in the form of byproducts of sulfur control, such as sulfur, sulfuric acid, and building materials made of fly ash combined with dolomite. Also, the sulfur oxides research and development effort may provide concepts and techniques that will be applicable to the control of other important types of air pollutants, including nitrogen oxides.

To some extent, the program would pay such dividends even if we were not looking for them. But we are not relying purely on chance; rather, through the application of systems analysis in planning the program, we are consciously trying to identify and take advantage of all the scientific, engineering, and technical opportunities that this effort may offer us.

FEDERAL EXPENDITURES

During fiscal year 1968 and in fiscal year 1969 and future years, the bulk of the funds devoted to the sulfur oxides program will be used to support research and development in the private sector through contracts and, to a lesser extent, in other Federal agencies, including the Bureau of Mines in the Department of the Interior, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Federal Power Commission, and the Environmental Science Services Administration in the Department of Com

merce.

The program also reflects the fact that some of these agencies and others, particularly the Office of Coal Research in the Department of the Interior, are spending funds of their own for related research and development work.

The sulfur oxides program is indeed comprehensive, as it must be. But it is by no means the only area in which such an intensive, largescale effort is needed. There are many others. Among them are motor vehicle pollution, stationary sources of nitrogen oxides, the hydrocarbon problem, incinerators, particulate emissions from industrial sources, and so on. We are, of course, conducting and supporting some research in all of these areas now.

What we need to do, and what we fully expect to do, in the months and years ahead is to mount comprehensive research and development programs in these and in whatever other areas our investigations reveal need attention. It is only through this systematic exploration and evaluation of the ways in which we can best use and manage our scientific and engineering capabilities that we can make sure we will achieve without delay, and will sustain thereafter, that air quality which is necessary for the adequate protection of the public health and welfare.

NITROGEN OXIDES

In regard to nitrogen oxides, for example, it is likely that a comprehensive research effort will lead to basic changes in the design of new combustion units, as well as to the development of techniques which will be particularly applicable to existing large combustion sources and which will permit recovery of nitrogen as a useful byproduct.

In regard to motor vehicle pollution, the benefits resulting from the application of existing control technology will inevitably be offset during the next 10 to 15 years by increaess in the Nation's reliance on automobiles. We must explore fully the extent to which motor vehicle

pollution can be controlled through modifications of the internal combustion engine, and we must explore also alternative propulsion systems.

RESEARCH PLANS

Recent reports of studies conducted by our contractors are helping us to plan a comprehensive research and development program on steam and electric vehicles. The hearings jointly conducted by the Senate Commerce Committee and this subcommittee 2 months ago have helped to focus national attention on the need for such a program. For the most part, the work I have been discussing up to this point lies in the area of what is usually called applied research, and for many years to come this will necessarily constitute the great bulk of our research and development activity. But we are supporting, and we will continue to support, basic research as well, principally through research grants.

RESEARCH GRANTS

Insofar as possible, our grants program serves as a source of funds to encourage and support nondirected research on all aspects of air pollution and its prevention and control. Grant applications are nevertheless reviewed by our staff to determine their relevance to areas in which we have identified needs for new knowledge.

PATENT POLICY

In a research and development program such as ours, questions relating to patent policies are bound to arise. In general, the application of the patent policies of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare tend to result in the retention of, by the Federal Government, all domestic rights to inventions made under grants or contracts, except where there is assurance that other arrangements would serve the public interest equally well or better.

Thus far, there is no evidence that this policy has prevented us from enlisting a high degree of industrial participation in our research and development activities. We are, nevertheless, aware that this policy may ultimately tend to deprive us of the capabilities of some segments of industry, particularly as we intensify our efforts in the area of control technology development.

This question is one of several subjects that have been discussed at meetings between officials of the Department and the National Air Pollution Control Administration and leaders of business and industry. In view of our growing reliance on the capabilities of the private sector, our patent policies will be the subject of continuing review and reevaluation to insure that they do not interfere in any significant way with our ability to enlist industrial and other nongovernmental

resources.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I want to underline a few important facts about our research and control activities:

First, that while our fundamental purpose is to protect public health and welfare, we are, nonetheless, aware of the need for consideration of economic and technological factors;

Second, that we are increasingly relying on a systems approach to help the best solutions to major problems in air pollution control; And, third, that we draw on every scientific and engineering technology specialty whose knowledge and talents are germane to air pollution and its prevention and control.

Our research and control activities are interrelated and interdependent. Research provides the knowledge needed for effective control of air pollution. Action to achieve effective control stimulates efforts to develop new knowledge, as nothing else can. If research is not tied in with control action, it tends to become purely academic. And if control action is not linked with research, it will starve for lack of relevant new knowledge.

The Air Quality Act calls for both expanded research and improved control action, and it ties them together in a way that makes sense. I believe that under this legislation we can look forward to real progress toward cleaner air.

Mr. Chairman, that represents our view on the way to manage the research program, to bring about a cleaner air environment. Thank you for the opportunity of giving it to you. Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, Dr. Middleton.

APPROPRIATIONS

Your presentation, as always, moves immediately to the problems which we face and to the needs for an all out attack in order to meet our responsibility in this area.

You have said:

Research provides the knowledge needed for effective control of air pollution. Action to achieve effective control stimulates efforts to develop new knowledge, as nothing else can. If research is not tied in with control action, it tends to become purely academic. And if control action is not linked with research, it will starve for lack of relevant new knowledge.

I agree with this statement.

Without objection, I shall place in the record at this point in the hearing record a copy of a letter of June 28 to Senator Lister Hill, chairman of the Subcommittee on Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare appropriations.

(The letter referred to follows:)

Hon. LISTER HILL,

JUNE 28, 1968.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Labor and Health, Education and Welfare Appropriations, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR LISTER: As you know the Congress last year passed the Air Quality Act of 1967, a far-reaching and critically important measure authorizing major Federal support for a National program to control and abate air pollution. The Senate on July 18, 1967, by a vote of 88-0 pledged $175,000,000 and $225,000,000 for Fiscal 1968 and 1969, respectively.

The success of this program depends upon the development of economically and technically feasible methods of air pollution control. Recognizing this, the Senate bill specifically authorized $225 million for the two fiscal years for research relating to fuels and vehicles, Sec. 104 of the Act.

The conference agreement with the House on the Air Quality Act of 1967 compromised total authorizations to $109,000,000 for FY 1968 and $185,000,000 for FY 1969. This represented a reduction of $106,000,000 from the original amount. Research funds for Section 104 of the Act were reduced to $35,000,000 for FY 1968 and $90,000,000 for FY 1969. At the time of adoption of the Con

ference Report this was considered an absolute minimum if the air quality program was to proceed with a minimum delay, and the Senate accepted the reduced amount on that basis.

This year the Department of Health, Education and Welfare requested only $106,733,000 for FY 1969, 58 percent of the authorized amount. As you know the House, in passing H.R. 18037, reduced the Administration's request to $86,733,000 or 47 percent of the authorized amount. A substantial portion of this reduction was for air pollution control research relating to fuel combustion and vehicles.

Of the $90,000,000 authorized for the implementation of Sec. 104, the Administration requested $31,300,000, but the House approved authorization would have the practical effect of reducing this to $16,700,000. Therefore, of the total $125,000,000 authorized for FY 1968 and FY 1969 less than 14 percent will be made available to the research program if the House figure stands. There was no appropriation made for Sec. 104 during fiscal year 1968.

As pointed out above, without the development of economically and technically feasible methods of control the Nation's commitment to an effective air pollution control cannot be honored. The House, by deleting funds for this vital activity, will delay further important research and development work in control technology thus delaying the establishment of air quality standards, and impeding vital efforts to improve the quality of our air resources. Therefore, it is respectfully urged that you seek restoration of the amount cut by the House from Sec. 104 funds requested by the Administration for FY 1969. Truly,

JOHN SHERMAN COOPER, JENNINGS RANDOLPH, Chairman, Committee on Public Works. EDMUND S. MUSKIE,

Chairman, Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution. Senator RANDOLPH. This communication signed by Senators John Sherman Cooper, Edmund S. Muskie, and myself calls attention to what we believe to be the need for a more active funding of air pollution.

The subcommittee members have, in most instances, been contacted by those of us who signed this communication and I have talked with eight or nine of the Senators myself. We believe the markup on this bill will take place next week.

Why did we address the letter? It was to call attention to the lessening of the emphasis on air pollution research. I read of the $90 million authorized for the implementation of just section 104, and the administration's requested $31,300,000.

The House authorization would have the principal effect of reducing this to $16,700,000. Therefore, as we have indicated in our communication, of the total of $125 million authorized for fiscal year 1968 and 1969, less than 14 percent would be made available to the research program if the House figure is allowed to stand. There was no appropriation made for section 104 in fiscal 1968.

This comment is not intended to be critical of the other body, but rather to indicate for the record that I do not believe their action reflects the need.

We in the Senate, through the Appropriations Subcommittee, shall try to restore at least in part these funds which we believe are necessary, the need for which you have underscored repeatedly in your statement this morning.

Now, I believe, Doctor, as a part of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare organization or reorganization you have been designated as the Commissioner of the National Air Pollution Control Administration.

Is that correct?

Dr. MIDDLETON. Yes, Senator.
Senator RANDOLPH. Yes.

Has your appointment been confirmed?

Dr. MIDDLETON. As is often the case, we have work to be done and titles and new reorganizations do not hinder us. Yes, but I don't believe it is an appointment that requires Senate confirmation, however, sir. Senator RANDOLPH. We will return to this point a little later. Dr. MIDDLETON. I hope following the appropriation. Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you again, Dr. Middleton.

Mr. Vaughan, will you identify yourself and present your statement? STATEMENT OF RICHARD D. VAUGHAN, CHIEF, SOLID WASTES PROGRAM, NATIONAL CENTER FOR URBAN AND INDUSTRIAL HEALTH, ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL ADMINISTRATION, CONSUMER PROTECTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Mr. VAUGHAN. Mr. Chairman, for the record, my name is Richard D. Vaughan. I am chief of the solid wastes program of the Environmental Control Administration, Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

Before I begin, I would like to comment on your question to Dr. Middleton concerning inundation of our garbage.

Since this is my field, I believe that could have come from a movie called The Third Pollution, in which the quote was made that unless we realistically face up to our solid waste management responsibilities, we are likely to be known as the Nation that sent a man to the moon while standing knee deep in garbage. That may have been the quote. Senator RANDOLPH. Yes; perhaps that is the quote.

Mr. VAUGHAN. In further reference to this, we are in the business to see that this does not happen.

Senator RANDOLPH. You are trying to stand tall rather than stand on it.

Mr. VAUGHAN. We have to let another department take care of the moon but we will take care of the garbage.

I am very pleased to be here today and welcome this opportunity to report to your subcommittee some of our current research activities in solid waste disposal.

LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY

The solid wastes program of the Environmental Control Administration functions under the authority of the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-272), which has as its objectives:

(1) To initiate and accelerate a national research and development program for new and improved methods of proper and economic solid-waste disposal, including studies directed toward the conservation of natural resources by reducing the amount of waste and unsalvageable materials and by recovery and utilization of potential resources in solid wastes; and

(2) To provide technical and financial assistance to State and