innovations. Wastes will always be with us, and their more efficient management is a direct benefit to our welfare, beyond the elimination of gross and obvious pollution. So here we are with the problem in its most obvious and concentrated form. And here today are leading proponents of the technology to deal with it. The committee is anxious to hear specifics on how re- search and development can give us new and improved tools to meet the challenge. Mr. Bell, would you care to add to that? Mr. BEI~L. There is not much I could add to what you said, Con- gressman Brown. However, I want to point out that we are looking at the situation as it presently is, and also the future possibilities of developing of some kind of methods of waste abatement. I was interested in hearing from one of my friends about a sci- entific meeting that occurred in one of the hotels up north in which one of the scientists indicated as he spoke that the water in that hotel really was only needed for purposes of drinking water; that a per- son actually doesn't need to use water for a bath-they could use some kind of power that would clean the skin-and the waste disposal could be handled by some kind of chemical recycling, and so forth. These ideas that may appear to be way out, I think, bring home the importance of why we are here in Los Angeles. The aerospace industry here is deeply involved in studies of this kind for the future, and also, of course, the problem of our pollution right here in Los Angeles. I think that further and deeper research could develop into some kind of proper waste management. Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Congressman Bell. Our first witness this morning is Dr. A. J. Haagen-Smit, who is probably the best knowrt name in the field of air pollution research. Dr. Haagen-Smit, would, you take a se:at here? I want to say a few nice words about you before you start your testimony. I think all of us are well aware of the contribution he has made. I like to recall it was, I think, more than 10 years ago that I first called on Dr. Haagen-Smit for advice and counsel when I was serving as mayor of the city of Monterey Park, and we were considering solving the smog problem of fumes emitted from gasoline stations. I am sure now we wouldn't have solved the problem had we not had the benefit of Dr. Haagen-Smit's counsel at that time on these prob- lems. I have since read with great pleasure his increasing contribu- tion to this field. Dr. Haagen-Smit. PAGENO="0515" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 515 STATEMENT OP DR. ARIE ~. HAAGEN~SMIT, CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OP TECHNOLOGY Dr. HAAGEN-SMIT. Thanl~ you, Mr. Brown and Mr. Bell. Gentle- men. The problem is a very large one, as you have pointed out. I would like to discuss briefly a few sections of that general problem. I sent in a brief statement to Washington, and I will follow this closely. In the first place, I would like to talk about stationary sources of pollution and then about moving sources, the automobile, naturally. Then about the efficiency of the different methods that are available now. Then I would like briefly to mention some of the criteria that we have to establish to see how far we have to go, what decisions we have to make between economy and between the health of the people. Now, my statement that I sent to Washington started out with this sentence, "The nationwide application of existing methods of air pollution control would go far toward cleaning the air of most of our cities." Now, this is not contrary to what you are trying to accomplish. The only thing that I want to express here is that most of our cities would be greatly benefited by the application of existing methods. l~\Te can mention quite a number of cities all over the country that would be greatly benefited with ordinary engineering methods and with existing dust collection and fume collection methods. This, however, doesn't take away the fact that we have to i~efine our methods. The increase in th~ population, and the increase in the urbanization demands more and more technical skill to accomplish what we want to do. I was most impressed about 2 years ago to see in the New York World's Fair what they call a demograph, which showed how many people were being added to the United States. A light flashed on when somebody was born every 7% seconds. Every 17 seconds some- body died. So you have an excess there. Every 12½ seconds there is an extra person in the United States. As you know, when you divide that into the number of seconds that there are in a year, you will see that easily amounts to around 10 million people. So we have to work hard to keep up with just the growth of our population. Now, Los Angeles has dealt quite well with its stationary sources, as you will undoubtedly hear from Mr. Fuller. We had here some rather ugly problems in the metals indu~t.ry, the steel factories-two large steel factories-some 120 foundries, and, `of course, we had a number of large refineries. All of these have been controlled. If we go to the area of Torrance, Dominquez, and in the southern part, such as Vernon, there is the difference between day and night compared to when we ~tarted in 1950. As `a matter of fact, `the real estate development in that area-in the Inglewood area and Rolling Hills area-would not have been possible without the control of the stationary sources which `have been taken care of by the air pollution control district. While it might cost a little, `the financial advantages of the control are so great that we could easily spend much more than is being PAGENO="0516" 516 ADEQUACY 0]? TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT done presently. If we divided the amount of money that is spent all over the country, it amounts to only about 30 or 50 cents per individual per day. Now, we i~re talking here only `about material advantages. There are `many of us who believe there are some other `advantages in our health. We began `to `believe also that we `have `a right to `the enjoy- ment of life. It isn't just that we have to watch out for being sick, we also want to enjoy. life when we are healthy. This means that we have to have much greater control than we have at `the present time. Now, as I said, we have good control in Los Angeles, but as there is an mcrease in population we will have to control further. Now, in the dust field `we usually control t'he larger particles, but for every large particle that we catch, there are millions of very small ones that escape into the air. You don't see them, but they find their way in your lungs. There is no barrier for them and there is a general belief now `by the medical people that this might have adverse effects. So the `methods that we do have, such as the electrostatic method, do not trap these `small particles.. Here is a field of development that needs the best brains of the country, and `we should spend considerable amount of `effort in that direction. `Then, `of course, we have the old problems, su'ch as sulfur dioxide. We have solved `this problem, to a very large extent, here in Los Angeles by the use of natural gas during the summer months, and as a matter of fact, even longer. First, we had only 7 `months `of ~as use. Recently, through the action of the Los Angeles Air Pollution Control District, another 100 days was added to this 7' months. Those are `the `worst smog days. Of course, there are other cities th'at want gas `and would like to have a share of the cleanest fuel that you can use. Thus there will be more and more competition, and more and more people that want more and more power. When we see the program of power expansion, then you `begin `to worry a little bit. You say, "Well, what do we have to do? What `about those small particles? What about, sulfur dioxide?" Several methods are under discussion. One of them is, of course, to locate the power production source outside this basin. There is also nuclear energy, but here too new problems arise. They are not the type that you can see, such as one~ can see dust and soot~ But there is small atomic radiation, and we might have to go to refined methods. This development of nuclear power should parallel the developments of. methods to eliminate any possibility of release of noxious com- pounds. Then, we hate the automobile here in Los Angeles as a major source that still has to be cleaned up. It isn't only Los Angeles which is plagued by this problem. There'ar~ other cities too that may not have the problem as frequently as we have. I believe that the California State Health Departmeht determined that about 75 percent of the time, people complained about smog `here in our area. Up north, it is only about 40 percent, but still if you complain 40 percent of the time, that is still too much. PAGENO="0517" ADEQIJACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION M3ATEMENT 517 I have been in New York when there was smog, and in Chicago where the smog has the typical odor of the Los Angeles smog. I also smelled it in Philadelphia and in some European countries. So we need to put all our resources behind solving the automobile problem. Now, as you know, there is work going on in the automobile indus- try in Detroit. There is work going on at several of the universities, but a great deal more has to be done. The State motor vehicle pollu- tion control board has done a good job in getting the people to work and set criteria and standards, but these criteria and those standards will have to be stricter and stricter, because of the increase in the num- ber of people. I think we have not yet found a satisfactory solution to the auto- mobile combustion problem. Maybe the current devices will tide us over. I think it is good that we have devices, such as air injection and the Detroit packages, hut more has to be done. There isn't any doubt about that. I would like to mention in this connection that I feel that not every- thing should be left to Detroit or the local community. When Detroit is asked for inspection of cars, that was a reasonable demand. We ask the same from the individual. Why shouldn't the individual go through a reasonable inspection of his car? Then there is a great deal to be gained by measures which can he adopted in the local area. This is difficult, I realize. We have here 76 different governmental organizations which have to get together on just a common pattern of traffic. This morning it took me three quarters of an hour to come down to this meeting, and it was only 1~ miles. I think some improvement could be made without too great diffi- culty, if we do some thinking about this. Now, I think I have said enough about this technical part. You will hear more about that from Mr. Fuller. I would like to mention something about instrumentation. This' is a field where a great deal of work has to be done since we must measure to control. The Air Pollution Control District monitors our air so that people have the certainty that they are not being sub- jected to lethal concentrations of pollutants. This is good and it works very well. But in judging the control of automobile exhausts, we need instru- ments to measure, and in this field a tremendous amount of work has to be done. Its complexity gets greater and greater. This is not oniy true with air pollutants, such as ozones, carbon monoxide and a few others, but also with agricultural chemicals which are extremely complex, such as 24-D, for example. This' problem i~ going to be extremely complex, and this is where we need a great deal of `development. There is one other thing that I would like to mention, and that is the criteria on which we base our control methods. We must have criteria. There are some people that want nothing in the `air except nitrogen and oxygen and carbon dioxide for the plants. here are others that say a little carbon monoxide won't hurt you, but in be- I ween there must `be a basis found for a technical solution. PAGENO="0518" 518 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Now, the fact is, we do not have a community criteria for any single automobile ~pollutant. This might come as a surprise to many people because many of those compounds have `been around a long time. Shifur dioxide has been around for a long time. So has carbon monoxide, fluorescein, and ozone, but we do not have criteria for a community. What we have is criteria for an industry, but industry criteria is completely different from a community criteria. If a fellow works in a factory, and doesn't like the smell, he can still find another job. In a community, this is a completely different thing. This man is go- ing to live here, and he is not. going to .go `because he doesn't like the smell. There is one: other item and this is the question of statistics which is very difficult in the case of a community. We say as a standard that only 1 percent, 10 per~ent, or one one-hundredth of a percent of the people' will be bothered but when you calculate what one one- hundredth of a percent is in a population of 10 million people, that is an'awful lot of people and an awful lot of complaints. So it i's extremely difficult to develop the criteria for a community. The kind of research we need there is preventive research. That is, we must study the physiological acts that appear when there is a compound in the air, and then see when the first changes begin to occur. These begin long before a man enters a clinic or before he `becomes drowsy. This is the type of work that has to be done on a very large scale. As I said, there isn't any pollutant for which we have at the present time that kind of a figure. For example, the industrial level for car- bon monoxide is somewhere around a few `hundred parts per million. The California State Health Department has accepted the level of 30 parts per million. At 30 parts per million, 5 percent of your blood hemoglobin is taken up by carbon monoxide, instead of oxygen. That is nothing serious. But the smoker inactivates another 5 per- ``cent, so together that is 10 percent. The judgment `was made that 10 percent of the hemoglobin inacti- vated might be acceptable, but who determines whether it should be 5 or 10 percent? At a matter `of fact,' I d'on't like to have the court determine that `I am `all right with 5 percent of my blood hemoglobin inactivated. I don't like to have inactivation at any time. So here is where a tremendous amount of work must be done by the people in the uni- versities, the different health' departments, and everywhere you can find competent people. Thank you. `Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Dr. Haagen-Smit. Your testimony has certainly covered the gamut of' problems that exist in the field of smog control and the necessary research. I want to ask just one question to start off with, and then I will ask Congressman Bell for questions. We are faced within the next year or so with a requirement for exhaust devices on automobiles, which even at a modest cost of $50 per automobile for 10 million cars produced a year would mean about $500 million, which of course will be paid by the automobile pur- chasers-by the taxpayers. PAGENO="0519" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 519 Do you feel in your opinion, we are justified in adding that amount of cost on the American automobile buyer at the present time, or do you feel a part of that money, say, 10 percent of it, could be better spent on additional research before we require mandatory devices? Dr. HAAGEN-SMIT. Well, Mr. Brown, I have been through that pro- cedure since 1947, when I first entered the smog field, and talked with you, if you remember. There was always the idea of puttir~g things off and there is always this idea that we have a solution around the corner. You hear of the electric car, you hear of all kinds of ideas. I am all for rapid transit. But, if we start digging now, you know we won't have a transit system by the year 2000, I mean a good one. So my answer is to install the devices. Many figures are very misleading. I am a moderate drinker, I should say. My bill per year is probably around $50 a year. Mr. BROWN. That is pretty moderate. Dr. H~GEN-SMIT. That is very moderate. You mtist admit that. If I had to choose between leaving drink alone or having clean air, I like clean air. Mr. BROWN. What you are saying then is that we should use the device, do the necessary research also, and if the extra money hurts, maybe do without tail fins, or items like that? Dr. HAAGEN-SMIT. Every time I look at a car, I am surprised how much unnecessary stuff there is on it. Mr. BROWN. I agree with that. Congressman Bell? Mr. BELL. Dr. Haagen-Smit, it is a pleasure to welcome you to the committee. I, too, think your statement is most informative and covered a big area. One question, Dr. Haagen-Smit. Should more of the NIH research be directed toward community hygiene problems, rather than well defined diseases, such as cancer, heart, and so forth? Dr. IIAAGEN-SMIT. No, I wouldn't make a choice there. We are rich enough to afford both and, as a matter of fact, there is over- lapping, you know. There are quite a .number of substances which have pathogenic ef- fects Which might lead to cancers so there is an overlapping. I think that a solution to those problems arid then the criteria that will have to be established will come from both sides, that is, the study of cancer for cancer's sake, and the study of the effect of those minute sub- stances in the air. Mr. BELL. In other words, the studies should not affect each other in any shape or form; you should study both the hygiene problem and the cancer and heart problems? Dr. HAAGEN-SMIT. There is no reason at all to let it interfere. Mr. BELL. Do you see adequate cooperation within universities in research programs and training and control? In other words, do the departments of chemistry, biology, sanitation engineering, and so forth all plan a program together, or is the research fragmented in some way? Dr. HAAGEN-SMIT. I think that it is most often fragmented, but then I think that is probably due to the peculiar nature of professors, rather than a feeling that they should not cooperate. PAGENO="0520" 520 ADEQUA'cT O1~ TECENOLOGY FOR POLLTJTION ABATEMENT However, there is cooperation. There is no doubt about it. We have at our Institute, Dr. McGee, who is heading `the environmental pollution group. His interest is mostly in water. We have also' Dr. Fredamalather, who is specifically interested in the deposition of material in air. So this is an air pollution problem. He talks freely to his co'H~agues. There is no doubt about it. If you mean is there a tendency to form a united group, 1 think that in most cases you will find this absent. Mr. BELL. In other words, you are saying there could be more cooperation. Dr. HAAGEN-SMIt. There `could be more cooperation, but I think that the Federal~overnme~t has dane a very worthwhile job in given training gra~ts~to the different universities. I know of about 10 of those different groups across the country, at Harvard, South Carolina, Virginia, and a few other places. A staff member is added to the existing group of people, and he then organizes a unit on enviràninental hygiene. `Mr. BE~LL. Dr. Haagen-Smit, in the broad pi'cture do you think there is a lack of skilled, manpower on management techniques in the pollution abatement industry? Dr. HAAGEN-~Irr. Oh, yes. Mr. BELL. You think there'definitel.y is? `Dr. HAAGEN-S?~P. Thatreport that we wrote, ~` storing the'Qual- ity of the Air and Environment," which was issued by a Presidential Panel, has so many quotations and chapters'on the manpower require- ment. Is there any doubt about it that we must have more men? The question we discussed in this report was where we could get this manpower. Mr. BELL. Go ahead and comment on that. Dr. }IAAG~EN-SMrP, There are several places where you can get those people. First, of course, you have-let's `call them the old ones, since I am old myself, I can cadl them the old ones-the ones that have learned the trade 25 or maybe 50 years ago.' These should have retraining programs. I resented it wh'en one of my colleagues said "retreading." What we are dewling `with here is the introduction of new substances in the' Los Ange~les area. We have the photo industry enter the area, and the old ~smog ii~spector is, `of course, at a handicap because he doesn~t know anything about photochemistry. The new specialists `will learn about this~ When insecticides, for example, get into the air, how do the older men cope with them? There should be a retraining, and this is partly done by the ~Federal Governm~nt-~th~ Department of Agriculture, t'he Department of Health, and the Department of the In~terior. Then we come, of course, to the group that will take over from us, the new ones. This is where those Federal training grants come in, and they' could easily be increased. We should have ~many centers where this training of modern air pollution control men take place. We should also have the funds that are necessary to attract people into this field, because it is very often forgotten that we buy our stu- dents nOw. Mr. BROWN. Just like our football players? Dr. HAAGEN-SMIT. rphat is just about right. PAGENO="0521" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 521 It is hard for some of us to get over this idea, but there are so many attractive fields. If you consider a boy at the beginning of his life who can work with Dr. Pickering (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) and design spacecraft for flights to Mars or Venus, while an alternative is to clean up the pollution problems from a powerpiant, for example. The latter may be a very noble enterprise, but it doesn't appeal to the boy. Now, money speaks a good deal and we must have the support of these fellows to want to go into such a field. Mr. BELL. Thank you, Dr. Haagen-Smit. I have one other question I would like to ask you. Should the Federal funding of technological development stop at the proof-of-principle stage, or extend on to hardware prototypes and to demonstrations, and so forth? Where do you think the Federal Government's role should extend to in this particular area? Dr. IIAAGEN-SMIT. I don't believe that this answer can be given quite one way or the other. Let me give an example. The Bureau of Mines has for many, many years done research on shale. After all, shale is not as valuable as coal, but we h&ve lots of it; so a great deal of research went on, basic research. They also had pilot plants, because nobody else wanted to do it. Now, if we leave this to the coal people, maybe something like that wouldn't happen. I believe that in the automobile field, for example, some competition. wouldn't hurt the automobile industry. I think that the work which is going on, for example, at UCLA, and at some of the oil companies on reducing oxides of nitrogen and also hydrocarbons is good. It was very good when outside agencies, the muffler makers,. began to produce mufflers. By the time it was set to be put on a car, we suddenly found there were some other solutions, too. I think we should always be in a position to have the funds and knowledge with which to cope with such a situation. So my answer is that there should be a certain competency in the Government organi- zations and at the universities to do certain things. Mr. BELL. In other words, you do feel as far as the Federal and local governments and universities and industry, there should be some cost sharing in this program, too? I am talking about for research contracts. Dr. HAAGEN-SMIT. The Federal Government, of course, should pro- vide support as well as State goveruments. There is no reason why the industry couldn't support research, and they do, as a matter of fact. There are brains in the university which may not be available to the industry, which may not be better but do represent different ap- proaches. Some of the people in mathematics, physics, or chemistry might do better in the university atmosphere, and to draw upon their talents funds should be supplied. Mr. BELL. Of course, we all recognize the difficulty in industry and in other areas, too. It is an additional cost to industry, basically, and I suppose from that standpoint you could say it would be necessary for some kind of cost sharing and participation of `governmental or- ganizations until we can get over the difficulties of the extra cost involved. Dr. HAAGEN-SMIT. There is a certain extra cost involved, yes; but on the other hand, there are some advantages to `be gained, too. So I don't feel too sad about the- PAGENO="0522" 522 ADEQUACY'br T C~OLOGT FO~E~ `rOLLu~rxO~ ABATEMENT Mr. BELL. In other words, there may be created an incentive to free enterprise from the development of additional methods of selling programs? Dr. HAAGEN-SMIT. That is a possibility; yes. Mr. BELL. That is all. Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much, Dr. Haagen-Smit. The com- mittee has certainly benefited from your testimony. If we have any further questions which we feel need to be explored, I hope you will allow us to send them to you in writing. Dr. HAAGEN-SMIT. Thank you. (The information requested is as follows:) SPATBMBNT n~ t'n. A. J. HAAGItN-SMrr, CALIFORNIA INSTITtTF OF TuCHNOLOGY' The nationwide application of existing methods of air pollution control would go far towards clearing the air of most of our cities. ITigh efficiency dust col- lection electrostatic precipitators, scrubbers, etc., can take care of particulate matter and a variety of gases. There are, however, some noteworthy exceptions to this general stalement; One has to do with the development of smog in large urban areas, such as Los Ang~les, where automoblie exhausts' are a major cause of concern. Control methods have been applied but calculations of theoretical efficiencies coupled with practical Considerations show that we must go further in' control than is presently contemplated. This control Includes hydrocarbons and their derivatives as well as oxides of nitrogen formed in the high temperature reactions between nitrogen and oxygen. While it is true that efficient control methods exist for dusts, fumes and aerosols, and the efficiency is high for larger particles, smaller particles `escape and remain suspended in the atmosphere. Our upper respiratory system is a barrier to the larger particles; the smaller ones which are not controlled, readily reach the lungs. With our increasing urbanization and in~reasiug pollution with small particles, ways have to be found to ca'tch these and prevent serious damage to our health. In all control work instrumentation `Is of great importance. One has to meas- ure pollutant levels in the atmosphere and also the quantities emitted by various, sources of pollution. There is a need for instrumentation, which gives a con- tinuous record and where price is of secondary importance. There Is also a need, for low cost analytical tools. Control of our pollution is' indicated when our health is affected `or our senses are offended, when animal and plant life is affected, and damage to materials is seen. In each case the degree of control is a balance between technical feasi- bility and economic judgment. For control purposes It is of great importance to acquire the knowledge at what levels harm may be done. These criteria form the basis of legal standards for control. At present there are no satisfactory criteria for any one of the pollutants and a greatly accelerated program to ac- quire this fundamental knowledge for any control program is' of prime importance. Mr. BROWN. `Thank you. Our next witness is Mr. Louis J.'Fuller. Mr. Fuller is the air pol- lution control officer in the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District, and in that capacity I am sure he has had considerable ex~ posure to this problem. We are happy to see you here, Mr. Fuller. STATEMENT OP LOUIS J. PULLER, AIR, POLLUTION CONTROL O~TI- OER, LOS' ~NGELES COUNTY'AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT' Mr. FULLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Bell, and gentlemen. `I think the urgency. of our situation here in Los Angeles i~ouldhave been more apparent if the hearings had been held last Friday, rather than today. ` ` ` , SIr, BROWN. I arrived last Friday, and I appreciate your comment. PAGENO="0523" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 523 Mr. FULLER. I think I can also appreciate the position you gentle- men are in. You have a grave responsibility which I recognize. I think further that you will also recognize that it is usual for any speaker or witness to recall a statement from some previous person which has some bearing. I would like to at this time make reference to a statement from one of the political giants of our American his- tory, Thomas Jefferson. He wrote that "men are inherently capable of making proper jucig- ments if they are properly informed." That is what you gentlemen are seeking, I am sure. Now, this presupposes, I am sure, that a witness is capable of giving you information which is proper and on which you can base sound judgments. I will try to do this. I have prepared a statement here, but because of the atmosphere which has been generated by the testimony of Dr. Haagen-Smit, rather informal, I think I will depart, if I may, somewhat from my prepared statement. Mr. BROWN. That will be very satisfactory. Mr. FULLER. But in leading up to what I have to say, and a recom- mendation I would like to make `for your consideration, I would like to discuss briefly the financial burden which has been borne by the county in the last 18 years. The air pollution experienced during the late forties and early fifties consisted of about 40 percent emissions from stationary sources-in- dustry and rubbish disposal-and about 60 percent of emissions from automobiles. Today, pollution from rubbish disposal has been elimi- nated, pollution from industry has been reduced almost to the prac- ticable minimum, but pollution from motor vehicles has been con- trolled only slightly. We are making a tremendous inroad on this, and lest there be any misunderstanding in what I have to say, let me make this statement at this time. I think that the efforts and the work that has been accomplished by the motor vehicle pollution control hoard and its staff since 1960 has been highly commendable. They are pioneering in a field in which there was resistance, and what they have accomplished I `think con- stitutes the highest type of public service. They are to be, in my opinion, congratulated for the efforts they have made. At present, control measures now in effect are keeping a total of 6,185 tons of pollution out of the air of Los Angeles Oounty every day. Of these 6,185 tons, 5,085 tons are controlled as the result of the steps taken by the air pollution control district in regulating stationary sources. The other 1,100 tons are being controlled by the installation of crankcase and exhaust control devices. Still uncontrolled and'being emitted are pollutants totaling `18,780 tons per day. Of this, 1,310. tons come from all stationary sources including not only industry, but all combustion processes such as do- mestic heating and cooking as well. The other 12,420 tons are being emitted from motor vehicles, meaning for the most part from the ex- haust pipes of gasoline-powered automobiles. That is the balance sheet: 6,185 tons controlled; 13,730 tons uncon- trolled. That which can be controlled from nonmoving sources has been almost completely controlled; that which can be controlled PAGENO="0524" 524 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATE1~ENT from automotive sources has scarcely been touched and makes up 90 percent of our problem. The cost to control 5,085 tons of pollution from stationary sources has been at least three-quarters of a billion dollars. Some of this. we can measure with exactness, the remainder we can estimate. For ex- amjile, a permit must be obtained for every piece of air pollution con- trol equipment installed in Los Angeles County, and we keep a pre- cisé record of th~. cost of this equipment. Our records show that in- dustry has expanded more than $130 million for such control equip-, ment. This does not include, however, the cost of maintaining or operating `this equipment, or the value of the land it occupies, nor does it take into account the cost of designing~'and building:into other basic equipment the modifications necessary to `meet our requirements with- out use of. separate control devices. Wherever this is, possible, it is done. The true cost to industry may be twice the $130 million. An- other item which we measure precisely is the amount paid for fees for these permits, `and the amount paid as fines for convictions of viola- tions of our rules. Since 1948 these two items amount to $2,875,000. We also know accurately ~the cost of the air pollution control `district f'or the 18 years of its existence: $42,530,000. Of this amount, more than $6 million have been spent for basic research. In addition, how- ever, Los Angeles County taxpayers have also borne a pro rata share of `the air pollution expenditures of the State of California and of the Fed~ral Government; and that is a `sizable amount. Another area of expense has been rubbish collection and disposal, which costs an estimated $55 million a year in Los Angeles County. Since 1957 this has amounted to $450 million. All of this expenditure for control is only the top of the iceberg of the cost of air pollution. There is no way of knowing the full cost to Los Angeles County over the past 20 years, but we can make an estimate. President Johnson has given the Federal Government's estimate of the cost of air pollution to the Nation as $11 billion each year. Los Angeles County represents about 5 I~ercent of the national market, and if we assume that we share the national air pollution cost in the same 5-percen't proportion, then in 20 years we have suffered a loss equal to $11 billion. Because the figure is so staggering, our inclination is to discount it, and then discount It again, but even so we must conclude that the loss has, been tremendous, And th'at is without taking account of the loss of productivity due to the dist'ress ~of air pollution, and the price of pain and suffering, impaired health, and loss of well-being for millions oi~ people, Nor does it take into account the general friction and drag on the entire mechanism of society caused by the debate, and pulling and. h~auli~ig over the problem; the deluge of billions of words printed and spoke~i about the. subject; the legislative hours expended, and the cost in tiwe aw1'm~oney of proceedings such as this very hearing. For ex~mpl~,, the,, cost, to the APCD of just two proceedings that have ex- te~de~ ovei~ `the past 3 years have cost about a quarter.miilion dollars. Now, we have been fortunate,gentlemen, in receiving some high corn- menjs, and accolades, frOm the Vice President of the United States. I rnigb~tqiA~ote, a~ recent statement of his. He said: PAGENO="0525" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOB POLLUTION A~BATE~ENT 5~5 The war Los Angeles is waging against air pollution is already a modern legend * * ~. The experience of Los Angeles has shown that local government can control most sources of air pollution, if they will * * ~. The skeptics would do well to take a close look at what you have achieved here. Now, at this point, gentlemen, if I may, I will not read the rest of this statement, but I would like to hand to you a report on air pollu- tion engineering in Los Angeles County. Mr. BELL. Mr. Chairman, I move this be made a part of the record. Mr. BROWN. Without objection, that will be made a part of the record. (The report referred to is as follows:) 68-24~O-C6-vo1. 1-34 PAGENO="0526" ~OT~T1'T~TON A13ATFJMEN~I' Am POLtU~f'ION ENGINEERING IN Los ANdELIIS COUNPT (By Robert 0. Lun~he, Director of Engineering; Eric E. Lemke, Principal Engineer; Ralph L. Weimer, Air Pollution Engineer; Julien A. Verssen, Air Pollution Engineer; Louis J. Fuller, Air Pollution Control Officer; and Robert L. Chass, Chief Deputy, Air Pollution Control Officer, July 1~ 1966) CONTEN1~S Page Introduction 527 Legislative support 527 Prohibitions 530 Engineering control equipment 531 Electrical precipitators 531 Baghouses 531 Fume burners - 531 Other solid material collectors 531 Scrubbers and washers 531 Vapor collection equipment 531 Absorbers 531 Adsorbers.. 531 Onntrol program achievements 531 Engineering "flrsts" 535 Problems for further control 541 Motor vehicles.... 541 Fuel oil burning 542 Organic solvents 542 Oonclusions 543 Photographic case histories (this section omitted; available in the committee files). LIsT o~ TABLES Table I. Oontaminants prevented from entering Los Angles Oounty atmosphere from stationary sources In tons per day, as of January 1966 528 IL Emissions of contaminants into the Los Angeles county atmosphere from stationary sources in tons per day, 1948 and 1966 529 III. Los Angeles Oounty "firsts" in air pollution control - 536 IV. Typical costs of basic and control equipment Installed in Los Angeles Oounty 539 V. Emissions of air contaminants into the Los Angeles county atmosphere from motor vehic1es~ - 541 PAGENO="0527" ADEQUACY ~F TECHNOLOGY FO~ POLLI3TIO~ ABATEMENT 527 INTRODUCTION Am POLLUTION ENGINEERING IN Los ANGELES COUNTY Los Angeles County, the largest heavily-industrialized, semi-tropical area in the world, is afflicted with a serious and well-publicized air pollution problem. This problem is accentuated by average wind speeds of less than siv miles per hour, and temperature inversions on more than 260 days per year, which restrict dispersion of the air contaminants generated by the activities of seven Inillion people. Sunlight acting upotL the mixture of contaminants in the stagnant reservoir of air induces the phenomenon known as photochemical air pollution, commonly called smog. This type of air pollution is identified by distinctive eye irritation, ozone formation, vegetation damage, rubber cracking, and reduction in visibility. Non-meteorological factors have been contributing to intensification of the smog problem over the years. Since 1939 population has more than doubled, industry has expanded from approximately 6000 establishments to more than 20,000 in 1966, and automobile registration, gasoline consumption and fuels usage have increased sharply. The only influence opposing this growth has been the stationary source control program. Eighteen years of prosecuting this vigorous program in Los Angeles County has demonstrated that industrial operations can be compatible with clean air in a communit3r with strict air pollution laws. This program also has shown that remedies now are available for most types of air pollution problems wherever they may occur. The program has not been cheap. In addition to nearly two decades of ex- penditures `by the District for research, engineering and enforcement, industry has expended during this same period 127 million dollars for the installation of new control equipment units and 882 million dollars for basic production equipment. The cost of the basic equipment has undoubtedly been increased substantially to insure that it will comply with the exacting standards of the District's Rules and Regulation's. Moreover, although there are no de~criptive figures available, sizable sums also are spent each year to operate and main- tain both basic and control equipment. Records indicate the cost of air pollu- tion control equipment averages 25 per cent of the cost of the basic production equipment, but without these controls, air pollution in this area would be very measurably worse. Table I shows that this program is preventing some 5085 tons of various air contaminants from entering the Los Angeles atmosphere each day. Of this total, control measures of the petroleum industry are responsible for removing some 3425 tons. `The prohibition of burning of high sulfur fuels accounts for another 535 tons. The ban on single chamber incinerators and open burning prevents another 605 tons from entering the atmosphere. The control of' air contaminants from mineral and metallurgical industries accounts for another 420 tons. `Of the 5085 tons of various air contaminants now prevented from entering the Los Angeles atmosphere from stationary sources each day, 1195 tons are hydro- carbons, `1320 tons are sulfur `dioxide, 1i~4'5 tons are carbon monoxide, 470 tons are aerosols', and 155 tons are oxides of nitrogen. Table II compares the emissions of each category of industry from 1948 to 1966. As low as the industrial emission levels of 1q66 are, however, the program will not be complete and a problem will still `be present in future years until effective control over the last remaining major sources of air pollution in Los Angeles County are achieved. These sources are the gasoline-powered vehicle, which is the largest source of air contaminants, fuel oil burning and organic solvent usage. LEGISLATIVE SUPPORT The accomplishments of the Los Angeles control program are attributable to strict application of effective air pollution legislation. `This legislation `stems from the enactment of the `basic State law in 1947 by the `California Legislature. This act was Assembly Bill No. 1 and was added as Chapter 2 to Division 20 of the `State of California Health and Safety `Code. This act established the machinery for the adoption of Rules and Regulations for the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District. The `statute enables a District to enact new and more stringent pi~ohibitions when needed and when essential technical information becomes available. Over the years thi's pro- vision has been utilized a's shown by the addition of 13 new prohibitions and many amendments to existing prohibitions. Each addition or amendment fol- lowed a thorough investigation of the emissions, pollution problems and control *otential. PAGENO="0528" 528 ADEQ~XACY OF TECHNOLOGr FOR POLLIJTION ABATEMENT Petroleum refining: Catalytic cracking Storgge Separators and sewers Blowdowus and relielvalves 112S absorption Others Petroleum marketing: Storage (ecclusive of re- fineries) Bulk loading Sers-icestations Petroleum production. Total, Organic solvent uses Chemical: Sulfur apd sulfuric acid..~.. Other Total Incineration Metals: Nonferrous 1~rous: Gray iron cupola Electric steel Open hearths Other Total Mineral: Asphalt batching. Asphalt roofing Other Total 25 350 105 125 90 5- 50 14 ~25 TABLE L-Uoiata,min,ants prevented from erttering Los Angetes Uousaty atmosphere from 8tQ~tiOna/ry sources in tons per da~i, January 1966 Emission sourcp category ~ UCanU other organic gases Aerosols NO~ ~ SO2 CO ~ 5 885 1,545 990 14 ~ ~ 885 ~ 1545 ~ - 20 20 25 20 165 20 ~ l~5 25 ~- 21 225 = 30 -~ 75 ~ 20 3 175 110 3 175 -~ 3 1 25 2 105 130 Combustion of fuels: Rule 62 Rule 62.1 1~4iscellaneous - Total (rounded): Rule 62 Rule 62.1 1 3 25 125 385 15 165 265 1,195 1,195 470 470 155 195 j 1,320 1,200 1,945 1,945 PAGENO="0529" TABLE 11.-Emissions of contaminants into the Los Angeles County atmosphere from stationary sources, 1948 and 1966 [Average daily emissions of air contaminants, in tons per day] Hydrocarbons, other organic gases Oxides of nitrogen Oxides of sulfur Carbon monoxide Aerosols - 1948 1966 1948 1966 1948 1966 1948 1966 1948 1966 Petroleum: Refining Marketing Production Organic solvent uses: Surface coating Dry cleaning Degreasing Others Chemical: 450 155 270 170 30 35 75 55 100 60 295 30 100 95 7 25 11 ~ 30 38 570 90 8 2 4 7 35 30 1 3 12 185 25 4 } 135 8 1 8 7 { 2 { Sulfurplants Sulfuric acid plants Others 25 60 15 1 20 145 325 1 3 Incineration Metals 1(10 1 20 1 a 6 { ~ - Minerals Combustion of fuels: i~~i:I:::::::::::::::::: M~sceilaneous - 2 } ``~ 1 { ~ *---- } i~ao - } is~o { ~ } x2 { Totals: T~i:::I::::::::::::: } ~ { ~ 1255, { ~ } ~sss } `1,040 { ~ } `270 1 In 1948, Rulos-fl2and 621 were nof in effect. The losses indicated are daily averages for the year. 0 0 0 0 0 0 z 96 z PAGENO="0530" 530 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT The statute also provided for a permit system, which inLos Angeles County requires approval by the Air~ Pollution Control Office prior to construction and prior to operation of equipment capable of emitting air cofltaminants. This permit system is one of the most effective means of preventing air pollution, and the provision for a construction permit has saved may companies the expense of installing and subsequently replacing inadequate control equipment. Under other provisions of the State law, a quasi-judicial Hearing Board was established to hear petitions for variances and appeals from deziiais of permits. If the Hearing Board judges that the evidence and equities justify a variance, It determines the conditions, duration and extent that a variance from require- ments are necessary `and permitted. To obtain a variance, the petitioner must demonstrate that he is `diligently following a `remedial program to develop or install controls for the equipment involved. PROHIBITIONS The prohibitions contained `in the Rules and Regulations of the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District are the most stringent anywhere in the world. They govern smoke, nuisance, particulate matter, sulfur compounds, combustion contaminants, dusts and fumes, open fires, incinerator burning, storage of petroleum products, oil effluent-water separators, gasoline loading, sulfur content of fudts, gasoline composition, animal reduction processes and gasoline loading into tanks. These prohibitory rules and their intents are: Rule 50: Ringelmann cMrt.-Establishes the maximum permissible time and opacity limits for the discharge of any contaminant. Rule 51: Nuisanee.-Defines a nuisance. Rule 52: Particulate matter.-Establlshes the maximuth allowable weight of discharge, of, particulate matter per cubic foot of effluent. Rule 53: Speeiliø contaminant&-Establlshes the ma~dmum allowable con- centrations f~r the discharge of. sulfur comp~unds and `combustion con- taminants. Rule 53.1: ScavenOer plants.-Specifies the conditions under which a sulfur scavenger plant may operate. Rule 54: Dust and fumes.-Establishes the maximum allowable weight of discharge for dust and fumes. Rule 56: Storage of petroleum products.-Describes equipment that can be used for the control of hydrocarbons from the storage of gasoline and certain petroleum distillateS. Rule `57: Open flres,-~--Bans burning combustible refuse in the open. Rule 58: IncInerator burning.-Bans the use of single chamber incinerators. Rule 59: Oil effluent water separators-Describes equiptnent that can be used for the control of hydrocarbons from oil-water separators. Rule 60: Circum'venfion.-Prevents the use of equipment which would tend to conceal the emissions of air contaminants without actually resulting in the control of air pollution. Rule 61: Gasoline loading into tank trucks and trailers.-Describes control equipment that can be used for the control of hydrocarbons from. the loading of gasoline into tank trucks. Rule 62 and 62.1: Sulfur content of fuels.-Bans the use of high sulfur fuel oils in the Los AngelesBasin. Rule 63: Gasoline speetflcations.-Prevents the sale of high olefin gasoline. Rule 64: Reduction of ainimal matter.-Describes equipment that must be used to control odors from rendering operations. Rule 65: Ga~o'line loading into trucks.-Descrlbes the equipment that must be used to óontrol hydrocarbon vapors from the loading of gasoline tanks. It can be seen that the Rules and Regulations affect the operation of every Industry, almost every commercial endeavor, and, In the case of open fires and incinerator burning, every homeowner in Los Angeles County. Through their enforcement, controls have been applied to such diverse sources and operations as Incinerators, rendering cookers, coffee roasters, petroleum refineries, chemical plants, rock crushers, asphalt plants, open hearth furnaces, electric furnaces, automobile assembly plants, as well as less obvious sources such as restaurants, crematories, and housIng tract developments. From the smelting of metal to the production of dog food, air pollution-prone operations have been brought within the scope of the control program. PAGENO="0531" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 531 ENGINEERING CONTROL EQUIPMENT From April 1948 to January 1966, 66,756 permits fOr basic and control e~ulp~ ment were issued by the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District. During this same period of time, the Air Pollution Control District denied 5457 applications for basic and control equipmnet valued at $526,655,000. The approximately 12,000 aIr pollution control devices installed in industrial plants vary widely in cost and collection efficiency. The principal types used in the engineering control program Included electrical, precipitators, baghouses, fume burners, centrifugal collectors, scrubbers and washers, vapor collection equip- ment, absorbers and adsorbers. Electrical Precipitators separate and collect particulate matter from dirt- laden gas streams. The control device contains oppositely charged, high voltage plates and wires. The solid materials in the gas stream are given an electrical charge by the wires, and then are attracted to the oppositely charged plates. Periodically, the particulate matter deposited on the plates are "rapped" or washed off and collected for harmless disposal. Baghouses colleCt particulate matter, and function much like the house- hold vacuum cleaner. They contain a number of tubular bags made of glass fiber, felt, or similar material. Dirt-laden gas streams are vented to baghouses through inlet headers, which distribute the gas under' pressure into the tubular cloth bags. The gas passes through the cloth, while the aerosol contaminants are filtered out and retained on the cloth. The filtered aerosols are removed from the bags by periodically stopping the gas flow' and shaking the bags or jetting air back through the bags, allowing the material to be collected in hoppers and the bags to be restored to operating efficiency. Fume Burners incinerate the combustible materials contained in a waste gas stream. These devices consist of a refractory-lined shell equipped with one or more natural gas burners. Sufficient time and temperature are most important factors in the ultimate efficiency of such devices. Other Collectors and separators commonly used to collect solid materials are cyclone separators and settling chambers. Cyclone separators employ the principle of centrifugal force to throw the solids out of the swirling gas stream, and function much like a cream separator. Settling chambers collect large solids by slowing the gas stream to permit heavy particles to settle out. &~rubbers and Washers cleanse particle laden gas streams by use of a spray which strikes the solids and washes them from the gas. Gas also may be bubbled through a liquid bath for cleansing. Vapor Collection Equipment captures vapors generated during the storage or handling of gasoline and other volatile products. The vapors expelled from storage vessels are conveyed through vent piping to collection equip- ment such as vaporspheres. The control System may compress and con- dense the collected vapors back into a liquid state, or may process them for removal by absorbers. In some cases, the vapors can be used to fuel boilers, and in other cases, they are Incinerated in fume burners. Absorbers employ a process in which a liquid dissolves a gas. They may be used to remove selectively one gas from another. Usually, absorbers are cylindrical towers which are packed with an inert material or equipped with trays or plates to increase contact area and efficiency of absorption. Adsorbers employ a physical process in which the molecules of either a gas or a liquid are captured and held by a solid material. Activated carbon is * a common adsorbent and has a large surface area available in the form of many very small capillaries to capture and hold gas and liquid molecules. The activated carbon very frequently Is regenerated by steam which vapor- izes the adsorbed material. A condenser returns the steam and adsorbed material to the liquid state. CONTROL PROGRAM ACHIEVEMENTS Each type of device possesses its own advantages and' limitations'. Each source poses different problems in terms of the volume, temperature, and chara'c~ teristics of the waste emitted from it. In effect, a solution must be tailored to the source. The degree of control which a community requires will dictate, In the main, which type of control will be utilized and the cost of the control system. Concrete examples of contaminant emission reducing actions, many employing PAGENO="0532" 532 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT the preceding devices, that have been effective in the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District's control program can be pointed out in almost every industrial activity. Large crude oil tanks at petroleum pipeline tank farms and marine terminals are equipped with vapor controls, such as floating roofs. Wet gas from produc- tion fields is collected and processed in natural gasoline absorption plants and dry ga~ is compressed, where necessary, and sold or used as fuel. Vented thermal dehydraitórs have been replaced with electrical dehydrs~tors to reduce hydrocarbons emitted through greater evaporation at the elevated tençiperatures. Vapor emissions from petroleum distillate storage tanks have been curbed through enforcement of Rule 56, enacted in 195g. The first control measure of Its type anywhere, this rule specified that all tanks greater than 40,000 gallons in capacity must be controlled when used for the storage of `a petroleum diStillate having a vapor pressure of 1,5 pounds per square inch absolute or greater. This one rule has resulted in a reduction of hydrocarbon vapor emissions of approxi- mately 355 tons per day. Attempts to control oil-effluent water separators began in 1953 and became effective with the enactment of Rule 59 in 1955. Phls rule prevents the emission of malodors and approximately 105 tons per day of hydrocarbons, Compliance with the rule is 100 per cent and, so far as is known, this is the only area of the United States in whIch contr~ls for separators ate required. Visible e'c~idence of technical progress in air pollution control in the petro- leum industry is provided by the replacement or conversion of cOnventional flares to smokeless-type ifares, One type of smOkeless flare uses steam Injection, another uses a series of venturi butners actuated individually or in groups by pressure increments. Since 1956, the operating controls of steam-injected re- finery flares have been elaborated in an effort to make them Oapable of handling without snioking the largest release of vapors expected, even during disaster conditions. Fluid catalytic cracking presents an~ air pollution problem because of the discharge of visible plumes, carbon monoxide, catalyst dust, hydrocarbons, and other air contaminants. In Los Angeles County, all fluid catalytic cracking units are equipped with approved dust collection equipment, such as electric precipitators, to coi~trol the catalyst dust. In addition, carbon inOnoaide waste heat boilers effectively and economically `control discharges of hydrocai~bons, carbon monoxide and plumes from these units. Because of the limitations imposed by regulations of the District, and. through the modernization of the refinery and petrochemical units, continued air pollu- tion control improvement for process equipment has been realized. The last major vacuum jet discharge into the atmosphere in this area was controlled by iTicinerating the efiluent vapors in a heater flrebo~. An estimated 450 pounds per day of hydrocarbon vapors from this one jet are now being used as a source of fuel. Mechanical seals on centrifugal pumps, manifolds for emergency relief sys- tems to smokeless-type refinery flares, sealed drains, and controlled Shutdown and startup procedures have further decreased the hydrocarbon emissions' from such mdnufacturing operations. Rule 01, which was adopted in 1950, requires that th~ hydrocarbon vapors dis~ placed from tank trucks during their loa*dii~g with large volumes of g~o~ne be collected and disposed of in an approved system. ApproxImately 50 tons per day of hydrocarbons now are prevented frOm being discharged into the atmos- phere during loading operations by this rule. This is a savings to the industry. Gasoline loading is controlled in no other area and, in fact, the control tech- nology was developed locally. An additional 14 tons per `day of hydrocarbons are prevented from entering the atmosphere by control of the filling of underground gasoline storage tanks from tank trucks, mostly in gasoline service stations. Rule 65, adopted in April 1964, prohibits the loading of gasoline into a stationary tank with a capacity of 250 *gallons or more unless through a permanent submerged fill pipe, or unless the tank is equipped as specified in Rule 56. The control of sulfur dioxide was one of the first major programs undertaken by the District after its formation in j947. One of the first successful phases of this effort involved the control of sulfur dioxide from sulfuric acid plants, all of which now are operating in compliance with Rule 53a. This rule limits the concentration of sulfur dioxide in the effluent gases to a maximum concen- tration of 0.2 per cent by volume. PAGENO="0533" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 533 An important breakthrough in the overall sulfur dioxide program came with the commercial development of the Claus sulfur recovery process, and with *the expansion of hydrogen sulfide extraction facilities in the refineries. The C1ai~s sulfur recovery-process converts hydrogen sulfide into elemental sulfur. Refineries which previously burned their hydrogen sulfide in combustion equip- ment to sulfur dioxide now send this hydrogen sulfide to sulfur recovery plants. In 1949, the first sulfur recovery plant constructed in this area began opera- tion to produce elemental sulfur from the hydrogen sulfide extracted by four refineries. In 1950, two more refineries began recovering their hydrogen sulfide and trucking it to a sulfuric acid plant. Today, nine sulfur recovery plants are operated by or for refineries in the area and as of January 1966 were preventing emissions of 885 tons of sulfur dioxide per day. Early in the Los Angeles County air pollution control program, it was de- termined that severe local nuisances and daily emissions of hundreds of tons of organic compounds and particulate matter resulted from open fires, single chamber incinerators, and burning dumps. These emissions contributed to local nuisances, visibility reductions, and other typical smog `symptoms. Soon after the activation of the Air Pollution Control District on October 14, 1947, action was started to prohibit these obvious and serious contributions to air pollution. The first abatement efforts of the District were directed at the open burning dumps. Injunctive actions brought against the dump operators proved very effective, and by the end of 1949, the open burning of refuse in all but one of the 54 dumps in Los Angeles County had been effectively eliminated. The last burning dump was eliminated in the following year. In 1955, Rule 57 was added to the Rules and Regulations of the District, pro- hibiting, with but few exceptions, the open burning of any combustible refuse in the Los Angeles Basin. Efforts of the District next were directed to the elimination of more than one and one-half million domestic single chamber incinerators and several thou-. sand of their inefficient industrial and commercial counterparts. On June 9, 1955, Rule 58 banned the use of all single chamber incinerators after September 30, 1957, the deadline date being fixed to permit the incorporated communities of the County sufficient time to provide for other means of refuse disposal. On March 14, 1957, the Board of Supervisors adopted Rule 58.1, which advanced the deadline for the ban to July 1, 1957, for single chamber incinerators at com- mercial and indu~trial establishments, as well as at multiple dwellings. Those operations, which require the burning of combustible waste product's, now can be conducted only in multiple chamber incinerators. Emission stand- ards applicable to this equipment were tightened in 1958 so as to reduce allowable concentrations of combustion contaminants from 0.4 to 0.3 grains per standard cubic foot of gas at 12 per cent CO2. Multiple chamber incineratoi~s which meet this new standard decreased emission of combustion contaminants about 90 per cent compared with the operation of single chamber incinerators. Refuse presently being burned in approved multiple chamber incinerators is principally from commercial and industrial establishments. There are also several large industrial incinerators, ranging in size from 500 pounds per hour to 6,000 pounds per hour, and designed primarily to dispose of wood, paper, and cellulose type waste material created by mass production industries. The num- ber of multiple chamber incinerators constructed since the ban of single chamber incinerators has not been as great as expected. Instead, most of the rubbish formerly burned now is being hauled to sanitary landfill sites. In general, rubbish collection charges have decreased since the ban, and most commercial and indus- trial establishments find it more economical to use refuse collection services than to construct a multiple chamber incinerator. Asphaltie concrete batching plants have been controlled in Los Angeles County with the use of water scrubbers. Most collection systems consist of simple cy- clone, used as a precleaner, followed by one or more long, internally fluted cylindrical spray chambers in which the dust-laden gases are admitted tangen- tially at high velocities. Emissions from concrete batching plants have been reduced by process changes and cloth filter devices. Malodors are the principal air contaminants caused by inedible rendering operations. Noxious ordors are evolved from the handling and storage of "dead stock," packing house scrap, blood, etc.; but, by far, the largest ordor sources are heated rendering cookers and driers. It is generally considered that handling and PAGENO="0534" 584 ADEQUACY OF TECHN~OLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT storage malodors are insignificant In comparison to those odors emitted from cookers and driers. Rule 64 was enacted in 1959 to combat noxious odors from inedible rendering operations. It requires, essentially, that all gases and vapors created in the heated reduction of Inedible animal matter be incinerated at 1200° F, or treated in a manner equally effective for purposes of air pollution control. All rendering equipment is vented to adequate odor control devices as of this date. Since 1961 the total quantity of feedstocks handled in local rendering systems has increased by approximately 40 per cent while reduction in total odor emission due to control measures has remained at better than 99 per cent. A quantitative measurement of odors developed by the Engineering Division has enabled the Air Pollution Control District to check constantly on the degree of control main- tained by the rendering industry, and on industrial compliance with the stand- árds specified in Rule 64. Since 1959, nuisance complaints of rendering odors received by the Air Pollution Control District have decreased sharply. Where source identification has been possible these have been traceable either to malfunctioning of control equipment, to operator negligence, or to inadequate housekeeping practices. The exact quantity of odors exhausted to the atmosphere during these excursions is impos- sible to assess, but it is apparent that any one of the plants engaged in rendering operations Is capable of producing more odors, if uncontrolled, than the total quantity of odors emitted from all Rule 64 control equipment combined. Under the Impetus of Rule 64, and with guidance from the District, Industry developed and placed in operation much original control equipment. As an example, the first unit in the U.S.A. to control odors from fish meal driers by mixing effluent gases with chlorine and scrubbing with sea water began in operation in May 1962. Since 1948, metallurgical melting operations in Los Angeles County have been subject to vigorous air pollution control measures. Both ferrous and non-ferrous metal melting operations have been affected. Ferrous operations include gray iron foundries and steel foundries. Non-ferrous operations include foundries making castings of brass, bronze, aluminum, zinc, lead, and magnesium, as well as secondary smelters used in the recovery of these metals. Air contaminating emissions from metallurgical industry melting operations consist principally of smoke, dusts, and metallic fumes. Characterized by their extremely small particle size, control of metallic fumes emissions requires highly efficient collec- tion equipment. Four types of ferrous melting furnaces now operated in Los Angeles County include gray iron cupo'l'as, reverberatory and open hearth furnaces, electric arc furnaces, and electric induction furnaces. Aerosol emissions resulting from cu- pola furnace operations consist of dust, smoke, and metallic fumes in varying quantities `depending upon the material's charged. The voluminous opaque emis- sion's from cupola furnaces were an air pollution problem which required early attention of the Air Pollution `Control District. Detailed source tests showed the emissions to be in excess of weight limits as well a's opacity limits. Enforce- tnent and application of permit standards `secured proper control of all cupola furnaces. PAGENO="0535" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTT~DN ABATEMENT 535 Since 1948, substantial increases have occurred in the total number of electric furnaces in use in Los Angeles `County, and in the total tonnage of steel melted in those furnaces. From 1948 to 1953 the total tonnage of electrié steel production increased greatly, even though the number of furnaces in operation remained the same. This resulted from the replacement `of `smaller capacity furnaces with larger ones. Since 153-54, `the reverse has occurred, with `a. substantial increase in usage of small capacity furnaces, having only a moderate effect on total pro- duction tonnage. Application of permit standards has insured that all electric steel furnaces operate in compliance with Air Pollution `Control District Rules. Currently there are over 400 companies engaging `In n'on4errous metal melting operations. Over 100,000 `tons per `month of `aluminum, brass', lead, magnesium, zinc and `other non-ferrous metals are processed in approximately 1~00 furnaces. Engineering estimates show that 75 tons of aerosol contaminants a~e prevented from entering `the atmosphere on an average day and but three tons `are emitted. The main regulatory `statute forcing `pollution from all types of metal melting furnaces to `be reduced to acceptable levels is Rule 54, which limits the weight of emission `on a graduated scale corresponding `to the amount of metal processed. Vigorous application `of Rule 54 `has changed `the industry from one of almost no control In 1988 to one of almost complete control In 1986, through the installa- tion of over 300 `devices consisting `mostly of `baghouses and electrical precipita- tors. Culminating `this program, but `by no means ending this period of achieve- ment, `is the placing in `operation of a ba'gh'ouse, the first `installation of Its kind to collect `all en±Essions within a building containing steel melting and pouring operations. This major piece of air pollution control equipment ha's been con- structed at a cost of `over 1.5 million `dollars. ENGINEERING "FIRSTS" In staying at least one pace ahead of the problem, the engineering control pro- gram has produced many "firsts" during the past eighteen years. The type `of equipment and approximate costs involved are listed in Taible III presented in the following pages. With `the technological developments necessary to keep pace, even `some `of these "firsts" `are no longer in use `since better methods of solving the air pollution problem have been found `and `adopted. Table IV gives a list of typical basic and control equipment installed In Los Angeles Oounty over the past eighteen years. In some cases, the cost of the con- trol equipment i's but `a small fraction of `the cost of the production equipment. In other `cases, the cost `of control equipment i's greater than the cost of the basic equipment. PAGENO="0536" TABLE 111.-Los Angeles County "firsts" in air pollution control Exhaust system and electric precipitator with waste heat boiler serv' jug an open hearth steel melting furnace. Electric precipitator serving an aluminum dross recovery plant Chemical plant to recover elemental sulfur from refinery waste hydro- gen sulfide. Exhaust system, quencher, and baghouse serving two iron melting cupola furnaces. Baghouse serving a galvanizing kettle Water spray cooler and baghouse filter serving an asphalt roofing paper saturator. Electric precipitator serving an iron melting cupola Exhaust system with electric precipitator serving 2 75-ton and 1 50-ton electric steel melting furnaces. Pease-Anthonyventuri-cyclonescrubber Exhaust system with afterburner and baghouse serving aluminum sweat furnace and a rotary aluminum chip dryer. Water scrubber serving galvanizing kettles Boiler firebox and crude oil absorber serving refinery waste water system. Water scrubber coupled with electric precipitator for controlling fumes from fluxing of aluminum in a reverberatory furnace. Electrostatic precipitator serving an asphalt roofing paper saturator~ - Water scrubber for control of fumes from airblown asphalt manufac- ture. Sour water oxidizer to convert odorous sulfides into water-soluble thiosulfates. Absorber unit employing gasoline as the absorbing medium for re- covery of vapors collected from bulk loading of tank trucks. Vapor collection system for gasoline loading rack at refinery First brass furnaces of this type to be controlled. First electric ste8l furnace ever to be controlled with a baghouse. First coffee roaster ever equipped with afterburner. First direct fired afterburner and the first really satisfactory control device on a varnish, kettle. First open hearth furnaceLto have satisfactory air pollution control equipment. First dross recov~ty plant ever controlled by a precipitator. First chemical plant in Los Angeles County to recover waste hydrogen sulfide gas and convtrt to elemental sulfur. First iron cupola ever to be satisfactorily controlled. First baghouse to serve a galvanizing installation. First baghouse ever used to control oil mists from an asphalt roofing paper saturator. First electric precipitator ever used to control a gray iron melting cupola furnace. First satisfactory installation, ever to control large electric steel melting furnaces. FirSt ceramic `frit smelter to be controlled satisfactorily. First really satisfactory installation ever to control such nonferrous operations. First control' device capable of controlling odors and gases from a gal- vanizing operation. First controls for a refinery waste water system in which separator is covered and collected gases are absorbed or incinerated. First such control system ever installed for the combined problem of fluoride and chloride fluxing flumes. First 2-stage electrostatic precipitator ever installed to control a roofing paper saturator. First installationever to use a sea water scrubber. First installation for disposal of sulfides in effluent water as contrasted to standard method of burning to sulfur dioxide. First installation of its type ever to be designed and installed. First vapor collection system to collect escaping hydrocarbon vapors released in bulk loading of gasoline into tanker trucks at loading racks in refineries. First control of open effluent oil-water separator by covering the oil separation section with a rectangular designed floating roof. First paint bake oven equipped with a direct flame aft~rburner to con- trol emissions. First direct flame afterburner ever installed on a meat smokehouse. Date placed in operation Equipment Cost in dollars Remarks . Exhaust system with bagbouse serving brass melting crucible furnaees Exhaust system and baghouse serving an electric steel melting furnac& Afterburner serving a coffee roaster Afterburner for a varnish cookins kettle January 1948 August 1949 February 1950 June 1950 August 1950 November 1950 December 1950 January 1951 February 1951 May1951 January 1952 Do February 1952 April1952 February 1953 Do' June 1953 July1953 November 1953 Do December i954~ Do January 1955 April 1956 Do 4, 000 2,500 1,800 :2,000 110,000 30,000 1, 150, 000 15, 000 1, 000 25, 000 40, 000 650,000 25, 000 6, 000 12,000 340, 000 45, 000 40, 000 45, 000 30,000 40,000 30,000 250,000 5,030 4,000 d 0 H 0 0 0 0 H 0 H H Floating roof for effluent oil-water separator Direct flame afterburner on a paint bake oven Direct flame afterburner serving meat smokehouse PAGENO="0537" October 1956 - November 1556 March 1957 October 1957 January 1958 February 1958 March 1958 Do 1 Do April1958 August 1958 February 1959 1 June 1959 July 1959 September 1960 November 1960 Baghcuse with radiant cooling ducts on glass furnace Scrubber coupled with an electrostatic precipitator serving meat smokehouses. System for control of discharge from coker unit blowdown, consisting of water scrubber, condensers and final discharge to refinery flare. Exhaust system with baghouse serving four stereotype metal melting pots. Direct fired afterburner serving plastic curing oven Activated carbon adsorber installed to control solvent losses from dry cleaning plant. Direct fired afterburner on a large paint-baking oven Activated carbcn vapor adsorter on a 5-color rotogravure printing press. Activated carbon adscrber serving 47 paint-mixing tanks Catalytic afterburner on paint bake oven in automobile assembly plant. 2-stage combustion modification of front-fired powerplant steam generators. Electric precipitator serving a 1,254,000-lb-per-hour oil-burning steam generator. Afterburner for three silicone rubber curing ovens Cloth filter dust collector for dry batching of concrete Sludgeincinerator - Direct-fired afterburner serving a phthalic anhydride manufacturing unit. First installation of control system on glass furnace. First such control device ever installed to control smoke from smoke- house. First system for control of hydrocarbons from coker unit blowdown. First such controls installed at a printing establishment to control metal melting operations. First afterburner ever installed to control the discharge from a plastisol curing oven. First such installation for this type cleaning plant. First installation of its kind on an automobile paint bake oven. First regenerative activated carbon adsorber unit serving rotogravure press and which was installed strictly for air pollution control pur- poses. First such installation made at an automobile manufacturing plant for the purpose of controlling solvents. First catalytic afterburner installed to control paint baking oven in an automobile assembly plant. First application of delayed air entry, as a means of reducing oxides of nitrogen emissions from large oil-fired steam generators First time any oil-burning steam generator has even been equipped with an air pollution control device other than controls for soot blowing. Eliminates visible emissions. Cloth baghouse using a canvas hood. Special designed incinerator that burns heavy ends from ethylene manufacturing facility. First direct-fired afterburner for a phthalic anhydride unit, as opposed to other units in the United States controlled by catalytic combus- tion units. First commercial gasoline loading arm with integral vapor recovery line designed expressly for air pollution controlof hydrocarbon vapors displaced during filling of tank trucks and trailers and equipped with positive safety features. First in Los Angeles County for drying auto bodies coated with water based primers. First hydrocracking unit in Los Angeles County for producing low olefin content gasoline from diesel oil and heavy naphtha. First direct-fired afterburner to incinerate vapors from can coating oven operations. The heat from the afterburner is used to preheat incoming effluent. First activated carbon adsorbing device used to recover organic vapors from a degreasing system. Waste gases are burned in a boiler with the gases scrubbed before enter- ing boiler and after leaving the boiler. Automatic blending of various gasoline stocks by means of electronic panels through pumps and valves with controlled loading to each truck. Heated reverse air jet type baghouse controls emission from 2 transfer points and ships' holds during loading of dusty material. First installation in the United States to continuously extract tallow and fats from rendered animal matter with a hydrocarbon solvent. Do Integral gasoline loading and vapor recovery arm 8,500 10, 000 385, 000 9,000 2,800 4,000 16,000 48, 000 10,000 70, 000 40, 000 1, 000, 000 2,000 3,500 23, 500 20,000 2,000 10,000 530,000 37,000 10,000 8,500 1, 100,000 5,000 200,000 February 1961 March 1961 April 1961 Do Do Do March 1962 April1962 Automotive bake oven for water-based primers Hydrocracking unit Direct-fired afterburner for a can coating oven Activated carbon adsorbing device for a degreasing system Waste gas disposal system in a vinyl chloride operation Automatic gasoline blending Baghouse to control emissions from ships' holds Continuous solvent extraction unit for rendered animal matter 96 (-I 0 0 0 cJ~ 1 no longer in operation. PAGENO="0538" 1 Unit no longer in operation. TABLE 111.-Los Angeles County "firsts" in air pollution control-Continued * Date placed in operation Equipment Cost in dollars Remarks . May 1962 Do Electric induction furnace to melt gray Won Chlorinator-scrubber serving a fish meal drier 45,000 50,000 First electric induction furnace toreplace a cupola for melting gray Iron. First such unit In the United States to control odors from a flshnie~l drier. Gases are mixed with dry chlorine gas and then scrq~bed with sea water. - September 1962 October 1962 ~ Scrubber serving TCC unit ~ Control of sedlinentation tanks in a water reclamation plant 15,000 1,525,000 Fixed-type water-scrubber to collect catalyst dust. Replaces ~toto clone, less maintenance. Two exhausters vent covered scdimentati~n tanks through aeration tanks. November 1962 1.._ February 1963 April 1963 Multiple-chamber incinerator for the burning of chaff from coffee roasting. Bottom loading gasoline rack Scrubber to control 13 ceramic porcelain spray booths 3,000 14,000 45,000 First multiple-chamber incinerator for burning of chaff. In th~ past, afterburners had been used to dispose of chaff. First control of hydrocarbon emissions from bulk loading by means of a bottom-loading vapor collection system. Scrubber has an air to water ratio of 25 to 1. 530 nozzles are re~ul~eU in scrubber. March 1964 Baghouse on three rotary fit smelters 60,000 Baghouse handled 12,000 CFM at 20f' F. Cooling train pr~scc~Ies collector. June 1964 August 1964 Flare system serving covered waste water separator system and dehy- drator tanks. Direct-fired afterburner for a can coating oven - ~ 2,500 23,000 Elevated flare operating without steam disposes of vented gas fr~n system. - Waste heat from the afterburner supplies all the heat requfredhy ~j~e oven. - October 1964 November 1964 1965 Afterburner for two rubber grinders Baghouse serving a grain loading facility Baghouse serving pouring floor emissions at a steel mill Baghouse serving a 2,200,000 pound per hour steam generator during oil fired. 3,500 130, 09(1 I, 409,000 1,000,000 Two rubber grinders in series grind scrap rubber. Formerly this operation created smoke and odors. Grain terminal with controls on all grain receiving and loading fa~iilftscs. First installation to co lect all emissions within a building cont~inmg steel melting and pouring operations and to vent them to a bagboq4(~. The emissions from the electric steel melting furnaces also controlled by the same baghouse. First fabric dust collector to be installed at a power plant steam gene- rator. A dry alkaline additive will be used to effect the filtration of sulfur trioxide, the major cause of visible emissions. ~0 i_I PAGENO="0539" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 53~1 ~ C.) r~) c) PAGENO="0540" 540 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATE~tT~NT PAGENO="0541" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 541 PROBLEMS FOR FURTHER CONTROL The three air pollution problems in Los Angeles County which aro still of major concern and which must be further controlled are fuel oil burning, organic solvents and the motor vehicle. 1. Motor vehicles The complete solution to the smog problem in the Los Angeles Basin depends not only on control of stationary sources, but also upon the control of emissions from motor vehicles. As stationary sources have been controlled, and vehicle population has risen, pollution from vehicles ha~ increased in relative importance until it is now responsible for about 85 per cent of the contamination in the atmosphere in the Los Angeles Basin. To indicate the magnitude of the problem, in the beginning of 1965, 3.5 million motor vehicles in Los Angeles County were consuming a daily total of 7.4 million gallons of gasoline, resulting in emissions to the atmosphere of 12800 tons of air contaminants. This figure is indeed startling when it is realized that only 5900 tons of contaminants were emitted from vehicles in Los Angeles County in 1948. (See Table V.) The most conspicuous effects of smog, eye irritation, reduced visibility, and damage to growing vegetation and to property, are traceable to the "photo- chemical smog reaction". This occurs when auto exhaust is acted upon by sunlight. The hydrocarbons, which are present in the exhaust as unburned gasoline, react chemically with oxides of nitrogen, which are formed during the burning process in the engine. The resulting chemical products create smog. While the exhaust is responsible for the largest emission from motor vehicles, crankcase and evaporation emissions must also be considered. Crankcases must be ventilated if the engine is to continue to operate properly, but the fumes vented contain substantial amounts of unburned gasoline that leak past the piston rings. This leakage, termed "blowby" accounts for about 25 per cent of the total hydrocarbon emission from automobilqs. For this type of emission there Is a simple system of control which imvolves recirculating the crankcase emissions back into the engine intake system so they are drawn into the cylinders and burned. TABLE V.-Emissions of aSr contaminants into Los Angeles Connty atmosphere from motor vehicles Source ~ Average daily emissions of air contaminants (In tons per day) Ilydrocarboils and other organic gases Oxides of nitrogen Oxides of sulfpr Carbon monoxide . Aerosols 1948 1 1965 1948 1965 1948 1965 1948 1965 1948 1965 Gasoline.powered vehicles: Exhaust - Blowby 2 Evaporation Diesel-powered vehicles Total (rounded) 630 215 155 6 1,400 190 340 8 215 6 490 8 47 1 30 2 4, 570 35 2 10,300 30 2 20 2 45 2 1,000 1, 540 220 500 50 30 5, 000 10,330 20 45 1 1948 emIssion data has been revised on basis of 1965 baseline date. 2 Blowby emissions are not controlled in 1948 and are partially controlled in 1965. As a result of laws passed by the California State Legislature in 1959 and 1960, the State of California occupied the field for control of the motor vehicle. Under these laws, the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board was given jurisdiction over vehicular emissions in the testing and certifying of vehicle control devices, while the Department of Public Health was given jurisdiction over health aspects, in the establishing of standards f6r air quality and motor vehicle exhausts. More recent federal statues shift the responsibility for new car control to the federal government, leaving only used car control in the hands of the state government. Nevertheleis, the 13-man California Motor Vehich~ Pollution Control Board was the first to establish criteria for both crankcase and exhaust control devices. 68-240-66-vol. U-35 PAGENO="0542" M2 ADEQUACY OF `TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION AB4T~MENT Crankcase emission control systems have been installed on most new cars sold in California since 1961 and most used cars are required to be equipped with "blowby" control devices when sold. American automobile makers have been equipping all models manufactured in the United States since 1963 with Cali- fornia-approved crankcase control systems. At the same time, great progress has been made by the automobile manu- facturers in their attempts to reduce exhaust emissions. California motorists now have new cars delivered to them with factory-equipped devices or engine modifications permitting the exhaust emissions to conform with the California State Standards for Clean Air. This solves part of the problem, and it i~ anticipated that the remaining part, control çf exhaust emissions from used cars~, will be controlled by some of the devices developed, catalytic and direct-flame afterburners~ But neither this, nor any other solution to the motor vehicle problem, or any other air pollution problem, could have been envisioned, much less. developed, if the public had.nqt Uenianded..action and the control agency and the government officials had not accepted their responsibilities and worked to find the solutions, 2. Fuel oil burning The boilers now operating in steam power plants in Los Angeles County dis- charge visible smoke emissions when fired with heavy residual fuel oil and emit. substantial quantities of sulfur oxides, particulate matter and oxides of nitrogen. The Joint Research Council oij Power Plant Air Polli~ition Control was foriaed in 1956 for the express purpose of eliminating air contaminants from power plant flue gases. Since then, a great deal of money has been spent by participating power plant operators, both on the study of plume formation and on means of removing pollutants. Some important research by the Southern California Edison Company to control the particulate matter emissions from power plants Indicated the possibility of using an electrical precipitator. A one million dollar electrical precipitator was built but did not prove up to expectations. Subsequently, a one and one-half million dollar glass filter cloth baghouse was constructed to serve a new unit during oil-firing and is still being investigated. To increase effectiveness in removing particulates from the flue gases,, powdered dolomite is injected into the gas stream as a filter aid prior to entry to the baghouse. Strong efforts have also been made to secure additional natural gas supplies so that fuel oil burning can either be eliminated or restricted to periods when weather conditions are not conducive to smog formation. The substitution of natural gas eliminates six-sevenths of the pollution from power plants. During the peak periods of fuel usage, if all gas were burned the emissions would be reduced from 1,285 tons per day to 290 tons per day-eliminating 995 tons per day. The reductions of specific contaminants are: sulfur dioxide, 735 tons per day; oxides of nitrogen, 185 tons per day; aerosols, 65 tons per day; and hydro- carbons, 10 tons per day. 3. Organic solvents - In the industrial, commercial and domestic activities carried on in Los Angeles County many different solvents are used which are eventually vaporized into the atmosphere. Alcohols, ethers, paint thinners `~nd lacquer thinners, are~ included in the definition of organic solvents. These organic solvent vapors react in the Los Angeles atmosphere to produce smog in the same mauner as gasoline vapors. Surveys have been made to identlf~ sources of emissions and usages of solvents; research experiments have been performed to determine the reactivities of various solvents; and engineering projects have been completed to develop feasible controls. The most recent estimates indicate that about 550 tons per day of these solvents are discharged into the atmosphere. Engineei-lng studies indicate three approaches to the successful reduction of organic solvent vapor emissions: (1) installation of equipment to capture, or consume, the organic vapors; (2) introduction of an operational change; and (3) alteration of the type of solvent used, probably the substitution of less reactive organic solvents or inorganic solvents such as water. Many direct flame incinerators are used in Los Angeles County today for control of odors and other combustible gases, including solvent vapors. These vary in size; some can IncInerate 700 pounds of solvent daily, others only a few pounds.' One plant alone has 14 units which incinerate a total of 4,800 pounds PAGENO="0543" ADEQUACY OF T~CENOT~OaY FOR PoLLUflON ABATEMENT 543 of ~lvent each day. rAboratory analyses thave~rPvIded datn~needed on the efficiency of units in incinerating solvents evaporated clUnin~ the baking of va~rlous organic surface coatings to guide the Air Pollution Control t~istrict engineers in their evaluations of permit applications. The adoption of Rule 66 will be the District's major action to eliminate or reduce the effect of solvent emissions. Cognizance by industry of the District's intent with regard to solvents has led to several technological advances which are Engineering "firstS" in air pollution control. One such "first" is the integral bake oven-afterburner combination wherein the direct-fired afterburner supplies all the heat required by the oven. The first such unit wits placed in operation August 164. There are now many units in operation in Los Angeles County that are partially heated by the'afterburner control. CONCLUSiONS From our experiences over the years we can draw two important conclusionS. First, the technical know-how and the actual control devices are now available for the control of almost any air pollution problem existing from stationary sources and soon will be available for the control of vehicular sources. Second, each conununity must determine for itself the degree of clean air it desires and the price that the community is willing to pay for that degree of clean air. In Los Angeles, the price has been high because the control program was a pioneering effort. The price in other areas should be much lower because of that effort. Results, answers and techniques now are available that can be of benefit to other areas. Our experiences need not be repeated in every urbanized area facing an air pollution problem. The mistakes as well as accomplishments, should prove valuabin guidelines for other areas to follow The price any community pays, therefore, for a comparable reduction in air pollution should be far less than it has been in for LosAngeles. Mr. FULLER. The ink is hardly dry on this report, but I would like to invite your attention to page 15 of that report, gentlemen. Now, when I tell you that millions of dollars have been spent locally, and that the burden of the expenditure has been borne by the local tax- payers, this is what I mean to indicate. That as a result ~ the work we have accomplished over the past 18 years, in conjunction with in~ dustry, and I would like to stress that, we have achieved a degree of control of stationary sources which I believe is second tG none any- where in this world. Now that this research has been accomplished, the results of the research are very apparent. The types of industry which are~ being controlled is clearly set forth and delineated here. If I might, I will ask you to move forward in the report to page 25. There is a list of sources of air pollution from industrial operations, the size of equipment, the cost of the basic equipment, and type of control equipment and the cost. I am sure this may be of interest to the Library of Congress because I think it belongs there. I believe further, gentlemen, that all of this work which has been done has shown conclusively that the vast majority of industrial operations which produce air pollution can be controlled. There is no question about this. I think it would be a waste of public funds to duplicate this. I would suggest to the committee for their consideration that all of the research and data which has been accomplished by this district over the past 18 years be made available to every other urban area with a population in excess of 50,000. We have produced some guidelines in the way of manuals which are the Bible now for other air pollution agencies. The Public Health is now printing our Engineering Manual of which there has been a PAGENO="0544" 544 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY. FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT crying need of agencies just waiting for it. When the proofs of our manual were forwarded to Cincinnati I received a call. They said, "May we start using this now? We don't want to even wait for the publication." I think this manual alone cost us over $100,000 to produce. Now, if we have this information, gentlemen, and we do have it, I think it would be a great contribution to the reduction of air pollution in other urban areas throughoi~tt the United States if this could be made available piece by piece. If you want to know how to control an asphalt saturator, we know how to control it. Last week I received a telephone call from Toronto, Canada on how to control asphalt saturators. We send out this information. It is a cdst factor. We receive visits from all over the world, in- cluding the Soviet Union, incidentally. We have given freely of all of the information which we have, but it. is a cost factor. Now, lest you get the impression I am asking for dollars, I am not. All I ask is that if this information which is so vitally needed by other areas could be made available at no cost to the district (and no profit), we would be most willing to cooperate with. the Federal agencies to have them send a staff of people into this area for the purpose of reproducing all this information. In my basket this morning I received a letter which is typical, and I will read just one portion of it, if I may. There is one iteili of unfinished business, however, which we must not neglect, and that is to thank people, like yourself `who gave so much assistance in our long fight. Your very helpful advice, the imformatlon obtained from you and the help so freely given by yourself were all of tremendous assistance, and for `that we are most grateful. We do thIs daily, and we like to do it, but it is certainly a cost to the taxpayers of Los Angeles County. We don't have the personnel who can sit down and write this information in terms which could be of extreme value to `local air pollution agencies that do not have an engineering staff. Anything `they have of a local nature, an industrial source which lends itself to the type of control listed here page after page, you can see that it is available. In some of these areas I think you will `find the cost of the control equipment exceeds the cost' of the base equipment. In some instances, industry has come to us and said voluntarily, "We think we can control this emission from our operations, and'we' would like to build this type control eqthpment.."' Our `engineers would sit down with them and make a determination, and' the `cost to industry `itself has been on occasion, for a single con- trol device, in e~ess'of a million dollars. Now, this, to me, represents an attitude on the: part of industry which' must `not' be' `rejected. I think industry generally throughout this country ha~ tth ~exp&rtise and the knowledge and skills which must be brOugtht to be~r'øn this'probleim `Phi~ isnot n prob'leth whidh `can be controlled simply `by the creation of a public agency and a few tax dollars.' Industry must be brought into full partner~hip,'if we are to whip this problem. So in eonc~lusion I would only wish to read the last paragraph PAGENO="0545" ADEQUACY OF `TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABAtEM1~NT 545 From our experiences over the years we can draw two important conclusions. First, the technical know-how and the actual control devices are now available for the control of almost any air pollution problem existing from stationary sources. Second, each community must determine for itself the degree of clean air it desires and the price that the community is willing to pay for that degree of clean air. In Los Angeles the price has been high because the control program was the pioneering effort. The price in other areas should be much lower. `The results and answers and techniques now are available that can be of benefit to these other areas. The experiences in Los Angeles need not be repeated in every urbanized area facing an air pollution problem. There are valuable guidelines for other areas to follow, and the price which any community pays for clean air, therefore, should be far less than here locally. Thank you, gentlemen. Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Fuller. Your statement and your re- port will be of tremendous value to the committee. Your offer of sharing the know-how of Los Angeles County I am sure should be taken advantage of, as many agencies have already taken advantage of it, and if we can be instrumental in helping to further this, I am sure Mr. Bell and I have enough pride in Los Angeles that we will do our best to do that. Mr. FULLER. I am sure you will. Mr. BROWN. I wanted to ask a couple of questions. With regard to the devices which have been developed for control- lung the variou's manifold number of stationary sources of emission around here, is there a problem with regard to proprietary or patent rights that may have been generated on these devices as they are de- veloped, particularly by local industry? Would there be that sort of problem in sharing that know-how, or do you feel this is not sig- nificant? Mr. FULLER. No, I don't think that is a problem, because the device, whether they be precipitators, afterburners, or what ever, are in prO- duction by private industries. We do not have a proprietary right to a specific device. When devices have been developed in conjunction `with engineers from industry, we finally arrived at solutions to specific problems, and these devices have met the test of our rules and regula- tions, and they are effective. I don't think there would be any problem involved there. Mr. BROWN. I noticed in glancing rapidly through the list of devices and instruments and so forth that there are some which have the ef~ fect of cleaning the air, or washing it clean, but in effect translating the pollutant into another medium. Mr. FULLER. Yes. Mr. BROWN. Has this problem of translating an air pollutant or air contaminant to a ground contaminant raised any problems as yet in this area? Mr. FULLER. No. As a matter of fact, there are some industries which are showing ~t profit as a result of the control device which they are operating. This is true in evaporation losses from refineries. This is true in the contaminants generated by the making of steel. PAGENO="0546" 546 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT One of the local industrial operations-I try to keep away from names~-has found that the contaminant which has been recovered was running a very high percentage of nickel. This was reduced and pelletized and shipped to Utah for smeltering, and they have recovered the cost of their control equipment. Mr. BROWN. I wish that could betrue of all industry, Mr. FUlLER. I do, too. Mr. BROWN. Congressman Bell? Mr. BELL. Just a few questions. It is a pleasure to welcome you here before the committee, and I am certain, as Chairman Brown has indicated, we can take great pride in sending to other areas suggestions you have made. How can the training and equipping of local agency officials be coordinated with industrial pollution control personnel? Mr. FULLER. I am sure you gentlemen are aware of the fact there is presently in effect grants for the training of air pollution officials in the universities, one particularly in the University of California. I think this effort is in swaddling clothes at the present time. I thing there has to be a review of the training programs to bring a more practical aspect to it. I think it is time for the coveralls to be put on, and to actually enter industry and get acquainted with the problem in that area under the heat and stress of production, rather than in the classroom with the blackboard. I think that the program can be advanced. As to how this can be accomplished, again the local agencies2 including this agency, have reached the extent of our fiscal responsibility here, and I don't think we can go any further. I have heard rumors there is a city back East that has unlimited funds they dole out by the basketful. I don't necessarily believe that, hut I think that the Federal Government has a responsibility to pro- ceed as far as is absolutely necessary, but no further. In those areas where the local district is completely handicapped either by technical knowledge or financial support, then the Federal Government does have the responsibility for the health of its people. Mr. BELr~. Would you say in the Los Angeles area the Federal Gov- ernment has some responsibility? Mr. FUELER. Yes, I do, for this reason. I don't want to paint too rosy a picture here, I don't want you to leave here under the impres- sion everything has been solved here. It hasn't. There are still some problems that are very knotty problems, and will require the finest type of research. For example, the control of nitrogen oxides. Oxides of nitrogen are a very serious problem because they, as you know, are highly toxic, and last longer than carbon monoxide. So there are still some areas where we don't have the ability in Los Angeles. We have a modest laboratory here, but we no longer have the support and money to proceed with that type of research, but it must be. done. Mr. BELL. So you feel there should be some additional effort on the part of perhaps a partnership arrangement between State, Local and Federal and industry generally to further research and study inthis area? . PAGENO="0547" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 547 Mr. FULLER. Yes. This is a tough one, but certainly industry will play an important part. They are certainly willing to do so, in my opinion, and I think that the financial support necessary for this must be obtained. Mr. BELL. One more question, Mr. Fuller. To what extent should zoning of selected industrial locations in respect to population be used to decrease the need for effluent treat- ment? In other words, the moving of industries, and so on. How far should we go in this area? Mr. FULLER. I think this is a problem that I think is facing every- body. Even as the mayor of Monterey Park, you had a zoning prob- lem. Where a small community must rely upon industry for fiscal responsibility, there is a tendency to say, "Well, it shouldn't be there, but we need it and we invited you, so go ahead, and we will zone this area for manufacturing and whatever is necessary." Of course this is a most important aspect of air pollution cor~trol. We here in the district have a meteorological section in which we deal in micrometeorology which the Federal Government has said they don't have the degree of exactness that we have here. Because we have been at it a number of years here, we can predict where pollution will occur in a certain portion of the basin, which we did last Friday. We said there was a strong possibility of a smog alert downtown, which we almost got to. We got to a reading of 46, and 50 would have caused an alert. We cooperate with zoning commissions and boards throughout the county. We are available on call for testimony to produce meteoro- logical information to help on any zoning. This is certainly a very necessary part of expanding whenever you are faced with a situation like we are now, where I don't think moving a factory 1 or 2 miles in either direction is materially going to affect an area such as this Los Angeles Basin. Mr. BELL, Mr. Fuller, I would like to commend you for a very fine statement. Mr. FuI~LE1L Thank you. Mr. BROWN. Just a concluding word, Mr. Fuller. This job for you is a second career. Mr. FULLER. Yes. I am about to enter into a third one. I got a call from Washington this morning. The Secretary of HEW asked me if I would accept the chairmanship of hearings between Maryland and Delaware. So I may be a professional consultatit on abatement. Mr. BROWN. You have certainly shown the ability to master this field, and it indicates at least some people can solve this problem of retraining that Dr. Haagen-Smit spoke about. Thank you for being here this morning. (The prepared statement of Mr. Louis J. Fuller follows:) PREPARED STATEMENT OT LOUIS J. FULLER, AIR POLLUTION CONTROL OFFIcER, LOS ANGELES COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIsTluoP My name is Louis J. Fuller. I am the Air Pollution Oontrol Officer of Los Angelos County. It is a pleasure to appear here today to provide nny informa- tion that I can, which may be helpful to your Honorable Oornmittee, Let me hegin by describing the statuts of air pollution control In Los Angeles County. PAGENO="0548" 548 AD1~QUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLuTION ABATEMENT As you gentlemen are aware, air pollution first became a noticeable problem in Los Angeles during World War II. Today, more than twenty years later, it still remains; however, it is not the same problem, any more than this is the same Los Angeles. The air pollution experienced during the late forties and early fifties con- sisted of about 40% emissions from stationary sources-4ndustry and rUbbish disposal-and about 60% of emissions from automobiles. Today, pollution from rubbish disposal has been eliminated, pollution from industry has been reduced almost to the practicable minimum, but pollution from motor vehicles has been controlled only slightly. In the meantime, the number of motor vehicles has more than doubled, and there is more than twice as much pollution from this source as there was when the control program began. The ratio now J,s approxi- mately 10% from stationary sources and 90% from motor vehicles. At present, control measures now in effect are keeping a total of 6185 tons' of pollution out of the air of Los Angeles County every day. Of these 6185 tons, 5085 tons are controlled as the result of the steps taken by the Air Pollution Control District in regtUating stationary sources. The other 1100 tons are being controlled by the installation of crankcase and exhaust control devices. Still uncontrolled and being emitted are pollutants totaling 13,730 tons per day. Of this, 1310 tons come from all stationary sources including not only in- dustry, but all combustion processes such as domestic heating and cooking as well. The other 12,420 tops are being emitted from motor vehicles, meaning for the most part from the exhaUst pipes `of gasoline-powered automobiles. That is the balance sheet: 6185 tons controlled; 13,730 tons uncontrolled. That which can be controlled from non-moving sources has heen almost corn- pintely controlled; that which can be controlled from automotive sources has scarcely been touched and makes up 90% of our pro~lern. The cost to control 5085 tons of' pollution from sttttionary sOurces has been at least tbree-quai~ters of a billion dollars. Some of this we chn measure with exactness, `the remainder we can estimate. For example, a permit must be ob- tained for every piece of air pollution control equipment installed in Los Angeles County, and we keep a precise record of the cost of' this equipment. ,,Our records show that industry has expended more than $130,000,000 for such control equip- ment. This does not include, however, the cost of maintaining or operating this equipment, or the value of the land it occupies, nor does it take into account' the cost of designing and building into oth'er basic equipment the modllfications necessary to meet our requirements witho~t use of separate control devices. Wherever this is possible, it is done. The true cost to industry thay be `twice the $130,000,000. Another item which we measure precisely Is the amount paid for fees for these permits, and the amount paid as fines for convictions of viola- tions of our Rules. Since 1948 these two items amount to $2,875,000. We also know accurately the' cost of the Air Pollution Control `District for the eighteen years of its existence: $42,530,300. Of this amount, more than $6 million have been spent for basic research. In addition, however; Los Angeles County taxpay- ers have also borne a pro-rata share of the air pollution expenditures of the State of California and of the Federal Government; and that is a sizable amount. Another area of expense has been rubbish collection and disposal, which costs an estimated $55,000,000 a year in Los Angeles County. Since 1957 this has amounited to about $450,000,000. All of this expenditure for control Is only the top of the Iceberg of the cost of air pollution. There is no way of knQwing the full cost to Los Angeles County over the past twenty years, but we can make an estimate. President Johnson' has given' the Federal Government's estimate of the cost of air pollution~ to the nation as eleven billion dollars each year. Los Angeles County represents about five per cent of the national market, and if we assume that we share the national air pollution cost In the same five per cent proportion, then in twenty years we have suffered a loss equal to eleven billion dollars'. 1~ec~tuse the figure is so staggering, our inclination is to discount it, and then discount it again, but even so we must conclude that the loss has been tremendous. And that is without taking account of the loss of prodUctivity due to the distress of air pollutiob, and the price of"pain and suffering, impaired health and los's' of well-being for millions of people. Nor does it take into account the general friction and drag on the entire mechanism Of society caused by the debate, and pulling and hauling over the problem; the deluge of billions of Words printed and s~o'ken about `the' subject; the legislative hours expended, and the cost in time and money of pro- PAGENO="0549" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR, POLLUTION ABATEMENT 549 ceedings such as this very hearing. For example, the cost to the APCD of just two proceedings that have extended over the past three years-the hearings before the Federal Power Commission on applications to bring more natural gas here, and the case in `the Superior Court brought by the Western Oil and Gas Association-have cost the County of Los Angeles at least $250,000, and the end is not `in sight for either of those matters, which will exhaust all possible avenues of appeal before they terminate. It is against this backdrop of cost and lose-the three-quarters of a billion in costs of control, the eleven billion, in loss due to air pollution-that we must evaluate the steps necessary to stop this bleeding. Now I would like to tell you something about the Air Pollution Control Dis- trict, and what we are doing to control air pollution here in Los Angeles County. The Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District has 305 personnel, and our budget for 1966-67 is $3,565,000. Our District is organized into 6 divisions: Engineering, Enforcement, Technical Services, Evaluation & Planning, Public Information & Education, and Business Management. You will forgive me if I say with some pride that the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District is recognized internationally as the leading agency of its kind. Its function and structure a~,e a model for the guidance of other agencies. The U.S. Public Health Service has printed as the standard guidebook "The Air Pollution Control Field Operations Manual," which describes our prac- tices and procedures. They are now printing our Engineering Manual which sets forth the design criteria of both basic ~tIit1 control equipment. They are the "How-to-do-it" for air pollution control Officials everywhere. The Vice-President of the United States recently said, `The war Los Angeles is waging against air pollution is already a modern legend. -. The experience of Los Angeles has shown that local governments can control most sources of air pollution, if they will.. The skeptics would do well to take a close look at what you have achieved here. The prohibitions contained in the Rules and Regulations of the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control District govern smoke, nuisance, particulate matter, si~tlfur compounds, combustion contaminants, dusts and fumes, open fires, In- cinerator burning, storage of petroleum products, oil effluent-water separators, gasoline loading, sulfur content of fuels, gasoline composition, solvents, and animal reduction processes. It can be seen from this impressive list that the Rules and Regulations affect the operation of every industry; almost every commercial endeavor; and, in at least one direct aspect, every homeowner in Los Angeles County. Through their enforcement, controls have been applied to such diverse sources and operations as incinerators, rendering cookers, coffee roasters, petroleum refineries', chemical plants, rock crushers, asphalt plants, open hearth furnaces, electric furnace's, automobile assembly plants, as well as less obvious sources such as restaurants, crematories, and housing tract developers. From the smelting of metal to the pro- duction of dog food, air pollution-prone operations have been brought within the scope' of the control program. The types of' control devices installed vary widely in cost and collection effi- ciency. Among these are electric precipitators, baghouses, afterburners, sepa- rators, scrubbers, absorbers, adsorbers, and various types of vapor collection equipment. Each type of device possesses advantages and limitations that must be considered carefully. Each source poses different problems in terms of volume, temperature, and characteristics of the waste emitted from it. The degree of con- trol which a community requires will dictate, in the main, which type control device will be utilized and, hence, the cost of the control system. From our experiences over the years we can draw two important conclusions. First, the technical know-how and the actual control devices are now available for the control of almost any air pollution problem existing from stationary sources. Second, each community must determine for itself the degree of clean air it desires and the price that the community is willing to pay for that degree of clean air. In Los Angeles, the price has been high because the control program was a pioneering effort. The price in other areas should be much lower because of that effort. Results, answers and techniques now are available that can b~ of benefit to other areas. The experiences in Los Angeles need not be repeated in every urbanized area facing an air pollution problem. The mistakes and accom- plishments in Los Angeles should prove valuable guidelines for other areas to fol- low. The price any community pays, therefore, for clean air should be far less than it has been for Los Angeles. PAGENO="0550" 550 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. BROWN. Otir next witness is Mr. Eric Grant, executive officer of the California State Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. We are glad to have you here, Mr. Grant. I think it is obvious to everyone here, and to the committee, I am sure, but Mr. Fuller and Mr. Grant have complementary responsibilities in the smog field. Basically, the emphasis on the part of Mr. Fuller was with the control of stationary sources in Los Angeles County. Mr. Grant's responsibilities deal with the problems of moving sources, the automobile, the truck, and anything else related to motor vehicles. We are very happy to have you here to hear your testimony, Mr. Grant. STATEMENT OP ERIC GRANT, LXECIJTfltE 0ITIC]~R, CALIFORNIA STATE MOTOR VEHICLE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD Mr. GRANT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to indicate that Mr. Fuller and I have many relation-* ships in common. It was my luck almost 11 years ago while going to law school to be hired by Mr. Fuller to go to work for Los Angeles County Pollution Control District. So he is keeping an eye on me. I have a prepared stutement, Mr Q~airman, and also some informa tion that I would like to snbmit for the record, so you can review it at your pleasure and leisure, Mr. BELL. I move that be a part of the record. Mr. BROWN. Without objection, they will be `made part of the' record. (The prepared statement of Mr. Eric Grant and the information re- ferred to follows:) ` PAGENO="0551" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABA~EMEN1? 551 PREPARED STATEMENT or Mn. ERIC GRANT, ExEcUTIVE OFFICER, CALIFORNIA STATE Mouon VEHICLE POLLUTIO1~T CONTROL BoAIrn Mr. Chairman and Members of the House Committee, It has always been the policy of the Motor Vehicle Pollutiou ContrOl Board to keep you well Informed as to the activities and progress which we have been able to accomplish towgrd control of emissions from motor vebicløs. It is my pleasure to indicate t~ you. today that our accomplishments have been significant; that our control programs are eliminating large amounts of raw gasoline from the atmosphere; and that the future results from our continued efforts we feel confident, will ultimately eliminate the motor vehicle as a source of pollution. This chart (p. 560) shows, we have made great progress, but there is still a long way to go. We know that each day less pollutants are going into the atmosphere. In Section 1 of the pamphlet submitted for the record, the information contained therein indicates that the control systems on 1966 model vehicles are working effectively, and the 1967 model vehicles will be equipped with even better sys- tems. The efforts of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board, as a result of the strong support received from this Committee, the Governor's Office, and the Senate Transportation Committee, have allowed us to cooperatively demand from the American automobile industry controls that actually do function effectively and conserve our natural resource, air. We know that our efforts have caused the manufacturers of motor vehicles to not only install control equipment, but to be more concerned about quality con~ trol in their production. They have up-graded the quality of carburetors, ignition systems, and many other components of the engines. We also know that throughout the State of California, pro-delivery service performed by dealers prior to delivery of the vehicle to the purchaser has greatly improved. The ultimate result is that the motorist in California is. purchasing a better vehicle. We know that our efforts to date with over si~ million vehicles equipped with crankcase control devices, and with apprQximately 800,000 1966 model vehicles equipped with exhaust control equipment, keep from our skies ~uearly 400,000 gallons of gasoline each day. A unique factor involved in this is that a la~rge percentage of this gasoline is be1i~g used by the mQtorist at a considerable saving to him. As an example, we know that a properly installed crankcase emission control system results in about a 3% increase in mileage, since raw ga~oliIle which was going out into the air is now kept in the engine anU. ~ised as fuel. There is also a report made to the Board by Mr. John Maga, of the State Department of Public Health, Bureau of Air Sanitation, which indicates in Figure 1 that the results of our efforts to date have caused about a 30% re- duction in emissions into the atmosphere of contaminants which would have been present if we had not take~i action comi~ienciflg in 1960. In Section 3 of the information is a report On the crankcase, control program. Of particular importance are the statistics on rage 4 which indicate that there are still about 1,250,000 vehicles which still need to be equipped, and presumably a sizable percentage of these will be subject tQ our regulations because of sale and transfer of oWnership in the future. We have also made a real effort to control emissions from diesel vehicles. The obnoxious black smoke whiCh, under some conditions is emitted from diesel vehicles, has been reduced on the highways of California due to legislation passed at the last Session, and the cooperative efforts made by ourselves and the Cali- fornia Trucking Association, which organization has made a diligent effort to secure cooperative interest on the part of its ov.m members to achieve control of their diesel vehicles. We now have standards for odor and visible smoke, and possibly in the future devices will be developed that may be applied to diesel vehicles. In the mean- time, however, due to the complexities of the control of these emissions, we feel that strong on-the-road enforcement, plus cooperative interest, have and win achieve a great deal. There has been considerable interest shown in the control of oxides of nitrogen. In Section 5 of the submitted material, we have Title 13 of the California Ad- ministrative Code. On Page 5 are the criteria which have now been finalized. We are prepared to evaluate any device to control oxides of nitrogen. None as yet has been presented to the Board. PAGENO="0552" 552 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLuTION ABATEMENT In Section 6 of the pamphlet, you have for your files a cop~r of all the laws relating to motor vehicle emission control in the Health and Safety Code. This includes those sections from Assembly Bills 72, 73, 74, 75 and 98, passed at the last Session. I hope, Mr. Chairman, that this has defined the present status of the Board. I would like to indicate additional areas of concern. The Board, at its last meet- ing, took a strong position in support of the need for continued increased effort to secure more and better control of emissions from motor vehicles. As the charts indicate, we cannot achieve 1940 air unless this action is taken. The auto- mobile Industry and the Federal Government have been made aware of the ab- solute necessity of accomplishing the 197.0 standards recommended by the State Department of Public Health. We strongly support the need for a state-wide concept of conservation of our air resource, which necessitates the creation of a state-wide agency which will function as a coordinating, and if necessary enforcing agency, to control emissions from all sources. We are convinced that the people of California, the Legisla- ture, and the Administration no longer can permit indiscriminate, uncontrolled, illegal contamination of the air we breathe. Present standards established by the State Department of Public Health are only recommended for 1970 under present law. They would not become manda- tory until two or more devices have been developed to meet the requirements. I feel that as the charts indicate, it is essential that we make these 1970 stand- ards mandatory and give notice to industry that their vehicles shall not exceed these basic requirements. I feel that It is within the ability of the industry to Control their vehicles to this degree, and that certainly a timely notice to them would give them sufficient time to comply and deliver to the California motorists vehicles that do not emit excessive pollutants into our atmosphere. We in California cannot take a chance that the Federal Government will answer our needs. We recognize that your Federal efforts will result in a strong ~eh1cle emission control program nationwide. However, at the same time we know that our control efforts here must continue at the strong leadership level we have established. All present controls on stationary sources in America are patterned after the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control E$istricts' program. All present controls on vehicles in the world are patterned after our State Motor Vehicle ~ollution Control Board's actions and leadership. You and ~o~tr colleagues in Washington must recognize the importance of this and not hliow Federal entry into this area to diminish its effectiveness. 1~ocal, State and Federal efforts to collectively work together to accomplish our needs have in the past and should in the future result In significant program gains. . . Gentlemen, in conclusion I would like to Indicate to you again that the Board Is confident that cOnsiderable pollution is being kept from the air, and that this Is an important factor in the fact that there have been fewer incidents of air pollution; and that with each day that passes, there will be more and more vehicles on the road which are controlled. I would like to emphasize, however, that we are a long way from our goal. There is still serious! air pollution, and if the weather is adverse we shall have smog alerts. We shall put forth con- tinued~ effort so as to assure the people of, Califronia that eventually the air of California will be fit to breathe. PAGENO="0553" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENP 553 MOTOR VEHICLE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD (Eric P. Grant, Executive Officer) Co NTENTS Page A. Memo to Board, Relating to approval of 1967 Exhaust Control Systems_ 554 B. California and Federal Motor Vehicle Emission Standards 557 C. Staff Report on Crankcase Systems 562 D. Report on Diesel Fuel Additives and Other Matters Relating to Diesel Emissions 565 E. Administrative Code Provisions-Title 13 In Support of Chapter 3, Division 20 Health and Safety Code 568 F. Chapter 3, Division 20 of the He~lth & safety Code of California - - 573 ~G. Resolution No. 66-23 583 PAGENO="0554" 554 ADEQUACY OF TECI~NOLOGY FOR, POLLUTION ABATEMENT A STATa OF CALIFORNIA MnMoRA~st)M ATrOIYST 10, 1660. To The Chairman and Members of the Board. Prom: Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board, Eric P. Grant, Executive Officer. Subject: The L966 motor vehicles equipped in California with exhaust emission control devices' are the result of action by your Board in approving systems' submitted by' the marmfacturers. `The conditions of,approval were `based upon engineering evaluations, in the State's `laboratories `and proviñg-groniid data' accumulated ~y `the manufactu~re~s, indic~tin'g that the deylces would satisfactorily control calissions to the required' State `standards. Letters of representation froni ea~h of the manufacturers indicated that' the systems woldd comply with the basic criteria when in service and installed on the `motor vehicles sold to' the motoring public. The Board now must `consider systems for the 1967 model vehicles. Action `by the Legislature and this Board eliminated compulsory annual re~ ~harg1ng or servicing of exhaust devices, such that they must have durability equal to' the car itself., As you are well aware, our test procedures require that durability and certification fleets: be run by the manufacturers. The durability fleets are representative vehicles of the various engine, transmission combina- `tions. These were run for 50,000 miles. By running the vehicles for this' period of time, a trend of emissions was established for the life of the vehicle or 100,000 `miles Each manufacttirer then fitted into this basic curve all the other various makes and models. The data thu's accumulated from manufacturers indicate compliance with the emission standards for the life of the vehicle. `Surveillance data indicates `that the average emission's are 223 PPM H.C. and 1.17% CO on `a hot-start basis and 281 PPM HO and 1.62% CO on a `cold- start `basis. The reasons for this variance are discussed in the report. Average proving-ground data supplied for 1967 certification is 220 PPM H'C and 1.23% CO. These figures represent a composite of the durability data supplied by the manufacturers f'or the 1967 model vehicles. You will note that the emis- sions are lower than those found on the 1966 models in pu'blic use. The im- portance of these figures `are two-fold. First, that the' manufacturers have achieved a significant reduction, an'd when considering all available data, have complied with the basic State standards as required by this Board. Secondly, these data `are subject to question in that it represents a relatively `small number of vehicles under various test conditions, as indicated in the attached report. There is a wi'de range of emissions, even between identical vehicle's. Other variations in emissions are significant depending upon the type of tests, cold versus hot, conditions under which the vehicle was received, the mileage on `the motor vehicle a't the time of the test, `and many other factors. In considering the approval of the 1967 systems, the Board should consider surveillance data accumulated by the `staff on 1966 model vehicles in use In Cali- fornia, and also improvements made in the basic systems. Of great importance is `the need for continued `surveillance, representing more vehicles. There is considerable effort being put forth to have more an'd better surveillance data available. Surveillance is being carried on by your staff, and increased effort will be made to get more tests, both hot and cold. Addi- tional tests are being run by the motor vehicle manufacturers. In addition, there is the ever present need to stabilize test methods and test conditions specified for the vehicle when it is received. It is' our intent to' nail down with the manufacturers an exact procedure and co-relation factor, if one can be established between hot and cold `s'tart tests. It is the feeling of the staff that by far the `better method `statistically would be to `secure a very large number of hot start tests and corelate these to cold start officials test procedures. How- ever, as l's pointed out, there is this problem of relating cold to hot starts. ~S~tate standards The original State standards established by the `S'tate Department of Public Health were based on average emissions of the car population (as measured in 1956) of 1375 parts per million of hydrocarbon, and an 80% reduction of these emissions was required. `This resulted in a 275 p'art per million State standard. Based upon `the data herein presented and the projection of emis- `sions for the 1967 systems, the systems meet the requirements `specified `by the State Department of Public Health. Present emissions In the ifehicle po'pula- PAGENO="0555" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 555 tion are considered to be less than the original 1375, due largely to improve- ments in test technique, and are ostablished at approximately 900 pai~ts per ini~lion. Base4 upo~i this figure, bhere is a 70% reduction of total exhaust hydro- carbon emissions due to the installation of these systenis. `L'he carbon monoxide ancla~rd' is based upon existing emissions, and ~ 60% ieductiori o~ c~r~n monoxide was specified. Again, based upon ~urveil~ance data ana sübmis~ion of test ~I'i5SlOfl data from, the manufacturers, the 1943i~systems do comply with these req~irç~nents. The reason for this reduction in total average emission ~an be attributed to several factors, one of which is improvements made b~ manufa~ture'rs. I feel that the efforts of this Board have resulted in a total emission reduc- tion from all vehicles. All manufacturers now consider "emissions" as a major design criterion for engines. Vivid evidence of this is present today when several manufacturers will present new "controlled engines" for your consideration, which have achieved State standards by considering emissions early in the engine design phase. These "controlled engines" are also less costly to the motorist than present air injection systems. Of particular importance also is the direction influence that your honorable Board has caused upon the manufacture, assembly and pre-delivery preparation of automobiles in California. Quality control, assembly upgrading and pre-delivery service have all been improved. The end `result is a better vehicle being sold to the motorists of California. Criteria The Board has numerous criteria with whieh any system must comply, in addition to State standards. These criteria basically relate to the cost and operation of the system when installed on the motor vehicle. Surveillance data, and the letters of representation from officers of each of the corporations, gives assurance that the systems have in the past, and will `in the future, continue to comply `with the criteria established by this Board. This is not to indicate that there are no problems with the vehicles when in operation by the motor- ing public. Our surveillance data indicates there have been problems with the operation by the motoring public. However, the data does support fully that these problems have not been great in number. Problems of heat, starting of the vehicle, rough idle, etc., have been present and are being resolved when they appear. `Staff and Board members have driven representative vehicles and found problems present, and others did not. Our public survey of owners of 1965 and 1966 vehicles resulted generally in the same complaints being expressed but perhaps with slightly greater frequency on the 19166 cars equipped with exhaust control systems. Emissions controlled As has been reported periodically, the emissions controlled due to the in- stallation of exhaust control systems on 800,000 1966-model vehicles, have re- suited in control of 110,000 gallons of gasoline each day in the State of Califor- nia, and more than 1600 tons of carbon monoxide each day. This control in conjunction with crankcase emission control results in 400,000 gallons of gasoline each day being kept from the skies of California and in many cases being used by the motorists at a considerable savings. Certainly these accomplishments will increase with the passage of time. Recommendation It is therefore my recommendation as Executive Officer that under the pro- visions of Section 24386(4) of the Health and Safety Code of the State of Cali- fornia, this Board issue certificates of approval to those manufacturers who have requested certification for their systems or amended certifications to their existing applications as required by Resolution 64-30 which limited the :1960 certification to only one model year. Exemptions It is my pleasure to report that there are no exemptions requested of the MVPOB for 1967 model domestic vehicles. Those vehicle manufacturers and assemblers who had originally requested exemptions such as, ambulances and other specialized equipment have met with the staff, and it has been determined PAGENO="0556" 556 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOB POLLUTION ABATEMENT that there is no justification to exempt any of these vehicles. Class A vehicles (foreign) have been granted an exemption by prior action of this Board for the one model year Of 1967. Indications from the foreign manufacturers are that they will be able to comply for the 1908 model year, and be able to supply to the California market, vehicles in compliance with the State standards and the requirements established by this Board. It is anticipated therefore that every vehicle sold in the State of Oallfornia, whether from a foreign manufacturer or not, will be equipped with exhaust and crankcase emission control systems by the 1968 model year. PAGENO="0557" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOE POLLUTION ABATEMENT 557 CALIFoRNIA AND FEDERAL MoToR VEHICLE EMIsSIoN STANDARDS1 California Department of Public Health, Bureau of Air Sanitation, July, 1966 On March 30, 1966, the Federal Government adopted standards for exhaust and crankcase emissions. These standards are tO be effective beginning with 1968 model cars. The purpose of this report is to evaluate quantitatively what the impact would be on vehicle emissions if California were to adopt standards similar to the Federal ones for small vehicles. The effects on emissions in Los Angeles will be used as examples. Because the Federal. standards pertain only to hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide, consideration will be mainly concerned with these two contaminants. In California, emission standards have been established for exhaust hydro- carbons, carbon monoxide, oxides o~ nitrogen, smoke, odor and irritation; for hydrocarbons in crankcase emissions; and evaporative losses. In 191'O, more stringent standards for exhaust hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide will be In effect in the state. Federal exhaust standards for Class A vehicles are more liberal than the corresponding Califorina standards. The Federal crankcase standard, on the other band, permits no emissions while California limts emissions amounting to 0.1% supplied fuel. Both crankcase emission standards, bçwever, have the effect of requiring devices that are virtually 100% effective. Table I compares the standards established by the two governmental levels. The effect of more lenient standards for Class A cars on the California pro- gram Is dependent on the percent of these vehicles in the state's total vehicle population Direct information on vehicle digtributlon by engine displacement is not available either for the nation or~ the state on the `basis of ~registration figures. The distribution shown in Table ,II,was derived from'data contailied in the 1965 "Automotive News Almanac", which gives numbers of cars in operation in California by model year and make. Estimation of engine class was made by the Department for each model and make according to the pub- lished data. The summation of this information yields the percentage of each engine class. Foreign cars were similarly estimated from reported figures for California in the Almanac. TABLE 1.-Comparison of California and Federal standards . Source ` . Class 1 California Federal Hydro- carbon, parts per million Carbon monoxide percent Oxides of Nitrogen parts per million Hydro- carbon parts per million Carbon monoxide percent Oxides of nitrogen parts per million Exhaust (current standards) - Exhaust (1970 standards) - . -- Crankcase Evaporative emissions Al A2 A3 B C 0 E F Allclasses~ do.... - do..... 275 1. 5 350 275 1.5 350 275 1.5 350 275 1.5 350 275 i.5 350 275 1.5 350 275 1.5 350 275 1.5 350 180 1.0 350 0.1% supplied fuel.3 6 grams hydrocarbons per day, fuel tank. 2 grams hydrocarbons per soak, carburetor. (1) (2) 410 2.3 350 2.0 None. 275 1.5 275 1.5 275 L5 275 1.5 275 i.5 Permits no crankcase emissions. None. None. 1 See table II for engine displaoement. 2 Exempt. 3 In effect, requires virtually 100 percent control. 1 Presented at the August 19, T906, California Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board meeting, Los Angeles, California. 68-240-66-Vol. 1-36 PAGENO="0558" ~55~ ~ADE~UACY OF ThOUNOLOQY FOR POLLIJT~ON ABATEMENT TABLE 11.-California motor vehicle population) distributioii by class ` Class . Displace- ment cubic inches Percent of total Estimated State total 1 ~ Al.. A2 ~~__1~ B - ..~.. C ID <50 50-100 100-140 140-200 ~00-250 250-300 300~-375 . >~75 08 26.9 .8 9,0 30.0 25.0 .18.0 10.0 30,000 694, 0~0 81,000 906,000 3,020,000 2, 516, 000 1,812,000 . 1,007,090 - ` - -, . ~4 i3aeed on 1965~-aarend Califorpiaregistered'~iiothrvehiclepQpulatlon~of 10,065,900, rounded oIl to nearest *4ouslii4 ~s repqrted. by, ct~p~rtgiont of motor ve~icles, 2Vblk8'~rbgeti &imprlses ST `p~rcont of class A2, `~r 4~ perceht of the combined olisses Of Al, A2, and A3 t5Isl~1es (natlonally~. ~Sbtircè: `IDeri d fi~Om Au~bmôtivô NeWs Almanac, 1965 issue, and department of niotorvehicles. The effee~s~of the Fedevcrl Sta4~4àrds ` 4, report eii~itied Effects of control Pro~ams on the Emissions of liydr3 cti~rbon ftnd Carbon Monoxide in tios Angeles Coinity' was presented to the dáit~ori~i~ Motor 1te~iciè ?otlutlou ~3ontro1 Board in January, 1966 ~ the `I~âttment. The i~pOrt p ~èIited data ~howing the ~h~dro~arlibr~ , andy cari~bh mojioxide e~m~sions frotn 1~4O to tI~e ~r~sent with pro~ection~ to 19~0 u~ider the CalifQirnla pro%i*ln TW~1 charts depiot1ii~ those data tmre redrawn Figure 1 ~hQ~iughy~rocarbon'and Figure 2 showing carbon monoxide wi~th an additional cur~Te showin$ the, effect of the ~es,s ~tt~ict ~tàndard for Class A cars. The diIt'terenees between the ~ontrOIs req~i~ed by the Federal and OalifQrnia standards are slight at present; but unless :the Federal Government adopts' stricter ~tand- ards wbie~i will be effective in Ct~lnfornia thosO differences will be substantial `after 1910,.' With the adve~t.~~apor~tive control in California,, `Federal stalict- ards will %lsp be needed ~o~' th~se soØces to ach~ve the paine degree of controL Table, ITT shows the e~is'sions under t~ie Califorfnia and the present Federal standards fôrTuture years. ` ` ` ` . " . . ` By 1980 the projected uncontrolled emisions of hydrciearbofis ~i1l be 4140 tons/day (see Fig. 1, p., 560) a~i, 18,O4~0 tons/day for carbon monoxide (see Fig. 2, p. 561). The contemplated reduction' nuder the Federal program of crankcase and exhaust controls by 1980 will amount to 2790 tons/day or 65% for hydrocar- bons whilecarbon monoxide will .be.re'duced 97o0 tons/day or 54%. By contrast, California's control program of crankcase, stricter exhaust and evaporative vontrols is. estimated to effect reductiomis of hydrocarbons by 1980 of 8400 tons/ day or, 82%~ and 12,480 tons/day or 60% for carbon monoxide. PAGENO="0559" 4DEQI~AçY OF T~C1INQLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 5~9 Btandards based o'rt qnantity of omissions On September 15, 1965, the Department reported to the Motor Vehicle Pollu- tion Control Board on the feasibility of exhaust standards effective In 1970 based on quantity of emissions. One approach was to apply a given degree of reduction to the average quantity of emissions from each class of vehicle. Under this scheme the 1970 concentration standards for Class A vehiéles would be approximatelY the same as those recently adopted by the Federal Govern- ment. In order to meet the objective of rolling back the hydrocarbon emissions to the 1940 level, the standard ~or vehicles in classes B through F would be npproxis~nately 160 ppm. This analysis does not include oxides of nitrogen emissionS from exhaust be- cause the Federal Government has not established standards for these corn- Dounds. The concentrations of oxides of nitrogen in the euhaust from dif- ferent clas~es of vehicles do not differ greatly, T1~ a standard is established based on quantity emissions, the allowable concentration will be inversely pro- ~portional to exhaust flow rate. Class A vehicles, with lower exhaust volumes, would be permitted higher oxides of nitrogen concentration in their exhausts, while vehicles with large engines and high exhaust flow rates would be allowed proportionately lower concentrations of exhaust nitrogen oxides. TABLE III.-MotO~' vehicle emissions in Los Angeles under different standards Hydrocarbons, tons/day Carbon monoxide, tons/d8y Yearend California' Federal 2 DIfference California' Federal 2 DIfferepce standard standard standard standard 1970, without evaporation control 1,690 1, 730 40 9,320 9,620 300 1975, without evaporation control 1,360 1, 510 150 7,110 8,530 1,420 1975, with evaporation contro1~ 1,160 1, 510 350 1980, without evaporation control 1,150 1,440 290 5, 520 8,250 ~, 730 1980, wIth evaporation control 740 1,440 700 1 Assuming emissions will comply with standards now adopted In California. 2 Assuming no change in the present Federal standards. PAGENO="0560" 560 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLL~UTION ABA~EMENP 2800 CS `S 0 i 2400 Cs U) U) 2c2000 ~J California exhaust ~v 275 ppm (+ crankcase) 1200 8OO~ I4LL. _ 19402 4 J~OO() Figure 1 EFFECT OF FEOEEAL AND CALI~OhNIA CONTROL PROGRANS ON HYDROCANBOW EMISSIONS FROM MOTOR VEHICLES IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, 1940-1980 3600 CALIFORNIA DEPANTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH BUNEAU OF AIR SANITATION 7-12--66 3200 I, / / / / /~ / I, No control / ,/ rankcase control Federal exhaust. (+ crankcase) California exhaust ~& 180 ppm~. (+ crankcase) Evaporative control (s crankcase) (+ exhaust ~ 180 ppm) ~ 6 8 50 2 4 6 8 60 2 4 6 8 70 2 4 6 8 1980C Year End PAGENO="0561" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 561 18 Figut~e 2 EFFECT OF FEDERAL AND CALIFORNIA CONTROL PROGRAMS ON CARBON MONOXIDE 16 1~MISSIONS FROM NOlOR VEHICLES IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, 191+0-1980 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH BUREAU OF AIM SANITATION 7-12-66 14 U, 12 10 U) 0 a J 6 / / / / No control / o II1IIi1II1IIIIIII II,, LI11'II!I Ill I I Ii~I~ 1940 2 4 6 8 ~3 ~ 4 6 8 6Q 2 4 6 8 70 2 4 6 8 198~ Federal exhaust Calirornia exhaust @ 4 Calirornia exhaust ~ Year E~cL PAGENO="0562" ~62 AIYEQtTACT OF TfiCHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT C STATE OF CALIFORNIA MOTOR VEHICLE POLLUTION CoI~moL B0A1W STAFF REPORT ON CRANKCASE SYSTEMS, AUGUST 10, 1966 L~ Crankcase device app'icants under consideration There are at present four companies who have ~ignified their intentions to ap..- ply 1~or certification for used cars. These companies are: .Eichlln Manufacturing Co. (Ii~istalled Fleet) F & J Control Filters (Partial Installation of Fleet) Salyer Sta-Ready Filter Co. (Partial Installation of Fleet) Co-Recti-Fire Co. (Will begin Installation soon) II. The board on May 11, 1966 requested a status report on the crankcase con~ trol program On June 15~ 1966 a letter was sent to all crankcase device manufacturers for u~ed vehicles. The questions~, put to each manufacturer and their guarded composite replies are as follows: The figures given are estimated as deduced from the informa~ tion received. (1) The total number of sales to July 1, 1966: Approximately 1,750,000. (2~ The number of field men and their location: These varied from 1 to 80.- Some concentrated their activities in Northern California. (3) The number of devices manufactured to date and reserve stock: One manufacturer is in short supply. The others appear to have adequate stock. Total esthnated reserve about 150,000 kits. (4) Present means of Sales Distribution: Most manufacturers use wholesalers and jobbets. some use franchised statlous. (5) The total; number and kind of complaints and their distribution: The number of complaints in 1964 far exceeded those in 1965. The number of com- plaints in 1965 has decreased ~o an insignificant number due to the more strict station personnel licensing requirements by the California Highway Petrol. (6) The number of legal suits and their disposition: Only one manufacturer had a legal ~utt directed against- him. This was settled in his favor. There were a few suits against inètallers and the majority were found in favor of the defendants. (7) Training program: Most manufacturers conducted special schools. Some- sent instructions to installers and franchised stations. ~(8) J?lease submit copies of product literature for Board staff use: The re- sponse was most fa~orable. (9) Estimation of public response: Most manufacturers felt that the response- was favorable. Some felt that the public was merely following the law. (10) Opinion as to the feasibility of extending the program to 1950-54 cars- at this time: The majority was of the opinion that the program should be ex- tended to include these cars. One manufacturer had inadvertently disposed of these kits. However, he still was not against including these cars. (11) Future Plans, business forecast for 1967-4968: Most manufacturers were- optimistic and some even Intend to expand their operations. Only one felt tI~at the market was limited. Some manufacturers felt that their system was sn- perior and therefore intend to concentrate on the replacement market. (12) The present and future availability of replacement parts: All manufac- turers felt that the availability of their replacement parts would be adequate for the future. - The Staff thanks the n1a1iufacturer~ for thth' kind cooperation iz~ the past and intends to work clos~1y with them td~ as~ure the ~onttau&I SuCcess of the program. -J The year 1965 may be considered as the turning point in the program. The number of complaints on crankcase device installations received by this office averages about or or two a week and these are mostly due to other causes.. The staff wishes to thank the California Highway Patrol for their sincere efforta arid cooperation in the qualifying and policing of licensed stations and mechanics. The public has also been alerted to contact the highway patrol directly in the advent of any complaint against an installer or smog device. For the period~ PAGENO="0563" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 563 from May 15 to June 15, 1966 there were only 18 complaints received by the California Highway Patrol traced to an improper installation.. There are at present two revocation proceedings against licensed stations and one against an installer. III, sale of "pseudo" AC and midas valves A member of our staff has purchased valves which have the appearance of AC and Midas products. The manufacturer was notified in writing to immediately desist from the sale of these valves in California and that all valves on dealers shelves must be immediately removed. He was also advised that be has the option to apply for certification if he so desired. The California Highway Patrol was alerted to be on the lookout for these valves. IV. Present status of the K ~ B crankcase emission control device The K & B Corporation completely redesigned and changed the material used in their Vae-U-Tron valve from steel to plastic. At a meeting held at the offices of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board on July 8, 1966, between representatives of the company and staff engineers, the following was agreed upon: 1. K & B would run at least 10 cars for the 12,000 mile test to determine the efficiency and durability of their new valves. 2. The system would not be sold to the public until the completion of these tests. K & B is now running 100 cars on their own for evaluation purposes. They will start the official 12,000 mile tests when they are satisfied with the per- formance of their modified Vac-U-Tron valve. V. The following statistics were derived from the best sources available (a) status as of February 1966 Number of registered autos and trucks 10,060, 000 Number of cars and trucks equipped with crankcase devices: State of California 6, 139,000 Smog counties only 4,420,000 Number of cars and trucks in smog counties which do not have devices but will require them on transfer (as of August 1966) _~_ 1,260, 000 Number of out~of-state cars which will require devices in 1966 (usually register at end of year) 114, 000 Potential market (balance of 1966) 1,374, 000 Number of additional cars and trucks added to the program: If all counties were included 1, 070, 000 If 1950-54 models were included 1,087, 000 Total 2, 157, 000 Hydrocarbons emitted by the 2,157,000 cars through the crankcase: 660,000 pounds per day or 100,000 gallons per day. Cost to the motorist (at 30 cents a gallon) : $30,000 a day or $10,950,000 per year. Cost of installing crankcase devices on 2,157,000 vehicles, at $15 each: $32,355,000. The savings on gasoline will therefore pay for the devices in less than 3 years. (b) Crankcase device installations on used vehicles, Jan. 1, 1964, to July 31, 1966 Installations since Jan. 1, 1964: Commercial (1950-54 models) 98,000 Autos (1950-54 models) 116,000 Commercial (1955 and later models) 260, 000 Autos (1955 and later models) 1, 043,000 Total 1,517, OOG PAGENO="0564" 564 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Hydrocarbons prevented from escaping to atmosphere from crankcase: 450,000 pounds per day or 68,000 gallons p~r day. Savings to motorist at 80 cents a gallon: $20,400 per day or $7,500,000 per year. VI. 1?equest.~ for instalki~tion `instructio~,s for form4eriy ea~empt cars' 1950-1960 and for out-of-Bt ate ears 1961-1965 models. The staff has received numerous requests from installers for installation in- structions for these cars, 1950-1960, which had been formerly exempt and for 1961 thru 1965 out-of-state vehicles seeking registration in California. The manufacturers have been notified of this situation and the staff intends to work closely with them to assure that proper instructions are available' to the installers for these vehicles. Based on the attached data, we are aware that many of these vehicle owners must have devices installed at time of transfer and in other cases, pre-1955, will desire to install a system to control emissions and secure the other benefits of a crankcase control system, even though the law does not require such action. PAGENO="0565" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 565 p REPORT ON DIESEL FUELADDITIVES AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DIESEL EMIs- SIONS, AS REQUIRED UNDER SENATE CONCURRENT RnsoLu'rIoN No. 90 INTRODUCED BY SENATOR COLLIER, CHAIRMAN, SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION Concurrent Resolution 90 directed the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board: 1. To test or cause to be tested various diesel fuel additives' to' determine compliance with State standards, co~ts, detrimental side effects, if any, and effect on operation of diesel trucks and buses. 2. To cooperate with the California Highway Patrol to determine if such additives would reduce smoke density on diesel equipment below existing en- forcement levels for "excessive smoke." 3. To render a progress report concerning the effectiveness of diesel fuel additives to the Senate Factfinding Committee on Transportation and Public Utilities, and the Assembly Interim Committee on Transportation and Com- merce by July 1, 1906. INTRODUCTION As a result of emission standards being established by the State Department of Public Health for smoke and odor from motor vehicles, the Motor Vehicle Pollu- tion Control Board baa been engaged in several areas of activity to secure com- pliance with these standards. In addition to this activity, which is directed toward certifying a device, the staff of the Board has endeavored to secure the cooperation of the petroleum and trucking industries to purposefully accomplish better emission control from diesel vehicles prior to the time, and possibly in lieu of, actual deyicesç It is the policy of this Board, and has been in the past in relation to other areas of control, that the primary objective is to secure compliance. If, through co- operative interest, emissions from diesel vehicles can be reduced without the ~necessity of enforcement of the law, this is by far the best course of action to take. FUEL ADDITIVES The principle of utilizing an additive to diesel fuel to eliminate visible emis- sions has been recognized for many years as a potential means of control. As is discussed in the attached paper to be presented by our Supervising Engineer, at the August SAB meeting in Los Angeles, significant reduction o'f emissions may be achieved. Due tç~ this reduction and the preponderance of evidence that there is no injury to the engine or significant increase in cost, it appears at this time that an additive will be added to diesel fuel supplied to the California market. The use of this fuel additive should result in effective smoke reduction. Unfortu- nately, it appears that it will not be added to all diesel fuel marketed, but only as a premium fuel as an addition cost to the trucker if he wants to place the addi- tive in his fuel tank after he has purchased the untreated fuel. Extensive tests and evaluations by the Lubrizol Corporation and several Cali- fornia petroleum refining companies clearly indicate thatno damage, after hun- dred of thousands of miles, will result to the engine from the use of a fuel addi- tive. The attached report from the Lubrizol Corporation contains data and ma- terial relating to their evaluations. There are two observations and possible objections to the fuel additive approach for diesel smoke suppression. First, the Department of Public Health, although they find no foreseeable tnjurioua effect as a result of fuel additives; feel that to require the use of an additive is, in a sense, requiring something similar to lead in gasoline. It may or may not be a health problem. Basic ingredients of a fuel additive are metals, such as barium and iron, and have the effect of being a com- bustion improver. There is, however, a residual which results from their use. The best information to date from all sources is that there is' no potential prob- lem found in their use. However, it does concern the Department of Public Health that if they were to be required by law, it would be~ specifying an addi- tional ingredient which may be a potential problem. The second objection to the additive appro'ach is that since it acts' as a com- bustion improver, increased available horsepower results, and the operator of the vehicle could re-adjust his driving practices and engine adjustments so as to utilize the horsepower. rather than getting the benefit of the smoke reduction. In other words, he would utilize the horsepower rather than allow the additive to PAGENO="0566" ~566 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT cause a reduction in smoke. The net result would be that the diesel would con~ tinue to smoke, but more horsepower would be used by the driver. Experience with additives indicates that it would be desirbale to have the fuel additive used as an alternative method for smoke reduction. It is inconsistent with established Board policy, however, under existing law, to specify its use since it would appear that it is not a device, as defined in the laws under which this Board must operate. OTHER AREAS OF EMISSION REDUCTION As Mr. Brubacher points out in the attached paper, maintenance, driver `practices, fuel specifications, engine modifications, and engine dera'ting all have their effect on diesel emission reduction. Through a cOoperative campaign with `the Oalifornla Trucking Association, we are endeavoriflg to inform the trucking industry of the benefits of all of these approaches. We have met, and will con- tinue to meet with representatives of the petroleum Industry, In an effort to determine the advisability of securing tighter fuel specifications. We know that quality fuel will help reduce emissions. We also know that If a diesel `vehicle's injectors are set for a certain grade of fuel, a change in the fuel may cause he vehicle to emit smoke. As an example, a Los Angeles trucking operator `maintains excellent shop facilities, good driver habits are followed by the drivers, and he purchases a quality fuel for his vehicles in Los Angeles. A truck moving from Los Angeles to Bedding would re-fuel at that Northern Oalifornia ~city. Unless he has available substantially identical fuel, the vehicle may smoke. In a follow-up report to the Oommltee we hope to indicate that a cooperative program between the refinery Industry, the trucking industry, and ourselves will `be solving this probleth. ENFORCEMENT As you are well awwre, the Legislature, In Senate Resolution 18, directed law ~enforcement officers within the State of Oalifornia, and particularly the Call- `fornia Highway Patrol, to increase their efforts in the area of visible smoke emissions. The number of citations issued ha's indicated that this directive has been given a great deal of support. It is my considered judgment that the strong enforcement now being utilized In the State of California will cause the diesel user to recognize the need to control emissions, and to respond, in the areas `mentioned above, to see that they are in compliance with' the law. DIESEL cECItNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Diesel Technical Advisory Committee to the Motor Vehicle Pollution Oontrol Board has met, and will meet in the future, In relation to the technical approach to this problem. Interesting observations were made by these technical ~experts (a list nf' the Committee is attached) that basically, in the low eleva- tion areas in the State of California, visible diesel emissions can be controlled ~within existing legal requh1ements. A major point of eonëern, howe'ver, was the difficulty, due to reduced oxygen `concentrations ~in the air at higher elevations, of keeping emissions at a low level. The problem is this: We know that oxygen decreases with increase in elevation, because of the decreased density of the air. Since all motor vehicles, including the diesel, rely upon the available oxygen In the air, the combustion process is affected. It may therefore be suggested (and this would again be the subject of future reports to the committee) that an allowance be made for legal emission levels when the vehicle is at higher elevations. As an example, possibly a No. 1 Ringelmann would be used at sea level to 2000 feet; and above 2000 feet a No. 2 Ringelmann. An alternative would be to fit an aneroid control to the engine fuel system. This would hold smoke essentially constant with altitude. However, the fleet operators may object to the i~esultant slight horse. `power decrease at altitude. To summarize, therefore, in this interim progress report t& your committee, considerable effort is being put forth to reduce visible emissions from. motor vehicles, particularly the diesel, with significant results. Plans and procedures are being prepared which, as a cooperative effort of all concerned, hopefully will result in a significant reduction in visible smoke. In conjection with this program, enforcement policies are being strongly supported by law enforce. PAGENO="0567" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 567 ment officers. Test procedures and criteria for the evaluation of devices to con- trol emissions are being prepared by the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board, in cooperation with the Technical Advisory Committee. The problem of odor control from diesel vehicles is one of substantial difficulty, both as to its de11~iition and as to its controL Nevertheless, we are recognizing this fact, and through the cooperative effort of the committee and the Board, will establish satisfactory means of evaluating such a control system. The results of this effort will hopefully be immediate reduction of visible ~emissions and the necessary administrative-procedural means to evaluate any device or system that is submitted to this Board by private industry that will meet the standards established by the State Department of Public Health. PAGENO="0568" 568 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA MOTOR VEHICLE POLLUTION CONTE0L BOARD Administrative Code Provisions, Title 13, in Support of Chapter 3, Division 2O~ Health and Safety Code CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE Coun: TITLE 13, CHAPTER 3, SUBCHAPTER 1 Sec. 2000. Requirements. 2001. Plans Submitted. 2002. State Standards. 2003. Other Criteria. 2004. Motor Vehicle Olassification. 2005. Board Action. 2006. NotIfication. 2007. Device Identification. Article 1. Certification of crankcase em4ssion control devices 2000. Requirements.-Crankca~e emission control devices will be certified for approval pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 24386(4) only if such devices operate within the standards set by the State Department of Public Health pursuant to Section 426.5, Health and Safety Code, and meet the criteria adopted by the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 24386(3). Note: Authority cited for Chapter 3: Sections 24386, 24387 and 24388, Health and Safety Code. 2001. Plans Submitted.-Any person seeking a certificate of approval by the Board for any device to control crankcase emissions from motor vehicles shall submit plans thereof to the Board at its office in the Subway Terminal Building,. Suite 1085, 417 South Hill St., Los~ Angeles, California, 90013. Such plans shall be accompanied by reliable test data indicating compliance with the California Standards for Motor Vehicle Crankcase Emissions adopted by the State Board of Public Health December 2, 1960, and with criteria as established by the Board as contained in this article. 2002. State Standards.-~Every device controlling crankcase emissions from motor vehicles receiving a certificate of approval from the Motor Vehicle Pollu- tion Control Board shall meet the standards as established by the State Depart- inent of Public Health in Title 17 of the California Administrative Code, Chapter 5, Subchapter 5, Article 1, Section 30530. 2003. Other Crit eria.-E very device controlling crankcase emissions from motor vehicles receiving a certificate of approval from the Motor Vehicle Pollu- tion ContrOl Board shall meet the following criteria: (a) Be so designed as to have no adverse effect on engine operation or vehicle performance. (b) Operate in a safe manner. (c) Have sufficient durability so as to operate within State Standards and other Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board Criteria for at least 12,000 miles without maintenance. The effective date of this amendment shall be the 1966 model year or October 1, 1965. (d) Operate in such a manner so as not to create excessive heat, noise, or odor beyond the standard characteristic of the motor vehicle without such device. (e) The purchase or cost of installation of such device shall not constitute an undue cost burden to the motorist. (f) Installation of such device shall not create or contribute to a noxious or toxic effect in the ambient air. (g) The adequacy of methods of distribution, the financial responsibility of the applicant, and other factors affecting the economic interests of the motoring public shall be evaluated and determined satisfactory to protect the motorists. 2004. Motor Vehicle Classification.-Motor vehicles for which crankcase emis- sion control devices will be certified are divided into the following classifi- cations: (a) 17nde~ 140 eubic inches engine displacement. (b) 140-200 cubic inches engine displacement. (c) 200-250 cubic inches engine displacement. PAGENO="0569" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 569 (d) 250-300 cubic inches engine displacement. (e) 300-375 ci~ibic inches engine displacement. (f) Over 375 cubic inches engine displacement. (g) Motor vehicles which because of unusual engine design by the manu- facturer require special control methods for crankcase emiSsion regardless of engine displacement. 2005. Board Action.-The board upon review and evaluation of appropriate tests shall make a finding at a duly called public meeting as to whether a specific device for control of crankcase emissions meets the standards and criteria specified in this article. If a device is found to be in compliance, a certificate of approval will be issued for its operation on a classification or classifications of vehicle. 2006. Notification.-When two or more devices have been granted a certificate of approval for a classification of motor vehicle, the Board shall notify the Department of Motor Vehicles by submission of an appropriate Board Resolu- tion within 30 days of the date of their action. 2007. Device Identiflcation.-(a) The device shall be permanently and visibly marked with the trademark or name, and the model designation, in letters and/or numerals at least 1~m inch in height. The manufacturer's initials will be acceptable as the name, and trademarks shall include at least one letter 1/16 inch or more in height. (b) The required markings shall be die stamped or molded on each major component, or imprinted on a permanent name plate on each major component of the device or, as determined necessary by the Executive Officer of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. (c) Samples of working models may be required by the Motor Vehicle Pollu- tion Control Board as needed for inspection and approval and may be retained by the Board for reference and comparison purposes. (d) This section shall be immediately applicable to deylces approved after the effective date of this regulation. Devices approved prior to that time for used motor vehicle application must comply with the provisions of this section by January 1, 1064. Devices approved for new vehicle installation at the factory must comply by the time of the 1965 model year or October 1, 1964. ArticZe 2. Oertiflcation of ewha'ust emission control devices for controlling hydrocarbons and carbon monocvide 2100. Requireinents.-Exhaust emission control devices for controlling hydro- carbons and carbon monoxide will be certified for approval pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 28386(4) only if such devices operate within the Standards for said pollutants set by the State Department of Public Health pur- suant to Section 426.5 Health and Safety Code, and meet the criteria adopted by the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 24386(8). 2101. Plans 1gubmitted.-~-Any person seeking a certificate of approval by the Board for any device to control exhaust emissions from motor vehicles shall submit plans thereof to the Board at its office in the Subway Terminal Building, 417 South Hill Street, Los Angeles. Such plans shall be accompanied by reliable test data indicating compliance with the California Standards for Motor Vehicle Exhaust Emissions adopted by the State Department of Public ~Iealth pursuant to Section 426.5 of the Health and Safety Code, and with criteria as established by the Board as contained in this article. 2102. $tate Standards.-Every device controlling exhaust emissions from motor vehicles receiving a certificate of approval from the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board shall meet the Standards for specified pollutants as established by the State Department of Public Health in Title 17 of the California Admin- istrative Code, ChapterS, Subchapter 5, Article 1, Section 30520. 2103. Other Uriteria.-No device controlling exhaust emissions from motor vehicles shall receive a certificate of approval from the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board unless it meets the following criteria: (a) The purchase or cost of installation of such device shall not constitute an undue cost burden to the motorist. (b) Such device shall operate on a designated classification of motor vehicle, as specified in Section 2104, SO that, with vehicle maintenance which is char- acteristic of general usage by the motoring public, its average emissions are within the limits established by the State Standards. PAGENO="0570" 570 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEM1~P (c) Such device shall operate in a safe manner and so that the device will. not result in any unsafe condition resulting from excessive heat applied to the floorboards, hydraulic brake cylinders, brake lines, gasoline tank, fuel pump, fuel lines, trausmissiQu or ot1~er components of the motor vehicle or otherwise result in an unsafe motor vehicle. (d) Malfunction or failure of the device shall not endanger life or property. (e) Such device shall not malfunction or fail under the stress or backfire in.~ the exhaust sysl~em. (f) Such device shall not allow exhaust products of the motor vehicle to enter the passenger compartment in a volume beyond the volume characteristic of the motor vehicle with a standard exhaust system. (g) Heat emanating from an operating device shall not create a hazard `to persons or property who are in close proximity to the motor vehicle. (h) Such device shall not cause an increase iii fuel consumption or a decrease in vehicle performance beyond the limits established in the Fleet & Life Testing Procedures of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. (1) Such device shall not be permanently impaired by the variety of severe motor vehicle operating conditions frequently encountered in California includ- ing heavy rains, mountain and desert driving, and other severe operating condi- tioiis. (j) Such device shall operate in a manner so as not to create excessive noise or odor beyond the standard characteristics of the motor vehicle equipped with. a standard exhaust system; nor should the installation of such device create a noxious or toxic effect in the ambient air. (k) Such device shall be so designed as to have no adverse effect on engine operation or vehicle performance. (1) The adequacy of methods of distribution, the financial responsibility of the applicant, and other factors affecting the economic interest of the motoring public shall be evaluated anddetermined satisfactory `to protect the motorists. 2104. Motor Vehicle Ula$siflcation.-Motor vehicles for which exhaust emission control devices will be certified are divided into the following classifications: (a) (1) Under 50 cubic inches engine displacement. (a) (2) 50-100 cubic inches engine displacement. (a) (3) 100-140 cubic inches engine displacement. (b) 140-200 cubin inches engine displacement. (c) 200-250 cubic inches engine displacement. (d) 250-300 cubic inches engine displacement, (e) 300-375 cubic inches engine displacement. (f) Over 375 cubic inches engine displacement. (g) Motor vehicles which because of engine design by the manufacturer include or require special control methods for exhaust emission regardless of engine displacement. 2105. Board Action-The Board upon review and evaluation of appropriate tests shall make a finding at a duly called public meeting as to whether a specific device for control of exhaust emissions meets the Standards and criteria specified in this article. If a device is found to be in compliance, a certificate of approval will be issued for its operation on a classification or classifications of vebicle~ 21Gb. Notiflcation.-When two or more devices have been granted a certificate of approval for a classification of motor vehicle, the Board shall notify the' Department of Motor Vehicles by submission of an appropriate Board Reso- lution. 2107. Device Identiflcation.-(a) The device shall be permanently and visibly' marked with the trademark or name, and the model designation, in letters and/or numerals at least % inch in height. The manufacturer's initials will be acceptable as the name, and trademarks shall include at least one letter 3/~ inch or more in height. (b) The required markings shall be die stamped or molded on each major com- ponent, or imprinted on a permanent name plate on each major component of' the device or, as determined necessary by the ExecutIve Officer of the Motor' Vehicle Pollution Control Board. (c) Samples of working models may be required by the Motor Vehicle Pollu- tion Control Board as needed for inspection and approval and may be retained by the Board for reference and comparison purposes. (d) The effective date of this section shall be January 1, 1Oti~i~ PAGENO="0571" ADEQIJACY OF TEC1~NOLOGY FOR POLLIJT~ON ABATRMENP 571 Article 3. Certification of ecohaust enission control device8 for controUt~vi~j ides of nitrogen 2200. Requirements.-Exhaust emission control devices for controlling oxides of nitrogen will be certified for approval pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 24386(4) only if such devices operate within the Standards for said. pollutants set by the State Department of Public Health pursuant to Section 426.5 Health and Safety Code, and meet the criteria adopted by the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 24386(3). 2201. Plans Submitted.---Any person seeking a certificate of approval by the Board for any device to control exhaust emissions from motor vehicle shall submit plans thereof to the Board at its office in the Subway Terminal Building, 417 South Hill Street, Los Angeles. Such plans shall be accompanied by reliable test data indicating compliance with the California Standards for Motor Vehicle Exhaust Emissions adopted by the State Department of Public Health pursuant to Section 426.5 of the Health and Safety COde, and with criteria as established by the Board as contained in this article. 2202. Btate Standards.-Every device controlling exhaust emissions from motor vehicles receiving a certificate of approval from the Motor Vehicle Pollution Con- trol Board shall meet the Standards for specified pollutants as established by the State Department of Public Health in Title 17 of the California Administra- tive Code, ChapterS, Subchapter 5, Article 1, Section 30520. 2203. Other Criteria-No device controlling exhaust qmissions from motor vehicles shall receive a certificate of approval from the Motor Vehicle Pollution C~ptral Board unless it meets the following criteria,: (a) The purchase or cost of installation of such device shall not constitute an undue cost burden to the motorist. (b) Such device shall operate on a designated classification of motor vehicle, as specified in Section 2104, so that with vehicle malntenaace which is charae- teristiç of general usage by the motoring public, its averagq emissions are within the limits established by the State Standards. (c) Such device shall operate in a safe manner and so that the device will not result in any unsafe condition resulting from excessive heat applied to. the floorboard, hydraulic brake cylinders, brake lines, gasoline tank, fuel pump, fuel lines, transmission or other components of the motor vehicle or otherwise result in an unsafe motor vehicle. (d) Malfunction or failure of the devl~e shall not endanger life or property. (e) Such device shall not malfunction or faiL under the stress of backfir0 In the exhaust system. (f) Such device shall not allow exhaust products of the motor vehicle to entei~ the passenger compartment in a volume beyond the volume characteristic of the motor vehicle without such a device. (g) Heat emanating from an operating device shall not create a hazard to persons or property who are in close proximity to the motor vehicle. (h) Such device shall not cause an increase In fuel consumption or a decrease in vehicle performance beyond the limits established in the Fleet & Life Testing Procedures of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. (i) Such device shall not be permanently impaired by the variety of severe motor vehicle operating conditions frequently encountered in California lnclud- ing heavy rains, mountain and desert driving, and other severe operating conditions. * (j) Such device shall operate in a manner so as ~ot to create e~cessive noise or odOr beyond the standard characteristics of the motor vehicle equipped with a standard exhaust system; nor should the installation of such device create or~ contribute to a noxious or toxic effect in the ambient air, includiug emissions, of hydrocarbons and carbon. monoxide which shall not be beyond the emissions of said pollutants from a certifiable exhaust emission control devlce~for con- trolling said pollutants. (k) Such device shall be so designed as to have no adverse effect on engine oleration orvehicle performance. (1) The adequacy of methods of distribution, the financial responsibility at the applicant, and other factors affecting the economic interest of the motoring public shall be evaluated and determined satisfactory to protect the motorists~ PAGENO="0572" 572 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 2204. Motor Vehicle Classification-Motor vehicles for which exhaust emission control devices will be certified are divided into the following classifications: (a) (1) Under 50 cubIc Inches engine displacement. (a) (2) 50-100 cubic inches engine displacement. (a) (3) 100-140 cubic Inches engine displacement. (b) 140-200 cubic inches engine displacement. (c) 200-250 cubic inches engine displacement. (d) 250-300 cubic inches engine displacement. (e) 300-375 cubicinche~ engine displacement. (f) Over 375 cubic inches engine displacement. (g) Motor vehicles which because of engine design by the manufacturer include or require special control methods for exhaust emission regardless of engine displacement. 2205. Board Action.-The Board upon review and evaluation of appropriate tests shall make a finding at a duly called public meeting as to whether a specific device for control of exhaust emissions meets the Standards and criteria speci- fied in this article. If a device is found to be in comjjiliance, a certificate of aproval will be issued for its operation on a classification or classifications of vehicle. 2206. Notification.-When two or more devices have been granted a certificate of approval for a classification of motor vehicle, the Board shall notify the Governor and the State Legislature by submission of an appreqiriate Board Resolution. 2207. Device Identijtcation.-(a) The device shall be permanently and visibly marked with the trademark or name, and the model designation, in letters and/or numerals at least J~4 inch in height. The manufacturer's initials will be acceptable as the name, and trademarks shall include at least one letter 1/s inch or more in height. (b) The required markings shall be die stamped or molded on each major component, or imprinted on a permanent name plate on each major component of the device or, as determined necessary by the Executive Officer of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. (c) Samples of working models may be required by the Motor Vehicle Pollu- tion Control Board as needed f~r inspection and approval and may be retained by the Board for reference and comparison purposes. Article 4. Identical devices 2300. Deflned.-An "identical device" is a device Identical in all respects, in- cluding manufacture, installation and operation, with a device which has been certified by the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 24386 (4) but which is manufactured by a person other than the original manufacturer of the "certified device." 2301. Proof of Identical Device.-Any person intending to manufacture an Identical device shall first submit proof to the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board that said device is an identical device as defined in Section 2200, supra. Such proof shall include the following: 1. Statement of principle of operation of the device. 2. Design drawings including materials and specifications. 3. Installation drawings. 4. Sample device. 5. Other material as deemed necessary for evaluation by the Executive Officer. 2302. ~,ubject to Original Certifical,ion.-An identical device is subject to and dependent upon the original application and certification of approval on which it is based. 2303. Evaluation-The board, after review and evaluation of such proof and other date shall make a finding as to whether or not the proposed device is in fact identical to that which received prior approval. 2304. Notification.-When a device has been approved as an identical device, the Board shall notify the Department of Motor Vehicles and the California Highway Patrol by submission of an appropriate Board Resolution within 30 days of the dateof their action. PAGENO="0573" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 573 F CHAPTER 3, DIVISION 20 OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE OF CALIFORNiA Article 1. Application 24378. The Legislature finds and declares: (a) That the emission of pollutants from motor vehicles is a major contributor to air pollution in many portions of the State; (b) That the control and elimination of such pollutants is of prime importance br the protection and preservation of the public health and well-being, and for the prevention of irritation to the senses, interference with visibility, and damage to vegetation and property. (c) That, as the Department of Public Health has established standards tor air quality and for emissions of contaminants from motor vehicles pursuant to Section 426.1 and 426.5, `the State has a responsibility to establish uniform proce- 4ures for compliance with these standards. 24379. (a) As used in this chapter the following terms shall be construed as defined in the Vehicle Code: (1) Commercial vehicle (2) Implement of husbandry (3) Motor vehicle (4) Motor-driven cycle (5) Used vehicle (6) Passenger vehicle (b) A~ used in this chapter, "motor vehicle pollution control device" means equipment designed for innstallation on a motor vehicle for the purpose of reduc- ing the pollutants emitted from the vehicle, or a system or engine modification on a motor vehicle which causes a reduction of pollutants emitted from the vehicle. (c) As used in this chapter, "certified device" means a motor vehicle pollution control device for the control of emissions of pollutants from a vehicle, Including, but not limited to, the exhaust system, the crankcase, the carburetor, and the fuel tauik., far which standards have been set by the state department tinder Sec- tion 426.5 and for which a certificate of approval has been issued b7 the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. Whenever unçler this chapter or any other law a motor vehicle is required to be equipped with a certified device, such require- ment refers to the certified device for the control of the specified pollutants from the particular source involved. 24381. The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to any motor vehicle manu- factured in the year 1938 Or prior thereto, if such motor vehicle is o:perate~ or moved over the highway solely for the purpose of taking it to a place for his- torical exhibition or other. similar purpose. Article 2. Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board 2438~. There is in the State Department of Public Health a Motor Vehicle Pollutiob Control l3oard~ The board shall be responsible directly to the Governor. Administrative services for the board shall be provided by the State Department of Public Health. The board sbal~, consist ~f 13 members, ni~i~ of whom shall b~ appointed by the Governor witl~ the consent of the Senate, and fOW~ shalibe the following officers of the State, or their nominees: Director of Public lTealth, Director of Agriculture, Commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, and Director of Motor Vehicles. 24384. (a) Of the nine members originally appointed by the ~over~ior, three shall be appointed to serve until July 1, 1962, three shall be appointed to serve uptil July 1, 19(33, and three shall be ap~)ointed to serve until July 1, 1964. Thereafter, all members shall be appointed for a term of four years. All mem- bers shall hold office until the appointment of their successors. Any vacancies shall be immediately filled by the Governor for the unexpired portion of the terms In which they occur. (b) Members of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board shall serve without compensation, but eaeh member shall be reimbursed for his necessary traveling and other expenses Incurred lii the performance of his ~fficlal duties. (e) The members of the board appointed by the Governor shall be selected in suvbá fashioo~that the interests of various affected groups throughout the State, including agrlctilttLre, labor, organizations of motor vehicle u~êrs, the motor vehicle industry, science, air pollution control officials and the general public are represented to the fullest extent possible. 68-24IO--~64i---Vo1. 1-37 PAGENO="0574" ~574 ADEQUACV OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 24385. The Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board shall select annually from, its membership a chairman and vice chairman. Only those members who have been appointed by the Goternor shall be eligible for these offices. 24385.5 All meetings of the board shall be open and public and all perspns shall be permitted to attend any meetings of the board. 24386. The Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board shall have the powers and authority necessary to carry out the duties imposed on it by this chapter, including but not limited to, the following: (1) To adopt rules and regulations in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (commencing at Section 11370 of the Government Code), necessary for proper execution of the powers and duties granted to, and imposed, upon the board by this chapter. S (2) To ethploy such technical and other personnel as may be necessary for the performance of its powers and dttties. S (3) T'o"det'èrm&ile and publish the crltetrjtt for approval of motor vehicle pollu- tion control devices. In determining the criteria the board shall take Into con- sidération the cost of the deviCe' and its installation, `its~ durability, the ease and facility of determining whether the device, when installed on a motor vehicle, is properly functioning, and any other factors whi~h, in the opinion of the board, render such a device suitable or unsuitable for the contrQ~! of motor vehicle air pollution or for the health, safety, and welfare of the public. (4) To issue certificates of approval for any motor vehicle ~Olluti0n control device where, after being tested by the board or tested and recommended by a laboratory designated by the board as an au'thor1~ed vehicle pollution control testing laboratory, the board finds that the device operates within the standards set b3~ the state department under Section 426.5 and meets the criteria adopted tinder subdivision (3) of this section; proVided that no certificate of approval shall be isstte'd for any device required by subdivision (d) of Section 24390 `of this code if: S S (a) The coat of such device, including installation; is more th~tisixty-~ve dollars ($65) : S S (b) The annual maintenance cost of the device, including âny~ adjtstin~nt ne~essary'for its proper operation in order to meet the standarU~ set'~ursuant to Section 426.5, Is likely to eitceéd fifteen dollars (`$15) a year; or The d~~ice does nOt' equal or exceed the perfoFtnailce Criteria estfi~b- lished by the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board' for devices for new motor vehicles or, in the `alternative, have aü e~pectèd `useful `life of 50,000 miie~ of operation. ` S , (`5) To' exempt' froth ArticIC~ 3 of this chap'ter designated classifications of thotor vehicles for `which certified devices are not available, and motor vehicles `whose~emissions are found by appropriate tests to meet state' standards without additional equipment, and motor-drivé~' cycles;' Implements of `husbandry, and vehicles which qualify for speciallic'ense plates. under Section 5004' of the Vehicle Code,. , ` ` ` ` `~,6) To rev~ke, su~pend, or restrict a certificate of approval previously i~ued or an exep~ption previously granted upon a determination by the Boai~i that the device or mo'to~- vehicle no lox~ger operates within the stand~trds set by the state department up~Ier Section 4265 or nç longer pieets the erlteri~ adopted under Subdivision (3) of this section or no longer should be exempted Provided that once ai~y motor vehicle is equipped with a certified device it shall not thereafter `be deemed'to be in violation of this chapter' or Se~tion 27156 of the Vehicle ,Code b~cause ,a c~t~f1cate of approval for such device is `su'baeqiiently revo1~ed, sus- pended, or restriCtOd~ and replacement parts for such device may cOii~tinue to be supplied and u~ed' fOr si~ch vehicle, unless such revocation, ~usbei~sion `Or re,strle- tiorl o'f'a certificate, of a~proval is based upon a' finding that, tli'èecrtified d~vice'has been found ~o be unsafe in ltctual use or is ~~lierwise mechanically defective i~i which event such motor vehicle must be brought into compliance With this 5chapter within 30 days after such finding. ` S , (7) Pr~~edixigs under this chapter with respect to the denial of, applicatiOns for the issuance of certificates of approval or the gran1~ing of exemptions7 or fc~r t~he revocation suspension, or restriction of certificates of approvab previotisl~ issned~ or evemptions previously granted, by the board, shall be',eo'nth~c~ed'ih accordalice with the provisiops of Chapter 5 (cogu~encing w~b Section 11~00) Part 1 Division 3 Title 2 of the Governipelht Code and the böârd shall have all the powers granted therein PAGENO="0575" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 575 24386.1 The Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board may issue permits for the testing of experimental motor pollution control devices installed in motor vehicles. 24386.2 Any manufacturer of a device required by subdivision (d) of Section 24390 of this code shall, as a condition to certification of such device by the hoard, agree that so long as only one such device is certified by the board such manufac- turer is made available for sale to the public, the board shall, taking into con- as the board determines are necessary to insure adequate competition among manufacturers of such devices to protect the public interest; or (2) agree as a, condition to such a ceritification that if only one such device from one manufac- turer is made available for sale to the public, the board shall, taking into con- sideration the cost of manufacturing the device and the manufacturer's suggested retail price, and in order to protect the public interes't, determine the fair and reasonable retail price of such device and may require, as a condition to continued certification of such device, that the retail price of such device, including installa- tion, not exceed such price as determined by the board. In either event the retail price so determined by the board for a device required by subdivision (d) of Section 24390 may be less than, but shall not be more than, sixty-five dollars' ($65) per vehicle. 24386.5 The Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board shall submit a report to" the Governor and the Legislature not later than 10 calendar days following the commencement of each general session of the Legislature covering the board's recommendations concerning such legislation and other action as is necessary for the implementation a'nd enforcement of this chapter. The board shall submit its first report to' the Governor and `the Legislature at the 1961 General Session. 24387. The Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board shall adopt regulations specifying the manner in which, a motor vehicle pollution control device shall be submitted for testing and certification. 24388. Whenever the Moto'r Vehicle Pollution Control Board issues certificates of approval for' two or more devices for' the contrOl of emissions of pollutants" from a particular source of emissions from motor vehicles for which standards have been set by the state department under Section 426.5, it shall so notify the Department of Motor Vehicles. 4rticle 3. Certification, sale and installation of motor i~ehicle pollution control devices ` 24390. (a) Every 1966 or later year model motor vehicle subject to registra- tion in this state shall be equipped with a certified device or devices to control emission of'pollutants from the crankcase and exhaust. (b) On and after December 1, 1965,. every motor vehicle of 1963 or later year model subject to registration in this state shall be equipped with a certified device to dontrol the emission of pollutants from the `crankcase. (a)' EvOry motor vehicle of 1955 through 1962 year model subject to registra- tion in this state upon transfer of ownership and registrationto' an owner whose residence is in a county or portion of a county within an air pollution control dis-, trict which' may function and exercise its powers, shall be `equipped with a certi- fled device to control the emission o'f pollutants from the crankcase. (d) Every motor vehicle of 1955 through 1965 year model subject to registration in this `state upon transfer of ownership and registration to an owner whose resi~ deuce is in a county or portion of a county within an air pollution control district which may function and exercise its powers, shall hO equipped with a certified'~ device tO control the emission of pollutants from the exhaust. (e) The provisio'ns of subdivisions (a), (b),' (c); and ,(d)' of this section shall. not be'applicable to any of the following: ` ` ` (1) ,Any motor vehicle or class of motor vehicles exempted by the Motor Ve- hicle Pollution Control Board. , (2) Any motor-driven cycle, implement of husbandry or vehicle which quali- fies for special plates under Section 5004 o'f'the Vehicle Code. (f) The provisions' of subdivisions (c) and (d) shall `not' be applicable In air pollution' control districts formed betWeen January `1, 1964, and the effectlvn date of the amendment Of this' section at the 1965 Regular Session of the Legi~- 1atur~. (g) On and after December 1, 1967, every 1968 or later year model pa~senger' vehicle, except motorcycles, subject to registration and first sold and reg1stere~1 in this state shall be equipped with a certified device or derteesto control Omis-' sion of pollutants from th~ crankcase and exhaust.' Notwithstanding any other' PAGENO="0576" 576 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT provision of this section or Section 24386, the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board may only grant an exemption for not to exceed 1 percent of a manufac- turer's passenger vehicle sales in California in the preceding model year. (h) On and after December 1, 1966, every 1967 or later year model commercial motor vehicle under 5,001 pounds unladen, subject to registration and first sold and registered in this state shall be equipped with a certified device or devices to~ control emission of pollutants from the crankcase and exhaust. (i) On and after December 1, 1968, every 1969 or later year model truck, truck- tractor, or bus, except those which are diesel-powered, subject to registration and first sold and registered in this state shall be equipped with a certified device or devices to control emission of pollutants from the crankcase and exhaust. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section or Section 24386, the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board may only grant an exemption for not to exceed 1 percent of a manufacturer's truck, truck-tractor and bus sales in California In the preceding model year. (j) Motor vehicles found by the board to meet established state standards and board criteria without additional equipment are exempt from the provisions of this section. (k) The provisions of subdivisions (c) and (d) of this section shall not be applicable to motor vehicles registered to an owner whose residence is In any county in which an air pollution control district may function and exercise its powers if (1) prior to the effective date of this section, the board of supervisors of the county has, pursuant to Section 24394, found that the equipment of motor vehicles with devices to control the emission of pollutants is unnecessary for the preservation of air quality lii that county, and (2) no air pollution control district created pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 24198) of Division 20 has ever been authorized to function and exercise its powers in any county adja~ cent to such county; nor shall such provisions be applicable to motor vehicles registered to an owner whose residence is in any county adjacent to such a county, which adjacent county Is lnclude4 within the boundaries of an air pollu- tion control district created by special law to include the area of two or more counties, and In which county such air pollution control district created by special law may transact business and exercise its powers. (1) The provisions of subivisions (c) and (d) of this section shall not be applicable to motor vehicles registered to an owner whose residence is In an area, designated pursuant to this subdivision, of any county having an area In excess of 7,000 square miles in which an air pollution control district consisting of a single county may function and exercise its powers and within 60 days after the effective date of this section the board of supervisors of such county has class!- fled the county into two areas because of substantial geographic and climatic differences between the two areas, and within 60 days after the effective date of this section the board of supervisors of the county has found that within one of such areas, designated by the board, the equipment of motor vehicles with devices to control the emission of pollutants is unnecessary for the preservation of air quality Within that area. 24391. No new motor vehicle required pursuant to this chapter to be equipped with a certified device to control the emissions of pollutants from the crankcase or exhaust shall be sold In this state unless the manufacturer thereof has filed a certificate with the board within the preceding 12 months stating that all new motor vehicles of that make, model and year will be equipped at the factory with certified devices as required by this chapter. 24395. No person shall. sell, display, advertise, or represent as a certified device any device whi6h, in fact, is not a certified device. No person shall install or sell for installation upon any motor vehicle any motor vehicle pollution control device which has not been certified by the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board, 24396. Any violation of this article is a misdemeanor. Artwle 4. Authorized motor vehicle pollution control testing laboratories 24397. The Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board may designate such labora- tories as it finds are qualified and equipped to analyze and determine, on the basis of the standards established by the board, devices which are so designed and equipped to meet `the standards set by the state department under Section 426.5 and the critei~ia established by the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. * 24398. The Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board may contract for the use of, or the performance of the tests or other services by, a laboratory or labora- tories operated by a~y public or private agency,. within or without the state, PAGENO="0577" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 577 All testing of devices by the board for purposes of certification shall be per- formed pursuant to such contracts. 24399. All devices tested for purposes of certification shall be tested by a procedure which includes tests of the device to measurO Its ability to control the emission of pollutants while a vehicle is operating at full performance. $tate standards 426.1 Health and safety code.-The State Department of Public Health shall, before February 1, 1960, develop and publish standards for the quality of the air of this State. The standards shall be so developed as to reflect the rela- tionship between the intensity and composition of air pollution and the health, illness, including irritation to the senses, and death of human beings, as well as damage to vegetation and interference with visibility. The standards shall be developed after the departix~ent has held public hear- ings and afforded an opportunity for all interested persons to appear and file statements or be heard. The department shall publish such notice of the hearings as it determines to be reasonably necessary. The department, after notice and hearing, my revise the standards, and shall publish the revised standards, from time to time. 426.3 The State Department of Public Health shall by February 1, 1967, define and publish criteria concerning the levels, duration, and frequency of occurrence of contaminants in the atmosphere, Including those contaminants emitted from motor vehicles, which, if occurring in the atmosphere of any area In this state, will pose a substantial threat `to the public health, including irritation to the senses or will interfere with visibility or damage vegetation. The criteria shall be developed after the department has held public hearings and afforded an opportunity for all interested persons to appear and file state- ments or be beard. The department shall publish snch notice of the hearings as it determines to be reasonably necessary. The department after notice and hearing may revise the criteria atid shall publish the revised criteria, from time to time. 426.5 It shall be the duty of the State Director of Public Health to determine by February 1, 1960, the maximum allowable standards of emissions of exhaust contaminants from motor vehicles wbich are compatible with the preservation of the public health including the prevention of irritation t~ the senses, inter- ference with visibility and damage to vegetation. Th'e standards shall be developed after the department has held public hearings and afforded an opportunity for all interested persons to appear and file .state~ ments or be heard. The department shall publish such notice of the hearings as it determines to be reasonably necessary. The department after' notice and' bearing may revise the' standards, and shall publish the revised standards, from time to time. In revising the standards the department shall, after February 1, 1960, take' into' account all emissions fro'm motor vehic'les rather than exhaust emissions only. Whenever the department revises the standards it shall submit a copy of such revised standards to the Legislature if the Legislature is in session, or to the Senate Fact Finding Committee on Transportation and Public Utilities and the Assembly Interim Committee on Transportation and Commerce if the Legisla- ture is not in session, and such revised statsiards shall not become effective until the 31st day after such submission. Vehicle code: gections relating fo motor vehiole pollntion control 2813. Every driver of a commercial vehicle shall stop and submit the vehicle to an inspection of the size, weight, equipment, and smoke emissions of the vehicle at any location where members of the California Highway Patrol are conducting tests and inspections of commercial vehicles and when~ signs are displayed requtring such stop. 2814. Roadside inspection.-Every driver of a passenger vehicle shall `stop and submit the vehicle to an inspection of the mechanical condition and equip~ ment of the vehicle at any location where members of the California Highway Patrol are conducting tests and inspections of passenger vehicles and when signs are displayed requiring such stop. The Commissioner of the California Highway Patrol may make and enforce regulations with respect to the issuance of stickers or other devices to be displayed upon passenger vehicles as evidence that the vehicles have been inspected and PAGENO="0578" `578 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT ~have been found to be in safe mechanical condition and equipped as required by this code and equipped with certified motor vehicle pollution control devices as. required by Section 24390 of the Health and Safety Code which are correctly installed and in operating condition. Any sticker so issued shall be placed on the windshield within a five-inch square in the extreme lower left corner thereof with respect to the driver's position. If, upon such an inspection of a passenger vehicle, it is found to be in unsafe mechanical condition or not equipped as required by this code and the provisions of Section 24390 of the Health and Safety Code, the provisions of Article 2 (com- mencing with Section 40150) of Chapter 1 of Division 17 of this code shall apply. 4000. Registrctti~rn requireme~ts.-No person shall drive, move, or leave stand- ing any motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, pole or pipe dolly, or auxiliary dolly upon a highway unless it Is registered and the appropriate fees have been paid under this code. No person shall drive, move, or leave standing any motoy vehicle upon a high- way which has been registered in violation of Chapter 3 (commencing at Section 24378) of Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code. 4000.1 (a) On and after December 1, 1965, the department shall require upon transfer of ownership and registration of any motor vehicle subject to Section 24390 of the Health and Safety Code, a valid certificate of compliance4~rom a licensed motor vehicle pollution control device installation and inspection sta- tion indicating that such vehicle is properly equipped with a certified device or devices which are in proper operating condition and which are in compliance with the provisions of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 24378) of Division 20 of said code. (b) The Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board established under `Chapter 3 `(commencing with Section 24378) of Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code may exempt designated classifications of motor vehicles from the provisions of subdivision (a) as they deem necessary, and shall notify the department of such action; provided, however, that no exemption shall be granted to those vehicles subject to the provisions of subdivision (g) or (i) of Section 24390 of the Health and Safety Code, except as provided therein. 4750. The department shall refuse registration or renewal or transfer of reg- istration upon any of the following grounds: (a) That the application contains any false or fraudulent statement. (b) That the required fee has not been paid. (c) That the registration or renewal or transfer of registration is prohibited by `the requirements of Chapter 3 (commencing at Section 24378) of Division 20 of the Health `and Safety Code. 9250. A registration fee of eight `dollars ($8) shall be paid to the department for the registration of every vehicle of a type subject to registrati'on, except as are expre~s1y exempted under this code from the payment of registration fees. ~nd except those referred to in Section 9253. During `the 1966 calendar year, the registration fee imposed by this section shall be nine dollars ($9) for each `such vehicle; during the 1967 calendar year, the registration fee imposed by the section shall be ten dollars ($10) for each such vehicle; and commencing with the 1968 calendar year and each calendar year thereafter, the registration fee imposed by this section shall be eleven dollars ($11) for each such vehicle. 9253. A registration fee of nine dollars ($9) shall be paid to the department for the registration `of every station wagon, which is subject to registration. During the 1966 calendar year, the registration fee imposed by this section shall be ten dollars ($10) for each such vehicle; during the 1967 calendar year, the registration fee imposed by this `section shall be eleven dollars ($11) for each such vehicle; `and commencing with the 1968 `calendar year and each calend'ar year thereafter, the registration fee imposed by this section shall be twelve dollars ($12) for each such vehicle. 24007. (a) No dealer shall sell a new or used motor vehicle which is not in compliance with the provisions of this code `and department regulations adopted pursuant to this code unless `the vehicle is sold to another dealer or for the pur- pose of being wrecked or `dismantled. (b) No dealer shall sell a new or used motor vehicle subject to the provisions o'f Section 24390 of the Health and Safety Code which is not in compliance with the provisions of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 24378) of Division 20 of said code and the roles and regulations of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board, unless the vehicle is sold to `another dealer or for the purpose of being wrecked or dismantled. The dealer shall, with each application for transfer of registra- PAGENO="0579" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 579 tion of every 1955 or later year model motor vehicle subject to Section 24390 of the Health and Safety Code, transmit to the Department of Motor Vehicles a valid certificate of compliance from a licensed motor vehicle pollution control device installation and inspection station indicating that such vehicle is properly equipped with a certified device or devices which are in proper operating con- diltion and.wbich are in compliance with the provisions of Chapter 8 (commencing with Section ~4378) of Division 20 of said code. ~6708. (a) No person shall drive any motor vehicle with any sign, ~poster, card, sticker, çr other nontransparent material upon the front windshield, side, wings, side or rear windows of the vehicle, except that signs, posters, cards, stickers, or other materials may be placed on the win4sbield within a seven-inch square in th~ l~wer corner farthest removed from the driver's position or upon the side, windows of the vehicle to the rear of the driver and so placel that the materials will not obstruct the driver's clear view of approacbi~lg traffic, ajid except as provided for by Section 2814 of this code. (b) No person shall drive any motor vehicle upon a highway with any object or m~tterial so placed in or upon the vehicle as to obstruct or reduce the driver's clear view through the windshield, except required or permitted equipment of the vehicle and adjustable nontransparent sun visors which are not attached to the glass. (c) This section does not apply to direction, destination, or termini signs upon a passenger common carrier motor vehicle. 27156. No person shall Qperate or leave standing upon any highway any motor vehicle which is required to be equipped with a certified motor `~ebicle pollution control device under Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 24378) of Division 20 of the Health and $afety Code unless the motor vehicle is equipped with a certi- fied motor vehicle pollutiot'i control device which is ôorrectlSr Installed and in oj~erating condition. No person shall disconneCt, modify, or alter any such device in a manner which will dec$ase its efficiency or effectiveness In the control of air pollution.' ~0004, It is unlawful and constitutes a misdemeanor for any person knowingly to make any false or fraudulent statement on an application' for registration or renewal or transfer of registration, of a motor vehicle. The sum of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) is appropriated from the General Fund in augmentation of Item 195, Budget Act of 1960, for support of the State Department of Health in carrying Qut the provisions of Chapter 3 (com- mencing at SectiOn 24378), Divlsidn 20 of the Health and Safety Code. If any provision of this act or the application thereof to' any person or circum- stances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or~ appli- cations of the act which can be given effect without the invalid ~próvlsion or appli- cation, and to this end the provisions of this act are serverable. CRAPPER 7. MOTOR vJraIcLE POLLtYTION CONTROL DRVICE INStALLATION AND INSPECTION STATIONS 28500. As used in this chapter: (a) "Motor vehicle pollution control device" and "certified device" shall be construed `as defined in Section 24379 of the Health and Safety Code. (b) "Station" means a motor vehicle pollution contrOl device installation and inspection'station. (c) "Licensed Station" means a station licensed by the department pursuant to this chapter. (d) ~Licensed installer" means a person licensed by tim department for Install- ing, repairing, inspecting; or recharging motor' vehicle pollution control devices In licensed `stat1ons~ 28501. No person shall operate a station unleSs a license therefor has first been is~ned by the depa~tment. 28502. (a) The department shall license stations and shall designate, furnish' instructions to, develop regulations for, and supervise licensed stations for in- stalling, repairing,' inspecting, or recharging motor vehicle pollution control devices in conformity with' the provisions of Chapter 3 (commencing with Sec- tion 24378) of Chapter 20'of `the Health and Safety Code and the rules and regu- lations of the department The department shall establish standards for the quâlifcations, including training, of licensed installers as a condition to desig- nating and licensing the station as a licensed station. `Ah owner of a fleet of three or more vehicles may be licensed by the department as a licensed station, provided such owner complies with the regula'~ons of the department. PAGENO="0580" ~8O ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT (b) The department shall license, furnish instruction to, develop regubitions for, and supervise licensed installers as a condition for installing, repairing, inspecting, or recharging motor vehicle pollution control devices in licensed stallons. 28503. The department may refuse to issue a license to an applicant who haa made application for a station or an installer license when it determines: (a) The applicant was previously the holder of a license 158usd under tbi~ Cha4~ter, which liCense was revoked for cause and never reissued by the depáTt- metLt, ~r which license wa~ suspended ~or cause and thO terms of the suspension. have not been fulfilled; or (b) The information contained in the application is Incorrect. 28504. (a) The department after notice and hearing uaay suspend, revoke, or refuse to renew the license issued to a licensed station upon~ deterthining that the licetisee Is not lawfully entitled thereto, has used a false or fictitious name,know- ingly made any false statements or concealed any material fact in any applica- tion fox' such license, has violated one or more of the regulations developed by the departthent nuder this chapter, or has failed to properly perform the business of ~ licensed station. (b) The detstrtment after noth~e and hearing may suspend, revoke, or refuse t~ renew the license issued to a licensed installer upon determining that the licensee is not th~wfull~ entitled thereto, has used a faine or fictitious name, know- ingly made any false statements or copc~aled any nUL~ërta1 fact In any ~p~rlicat1on for such lioeu~e,'Ms vk~iated one or move of the regalatlons develOped by the department thide~ this chapter, or has fa.iied'to proper1~r carry out the duties o~ a. licensed ii~stal~er. (e) The depa.rtment shall not reinstate a r~itoked Ucense within less' than one year fropi the date o~ revocation. 28~O5. 1~very hearing provided for in this ehal~ter shall be i~th~stiant to the ptro~- visions of Chapter ~ (commencing With SectIon 11500) of Part 1 of t~1v1sion 3 of Title 2 of the, Government Code. 28~0~. Any per~o4 tiay Install a IXLGtQT vehicle pollution control device.; how- ever, no person ~rho is not a licensed insitsfle~ shall install such a device for oompensat~on, ~o such ilevice shall be deemed. ton~'e't the~requireme~rts of this code or of Chapt~r 3 (commencing with $eetlon 24?78) of Division 20 of the ITea.lt~ and Sai'ety Code aixd t1~e rul~s and regulations `of the Motor VehiCle Pollution Oontrol Board unless it has been Inspec~ted by a licensed inA~fiUe~ in a licensed station and a, certificate of com~ljance has baen issued by su~b llcense~t $tation. , * 28508. Whenever a licensed installer in a license& statiàn, Ip conformity with the Instructions of the department, installs, inspects~ rep'air~, or recharge's a motor vehicle pollution control device, and' determinesi that the device conforms with the requirements of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 24378) of Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code, ançl the rules and regulations of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board, a certificate of compliance shall be Issued to the owner or driver of the vehicle'. The department; for a fee of ten cents ($0.10), shall furnish to the licensed station the ceviificate of compliance to be issued. The certificate of compliance shall contain provisions for the date of Issuance; the make and registration number of the vehicle; the name of the owner of ~ vehicle; and the `orncial deslgnation of the station; and If the device involved was approved by the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board by the issuance of a eei~tif1cate of approval requiring the obtaining of an `annual certificate of coin-. plianee, as authorized by Section 2488~342 of the Health and Safety C'ode~ a stnte~ ment that the certificate of compliance shall be valid only through the last day of the 12th month `from the date of issuance. The certificate of compliance shall be signed by a licens5~d installer who has installed, inspected, repaired, or recharged the mo'tor vehicle pollution control deviCe. 25509. The following fees shall be paid to the department for~a motor vehicle pollution control dOries installation' ahd inspection stl~tion license':~ * (a) From the original application fora license: $10.00. (b) For the annual renewal of the license: $5.00. * 28510. (&) Threry licenSe is~ued pursiianit to this chapter shall expire at mM~ night on the 31st day of December `of eaCh year and a new license may be obtained by the'person 1x W~hom any such iicense~was Issued as provided in subdIvisiOn j(b).* PAGENO="0581" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEM~~ 58~1 (b) Every application for the renewal of a license shaU be made by the person to whom issued betw~en November 1st and midnight of November p0th preeedthg the expiration date and shall be made by presenting the applicatioa form pro~~ vided by the department and payment of the full, annual renewal fee for s~~h license. ~28511. It is unlawful for any person, other than a licensed station, to issue a certificate of compliance required by this chapter. 40001. (a) It is unlawful for the owner, or any other person, employing or otherwise directing the driver of any vehicle to cause the operation of the vehicle upon a highway in any manner contrary to law. (b) It is unlawful for an owner knowingly to permit the operatto~il o~t any vehicle: (1) Which Is not registered or for which any fee has not been paid under this code. (2) Which is not equipped as required in this code. (3) Which does not comply with the size, weight, or load provisions of this code. (4) Which does not comply with the regulations promulgated pursuant to this code. (5) Which is not in compliance with the provisions of Chapter 3 (com- mencIng with Section 24378) of Division 20 of the Health and safety Code and the rules and regulations of the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. 42271.5 The Legislature hereby declares its intent that revenue received from additional `fees imposed pursuant to `Sections 9250 and 9253 of this code by the 1965 act amending these sections shall be appropriated for the purpose of doubling the uniformed strength of the California Highway Patrol by December 81, 1968. In so doing the Legislature declares its desire to increase the number of onview Highway Patrol enforcement units as a greater deterrent to potential law violators, and to place additional emphasis on proper maintenance of vehicles, thus resulting in a balanced `traffic `safety program which deals with driver, vehicle and use of the highway system. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 24396 of the Health and Safety Code and Section 40000 of the Vehicle Code, and notwithstanding the repeal of Section 24393.4 of the Health and Safety Code and Section 27156.5 of the Vehicle Code `by this act, the failure, prior to the effective date of this act, of any person to have a certified motor vehicle pollution control device for the control of emission of pollutants from the crankcase installed ~ipon a used passenger vehicle, as required by Section 24393 of the Health and Safety Code as it read prior to the effective date of this act, shall not constitute a crime; and no prosecution of such person for a violation of Section 24393 o'f the Health and Safety Code or Section 27156 of the Vehicle Code on account of such failure occurring prior to the effective date of this act shall be commenced or continued. This act is an urgency measure necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the Con- stitution and shall go into immediate effect. Labor code: $ections relating to air pollution control 6418. It shall be the duty of the division to determine by February 1, 1967, the maximum allowable standards of emissions of contaminants from portable and from mobile internal `combustion engines used inside factories, manufactur- ing plants, warehouses, buildings and other enclosed structures, which standards are compatible with the safety of employees. The standards shall be developed after the division has held public hearings and afforded an opportunity for all interested persons to appear and file state- ments or be beard. The division shall publish such notice of the hearings as it determines to be reasonably necessary. The division after notice and hearing may revise the standards, and shall pub- lish the revised standards, from time to time. 6419. All portable and all mobile internal combustion engines that are used inside factories, manufacturing plants, warehouses, buildings and other enclosed structures shall be equipped with a certified exhaust purifier device after the certification of such a device by the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. The Division of Industrial Safety shall be responsible for the enforcenient of the provisions of thl~ section. PAGENO="0582" t82 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 0420. Sections 0418 and 0419 shall apply to all portable and all mobile internal Combustion engines used inside factories, manufacturing plants, warehouses, bUildings and other enclosed structures unless the operation of such an engine used inside a particular factory, plant, warehouse, building or enclosed struc~ ture does not result in harmful, exposure to concentrations of dangerous gases br fumes in excess of maxhnu~n acceptable concentrations as determined by the division. - Amended or added, ~1900 Special Session--effectIve October 0, 1900. Health & Safety Code Sections 420.3, 24391, 24380(4), 24380.2. Labor Code 0418,0419, 6420. Vehicle Code 2813,24007,28500. July 18, 1900. PAGENO="0583" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 583 G RESOLUTION No. 66-23 Whereas the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board is charged by the People of the State of California to control emissions from. motor vehicles, and this effort has resulted in the certification of exhaust emission and crankcase control devices meeting established State standards for maximum allowable emissions from motor vehicles operated on the roads of California; and Whereas the Federal Government recognized the importance of these control systems and required them on all vehicles nationwide, commencing with the 1968 model vehicles; and Whereas the Federal requirements specify substantially those emissiOn stand- ards adopted by the California State Department of Public Health for motor vehicles; and Whereas the California State Department of Public Health has established emission standards for 1970 model vehicles which they have determined are es~ sential for the protection of the health and safety of the people of this State; and Whereas these standards are established at 180 parts per million hydrocarbons and 1.0 percent carbon monoxide, and are based upon the absolute necessity of reducing emissions from motor vehicles as effectively and as rapidly as possible; and Whereas emission control standards have been established for diesel emission control, oxides of nitrogen control, and evaporation control for motor vehicles; Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That it is the established policy of this Boar~1 that: (1) The automobile industry worldwide is hereby informed that the State of California shall require compliance with these standards, regardless of the emission requirements established by the Federal Government. (2) This Board shall continue its leadership, interest, and enforcement of strong air pollution laws, rules and regulations, to achieve the accomplish- ment of these objectives, and shall do everything within our technical and administrative means to secure compliance with these standards. (3) This Board recognizes that motor vehicles, in order to operate on the streets and highways of the great State of California, must not destroy our air as a natural resource. (4) In recognition of the needs of this State, this Board shall maintain a constant vigilance to protect our air quality and demand stricter control and regulations in the future, as deemed necessary by the State Department of Public Health. Mr. Gu~&i~'r. It has always been the policy of the motor vehicle pollution control board to keep you well informed as to the activities and progress which we have been able to accomplish toward control of emissions from motor vehicles. It is my pleasure to indicate to you `today that our accomplishments have been significant; that our control programs are eliminating large `amounts of raw gasoline from the atmosphere; and that the future results from our continued efforts, we feel confident, will ultimately eliminate the motor vehicle as a source of pollution. The chart (p. 560) which indicates to you the gains we have made. If no pollution control devices had been installed on motor vehicles this chart would have continued to soar. As you can see, there is approximately 2 million gallons of gasoline going out over the air in Los Angeles. When we put our crankcase control devices on the ve- hicles, we saw a decrease, but not a reduction. This is the same portion of the program or the point in the program that you are on on a national level now because of the crankcase approved devices going on all ye- hides nationwide starting with the 1963 model. PAGENO="0584" ~84 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT With th~ crankcase device you have a decrease in the amount of pollution into the air, but not ~ reduction. however, I would like to emphasize when you calculate out the fact that approximately 10 percent of the total fuel delivered to a motor vehicle-_as an example, Mr. Chairman, if you were to buy 10 gallons of gasoline at the station and pay your money for 10 gallons, 1 of those gallons on the* uncontrolled vehicle goes out into the at- mosphere. This 2-million figure is based on approximately 20 million gallons being sold each day in Los Angeles. The American Petroleum Insti- tute, and I feel this is important to you gentlemen, on a national level indicated there, were in excess of 70 billion gallons of gasoline sold in the tTnited States in calendar year 1965, Take 10 percent of that, and it comes to about 7 billion. Now, to get a more realistic figure, we cut this down to 1 hour's time. Every hour of the day, 24 hours a day, on a national approach there is over 800,000 gallons of gasoline going off into the atmosphere. Now, that is a staggering amount of pollution. Gentlemen, I must emphasize I am glad to see you taking the interest you are in this problem from the nationwide approach. In some of this material I am gqi~ag to submit to you there is an information type of report which indicates what the 1966 exhaust control device on all Cahforma vehicles ;resttlted in. We see there a signMt~ant reduction, and we feel confident the sys- tems are working satisfactorily, and we. can look into 1967 to see even better devices. The efforts of the motor vehicle pollution control board, as a result of the strong support received from this committee, the Governor's office, the Senate Transportation Committee, have allowed us to co- operatively demand from the American automobile industry controls that actually do function effectively and conserve our natural resource, air. Now, I emphasize cooperatively, because we do nc~t work in a vacuum. Ju ailotir con nittee efforts and board's efforts, although we don't always do ~ theythink is quite proper, we certainly recommend the importance of cooperating with the automobile industry because, in fact, they are the ones that have to put the devices on the automobile. Mr. Bnr4t. May I interrupt to see if Mr. Grant has any copies of the statement he might pass to the committee? Mr. GRANT. Yes, I do. There is one in each of these envelopes, with some descriptive materials on the devices themselves. This is the material for the committee, which 1 ~m sorry, I only have one copy. I can give you more copies, but this descriptive material on this has my statement, and al~ô a copy of the speech I referred to at the API. We know that our efforts have caused the manufacturers of motor vehicles to not only install control equipment, but to be more concerned about quality control in their production. They have upgraded the quality of carburetors, ignition systems, and many other components of the engines. We also know thatthroughout the State of California, predelivery service performed by dealers prior to delivery of the ve- hicle to the purchaser has greatly improved. The ultimate result i~ that the motorist in California is purchasing a better vehicle. PAGENO="0585" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 585 We know that our efforts to date with over 6 million vehicles equipped with crankcase control devices, and with approximately 800,000 1966 model vehicles equipped with exhaust control equipment~ keep from our skies nearly 400,000 gallons of gasoline each day. A unique factor involved in this is that a large percentage of this gaso- line is being used by the motorist at a considerable saving to him. As an example, we know that a properly installed crankcase emission control system results in about a 3-percent increase in mileage, since raw gasoline which was going out into the air is now kept in the en- gine and used as fue~t. There is also a report made to the Board by John Maga, of the State department of public health, bureau of air sanitation, which in- dicates in figure 1 that the results of our efforts to date have caused about a 30-percent reduction in emissions into the atmosphere of con- taminants which would have been present if we had not taken action commencing in 1960. These have been on all new vehicles, and we have a used vehicle program which requires them to be installed on used vehicles at the time of change of ownership back to 1955. Of particular importance are the statistics on page 4 which indi- cate that there are still about 1,~50,000 vehicles which still need to be equipped, and presumably a sizable percentage of these will be subject to our regulations because of sale `and transfer o~f ownership in the future. We have also made a real effort to control emissions from diesel vehicles. The obnoxious black smoke which, under some conditions is emitted from diesel vehicles, has been reduced on the highways of California due to legislation passed at the last `session, and the cooper~ ative efforts made by ourselves and the California Trucking Associa- tion, which organization has made a diligent effort to secur~ coopera- tive interest on the part of its `own members to achieve control of `their diesel vehicles. We now `have standards for odor and visible smoke, and possibly in the future devices will be developed that may be applied to diesel vehicles. In `the meantime, however, due to the complexities of the control of these emissions, we feel `that strong on-the-road enforce- ment, plus cooperative interest, have achieved and will achieve a great deal. As Dr. Ha;agen-Smit indicated, there has been considerable interest shown in the control of oxides of nitrogen. In section 5 of the sub- mitted material, we have title 13 of the Oalifornia Administrative Code. On page 5 are the criteria which have now been finalized. We are prepared to evaluate any device to control oxides of nitrogen. None as yet has been presented to the board. In section 6 of the pamphlet, you have for your files a copy of all the laws relating to motor vehicle emission control in the health and safety code. Thjs includes those sections from assembly bills 72, 73, 74, 75, and 98, passed at the last session. I hope, Mr. Chairman, that this has defined the present status of the board. I would like to indicate additional areas of concern, The `board, at its last meeting, took a strong position in support of the need for continued incre'~sed effort to secure more `and better control `of emissions from motor ~rehicles. As the charts indicate, we cannot PAGENO="0586" 586 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT achieve 1940 air unless this action is taken. The automobile industry and the Federal Government have been made aware of the absolute necessity of accomplishing the 1970 standards recommended by the State department of public health. The present standards, Mr. Chairman and members of the commit- tee, as to hydrocarbons are 275 parts per million. This is also the standard adopted by the Federal Government with some modification for the small foreign vehicles. We level out here in the future to 180, and are still kicking out in our atmosphere in excess of 8 million gal- lons a day. We have got to get down considerably lower to get 1940 air. This is why the board has taken this position, and to graphically illustrate it here in order to achieve this in 1970, we have to establish the 180 parts per million, and in the 1970's conceivably go below this down to 100, in order to achieve the quality of airnecessary. The 180 parts per million is the one established and recommended by California. I made a statement to the California Assembly Trans- portation Committee indicating we felt strongly this was necessary to make it mandatory, and I would feel, if I may express an opinion, that there is considerable interest in this approach. We strongly support `the need for conservation of our air resource, which necessitates the creation of a statewide agency which `will func- tion as a coordinating, and if necessary enforcing agency, to control emissions from all sources. This, Mr. Chairman, reflects, I believe, some of the concern Mr. Bell nidicated as to the `tying together of the various actions `of the various local, Sta'te, county, and city organizations. We feel this is the central approach which should be adopted by California, bringing together the same concept of control. As an example, in the motor vehicle area, making it statewide. I certainly would not minimize the efforts the districts are making now, but there are many areas of the State where there is total pollu- tion going on unhampered. We are convinced that the people of California, the legislature, and the administrati'on no longer can permit indiscriminate, uncontrolled, illegal contamination of the air we breathe. Present standards established by the `State department of public health are only recommended for 1970 under present law. They would not become mandatory until two or more devices have been de- veloped to meet the requirements. I feel that as the charts indicate, it is essential that we make these 1970 standards mandatory and give notice to industry that their vehicles shall not exceed these basic re- quirements. I feel that it is within the `ability of the industry to con- trol their vehicles to `this degree, and that certainly a timely notice to them would give them sufficient time to comply and deliver to the California motorists vehicles that do not emit excessive pollutants into our atmosphere. I may add this was taken at the last board meeting, and that the resolution which is in the submitted material, was recommended by' the executive committee to the board. We in California cannot take a chance that the Federal Government will answer our needs. We recognize that your Federal efforts will result in a strong vehicle emission control program nationwide'. How- PAGENO="0587" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 587, ever, at the same time we know that our control efforts here must con- tinue at the strong leadership level we have established. Essentially, all present controls on stationary sources in America are patterned after the Los Angeles County Air Pollution Control Districts' program. All present controls on vehicles in the world are patterned after our State motor vehicle pollution control board's actions and leader- ship. You and your colleagues in Washington must recognize the impor- tance of this and not allow Federal entry into this area to diminish its effectiveness. Local, State, and Federal efforts to collectively work together to accomplish our needs have in the past and should in th.e future result in significant program gains. in conclusion, I would like to indicate to you again that the board is confident that considerable pollution is being kept from the air, and that this is an important factor in the fact that there have been fewer incidents of air pollution; and that with each day that passes, there will be more and more vehicles on the road which are controlled. I would like to emphasize, however, that we are a long way from our goal. There is still serious air pollution, and if the weather is adverse we shall have smog alerts. We shall put forth continued effort so as to assure the people of California that eventually the air of Califor- nia~*ill be fit to breathe. Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Grant. Mr. Bell? Mr. BELL. Thank you, Mr. Grant. Let me welcome you to the com- mittee and commend you for your very excellent statement. Mr. GRANT. Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. BELL. Has there been a difference in acceptance of the auto- m~le devices between Los Angeles basin residents and those in smog- A~e areas? Mr. GRANT. It is a twofold question, Mr. Bell. It is a yes and no. As to the new devices going on new vehicles, there has been very little concern. They are built into the vehicles and are covered by the manufacturer's warranty. There are next to no problems. With these there has been citizen acceptance. As to the used vehicle application, I would have to say there has been a hazy area. Many of the people in the initial portion of the program were faced with the absolute need `of putting a device on within a sched- ule during the year in 1964 and 1965, and this caused concern. There were motorists who felt it was unfair. We do have devices and there were many problems, as I am sure you are aware of, in relation to the, emission control program. However, with the legislation being changed in 1965' so that only at the time `of transfer of ownership was it necessary to put a device on the vehicle, and only in those metropolitan counties, such as Los Angeles and other areas, there has been very little problem. We have almost reduced complaints in the motorists concerned down next to nil. This is not to say there is not some concern. Still you hear that some of the mechanics don't like them. But properljy installed devices will not give you trouble, and w~ have yet to find a motorist who has a device On a vehicle, unless it is a total wreck, where the device gives himany problem. PAGENO="0588" 588 ADEQUACY OF TECIINOLOOY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mr. BELL. I was, going to ask you what is known about the inspec- tion, maintenance, and cost of these devices. Mr. Grant. I assume you are referring to the exhaust control sys- tem on the 1066 vehicles? Mr. BaIL. Yes. Mr. GRANPS As part of our certification of the original device, we made it contingent upon a regular annual inspection of' some type, and this was not accepted by the legislature, and they directed us to change our requirements for the device so they would he effective essentially for the life of the vehicle. We did respond to this, and now `the 1967 devices, which are essen- tially the same as the 1966 devices, are good for the life of the vehicle. There is, however, always this need in maintaining any vehicle for ~eri'odio service. Then the question comes in, what is periodic service? In our evaluation and testing of the device, periodic service meant `that at 25,000 miles, `from zero to 25,0O0~ miles you were allOwed to give it a minor tuneup, and aside from `thatno other service. `This was projecting it out to 50,000 miles. , " ` ` `You had'one tuneup at 25~000, `and most motorists wIll recognize the ~need for reasonable theehanical service. Every rnanuf~icturer recom- mends ,that every 12~000' miles, you should have this minor' tuneup service on the vehicle. So these systems we have evaluated will last for `the life of the vehicle with a minor tuneup at every 25,000 miles through the life of "the vehicle. We have not considered `the necessity of annual inspection at this phase in the game. We were told we could not do that. However, there is still the importance of the fact that we are contmmng surveil- lance of the~e ~vehicles. W~ are constantly bringing in representative vehicles~ an~J th~ding out how they are working in' the hands of motorists. It may prove that in' the future that the service the motorist is giving his vehicle is not `~ufficient to keep the emissions down to where it should be, and it may be necessary' in the future, we will need more data to `take a position on this, that annual inspection is required. Now, as to the service that is actually necessary, it is next to nothing~ These systems are an integral part of the engine, and they require very little extra maintenance to' make sure that the fan belts are working on the air pump and are properly instai1ed~' `Mr. BELL. Mr~ Grant, perhaps you wou~d like to ~omrnent on~ the statement by the last witness. What part do' you feel' the Federal Government should play in a program of this kind, particularly in the automotive field? Mr. GRANT. I feel that the Federal Government has played a ver~t significant part to the extent they have gone already. Mr. BELL. I should have said, if any. Mr. GRANT. 1 am convinced they have. I couldn't very well say anything else,'because they have almost carte blanche adopted our pro- cedures and `regulations for devices, arid are going to evaluate them for the";i9~8 vehicles. `They are good systems. They will reduce total emissiGn~ into'theatrnosphere. ` `Being `air pollution oriented2 I would Say, to ,ehm,m$e air pQllution in any portion of the country is a noble endeavor, and thø preventive PAGENO="0589" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 589 maintenance to prevent that kind of problem from arising in other parts of the country. Mr. BELL. In othe~r words, you think there has to be some uni- formity? My next question would involve that. Should there be some type of uniformity? Mr. GRANT. Yes, I do. There is your uniformity built into itat the present time. You have the nationwide application, the one standard *f or the car device being approved. However, at the same time, as I itidicated in my statenient, I would feel it would be very ill-advised action fc~r the Federal Government to preempt the activities of those areas `that have done so much to control emission. At the same time I seriously question-I know the Federal people, and I work with them, and I say this with great respect for them, but I question whether or not they will be able on a national level to de- mand the devices or systems we are going to have to have in California. We were 2 years ahead of the national program on crankcase devices. We are now 2 years ahead on the exhaust emission control. I foresee that by 1970, and I might indicate the industry is pretty well in line with and recognizes that California has to go a little further than we are now, and I ±eel confident we wiU have 180 parts per mil~~ lion devices in California. It would take a great deal of not only personal bttt unified effort on the part of you people in Congress to recognize the need for the strict control, but I honestly and seriously question this on the na- tional level, whether it would be successful. Mr. BELL. I agree with you. However, you do believe that further research and effort should be made on the part of all? Mr. GRANT. Very definitely. Mr. BELL. Perhaps the Federal Government can play sm~ie part l*~ that. Mr. GRANT. Yes, very much so. The Federal Governth~nt has shown considerable leadership in this particular area, ~hey hi~ve been active many years now in supplying assistance not ~niy throRgh their own facilities, but in funds to other agencies to assist tii~m in their programs. Mr. BELL. Thank you. Mr. BRowN. Mr. Grant, there' are a number of other questions we will not be able to. ask, because of the shortness of time this morning. We have an additional witness. I am particularly interested in the research needs, if we are going to have mandatory standards in 1970 of 180 parts per million, for example. I also wonder whether the automobile industry is going to be able to meet this deadline. Mr. GRANT. I would like, Mr. Chairman, to reiterate the statement Mr., Fuller indicated, and that I initially said, we are deligl~ted to have the opportunity, shall I say, to spread the gospel and give you and a committee such as yours whatever information we have availthle. Mr. BROWN. We are grateful for your appearance here this morn- ~ng. It has been extremely valuable, and we thank you for it. Mr. GRANT. Thank you. ` Mr. BROWN. Our next witness is Mr. W. L. ROgers, of 4eroj~et- General Corp. ~s he c~wes forward~ and before he makes his statement~ I, would like to acknowledge the presence of a group from the St~u~, Out, Smog organization, headed by Mrs. Slade, who is here this morning. O8-24~~--6e--Voi. i-38 PAGENO="0590" 590 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Mrs. SLADE. At the end of the hearing I would like to make a statement. Mr. BROWN. We will try to give you that opportunity. Mr. Rogers. STATEMENT OP W. L ROGERS, VICE PEESXDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER, VON KARMAN OENTER, AEROJET-GE1~lERAL CORP. Mr. ROGERS. Congressman Brown and Congressman Bell, I thank you on behalf of Aerojet-General Corp. for this opportunity to testify this morning. I would like to request your permission to forward a statement to the committee for the record which will amplify the remarks I make this morning. (This statement may be found on p. 598.) Mr. BROWN. Without objection, that will be done. Mr. ROGERS. Aerojet-General Corp. has been pleased to serve the U.S. Government, which is our principal customer for almost 25 years in the field of defense, and in more recent years space as well as the Department of Interior Office of Saline Water. Perhaps our greatest contributions in these years has been in the development of liquid and solid rocket engines for various missiles, but today the company is making significant contributions in many other areas. In the Von Karman Center in Azusa, the plant I represent is engaged in producing the Mark 46 torpedo for the Navy, the develop.. ment and building of payloads for the Air Force, developing the SNAP-8 for NASA, working in life sciences technology for the Air Force, and domg research and development for the Office of Saline Water in reverse osmosis, a method of desalting sea water and cleaning polluted water. I mention these programs to give the background and capabilities that are r~presented by our staff of 4,400, of which some 1,700 engineers and scientists represent a broad range of specialties and capabilities. We are now turning our attention toward the problem of pollution. I would like at the outset to say that my comments are not aimed di- rectly at the Los Angeles County air pollution problem, because you have heard from the real experts here this morning in the preceding witnesses. My comments will, I hope, pertain to the overall work of the committee in assessing the adequacy of the technology. Mr. BROWN. We are particularly grateful for that emphasis. Mr. ROGERS. Now as to Aerojet's work which is pertinent to the in- terest of this committee. When Governor Brown initiated efforts to investigate the applicability of aerospace systems approach to special problems, the so-called California studies, we entered the competition for the study on waste management and were selected. Throughout our work in this study, our work on water resources for the Office of Saline Water., and our work in life sciences activities, we have become vitally interested in pollution abatement and are resolved to make whatever contribution we can to this most significant problem. I would like now to talk about the California waste management study. This was the first small step toward pollution of what is now, and will certainly be in the future, a very s&riou5 problem for the State of California PAGENO="0591" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 591 The study addressed itself to all kinds of wastes-gaseous, liquid, and solid. Such an application is necessary if we are to arrive at the best total solution to the problem throughout the country. The Committee on Pollution of the National Academy of Sciences- National Research Council states in a report, "Waste Management and Control": The difficult job of determining an optimum balance of competing require- ments must be approached from a systems point of view. The systems approach must consider the interrelationship of land, air, and water. Too often munici- ~a1ities get rid of solid wastes `by incomplete burning, which may solve land dis- posal `problems, but fouls the air. We must consider the assimilative capacity of water, air, and land taken together as a single entity and in relation to the plants and animals that live there. The assimilative capacities vary with such factors a's the tidal flushing of bays, the flow of rivers and the windiness of locality. Now, in this first attempt to apply systems analysis to waste man- agement problems in California we found our efforts hindered by in- adequate definition of environmental objectives, the lack of pertinent data and lack of generalized analytical models. However, we could readily identify sources of agricultural, indus- trial and domestic wastes, and it was clear that by redesign of existing plants, control of design of future plants, development of special waste disposal systems, much of the effluent and residues of California industry and agriculture could be eliminated or rendered less noxious. But at what permissible cost, and over what time period, and by what means of administration and control, and, perhaps most important of all, to what degree? These questions are not easy to find the answers to. Our studies showed that if we used the existing systems of waste management, merely continuing present methods and expanding these methods to cope with greater demands we see in the future, the annual cost in the year 1990 of treating industrial wastes, commuting greater distances on superciogged superhighways, refurbishing facilities and residences that have been deteriorated by polluted environment will be approxi- mately $8 billion annually. Systems engineers making use of improvements possible with today's technology or potential improvements from advanced technology, would reduce the approximate annual co'~t, we figured, in 1990 to $3 to $4 billion. So that is a substantial reduction. It is about equal to the current California State budget. To evaluate the utility of regional models, the Sacramento area was studied in some detail and simplified and experimental simulation models for digital computers were constructed to predict air quality conditions and to locate sewage treatment plants and scale them for size. From this and other work we concluded that modeling techniques are well enough advanced to apply to a large region to get better demon- station of the usefulness of the systems approach. The major conclusions of our study were: First, that in light of estimated compositions and quantities of waste in the next 25 to 30 years, the continued substantial degradation of environment will occur if present waste management practices are continued. PAGENO="0592" 592 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT Second, that urgent research and development is required to over- come these three principal hindrances of comprehensive systems analysis of waste management today. First, the lack of meaningful environmental objectives which define output requirements of system. Second, the lack of correlation between characteristics, quantities, ef- fluents and the deluge of environmental pollution. Third, the lack of generalized computer-type models of three basic elements of waste management system: the input function, the processing function, and the environmental assimilative function. I think our waste management study and other California studies have given a positive indication that aerospace techniques will be a useful tool in creation environment in the next few years. The cen- tral advantage offered by this tool is the ability to provide decision- makers with more facts on which to base their decisions. I now would like to turn my attention to comments on the subject with which your committee is concerned at the moment, the adequacy of presently available science and technology for pollution abatement. From our vantage point at Aerojet General, and based upon our very limited experience with a truly immense and fantastically com- plex problem, the adequacy of presently available science and tech- nology for pollution abatement cannot be quantitatively assessed, IT submit, however, that the following `two quantitative statements can be made with some confidence they are right. The first is that presently available science and technology has not been fully applied to pollution abatement ~.s yet. The second statement is that the pollution abatement problem will require new and improved technology to achieve acceptable solutions in the future. Now, if we try to design a specific course of action based on these statements in order to perhaps arrange `for improved application of presently available science and technology and. establishment of ap- propriate, research and development program to yield required new and improved technology, we very soon confront the same obstacle we found in our waste management study-the goals we are striving for are not well defined. If we consider the establishment of goals we find much work re~ mains to be done, and there is no clear channel for its accomplishment. Now, in this country of ours we have organized ourselves to make effective attacks on other gigantic problems-the defense of our country and the maintaining of our country's leadership in space exploration, to mention two, and we can and will organize ourselves. to make an effective attack on pollution abatement. The leadership of the Federal Government is required to assign. appropriate priority to pollution abatement among our other national objectives and to assign clear responsibilities and authorities so that the `establishment of goals, and the implementation of programs to achieve these goals can proceed in an orderly fashion. Now, as we strive toward more effective pollution abatement on a national scale ~we should proceed immediately on national projects to further develop our techniques of the application of systems ap- proach to pollution problems. There was a review of the `California studies conducted in a series of meetings at Williamsburg in which panel experts convened to spend PAGENO="0593" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR `POLLUTION ABATEMENT 593 :a couple of days with the authors of the studies examining' what was done and to figure out what should have been next. In the review of our waste management study, I am glad to say `the experts in the field concluded that indeed it looked as though there is value in this systems approach, and that the next step which' should be taken is that a region should be selected for an indepth study to get `further evaluation of the systems approach. I think the systems approach will be a valuable tool to add to other available resources which will be necessary t'o conquer the threat of pol- lution to the well-being of our citizens. It is not a panacea. There will have to be other resources also to conquer the threat of pollution `to th'e well-being of our citizens. `Thank ybu very much. Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Rogers. We appreciate your testi- mony, particularly in view of the contribution which Aerojet has already made in this field. I am sure, speaking for both Congressman Bell and myself, that the aerospace `industry in southern California will continue to play `an expanded role in this field, and this is part of the exploration we are interested in. Congressman Bell? Mr. Bi~I~L. I think, Mr. Rogers, following up on the statement my colleague made, Aerojet did pay part of the cost of the California study? Mr. ROGERS. Yes, sir. Mr. BELL. Would they continue to do this in pollution work in order `to gain experience for their company or something? Mr. ROGERS. Of course it depends upon a business ~evaluation of what the opportunity is. Although `the waste management study might be `considered somewhat far out to our stockholders, we consid~ ~red this was a worthwhile enough potential area to match the State funds in preparation of the study, which we did. Each case that comes along I am sure will be evaluated on its own merits. Mr. BROWN. If you felt the market would increase for this type of study, you might be interested in doing some in-house work on that? Mr. ROGERS. That's right. Mr. BROWN. Mr. Rogers, I will make the statement to you I did to other witnesses., We recognize the shortage of time this morning. I will not take up any more of your time this' morning. I want to thank `you again for being here, and I am sure this is going to be of great benefit to the committee. Mr. ROGERS. Thank you. Mr. BELL. I also want to thank you. Mr. ROGERS. Thank you. Mr. BROWN. There are two or three people who were not invited as witnesses, but have asked to appear. The committee is not at all seeking to exclude witnesses. We are merely handicapped by the mechanics of time. Any witness is free to submit a written statement to the committee, if you wish to do so, and in the next 10 minutes or `so I am going to try and call on the persons `who have indicated a de~ire to make a brief personal statement. PAGENO="0594" 594 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT If I may be' permitted to choose the order, I think I will ask Dr. Clark, who had previously inquired about coming to Washington, if `he would like to come forward for just a moment. Dr. Clark, we are happy to have you here. We don't know the gist of your testimony, but whatever it his, I am sure it will be welcome. You may address the committee. STATEMENT OP DR~ WILLIAM~ D. CLARK, TECHNICAL DIRECTOR, BYNA-THERM CORP. Dr. CLARK. In view of the shortage of time, I will make it as brief as possible, which is sort of akin to trying to explain nuclear physics in 5 minutes. Mr. BROWN. We appreciate that. Dr. `CLARK. I have been engaged many years in research involv- ing the use of cryogenic hydrogen as a fuel for internal combustion engines and for small powerplants. This came about as part of my work at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory when we were specuiat~ng on how we might apply atomic energy to small powerplants `such as automobiles. It became apparent quickly that we could not foresee having 50 million small reactors on the Nation's highways in automobiles in the near future. The nature of atomic energy is such it lends itself only to large pow- erplants. The only reasonable route seemed to be the construction of large nuclear po'werplants, the storing of the energy from these large nuclear powerplants and some intermediate substance which could be distributed throughout the United State's in smaller power- ~plants such as for automobiles. `The plant came out to be in electrol- ysis of water and the distribution of cryogenic hydrogen as fuel. Hydrogen, as you know, joins combination with oxygen in the air and the product is water. There are no pollutants involved at all. Now, ad~mittedly, this is a far out concept. This will take years and years of research. The role of the Federal Government, in my opinion, should be `the funding of some of this research. Even if the programs of Mr. Fuller and Mr. Grant are 100 per- cent successful, and we succeed in generating a device we can place onto an automdbile, that would result in stoichiometric reaction be- tween gasoline and air which would mean of course that the products would be carbon dioxide, gas and water; the amount of carbon dioxide, gas and water we would be dumping into the atmosphere is small in itself. In itself it would become a pollutant in the greenhouse. effect with large amounts of CO2 in the air, and would affect the entire teiñpe~ature of the earth. These are briefly the points I wish to make to the committee. Being a technical man, I am interested in research and development. I feel that the Federal Government should establish some research program to investigate the entire energy picture. With regard to the systems approach that the gentleman from Aerojet was speaking of, the fact is that when man uses energy there will be a waste. The laws of thermodynamics demand that, but by careful management we can arrange this waste to be in such a form that we can best handle it. PAGENO="0595" `ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY. FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 595 For instance, in the scheme that I have outlined, the waste of course is~ the fission products from the reactor, but we can handle these fis~ sion products in a much more efficient fashion because we get tremen- dously small amounts of fission product waste from nuclear energy for the production of a tremendous amount of energy. We can con- centrate these into relatively small packages, and the thought of, shall we say, depositing these. in outer space where radioactivity is no stranger `is not at all out of the realm of possibility, and it is defi- nitely economically feasible. We are talking of disposing of 10 or 15 pounds of reaction fission products after it has produc~ed several hundred million megawatt-hours of energy. I think I should give the other people a part of the time who want to be heard. I would like the opportunity of meeting with you two gentlemen in Washington and discussing this in. some detail. `I have presented this program to Congressman Overton Brooks over the years, and I just had a conference with Senator Clinton Anderson at his home discussing these issues. I would like to,go into it in more detail, and I am, frankly, not quite at home without a blackboard. Mr. BROWN. We appreciate your willingness to come here this morning, Dr. Clark, and present this to us. I think Mr. Bell and myself are both receptive to innovative ideas of this sort. We are looking for new ideas, and may I assure you on my own part of our willingness to meet and discuss this with you. Dr. CLARK. The last thought I would like to leave is that my pre- liminary studies, with the cooperation of Mr. Fuller making a con- siderable amount of his information available to me, led me to believe Los Angeles is on the brink of a disaster regarding smog. Mr. BROWN. Well, I would not `be at all surprised if you were right. Any further questions? Mr. BELL. I am sorry there wasn't more time to' hear further dis- cussion of this. I have heard of your work in the past, and I hope you have the opportunity to come back and bring this problem up to us in Washington, and expand on it. I hope that you will give us maybe some written material and addi- tional information with your thoughts in them. Dr. CLARK. I will forward a few reports I have gotten up on the subject to the committee for your reading and reaction. (Additional material furnished may be found in committee files.) Mr. BROWN. Thank you very much. Dr. CLARK. Thank you. Mr. BROWN. Mrs. Slade, would you like to make a brief statement at this time? Mrs. Slade, you represent the Stamp Out Smog Committee? STATEMENT OP. MRS. SHERMAN SLADE, STAMP OUT SMOG COMMITTEE Mrs. SLADE. That is correct. We represent about 400 organizations thoughout the State of California dedicated to eradicating smog. I suppose we speak for the people as much as `anyone could. I would like to briefly say, while we have had a cooperative Gov- ernor and supervisors, you can see the problem is still with us. We are happy for the great interest the Federal Government has shown recently. PAGENO="0596" ~596 ADEQUACY OF TECflNOLOOY~ FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT We wftnt to emphasize that the public is not apathetic. We have heard this said so many. times. It may seem apathetic on a rainy Monday morning, the first day of school. Most of them are highly confused about . the highly technical nature of this ~xroblem, and I think they wotdd. support anysolutions. We~ wouki recommend more Federal. research money. We would like to see it channeled through people already knowledgeable in the field, your universities, and the people who have done pioneering work, but we could use a great deal more. I would like also to say one word about natural gas. I have written Congressman Bell about the subject. We feel one thing ~he Federal Government èould do is let the urban areas with pollution problems have all the natural gas they need. We feel the Federal Government is being old fashioned in hoarding the natural gas, the supply o~ ~hich, I understand, is increasing all the time. We could use some more gas. Thank you very muth. Mr. BRowN, Thank you very much for your statement. Mr. BELL. Thank you. Mr. BROWN. I might say if hearings could eliminate smog, it would :have been eliminated many years ago. Mr. George Fisher, the California Taxpayers Council, asked to speak briefly also. We will welcome a statement from him. STATEMENT OP GEOB~GE PISRER, SOUTHERN CALIPORNIA TAXPAYEIW COrUNOIL 1 Mr. FIsHER. Thank you, Mr. Chairmen. I don't want to appear sarcastic or disharmonious, espedially toward you, Congressman Brown, because you were one of our sta~c1~ sup- porters in the years gor~e by in introducing legislation that would have eliminated effluent content of gasoline, and if that law had been sue~- cessful, we would have less of a. problem now, but the.oiI Lobby was too much, and polities, and we are. still fumbling around with smog. I only have time to. introduce myself. am George Fisher. I am secretary of the Southern California Taxpayers Council for Simplified Government. . Over the: past 20 years we have beê~i studying and writing thout smog, and we give no quarter to anyone when it,comes to information, technical, political and otherwise, with regard to sInog~ I would like to reiterate-I would like to make these two points. It is better in speaking in a short period to make only a few points. So I will just n~iake two. I would like to say that first over the past 20 years we have kept re- iterating that smog ckn be eliminated instantiy~ if the health depart- ments all over the country would enforce their own laws and abate a nuisance. That is all they have to do, and all this multibillion-dollar racket would beeliminated immediately. . That is the first point. . The second point I would like to make is with regard to the exhaust devices. This is a i~tt1e more technical, but I will make it just as sim- pie as I can. The exhaust devices on which the American public is going to spend upward of $500 million a year is a complete fraud and a hoax, and I will tell you why very briefly. ~ . PAGENO="0597" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 597 Dr. Haagen-Smit stated in 1950 as a cause of smog our gasoline has increased its effluent content twentyfold. He stated that in 1950 that as a cause of smog the effluent content of our gas has increased twenty- i~old. Now, in formulating the designs for this exhaust device that in- crease is completely ignored. There is no mention made of it what- ever in the formula. In other words, those who have devised that fraud have pretended that the effluent content of our gasoline has remained constant. `That is a fact that is to be found in chapter 17 on page 98 of the Standards for Motor Vehicle Exhaust. Now, that can be very easily rectified. Dr. Haagen-Smit was here and he could talk to it. It is tragic he doesn't remain, bu~ those who make a living from smog, they spend an hour or two talking to committees constantly, they get paid for it, but those who attempt to represent the taxpayers, such as I, we are shoved to the rear and offered a couple of minutes, and of course that is the reason why we still have smog, because we bring the taxpayers' viewpoint. Now, I want to mention just one more thing, and that is to get to the point of this meeting. The point of his meeting today as you are trying to find out how to spend some money on Aerojet's systems management. That very patently is the purpose of the meeting~ You want to find out if and how the Federal Government can let Aerojet into the account and spend some more of the taxpayers' money. I am going to oppose that, a~id lam going to tell you why. lVhen smog first came way back in 1943 we enunciated all these things that I have said now about the fraudulence of the entire program from the beginning to the end~, We have it documented, every phase of it, political and scientific. We have it documented in our literature which is available to anyone. We can show that every piecO is a~ fraud, and now Aerojet wants to get into the act and spend money. As good engineers, we never, miss a point. We have taken Aerojet's study from the Von Karman Center and have studied it exhaustively, and when it comes to air pollution, when it comes to exhaust devices, they have simply copied word for word, verbatim, in their study, copied word for word the program of the California Motor Vehiole Pollution Control Board. In other words, the same fraudulence `that the California Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board. has been handing out for the last 6 years, the Aerojet-General has simply copied. In other words,~ they have no better ideas, and we, the taxpayers council, we don't~ like to see our money spent for that kind of thing. We would like to see this $500 million the American public is going to pay, beginning in 1968-we would like to see some concrete results from that. As I pointed out, there can be no concrete results because scientifically the thing is a hoax and a fraud. Every Detroit engineer knows that. I attended .the SAE conven- tion in Detroit a few years ago, and when those engineers sit around a gla~s of cold beer in a club, they laugh at this. They think we are a `bunch of mental patients out here in Los Angeles. In the Automotive News for January 16, 1964, there are some of the quotes from those engineers. They think we are a bunch of idiots for suggesting such a thing. PAGENO="0598" 508 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT I happen to have with me some summaries of our earlier literature. The title of this is "Smog Co~ritrol-Politicai Fraud." Anyone whO wants to bring themselves up to date on it may have a copy. I would like to leave with you one point that we very definitely oppose and that is the systems engineering industry getting into this smog control act with taxpayers' money, unless they can show some- thing ~rery concrete and very different from the fraud that the Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Board has already handed to us. Unle~s they can ~h~w us that, we are definitely opposed to it. I don't know what good it will do, but I do want the record to show we are opposing it. 0 0 Do ~ny of the members have any questions? Mr. BnOw~. Mr~ Fisher, *~ appreciate the statement you have made~ I don't know that we necessarily agree with afl, of them, although I have been in the past and still am sympathetic with some of the points you made. 0 I do want to apologize for the time problem, but I did deliberately shOrten the time of some of the earlier witnesses so we could get to yott, even this briefly. I wish it could havebeen for longer. I reiter- ~te my invitation for you to expand on your testimony, if you wish to do so. 0 0 Mr. Bell~ 0 Mr. BELL.~Mr. Fisher, I appreciate your comIng before the com- mittee, and, in a similar vein as m.y colleague, I may not agree with everything yc~u say, but there are some points I think certainly ~re valid and worth considering. 0 I hope perhaps, sometime you could come to Washington and testify at greater length in this matter. I think it would be of benefit to hear a full disclosure of your views, rather than giving you here just 3 or 4 minutes to do it. If you could come back, I am sure we would be glad to hear further from you. 0 0 0 Mr. FISHER. If I were invited tO Washington, that would be the supreme triumph, because we could then get a genuine sounciipg bo~rd, We would be happy to ~pay our expenses for sending a delegation back there any time we are invited to `testify before any commission in Washington, because we would really feel we were getting somewhere then. Thank you for the invitation. Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Fisher. . This will conclude our hearing this mornings I am grateful for all witnesses who have appeared before us and for the members of the audience who have been so patient thismorning. 0 0 The meeting is adjourned. O (Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourn~d.) 0 0 (The prepared statement of W. L. Rogers follows:) `. 0 PREPARED STATEMENT OF W. L.. ROGERS, VICE PRESIDENP, VON O 0 KARMAN CENTER AREOJET-GENERAL CORE. Mr. Chairman,, members of the commitee, thank you' on behalf of Aerojet- General Corp. for the epportunity to testify before you on the subject of tech- nology and pollution abatement. The magnitude and gravity of the problem (~Ptaill1y eonft~p an o&~ll~flon on ~ll o~ mi~ation~ that can make a eontrthutio~a to dedicate `their efforts to the ta~ks that confront us in the control of pollution and the management of waste. 0 ` 0 0 PAGENO="0599" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 599 Early in 1065, Governor Brown of California initiated a series of pioneering efforts to investigate the applicability of the systems approach to special social- economic problems'. Areojet was selected to conduct the study of waste manage- nient. Among other assignments, we were required in the study to evaluate current technology as it relates to pollution and waste control. However, before I diseusis' this subject in detail, I would like to define the term "systems approach." It is simply the name for a technique of evaluating all the factors involved in a complex problem and determining possible optimum approaches. "Optimum" is a flexible term, but in general it means the best answer consistent with the results desired, the current state of technology, the expenditure required, and the time available. This approach, initially developed by the teiephone companies, has been further refined by the aerospace industry, whose member companies have almost continuously addressed themselves' to major problems of defense and space technology which are `characterized by great complexity and by financiai, technological, managerial, and time constraints. Let me hasten to state that the systems approach is by no means a magical solution to our technical problems' or a substitute for management experience. It is simply an efficient technique for data gathering and analysis which permits us to examine and evaluate huge amounts of co'mplex and interrelated data and to direct intricate research, development, and prodaction tasks in the most eco- nomical way. In this role, it can help us do the following: 1. Define the problem in terms of the requirements, i.e., input, output, condi- tions of use, reliability, and constraints. 2. Identity fluictions which niust be performed to satisfy requirements. 3. Define the interrelationships of the functions, feasible trade-offs, and the interfaces between subsystems. 4. Optimize functions. ~. Formulate plans to achieve the desired output within the constraints'. 6. Define the development activities needed to' produce the final operating system, or intermediate data. 7. Design the final operating system based on previous' input. Aerojet-General has successfully used the systems approach in many large ~programs; in defense, space exploration, nuclear energy, water desalination, material handling, and the life sicences. Some of our well-known systems pro- grams include those for the development of liquid, solid, and nuclear rocket engines, such as the Polaris, Titan, Minuteman, Nerva, and Apollo. In addition, Von Karman Center, which I represent, is currently applying systems engineer~ lag techniques in a number of other areas, including: Development and production of Mark 46 torpedoes for `the U.S. Navy. Development and manufacture of space payloads for the Air Force. Design arid development of the SNAP-835-kilowatt space power supply for NASA. Various programs in the life sciences, including the toxicology labora- tory for the Air Force at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Research and development for the Office of Saline Waiter on reverse osmosis-one of the more recently developed methods `of desalting sea water and purifying polluted water. These and other development areas occupy the attention of a staff of app'roxl- ~mately 4,400 people, including some 1,700 en~ineers and scientists trith a broad range of specialities and capabilities. I'd like to begin my discussion of the adequacy of technology for pollution ~abatement with a brief review of the principal conclusions of the California Waste Management Study. I believe that they bear directly on the' question and that they apply not only to California, but `to the Nation as a whole. 1. Pollution is the most obvious result `of a larger problem-that of our present failure to satisfactorily manage liquid, solid, and gaseous wastes'. 2. Continued, substantial degradation of the environment will occur if present waste-handling practices are perpetuated. 3. Research and development are urgently required to achieve the following ~objectives: The est'ablishment of correlations' between characteristics and quantities' of effluents and the degree of environmental pollution. The development of the economics of pollution; i.e., the financial penalties attributable to pollution compared with the costs of control. The establishment of meaningful and environmental standards, which in turn define what our systems must be able to do. PAGENO="0600" 600 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT The construction of general computerized models of the three basic ele- ments of a waste management system: Input to the system, pr'ocesslng through it, and assimilation by the environment. 4. The only technically and econoitik~ally efficient way to manage these wastes Is through the development of a waste management system organized on a. regional basis, transcending artificial political boundaries, and controlling all. forms oct waste. Our study also showed that if California continues to use existing systems, merely expanding tbem to meet greater demands, the total costs for the year 1990 deriving from wastes of all kinds will be about $8 billion per year, and the environment will be more polluted than it is today. (The current total budget; of the entire State `of California is about $4 billion a year.) Employing syste'ms~ engineering, and using improvements possible with today's technology or poten~ tially available from advanced technology, we believe that the cost in 199O~ coul~d be reduced to about $3 or $4 billion per year, and in addition to lower total co'sts, we would have a cleaner, more pleasant environment. In `this connection, I would like to amplify my earlier statement that the problem of pollution must be viewed in the larger context of waste management; in general. The distinction Is not merely semantic, hut has substantial practical. Consequences. I quote from the report "Waste Management and Control" issued this year by the Committee on Pollution of the National Academy of Sciences National. Research CounciL "The difficult job of determining an optimum balance of competing require- ments must be approached from a systems point of view. The systems approach must consider the interrelationship o'f land, air, and water. Too `often, munici- palities ge't rid of solid wastes by incomplete burning, which may solve land. disposal problems but fouls the air. We must consider the assimilative capacity of water, air, and land taken together as a single entity and un relation to the plants and animals that live there. The assimilative ca~sacities vary with such factors as the tidal flushing of bays, the flow `of rivers, and the windiness (A~ the locality." Pollution, in short, Is not a simple, straightforward problem. Population is n~t only increasing In most sections of the country, but Is also' constantly shift- ing about, usually making established waste control systems inadequate. Our present controls of waste are so fragmented that all too often little is done. Our industrial techniques are constantly changing, resulting in new waste peoblems as well `as requiring new control equipment if minimum disposal costs are to be realized. The pollutants are dynamic, flowing in air and water across county, State, and National borders, The waste is itself constantly changing from gaseous to liquid and solid, from liquid to solid and gaseous,. and so on, making it difficult and expensive to control once it has left its source. Indeed, we generally do net know what the effects of a given pollutant are, and hence whether to Insist `on controlling it. Finally, our esthetic demands are becoming of greater Importance. Not only are we concerned `about preventing undesirable health effects, and lowering waste treatment costs, we are also con- cerned about such intangibles as clear air and clean, sparkling water. Ancther riaj'or problem, frequently unrecognized, is that in most cases we do not even know what a pollutant is. To define one we must not only kno'w its chemical composition, but also'; 1. Relate this data to other `possible pollutants being added at the same time. 2. Define Its quantity and rate of addition. 3, Specify its precise location. 4. Specify the volume, composition, and physical and chemical character- istics of the receiving stream or body of air. 5. Determine the capacity of the receiving medium to assimilate or change the pollutant both along its line of flow and at its terminus. 6. Specify the uses that the receiving medium will be put to. Obviously, such determin'ations for the hundreds of potential pollutants which. may be added during the course of a given day to a given stream or airshed. would be very difficult and expensive, even if we knew all the interrelationships, could predict what the stream (or air) flow might he, and could measure the quantities in `the first place. Up to this point, I have attempted a candid assessment of the difficulties we face In merely knowing what we want to accomplish, let alone doing It, But in; spite of Imperfect knowledge, we must act and act now. The longer we wait,. the more serious the situation becomes. PAGENO="0601" ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT 601 Accordingly, we believe that future work should be undertaken in two distinct j~hases. The first phase must clearly attack the obvious sources of pollution, the ~autos and stationary sources, the primary sewage treatment plants, the industrial firms disposing of large amounts of toxic chemicals, etc. This phase is cur- rently being undertaken or considered by the Federal Government and many State and local authorities. The second phase is equally important, less obvious', and more difficult, because it will take a great deal of time and money with few tangible results. Its pur- pose will be to determine the efl~ects of potential pollutants on the earth and its inhabitants; the technical approaches feasible for removing these pollutants; and the costs associated with the `effects and the technical approaches. These .iuvesiigations should be undertaken simultaneously so that Information from flone can be fed i~ito the other `two'. The gathering and development of this data may take 10 to 15 years and cost a billion or more dollars. However, we need iiot wait until the end of the study for results. There can be intermediate steps `when tentative specifications can be reevaluated or created. A graphic lllustra~ tion of this overall approach is presented in figure 1. FIGuRE 1 ~rRE sEOUENCS or nVENTS ron .A.WASTE )VIANAGZMEIft STUDr Determine Pollution Effects aeneralizea Cost-Benefit Establish Build Analysis Environmental Time + $+Speclfic I AntiPollution \ Time? \ and ~oliticat Specifications * Trade-oft Studies ~lants \ i-/ \ Target ~ //\~/\\[_L..____1 Values with Effects ( for Many and Levels of Approaches Effects and Economics The development and analysis of `this data is imperative. It will result in an understanding of the problem and the approaches to its solution which will, prob- ably for the first time, permit political' bodies to make de~:isions with full and ~complete data and with an underStanding of what they can achieve, what it will cost, and what It will save. Once the data is available, then we can begin the very difficult task of design- ing specifications based on tradeoffs or compromises between certain levels' of improvement, our ability to pay for them, and our technological capability for ~ereating them. This situation is in contrast to the best guess approach on -Which ~nost of today's standards are based. For example, table 1 shows a brief sum- mary of the present drinking water standards of the World Health Organization and U.S. Public Health Service. These do not agree with each other, nor with two California water plan values (for nondrinking water). More important, the last column presents typical values for the water deliv- .ered by the metropolitan water district to several millions of users In the Los Angeles basin over many years, apparently without Ill effects. Note how the TABLE 1.-Selcoted valve8 for wa~ter environ~m~enta2 standards Condition . WHO In- ternatlonal (1958) permissible limit USPHS (1962) recom- mended limit Proposed California water plan Sacramento Hi ver maximum permissible concentra- tion Colorado River watek' supplied to the Los Angeles Metropoli- tan Water District `Dissolved solids parts per mil1ion~~ iSulfate do~... Chlorid,e ~ ~Sodium percent hardness as CaCO3 500 200 200 ` 500 250 250 400 100 100 50 160 525 130 180 60 200 704 297 92 63 1 195 1 Softened from 330. PAGENO="0602" 602 ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT dissolved solids and sulfate content substantially exceed the recommended limits in all cases, In light of such discrepancies, it is clear that we must know much more about the effects of wastes and pollutants before building expensive plants to enforce today's specifications.. Further, we must know more about how a given body of water or air changes from area to area, and day to day. Figure 2 shows bow the amount of dissolved solids in the Sacramento River changes as the river pro~ gresses downstream. Note how the dissolved solids vary from 60 parts per million to. 250 parts per million and back again to' below 50 parts per million. Many of these changes occur for natural reasons (i.e., highly saline rivers) rather than from manmade pollutants. Also, the values shown here are median values, a long way from the high and low points which may occur in times of storm or drought. I believe it is clear from the foregoing that it is a task of the greatest impor~ tance to define specifically the kind of environment we want and to understand what various kinds of wastes are doing to that environment. Until we do, the only genuineresponse to the question of the adequacy of technology is-adequate for what? All these formidable technical problems are paralleled, of course, by equally complex legal, political, and social considerations. Leadership of the Federal Governm,~t, is, mandatory to assign appropriate priority to waste management, among our Other nationa objectives, and to set forth clear responsibilities and authorities so that the establishment of goals, and the implementation of pro- grams to achieve them, can proceed in an orderly and expeditious fashion. I know o1~ no greater time and money waster than the "passing of the buck" ~rornoire governmental ~r, industrial' body `to another. A brief outline of a plan we ~uggested in our California study as a possible starting.joiI~t is presented in ftgure' 3, to indicate a few thoughts on the possible division of authority among the interested bodies. Fiauun 2 THE EFFECT OF VARIOUS COMMUNITIES AND RIVERS ON THE MEDIAN DISSOLVED SOLIDS CONTENT OF THE SACRAMENTO RIVER, 1951-1956 ~2OO C C 0 U ~ 150 I `a a) 0 ~100 C ___________ `0 a) I I . ~.I I I 1 250 Sacramento Slough Knights Landing C Stony Creek City of Sacramento Hamilton. ` Rio City Vista Feathers River American River Pit River J'1Ke swlck cClouT Itiver elt~ , 50 A U AUU £~U LUU ` 6~U ~UU Miles From First Upstream Survey Point PAGENO="0603" :FIGTJRE 3 LI 0 0 0 0 0 0 1. 2. 3. Federal Water, air and Basic U. S. Control Waste Basic Research to soil health Industry Wgote Generation of Develop Minimum guidelines Preven,tion Federal Coot Collection, Reoearch Facilities or Prone osing and Equipment Diooosal System State Establish water, Develop Waste Control Waste Adapt Basic air and soil Prevention Generation of Research to health criterion Technolefy for State Facilities State Situation from cost! the State!s or Equipment criterion analysis Industries Cou~ Apply water, air Applications of Control Waste Apply or and soil health Waste Pre- Generation of "Processing" District criterion vention Technology County or Technology District Facili- ties or Equip- Munici- Apply water, air Applications of Control Waste Apply "`lilies and soil health Waste Pre- Generation of "Processing0 criterion vention Mnthcipal `Pechnnlqgy Technology Fapilities or Equipment fCatiiornia Waste Mana~ecntnt Study, Aero,~et-General Corporation, 1965 7. ~, Establish Paoic Construct Basic Establish Basic Waste Environ- Socio-Economic Pollutant-Health meet Reactions Impact Models Relationships and Inter-related Water, Air and Soil Environmental Models Adapt Reaction and Adapt Socto- Integrate into Define Health, Model Research to Economic State Models Aesthetic and Other' State Models to Criteria for State State and Determine Cost. Sensitivities Employ Reaction Employ in Emptoy Cost! and Models Models Criteria Sensitivity Technology Analysis Employ Reaction Employ in and Models Medets Technology Employ Coot! Criteria Sensitivity k,ealy sic PAGENO="0604" 604 ~ADEQUACY OF TECHNOLOGY FOR POLLUTION ABATEMENT In conclusion, I would like to offer the following observation. We have orga- nized ourselves to make effective attacks on other gigantic pr~blems-tbe defense of our country and maintaining our leadership in space exploration, to mention tw&-~and we must organize ourselves to make an effective attack on pollution abatement and waste management. While our best starting point is a realistic, perhaps even grim, appraisal of where we stand, we also have certain assets that, if properly applied, can assure success. The Nation has an abundance of talent in all the categories required for the ~solution of technological problems, no matter how complex. There is no question ~of our ability to develop the equipment, systems, and procedures we will need once w~ have defined our expectations for their performance. In addition, we have the large-scale organizational and managerial capabilities required. One pow~rful weapon, the systems approach, is well developed and holds enormous promise for the most expeditious and economical understanding and control of our physical environment. Gentlemen, thank ~ou again for the opportunity to speal~ out today on this ~vital topic. 0