00087
OCLC06365822
-------
yf" .vfex,, , -f. , -::, r^
V ffff f V..^ f *• f J A
n proportion to the earth's sfee, the layer of sir '
whkfa surrounds CJUT globe is no tfaietai: than
the skm on an apple. A shallow crust oft the
surface, provides a limited supply o! Wtte
and other resources- This tiny envelope o| air
and this shallow crust of earth 3»d water art* the
• Mosj&ete—tfamt • • part of • oaf' • world • fiat • • supports
life, It is a closed system in which all things are
recycled and reused m support of the life process.
- Mao is, of course,, a part of this closed Ife-
$ystem and dependent on it for his survival. 01
all living things, however, he, alone, is capable
. of caaseiously...c;o«}per3tijtg,.»itll..Ba£Ke to...insOTB
•his survival and progress,
Since the Industrial Revolution, the accelerat-
iflg growth of science aad applied technology has
gives* "os laereased power and ne* tools to use
this planet as
..... Gar ' skill" and 'liipiftiiiy IS" tftMtpiiiMliflg 'the"
'BQvironmeot have produced tremendous benefits
to human life-. We have learned to control most
of the eoaijmiaieabfe diseases which once coor
troifcd us, to j»odi«» tamper crops where noth-
ing grew before, to produce energy, light, heat,
•••ami • consinflST' ooa^eawnces. ..wfeidb- 'Weu^. .fiftce-
beyond the resell of kings. We itsed our scientific
discoveries and our teolittolagieal wonders ftar the
purpose t?f enhaaeing life,, but in the process we
gave too little thought to the seeeM- at tMttf-
ortJer coa&equetiqes of our actions, We failed to
aflticipate . . the, fact . . that . e flwoanjeatol ^ ^ inodiiiea-^ >
have acecsnpilW' cw good iliten-
-------
• . ,
e. a gjo&al m la&nm-%®iH& 3tt$ tlmwing .tiinfs fway :l«srtw} of tepafeijig' of £
%& m& :fet$k$ct wy&> aad on tMe recydJag ffcesan, imping'oar wastes- into the Water "
s to fellow,; • . : and -A, m& ijarepfeceafclgi tesoirases.. It
lft#te has led tax. society to tfaft &«xmff?. ttw* nates instead of agwasi te, '
we:;aj?e dcsiiKaitkatt OH aid'part otsa eeo-syate^i • ^
chdt we did not invent sad must ttot'ttestaw/ ^ ^tere ^ a gea«catka of 'ted work tfbeai
^ , ' :, : Sach of w must raafce fefe o«a cootrfbottoa. But
. . Jim malizatioH fas fo^ed as to ask wmelves tie task wJU seem fes'^wig if we feette oft
' .very ftmdajuma!' qwesttesv Wh«e »0 o|j|>cj-fttmife ft* beitemunt *Meb'^resant fhem-
^.vWt-w.»t.'.ee0somi«j.'-»^'-wla--gife-wtk? ^^••feom-^-^-a^-I^-eoadjitt^-^feim-^
esa. we best use tfttf •»!»• $ur aatoial . iMreid«als3 M«strf» sad. :goveraments at al
resources? -flow-on we atJjttst our priorities to ki- tewts—tbough they m&j seem small wfett viewed
sure that ^W Mfill <» eaergy3 traasijQrtafiafi, « is0ia|i0o*~!d:an. mmfce an' 'jgaoraioag oo^ecti^e
eattos, jaid^ergoai consumjef .ueecls' feipact. A ttatiood ctatttBfitte^Jt ta»oMng each
kteasifytag eativimameMtal problems we 'Aimeriean,. will mot only lift tih£ veil of pototioti
dM: rot ^aatiE^r^te'^-dp act. wattt? = &<3a* ^ sMes. ^* ^«aftS6
-------
istory may well record that the beginning
of the decade of the seventies marked the
turning point in man's use and abuse of the
precious planet of which he is both ward and guar-
dian. Governments at all levels geared up for an at-
tack on environmental problems. Citi/ens from
every walk of life mobilized themselves to defend
the environment for themselves and their children.
Industries, great and small, began to embrace a
new view of corporate responsibility for protect-
ing the environment. International bodies began
planning in earnest for global control of global
pollution.
In our own country, the National Environmen-
tal Policy Act, signed into law on January 1,
1970, established a national policy to "maintain
conditions under which man and nature can
exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social,
economic, and other requirements of present and
future generations of Americans."
Under the new law, the President appointed
a Council on Environmetal Quality to coordinate
environmental matters at the federal level and
serve as his principal advisors in such matters.
All federal actions and proposals which could
have significant impact on the environment were
made subject to review by federal, state, and local
environmental authorities.
In 1970, by order of the President with the
consent of the Congress, federal programs dealing
with the environment were reorganized and
strengthened.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-
ministration was established in the Department of
Commerce and made responsible for research
on long-range effects of pollution on the physical
environment, especially global trends affecting
the oceans and the atmosphere.
The United States Environmental Protection
Agency, reporting directly to the President, was
charged with mounting an integrated, coordinated
attack on pollution, filling the need, in the Presi-
dent's words, for "a strong independent agency"
to serve as an objective, impartial arbiter of
environmental matters, particularly in establishing
and enforcing pollution control standards.
Federal anti-pollution laws were strengthened
and appropriations increased in 1970. Old pol-
lution control laws were being discovered, and new
laws were under development.
But, of course, public policy decisions affecting
the environment are not all made in Washington.
All over America change is taking place—change
that challenges the pessimistic view that man is
helpless to control the technological forces he has
set in motion, change growing out of a new
ecological perspective, translating a new environ-
mental ethic into environmental action.
More and more states and municipalities are
adopting environmental policies and programs
-------
which reflect a realistic understanding of ecologic
relationships and needs.
The concept of regional bodies to deal with
environmental matters that overlap existing juris-
dictional boundaries Is gaining acceptance and
effectiveness.
Industry, more and more, is demonstrating a
desire to overcome obstacles to pollution control
and to make a positive contribution to environ-
mental quality.
People all over the country are insisting that
we abandon the psychology of the blind bulldozer,
that we refrain from paving over the whole world,
that we stop polluting the air and the water and
the earth. They are taking their cases to the courts.
And their voices are being heard in corporate
board rooms and by government officials and
legislators at every level.
This last is the most important of all—the
commitment of citizens of all ages and from all
walks of life to environmental sanity. For the de-
cisions that are being made today, and that will
have to be made in the future, to preserve the
environment, are truly decisions for our whole
society.
The choice is ours. Americans are the privileged
members of the free institutions of the richest
country on earth. If we have the will, if we make
sensible choices, we can build the kind of world
we want—for ourselves and for those who will
come after us.
"The nineteen-seventies
absolutely must be
the years when America
pays its debt to the past
by reclaiming
the purity of its air,
its waters and
our living environment.
It is literally
now or never."
President Richard M. Nixon
January 1, 1970
-------
-------
' he United States Environmental Protection
Agency was established December 2, 1970,
bringing together for the first time in a single
agency the major environmental control programs
of the Federal government. EPA is charged with
mounting an integrated, coordinated attack on the
environmental problems of air and water pollu-
tion, solid wastes management, pesticides, radia-
tion, and noise.
To insure that the Agency is truly responsive
to environmental needs in every part of the coun-
try, it has established a strong field organization,
with Regional Offices located at ten major cities.
The Regional Offices are staffed by specialists in
each program area and headed by a Regional
Administrator possessing broad authority to act
for EPA in matters within his jurisdiction.
EPA's creation marked the end of the piece-
meal approach to our nation's environmental
problems which has, so often in the past, inhibited
progress—or merely substituted one form of pol-
lution for another.
EPA was created to lead a broad, compre-
hensive attack on pollution, and its administrative
organization has been designed to make this ap-
proach a reality. The new organizational struc-
ture makes it easier to identify, and to take into
account, all the factors bearing on pollution and
its control. It makes it possible to resolve com-
peting or conflicting program aims. It is facilitat-
ing the development of better information on the
total impact of stresses reaching man from various
parts of the environment, and makes possible
more sensible choices about what constitutes a
healthful, satisfying milieu for human life.
-------
Most important of all, perhaps, EPA gives to
the American people a single, independent, im-
partial agency to serve as their advocate for a
livable environment.
The United States Environmental Protection
Agency is, first and foremost, a regulatory agency,
with responsibilities for establishing and enforc-
ing environmental standards, within the limits of
its various statutory authorities.
Establishment of standards is central to the
whole pollution control effort, for it is in this way
that we define what each of us may and may not
do to the environment on which we all depend.
Whatever we do, however careful we may be,
we cannot avoid altering and being altered by the
world about us. We are required, moreover, as
was the first man, to use our human skills and
ingenuity to convert the resources of the earth into
the sustenance of human life.
The key, then, to sensible environmental con-
trol is to determine, within the limits of our
knowledge, what changes are tolerable or i useful
and which must be banned or limited as harmful.
The standards set by EPA (in some cases, in
cooperation with the States) have the force of
law. They define the kinds of levels of pollutants
which must be prevented from entering our air
and water, and establish time-tables for achieving
the prescribed quality. They set limits on radia-
tion emissions and pesticide residues. Enforce-
ment of environmental standards is, under certain
laws, shared with the States, the Federal govern-
ment acting only when the State fails to do so;
in other instances, the Federal government has
primary enforcement authority.
EPA is also a research body, monitoring and
analyzing the environment and conducting scien-
tific studies into the causes and effects of pollu-
tion, the techniques of pollution control, and the
environmental consequences of man's actions.
Effective action, particularly in standards-
setting and enforcement, requires that EPA have
sound data on what is being introduced into the
environment, its impact on ecological stability,
on human health, and on other factors important
to human life. By close coordination of its vari-
ous research programs, EPA strives to develop a
synthesis of knowledge from the biological, phys-
ical and social sciences which can be interpreted
in terms of total human and environmental needs.
Major aims of the Agency's research efforts at
this time include:
© Expansion and improvement of environmental
monitoring and surveillance to provide base-
lines of environmental quality.
® Advancement of understanding of long-term
exposures to contaminants, of sub-acute or de-
layed effects on human and other organisms,
of the combined and synergistic actions of
chemical, biological, and physical stresses.
-------
® Acceleration of progress in applied research
into the control of pollutants, the recycling of
so-called "wastes," and the development of
sophisticated, non-polluting production proc-
esses.
• Improved assessment of trends of technical
and social change and potential effects—first,
second, and even third-order effects—on envir-
onmental quality.
® Improved understanding of the transport of
materials through the environment; their passage
through the media of air, water, and land;
their ability to cross the various interfaces; and
their various changes of state that can make
them innocuous at one point and hazardous
at another.
In addition to performing research in its own
laboratories in various locations throughout the
country, EPA, through grants and contracts, sup-
ports the studies of scientists in universities and
other research institutions. The Agency also con-
solidates and evaluates information as it is devel-
oped throughout the scientific community to de-
velop the best possible scientific base for environ-
mental action.
teehniea! and financial assistance
EPA serves also as a catalyst for environ-
mental protection efforts at all levels of govern-
ment by providing technical and financial assist-
ance to state, regional, and local jurisdictions.
research facilities
EPA's research is carried out through
three National Environmental Research
Centers located at Cincinnati, Ohio; Re-
search Triangle Park, North Carolina; and
Corvallis, Oregon. In addition, EPA main-
tains the Western Environmental Research
Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada, for
extensive research in radiological health
and related safety programs.
The Centers direct and coordinate the
work of satellite laboratories in various
parts of the country.
The programs conducted at each Cen-
ter cover a wide range of problems in all
aspects of pollution and pollution control.
However, the Cincinnati Center gives
particular emphasis to pollution control
methods; the North Carolina Center to
the health effects of environmental fac-
tors; and the Corvallis Center- to eco-
logical effects.
Laboratory locations include:
Dauphin Island, Alabama
Montgomery, Alabama
College, Alaska
Gulf Breeze, Florida
Perrine, Florida
Athens, Georgia
Chamblee, Georgia
Rockville, Maryland
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Grosse He, Michigan
Duluth, Minnesota'
Las Vegas, Nevada
Ada, Oklahoma
Narragansett, Rhode Island
Bears Bluff, South Carolina
Gig Harbor, Washington
-------
EPA publishes and gives wide distribution to
its technical and scientific findings in all pro-
gram areas, to advance the total body of scien-
tific knowledge and hasten the application of new,
proven pollution-control techniques.
Its "Technology Transfer" program is spe-
cifically designed to bridge the gap between the
development and application of new techniques
to control pollution. Workshops and seminars are
held for state and local officials, design engineers,
industrial representatives, and the public to intro-
duce them to new, practicable control technology;
technical bulletins and design manuals are widely
disseminated.
Through EPA's ten Regional Offices, prompt
assistance is given to State and local authorities,
industries, and citizens in the solution of technical
problems.
In several program areas, Federal funds are
made available for the construction and operation
of facilities to reduce pollution and to demon-
strate new technology. Financial assistance is also
provided for state and local governments to aid
their environmental control programs.
EPA provides training both in its own exten-
sive training facilities and in universities and
other educational institutions, to help develop the
highly skilled manpower the Nation needs to
combat environmental problems. Technical train-
ing in control techniques and program manage-
ment is given to employees of state and local
governments, industry, and other organizations.
Support is given to universities for environmental
courses. Fellowships are available to qualified
students for advanced training.
citizens technology assessment
EPA also serves as a source of information to
the public. By widely disseminating scientific data
bearing on environmental problems, it tries to
bring to concerned Americans the facts on which
they, individually and in community, can make
sound, rational choices in environmental issues.
The decisions that shape the world we live in
are being made daily, by thousands of people, in
homes and factories, in town councils and zoning
boards, at the ballot box and in the shopping
center.
Each of us, every day, is making his own
"technology assessment." We may not always
make the correct choice between competing bene-
fits and costs, but we can, if we have the facts,
make a sensible choice.
the environment —a new ingredient
EPA is not, by any means, an environmental
czar. For one thing, it shares many of its enforce-
ment authorities with the States, in accordance
To ensure full consideration of environmental
factors in Federal decision-making, each Federal
agency is required to submit to the President's
Council on Environmental Quality an environmen-
tal impact statement on any proposal for legisla-
tion or other major action significantly affecting
the quality of the human environment. This must
include:
® the environmental impact of the proposed action,
8 any adverse environmental effects which cannot
be avoided should the proposal be implemented,
« alternatives to the proposed action,
• the relationship between local short-term uses
of man's environment and the maintenance and
enhancement of long-term productivity, and
8 any irreversible and irretrievable commitments
of resources which would be involved in the pro-
posed action should it be implemented.
Before filing with the Council, the statement
must be circulated in draft to EPA and other ap-
propriate federal, state, and local environmental
agencies for their comments. These must accom-
pany the final statement.
The final environmental impact statement, to-
gether with all comments, must be made available
to the Congress and the public by the originating
agency. Federal agencies must insure the fullest
practicable provision of timely public information
and understanding of the environmental impact of
federal plans and programs including, whenever
appropriate, public hearings.
EPA is specifically charged with making public
its written comments on environmental impact
statements and with publishing its determinations
when these hold that a proposal is unsatisfactory
from the standpoint of public health or welfare or
environmental quality.
The Council on Environmental Quality consid-
ers all the evidence and advises the President as
to the best course of action.
-------
with principles and procedures established by the
Congress in the legislation governing its activities.
Moreover, since "the environment," after all,
is practically everything, it follows that many
agencies of government conduct activities that
directly affect it. The Department of Transporta-
tion, for example, is concerned with highways,
railroads, and air transport. The Department of
Interior administers public lands and natural re-
sources. The Departments of Housing and Urban
Development; Agriculture; Health, Education, and
Welfare; Defense—all carry out activities that are
of the greatest importance in determining not
only the kind of life we live but also the kind of
world we live it in.
Under the National Environmental Policy Act,
all departments of government are required to
take into account the environmental impact of
proposed actions and these are subjected to care-
ful scrutiny before action can be undertaken.
Ou-r Nation has resolved to "maintain condi-
tions under which man and nature can exist in
productive harmony." The United States Environ-
mental Protection Agency has a key role to play
in carrying out that National policy.
EPA is determined to be an advocate for the
environment wherever it can, whenever it can,
as decisions about our Nation's future are being
made—whether it be in the councils of govern-
ment, in the boardrooms of industry, or in the
living rooms of our citizens.
-------
PV°
* * '"V
-------
In the United States air pollution is a problem
in all large cities and in many small towns.
Each year over 200 million tons of manmade
waste products are released into the air of the
United States. About half of this pollution is pro-
duced as a result of the transportation system,
coming chiefly from the internal-combustion
engine.
In terms of weight—which is not necessarily in
all cases the best indication of their importance—
according to 1969 estimates 51 percent of these
pollutants come from transportation sources, 16
percent from fuel combustion in stationary
sources, 15 percent from industrial processes, 4
percent from solid waste disposal practices and
14 percent from forest fires and other miscel-
laneous sources. The main classes of primary pol-
lutants include sulfur oxides, particulate matter,
carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and nitrogen
oxides. Numerous other noxious gases and harm-
ful particulates also are introduced into the at-
mosphere from a variety of specific activities.
Photochemical oxidants, a category of secondary
pollutants of extreme importance, are formed in
the atmosphere when, under the influence of sun-
light, nitrogen oxides combine with gaseous
hydrocarbons.
At levels commonly found in urban areas, air
pollution contributes to the incidence of such
chronic ailments as emphysema, bronchitis, and
asthma; diseases which have increased dramatical-
ly in recent decades.
Moreover, chemical and radiological sub-
stances produced by modern technology may
threaten our health and the health of future gen-
erations in ways that we are far from fully under-
standing. Scientists are now beginning to give at-
tention to such matters as the capacity of chem-
ical agents in the atmosphere to produce _muta-
genic effects in biological systems, the metabolism
of absorbed pollutants, the ways in which pol-
lutants may alter the normal biochemistry of cells,
affect the hormonal system, and alter the general
functions of body activity.
The adverse economic effects of air pollution
are much more varied and substantial than is
generally realized. They range from the waste of
fuel and other valuable resources, through the
soiling and corrosion of physical structures of all
kinds, to damage to agriculture and forests. More-
over, by reducing visibility, air pollution con-
tributes to the toll of accidents in both air and
ground travel.
Within the last decade we have begun to un-
derstand that air pollution is a complex phe-
nomenon of global significance. It Involves gas-
eous as well as particulate contaminants; both
can sometimes be altered and rendered more
hazardous through interreactions which occur in
the atmosphere under the influence of sunlight,
moisture and other environmental factors.
The first Federal program on air pollution was
developed in 1955 when the Public Health Serv-
ice conducted a modest air pollution research
program and offered technical assistance to state
and local governments, which traditionally have
had primary responsibility for dealing with com-
munity air pollution problems.
In 1963 Congress passed the landmark Clean
Air Act. This law authorized financial assistance
to state and local governments for the initiation
and improvement of control programs, federal-
11
-------
interstate abatement actions, and the publication
of criteria describing the effects of pollution. The
law placed special emphasis on gaseous pollu-
tants, particularly exhaust emissions from motor
vehicles, and sulfur oxides from stationary sources.
In 1965, amendments to the Clean Air Act
gave the federal program authority to curb motor
vehicle emissions. Federal standards were first
applied to 1968 model motor vehicles.
The Air Quality Act of 1967 called for a new
and more comprehensive approach to the prob-
lem. It required the designation of air quality
regions on the basis of meterologic and urban
factors, and the publication of criteria documents
(describing the effects of pollutants) accompanied
by related documents on the types and costs of
techniques available to carry out source control.
Armed with these data, Governors were required
to establish air quality standards and implemen-
tation plans for regions designated. The work ac-
complished under the 1967 legislation paved the
way for enactment of the Clean Air Act Amend-
ments of 1970 which were signed into law on
December 31, 1970.
Under the provisions of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1970:
» EPA established in 1971 national ambient
air quality standards specifying the maximum
levels to be permitted in the ambient air of the six
principal and most widespread classes of air pol-
lutants: paniculate matter, sulfur oxides, hydro-
carbons, carbon monoxide, photochemical oxi-
dants, and nitrogen oxides. These comprise pri-
mary standards, required to protect the public
health, and secondary standards (requiring fur-
ther reductions in particulates and sulfur oxides),
12
to prevent the many other undesirable effects of
pollution.
» States must carry out approved implemen-
tation plans for limiting the emission of pollutants
so as to achieve the primary standards by mid-
1975 and to achieve the secondary standards
within a reasonable period of time. If any State
should fail to develop or carry out such plans,
EPA is authorized to do so.
® EPA establishes and enforces performance
standards (emission standards) limiting emissions
from new or modified stationary sources of pol-
lutants. The first such performance standards is-
sued cover large steam-electric generating plants,
municipal incinerators, cement factories, and sul-
furic and nitric acid plants.
® EPA establishes and enforces Federal emis-
sion standards for pollutants that, while not
necessarily widespread, are exceptionally hazard-
ous to human health. Standards limiting emissions
of beryllium, mercury, and asbestos are being
promulgated in 1971.
® EPA establishes and enforces emission stand-
ards for new motor vehicles. Standards have been
promulgated requiring a reduction of 90 per-
cent in hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide
emitted by 1975 models as compared with the
1970 requirements, and a 90 percent reduction in
oxides of nitrogen by 1976.
• EPA may regulate or prohibit the manufac-
ture or sale of fuels or fuel additives that result
in harmful emissions or interfere with motor
vehicle pollution control devices. The first such
regulations will cover alkyl lead.
• Research is being stepped up and incentives
are provided to encourage the early development
of low-polluting motor vehicle propulsion sys-
tems, including government purchase and use of
vehicles employing such systems.
® EPA is investigating the effects and control
of aircraft emissions, and will publish, in Sep-
tember 1971, emission standards for aircraft, to
be enforced by the Secretary of Transportation.
® Citizens are specifically authorized to take
civil court action against private or governmental
officials failing to carry out the provisions of the
law. Public hearings are required at various steps
in the standards-setting, enforcement, and regula-
tory procedures to enable all interested persons
to make their feelings known.
® EPA conducts extensive research into all
aspects of air pollution, both in its own labora-
tories and through grants and contracts. It con-
structs and operates demonstration plants or
processes, or financially assists such projects.
® Financial grants are made to state, inter-
state, and local agencies to aid their air pollution
control programs.
-------
r ff f : v
% '•• fff <,** "•''
'i>'?&%&^'^ "'
-------
, ur streams and rivers, our fresh water lakes,
our salty bays and estuaries—these life-
giving waters are among America's most
precious natural endowments.
Yet today, many of our waters are grossly
polluted by a staggering load of waste materials
from farm, factory, and home, and there is scarcely
a stream that does not bear some mark of man's
abuse. The list of "most polluted" rivers spans
the continent.
Certain pollutants, such as the phosphates,
provide an excess of nutrients which disturb the
ecological balance of our lakes and, by stimulat-
ing plant growth, greatly accelerate the otherwise
slow, natural aging process. Lake Erie—not dead
but surely dying—is an outstanding example of
this "eutrophication" process.
Contamination of our coastal waters prevents
the harvesting of fish and shellfish in many areas.
Dredging and filling operations threaten the estu-
arine waters that nurture aquatic life. Oil fouls
our beaches and destroys fish and sea birds.
The ocean depths themselves are showing the
effects; and far from the sources of pollution,
polar bears and penguins carry DDT in their
fatty tissues.
Even water far below the ground—the precious
moisture that serves so many municipal drinking
systems—faces pollution danger from poisonous
wastes pumped into the earth.
The pollutants which clog America's waters
are a mixed brew, and come from millions of
sources:
® More than 1,300 communities still discharge
their sewage into the waterways without any treat-
ment whatever. An equal number employ only
primary treatment, removing 30 to 40 percent of
some pollutants. The waste flows from municipal
systems are expected to increase by nearly four
times over the next 50 years.
« Approximately 240,000 water-using indus-
trial plants generate the largest volume and the
most toxic of pollutants. The volume is growing.
& Oil spills from vessels and offshore drilling
have produced tragic destruction along ocean
beaches, while less spectacular spills, totaling
thousands of barrels of oil, occur almost daily in
waters across the nation.
Other important sources:
® Animal wastes from feedlots, fertilizer and
pesticide runoff from fields and forests.
® Irrigation return-flows bearing fertilizer, pes-
ticides and salts leached from the soil.
® Acid and sediment drainage from mining op-
erations.
® Heated water, discharged principally by the
electric power industry, which threatens aquatic
life.
Federal clean water efforts were first launched
in 1948 on a trial basis, and a permanent pro-
gram established with passage of the Federal
Water Pollution Control AcC in 1956. By the
late 1960's a broad program based on federal/
state cooperation in establishing and enforcing
water quality standards, river basin planning, and
federal grants for construction of waste treatment
facilities was in operation.
An important new mechanism for achieving
clean water was provided when a Federal court
decision in 1966 held that the Refuse Act of 1899
(previously applied only to debris that might ob-
struct navigation) outlaws industrial discharges
14
-------
>«l
>•& "'• I •*" 1 ^»- • * i 4
stet^
i. sfe
c ™:
¥P
-------
of pollutants into navigable waters or their tribu-
taries without a permit. Today, the provisions of
this act are being increasingly invoked against
polluters.
The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970
included important new authorities to .fight pollu-
tion, and today a massive effort has been launched
to restore America's waters.
Major features of the current Federal Program
are:
» Under the Water Quality Act of 1965, each
of the States, and the District of Columbia, Guam,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, have been
in the process of establishing water quality stand-
ards for all interstate and coastal waters. These
must be fully approved by EPA by January 1,
1972. The standards specify stream use classifica-
tion (recreation, fish and wildlife propagation,
public water supplies, industrial and agricultural
uses); the quality of water required to support
these uses; and complete plans for achieving and
enforcing the desired levels of quality.
Over 90 percent of all interstate waters have
been classified for either recreation or fish and
wildlife propagation uses, which require high
quality water.
enforcement
® States have first responsibility for enforcing
the water quality standards. However, if the
standards are violated, EPA may enforce them
through procedures provided by the Water Qual-
ity Act or by initiating civil or criminal action
under the Refuse Act.
One of the EPA Administrator's first official
acts was to issue violation notices to three major
cities placing them on notice that corrective ac-
tion must be taken within 180 days to avoid
prosecution; by the end of the 180-day period,
agreement had been reached for joint federal-
state-local construction of the needed treatment
plants. In the Agency's first eight months, 47 such
notices were issued to municipal or industrial
polluters. These included 32 municipalities which
discharge sewage into Lake Erie.
In several instances, EPA has initiated enforce-
ment by convening a conference of federal and
state officials, a procedure which is followed by
a public hearing and court action against the
violator if required. Of major importance are new
conferences called to enforce standards covering
the interstate waters of Long Island Sound in
Connecticut and New York, of Galveston Bay
and its tributaries in Texas, of western South-
Dakota, and of Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Confer-
ences concluded on Lake Michigan and Lake
Superior resulted in major EPA actions to abate
pollution.
As of mid-1971, more than 50 civil or criminal
actions had been brought against industrial dis-
chargers by the U.S. Department of Justice under
the Refuse Act provisions. Fourteen civil suits
had been concluded favorably by court-approved
settlements. In civil actions against ten discharg-
ers of mercury, a prompt reduction of total dis-
chargers from 139 pounds to 2 pounds daily was
brought about, with final disposition of the cases
depending on EPA approval of plans for further
reduction; in one case only, the discharging plant
was shut down. Criminal prosecutions have gen-
erally resulted in convictions and assessment of
fines; in one case, a violator was fined $125,000.
-------
the refuse act permit program
By Presidential Order, a new permit program
has been established under the provisions of the
Refuse Act of 1899. Effective July 1, 1971, a
permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
is required for the discharge of any industrial
waste into navigable waters or their tributaries.
If, in the judgment of EPA, a discharge violates
water quality standards, no permit can be issued.
Violators are liable to swift Federal enforcement
procedures.
construction of treatment facilities
EPA makes available federal funds to aid the
construction of new or improved municipal sew-
age treatment plants. From the inception of the
federal grant program in 1957 through July 1971,
nearly $3 billion had been provided for over
12,000 projects. During the last half of 1971,
the level of funding rose to $2 billion annually.
By the end of 1974, EPA expects to have pro-
jects funded and underway that will provide secon-
dary treatment for almost all municipal waste
water.
oil spills
The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970
prohibits the discharge of harmful quantities of
oil into or upon the navigable waters of the
United States or their shores. It applies to on-
shore and offshore facilities, as well as to vessels.
The owner or operator is liable for cleanup costs
and heavy penalties for knowingly discharging
oil in harmful quantities.
EPA cooperates with the Coast Guard and
other federal agencies in administering this Act
and plays a primary role in implementing the
National Contingency Plan for the' removal of oil
spills.
The 1970 legislation gave EPA authority to set
performance standards, which will be enforced by
the Coast Guard, for marine sanitation devices.
Proposed standards were published in May 1971,
requiring the equivalent of secondary treatment
for vessel discharges. After all comments are con-
sidered, final standards are to be promulgated.
water hygiene
EPA establishes recommended health stand-
ards for municipal drinking water supplies, and
waters used for recreation and shellfish-growing.
These are generally used by States for assessing
and improving the quality of water supplies with-
in their boundaries. EPA may ban the use of
unsafe water supplies on interstate carriers.
EPA supports research and demonstration
projects, looking toward better means of control-
ling all forms of water pollution, with particular
emphasis on finding improved ways to help muni-
cipalities and industry do the job.
other activities
EPA encourages effective river basin planning
that takes into account all factors affecting water
quality, provides expert technical assistance on
difficult pollution problems, supports the train-
ing of much needed manpower in all aspects of
pollution control, and gives financial and other
assistance to States to help them strengthen their
own control programs.
-------
hile accounting for only 7 percent of the
world's population, Americans consume
nearly half of the earth's industrial raw
materials. Not surprisingly, the way of life that re-
quires such large amounts of natural resources also
produces enormous amounts of wastes in the solid
state. But until recently, Americans were not great-
ly concerned with environmental problems associ-
ated with the collection and disposal of trash,
garbage, or other solid wastes. In a vast country,
with low population density and seemingly un-
limited natural resources, the most convenient
disposal method—usually an open dump—seemed
adequate. There appeared no reason to reuse
wastes since virgin materials were abundant and
often cheaper than reclaimed materials.
Today, however, this view has been replaced
by a genuine concern, not only for improved dis-
posal methods but for the recovery and reuse of
the valuable and often irreplaceable resources that
form a large part of the discards of this high-
production, high-consumption society.
The solid wastes produced in the United States
now total 4.3 billion tons a year. Of this, 360
million tons are household, municipal, and indus-
trial wastes. In addition there are 2.3 billion tons
of agricultural wastes and 1.7 billion tons of
mineral wastes.
Of this annual total 190 million tons, or 5.3
pounds per person per day, are picked up by some
collection agency and hauled away for disposal
—at a cost of over $4.5 billion per year.
Most present disposal methods pollute either
land, air, or water. Three-fourths of the dumps
contribute to air pollution and half of them are
so situated that their drainage aggravates pollution
of rivers and streams. Almost all municipal in-
cinerators are obsolescent in terms of today's
needs and technology.
A national survey has revealed that less than
6 percent of 12,000 land disposal sites meet the
minimum federal standards for sanitary landfills;
and all over the country, cities, unable to find
convenient space for land disposal, are desperately
seeking new sites—even distant sites—-to which
they can haul trainloads of municipal wastes. In
the cities, all too frequently, inadequate collection
results in waste accumulations that breed disease,
rats and .accidents.
By 1980, it is expected that waste collection
will mount to over 340 millions tons per year,
or 8 pounds per person per day. It is estimated,
in fact, that our solid waste load is presently in-
creasing at twice the rate of the population
increase.
Americans see the effect of the present solid
waste load everywhere: in smoking dumps that
ring their cities and add to the pollution of their
air; in the foul-smelling barges that make their
way out to sea to dump their cargoes of sludge;
in the overflowing garbage cans that line their
sidewalks or alleys; in the acres of junked car
graveyards that mar their countryside.
The annual "throwaway" includes 48 billion
cans, 26 billion bottles and jars, 4 million tons of
plastic, 7.6 million television sets, 7 million cars
and trucks and 30 million tons of paper. The
problems of disposal have been aggravated by
widespread and increasing use of packaging, dis-
posable containers, and other convenience ma-
terials that do not burn or decay.
-------
But the environmental pollution, the scenic
blight, the waste disposal difficulties are only part
of the total problem. The vast quantities of non-
renewable resources, such as ferrous metals,
which are permanently lost in the solid waste
stream, present a growing and unnecessary eco-
nomic and resource drain.
Today, a new concept of solid waste manage-
ment is evolving; it assumes that man can devise
a social-technological system that will wisely con-
trol the quantity and characteristics of wastes,
efficiently collect those that must be removed, cre-
atively recycle those that can be reused, and
properly dispose of those that have no further
use.
The Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965 marked
the first significant interest by the federal gov-
ernment in management of solid wastes. The act
provided for assistance to state and local govern-
ments, and others involved in managing solid
wastes, by financial grants to demonstrate new
technology, technical assistance through research
and training and by encouragement of proper
planning for state and local solid waste manage-
ment programs.
The Resource Recovery Act of 1970 amended
the legislation to provide a new focus on recy-
cling and recovery of valuable waste materials.
Under current legislation, EPA:
® Performs research to find improved methods
in all aspects of solid waste management and pro-
vides technical assistance to speed the applica-
tion of new knowledge.
Special emphasis is given to studies to deter-
mine means of recovering materials and energy
from solid waste; methods of accelerating the
reclamation of such materials (by economic in-
centives and disincentives, subsidies, depletion
allowances, federal procurement to develop mar-
ket demand, etc.); and the feasibility of reducing
the amount of solid wastes by changes in product
characteristics, production or packaging practices.
® Makes financial grants for the construction
and operation of plants or processes for demon-
strating new technology.
In the city of Franklin, Ohio, for example, an.
advanced system for recovery of municipal wastes
is being demonstrated. It features a hydropulper,
by which solid wastes are processed into slurry
form. Heavy materials are ejected and ferrous
metals removed for salvage by an electromagnet.
Paper fiber is recovered for reuse. An additional
step planned involves extraction of glass, with
separation into various colors by an optical sort-
ing device. The residue has a relatively high per-
centage of aluminum, which also may be re-
claimed.
® Is developing a comprehensive plan for a
system of national disposal sites for storage and
disposal of hazardous wastes.
Q Provides financial assistance to state and
local governments and interstate agencies for the
development of resource recovery and solid waste
disposal systems and for solid waste manage-
ment planning. By 1971, 50 state or interstate
agencies have used this assistance for developing
statewide or regional plans for managing solid
wastes.
» Provides training to develop the highly skilled
engineers and technicians needed to design, oper-
ate, and maintain complex new regional systems.
19
-------
!
hroughout his history, man has been exposed
to cosmic and other naturally-occurring ra-
diation. This natural background radiation
still constitutes about 55 percent of the total radia-
tion dose reaching the average American each year.
The remainder comes from a variety of man-made
radiation sources, including x-rays, the operating
of nuclear power plants, and electronic devices
in the home and workplace.
The potential benefits of successful application
of nuclear and electro-magnetic technology are
tremendous. However, since radiation can cause
cancer or other injury to the body, and since the
degree of risk is assumed to vary in direct pro-
portion to the level of exposure, society has a
responsibility to keep man-made exposures as
low as possible.
Radiation generally classed as '"environmental"
is only a part of the problem. Levels far higher
than are present in the environment today reach
increasing numbers of people from "non-environ-
rnetal" sources. Medical uses of radiation, for
example, now represent about 94 percent of all
exposure to man-made radiation, or roughly 40
percent of all radiation sources to which the
average person is exposed. Moreover, the last
few years have brought increasing application of
radiation in research and industrial processing as
well as a phenomenal growth in the use of radia-
tion-generating electronic products in the home
and workplace.
As a source of environmental radiation, the use
of nuclear energy to generate electric power has
become an increasing focus of concern. Some 20
nuclear power plants are now in operation in the
United States, and about 450 are expected to be
in use by the year 1990. Small amounts of radia-
tion are released into the environment from these
reactors and from fuel reprocessing plants. These
emissions constitute only about .003 percent of
all man-made radiation to which even those per-
sons living near the plants are exposed. However,
since any increase in radiation is believed to be
accompanied by increased risk, even low-level
exposures cannot be ignored.
The possibility of accidental release of large
amounts of radioactivity from nuclear reactors
also cannot be dismissed, even though safety has
been stressed since the very inception of the
nuclear power industry to make this possibility ex-
tremely remote.
The disposal of radioactive wastes from nuclear
power generation and fuel reprocessing is a prob-
lem which may be expected to increase with the
growth of the nuclear industry. At present, such
wastes are buried or stored at carefully selected
sites and a close watch is maintained to assure
that leakage does not occur. About two million
cubic feet of solid wastes of low-level radioactiv-
ity are interred in authorized burial grounds.
Some 80 million gallons of stored high-level liquid
wastes are in the process of being solidified
through newly developed technology which will
reduce their volume to one-tenth of the liquid
form.
Fallout from weapons-testing prior to the 1963
atmospheric nuclear test ban treaty currently con-
tributes about 3 percent of the man-made radia-
tion to which Americans are exposed.
20
-------
Health effects which may result from exposure
to relatively large doses of ionizing radiation are
well known: leukemia and other types of cancer,
reduction in fertility, cataracts and other eye
damage, acceleration of the aging process, and
damage to reproductive cells. There is little under-
standing, however, of the long-term effects from
repeated exposure to all forms of radiation at
. low-levels. A major potential hazard is damage
to, or alteration of, human genes, since natural
background radiation is believed to be one of the
causes of natural mutation. It must be recognized,
therefore, that the protracted release of even very
low levels of long-lasting radioactivity from an
increasing number of man-made sources has im-
plications for human health which science has
barely begun to explore.
The hazards associated with radiation, unlike
those of other environmental pollutants, were
dramatically illustrated long before widespread
commercial application of radiation-producing
technology took place." Strict governmental con-
trols were imposed early, therefore, and the
formal procedures and scientific bases for estab-
lishing and enforcing standards for protection
against ionizing radiation have been the most
comprehensive of any applied to environmental
stresses. Even so, recent federal actions have been
aimed at making doubly sure that the utmost pre-
cautions are observed:
» Under the reorganization plan establishing
the United States Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA assumed federal authority to set
generally applicable environmental radiation
standards. The Atomic Energy Commision (AEC)
retains authority to Implement and enforce EPA
standards In the regulation of radioactive ma-
terials and nuclear facilities.
« When EPA was established a comprehensive
review of existing radiation standards was under-
way to determine their adequacy. EPA, In coop-
eration with the U.S. Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare, the Atomic Energy Com-
mission and other Federal agencies, has continued
the review, and it is scheduled for completion In
1972.
® Radioactive emissions from nuclear power
reactors have constituted only a small fraction
of the limits permitted under the radiation con-
trol standards which, as mentioned, are currently
being reviewed. In 1971, in order to hold such
emissions to the "lowest practicable levels," the
AEC proposed new design and operating guide-
lines aimed at limiting emissions to 1/100th of
the levels permitted under the standards.
e Under the provisions of the National En-
vironmental Policy Act, EPA reviews all pro-
posals of the Atomic Energy Commission which
involve the siting, construction, and operation of
nuclear facilities.
s EPA conducts research on the health impact
of radiation from all sources, and monitors
radiation in the environment.
Federal authorities have developed and have in
partial operation an improved state-federal-indus-
try system for monitoring environmental radiation
sources to provide improved surveillance capabil-
ity as the nuclear power Industry expands.
21
-------
se of chemicals to control pests has long
been practiced in the United States. Dec-
ades ago, insects causing harm to agricul-
tural crops were dusted with arsenical compounds
or sulphurs, and insects that carried human disease
or were regarded as nuisances were fought with
sprays of light oils and pyrethrins.
Subsequently, synthetic, organic compounds
were developed that effectively killed many insect
pests long after the time of application. Other
chemicals—the herbicides—regulated the growth
of broadleaf plants, still others controlled fungus
of many types.
Over the years, several hundred basic chemicals
have been created and marketed In thousands of
formulations to control unwanted insects, plants,
fungus growth, soil nematodes, small mammals,
and other pests. Not only were agricultural lands
treated but homes, gardens, and turf were also
covered liberally. The total tonnage of all liquids,
granules, and powders rose to the hundreds of
thousands and thousands of uses were devised.
The benefits, in terms of increased food pro-
duction and the control of such killing diseases
as malaria and encephalitis all over the world-
were real and apparent. However, knowledge of
the possible side effects of such chemicals enter-
Ing the environment came more slowly. ,
By 1944, research had shown that the first
chlorinated hydrocarbon compounds such as DDT
must be classed as killers of fish. By 1948, their
ability to accumulate In fatty tissues became ap-
parent.
It is now known that some of the more per-
sistent compounds are present in the tissues of
birds, fish, and other wildlife and man as well.
A concentrating effect takes place as one species
feeds on another and passes the pesticide from
one link to another in the food chain. Hence, cer-
tain predator birds, fish, or animals may accumu-
late levels several thousand times the concen-
tration In their environment.
Mae, of course, is at the top of this food chain,
and the average American now carries about 12
parts per million of DDT in his fatty tissues.
There Is no direct evidence that this concentration
has a harmful effect on humans. However, there
is evidence that concentrated pesticide residues
have adverse effects on reproduction, physiology,
and behavior in some birds and may threaten the
survival of certain desirable species of wildlife.
The oceans are a final accumulation site for
many of the persistent chlorinated hydrocarbons.
One quarter of the world's entire production of
DDT may have been transferred to the sea by
now, according to some estimates. Some of its
effects on the marine environment have been
demonstrated. Marine fish are almost universally
contaminated with residues of the persistent pesti-
cides, and declining production of shrimp, crabs,
and oysters in certain areas is believed to be di-
rectly traceable to pesticide contamination.
Newer types of chemical families include the
organophosphates and carbamates. Less persistent
but more toxic, these have been responsible for
accidental kills of both wildlife and humans. Mis-
use of various pesticides Is Implicated in up to
200 human deaths per year and thousands of
cases of severe illness.
Ironically, by relying too heavily for pest con-
trol on the strategy of chemical extermination,
we may well have played Into the hands of the
insect enemy itself, with its tremendous capacity
for adaptation and survival. More and more in-
sect species. Including some of those that carry
human disease, have developed immunity to the
pesticides which had kept them under control.
They are thriving again, impervious to such
chemical treatment. The answer to our present
dilemma will not be found solely In the develop-
ment of safer more selective chemical formula-
tions, although this Is important. It requires, as
well, the development of alternative strategies for
disease control and crop protection.
Perhaps no environmental problem illustrates
more clearly than this one the complex Infrac-
tions that take place throughout the ecosystem,
and the caution that must be exercised to be sure
that beneficial changes made by man in one part
of the system do not create serious damage In
another.
22
-------
The United States Environmental Protection
Agency now exercises the principal regulatory
and research functions of the federal government
over pesticides under authorities contained in the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act of 1947, as amended; Section 403(d) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as
amended; and other laws.
In brief, the salient points of the Federal pro-
gram are:
® Manufacturers must apply to EPA for regis-
tration of any insecticide herbicide, fungicide, or
similar economic poison that will move in inter-
state commerce. Such chemicals cannot be ap-
proved for sale unless the maker provides scien-
tific evidence that his product is effective for the
purpose intended and will not injure human
beings, livestock, crops, or wildlife when used as
directed. Labelling must show the types and
amounts of ingredients, method of application,
and precautions to be observed.
EPA continuously reviews registered chemicals
in light of developing scientific data to insure
continued compliance with requirements for safety
and efficacy. EPA inspectors collect samples for
laboratory analysis. Field checks are performed
periodically to confirm the effectiveness of the
compound. Pharmacological tests are made to in-
sure that safety precautions shown on the label
are adequate.
* EPA may immediately suspend the registra-
tion of any pesticide product, thus effectively ter-
minating any further interstate shipments if such
action is found to be necessary to prevent "immi-
nent hazard to the public."
® Where "imminent hazard" does not exist,
EPA may commence action to terminate a regis-
tration by issuing a notice of cancellation to be-
come effective after 30 days. If the cancellation is
challenged, extensive review procedures are re-
quired. During this period the product registration
remains valid and interstate marketing may
continue.
Cancellations and suspension covering certain
uses of DDT, aldrin, dieldrin, and the herbicide
2,4,5-T, initiated by the Secretary of Agriculture
prior to the establishment of EPA are now final.
Notices of cancellation covering remaining uses
of these chemicals—as well as of mirex, a com-
pound used to control the fire ant—have been
issued and the review procedures initiated. Final
determinations with regard to continued use of
these products may be expected early in 1972.
EPA is also carrying out within the Agency,
intensive review of registrations of products, con-
taining benzene hexachloride, lindane, chlordane,
endrin, heptachlor, and toxaphene, among others,
as well as all products containing mercury,
arsenic, or lead.
« EPA establishes for each registered pesticide
a "safe tolerance"—that is, the amount of residue
that may be safely permitted on raw food crops—
to protect the public health. The Food and Drag
Administration, Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, enforces these tolerances for
foods in interstate commerce by regular inspec-
tions, and seizure or recall of shipments exceed-
ing the established limits and prosecution of
offenders.
• EPA conducts extensive research on all
aspects of pesticides in the environment. At its
Primate Research Facility, in Perrine, Florida, it
seeks to determine more precisely the effects of
pesticides on man. Various community studies are
designed to provide a picture of total human
exposure to such chemicals and their effects on
human health. Studies of the effects on fish and
wildlife are carried out, particularly at the Gulf
Breeze Laboratory in Florida. Monitoring of soil,
air, and water provides knowledge of the levels
and pathways of pesticide contamination.
technical assistance
® Technical assistance is given to State agen-
cies to strengthen their pesticide control programs.
23
-------
In the United States, we are beginning to realize
that man should not tolerate indefinitely the
increasing noise that presently characterizes
the modern, industrialized nation. Mechanically-
generated noise—from the jet plane, the power
mower, the diesel truck, the motorcycle, the jack-
hammer—is a profound annoyance to most peo-
ple. It has increased dramatically in volume in the
last 30 years and continues to rise in urban areas
at a rate estimated at one decibel per annum.
It has been clearly demonstrated that workers
in certain occupations suffer noise-induced hear-
ing loss. The effects of community noise on hear-
ing are not yet known. However some 20 percent
of the United States population, in addition to
those exposed to excessive occupational noise,
suffer measurable hearing impairment by their
fifties, whereas people in non-industrial societies
experience no such loss.
Hearing loss is not the only potential health
problem associated with noise. Evidence is grow-
ing that intense noise may affect other psychologic
and physiologic functions of man.
We have tended in the past to accept noise
as a phenomenon essentially beyond control. As
a result, we have failed to take full advantage of
the many noise suppression techniques that are
available.
The technology to curb noise from construc-
tion equipment, railroad equipment, cars, trucks,
and buses exists today. Much can be done to re-
duce noise associated with aircraft. Auto tires can
be made with non-squeal treads. Silence can be
designed into machinery for the home, office and
factory at reasonable cost. And there is no
mystery about constructing sound-proof buildings
of all kinds.
In accordance with the Noise Abatement and
Control Act of 1970:
® EPA has set up an office of Noise Abate-
ment and Control to evaluate health hazards to
the extent possible, summarize the state-of-the-
art in noise suppression technology, and recom-
mend a program of counter-measures to Congress
not later than December 31, 1971.
• Public hearings have been held in various
parts of the country to determine the extent of the
problem and identify required control measures.
Photos by: Elliott Erwitt, Magnum, cover; Nelson
Morris, Photo Researchers, inside front coyer;
Katrina Thomas, 3; EPA, 4, top; Robert McBride,
4, right; Peggy Miller, Fix, 4, left; Thomas E.
Evans, Fhoto Researchers, 4, lower right; J. Alex
Langley, 4, center; National Bureau of Stand-
ards, 4, lower center; Burk Uzv.le, Magnum, 5;
Robert McBride, 6; Tom McHugh, Fhoto Re-
searchers, 7; Burt Glinn, Magnum, 9; Susan Mc-
Cartney, Fhoto Researchers, 10; Russ Lamb,
Photo Researchers, 12; Pierre Berger. Photo Re-
searchers, 13; John Neubauer, 15, left; EPA, 15,
right; George Scherventer, National Park Service,
16; Darwin Van Carnoen, Western Ways, 17;
Burk Uzzle Magnum, 18; Dennis Stock. Magnum,
19; EPA, 20; Burk Uzzle, Magnum, 23; Roger Mai-
loch, Magnum, 24; Rene Burri, Magnum, inside
back cover.
•feU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1971-0—443-062
24
-------
On-going programs transferred to EPA
under the President's Reorganization
Plan No. 3 included the functions of:
The Federal Water Quality Administra-
tion—from the Department of In-
terior
The National Air Pollution Control Ad-
ministration
The Bureau of Solid Waste Management
The Bureau of Water Hygiene
The Bureau of Radiological Health (en-
vironmental radiation programs)
—from the Department of Health, Ed-
ucation, and Welfare
The Federal Radiation Council
Also transferred to EPA were responsi-
bilities and authorities for:
Establishing standards for environmental
chemicals—from the Atomic Energy
Commission
Establishing tolerances for pesticide
chemicals—from the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare-
Registration and labeling of pesticides—
from the Department of Agriculture
Conducting research on pesticides—from
several Departments
Conducting research on ecological sys-
tems—from the Council on Environ-
mental Quality
In addition, the Noise Abatement and
Control Act of 1970 assigned to EPA the
responsibility for studying the problem of
noise and making recommendations for
control.
-------
Ho^&C?^
••^V^V xVj\°^l
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
New York, New York 10007
Philadelphia, Pa. 19106
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Dallas, Texas 75202
Kansas City, Missouri 64106
Denver, Colorado 80203
San Francisco, Calif. 94102
Seattle, Washington 98101
617-223-7210
212-264-2525
215-597-9151
404-526-5727
312-353-5250
214-749-2827
816-374-5493
303-837-3895
415-556-4303
206-442-1200
States covered
Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont
New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico,
Virgin Islands
Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania,
Virginia, West Virginia, D.C.
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,
Mississippi, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Tennessee
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin
Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, Texas
Iowa, Kansas,'Missouri, Nebraska
Colorado, Montana, North Dakota,
South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming
Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada,
American Samoa, Guam, Trust Territories
of Pacific Islands, Wake Island
Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington
For sale by the Supmntendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 80 cents
Stock Number 5500-0031
------- |