Page images

Europe at this time, and through one very fine manufacturer in this country. Tremendous progress has been made in preparation equipment in our own country, and my company has developed the incinerators necessary to clean the material and to eliminate any contamination that may be released to the atmosphere. Existing now is the full technology of how to place into effect a complete program of resource recycling, and before the turn of the century, the problem will metamorphose into a great and profitable industry in our land.

I urge the committee to consider the latent value of this problem, and by approving a strong bill, enabling our President to act, will expand a highly profitable field of technology that will rival in size and benefit to our nation our space program or the development of atomic energy. Thank you. Yours very truly,



San Mateo, Calif., June 7, 1966. Re S. 3400. Hon. EDMUND S. MUSKIE, Chairman, Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, Committee on Public

Works, U.S. Senate, Room 4204, New Senate Office Building, Washington D.C. DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: In lieu of testifying at the hearings on S. 3400 which we understand are scheduled to be held by your Subcommittee on June 15, 1966, the National Auto and Truck Wreckers Association would like to take this opportunity to advise you of our comments on Senator Douglas' bill.

As the national trade association representing the auto and truck salvage industry, NATWA has a vital interest in the growing accumulation of junk automobiles in this country. In this connection, NATWA is pleased to advise you that we are in full and complete accord with the provisions of S. 3100 which would divert the 1% excise tax on new automobiles for use in disposing of junked automobiles.

When President Johnson signed the excise tax revision bill into law last year. he stated that he hoped that some of the revenue of the 1% permanent excise tax on automobiles could be used for meeting the problem of the old and useless automotive scrap heap. We agreed with President Johnson at that time, and we agree with Senator Douglas' approach to the problem at this time.

The proposed bill is based on the understanding that the question of disposing of automobiles is an economic one. The demand for scrap steel made from old cars has declined in recent years. The price of scrap has fallen to a level where it does not always cover the cost of converting an old car into usable scrap. It has now become cheaper in many parts of the country to let the old automobile rust away on a junk heap or leave it on a highway or street.

Every ton of scrap used in making new steel saves three tons of valuable raw material such as iron ore, coke and limestone. Thus, it is very important to the economy of this country that steps be taken to insure that junked automobiles eventually end up as scrap used in the making of new steel." NATWA feels that s. 3400 is a logical attempt to meet this problem by providing financing to help facilitate the processing of old cars into scrap. In addition, we applaud those provisions of this bill which provide financing for research to find other solutions to this vexing problem.

NATWA respectfully requests that the comments contained in this letter be made a part of your Subcommittee's records on the hearings on S. 3400 and that your Subcommittee give favorable consideration this bill. Respectfully submitted.

RAYMOND E. MORRIS, Managing Director.


Washington, D.C., March 25, 1966. Mr. RICHARD B. ROYCE, Senate Public Works Committee, New Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Royce: I was in contact with Senator Douglas' legislative council

. Mr. Gleason, on March 23, 1966 with regard to progress in eliminating some of

the solid wastes covering the American countryside. In conformance with the President's wishes on Natural Beauty may I suggest a helpful means of disposing of substantial numbers of old auto bodies cluttering the countryside and many junk yards throughout this nation. My proposal would have the added feature of utilizing this embarassing solid waste in a manner that would generate substantial conservation benefits.

I understand that a bill is under way, not yet introduced, from your office that would provide means and funds for disposal of solid wastes. You may be aware of some of the successes that a few of our coastal states have had in creating better fish habitat and increased production through construction of artificial fishing reefs using old junked auto bodies in coastal waters. The life of auto bodies in the ocean is from three to five years at best, so that there is a natural maintenance (replacement) requirement that would consume large numbers of units annually. The chief reason why agencies are not already deply involved is that they do not have the funds to meet the additional expense. A waste disposal act which would provide federal funds (approximately $200.000 per state is needed—a total of $1,600,000 if all 23 states with coasts were included) from the automobile excise taxes could be a great boost not only toward ridding the countryside of the unsightly auto junk yards, but by providing an outlet for a most beneficial use. At an average cost of $30 per auto body unit acquired and emplaced on the ocean floor over 150,000 old autos could be beneficially utilized each year in an official fishing reef program. A feleral aid in fish restoration mechanism (64 Stat. 430, as amended) already exists for administration of such funds as might be allocated for such purpose.

I invite your attention to our SFI Bulletin for January, 1966, enclosed, entitled “Artificial Reefs as Tools of Sport Fishery Management in Coastal Marine Waters." You will note that the entire 8-page issue is concerned with artiticial reefs and their effects on the marine fishery populations and fishing success by the sport fishermen.

I am confident that you will find this information will illustrate the potential involved. If we can be of further assistance in helping to provide language for a suggested amendment or actual inclusion in the first draft of the solid waste disposal bill please do not hesitate to call on us. Sincerely,

PHILIP A. DOUGLAS, Executive Secretary.


Washington, D.C., June 14, 1966. Senator Paul H. DOUGLAS, Senate Office Building, Tashington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR DOUGLAS: As a Scrap Processor I have been disposing of junked autos since the Model T. It is natural for me to resent the "Deep-six Syndrome”, those who suggest burial ... in the ocean, under sand-dunes or in abandoned mine shafts.

Our own Institute of Scrap Iron & Steel, (headquarters in Washington), can furnish your Committee much more accurate statistics than your "recent study." We can add a more significant fact; 100% of all junked cars that find their way into a Scrap Processor plant DO “find their way into a steel furnace”.

This suggests a solution. Rather than subsidize the freighting of junked cars to the nearest seaport (freight alone: from $6 to $20 each), pay the auto graveFard owner for their movement into the nearest Scrap Processor yard. We'll see they reach a steel mill.

The low value for scrap is going to make transportation of the bulky auto by the major deterrent to orderly disposal for years to come. This then is the vital area that demands studied consideration. Sincerely,

LEO J. KELLEHER, National Director.

? The exhibit may be found in the appendix of this record.

(See p. 407.)



[ocr errors]


Los Angeles, Calif., June 13, 1966.
Public Works Committee,
New Senate Building,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE: On request of Solid Waste General Corporation of America, enclosed is a copy of an original draft of the information sheet for a proposal made to the City of Los Angeles by Adlen Brothers Auto Wrecking, a subsidiary of Solid Waste General Corporation of America.?

The information contained in said draft will be of help in your above-captioned hearings, currently being conducted.

The proposal itself has been lodged with the City of Los Angeles and a copy can be obtained from Dr. Piper, City Administrator, City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles City Hall, Los Angeles, California, or we can supply a copy of said proposal on your request.

We respectfully request that the information sheet be put into the congres-
sional record as part of your Committee's findings.
If we can be of any further help to you, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yo


Counsel for Solid Waste General Corp. of America.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]



Spokane, Wash., June 27, 1966.
Chairman, Public Works Committee,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR RANDOLPH: We oppose Senate bill 3400 amending the Solid
Waste Disposal Act of 1965, which would delegate regulatory authority to the
President. Control by Congress gives us a fairer and more enlightened con-
sideration of those matters pertaining to government regulation of our busi-

A regulatory board to include members of the auto wrecking industry and scrap metal dealers in proper proportions would be, in our opinion, superior to executive control.

We further protest blanket legislation that makes no distinction between auto wreckers dealing in salvaged used automobile parts and scrap or junk dealers. The former group are engaged in a business activity that is essential to the repair of used motor vehicles. Millions of additional automobiles would be sent to the scrap heap each year were it not for the less expensive used motors, transmissions, body sections and other parts, made available by this source. Without these, the costs of new replacements would be prohibitive and new and additional junk yards would flourish.

New methods of processing and utilizing scrap metal are being developed which will eventually solve this problem without government expense or regulations. Reference is made to the June 18, 1966, issue of Business Week which carried an article on this subject entitled “Better Diet for Oxygen Steelmakers."

It is our opinion that extinguishing all scrap from side trails and country roads is causing an excessive stress to be laid on aesthetics. History has shown that scrap reserves have been most helpful in times of national emergencies as experienced in the last two World Wars.

Junked vehicles may be unsightly but they are not a fire hazard or otherwise dangerous. They do not attract flies, rodents or other pests nor are they unsanitary. If they are screened or removed from our major interstate highways, beautification should be adequately served at least as a first step in this direction.

We respectfully submit that the present law is superior to that which is
being proposed by Senator Douglas in this amendment.
Very truly yours,


1 The exhibit submitted appears in the appendix to this record.

BILLINGS, MONT., June 16, 1966. Senator JENNINGS RANDOLPH, 1.8. Senate, Public Works Committee, Washington, D.C.:

As president of the Montana Dismantlers Association I urge you to kill Senate bill 3400 as it is a great blow to the auto wrecking industry and free enterprise in our great democracy. A bill like this should not be introduced until all those it will affect have had a say in the writing of the original bill.

ELDON PIPER, President.

U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.:
Hon. Jennings Randolph, Oregon Wreckers Association strongly opposes bill
S. 3400.


MISSOULA, MONT., June 15, 1966. Senator JENNINGS RANDOLPH, Washington, D.C.: We would like to protest on bill S. 3400.

A. & C. AUTO WRECKING. (Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned subject to call.)

« PreviousContinue »