to the initial filing deadline of May 1. This response is a clear indication that the States are becoming increasingly aware of the urgency of the solid waste problem and of the need to take steps now to plan and develop programs capable of meeting it. In another important activity created by the Solid Waste Disposal Act we will shortly announce the award of the first series of grants for demonstration and study and investigation projects. This is I believe one of the most sensitive and critical areas of activity being carried out by the Federal solid waste program. We are seeking here the kind of bold, new, imaginative, and farreaching enterprise that can lead to fundamental changes in our capacity to meet the challenge of solid waste management in the years to come. As the subcommittee is aware, present practices of solid waste disposal represent little more than modest refinements of methods that have been in use for centuries. We are still dumping our solid wastes, we are still burning them on the ground, we are still casting these materials in our lakes and rivers or burying them in ways that insidiously, but just as surely, pollute our water resources. We are still cramming solid wastes into domestic and municipal incinerators that are outdated, poorly designed, and ridiculously overburdened. And by these processes, we are not only endangering our own health and welfare, we are undoubtedly discarding tremendous amounts of raw materials and energy potentials that could be turned into the servants, rather than the scourge of men. Through nearly $2 million in matching grants, we will be supporting up to two-thirds of the cost of some 20 projects designed specifically to lead to newer and better methods of handling the growing national solid waste burden. Some will involve full-scale demonstrations of new and improved techniques, others will be studies of or investigations of specific problem areas, often having national signifi cance. All these projects and the ones that follow in future years will lead to the early application of new solid waste management principles and systems without which the prospects for substantial improvement in controlling the mounting solid waste problem would be meager indeed. Our basic philosophy in developing and carrying out the solid weste program envisioned by the Congress can be expressed simply: We regard the present state of solid waste disposal in the United States as bordering on a cris's. If this Nation continues much longer in the course it has followed up to now, a course charted in apathy and ignorance, we will find out-we will find ourselves quite literally bogged down in a relentlessly growing mass of discards of our abundance. The threat to our health through environmental pollution and the spread of disease-carrying insects and rodents that thrive in our rubbish will reach truly alarming proportions. The sheer lack of any place to dispose of our solid wastes without dropping them at our neighbor's doorstep will make solution of the problem infinitely more complex and more costly than it is today. Were it not for the fact that we have at last begun to wake up to the prospect of this grim future, we would surely be heading for it. But I believe, Mr. Chairman, we have reason to be cautiously optimistic about the solid waste problem facing this Nation. The rising national awareness of the critical need to make up for our past and present shortcomings, the wisdom of the Congress in enacting meaningful and effective legislation, and the manifest desire of local and State governments and of industry, as well as of the academic and scientific communities, to join with the Federal Government in a belated and urgently needed effort to gain the upper hand in the struggle to manage our burden of solid wastes, give us all reason to believe that solutions for this problem can and will be found. The Federal role of leadership is now well established and welcomed, even through this program is less than a half year old. The framework has been erected on which will be built a concerted national effort to bring an end to the threat to health and welfare posed by decades of neglect of the solid waste problem. May I say that the continued interest of this subcommittee in the subject of solid waste management as a major problem affecting the health and welfare of people throughout the country is of immeasurable value in our efforts to help forge the program called for by the Solid Waste Disposal Act. We welcome this subcommittee's guidance and support as à factor of critical importance in putting the United Stares on the the road toward final and lasting control of the problem ef solid waste disposal. In turning now to the legislation pending before this subcommittee to authorize a new national program for the disposal of junked automobiles, we focus our attention on a very important facet of the national solid waste disposal problem. In his testimony here last week, the author of this legislation, Senater Douglas, accurately and graphically outlined the nature of this problem. I would only want to add to Senator Douglas' comments the observation that junked and abandoned automobiles are not only a highly valuable resource that is now largely neglected in this country for both economic and technological reasons; they are also a serious and growing environmental health hazard that will have to be brought under control if we are to achieve the goals set by the Solid Waste Disposal Act. The very presence of tens of millions of discarded automobiles along the Nation's streets and highways contributes directly to health and welfare hazards by providing breeding places for insects and rodents and by pollution of our land, air, and water resources. Moreover, the methods used to dispose of motor vehicles, which very often involve open burning to get rid of rubber, upholstery, insulation, and other combustible automotive parts, add needlessly and dangerously to pollution of the air, creating health and safety hazards and economic losses as well. As Senator Douglas' bill, S. 3400, implies, and as the report on this legislation to be submitted to the chairman of the Committee on Publie Works by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare will indicate, a potentially very promising approach toward solution of a major share of the automobile disposal problem lies in converting automotive hulks into usable scrap for the making of steel. Somewhat less than half of the automobiles discarded in this country each year are processed into scrap steel for use at steel mills in this country and abroad. It would seem appropriate and necessary in the public interest to explore the potential for expanding this activity as much as possible, as well as for finding and demonstrating other safe and efficient disposal techniques. Because the disposal of junked automobiles significantly involves metallurgical technology, our report on S. 3400 defers to the Department of the Interior, which has primary responsibility for this aspect of the solid waste problem under the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965. I should only like to emphasize the attitude expressed in the report of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; namely, that there is an urgent need to develop and apply means of disposing of junked and abandoned automobiles that will convert this contaminant of our environment into a useful natural resource. And we must take care to see that in recovering the vast mineral potential represented by the Nation's junked automobiles we do not solve one problem of environmental pollution by creating another through unnecessary air and water pollution. The Solid Waste Disposal Act, through its authorization for research and development and for demonstration projects, provides a means of carrying out projects relating to disposal of junked automobiles, some of which I understand the Bureau of Mines of the Department of the Interior now has underway. The Public Health Service Office of Solid Wastes, too, will conduct and support investigations and demonstrations relating to community aspects of automobile disposal, such as those relating to public health, intergovernment cooperation, and other areas in which the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has both major responsibilities and extensive experience. The need is obviously great and must be met promptly. Mr. Chairman, I have tried to furnish a broad outline of the program we are carrying out under the Solid Waste Disposal Act and some general comments relating to our interest in S. 3400. I will, of course, be glad to provide any additional information that you or members of the subcommittee may want and to answer any questions at this time. Thank you very much. Senator MUSKIE. Thank you, Mr. Gilbertson, for your comprehensive review of what is being done along the solid waste disposal line. It is very useful to have that in the record. With respect to S. 3400, do you support the enactment of the bill? Mr. GILBERTSON. The present position of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare is noted in my testimony. As I understand it, the report to be submitted to you, Mr. Chairman, will indicate that we are deferring in this connection to the Department of the Interior. Senator MUSKIE. So you would appear to regard the problem as involving primarily metallurgical technology rather than environmental contamination? Mr. GILBERTSON. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that the problem does involve certainly many environmental problems, as I noted in my testimony. In our discussions of the Solid Waste Disposal Act with representatives of the Department of the Interior, we have, of course, discussed the relationship of this junked auto problem to the present program. We have worked out a tentative working agreement with Interior which provides some program guides in which the metallurgical development aspects of the junked automobile disposal problem would be tackled by the Department of the Interior, and we would utilize our resources and our capabilities in working on problems where environmental health, community organization, and such things as zoning laws and public participation might be involved. This, we think, might help in working out a comprehensive program. Senator MUSKIE. Would you think that you can do under your present authorization what Senator Douglas proposes to do under S. 3400? Mr. GILBERTSON. No, sir. I think it is quite evident that the intent of Senator Douglas' bill goes considerably beyond the authorization contained in the Solid Waste Disposal Act. Senator MUSKIE. We have received no comment as yet from the Department of Interior on S. 3400, so we don't have the official position of the administration, I take it. Senator Boggs? Senator BOGGS. I have no questions. Senator MUSKIE. Thank you again, Mr. Gilbertson for a comprehensive recitation of what has happened on last year's bill. Mr. GILBERTSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator MUSKIE. Our next witness is Mr. William Story, executive vice president of the Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel. Senator COOPER. Mr. Chairman. Senator MUSKIE. Yes, Senator Cooper. Senator COOPER. I would like to ask unanimous consent of the committee to put in the record a letter I received from Mr. David S. Blue, president of the Louisville Scrap Material Co. who is in the scrap processing business. In his statement he raises some questions which he hopes the committee will inquire into. Senator MUSKIE. Without objection, yes, thank you very much, Senator Cooper. (The letter referred to follows:) LOUISVILLE SCRAP MATERIAL CO., INC., Senator JOHN SHERMAN COOPER, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR COOPER: For the hearing on the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution of the Senate Public Works Committee, you may insert the following for the hearing record: Junk automobiles and scrap iron will not disappear unless there is machinery to help it disappear. Our business is a necessity in this industrial world. The laws, regulations, and enforcement of the law should provide for operation of processing plants. Scrap processors have installed balers, shears, shredders, and cranes to prepare the scrap iron for mill and foundry use. There is every indication that in the future the scrap processor's yard will have larger and more intricate equipment in his outdoor manufacturing operation. It is interesting that the scrap processors in Kentucky purchased approximately $50,000,000 of scrap in 1965. Approximately 500 people were employed with a payroll of $2,500,000. We have the present facilities to process 900,000 tons of scrap per year and process 600,000 automobiles annually with the estimated future capacity to process automobiles much higher with the coming of new machinery. An important problem that the scrap industry has had to live with in the area of transportation is with railroad rates. A foundry or steel mill makes new steel products or castings from either of two raw materials. These are pig iron or scrap iron, or a combination of the two. Therefore, we are in direct competition with the manufacturing of pig iron, a product of iron ore. The pig iron producers have gained a tremendous and unfair advantage on the freight rates of scrap iron versus iron ore. In some cases new steel is even hauled cheaper by the railroad than serap iron. One example would be the railroad rate from Portsmouth, Ohio to Lexington, Kentucky for new steel worth approximately $160.00 per net ton. The rate is $4.50 Net Ton for the new steel and $4.70 Net Ton for scrap steel, a product which sells to the mill today at approximately $20.00. If anything, the scrap rate should be much cheaper than the new steel rate. Also, it is cheaper to ship a ton of scrap from Baltimore to Japan than to ship it from Baltimore to Pittsburgh. If freight rates were adjusted to a more equitable level, we could pay more for the unprepared automobile scrap and speed up the flow of this scrap to the market. There is a critical shortage of railroad gondolas which the scrap industry depends on to get its product to the market. There are cases during the first quarter of 1966 when scrap processors in Louisville were without cars (railroad) for over a week at a time. It is imperative that immediate steps are taken to relieve the shortage of cars. Very few new gondolas are being built relative to other specialty types of cars. The scrap industry does not need special cars in that the sand, gravel, coal, and serap industry all can use the same types of railroad cars. Another possible solution to the junk car problem is to subsidize some aspect of the scrap processing or steel industry. Suggestions have been made to take a one percent subsidy from automobile license fees or taxes. This, in my opinion, would require extensive administrative problems. If done, the only feasible way seems to be on the steel mill or foundry level. In this way the appropriations could be controlled. At the mill or foundry level, the participants would simply be the ones buying auto body scrap. Some methods that could be developed by subsidizing as listed below: (1) Improve the use of scrap in the basic oxygen furnace by research and other means. At the present time, this process uses only 28% scrap. By comparison, electric furnaces use 98% scrap. (2) Study the extent to which it is feasible to use shredded scrap in various types of iron and steelmaking furnaces. This new process is extremely promising in that the final product is uniform, dense, and clean of nonferrous and contamination. (3) Collect accurate data on the amount of automotive and other similar scrap which is originated, processed, and held in inventory. (4) Find new export markets for scrap through research and expand present markets. (5) Study problems of transporting scrap, including a study of the strueture of freight rates for scrap as compared to pig iron, iron ore, new steel, and machinery. The equity of scrap freight rates should be evaluated. Possibly there can be developed improved methods of transporting scrap as mentioned in previous paragraphs. Scrap is a big profit maker for the railroads: seldom do they ever have a loss or damage claim, and there seldom is a problem of rapid delivery requirements. This railroad situation is extremely important. Senator Douglas's bill seems good in general, providing the money he is considering for appropriation is used to find solutions to the problem. This seems to be better than subsidizing steel mills and foundries directly. The basic economies of supply and demand seems to run the country so well. Possibly this demand variable can be adjusted to provide a realistic solution. The Institute of Scrap Iron and Steel will have representatives at the hearings to present factual statements directly. These should not be passed over lightly. Thank you for your interest. Very truly yours, DAVID S. BLUE, President. Senator MUSKIE. Do you want to proceed, Mr. Story? |