as well as saw, certain accomplishments that had been wrought by industry, in this instance an industry which recognized the value of conservation in waste management practices.

We have to look and learn from what has been done, and not be satisfied, because there are other alternate waste management approaches that are good, yes; significant; and humanitarian, yes.

We must not close the book, but rather keep open the alternatives for better waste management practices.

Today we have scheduled representatives of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, the Department of the Interior, and the Department of Defense.

I wonder if the witnesses might come together as a panel rather than separately.

Would those who represent the agencies I mentioned please come to our witness table.

Off the record a minute.

(Discussion off the record.)

Senator RANDOLPH. Dr. Middleton.

I will leave up to you the manner in which you present your statements.

Doctor.

STATEMENT OF DR. JOHN T. MIDDLETON, COMMISSIONER, NATIONAL AIR POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION; ACCOMPANIED BY DR. STEIGERWALD, CHIEF, OFFICE OF PROGRAM PLANNING AND EVALUATION

Dr. MIDDLETON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It is a pleasure to be here and participate in your hearings on waste management and to have an interest on your part shown for the necessity of improving the quality of our environment.

Senator RANDOLPH. May I interrupt.

I read a few months ago that we face the possibility of being buried under our own garbage. Are you familiar with such a statement?

Dr. MIDDLETON. I have heard of such statements. I have also heard we are being buried under our own protoplasm, that we are having population and growth problems as well as being inundated by liquid gases and solid wastes. Many people recognize this. I cannot tell you from which particular place that particular quote was taken. Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, Doctor.

Khrushchev told us once we would be buried. You have brought in two other burials.

Dr. MIDDLETON. At least we have put the Kenilworth dump to rest. Mr. Chairman, to continue, today, in all parts of the Nation, there is considerable evidence that the gaseous, liquid, and solid wastes which our modern civilization produces in such abundance are increasingly damaging and disrupting the ecological system of which man is part.

PUBLIC AWARENESS

Awareness of how this growing problem is endangering our health and welfare is rising, and this is indeed fortunate, for it will require awareness and action on the part of all segments of society to put a

stop to the unplanned and unwelcome contamination of the Nation's environment. There can be no doubt that the work of your subcommittee has been instrumental, not only in focusing attention on the need for such action, but also in designing the legislative framework under which a great deal of action on a national scale has been stimulated in recent years.

In many respects, the Nation's current efforts to prevent and control environmental contamination are still inadequate, but I believe that the path which your subcommittee has helped to chart is the right one that the strategy, the word you used this morning, of directly and separately attacking such problems as air and water pollution will, in the long run, lead to a better human environment.

GOALS

We certainly will not reach that goal by making nebulous pronouncements on the complexities of ecology and throwing our hands up in despair. Nor will we reach it if we pretend that the various problems of environmental contamination are unrelated. In my opinion, we must continue to attack these problems in full awareness of the ways in which each one impinges on the others.

This is precisely how the National Air Pollution Control Administration is attacking the problem of air pollution under the Air Quality Act of 1967; moreover, this approach will be facilitated by the recent reorganization of the health-related activities of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, under which the air pollution program of research and control will retain its separate identity but, as part of the new Consumer Protection and Environmental Health Service, will be more closely integrated with those programs concerned with protecting man against other environmental hazards-whether they occur at home or at work, indoors or out, in air, water, food or drugs.

Our activities under the Air Quality Act reflect the Nation's growing recognition that the contemporary air pollution problem has its roots in all those complex economic, social and technological forces which support our way of life in this latter half of the 20th century.

SOURCES

Air pollution has its source in the fuels we burn to heat our buildings and to generate power. It comes to us in the form of waste from a myriad of processes that produce the goods which flow so abundantly to the marketplace. It is a byproduct of the way in which we transport ourselves and our goods.

The impact of air pollution is felt by every segment of our society. Its adverse effects on health are felt by people of all ages. The economic burden it imposes on society is shared by all of us-whether we realize it or not-in our various roles as homeowners, businessmen, consumers and taxpayers.

The esthetic effects of polluted air are an insult to everyone who shares in the Nation's aspirations for an environment that will enrich, not degrade, the quality of our lives.

A problem with such far-reaching implications and such diverse effects on man and his environment must be attacked along a broad front. It cannot be solved exclusively by the enforcement of laws and regulations or the application of engineering techniques or economic formulas.

PROBLEM

To succeed in coping with such a problem, the Nation must employ all these approaches and others. Attention must be given to the way we build and rebuild our cities, to the selection of sites for new industry and new housing, to the ways in which we meet our rising demands for energy, to the design and operation of transportation systems, to the processes we select for manufacturing our goods, and to the ways in which we dispose of refuse-in short, to all those factors that affect the quality of the air.

A problem which has such complex ramifications cannot be fully or realistically solved by any single agency of government or even by all agencies of government without the involvement of the private sector. Nor can it be solved exclusively through the efforts of specialists in any single area of science or technology.

COOPERATION

Numerous organizations in both the public and private sectors and specialists in many areas of science and technology must work together in a wide-ranging program of research and control activities if we are to reach our goal-that goal being to control air pollution without delay, and to do so without creating more problems than we solve. The need for participation by many different segments of society does not mean that the responsibility for dealing with air pollution should be so diffused as to preclude a systematic attack on the problem. In my view, the fundamental responsibility for directing the Federal air pollution program must be placed in one mission-oriented agency whose principal interest in controlling air pollution will not be compromised by competing interests.

To divide the responsibility for leading such a program would, in my view, deprive the separated elements of the fundamental purpose for their activities. One agency must lead the program toward its goals. To expect orderly progress without such leadership would not be realistic.

SYSTEMS APPROACH

The Nation's need for a really systematic effort to control air pollution has been widely recognized only in the very recent past. For most of the past 30 years, as you know, air pollution was thought to be little more than a nuisance-annoying to many people, but not particularly harmful-and so it was controlled only to the extent necessary to relieve the public's annoyance. This casual approach was still the rule, rather than the exception, at the time the Clean Air Act became law in December 1963.

Today, largely as a result of the efforts stimulated by the Clean Air Act, there is wide recognition that air pollution is, in reality, a very serious and sinister threat to public health and welfare, that it promises

to worsen in the years ahead, and that we dare not rely on casual, hitor-miss efforts to deal with it. This awareness of the need to attack air pollution in a systematic way-to consider economic, social, and technological factors, as well as concern for public health and welfare-is clearly reflected in the provisions of the Air Quality Act of 1967 and in the activities we are conducting under this legislation.

REGIONAL CONTROL

One of the major objectives of the Air Quality Act is to insure that air pollution will be controlled on a regional basis, and, toward this end, it calls on the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to designate air quality control regions.

This is not a mere exercise in mapmaking; rather, it is intended to provide patterns for air pollution control efforts that will be in keeping with the technical, legal, and political realities of urban life and air pollution.

To insure that our regional patterns will be realistic, we are employing the kind of systems approach to solving complex problems that has been used so successfully in the fields of aerospace and defense.

METEOROLOGICAL FACTORS

Very briefly: For each urban area where air pollution is a problem, we are first defining the natural boundaries dictated by geographic and meteorological factors. In most places, we can build the meteorological factors into a computerized diffusion model, feed the model information on an area's sources of air pollution, and derive estimates of pollutant levels in the ambient air at various points in the area. These estimates will enable us to determine the geographic extent of the area affected by those air pollution sources. In some areas, we must also factor in land-form characteristics to obtain the pollution level estimates.

POLITICAL FACTORS

The next step is consideration of such factors as State, county, and city boundaries; the jurisdiction of existing air pollution control agencies; existing arrangements for regional cooperation and action; and the patterns and rates of urban and economic growth in the region.

Often, consideration of these factors will suggest modifications of the regional boundaries derived from the diffusion model. State and local officials must be consulted before air quality control regions are actually designated and they will be; in fact, in many instances, we will be working with them before we reach the final stages of this process.

AIR QUALITY CONTROL REGIONS

In short, then, our work on designation of air quality control regions will indeed be comprehensive. It will include consideration of information on air pollution sources and emissions, meteorology, urban and economic trends, jurisdictional factors, and intergovernmental relationships.

We will be drawing not only on our own experience, but also on that of other governmental agencies and private organizations. This syste

matic approach should insure full consideration of all available knowledge pertinent to the designation of air quality control regions and the diverse points of view of all interested groups.

Over the next 12 months we expect to designate air quality control regions in 32 of the Nation's largest urban areas. And, at the same time, we will begin publishing air quality criteria and information on control technology. Thus, the time is fast approaching when the States will have all the tools for setting air quality standards for some regions and for developing plans for the implementation and enforcement of the standards.

AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY

This procedure will, I believe, result in full application of existing technology as a step toward controlling air pollution to the degree necessary for adequate protection of the public health and welfare.

For the most part, achieving that high degree of control will require better technology than we now have. This was recognized by the Congress when it developed the Air Quality Act; accordingly, the act calls not only for full application of existing knowledge, but also for simultaneous efforts to expand and improve our knowledge. Toward this end, the act opens the way for a greatly enlarged and accelerated program of research on all aspects of the modern air pollution problem, and particularly in the area of control technology.

FEDERAL ROLE

In this area, our mandate, as we see it, is not simply to serve as a source of funds for a random series of research and development projects, but, rather, to act as manager and coordinator of a methodical effort to define the problems that must be solved and then to plan the necessary research and enlist all the diverse skills and resources needed to get the work done.

To carry out this mandate, we are increasingly relying on the capabilities of industry and private research institutions. We will, of course, continue to conduct research in our own facilities and support work by other Federal agencies, but this will be only part of our total effort.

INDUSTRIAL ROLE

An increasing share of the work will be done under contracts with organizations in the private sector. Our contractors will include not just those organizations that have traditionally been involved in air pollution research and development; they already include many whose previous experience has been primarily in aerospace and military work.

We are drawing on the capabilities of the private sector in other ways, as well-through meetings with leaders of business and industry to explore ways in which we can work together more effectively, through consultation with advisory groups and special panels of experts from the worlds of science, engineering, and industry, and through a variety of cooperative projects focused on the air pollution problems of specific industries.