whelming that polluted air is a contributing factor, and perhaps one of the major causes of lung cancer, as well as heart ailments, asthma, tuberculosis, bronchitis, pulmonary emphysema, and other respiratory ailments. Moreover, the economic toll is considerable in terms of the damaging effects on building materials, trees, ornamental shrubs, farm produce, and on other substances.

New York City's trees and foliage are suffering from the toxic effects of exhaust from the millions of buses, trucks, and automobiles which daily jam its streets. The New York Botanical Garden's senior plant pathologist, Dr. P. P. Pirone, has observed trees, particularly at stoplights and intersections, become partly, then completely denuded of foliage and ultimately killed. Interestingly enough, as one approaches the middle of the block, trees get progressively healthier.

Another example-again in New York. For 6 weeks recently, an electrically driven giant breathing machine was installed at the curb of Herald Square. It inhaled, during that brief time, 5,000 cubic meters of New York's air-the same air all New Yorkers breathe. Afterward, scientists at the Sloan-Kettering Institute removed the filters from the machine, coated with soot, metals, and organic gum which they dissolved in chemicals and separated into several factions. This material was painted on the backs of mice. After a several months waiting period, 90 percent of the mice had developed skin cancer. The scientists who performed and participated in the experiment said they anticipated the result. Obviously, the cancer-causing properties of New York's air should raise a cautionary note although it is stated that the mouse findings cannot directly be related to human beings.

Again, what major disaster, what national catastrophe, are we waiting for before we take the necessary steps to control the filth being poured into our air. The time is now for Congress to show its responsibility by requiring others to meet their responsibility in this area, the Federal Government, State, and local governments, private industry, automobile manufacturers, and owners.

There was a time-not too far back in memory really-when billows of smoke streaming out from factories and smokestacks over our cities was regarded as a good sign-a sign of good times and prosperity. This is no longer true. Now these are warning signals, as clear as a skull and bones, of the poison in the air we breathe and that unless we adopt stringent measures to control pollution of our air this health. hazard will assume even more gigantic proportions in the years ahead. To review the provisions of H.R. 8800 which I introduced with a number of my colleagues, I'd like to take just a few more moments. Title I directs the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to set standards for emission of air pollutants for new gasoline-powered vehicles, effective not later than September 1, 1967. This will mean that the 1968 models must carry devices for controlling motor and gas exhaust. In addition, this title directs the Secretary to recommend legislation to regulate pollution from diesel-powered vehicles by January 31, 1967. It prohibits the manufacture and sale of any vehicle or engine not in conformity with the regulations and provides up to $1,000 fine for any violation and provides for inspection to assure compliance with the regulations. It makes provision for air pollu

51-707-65- -7

tion affecting a foreign country and authorizes research on control of automotive pollutants as part of HEW's air pollution research program. The bill also authorizes construction of a Federal Air Pollution Control Laboratory.

It provides for a new act-the Solid Waste Disposal Act—to begin a national research and development program for new and improved methods of solid waste disposal and provides for technical and financial aid to State and local governments to develop, establish, and conduct solid waste disposal programs; provides for grants-in-aid or contracts with public and private agencies, institutions, and individuals for research and training projects and authorizes grants to State, municipal, interstate, and intermunicipal agencies for solid waste demonstration projects. The bill authorizes appropriations of $20 million annually for fiscal 1966 and 1967 to carry out the Solid Waste Disposal Act.

This legislation represents a good beginning in the steps to abate and control pollution in the air. No matter how onerous, no matter how costly, enactment of the legislation before us is imperative.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions? If not, we thank you for your testimony, Mr. Ashley.

Mr. ASHLEY. Thank you for the opportunity, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Our next witness is our colleague from New Jersey, the Honorable Henry Helstoski. Mr. Helstoski, we welcome you to

the committee.

STATEMENT OF HON. HENRY HELSTOSKI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Mr. HELSTOSKI. Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee on Public Health and Welfare, I am most grateful for the opportunity you have given me to testify before this committee on legislation to amend the Clean Air Act.

The Clean Air Act of 1963, Public Law 206 of the 88th Congress, was signed by President Johnson on December 17, 1963, and set into motion a process for stimulating our national efforts to control and abate the pollution of our Nation's air.

Although this act was far reaching in its effects, such as financial aid for control programs, expanded research into the sources and control of air pollution from the gaseous emissions of automobiles and fuel consumption of industrial plants, it was only the beginning of a program which requires the attention of Congress to further enhance the effectiveness of the present law.

The legislation being discussed by the committee today would help meet the objectives as proposed by President Johnson that we end "the poisoning of the air we breathe" and called upon us to "prevent the pollution of our air before it happens."

The millions of motor vehicles which jam the highways and expressways of this country are the main culprits in the pollution of our air and some efforts should be taken to reduce these pollutants.

Our national air pollution, at the present time, is due chiefly to automobile exhausts, smoke discharges from industrial plants, and disposal of solid wastes.

Our increasing population, the expansion of urban and suburban areas, the additional consumption of energy-producing fuels and industrial development and expansion have all added to the creation of solid wastes which are disposed of by burning in open dumps or land fills. These methods are a prime factor in creating a polluted atmosphere for miles around such a disposal facility.

The provisions of the various bills presently under consideration by this committee will provide the necessary stimulus to aid in the proper disposal of these solid wastes.

Another problem which we must face and take every effort to correct is the emission of fumes and smoke from industrial plants. It is a major factor in the pollution of air in the communities in which such industry is located and costly to the residents of these areas because of the corrosion effect on buildings and paints.

The soot, ash, and chemical components of the smoke and fumes emitted by the smokestacks of industrial concerns cause many respiratory ailments. We must take action to make sure that these industrial concerns will be the beneficiaries of some incentive to install devices which will lessen or completely eliminate this particular source of air pollution.

In my own district, the ninth of New Jersey, there are 39 separate communities. Each of them have the same common problem of combating air pollution, which constitutes a substantial everyday experience. Any assistance which the Federal Government can give these communities will be a great step forward in the development of systems which will curtail or greatly diminish the air pollution created by harmful emissions of various types of pollutants.

Any money that the Government spends for research and development is money well spent and can be justified when the research and development is for the benefit of all the citizens of this country.

Polluted air combined with stagnant air is not only costly, but hazardous. Such a combination, by reducing visibility, creates a very real danger to air and land transportation.

As an example, the New Jersey Turnpike Authority is compelled to close that superhighway at least 20 times a year when smog aggravates conditions already made bad by weather conditions. Where the turnpike continues through the highly industrialized northeast section of the State, smog causes many motorists to miss their desired exits.

Last November, a two-car collision on the turnpike was blamed directly on poor visibility because of smog. And, there were many incidents where car pileups occurred because the visibility was reduced to zero. And who was the villain in these incidents? Smoga combination of smoke and fog.

Aircraft operations out of Newark were also hampered by reduced visibility. As far back as 1946, a survey was conducted on this matter and it showed that smoke, alone or in a combination with fog, lowered the visibility to less than 6 miles every second day of the year. Aggravation of poor weather conditions by pollution results in delays in landings and takeoffs at busy airports. At times entire flights are canceled because of the difficulty of making a safe takeoff due to poor visibility. This is an inconvenience to the traveling businessman and very costly to the carrier.

The average individual, on the streets of any community in these United States, does not care to take up the fight for the principle of clean air. We are surrounded not only by dirty air but by public apathy. Because of this, we, as Members of Congress, representing the people of the entire United States should take the initiative and provide for legislation which will clean up the air we breathe at the rate of 15,000 gallons per day.

For a richer and healthier life, under clean skies, we should take a three-step approach to this problem.

First: Impress upon the automobile manufacturers to install antipollutant devices upon every motor vehicle leaving the factory. If this cannot be done on a voluntary basis then Congress should enact legislation to make such installations mandatory.

Second: Take steps to find a method to reduce the sulfur content in fuels used by industry which contribute so much to the pollution of the air around these industrial centers.

Third: Waste disposal problems should be solved in such a way so as to end the overburdening of our cities' incinerators and the open burning of rubbish.

If we do anything less than this we are neglectful in our duty to the people of our Nation. I am sure that this committee fully understands the problem of air pollution and will take early and favorable action on the bills pending before it, which would be far reaching toward finding a solution of this problem.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I wish to thank you for the time you have given me to present my observations on a problem of great benefit to the people of this Nation for the betterment of a healthier climate around us.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions? If not, we thank you for your appearance, Mr. Helstoski.

Mr. HELSTOSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. The next witness is our colleague from Colorado, the Honorable Roy McVicker. Mr. McVicker, we will be glad to hear you at this time.

STATEMENT OF HON. ROY H. McVICKER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO

Mr. McVICKER. Mr. Chairman, my name is Roy McVicker. I represent the Second District of Colorado, and I am appearing on behalf of my bill, H.R. 7394, to amend the Clean Air Act of 1963.

The purpose of this measure is to meet the problems of air pollution which all areas of our country find to be an increasing problem. The contamination of the atmosphere has become a critical national problem. Smog and other forms of pollution have pervaded the air, in varying degrees, in nearly every large metropolitan area in our country, and in many of our smaller cities. The air pollution problem is national in scope and it demands a national remedy. Our fresh air supply is one of our most precious, and indeed one of our most limited, natural resources. It deserves and requires our pro

tection and conservation.

Last year when I was serving as a member of the Colorado State Legislature, State Senator Roland Mapelli and I introduced an air pollution bill which was designed to put real teeth into an air pollu

tion control program and to make its requirements regional in scope, a provision necessary to its practical operation.

At that time we noted that a number of companies which we investigated, notably the Public Service Co. of Colorado, were on their own initiative spending their own resources for installations of air control systems.

We stated, at that time, that we felt that a special tax incentive was in order inasmuch as these efforts in a great majority of cases were not inuring to the benefit of these companies nor adding directly to their operations but were essentially contributions to the welfare of the community.

It is a real pleasure for me, therefore, to include in this bill this tax incentive provision which in my opinion will operate to the advantage of both industry and the public.

In recent years this country has been so preoccupied with realizing an unprecedented rate of industrial growth that we have largely neglected the great residue of waste which has been left in the wake of industrial progress. Industrial prosperity does not necessarily exact the price of waste and pollution. We are now capable of reducing or eliminating nearly all forms of air pollution. Such a project will be costly. It will require a limited economic sacrifice on the part of certain industries and additional expenditures by State and municipal authorities throughout the country. And it will require the Federal Government to give meaningful financial and technological assistance to local governments and private industry.

Much has been written to alert us of the health hazards from exposure to normal pollution conditions and there is a plethora of statistics available on the number of persons who have died from heavy concentrations of pollutants. A 1948 episode of pollution in Donora, Pa., left 20 inhabitants dead and more than 4,000 acutely ill. In 1952, one of London's smogs was responsible for more than 4,000 deaths in a single week. For a period of 1 week in 1953, New York City was enveloped by an inversion of air pollution which resulted in the death of more than 200 inhabitants. There is evidence that even the normal concentration of pollution found in many of our cities has an adverse effect on health. The incidence of several varieties of upper respiratory and pulmonary disease, ranging from asthma and chronic bronchitis to emphysema and lung cancer, shows a measurable increase under normal pollution conditions.

The health of our citizens is not the only consideration when dealing with air pollution; there are economic reasons as well. It is well established that air pollution substances such as sulfur dioxide, ozone, and fluorides have caused extensive damage to vegetation. Various sulfur gases react with moisture to form an acidic mist which corrodes metals, rubber, leather, and most other common materials. The estimated annual cost to the Nation of all property damage resulting from air pollution is over $11 billion.

The first identifiable Federal program in air pollution came with the enactment of the Air Pollution Control Act of 1955, which authorized a program of research and technical assistance by the Federal Government to State and local air pollution control agencies. In this act, Congress set forth the policy that the primary responsibility for regulatory control rests with the State and local governments, and the