CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS

TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 1965

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE OF THE

COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a.m., in room 2123, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Oren Harris (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. This morning as we resume hearings on numerous bills with reference to clean air, the first witness will be Mr. Harry Barr, chairman of the Engineering Advisory Committee of the Automobile Manufacturers Association.

Mr. Barr, I believe you have with you Mr. Frank Isbrandt, vice president, American Motors, Mr. B. W. Bogan, Chrysler Corp., and Mr. Misch, of the Ford Motor Co.

Gentlemen, we are very glad to welcome you here in connection with this important legislative program. I assume that you have a procedure that you wish to follow. You may proceed if you desire. STATEMENT OF HARRY F. BARR, CHAIRMAN, ENGINEERING ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION; ACCOMPANIED BY RALPH ISBRANDT, VICE PRESIDENT, AMERICAN MOTORS; B. W. BOGAN, VICE PRESIDENT, CHRYSLER CORP.; HERBERT MISCH, VICE PRESIDENT, FORD MOTOR CO.; WILLIAM F. SHERMAN, SECRETARY, ENGINEERING ADVISORY COMMITTEE; AND CHARLES HEINEN, CHRYSLER CORP.

Mr. BARR. All right, sir. Thank you Mr. Chairman. I think I should start by saying my name is Harry F. Barr. I am vice president in charge of the engineering staff of General Motors Corp.

Today, however, I am appearing before you in my capacity as chairman of the Engineering Advisory Committee of the Automobile Manufacturers Association. And, of course, several other members of this committee are here today and I should like to introduce them again so you can see who they are.

On my extreme left, Ralph H. Isbrandt, vice president, automotive engineering and research, American Motors Corp. Next, Mr. Herbert L. Misch, vice president, engineering and research staff, Ford Motor Co. On my immediate right, Mr. B. W. Bogan, vice president,

director of engineering, Chrysler Corp., and the secretary of the engineering adivsory committee and on the AMA staff, Mr. William F. Sherman.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, speaking on behalf of the Automobile Manufacturers Association, I want to say that we welcome this opportunity to express our views on H.R. 7429 and other proposed legislation on air pollution.

In our several previous appearances before National and State legislative committees dealing with air pollution, representatives of the automobile industry have taken a cooperative and constructive stance, to help assure that if legislation is passed, it will be good legislation, will meet recognized needs effectively, and will be in the public in

terest.

HAVE REPORTED ABILITY TO PRODUCE EXHAUST

EMISSIONS CONTROL SYSTEMS

It was with this cooperative attitude that representatives of our industry testified just 2 months ago on Senate bill 306 before a Senate Subcommittee on Air Pollution. The need for careful evaluation of the air pollution problems in various areas is recognized, as well as the need for ambient air quality standards. At that time we also stated that our research and development efforts on air pollution control systems had progressed in the industry to the point where we were in a position to manufacture and install exhaust control systems, which would satisfy California State requirements.

We made several recommendations to the Senate subcommittee with regard to S. 306 and found the Senate to be responsive to the suggestions made in the interest of good legislation. However, the evolution of the test of that bill has introduced other elements about which we desire to comment here in view of the fact that S. 306 is pending for House consideration.

Mr. Chairman, it is against our background of research and development that we are able to say that, if Congress decides that all new cars should be equipped with exhaust control systems of the types now becoming available to meet the standards set in California, the automobile manufacturers will cooperate fully to manufacture and install the equipment, on our vehicles nationally. For national application the climatic extremes of temperature and humidity require extensive field tests, and possible resultant modifications to our systems. Additional time also would be required for extensively tooling the much larger volume required on a national basis.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Barr, if you will permit an interruption for just a moment. We have a distinguished group of high school students who have just come in. They are from one of the great districts of this Nation-I will refrain from saying the greatest because I have that one myself-from the State of Ohio. I am glad to recognize our esteemed colleague, Mr. Gilligan, in order to give these students an appropriate welcome.

Mr. GILLIGAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and colleagues of the committee. There are a dozen students from various high schools in the First District of Ohio around Cincinnati here this morning. They are involved on a 4-day Government study tour and they are now studying this morning the most important phase of the Federal Gov

ernment, that is, the committee system of the House of Representatives, and so with this distinguished panel of automotive experts here this morning, I am sure they will learn a great deal and I am very grateful to you, Mr. Chairman, for the chance to welcome them to this committee.

The CHAIRMAN. For the committee I would like to join in welcoming this outstanding group of young people. We always encourage young people to visit us to see your Government actually in operation. It is in committees such as this one that legislation is designed and developed and reported to the House. Legislation then makes its way through the Congress and becomes a part of our laws governing what we refer to now as the Great Society. We know you will derive a lot of benefit out of your visit and your study of your own government. We are glad to have you remain with us as long as you can.

We are now considering legislation that will make the air you breathe clean and fresh. I am sure that you will wish us well in this undertaking.

Thank you very much.

You may proceed, Mr. Barr.

Mr. BARR. The vehicle manufacturers, given sufficient time, can do the job required in legislation being considered, but we believe this proposed legislation poses certain questions that need to be considered before it is finalized. Here are some of the questions that should be answered:

Does a nationwide photochemical smog problem exist? Do the facts indicate that motor vehicles are the only air pollution source that should be controlled on a national basis?

How severe is the air pollution problem and photochemical reaction in various cities, areas, and States? To what extent will control of vehicle emissions significantly improve their kinds of air pollution problems?

What has been the experience of efforts to control the many sources of air pollution in California?

What are the economic aspects of the problem? Will expenditures on the part of the automobile owners to control vehicle emissions reduce air pollution in varied communities in commensurate amounts; or where can additional costs be best applied in other directions to derive the greatest and most immediate benefits?

NATIONWIDE PHOTOCHEMICAL SMOG FACTS NOT ESTABLISHED BY

USPHS NETWORK DATA

In the testimony before another committee of Congress last year, it was stated that more information was needed to establish whether vehicle emissions do represent a problem to a degree that warrants a national control system, and the expense to car users, and other complications involved, as is now required in California. A great deal of significance attaches to this point if a decision is to be made by Congress that will require substantial initial investment and annual maintenance cost by every motorist in the Nation.

In this connection we want to cite the data from the Public Health Service National Air Sampling Network, published in the report of the hearings of the Senate Special Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution last June 1964.

The data are based on an oxidant level of 0.15 parts per million, the criterion used by California to indicate the threshold at which eye irritation, reduced visibility and plant damage from photochemical smog may occur. The tabulations show the number of days in various cities during which the oxidant value reached or exceeded this threshold value for one hour or longer. The 1963 data are published on page 887 of part 2 of the 1964 Senate committee hearings.

The tabulation for 1963, reported that Los Angeles experienced at least 102 days during which this threshold was reached. Philadelphia never reached this level in 1963.

You might observe the table which is displayed on page 6 of our transcript.

On the other hand, Chicago, San Francisco, Cincinnati, New Orleans, and Washington, D.C., reached this threshold for 1 hour or longer, or only 2 to 5 days of the entire year.

Now, more recent data, using the same standard of 0.15 parts per million, the full year 1964 shows that Los Angeles had 83 days, Philadelphia 9, Chicago 0, San Francisco 1, St. Louis 6, and Washington, D.C. 4.

This information, supplied from the National Air Sampling Network through the Taft Engnieering Center shows fairly wide variations, as you can see.

Such disparities in the data indicate at least a need for further research. The figures do not indicate that photochemical smog is a major problem in communities listed other than Los Angeles or that motor vehicle exhaust control systems are likely to make apparent differences in the air pollution situations observed in these communities. In terms of either scientific measurements or citizens' observations this is an important fact.

VEHICLE EMISSIONS ALREADY REDUCED

For these communities, and the Nation as a whole, it is important to note that a reduction of 30 to 40 percent of total vehicle emissions of unburned hydrocarbons was achieved in 1963 and subsequent model automobiles by use of crankcase blowby controls. This followed 2 years of experience with blowby control equipment on automobiles in California. As older cars are retired from registration, the percentage of cars with this control will increase until the entire car population will have achieved 30 percent or more emission reduction noted for new cars, thus providing a significant reduction in automobile emissions everywhere.

An important purpose of this statement is to bring your committee up to date on the efforts of the vehicle manufacturers during the past year and to report the progress made toward compliance with the California emissions standards which are based specifically on a target of re-achieving 1940 quality air in the Los Angeles basin.

MEETING CALIFORNIA REQUIREMENTS FOR 1966 MODELS

At this time last year the individual automobile companies were engaged in their engineering, design, and testing programs aimed at achieving compliance with California exhaust standards by the time of 1967 model introduction. It had been made clear to the California

authorities that a comprehensive and orderly program of this sort, plus the tooling that would be required, would be applied to about 175 engine-transmission combinations in vehicles produced by the various companies.

However, California urged that an attempt be made to comply on all 1966 models instead of the 1967 models. Such a foreshortened schedule could be met only by a substantial variation from normal development, testing, and tooling efforts. To make this feasible the total task was measurably reduced, when the California officials granted an exception to meeting the standards for every 1966 model. Each of the companies was given an opportunity to file a list of exemptions, particularly relating to models which are distributed in California in limited volume. In addition, testing procedures were changed to utilize industry facilities, and trucks above one-half ton rating were excluded, pending more research and development.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY PROBLEMS STILL BEING SOLVED

This change in the size and detail of the task led the companies to announce that they would meet the California exhaust standards on over 95 percent of 1966 passenger car models and light trucks. The programs to do that are just now at peak intensity. California officials are now driving and evaluating many of the vehicles to confirm our tests of compliance. Accelerated programs such as these have presented engineering and production problems which are being solved as they appear. However, the legislative problem of mandatory maintenance and inspection have not been solved in schedule, and this factor jeopardizes orderly regulation of controls in that State. Thus California air pollution control officials are still without the detailed and specific legislative backing on mandatory maintenance and inspection requirements to be able to set up their own program in detail.

Also, in trying to meet the California schedule the vehicle manufacturers have of necessity concentrated on the evaluations that relate primarily to California operating conditions; they obviously have not had sufficient time to acquire field experience with productionbuilt vehicles on the wide variety of climatic conditions that exist throughout the country.

QUESTIONS AND PROBLEMS IN CALIFORNIA

Meanwhile, administrative officials and legislators in California have been dealing with many other questions raised by the public in that State, as motorists have attempted to accommodate themselves to the present laws. The most serious problem has been that of gaining public acceptance of mandatory installation of even the relatively simple crankcase blowby emissions control systems on used cars. Difficulties are also being encountered in attempts to establish an annual mandatory maintenance program for exhaust control systems and a program for State inspection of crankcase emissions control devices on both new and older cars. At the present time, major revisions of the existing California smog laws and regulations are being debated in California in an attempt to cope with these questions.