SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL CRITERIA Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Vaughan, it was suggested yesterday that land quality criteria on solid waste disposal methods be developed and compiled for use in local planning. Mr. VAUGHAN. Yes. Senator RANDOLPH. Would you comment? Mr. VAUGHAN. Land quality criteria, I think was compared to water quality criteria and air quality criteria. Some have attempted this on the local basis through zoning, or landuse planning. I think from our standpoint we can develop criteria for the proper disposal and management of solid wastes thus protecting the environment. Senator RANDOLPH. And air quality and water quality. Mr. VAUGHAN. Air and water and land quality. In other words, we are a little different than the other groups here today. I would admit, that our primary mission is to encourage proper disposal of solid wastes so that the entire environment is protected, whereas the other missions are protection of a particular resource from all dangers. So, we are working at the present time on criteria for the proper disposal of solid wastes whether it is using land disposal techniques, composting or incineration or others in collection which could be used as guidelines for cities and States. So, if you look at it this way, that is, establishing criteria for disposal of the solid wastes affecting the environment, I would agree with that statement. Senator RANDOLPH. We are grateful, Dr. Middleton and Colonel Meyer, Dr. Weinberger, and Mr. Vaughan, for your presentations and your colloquy with the chairman. Is there further comment you wish to make to conclude this hearing? We will have air quality criteria hearings in future hearings. The dates have been set for the 29th, 30th, and 31st of July. I want to express appreciation to those who have testified this morning. I assure you that the other members of the subcommittee will be brought in contact with what you have said even though they were not here this morning. Thank you, gentlemen. (Whereupon, at 12:02 p.m., the subcommittee recessed.) APPENDIXES SELECTED REPORTS ON WASTE MANAGEMENT, BACKGROUND MATERIAL COMPILED FOR SUBCOMMITTEE ON AIR AND WATER POLLUTION, U.S. SENATE, MAY 1968 Appendix 1. Recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council's Committee on Pollution, "Waste Management and Control," pp. 25-27, Publication 1400 (1966)__ 2. Recommendations of the Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Development to the Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, "Environmental Pollution, A Challenge to Science and Technology," pp. 7-8 (October 21, 1966) – 3. Roger Revelle, "The Quality of the Human Environment," from a Compendium of Paper on Federal Programs for the Development of Human Resources, United States Congress, Joint Economic Committee, pp. 602-617 (1968) _ _ _. 4. Glenn T. Seaborg, Testimony before the United States Senate Committee on Government Operations on "Establishment of a Select Committee on Technology and the Human Environment" (S. Res. 68), March 20, 1967, pp. 71-97-- 5. Athelstan Spilhaus, "Waste Management and Control," Scientist And Citizen, November-December 1967, pp. 219-223- Page 243 245 247 263 291 6. René J. Dubos, "Scientists Alone Can't Do the Job," Saturday Review, December 2, 1967, pp. 68-71- 297 7. J. R. Pierce, "When Is Research the Answer" Science 159:1079-1080 (March 8, 1968). 303 8. Federal Council for Science and Technology, "Annual Report on Gov- 9. Demonstration Project Abstracts-Solid Wastes Program.. 11. State-Interstate Solid Waste Planning Grant Listing 12. Summaries of Research and Training Grants in Solid Waste Disposal.. 13. National Society of Professional Engineers, statement entitled, "The Engineering Challenge of Polution Control_ 305 315 345 375 385 435 95-825 0-68-17 (241) APPENDIX 1 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES-NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL'S COMMITTEE ON POLLUTION, "WASTE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL" The complexities of most remedial measures for pollution must be taken into account in planning new approaches; solving a local pollution problem by transferring it to another suburb, community, or state is no solution from a national or a regional standpoint. Particularly, as has been noted, greatly expanded study and research is required to identify and evaluate the options. Much new technology will be required to improve efficiency and reduce costs in the new systems that will be necessary. Action is needed to create a climate conducive to the development and implementation of better design concepts, and to the promotion of effective institutional and inter-community cooperation. The initial impetus to resolve the difficulties inherent in the economics, politics, and law of the situation can be generated most effectively at the federal level. Therefore, it is the Committee's belief that priority must be given to initial actions by which the executive branch of government can assume leadership and, through appropriate actions, promote public awareness of the importance and the opportunities of improving the management of our resources and residues. Many of the actions that are needed will, in the Committee's opinion, be catalytic, releasing and giving direction to the interest and resources now available in our industries and universities and in the affected communities. Feasibility experiments providing data on cost and on performance and desgn techniques are believed most appropriate for federal initiative and support and are critically needed. Critically needed too, are well-staffed and adequately supported programs to develop techniques for joint planning within regions, to couple need and capability in the securing of data required for efficient and realistic planning, and for the encouragement of cooperation among the communities and institutions whose participation is required. Of direct interest and concern to the federal government is the need and opportunity to organize and make available the very considerable body of data, both national and international, relating to effects, acceptable levels and standards of performance, and protocols for measurement and monitoring. Finally, the federal program of research and development should be continued and extended to include research into many legal questions relating to responsibilities and rights in the use of our water, air, and land resources. The Committee believes that the initiating role of the federal government particularly is of paramount importance. The government can demonstrate feasibility and opportunity; it can take the first essential steps toward needed standards, of both acceptable levels and technical performance; it can provide a meeting ground for industry and customer communities; and it can establish a program of incentives in its participation in the design and building of new systems. If substantial efforts are made along these lines, the Committee feels confident that the potential for the development of new technology by industry will be encouraged and realized, and that a public-utility attitude will develop in the industrial participation in the management of our residues and wastes. The following recommendations of the Committee are proposed as first steps that can be taken to meet the needs described in this report. They reflect, too, an integration of many of the specific recommendations presented in the appendixes that follow. 1. That a full-scale experimental residue-control system be planned, designed, and constructed in a new city-this system to embody the newest and best principles of recycling, re-using, and recovering residues, and to serve as demonstration model. 2. That one or more experimental, regional, environmental design groups be established to: a. Develop residue-management plans in concert with comprehensive landuse plans. b. Advise agencies and bureaus of the several federal departments as to information, data, instrumentation, and other needs of local (state, city, subregional) bodies to design and construct plans and systems. c. Assist local planners and authorities with needed data, services, and techniques to develop subplans compatible with regional design. 3. That there be provided within the structure of the federal government: a. A Center for Criteria and Standards to collect, compile, and issue critical data from national and international sources on acceptable levels of residue concentrations for guidance of regional and local bodies. b. A Development Center for the testing and evaluation of system and subsystem components, with strong ties to professional associations, industry, and state and municipal authorities. 4. That there also be provided, within the structure of the federal government, a program including contract work, to support the following: a. A legal study on legislative precedents and needs, including questions of equity, simplification of access to courts, and development of model legislation relating to society's use of national resources of air, inland and coastal waters, and land. b. Biological and ecological studies. c. Engineering studies, including economic considerations, relating to residue management. d. All relevant studies toward closing the loop from resources to user to reuse as a resource. 5. That a National Commission for Environmental Protection be established under presidental appointment to: a. Promote national awareness of the need and opportunities to preserve the health and beauty of our national environment. b. Promote better use of the resources we mine and consume. c. Draw attention to notable progress in innovation, design, and practice developed by national and local authorities and industry. d. Monitor progress of the composite national program. e. Advise the President and people of needed remedies and desired goals. |