It is my understanding that to date Federal authority has been invoked in eight interstate areas. Certainly the Federal Government has a particular responsibility, too, in the Nation's Capital. air. The Federal City, pollutionwise, should be a model city of clean I only wish, Mr. Chairman, that the State of California was making as rapid progress in controlling the pollution from the automobile as we have made in controlling pollution from stationary sources. Unfortunately, such is not the case. Although we are making progress, the truth of the matter is that we have to run as fast as we can to stand still. This is so because of our rapidly growing population, which is expected to double by the end of this century, and the increasing nun ber of autos. On May 27 the Air Pollution Control District of the County of Los Angeles issued its report to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles regarding the status of air pollution control in Los Angeles County and the prospects of success of the current control programs. Their conclusions were: (1) Current motor vehicle control programs will not achieve acceptable air quality in Los Angeles, in the next decade, and (2) control of motor vehicle emissions must be intensified and accelerated if Los Angeles County is to have acceptable air quality by 1980. Since it has been estimated that emission from the motor vehicles is responsible for about 80 percent of the Los Angeles problem, and a substantial contribution elsewhere, we must do better. In California, all 1966 and later model cars must meet California standards that limit the amount of hydrocarbons to 275 parts per million and carbon monoxide to 1.5 percent. Standards have been adopted to further reduce these exhaust emissions in the case of hydrocarbons from 275 parts per million to 180 parts per million, and carbon monoxide from 1.5 percent to 1 percent by 1970. This raises a very interesting question, Mr. Chairman. The question of Federal preemption. Since the Federal Government is in effect going to adopt the 1966 California standards as national standards on 1968 vehicles, the very serious question of whether the Federal Government's action will preempt the field and thus prevent California from enforcing more stringent standards established for 1970 is presented. It would be undesirable from a policy standpoint for the Federal Government to preempt the field. I feel certain such was not the intent of Congress in enacting the Clean Air Act, since primarily the responsibility for air pollution was recognized rightfully to belong to the States. For obviously the degree of control needed in one community will vary with the degree of control needed in another. I therefore believe the committee should clarify this point. Mr. Chairman, I would also urge that the automobile industry of this country give the problem of air pollution the top priority to which it is entitled. I feel very confident that the industry, if it focuses the skills and abilities of its personnel, will find solutions to the pollution problem. In any event, the industry should move and move quickly, for I can say that the public is demanding answers to the problem of air pollution. Also Mr. Chairman, I believe it imperative that the Federal, State, and local governments undertake educational programs designed to make the public aware of the air pollution problem. In this effort, I would hope that such voluntary groups as the tuberculosis association might join in such a campaign in view of the increasing statistical evidence showing some relationship between respiratory problems and pollution. Finally, although I understand, Mr. Chairman, this lies outside the jurisdiction of this committee, I believe the Federal Government should provide a tax incentive to private industry to anyone who acquires, constructs, or installs air pollution devices that have been certified. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I believe that the work of this subcommittee is as important as that carried on anywhere in the Congress. Indeed, if we are to pass only the benefits of our great civilization and unsurpassed technology to future generations without eliminating or at least controlling some of its undesirable byproducts, such as pollution, we may be cursed rather than praised. We in this country must learn to conserve our air and water resources, just as we learned to conserve other natural resources. We have already been given a glimpse of the folly of the failure to do otherwise. In closing, I again congratulate the chairman and my colleagues for their work in keeping the air pollution problem before our people and for their efforts in bringing S. 3112 before the subcommittee. I feel confident that the enactment of S. 3112, which establishes maintenance grants and increases the authorization by $9 million during fiscal year 1967, will help us to continue the battle against air pollution. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, this concludes the reading of Senator Murphy's statement. Senator MUSKIE. I take this opportunity to thank Senator Murphy. although he is not present, for his excellent statement. I particularly commend to the attention of the Secretary Senator Murphy's suggestions relative to the city of Washington. They are most appropriate and most pertinent. On the question of stricter State standards on automobiles than those of the Federal Government, I would say that it is the intent, of course, of the committee, and as indicated in last year's bill, that the whole country be given the benefit of any technology which is used in California to control the performance of the automobile. We would expect the Secretary to reflect in his legislation the advance of the technology which might be reflected in California regula tions. But, nevertheless, if there is a discrepancy which puts the Secretary in a bad light on this point then I think we ought to make sure that the lesser or lower Federal standards do not preempt the higher or more effective standards of any State, including California. So I think we will undertake to clarify both of those points. I think Senator Murphy has made a distinct contribution in raising this question at this point in the record. Mr. CARTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator MUSKIE. This concludes the scheduled hearings on air pollution legislation. We never foreclose the possibility that we may schedule others to further probe points that have been raised but we have no specific plans to do so at the present time. So, for the present time, the hearings are adjourned and the record will be kept open for a week to 10 days for any additional statements. Thank you all very much. I note that we have a number of communications and statements in the hands of the staff. I will order them and any subsequent statements placed in the record at this point. (The material placed in the record is as follows:) CONFERENCE OF STATE SANITARY ENGINEERS, Hon. EDMUND S. MUSKIE, Chairman, Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, Committee on Public Works, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MUSKIE:The Conference of State Sanitary Engineers sincerely appreciates the opportunity to present its views on the Federal Solid Wastes Program initiated under P.L. 89-272. We are extremely gratified with the prompt and effective initiation of the new Federal program by the Public Health Service, and in particular, the efforts to encourage and develop State programs to cope with this serious and growing problem. At the 41st Annual Meeting of the Conference of State Sanitary Engineers, action was taken to review the present authorizations, and resolutions were adopted which we believe should be considered when modification of the present Act is undertaken. Copies of these resolutions are enclosed for your consideration. Sincerely yours, MEREDITH H. THOMPSON, Eng. D., Chairman. RESOLUTION No. 1. SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT GRANTS Whereas, P.L. 89-272 provides funds for the development of State comprehensive plans for solid waste disposal, and Whereas, these grants will provide a nucleus of trained professional personnel capable of maintaining and carrying on statewide programs of solid waste disposal, and Whereas, the basic concept behind the development of comprehensive statewide plans is the establishment of a continuing, on-going program in solid waste management, and Whereas, the fiscal resources in many of the States are not adequate to support the costs of such a program, and Whereas, the problem has certain intrastate, interstate, and regional aspects: Therefore, be it Resolved, that the Conference of State Sanitary Engineers requests consideration by the Congress of amending the Solid Waste Disposal Act to provide for solid waste management grants to the States, regions, and communities on a matching basis which will permit funding and support of comprehensive programs of solid waste disposal: And be it further Resolved, that copies of this resolution be transmitted to the State and Territorial Health Officers, to the Surgeon General, Public Health Service, to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, and to the appropriate members of Congress. RESOLUTION No. 2. SOLID WASTE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT GRANTS Whereas, the Solid Waste Disposal Act provides authority for the awarding of grants to assist in the demonstration of new and improved solid waste disposal techniques and facilities, and Whereas, there is a genuine need for improvement in the technology of solid waste management, as well as application of proven effective waste management procedures: Therefore, be it Resolved, that the Conference of State Sanitary Engineers request the Congress to consider amending the Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize the awarding of demonstration project grants to encourage and support demonstrations of existing solid waste management procedures in geographical areas and under operating conditions in which such procedures have not previously been attempted, so as to add much-needed information which could promptly be applied to help meet the national solid waste management problem. FRANK P. WRIGHT & ASSOCIATES, Re comments on S. 3400. Senator EDMUND S. MUSKIE, New Senate Ožice Bulding, Washington, D.C. (Attention of Mr. Leon G. Eillings). GENTLEMEN: May I respectfully submit to you my observations on Bill S. 3:00, introunced by Senator Paul Douglas of Llinois. In the beginning, let me site that I su po't this bill, and my only criticism of it is that I do not believe that it is broad enough or strong enough, for, as I will state later, I think that we are on the verge of reaching full understanding of the problems of environmental contamination which may prove to be one of the most important advances of one the, 1a" overshadowing the more dramatic programs now sponso ed by the federal government. The magnitude of what our President and Senator Don Jas have proposed may not be fully appreciad in this decade, but it may well be an act that history will remember with gratitude. 3 I becare aware of this problem in the early days of World War II. when, as a member i do Ordnance Department in Binaingbem, Alaban a, I was asked to serve on the strap, metal collection cocamitice of that city. Being somewhat sensitive to air 16'lution, I was inpressed by the seemingly senseless waste of our invested natur:1 resources and the terrible pollution of Ce at:osphere, our strep s, and th and itself. After the war was over, I began to work to find out for my own bee fit if there was a reasonable ansy, or to these problems. Over Lese past twenty years, I have sent a small fortu, e ard thousands of hours of research work, bech my own and that of other engineers employed by me, on a bread base program for the climination of environmental contamination, and as an ezit eer, have been responsible for a number of advanced machines for the processing of scrap metal. Investave to eight years, o'r work has shown that environmental contamination, both air and water, is the result of a senseless waste of valuable raw materials that can be recycled at great profit back into the economy of our comtry. Of the total problem, the junked automobile is really a v inor part, and offers the simplest solution. The total problem includes the reuse of city garbage, industrial wastes and litter found alongside our nation's highways. To do this requires no great technological breakthrough, because the technology of how to do this exists today. It will require the support of the federal goverment to start the machinery turning and a firm supporting hand until sufficient momentum is gained for private industry to take over. To answer critics who might complain that this is just another government subsidy and that it interferes with private enterprise and establishes another unwanted bureau, let me remind them that all great economic changes since the beginning of time have been essentially subsidized by governments. I have heard no complaints about the fact that Christopher Columbus himself received a subsidy from a head of state. Nor do I hear people complaining that our aircraft industry and systems had their fledgling wings firmly sup ported by government subsidies in their infancy. For some reason, the terrible consequences of federal support of new ideas that were predicted when I was a young man in the mid 1930s do not seem to have materialized. I therefore urge that the committee consider that a new technology to recycle our invested resources will bring great and lasting benefit to our nation. To put such a program into effect will require from three to five percent of our total population. and will be the greatest single blow at poverty we can achieve by creating thou sands of new job opportunities. It will eliminate forever the city dump and the roadside junk yard, and the piles of refuse alongside our highways. By placing value on this refuse, the pressure of good, sound economics will cause it to disappear. After two decades, I have stopped using the word "waste", for the material itself is not waste. It is simply our inability to recognize its value to which the word "waste" really applies. I prefer to call this material invested resources, for, in effect, this is precisely what they are. These materials have had great quantities of other irreplaceable natural resources invested in them to produce a technical level of excellence as a material. The simple fact that the mechanical function has ceased does not in any way affect the quality of the material which is as fine as it was the day it emerged from the factory. The original cost of refining has already been borne by the consumer. This investment offers to our economy a subsidized raw material. Our great nation grew from the vast deposits of natural resources unmatched anywhere on earth. The great industries of our nation, to whom we owe a lasting debt, developed processes that sped the unrefined resources through the mills in a never ending stream to pour out on our land and into the world into the tens of thousands of items that contribute to our present civilization. However, American industry, particularly the American steel industry, made little provision in its overall scheme of its production facilities to reuse any of the material that it produced, once its mechanical life had ceased. There are two very significant reasons why this was not done. It is economically impractical for the large monolithic unidirectional mills to use two very dissimilar raw materials. Secondly, serap metal, particularly that of the automobile, becomes widely distributed by civilization, and is not found in the high concentrations as is ore. The problem of collecting this material becomes difficult logistically, and transportation costs, digging deeply into sale prices, eroded away profits on which the scrap industry must depend. Of course, in the case of the lighter body steels that we are concerned with, the problem was magnified. Efforts to overcome the disadvantages of the light material by the use of powerful baling pressos gave life to the industry for a short time. But the vital elements of life itself were missing from this industry, and it gradually died, leaving the problem we see today. The recycling of automobile steel did not break down; it simply never existed as an important industry. Again, this has nothing to do with the importance of this material to the foture of our country. Essentially, it is the finest raw material available anywhere in the world in commercial quantities. Properly prepared, it represents the greatest source of high purity iron in the world today. Latent within every junk yard in our nation is a partial solution to our frustrating problems of unemployment. We should consider the potential of ready world markets for new and specialized steels that are purchased on the basis of their properties rather than their prices, bringing relief to our balance of payments headache, and most important, giving this country the security of being able to be independent within its own borders by learning to recycle its invested resources. It is well worth noting here that a large percent of our better iron ore now comes from other countries where recent history teaches us that the rising wave of nationalism may induce these countries to profit from their own natural resources by converting them into finished goods within their own borders, thus diminishing a ready supply of raw materials to our country. This, of course, was what made our country great, and we may expect other countries will follow our example. The solution to the junked automobile problem, as well as the solution to other environmental contamination, depends upon the theory that markets must be developed to absorb them as raw material. These markets do not exist in our Country at this time as, of course, they did in both Germany and Japan during World War II. The ability to recycle their important resources enabled Germany and Japan to hold off half the world in World War II for a longer period of time than would otherwise have been possible. And I am sure that there are many people who remember vividly our own struggle to develop this technology for ourselves during this conflict. There is no great technological breakthrough necessary, however, to bring about markets for these materials, for latently, they do exist. This new industry will in no way be in competition with any existing industry in the United States today, but will simply augment our present industry, and expand our economy in the vacuum where most unemployment now exists. From a metallurgical standpoint, the new low frequency induction furnaces that will convert the very high quality irons in the automobile body directly into high quality, fine grain, fatigue resisting steels, are available in |