for approval by the Environmental Control Administration. Unsolicited contract proposals are being submitted increasingly as more and more firms are developing a technical and competence in solid waste technology.

PATENT POLICY

Any patentable inventions developed with the use of Federal funds accrue to the public interest with the inventor signing all rights over to the public. Before awarding any grant, the Department is advised of any patent commitments of the applicant organization in writing. After completion of the grant, the grantee organization notifies the Department of any inventions resulting from the project and for determination of ownership, patent protection, and the rights of the invention.

We have had a number of applications worthy of support, which were withdrawn upon notification of patent policy. We sincerely hope that development will continue in a private basis, for we need many new weapons in our environmental conflict.

We have never encountered any antitrust difficulties in our contracts. Competition in the solid waste industry is very keen; at the present time, we feel that there is very litle possibiliy of a dominant group being formed.

I appreciate the opportunity of presenting this information before the subcommittee.

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, Mr. Vaughan.

BEVERAGE CONTAINERS

We were discussing the matter of disposal of beer cans. We are preparing to report S. 3201 from the Committee on Public Works. This is the Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendment of 1968.

In the report we are preparing to send to the Senate, we have said— Although it is difficult to ascertain how much packaging material turns into litter, the litter bug will have considerably more ammunition at his disposal within the next decade.

Considering beverage containers alone, it has been estimated that the consumption will increase from 30 billion units-that is a nice term, "unit"; the can-in 1966 to 63 billion units in 1976. While in 1966, eight beverage containers out of every 100 were returnable, by 1976 only three out of every 100 will be returnable.

The same period per capita consumption of beverage containers will have risen from 155 units per year to 285 units. This represents nearly a doubling in container use in 10 years.

While beer consumption is not a matter of record; beer can disposal is a matter of record as I have mentioned it. Is this not just an indication in many cases of the thoughtless attitude, isn't it, Mr. Vaughan, of Americans? They use something that is packaged and then the container in which it has been packaged is thrown away anywhere.

Mr. VAUGHAN. Yes. I do appreciate your concern, Senator, on this issue. It concerns me very much and all of our staff.

We have recently completed a comprehensive survey of the packaging. We don't think that we should sit idly by and let these statistics that you are quoting necessarily come about. That part of our responsibility is to develop alternative methods so that perhaps you won't have

this many disposable containers to throw away or that if we do we will have effective means for coping with them other than throwing them on the ground or other than overloading incinerators or using up land prematurely.

We are working cooperatively with the packaging industry, itself. I, frankly, feel that the industries that have spent large amounts of money in research in developing new packaging materials and disposable containers should spend more of their research resources in developing better methods of either disposing of them after use or reducing the amount of such material.

This is the kind of approach we are using to try to encourage them as an industry to realistically face up to their responsibilities. They just can't forever create problems for the country without helping to solve them.

Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, Mr. Vaughan. Thank you very much.

Dr. Weinberger.

STATEMENT OF DR. LEON W. WEINBERGER, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Dr. WEINBERGER. Mr. Chairman, I am very pleased to appear before you to discuss the management effort in research activities concerning waste disposal.

Our environmental problems involve air, water, and land pollution, along with the accompanying interfaces, and that in many instances there is no easy or recognizable line of demarcation among these areas. Research management for each of these areas would be similar, as has been indicated by my colleagues, Dr. Middleton and Mr. Vaughan. However, I shall focus specifically on water pollution control.

LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY

Recognizing research needs in the 1961 amendments to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the Congress indicated its intent that the Federal water pollution research program be accelerated. The amendments direct the Secretary to undertake research in three specific areas the development and demonstration of:

1. Practicable means of treating municipal sewage and other waterborne wastes, and to restore and maintain maximum amount of our water at a quality suitable for repeated reuse;

2. Improved methods and procedures to identify and measure effects of pollutants on water use, including those pollutants created by new technological developments; and

3. Methods and procedures for evaluating the effects on water quality and water uses of augmented streamflows to control water pollution not susceptible to other means of abatement.

Implementation of the water pollution control program again was facilitated through congressional passage of the Water Quality Act of 1965 and the Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966. Both of these acts amended the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

The 1965 amendments provided for research and development grants and contracts to assist in the development of projects for the solution of a specific water pollution problem. The projects are to demonstrate new or improved methods of controlling the discharge of untreated or inadequately treated sewage or other wastes from sewers which carry storm water or both storm water and sewage or other wastes. The 1966 amendments provided for research and development grants to assist in the development of projects demonstrating advanced waste treatment and water purification methods, and improved methods of joint treatment for municipal and industrial wastes.

The act also provided research and demonstration projects in the prevention of pollution of waters by industry, including, but not limited to, treatment of industrial wastes. In the 1966 amendments, programs dealing with specific water pollution problems were called for. There is water pollution control legislation currently pending before the Congress. The Senate has passed legislation relating to lake pollution, acid mine drainage, and oil pollution. Again, programs dealing with specific water pollution problems would be authorized.

PROGRAM ELEMENTS

There are a number of necessary items before one can have an effective water pollution control program. These elements consist of:

1. Adequate and reliable data on sources of pollution and the effects of pollutants on water quality and water uses;

2. A strong overall program effort based on sound scientific and engineering principles and experience backed up by research and development competence;

3. A strong enforcement and water quality standards compliance effort;

4. An effective comprehensive planning and management activity, including the continuing development and upgrading of water quality standards;

5. Financial resources to install the necessary pollution control systems; and

6. Competent manpower.

I, of course, do not intend to minimize the importance or role of research and development; however, we should recognize that many of the water pollution problems facing our Nation today can be alleviated by the application of existing technology. In fact, in the immediate future, the most significant progress will be made in this

way.

Through research and development, we will find solutions where none now exist; we will better define the effects of impurities on water uses; we will improve the effectiveness of available solutions; and we will reduce the costs of waste treatment systems.

RESEARCH STRATEGY

The research program of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration is directed primarily to the solution of water pollution problems.

In planning our research, a major task is to establish priorities of research within available resources and the directives provided by

legislation. With regard to the latter, we recognize that in the enactment of the specific legislative directives in the 1961, 1965, and 1966 amendments, the Congress, in effect, established certain priorities in needed water pollution research and development. Consequently, much of our effort is directed toward these congressionally defined problem

areas.

RESEARCH PRIORITIES

In our program, priorities are based on needs, recommendations, and ongoing research and development of the following individuals and groups:

1. FWPCA regional directors and their staff. They are knowledgeable of the problems as they exist or may develop in their respective regions (river basin);

2. FWPCA program directors at headquarters;

3. Other Federal agencies;

4. State and local agencies;

5. University professors and researchers;

6. Consultants and advisory groups;

7. Interdepartmental Committee on Water Resources Research; and 8. Industrial groups.

The setting of research priorities and certainly the allocation of research resources is still, to a considerable extent, based on subjective professional analysis. The analysis, however, has considerable merit when carried out by competent and knowledgeable people who have available to them the information obtained from answers to the following series of questions:

1. What is the problem?

2. What is the magnitude of the problem?

3. What answers or solutions do we need?

4. What answers or solutions are available? (The statement of problem should not be considered equivalent to needed research.)

5. When do we need the solutions?

6. What are the specific objectives being sought? What answers are being sought? How will you know when these objectives have been achieved or answers found?

7. How much work has been done on this problem to date, by whom and when was it started? Has an adequate literature review been made? What is the magnitude of the ongoing research effort and who is doing it? What cooperative work is being undertaken and by whom? 8. What work is being planned by others? (This is probably the most difficult information to obtain.)

9. Can the answers be obtained from proposed research?

10. What will be the total cost of research and development and demonstration effort to obtain answers?

11. How long will it take to obtain answers? When will the project be terminated?

12. What effort or information must be provided by others in order to complete research?

13. If new answers are found, will they have significance?

14. How are the results to be disseminated? How will the effort be coordinated with other related programs?

15. Should research be carried out at laboratory, pilot plant, or at field evaluation scale?

16. How much replication of effort should be carried out?

17. How are types and levels of competence of personnel required? Do we have these people?

18. What facilities, equipment, and instrumentation are required? Are these available?

19. Should the work be performed in-house, by grants, or by contracts? Where can the work best be done? If in-house, which laboratory? If contract, are there contractors with special or unique competence?

20. Are there other approaches to solving the problem? What are they?

21. Does proposed approach and methodology differ substantially from those who are recognized in the field of study? Why?

22. Has the proposed program been subject to technical review? 23. Are there predictable technological developments in this or related field which could substantially affect your research effort? 24. If the program or project is approved, when can the next decision be made as to termination or continuation of work? 25. What is the probability of success?

IMPLEMENTATION

The implementation of approved program plans consists at least of the following aspects:

1. Development of detailed operational plans and resource requirements.

2. Review and approval of detailed plans.

3. Allocation of resources.

4. Reports and reviews of progress and resource utilization.

5. Evaluation of progress.

6. Redirect efforts as necessary to incorporate new decisions, results, and actions affecting program.

7. Publication and dissemination of results.

8. Integration of research efforts into total solution of problem. Broad objectives of the R.D. & D. effort:

SCOPE

The scope of the effort of research, development, and demonstration is quite broad, ranging from:

1. Identification, sampling, and monitoring of water impurities; 2. Fate and persistence of impurities in the environment;

3. New and improved treatment systems;

4. Control through nontreatment methods;

5. Ultimate disposal;

6. Water quality requirements; and

7. Socioeconomic, management, and planning tools.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND PLANNING

Figure 1 illustrates the program structure and elements of the research and development program of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. It represents the framework within which we

95-825-68-14