For sale by The Superintendent of Document?, (j.S. Government Printing Oihee
                    Washington, D.C., 20402 - Price $2

             a  progress report
               DECEMBER 1970 - JUNE 1972
                       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                       Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
                       77 West Jackson Boulevard, 12th Floor
PUBL.SHED NOVEMBER ,972             ChiC3gO. IL 60604-3590

To  the  American  People:

Earth Day 1, in April of 1970, signaled the awakening of  an environ-
mental  conscience in this  nation. Clearly  we Americans  had abused
our natural heritage.

The air was cluttered with  pollutants difficult to  control and  unhealthy
to breathe.  Our waters from  the Potomac to the Snake  Rivers  had
been severely ravaged by the  works and neglect of man. We littered,
abused  and wasted our land  with  little or no thought for the shape
of the  future.  Pesticides were  poorly controlled,  and we exposed our
fellow citizens every year to some 900 new  chemical compounds whose
environmental or human impact were largely unknown.

That was  eight  months before  the creation of the Environmental Pro-
tection  Agency. After more  than  a year  of operation,  this  is now
history.  Unfortunately, those problems and  others remain and probably
will for  some time, but we  are making progress.  In the environment as
elsewhere real progress comes one  step at a time.

In our first year we set national ambient air quality standards that will
protect the health of every American citizen.

In our  first  year  we  attempted  to open  up the whole  process  by
which we  determine  which pesticides we can tolerate in the environ-
ment and for what purposes.

In our first year we established three National Environmental  Research
Centers to  conduct  on-going  studies  on  the health and ecological
effects of environmental contaminants as well as to pursue the search
for technological controls of all forms of pollution.

In our first year we completed some major studies on the  recovery of
municipal  waste which chart  a definite course for use in  solid waste

These  efforts are  not a cause for  alleluias —  or predictions of the
millenium.  Rather, they are the  sound foundations  upon  which  real

                                                  William D. Ruckleshaus
progress  depends.  I  believe in the  first year of this Agency, we have
plotted a course in which demonstrable and visible improvement of our
air, land  and water will increasingly occur in the next few years.

On balance, a great deal of attention has been paid to  this Agency  and
to the cause we served in  this first year. Hardly a week has gone by
without the  emergence of new environmental issues: the Cross-Florida
Barge Canal and a jet port in  the Everglades; the Supersonic Transport
and the Alaska Pipeline; national air  quality standards and the Refuse
Act Permit  Program;  mercury in the water and asbestos  in the  air;
NTA  and PCB's; DDT and 2,4,5-T.
In fact, the rate at which environmental impact statements arrive in our
EPA  offices around the country leads one to believe that everything is
an  environmental  issue.  Perhaps that is  the  greatest measure  of our
progress in the first year.  The fact  is sinking in among all elements of
our society that, sooner or later, everything is an environmental issue.
Dr. Barry Commoner propounds as the First  Law of Ecology "Every-
thing  is Connected to  Everything Else."  I believe in this country we are
beginning to  realize  the  validity of that proposition, but  more im-
portantly, we  are beginning to search out  the  connections and  we are
striving to understand them.

The real significance of the debate over  individual environmental issues
in the Agency's first year  does not  lie in the specifics nor in  the dispo-
sition of each case. The significance lies in the debate itself. The fact
that it occurred—that questions never before asked about our personal
and corporate  actions were raised  is a  new,  and I  think, permanent
element in American life.

I  believe it's all to the good.
                                    WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS


Letter to the American People from William D.

           Creation of EPA	.-..
           Environmental Legislation	
           Summary of  Major  Accomplish-
           Legislative Initiatives  	

           Air Quality and Emission Standards
           Emission  Control  Technology—
             Stationary  Sources  	
           Emission  Control  Technology—
             Mobile  Sources 	
           Air Quality Monitoring	
           Financial and Technical Assistance
           The Economics of Clean Air	

           Water Quality Standards	
           Water Quality Monitoring	
           Basin & Regional Planning	
           Oil & Hazardous Materials	
           Water Supply Program	
           Assistance Programs	
           Economics of Clean Water	
  Nature of the Solid Waste Problem
  Objectives of the Solid Waste Pro-
  Program Operation 	

  Registrations and Tolerances	
  Environmental Surveillance	
  Market Surveillance	
  Monitoring of Accidents	
           Criteria Development	
           Technology Assessment	
           Surveillance and Inspection.

   VII.  NOISE 	
           Public Hearings	
           Report  to  Congress	
           Proposed Legislation	







                    TION CONTROL  	
                  Micro Study 	
                  Macro Study 	
                  Pollution  Abatement  Cost  Sum-


                  State & Local Assistance Programs
                  Regional and State Profiles	
                  State Reorganization 	
                  Citizen Action  	

            X.  ENFORCEMENT 	
                  Refuse Act Permit Program.
                                                     RESEARCH  AND MONITORING
           Multifaceted  Problems

           Pollution from Federal Activities....
           Control of Pollution from Federally
             Owned Facilities 	
           Control of Pollution from Federally
             Supported  and Authorized Ac-
         Environmental Impact Statements	

           U.N. Conference 	
           Multilateral Organizations	
           Bilateral Cooperation 	
           Special Foreign Currency Programs
           Exchange of Information	
           Viewing World Developments 	




  The Environmental Protection Agency's creation was
recommended  to President  Nixon  by the President's
Advisory  Council on Executive Organization, headed
by Roy L.  Ash. The Ash  Council recommendations
ultimately resulted  in Reorganization  Plan No. 3  of
1970,  which President  Nixon  submitted to  Congress
on July 9, 1970. In the absence of negative Congres-
sional  action,  the provisions  of Reorganization Plan
No. 3  took  effect on December 2,  1970.
  The creation of EPA brought together in one Agency
a variety of research, monitoring, standard-setting and
enforcement activities formerly  scattered through sev-
eral departments and agencies.
  With its  broad  mandate, the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency  is developing competence in  areas  of
environmental  protection which previously  have not
been given sufficient attention,  such as the problem  of
noise  as a  degradation  of  the  Nation's  environment.
Thus,  for the  first time,  there is a governmental struc-
ture for  approaching pollution  control  problems  in
terms  of  the   total  environment,  perceiving  it as  a
single, interrelated  system.
  In  brief, these are the principal  functions  that were
transferred to EPA:

   Federal  Water  Quality  Administration.   Charged
with the control of pollutants which impair water quality,
FWQA was  broadly  concerned with  the impact  of
degraded  water quality. It  performed a wide  variety
of functions,  including research, standard-setting and
enforcement, and provided  construction  grants  and
technical assistance.
   Certain  pesticides  research authority from the De-
partment of the Interior. Authority for  research on the
effects of pesticides on  fish and wildlife has been  pro-
vided  to  EPA  through  transfer  of  the  specialized
research authority of the pesticides act enacted in 1958.
Interior retains its responsibility to do  research on all
factors  affecting  fish and  wildlife. Under this  provi-
sion,  only  one laboratory was  transferred to EPA—
the Gulf Breeze Biological  Laboratory  of the  Bureau
of Commercial Fisheries.  EPA works closely  with the
fish and wildlife laboratories remaining with the Bureau
of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife.

   National Air Pollution Control Administration. As
the principal Federal agency concerned with air  pol-
lution, NAPCA conducted research on the  effects of air
pollution, operated a  monitoring network, and promul-
gated criteria  which served as the basis of setting air
quality standards. Its regulatory functions were  similar
to those of the Federal Water Quality  Administration.
NAPCA was  responsible for administering the Clean
Air Act, which involved designating air  quality regions,
approving State standards, and providing financial and
technical assistance to State control agencies to enable
them  to comply  with the Act's provisions. It also set
and enforced Federal automotive emission standards.

   Elements of the  Environmental Control Adminis-
tration. ECA  was the  focal  point within  the Depart-
ment  of Health, Education and Welfare for evaluation
and control of a  broad range of environmental health
problems, including  water supply, solid wastes,  and

radiation. Programs  in  ECA  involved research and
development of criteria and standards, and the admin-
istration  of  planning  and demonstration grants. From
ECA, the activities of the Bureaus of Water Hygiene
and  Solid  Waste  Management and  portions of the
activities of the Bureau of Radiological  Health were
transferred to EPA. Other functions  of ECA, includ-
ing those related to the regulation of  radiation from
consumer products and occupational safety and health,
remain in HEW.

   Pesticides research and  standard-setting  programs
of the Food and  Drug Administration. FDA's  pesti-
cides program consisted of setting and enforcing stand-
ards which  limit pesticide  residues in food.  EPA
now has the authority to  set pesticide standards and
to monitor compliance with  them,  as well as to con-
duct related research.  However, as  an integral part of
its food protection activities,  FDA retains its  authority
to remove food  with excess pesticide residues from
the market.

   General ecological  research  from the  Council on
Environmental Quality.  The   authority to  perform
studies and  research relating to ecological systems, in
addition  to  EPA's  other specific research authorities,
helps  EPA  measure  the  impact of pollutants.  The
Council on Environmental Quality retains its  authority
to conduct  studies and  research relating to  environ-
mental quality.

   Environmental  radiation  standards  programs. The
Atomic Energy Commission was responsible for estab-
lishing environmental radiation standards and emission
limits  for radioactivity. Those standards have been
based largely on broad guidelines recommended by the
Federal Radiation Council. The Atomic Energy Com-
mission's authority to set standards  for the protection
of the general environment  from  radioactive material
was transferred to EPA. The functions of the Federal
Radiation Council were also transferred. AEC  retains
responsibility  for the implementation and enforcement
of radiation  standards through  its licensing  authority.

   Pesticides registration program of the  Agricultural
Research Service. The Department of Agriculture was
responsible  for several distinct functions  related  to
pesticides use. It conducted research on the efficacy
of various pesticides,  as related to  other pest control
methods, and on the effects of pesticides on non-target
plants,  livestock, and poultry. It registered pesticides,
monitored  their persistence  and carried out an edu-
cational program on pesticide use through its  extension
service.  It conducted  pest control  programs  in  which
pesticides were utilized extensively.
   By  transferring  the  Department  of  Agriculture's
pesticides registration  and monitoring function to EPA,
and merging it with the pesticides programs transferred
from HEW and  Interior,  the  new Agency was given
a broad capability for control over the introduction of
pesticides  into the environment.
  The Department of Agriculture continues to conduct
research on the  effectiveness of  pesticides. It  furnishes
this information to EPA, which has  the  responsibility
for  actually licensing pesticides for use, after  consider-
ing  environmental and  health effects.
  EPA, as a new Federal force  in  the  environment,
presents  substantial opportunity to  accomplish posi-
tive environmental improvement. It is  an independent
regulatory Agency with  no  adjudicative powers, re-
porting directly  to the  Office  of the President.  No
longer is the setting and enforcement of environmental
quality standards in  the  hands of  an agency  which
also has a promotional  interest. EPA's sole  charge  is
to  see that  the  standards it sets  and enforces, ade-
quately protect the total environment.
   Another significant aspect of EPA is that  it pro-
vides  a  mechanism  for  a  coordinated  approach  to
environmental  improvement.  No  longer  will there be
water pollution and solid  waste disposal  agencies urg-
ing solutions to waste  disposal problems,  which only
serve  to  exacerbate or create serious  air  pollution
problems. And,  no longer will  Federal environmental
research plunge  off in  all directions, unrelated to any
overall plan for dealing with the total environment.
   EPA intends to make major decisions publicly and
openly. For example, in January 1971 a Federal court
ordered  EPA  to decide  whether  the pesticide DDT
should be  suspended and prohibited from  interstate
transport.  The  Agency took the  unprecedented  step
of  imposing a 60-day  deadline on itself to  make the
decision and requested  comments from  the  public  as
to  whether  DDT posed  an  imminent hazard,  which
would require suspension  under the  Federal Insecti-
cide,  Fungicide and Rodenticide Act. More  than 500
submissions  were received which were considered along
with  data compiled by  EPA's Pesticide Office and sci-
entific experts. EPA's final decision was that  the statu-
tory  test  for suspension had not been met.  However,
the  potential harm  proposed  by DDT did warrant
an  aggressive administrative  process called "cancella-
tion"  under the  Act, to determine whether, on  a risk-
benefit basis, the registration of DDT products should
be  continued. EPA  then issued  a  23-page opinion
which detailed reasons for the  DDT decision, as well
as  related  decisions on  2,4,5-T,  Mirex, aldrin and

  Since EPA  is a new initiative  in  guaranteeing en-
vironmental  quality,  it  is worthwhile to  review the
efforts of the Federal Government  which  have cul-
minated in the  establishment of this Agency.
  The evolution  of  Federal pollution  control  legis-
lation represents the  attempt by Washington to come
to  grips  with  the seriousness  of  pollution  problems

 consistent with traditional concepts of Federalism. The
 States and Federal Governments played their respec-
 tive roles and despite the Donora,  Pennsylvania, air
 pollution disaster of 1948, in which 20 died and 6,000
 were made ill, major Federal pollution programs were
 first initiated in water. Until 1948, the States had exclu-
 sive  control  over  the problems of  water pollution.
 With the passage of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
 trol Act  of  1948,  the Federal Government began to
 move in.
   In  1956,  the  Water  Pollution  Control  Act was
 amended, and these changes set up the basic structure
 of Federal water pollution enforcement procedures for
 the next  14  years.  The 1956 amendment provided for
 an enforcement conference  to  be  called by the Fed-
 eral Government and to  include all interested  parties,
 especially the States. In  six months,  if no action was
 taken  to  abate the problem under  study,  a  hearing
 could  be  held.  The hearing was  to  be followed by
 another six-month  waiting period, after which  the case
 could  be taken  to  court.  This  procedure required an
 accusation that  a State had  failed  to act, before  the
 Federal Government could go to court. Until  the cre-
 ation of  EPA, only one  case had appeared in court.
   The Water Quality Act of 1965  made far-reaching
 changes  in the  Federal role. It provided for  the set-
 ting, by  the  States, of water quality standards, subject
 to the approval of the Secretary of HEW (now EPA).
 It also provided for  the  creation of  a Federal Water
 Pollution Control Administration, which would assume
 administrative control  for  these programs from the
 Public Health Service.
   Again  in 1966, with the signing of  the Clean Water
 Restoration  Act, Federal involvement increased. This
 Act provided for another increase in Federal construc-
 tion grants.
   The  Water Quality  Improvement Act of  1970
 changed  the name  of the Federal authority designed
 to deal  with water  pollution  to the Federal  Water
 Quality Administration. This new Act  contained tighter
 regulations related  to oil and vessel  pollution,  Alaskan
 village demonstrations, a  program  to solve the  acid
 mine drainage problems  and several other functions.
   In the  area of air pollution,  the legislative program
 is essentially the same  with  a later  timetable. Despite
 the Donora  disaster  of  1948,  and the emergence of
 the smog problem in Los Angeles in the  early  1950's,
 Federal air pollution legislation was not  enacted until
   Finally  in 1963,  following  the   London   "Killer
 Smog" of 1962, in which 700  died,  Congress passed
 the Clean Air Act. Essentially, its enforcement pro-
 cedures were the same as those developed  for water
 pollution:  a  conference, hearings and court action if
 no abatement. This  Act also provided funds for further
research   into the  problems  of  air  pollution  and  its
control  and  provided grants for the  development of
State and  local air pollution control agencies.
  In  1965, with  the  passage of the  Motor  Vehicle
Air Pollution  Control Act,  the  Federal Government
recognized the need to control  pollution  caused by
automobiles. It initiated the procedures which  resulted
in the first vehicular controls in  1968.
  The major  thrust of Federal concern for air pollu-
tion came  with the passage  of the  Clean Air Act of
1967  which allows for the designation of  air quality
control  regions,  either within a State or  interstate.
After such designation, the  Secretary of HEW  (now
EPA)  set  air quality  criteria for specified  air pollu-
tants. The State,  or States,  set  air  quality  standards,
subject  to  the Secretary's approval, and then  provide
an implementation plan, also subject to approval.
  The  Clean  Air  Amendments  of  1970  now  allow
EPA to set air quality standards nationwide,  not  just
within regions. The Act further provides stricter regu-
lations  on auto  exhaust  emissions, and stronger  en-
forcement  procedures  which permit  EPA,  as  the
successor  to HEW, to move with more flexibility  and
  The  Resources Recovery  Act  of  1970 added new
facets to the earlier Solid  Waste Disposal Act of 1965,
including not only solid waste "disposal" but also solid
waste "recovery" and  "recycling." This addition stipu-
lates that  special studies and demonstration  projects
be undertaken to determine means of recovering mate-
rials and energy  from  solid wastes.  The Act also pro-
vides  for   grants  to  promote area-wide solid  waste
planning by cities and States, including methods for
collecting,  separating and disposing of trash;  to train
personnel  of all kinds; and to build new, state-of-the-
art, solid  waste  facilities for  recycling or   recovering
energy or  material resources.
   To meet the expanding need for electricity,  the util-
ities have  been turning principally  to nuclear power
stations. EPA does not have licensing  power over the
nuclear  power industry. That authority belongs to the
Atomic  Energy  Commission, primarily through  its
power to  issue construction  and  operating permits for
reactors. But  EPA can influence the  safe  siting  and
operation  of these reactors with  authorities  transferred
in the President's  Reorganization Plan  No.  3 of 1970.
These  authorities are  the establishment of radiation
standards  to insure that no  significant  harmful effects
will occur  in  the  population, the approval  of  thermal
effects standards  set by the  States,  and the reviewing
of  environmental impact  statements  for nuclear fa-
   Title  IV of  the  Clean Air Act  Amendments  of 1970
is the "Noise  Pollution and Abatement Act of 1970".
It created  an  Office of Noise Abatement and  Control
within EPA which was given authority to carry out a
one-year study of  the noise  problem to identify  and
classify  causes and sources of the  noise problem  and
its effect on human health and welfare.
  Probably the most  significant  piece  of Federal  leg-
islation  enacted  in recent years  is the Environmental

                           TABLE  1—ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION  AGENCY
                                                William D. Ruckelshaus
                                              DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR
                                                  STAFF  OFFICES
        OFFICE  OF
         OFFICE OF
                                  REGIONAL  OFFICES
        FOR AIR &
                                                            OFFICE OF
                                                          AIR PROGRAMS
                                                            OFFICE OF
                                                         WATER PROGRAMS
                                                             OFFICE  OF
                                                             OFFICE OF
                                                                                    OFFICE OF
                                                                                  SOLID WASTE
                                                                                 MGT. PROGRAMS
                                                      OFFICE OF
                                                      OFFICE OF
                                                                                     OFFICE  OF










Policy Act  of 1970.  This requires  every agency  of
the Federal Government to take into account, and  to
make public, the environmental impact of each major
action,  as  well as  to  discuss alternatives  which were
considered and  which might minimize environmental
damage. Already,  the procedures of  this Act have
influenced  many  projects,  and caused the redesign  of
others,  in  order to reduce  their impact  on the en-

   In his message to  Congress on the Organization of
EPA, President Nixon said:  "The Environmental Pro-
tection  Agency would focus on  setting and enforcing
pollution control standards."
   This  task  was to be accomplished even though the
creative activity of 1970 had moved the country ahead
of existing legal  tools to rectify specific environmental
problems.  The  existing  Federal  and State laws and
the capability to enforce them were  unwieldy.
   Although  EPA  started  with  some  difficult legal
machinery, its unified, coordinated approach promised
more effective standards and the enforcement of those
standards.  It also had the  benefit of  laws  just recently
passed,  such as the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970.
  The Atomic Energy Commission, for example, pro-
tected the  environment from radiation hazards  while
at the  same  time it  promoted nuclear  power. The
Department  of   Agriculture  controlled the use and
abuse of  agricultural  chemicals  while simultaneously
seeking  higher farm  yields.  Three  different  depart-
ments had roles  in the handling and control of pesti-
cides.  Such  division  of responsibility precluded any
possibility  of a  Federally  integrated, coordinated ap-
proach  to the total environmental pollution problems.
  In  1971,  national  ambient  air  quality standards
were set to protect the health of every American citi-
zen.  Right now,  each State is  drafting  its  plan  to
implement those standards  and achieve the rigid dead-
lines for the  preservation of our air  resources.  There
has been a great  deal of discussion about the rigorous-
ness  of some  of these deadlines. But no matter whether
they  can be totally  achieved in every case, no one can
dispute  that  solid and far-reaching  progress is  being
made in restoring the quality of our  air.
  EPA  also  concluded hearings on new auto emission
standards. It announced the registration of fuel addi-
tives to reduce auto pollution and held a  special auto
emission control conference  in  which  the Adminis-
trator made  clear  to  the  industry precisely what he
expected of them. The first "clean car" incentive con-
tracts were awarded,  and the  Army  announced the
development  of an experimental  motor vehicle which,
it said, meets the 1967 emission standards.
  A permit program was  inaugurated  to regulate the
discharge of wastes into navigable waterways and their
tributaries within the continental U.S. The Refuse Act
permit system is not perfect;  the division of  adminis-
trative authority  between several agencies of govern-
ment is not sound management. The program  does not
apply  to  all  discharges—only  those  not discharged
through a municipal system; therefore, the permit sys-
tem  is cumbersome and incomplete.
  But, based on the limitations of the present state of
the law, it is the best  system that  could be  devised,
and  is  a  giant  step  toward  cleaner  water.  For the
first  time,  there will be a Nationwide  inventory of
industrial  waste  being   discharged  directly  into our
waterways. These discharges will be controlled through
the permit program, or  its successor in the new  water
bill;  and through  this  control  our  water will be pro-
tected as never before.
  Enforcement  of  water quality standards and con-
trols  through the permit program  alone, of course,
cannot solve  the problem of water  pollution. A major
part  of the  problem resides  in the  fact  that  most
municipal sewage treatment  plants are woefully out-of-
date.  For this reason, a  major portion of EPA's budget
is  earmarked to  provide localities  with  funds for the
construction  of  modern  municipal  sewage  treatment
plants,  including new  experimental pilot plants that
might conceivably demonstrate a better,  more efficient
way of disposing of municipal sewage.  A number of
these projects have begun to yield results.
  An  attempt has  been made to open  up the whole
process of determining  which pesticides can be  toler-
ated in the environment and for what purposes. Much
greater public participation in  making a decision, as to
what risks are acceptable for what  benefits, has been
sought. In the new pesticide legislation pending before
Congress, the necessary authority has been sought to
control the  use  of any pesticide and,  thereby,  much
more carefully maximize the benefit of a chemical and
minimize or  eliminate the environmental hazard.
  To  meet the   growing demand  for electricity, the
utilities are increasingly turning toward nuclear-power
stations. As  "an advocate of the environment"  EPA
has  direct  responsibility to  protect  the  health of the
people living near nuclear plants. EPA must also pro-
tect the rest of the environment—plants and animals—
from any  other  adverse effects of this activity, such as
excessive discharge of waste heat into  waterways.
  Also, under its review of environmental impact state-
ments authority, EPA  studied many  such statements
prepared  by the AEC  for various nuclear  facilities,
and  in many cases, was able to effect changes.
   EPA was  deeply involved in providing financial and
technical  assistance to  the Colorado State Health De-
partment on  the problem of a  building for which radio-
active tailings from uranium  mines had been used  as
construction  fill  for the  foundations.
  Three  National  Environmental   Research Centers
have been established to conduct on-going studies on
the health and ecological effects of  environmental con-

taminants, as well as to pursue the search for techno-
logical controls of all forms of pollution. The integrated
research  program conducted through  these  centers,
and their satellite  laboratories,  enables  EPA to estab-
lish environmental standards on the basis of scientific-
ally verifiable data. The research program is beginning
to place the Agency in a predictive, instead of reactive,
position  with regard  to environmental  protection and
the introduction of new elements into our habitat.
   Since  the beginning' of EPA,  some  major studies
were  completed on  the recovery  of  municipal waste,
which chart a  definite course in solid  waste  manage-
ment.  It is clear  that useful basic  technology to re-
process  municipal waste  has been developed.  The
problem in many applications is  not technology,  but
markets. There are  currently  no substantial markets
for the products recovered by solid waste systems. So,
as the Agency works with cities to increase their per-
formance  in  the  collection and  handling of  wastes
at  costs they  can  afford,  EPA  will  concentrate  its
efforts, as  well, on analyzing and  recommending ways
to  increase the demands  for resources received from
municipal waste.
   In  a  new  area  of environmental  concern, EPA
established  its  Office  of  Noise  Abatement  Control.
Currently, the Office is evaluating the health hazards
of noise and  reviewing promising  advances  in noise
suppression technology. Although  the major effort thus
far has  been in the area  of aircraft noise suppression,
investigations  of  other noise sources are expected to
be substantially  broadened. EPA has  prepared spe-
cific  recommendations  to  Congress on new programs
to further combat noise pollution.
   The December 2, 1970,  stroke of  the Presidential
pen did  not bring an immediate solution to these prob-
lems,  since at that  point, EPA  was  merely  an idea
embodied  in words  on a  piece of paper. The  job  re-
mained  to  turn that idea into  a  reality. The existing
 facilities,  programs  and   people  who  were  to come
 under the aegis of EPA were scattered throughout  the
 country and   the Federal  establishment. They,  their
 work and their tools had  to be brought together both
 physically and organizationally. For the first time, their
 efforts had to be realigned  into some  kind of coordi-
 nated  program   that  reflected   the  interdisciplinary
 nature of environmental pollution.
   This  vast organizational effort, moreover, was com-
 plicated by the fact that  the urgency of the attack on
 pollution demanded that  vital on-going programs not
 be disturbed  or  delayed  by the  realignment.  Indeed,
 work also  had to begin immediately on a host of new
 programs  and initiatives included in EPA's mission.
   Internally,   EPA   started  organizing itself  to  cope
 with a  myriad of interrelated problems. By  February
 of 1971, the Administrator  had named five officials as
 acting  Assistant  Administrators—three  of  them in
 major  functional  areas:  enforcement,  research  and
 monitoring, and  planning  and  management;  one to
supervise the programs concerned with air and water;
and one to supervise pesticides,  solid wastes  and radi-
ation programs.
  In that same  period, the Administrator also  set up
10 Regional  Offices along boundaries  already  in use
by other Federal agencies, with the Regional Admin-
istrators reporting directly to him. This  reflected the
Administrator's  belief  that much  of  the  work  of the
Agency should be done through the  Regional  Offices;
they  would be  the  "cutting  edge"  of  the  Agency's
effort.  These  efforts were  the  sound foundations upon
which  real progress  depended.  EPA  has plotted  a
course in which  demonstrable  and visible  improvement
of air, water  and land will increasingly  occur in the
next few years.
  The establishment of the Environmental Protection
Agency was  a  landmark  decision to replace  a hap-
hazard, fragmented approach to  environmental  quality,
with  a coordinated, sustained effort  to the protection
and the  enhancement  of  our  atmosphere and living
space.  By consolidating in EPA  the  responsibility for
research and  standard-setting,  monitoring and enforce-
ment with regard to six major environmental concerns
—air,  water,  and noise pollution,  pesticides,  radiation,
solid waste disposal—recognition has  finally been given
to the interrelated nature of environmental problems.
There  is little sense in removing impurities from the air
only to liquefy  them  and put them  in  the  water,  or
solidify them and put  them on the land. The mandate
of EPA is to view the environment as a whole—to  be
an advocate  for its preservation,  to  be  sure that one
problem  is not  aggravated while  another problem  is
solved, and to educate and lead the  Nation to a new
awareness of peoples'  relationship to the delicate bal-
ance of life on  this planet.
  In  many ways, what EPA has done since  its cre-
ation  is  less  important than  what  it has learned  or
affirmed about the problems of environmental degrada-
tion,  and the people  and groups who  have made a
cause  of it. What has  been learned about society pro-
vides  invaluable insights into  the  chances for ultimate
resolution of the Nation's environmental  difficulties.

  Although much progress has been  made in building
a set  of laws  that are workable and  rational, some
important legislation  requested in  last  year's Presi-
dential Environmental  Message is  still before Congress.
Other  vital legislative  programs  have  been recently
proposed. The following list shows the major bills now
awaiting Congressional action.

Major Initiatives Still Awaiting Final Legislative Action
   1.   Regulation of toxic  substances
   2.   Comprehensive  improvement in pesticide con-
       trol authority

 3.  Noise control
 4,  Preservation of historic buildings
 5.  Power plant siting
 6.  Regulation of environmental effects of strip and
     underground mining
 7.  More effective control of water pollution through
     a greatly expanded waste treatment grant pro-
     gram  and strengthened  standard-setting  and
     enforcement authorities
 8.  A National Land Use Policy Act
 9.  Substantial expansion of the  wilderness system
10.  Expanded  international   cooperation  to   deal
     with oil pollution
11.  Prevention of oil spills through navigation  aids
12.  Amendments to Land and Water Conservation
1972  Action Program
              Disposal of Toxic Wastes
   A Toxic  Wastes Disposal Control Act to ensure
   that the increasing use of land and underground
   disposal of toxic wastes does  not  pose  a hazard
   to health.  Under the proposed bill, which would
   amend  the  Federal  Water  Pollution  Control
   Act,  States  would regulate  disposal  of toxic
   wastes  on and  under  the land, including "deep
   well" disposal, pursuant to guidelines established
   by  the  Environmental  Protection  Agency, with a
   provision  for Federal  enforcement  action  if  a
   State fails to establish  its own  program.
                  Sediment Control
   A Sediment Control Act would  call for States
   to establish regulatory programs to control sedi-
   ment  affecting  water  quality  from earthmoving
   activities  such as building and road construction.

            Sulfur  Oxides Emission Charge
   A  charge on  sulfur  emitted  into  the  atmos-
   phere from  combustion,  refining, smelting  and
   other processes. The charge is designed to  sup-
   plement regulatory  provisions  of the Clean  Air
   Act  in controlling  sulfur  oxides  emissions,  one
   of the most harmful of air pollutants. The charge
   would begin  in  1976 and  apply  in  all regions
   where the  air quality did not meet national stand-
   ards for sulfur oxides during 1975.
   A charge  of 15<-  per  pound of sulfur would be
   levied in areas failing to meet the primary (health
   protection) ambient air quality standards estab-
   lished under the Clean Air  Act, with a  10^  per
   pound charge levied in  areas  that meet  the  pri-
   mary standard but fail to meet the more stringent
   secondary  (damage to  property and vegetation)
   sulfur oxide  standards. No charge would be  lev-
   ied in areas meeting both primary  and secondary
   Clean Energy Generation and Conservation

Eighty-eight  million dollars  in  1973  budget for
additional  development  of  a broad spectrum of
new technologies for producing clean energy.

Issuance  by  the  Department  of  Housing  and
Urban Development of revised standards for Fed-
erally insured apartments and other multi-family
structures requiring insulation that will reduce up
to 40 percent of heat losses from such structures,
with fuel savings exceeding the  additional  insula-
tion costs within a five-year period.

Council  on  Environmental  Quality  and  Office
of Science and Technology to conduct survey with
other Federal  agencies  to  determine additional
actions they might take to conserve energy.

The Treasury Department is clarifying the avail-
ability of tax exempt treatment industrial revenue
bond financing for the construction of recycling
facilities built by  private concerns to recycle their
own wastes.

           Integrated Pest Management
Research,  development,  and  demonstration  pro-
grams on  integrated  pest  management,  a  sys-
tematic approach to pest control  that  involves
judicious  use of  selective  chemical  pesticides in
conjunction  with maximum  use of natural  pest
control  techniques,  such as predators,  steriliza-
tion and pest diseases.
Expansion of current  research  and  development
activities in integrated pest management through
a  new,  large-scale  program  involving the U.  S.
Department of Agriculture, the  National  Science
Foundation,  and  the  Environmental  Protection
Agency,  and  conducted by  leading  universities.
Expanded  U. S.  Department of Agriculture  pro-
gram of field testing of promising new methods of
pest detection and control.
Federal encouragement for development  of  uni-
versity training  programs and State  certification
of crop  protection specialists needed to  ensure
widespread   implementation  of  integrated  pest
control techniques.
Expansion  of USDA field scout programs to cover
nearly four million  acres of  crops  this  growing
season. This program permits elimination of many
unnecessary  pesticide  applications  by using  the
scouts to determine when such applications actu-
ally  are needed.
Development of standards by  the Departments of
Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare under
the Occupational Safety and Health Act  to  pro-
tect farm workers from  pesticide poisoning.

         Increased Research on Pollution

Request  in  1973 budget for an increase of  $23
million in research to reduce aircraft noise,  and
new funds to reduce street traffic noise.
Request  in  1973  budget for an  additional  $12
million for research on health effects of pollution,
regional  air pollution modeling,  and  improved
pollution measurement and instrumentation.

         Strengthen Land Use Policy Bill
Amendments to the pending Administration Land
Use Policy  Bill would require States  to control
siting of major transportation facilities and impose
sanctions on States failing to implement adequate
land use  programs.
States  not   implementing adequate programs by
1975 would be  subject to incremental seven per-
cent annual reductions in Federal  funds allocated
to them under the airport and highway  assistance
programs and the Land  and Water Conservation
Fund.  Funds  so  withheld  would be  allocated
among States with acceptable programs.

      Controlling Development of Wetlands
Amendments  to the Internal Revenue  Code to
limit in coastal wetlands certain Federal tax bene-
fits for  new development, thereby  discouraging
unnecessary development  in these  environmen-
tally critical areas.

                Predator Control
Executive Order barring the  use  of poisons for
predator  control on public lands, except in emer-
Proposed legislation  to shift  the emphasis  of the
current direct Federal predator control program
to one of  research,  technical and financial as-
sistance to the States  to help  them control preda-
tors with  means other than poisons.

              Endangered Species
New legislation to  permit earlier identification and
protection of  endangered species,  so that  action
can be taken before a species is so depleted  that
regeneration is  difficult or impossible.  The new
legislation would also for the first  time  make the
taking  of endangered  species a Federal offense.
               Migratory Species
Secretary of State  authorized in conjunction with
the Department  of the Interior to seek agreement
with Mexico to  add 33 families of birds—includ-
ing eagles, hawks, owls, and many wading birds—
to  the  protected  list  established by  the  two
                Legacy of Parks
Legislation  submitted to the  Congress  to  create
a Big Cypress Fresh Water Reserve, empowering
the Federal Government to acquire requisite legal
interest in  547,000 acres of private lands in the
Big  Cypress  Swamp in Florida  to  protect  the
unique Everglades National Park.

New legislation to establish in the San Francisco
Bay region a Golden  Gate National  Recreation
Area,  combining  a number  of existing  parks,
undeveloped  military  reservations,  and  private
lands.  The area would encompass 24,000 acres
of beaches, rugged coastline, and  readily acces-
sible parklands; the area would extend approxi-
mately  30 miles  along  the  Pacific Coast  north
and south of  the Golden  Gate  Bridge  in  San
As a result of activities of the Property  Review
Board,  established by the  President in 1970,
20 additional parcels  of public lands are  being
made available for park and  recreation use. The
20 properties announced today for inclusion in
the legacy  of parks program include  all  or  por-
tions of the  Alvord Estate  in Phoenix, Arizona;
Camp  Elliott in San Diego, California; San  Luis
Obispo, California; Outer Market Annex,  Palm
Beach, Florida; Gap Filler Annex, Winter Gar-
den, Florida; Boca Grande Light Station, Gaspa-
rilla Island,  Florida;  Panama  City   Jetties,  St.
Andrews Bay,  Florida; Federal Correctional In-
stitute, Tallahassee, Florida; Crooked River Light,
Carabelle,  Florida; Dinner  Key Air  Station,
Miami, Florida;  Veterans  Administration  Hos-
pital, Topeka,  Kansas;  Veterans  Administration
Center Reservation, Leavenworth, Kansas;  Vet-
erans Administration Hospital,  Bedford,  Massa-
chusetts; Federal Correctional Institution, Milan,
Michigan; Chillicothe Station,  Ross County, Ohio;
Former Naval Air  Station,  Tillamook County,
Oregon;  Roosevelt  Roads,  Puerto  Rico; Fort
Hood,  Killcen, Texas; Veterans  Administration
Hospital, Waco, Texas; Fort  Douglas, Salt Lake
City, Utah.
These  20  parcels  constitute 2,853  acres with an
estimated fair market value of $4.6 million. Com-
bined  with 63  parcels  already made available
during the past year,  this program will provide
14,585 acres  of parkland, in 31 States  and Puerto
Rico  with  an  estimated fair market value of
more than  $56 million.
               Wilderness Areas
Proposal of 18 new wilderness  areas  that would
add  1.3 million acres to the wilderness  system.
These 18 areas are in addition to 18 areas already
proposed  by  this  Administration, and pending
before  the Congress.
The 18 proposed  new  areas  and their acreages
are as  follows:

   Weminuch, National Forest, Colorado, 346,833
   Eagles Nest, National Forest, Colorado, 87,755
   Emigrant, National Forest,  California, 105,376
   Aqua Tibia, National Forest, California, 11,920
   Mission  Mountains, National Forest, Montana,
   73,207 acres
   Glacier,  National Forest,  Wyoming,  182,510
   Blue Range,  National Forest,  Arizona,  New
   Mexico,  177,239 acres
   Aldo Leopold, National Forest, New Mexico,
   188,095 acres
   St. Marks, National Wildlife  Refuge, Florida,
   17,746 acres
   Wolf Island, National Wildlife  Refuge,  Geor-
   gia, 4,168 acres
   Moosehorn, National Wildlife Refuge, Maine,
   4,598 acres
   San  Juan Islands, National Wildlife Refuge,
   Washington, 355  acres
   Cape Remain, National Wildlife Refuge, South
   Carolina, 28,000  acres
   Bosque del Apache, National Wildlife Refuge,
   New Mexico, 32,500 acres
   Bryce Canyon,  National Park,  Utah,  16,303
   Black Canyon, National  Monument, Colorado,
   8,780 acres
   Colorado,  National  Monument,  Colorado,
   7,700 acres
   Chiricahua,  National  Monument,  Arizona,
   6,925 acres
     TOTAL 1,300510 acres
The  Secretaries  of  Agriculture and the Interior
will accelerate identification of areas in the East-
ern United States having wilderness potential,  in
order to increase the opportunities  for wilderness
experience  within the regions  where most of our
people live.
               Off-Road Vehicles
Executive  Order directing Secretaries of  Agri-
culture, Interior, Army and the Board of Direc-
tors  of the  Tennessee Valley  Authority to  issue
regulations  for controlling the use  of these  vehi-
cles  on Federal lands.  Regulations to designate
specific areas where their  use is  or is not per-
mitted,  prescribe operating conditions that  will
be necessary to minimize damage to the natural
resources of the Federal lands, and ensure  com-
patability with other recreational uses,  taking into
account noice and other factors.
    United Nations Fund for the Environment

Proposal  for  a  United  Nations  Fund for the
Environment to help stimulate  international co-
operation  on  environmental  problems,  which
would  bring to bear new resources on worldwide
problems through activities  such  as monitoring
and cleanup of the oceans and atmosphere. Rec-
ommendation  that the  fund  establish  an initial
funding  goal  of  $100 million for the first five
years,  with the United States providing  its fair
share on a matching basis.

           Control of Marine Pollution
The United States is preparing for a 1973 Inter-
governmental  Maritime Consultative Organization
(IMCO) Conference to  draft a convention bar-
ring intentional discharges to the  sea of  oil and
hazardous substances from ships.  In conjunction
with the  Law of the Sea Conference  scheduled
for 1973, the  United States  is  examining meas-
ures to control the  effects  of developing under-
seas resources. In the preparatory work  for the
1972 U.N. Conference on  the Human Environ-
ment,  progress has been  made on an agreement
to  regulate  the  dumping  of  shore  generated
wastes, and further  work  in this  area has been
scheduled  by  IMCO.
               Protecting Children
In addition to other Federal activities, Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare will use
grants and technical assistance to initiate programs
in more than  50 communities to test children  in
high-risk areas for lead concentrations.

                Youth Programs
The President's Environmental Merit Awards Pro-
gram, initiated last October by the Environmental
Protection Agency in cooperation  with the  U.  S.
Office  of Education, awards national recognition
to successful  student projects which  lead to en-
vironmental understanding or improvement.  More
than  2,000 high  schools  throughout  the entire
50 States are already participating in the program.
The  Department of  Agriculture's  expanded field
scout demonstration program, designed to permit
more effective  pest control with substantially less
pesticides, v/ill employ over 2,000 high school and
college  students.
The  Environmental  Protection  Agency recently
initiated in its Seattle Regional Office a pilot pro-
gram  to use young people in its monitoring and
other  activities, with  the program to be expanded
if it proves successful.
ACTION volunteers and youth employed through
the Neighborhood Youth Corps, Job  Corps and
college  work-study programs  will  work with city
governments to help alleviate lead-paint hazards.


   The American public has become increasingly con-
cerned  during the last  20  years  about the harmful
effects of air  pollution  on human health, welfare and
the quality of life.  This concern is  reflected in  a suc-
cession of increasingly more stringent laws, at all levels
of government,  to control  emissions  from  stationary
and mobile sources of air pollution.
   The first organized Federal program on  air pollu-
tion  was developed in  1955 when legislation was en-
acted authorizing  the Public Health Service to carry
out a modest air pollution  research program and to
provide technical  assistance to State and  local gov-
ernments, which traditionally  have had primary re-
sponsibility for  dealing with community air pollution
   In  1963, Congress passed the landmark Clean Air
Act.  This law authorized financial assistance to State
and local governments for the initiation and improve-
ment  of control  programs, Federal-interstate abatement
actions, and  the publication of criteria  describing the
effects of pollution. The law placed special emphasis on
gaseous pollutants, particularly exhaust emissions from
motor vehicles,  and  sulfur  oxides from   stationary
   In  1965, amendments to the Clean Air Act gave the
Federal program authority to curb motor vehicle emis-
sions. Federal standards were first applied  to  1968
model motor vehicles.
   The Air Quality Act  of  1967 required a new and
more   comprehensive approach  to  the problem.  It
called for  the Federal  government  to designate air
quality  regions  on the  basis  of  meteorological and
urban factors, and to publish criteria  documents (de-
scribing  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,  State Governors were required  to establish air
quality  standards and   regulating   control  programs
aimed at meeting such standards for designated regions.
The  work  accomplished  under the 1967  legislation
paved the way  for enactment of  the Clean  Air Act
Amendments of 1970, which were  signed into law on
December 31, 1970.

   The  1970 Clean  Air Amendments require EPA to
 set national  ambient  air quality  standards. In  April
 1971, EPA promulgated national  air quality standards
 for six  common classes of pollutants:  sulfur  oxides,
 particulate matter,  carbon  monoxide, photochemical
 oxidants,  nitrogen  oxides, and hydrocarbons.  As re-
 quired  under the law, two  types of standards have
 been set:  primary standards to protect against damage
 to public  health, and  secondary standards to  protect
 against  all other damage (property, animals,  vegeta-
 tion, materials, visibility, aesthetics, etc.).
   Under  the Act, the  States  must  submit implemen-
 tation plans to achieve the national air  quality  stand-
 ards. During 1971, EPA promulgated guidelines  to be
 followed by the States  in developing these plans. The
 guidelines  require  States to  provide for attainment
 within  three  to five years, and maintenance  of the
 national  standards   through  the development  of  air
 pollution control strategies, which  besides the required
 source  emission limitations could  include other meas-
 ures,  such  as  land use  and  transportation  control
   State  implementation plans also must include emer-
 gency action plans designed to prevent significant  harm
 to the health of persons during high air  pollution epi-
 sodes. EPA has defined, for the five most common air
contaminants,  the  levels at which significant harm to
the health of persons can be expected to occur.  State
 plans must provide  for  action designed to prevent sig-
nificant harm levels from occurring.

   In addition,  EPA has listed  seven specific kinds of
 legislative  authority  that  will  be  needed  by  State
 air pollution control  agencies to meet the  requirements
 of the Clean Air Act.  The State air pollution control
 officials must have authority to:

   1. Adopt emission standards  and limitations and
   any other measures  necessary for attainment and
   maintenance of national standards.

   2. Enforce applicable laws, regulations and stand-
   ards, and seek injunctive relief.

   3. Abate pollutant  emissions on  an  emergency
   basis  to prevent substantial endangerment to the
   health of persons.

   4. Prevent construction, modification,  or opera-
   tion  of  any stationary source  at  any  location
   where emissions  from such  source will prevent
   the  attainment  or  maintenance  of a national

   5. Obtain  information necessary  to   determine
   whether air pollution sources are  in compliance
   with applicable laws, regulations, and  standards,

   including authority to require record keeping and
   to make inspections  and conduct tests of air pol-
   lution sources.

   6. Require  owners  or  operators  of stationary
   sources  to install,  maintain,  and  use  emission
   monitoring devices and to make periodic reports
   to the State on the nature and amounts  of emis-
   sions from  such stationary sources;  also authority
   for the State to make  such data available to the
   public  as  reported and  as correlated with any
   applicable emission standards or limitations.

   7. Where  a  plan  sets  forth  a control  strategy
   that provides  for  application  of inspection and
   testing of  motor vehicles and/or other transpor-
   tation control  measures,  such plan  shall  set forth
   the  State's  timetable  for obtaining such legal
   authority  as  may be  necessary to  carry such

   8. EPA,  under the Act,  has  important  residual
   enforcement power in  the event of failure of a
   State to perform according  to law  or regulation.
   During 1971, EPA approved portions of 21 regional
air pollution control plans for sulfur oxides and par-
ticulate matter. The plans were prepared by State gov-
ernments prior to the Clean  Air Act Amendments of
1970.  However,  the approved portions  include  regu-
lations  for  attainment and  maintenance  of  national
primary  (health-related)  air quality standards for par-
ticulate matter or sulfur  oxides or both.  In some in-
stances the  plans  also provide  for the achievement of
the national secondary standards for these pollutants.
By July  of  1972  13 State plans were approved, four
plans  required  additional  legal  authority within  the
States  and 38 plans are  being proposed  and promul-
gated by EPA.

Stationary Sources Emission  Standards

   Unlike ambient  air quality standards, emission stand-
ards are  limitations  placed on  the  actual sources  of
pollution. Emission  standards  are key elements in the
State  implementation plans.  EPA  is developing two
types of  Federal emission standards. The first is a set
of standards on especially  hazardous air pollutants,
Houston Smokestack pouring out from the burning of old Batteries, Houston, Texas.
                                                                                                Documorica 1*110 to

which may not be as widely distributed or prevalent
as  pollutants  covered  by  the  State  implementation
plans. The  second is a  set of performance standards
on  industrial  operations,  which  limit  the pollution
effluent on new or modified industrial facilities to best
available and demonstrated control  techniques. These
standards  are  designed  to prevent  pollution  as our
industrial capability expands.
  Proposed  emission standards have been published
for  three hazardous air  pollutants. The hazardous pol-
lutants—asbestos,   beryllium,  and  mercury—are  the
first to be identified as such under the 1970 Clean Air
Amendments. The  proposed standards would apply to
various types  of  facilities producing,  manufacturing,
or using these substances or products containing them.
Both  existing and new plants would be covered.
  Hearings on  the proposed standards were held during
January  and February  1972. The standard for  each
pollutant is scheduled to be made  final shortly.
  The first group of new source performance standards
have  been  promulgated for steam generators,  sulfuric
and nitric acid  plants, cement plants, and municipal in-
cinerators.  The standards are  based on capabilities  of
the  best adequately demonstrated  emission reduction
systems, taking into account the costs. The standards
apply primarily to  new plants, but also to existing plants
which are modified in such a way as to increase or  alter
the  nature of their emissions. In developing these stand-
ards,  EPA conducted tests of existing sources, consulted
industry experts, studied  published  reports, and  con-
sidered available information on industrial practices in
the  United States and abroad.
  Two more groups of industries may be  covered by
proposed  new  source performance  standards during
1972. By that  time it is hoped that all the major sta-
tionary sources of  pollution will be  covered by either
ambient standards, hazardous pollutant standards,  new
source performance standards,  or a  combination  of

Mobile Sources Emission Standards

  EPA has announced several mobile source standards
that  will provide  the  90  percent  reduction  in  the
level  of  auto emissions  by 1975-76 required  by the
Clean Air Act.
  Final regulations by  which 1975  and 1976  model
cars will be judged for their compliance with the Clean
Air Act of 1970 were promulgated in 1971, including
standards for carbon  monoxide  and hydrocarbons be-
ginning with the  1975 model  year. These would  limit
emissions to  3.4 grams  of carbon monoxide and  0.41
grams of hydrocarbons  per vehicle mile.  By compari-
son, allowable  emissions from 1970 automobiles were
equivalent to 34.0 grams of carbon monoxide and 4.1
grams of hydrocarbons per vehicle mile in terms of the
test procedure adapted for use in 1975. The 90 percent
reduction in permissible levels is required in the Clean
Air  Act.
   EPA also has promulgated a new exhaust emission
standard for nitrogen oxides, which will limit emissions
to 3.0 grams per vehicle mile beginning  with the 1973
model year. This will be  the first Federal limit placed
on emissions of nitrogen oxides from motor vehicles.
By comparison, emissions from  1971 cars that are not
equipped  with  nitrogen oxides control systems average
4.0 grams per vehicle mile.  In addition, the regulations
require a  further reduction  in the  nitrogen oxides limit
to 0.4 grams per vehicle mile beginning  with the 1976
model year. This limitation is in accord with the Acts
requirement  for  a 90 percent  reduction in nitrogen
oxides by  1976.
   The new  regulations also provide for changes in the
present EPA  testing procedure,  beginning with  the
1975 model year,  which will more  accurately reflect
the driving experience of  the motor vehicle population
in major urban  areas.
   EPA has  also issued final regulations to require auto
makers to provide instructions  for the  proper main-
tenance of air  pollution control  systems. The regula-
tions  took effect  in  the  1972  model year,  although
their provision  for  EPA's review  of  these instructions
is not  effective  until the 1973 model year.
   The Clean Air  Act  authorizes  EPA to ensure that
motor  vehicles  remain in  compliance  with  Federal
emission standards throughout the vehicle's useful life.
   The new regulations define "useful life" as follows:
     For light-duty vehicles, five years or 50,000 miles.
     For  heavy-duty  gasoline  engines,  five years  or
     50,000 miles.
     For heavy-duty diesel engines, five years or 100,-
     000 miles.
   The regulations  applicable  to maintenance  instruc-
tions would  require manufacturers to provide informa-
tion on the  maintenance of exhaust, crankcase, and
evaporative-emission  control systems, and on ways to
identify and  correct malfunctions in those  systems.
   In May of 1971, EPA  conducted public hearings at
which  domestic and foreign automobile  manufacturers
were  requested to  describe their efforts to  develop
systems to meet the stringent  1975-76 emission limits.
The results  of  these  hearings are described in EPA's
report  to  Congress of  July 9,  1971, on the  develop-
ment  of systems to  reduce  automobile  emissions, and
are intended to provide information to assist in deter-
mining the  feasibility  of  producing low  emission  ve-
hicles by 1975.
EPA Federal Laboratory, Ann Arbor, Michigan: Tests begin
in the formulation of EPA National Air Standards.

  During 1971, the research and development program
for  stationary source air pollution  control moved for-
ward on a broad front, toward  the goal of developing
and demonstrating technology in support of the EPA
objective of enforcing and  preserving air quality in an
economic  and timely manner.
  A  significant part of this  effort in line with  the
President's Energy  Resources  Message  to Congress
June 1971, was devoted  to continuing work on  the
large-scale demonstrations  of  sulfur oxides  stack  gas
cleaning processes. Test programs have been underway
since mid-1970 and new tests will begin during 1972.
  Work in advanced processes has continued  in  the
development  of fluidized bed combustion  of coal  in
limestone  as  a means of providing  low-pollution, low-
cost power. Progress is also being  made  in the plan-
ning and laboratory  testing of several  other advanced
  Progress in the  area  of pollutant  control by  fuel
processing  has also been  made. The program on physi-
cal  desulfurization and  de-ashing of coal has reached
the point  where overall potential has  been reasonably
well  established. Further  work will  concentrate  on
washability testing,  already over 50 percent complete,
and will include pilot and demonstration activities on a
promising new approach uncovered in  work on desul-
furization and cleaning  of fine  coal.  A program  has
been initiated in cooperation  with  other  Federally
sponsored fuel conversion  projects to undertake pollu-
tant control evaluation and optimization.  A  new tech-
nique  for  chemical  desulfurization of coal was  es-
tablished  and  work  initiated on  denning  hazardous
pollutants contained  in fossil fuel.
  In the  industrial  process area,  progress  has been
made in several areas. In  the iron  and steel industry,
the primary problem of controlling pollution from slot-
type coke ovens is nearer solution because of the Coke
Charging  system under  a  joint, EPA-American Steel
Institute project. The system  is scheduled  to go  into
operation in  mid-1972. Other industrial process dem-
onstrations are in the contract negotiation or develop-
ment stage, including control  of sinter plants, Kraft
pulping operations,  iron  foundries,  and secondary alu-
minum furnaces.
  An R & D program to develop combustion modifica-
tion  techniques and technology to control nitrogen
oxides emissions was planned and  initiated. Although
the program  is only in its  infancy,  preliminary  results
from field testing of  utility  boilers and  in-house  studies
show that  combustion modification is  a generally  ap-
plicable method to significantly  reduce nitrogen  oxides
emissions.  Major emphasis is on coal  combustion,  but
the program  is  designed to develop technology appli-
cable to all fuels and boiler classifications.
  A prototype stratified charge engine being developed
jointly by the U.S. Army and the Environmental  Pro-
tection Agency has  met EPA's 1976 emission stand-
ards in initial low-mileage tests.  EPA and the Army,
together  with private industry, have  been working on
this program for the past two years. The  test engine is
mounted in  a one-quarter-ton light truck. A light  duty
motor vehicle does not fully meet the Federal  emission
standard until it  has demonstrated satisfactory reduc-
tions  through its useful life. It remains to be seen  how
well this  engine  will perform in  the durability tests.
However, this  engine, which is  one  of  three engine
systems  being  worked  on  as part of the Advanced
Automotive   Power Systems  Program, is the  cleanest
EPA  has ever  tested and  represents a significant ad-
vance in emissions control  technology. EPA is  increas-
ing its activity on this engine system,  hoping to further
reduce  emissions  while maintaining acceptable  fuel
economies and  durability.
   Other research on  low emission  vehicles   is being
carried out  under  the  Federal  Clean Car Incentive
Program. This program is intended to  stimulate the
development by private  researchers of unconventional
approaches  to the initial  1975-76 auto emission objec-
tives  of  the  Clean  Air Act, to provide data  to assist
EPA  in  evaluating the  auto  industry's effort  to  meet
those objectives, and to determine whether more strin-
gent  emission  reductions  may be possible.  The  first
contracts to deliver  prototype low-emission  vehicles
for testing  under this program were awarded during
1971. The  contracts  are  for the development  of  a
lightweight,  diesel-powered vehicle, the exploration of
a new approach  to  catalytic  muffler  systems  for  con-
ventional internal combustion  engines, and the devel-
opment  of  a hybrid  system using a heat engine and
electric  battery combination.  The contracts   call for
delivery  of  a prototype  vehicle and  exhaust  emission
test results,  and provide options  for  EPA to lease the
vehicle for testing.
   EPA started operations  this year of the first Federal
laboratory specifically  designed for motor vehicle pol-
lution control activities. The  laboratory, in Ann Arbor,
Michigan, is expected to play a vital role in the Federal
Government's efforts to insure a  low-pollution auto-
mobile by 1975 and in making the tests that are neces-
sary before   engines  used  in automobiles, trucks, and
buses can be certified as meeting Federal air pollution
control emission standards.


   Weather  stations at 10  U.S. cities have been desig-
nated  "regional air pollution monitoring  stations" in a
network that eventually will keep tabs on worldwide
air quality.

   The National Weather Service, a component of the
 Commerce  Department's National  Oceanic  and  At-
 mospheric Administration  (NOAA),  and EPA  will
 cooperate in the measurement and analysis of atmos-
 pheric turbidity (particles in the  air) and precipitation
 chemistry  (atmospheric  impurities in rain or snow).
 NOAA's  Environmental  Data Service will  store  the
 information  and disseminate it  in this  country  and
   To determine current  levels of air pollution so that
 meaningful control strategies  can be developed which
 will result in the national ambient air quality standards
 being met, it is necessary to have a broad base of data
 on air quality. Gathering and evaluating these  data are
 tasks that require  a joint Federal-State-local effort. To
 this  end,  EPA  operates  its  own air  monitoring net-
 work and also provides extensive support to State and
 local monitoring activities.
   State and  local governments have  the  primary  re-
 sponsibility for maintaining surveillance of air quality
 in their areas of jurisdiction.  Establishment and opera-
 tion  of air monitoring networks  are among  the pur-
 poses for which program grant funds provided  by EPA
 can be used by State and  local agencies.
   In  the  guidelines  promulgated by EPA in August
 1971, for the States in the preparation, adoption, and
 submittal  of  implementation  plans, minimum  require-
 ments  were  specified that must  be met  by  State  air
 quality surveillance systems as part of their implemen-
 tation plans.  Such systems must  be completed and in
 operation  not later than two years after EPA approves
 the plan. EPA  has worked with  State and local  agen-
 cies to evaluate their present systems and to  develop
 plans and  schedules  for modifying  and  augmenting
 them where necessary. Once implementation plans have
 been submitted  and adopted,  States are expected  to be
 able  to accelerate expansion of their monitoring activi-
 ties during 1972.
   An EPA-developed instrument  for measuring ozone,
 an important constituent  of  photochemical smog,  has
 come into general use. Because of its ability  to  oper-
 ate for long periods without any need for maintenance
 or recalibration, this instrument has grown rapidly in
popularity,  until it is now made  and  sold by  a  half-
 dozen domestic manufacturers and at least one  over-
   A second instrument, that  has  emerged from EPA's
 laboratories, measures nitric oxide (an important smog-
forming gas emitted by all combustion sources, includ-
 ing automobiles) by electronically sensing the radia-
tion generated in its reaction  with ozone. Five manu-
facturers now offer nitric oxide  analyzers sufficiently-
sensitive to respond reliably,  even to low levels of this
important pollutant.
  EPA's instrument development  group has  further
modified its nitric oxide analyzer  by adding a  catalytic
converter  that  changes  nitrogen  dioxide  into   nitric
oxide, thus making possible the measurement of "NOX",
 jargon for the sum of the concentrations of the two
 gases. Parallel measurements of  NO and  NOX,  sub-
 tracting the one from the other, provide the analyst with
 the ability to  measure nitrogen dioxide, which is more
 important from the health aspect.
   Following  the  enactment  of   the  Clean  Air  Act
 Amendments  of  1970, with its shift  of  emphasis to-
 ward the  measurement  and control  of  pollutants  at
 their  sources,  there  has  come  an  increasing aware-
 ness that at least,  for some time to come, most  source
 measurements  will be made by  adapting existing in-
 struments,  such as those described above, to the task.
 Because  the   levels  of  pollutants  to  be  measured  at
 sources are thousands of times  higher than  those for
 which the  instruments were designed, a  reliable dilu-
 tion system was required.  One such system,  with the
 added advantages of totally removing solids such  as
 soot or fly ash, and of operating without moving parts,
 was developed by  an EPA scientist and is being evalu-
 ated both by  EPA and by  several instrument makers.
   Through an interagency agreement with the Atomic
 Energy Commission, EPA is funding the development
 of  an X-Ray  instrument  that will permit the rapid
 measurement of a  large number of trace metals occur-
 ing in airborn particles. This research will eventually
 result  in  field instruments that  will  permit  detailed
 studies of  the  occurrence  of many  metallic and non-
 metallic elements in polluted air.
   EPA is  also supporting  an effort  at  the National
 Bureau of Standards in air pollution measurement tech-
 nology. For example,  NBS has  worked  with  EPA  to
 develop a  method for certification of sulfur dioxide
 permeation tubes for on-site calibration of monitoring
 devices. Similar calibration devices for carbon monox-
 ide, nitrogen oxides, and ozone are planned with EPA
   In  fulfilling  its  mission  of recommending  measure-
 ment  methods  and instruments to  the  States and local
 agencies, EPA has  undertaken  a  major program  of
 methods standardization. An important segment of this
 program involves the establishment of a laboratory or
 instrumental method as being "equivalent to", that is,
 producing the  same analytical result when  examining
 the same sample, as a specified standard  method.


   In  Fiscal Year  1972, EPA  estimates  of grants  to
 State, interstate, and local air pollution  control  agen-
 cies total $42.9 million, representing an increase of 42
percent over grants made  in  Fiscal Year 1971. The
Regional Activities Chapter summarizes  this  support
 for Fiscal Years 1971  and  1972.  Amounts  shown for
each State  include grants to local  control  agencies.
   EPA provides technical  assistance to  States in the
 adoption and submittal of plans to implement national
ambient air quality standards  as  authorized by  the

Clean Air Act Amendments  of 1970, including assist-
ance in the  development of air quality monitoring sys-
tems, emissions inventories, plans for effective enforce-
ment of standards, land use and transportation con-
trols, control regulations, and emergency episode plans.
After all implementation  plans  have been  submitted,
emphasis will shift to  insuring that States carry out the
   In addition to direct technical assistance, EPA has
contracted with 10 consulting firms, one  serving each
of the  10 EPA Regions, to  assist States  in preparing
plans on an  on-call basis. These companies are capable
of completing all phases of implementation plans, from
emission source inventory to  recommending  abatement
schedules. Many States took  advantage of this source
to assist them in meeting the  requirements of the  1970

   Section 312(a) of the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1970 requires an annual report to Congress on the
prospective costs and impacts of governmental and pri-
vate efforts to carry  out the provisions of the Act. The
1972 report includes cost estimates, computed 'for the
first time on a  national level, for controlling major  air
pollutants from most (but not all)  stationary and mo-
bile  source types. For mobile sources three  pollutants
are covered:  carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and  ni-
trogen oxides.  For stationary sources five pollutants are
covered: particulates, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide,
hydrocarbons,  and  nitrogen oxides.  Three general
classes of stationary sources are considered: solid waste
disposal  (open burning  and incineration), stationary
fuel combustion (heating and power generation), and
industrial  processes  (17 types).  Mobile source  types
studied include light duty and heavy duty road vehicles
only.  Stationary source control costs are projected  for
the five Fiscal  Years 1973—1977. Mobile source con-
trol costs are given for the 1968-1977 model years to
show  the relative impact of increasingly more stringent
Federal standards since 1967. In 1972, uniform  emis-
sion standards were selected without going through  the
various steps of emission inventories and diffusion cal-
culations to  determine  acceptable emission standards
for achieving air  quality standards in each  air quality
control  region. The basis  for  the  selections  was  the
sample limitation procedures promulgated  in the Fed-
eral Register, Volume 36, Number 158, Part II, "Re-
quirements for Preparation,  Adoption,  and Submittal
of Implementation Plans",  August 14, 1971.

Estimated Costs  of Reducing Air Pollution
   A  private outlay  of about $35 billion is estimated
over the period of Fiscal Years  1973-1977 to imple-
ment  the stationary and mobile source emissions reduc-
tions  postulated in the 1972  study. Mobile source con-
trols  are projected to cost $24.7  billion for the 1973-
1977  model years ($26.9 billion for the 1968-1977
model years).  The  cost of  controlling the stationary
source types is projected to  be $10.1 billion. All cost
estimates  are in  1970 dollars.
   Table  2  compares the source emission reductions
likely to be achieved in Fiscal Year 1977 under assumed
emission standards with potential emissions from these
 Hollywood Freeway 8:30 A.M.
                                                                                              Documerio.i Photo

source  types  if  no  controls  were implemented beyond
those normally found  in practice.
   The  Fiscal Year  1977 costs of the control technology
likely to be used by the sources studied are given both
as total investment  in  that year  (purchase plus installa-
 tion cost)  and as annualized cost  (capital charges plus
 operating and  maintenance costs).  Federal, State and
 local  subsidies  (accelerated  amortization,  investment
 tax credit, etc.) have not been considered in calculating
 private industrial  emission control costs.
   TABLE  2.—National  Emission  Reductions and  Costs  Under Assumed  Standards  for  Fiscal Year 1977
                  (Cost  in 1970  Dollars) '
Source Class

Mobile Sources 4
Solid Waste Disposal . . .
Stationary Fuel Combustion:
Small & Intermediate
Steam-electric power
Industrial Process Studied:
Asphalt Batching
Coal Cleaning 	
Grain Plants: Handling
Gray Iron Foundries . .
Iron and Steel 	
Kraft (Sulfate) Pulp . . .
Nitric Acid 	
Petroleum Products &
Petroleum Refineries
Primary Nonferrous
Copper . . .
Secondary Nonferrous
Sulfuric Acid . . . . .
Industries Not Studied . . .
Miscellaneous Sources Not
Studied 5 	
National Total 6

Emission Reductions and Cost Under Assumed Standards
Emission Level without further control 2 rwrpjxp nf Pnmcmn I PVPI Total Contro1 Cost
(Thousands of Tons per Year) "percent) ^ (Millions of Dollars





. 10,150

1,490 165,000
260 6,720

7,660 —
27,600 —
35,260 —

— —
— —
— —
— —
— —
— —
— —
— —

3,010 12,100

3,335 —
213 —

— —
920 —
8,033 15,900
1,530 9,750

280 19,740
46,850 217,110
28,000 9,900 4
2,530 510 96

— 4,800 84
— 6,000 49
— 10,800 72

— — 86
— — 93
— — 93
— — 94
— — 88
— — 96
— — 85
— — 94
— 230 —

1,349 — —
197 — 59
— — 54

— — 33
— — 89

— — 83
— — 74
1,546 230 86
1,610 — 0

7,750 5,250 0
41,440 26,690 39
4 66 72
0 92 86

83 — —
90 — —
88 — —

— — —

— — —
— — —
— — —
— 94 —
— — —
— — —

— — —

— — 78
99 99 94

89 — —

— — —
81 — —
89 98 80

81 57 17
NOi Investment
44 $
0 $

0 $
0 $ 4
0 $ 5

— $
— $
— $
— $
89 $ 4
0 $

0 $
60 $10




*+ j.








8,385 7






  1 Standards assumed  in the  1972 Report to Congress,  "The Economics of
Clean Air " Blanks in the table indicate that  emission levels meet applicable
regulators  or that emissions are negligible or do not exist.
  2 Emission abbreviations are  particulates (Part), sulfur oxides (S0«), carbon
monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons (HC),  nitrogen oxides (NOO.
  3 Projected costs are  the initial investment  expenditures for purchasing and
installing control equipment (total investment)  and the continuing annual costs
for interest, property taxes, insurance, depreciation, etc.,  and for  operating
and  maintaining of equipment  (ultimate annual cost). Cost of  government
programs is not included.
  * Includes light  duty and heavy duty road vehicles  only. Control of par-
ticulate and sulfur  oxides  from mobile sources was not considered in this
  5 Forest  fires,  structural  fires,  solvent evaporation,  agriculture  burning,
natural gas production and  transmission, coal refining, etc.
  ' To nearest 10,000 tons.
  7 All mobile  source emission control investment costs are  assumed  to be
expended in Fiscal  1977  Annual costs  are  based on Alternative  1 in  Table 3-3
for meeting 1975 and 1976  vehicle emission  standards.

  The aggregate price impact  of private investment in
air pollution control is projected to result in less than a
one  percent cumulative increase in  consumer prices
through  1977, with over half of the increase caused by
a 10 percent rise in the price of new automobiles. Other
key price increases projected are four percent for  elec-
tric power, and 2.5 percent for iron and steel, cement,
and  sulfuric acid.  The remaining projected industrial
price increases are  1.5 percent or less.
  An examination of  the impact on  families of different
income  levels indicates that  middle  income  groups
would be affected  relatively  more  than  low  or  high
income groups.
  New  construction  is  the investment  activity  most
heavily affected by projected price increases. New public
utility construction is affected most because of increased
prices for copper,  electricity, iron and steel, iron  cast-
ings  and  passenger cars and trucks. Higher passenger
car and  truck  prices will increase investment  costs for
transportation. Projected price increases will also  raise
prices for machinery,  electric industrial equipment and
apparatus and communications equipment.
  Export prices for agriculture products, chemicals and
chemical  products and passengers cars  and trucks
would increase,  but  the net  impact  on  exports  and
balance of payments  is difficult to predict because the
relationship  of demand to projected price increases  is
  Thus,  the net adverse economic impact of the stipu-
lated air  pollution  controls is projected to be small.

Benefits  of Air Pollution Control
  The direct  and  indirect  costs  of pollution  control
should be judged  in  comparison with the direct  and
indirect costs of the damage which  could be mitigated
by such control.
  Quantitative scientific information on the extent of
damage caused by these pollutants to health and welfare
is substantial enough  to indicate the need  for Federal,
State, and local abatement programs, but still  far short
of the level of detail needed to  assess monetary damage
costs with the same precision as control costs. Neverthe-
less,  it is possible  to  develop crude  estimates of the
pecuniary costs of air  pollution damage to health, mate-
rials, vegetation,  and property  values.  Extrapolating
from data presented  in  a  1970 study by  Barrett  and
Waddell1 for the Public Health Service, the total U.S.
emission  levels,  without application of the standards
assumed in the 1972 report, imply direct costs of human
mortality and  morbidity in the neighborhood  of  $9.3
billion annually, and damage to property values around
$8 billion annually, for a total annual damage  cost of
about $25 billion  by  1977.  The  extrapolated damage
costs are given in  Table 3.  The Barrett-Waddell study
   1 "The Cost of Air Pollution Damages: A Status Report" by
Larry B. Barrett and Thomas E. Waddell, Public Health Serv-
ice, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, July 1970.
TABLE 3.—Projected National Annual Damage Costs'
             By Pollutant  in  1977  (1970 Dollars  in
    Damage Class
Health  	   $3,880 $ 5,440 $ 3    $3   $ 3 $ 9,320
Residential Property	   3,330   4,660   3      3     3   7,990
Materials and Vegetation.     970   3,680  1,700   1,250   01   7,600
   TOTAL  	   $8,180 $13,780 $1,700  $1,250  $ * $24,910
  1 Based on  "The Cost of  Air Pollution  Damages: A Status  Report" by
Larry  B. Barrett and Thomas  E. Waddell, Public  Health  Service, Department
of Health, Education and Welfare, July 1970.
  2 Assumed proportional to HC emissions.
  3 Not available due to lack of data.
  4 Assumed to be neglig.ble.

did not include health costs ascribable to CO, HC, NOX,
and  oxidants (Ox) because of an almost complete lack
of data upon which to base any estimates. (Oxidants are
irritant components of smog produced in the atmosphere
by the interaction between HC, NOX, and  sunlight.)
When, in  addition, the as yet  unestimated  pecuniary
costs of air pollution  effects on industrial,  commercial,
and  cultural property,  esthetics, visibility, odor, soiling,
etc., are considered, the $25 billion total appears rather
   Table 4 attributes  projected  1977 damage  costs by
source class, assuming strict proportionality between the
total weight of a  pollutant emitted by a  source class
(Table 2), and the damage cost of the  pollutant as-
signed to the source class in Table 3. On this basis, sta-
tionary fuel  combustion ranks  as the most damaging
source class, while solid waste  disposal  (incineration)
is the least damaging.
TABLE 4.—Projected National Annual Damage Costs'
            By Source  Class  in  Fiscal  1977 (1970
            Dollars in Millions)
Source Class
Solid Waste 	
Stationary Fuel Combustion . . .
Industrial Processes Studied . .
Industries Not Studied . . . .


$ 220 2
. 4,950 3
. 1,780
. . $9,320

Damage Class
Resi- rials
dential and
Property Vege-
$ 190 $1 740
190 200
4,240 3,650
1,530 920
1,080 460
760 630
$7,930 $7,600

$ 2 150


  i Based on "The Cost of Air Pollution Damages: A Status Report" by Larry
B. Barrett  and Thomas E.  Waddell,  Public  Health Service,  Department  of
Health, Education and Welfare, July 1970.
  2 Health damage costs due to CO, NOx, and 0» not included due to lack of
data. Entry is health damage cost ascribed only to minor amounts of vehicle-
related particulate and SO*  and, therefore, considerably understates probable
  3 Health damage costs due  to H0\ from  stationary fuel combustion  not
included due to lack of data.

   It should be understood that this method of allocating
damage  cost  by source class assumes that a unit of
emission of a certain pollutant from one source is as
uniformly damaging as a unit of  emission of the same
pollutant from  another  source. In the case of  mobile
sources,  it is  possible these  assumptions considerably
understate  attributable health damages. This possibility
derives from the fact that auto exhausts are so near to
people's  breathing level  and autos are so concentrated
where urban populations walk, work, and drive.
   If reductions  in damage are equated to benefits, then
it is possible to compute from the foregoing assumptions
and  data  a crude estimate  of  the  value  of  benefits
obtained from the emission reductions summarized in
Table 2. Table  5 gives the projected national  annual
benefits  (damage cost reduction)  attributable to these
emission reductions in Fiscal Year  1977.  Under  the
assumptions made, computed  total benefits  in 1977 of
$14.2 billion  are generated by the  $12.3 billion esti-
mated to be spent in that year for emission control—
a benefit/cost ratio of over one-to-one. When it is con-
sidered that due to lack  of data the value of the health
benefits generated by reductions in CO, Ox, and NOX,
has not been  included in Table 2, then the one-to-one
benefit/cost ratio appears conservative.
   The lack of data on the health  costs of CO, Ox,  and
NOX  seriously biases  the results in Table 5  against the
efficacy of mobile source emission controls. However,
in 1977, without the controls mandated by the Clean
Air Act, mobile sources would produce nationally 76
percent of  national Ox (smog) formation.
   Research sponsored  by EPA now  underway is  ex-
pected to lead  eventually to better  data for ascribing
damage  costs to different pollutants  and  their  interac-
TABLE 5.—Projected National Annual Benefits (Dam-
            age Cost Reduction) By Source Class in
            Fiscal 1977  (1970 Dollars in  Millions)
Benefit Class
Source Class
Mobile . . 	
Solid Waste
Stationary Fuel Combustion
Industrial Processes Studied
Industries Not Studied . .

3,812 2
$ 945
$ 945 '
$ 8,385 3
  Walue of benefits from reducing CO, NCK, and HC emissions not available
due to lack of data.
  ' Health damage  cost due to NOx from  stationary fuel combustion not in-
cluded due to lack of data.
  3 Based on Alternative 1 in Table 3-3 for meeting the 1975 and 1976 vehicle
emission standards
  •t Benefit  computation based on proportional reduction of damage costs in
Table  1-3 excluding "miscellaneous" source damage costs since these are
generally not controllable and, therefore, can not become benefits.
tions. Presently,  however,  the  assignment  of  damage
cost to pollutants lacks a solid empirical basis. Accord-
ingly, the cost-benefit results presented above should be
considered as very tentative.

Consideration  of  Other Abatement Strategies

   In August  1971, EPA published guidelines for the
States in developing regional abatement implementation
plans for  achieving  the national  ambient  air quality
standards for the  pollutants studied in this report.  The
emission  reductions simulated in the  1972 report are
based on  the  same  emission limitations  given in the
guidelines, but no attempt was made to  relate these
reductions to regional changes in air quality.
   Ideally, strategies could  be developed which achieve
the national  ambient air quality  standards  by the legal
deadlines at the least net cost to  the region affected. To
do this, however, requires a detailed emission inventory
of sources in each region where the ambient air quality
standards are violated plus  very detailed information on
the cost and efficiency of control techniques and fuels
available to  those sources. The use  of computerized
meteorological dispersion models would then be needed
to translate emissions from these sources into average
concentrations at points within the region where stand-
ards are being violated Once the meteorological impor-
tance of  each  source to these points is estimated  and
the  cost  to  each source  to  achieve  certain  levels of
emission  reduction is also  estimated, it would be pos-
sible to compute the set of source  emission reductions
which achieves the air quality standards at "least cost"
to the region.  The "least cost"  approach to achieving
national air  quality  standards will require that  some
sources abate  their pollution to different  degrees than
others because of differences in  location  and process
   The emission controls for stationary sources assumed
in the 1972 report are probably  more representative of
strategies expected to be proposed in State abatement
implementation plans than any other set of  controls
which could be postulated for  a nationwide  estimate.
Yet in many cases the actual regional approach imple-
mented will be less expensive than that assumed in this
report,  and  in  a few  selected  regions  more  costly
methods  will  be  employed and still not  succeed in
reaching  air quality  standards by  1975.
   In some regions the critical pollutants are those asso-
ciated with mobile sources. New car emission standards
are set  nationally, but options  available to a  State in
controlling pollution from mobile sources include adopt-
ing  policies  to  encourage  and support  urban  mass
transportation  systems and to  discourage the current
heavy reliance  on  private automobiles, requiring retrofit
of in-use automobiles  with effective emission control
devices, requiring conversion of private and public fleets
to cleaner gaseous  fuels, instituting  state  systems for
inspection of proper operation of  mobile source  emis-
sion controls and improving urban traffic patterns.

  Almost any day, in the United States, the signs of
water pollution in large population centers and in the
countryside can be seen. Pollution may appear as  sur-
face oil  slicks, in which  old  tires,  debris and picnic
remnants are  trapped  and float sluggishly by, or  evi-
denced by public  health notices warning the citizen not
to swim  or wade  in the water. Pollution may be mani-
fested in less obvious ways by masses of aquatic weeds
and bad  taste in the drinking water supplies. Even more
subtle will be the often unseen-changes in the aquatic
life of the river,  the loss  of sport fish and increase of
sludge worms and other  "tolerant"  life-forms such as
   This   urban  example  is repeated  throughout  the
Nation.  As  society and  economy  have  grown,  the
wastes generated  by population  and technology have
increased. Population  growth is  a principle pollution
factor. In 1971,  the Nation's population was well  past
the 200  million  mark.  This  number of people  is ex-
pected to double  in the next 50 to 60 years. Staggering
demands will be  placed  on  our natural  resources to
support  this  population.  Waters  are needed  for  con-
sumptive purposes, such  as non-recycled public water
supply,  food production and processing, and some in-
dustrial uses, as well as for non-consumptive uses,  such
as reaction, industrial cooling, and sport and commer-
cial fishing.  As  demands for water will increase, so
will the production of wastes that threaten the environ-
   Not  only  the   rate  but the pattern  of  population
growth   concentrates  and magnifies  pollution. Urban
and suburban sprawl covers  green spaces  and reduces
clean environment in the  very areas  where people most
need  it.  Intensive  development has occurred particu-
larly along the Nation's coastlines, in the very estuarine
areas most  sensitive to environmental degradation. In
the President's  1972  Environmental  Message special
attention is  given to these areas. Amendments are  pro-
posed to the Internal Revenue Code to limit in coastal
wetlands certain  Federal  tax benefits for new develop-
ment, thereby discouraging unnecessary development in
these environmentally critical  areas.
  Higher individual incomes and expectations have led
to increasing demands for food and  consumer goods,
for  more and  better housing and highways and for a
whole range of conveniences. In most  cases, production
of wastes is "built-in" to technology;  as industrial  pro-
duction increases, with attendant demands for water, so
does the per  capita  production  of  wastes,  many of
which find  their way to the waterways.
  Consumer use and production of goods have greatly
increased the demand  for electric  power—power  pro-
duction has doubled every 10 years since World War II,
and this rate is expected to continue. Great amounts of
water are used in producing electricity, and waste  heat
from both  fossil fueled and nuclear  generating plants
constitutes  a  serious,  and  increasing, threat  to  the
Nation's waters.
  Not  only is the volume  of industrial production in-
creasing,  but the  very  complexity of  the products and
wastes  creates  severe  challenges for waste  treatment
technology. New chemical products  appear on the mar-
ket every day, often without sufficient research into the
environmental consequences of using them.
  Mining and transporting natural  resources  also  pose
increasing dangers for  the environment. Greater use of
supertankers and  pipelines to transport oil  and hazard-
ous materials,  as well as increasing  use of offshore and
underwater mining, will greatly increase the dangers of
accidental oil pollution and other hazards.
  The growing popularity  of  deep  well  disposal of
wastes  presents yet another  serious  threat  to water
resources. Although  carefully controlled deep well in-
jection may contribute to groundwater management,
improperly  carried out, this method of disposal  may
result in contamination  of groundwater  or  intercon-
nected surface  water  supplies.  A  proposed  Toxic
Wastes Disposal Act would regulate  disposal of toxic
wastes on  and under  the land pursuant  to  guidelines
established  by  EPA.
  Production  of  greater  quantities  of better  quality
food for  American citizens has caused increasing pol-
lution  problems.  Higher agricultural productivity  has
been based on irrigation and use of chemical fertilizers
and  pesticides.  Runoff  carries salts and chemicals,
many of  which are highly  toxic and  have long-lasting
environmental effects, into streams.  These diffuse waste
sources are most difficult to control or treat. The  pos-
sibility of irreparable and  disastrous  ecological  conse-
quences,  particularly from persistent pesticides, has led
to increasing  demands for controlling or eliminating
their use; no one can predict with certainty the impact
of such a move on agricultural productivity.
  EPA is  developing  an index to  evaluate water pol-
lution. This index uses data which  measures  deviations
from established standards for water quality as a basis.
It describes bodies of water with respect to prevalence,
duration, and  intensity of water pollution.
   In  1970, an assessment of the  prevalence of pollu-
tion indicated  that 27 percent of America's stream miles

were  polluted. In  1971, 29 percent of  the  Nation's
waters were polluted. Although the assessed prevalence
of water pollution  in  1971 indicated an increase, dif-
ferences in the methods and data used  in  the calcula-
tion make  comparisons difficult.
   Every part of the U.S. has some water pollution, but
it  is  not distributed uniformly.  In  1971, there were
almost twice as many polluted stream miles east of the
Mississippi River than west of it.
   The 1971 pollution index considers the duration and
intensity as well as the prevalence  of  pollution.  The
relative  water pollution  of  the  Federal  regions,  in
Table 6  is  not significantly changed when the frame  of
reference shifts from prevalence of pollution to  one  of
prevalence, duration, and intensity.
   The distribution of pollution becomes  more  appar-
ent when the  focus is shifted from political to natural
drainage basin boundaries. The degree to which water
pollution is concentrated  now becomes  evident. Three
Basins (Ohio, Southeast, and Great Lakes)  contain 23
percent of  the nation's stream miles, but 49 percent  of
the polluted stream miles  (Table 7).  Extensive pol-
lution is very nearly limited  to the Ohio, Great  Lakes,
and Southeastern  drainage  systems,  and  though the
Northeastern watersheds are in a class  with the other
three, with  respect to duration  and intensity of pollu-
tion,  they tend to dominate  that measure as well.
   On the basis of the available data, of the  four ap-
parently significant shifts in reported  pollution that
took  place in the Ohio, Gulf, Missouri,  and Northeast-
ern Basins—three  are so  obscured  by variations  in
procedure that it is difficult  to evaluate the degree of
real change.  Both  the  Gulf and  the Missouri  Basins
reported an enormous improvement in compliance with
water quality  standards. But in each case, the 1970
assessment failed to make allowance  for legally sanc-
tioned breaches of water quality  criteria that resulted
from  precipitation; and  in  both cases,  that exception.
is significant. In the case of the Ohio River Basin, the
1970  assessment concentrated on the quality of major
waterbodies  overlooking smaller  tributaries.   But  in
Ohio  many  streams are polluted at the source as a re-
sult of acid drainage of mountain coal  mines.  Failure
to account for this total prevalence of pollution in 1970
is at least partly responsible for the increase in reported
pollution in 1971. Thus  the conclusion is that substan-
tially  the same number of river miles were polluted in
1971  as in 1970.
  It should be  noted  that the line  of water pollution
does  seem to be holding in face of rising population
and industrial production. Also, while national statis-
tics do not indicate a  marked  change in water  quality,
some  individual water bodies have been  notably im-
proved, e.g.  Lake  Washington.  In coming years,  as
comparable  data are developed, the water pollution in-
dex will be able to  better identify  trends  in water
pollution for the Nation.


  Federal  enforcement   authority on  interstate and
navigable waters has  been strengthened  over the years
since  initial enactment of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act in  1956.  The most significant increase in
these  authorities stemmed from the Water Quality Act
of 1965,  authorizing  the establishment  and  enforce-
ment  of  water quality  standards for  interstate and
coastal waters.
  The water quality standards authorized by the  1965
legislation are  the keystone  of America's clean water

                  Washington, D.C.:
               Debris collected from
                   the Potomac and
                    Anacostia rivers
                       by students.

program.  The Act  called upon  the  States to establish
standards for their interstate waters.  These State stand-
ards could then be  accepted  as  Federal  standards by
the Secretary of the Interior (now by the Administra-
tor of the Environmental Protection Agency). To set
standards, the States had to make crucial decisions in-
volving the desired  uses  of their water resources, the
quality of water to support these uses and specific plans
for achieving such levels of quality.  The standards are,
in effect,  blueprints  for the national  program.
   Water quality standards are composed of three parts:
those uses that are designated for each separate stretch
of interstate or coastal  waters, the criteria established to
assume that these uses will be attained and a plan  of
implementation  and enforcement which outlines  the
pollution  abatement measures which will  be required
to meet  those  criteria. First  responsibility for imple-
  TABLE 6.—Relative Incidence of Water Pollution

EPA Region

1 Boston . . . . . .
II New York
III Philadelphia
IV Atlanta
V Chicago . .
VI Dallas
VII Kansas .
VIII Denver
IX San Francisco . . . .
X Seattle
Continguous U.S 	
East of Miss. River
West of Miss. River . . .




42 4
34 7
37 9
64 5
21 5
12 5
25 0
19 4


as a


2 7
11 7
19 4
13 1
3 1
7 4
7 2
menting  and enforcing water  quality  standards  rests
with the  States. But, once accepted by the Administra-
tor, the standards become Federal standards and are
subject, if  necessary, to Federal enforcement.  In the
absence of timely and acceptable action by a State to
adopt water quality standards on interstate streams, the
Administrator can initiate action to  establish  Federal
standards. Heavy emphasis has been  placed on  resolv-
ing differences so that State standards  can  be  fully
approved. Negotiations have been  underway  with the
States concerned, and  a number of States have agreed
to complete their standards.
   Even where standards have been approved,  there  is
a  need to  refine and  improve  certain aspects of the
water quality criteria to assure that the criteria  applied
will adequately protect the  intended  water uses.  Con-
tinued emphasis must be given to improving our knowl-
edge of  water quality  characteristics  and requirements
and incorporating this  information in approved criteria.


   Effective  implementation  and enforcement  of water
quality standards, development  of  regional and basin
plans,  administration of grants and preparation of re-
ports  assessing costs of pollution  control and abate-
ment progress require  up-to-date, accurate and  readily
available data. This has always been a requirement, but
the need has intensified  with the establishment  and
implementation  of water quality  standards  and the
resulting  necessity  of  identifying  priorities  in waste
treatment facility construction.
   Thus,  EPA has been expanding its data collection
activities to identify compliance  and  noncompliance
with water  quality standards;  improvements  in water
quality resulting from pollution abatement  measures,
such  as  waste   treatment  facility  construction;  and
emerging water  quality problems that  should  be cor-
rected before crises arise.
            TABLE  7.—Water Pollution Index Summarized for Major Drainage Areas,  1970 & 1971
Major Watershed
Great Lakes
Middle Atlantic ....
California . . ...
U.S. Less Ohio
U.S. Less Columbia ....
28 992
. . . 21,374
.... 28,277
. . . 260,324
231 332
7 443
59 870
Polluted Miles
11 604
5 685
52 268
+ 13,746
+ 1,381
+ 2,191
— 6,072
+ 869
+ 2,499
— 5,001
— 2,420
— 1,758
+ 5,435
— 8311
+ 7,193

  A portion of a coordinated State/Federal water qual-
ity monitoring network is already in operation. It pres-
ently  utilizes approximately  400  stations funded  and
operated by EPA,  220  stations funded by EPA,  and
operated by the U.S. Geological Survey, 200 stations
jointly funded  and  operated  by the State and Federal
agencies, and 5000 State-funded and operated stations.
Data  from this network will  be  supplemented  by the
findings of the many short-term intensive field  studies
of specific water quality problems that are conducted by
  In addition to water quality data, detailed knowledge
of waste  sources,  treatment and discharges is  also
necessary. Municipal sewage and industrial wastes are
the two largest sources of pollutants. EPA completed
the processing  and  analysis of data on municipal waste
facilities which was collected in a  cooperative Federal-
State  inventory. Because the  need  for timely and accu-
rate  data  in  this area is so critical, procedures were
developed and  implemented  for keeping  the inventory
updated. Data  from the implementation plans of the
water quality standards are being  correlated to  and
integrated  with  the inventory  to show schedules for
providing additional municipal  waste disposal facilities.
  As for industrial wastes, an inventory of industrial
manufacturing and processing plants has been  initiated
on a voluntary basis to  obtain data on discharges other
than those into navigable waters.
  Again, data  from the implementation plans of the
water quality standards will be a valuable  addition to
the inventory. This inventory, like that  of municipal
facilities, will be continuously updated.
  With the recent and pending water pollution control
legislation, data  on waste sources and discharges  have
become  even more important. States are required to
show that a proposed municipal facility is a part of, and
in conformity with, a  basin, regional or metropolitan
pollution  control  plan  before  the  project  is declared
eligible   for  a  construction  grant.  Regulations   also
prescribe the provision  of data on all waste discharges
TABLE  8.—Water Quality Standards Approved Under the Federal Water Pollution  Control  Act,  as Amended
                                             (as of February 1972)

































New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico














TABLE  8.—Water Quality Standards Approved  Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as Amended
New York

North Carolina

North Dakota





Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota















                                                        West Virginia







                                                        District of Columbia

                                                        Puerto Rico
                                                        Virgin Islands

                                                        FA—Fully approved  water  quality standards—anti-     46
                                                            degradation  statement included
                                                        F—Approved  water quality standards—antidegrada-      1
                                                           tion statement not included
                                                        PA—Partially approved water quality standards-—anti-      4
                                                            degradation  statement included
                                                        P—Partially approved water quality standards—anti-      3
                                                           degradation statement not included
                                                                         STATUS SUMMARY
                                                        Fully approved with antidegradation statement (FA)    46
                                                        Standards approved wholly or in part                54
                                                        Approved antidegradation statement                 50
in the immediate proximity of a proposed plant which
may affect its design and operation. For these reasons,
additional data will  be required on wastes  character-
istics and strengths.
   In addition to the municipal and  industrial inven-
tories,  a new collection effort has  been initiated  to
provide data on thermal discharges from electric power
generating plants. By agreement with the Federal Power
Commission,  data for  this inventory  are  collected  by
that agency through a  questionnaire on  the environ-
mental control information.
   To achieve the objectives of a coordinated informa-
tion program, it  is essential that the data collected be
evaluated and made  available to all users. EPA's exist-
ing computerized data Storage and  Retrieval system
(STORET)  makes  these data  available  for  analyses
and use by both  State  and Federal  organizations.
   Quantitative analyses of  changing trends in water
quality, and of the progress in abating pollution nation-
wide,  will  be essential in guiding the course of  the
national water pollution control effort. It will also con-
tribute to  the  assessment  of national  environmental
conditions  and  trends  required  under  the National
Environmental   Policy  Act  of  1969  by  indicating
whether we are gaining or falling behind in pollution


  Basin and regional water quality management plan-
ning are essential in pollution control. They are directed
at protecting both  the  private and public  investment
interests  in water quality  through attainment of the
water quality standards in a cost effective manner.
  Clean  water  will  be achieved  only  by  controlling
present and future wastewater discharges in river basins.
It must be insured that these results are lasting;  that
actions today are adequate to meet the  needs of the
future; and that provision is made for the future growth
of population and industry.

            A.         J           ,       /
                                       Docuinericji Photo
   Discharge from Denver Metro Sewage Treatment Plant into
   South Platte River, Denver.
  For these  reasons, water quality management plan-
ning is a major element not only of the water program,
but also of the  total national effort for environmental
enhancement. EPA  participates not only in the water
and  related  land  resource  planning  programs  of the
Federal establishment, but  joins with local and State
government in their  development of water quality man-
agement plans both  in river basins and regional areas.
  At the Federal level, EPA's water planning activities
are mainly of two types.  The first type, participation in
the general planning for the development of the water
and  related  land  resources in  entire river basins, is
normally  conducted under  the aegis of  the  Water
Resources Council. In this type of study, EPA's mission
is to assure that not  only water quality, but  all environ-
mental aspects, receive due  recognition in the develop-
ment of the Nation's land and water resources.
  In  addition to Federal basinwide resources planning
activities, EPA reviews proposed water resources proj-
ects on an  individual basis to assure that these projects
do  not have an  adverse effect on  the  environment.
Storage for  water quality may be included  in many
Federal  reservoirs but  only  after the  best  practical
methods of treatment of wastes is undertaken.
  EPA  assists  State and  local government in  their
development of water quality  management plans for
river basins and regional areas.  These plans  provide the
basis  for the  public  investment  to  construct  water
treatment facilities. (See  the Regional, State, and Local
Activities chapter for more information.)
  In order to maximize the effect of Federal assistance
in planning at the State and  local level, EPA has imple-
mented a formal  agreement with the  Department  of
Housing and Urban Development  and  an  informal
working  arrangement with the  Farmers Home Admin-
istration  through which EPA's planning guidelines are
used by these agencies. The aim is to assure that Federal
programs  avoid  duplication  of  effort  and provide
quicker service to State and  local entities.
  Mathematical models  are the basis for an effort to
provide nationwide river  basin models for planning pur-
poses. In order to  stimulate the States' interest in whole
basin systems rather  than individual projects, the models
will be tailored to simulate those water quality parame-
ters deemed  most important in each basin now  and in
the future.
  Planners will use the models  to predict the effects on
water  quality of  alternative wastewater  management
schemes  in  the basin.  By  analyzing alternatives  the
planners can select a cohesive  comprehensive plan for
the basin to provide  cost  effective  answers to  such
questions as treatment, sophistication, staging of waste-
water treatment controls, possibilities of regionalizing
treatment facilities, effects of  proposed impoundments
on water quality,  effect of nonpoint sources of  wastes
throughout the  system, potential for  algae problems in
an estuary  and a host of others.
  This effort is using the expertise within EPA,  joining

TABLE  9.—Number of Spills Reported by Regions for Month of March
Total Spills Reported for March 1972-191
Total Spills Reported for 1972        -682
Federal and State forces in a coordinated  attack on
some massive  planning problems and stimulating the
application of  modern  techniques by State  and local
planners to act effectively to protect and revitalize the
Nation's essential water resource. Basins and regional
plans provide  a blueprint  for both  meeting  present
pollution  abatement  problems and  avoiding  similar
problems in future years.

  Over 10,000 spills occur annually in the navigable
waters of the  U.S. Spills are defined as  non-continuous
discharges  or  dumping which occur  as  a result of
accidents,  malfunctions  of  equipment,  human error,
deliberate discharges of bilge or ballast  water and con-
venience dumping of hazardous materials and  oil  into
sewers, streams,  estuaries or coastal waters.
  Approximately 75 percent of the spills involve petro-
leum products and include crude oil, refined products
ranging from  grease to gasoline and waste lubricating
oil. In the last year, over 2000 significant spill incidents
occurred and those account for about 90 percent of the
total volume of oil spilled.  It is  estimated that  over
15 million gallons of oil were discharged.
                 Sources of Oil Spills
                    (1970 Data)
                  % of total number
                                    % of total volume
Vessels  	   33
Onshore Facilities ....   19
Offshore Facilities ....   24
Other	   24
  The remaining  25  percent  of  the spills involve
hazardous materials which  include poisons,  corrosive
materials, oxidizing agents,  radioactive materials, and
other compounds and mixtures which severely affect the
aquatic environment. Specific materials include creosote,
ammonia nitrate, combined  pesticides and insecticides,
chromic acid, isopropyl alcohol, polyethylene latex, and
zinc cyanide. The  toxicity of individual substances is
the critical factor to be considered.

   For both oil and hazardous materials the source of
the discharges is  linked to transport, transfer,  storage,
manufacturing and production operations. The goals of
EPA are  to eliminate  the spills, reduce  discharges re-
sulting  from operational  practices and  minimize  the
impact  of spills  on the environment. To  accomplish
these goals, a three phase program has been developed
by EPA and the  Department of Transportation largely
through the U.S.  Coast Guard and the Office of  Pipe-
line  Safety which includes  response,  prevention and
   In this  regard the National Oil  and Hazardous Sub-
stances  Pollution Contingency Plan has  been  revised
and  updated to reflect the role of EPA during emer-
gencies  involving spills. In accordance with the  Plan,
EPA maintains the  lead  role  in  providing advice on
environmental priorities, cleanup techniques and serves
as on-scene coordinator for inland spill incidents. EPA
is  also responsible for continuous updating and revision
of the National Contingency  Plan  and for providing a
Chairman for the National Response Team.
   Initiation of EPA's ability  to respond  to  a major oil
spill occurred  just as it was  formed. On December 1,
1970, a production well on a Shell Oil Company plat-
form exploded, igniting  adjacent  wells.  An estimated
4,000,000 gallons of oil were spilled during  a period of
4l/2  months. This major disaster resulted in the loss of
four  lives, the destruction  of millions  of dollars  in
equipment and immeasurable damage to the environ-
ment. EPA continuously provided technical assistance
to the U.S. Coast  Guard and the U.S. Geological Survey
in addition to the conduction of extensive assessments
of biological damage.  The Arizona Standard  and the
Oregon Standard collided under the Golden Gate Bridge
during  a   heavy  fog.  About  20,000 barrels of oil
escaped along the coastline and into the Bay  proper.
EPA assembled a team of scientists to investigate and
document  the extent  of  environmental  damage.  An
emergency response  contract was  activated to  provide
remote sensing coverage of the oil  spill.
   On June 2,  1971, EPA, at the request of Ohio, pro-
vided direct support in the removal of endrin (a highly
toxic pesticide) which had  been  deliberately dumped
into  a small lake near Portmouth,  Ohio. The endrin
destroyed  all aquatic life in the lake and had the poten-
tial to prevent the use of the lake for years unless all
traces were removed. EPA  provided   the  expertise,
design and construction  of a carbon absorption filter
which treated the lake water and  removed  the  endrin.
   On June 20,   1971, after  an agricultural chemical
warehouse fire, EPA received a  request from North
Carolina to provide emergency assistance for  the re-
moval of a mixture of pesticides and herbicides trapped
in  drainage ditches and a swamp. Immediate action was
required because  of the  toxic  fumes surrounding  the
area,  residual  chemicals  in the destroyed foundation,
and  the  potential of  seepage into a  nearby public
water  supply  well.  EPA's  expertise  was provided
New  Orleans, Louisiana 3/10/71: Oil leaks  from offshore  well!:.
New Orleans, Louisiana: A dynamite blast extinguishes an  oil well fire.
                                                      * - ,3

enabling the successful treatment and disposal of the
material at an isolated and sealed burial site.
  In  addition to response  actions by regional teams,
EPA  established emergency response contracts with six
technical firms to provide support to Regional Offices
during major spills.  EPA was  to  provide assistance  in
conducting chemical, physical and  biological studies and
performing remote sensing services. These services were
activated on five occasions during the past year.
  During 1971, EPA has provided on-scene coordina-
tion or advice  on 60 percent  of  the major incidents.
The continuing success  of  the response program  is
dependent  upon  rapid action  at  the  State and  local
levels. Many  coastal  States now have response pro-
grams, and  EPA is  encouraging all States,  local agen-
cies and port  authorities  to  develop  similar programs.
EPA  published criteria  to  aid States, municipalities
and industries in preparing emergency planning.
  It  is estimated that during  1971  over  12  million
gallons  of  oil remained  in  the environment and less
than  one percent of  the hazardous  materials spilled
were removed or mitigated. Greater emphasis must be
placed on rapid action by  the discharger and  more
effective cleanup methods. Regulations specifying meth-
ods and procedures for removal of oil  and hazardous
materials  are being developed. In order to disseminate
current research information EPA co-sponsored,  along
with the  American Petroleum  Institute  and  the  U.S.
Coast  Guard, the 2nd Conference on Prevention  and
Control of Oil Spills  which was held in Washington,
D.C., on June 15-17, 1971.
   The positive solution of the spill problem is through
prevention. Regulations to prevent oil spills from non-
transportation related  facilities  are currently being de-
veloped by EPA. Emphasis has been placed on fail-safe
design concepts to minimize  human error and reduce
equipment failure.
   A  special prevention  study by industries at four
major industrial areas  was completed in February. This
report has served as  the basis for development  of an
EPA  prevention program to reduce spills by  requiring
industries which handle, store, manufacture and  trans-
   In March, 1972, a barge carrying liquid chlorine became
   stuck to  the Me Alpine Dam at Louisville, Kentucky, and
   could not be set free. If the tanks on this barge were punc-
   tured the liquid chlorine would be turned into a poisonous
                                       Documerica Photo
gas that could devastate Louisville. In^the days that followed,
the E.P.A. along with the Coast Guard, the Army Corps of
Engineers and local groups fought this accidental environ-
mental crisis.

port oil and hazardous materials to submit a spill pre-
vention plan. This program is being carried out through
the Refuse Act Permit Program. A special provision is
included  in selected  industry permits  which  requires
that a  plan be submitted for approval by EPA.
   A study  was  completed by  EPA,  the District  of
Columbia,  Maryland  and Virginia to evaluate the oil
handling practices in  the Washington area and to ini-
tiate a prevention program. A similar  study  of Balti-
more Harbor was jointly funded  by EPA and Maryland
to determine the  sources, causes and  steps to be taken
to eliminate spills of both oil and  hazardous  materials.
Although the primary efforts of  EPA have  been di-
rected  to response and  prevention  of  spills  in  U.S.
navigable waters, significant steps have been taken  at
the international  level to reduce discharge and spillage
into the  oceans  and boundary waters. In the  U.S./
Canadian Conference on Great Lakes Pollution, two
studies were  completed involving response to and pre-
vention of spills. EPA provided the sub-group chairman
for the study on prevention of spills from onshore facili-
ties and  served on the committees for development  of
a joint U.S. contingency plan and prevention methods
for vessels.
 EPA  provides input to the Inter-Governmental Mari-
time Consultative Organization  (IMCO) and its Ma-
rine Pollution sub-committee. With IMCO's expanding
role to prevent  operational and accidental discharges
of oil and hazardous  materials into the oceans, EPA's
efforts  have been increased to provide  guidance at the
international level to ensure compatibility of interna-
tional criteria with that of the U.S.
   In the coming months,  emphasis will be placed  on
promulgation of  removal  and prevention regulations.
These  regulations, together with the  provisions of the
1970 Water Quality  Act relative to the  reporting  of
oil and hazardous materials spills,  the penalties for ille-
gal discharges of  oil,  the penalties for failing to comply
with regulations  and  the liabilities for  the cleanup  of
oil spills, will be actively enforced.
   Contingency plans  at  the Regional,  State and local
levels will be updated and  refined in  order to integrate
new technological concepts associated  with detection,
surveillance,  prediction, containment, cleanup  and dis-
posal of  oil and hazardous materials. Federal, State and
local agencies will be encouraged to develop  contin-
gency  plans  within the coming  year.
   Response  to  hazardous  materials  spills  will  be
strengthened. A technical advisory group on hazardous
materials will be  formed and consist  of experts in toxi-
cology, biochemistry,  medicine and other related fields
to study  the problems of personal safety and the threats
to public health.
   With the promulgation of the oil prevention regula-
tion, an  active program will be  initiated for non-trans-
portation facilities. Efforts will be directed toward post-
spill   inspections  to  determine  compliance  with
regulations and the Corps of Engineers Permit Program
prevention schedules.  Offshore facilities  will require
special review to insure  compliance with regulations.
  "Fail-safe"  design requirements  are essential to the
development  of  an effective program. Analysis studies
will be continued for facilities and Federal installations
handling,  storing, manufacturing  and transporting  oil
and hazardous materials. Findings  will be used to pre-
pare guidelines,  regulations, manuals and model codes.
  EPA training  seminars have been held and are neces-
sary at  a  local level to keep abreast of new technology
to minimize  discharges.  This program will provide a
constant exchange base for new technology.
  On a continuing basis EPA  will participate in inter-
national activities dealing with tanker operations, de-
sign, ocean dumping,  designation  of  hazardous mate-
rials,  technology transfer, and  other related programs.
Through  the  Department of State, advice and  assist-
ance will  be provided to  other countries and operational
programs, such  as those  with Canada and IMCO.

   EPA is responsible for conducting a series of activi-
ties designed to promote an  adequate supply of safe
drinking water for all Americans.  These activities in-
clude the establishment of standards for potable water.
The standards  apply directly to over 600  water sup-
ply systems serving interstate carriers  (trains, planes,
busses,  and vessels). These systems also serve a resi-
dent population of 80,000,000 people.
   As of luly  1,  1971,  there were 658  water supply
systems  serving interstate carriers. Five  hundred and
twenty-nine of  the systems were in general  compliance
with the federal drinking water standards and classified
as approved. One hundred and twenty-nine systems were
not in  compliance with  the  standards. However, the
deficiencies  were  not  sufficient to prohibit their use,
and they were therefore approved  on  a  provisional
basis. During  1971, seven supplies were classified use-
prohibited due  to serious  violations  of the drinking
water standards.
   Although Federal enforcement action, taken through
the Food and Drug Administration, is limited to pro-
hibiting  interstate carriers from using supplies  which
may cause the spread of communicable  disease,  most
States  have adopted the  standards and  apply them to
all community water supplies.
   EPA conducts evaluations of  State water  supply pro-
grams  at the  request of the  States.  The findings and
recommendations  are used to upgrade State programs.
In 1971, an evaluation of Tennessee was completed and
similar  evaluations were initiated  in  Maryland,  Ken-
tucky,  New Mexico, Wyoming and Idaho.
   EPA  is  conducting  a  series  of  pilot   studies  of
Federally-assisted  water  supply systems to determine
their adequacy and safety. A study has been completed
on water supplies  constructed by the Corps of Engi-

neers at recreational areas in  Ohio and Indiana.  A
similar study has been  initiated on a series of Bureau
of Reclamation water  supplies in  Kansas, California
and  along the Colorado River. Plans have been devel-
oped to study water supply systems serving the travel-
ling  public along  Federal  interstate highways in  Vir-
ginia, Oregon and Kansas.
   A pilot  study  of bottled water  has  also been  con-
ducted,  and a report of findings is being prepared.  In
addition  to  conducting studies, EPA  provides  a  pro-
gram of training and technical assistance to upgrade
water supply systems. A variety of courses is  available
at the  National  Environmental Research Center  in
Cincinnati. Selected courses are conducted at various
field locations.
   EPA makes federal  funds available  to aid the  con-
struction of new  or improved  municipal  sewage treat-
ment plants and experimental pilot  plants. These grants
are explained  in the Regional,  State, and  Local  Activi-
ties Chapter.
   In 1971, a  survey was  conducted to update  EPA
estimates of  the  scope and  cost  of  construction  of
municipal  waste  treatment facilities, planned through
Fiscal  Year 1976—which are  needed to meet current
water  quality standards implementation  schedules,  or
other current standards or enforcement  requirements.
   The  survey was  directed  to  2294  municipalities
whose population  was greater than  10,000  persons,
or whose  facilities  were  serving  more  than  10,000
persons. The estimated  total cost of constructing needed
waste treatment facilities for the five-year period Fiscal
Year 1972 through Fiscal Year  1976 for these mu-
nicipalities  is just  over $14  billion.  This estimate  is
based  on  1971  construction  costs and excludes the
cost of needed combined sewer overflow  control facili-
ties.  When the  construction  needs for  communities
less  than  10,000  are included, then the total  cost of
projects planned  over  the period Fiscal Year  1972
through Fiscal Year 1976 reaches $18.1 billion.


   Technical assistance is  another  key program avail-
able to  help States solve  pollution problems. A  great
many of the water  pollution problems facing the Nation
call  for technical  study  to  determine the sources or
causes of the pollution and to find the most  appropri-
ate abatement measures to remedy the  situation. Often,
the problem is complex and requires extensive field and
laboratory study.  Acid mine  drainage, coastal  and es-
tuarine pollution,  groundwater contamination, and pes-
 ticide  and  toxic  chemical pollution  are examples  of
 pollution problems for which  the most effective and
 appropriate  corrective  action  is  frequently  unknown
 and for which specific technical study is necessary  be-
 fore abatement action  can be pursued.
   EPA assists the  State, interstate  and other  water
 pollution control agencies and individuals in develop-
ing their technical  capabilities and  provides financial
assistance for this  purpose  through program  grants.
These agencies conduct a great many technical investi-
gations required to carry out an effective water  pollu-
tion control program, but frequently they find it neces-
sary  to call for outside assistance to handle problems,
or parts of a problem, which exceed their capabilities.
To meet these needs, EPA provides technical assistance
of various kinds ranging from  technical advice  and
consultation to extensive, long-term  field  and labora-
tory  studies. Within the  limits of available  resources,
this assistance is provided on request, primarily  to the
State  and  interstate water pollution control agencies,
but also to other public  agencies, including other Fed-
eral agencies,  and individuals.
   During 1971, EPA  responded to over 55 major re-
quests for technical  assistance  and innumerable re-
quests for  advice, information, reviews  and  comments
on technical problems.
   EPA operates both a voluntary  fish kill reporting
system and an  emergency  fish  kill  response system.
Examples of assistance  available to State agencies in-
vestigating a  fish kill are  field  investigation,  sample
analysis and autopsy of fish  to establish cause of death.
   Abatement and control of industrial sources of water
pollution in 1971  involved development of effluent in-
formation guides for 20  basic industrial categories, the
application  of advanced waste  treatment  techniques,
guidelines for review of Refuse Act Permits, a  volun-
tary national industrial waste inventory, and technical
support for enforcement, standards compliance and the
Justice  Department's  pursuit of legal  actions  against
polluters.  In 1972, effluent guideline development will
continue with emphasis  on types of industry not  pre-
viously studied.  Criteria  are   being   developed for
ocean and deep well disposal. Expertise will  be  used  to
review Refuse Act Permit applications, the  implemen-
tation of effluent  monitoring, ocean  disposal  permit
review, assistance in upgrading  wastewater treatment
and technical support  to enforcement actions.
   In  1971, technical assistance to State, interstate and
local agencies, and to universities, industry and individ-
uals  accounted  for  approximately  20,000 technical
assistance acts. These include:

   EPA's  application and implementation of demon-
   stration  and research  findings  by other agencies
   and the mining industry concerning mine drainage.
   Projects  in the  control  of Animal  Wastes,  Irri-
   gation  Return Flows  and  General Land Runoff,
   Highway Construction and  Land  Development
   Wastes, Logging  and Forestry Wastes and Prob-
   lems with Rural Sanitation Facilities.
   A  National  Eutrophication Control  Program has
   begun which involves a field survey of the extent of
   eutrophication in  1,200  lakes of the  U.S.   The
   survey also includes the use of questionnaires. The
   other aspect of the program is the implementation

Tires discarded in  Lake Tahoe.
                                                                                              I)oeuim'ric;i  Photo
  of methods to control the extent of eutrophication
  in lakes and impoundments. The means of controll-
  ing eutrophication is by reducing the amount of
  phosphorus  entering into the  water bodies,  pri-
  marily  through  upgrading or  constructing treat-
  ment facilities.

  A program designed from the  National  Estuarine
  Pollution Report to maintain the national data base
  needed to combat estuarine, coastal, and oceanic
  pollution problems effectively,  to assist  States in
  developing effective  attacks on such pollution,  and
  to support enforcement and research directed at
  such problems.  This program includes an oceans
  islands  project to  combat unique pollution prob-
  lems  in these  particular ecosystems.

  Efforts  in  preventing  freshwater  pollution  are
  continuing. Upgrading and development of criteria,
  technical  assistance, special  Great  Lakes  and
   eutrophication control programs, deep well  dis-
   posal, and surface and ground waters are areas of
   vital concern.

  Another important  part  of  technical  assistance to
State and local governments is the Manpower Develop-
ment and  Training  Program. EPA's main objective in
manpower is to assure that there is enough skilled man-
power, both  professional and  sub-professional,  in all
sectors of the economy to meet EPA's mission to abate
and control pollution. All of EPA's program activities
require trained manpower to  accomplish their  goals.
Thus,  EPA must  assure that  manpower in requisite
numbers and  skills are available at the times and places
needed to  get the job done. The intention of this objec-
tive is  not that  EPA should build massive programs to
train  and supply all  manpower  needs. Rather, EPA
should provide  leadership and develop programs to fill
the unmet needs.


  EPA has been conducting a series of economic studies
aimed at gaining  deeper understanding and assisting
the Executive Branch and the Congress in formulating
national policies  and legislation. Studies have  been
undertaken and are continuing to provide estimates for
the total municipal and industrial  costs for  achieving
current water quality standards. Areas included in the
studies are combined  sewer  and storm overflow control
costs; effluent guideline cost criteria; and costs of non-
point sources of pollution  including mining,  oil spills,
agriculture and thermal and  radioactive discharges from
power plants. Collectively,  these  studies represent the
most intensive and comprehensive effort ever made to
understand the costs of water pollution control.
  The findings of EPA's economic studies are submitted
to Congress  annually. The first report projected munici-
pal  investment requirements for the period 1969  to
1973 and assessed the impact of funding required to
meet municipal waste treatment needs on the  municipal
governments  and  bond  markets. The  second  report
examined the influences that determine investment levels
and  concluded that the critical factors were to be found
in the dynamics of the situation, in the interaction of
investment with  time-conditioned growth, replacement,
and  demand for  higher  plant efficiencies.  It was  also
found that regional cost differences, transmission costs,
and the influence waste loadings were extremely impor-
tant  factors in analyzing the economics of water pollu-
tion  control.
   Various aspects of the socio-economic problems of
water  pollution  were presented in the  second report.
These included  discussions  and conclusions  about in-
vestment trends and needs, Federal cost sharing, priority
systems for  grant  funds, public treatment of industrial
wastes and  regional waste  handling systems. In  addi-
tion, several  estimates discussed in earlier reports were
reviewed  in  view  of the latest  available information.
These included  investment estimates  for  collecting
sewers, separation of storm sewers, industrial waste
treatment and cooling facilities,  and sediment control
and  acid mine drainage reduction.
   The Water Quality Improvement Act  of 1970  re-
quired  that   a complete  investigation and  study of all
methods of financing the cost of water pollution control,
other than methods authorized by existing law, be made
and the results submitted to Congress by December 31
of each year. To meet this requirement, EPA structured
a study which dealt with pollution sources of all types
including, but not limited to, municipal, industrial, agri-
cultural, land and  acid mine drainage, oil and accidental
spills and debris.  Questions of responsibility, ability to
pay and equity  were addressed in allocating potential
funding requirements among the  private sector and the
various levels of government. The  study examined the
feasibility of a wide  range  of financing possibilities in
the light  of  the  analysis  outlined  above.  Potential
methods included conventional financing; loan arrange-
ments;  user, influent  and  effluent  charges;  taxation;
insurance-type  arrangements  and others. In  addition,
potentials  for reducing financing requirements by means
of structural policy alternatives were assessed.
   The Economics of Clean  Water 1972 further investi-
gates  the methods and means  for financing the costs of
water  pollution  control,  concentrating on industrial
water use, discharge and treatment. The report analyzes
the use of water by industry as a raw material; outlines
the major assumptions and  data  sources for the calcu-
lation of industrial waste  treatment  costs; presents the
range of capitalization levels and  annual costs that have
been  calculated to coincide  with levels  of industrial
effluent treatment dictated by  current interpretations of
water quality  standards; evaluates treatment  currently
provided to industrial  wastes  by  industry-supplied and
public waste  treatment  plants;  and,  finally,  assesses
manufacturers' waste treatment investments since 1968,
projects investments and annual  costs consistent with a
policy of  full compliance with   effluent standards  by
1976, and relates those costs  to  annual cash flow and
prices of manufactured goods. The following are  some
specific results of the most  recent Economics of Clean
Water 1972.

Industrial—Capital Expenditures

   The costs (in billions of 1971 dollars) of the com-
ponents of the level of industrial waste treatment as of
 1968 are:

     Total capital required to meet quality
        standards  	    $8.1

     Available capital stock as of 1968 .. .    $3.9
          Industrial  treatment  ....   $2.4
          Public waste treatment
            serving industry	   $1.5

     Unmet capital demands  as  of  1968. .   $4.1

     Unmet capital demands  as  of  1971. .   $3.0

   These figures  as presented in Table 10  are broken
down by industrial categories. Capital requirements are
distributed through the various  manufacturing sectors
in a manner that strongly reflects their water use  char-
acteristics  and has only a  slight correlation with out-
put  values. Chemical manufacturers,  primary metals
production, pulp and  paper production, petroleum re-
fining,  and food processing account,  respectively,  for
27 percent, 18 percent, 17  percent,  12 percent and 11
percent of the  indicated  investment,  and 29  percent,
32 percent, 15 percent, nine percent, and five percent of
reported water intake. That there is a concentration of
water use within industries is  shown by the fact that 85
percent of the  capital  requirement  associated  with
water  pollution abatement comes  from  only  a  little
more than a third of values  added by manufacturers.

   These figures are current as of 1968 and are only an
approximation because  data  are reported on industrial
investment in a  manner  that will not permit  direct
correlation with the calculations made in this  report.
The $3.9 billion of works-in-place  as of 1968 appears
to represent  about 50 percent of the waste treatment
required by  water quality  standards with,  however,
enormous variation in degree of compliance to be found
between one industry and another.
  The above figure of $8.1 billion  to cover capital re-
quirements dictated by current interpretations of water
quality  standards was obtained by  use of an industrial
cost model. Industrial waste treatment costs (Table 10)
are dependent on flow  volumes, residuals characteris-
tics, waste   segregation  opportunities  and   available
technology.  Such  considerations  are  generalized for
industrial categories and  then evaluated  on the  basis
of reported flows and flow to  cost relationships, in order
to calculate treatment costs for such treatable discharge.
Such treatment costs may vary greatly  depending  on
the efficiency with which abatement procedures are ap-
plied in  any  given plant,  even within an  industry. Al-
though  the most  likely  level of capitalization is  about
$8.1 billion,  it could  be as high as $12.2 billion.
   In the eventual  resolution of the  industrial  waste
handling situation,  it is not  likely  that  the maximum
investment of $12.2  billion  will occur under existing
abatement requirements.   The  association of  capital
requirements with water  use practices has  enormous
implications  for  the  dimensions  of ultimate  costs.
Higher  treatment  costs,  other  things being equal, are
a direct consequence of wasteful use  of  water. Water
is wasted largely because it has  had many of the char-
acteristics of a free  good.  Imposition of a wastewater
treatment requirements—or other  cost-incurring  con-
straints  on water utilization—will, it has been demon-
strated both in theory and in practice, lead to produc-
tion  practices that are less water-intensive, and  thus
have lower  associated waste treatment  values.
  Several modifications of the  evaluation model  were
attempted in order to arrive at a  realistic assessment
of capital  requirements.  One  took  into  account the
modification  of water utilization practices that accom-
panies  installation of waste treatment as well as hard-
ware and construction costs. Without altering the re-
lationships among treatment process components, water
use coefficients were  substituted for the  observed  ones
—though all substitutions were made by recourse to
observed conditions—and  investment and annual cost
calculations were  produced to  reflect the altered  vari-
ables. The most likely investment level  ($8.1  billion)
is  thought to  be  the one associated  with "median"

Industrial—Annualized Costs
  The  initial capital  cost  of facilities  represents less
than a fourth of the  total cost of industrial waste treat-
ment. Once  installed, facilities  must be operated and
maintained. Given the composition  of the set of treat-
ment requirements evaluated here, operation and main-
tenance  accounts  for 35   percent of the  annual  cost.
Interest, at current  rates,  accounts  for  a large share
of annual charges for waste treatment.  Some 40 per-
cent of  the annual costs of the  modelled treatment sys-
                      TABLE  10.—Industrial Waste Treatment Situation Summary, 1968

Food & Kindred Products
Lumber & Wood Products
Paper & Allied Products
Chemicals & Allied Products 	
Petroleum & Coal 	
Rubber & Plastics 	
Stone Clay & Glass
Primary Metals 	
Fabricated Metal Products
Electrical Equipment 	
Transportation Equipment

(1971 dollars) 	
By Industry
	 343 2







tem, and 27 percent of the annual costs of the system
of works that industry reported to be in operation  in
1968, can  be attributed to interest  payments implicit
in the value of the capital stock. To make the sequence
of major and minor replacement expenditures required to
sustain  the stock of physical  capital, the firm faces a
continuing  capital demand, one that is  estimated  to
equal the capital cost within a 20-year period, and  to
account for 25 percent of the  annual  costs of the mod-
elled system of waste treatment works. The annual costs
(operation, maintenance,  debt service,  and  replace-
ment)  associated with the $8.1 billion capital invest-
ment requirement is $1.6 billion. The annual cost asso-
ciated  with the  higher  $12.2  billion  figure is $2.4
   The  projected cash outlays associated  with attain-
ment of effluent standards over the  years  1968-1976
that manufacturers must  anticipate is  $20  billion (1971
dollars) (Table 11). While incremental annual costs
will probably amount to only  about two-tenths percent
of aggregate values added by manufacturers, up to four
percent of  total capital spending of some industries will
be required to comply with standards, and  as much as
one percent of values added  in some industries  (pulp
and paper,  steel) will be added by waste treatment costs.
If such costs were absorbed,  the  incremental costs  in
1968  would have reduced the pre-tax profits of manu-
facturers by  nine-tenths percent.  However, as seems
more  likely, if additional costs are passed  on  to  con-
sumers, with  full  maintenance  of margins, prices  of
manufactured  goods may increase by 0.1  percent.

Municipal—Capital Expenditures

   The estimated total  cost of constructing waste treat-
ment  facilities planned through  Fiscal Year 1976 and
needed to meet current water  quality  standards  or
enforcement requirements is  $18.1 billion,  (Table 12)
according to a survey  conducted by EPA.  However, a
lower estimate of $14.3 billion  of required investment
to achieve water  quality standards by  1976  resulted
from  the Waste Treatment Facilities Evaluation model
(Tables 13 and  14).
   As  well as  differing from the model estimate, the
1971   survey  estimate  differs from the 1970 survey
estimate of $12.6  billion. Among the reasons for this
variance are:  a different time period for each survey;
a  15  percent  inflation  rate in the cost of construction
in the period  between  the two surveys; a tightening of
water  quality standards or  implementation schedules
in certain situations; and more  comprehensive assess-
ing and reporting.
 TABLE  11.—Projected  Cash Outlays Associated With Attainment of Discharge  Standards  by 1976 (Median
OUTLAYS, 1968-1976


Food & Kindred Products 	
Lumber & Wood Products 	
Paper & Allied Products 	
Chemical & Allied Products 	
Petroleum & Coal 	
Rubber & Plastics 	
Stone, Clay, Glass 	
Primary Metals 	
Fabricated Metal Products 	
Electrical Equipment 	
Transportation Equipment 	
Manufacturing Total 	
(1971 Dollars) 	
Maximum Cost Total 	
(1971 Dollars) 	
Minimum Cost Total 	
(1971 Dollars) 	






( 9,936)

    •Rate of improvement in water productivity is greater than rate of growth of output.

TABLE  12.—Survey Results of  Estimated Construction Cost of Sewage Treatment  Facilities Planned for the
               Period  FY  1972-1976 (Millions  of  1971  Dollars)
                                                     FY-1973 >
                                                                  FY-1974 '
         TOTALS	  5,278.2       6,080.0       3,198.2       2,236.5       1,289.3       18,082.2
Alabama 	     33.5           9.6           9.5           7.9           5.1           65.6
Alaska  	      4.1          26.4           2.3           7.5            —           40.3
Arizona	     10.7           8.9           —           6.2           1.4           27.2
Arkansas  	     12.5          27.7          11.3          10.0            —           61.5
California    	    280.4         930.9         218.4         369.0         340.8        2,139.5
Colorado	     23.3          14.4           8.4          30.0           6.1           82.2
Connecticut   	     96.2          95.1          53.5            —            —          244.8
Delaware	      7.8           8.8          79.0           2.5           5.6          103.7
Dist. of Columbia	     62.7          40.9           —            —            —          103.6
Florida  	    313.0         125.7          89.4         106.3          17.0          651.4
Georgia	     36.3          89.6          15.8            —          12.6          154.3
Hawaii  	     15.0          28.5           4.6          24.1            —           72.2
Idaho  	     15.7           8.6           7.4             .3            .4           32.4
Illinois  	    336.7         332.5         240.8         382.9          38.7        1,331.6
Indiana  	    161.3         207.2         121.7          22.1          27.6          539.9
Iowa  	     16.8          78.8          72.7          21.8           7.2          197.3
Kansas  	     19.8          28.8           5.9           3.2          11.6           69.3
Kentucky	     46.8          35.0          14.3          39.5          27.1          162.7
Louisiana 	     68.5          40.6          28.2          17.7            .1          155.1
Maine 	     25.4         100.5          15.0          35.4          25.0          201.3
Maryland  	    201.5         204.0         214.6          15.7          36.6          672.4
Massachusetts  	    206.5         190.8         149.9          80.0            —          627.2
Michigan	    331.8         523.2         307.3         100.4         130.0        1,392.7
Minnesota 	    142.3         112.1          41.5          30.8          12.9          339.6
Mississippi  	     32.5          17.4           7.4          14.5          18.2           90.0
Missouri 	       9.2         160.0          71.9          38.1          27.4          306.6
Montana 	     13.7           2.7           7.8            —           3.0           27.2
Nebraska 	       1.8          28.7          23.5          24.1          15.7           93.8
Nevada 	        .4          30.7          10.8            1.3            —           43.2
New  Hampshire	     21.3          36.9          62.8          58.5          10.5          190.0
New Jersey	    461.9         554.4         105.6         299.6           6.3        1,427.8
New  Mexico	     17.8          12.8             .1            —            —           30.7
New  York 	   1,047.1         422.4         140.8         102.0         167.2        1,879.5
North Carolina	     36.6          66.5          31.3          18.2            1.1          153.7
North Dakota 	       1.4           3.7           1.7            —            .3            7.1
Ohio  	    277.2         250.3         313.3          62.7         156.8        1,060.3
Oklahoma 	     14.4          24.2          28.5            8.1          39.8          115.0
Oregon  	     41.5          72.3           9.9          13.0          12.6          149.3
Pennsylvania  	    187.2         343.3         259.0         105.8            1.2          896.5
Rhode Island 	       9.9          35.6          25.7           —             —           71.2
South Carolina	     31.2          29.5          33.3          18.8          17.8          130.6
South Dakota 	       9.3            1.7           2.8            3.3            .9           18.0
Tennessee  	    120.6          31.0          17.4          11.9            7.8          188.7
Texas 	    127.5         165.5         110.3          34.4          11.5          449.2
Utah  	     14.5            3.5           2.5            1.4            5.5           27.4
Vermont 	       5.3          13.5          13.5            6.3           3.7           42.3
Virginia 	    100.0         243.3          81.1          11.0          61.5          496.9
Washington	     38.1          67.8          23.8          52.6            5.8          188.1
West  Virginia 	     38.2          32.5           2.1          23.0            —           95.8
Wisconsin 	    135.1          97.2          21.3            6.6           3.9          264.1
Wyoming  	       1.5            2.4            —            —            —            3.9
Guam 	       2.2          10.5            —            4.1            .7           17.5
Puerto  Rico 	       4.2          48.6          76.0             .8            .5          130.1
Virgin Islands 	       8.0            2.5           2.5            3.1           3.8           19.9

                             ' Separate costs for FY 1973 and FY 1974 estimated from FY 1972/1974 total.

   The evaluation model results in an estimate of $14.3
billion needed to be invested during the period Fiscal
Years  1972-1976 in order tb overcome deficiencies in
present facilities and to keep pace with growth, capital
replacement and inflation. On the other hand, the sur-
vey result  of $18.1  billion  is an aggregation of State
and local estimates of  their  construction activity  dur-
ing this  same period. There are several basic metho-
dological differences between the survey and the model:

     The model uses statistically derived cost func-
   tions,  whereas the survey  relies  on community-
   generated cost data.
TABLE  13.—Five-Year  "Backlog" Capital  Elimina-
             tion Schedule (Millions of 1971 Dollars)
Year End
. . . 1706.1
. . . 784.9
. ... 0.0

Total Investment, 1972-1976

"Backlog" . .
Recapitalization . .

Recapitah- Invest-
zation ment '

588.4 2870.9
682.2 2870.9
777.6 2870.9
874.6 2870.9
972.9 2870.9
  1 Includes 7.5 percent cost increase factor for the period.
     The  model uses  statistically estimated growth
   and replacement factors  and calculates  the con-
   struction required to maintain the capital stock of
   treatment  plants and to  provide  for additional
   population and industrial wastes.

     The model also includes a specific factor which
   adjusts  for  price increases in construction activi-
   ties. As noted in the survey  discussion, State and
   local intentions are  expressed in 1971 dollars.

   A primary purpose  of the survey is to give an indi-
cation of  each local  government's construction  plans
in the municipal waste  treatment  sector.  The  survey
reflects the summation of local activities which,  when
viewed in  the aggregate, presents an estimate of desired
construction activity which may or  may not commence
during the period  Fiscal  Year  1972-1976, e.g.  com-
pressing  of  the  20   year  California  program  into
five  years. The purpose of the model is  slightly dif-
ferent in that it provides an estimate  of the investment
activity between  1972 and  1976  that  local  govern-
ments will be required to undertake in order to  main-
tain  their current  growth and  replacement needs and
make progress toward constructing those facilities re-
quired to meet water quality standards.

Evaluation of Benefits and Costs

   Aside from the specific  municipal  and industrial
sectors, attention to the  marginal benefits and costs of
various treatment levels from a national point of view is
necessary to insure that the water pollution goals sought
are defensible  in terms of their net benefit to society.
TABLE 14.—Model  Investment Schedule Investment  Needed  to  Reduce  Backlog by  1976 (Millions of 1971
California . . ...
Colorado . . .
Dist of Columbia
502 4
617 2

Louisiana . . . .
Maine ... 	
Maryland . .
Michigan .
Mississippi . .
Nevada . .
New Hampshire . .
New Jersey . . .
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina .
North Dakota


Oklahoma . . .
Rhode Island
South Carolina 	
South Dakota
Virginia . ...
Washington . . .
West Virginia ....
Puerto Rico 	
Virgin Islands 	

. . 186.6
1 205 8
28 7
. . . . 315.8



An analysis of the marginal costs and benefits to levels
of treatment suggests:
   Because costs  accelerate rapidly as higher levels
   of  treatment are  achieved (Table  15 and Table
   16) the total cost of meeting very high levels of
   treatment  approaching  zero  discharge could be
   many  times those required to meet current water
   quality standards.
   The  improvement  in beneficial  uses of  water
   from a no discharge policy is likely to be  modest
   compared to the costs.  The ultimate goal  of any
   pollution control  program is to achieve  certain
   environmental  quality objectives. These goals have
   traditionally been set forth in standards of  quality
   that deal with preventing adverse effects or  achiev-
   ing  certain beneficial uses.  For example,  higher
   water quality provides such beneficial uses as water
   supply, recreation and fish and wildlife. The least
   costly method of  meeting these objectives  is to
   tailor  effluent  reductions  to  meet those ambient
   objectives. To  the extent  that the effluent reduc-
   tions are  more  stringent than  those which are
   required, excessive  costs are incurred needlessly.
   This is  particularly true at  high  control levels
   where control  costs escalate very rapidly. A study
   of cost and benefits in the Delaware Estuary per-
   formed  by  the Federal Water  Pollution  Control
   Administration illustrates the  relationship of bene-
   fits to costs in  the following table:
TABLE 15.—Index of  Pollution Control  Investment
              Costs Related to Level  of  Abatement
Oxygen (mg/1)
Index of Costs
of Control
Index of
  The Delaware study is now nearly a decade old.
  EPA recognizes the paucity of information con-
  cerning  economic  measures  of  benefits  and  is
  making  a concerted  effort to  refine  costs  and
  develop  methodologies for  quantifying benefits.
  A  number  of  adverse  environmental  impacts
  would occur  such as higher energy consumption
  and solid  waste problems.  Disposal on land will
  increase dramatically,  resulting in potential  soil
  and water contamination. High effluent  limitations
  would also encourage deep-well disposal with great
  potential  for  long-term damage  to  underground
  water  supplies.
  Large resources  devoted  to achieving small  in-
  creases in water quality benefits have the effect of
  withdrawing  resources  from other  environmental
  efforts or other national priorities.
Level of
100 . .
98 ... .
Percent of
... 3
. . . 10
. . 	
Cost Per
Percent of
TABLE 16.—Total Control  Costs as  a Function  of
              Effluent Control Levels
  Index of
 Control Costs




 Source:  Interior 1965 Saline Water Conversion Study
       Young and Pisano: "Nonlinear Programming Applied to Regional Water
       Resource Planning".

       FWPCA: Cost of Clean Water, 1968, Volume I

       FWQA- Cost of Clean Water, 1970, Volume IV.
  Although considerable insight into and understanding
of the economics of water pollution control have been
gained through .past studies, there are still many unan-
swered questions  concerning the  costs  of  pollution
abatement and  the impact that  efforts  to cleanse our
environment will have on the national  economy.  The
challenge,  however, is  clear: if the Nation's water re-
sources arc to be enjoyed without the burden of increas-
ing water pollution, now is the time  to institute prudent
action to clean  up our streams.  The  people and their
government have accepted  the challenge.  HPA reflects
their  determination and will  give continuing  emphasis
to devising policies and programs which  will create  a
cleaner environment  in the  most expeditious  and  eco-
nomical manner.



  Solid waste problems vary widely across the United
States, but  are generally characterized by unnecessarily
high collection costs  and disposal practices  that  are
environmentally and aesthetically unacceptable. These
problems are most  intense  in the urban complex and
are generated not by lack of adequate technology and
financial capacity, but primarily by lack of incentives at
the local level to operate sound solid waste management
systems; institutional and political constraints for maxi-
mizing system productivity  and utilization of environ-
mental safeguards; public attitudes; and obsolete financ-
ing and institutional practices.
  Some cities have critical problems typified by an
inability to  locate disposal sites, an inability to efficiently
operate or control the collection and disposal system, or
an inability to raise revenues to cover increasing costs
for  collection  and disposal service.  Other  cities have
very few major problems, typified by long range acquisi-
tion of disposal sites, efficiently controlled regional col-
lection and disposal systems,  and an ability to obtain
needed operating and capital funds.

Moab dump, considered a recreational asset.
   Approximately $5.5 billion is spent annually on solid
waste management. Even though costs in some areas
may increase as dumps are converted to sanitary land-
fills  and incinerators  are upgraded to meet environ-
mental  standards, extrapolations of costs  from exem-
plary systems indicate that, if  properly managed,  the
total national costs for proper solid waste management
need not rise much above the present level.
   There are many barriers  to  affecting change at  the
local level. Political realities exist which make it diffi-
cult  for  neighboring communities to join together in
obtaining economies of scale in waste collection and
disposal. For many areas, solid  waste management  has
historically  been funded by revenues  generated  by
property taxes.  As these funding mechanisms reach
their revenue generating  limit and waste management
costs rise, collection and disposal service  deteriorates.

   Lack  of  attention  to  solid  waste management by
local  government  means that  many systems are  not
managed efficiently. There is a lack of effective ordi-
nances  for collection  and disposal  at the local level.
Many communities lack  the proper  management tools
and mechanism to operate an efficient, low cost system.

   The general public is apathetic to solid  waste man-
agement problems. Generally, the public is  willing to
pay  the full cost for solid waste services  and envi-
ronmental control measures, but few systems take  ad-
vantage of this  fact and utilize revenue raising mecha-
nisms which are, in some cases, constrained. In some
parts of the country, there is  also a great public concern
about proximity to disposal sites like sanitary landfills,
which aggravates the problem of finding acceptable dis-
posal sites in densely populated areas.
   Resource  recovery offers  significant potential as an
alternative to the disposal of solid waste, but will  not
materialize as a real alternative for most urban areas in
the near term. The principal  problem in this area is not
with the technology of resource recovery,  but lack  of
adequate market demand for materials and fuel recov-
ered from the solid waste stream.

                                     Documerica Photo


    Klean Steel Manufacturing Corp., Flowood, Mississippi, has
    a 2,000 horsepower mill which shreds 300 cars a day.  Steel
    rods made from shredded autos are  being used as reinforce-
    ment in portions of Interstate 55.
                                                                                                                                     Documerioa Photo


  In light of the above assessment of solid waste prob-
lems,  EPA's solid waste program has  concentrated the
majority of  its resources  in pursuit  of  the following
     1.  To  demonstrate that existing solid waste prob-
        lems can be solved by:

        a. upgrading local methods for managing solid
          waste collection  to the best  demonstrated

        b. replacing poor incinerators and open dumps
          with  economical,  environmentally  sound
          disposal practices now available;

        c.  recovering resources from waste where mar-
          ket conditions permit;

        d.  creating  institutional  change to maximize
          and sustain productivity and utilization of
          environmental safeguards.

     2.  To  perfect  sanitary landfilling  as  a  disposal
        technique by solving remaining problems  as-
        sociated with leachate, gas and  settlement.

     3.  To  develop  techniques and institutions to han-
        dle the collection,  transport  and  disposal of
        hazardous wastes.

     4.  To   encourage   greater  resource   recovery
        through  such means  as Federal  purchasing
        power or market incentives  for resources re-

   At the same time, EPA's  longer-term  objective is
increased resource  conservation.  This is broadly  de-
fined to include all  substances, energies,  manpower,
and conditions which are valued. Maximum  resource
conservation may be  accomplished for different locales
by disposing  of  wastes in  a  sanitary landfill, with  a
park  or a golf course as the  eventual end use, or by
recycling waste materials  by converting  them  to other
uses such as energy production.

   The  chief program tools that  OSWMP utilizes  to
achieve its objectives are:
   1. Planning  grants awarded to  State  and local
   agencies to develop plans which will upgrade the
   environmental aspects of solid waste management
   and  rationalize delivery systems.

   EPA currently has solid waste  planning  grants
   with 49 States and 20 local and regional agencies.
   Planning  grants concentrate  on obtaining  survey
data to plan waste facilities, studying alternative
collection and disposal  or recycling systems,  de-
termining appropriate  local  ordinances  or State
legislation and examining alternative financing and
management systems. Since solid  waste  planning
grants  were initiated, the number of  State solid
waste programs has increased from  five to 50.

The number of full-time State solid waste person-
nel has increased from 13 to over 200.

As States complete their plans, emphasis will shift
from issuance of State  grants  to the issuance of
local/regional grants focusing  on environmental,
self-financing and regulatory aspects.

Grant award criteria, promulgated in regulations,
have been structured toward "real world,"  "im-
plementable" plans  and  away  from surveys and
models  that  end up on shelves. Regional office
grant monitoring and review procedures  will con-
centrate on aspects leading toward implementation
of the  rational delivery system and environmen-
tal solution.

2.  Technical assistance will  be provided to lo-
cal and regional solid waste agencies  to  improve
the environmental aspects of their systems while
lowering overall systems costs.

Major technical  assistance will be targeted to cities
or  areas  which  have a  capacity  (resources and
willingness to utilize resources) to improve  their
solid waste management.

In  July  1970,  a  program  called Mission  5000,
was launched. The  objective is to close  5000 of
the 15,000 open dumps across the Nation in two
years through  local action. In  14 months,  the
program  succeeded  in  closing, or converting to
sanitary landfill, 800 of these sites.

Mission 5000 efforts will be focused on the public
education to  make  citizens and local  decision-
makers aware of  solid  waste problems, potential
solutions, and local progress in implementing such

3.  Demonstration grants will be utilized to dem-
onstrate  that existing  solid  waste  management
problems can  be solved  by  local communities
through the rational application of existing knowl-
edge and technology.

Prior to incorporation into EPA, the  solid waste
program  had placed primary  emphasis on  tech-
nology  development. This  effort, which  included
research  and development, pilot  plant  operation
 and demonstration,  received over two-thirds of the
 total funds and one half  of  the man  years ex-
 pended by the program since its inception in 1965.

 Most  of EPA's  60-odd "demonstration  grants"

awarded to municipalities  since 1965 have been
heavily equipment-oriented.

After moving to EPA, internal studies  indicated
that the time had come to shift  the  solid waste
program priorities away from  technology develop-
ment to an effort designed  to  upgrade  current
practices to acceptable levels  (managerically  and
environmentally)  that utilize  existing knowledge
and technology. This  is not to say that technol-
ogy should play no role in EPA's  solid waste pro-
gram,  but  rather that  it  should not  dominate
EPA's concern  as it has in the past.  Technology
should be pursued by  EPA only under strict con-
ditions, and focus primarily on practical  modifi-
cations of existing technology.

Priority will be given to those projects which create
the institutional  change required to improve labor
productivity, provide sound financial  support for
waste management, and replace poor  incinerators
and open dumps with economical,  environmentally
sound disposal practices.

The availability of grants  and the award  criteria
have been publicized and grants are being actively
4.  Resources recovery demonstration grants  will
be  awarded  to  demonstrate  resource  recovery
where adequate  local markets  exist.
Criteria for these grants, setting stringent technical
and economic requirements for EPA financial par-
ticipation, were  announced in the Commerce Busi-
ness Daily on March 24, 1972.
Market conditions will be investigated prior to, or
in conjunction with, applicant selection for Section
208 funding. Systems must be commercially viable:
i.e., should have a net cost competitive with alter-
native disposal techniques on a given area. Systems
must be technically sound; the system must be past
the pilot plant stage.
In  addition, EPA is studying another  increasingly
critical  aspect of the solid  waste problem:  the
disposal of hazardous wastes. Biological,  radiation,
pesticide, and toxic mercury wastes are  examples
of  materials which present serious disposal prob-
As  part of  a  study to determine  the  advisability
and feasibility of establishing a system of national
disposal  sites,  EPA  currently is assessing  the
amount, locations and present means of disposal of
hazardous materials, and is recommending desired
disposal  methods,  warning  potential sites,  and
estimating  the costs  of operating  such  a system.
In addition, President Nixon, in his 1972 Environ-
mental Message proposed Federal regulation of land
and underground disposal of all toxic substances.

  Several technical  assistants  and  resource  recovery
demonstrations highlight the accomplishments of EPA's
solid waste management program.

Technical Assistance
   1.  Cleveland, Ohio, is an example of a city which
  was forced by financial constraints to examine the
  efficiency  of its solid waste  management system.
  With  Federal assistance, Cleveland implemented
   changes in  solid waste collection that resulted  in
  $4 million savings in one year (potentially another
  $5 million in 1972) and  then upgraded its disposal
  techniques.  This amounted to a 30 percent  reduc-
   tion in total waste management costs.
  2.  River  Rouge,  Michigan, utilizing technical as-
  sistance from EPA,  rerouted collection vehicles
  and altered  crew sites.  Total system costs were
   cut in  half.
  3.  Utilizing technical assistance, southeast Oak-
  land  County, Michigan, rerouted collection ve-
  hicles and saved approximately 15 percent of total
  waste management costs. One community,  Hunt-
  ington  Woods,  also altered equipment  and crew
   sizes  and cut collection  costs in half.
  4.  Chilton County, Alabama, implemented a rural
  collection system  and  areawide  sanitary  landfill
  under an  EPA demonstration grant. This success-
   ful concept  has been adopted by a number  of
  other  rural  counties  without  Federal financial

Resource  Recovery
   1.  Franklin, Ohio project, is a  150-ton per day
  plant (24 hour basis),  funded under  an  EPA
  demonstration  grant,  which  mechanically  sepa-
  rates  glass,   aluminum,  paper fiber  and ferrous
  metal. The process is based upon a hydra-pulper
  which   shreds and slurries  incoming  municipal
  refuse.  Firm market  agreements were negotiated
  with local industries for  the recovered  materials.
  2.  In  St. Louis,  Missouri,  shredded  municipal
  refuse  (input of 300 tons per  day in  one  eight
  hour shift) is being used as a supplementary fuel
  in a coal electric utility boiler in this EPA demon-
  stration project. This system has great potential
  given its  broad  market  applicability, low  capital
  investment requirements, increasing demands for
  fuel, etc.
  3.  Local  private industry in Jackson, Mississippi
  is  successfully operating an automobile  shredder,
  attracting  abandoned hulks  from  a three   State
  area. Shredded scrap is sold to private industry for
  making  steel for use as  roadside  barriers  along
  interstate  highways.

   There are presently some  34,500 registered prod-
ucts manufactured from one or more of 900 chemical
compounds to be used against harmful  weeds,  insects,
plant diseases and other pests attacking wildlife, live-
stock and food crops. Although farmers are the larg-
est users  of  pesticides, about half of  the registered
products are  for non-farm  uses in and  around  homes,
industrial plants, commercial buildings and other insti-
   In   1970,   U.S.   production  of  these  products
amounted to  1,034 million pounds, including 59 mil-
lion pounds of DDT products  (the lowest since 1949),
one million pounds  of mercury  fungicides, 89 million
pounds  of   the  aldrintoxaphene   group,  15  million
pounds of parathion, and 12 million pounds of 2,4,5—T.
As in the other programs, EPA's  attack on the prob-
lem has been multi-pronged.  One  approach  has been
simply  to cancel the registration  of certain products
that EPA's  scientists determined  were too  danger-
ous for their intended  uses.   In 1971,  such cancella-
tions  involved some  1,800 to  2,000 DDT  products of
about  250 companies,  1,300  aldrin/dieldrin products
of 377 companies and  307 2,4,5-T products  of 107
   Another EPA pesticide control mechanism  is the
statutory authority to establish safe limits  on pesticide
residues in food. By forcing food producers to  comply
with these limits, EPA is  launching a direct attack on
the unnecessary and careless  use  of these chemicals.
   Many of the pesticide accidents which occur are, in
fact, due to  misuse.  A major proportion  of pesticide
chemicals are applied by  commercial  applicators for
agricultural purposes and for structural control of pests.
Federal Pesticides activities were in somewhat unique
situation at the time Reorganization Plan No.  3  was
promulgated, establishing  EPA. It was  not a complete
ongoing program like Water Quality, Air Pollution and
Solid Wastes. Program activities were  divided among
three major Federal agencies:
   Research on the effects of  pesticides in fish and
   wildlife  was  conducted by the  Department of
  Interior. Under the provision of the Reorganiza-
  tion Plan 3, the Gulf Breeze Biological Laboratory
  of the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries was trans-
  ferred from Interior to EPA.
  Establishing standards limiting  pesticide residues
  in food and for conducting related research, was
  the responsibility of the  Food  and Drug Admin-
  istration, Department  of  Health,  Education and
  Welfare. When  EPA was  created  the  Perrine
  Primate Laboratory in Florida,  Community Stud-
  ies  Office  in  Chamblee,  Georgia, and  the unit
  responsible for pesticide residue tolerances, peti-
  tion review and  control  were  shifted from FDA
  to the new Agency. However,  as part of its food
  protection  activities, FDA retained responsibilities
  for monitoring residues in foods,  and for  regula-
  tory activities to remove food from  the market if
  it is found to contain excess residues.

  Pesticide registration  and enforcement  activities
  provided for under the Federal Insecticide, Fungi-
  cide and Rodenticide  Act (FIFRA) and  related
  research and  soil monitoring activities were for-
  merly conducted by the Department of Agricul-
  ture.  These  functions were also transferred  to
  EPA.  The Department  of  Agriculture  retained
  pesticide research activities on livestock,  poultry
  and plant  effects, several other pest control pro-
  grams and the education program  on  pesticide
  conducted  by the Department's Agricultural Ex-
  tension Service.

  There are  two administrative procedures  under  the
present  FIFRA  which can  be invoked to limit the  use
of pesticides  detrimental to man  and the environment.
The milder one, "cancellation",  allows the  continued
shipment  of  the pesticide products  in  interstate  com-
merce while  a decision  to  prohibit future use is  re-
viewed; the  stronger administrative procedure,  "sus-
pension", prohibits the  further sale  in  interstate  com-
merce of the product with possible  recall  action until
administrative appeals and reviews are finished and  a
final decision made.
  Notice  of  cancellation was issued in August  1970,
on  products  containing  DDT for  certain specific uses.
In  January of  1971, a notice was  issued which  can-
celled registrations  of  all products  containing  DDT
because of serious question effects of its use. In March
of  1971,  EPA began prehearing conferences concern-
ing the  42 product formulators involved in accordance
with  the  administrative approval  provisions  contained
in the enabling legislation.
  The registration of the product Mirex  produced by
the Allied Chemical Company was cancelled March
1971. In this case the manufacturer requested an  ad-
visory  committee  as provided under  Section  4c of
FIFRA, and the  National Academy  of Sciences  was
asked to list  experts to serve on the  committee. Due to
the complex procedures which must take place,  final

action  on the cancellation  of this product could con-
ceivably  take one to two years.
   Notice of cancellation was issued March 1971, can-
celling the registrations of all products containing aldrin
and dieldrin because of similar serious questions about
product safety. About 80 companies have invoked  the
administrative appeal procedure described above requir-
ing an advisory committee  and  some  companies have
also requested public  hearings. These procedings could
also be lengthy.
   Notices of suspension were issued as of April 1970,
concerning some uses of 2,4,5-T. Again, the adminis-
trative appeal procedure was invoked by the companies
for referral to an advisory committee  which issued  its
report in May 1971. A  public hearing was called for in
the fall of  1971 to obtain  additional facts on 2,4,5-T
while a suspension  order continues to  prohibit the  use
of this herbicide on food crops for human consumption.
   The DDT cancellation involved  approximately 250
companies  and 1,800  to  2,000  products,  and  the
aldrin/dieldrin cancellation  involved  377  companies
and  about   1,300  separate products.  The  2,4,5—T
suspensions  resulted  in recall  actions for  over  307
products  and  107  companies.  Under  present law,
companies  that appeal cancellation of Federal  regis-
trations  may continue to  market  their products  in
interstate commerce  pending final resolution of  ad-
ministrative  appeals. After  seven   months  of  public
hearing  testimony  and  additional hearings  by  the
parties concerned,  it was  decided  that most  uses  of
DDT  would  be banned  after  December  31, 1972.
EPA's  action does  not bar the use  of  DDT  in  the
cases  of emergency  public health  measures, such  as
might  follow  an outbreak  of malaria  or  other  insect-
borne  epidemic. Another  exception  to  the  ban is
for three  minor crops:  green  peppers,  onions, and
sweet  potatoes in storage,  for  which no effective  al-
ternative has been  developed.
   The overall activities of EPA's  pesticides program
are contained in six functional areas: Product Registra-
tion and Tolerance,  Setting Standards and Criteria,
Technical Assistance, Environmental Surveillance and
Research, and Market Surveillance and Enforcement.


   New product applications, as  well as amendments to
and  registration renewals,  have been  received at  an
average rate of 450-600 a week. This includes renewals
for projects registered five years  ago of which there  is a
total  potential of about 10,000  in  Fiscal Year 1972.
Registration applications and amendments in the review
process increased to  a  peak of  5,422 in Fiscal 1972,
but have since been  reduced to  1,424 in April 1972.
The objective of the review procedures is to protect the
public health and  the environment, while at the same
time providihg efficient  review from the manufacturers'
viewpoint.  Handling and review time of applications is
being reduced  to a median range  of  45 to 60  days
through more efficient procedures, without sacrifice in
the quality of the review.
   The  Food,  Drug  and  Cosmetic  Act requires the
establishment of  tolerances for pesticidal chemicals  on
or in food and  animal feeds. No such pesticide product
can be registered until appropriate tolerances have been
   There were 212 petitions in the review process at the
start of February 1971. Due to changes in the adminis-
trative  definition of  residue tolerances,  only  a small
change in the over 90-day backlog level had been noted
until recently. Recently added toxicologists have begun
to reverse the trend of the over 90-day backlog from  64
in December 1971, to 36 in March 1972. The objective
is to protect the  public health and the environment  by
not allowing chemical concentrations of residues higher
than safe levels.  Once the petition backlog is reduced,
it is expected that selective reexamination of previously

Docuinoriojl  Photo
 Dusting sulphur to  retard mildew on grapevines:  Fresno, California.

established tolerances can be begun, as well as process-
ing all new petitions  within the 90-day statutory time
   A special in-house scientific review group has been
established to review present  registrations of products
containing mercury, arsenic and lead, heptachlor and
chlordane, endrin, benzene hexachloride, lindane, toxa-
phene, strobane,  captan, folpet, difolatan, carbary and
2,4-D and any others whose use may raise  substantial
questions  as to safety. Recommendations on mercury,
arsenic and lead have already been completed; chlor-
dane  and  heptachlor  are expected to be completed by
mid-1972. The  10 other listed products are expected
to be reviewed during Fiscal Year 1973.

TABLE A.—Five States in U.S. With  Highest DDT
Michigan . .

1 13
	 1 46


Range ,
0 03-13 14

No. of


   The activities of environmental surveillance include
community  health  studies,  soil residue  and estuarine
monitoring and some limited amount of air monitoring.
It is expected that ultimately  these data will  provide
for more adequate use controls, reevaluation of certain
pesticide tolerance  levels, as well as improved proce-
dures for diagnosis and  treatment of pesticide poison-
ing in  man. As these  monitoring studies are designed
to  provide  more  closely  interrelated  end-data,  they
will provide an  alert system  for delayed  effects  of
pesticide chemicals on man,  a  warning system  for reg-
istration re-examinations, setting residue tolerances for
market surveillance and improving  the amount and
kinds of technical assistance to States.
   Epidemiological  studies of human  case  subjects  in
areas of heavy pesticide usage is the only program  of
its kind in  the  U.S. There  are  currently 14  ongoing
State studies in Arizona, California, Colorado,  Florida,
Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa,  Michigan, Mississippi, New Jer-
sey, South  Carolina,  Texas,  Utah  and Washington.
These  studies are contracted through State health agen-
cies and  with  local universities. These are long-term
studies to detect  any delayed or obscure  health ef-
fects that may result  from long periods of low  level
exposure to any of a variety of pesticide  chemicals.
Ambient air at  selected sites  in  30  States  is being
monitored for  pesticide  residues, and  these data will
be correlated with human health status.
   Profile studies of pesticide residues are being moni-
tored  in  soils  in 36  states and five  urban  areas  in
Fiscal Year 1972. Soils are the most important  stor-
age area of the environment for pesticides, as well as
other  contaminants. Recognizing a need for more in-
tensive examination  of  specific problem areas,  sam-
pling has been carried on in the corn and cotton belt
regions; also special studies have been  conducted  on
cattle  feed lots, commercial catfish farms, peanut grow-
 ing land, and  vegetable and  orchard  areas.
   Mercury and arsenic  have  been found to be wide-
spread in soils in a number  of States, and DDT seems
to be as wide-spread in non-crop areas as in crop areas.
In  addition  to the  expanded monitoring  program,
studies  are being made  to  determine the distribution
of mercury, cadmium and other heavy  metals of the
soil component of the environment;  and the fate and
persistence of the herbicides 2,4-D, 2,4,5-T, picloram
and their contaminants.
  By 1978 nationwide soil  residue monitoring is pro-
jected to include:
     Cropland—about 2500 stations  a year in 48
     Non-cropland—about 1000 stations a year in
       48 states  (forest, range and pasture)
     Urban areas—about 20 cities of 50 states a

  Estuarine  Monitoring  was  started in  1965 by the
Bureau of Commercial Fisheries  and until the present
time the program has been designed toward discreet
problems of   commercial estuarine  fisheries.  Oysters
and clams have  been primarily  sampled in the past
because of their commercial value and also because as
sessile  forms  they are particularly well suited for pesti-
cide monitoring.  Samples are being  taken monthly at
170 coastal locations and are  normally collected  under
contract with States. The present program has  been
redesigned to cover 200 primary  estuaries and subse-
quently expand to  600 secondary estuarine  areas that
show significant levels of pollution.


   Market Surveillance includes the  activities  of  sam-
pling pesticides and devices at manufacturer, wholesale,
distribution and retail outlets, by field inspectors and
their subsequent examination  in field chemistry labora-
tories and the centralized headquarter biological labora-
tories.  Post-market surveillance  is  undertaken  for a
two-fold purpose:  for labeling violations for  enforce-
ment purposes and for the investigation of use records,
historical information on accidents and epidemiological
safety information accumulated since original marketing

TABLE  B.—Nine  States   in   U.S.  With   Highest
            Dieldrin  Residues
TABLE C.—Comparison of DDT  Residues Between
            Cities  and Cropland
Illinois . . .
North Carolina
South Carolina . .
Va./West Va 	
.. 0.11
. . . 0.06
.... 0.06
No. of
as a basis for reexamination of previously submitted
registration data.  A natural selective sampling schedule
is expected to provide for the collection of about 6,000
product samples in 1972.


   Present reporting of  pesticide accidents are directed
primarily to human accidents and cover less than  one
percent of what  has been  generally  estimated  to be
50,000 accidents  and incidents occurring each year. A
major  constraint  has been  the  overall inadequacy of
current reporting  of human and other accidents  and
incidents.  Also in recent years the millions of pesticide
containers  and packages  of all sizes have  become
disposal problems for farmers, commercial applicators,
industry and local and State  agencies. Prior to the EPA
reorganization, field investigation of pesticide accidents
and  incidents  involving  humans  were  very limited.
Fewer than 200  human accidents were investigated in
Fiscal  Year  1971, and less in  previous  years, along
with  limited  numbers  by   other  Federal  and State
agencies. Since one of the outstanding basic deficiencies
in this area is the reporting system, present efforts are
being  directed  toward working  with States and other
Federal agencies.  A comprehensive national pesticide
accident  investigation  and  reporting  system is being
developed. Also,  EPA is strengthening  its Regional
Office  capabilities to  work  with  State  agencies in
developing uniform and productive programs.
                                 A  scientist
                                 in  an  EPA  laboratory
                                 conducting research
                                 to  identify
                                 pesticide residues.
City and State
Bakersfield California
Carnden New Jersey
Houston Texas
Manhattan Kansas 	
Miami Florida
Milwaukee Wisconsin . . . .
Salt Lake City Utah 	
Waterbury Connecticut

. 1.07

1 46
No sample
No sample

             "Average from composite of States.

   The  Food  and Drug Administration  operates  two
mechanisms that provide data  on pesticide accidents.
A Clearinghouse on Poison Control collects data from
580 local non-Federal supported poison control centers.
The  FDA  collects  information  on  about 130,000
poisoning cases annually from these  centers,  and of
these,   5,000   to  6,000  relate  to  poisonings  with

  New scientific  research  on the effects  of  selected
products is underway to provide a basis for registering
or cancelling registration of these products. Continuing
research on effects of  pesticides  and  other metabolites
on  human health, animals and aquatic life  is  being
conducted. Controlled  animal exposure studies  using
primates and  rats  as  test-animals are part of EPA's
efforts to learn more about the basic hazards of pesticide
chemicals.  Bioassays with  aquatic animals and orga-
nisms  have been  undertaken to determine acute and
chronic effects of pesticides on aquatic life.
  Research for regulation purposes represents only part
of the  total research effort. Simultaneously, research is
being conducted  to develop alternatives to pesticides,
such  as so-called  biological controls which  do  not
pollute the land  and  water,  or  new  pesticides  which
quickly  break down  into harmless  substances  after
performing their function.  This research effort  involves
EPA,  NSF, and  the Department  of Agriculture with
much  of  the work  being  done by  the academic
  In the years to come, EPA will seek the strengthening
of regulatory  controls  on the uses and users  of pesti-
cides, rather than just  on the  distribution of pesticides.
Proposed legislation calls for  Federal  control  over the
use of pesticides  in all applications,  and the  licensing
and  training  of commercial  pesticide applicators for
hazardous, restricted  use  pesticide  applications.  On
the public front, EPA and other agencies are conducting
a major information program to encourage the public
to use pesticides  more carefully.

  inspection  program for measuring radiation lev-
  els in the environment.
                                                          6.  Technical  assistance  to  other agencies  and
                                                          State radiation protection programs.

                                                          7.  Training of personnel for radiation protection
  EPA has the basic responsibility to protect the pub-
lic from the adverse effects of ionizing and non-ionizing
radiation.  This  authority comes from  Executive Re-
organization Plan No. 3 of 1970, transferring to EPA
specified  functions  and resources  from  the Atomic
Energy  Commission,  the  Bureau  of  Radiological
Health,  and  the  Federal Radiation  Council.  These
transferred functions provide EPA with the authority to:

   1.  Establish  generally applicable  environmental
  radiation standards for the protection of the gen-
  eral public  from  radioactive materials.

  2.  Perform research,  development,  surveillance
  and inspection,  provide Assistance to States  and
   provide training and research grants.

   3.  Advise  the President with respect to radiation
  matters  directly or indirectly  affecting health,  in-
   cluding  guidance  for  all Federal  agencies in the
   formulation of  radiation  standards  and  in  the
   establishment and  execution  of programs in co-
  operation with the States.
   In addition, Section 309 of the  Clean Air Act re-
quires EPA to  evaluate the environmental impact  of
Federal activities as described in the Act.
   EPA's responsibilities  in radiation are carried out
through programs of criteria  development,  technology
assessment, surveillance and  inspection  and training
and assistance. The major programs  are as follows:

   1. Development  of radiation protection criteria,
   standards and policies.
   2. Evaluation and assessment of the impact  of
   new  and developing radiation technology on  man
   and the environment.

   3. Research on  environmental  effects of radia-
   tion exposure.
   4.  Development  of  methodology for measuring
   and controlling radiation exposure.

   5.  Maintenance  of a  national  surveillance  and

  Although significant  research programs have been
conducted for many years, the effects of very low lev-
els of radiation over long periods,  such  as encountered
from  routine emissions of nuclear  power plants,  re-
main  virtually  unknown. Recognizing  this,  EPA has
adopted what it considers  to  be  a prudent,  conserva-
tive policy, and  bases development of radiation stand-
ards and guidelines on the following criteria.

   1.  All  radiation is potentially harmful.

  2.  The  biological risk associated with low levels
  of  exposure  is  proportional  to these  risks  that
  have been estimated at higher exposure levels.

   3.  Exposure to radiation  should always  be as
  low as practicable.

  4.  No  exposure should be allowed without the
  expectation of some net benefit to society.

   This last criteria indicates that standards  for each
source  class of radiation,  e.g., nuclear power  plants,
fuel reprocessing plants,  mining, etc., should be  treated
on an individual basis.
   In fulfillment of its responsibility for setting gener-
ally applicable radiation standards,  the Environmental
Protection Agency now  has  underway  a major review
of  all  existing  Federal radiation  protection  criteria,
standards,  guidelines, and policies. This review  is con-
ducted in cooperation with the Department of Health,
Education,  and Welfare; the Department of Defense;
and the Atomic Energy Commission and is  scheduled
for completion in 1972.
   As  part  of  this review, EPA  has  awarded  and is
monitoring contracts with the National  Academy of
Sciences (NAS) and the National Council for Radia-
tion Protection  and Measurements  (NCRP). The NAS
contract calls for  review of the scientific  bases  for the
evaluation  of  risks at  low   levels  of  exposure. The
NCRP contract involves  development of  dosimetric
 models for  selected  radionuclides  and realistic  units
for measuring hazardous non-ionizing radiations.
   A further accomplishment in this area has been the
 completion of a draft  technical report, "Estimates of
 Ionizing Radiation Doses  in  the United States, 1960-
 2000" in June  1971. The study will be used in EPA's
 overall review of the scientific basis for radiation pro-
 tection guidance.
   During 1971, final "Radiation Protection Standards

in Uranium  Mines"  were  published in  the  Federal
Register  (FR, July 9, 1971). These standards placed
tighter restrictions on the amount of radioactive mate-
rials allowed  in  the  air of uranium mines,  effective
July 1, 1971.
   Further  accomplishment  in  this  area  has  been the
preparation of testimony for the Joint Committee on
Atomic Energy Hearings relative to the  uranium  mill
tailings problem in the western United States.
   During 1971, the Environmental Protection Agency
prepared testimony for presentation before  the Sub-
committee on Legislation, Joint  Committee on Atomic
Energy,  June 23,  1971, on EPA's  responsibilities re-
garding  radiation protection standards,  and  the ther-
mal effects of effluents from  nuclear power  reactors.
It has also prepared testimony for  the hearings on 10
CFR  Part 50  related  to  proposed AEC  guides for
light-water-cooled nuclear power reactors.


   In this  critical area,  EPA has the responsibility for
 evaluating major Federal actions involving ionizing and
 non-ionizing radiation, and the design, construction, op-
 eration, modification, or discontinuance of applications
 of technology related to these  radiations in order to
 assess the impact  on the environment and population.
 All new Federally sponsored  or regulated activities or
extensions thereof are evaluated, as well as all indus-
rial and commercial products or processes, which may
have an effect on the environment and result in addi-
tional radiation exposure.
   EPA also has  the  responsibility to  determine the
potential impact  of  nuclear applications or other uses
of radiation, and  the appropriate measures to control
and minimize all potential adverse effects. Environmen-
tal impact statements submitted by other Federal agen-
cies on applications  of radiation-related technology are
evaluated.  Program  guidance and  technical assistance
are provided to States, relative to applications of nu-
clear  technology  and other radiation  uses  in order to
         Control room of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.
 San Clemente, California: The San Onofre Nuclear Gener-
 ating Station  Unit 1, placed in operation in 1967.

minimize the impact  of  such actions on  the  environ-
ment and the public.
  One of the major roles of EPA is  assessing the en-
vironmental impact of the nuclear power program. On
the  one hand, there  is the critical need for electricity;
on  the other hand,  generation  of  electricity  involves
environmental impact.
  President Nixon, in his message  on Clean Energy
to the Congress on June 4,  1971, pointed out that the
Nation's  demand  for  electricity  is fast outstripping its
generating capacity. "A sufficient supply of clean energy
is  essential," he  said, "if we  are  to sustain  healthy
economic growth and  improve the  quality  of our
national life."
  To meet this expanding need for electricity,  the utili-
ties have been turning  principally to nuclear  power
stations.  As of today, there are about 20 nuclear reac-
tors in operation  around the country. By  1975, there
may be as many  as 100. By  1990, the number may be
as high as 300 more. Best estimates indicate that by
1990  over one-third of  the total U.S. energy require-
ments will be met by  nuclear power.
  The environmental impact of these nuclear reactors
is a major concern of EPA. As an  "advocate  of the
environment" EPA has  a direct responsibility to pro-
tect the  health of people living near these  plants—
and near the facilities that process their  fuel and  re-
ceive  their  radioactive  wastes—against  the  adverse
effects of the plants' radioactive emissions  and dis-
charges of waste  heat.
  The impact of the nuclear power program  is deter-
mined by review  of the impact of individual plants and
by studies of various classes of nuclear facilities, such as
light-water-reactor power plants,  reprocessing  plants,
mining, etc., on the basis of  both immediate and long-
term environmental impact. Anticipated future develop-
ments such as  the breeder reactor program are being
evaluated in terms of environmental impact.
  Individual actions affecting the environment are  re-
viewed through the mechanism of the  environmental
impact statement  review process. A total of 49  environ-
mental  impact  statements   reviews  were  completed
during 1971. Of  these reviews, 15 related to nuclear
power plants, 20  to NASA projects and the remainder
to a wide variety of nuclear  activities. Four additional
reviews are  in progress.
  Criteria  and  guidelines have been  established to
enable EPA to  classify  its comments into four cate-
gories: EPA is in general agreement with  the  proposed
action or has no objection to it;  inadequate information
is  contained in  the  draft  statement; major  changes
should be made  in the  proposed action;  and the pro-
posed action is unsatisfactory.
   Studies of classes  of nuclear activities and studies of
the anticipated  impact  of  future  developments have
been  continued.  Significant progress  was  made in this
activity  during the year. Several internal studies were
completed on:  plutonium and  actinide production and
release and  environmental  movement; fast breeder re-
actor operating experience;  transportation  problems
associated with high radiation activity wastes; impact of
non-power applications for nuclear energy; and models
for  estimating  the  dose  contribution  from  several
nuclear facilities in the same geographic area.
   Work was completed or continued in depth in several
critical special field study areas. A final report was com-
pleted  on the  Yankee  Pressurized  Water Reactor in
Rowe,   Massachusetts. Analysis of  samples  from  the
Connecticut Yankee  Reactor  (Haddam Neck)  field
study is about 90 percent complete. Arrangements were
completed  for  a study  at the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Power  Plant in New Jersey. All of these studies provide
information on  radionuclide concentrations in reactor
effluents and determination of critical exposure path-
ways. These data  are used to enable accurate  assess-
ment for  impact  review activities,  and  for  design of
environmental surveillance programs.
   Satisfactory  progress  was made on the long  range
study at the H.  B. Robinson Nuclear Facility in South
Carolina. The primary purpose of this study is to detect
the  possible  accumulation  of radionuclidcs  in  the
environs of nuclear reactors in which cooling water  is
   An additional data gathering activity that will provide
information to the technology assessment program  is
the study being conducted  at the Nuclear Fuel Services
Spent  Fuel  Reprocessing  Plant in West Valley,  New
York.  This  study  is about 90  percent complete.
   Accurate measurements of radioactivity release are
required to correctly evaluate environmental  impact.
New techniques for the measurement  of  krypton-85,
tritium  and  iodine-129  were developed  during  the
year by personnel at the  Winchester,  Massachusetts


   EPA conducts surveillance and inspection programs
to obtain base line data on the levels of existing environ-
mental radiation; determine any change occurring in the
radiological quality of the  environment,  the magnitude
of this change, and the nature and  probable source of
the contaminant; provide data for estimating population
exposure  to  ionizing and  non-ionizing  radiation;  and
determine if environmental levels are within established
radiological guidelines and standards. EPA  also  pub-
lishes periodic environmental radiological  quality data
from Federal, State and utility surveillance programs.
   Specific accomplishments during the past year in this
area include the following:

   1.  Operated national  environmental  radiological
   surveillance networks for milk, water, food, and
   tritium and published  the results of these analyses
   monthly  in  a  section  of  Radiation Data  and

   2.  Published an addendum to the report, "Radio-
   active Waste Discharges to  the Environment from
   Nuclear Power Facilities", bringing these data up-
   to-date through 1970.

   3.  Completed or initiated contracts with six States
   (Michigan, New Hampshire, South Carolina, New
   York,  New Jersey  and California)  to provide
   timely environmental surveillance data as an input
   to  the National Environmental Radiation  Moni-
   toring Program.

   4.  Supervised a contract with Battelle  Memorial
   Institute for the completion of a draft program for
   the automatic data processing system for environ-
   mental data.

   5.  Conducted an Analytical Quality Control Serv-
   ice for the radiation data from the State programs.
   Twenty-three States currently participate in this
   program and invitations have been issued to about
   20 utility companies requesting their participation
   in a cross-check and standards program.

   6.  The Western Environmental Research Labora-
   tory  participated in Project Cannikin, the under-
  ground nuclear detonation conducted at Amchitka,

  7.  Prepared an environmental surveillance guide
  for the conduct of environmental  sampling pro-
  grams around nuclear power facilities.

  8.  Provided off-site environmental radiation sup-
  port  for  nuclear  weapon  test activities  at  the
  Nevada Test Site  and demonstrated feasibility of
  utilizing aerial  sampling techniques for evaluation
  of radioactive gaseous release from  nuclear plants.

  9.  The  Eastern  Environmental Radiation Lab-
  oratory provided  off-site radiation  safety support
  to NASA for Apollo launch.

  These programs and studies are being undertaken to
protect  the public health and welfare  from  both  imme-
diate  and long-range environmental impact of the nu-
clear  energy program and from non-ionizing radiation
sources.  Strategies for achieving these environmental
goals  have been developed and are continually assessed
and reviewed  as  information from these  programs be-
comes available.
  Title IV  of  P.L.  91-604  established the Office of
Noise  Abatement  and Control in EPA  on December
31, 1970. EPA's  role under  this title was to be  an
interim one, the principal responsibility being to iden-
tify and  classify causes  and  sources of noise and to
determine their  effects on public  health and welfare.
  The law called for studies on the effects  of  noise on
people, wildlife,  and  property and the expected growth
of noise  problems  through the  year  2,000. It also au-
thorized  EPA to hold hearings and  demonstrations to
supplement  research activities.  The  results  of these
efforts were  included in  a  special  report to the Presi-
dent and the Congress at the end of 1971.
  One source  of  assistance  for  the Report  was the
National Bureau of  Standards  which has expertise in
the  noise field. Contracts were negotiated with a num-
ber of universities  and other organizations with acous-
tical expertise. Both  Federal and private organizations
gathered information in the following areas: the effect
of noise on living things and property; sources of noise
and their current  environmental  impact; current and
future control technology; the economic implications of
noise; laws and regulatory schemes for noise abatement;
government, industry, professional and voluntary asso-
ciation programs;  and an assessment  of noise  abate-
ment programs and legislation in other nations.

   Shortly after work started on the report,  EPA be-
gan a series of eight regional public hearings to develop
supplementary information on  current  state-of-the-art
on noise pollution control technology and on attitudes
of the public, industry and State and local government
towards the problem.
  The hearings were organized with a panel of experts
in the  field of  noise. In this way, the  hearing record
included not only  the formal presentations of the wit-
   A typical source
  of noise pollution
  under EPA study.

nesses but also discussions  between the witnesses  and
the experts. Beginning in Atlanta, Georgia, early in July
and ending in Washington, B.C.,  in November,  each
hearing ran for two to four days and presentations from
some 225 witnesses were heard. In addition to witnesses
from industry and State and local governments, repre-
sentatives from 32 different public  affairs and environ-
mental organizations  also made statements.
   Topics covered at the hearings included: noise from
construction  and transportation  equipment, including
snowmobiles and other recreation vehicles; noise  con-
siderations in architecture and planning activities; laws
and enforcement  schemes; noise in and around the
home; and the physiological  and psychological effects
of  noise. Complete transcripts of each  hearing  were
published and represent an important  contribution to
literature in the field of noise.


   The results of the public hearings, and the studies of
Federal  and  private organizations formulated the com-
prehensive Report  to the President and  the Congress.
The following topics are discussed in the Report.

Effects of Noise on Living Things and Property

   It has not been demonstrated that people  are having
their lives shortened by exposure to audible  noise.  The
effects of noise on people  have not been successfully
measured in terms  of excess deaths, shortened  lifespan,
or days of incapacitating illness.  There  are only  hints
that such effects might exist.
   However,  there  is clear  evidence that exposure to
noise of  sufficient  intensity and duration can perma-
nently damage the inner ear  with  resulting  permanent
hearing losses that  can  range  from  slight  impairment to
nearly total  deafness. It can  also  result in  temporary
hearing  losses,  and  repeated exposure  to  noise  can
result in chronic hearing losses. Evidence is  also ap-
parent that noise can interfere with speech communica-
tion and  the perception of  other auditory signals; dis-
turb sleep; be a source  of annoyance; interfere with the
ability to perform complicated tasks and can especially
disturb those tasks that demand speech communication
or response to auditory signals; and adversely influence
mood and disturb relaxation.
   With  the  exception of the  extensive body of litera-
ture exploring the effects of noise upon auditory struc-
tures and hearing, well controlled experiments substan-
tiating nonauditory effects of noise on animals  are rare.
In the case of wildlife,  such  studies are virtually non-
   The  ambiguities,  and conflicts  in  reports  of  non-
auditory  physiological,  metabolic,  sexual,  and other
physical effects of noise suggest the need for a research
program  to  study  the  effects of long-term, low  level
chronic  noise  exposure in  animals.  Concurrently, the
effects of noise on  true  wildlife  in  its native  habitat
requires  detailed investigation.
   There is little data available regarding the effects of
acoustical energy on structures other than aircraft, in
which case high frequency, high intensity noise has been
implicated  in mental  fatigue  in  certain  components.
High  intensity, low  frequency acoustical energy, such
as associated with pulsejets and  other high intensity
pulsation sources, has been  observed to set  structural
components such as windows, light aluminum or other
sheet  metals  into sympathetic vibratory motions. Since
shock and vibration  do play a major role in  certain
types  of mechanical deterioration and equipment fail-
ures  or  malfunctions,  it  is  evident  that  a complex
relationship exists.
   The heavy concentration of construction equipment
in certain urban areas may produce  a combination of
vibratory energy transmission through soil  and sup-
porting   structures,  which  could  conceivably  affect
fragile structures such as  glass and certain particularly
susceptible materials including plastics and  thin alu-
minum panels. Further investigation  is  needed  on  the
exact  nature  of this problem.

Sources of Noise and Their Current
     Environmental Impact

   Several significant observations  regarding the  nature
of noise  and the methods of measuring its magnitude
are made in  this Report. Although many of these con-
clusions are tentative because of the lack of statistically
sound community noise baselines, the  general  trends
appear straightforward and give useful perspective  for
the overall nature of the problem.
   The outdoor daytime residual noise level in a  wilder-
ness area,  such as the Grand Canyon  rim,  is  on  the
order of 16  decibels, on  the farm 30 to  35 decibels;
and in the city 60 to 75  decibels.  Areas in which  the
daytime  outdoor median noise level exceeds  the range
of 56 to 60 decibels,  categorized as "noisy urban",
are not  well  suited to detached residential housing.
   Areas in  which  the  daytime outdoor median level
exceeds 66 decibels  are not  suited to apartment living
unless the buildings  are  air  conditioned,  so that  the
windows may  be  kept closed to enable  conversation
indoors.  If the outdoor median noise levels are above
71  decibels,  special  sound  proofing is necessary   to
preserve the  indoor noise environment.
   A  significant increase in noise  in the past 20 years
has resulted from the rapid  growth of  commercial
aviation  and  from its use of jet aircraft that  are about
10 to 20 decibels noisier than the older, smaller piston
engined  aircraft.  A  somewhat lesser increase in noise
has resulted  from the construction and use of freeways
located  within  urban  and suburban   residential areas.
It is estimated that at least 2000 square miles of urban
and  suburban  area have  been severely impacted  by
noise  from these two major sources.

   The rapid  increase in the use of noisy recreational
 vehicles and  home lawn  care  equipment powered by
 poorly muffled internal combustion engines has  con-
 tributed to noise in both wilderness areas and residen-
 tial neighborhoods.
   Research shows that approximately 22 to 44 million
 people have lost  part of  the utility  of  their dwellings
 and yards to  noise from traffic and aircraft on a  con-
 tinuous basis,  and another 21 million at any one  time
 are similarly affected by noise from construction activ-
 ity.  Further,  many people are exposed  to  potentially
 hazardous  noise  when  operating noisy  devices.  Al-
 though the number thus exposed cannot be accurately
 assessed,  a total of 40 million people might be reason-
   Thus, not  including the contribution of  appliances,
 noise appears to affect at least 80 million people, or 40
 percent  of the population. Roughly one-half of the
 total impact of noise represents a potential health  haz-
 ard  (in terms of  hearing impairment potential  alone),
 and the remaining half  represents an infringement on
 the ability to  converse in  the home. Such impact  esti-
 mates clearly  show the need to reduce  the  number of
 devices that emit potentially hazardous noise levels and
 to reduce the outdoor  noises  that interfere with the
 quality of life.

 Current and Future Control Technology

   Much of the Nation's economy  and the high stand-
 ard of living result from technical innovation and the
 development of new  and better machines by industry.
 Generally, the performance criteria for these machines
 are defined in terms  of  the  useful work  that they will
 accomplish and the value  of this work with respect to
 its cost. The success of any new product is determined
 in the market place primarily in terms of the potential
 economic value of the product to the customer relative
 to its total cost.
   In the  case of acoustical  devices such as musical
 instruments,  hi-fi  sets,   and  speech  communication
 equipment, sound  characteristics are a  primary per-
 formance   criterion.  However,  for the  other  devices,
 noise is generally an  unwanted by-product not asso-
 ciated with the  primary  performance  criteria. Only
 when a need  for  less noise is  articulated, does noise
 become one of the primary  performance criteria. The
 information feed  back  process from  the  public  to
 industry  generally  takes  many years and often  pre-
 sents  a conflicting set of needs.
  One of the  best examples of the possible long-term
 noise accommodation among industry, public, and the
 market place is the standard American passenger car.
In its 60-year history, it has evolved from a noisy, low-
powered  vehicle  to a relatively quiet efficient  high-
powered  vehicle.  Cities and towns set regulations re-
quiring that all cars be muffled  in the  1920's. Without
further action  in the public sector, industry has made
progress  toward  quieting  the  automobile  interior to
 TABLE  18.—Order-of-Magnitude  Estimates of  Ex-
              posure to Home Appliance  and Build-
              ing  Equipment  Noise  Expressed  in
              Millions  of  Person-Hours  Per  Week
Noise Source
Group 1: Quiet Major
Equipment and
Air Conditioner . . . .
Clothes Dryer
eMratde S—
Interference "
Slight M°de
Damage Risk
S"g« e^e
 Group II: Quiet Equip-
   ment and Small
 Plumbing (Faucets,
 Vacuum  Cleaner . . .
 Electric Food Mixer. .
 Clothes  Washer .  . .
 Electric  Can Opener
 Electric Knife	
Group III: Noisy
Small Appliances
Sewing Machine. . . .
Electric Shaver ....
Food Blender ....
Electric Lawn Mower
Food Disposer
Group IV: Noisy
Electric Tools
Home Shop Tools . .
Electric Yard Care










 '"These figures are not directly interpretable in terms of person-hours
 of lost sleep or speech interference.
gain wider acceptability in the market  place; and thus
has also attained  reasonably  acceptable exterior noise
   However, in most product areas, there has not been
any method of placing before the public the data to
provide  for  consumer choices  between  alternatives.
Thus,  industry has  not been  able  to  ascertain what
purchasing habits the public might adopt. Source noise
standards and implementing regulations should be pro-
mulgated for those products which are capable of caus-

ing excessive noise.  Such standards should have  time
scales for achievement that are consistent with indus-
trial design, prototype test, and production cycles to
encourage the most  economical and effective incorpo-
ration of noise performance criteria into the design of
the product.
   Priority  should be given to  the sources that  may
constitute a potential hazard for hearing.  In  addition,
priority should be given to  all types of  aircraft  and
large highway vehicles associated with the airport and
freeway noise. Finally, priority should be given to con-
struction equipment and the  noisier elements of city
traffic, so that the people living in  major cities will be
able to enjoy conversation outdoors. Without an effec-
tive local, State,  and Federal regulatory  program, to-
day's noise problems will affect  an  ever  increasing
number of  people.  The  technical  components of an
effective noise abatement plan must include both con-
trol of noise at its source and  preventive intervention
in  terms of balanced  transportation system planning,
land use planning and upgrading of building construc-
tion quality.

Economic Implication of Noise

   Information on the  adverse  effects of noise and the
costs associated with various types  of abatement meas-
ures was obtained during public hearings held by EPA.
However, the rudimentary state of knowledge regard-
ing costs, benefits, and the impact of abatement expen-
ditures upon the  national economy makes it extremely
difficult to undertake an economic analysis related to
this problem.
   As background material, EPA commissioned a  study
of the economic impact of noise. This  study provides a
general overview of some  aspects of the problem, dis-
cusses the limitations of existing data, and  indicates the
need  for additional  research and analysis  in this  area.
To evaluate alternative noise abatement strategies, there
are three major types of economic  considerations  to be
evaluated:  the  magnitude of  the  benefits derived in
terms of damages avoided and positive gains attained;
the costs of attaining various levels of  control included;
the impact  of abatement costs on the economy.  With
a better understanding  of these  economic factors, it
should be possible in the future to evaluate alternative
control strategies and to  identify cost-effective solutions.

 Laws  and Regulatory Schemes for Noise Abatement

    There  are  some  general  observations  that  can be
made  regarding  the laws and  regulatory schemes for
 noise  abatement  and control. With regard to  aircraft
 noise, there is  a jurisdictional problem. State  statutes
exhibit increased technical proficiency in  understand-
 ing the evolving technologies  for noise control as com-
 pared with city  ordinances. However, States  are con-
 strained in many instances  by Federal preemption of
 the regulatory field  (an example being aircraft) or con-
flicts with interstate commerce matters or other Federal
constitutional powers.  City ordinances are, in general,
vague  and technically  deficient. However,  some  city
ordinances are  becoming more  sophisticated through
the use of objective standards with  decibel levels.  The
courts  are becoming increasingly involved in the con-
troversies over noise control. In general, however, pri-
vate suits for money damages have not accomplished
a great deal regarding noise suppression.
   One  of the major problems  in the State  and local
levels of government is that of enforcement. In general,
noise statutes,  no matter how well written,  are often
rendered  ineffective due to insufficient funding  and
staffing at the local level.

Government, Industry, Professional and
Voluntary Programs
   State and local  efforts  on noise control show that
over half of the States and cities have no  agency re-
sponsible for noise abatement,  and of  those that do
have some type of program, the responsibility is frag-
mented throughout  several  agencies. Reflecting  the lo-
cal nature of many of the noise problems, a greater per-
centage of the cities,  as compared  to the States, have
specific noise programs, and personnel assigned to them
on a continuous basis.
   Most local  governments feel that if noise criteria,
 involving such  issues  as land use and human reaction
 to noise, were available in measurable terms, they could
 develop  and  implement  more  meaningful  programs
 appropriate  to their  local requirements within three
 to five  years.
   The importance of the effects of noise abatement and
 control is reflected by the concerted efforts of many
 industrial,  professional and   voluntary  associations
 throughout  the country.  Their  noise   abatement re-
 search and development programs, their programs in
 hearing conservation  for the protection  and well-being
 of personnel,  and  their initiative  in  establishing cri-
 teria and standards reflect  not  only an awareness of a
 significant problem, but a willingness  and ability to
 attack the problem  so  it may be resolved or controlled.
 The  efforts  of these  organizations  reflect the absence
 of governmental  influence. Furthermore,  their efforts
 have not been a mere  reflex reaction to public dissatis-
 faction with noise  problems  that have been projected
 in recent years.  Instead, the  efforts of many  of the
 organizations reflect active engagement during the past
 15 to  20 years.
    Interest in noise and noise related problems  is dem-
 onstrated by the activities of  over 100 professional/
 industrial organizations.  The  Acoustical  Society  of
 America is perhaps one of the  larger professional soci-
 eties that is directly  engaged  in a broad  spectrum of
 noise  and acoustical problems. It is currently develop-
 ing a program which  will establish means for defining
 environmental problems in societal  and technical terms
 and for disseminating information to  the community.

The  Society of Automotive Engineers and the Ameri-
can Society of Mechanical Engineers are two societies
that  have directed  efforts over  the  years  to  preparing
suggested standards for the safety and protection of the
  Hearing conservation, since 1947, has  received the
primary  emphasis from the Subcommittee on Noise  in
Industry of the American Academy of Ophthalmology
and Otolaryngology. This group  has prepared and dis-
tributed  guides and manuals, and participated in sym-
posia concerned  with  industrial  hearing loss. Two in-
dustrial hygiene organizations, the American  Industrial
Hygiene Association and the American Conference  of
Governmental Industrial Hygienists, also have substan-
tial involvements in noise related problems.

     The American National Standards Institute is the
  national organization, representing industry, the in-
  dividual consumer and the government,  which meets
  demands for voluntary national  standards. Through
  its committees on acoustics, bioacoustics, and shock
  and vibration,  the Institute coordinates  the work  of
  standards development in  the private  sector  in the
  areas of noise and noise related problems.

     Activities  of professional and industrial organiza-
  tions are also extended to testing procedures, certifi-
  cation, and rating of various noise producing prod-
  ucts. For example,  the American Society for testing
  and Materials  has  proposed  a standard method  to
          test  sound absorption  and  acoustical materials in
          reverberation rooms.
          The legislation which established the Office of Noise
        Abatement and  Control also stated that EPA shall be
        consulted by  other  Federal agencies in dealing with
        noise problems which the Administrator has determined
        to be a public nuisance or otherwise objectionable. This
        requirement interrelates with  those  regarding environ-
        mental impact statements and Council on Environmental
        Quality guidelines concerning noise nuisances.
          Beginning early in May,  1971, a series of conferences
        were held with  other Federal agencies to review their
        activities in  the  field of noise control prior to the issu-
        ance of interim guidelines for noise control activities for
        these agencies. The guidelines are still being reviewed.
          Although much has been accomplished, there is still
        much work to be done. The eventual reduction of noise
        in the Nation requires the  establishment of a balanced
        set of noise goals that will enable priorities to be set for
        systematic exploitation of  existing  technology and de-
        velopment of new technology.
          EPA will continue to seek the strengthening of regu-
        latory controls as emphasized by the proposed  legisla-
        tion. The Agency also will continue to evaluate the
        health hazards of noise and review promising advances
        in noise suppression.
                            TABLE  19.—Highlights of Proposed Noise Control Act





Coordination of all  Federal  programs  of noise  research  &
noise control.

Develop and publish documents  on  criteria, identifying major
sources, and control technology and cost  information.

Adopt  regulations setting  emission  standards for  products
identified as major sources, from among four specified gen-
eral categories.

EPA review process  regarding FAA aircraft noise  regulations.

Promulgate labeling  regulations on  noise emissions  by addi-
tional  sources  (1) capable of affecting public  health or wel-
fare, or (2) sold on  basis of noise protection qualities.

Determine low-noise emission products  for  preferential pur-
chasing by federal agencies.

Conduct and fund research on effects, measurement  and con-
trol of  noise. Provide technical assistance to  state and local
governments. Disseminate  noise  information  to  the  public.

Assist Secretary of Treasury in issuance of import regulations
equivalent to domestic product emission standards and label-
ing regs.


   This chapter presents an overview of recent studies
which were conducted to assess the economic impacts
of air and water pollution abatement requirements on a
number of industrial activities.
   The studies were conducted under contract with the
Council on Environmental Quality, the Environmental
Protection Agency, and the Department of Commerce.*
The Council of Economic Advisers provided guidance
on economic methodology for the studies.
   Adequate data are not yet available on all the ways
in which pollution control requirements will affect in-
dustrial activity, Environmental standards as well as the
changes being induced in the  way materials are ex-
tracted,  processed, transported, fabricated,  consumed
and ultimately disposed  of are not only  extensive but
still evolving. Comprehensive studies would require  a
great  deal more time  to conduct than was allotted to
these  preliminary  analyses.
   In view of  these recognized limitations, none of the
studies can be considered  definitive presentations  of
total impact on the industrial activities examined or on
the economy. However, it is  reasonable to believe that
the relative relationship  of  postulated standards and
pollution  abatement  cost consequences  are  at  least
indicative of the nature and order of magnitude of the
economic impacts.
   In general, the studies found that for existing laws the
impact of those pollution control costs that were esti-
mated and examined would not be severe in that they
would not seriously  threaten the  long-run economic
viability of the industrial activities examined. However,
the estimated impact is not inconsequential in that there
are likely  to  be  measurable  impacts  both  on  the
economy as a whole and on individual industries.


   Pollution abatement regulations have been imple-
mented by government at all levels in order to reduce
the substantial and rising costs society has been bearing
as a result of pollution.  These costs  are reflected  to
varying degrees—sometimes subtly, sometimes directly
—in such factors  as  increased demands for medical
services, property devaluations, lost man-hours of pro-
ductive work, lower crop yields, shorter useful lives of
man-made structures,  animal losses, and soiling costs,
as well as in such  considerations as aesthetics and the
quality of life.
   In  the  absence  of  public action, the full costs to
society of producing goods are not reflected in the prices
of goods since society rather than  the producer bears
the costs of pollution.  Environmental regulations are a
means to  "internalize" these  costs  by  requiring pro-
ducers to bear the costs of pollution  abatement. As
prices change to reflect pollution abatement costs, con-
sumers can be expected to shift their purchases to rela-
tively less expensive goods which  are  produced with
lower pollution  abatement costs.  Hence,  more low-
pollution  and  fewer  high-pollution products will  be
produced. As  a result, less pollution will  be created,
fewer resources  will be required for pollution  abate-
ment, and more resources will be available for meeting
society's  demands  for other goods  and services.
   However, the process  of reallocating society's eco-
nomic resources outlined above can in  the  short run
have  adverse  as well as positive impacts  on society.
Specifically,  transitional  economic dislocations  may
occur. For example,  although sales and employment
may be rising  in one industry while falling in another,
the employees laid off from one industry are not likely
to be immediately hired  by the other  industry due to
such  considerations as geography,  skill requirements,
and lack of knowledge of job opportunities.
   The purpose of the economic impact studies was to
begin to develop a better understanding of the nature
and order of  magnitude of  the  adverse  impacts of
environmental  regulations on the economy as a  whole
and on individual  industries  and  regions within the
   Although these studies focused on adverse economic
impacts, it should  be noted that there  will be positive
economic  impacts as well.  An  example  of positive
economic  impacts, which were not addressed  by the
microeconomic studies, is increased  profits and employ-
ment  (a) in the industries that produce pollution abate-
ment  equipment and services,  (b)  the  industries that
produce relatively low-polluting products, and (c) some
of the firms  in  the industries that are impacted by
environmental  regulations (i.e., firms that  absorb the
market shares previously held by  firms that are not
efficient when measured by their use of total resources,
including the environment, and thus close when they
must  incur pollution abatement costs).
  Examples of positive economic impacts, which were
not addressed  by either the microeconomic or macro-
economic  studies,  are (a) possible productivity in-
  *The Economic Impact of Pollution Control—a summary
of recent studies, March, 1972.

EPA Federal Laboratory,  Research Triangle  Park, North
Carolina: Determining the effects of carbon monoxide on
human performance, while establishing  EPA's  National Air
creases where environmental regulations stimulate tech-
nological  developments  (e.g.,  changes in production
processes  which both increase productivity and reduce
pollution), and  (b) increases  in the average level of
productivity in some industries as environmental regula-
tions result in the closing of plants that are inefficient in
their use  of  total resources.  Further,  no  attempt was
made to quantify the  economic benefits of  a cleaner
environment  (e.g.,  higher crop yield, increased  man-
hours of productive work) or to compare these benefits
with the costs of pollution abatement. Finally, since the
macroeconomic   analysis employs  the  conventional
national income accounts framework,  it overstates the
net costs  (or understates the net benefits) to society
because such accounting fails to include the benefits of
a cleaner  environment.

   One  macroeconomic study and 11  microeconomic
studies were conducted. The macroeconomic study used
a computer-based econometric model to determine the
impact  of  pollution abatement  costs on such macro-
economic variables as growth of GNP, inflation, unem-
ployment,  interest rates  and  balance  of  trade  and
   The  microeconomic studies concentrated  on major
elements of  11  specific  industries  selected  in  part
because of  availability  of pollution abatement cost  data
from the Environmental Protection Agency and in part
because they were thought to represent a reasonably
complete spectrum of industrial activities that might
experience  significant  dislocations  and  impacts.  The
microeconomic studies concentrated on such variables
as sales, prices, profits, plant closings, employment and
community impacts in the  industries studied.
  While  effects on  related (customer,  supplier,  and
competing) industries were examined, the simultaneous
impacts on different  industries and their cross relation-
ships were  not studied in detail.
  In interpreting the findings of these  studies, it is im-
portant to be aware of the nature and limitations of the
cost data  and  the key  assumptions which were used.
Although  these are  outlined in each  report in detail,
some of the major considerations are outlined below:

   1.  Cost Definitions. The investment costs of pol-
  lution control equipment were defined to  include
  the direct incremental investment required to at-
  tain environmental standards (a) for  existing fa-
  cilities and  (b) for new facilities. The operating
  costs for pollution  control  equipment were de-
  fined to  be  incremental and net of any produc-
  tivity increases or by-product revenues. It should
  be  noted that the figures used  in these  studies
  sometimes differ from the cost estimates prepared
  by  others. However, in general, a significant por-
  tion of  such differences  can be explained by the
  fact that the costs were estimated using definitions
  different from those above.

   2.  Water Pollution Abatement Costs. The water
  cost data were estimated under the   assumption
  that the relevant  standard is the best  practicable
  treatment—roughly  the  industrial  equivalent  of
  secondary treatment. If the pending water quality
  bill set more stringent standards  to  be  met at any
  time  in  the next decade,  investment and  engi-
  neering  decisions  would  undoubtedly  be affected
   and higher  costs  would result.

   3.  Air Pollution  Abatement Costs. The air cost
  data were  estimated in most cases  under  the as-
  sumption that the same  set of emission standards
  would apply in  every state.  The  standards  as-
  sumed were those published by EPA in the guide-
  lines for developing state implementation plans.
  If the states adopt  different control strategies  in
  order to meet national ambient air  quality stand-
  ards, the costs would vary accordingly. The studies
  did  not include  consideration of  the proposed
  sulfur tax.

  4.  Other Pollution Abatement  Costs. Only  air
  and water  pollution  abatement  costs associated
  with  Federal standards were considered.  If  lo-
  calities   implement more stringent  standards  or
  other standards (e.g., standards  for odors), the
  total pollution abatement costs  would be  higher
  than assumed in  these studies. Further, although
   some solid  waste  costs  were reflected in  the air
  and water estimates, these  were  not  comprehen-

  sively  estimated. Because the volumes of  solid
  waste,  which will require recovery and disposal,
  will  vary appreciably depending  upon  how air,
  water  and solid waste  control  requirements are
  addressed, no meaningful and comprehensive solid
  waste control  costs can as yet be estimated.

  5. Phasing.  The  year  in  which the  pollution
  abatement costs must be absorbed is  a significant
  determinant of economic impact. For the purpose
  of the studies, it was assumed  that all pollution
  abatement costs for existing plants and  for those
  to be  completed by  1976 would  be  incurred  by
  1976.  Further, it was assumed that the water pol-
  lution  abatement costs would be incurred in equal
  increments over the period and  that those  for  air
  would be incurred over the five year period 1972—
  1976 in  the  following  annual  proportions: five
  percent,  10 percent,  35 percent,  40  percent,  10
  percent respectively.

  6. Time  Frame and Coverage.  The  microeco-
  nomic studies  covered  only  the period  1972-
  1976.  The macroeconomic study covered the pe-
  riod  1972-1980. For the macroeconomic study
  the cost  estimates for the period  1972-1976  in-
  cluded the same estimates as used for the micro-
  economic studies plus additional estimates  of pol-
  lution  abatement costs  for other industries  im-
  pacted  by  environmental regulations.  For  the
  1977-1980 period,  the cost estimates included (a)
  the operating  and maintenance, interest, and  re-
  placement costs on the facilities  and equipment
  installed  by 1976  in all industries, plus (b) the
  capital and operating costs  associated  with the
  equipment required  for  control equipment  in
  facilities  expected  to be built during  the period.

  7. Technology. Most cost estimates were  based
  on end-of-Iine control technologies. Since some of
  these are  still  in the early stages of development,
  the actual cost of these  technologies  may  vary
  considerably,  in either  direction, from current
  estimates. To  the  extent  that firms meet  abate-
  ment requirements by production process changes
  rather  than end-of-line  controls,  the costs em-
  ployed in these studies could  be  over-estimated.
  8. Inflation. It was  assumed that the  prices  of
  pollution  abatement  equipment  and  services  re-
  main constant  relative  to other prices  over the
  decade. In fact, the prices of pollution abatement
  equipment and services  could  rise  faster  than
  other prices due to  significantly increased demand
  which  is  likely to peak  in mid-decade. If this oc-
  curs, the costs employed in these studies would be

  All of the cost data were  estimated  by the  Envi-
ronmental Protection  Agency. Although the data were
examined with  the assistance of industry experts iden-
tified  with assistance of the National Industrial  Pol-
lution  Control  Council (NIPCC), the cost estimates
provided  to the contractors  represented the views  of
the interdepartmental task force and were  not neces-
sarily endorsed by  the  industry experts. The contrac-
tors were asked only to assess the economic impact  of
the cost  data  given them. They were  not asked  to
assess  the accuracy  of the cost estimates. Since defini-
tive cost  estimates  could  not  be developed, ranges  of
estimates were given to the contractors so that  they
could test the sensitivity of the impact to different cost
estimates.  However, in some  cases, additional  cost
analyses conducted  simultaneously with the economic
studies  indicated that the actual costs could be higher
than even the high  range  of estimates given the  con-
tractors. These additional analyses are noted below  in
summarizing the contractor reports.


   The  microeconomic  studies indicated that none  of
the industries studied would  be severely impacted  in
that the long-run  viability of no  industry  is seriously
threatened solely by the pollution abatement costs es-
timated. However,  profits  will decline for  some firms
in most of these industries because  firms will  not  be
able to pass on the  full cost of pollution abatement to
consumers in the form  of higher prices.  Costs  will not
be  passed on completely either because  substitute  or
foreign produced products are  available so that none
of the firms in  the industry can pass  on their full costs
or  because the price increases  of  the smaller firms
which  have higher  unit  abatement costs are  con-
strained by those  of the larger firms with lower unit
abatement costs. Accordingly,  some firms will  earn
lower  profits,  some  will curtail production, and some
firms and plants will be forced  to close.
   However, the studies indicated there will be some
price increases  as a result of environmental regulations.
Depending on the industrial activity in question, prices
are likely to rise from zero percent to 10 percent over the
period  1972-1976.  This  is equivalent to  average an-
nual increases of from zero percent to two percent with
the bulk  of the increases likely to come in 1974 and
   Most of the firms or  plants  that will be  forced
to  close  are  currently   marginal   operations  (e.g.,
smaller, older  less   efficient producers)  that were al-
ready  in  economic  jeopardy due  to  other competitive
factors.  In  such  cases,  the  impact  of environmental
standards  is only  to accelerate  closings  that would
have  occurred  anyway. The  pollution abatement costs
either  eliminate already slender profit  margins or re-
duce  them to  a level at which  they  fail to justify the
required  capital expenditures  in  pollution  abatement
equipment (in  terms of an adequate  return on invest-

  There are  approximately  12,000 plants currently
operating in  the industrial activities studied. Of these
it is expected that approximately 800  would close in
the normal course  of business between 1972 and 1976.
It would appear from the contractors' evaluations that
an  additional 200-300  will  be forced to close because
of  pollution  abatement  requirements.  Many  of these
additional closings would appear to  involve plants that
were vulnerable for other reasons and, hence, that were
likely to have closed anyway  a few  years later.
  These plant closings and production  curtailments
will have both direct and indirect impacts. The direct
impacts  include the loss of jobs  and reduced value of
equity.  An  indirect impact  is that  related  (customer
and supplier) firms will be  forced  to  close or reduce
production.  For example, farms  which have marketed
their  produce to a cannery  that closed might  be  un-
able to  find new  markets for their produce. Another
indirect  impact is that the  communities where such
plants are located may suffer local  recessions—an im-
pact which  will be most severe in  one-plant towns.
   The  studies suggest that direct job loss attributable
to  environmental  regulations in the affected  industry
activities examined may range from  50,000 to  125,000
jobs over the 1972-76  period.* These figures represent
approximately one  percent  to four percent  of total
employment in the industry activities studied. The direct
average annual unemployment created in these indus-
tries represents .05 percent  of the  1970 total  national
 work force. However, the studies suggest that these esti-
mates could be substantially higher if  the economy is
not at full employment.
   While the  total plant closings in the  industries  in
which plant closings  might have a  community impact
appear to be about 150, the  data presented are not in
sufficient detail to determine the number of these com-
munities that will  be significantly impacted.
    It is important to note that the figures reported in the
preceeding paragraphs  apply to the  industrial activities
studied; neither the positive nor negative impacts on
other industrial activities have been  included. However,
in  a general sense these other impacts are considered
in  the macroeconomic  study.
   In Table  20,  a brief  description of the impact  of
pollution abatement  costs   on  each  of  the  industry
activities studied is presented.


    The macroeconomic  study indicated that the national
economy will not be severely impacted by the  imposi-
tion  of pollution abatement standards.  However, the
impact is not insignificant.
  In  general,  the dynamics  of  impact are as follows.
Pollution control costs are assumed to affect the econ-
omy in the form of higher product prices  and new
demands for investments in  pollution control facilities
by  industry  ($26  billion in  1971  dollars  over the
1972-80 period). Prices rise  as a result of the cost-push
impact  of  pollution control  costs.  In the absence of
compensatory  macroeconomic  policies,  the  effect of
rising prices, which tends to slow the growth of demand
in the economy, outweights  the stimulating impact of
investments in pollution control facilities. Consequently,
the rate of growth of GNP in constant  dollars is  re-
tarded.  The increase in unemployment  is tied to the
slowdown in real product growth. The current account
balance of international trade deteriorates primarily as a
result of the increase in domestic prices relative to world
prices.* Monetary and fiscal policy  adjustments can be
initiated to completely offset  the slowdown in GNP and
employment declines but at the expense of more  rapid
price rises  and further decline in the balance of inter-
national trade.

  The impact of pollution control  abatement costs is
discussed below in  the context of three alternative pro-
jections of the national economy:

   1.  A baseline projection  assuming a return to a
  near full employment economy and no pollution
  control costs.

   2.  The addition of pollution control costs to the
   baseline  projection using  best  estimates of pollu-
   tion control costs  as  well as a variant  with  costs
   50 percent higher than the  best  estimates.

   3.  The addition of compensatory monetary-fiscal
   policies and pollution control costs to the baseline

   To put these findings in perspective, the key assump-
tions and  possible sources of bias are  discussed, fol-
lowed  by  a  brief  description  of the   methodology
employed in this study.

Baseline Projection

   The  baseline  used in this study  was constructed to
push the economy  toward full employment. This trend
toward full employment shows the  unemployment rate
falling  to  4.4 percent  by  1976. Over  the  1971-76
interval, the value of GNP in constant dollars grows at
an average annual  rate of 5.2 percent and  consumer
  *These figures  represent the  total  number of people dis-
employed as a result of environmental regulations.  They are
not net figures because they do not account for the number of
people (conceivably the same people that  are  disemployed)
who find employment in the industry over the  same period.
In many industries the net figures indicate  that more people
find jobs than lose them.
   *For lack of data, this exercise assumes that price increases
 resulting from pollution control occurs only in  the U.S.  To
 the extent that similar price rises do take place in the econo-
 mies of our major trading partners, the trade effects  are over-

            TABLE  20.—Pollution Control Capital and Operating Costs (All Figures in 1971 Dollars)
Industry Annual
Control Capital
($ Million)
Fruit & Vegetable
Canning & Freezing
Pulp and Paper . . .
Iron Foundries .
Petroleum Refining
Leather Tanning . . .
Electric Utilities



1974 Capital
($ Million)


Control Capital
as Percent of
1974 Capital


Annual Costs
($ Million)


Value of
($ Million)


Control Costs
as a percent of
Estimated Value
Value of



Total Price



prices  by four percent.**  Because this study concen-
trates on the changes in the economy due to pollution
control costs, the specific details of the baseline case are
not at  issue here.

Impact of Pollution  Control Costs

  Constant dollar GNP grows more rapidly  in 1972
than in  the baseline  case as a  result  of  additional
demand  generated by  pollution control  investments.
However,  reflecting  the impact  of  higher  prices  for
consumer and capital goods, constant dollar  GNP falls
below  the baseline  in  1973  and  remains  below  the
baseline throughout the decade. As shown in Table 21,
the  annual rate of GNP growth averages three-tenths
percentage  points lower  over  the  ! 972-76  interval
(average annual growth rate drops from 5.2 to 4.9 per-
cent) and  one-tenth percentage points lower over  the
decade (from 4.8 to 4.7 percent).  These averages  are
not fully informative because the assumed time-phasing
of pollution control investments concentrated in 1975-
1976 lowers the growth rate by one-half of a percentage
point in  those years,  whereas the economy recovers
somewhat near the end of the decade.
  The impact on prices is felt immediately, with  the
most significant increases occurring in plant and equip-
ment prices as a result  of cost increases in steel, non-
  ::'*These guidelines were provided to the  contractor before
the Phase II economic policy  was announced.
ferrous metals and electricity. Over the 1971-76 inter-
val,  fixed investment prices  rise at  an annual rate of
five-tenths percentage points above the baseline, while
the consumer price index increases by two-tenths per-
centage points on  an annual basis from a baseline aver-
age  of four percent per year.  Here again, the largest
price increases occur in mid-decade.  Inflationary pres-
sures ease considerably by 1976, and near the end of
the decade prices rise at a lower rate than in the baseline
case. In large part this  is a result of lesser incremental
pollution control costs in conjunction with a greater de-
gree of excess capacity  in the economy.
   The unemployment rate is slightly higher (one-tenth
to two-tenths percentage points  from  a baseline ot  4.6
percent)  over the decade with employment declines
nearly offset  by  new jobs created by pollution control
   Fixed investment, excluding  those for pollution con-
trol  purposes, declines slightly over the decade as  a
result of slower GNP growth, rising prices and a lower
level of capacity utilization in  the economy. By  1976,
investment levels  for  non-pollution  control  purposes
are 3.2 percent below the baseline level of $112 billion
in 1958 dollars and 1.3 percent below by 1980. Total
fixed investment  lies  above the baseline until  1976
when pollution  control  investments fall  sharply. The
resultant decline leaves total fixed  investment $.6  bil-
lion  below the baseline in 1980.
   Net exports of  goods and  services fall below  the
base  case  with imports rising  due  to domestic price

increases.  The  current account balance  declines  by
more than $1 billion per year over the 1972-76 period
from a baseline  of $2 billion in current dollars.  Less
confidence should be placed on  the  reliability of these
trade results because the model deals with such impacts
very crudely. However, given the assumption that for-
eign prices will not increase due  to environmental regu-
lations overseas,  it is clear that  net  exports would de-
   Although  the  previous  results were based  on best
estimates of pollution control costs, another variant was
run  assuming that  pollution control costs were 50 per-
cent higher, in part to account for any costs which
may have been excluded.  In  general these new results
(Table 21) were simply about 50 percent greater than
before for nearly all variables, e.g.,  GNP growth over
the  1972-76 interval slowed  by .45 percentage points
instead of three-tenths.  Thus,  except  for the unemploy-
ment rate, which increased by more than 50 percent,
variations in economic  variables were roughly propor-
tional  to  the  percentage variation in pollution control
              Impact with Monetary-Fiscal Policy Adjustments

                Assuming that the Federal Government may try to
              offset some  of  these  impacts,  the contractor  experi-
              mented with monetary-fiscal policy changes in order to
              bring the  economy  back  to  its  baseline  path  with
              respect to GNP  growth and the level of unemployment.
              Although it is not at all clear that the particular mix of
              adjustment policies selected by the contractor,  relying
              primarily on government spending,  would be  the  most
              appropriate one, the  results are nevertheless indicative
              of the magnitude of adjustments required and the im-
              pact of expansionary policy changes.
                The fiscal stimulus  required to return the  economy
              to its baseline growth path is substantial. Federal spend-
              ing  over  the nine year projection period sums to over
              $70  billion above  the  baseline case,  implying  annual
              increases in expenditures less revenues of from seven
              to $10 billion during the last half of the decade.
                This stimulus does bring the  economy back to the
              baseline  growth path but in the process it aggravates
              the  impacts  on prices and the  balance of payments.
             TABLE  21.—Average Yearly Baseline Level and Absolute Differences From the Baseline
                                                                Input of Best Estimate of
                                                                 Pollution Control Costs
                                             Input 150% of Best Estimate
                                              of Pollution Control Costs
 GNP—baseline average
     With Pollution Control  Costs (P.C.)
     With P.C. and Monetary Fiscal Policy
billion of
1958 dolars
                 872.2    1062.8    956.9
                  -4.7     -7.6    -6.0
               872.2    1962.8    956.9
                —7.0    -13.1    -9.7
Annual Growth of Constant Dollar GNP —
baseline average
With P.C.
With P.C. and Offsets
Unemployment Rate — baseline average
With P.C.
With P.C. and Offsets
Net Exports of Goods and Services — baseline
With P.C.
With P.C. and Offsets
Annual Rate of Inflation (CPI) — baseline
With P.C.
With P.C. and Offsets
Fixed Investment Less P.C. Investment —
baseline average
With P.C.
With P.C. and Offsets



of current


billion of
1958 dollars
























     The contractor experimented with monetary fiscal policy adjustments to force the economy back to baseline values of GNP and unemploy-
ment In the case in which costs were increased by 50%, the policy offsets do not quite achieve resumption of baseline product and employment
paths only because the contractor lacked the time to refine the policy effects.

Inflationary pressures increase slightly in 1972-76 but
do not ease off after that period as they  did when only
pollution control costs  were added. For the  1972-80
period,  the consumer price index rises  by  about one-
quarter of  one percentage point annually above the
  The sustained price  increases  further aggravate the
current account balance, generating an average annual
decline  in  net exports  of about  $2  billion  per year
over the 1972-80 period.
  Interest  rates  were  essentially unchanged  because
the policy  adjustments employed  in  the study  were
designed to maintain stable interest rates.
  In  this case, the  effect  of  raising pollution control
costs by 50 percent produces somewhat more than pro-
portional  impacts  on  the economic  variables.  The
federal budget deficit must be increased  to attain base-
line GNP  levels while  prices  and the balance of pay-
ments deficit increase by slightly more  than 50 percent.

Assumptions and Sources of Bias

  This section looks at issues which may have biased
the results in the  areas of the basic pollution control
cost data, the method of inserting costs into the model
and  the  model itself.  Finally, a few  comments are
made concerning the probable direction of bias in the
macro-impact results.

1.  The Input  Data

  a.   Coverage—pollution  control  costs  were  in-
  cluded for  15 industry  groups which were con-
  sidered  the major sources of industrial pollution.
  It  is probable that other sectors are  affected but
  the empirical impact  is expected to be negligible.
  As  shown earlier, pollution control  costs are pre-
  dominately air and water for industry which  ex-
  clude costs in the areas of solid waste disposal,
  governmental water pollution abatement activities
  and public  air pollution abatement. The absence
  of these  figures  implies  the  assumption that there
  are no incremental costs in industrial solid waste
  disposal  and  that no adjustments  were made  to
  increase  revenues of  state and local governments
  above the baseline projections.

  b.   Cost data issues—aside  from any difficulties in
  the engineering cost  work,  there are some con-
  ceptual  issues, although  the direction  of possible
  bias is not clear. For  example, investment costs in
  the water  area  include  a 20 percent  upward  re-
  vision  in  part  to compensate  for  down  time
  required to install abatement facilities  while down
  time should be reflected as a decline in production,
  not as an increase in aggregate demand.

  c.  Cost phasing—phasing patterns clearly have an
  important  impact  on  the timing of  economic  ef-
  fects, e.g., assumptions  used herein produce the
   most significant effects in  1974-76. However, it is
   not clear  that other  phasing  assumptions would
   reduce impacts over the decade  as  a whole.

   d.  Costs of pollution control facilities—a key as-
   sumption underlying the cost data is that the prices
   of  abatement facilities relative to other prices re-
   main  constant over the  decade. In fact,  if new
   demand is  significant enough  and especially if
   demands are bunched, prices of facilities might rise
   at  a much greater rate relative to other prices in
   the economy.  If these effects  occur,  costs would
   be  understated.  Obviously,  the  time  phasing as-
   sumption might have a critical  impact  on the basic
   cost numbers.

   e.  Foreign trade assumptions—no  allowance was
   made  in the results  for  any  price increases  of
   world prices as a result of pollution control efforts
   outside  the  U.S.  or the  use of  higher cost  U.S.
   goods in production processes elsewhere. To the
   extent  that  foreign  prices  do rise,  net  exports
   would rise. Further analyses are to be made that
   consider increases  in world prices. There  is also
   a probability that the U.S. may be exporting pollu-
   tion control equipment  in  the  future,  a factor
   which could improve the balance of trade but has
   not been included in this study.

2.  Problems of  the Treatment  of Cost Data in  the

   As mentioned  above, a critical assumption in this
   study  is that pollution control costs  are entirely
   unproductive. By making this assumption we have
   by-passed  an area of intense controversy where a
   great deal  of research is now taking place.
Land Use in BIythe, California.
                                                 Documericji Pho

  Abatement costs are  assumed  to  be  based on
  end-of-line control technologies. In fact, a lower
  cost  approach may be  adopted relying on  man-
  agerial improvements  or  changes in  basic  pro-
  duction processes.  Such  changes  would  affect
  the results both  with respect to  the magnitude of
  costs  which in turn  affects  the  magnitude  of in-
  creases in  prices  and in cost of capital.
  There are  many  ramifications of  this issue. For ex-
  ample, pollution control efforts may spur increases
  in labor productivity  because  of a  more  rapid
  adoption  of new technologies, which often  tend
  to produce fewer pollutants  per  unit of output. It
  can  also   be  argued  that   cost  increases  may
  eliminate marginal firms and thereby average labor
  productivity could increase  if aggregate demand
  is maintained  at  full employment.  The  results
  also  ignore possible feedbacks on labor productiv-
  ity from improved health, etc., as a result  of less
  pollution which could lead to results different  from
  those indicated by the study.

3.  Problems with the  Econometric Model
  It is not clear at this point what the nature  of bias
  may be from  incorrect specification in the model
  itself.  Clearly the model  was not  designed to
  handle  the special case  of  pollution control and
  thus refinements could be made (such as produc-
  tion functions by  industry  to  account for  pro-
  ductivity  impacts  varying with pollution  control
  technologies). Whether such changes would sub-
  stantially  alter the results reported is not known.
  One part  of the model which may be weak is the
  trade sector,  which is  quite  simple, including only
  four-five  sectors.  For  example,  if  imports fall
  off more  than proportionately  as GNP declines,
  then net exports would not fall as much as they do
  in current results. Another issue is the inability of
  the  model to capture  employment loses  due to
  plant shutdowns or cutbacks as profits, in  some
  cases, are squeezed.  Because the model  relates
  unemployment only to aggregate variables, it may
  understate the  impact  of pollution control  costs
  on unemployment. While we are not sure  bias in
  the model is  significant, we  do believe that  further
  study and refinement  may be warranted in  order
  to realistically capture pollution control impacts.

4.  Possible  Direction of Bias
  As a result of this complex  set of qualifications, in
  which some have biases in opposite directions and
  other factors  have unknown effects,  no statement
  can be made with confidence about  the direction
  of net bias in the present study.


  Pollution  control costs  are assumed  to  affect  the
economy  in  several  respects:  the  efficiency  of capital
on the aggregate production function is reduced, prices
of consumer and  capital goods  increase,  the  cost  of
capital per unit output increases and  finally pollution
control investments generate new output  and employ-
ment  in industries producing abatement facilities.  It is
worthwhile emphasizing that the quantitative magnitude
of the first three negative impacts hinges importantly on
our assumption that pollution  control costs  are  en-
tirely  "unproductive" in the sense of generating  new
capacity in industrial establishments.

1.  Prices

  Annual costs in the  form of percentage cost in-
  creases were inputed into  the  industrial  sector
  of an input-output table. These cost increases are
  initially converted  to first-round price  increases
  by  industry  markup  factors  which range  from
  eight-tenths to one. These price increases are then
  passed on through other industries which use  other
  products as inputs, assuming that all raw material
  price increases are passed on  100  percent. After
  taking  account of these inter-industry effects,  these
  price increases  were passed on  through another
  series  of markup factors for final  demand  com-
  ponents, such as cars, shoes,  and plant equipment.
  This set of price increases is then used to move the
  economy off the baseline growth path.

2.  Aggregate Production Function

  Pollution  control  investments  are  included  as  a
  factor boosting aggregate demand in the  economy,
  thereby generating output and employment, but
  were not considered to augment the productive or
  capacity-augmenting capital  stock  of the  nation.
  No  adjustment  was made for reducing the effi-
  ciency of  labor  in the aggregate production  func-
  tion, although this effect is  probably small  corn-
  pared to that for capital  stock.

3. Cost  of  Capital

  Since pollution  control expenditures are assumed
  not to be  capacity-augmenting, some further ad-
  justment  was  necessary  to   reflect  the negative
  incentive this would have on industry's considera-
  tion of new  investments  which would augment
  capacity.  This adjustment was necessary because
  the  determination  of investment  in the  macro
  model did not  explicitly consider  the  impact  of
  more capital required per unit of output. This was
  done by boosting the "user cost of  capital" by the
  ratio of pollution control costs to baseline invest-
  ment levels.  Conceptually,  this  is  equivalent  to
  raising the cost of capital needed to produce a unit
  of output.  To provide some feeling  for the  compli-
  cated set of factors which affect investment (ex-
  cluding pollution control)  demands in the model,

   we note that it is negatively affected by the slow-
   down in GNP growth, the rise in capital goods
   prices, the rise in  the  cost of capital  and by  the
   decline in the degree of capacity utilization. Off-
   setting these factors to  some degree,  investment
   demand is stimulated by the increase in wholesale

   The following tables present EPA's estimates of  pollu-
tion abatement costs  for air,  water and solid waste for
the period 1972-1976.
   Table 22 contains  EPA's estimate of the total  pollu-
tion abatement costs to be spent over the period 1972-
1976.  These  costs  include the  costs that  are already
being incurred (e.g., municipal trash collection and dis-
posal) plus the additional costs  required  to meet  exist-
ing environmental standards  by the end  of the period.

TABLE  22.—Total  Pollution   Abatement  Costs *
               Aggregate Summary  1972-1976
   Pollutant/Medium    Investment    Annual Cost A  Annual Cost
Mobile , .












  Total       ...      24

Solid  Waste      .      _!_

Grand  Total  	      49




   These figures include the costs associated with  maintaining the
current  pollution abatement  effort as  well  as the costs associated
with upgrading this effort to  achieve existing air and water pollution
abatement standards. The derivation of these estimates is explained
in "Derivation of Cost Estimates" below.

  A Annual  costs  include  operating,  maintenance,  interest,  and

  B Cash expenditures  include investment  plus  annual costs less
depreciation. For example air pollution control  total cash expendi-
tures ($48)  equal  investment ($24) plus annual  costs ($30) less de-
preciation ($6). Water pollution control  total cash expenditures  ($43)
equal investment ($24) plus annual costs ($28) less depreciation ($9).
                            Table 23  contains EPA's  estimates  of  only  the
                          additional costs (over  and above those currently  being
                          incurred)   associated   with   existing   environmental
                            EPA estimates that $127  billion will be  spent on
                          pollution abatement over  the period. This  is  broken
                          down relatively  evenly between  air, water  and  solid
                          waste—$48  billion,  $43  billion,  and   $36  billion
                            Slightly more than half of this total, $68 billion, will
                          be required over and  above  current practice to  meet
                          existing environmental standards. These additional costs
                          do not  break  down evenly.  Since little  air  pollution
                          abatement has been practiced,  additional expenditures
                          of  $43  billion are  estimated  to  be required  to  meet
                          standards.  About  half of  these  are  for automobile
                          (mobile source) pollution abatement. In the water area,
                          a great deal of pollution abatement is practiced; hence,
                          only  $25 billion of additional  costs are estimated  to be
                          required. For solid  waste disposal,  no additional  costs
                          are estimated since no new standards have recently been
                          or are expected to be set.

                          TABLE 23.—Incremental Pollution Abatement Costs*
                                       Aggregate Summary 1972-1976
                                                               Pollutant/Medium    Investment   Expenditures B Expandi?ures B
Public . ...






  Total           .      23

     Federal ...       1
     Municipal  . .        9

     Manufacturing       5
     Utilities             3
  Total    	      18

Solid Waste ....      —

Grand Total ....      41

                           •"These figures include the costs required to upgrade current pol-
                         lution  abatement efforts to achieve existing standards under the
                         Clean Air Act of 1970 and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
                         of 1967. There are no federal standards for solid waste disposal. The
                         derivation  of these  estimates  is explained in "Derivation of Cost
                         Estimates" below.

                           A Annual  costs  include  operating, maintenance,  interest, and

                           B Cash expenditures  include investment plus  annual costs less

  These pollution abatement cost  estimates  are based
upon  the best available information; principally upon
the  1972 editions  of  Economics  of Clean  Air  and
Economics of Clean Water, and upon 7965 National
Survey of Community  Solid Waste Practices.  In  pre-
paring these estimates  many  assumptions about  the
phasing of  required investments, the rate of industrial
growth and the value of equipment in place have been
necessary. The actual  circumstances may, of course,
differ  from those assumed. Accordingly, EPA attributes
a degree of uncertainty of approximately 20 percent to
these estimates.
  Cost estimates associated with noise pollution abate-
ment, water pollution abatement for feedlots and con-
struction,  radiation  controls,  land  reclamation  and
disposal of  solid waste  generated  by  air  and water
pollution abatement systems have  not  been included.
Therefore, this summary cannot be considered to be a
comprehensive  summary  of  all pollution  abatement

Total Pollution Abatement Costs


    Public—Public expenditures  were derived from
             OMB estimates of costs of controlling air
             pollution from Federal facilities.


       Mobile—Investment costs are based upon  the
                sum of new investments plus assembly
                line testing as reported in Table 3-7 of
                the Economics  of Clean  Air.  Each
                fiscal  year has  been converted to a
                calendar  year by  subtracting half of
                the current fiscal year and adding half
                of the next fiscal year (i.e.  CY'76 =
                (!/2XFY'76)  +  (1/2XFYT7)).  The
                figures have also  been multiplied by
                1.05 to convert 1970 dollars to 1971

                  Annual costs are  based upon  the
                sum of annual operating and mainte-
                nance  costs plus  gasoline price in-
                creases  as reported  in  Table  3-7.
                Adjustments   have  been   made   as
                above. Estimates  of annual deprecia-
                tion   (10%)  and interest  charges
                (10% ) have been added to the above
                costs.  These have been based upon the
                accumulated new  investments plus as-
                sembly line testing from 1968 as re-
                ported in the above-mentioned table.

       Stationary—Investment  costs have been based
                upon  the  $10.1 billion investment re-
                ported in Table 1-1 of the Economics
                of Clean Water. This  has been multi-
             plied by  1.05 to convert 1970 dollars
             to 1971  dollars.

               Annual costs are based upon the
             $3.9 billion  annual costs in 1977 for
             all stationary sources also reported in
             Table  1-1.  The portion of the total
             projected investment assumed in place
             each year was as follows:  1972 = five
             percent;  1973 = 15 percent; 1974=50
             percent; 1975 = 90 percent;  1976=100
             percent. Hence, annual costs were es-
             timated to be 260  percent of the $3.9
             billion  annual costs reported in Table

               Depreciation was assumed to be 6.7
             percent of the investment in place each
             year, or 17 percent (6.7 percentx260
             percent)  of  the total projected invest-


     Federal—Federal  expenditures  were  derived
              from OMB's estimates of the costs of
              controlling water pollution from Fed-
              eral facilities.

     Municipal—Municipal investments were derived
              from page  125 of Volume 2  of  the
              Economics of Clean Water. Estimates
              in current dollars were converted to
              1971 dollars  by applying an  annual
              inflation factor of 7.5 percent.
                Annual costs were based upon  the
              estimated equipment in place in 1971
              (Table  4, Volume 1, page 120 of  the
              Economics of Clean  Water) plus  the
              projected investments.  Annual costs
              were assumed to be 12  percent  of
              equipment in place. Of this total  5.5
              percent is interest costs, 3.5 percent is
              operations and maintenance, and three
              percent is depreciation.


     Manufacturing—Manufacturing investment was
              derived  from Table  35, Volume  1,
              page 89 of the Economics of Clean
              Water.  These  estimates were  multi-
              plied by 1.357 to convert  from 1967
              dollars to 1971 dollars.

                Annual costs were based upon  the
              equipment in place in 1968   (Table
              33,  Volume  1,  page 84 of the Eco-
              nomics of Clean Water) plus the pro-
              jected investments. Annual costs were

                assumed to be 19  percent of equip-
                ment  in place  (7.7 percent  interest,
                7.3 percent  operations  and  mainte-
                nance, 40 percent depreciation).

       Electric Utilities—Expenditures for electric utili-
                ties were derived from the  thermal
                pollution control costs reported in the
                Economic Impact of Pollution Con-
                trol. Annual costs include an  estimate
                for the  costs associated with thermal


  Solid waste  expenditures  were  based upon those
reported in  the  1968 National Survey of Community
Solid  Waste  Practices.  Investments  of approximately
$120  million  were estimated to have been  financed
through municipal bond issues in 1967. For the 1972-
1976 period it was assumed that $1 billion, or  approxi-
mately $200 million per year would be  invested.
  The annual costs of $4.5  billion estimated for  1967
were converted to 1971 dollars using the cost  of living
price  inflator  (19.6 percent),  and were projected to
grow steadily through 1976 at an annual rate of  four per-
cent. No estimates of depreciation costs  are available.
  EPA has not  added to these costs any expenditures
for  upgrading  facilities.  It  is  anticipated that  any
expenditures of this nature will be offset by cost reduc-
tions due to increased efficiencies.
  These figures  are lower than those reported in the
Council on Environmental Quality's  7977 Annual Re-
port for two reasons:

  (1)  The CEQ report covers a six year  period, 1970—
        1975, rather than a  five  year period; and,

  (2)  CEQ includes  estimated expenditures  for up-
       grading facilities,  where as EPA does not.

Incremental Pollution  Abatement  Costs
    Public—Public expenditures for air pollution con-
             trol have  been  assumed to  be  entirely


       Mobile—Incremental  investment  and annual
                operating and maintenance costs were
                assumed to  be those listed  in  Table
                3—7 of  the Economics  of Clean  Air
                after adjustment for calendar year less
                the  level  of  expenditures in  1971
                (1971 investment=$342 million, 1971
                annual costs=$547). Depreciation and
                interest were taken to total 20 percent
                of the accumulated incremental invest-
       Stationary—All  of  the air pollution  control
                expenditures  for  stationary  sources
                were considered to be incremental.



       Federal—All of the federal investments in water
                pollution control were assumed to be
                incremental. The majority of  the an-
                nual costs  ($200  million/year) were
                considered  to  be continuing costs  as-
                sociated with current control practices.

       Municipal—Incremental  investment expendi-
                tures were considered to be the growth
                plus the backlog investment listed on
                page  125 of the Economics of Clean
                Water  as  adjusted  to  1971  dollars.
                Annual costs  and depreciation were
                calculated as a percentage of  the ac-
                cumulated  incremental  investment in


       Manufacturing-—Incremental investments were
                considered  to be  the net  investment
                plus growth investment from  Table
                37, Volume  1, page  96 of the Eco-
                nomics of Clean Water less the invest-
                ment  reported  (excluding  deprecia-
                tion)  for the period  1968-1971  in
                Table 35, page 89 of the same volume.
                Annual costs  and depreciation were
                calculated as a percentage of  the ac-
                cumulated incremental investment.
       Utilities—All of the expenditures for control of
                the thermal pollution from electric utili-
                ties were considered to be incremental.


   Because there are no new  Federal standards for solid
waste disposal, none of the expenditures were considered
to be incremental.  Costs associated  with the control of
air pollution from  incinerators  are  included in  the air
pollution control cost estimates.


   /  want to  assure you that we have no  ambition to
usurp the State role or to coerce States into action. We
hope only to  lead, to guide, to offer vital assistance and
to maintain the strengths of different State attacks on
environmental degradation. I also want to assure you
that if the States do not act, the Federal Government will.

                           William Ruckelshaus
                           Februarys, 1971.
   Since the citizens of one State cannot be expected to
 protect the air  and water  of the  citizens  of  another
 State,  a  Federal presence  is  needed as long as  the
 pollution which clouds  the air and clogs the  streams
 respects no political boundaries. This Federal presence
 is needed also to enable all States to meet their respon-
 sibility to the environment fairly. The separate States
 compete for industry to provide jobs for  their citizens,
 revenues for their government, and prosperity for their
 merchants. That competition cannot be allowed to lure
 some States into relaxing their regulatory role at  the
 expense of the environment.  The Federal  presence
 behind the States strengthens EPA's role as regulator,
 insuring that no State should suffer disadvantage  be-
 cause of vigilant protection of its environment.
   To enable States to fight pollution,  EPA has set up
 10 Regional Offices to  assist States and to administer
 State and  local assistance grants.  EPA's Washington
 Headquarters administers additional grants.
   A strong feature of EPA  is an emphasis on decen-
 tralization.  To enable  the Agency to work closely with
 all levels of State and local  government and industry,
 the  Administrator  decided to  establish  10 Regional
 Offices along boundaries aready in use by other Federal
 agencies. He announced that much of the work of  the
 Agency would  be done through the  Regional Offices,
 headed by Regional Administrators.
   The Regional Administrators possess broad authority
 to act for EPA in matters within their jurisdiction. They
 exercise authority in the fields of enforcement, surveil-
 lance  and analysis, and  air, water,  pesticides, solid
 waste,  and  radiation  program  operations, including
 EPA's State  and local assistance grants programs.

   The job of controlling pollution is an enormous one,
 both in terms of  costs and  in  terms  of manpower
 requirements. Few, if any, State and local governments
 have revenues  large  enough to meet the many and
 increasing demands confronting them. The largest share
 of  EPA's  resources  are,  therefore,  spent for  direct
 assistance to  States and communities.  EPA's State and
 local assistance grants programs represent 85 percent of
 EPA's budget. These programs have been decentralized
 and are now administered through the Regional Office
 structure. This decentralization places Regional  Admin-
 istrators in a position  to be  more  effective and more
 responsive to the needs of States and localities in  en-
 vironmental matters. These grants include Waste Water
 Treatment Works Construction Grants, Water Pollution
 Control, State  and Interstate Program Grants, Water
 Pollution   Control   Comprehensive  Basin  Planning
 Grants, Air  Pollution Control Program Grants, and
 Solid Waste Planning Grants.

 Grants  Procedural Process

  The  establishment of  EPA  brought  together  21
 separate, categorical grant  programs  which had been
 operating in  the predecessor  agencies.  EPA's initial
 objective was to integrate  these grant activities into a
 common framework to  support  the Agency's  mission
 and to respond to the President's desire and efforts  to
 reform the grant-making processes of  the government.
 EPA has standardized grant regulations, policies, forms,
 and reporting  procedures; consolidated all research,
 demonstration,  and training programs in  Headquarters,
 with a centralized grants administrative function serving
 all  programs; and  decentralized State  and  local assist-
 ance grant programs to the Regional Offices.
  EPA has been  actively involved  in the  President's
 Federal Assistance Review (FAR) Program to  stream-
 line Federal domestic assistance by  increasing reliance
 on  State and  local  governments and  other recipients of
 Federal assistance, improving interagency coordination,
 and improving intra-agency  assistance  systems. The
 Agency has been strengthening liaison with  (a) Federal
 Regional Councils  (established in the  10 Federal Re-
 gions to develop and maintain close working relation-
 ships with State and local governments,  to coordinate
 grant programs in a manner responsive to  other levels
 of government, and to develop means to react better to
 specific  regional, State, and local problems); and (b)
 Federal Executive  Boards  (operating  in 25 cities, to
provide  association of top executives in  support  of
government-wide Presidential policies, to  help  solve
community problems, and to enhance the image of the

               TABLE  24.—Allocation of Grant Funds for Wastewater Treatment Works Construction
State or Territory
"Alabama ... ....
*Alaska ... 	
'"California . .
*Delaware ... 	
'"District of Columbia
* Florida . . ....
Georgia . 	
Kentucky . . 	
"Maine .... 	
"Maryland . . 	
"Minnesota ... 	
Nevada . ...
"New Hampshire 	
"New Jersey . . 	
"New Mexico 	 	
"New York 	
North Carolina . . . 	
"North Dakota 	
"Oregon . . 	
"Rhode Island
South Carolina 	
South Dakota 	
"Tennessee ...
"Virginia . . 	
West Virginia . 	
"Wyoming . 	
"Guam . 	
'" Puerto Rico 	
"Virgin Islands . 	
"American Samoa 	
"Trust Terr of Pac . .

Subtotal ... 	
Allocation for serious water pollution
problems • .


$ 14,672,000
6327 100
8,072 600
11,117 600
3,780 500



$ 14 680 000
1,622 500
6 316 000
8,580 800
65,557 000
8,084 200
11 117 800
2,571 000
3 788 000
3,410 900

800,000,000 '


$ 18 745 300
3 835 500
7 742 700
8 401 500
141 049 600
9 642 600
64 227 400
3 894 000
14 746 000
53,127 400
29,299 300
5 440 500
89 236 800
9,825 300



1973 Estimated
$ 50 118 000
4 398 000
25 794 000
27 987 000
290 352 000
32 118 000
44 124 000
7 977 000
1 1 007 000
98 799 000
66 786 000
1 1 202 000
10,374 000
161 727 000
32,727 000
53 016 000
57,078 000


$3,000,000,000 3

    'States and Territories with matching grants programs (as of 10/15/71).
  ' Although the total allocation is identical in 1970 and 1971, the existing  formula in Section 8(c) of the Federal Water Pollution Control  Act, as
amended, provides that per capita income of each State is the basis for allocating  a portion of the appropriation. Therefore, a change in a State's
per capita income from the latest two years available would cause a change  in their allocations for 1970 to 1971.
    2 FY 1972 allocation based on administration proposed revision to Section 8.
    3 FY 1973 allocation  based on $3 billion dollars distributed by population among States.
    4 $200 million for serious pollution problems  is incorporated  in  reallocation of the above funds.

Federal Government as a model enterprise in the com-
munity).  EPA  participation in  these programs  has
developed rapidly. The Agency now is a full member on
all 10 Federal Regional Councils and an active partici-
pant on most Federal Executive Boards.

Wastewater Treatment Works Construction Grants

  The  Wastewater  Treatment  Works  Construction
Grants, EPA's  largest program, assists in the construc-
tion of waste treatment works to prevent the discharge
of untreated or inadequately treated sewage  or other
wastes into any waters. These grants  are  much needed
because of the rapid population growth  in urban cen-
ters. In 1956, a program was initiated to provide Fed-
eral funding to communities  to  streamline  or build
sewage   treatment  facilities.   Today,   municipalities,
States, and interstate agencies can service grants of at
least 30 percent of the cost of the project. These grants
may be increased to  50 percent if a State is paying at
least 25 percent of the total cost. 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 fund-
ing rose to  $2  billion annually. By  the end of  1974,
EPA expects to have projects  funded and  underway
that will  provide secondary treatment for almost  all
municipal waste water.
  EPA provides  localities funds for the construction
of modern treatment plants, including experimental pilot
plants that might  well demonstrate a better,  more  effi-
                                     cient way of disposing of municipal sewage. In the past
                                        r,  a number  of  these  projects  showed  promise.
                                        iong them:
                     year,  _ 	
                     Among them:
                                       A full scale demonstration of the removal of phos-
                                       phates from water by the addition of minerals with
                                       minimum  modification   of   the  installation  in
                                       Richardson, Texas.

                                       The technical and economic practicality of utilizing
                                       waste "pickle liquor" (ferrous chloride)  to remove
                                       phosphorus from raw sewage has been  developed
                                       in some six different projects.

                                       A small  scale plant study at Batavia, New  York,
                                       has demonstrated that the  use of pure oxygen
                                       instead of ordinary air in secondary treatment can
                                       increase the capacity of the sewage treatment plant

                                       Another plant study in St. Michaels, Maryland, has
                                       demonstrated how secondary treatment effluent can
                                       be disinfected with ultra-violet light.

                                       A method of regenerating powdered carbon for
                                       sewage treatment has been developed on a small
                                       pilot plant scale at Lebanon, Ohio.

                                     Water Pollution Control State and
                                     Interstate Programs Grants

                                       The Water Pollution Control Act authorizes EPA to
                                     assist  State and  interstate agencies in establishing and
      TABLE 25.—Assistance From Other Federal Agencies for Wastewater Facilities and Related Projects
Appalachian Regional
Development Act of 1965

Public Works and
Economic Development
Act of 1965

Lead Agency
Department of

Department of

Purpose of Grant
Increase con-
tributions for
public works
projects in
Increase Federal
grants for public
works in eco-
nomically dis-
tressed areas

Max. Federal
80% of project

80% of project
(100% on Indian

EPA Role
EPA administers
Sections 212 and 214
of this act and receives
funding on a transfer
basis from Commerce
EPA administers grants
for waste treatment
works after funds
transferred from Com-
merce. EPA also
certifies for adequacy
sewer loans and grants
Approximate Funding Level
Approximately $4.0 million
per year ($2.4 million
received through 2/28/71)

EPA administers approxi-
mately $6-$10 million
annually (4.4 million re-
ceived through 2/28/71).
Additional $5-10 million
administered by commerce
for sewer loans and
Housing and Urban
Development Act of 1965
                Loans and grants
                for water supply
                and collecting
                50% of project
                EPA certifies for ade-
                quacy sewer loans
                and grants
Approximately $150 million
per year (55% water
supply & 45% collecting
sewers). Fy 1972—$100
million in this approximate
ratio—$100 to revenue
sharing after 1/1/72
Consolidated Farmers
Home Administration
Department of
Loans and grants,
water supply,
sewers, and
waste treatment
facilities in
rural areas.
50% of project
For water supply, sewers,
and waste treatment
facilities in Fy 1972—
$42.0 million.

            maintaining adequate water pollution control programs.
            This program began in 1957 with an annual funding of
            $2 million. As of Fiscal  Year 1971, the annual figure
            had grown to $10 million,  and State and  interstate
            agency expenditures  have increased more than seven
            times. These funds have been utilized for  all phases of
            State and  interstate agency  programs, including tech-
            nical  assistance  and  planning,  laboratory and  field
            equipment, training programs, monitoring and  surveil-
            lance, and  enforcement activities. To qualify for  a grant,
            each  State and interstate agency must prepare a  plan
            describing  how the grant will be utilized to strengthen
            its  pollution control program.  Funds are pro-rated on
            the basis of financial need, population and  the extent of
            the water pollution problem. States must provide match-
            ing funds based on per capital income, from a minimum
            of 33%  percent of the Federal amount to a maximum
            of 66%  percent of the Federal amount.

            Air Pollution Control  Programs

              Air Pollution Control  Program grants are awarded
            directly to  air pollution control agencies to equip State
            and local governments to prevent and control air pollu-
            tion.  The  Clean  Air  Act provides  for  funding  for
            planning new programs,  developing  these  programs,
            establishing programs  which have been authorized by
            State and local government and improving and main-
            taining existing programs for the prevention and control
            of air  pollution. Funds also  are  designated to support
            program planning activities in air quality control regions
            as part of a regional approach to  the control of air
            pollution. The result has been a significant expansion of
            State and local activity. In Fiscal Year 1971 there were
            51  State control programs and  153  local and  regional
            programs. EPA supplies up to 75 percent  of the fund-
            ing to regional programs, up to 66% percent to control
Washington, D.C.: Four clanficrs under construction at the
Blue Plains sewage  treatment  plant, supported joiii/ly  by
EPA and the Washington. D.C. Di-pt. of Sanitary Engineer-
        n, D.C.: Recalcinating furnace at Blue Plains sew-
age treatment plant.

agencies  for improvement grants,  up to 60 percent to
regional  programs  and up  to 50 percent to control
agencies  for maintenance grants. Program maintenance
grants assure State and local governments that EPA will
continue  to  support their efforts. Support to air pollu-
tion control  agencies will continue  as long as air quality
objectives and State implementation objectives are met.

Water Pollution Control Comprehensive
Basin  Planning Grants

   Water Pollution  Control Comprehensive Basin Plan-
ning Grants serve  as an incentive  to  State and  local
governments to cooperate in the development of  plans
for the cleanup of a river  basin  or a  portion of one.
These  plans, after development  by State or local agen-
cies, certification  by  the Governor and  approval  by
EPA,  provide the  basis for the  public investment to
construct water treatment facilities. The plans  consider
both point and nonpoint sources;  alternative strategies,
including  possibilites of regionalizations;  institutional
and management requirements; and environmental  is-
sues.  As  an  example, the recently  completed Dallas-
Fort  Worth  regional  plan developed by  the North
Central Texas  Council of Governments  provides the
full methodology which will guide the public investment
of $600 million in waste treatment facilities over the
coming years.  This plan  provides  the  intense  detail
required to meet the water quality goals for the  upper
Trinity River Basin, and will be fully integrated with a
similar plan in the Houston area, in the lower Trinity
River. An interesting feature of the Upper Trinity plan
is the location of proposed industrial areas adjacent to
the waste treatment facilities, so that  treated  waste
waters can be utilized  by industry.
  The planning agencies in the Trinity Basin  received
a 50  percent planning grant  from  EPA.  Thirty-eight
agencies are now receiving such grants. To date,  EPA
has approved  plans for more than  400  basin and
regional areas throughout the  Nation.
               TABLE 26.—Summary of Grants for State and Local Control Agency Programs
State or Territory
District of Columbia 	
New Hampshire 	
New Jersey 	
New Mexico 	
New York 	
North Carolina 	
North Carolina 	
	 $ 43,203
$ 190,500
$ 233,703
$ 405,926
$ 277,350
$ 683,276

 Solid Waste  Planning Grants

   The  Solid Waste Planning  Grants program awards
 grants to State, interstate, municipal, and intermunicipal
 agencies  for  developing comprehensive plans  for solid
 waste management, in  coordination with State air and
 water  pollution  control  plans. EPA will fund  up  to
 two-thirds  of the  costs for  these  planning programs.
 Agencies have typically used  their  grants,  in addition
 to surveys  and plans,  to  develop and  pass legislation
 and  regulations,  and to carry on public relations and
 information activities.
      Solid waste management plans are basically oriented
    toward the  development of policies and  procedures in
    order to guide the activites of State solid waste manage-
    ment agencies in  solving their problems. The plans also
    provide a framework within  which local and regional
    plans  might  be  formulated and  provide  support for
    legislation. Interstate plans, on the other hand, are more
    oriented  to  the design of  operating-level  regional sys-
    tems including collection, transportation,  disposal, pos-
    sible  reclamation  and  reuse  and overall management
    systems. Plans formulated  at each level are coordinated
    with comprehensive  plans of  each  respective  jurisdic-
           TABLE  26.—Summary of Grants for State and Local Control Agency Programs* (Continued)
State or Territory
Ohio  	     1,257,189       447,300
Oklahoma  	       236,877       117,600
Oregon  	       567,650        96,900
Pennsylvania  	     2,562,671       488,300
Rhode Island	       106,473       111,000

South Carolina  	       345,623       157,400
South Dakota  	        33,441        38,500
Tennessee  	       801,281       208,200
Texas 	     1,426,216       427,000
Utah  	       101,551        55,400

Vermont  	        59,920        43,700
Virginia	       478,067       210,500
Washington	     1,125,000       136,300
West Virginia 	       256,462       110,200
Wisconsin 	       199,494       193,000
Wyoming  	        33,536        23,600

American Samoa	          219          —
Guam 	        10,823        75,000
Puerto Rico 	       149,310       195,000
Virgin Islands	        39,181        73,000
      Subtotal  	    30,200,000      9,400,000
Interstate Agencies                                Air           Water
Delaware  River Basin Commission 	         —         133,500
  (Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania)

Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin         —          50,400
  (District of  Columbia, Maryland,  Pennsylvania,
     Virginia, West Virginia)

Interstate Sanitation Commission	         —         137,800
  (Connecticut, New Jersey, New York)

New  England  Interstate  Water  Pollution  Control
  Commission  	         —          87,400
  (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hamp-
     shire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont)
Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission...
   (Illinois,  Indiana, Kentucky,  New York,  Ohio,
    Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia)

















                                              30,200,000     10,000,000     40,200,000
                           42,900,000      15,000,000     57,900,000
     * Water Grants are made to State or Interstate Agencies.
      Air Grants are made to State or Local Agencies.

 tion, and take into account other environmental prob-
 lems,  population,  land  use,  capital  and  operating
 budgets, public facilities, pertinent regulations, govern-
                    mental framework  and transportation  systems. To ac-
                    complish this, EPA now has solid waste planning grants
                    with 46 states, five interstate agencies, and eight regional
             TABLE 27.—Grantees Under Section 3(C) Water Basin Planning Grants 1968 to 1971
                                       (AWARD PERIODS SHOWN IN PARENTHESES)
Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning
Commission—Upper White River, Fay-
etteville-Springfield Area (3/71-3/74)

California Water  Resources  Control
Board—San Francisco Bay Delta
Humboldt County California Board of
Supervisors—Humboldt  Bay   (6/69-
Santa Ana Watershed  Planning Agency
—Santa Ana  River  Basin   (11/68-
Association of Monterey Bay Area Gov-
ernments—Monterey  Bay Area, Mon-
terey Bay SMSA   (1/71-1/74)
Joint Administrative   Committee  of
Santa Marqarita—San Luis Rey Rivers,
Santa Marqarita   (11/71-6/73)

Denver  Metropolitan Regional Council
of Governments—Upper South Platte
River Basin, Upper Denver SMSA

East Central Florida Regional Planning
Council—Oklawaha River Basin
Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council
—Tampa  Bay,  Tampa Bay-St. Peters-
burg SMSA  (3/71-3/74)
Metropolitan Dade County — Florida
East  Coast,  Miami  SMSA  (6/71-
Jacksonville SMSA  (11/71-6/73)
West  Palm  Beach  SMSA  (11/71-

ADA of  Governments Council—Boise
River Basin,  Boise  SMSA  (12/70-

Indianapolis Department of Metropol-
itan  Development—White River, Indi-
anapolis SMSA  (6/71-6/73)

Dickenson County Board of Supervisor
—Spirit Lake   (11/71-6/73)

Northern  Maine   Regional Planning
Commission—Aroostook and  Prestile
River Basins  (11/70-5/72)
 Maryland Environmental Service—Bal-
 timore Harbor  (2/69-2/72)

 Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities
 Area, Mississippi River Basin, Minne-
 apolis-St. Paul SMSA   (2/70-2/73)
 St.  Cloud  Metropolitan Area  Sewer
 Commission,  Mississippi River  Basin,
 St. Cloud Area  (10/70-10/72)

 Pearl River Basin-Jackson SMSA
 Pat Harrison Waterway   (11/71-6/73)

 East-West Gateway Coordinating Coun-
 cil-Mississippi  River Basin,  St. Louis
 County Area   (12/70-12/72)

 Nebraska Soil and Water Conservation
 Commission-Salt Creek-Lincoln  SMSA

 Clark County  Nevada  Board of Com-
 missioners—Las Vegas Wash

 Erie & Niagara Counties Regional Plan-
 ning Board—Niagara  River, Buffalo
 SMSA  (6/71-6/73)

 Ohio Department of Natural Resources
 —Great Miami River   (12/68-12/71)

 Lane Council  of Governments—Willa-
 mette  River  Eugene   SMSA  (3/69-
 Coos-Curry Council of Governments—
 Southern  Oregon Coast  (4/71-4/71)

 Environmental  Quality  Board—Com-
 monwealth  of Puerto  Rico  (3/69-

 Black Hills Conservancy Sub-District—
Cheyenne River Basin—Belle Fomche
 River Basin    (10/70-10/73)

Guadalupe-Blanco  River Authority—
Guadalupe River Basin  (6/69-6/72)
 North Central Texas Council of Govern-
 ments—Upper  Trinity  Basin,  Dallas
 SMSA  & Fort Worth SMSA   (5/68-
 Sabine River Authority—Sabine River
 Basin, Texas &  Louisiana   (6/70-
 San Antonio River Authority—San An-
 tonio  River Basin   (5/70-5/73)
 Texas Water Quality Control  Board—
 Galveston Bay Area  (12/70-12/73)
 Trinity River Authority—Middle Trinity
 River  Basin   (11/71-6/73)

 Salt Lake, Provo-Orem SMSA  (11/71-

 Virginia Statewater  Control   Board—
 Lower James River,  Richmond SMSA,
 Petersburg-Colonial  Heights  SMSA,
 Norfolk-Portsmouth  SMSA, Hampton-
 Newport News SMSA  (6/71-6/73)

 Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle—
 Green  &  Cedar River Basins, Seattle
 SMSA  (6/71-6/73)
 Walla  Walla Regional Planning Com-
 mission—Walla Walla County
 Snohomish  County—Seattle SMSA

 Southeastern Wisconsin  Regional Plan-
 ning Commission—Milwaukee  River
 Basin   (5/68-5/71)

Omaha-Council  Bluffs  Metropolitan
Area Planning Agency—Missouri River
 Basin,  Omaha-Council  Bluffs  SMSA

Kansas City  SMSA Metropolitan Plan-
ning Commission  — Missouri River
 Basin,  Kansas  City Region  (1/71-

Duluth-Superior Council of  Govern-
ments—St.  Louis River  Basin

                        TABLE 28.—Solid Waste Planning Grants Under Section 207
                                       (START DATE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES)
Department of Health   (7/1/71)

Pollution Control Comm.   (10/1/67)

Department of Health   (6/1/66)

Department of Public Health
Department of Health   (6/1/66)

Department of Health and Social Serv-
  ices   (6/1/67)
Department of Sanitary Engin.

Department of Health & Rehabilitative
  Service   (6/1/67)
Department of Public Health
Department of Health   (6/1/66)

Department of Health   (6/1/66)
Board of Health  (12/1/69)
Department  of Health   (7/1/71)
Department of Health   (2/1/68)
Department of Health   (6/1/66)
Board of Health   (9/1/166)
Department of Health and  Welfare
Department of  Health & Mental Hy-
  giene  (1/1/67)
Department of Public Works  (7/1/69)
Department of Public Health  (6/1/67)
Pollution Control Agency   (6/1/68)
Board of Health  (3/1/69)
Division of Health   (8/1/68)
Department of Health   (6/1/67)

Department of Health   (7/1/71)
Department of Health & Welfare

Department of Environmental  Protec-
  tion   (6/1/66)

Health and Social Services Department
Department of Environmental Conser-
  vation   (6/1/66)

Board of Health  (9/1/66)

Department of Health  (7/1/67)

Department of Health  (9/1/66)
Department of Health  (6/1/66)

Department of Environmental  Quality

Department  of  Environmental  Re-
  sources   (6/1/66)

Public Utility Commission   (6/1/66)

Pollution Control Authority   (6/1/66)
Department of Health  (9/1/68)
Department of Public Health   (1/1/67)
Department of Health  (1/1/67)
Department of Social Services

Agency of Environmental Conservation
Health Department  (9/1/66)
Department of Ecology  (9/1/66)

Department of Health  (6/1/66)
Department of Natural Resources

Department of Health & Social Serv-
  ices   (6/1/68)
Department of Public Works
Environmental Quality Board
Office of Lieutenant Governor

Metropolitan Washington Council of
   Governments   (3/1/69)

Chattanooga Area  Regional Council
   of Governments  (6/1/68)
Omaha-Council  Bluffs  Metropolitan
   Area Planning Agency  (7/1/68)
Metropolitan  Planning  Commission-
   Kansas  City Region  (3/1/68)

Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana  Regional  Plan-
   ning Authority   (7/1/69)

East-West Gateway Coordinating
   Council   (10/1/71)

Mon-Kan  Bi-State  Planning Commis-
   sion  (7/1/71)

Oconee Area Planning & Development
   Commission   (7/1/71)

Marshall  County Planning  Commis-
   sion  (7/1/71)
Head of  the  Lakes  Council  Govern-
   ments   (7/1/71)

Bootheel  Regional Planning Commis-
   sion  (10/1/71)
Board of Cuyahoga County Commis-
   sioners   (8/1/71)

Lane Council of Governments
Mid-Willamette   Valley  Council  of
   Governments   (9/1/71)
Central  Pennsylvania  Joint  Planning
   Commission   (9/1/71)
Turnpike  District Planning  & Devel-
   opment Commission  (9/1/71)

North Central Texas Council of Gov-
   ernments  (9/1/71)
County of Pierce  (7/1/71)

 agencies.  Since solid waste planning grants were initi-
 ated, the number  of  State solid waste programs has
 increased from five to 48.

 Research and Development Grants

   Research and  Development Grants  are awarded in
 the areas of air  pollution, pesticides,  radiation,  solid
 waste, water hygiene, and water pollution control. These
 can be obtained from  EPA Headquarters by public or
 private agencies, institutions and individuals to assist in
 research projects  relating  to  the causes, control and
 prevention of pollution that support projects directed
 towards the discovery and development of new infor-
 mation  and technology in  the chemical, physical, bio-
 logical and sociological sciences. This includes the iden-
 tifying of pollutants, the rate and persistence of pol-
 lutants, the effects of pollutants, the treatment processes,
 the non-treatment  methods of pollution  control and the
 ultimate disposal of pollutants.

 Demonstration Grants

   EPA Headquarters awards Demonstration Grants in
the fields  of water  pollution control, air pollution and
solid waste. Public or private agencies, institutions, and
individuals can use these to support surveys and demon-
strations of new methods related to the causes, control
and  prevention of  pollution.  They are  designed  to
evaluate the  application of research findings.


   The States  of Region I constitute two percent of the
U.S.'s total area, six percent of the population, and eight
percent of the manufacturing establishment.
   Although 25 percent of New England's population is
concentrated in the Boston area, there have been some
striking  environmental  improvements  in this  area.
Boston   Harbor,  polluted  by  municipal  sewage and
industrial waste, is now the cleanest  it has been in  20
years because  of  EPA support.  Its  beaches  are  now
open for public  bathing, and many  of  the Harbor's
shellfish  areas are reopened for harvesting.
   An EPA grant has  been given to  Boston  for the
construction of an underground sewage retention facility
to prevent polluted runoff from pouring into the Basin
during periods of  heavy rainfall.  If this demonstration
project is successful, it will be employed in other areas
of the U.S.
           VII-KANSAS CITY

   Since 1956  when  the Federal Construction Grants
Program was initiated, there have been 640 waste treat-
ment facilities  projects. In 1971 alone, there were 67
   The  EPA Water  Program  has 110 active research
and development projects in New England. There  are
11 active solid waste research and development  grant
awards and some air research grants. Grants have also
been awarded to the States' pollution control agencies
and the New England Interstate Water Pollution Con-
trol Commission.
   A significant accomplishment has been the cleanup of
New  Hampshire's Pemigewasset River  which  essen-
tially had been dead for the past 40  years. With EPA
financial support,  seven treatment  plants were con-
structed on the "Pern," which has now become one of
the finest trout streams in the Region.


   Connecticut has 70 active construction projects, more
than any other State  in New England. In Fiscal  Year
1972 alone, 25 new  projects  were planned with total
eligible  cost amounting to $96.2  million.  A unique
accomplishment involving Federal, State, municipal and
labor union cooperation was  initiated in seven  Con-
necticut communities in the training of  40  Vietnam
veterans as waste treatment plant operators,  which is
the first program of its kind in the country. Solid waste,
pesticides and radiation programs were placed under  the
new Connecticut Department of Environmental Protec-
tion which  began operating October 1, 1971. Radiation
program responsibilities of the new Agency include
medical as well as environmental aspects. The Connecti-
cut  legislature  through Public  Act  845  (approved
July 8,  1971)  enacted comprehensive solid waste  man-
agement legislation. It included,  among other  things, a
grant-in-aid program to communities for practically all
types of solid waste facilities.


   Maine continues to lead in the development of safe-
guard regulations for the control and prevention  of oil
pollution.  New regulations were enacted  which  detail
actions  for regulation  and  enforcement of  oil spill
cleanup to public waters from any source. The Gover-
nor of  Maine  adopted the State solid waste plan  on
September   2,  1971. However,  the  plan which was
developed  under a grant from  EPA needs  legislative


   Massachusetts  proceeded  with  its reorganization
process combining  170  existing State  agencies  and
assigning   them to one of nine cabinet offices. The
Executive  Office of  Environmental Affairs, one of the
new  cabinet  offices,  will combine  the  functions of
several environmental  programs including  air, water,
solid  wastes,  and pesticides  under a  single  agency.
Massachusetts passed legislation authorizing any group
of 10 or more residents to sue a polluter. The statute
permits action against air and water pollution as well
as against excessive noise,  and destruction of seashores,
wetlands and historic sites. Community noise standards
were developed and  proposed for adoption by Boston.

Massachusetts, Vermont and New Hampshire

   The three States of Massachusetts, Vermont and New
Hampshire established a tri-State Radiation Surveillance
Program for the  Vermont  Yankee Atomic Power Plant
at Vernon.

New Hampshire

   The New Hampshire legislature prepared legislation
authorizing  the  creation of the Winnipesaukee  River
Basin Region which  will  join  together six  towns and
two  cities  in  a  regional  sewage  and  waste disposal
system. Present plans call for  a single, regional facility
to eventually serve all of the communities. This project
is a national landmark approach to the regional  treat-
ment  concept. Administrator  Ruckelshaus thought  so
highly  of this project that  he allocated  $1 million from
his discretionary anti-euthrophication  program  funds
for the  purpose of  improving the efficiency  of  an
existing  primary treatment plant  at  Laconia  which
should help prevent  further  euthrophication  of  Lake

Rhode  Island

   Rhode Island is making  progress toward municipal
and industrial abatement.  The Blackstone Valley Sewer
District  Commission has further  extended  its multi-
million dollar interceptor  system from  East Providence
to the  Woonsocket   area, thereby  abating substantial
industrial  discharges  to  the  Seekonk  River.  Geigy
Chemical Corporation, one  of the largest  industrial
dischargers  in the State,  is  completing its 1.2  MGD
treatment plant. This Cranstone,  Rhode Island plant
should  have a marked, favorable effect on the  water
quality of Pawtuxet River. Rhode Island adopted legis-
lation  (Chapter  265  of the Public Laws of 1971, the
Solid Waste Disposal Companies Act)  to set up solid
waste collection  and disposal on a Statewide basis as a
privately  operated  public  utility.  The legislation is
controversial and  did not provide  for  administrative
capability in the Public Utility Commission.


   On  July  1, 1971,  the State of Vermont instituted a
new permit program with temporary discharge-fee pro-
visions.  It is believed  to be the  first effluent charge
system in the Nation. Penalties for violation of  any
provision of the permit act can amount to $10,000, or
imprisonment of not more than  five years,  or both.

Vermont  is also one  of the first States  to  adopt a
Statewide land  use planning  and  control  program.
Planning  task  forces  were established  to  implement
provisions of the Act.

New  England Interstate Water  Pollution
Control Commission (NEIWPCC)

   The Commission has sponsored  and  developed a
unique surveillance technique for determining isotherms,
(lines of equal temperature) in  large bodies of waters
using aerial infra-red and other photographic methods.
The Commission continues  to operate the New England
Regional Wastewater  Institute, located  in South Port-
land,  Maine, which offers one-year technical courses as
well as shorter one and two week specialized courses
for wastewater treatment plant  operators.

   All States in Region I have submitted the  required
air quality standards and all have been approved.

   Region II embraces the most densely populated area
in  the  U.S.  Twenty-eight million people  inhabit its
59,500  square miles. Despite staggering troubles of
overcrowding  and extensive industrialization, the staff
of Region II has achieved some notable successes.
   Under pressure from the EPA Regional Enforcement
Division,  12  industrial firms  in New York and New
Jersey voluntarily imposed strict controls that restrict
the discharge  of  toxic mercury from their  plants into
local waterways. Implementation plans to achieve com-
plete elimination of mercury discharges  at all 12 plants
are now well underway, and abatement efforts have
already reduced mercury effluent to a small fraction of
their former levels.
   At the same time there are many obstacles to EPA's
progress. For example, the Passaic Valley Sewage Com-
mission collects, and  partially treats, wastes from  1.2
million  people, 30   cities,  and  1,700  industries in
northern  New  Jersey.  The  Commission  is able to
remove  only  12 percent of the  waste material  and is
forced to  discharge the rest into New  York Harbor's
upper bay, constituting a major source of pollution in
the New York City area.

New  York

   A comprehensive air pollution control implementa-
tion plan has been submitted by New York. The State
legislature  enacted necessary  legislation  authorizing
enforcement of the plan. Construction  began  on  the
much-needed North  River sewage  treatment plant in
New York City. This  is part of a $774 million project
and the State is funding more  than  $57 million of that
amount. A mathematical model has been developed to
facilitate the  assigning of sources of  solid waste to
disposal sites.  Rules and regulations implementing  the
1970  State pesticide  law have been  adopted, thereby
enabling the State to establish  a list of  72 restricted
pesticides.  A contract was  entered into with AEC to
conduct environmental  surveillance  around  nuclear
facilities. A field study of the Nation's first commercial
nuclear fuel reprocessing  plant  has  been  conducted.
New York State has enacted an amendment to its air
pollution code  to  include "noise" as an air pollutant.
The State  is developing  a  State-wide  noise pollution
control program.

New Jersey

   New Jersey has initiated  a full-scale, State-operated,
motor  vehicle emission testing program designed to con-
trol hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide air pollutants.
This program is a part of the New Jersey air pollution
control implementation plan. A water quality standards
revision conference for the New  Jersey coastal area has
been requested  by the Governor. As of December 1,
1971,  the State  led the Nation in the total number of
disposal sites meeting the criteria of the Mission 5000
Program. The New Jersey Energy Council was formed
by executive order in the fall of 1971,  to investigate and
assess  the  siting and other environmental factors  of
existing and proposed nuclear facilities within the State.

Puerto  Rico

  An  air pollution  control implementation  plan  was
submitted.  As part of the  requirements of this  plan,
Puerto Rico adopted its first comprehensive regulations
for the control of air pollution.  Puerto Rico has  sub-
mitted "Regulations for the Control of Radiation" for
approval by its Commission for  the Control of Radia-
tion. A strong enforcement  program has been initiated
for the closing down of open burning dumps or their
conversion  to sanitary landfills.

Virgin   Islands

  A comprehensive air pollution control  implementa-
tion plan has been submitted. A  study has been under-
taken to develop a comprehensive plan for solid waste
management for the Islands.
   Region III occupies only 3.4 percent of the U.S.
land area, but has 11.5 percent of its population. Most
of Region Ill's people are concentrated in the Eastern
Seaboard megalopolis, where average density is 193.5
people per square mile. Manufacturing in Region  III
contributes 13 percent of  the Nation's employment and
63 percent of the U.S. mine-pollution  problem. As  a
result of EPA grants this year, Region  III States have
doubled  their spending on  water  pollution during  the
last four years.
   With  EPA's  assistance,  Maryland's Environmental
Service developed an environmental plan. It  now bears

responsibility  for  the  operation  and  maintenance of
some 27 state-owned sewage treatment plants and waste
disposal units. The State also passed oil spill regulations
and  the first  power plant  siting act in  the U.S. Heavy
metals,  oil, and grease contained  in material dredged
from Baltimore Harbor are  being deposited in a diked
area rather than the Chesapeake Bay.
  In 1960, West Virginia's  Kanawha River was prac-
tically  an open sewer. The  State and Federal Govern-
ment began cleaning up  the Kanawha,  and  by 1971
EPA was supervising an intensive purification program.
At present there is an improvement in  the river's taste,
odor, oxygen content  and water  quality. By 1975  it
should be up to normal standards.
  In Pennsylvania,  there was  a  three million gallon
oil spill at Berks Associates, Inc.,  oil reclaiming plant.
EPA contributed funds to clean up and minimize the
damage and  it helped to  eliminate 15 million gallons
of oil  sludge in the Berks  Company's waste lagoons.
  Since thermal pollution  promises to be  a major prob-
lem  in the future, as power demands increase, EPA has
been concerned with methods of preventing or minimiz-
ing its adverse effects on the environment. In Virginia,
EPA is  encouraging a Virginia  Institute of  Marine
Science study—the first of its kind—to provide the first
detailed "before and after"  analysis of waste heat dis-
charges into  an estuary from a nuclear power plant.
  An example of the effectiveness of interstate coopera-
tion is the agreement between the District of Columbia,
Maryland and Virginia to  give the Metropolitan Wash-
ington Council of Governments the responsibility for
area air pollution control planning. This agreement pro-
vides a more coordinated attack  on the  problem,  and
affords the opportunity for  total Federal grants which
would not otherwise  be  available  to the   individual


  Regulations governing drinking water standards were
adopted. These regulations set chemical, bacteriological,
physical, source and protection standards for  all public
water  suppliers  in the State. Also, requirements for
bacteriological, chemical,  and  physical  sampling  fre-
quency and manner of sampling  were set forth.  The
adjustment of fluoride concentration and the chlorina-
tion of all public water  supplies  are  required.  There
has been  one recent encouraging incident involving air
enforcement.  The Department of Natural  Resources
and Environmental Control has taken a vigorous stance
against Delmarva Power and Light Company for violat-
ing a Federally approved  air implementation  plan with
respect to the use of sulfur in fuels, has cooperated
fully with EPA, and shows  every indication of being a
vigorous  State  enforcement agency. Delaware plans
to have a quarterly, longitudinal study on tritium, gross
alpha and beta and gross  gamma.  Radioactive samples
have been taken  from six  stations on  the  Delaware
River  for study  of tritium and  gross gamma  scans.
Daily air samples are taken for gross beta count.  A
noise bill has  been drafted and is being reviewed.  A
pesticide  law was passed July, 1971.  Present enforce-
ment activities  involve the removal of pesticides  intra-
state which do not meet the standards of the Act. Three
open dumps were eliminated  and replaced with ap-
proved disposal methods.

District  of Columbia

  The Eighth Planning  District of Northern Virginia
and the Washington Metropolitan Council of Govern-
ments developed an  agreement which is  intended  to
lead  to the first attempt to develop an integrated  water
quality management plan for a portion of the Washing-
ton Metropolitan Area. Construction was started on the
expansion and  upgrading of the Blue Plains  Sewage
Treatment Plant  in  Washington, D.  C. On July 27,
1971, the Department of Environmental  Services was
established.  The new  Department is the result of com-
bining functions  of  the old Department  of Sanitary
Engineering, Environmental Health Administration, and
related responsibilities of the Department  of  Human
Resources. This new Department has responsibility for
air, water and solid waste activities. Radiation Protec-
tion  Standards  have been  drafted  and  are  being
reviewed. The  actual  legislation was passed in  July,
1970. D.C.  has scheduled and  surveyed  hospitals  for
annual inspection.  There has been an intensive program
mounted to  collect as many radium sources as possible
for shipment to the Southwestern Radiological Health
Lab. Nine hundred and eighty-one environmental sam-
ples  including air, water, and sewage were monitored
for radioactivity. Three hazardous radium sources from
the public school  system in Washington, D. C., have
been removed.  Noise  abatement   regulations  were
drafted and sent out for review. A request  for a  grant
for two mobile, sound monitoring stations was sent  to
EPA Region III.  A traffic noise study was conducted
to determine average noise levels at a busy intersection,
a hospital area and a residential area.  Also,  a  noise
study on aircraft noise from National Airport was made.
Plans for an asphalt  plant were disapproved due  to
noise level criteria in the zoning regulations.


   A  mandatory  certification  law  for all  wastewater
treatment facilities operators was implemented. The
water supply surveillance capabilities  of the Maryland
Water Supply Program was improved  by the addition of
two  permanent positions to the field investigation staff.
Also, a  Statewide notification  procedure  was  estab-
lished, whereby the Maryland Water Supply Program
will  notify the appropriate county health officers  of the
detection of sodium  content in drinking water  which
may present a health hazard to those consumers on a
sodium-strict diet. Maryland  holds  monthly "enforce-
ment conferences" in which  all parties  interested  in

water enforcement in the State participate. Maryland's
"Power Plant Siting Bill' has become effective. Monitor-
ing equipment has  been installed, and  is  operating
around  the Calvert Cliffs nuclear reactor site. Prelimi-
nary  monitoring  surveillance was  established in  the
lower Susquehanna River Basin where  proposed reac-
tors are scheduled. Maryland is receiving $12,500 for
three years  from  the Atomic Energy Commission to
assist the  on-site  surveillance  of  the  Calvert  Cliffs
nuclear reactor. Maryland is also attempting to identify
tritium concentration in the lower Susquehanna and the
Calvert Cliffs area. Four noise  bills  have been  intro-
duced. Plans have been developed to inform the public
of noise effects  and  available means of  control. The
State  has provided technical assistance and/or informa-
tion to other State agencies,  citizens groups and private
citizens on specific noise problems,  and  noise pollution
in general. State Regulation 4309 requires each county
to develop plans for solid waste management.  Thirty
open-dumps were eliminated and replaced with accept-
able disposal  methods.


   Tax  reform and State taxation providing for  tax
credits in certain cases relating to the environment have
been  approved. The Department of Environmental Re-
sources was  established to consolidate  State Environ-
mental functions. A grant of  $275,000 was awarded to
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to develop, during
an 18-month period, a water quality management plan
for the  Pennsylvania portion  of the  Lake Erie Drainage
Basin. In  1971,  the Pennsylvania Department of En-
vironmental Resources  beefed up  its  State Environ-
mental  Strike  Force, consisting  mainly  of lawyers
assisted by  a few engineers.  This  force has  been
responsible for instituting numerous law suits under the
Pennsylvania  Clean Streams  Law  (150 stream  miles
were cleaned up), and only recently filed a multi-count
suit in conjunction with the Allegheny County authori-
ties against United States Steel's  numerous plants  south
of Pittsburgh. The Atomic Energy Commission is pro-
viding $10,000 a year, for three years,  to aid Pennsyl-
vania in the surveillance of three  nuclear power reactors
within the State.  In January 1972, the  Motor Vehicle
Noise Bill came  into existence. This includes trucks,
motorcycles and cars. Pennsylvania  has  also established
procedure on handling public noise complaints (Public
Health  Nuisance  Law).  All  of the 67 counties have
been requested lo develop and implement plans for solid
waste management. During  1971, 62  counties  were
actively engaged  in preparing county plans.  Two re-
gional planning  grants have been awarded. Susque-
hanna Economic  Development Authority is developing
solid  waste management  plans for a 10-county region.
The   Pennsylvania Turnpike Development  Planning
Commission  is  developing   solid  waste  management
plans for a six county region. These grants will demon-
strate the feasibility of multi-governmental bodies join-
ing together to  cope with a common problem—solid
waste management. Approximately 400 violation notices
were  issued to  landfill operators who were in non-
compliance with State  solid waste regulations. Legal
actions were filed, and  won, against 50 landfill opera-
tions for  non-compliance with the court rulings  in favor
of the State in all 50 cases. Regional Solid Waste Man-
agement  personnel conduct visits  to  each solid waste
disposal  site at least once monthly, and the results  are
computerized.   During  1971,  41  open-dumps  were
eliminated  and  replaced  with   acceptable  disposal


   A  joint  resolution was adopted directing the Vir-
ginia  Advisory Legislation Council to study the desira-
bility of  establishing a  single, State agency  to  regulate
and  control all  environmental  pollution. The Virginia
legislature  passed a bill  which transfers  the Division
of Water Resources from the  Department  of  Conser-
vation and Economic Development to the  State Water
Control Board.  Rules and regulations for the disposal
of solid  waste were enacted by  the  State  legislature
effective  April 1,  1971. Thirty-two  open dumps were
closed during  1971  and  replaced with approved dis-
posal systems. The Virginia State Water Control Board
adopted  a  policy which  reequires that  water  quality
management plans be developed for all planning dis-
tricts within the State. They further  passed regulations
which give the Board legal power to  enforce the pro-
visions  of  duly approved water  quality  management
plans. A grant  of $399,890 was  awarded  to  develop
a water quality management plan for the Lower James
River Basin. A detailed  study of the pollution prob-
lems of the Occoquan Creek Watershed was made and
a comprehensive plan for their solution was developed.
Treatment  facilities  to  be installed  in the basin will
employ the latest  and most advanced technology. Sim-
ilar plants will be constructed by Alexandria, Arlington,
Fairfax and  Prince  William to improve and  protect
the Potomac  River. The Radiological Health  Section
of the Bureau of Industrial  Hygiene  has been engaged,
during 1971, in the development  of the  regulations to
implement  Virginia's  radiation  law. The  Bureau  of
Industrial Hygiene is working on  a State  plan  to con-
form  with  the State of Virginia's participation with  the
Williams-Steiger Occupational  Safety  and Health Act
of 1970, which will improve the  coverage  of  occupa-
tional noise in the State.  "Resolution 51" was passed
by the legislature. This  provided for a  report submitted
in December,  1971, titled "Virginia Pesticide Study and

West Virginia

   The Ohio River Basin Commission was  established
January  13,  1971. The  West  Virginia Water  Supply
Program developed  a 44-week training  course which
will  be initiated in  1972 for  the education of water

treatment plant operators in the  rural localities of the
State. One hundred and six gross alpha and beta anal-
yses on public water supply have been done.  All coun-
ties  were  instructed  to formulate county-wide plans
for solid waste management. A solid waste management
plan  for  an eight-county  region  was completed  and
implemented. During 1971, 17 open dumps were elim-
inated and replaced with  acceptable disposal methods.

   During 1971, all six States within Region  III devel-
oped and submitted implementation  plans  in conform-
ance with the Clean Air Act, as amended.

  Region IV, which  in recent years has had a rapid
growth  of  population and industry, has  31,8  million
people and an area of 371,000 square miles.
  Atlanta,  the  principal  polluter of Georgia's Chatta-
hoochee River, was served  with a 180-day notice on
December  10, 1971, to halt violations of Federal-State
water quality  standards  or  to face the possibility of
court action. As  a result, Atlanta  committed itself to
one half the cost  of the cleanup of the Chattahoochee.
  In  addition  to  the Atlanta  achievement,  the  most
dramatic EPA action has  been  the cleanup  of the
Coosa-Etowah  River complex  in Georgia,  where the
Federal  enforcement conference exerted strong  pres-
sure for pollution abatement.
  In  Tennessee,  Nashville-Davidson  County was one
of the first metropolitan areas in the Southeast to initi-
ate an effective water pollution abatement program. In
1970, it began  operation of  an  entirely new wastewater
treatment  facility and expanded  one it  had built in
1956. Presently,  it  is completing  designs for a  $21
million  wastewater treatment facility with a daily ca-
pacity  of  25   million gallons.  Since January,  1970,
Memphis began a five-year  program for full secondary
waste treatment,  which includes interceptor sewer con-
struction, a main pump station, and a new wastewater
treatment plant.
   EPA has awarded grants  to Florida, South Carolina,
Georgia, Tennessee, and Kentucky to set up practical
solid waste programs. Orange County, Florida, will use
solid refuse to provide a large housing and recreation
area  near Orlando. This  project is  expected to become
a national  model  for solid waste disposal.


   A  new air pollution law was passed,  which gives the
State Commission  comprehensive  legal authority and
responsibility for  controlling and preventing air pollu-
tion in  the State.  This Act completely replaced the Air
Pollution Control Act of  1969 which was considered by
the Federal Government to have inadequate legal  au-
thority  to control air pollution.  A new law was enacted,
which established a  Water Improvement Commission
with  professional  and  citizen-at-large  representation.
The new Commission replaces the former one that was
industry-oriented. Also, the new Commission has  re-
ceived a considerable increase in funds (although still
minimal), over  that received in previous years.  The
Pesticide Act  of 1971 for Alabama became effective
January  1, 1972, as did Act #1957 which  regulates
custom application  of pesticides.  The Pesticide Act  of
1971  requires  certification by users prior to purchase of
certain restricted pesticides. The  State Matching Con-
struction  Grant  Program  authorized and  made  all
projects initiated during Fiscal Year 1971 retroactive. A
mandatory wastewater treatment  plant operator certifi-
cation program  was initiated. The  State Solid Waste
Management Act was passed in 1969, and became fully
effective on September  12, 1971. Another State law was
passed, which authorizes cities and counties to form solid
waste management authorities which may both establish
user fees and  make their services mandatory. Twenty-
six county-wide  solid waste collection and disposal
systems have been established, eight more counties have
begun implementing county-wide  systems, and 17 addi-
tional counties are actively planning  for  county-wide
collection and  disposal systems. The number of sanitary
landfills in Alabama was  increased  from less than  10
in 1967, to  approximately  50 at  the present.


   Florida has enacted new provisions and amendments
to  its 1969 Air Pollution Statute  which  provides for
establishment  of a permit system and prohibition against
open burning. The State passed  a $100 million refer-
endum for  matching Federal waste treatment  facility
grants. The State  is  now eligible  for the 55 percent
grant. The State Department of Pollution Control filed
a  $20 million  suit against  a phosphate  mining and
processing industry for a major spill in the Peace River,
and also, for the  first time, cited  major  agricultural
polluters (muck farmers)  as contributors  of  pollution.
The  State has  an active  water quality  management
planning program  with five active  Federal grants. A
mandatory treatment plant operator certification  pro-
gram  has been initiated.  Florida  has  completed and
published a State solid waste management plan. Legisla-
tion was passed which prohibits  open burning of  solid
waste, effective  July 1, 1971. The closure, or conver-
sion, to sanitary landfill of 7141 dumps was reported,
of which 91 qualified for Mission 5000. Approximately
55 new landfill site and  operational plans have  been
approved by  the State.


   Georgia amended its 1967 Air Quality Control Act
to provide for civil penalties for violators. It established
a  permit system and the authority to inspect pollution
control devices on  motor vehicles. The State legislature
has,  as requested  by the Governor, reorganized the
entire pollution  control •effort in  the  State, and  has

 established a Department  of Environmental  Control
 patterned  after  EPA.  The  State  Pollution  Control
 Authority  continues  its active enforcement program.
 Although the legislature established a matching grants
 program, the stipulations put on it  preclude the State
 from being eligible for  the 55  percent Federal grant.
 A mandatory treatment plant operator certification pro-
 gram has  been initiated. The State Board of Health
 adopted rules and regulations for solid waste collec-
 tion and disposal. The  Solid Waste  Management Act
 was passed by  the State legislature. A  Constitutional
 amendment was passed by the State legislature allowing
 cities and counties to establish solid waste management
 districts which must  now be approved by  the voters.
 State government reorganization placed the  solid waste
 agency in  the Environmental Protection Division, De-
 partment of Natural  Resources. The State solid waste
 management  plan was  completed  and published,  ac-
 cepted  by  EPA,  and  adopted by  the Governor  of
 Georgia. Enforcement actions have been instituted and,
 to date, 22 cease and  desist  orders  have been issued
 and one injunction has been brought; acceptable disposal
 sites have  increased from two percent  to 20 percent.
 A survey of solid waste management in nursing homes
 was completed,  and a survey of industrial solid waste
 management was begun. Nine solid waste management
 training courses have been  held throughout the State.
 An on-site landfill operator  training course was set up
 and is being implemented.


   The  legislature  recently   passed   legislation  which
 created a new Department of Environmental Protection
 which provides more enforcement authority to the State
 Pollution Control Agency.  The  legislature has  also
 doubled the funds for  pollution control  and is in  the
 process of  voting on  a  matching grants program.  The
 solid waste agency was elevated to  division status  in
 the Health Department; recent legislation will move it
 to a new Department of the  Environment. The  State
 solid waste management plan has  been completed and
 published,  accepted  by EPA,  and  adopted  by  the
 Governor of Kentucky.  Enforcement actions have been
 initiated, 25 informal and  five formal hearings  have
 been held,  with four convictions resulting from the for-
 mal hearings. Ninety-eight dumps were reported closed,
 of which 46 qualified for Mission 5000. One hundred-
 ten permits for  sanitary landfills have been issued. A
 survey  of  industrial   solid   waste  management   was


  The State established a matching grants program for
waste treatment  facilities, making them eligible  for the
55 percent  Federal grant. A bill was passed in the State
legislature  allowing counties to establish solid  waste
management  districts.  Standards  and guidelines  for
sanitary landfills were adopted.  The State solid waste
management  plan  was  completed and published, ac-
cepted by EPA,  and  adopted  by  the Governor of
Mississippi. County-wide solid waste management plans
were prepared for 15 counties. Sixteen municipal dumps
were converted to sanitary  landfills. Storage and  col-
lection practices were improved in 17 cities. Air pollu-
tion from the open burning of solid waste was abated or
eliminated at over 200 municipal dumps. Potential water
pollution  problems were  abated  or  eliminated  at  16

North  Carolina

  North  Carolina  has amended  its Air Act to include
limitations on open burning, as well  as emission limits
on fuel burning equipment.  The  State  upgraded  classi-
fication for all its  major streams to  Fish  and Aquatic
Life. The North Carolina Pesticide Law of 1971  was
enacted and  became effective January 1,  1972.  The
law covers the use  of  certain pesticides and  requires
permits for  restricted products.  A  Regional Sewage
Disposal  Planning Act  was passed.  The North Caro-
lina Clean Water Bond Act was passed.  A Constitutional
Amendment termed "Environmental Bill of Rights" was
passed, and is to be voted on at the next General Elec-
tion. The  North Carolina Environmental Policy Act of
1971,  passed, effective  October  1, 1971-September 1,
1973.  A solid waste management act was passed by
the State legislature rules  and  regulations for  solid
waste  management  were adopted.  Forty-five  dumps
were  reported closed  or  converted  to sanitary land-
fills,  35  of which qualified  for  Mission  5000.  Basic
county-wide solid  waste management  plans were de-
veloped for  over 90 (90)  of the State's  100  (100)

South  Carolina

  The State is presently upgrading the classification of
over  200 streams.  The  legislature  has  significantly
increased  the  Pollution Control Authority's staff  and
budget. The  State Matching Construction  Grant Pro-
gram  Act was passed by the Senate,  and is expected
to be passed by the House. The State solid waste man-
agement  plan  was completed  and published, accepted
by EPA, and  adopted by the Governor of South Caro-
lina. Rules and regulations for solid waste management
have been separately developed  and  adopted  by the
State   Board   of  Health  and the Pollution  Control
Agency's  solid  waste  programs.  Thirty-nine  dumps
were reported closed or converted  to sanitary landfills,
of which  36 qualified for Mission 5000. A on-site land-
fill operator training course  was set up and is being

  A  new  water pollution control  law  with  provisions
for matching  wastewater treatment facilities  grants and

stronger enforcement was enacted. The legislature has
doubled the budget  and staff of the Pollution Control
Agency. A new strip  mining law was passed by the
legislature and is awaiting approval by the Governor.
A State  solid waste act was passed.  Legislation was
passed establishing a State grant program to financially
assist local governments in  the operation of approved
disposal  operations.  A training program for waste dis-
posal operators and managers of waste  disposal systems
was developed and is being implemented. Ten registered
disposal  operations have been approved.  A survey  of
industrial solid waste management was begun.

  Region V, encompasses 325,000 square miles, has
a population of 43.6  million, about 20 percent of the
total U.S. population,  and accounts for  about a third
of the gross national product.  Manufacturing activity
in the area  represents a third of the national  total.
  Region V contains  portions  of four  of  the five
Great Lakes (Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie). Lake
Erie  is the most notorious  example  of pollution; a
body  of water "dying" as a direct result  of high popu-
lation  density  and industrial concentration. But Erie
is only the most obvious case of neglect. Thousands  of
smaller lakes in Region V suffer from  eutrophication
or  "premature  aging",  a condition resulting largely
from  untreated phosphorous wastes.
  Encouragingly,  some  of the Nation's most original
and effective anti-pollution actions  have been taken in
the Great Lakes  area,  and  Region V  is one of  the
most  active Federal jurisdictions in the battle against
environmental degradation.
   The Detroit-Cleveland area, reacting  to EPA's ini-
tial onslaught,  has instituted a cleanup  campaign.  By
the end  of  the present decade, Lake Erie is  expected
to be well on  its  way toward recovery.
  Although seven of the Nation's 20 operable nuclear
power reactors are  located in  Region  V,  they  are
expected to increase to  11 of 29 national reactors by
the end  of  1971, and  27 of 97 national reactors by
the end  of  1976.  EPA has lent  significant impetus  to
an  encouraging trend toward the construction of cool-
ing towers  in  connection with  reactor thermal dis-
   Indiana was the first  to ban discharge of nearly  all
phosphates  into lakes and streams. A fine of $1,000
can be  imposed  on any firm  discharging detergents
with  a phosphate content of more than 12 percent, a
proportion far  below that of most commercial cleans-
ing preparations.
   With  the encouragement of  EPA,  the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency has adopted animal feed  lot
regulations  applying to  15,000  operators. The rules
require drainage from outdoor feed lots to be trapped
by dikes, thereby preventing uncontrolled runoff into
streams and lakes.
  One of the major tools  for encouraging cleanup of
water pollution in Region V has been the water qual-
ity standards violation  notice (180-day notice). Forty-
six  of  the  57 notices  that have  been issued  by EPA
have been issued in Region V.
  Fast, effective response to oil  spills has been devel-
oped by Region V in  cooperation with other Federal
and State agencies. A spill of 200,000 gallons of  oil
in Saginaw Bay in October, 1971, was  quickly cleaned
up  through on-the-scene efforts supported  by EPA.
EPA efforts were the primary force behind removal of
550,000 gallons of fuel  oil from a stranded freighter
in Lake Huron,  after fears  were  expressed the  oil
would  spill  out and pollute nearby beaches.
  EPA also took steps following complaints  from citi-
zens to  install sophisticated air pollution monitoring
equipment  on  Chicago's South  Side  to determine the
impact  of steel plant  pollution  on neighborhood  resi-


  Illinois implemented a source-oriented environmen-
tal radiation surveillance program for its nuclear power
stations. It recognized the need  to adequately staff its
water  quality  management functions  and has  taken
positive  steps to do so. A  series of 10 public hearings
have been  authorized  by the Illinois  Pollution Control
Board  to  regulate the  application of  fertilizers  and
animal  manure on farms to reduce input of nutrients
to Illinois waters.  Some  17 plan reviews and perform-
ance specifications of  Federal installation waste treat-
ment facility  projects were performed,  and environ-
mental  impact statements  on 43  highways  and  two
bridges were  filed for review and  comment.  The  Illi-
nois Pollution  Control Board, with assistance from the
State Environmental Protection  Agency and the Attor-
ney General's Office, has conducted approximately 500
hearings on varied  pollution matters. In addition to
adopted effluent standards, the board has also adopted,
upgraded and revised water quality  standards for  all
the waters of the State. An air implementation plan has
been submitted for the purpose of  carrying out the
requirements of the Clean Air Act, and emission regula-
tions have been adopted which  will  hopefully achieve
primary ambient air quality standards.


  Comprehensive  radiation protection regulations were
adopted by the State Board of  Health, with standards
for radioactive waste discharge limits compatible to
Atomic  Energy Commission  regulations. A  pesticide
model  use and  application  act,  which regulates the
distribution,  sale,  and use  of pesticides and provides
for the appointment of a Pesticide Review Board was
passed.  Indiana has agreed to  increase its staffing of
the air pollution control program. A one plan review
and performance specification of a Federal installation

waste treatment facility project  was  performed, and
environmental  impact  statements  on  17  highways
were  filed  for  review  and comment.  The  State has
agreed  to  a comprehensive  study  of  environmental
pollution control authorities  and organizational  struc-
ture  and program resource needs, by an independent
study organization, which  will be  financed  by  EPA.
In 1971, 55 enforcement actions were initiated and 15
actions  were referred to the  Attorney General for en-
forcement  by the Indiana  Stream Pollution Control
Board,  the State's pollution control agency. The State
has added to its water pollution abatement programs by
the adoption of revised  water quality  standards for the
waters of Lake Michigan and the Calumet River and the
proposal of a revised implementation  plan to meet the
revised  standards adopted in 1970. The State has also
adopted standards  designed to protect  natural spawning
areas, rearing or imprinting areas and migration routes
of Salmonoid fishes. Indiana  has submitted  an imple-
mentation  plan  to carry out the requirements  of the
Clean Air  Act. It has also passed legislation broaden-
ing the powers  of the  State  agency  to carry out air
pollution control programs,  and  it has  adopted emis-
sion regulations which  will hopefully  achieve primary
ambient air quality standards.

   A contract was negotiated with  the Department  of
Public Health to  provide data in support of the Na-
tional Environmental Radiation Monitoring Program.
A stringent solid waste law was adopted in 1971. The
Michigan  Insecticide, Fungicide and  Rodenticide Act
of  1949  was amended to  control  restricted  use  of
pesticides.  An active and forceable position was taken
with regard to water pollution control  activities  in the
critical  southeast  Michigan  area  which encompasses
Detroit  and  environs; an  improved working relation-
ship with local governments has been  established. Some
 17 plan  reviews  and  performance  specifications  of
Federal  installation  waste  treatment  facility  projects
were performed,  and environmental impact statements
on 20  highways  and one bridge were  filed for review
and comment.  The  Michigan Water Resources Com-
mission, the State's  pollution control  agency,  issued
63 Final Orders of Determination against, and entered
into 36 stipulations  (voluntary agreements)  with, mu-
nicipalities and  industries  responsible for causing pol-
lution.  A  successful watercraft pollution control com-
pliance inspection and enforcement program was  ini-
tiated by  the combined efforts of county sheriffs, ma-
rine deputies,  conservation  officers,  and  the staff  of
the MWRC. The  purpose  of this program is to assure
that  all toilet-equipped recreational  and commercial
watercraft are equipped with either a  holding tank or
an incinerating  device. The  MWRC  has also adopted
revised temperature  criteria  for all  of the waters  of
the State.  Public  Act 200 was passed  which requires
 wastewater discharges  to pay annual surveillance fees
for increased State monitoring of the streams, and to
list each year the toxic and  critical materials that the
company uses or produces in its operations. The State
has submitted its implementation plan for the purpose
of carrying out the requirements of the Clean Air Act.

   Significant modifications  in  off-site  environmental
radiation surveillance networks  were  made. An agree-
ment  was executed with a nuclear  power  company to
perform  on-site surveillance. Legislation was enacted
pertaining  to  dispoal  of  junk  cars  and wastes from
cattle feed lots, as well as an  increase in  appropriations
to strengthen the solid waste program. The Minnesota
Economic Poisons and Device Law and  the Minnesota
Spraying and Dusting Law were amended.  The Eco-
nomic Poisons Law changed the registration  fee for
products; it now requires  dealers to obtain a calendar-
year  license, changes  expiration date of registration
trom  June 30 to January  1, each year, and adds a new
section  for  the handling, discarding, storing and  dis-
playing  of  pesticides. The Spraying and Dusting  Law
requires  licensing  of  aerial  applicators;  licensing of
applicators who  apply  pesticides to  public  waters to
pass Federal examinations;  identification  cards to  be
carried  by  all licensed  applicators; makes it unlawful
to misrepresent the effect of  methods  and materials
used; authorizes  the  Commissioner to inspect  equip-
ment  and  set standards  for operational use;  permits
filing  of damage  claims  arising from application of
pesticides; provides nonresident applicators to  appoint
Commissioner  of  Agriculture  as  their  agent,  upon
whom all legal processes  may be served; makes it un-
lawful for licensee to  permit judgment to remain  un-
satisfied for more than 30 days; grants the Commis-
sioner authority  to enter public or  private premises
for necessary  inspections; broadens enforcement  pro-
cedures  including assistance from the County Attorney
or Attorney General; authorizes the  Commissioner to
enter  into  cooperative  agreements  with any Federal,
State, or local governmental  units; and  authorizes the
Commissioner, after notice and a hearing, to deny, sus-
pend  or revoke a license. Minnesota enacted its State
Matching Grants  Program for sewage treatment works
construction. Some six  plan  reviews  and performance
specifications of  Federal  installation waste  treatment
facility  projects were  performed,  and  environmental
impact statements on  11  highways  and three  bridges
were  filed for review and comment.  Enforcement ac-
tions  include the  continuing suit of Reserve  Mining
Company and Northern  States Power Company's Nu-
clear  Plant at Monticello. The State has also filed  suit
against the City of Bemidji and is continuing negotia-
tions  with  the  Western  Lake  Superior  Sanitary  Dis-
trict.  Minnesota's Pollution Control Agency previously
adopted  water  quality  and  effluent  standards  which
provided a  high degree of protection  for the waters of
the State. The State has submitted  an implementation

plan to carry out the requirements of the  Clean Air

  Ohio's  Health Department  purchased more  than
$50,000  of laboratory equipment  as  a first phase  of
expanding its environmental surveillance program. The
Governor adopted the completed Statewide solid waste
plan. The legislature and Governor's Office recognized
the deficiency in the State environmental programs, and
initiated  actions  toward enactment of  legislation  to
consolidate its programs into a single agency. The State
took a step forward in air  pollution control by adopt-
ing  comprehensive  emission   regulations.  Some six
plan reviews and performance specifications of Federal
installation waste treatment facility projects were per-
formed,  and  environmental impact statements on 28
highways and  one  bridge  were filed  for review and
comment. The State has agreed to the performance of
a  comprehensive study, by an  independent study firm,
of  the organizational structuring and manpower  plan-
ning for an integrated  State agency, which will have
responsibility  for environmental  protection activities
related to air,  water and  solid waste pollution problems.
This is the first study of this scope to be sponsored by
EPA.  Value  of the contract  being  negotiated  with
Stanford Research  Institute  is   anticipated   to  be
$52,000. The study began in January, 1972. A suit was
filed in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas
 against  the City of Cleveland  by the Water Pollution
 Control  Board. Up to this time, the OWPCB did not
 involve  itself  extensively with large metropolitan areas
 in Ohio. In addition, legislative action is pending which
 would consolidate  pollution abatement efforts in  the
 State  by the  creation of a new agency. The  State is
 moving  forward in an attempt to develop revised stand-
 ards which would be Federally approvable. In addition,
 it is developing effluent standards and a uniform effluent
 reporting system. The State has begun a very active air
 pollution control program. Legislation has been passed
 which broadens the powers of  the State agency to carry
 out air pollution control programs; emission regulations
 have  been adopted which will hopefully achieve  pri-
 mary ambient air  quality standards;  and an implemen-
 tation plan  has been  submitted  for  the  purpose of
 carrying out the requirements of the Clean Air Act.

    Modifications were  made  in  surveillance  networks
 and surveillance data submitted was updated in sup-
 port of  the  National  Environmental Radiation  Moni-
 toring Program. Wisconsin  initiated  the development
 of a Statewide solid waste management plan with the
 aid of  an EPA planning grant.  The legislature also
 adopted a solid waste  management enabling act. Pub-
 lic hearings  were initiated with regard to the develop-
 ment  of proposed animal waste  control  regulations.
Some seven plan reviews  and performance  specifica-
tions  of Federal installation  waste  treatment facility
projects were  performed,  and environmental impact
statements on  32 highways and two  bridges were filed
for review and comment. The State's pollution control
agency, the Department  of Natural  Resources,  has
adopted revised temperature standards for Lake Michi-
gan waters.  In addition, the State submitted an imple-
mentation plan for the purpose of carrying out the re-
quirements of  the Clean Air Act.
                                                        REGION VI

                                                          Region VI,  the third largest Region, has an area of
                                                        550,000 square miles and a population of 20.3 million.
                                                        Statistically, more than 60 percent of Region VI's popu-
                                                        lation  is  concentrated  in  37  standard  metropolitan
                                                        areas that usually coincide with the area's major indus-
                                                        trial complexes  and ecological  problems. Region  VI
                                                        leads the Nation in mineral production,  which includes
                                                        petroleum, natural gas, natural gas liquids, cement,
                                                        sulphur,  stone, bauxite, sand and gravel, molybdenum,
                                                        potassium salts and copper, and produces some 75 per-
                                                        cent of the Nation's rice.
                                                          As a result  of an EPA-initiated conference to  avoid
                                                        widespread use of  the persistent pesticide, toxaphene,
                                                        which  had  polluted Lake  Meredith,  a  major  water
                                                        supply source  for 11 Texas cities, the U.S. Department
                                                        of  Agriculture withdrew  its support  of this poison.
                                                        Texas  outlawed its use, and New Mexico abandoned
                                                        its backing of  a program to use toxaphene against range
                                                        caterpillars on two million acres of pastureland in the
                                                        Canadian River Basin.
                                                          The  American  Smelting  &  Refining  Company  at
                                                        El  Paso has  installed  a pilot plant operation for re-
                                                        moving sulful  oxide from smelting operations and pro-
                                                        ducing elemental  sulfur  which  does  not create  the
                                                        problems for the environment that conventional conver-
                                                        sion to sulfuric acid would.
                                                          Following a seminar in January 1971, attended by
                                                        more  than  500 consulting  engineers,  State  and local
                                                        officials, a broad application of advanced waste treat-
                                                        ment technology began in the Region. At the  end of
                                                        1971,  most new wastewater treatment  plant  construc-
                                                        tion projects involved  some degree of new technology.


                                                           The enactment of comprehensive solid waste man-
                                                        agement legislation and adoption of a state solid waste
                                                        plan were two major milestones. The air pollution con-
                                                        trol  implementation  plan   was   completed  by  the
                                                        Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology
                                                         (ADPCE).  The  State more  than doubled  its air
                                                        sampling network  with the addition of six  communi-
                                                        ties. Arkansas enacted legislation which permits state
                                                        financing assistance (with pay back feature)  of 25 per-
                                                        cent to communities for the construction of wastewater

treatment facilities. Eleven  new wastewater treatment
facility projects  were approved for construction at a
total cost of  over  $3.5  million. The ADPCE adopted
water quality standards for intrastate streams and com-
pleted  a  stream  survey of the White  River Basin.  A
grant for  $85,930  was  awarded to  the  Northwest
Arkansas Regional Planning Commission to develop a
basin plan for the Upper White River Basin.


  Sixteen open  dumps  serving 765,000 persons were
converted to  sanitary landfills. Louisiana completed its
air pollution control implementation plan  and modified
laws and regulations regarding air pollution control  in
1971.  A statewide  air sampling  network  was  estab-
lished,  and a major study of cotton gin operations was
initiated.  The Louisiana  legislature created the Joint
Legislative Committee  on  Environmental  Quality  in
order to  develop a management and resources develop-
ment program for the Atchafalaya River Basin  (Wet-
lands Project).  Louisiana  enacted legislation  which
permits state financial assistance (with pay back fea-
ture) of  25 percent to communities for the construction
of wastewater treatment facilities.  Six  new  wastewater
treatment facility projects were approved  for construc-
tion  at a  total cost of over $17.3 million. The State also
adopted  water quality standards for intrastate streams.
New  Mexico

  New Mexico established the Environmental Improve-
ment  Agency in 1971. A study of solid waste problems
associated with recreational areas and the Albuquerque
Solid  Waste  Study were  completed. Under the State
Solid  Waste Program, an aggressive program is being
pursued in the development  and operation of a recy-
cling  system involving abandoned cars. The State com-
pleted its air pollution  control  implementation plan,
developed an  adequate air monitoring network, com-
pleted a comprehensive emission inventory, established
an industrial source sampling team, developed  air en-
forcement policies  and guidelines,  filed  three lawsuits
for abatement of  air pollution  and eliminated open
burning in 20 cities. Nine new  wastewater treatment
facilities were approved for construction at a total cost
of $5.2 million.  New Mexico was the first State in
Region VI that approved a direct State grant assistance
program for the  construction of  municipal wastewater
treatment  facilities. It  developed a model  ordinance
regulating the discharge of industrial wastes into muni-
cipal  systems. The  State  Planning  Office  of New
Mexico has opposed construction of the Tucson Gas
and  Electric transmission line  from  San Juan, New
Mexico, to Tucson, Arizona, due to potential esthetic
damage to the environment.


  Oklahoma initiated a statewide training program to
help local communities solve their solid waste problems.
The  State completed  its  air pollution control  imple-
mentation plan and modified laws  and regulations for
air pollution control. The State Health Department's
Division of  Air Pollution Control  added a laboratory
facility and  expanded its statewide air  sampling net-
work. Oklahoma enacted legislation which permits State
financial assistance  (with pay back feature) of 25 per-
cent to communities for the construction of wastewater
treatment  facilities.  The State  also  adopted  water
quality standards for intrastate streams, and  provided
laboratory  facilities to local  health departments  for
stream  and  effluent  monitoring.  Twenty-seven  new
wastewater treatment  facility  projects were approved
for construction at a cost of over $28.0 million.
                                      Uocumerica Photo

   High School students testing water in Fort Smith, Arkansas.

  The first solid waste  planning  grant  in Region VI
was  awarded  to the North Central Texas Council  of
Governments. The two-year project covers 11  counties.
The  State Health  Department established municipal
solid waste rules, standards and regulations. The State
is participating in  the Corpus Christi  Area  Oil  Spill
Control Association by  contributing resources  to the
two-year study. Texas  completed its air  pollution  con-
trol implementation plan. The Texas Air Control Board
increased  its staff and capabilities,  completed 30-day


Recreational development of Lake Travis, Texas.
Documerica Photo
         air pollution surveys in all major cities and along the
         Houston ship channel, and added a complete  central
         laboratory and two mobile laboratories. Texas enacted
         legislation  to provide 25 percent State  matching funds
         (with pay  back feature) for the construction of waste-
         water treatment facilities, and the Texas Water Quality
         Board (TWQB) certified 89 new projects at a  cost of
         over $91.6 million.  A  model  ordinance regulating the
         discharge  of industrial waste  into  municipal  systems
         was prepared  by the  TWQB.  Legislation was also
         passed  which  requires all  municipalities with  popu-
         lations  over 5,000 to establish water pollution  abate-
         ment programs and  enact and enforce regulations to
         control the discharge  and character  of wastes into
         municipal  sewerage systems. A grant for $321,650 was
         awarded to the Trinity River  Authority to develop a
         basin plan for  the Trinity River.

         REGION  VII

           Region  VII comprises an  area of 285,467  square
         miles and  has a population  of  10.7 million. Most of its
         environmental problems derive principally from agricul-
         ture, such  as cattle feedlot runoff, meat and sugar beat
         processing wastes and  fertilizer drainage.
           EPA has completed many projects begun under the
         Federal Water Quality Act for research, development,
         and demonstration of methods for treating waste water
         carrying agricultural and food processing wastes.  Region
         VII has had  1,623  projects  for the  construction of
         wastewater treatment facilities  and  interceptor  sewers
         receiving  EPA  support.
           A portion of the projects in the Missouri Basin Re-
         gion completed by Region  VII are  as  follows:
  1.  Led local,  industrial  and regional  groups in
  aiding the development  of  a water quality  man-
  agement system for the Lake of the Ozarks.
  2.  Developed  an implementation schedule calling
  for secondary treatment of municipal wastes  at all
  cities along the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers.
  3.  Placed industrial  districts in Kansas  City on
  180-day notice to  act on interstate pollution of
  Missouri  River, cleanup measures for gross air
  pollution  and development  of a solid  waste and
  sanitary landfill management plan for Kansas City.
  4.  Prepared  a guide  providing  comprehensive
  technical  support for a policy of secondary  treat-
  ment for waste discharges into the Missouri River.

  5.  Completed a demonstration grant to Grand
  Forks,  North  Dakota,   to  develop  technology
  needed for  the treatment  of  potato  processing
  wastes, to  Union  Stockyards  at Fargo,  North
  Dakota,  for  treatment of cattle transport wastes
  and to Pratt,  Kansas,  for  design of  feedlots to
  prevent drainage.
  6.  Gave  funds for construction  of a primary  waste
  treatment  plants  to  reduce   discharge  in  the
  Missouri  River.
  7.  Helped St. Charles,  Missouri, build  primary
  and secondary treatment plants to reduce discharge
  in the Mississippi.

  8.  Awarded grants to St. Louis to  build a  two-
  plant  sewer  system  and  pumping  station  for
  primary waste treatment.

  All Region VII States are  committed  to secondary
treatment of wastes by 1975.


  Iowa completed a study of runoff sediment and asso-
ciated  chemicals  from farmlands and  demonstrated
efficacy of soil conservation practices  as a  means of
control  and  abatement of  water  pollution. The State
legislature enacted a Conservancy Act which provides
a structure  for administering  a control  program  for
farm pollution and established  a Chemical Technology
Review Board, primarily to manage the usage of chem-
ical pesticides.  The Water  Pollution  Control Commis-
sion has  exercised tight control  over  operations of
wastewater treatment, citing several negligent operators
and  referring cases to the  State Attorney General for
legal action; at the same time, an  outstanding program
has been undertaken to train  operators  at Kirkwood
College in Cedar Rapids.  The legislature passed  en-
abling bills  for Statewide management of solid waste;
the  Des Moines  metropolitan  area has  established  a
regional solid waste agency, which is  expertly managed
and  serving  as a national demonstration.  All major
sources of air  pollution in  metropolitan  areas  are on

rigid  compliance  schedules. As  might be  expected,
citizen environmental groups are exerting considerable
pressure; they are centrally organized through the Con-
federation of Environmental Organizations at Ames.


   Legislation has established a Department of Environ-
mental Control, with authority over air, water and solid
waste management. The Legislature  also made a direct
appropriation to  initiate  the State  matching program
for municipal  wastewater treatment.  Of considerable
interest  is  the  establishment,   by  legislation,  of  24
Natural  Resource Districts which will  exercise some
authority over pollution  control,  primarily  that from
agriculture.  Nebraska has  undertaken an extensive pre-
operational  survey of the  Missouri River in connection
with  the anticipated  1972  start-up  of two nuclear
power plants—adjacent States  of Iowa and Missouri
are cooperating; post-operational surveys are planned.
Considerable research in cattle  feedlot waste control is
underway, with the  development  of engineering tech-
nology; an excellent cooperative program prevails with
the feeding  industry and  local  government,  as well as
the State and Federal agencies participating.


   The State is the first to develop a fully implemented
waste control program for  all concentrated  animal-
feeding  operations; also it is first to complete interim
basin planning  for water  quality. Legislative  action in
1971  established  a solid  waste management plan and
regulation of pesticides usage. The State Health Board
adopted air pollution regulations and made disinfection
of municipal and selected  industrial water-borne wastes
mandatory. Research  was  pursued which demonstrated
the effective use of lime in bio-treatment processes  for
reduction of  phosphates in wastewater.


   The citizens of the State voted overwhelmingly  in
favor of $150,000,000  of bonds to provide the State's
share of  municipal  wastewater  treatment   faculties.
Legislation banning the discharge of waste from water-
craft into the intra-State waters was passed—a matter
of considerable importance in  the heavily used lakes
of southern  Missouri. The State  agency initiated a spe-
cial  program  for  heavy  metal  monitoring  in critical
areas. It also adopted a plan of action for dealing with
emergency situations. The Air Pollution Control Com-
mission  secured a compliance  schedule from  Union
Electric at St. Louis on particulates and sulphur dioxide
emissions;  limits  imposed  are  more  stringent than
existing Federal standards. Research was completed at
the St.   Louis  wastewater  plant,  which  resulted  in
advanced odor control techniques.  The Midwest Re-
search Institute at Kansas City  developed  futuristic
technology to manage concentrated animal wastes.
  Region VIII  is  comprised of  more  than  575,000
square  miles  and populated  by  a  total of only  5.6
million  people. The second largest of EPA's  Regions,
it occupies more than  16 percent  of the Nation's total
land area, but is the most sparsely populated territory
in the U.S.
  The  Region's  environmental problems arc associ-
ated chiefly with the extraction and processing of natu-
ral  resources,  agricultural  activities  and  population
density. The  latter  is concentrated in Denver and Salt
Lake City.  Solutions  to the Region's  environmental
problems  are complicated by  a  water  shortage.
  EPA  developed   a  plan  for  handling  anticipated
waste loads for a recreation center in Summit County,
Colorado. The Agency aided  in the construction of  a
100,000 gallons-a-day  advanced waste treatment plant,
and  is  helping to  add a process for more complete
removal of solids, organics and phosphates.
  EPA's  Southwestern  Radiological Health  Labora-
tory closely  coordinates its  efforts  with the  State  of
Utah's radiation surveillance program, which includes
studies  of thyroid   abnormalities,  congenital  defects,
and  cancer.  EPA  is  supporting  a  radiation  ecology
study at the  University  of Utah  and  operates a  mo-
bile  radiation scanning  unit  throughout the Region.
  EPA  and   the  National  Park  Service are jointly
developing a  water quality management  plan for Yel-
lowstone National Park. EPA  is also  presently evalu-
ating Wyoming's drinking water supply.
  EPA has been  working with the U.S.  Department
of the Interior in developing environmental protection
clauses  in the contracts  for power plant development
in the Four Corners area  of  Colorado,  New Mexico,
Arizona and Utah.
  EPA is actively involved in the  Western U.S. Water
Plan  Study, which  embraces  the  full range of water
resources and pollution problems.  Under EPA's Permit
Program,  90-95  percent of  industries and others  af-
fected in the Region have complied with  the Federal
requirements   and  have submitted their applications.
  The Regional Office has had success  in  influencing
other Federal agencies to  become more environmen-
tally conscious. For example,  there has  been coopera-
tion between EPA,  Utah  and  Hill  Air Force  Base
concerning a new location for a  fire  rescue exercise.

  Colorado  established  a  State matching  grant pro-
gram to assist  communities  constructing wastewater
treatment facilities and a training program for operators
of wastewater treatment plants. The  Denver Regional
Council of Governments received a  $200,000 grant from
EPA to develop a water quality management plan  for
the Denver metropolitan area. A  low speed  terminal
was obtained  for use of the STORET program. Mech-
anisms were established to deal with problems attend-
ant to noise pollution.


  Montana is considering creating mechanisms to deal
with noise pollution problems. The legislature created
an Environmental Quality Council with powers to hold
hearings, develop policy and review projects. It cre-
ated a Department of Natural Resources by consoli-
dating existing  resource  functions into  one  agency.
A previously authorized  state matching grant program
for  construction of municipal  wastewater  treatment
facilities was funded. Air quality standards and  emis-
sion standards  applicable  to the non-ferrous metals
industry were adopted, and a pesticides use and appli-
cation law was passed  which is scheduled to be imple-
mented  in   1972.  Also  passed were an Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act and a Food, Drug and
Cosmetic  Act.  The Executive  Reorganization  Act
consolidated  a number of environmental programs into
one agency within the Department of Health, and also
consolidated  or  eliminated a number of boards,  com-
missions and other  similar bodies.

North Dakota

  North  Dakota's legislature approved legislation  re-
quiring  mandatory  certification of water and waste-
water treatment plant  operators and  approved legisla-
tion controlling water well construction and well pump
installation,  as  well as  legislation providing controls
for  noise pollution. A State  loan  program  was estab-
lished to assist  municipalities constructing  wastewater
treatment  facilities,  air  pollution control  regulations
were  revised and  a permit  system  was adopted  to
control the  construction and  operation of  state  treat-
ment  facilities.  Mechanisms  were established  to deal
with noise  pollution problems, and it is  now manda-
tory that a qualification and competence test be passed
in order to be licensed as an aerial applicator.

South Dakota

  Air pollution control regulations  were  adopted  in
South Dakota, including air  quality standards, a con-
struction and operation  permits system,  regulation  of
open  burning, fuel  consumption  and incineration and
industrial  processes.  In addition,   regulations  were
adopted for  controlling  pollution  from feedlot opera-
tions. The legislature authorized a State matching grant
program for  construction  of water  pollution control
facilities  and approved  legislation regulating surface
mining by,  among  other things, requiring reclamation
of affected land and providing for penalties for  viola-
tion of  the  act.  The Black Hills Conservancy District
has been awarded a comprehensive water quality man-
agement planning  grant. A  low  speed   terminal was
obtained for use of the  STORET program.


  Utah received a comprehensive basin planning grant
for the Jordan River-Utah Lake hydrologic area. Regu-
lations for control of particulate  matter  from process
sources and ambient air quality standards were adopted.


   Wyoming's air  pollution  control budget  was nearly
doubled, and the Wyoming  Water Plan was completed
for three  of the four  major basins  in  the  State.  Five
training courses for wastewater treatment plant oper-
ators were conducted,  and approximately 50 operators
completed  the course work. These operators are being
tested under  Wyoming's new  voluntary  certification
program. Finally, several major industrial sources  were
brought into compliance with air quality standards and
14 towns abandoned dump burning in favor of sanitary

  Region IX's total  land area is  389,854 square miles
and  its population is  almost 23 million. More  than
half  of  the  population  is  concentrated  in  the Los
Angeles-San  Diego and San Francisco Bay  locales.
  Like Region VIII, Region IX has a climate that can
be generally  described as semi-arid.  In addition,  its
varied  rugged  topography causes several serious, lo-
calized  air  pollution  problems  where  physical fea-
tures contribute  to  the  creation of  atmospheric in-
  EPA has  been more concerned,  however, with the
Region's water pollution  difficulties,  leaving the leader-
ship of the air clean-up to those State and local groups
that  had been battling for pure  air  long  before  EPA
arrived on the scene. Consequently, it has concentrated
its major efforts  in five areas,  the San Francisco Bay
and  Delta, the Lower Colorado River,  the  Southern
California Coast, the  Island of  Oahu and the  Lake
Tahoe Basin.
  An  enforcement  conference held  in Honolulu re-
sulted  in a  three-year plan  for  the  cleanup of Pearl
  EPA has helped support a study for  the control of
water  pollution in California. It  has  mounted  a  mas-
sive  campaign against  California's water  polluters and
has  demanded that San Francisco clean up all  sewage
discharged into its Bay.
  Concern  about  increasing  nutrients  from  wastes
dumped  by  recreation-seekers into  Lake Tahoe re-
sulted  in an  enforcement conference in 1966  and the
setting  of a  time schedule for  the removal of  all
sewage from  the Tahoe Basin. EPA has been giving
technical assistance in  developing plans for controlling
the Tahoe environment.
  Because of  the Region's arid  nature,  EPA's initial
wastewater reclamation research  efforts took place in
there.  This accounts for 50  percent of  all wastewater
reclamation in the U.S.

  Arizona has  submitted  an air quality standards im-
plementation plan which  is now under review.  The
State  has also  completed  an interim  basin plan  for
water quality management planning.


  California has  submitted  an air implementation plan
which is currently under review.  Significantly, Califor-
nia has a law equivalent to NEPA,  requiring environ-
mental  impact  statements  on State-funded  projects.
This  program is  administered through the Lieutenant
Governor's  office. California has  been very active in
regional planning:  it has  created  a  comprehensive
regional agency to design and manage  the Bay  Area's
sewerage  system; two California COG's (the Associa-
tion  of  Monterey Bay  Area  Governments  and  the
Santa Ana Watershed Planning Agency) have received
hefty  planning grants ($868,000 and  $630,000,  re-
spectively) for  studies; and the State established  a pilot
project  to develop  procedures  for  a  statewide total
environmental monitoring program. California has also
been  a  leader in  water pollution control, taking action
which made possible the approval of the State-Federal
water  quality  standards  for California,  adopting a
thermal-pollution  control  policy,  and  implementing a
$200  million clean water bond to provide State match-
ing funds for wastewater  facilities. California has also
tightened  controls on: the  use of pesticides, particu-
larly DDT;  the storage, transfer,  and disposal of haz-
ardous  materials;  and airport noise. It has  submitted
interim basin plans.

  Guam  has developed  and submitted an air  imple-
mentation  plan,  which is under  review.  It has also
submitted interim basin plans.

  Hawaii has  submitted  an air  implementation  plan
which is being  reviewed. It has also submitted interim
basin plans. Hawaii is  also taking part in the  model
state  program for comprehensive  environmental qual-
ity  control.  This  is,  in part, a spin-off  from the Pearl
Harbor  Enforcement Conference. Honolulu has pub-
lished a solid waste management plan.

  Nevada has  submitted  an air  implementation plan,
currently  undergoing review. It has  also established a
Commission of Environmental Protection-to coordinate
all State environmental programs.

  Samoa  has developed and submitted an air  imple-
mentation plan  which is now under review.
                                              Dooumoriea I'hoto
Aerial view of Urban Development in Phoenix, Arizona.


  Region X, where  83 percent of its  835,000 square
miles of much unspoiled wilderness is owned by the
Federal Government, has  a total population  of 6.4
million people, extensive natural resources  in the form
of forests,  farmlands and  hydroelectric  power  and a
wealth of clean and unexploited land, air and  water.
  There are 43 pulp  and paper mills in  the  Region
which are a major source  of both air and water pol-
  Pollution  in  Oregon's Willamette  River  was a seri-
ous  problem for  40 years. The turning  point  came
with the establishment  of Federally-approved State of
Oregon  water  quality  standards and  implementation
plans, combined with passage of tough State pollution
control legislation  and the  crackdown  on polluters  by
the  State of Oregon, backed by firm Federal posture.
Now, all five  pulp mills have  installed primary treat-
ment facilities and four of the five no longer  discharge
sulfite cooking liquids into the river.  The fifth mill will
complete its process conversion and cease discharges
in 1972. The Willamette is now  safe for swimming.
  Eight  pulp  mills  have  polluted  Puget Sound for
years.  After  Federal-State  enforcement  conference
meetings in  1962 and 1967, most agreed to treat their
effluent, but on delayed schedules. Presently, EPA  is
pursuing an aggressive program to assure Puget  Sound
pulp mill cleanup.
  Region X's  "Industrial  Waste  Guide on  Logging
Practices" is an example of EPA's major  role in set-
ting standards  to protect the environment—in this case,
standards of performance in forest land use manage-
ment. EPA  aggressively urges the Federal  forest man-
agement  agencies  to require proper logging practices
not only to protect the  environment in Federal forests,
but also as the good  example  to private  forest land
  EPA has played a leading role in facing up  to the
threat of thermal pollution.  It  requires that off-stream
cooling  facilities  are necessary at  any  new thermal
(nuclear) powerplant  located   on   inland waters  or
  An EPA  representative is assigned  to the technical
advisory board formed  to review data concerning the
trans-Alaska  pipeline   proposal  and  participates  in
making recommendations to the Secretary of the In-
terior.  Through this arrangement,  EPA is  involved in
impacting problems  involving  the classical confronta-
tion  between wilderness protection and  economic de-


  In 1971 the State legislature established a Depart-
ment of Environmental Conservation in  a  reorgani-
zation and  strengthening of environmental  programs
and  resources. EPA funds  assisted  with the  develop-
ment of a State solid waste management plan, a State
survey and  evaluation of solid  waste needs of Kenai
Peninsula and a local proposal  for waste management
plan for  Greater Anchorage Borough. The State estab-
lished  an air  pollution  control  program;  adopted re-
vised water  quality standards approved  by EPA; and
initiated  significant effort  towards the State waste dis-
charge permit  plan. Mission 5000 courses were held in
Anchorage, Fairbanks and Juneau.


   The  State  legislature  approved  significant  amend-
ments  to the Idaho Air Pollution Code, adopted  a  25
percent construction grant matching program, amended
its  Solid Waste Management Act, expanded  a  solid
waste program from sites to solid waste management
system, and reorganized environmental activities in the
new Environmental  Improvement  Division under the
Department of Health. Other State actions included a
notification program for closing  dumps polluting water,
six dumps  were closed  or converted to landfills; par-
ticipated in  EPA funding to collect data on industrial
wastes throughout the State; initiated industrial  waste
discharger program; adopted kraft pulp mill  emission
regulations and established compliance schedule; estab-
lished  training school for  new  persons entering the
wastewater treatment plant  operator  field; and passed
stronger  pesticide legislation including licensing of gov-
ernment  agencies and pesticide dealers.


   The Oregon Nuclear and Thermal Energy Council
was created  with responsibilities  in  regulations and
power  plant site  certification. The Radiation Control
Program was  realigned and the surveillance  program
was enlarged  for pre-operational  monitoring of the
Trojan Nuclear Power Plant area. The  State adopted
the  first sulfite pulp  mill emission regulation in the
Nation,  as  well  as  adopting a Statewide secondary
treatment requirement  for  industrial  wastes in  all
waters (including coastal). It  also adopted  enabling
legislation allowing removal of  exemptions for forest
slash disposal  and agricultural field burning.  In  addi-
tion, voters  approved a one million dollar bond  issue;
$80 million for sewage works  treatment construction,
and $20 million  for  solid  wastes, sewage and  plan-
ning. Regulations  and licensing of pesticide disposal
sites were approved,  and the State enforced the dis-
continuance of sales  of  DDT  in  Oregon. Authority
and responsibility for solid waste management  was
transferred from  the  Department  of Health  Services
to  the  Department  of Environmental  Quality.  The
State has closed  or  converted 15  dumps to  landfills.
Training opportunities were established  for  treatment
plant operators and the Mission 5000 course was also


   The State  reorganized  the  Department  of Ecology
 along functional lines  and added  the  Shoreline Man-
 agement  Act,  the  Environmental Policy Act, and the
 Oil   Pollution Act to  its  environmental   legislation.
 The  State Solid  Waste  Management Plan,  assisted by
 EPA funding, was completed and approved.  In addition,
 14 regional-local solid waste management  plans were
 completed via $269,000 in the  1970-1971 State budget.
 Twenty-two dumps were closed or converted to landfills.
 The  Pesticides Control Act was passed, including appli-
 cation tests and applicator licensing. Pesticide containers
 were also monitored for amount and composition of resi-
 due.   Enabling  legislation  removed  exemptions  for
 agricultural field  burning and forest slash disposal.  The
 Radiation Control  Program submitted  an  EPA con-
 tract proposal to provide surveillance  at  AEC Han-
 ford  works  and  Trojan  Nuclear  Power  Plant.  The
 Thermal  Power  Plant  Site  Evaluation  Council pre-
 pared for the  1972 public hearings on  certification of
 the Hanford #2 nuclear plant.

   Most of the improvements and  innovations effected
 by the States in their air and water pollution control in
 recent years  have  been achieved without major  reor-
 ganization  of State-level  pollution  control  agencies.
 Thus, many of the measures necessary for these agen-
 cies to respond affirmatively to the widespread concern
 over environmental degradation have  been undertaken
 either under existing State statutes, or by enlarging in
 various  ways the  authority of the existing  pollution
 control  agencies.   Nevertheless,  another  highlight  in
 recent  developments  at the State  level has been the
 major reorganization of the State's organizational struc-
 ture for administrating its pollution control program.
   During 1970—71  major reorganizations were  adopted
 in 13  States—Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut,  Illinois,
 Maine, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York,
 Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Vermont, and Washing-
 ton. In addition, proposals for the restructuring of State-
 level agencies were advanced by the Governor and/or
 other bodies in a number of other States, and all pros-
 pects pointed to continued interest in reorganization of
 environmental protection programs in the 1972 State
 legislative sessions.
   A number of these recent  reorganizations and several
 earlier ones have been analyzed in  depth in Managing
 the Environment: Nine States Look jor New Answers,
 (Elizabeth  H. Haskell,  Victoria Price, and associates,
Smithsonian  Institution, Washington,  D.  C., April
 1971).  This  work concludes that the objectives being
sought in these reorganizations are  as follows:
   1.  Consolidate fragmented activities to make pro-


Region Ten Office, Seattle, Washinaton.

   gram  administration match the  integrative  way
   problems occur in the environment.

   2.  Reduce the proliferation of boards and com-
   missions to make State  government more  manage-
   able, and in  some cases change  their role and
   composition to  "professionalize" State  environ-
   mental  policy-making  and  make policy-makers
   more responsive to elected leaders and the public.

   3.  Transfer pollution control programs from the
   health department  to broaden pollution  concerns
   beyond health.

   4.  Create a stronger regulatory role  for the State
   and an agency  advocate  for the environment.

   5.  Design  a new environmental department that
   will be more  publicly visible, thus demonstrating
   the State's  commitment to  environmental protec-
   tion and rallying environmental interest groups to
   form a stronger political base for environmental

  6.  Increase accountability of public officials and
  public programs.

  7.  Facilitate administrative efficiencies.

  The  1970-71  reorganizations  increased to 20 the
number of States which recently have consolidated vari-
ous pollution control functions in  a single agency other
than the State health department. Table  30 gives  an
overview of the functions consolidated in these agencies.

  Two models are guiding the States in these organiza-
tions. One is the  EPA-like configuration, which is best
exemplified by the reorganizations in Alaska, Arkansas,
Illinois, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, and Washington.
These agencies combine air, water  and possibly  other
environmental protection programs such as solid wastes,
pesticides, radiation  and noise. The other—the super-
department concept adopted in Connecticut, Delaware,
New  Jersey,  New York,  Pennsylvania,  Vermont, and
Wisconsin—combines  these environmental  functions
with all or most of the functions of the typical con-
servation or natural resources  management agency.

  Another development in  the reorganization of  State
control pollution agencies has been the reduction or  the
complete elimination of polluting interest representa-
tion on state pollution boards.  A New  York  Times
survey  (Hill, Gladwin,  "States Curtailing Polluters on
Pollution Control Units," New York Times, Decem-
ber 19, 1971.) shows that the number of air or water
boards reflecting interests dropped from 35 to 32 during
1971.  The  number of full-time State  environmental
agencies rose from eight  to nine. More  than a  dozen
States mapped such changes or  revamped their  regu-
latory machinery  in that direction.
  The potential conflicts of interest arise from member-
ship of  executives of polluting  corporations, representa-
tives  of major polluters such  as  agriculture  and  local
government  and State officials who  have been spokes-
men for agriculture or  industry. There  is a repeated
correlation between  persistent pollution  and pollution
linked control boards.
  A good example is Alabama whose boards had heavy
industrial representation.  Alabama  was confronted by
extensive mercury pollution of waterways and in  April
1971, there was an air pollution episode in Birmingham.
In November, Birmingham's industry was temporarily
shut  down for two days  because  of health hazards.
Today, Alabama's old pollution boards have been  re-
placed  with  new  ones  structured to exclude polluter

  During 1971  some  States  passed laws abolishing
polluter interest  boards  and  in  others, boards  were
restructured  to lessen potential polluter  influence and
increase the  representation of the  public at large. In
still other States, proposals for more democratic boards
are scheduled to  be put before the  new legislative ses-
sions during  1972.

  This past year has seen the continued growth and
professionalization of the  citizen environmental  move-
ment. There  is full recognition that these groups are
viable, and that they are becoming a permanent institu-
tion of the community. Citizen groups are striving to be
well-informed and solidly credible  and many important
victories  have been  achieved. Greater professionalism
has been developed  because  of the need  for technical
competence in the challenging environmental problems
in the community. There has also been a positive move-
ment of private industry and the citizen environmental
organizations toward greater cooperation to  solve local
problems. There is more public recognition that serious
environmental problems exist,  greater appreciation  of
the effectiveness of citizen groups  and  a growing com-
petence on the part of these groups as the complexities
of the issues are recognized.
  Citizen groups have  brought considerable  pressure
on both the private and public agencies for compliance
with Federal  as well as local  environmental laws. They
have  lobbied for new laws, such as the one that now
bans  the development  of heavy industry  along the
Delaware coast.  They  brought  suit against projects
which were environmentally detrimental, and in several
significant  instances  have caused major  public and
private  works to be  halted.  The  citizen  groups have
been  using the power of  environmental impact  state-
ments to bring to the attention of the  general public,
as well as Government and corporate agencies,  pro-
grams which  were considered environmentally destruc-
tive. In most cases, citizen groups  have demonstrated a
capability of in-depth study and  professional  skill  in
dealing with these complex environmental issues.
  Citizen groups  were involved  in numerous  com-
munity projects  that were of serious concern to their
own localities, but reflected the national recognition  of
the  environmental problems which are EPA's legislated
responsibilities. Communities have been much involved
in recycling  projects this year  which have been   a
tangible  working  area  for  them. The  groups have
developed from  anti-litter  campaigns to more complex
separation centers that  dispose of  paper,  glass  and
aluminum  cans.  There  are now  recycling  centers  in
many communities  throughout the country. These ac-
tivities are often frustrated by the difficulties of separa-
tion   and transportation  of  waste  materials  to the
markets  that  will  pay.  Nevertheless,  the  efforts  of
citizen groups to clean up and reuse waste  materials has
had a big impact on the  paper industry, and has created
a demand for  wastepaper from that  industry.  The
aluminum can manufacturers  have  been working closely
with community groups to recover the increasing num-
ber of beverage cans produced and discarded. A  citizen
group in Missouri has opened  a  three-State glassphalt
factory to reuse old glass  for roadbuilding material.
  In Birmingham, Alabama, the Alabama Conservancy

                                  TABLE  30.—EPA Type Control Agencies
State and New Agency
Dept. of Environmental Conservation
Dept. of Pollution Control and Ecology
Dept. of Environmental Protection . .
Air Wastde at'on c"es Noise Other Major Control Funct.ons
— — —
X — Conservation programs
 Dept. of Natural Resources and Env. Control
 Dept. of Pollution Control          	

 (1) Pollution Control Board .
 (2) Environmental Protection Agency

 Dept. of Environmental Protection	
X     X      —    —

XXX     —
Pollution Control Agency

Air and Water Pollution Control Comm.

Dept. of Environmental Control   	

New Jersey
Dept. of Environmental Protection   . .
New York
Dept. of  Environmental Conservation .
North Carolina
Dept. of Air and Water Resources  . .

Dept. of  Environmental Quality  ....

Dept. of Environmental Resources
X      X
Puerto Rico
Environmental Quality Board	

South Carolina
Pollution Control Authority	

Agency  of Environmental  Conservation


XXX     —

X      X      X     X
Dept. of Ecology 	
Dept. of Natural Resources 	





X —

X —
                      Natural resources

      —    —      Conservation programs
                      Soil, water, and coastal
                        zone management

      —    —      Weather modification
                      Municipal water supplies
                                  —       Limited land use controls
                                  —       Limited land use controls
                     X     —     —
                     X     —     —
X      X

X     —
                      Public water supplies
                      Conservation programs
                      Natural resources

                      Conservation programs
                      Natural resources

                      Water resources
Conservation programs
Natural resources
      —     —       Conservation programs
                      Water use management

      —     —       Water use management
                                                                                        Municipal water supplies
                                                                                        Conservation programs
                                                                                        Water use management
                                                                                        Limited land use control

TABLE 31. — Composition of State Pollution Boards

Note: This table is not a classification of States' air and
water pollution conditions
• Means state pollution board with regulatory authority
contains members associated with basic pollution
sources (industry, agriculture, county and city gov-
O Means state board is free of such representation.
"No Boards" means air and water pollution regulation
statewide is handled by a full-time state agency.

Air Water nation
Board Board Air-Water

Alabama O 0 —
Alaska — No Boards —
Arizona 	 — No Boards —
Arkansas — — •
(l)California . . . O • —
Colorado . • • —
Connecticut .... — No Boards —
Delaware — — •
Florida 	 — — 0
Georgia . • • —
Hawaii . . — — O
Idaho . • O —
Illinois 	 — No Boards —

Indiana . • • —
Iowa . . . • • —
Kansas ... . . — — 0

Kentucky , • • —
Louisiana • • —
Maine . . — — •
Maryland — No Boards —
Massachusetts 00 —
Michigan • • —
Minnesota . — — •
Mississippi ... — — •
Missouri • • —
Montana 	 — — O
Nebraska — — •
Nevada ... — — •
New Hampshire • • —
New Jersey — No Boards —
New Mexico 	 — — 0
(2)New York — No Boards —
North Carolina . . — — •
North Dakota • • —
Ohio . . • • —
Oklahoma . . — — •
Oregon — — ^
Pennsylvania — — ^
Rhode Island . — No Boards —
South Carolina . . — — •
South Dakota . • • —

Tennessee 	 • • —
Texas 	 • • —
has opened an Environmental Information Center to
assist the community in their attempts to solve local
environmental questions.
These are but a few of the thousands of community
projects in which citizen groups are engaged. They look
to EPA as their source of support for information,
legislation and technical assistance. Dedicated to the
environmental cause, they are vitally interested in how
this new Agency works and what they can do to assist it.
National organizations such as the League of Women
Voters, the Garden Clubs, the Conservation Founda-
tion, National Wildlife Federation, and many others
have worked closely with EPA to provide information
programs for the public and to provide helpful feed-
back about public opinion. In October 1971, EPA
extended an invitation to 250 of these national head-
quarter citizens and service and professional organiza-
tions, to a day of briefings by the EPA Assistant Ad-
ministrators, and to technical workshops on the EPA
program areas. Each workshop had a prominent citizen
leader as a "citizen reactor." Over 400 participants
registered. At the conclusion of the program there was
a request for a continuation of such briefings, particu-
larly at the local or regional level so that constituent
groups could benefit. It is hoped that the Regional
EPA Offices will continue this process.
This grassroots movement has spread throughout the
U.S. school system. High school, as well as junior high
and elementary students, are talking ecology and are
taking courses in environmental studies. Many schools
have encouraged community environmental projects,
and most communities now have local recycling centers
at various schools. Last November, in recognition of
the impressive efforts of high school students, President
Nixon announced a program to bring appreciation to
those outstanding environmental projects by establish-
ing the President's Environmental Merit Awards Pro-
gram. Almost 3000 high schools enrolled. Recently, the
program was expanded to include junior high and
elementary school studies which again shows the com-
mitment and serious attention of the community to
environmental problems. For example, the high schools
of Oak Park and River Forest, Illinois, have established

Utah 	 • • —
Vermont O O —

Virginia 	 O O —
Washington ... — No Boards —
(3)West Virginia . • — —
Wisconsin 	 — — •
(4)Wyommg 	 • — —

(1) Pollution sources represented in regional branches of State
Water Board.
(2) State Environmental Board is advisory
(3) Water pollution under State Division of Water Resources.
(4) Water pollution under State Department of Health and Social

a  community pollution  control  center  to  study and
monitor community air and water problems and to pro-
mote better environmental awareness in the community.
In the  Fort  Worth area,  over 40 high schools and
numerous junior high students joined together to collect
over two  million pounds of paper, and raised  almost
$7000.  They bought thousands of trees  to reforest the
Trinity  River shoreline,  following plans developed  by
a  leading landscape architect. A high  school in San
Clemente, California, has completed a  detailed  study
of their bay area. The Bishop O'Connell High School in
Arlington, Virginia, has finished  an extensive  audio-
visual study of water pollution problems in the Metro-
politan  Washington area, as well as in the States that
are part of the Potomac  Watershed. Some of their film
and slides suggest violations of State and Federal  water
pollution control laws. The students are awaiting verifi-
cation of  their data.  They plan to take formal action
against the polluters.

  The citizen  environmental movement has  made  a
major contribution to environmental  improvement and
protection. Although  conflicts between  varied  interests
have  been aroused by citizen activity and  there have
been  some excesses, EPA recognizes  their overall posi-
tive contribution. There is an encouraging development
of cooperation on  the part of industry with such groups
—a sign that they are responding with flexibility and
commitment. Citizen  groups  have become increasingly
aware that environmental problems are  "for real." As
David Lilienthal said  recently, "If environment  is a fad,
it is man's last fad."
8th grade students from Huntington Beach, California, picking up trash during ret en period.


   One  of  EPA's major  accomplishments has been a
 vastly accelerated enforcement program. Prompt and
 decisive action has  been taken against both individual
 companies and  municipalities which are not moving
 ahead vigorously to  solve their  own  pollution  prob-
   Eight days  after  EPA's establishment,  the Adminis-
 trator served  the  cities  of  Atlanta,  Cleveland and
 Detroit with violation notices, giving  them 180  days
 to take  corrective action on severe water pollution prob-
 lems  or risk prosecution.  (The three cities subsequently
 did take such action and were granted financial as-
 sistance  by EPA to help meet agreed-upon schedules
 for water improvement. By the end  of 1971, 63  such
 180-day notices were issued  to  52 municipalities and
 11  industries.) On January  15,  1971, EPA initiated
 cancellation proceedings for products and uses of such
 pesticides as DDT, aldrin, dieldrin  and  Mirex.
   In  the first  few months, EPA took other significant
 actions. On December 17, 1971, it called on the Jus-
 tice Department  to prosecute a  plywood  and paper
 company in Ohio for discharging wastes into the Great
 Miami  River.  Similarly  EPA  called  on the Justice
 Department to prosecute a major steel  company for
 discharging wastes into the Cuyahoga River. EPA also
 announced a  reconvening  of  the  Lake Superior En-
 forcement Conference to  move ahead on the abatement
 of mining and  sewage  pollution of Lake Superior.
   In  its first  two months, the  Agency  initiated five
 times as many enforcement actions as all of its prede-
 cessor agencies combined in any  two month period.
 These actions  underlined the  Agency's intent. EPA's
 presence was felt and taken seriously.
   In  September, the Florida Power and  Light Company
 agreed to begin  an  extensive construction program to
 halt the discharge of  heated water into .Biscayne Bay.
 The agreement was contained  in a consent decree which
 the department filed to terminate a water pollution suit
 brought against the  Florida utility on March 13, 1970.
 The suit, which charged that the heated water damaged
 marine  life in the bay,  was  the first brought by the
Government to stop  thermal pollution.
  In November  of  1971, the Agency  invoked emer-
gency powers to  restrain industry in Birmingham, Ala-
bama, to abate air pollution in that city. EPA obtained
restraining orders in U.S. District Court  in Birmingham
to halt emission of air pollutants by 23  industries. The
authority for the action  was provided under  Section
303 of the Clean  Air Act of 1970.
  This was the first time  that EPA had taken enforce-
ment action under emergency powers of the Act. The
move followed measurements showing that pollution
reached a level of 771 and 758 micrograms of particu-
late matter per cubic  meter  of air during  two succes-
sive days. The EPA recommended alert level is for a
24-hour  average measurement of 375  micrograms of
particulate matter.  The "warning" level is  625 micro-
grams, and the "emergency" level is 875. At the latter
level,  significant  harm to  health can be expected. Sec-
tion  303 of  the Clean Air Act provides  EPA with
emergency  powers to seek  restraining  orders  to halt
air pollution when there is an "imminent and substan-
tial endangerment to the health of persons."
  These enforcement  actions frequently produced the
desired  result  of obtaining  voluntary compliance with
Federal standards. Last September, for example, sugar-
beet refineries in 15 states  voluntarily  agreed  to stop
discharging organic wastes from their plants; this pol-
lution-control  program  will  cost the  industry about
$13 million.
Birmingham, Alabama 4/27/71: U.S. Steel open-hearth fur-
naces contributing to pollution that led to the issuance of
the first EPA-Clean Air Act restraining order, against 23
firms here, on 11/18/71.

 Birmingham, Alabama, 11/18/71: The U.S. Steel plant following its court-ordered shutdown.

   While EPA  is working  to  increase its enforcement
 authority in the water area, the existing Federal water
 pollution control legislation represents EPA's broadest
 enforcement mandate at the present time.
   Under  authority first provided in  1956  and since
 expanded, Section 10 of the  Federal  Water Pollution
 Control Act  provides for  the  abatement of pollution
 of interstate  or navigable waters  (or  intrastate where
 requested  by the Governor),  which  endangers  the
 health  or welfare of any persons. Amendments to  the
 Act in  1965 additionally provided for the abatement
 of pollution,  which lowers  the quality of State waters
 below the water quality standards established for those
 waters,  under  the  authority   of those amendments.
 Consequently,  two  different  enforcement  procedures
 are  provided depending upon  the circumstances of  a
 particular case.
   Where  there  is judged to  be "pollution  of waters
 which  is endangering  the health and  welfare  of per-
sons in a State other  than that  in  which a discharge
or discharges  (causing or contributing to such  pollu-
tion)  originates" the  Act provides a  three-step pro-
cedure. First, the Administrator must call a conference
of Federal, State,  and any  interstate  water  quality
representatives.  At  this  conference,  a  nonadversary
proceeding,  opportunity is given to every person con-
tributing to the pollution or affected by  it to make a
full statement of his views. Following the conference
the Administrator  then makes  recommendations for
"necessary remedial action" to  the appropriate  State
water  pollution control agency.  If, after six  months,
"action which in the judgment of the  Administrator is
reasonably calculated to secure abatement of such pol-
lution" has not  been  taken,  the Administrator  must
then call a public hearing before a Hearing Board of
five or more persons appointed by him. Finally, if the
recommendations  of  the  Hearing Board  to  secure
abatement  are  not carried out  within six months of
the hearing, the Administrator may request the Attor-
ney General to  bring  suit on  behalf of the  United

States to secure such  abatement.  In 53  actions taken
under this procedure,  only  four  cases  have  reached
the second step, and only one case has  reached court
  Despite  its  limitations, the enforcement conference
has been  an  effective  mechanism  for  bringing to light
complex and  long-standing pollution problems. Because
the conference  brings  together representatives  of all
State  and interstate water pollution  control agencies in
the conference area, as well as other interested persons
including  affected industries and  municipalities,  the
open forum  so created is most helpful in developing
statistics,  technical information,  and  a general under-
standing of the pollution problems  involved. No other
                                        As of 3/31/72

 TABLE 32.—Summary of  Water  Enforcement  Ac-
              tions  Pursued  by  EPA  Since  Decem-
              ber  3, 1970

               Preliminary Consolidated Listing

 1.  180-Day Notices	      91

 2.  Enforcement Conference-type Actions .    . .     .46

      Water Quality Standards-Setting
        Conference    .  .      	       1

      New Enforcement Conferences         9

      Reconvenings and Additional
        Sessions of Conferences .  .   .  .    12

      Progress Sessions        . .    . .       4

      Approvals of Conference
        Abatement Recommendations       20

 3.  Actions under the Refuse Act .   ,          .       264
      Civil Actions Referred  to Justice Depart-
        ment  by  EPA Headquarters and  Re-
        gional Offices    	        49
      Criminal  Actions  Referred  to  Justice
        Dept.  by  EPA Headquarters and  Re-
        gional Offices   .       .         .68
      Non-filing of Section 13 Permit Applica-
        tions—Cases  referred  to Justice  De-
        partment  by  EPA Headquarters  and
        Regional Offices        ...    .      69
      Civil Actions initiated  by Justice Dept.
        with  Assistance  by  EPA  Regional
        Offices   .            .      ...   30

      Criminal  Actions  initiated   by  Justice
        Dept. with Assistance by EPA Regional
        Offices      .                  . !    48

 4.  Actions referred  under Section  11 of the Federal
      Water Pollution Control Act exclusively             9

                 Total         ...               410
enforcement  procedure  presently  available  to  EPA
could develop abatement plans for the number of mu-
nicipalities and industries involved in a conference. The
Lake Erie Conference, for example  (involving Michi-
gan,  Indiana,  Ohio,  Pennsylvania,  and  New York)
established detailed remedial programs for 110  cities
and 130 industries.
   Seven new conferences  have been called in the first
year  of  the  Environmental  Protection Agency:  Long
Island Sound, Galveston Bay, Western  South Dakota,
Pearl Harbor, and the Ohio  River. Seven conferences
have been recommended: Dade County, Florida,  the
Escambia River  and  Bay, Perdido Bay,  Lake Michi-
gan,  Lake Superior, the Monongahela  River and  the
Potomac River.
   The second  enforcement procedure under the Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control Act is  used where  there
is  judged to  be discharges which reduce  the quality of
interstate waters  below  the  water  quality  standards
established under authority  of the  1965 amendments
to  the  Federal  Water Pollution  Control Act. Under
this procedure, the  Administrator  first  serves  notice
upon the violator and other interested parties, notably
the  appropriate  State and  interstate water pollution
control agencies  that such violation  of  water quality
standards has,  in fact, occurred and must be  abated.
While the legislative  history  of  the  Act directs  EPA
to hold an informal hearing at the request of a State,
the  discharger, or  other  interested  party, EPA  has
provided  by regulation for  such  a hearing in  every
instance,  so  that  if possible voluntary agreement on an
abatement plan  can  be reached during the 180-day
period  which must  elapse before court  action may be
initiated,  and  thus  the  necessity for  a lengthy  suit
eliminated.  Should  the  violator fail  to  agree  to  and
begin action directed toward the abatement of  the
pollution within 180-days  of the  notice of violation, the
Administrator  may request  the Attorney General to
bring suit.
   To date,  no court action has been initiated.  In the
case of a steel company in the Lake  Erie Basin which
failed to  comply with the  remedial action requirements
of the  Lake Erie  Enforcement  Conference, and  also
failed to  comply with water quality standards after the
expiration of  the  180-day  period,  the  Administrator
recommended  to the Attorney  General that  he bring
suit  against  the  company under  the Refuse Act, as
well as under  the water quality  standards enforcement
   During 1971, another  authority,  in  addition to  the
Federal Water Pollution  Control Act, was called  into
 play to  assist in resolving water pollution  problems.
The Refuse  Act, Section  13  of the River and Harbors
 Act of  1899, prohibits  the  discharge  of  refuse  into
 navigable waters without a  permit, or  in violation of
 the conditions of  a permit,  and was administered for
 many years  by the  Army Corps of Engineers primarily
 in the interest of navigation.

  Although court  decisions had supported the use of
the  Refuse Act in water pollution abatement cases,  it
was not until 1970 that the 1899 Act came into promi-
nence  as  a viable water  quality enforcement  mecha-
nism. It was used as a basis of the suit brought against
an electric utility company in Florida to protect  Bis-
cayne  Bay. It  was the basis for  10 Federal suits to
abate the discharge  of mercury into  navigable waters
which  were brought when voluntary abatement action
was  discovered to  be a  threat  to water  quality  and
public health.
  The  Environmental  Protection Agency  has  rec-
ommended action under the Refuse Act to the Depart-
ment of Justice in 152 cases during the first  year of
the  Agency's  establishment. One important  case  is
that of ITT Rayonnier, a paper mill on  Puget Sound
which had failed to meet  the requirements of the 1967
remedial  action schedule  of the  requirements  of the
State discharge permit. After several  weeks of nego-
tiation  among  Federal  and State officials and repre-
sentatives  of the company, a civil suit  was filed, to-
gether  with  a  stipulation under  which  the company
agreed to undertake a $20 million abatement program.
The Department of Justice has  initiated separately 28
civil and criminal actions under the  provisions of the
Refuse Act.


   EPA's authority for protecting and enhancing the
quality of our  air rests in the Clean Air Act of 1965
which was dramatically strengthened by the Clean Air
Amendments  of  1970.  The  Amendments require na-
tional standards  for significant  new pollution sources
and for all  facilities emitting hazardous substances.  A
framework is  established for the States to set emission
standards for  existing  sources in order to achieve the
national air quality standards. The Act further requires
stringent national emission standards for  new automo-
biles—a  90-percent reduction  from existing  levels  of
hydrocarbons  and  carbon monoxide by  1975, and  a
90-percent  reduction  of  nitrogen  oxides  by  1976.
Hence, for  the next two or three years  the  emphasis
in the clean air  program will be the establishment  of
broad standards.  Under  the  timetable  of the Act, en-
forcement will come later when  the guidelines are fully
  Under the  Clean Air  Act,  all trucks sold in the
United States must have a valid certificate attesting that
the  engines meet  applicable air pollution control stand-
ards.  Automobiles are subject to a similar requirement.
In January of  1971, EPA revoked the conditional cer-
tification for two  heavy  duty trucks manufactured by
the Ford Motor Company which did not  meet the ap-
plicable hydrocarbon emission standards. This revoca-
tion was  the first  such  action since exhaust testing was
required of trucks in 1970. Pending certification of the
engines, Ford  was required to stop sales of the engines
and modify  any still in its hands before they  could be
sold.  Within one  month  of the  revocation of  certifica-
tion.  Ford completed appropriate modification of the
          TABLE  33.—Status of Refuse Act Enforcement Actions Pursued by EPA Since 12/3/1970
                                              (as of March 31, 1972)
Dtsposttion of filed cases
Type of Action
Cases referred by EPA to Justice:
Remaining . . 	
Total — direct EPA referrals
Justice-initiated Cases, assisted by EPA:
Total — Assisted Justice Dept. . .
Total — all Cases with EPA
ff of
Dis- Pending
missed in Ct.
— 20
— 6
1 3
— 3
1 32
— 22
— 25
— 47
1 79
of prose-
     Fines imposed total $22,750 for these 14 cases
    • "Fines imposed total $43,294 for these 23 cases

engines enabling them  to  meet the applicable stand-
ards and qualify for certification.
  The EPA requested that the Department of Justice
sue the Ford Motor Company for delivering some 1972
model cars and light duty  trucks  to  dealers  before
required emission tests were completed. The tests were
required to obtain certification that new motor vehicles
were in conformity with applicable Federal  emission
standards. While the manufacturer took steps to mini-
mize the  danger  that  uncertified vehicles would  be
driven or sold, the  company's shipment of automobiles
and trucks to  dealers  before certification made  en-
forcement  of Federal  standards  much  more difficult
inasmuch as the shipment was made prior to any judge-
ment as to probable compliance.
   The  Clean Air Act  provides that any person may
commence a civil action against the EPA Administra-
tor when there is alleged a failure  to perform  any non-
discretionary  act or  duty  prescribed  in the  Act.  At
least 60-days  advance notice must be  given  to the
Administrator  at the EPA headquarters in  Washing-
ton before such suits are filed. In  1971, EPA  proposed
rules for  giving notice of civil  suits  against  alleged
violators of standards and abatement orders under the
Act. The proposed guidelines provide for the service
of  notice of lawsuits  to individual States, alleged viola-
tors, the  Administrator  and  appropriate EPA  Re-
gional  Administrators. The guidelines  say  that such
notices must identify the complainant and describe with
reasonable specificity the act or failure to act, or in the
case of alleged  violators, the violation, the location and
the dates of such violations.
   A Federal interstate air  pollution  abatement con-
ference concerning pollution  in  the  Mt.  Storm  and
Keyser, West Virginia, and Gorman and Luke, Mary-
land, area was  held in May of 1971. The Conference
was called under the Clean Air Act, as amended, which
calls for EPA  to  take such action at  the request of
any State whose Governor alleges that residents of his
State are adversely affected  by pollution originating in
another State.  In  this  case, Maryland's Governor re-
quested a conference because of effects on  evergreen
tree farms in  Maryland of  pollution  alleged  to origi-
 nate from a power plant in Mt. Storm, West Virginia.
 Also, the Governor of West Virginia  requested  that
 the conference consider other possible sources of air
 pollution  in  the  area, specifically  a  pulp and paper
 plant at Luke, Maryland.
    Recommendations for the control of  interstate  pol-
lution  in  the  area involved  were issued by EPA in
 October 1971, as  a consequence of the May confer-
ence. The recommendations  were effective  immedi-
 ately, and called for reduction of emissions of sulfur
 oxides and  particulate matter from  the  power  and
 paper plants, reduction of emissions of odorous sulfur
 compounds  from the pulp and paper  plant, and  pro-
 vision  for abating  emissions of particulate matter from
 several small sources in the area.

  With respect  to  pesticides, EPA presently has im-
portant enforcement  responsibility under  the  Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
The responsibility,  however,  extends only to the regis-
tration and proper  labelling  of pesticides. Comprehen-
sive pesticide control legislation to replace FIFRA has
been proposed by  the  President.  The  bill is designed
to  prevent  misuse of  pesticides  by controlling  their
application, which  FIFRA does not do. EPA is work-
ing closely with Congress on this new legislation which
would give EPA essential new enforcement  authorities
in the pesticide area (more details  in Pesticide Section).


  On  December 23,  1970,  President Nixon  signed
Executive Order 11574  announcing the implementa-
tion of the Refuse  Act Permit Program, which  speci-
fied that it be a joint effort by EPA and the Corps  of
Engineers "to regulate the discharge of  pollutants  or
other refuse matters  into the navigable waters of the
United States  or their tributaries."
  The Executive Order provided that the Corps would
be responsible for  granting,  denying, conditioning, re-
voking, and suspending Refuse Act permits,  and in  so
doing would accept the opinions  of EPA on  matters
of water quality.
  The Corps also considers the opinions of State water
quality  agencies, as  indicated  by  their action  on re-
quests for the State's  certification that the proposed
discharge will not  violate water quality standards,  or
by  a written comment  on this subject. Section 21 (b)
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act provides
for  this State participation,  and  says   that no  permit
will  be granted  if  the  State denies certification.  This
is  consistent with  Section  10(b) of   the same  Act,
which  gives the States  primary responsibility for pol-
lution control within their own boundaries. EPA works
very closely with the States  in gathering complete in-
formation, developing conditions  and   suggesting rea-
sonable treatment  methods.  EPA also determines  if
interstate  waters are  affected, and  makes the certifica-
tion or denial if there are no applicable water quality
standards, if the State waives its  right  to certify or if
the  standards are not being properly applied. Like the
State, EPA can direct that the permit be denied.
  EPA recognizes  fully the primary responsibility  of
the  States to prevent  and  control water  pollution under
Section  21(b).  The  Agency has  maintained constant
communication with  each State,  working out  proce-
dures to  insure that the Permit Program is compatible
with  existing  State  programs.  There  are  important
values to be preserved  in  having the line  operating
responsibility conducted to a maximum  extent by State
officials.  This  does not minimize  the  Federal  role  in
upgrading standards and setting the pace. At the same

 time, it gives  full recognition  to  the  State  role and
 attaches great importance to it.
   The  President's Order also requires that in addition
 to the EPA and State agencies the Corps will consult
 with  the Departments of Interior and Commerce. All
 these agencies consider the effect the discharge will have
 on possible uses of the receiving water: swimming, fish-
 ing,   growth  of  plants and wildlife, navigation and
 aesthetic purposes.
   In addition,  the Corps  may  deny an application for
 permit  if, in their judgment, an obstruction to naviga-
 tion  will result, violating Section 10 of the River and
 Harbor Act.  Thus, the Permit Program was designed
 to be administered by the Corps with EPA serving as
 principal  environmental consultant.  Two  memoranda
 of understanding were drawn up establishing a policy
 of cooperation between the two  agencies.  In the first,
 the responsibilities of each are defined, and it is  speci-
 fied  that  either shall consult with  the other at  least
 30 days before issuing guidelines, instructions, policies
 or procedures.  Also differences between local person-
 nel will be resolved by forwarding them to Washington;
 ultimately  the  Corps  will accept  EPA's  findings on
 matters of water quality.
   The  second   memorandum  regards  enforcement.
 Where  conditioning  or  threat  of  suspension of  the
 permit  is  not sufficient to enforce water quality stand-
 ards,  the  Justice Department  may be asked to  seek
 either injunctive  action, or criminal action, which can
 involve a  fine  of up to $2,500.
   In  filing a permit  application  each discharger sub-
 mits  to the Corps a form which describes the plant loca-
tion  and  effluents and general information on  plant
processes. Those applicants who are on a list of critical
industries supply data both on the 11 parameters  in
Part A  of the  form, and on those parameters specified
for their particular industrial  classification  in Part B.
Part  B  includes a total of six  physical and  biological
parameters, 45  chemical parameters, and  eight radio-
logical parameters.
   Frequently the discharger will receive  a permit on
the condition that he  install certain  treatment facilities
by a  specific reasonable date, and  that he show  prog-
ress on the installation  by specific  interim dates. This
is  called an implementation plan.
   When the permit is issued, it requires that the dis-
charger live up  to applicable  water quality standards,
 and  that  he  monitor the discharge and  report  on it
 at regular intervals. If the  discharger does not  meet
the conditions of the permit, including the  time sched-
ule of the implementation plan, he is subject to legal
   At the same  time  that the Corps is sending copies
 of the  application to the  State, EPA, NOAA, and
 Interior, a notice and description of the application is
 sent   to appropriate  State  agencies,  local  governing
 bodies, conservation groups, and the local news media.
 This  allows interested groups  and citizens  to be  aware
of the proposed  discharge and express any opinions.
If there is sufficient interest, a public hearing  is held.
   Such publicity is one of the beneficial side effects
of the Permit Program.  Under the stimulus of public
interest and  a nationwide program,  some States  are
strengthening  their  own  permit programs, particularly
in adding requirements for monitoring, and in  specify-
ing interim dates  for implementation  plans.  RAPP
permits are not issued without implementation dates.
As the State programs are strengthened, they also tend
to become more uniform.
   Public  awareness also encourages  expanding appli-
cation of water quality standards to streams which now
have  no applicable standards,  and encourages  upgrad-
ing water-use classification.  That is,  bodies of water
which may now be designated for use for agricultural
or  industrial  use  only, may  require dischargers  to
attain a specific  level of treatment.  If the use is  up-
graded  to require water  clean  enough  to allow fishing
and provide a healthy environment  for fish, then dis-
chargers must attain a higher level of treatment. Waters
designated for use  for swimming would  require still
more  treatment.
   Research into better  treatment methods  has been
stimulated by RAPP. At  present, the best available
treatment may be  far below what  we would  like  to
see; the ultimate goal of research would  be complete
recycling and reuse.
   This eventually can be of financial benefit to indus-
tries.  At  present, some  polluters have been  unaware
of the  final chemical compounds they discharge as a
result of  their plant operations.  Now industry  is be-
coming more  aware of  its own contribution to water
pollution  and  is cooperating in pollution control. Some
plants  have  discovered  outfalls  they did not know
existed and others  have consolidated discharge pipes.
   To win the battle  against water  pollution,  it must
be found  out what  discharges each company is  making,
and it  must  be decided what level  of treatment that
company  needs.  This is not easy and  it has not been
done, and the permit program  is a very effective mech-
anism for requiring companies to come forward with
the information on  which such  judgments can be made.
   The most beneficial side effect of RAPP is probably
the data  being  gathered and  computerized. A  useful
amount should  be  available by  July 1972. This will
assist research firms,  States  wishing to upgrade their
programs and criteria, and industries, as well  as Fed-
eral planners.
   By any measure the Permit program is a large under-
taking.  During the  first year  a  total of  20,000  applica-
tions  were received by  Corps of Engineers of which
9,000 were transmitted  to EPA  for  review. The bulk
of this  review process was conducted  in the  10 EPA
Regional Offices.
   EPA is strongly  convinced that the Permit Program
will  continue  to be  an effective complement  to  its
other water enforcement  procedures. It is,  for example,

often technically difficult to establish legally that a dis-
charger is the cause of,  or  a contributor to, a violation
of water quality criteria.  On  the basis  of  data sup-
plied in  the application  for  a permit, EPA will impose
special conditions designed to insure abatement of any
criteria violations.  If the permittee discharges in viola-
tion  of the  permit conditions, EPA can bring  a suit
under the Refuse Act without  the technical necessity
of establishing that the permittee's discharge is a cause
of the criteria violation.
   In summary, then  EPA views the several  authorities
available to it as mutually supportive and applies them
as appropriate to achieve effective, suitable  abatement
                       TABLE 34.—Refuse Act Permit Program (As of December 31, 1971)

Applications Rec'd
Critical Industries '
Non-Critical Industries . .
Applications Complete . .
No. Sent to States for Action
No. of Final State Actions 2
No. of Recommendations to the
No. of C.O.E. Final Actions 3 . .
19,909 1387
15,566 1046
2,964 341
43 4
EPA Total
     1 "Critical Industries" are those which are deemed to have an important effect on water quality. This group includes approximately 40 SIC
     2 Final State Actions are: format certification, informal comment, waiver, or denial of certification.
     3 Numbers of Corps of Engineers' final actions — number of permits issued.
     4 Done only in exceptional cases in this Region


   The setting of anti-pollution standards and the en-
forcement of these standards require a sound scientific
base. So much  remains  to  be learned about how to
protect the  environment  that research is  the full-time
occupation of one in every four people on EPA's pay-
roll, and the part-time occupation of hundreds  more.
The need for research is put into even clearer perspec-
tive by  the  fact that over  75 percent  of  all EPA
research efforts  are conducted outside the Agency by
means of contracts and grants, thereby multiplying the
effectiveness  of the  EPA research staff.

   Most EPA research is  applied. While  one of the
aims  of  research  is  to  define  and prevent environ-
mental problems before they develop, all such research
should be  applicable in solving environmental prob-
lems. Further, EPA must constantly respond to prac-
tical immediate situations. For example, the Clean Air
Amendments provided that EPA set nationwide stand-
ards for the six  main  types  of air pollution:  sulfur
oxides, particulates, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons,
nitrogen oxides, and photochemical oxidants. EPA had
to define  the levels of  these pollutants that endanger
human health and to define how the  pollutants were
to be measured, as well as to determine the steps the
States should take to achieve the standards. The States
were  required to  develop implementation  plans  and
to submit them to EPA by January 31, 1972.
   Research accounted for nearly $125 million of EPA's
Fiscal Year 1972 budget. Almost 1,900 scientists, tech-
nicians, and support personnel,  representing 59 differ-
ent scientific disciplines and specialties,  comprise EPA's
in-house research team.
   EPA's research  falls into four main  categories:  the
processes  and effects of  pollutants; the technology to
abate pollution; the results of pollution  abatement;  and
man's long-range impact on the environment. Pollution
problems are intimately related to one another. Because
of this,  EPA's  research  emphasizes the study of all
types of pollution  (solid  waste,  pesticides, radiation,
and noise),  and polluted media (air, water, and land),
when dealing with  any  environmental  concern.
   Research  personnel  came  from  existing environ-
mental control  programs in five  Federal  Government
agencies:  a  water quality program from  the  Depart-
ment of Interior; water hygiene,  air pollution  control,
and  solid  waste management programs from the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare; radiation
exposure control programs from HEW  and the Atomic
Energy  Commission;  and  pesticides control programs
from  the  Department  of Agriculture, the Fish and
Wildlife Service of the Department of the Interior, and
HEW's  Food and Drug Administration.  Before their
reorganization into  EPA, these researchers in  the dif-
ferent agencies  conducted research independently from
one  another, without one  agency having  leadership
responsibility. The  results were often  overlapping re-
sponsibilities, as well  as failure  to recognize some pol-
lution problems.
   Implementation of  EPA's research program is con-
ducted by four National Environment Research Centers
(NERC's).  The NERC's are located in Research Tri-
angle Park, North Carolina; Cincinnati,  Ohio; Corvallis,
Oregon; and Las Vegas,  Nevada. These field units report
directly to EPA Headquarters.  The NERC's represent
a  new concept  in environmental  research by bringing
together research on  air,  water,  pesticides, etc.  They
have jurisdiction over a combined total of 42 full-fledged
laboratories located in 18 states stretching from College,
Alaska, to Perrine, Florida, which are valued conserva-
tively at $55 million.  Supplementing these facilities are
more than 130  related  resources, such as water  craft,
instrumental aircraft, field stations, and monitoring sites.
The organization of the laboratories and other resources
was  a major concern during 1971. A plan to  relate
EPA Environmental Control Lab., Cincinnati, Ohio.

laboratory resources to EPA missions and programs has
been prepared by the Agency's "Laboratory Study Task

Processes and  Effects

   A $53 million budget  is allocated for studying the
processes and  effects  of  pollutants.  This program is
implemented through all four NERC's. Such  pollutants
as chemical substances, biological materials,  radiation,
noise, and heat are  identified. Also, pollutant sources,
and physical and  biological paths  are  identified.  The
effects of pollutants on man, other living  organisms and
non-living things are studied, and models for the total
eco-system are  developed. Processes and  effects include
the health effects of pollutants; the ecological  and other
non-health effects  of  pollutants; the movement  and
transformation  of pollutants; the measurements, meas-
urement  methods,  and instruments used in assessing
pollution problems;  and water supply research.
   A large threat  to the Nation's  health is the  250
million tons of manmade waste annually dumped into
the air.  Consequently, researchers are  conducting  a
nationwide study—the first of its kind—on  the effect
of air pollution on humans. The Community Health and
Environmental  Surveillance Studies (CHESS) directed
by the Research Triangle Park NERC, is  comparing the
health of those who breathe polluted air with that of
those  who are  not exposed to such pollution. Working
in over 30 different communities throughout  the coun-
try, EPA scientists and technicians have the cooperation
of 38,000 volunteers. They  eventually  hope to have
200,000  such volunteers who  are willing to have their
health monitored.  Communities have   been selected
with  high and  low  sulfur  dioxide, nitrogen oxide,  par-
ticulate and photochemical pollution. With the coopera-
tion of school, hospital, and government officials,  the
scientists  are  seeing  how  each  pollutant  affects  a
person's short and long-term health.
   CHESS is attempting to answer  a host of questions:
What effect does long exposure to polluted air have on
school absenteeism? Is there an increased  frequency of
acute and chronic respiratory disease in highly polluted
environments?  Do  pollutants  concentrate in specific
organs  and  cause their malfunction?  Does the death-
rate rise and fall in rhythm  with a day's  pollution? Is
there a correlation between heart attack and high pol-
lution?  Already, some tentative answers are coming in.
   CHESS closely  relates with  EPA's  air  pollution
standards by providing data on the  health  effects of
various levels and types of pollutants. It  is hoped that
the new air  standards will lower  the levels of pollution
in CHESS communities and improve health and welfare.
CHESS  will provide  the  means  of measuring  the
amount and effect of those improvements.
   Marked geographic differences in  mortality exist in
this country, and a logical explanation for such differ-
ences is the effect  of  the environment. Therefore, in
cooperation  with the CHESS project, EPA  is com-
paring  morbidity  and  mortality data with data  on
drinking water  quality. Such correlations  will not give
definite answers,  but they can  develop leads for more
specific  studies.
   EPA plans to use specialized Army  aircraft in  a
National Eutrophication Survey.  The Agency will em-
ploy both fixed wing aircraft and helicopters in a nation-
wide aerial survey of approximately  1,200 lakes. The
purpose of the project is to identify bodies of water in
the U.S. with potential or actual  eutrophication  (ac-
celerated aging) problems brought on by the discharge
of excessive  amounts of  phosphates  into them from
various  sources.  Phosphates  are nutrients that cause
rapid growth of  algae in bodies of  water.  When  the
algae decay, the process depletes the  supply of oxygen
Ann Arbor, Michigan: EPA's first Federal Laboratory specifically  designed  to perform automobile pollution control research.

and results  in premature "aging" of a lake or pond,
including  the  disappearance of desirable  varieties  of
fish. Lake Erie has been widely cited as a classic exam-
ple of eutrophication.
   The survey would  determine the  present conditions
of the lakes, where the overabundance of nutrients is
coming from, and where the condition of the lakes can
be improved by curbing the phosphorus  reaching the
water from municipal treatment plants. It is an integral
part of EPA's control program to assist State and  local
governments, through construction  grants,  in  reducing
excess phosphates by additional municipal  waste treat-
   EPA is also developing  a series of  "water  models."
Essentially,  this kind of mathematical model is a set of
analytically  related  factors  in a defined system which
simulates the causes and effects of pollution on a living
body  of  water.  These  factors  can  be varied, and  a
correlation between causes  and effects can be identified.
It has been discovered for example,  that every  lake,
stream, and river tolerates pollution differently,  depend-
ing on its physical and chemical characteristics. The
onset  of eutrophication depends on the  water's  tempera-
ture, mineral content, natural  aeration, chemical input,
flora,  and fauna. In some  lakes, the addition  of  rela-
tively  small quantities  of  phosphates could  tip the
balance and bring  on eutrophication. In  other lakes,
for different reasons, nitrogen might  be  the critical
variable. As yet the most harmful pollutants can not be
   Armed with  the  predictive  ability  of  such water
models, however, planners will be able to  strategically
place  and size treatment plants, and to design  the best
kinds  of treatment plants to remove the offending chem-
ical.  In a related research  effort, the Southeast Water
Laboratory  at Athens, Georgia, reporting to Corvallis,
is beginning to  use  a $750,000 eco-systcm simulator
to examine  how fertilizers, pesticides,  and  rural runoff
from  industry,  fiber  production,   paper  processing,
poultry processing, and phosphate  mining,  all  effect
streams and fish  and plants therein. The  simulator is
an actual  water course for  which all variables, such as
aeration, mineral  content, diurnal cycles (sunlight,  tem-
perature,  etc.)  and  turbidity  are  controlled. These
factors can be changed  to  see how  each influences the
evolution of pollutant effects in streams. The pollutants
can also be varied to see  how they effect stream life.
In a  similar vein, atmospheric models are being de-
veloped to control and  abate  air pollution.
   In 1971 the environmental effects of a nuclear power
plant  which was submerged in 250 feet of water  were
studied. The program, handled by General Dynamics
under contract, showed  that fewer organisms would  be
killed  at a submerged plant than at a plant located on
the coast.


   EPA allocated $69 million for fiscal 1972 to provide
the technology necessary to abate and control air and
water pollution and to improve solid waste manage-
ment. This  research  function  includes municipal  en-
vironmental protection technology, applied science and
technology,  air  pollution technology and  solid  waste
control. These  programs are  conducted through  the
NERC's and their  associated  laboratories.
   Developing technology for water pollution control of
municipal wastewaters is  of chief concern. The num-
ber of sewered  communities in the  U.S.  is just  under
13,000. These facilities  serve  only  63 percent of the
Nation's population. As  a result,  raw or inadequately
treated  sewage from millions  of people  flows  into the
streams. And,  although many  communities have been
installing and improving their waste treatment facilities,
over 1,000  communities outgrow  their treatment sys-
tems each year. It  is estimated that  waste  loads from
municipal systems will increase nearly four times over
the next 50 years. In addition to the sewage wastes,
storm drainage  systems  in  urban  areas  are a serious
problem. Presently serving over 14 million square miles
of urban area,  storm drainage systems discharge, with-
out treatment, the  collected runoff  from rainfall and
snowmelt into water bodies. Significant projects dealing
with municipal  wastewater  during 1971  included  the
development of methods for upgrading  existing  treat-
ment plants, the removal of phosphorus  from lakes  by
the addition of chemicals,  the development of tech-
niques to control and  treat combined sewer overflows
and  storm water discharges and  the development  of
engineering  methodology  for  reaeration  of rivers and
   The pollution load coming from  industrial  sources,
agriculture,  mining and  marine  sources  is  another
concern of technology research. Pollution coming from
industrial sources is equivalent to  the pollution caused
by a population of  approximately 400 million.  Because
of the "slug"-like load which is characteristic of animal
feedlot runoff after significant rainfall, the concentration
or  organic   pollutants  emanating  from  agricultural
sources  may be as high as 100  times that of raw munici-
pal sewage. Other forms of agricultural pollution include
nutrients and  pesticides,  as well  as salts  and  other
pollutants in irrigation return flows.  Already research
and  demonstration projects  funded by grants have
found solutions to many of these pollution problems.
   Pollution  resulting from mining is  also a  concern of
technology research. An  estimated four million tons of
acid from mine drainage discharges annually into more
than 4,000  miles  of U.S.  streams.  There  are  many
active grant and contract programs conducting research
and demonstration  projects on this  problem.  In fact,
very shortly an estimated 11 states  should be participat-
ing in solving this pollution problem.
   The daily amount of solid waste discarded by house-
holds and commercial and  industrial establishments is
equivalent to seven pounds per capita. The  situation is
compounded by the fact that nearly every means  of

disposing of these wastes (burial, burning, deep  sea
disposal), contributes  to  pollution. At the  same time,
these wastes have the potential to become new resources
for fuel, raw  materials and even  animal feed supple-
   Under the authority  of the Solid Waste Recovery Act
of 1970,  much of the research for solid  waste tech-
nology  is being conducted by the contract and grant
mechanism. For example, under a  demonstration grant,
the Union Gas and Electric Company of St. Louis has
developed a system which generates electricity by burn-
ing ordinary municipal refuse.
   Cellulose-containing materials,   such as  paper, rags
and glass, constitute 50 to 60 percent of all municipal
waste. In addition, millions of tons of crop residues and
wastes from lumber, pulp and paper industries must be
disposed of  annually. Consequently, EPA is supporting
a study at Louisiana State University aimed at convert-
ing the  cellulose in these  solid wastes into new, useful
   During 1971, the ongoing programs in the field of air
pollution technology, were managed by the Office of Air
Programs, and therefore are discussed in the Air Quality
Section. However,  research related to the abatement
and control of air pollution from stationary sources will
now be  conducted by the Office of Research and Mon-
itoring.  The major emphasis  of this  research  will  be
related to the desulfurization of fuel gases from thermo-
electric power  plants.


   Two  and a half million dollars is used  for  the de-
velopment  and evaluation of  courses of action which
implement environmental protection. This research func-
tion is concerned with  techniques for selecting environ-
mental standards and  for assessing both the benefits
and the anticipated costs of achieving those standards.
The  former emphasis  on technological capability  and
economic  feasibility is  avoided. Techno-economic con-
siderations are  weighed  against   ecological,  environ-
mental and  human considerations. Economic  analyses
are used to evaluate the costs  and benefits  of pollution
control  methods. Research  is  being  continually con-
ducted  to  refine  these  analytical techniques.  Fiscal
solutions, together with more effective pollution control
laws for their  application, are being examined in  an
effort to  make pollution  control enforcement more
effective,  to  provide   incentives   for  environmental
quality  and to minimize  public funding  of pollution
control. The  complex  interaction among  population
growth,  economic  growth and  technological change  is
also being examined in order to avoid pollution  result-
ing from this interaction.
  Finally, research which helps the Agency  to comment
on environmental impact statements is being conducted.
For  example,  one  major undertaking  has been  to
coordinate EPA's  input  into  the Southwest  Energy
Study, which concerns the construction of a  power plant
capability in or near the Four Corners area (the point
at which  Utah,  Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico
all meet).

Environmental Studies

  The broad area of man's effect on the total environ-
ment is the  concern  of EPA's environmental studies
which  provide understanding  of  the  total effects  of
environmental policy.  Such  studies as  the  future  of
cities,  metropolitan  areas and regions  to  ascertain
what they will, or should, be like are conducted. The
purpose of  these  studies is  to  enable  EPA  to  move
from a position of reacting to  environmental  crises  to
one of anticipating and shaping events.


  Some  multifaceted problems  were  handled by re-
search during 1971  such as the controversy  over the
use of phosphate versus non-phosphate detergents. The
public  was  aware that  phosphate-containing  products
cause eutrophication. But some of the non-phosphate
products  also suffered  serious shortcomings, such  as
accidental poisoning of young  children by caustic de-
tergents.  In  particular,  nitrilotriacetic acid  (NTA,  a
major  contender  to  replace  phosphate in detergents)
was  believed to cause cancer.  Consequently,  after re-
search on this difficult  dilemma, EPA retreated from
its former  strong position  against phosphate  deter-
gents.  In October 1971, EPA announced  that  the
Agency's  immediate policy would  depend on  the pub-
lic's  choice  of detergent  according to the local  situa-
tion: where  there is no  eutrophication problem,  for
example,  the  housewife can choose phosphate deter-
gents;  where there is a local eutrophication problem,
however,  she  could use a non-phosphate detergent. If
this  latter housewife has small children,  immediate
EPA policy suggests that she make the  choice herself
between  the non-phosphate  and phosphate detergent.
Longer-term EPA phosphate policy,  however,  would
call  for removing household detergents  at municipal
sewage  treatment  plants before  they could enter local
  It is imperative that EPA's research be delivered to
users and be put to maximum practical use. In  co-
operation  with industry,  EPA  has published  and dis-
tributed data on  more than 200 water  pollution re-
search  and   demonstration  projects.  Grant,  contract,
and  EPA research activities generate technical pollu-
tion  control reports on current information  concern-
ing  air, pesticides, solid  waste, water and  radiation.
These  reports are printed in government publications
and  professional  journals and  as  contractor  reports.
Reprints  are available to  other  Federal,  State, and
municipal agencies, as  well as, to the public.
  Under  the Agency's  technology transfer program,
the  latest available technological data concerning pol-

TABLE 35.—U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Chess Community
 • Number of Communities

TABLE 36.—U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Laboratories

RESEARCH LABORATORIES      + National Environmental Research Centers
                             D Major Laboratories under Research Centers

lution  technology  have been  incorporated  into four
process design  manuals. Available  to  municipal  and
design  engineers,  these  publications  deal  with  sus-
pended solid removal, carbon absorption, phosphorous
removal  and  the  upgrading  of  existing  treatment
facilities. In 1971, 12 seminars, attended by a total of
1,200  engineers, were held to  disseminate information
concerning the  manuals and other  subjects.

The Challenge  Ahead
   More  research is needed of our  environment in all
areas. To maximize  the  benefits from extramural re-
search endeavors,  all  grants and  contracts  are  now
being reviewed by the Research Office for relevancy to
EPA's missions and  specific ongoing programs. There
is temptation to recoil at the complexity of the environ-
mental problems still  ahead; yet, these problems  can-
not be researched piecemeal. They must be considered
with  the  broadest  possible  perspective,  taking  into
account all  environmental implications. Otherwise, the
solutions might cause still other, perhaps  more serious,
  The efficient control of variables affecting environ-
mental quality requires the use of reliable  and timely
information. Thus, the key to effective  environmental
quality management  lies  in the  ability  to  continually
monitor  environmental characteristics and  to  provide
interpretation of the  data obtained. Such data are es-
sential throughout  the  pollution  abatement  effort—
from initially  identifying  the problem to finally  pro-
viding direct evidence in enforcement actions.
  The monitoring of the Nation's environmental qual-
ity is a cooperative effort  involving Federal, State and
local agencies.  Its main  objectives are to characterize
existing environmental conditions, identify trends, eval-
uate compliance with standards  and  assess the inter-
change of pollutants among air,  water, soil  and living
matter.  Monitoring of all media is necessary in order
to take  into account the  "total body burden"—that is,
how much of a given substance an  individual is ex-
posed to whether it comes from air, water or land.
  The collection and timely evaluation  of  reliable in-
formation on  environmental quality  always has been
needed,  but now it is a requirement with the estab-
lishment  and implementation of  air and water quality
standards and  the resulting necessity  of  developing
abatement strategies. Regardless of the number of con-
trol  facilities and  devices installed or the  number  of
environmental  quality  management  plans  completed,
in the final analysis,  program  effectiveness only can
be measured in terms of  actual  environmental quality
improvements. And, this can be achieved only  through
adequate monitoring of environmental quality.
  EPA   monitoring activities are carried  out in  two
ways: through  networks and special  studies. The net-
works are made up  of permanent stations located  in
urban  and  non-urban areas throughout  the  nation.
These  networks, now  being  implemented,  serve  to
identify  overall environmental  quality,  regional  and
national  trends and problem areas. Where information
is not provided by the networks as  needed,  special
studies are performed. Together, these two categories
of monitoring  provide  the  environmental  quality  in-
formation needed by  EPA to  carry out its mission.
   Monitoring of pollution source emissions and efflu-
ents  on a routine basis is  also necessary. This activity,
however, is the primary responsibility of pollution con-
trol  facility managers and of local and State  pollution
control agencies. Currently, emphasis is being given to
the integration  of the formerly widely  scattered moni-
toring activities  into a unified program for total envi-
ronmental  assessment.  When completed,  these  inte-
grated  networks will provide full assessment  of pollu-
tants, such as pesticides, not limited to one medium—
air, water or land—and that are difficult to combat by
single media-oriented control programs.
   There  are  over  3300 stations in the United States
where air quality measurements are taken. State  and
local agencies operate about  3000 stations  with  the
remaining 300  operated by EPA. Complexity  of the
monitoring stations  varies considerably. Some stations
are  equipped with automatic  instruments where  as
many as  10 pollutants are monitored continuously.  In
some cities, these stations automatically transmit  con-
tinuous data to a central location for display and analy-
sis.  Most,  however, employ  very  simple devices  for
period collection of samples.
  EPA's 300 station air quality monitoring network is
national in scope and represents a progressive  growth
of types and numbers of monitors since the particulate
pollution network was first  installed in  1953.  All of
the  stations in  this network  are  stationary, that  is,
fixed at  one point. The great bulk of sampling is  con-
ducted on an intermittent  basis,  usually for a 24-hour
sampling period  at two-week intervals; however, a  con-
tinuous monitoring network of six stations using highly
sophisticated  collector-analyzers  was  established  in
1961. In all,  over 40 pollutants found  as particulates,

gases and liquids  are  routinely measured. As States
and cities expand  their capability  for  measuring  the
more common pollutants, EPA's role will be redirected
toward  coordination of these  efforts and monitoring of
non-routine pollutants.
   The EPA air contingent also conducts a number of
special investigations. During the summer  of  1971, in-
strumentation  for  monitoring carbon  monoxide  and
photochemical oxidants (ozone) were installed in about
40 major cities  to provide  data  for  implementation
plans required of  the  States. Studies  were also con-
ducted  to determine  the  air  quality on  and around
roadways, within buildings adjacent to the expressways
and around airports. Surveillance programs have been
established  to monitor  emissions from new and in-use
light  duty motor vehicles. This  information  is impor-
tant since it supports the setting of  standards.
   A program to measure the  effect of air pollution lev-
els on selected human populations in nine communities
is in progress.  Study  results  provide epidemiological
data in support of air  quality standards setting. Total
suspended paniculate,  SO-.., tapwater, NO2,  oxidants,
and other pollutants  are  routinely measured in each
   Air quality data collected  through  the above moni-
toring activities are required by  EPA,  many  local and
State agencies and other organizations. To satisfy these
needs, the National Aerometric Data Information  Sys-
tem  (NADIS)  was  recently  established.  During  the
past year, most historical  air quality data collected by
State and local agencies  have been entered  into  the
system. Mechanisms for  routine storage and analysis
of  current  data  have  also been established  and  are
   In addition, the  National  Emissions Data System
(NEDS)  has been  established to  store for  rapid  re-
trieval and  data analysis all point source and  emission
inventory data  supplied  from implementation  plans,
rapid surveys and  point-source tests. These  data  will
be  used to  assist  EPA,  State and local  agencies  in
evaluating the  success  of  their pollution control pro-
  The EPA  water quality monitoring  network is  cur-
rently in the  implementation stage. Approximately 900
Federally-funded stream  and open-water  stations  (60
of which employ automatic  monitors) are in opera-
tion  throughout the nation. From  10 to 30 pollutants
are routinely evaluated at each  station. Sampling fre-
quencies vary from continuous  to once annually, de-
pending  on the  particular pollution and the station  of
  A considerable amount of short-term water quality
monitoring is  also  currently  performed.  Over  5000
locations are sampled for periods ranging from several
days to  several months each  year. Information  gath-
ered in these surveys is used  to  support EPA enforce-
ment actions, develop mathematical models for simu-
lating  water  quality  responses, support research stud-
ies  on the fate  of pollutants and  assess the effective-
ness of pollution control practices.
  All  data collected  through these long- and short-
term  activities  are  entered  into EPA's computerized
water  data Storage  and Retrieval  (STORET)  system.
Additionally,  water quality data collected at  approxi-
mately 1000 long-term  and  5000 short-term, State-
operated monitoring  stations also  are  entered  into
STORET by  the State agencies.
  The EPA  program in  pesticide monitoring has de-
veloped significantly over the past  year. Routine moni-
toring  of pesticides  in air, water,  land, and biological
matter is now underway on  a nationwide basis.  The
recent  development  of analytical methods for measur-
ing in  air  10 of the most common pesticides allowed
the implementation  of an  eight-station pilot  network
for assessing atmospheric levels of pesticides. Pesticide
monitoring in rivers, lakes, and  estuaries  is conducted
as part of the water monitoring  sub-network. In 1971,
pesticide levels  in water were  determined  routinely for
over 300 locations.  The national soils  monitoring  pro-
gram  for  pesticides  consists  of sampling   13,300
sites covering both crop  lands and non-crop lands.  In
1971,  samples  were taken at 3000 of these  sites.  In
addition, fish  and shellfish were  collected at  over 300
locations and analyzed for pesticide content.
                                TABLE 37.—Monitoring and Surveillance—Air

                                         Estimated Numbers of Air Quality Monitoring Stations
FY 1969
Types of Stations
Simple ....
Includes stations operated by
State :
FY 1970


FY 1971


FY 1972
State '

local agencies
    Note:  The numbers of stations are estimated  based on the  number of instruments available at the end of the year; there is great vari-
ability in the capabilities of individual stations  Simple stations generally have capability to sample  for  suspended particulates, while complex
stations include continuous gas sampling capability.

   A  study  of health effects  resulting from pesticide
exposure covering 14 separate areas is also in progress.
Its purpose  is to  evaluate the effects  on human health
from repeated  exposures to pesticides. As part  of  this
study, samples of food,  water, air and soil along with
human tissue are collected and analyzed.
   Radiation monitoring  in the United States consists of
the collection of  air,  water, precipitation, milk,  human
bone  and total  diet  samples for analysis of  specific
radionuclides such as  plutonium,  strontium,   cesium
and  tritium.  The  radiation  monitoring  stations  are
nationwide  in  scope  and serve as  an alert to  initiate
more indepth studies  if so indicated. EPA also provides
monitoring  services  in  direct  support of  the  Atomic
                 Energy  Commission's  (AEC)  underground  nuclear
                 testing program. Overall, there are 180  stations where
                 air samples are  taken,  over  200  stations  where  water
                 samples are taken,  and nearly 100 milk sampling sta-
                 tions.  Additional sampling sites are on a standby basis.
                 Mobile  and  aerial  monitors are  also on  standby  for
                 radionuclide  monitoring and sampling during  each nu-
                 clear test.  EPA is  currently expanding  its monitoring
                 activities to also provide information related to nuclear
                 power operations on a nationwide  basis.
                    A monitoring program for assessing noise levels and
                 trends on  a  nationwide basis is  in the planning stage.
                 Long-term monitoring  stations are needed  to obtain
                 baseline information  on the  range  of noise levels nor-
                                 TABLE  38.—Monitoring and Surveillance—Water
Monitoring Stations (Cumulative)
Key Locations, Long-Term: ' .
EPA Funded
Non-Key Locations, Long-Term: 2 .
Other Federal Agencies 	

6,000 9,000
3,000 4,000
3,000 5,000
Not Available
Not Available

 Federal &  State  Short-Term Stations :
   (Mostly  Inactive)
10,000   15,000   20,000  30,000   40,000  Not Available
    1  Key  locations, long-term monitoring stations  are stations on major navigable waters in the vicinity of State and International boundaries
and major metropolitan areas as well as in  the contiguous zone for the  purpose of measuring water quality  for compliance with established
water  quality criteria.
    2 Non-key,  long-term monitoring stations are on Interstate and  Intrastate waters  for measuring compliance with water  quality standards
within a State. A majority of these stations are operated by Federal agencies such as U.S. Geological Survey, TVA, Corps of Engineers, and Bureau
of Reclamation that sample primarily for purposes other than water quality control.
    3 Federal and State short-term  stations  are operated to develop  supplemental information through an intensive sampling program to obtain
detailed information on a particular problem or problem area. When the  required water quality data has been obtained, over a period of two weeks
to two years, the sampling  is  stopped
                                TABLE  39.—Monitoring for Residues of Pesticides

Residues  Monitored  m  Soils, Land Run-Off,  Sediments,  and  Crops to  Provide  Data for Evaluation of  Label  Registration
                                       Applications and Residue Tolerance Petitions.

Number of Sites Sampled
Number of Samples Collected for Analyses of:
Soil ...
Water . . .
Bottom Sediments 	
Biologicals (Fish, Fish Foods, Etc.)
FY 1969
FY 1970
FY 1971
FY 1972
FY 1973
   Non-cropland sampling in 10 States: Idaho, Washington, Nebraska, Georgia, Maine, Arizona, Wyoming, Iowa, Virginia and Maryland.
   Cropland sampling is performed throughout the continental United States, except Oregon, Montana,  Minnesota, Kansas and  Texas.
   Urban  area sampling is provided in  20  cities across the nation (e.g., Bakersfield, California; Camden, New  Jersey; Houston, Texas; Salt
   Lake City, Utah;  Greenville, Mississippi;  Sikeston, Missouri, Charleston,  South Carolina; Memphis, Tennessee;  Richmond, Virginia; Mobile,
   Additional cities sampled are:  Baltimore,  Maryland; Newport News, Virginia; Macon, Georgia; Gadsden, Alabama, and Hartford, Connecticut.

 mally encountered across the Nation  and to identify
 trends  in  these  levels with time. Special studies are
 being carried out as  necessary to identify and charac-
 terize specific sources and causes of  noise  and the
 effects of noise on humans, wildlife and property.

   A national solid waste data network is being imple-
 mented. It will  serve  to inventory and analyze on a
 nationwide basis information pertaining to solid waste
 legislation,  the  administration  and  management  of
 solid  waste programs, solid  waste generation,  solid
 waste  characterization and solid waste  management
 systems.  This information  is essential  and must be
 readily  available to  decision-makers  responsible  for
 the  effective and efficient control of solid waste prob-
 lems at the local, county, State and Federal level.

   In large measure,  the success of an environmental
 pollution control program rests  upon the reliability of
 the  data provided by monitoring activities. Meaningful
 assessments of environmental quality, whether they be
 within  one, or  among several,  environmental media,
 require valid data.  When such  assessments  are made
 in support of an  enforcement  action, the data used
 must be legally  defensible. That is, the data's validity
must be clearly demonstrable to  the  satisfaction of a
court of law.
   The  acquisition  of reliable, comparable  and legally
defensible  data requires EPA-wide use of  a set of
standardized measurement and calibration  procedures,
an  interlaboratory  quality control program, a labora-
tory  performance  certification  program and  a stand-
ardized laboratory  record-keeping  procedure. These
serve not only to ensure data uniformity and reliability,
but also to document the quality of the data produced.
  Standardization and  quality control programs were
under varying  stages of development  by the various
EPA environmental monitoring activities  at  the  time
EPA was  established.   Emphasis is  currently  being
given to the coordination and integration of these pro-
grams as their  development proceeds.
  Emphasis is also being given to  the development  and
adaptation  of advanced monitoring techniques, such as
remote  sensing from aerial platforms, for use  in moni-
toring the  environment. These techniques show  much
promise and, eventually, may significantly  reduce  the
amount of  manual sampling and analysis now required
to provide adequate nationwide coverage of the environ-
Collection of water samples.

                              TABLE  40.—Monitoring and Surveillance—Radiation
                                                                                        Analysis Performed
Radiation Alert Network           1956
Pasteurized Milk Network         1960
Institutional Total Diet            1961
  Sampling Network
Tritium  Network,  (Tap           1964
  Water, Precipitation and
  Surface Water)
Carrier Water Supply             1960
Human Bone                    1961
               117      Monthly/
             Variable    125 Samples
                          per Quarter
              Gross beta field estimate with laboratory analy-
              sis of  selected samples  for  fission,  products,
              pultonium,  and tritium. To alert  EPA and the
              states  to  increased  levels of  radioactivity in
              precipitation and  airborne particulates.
              For measures of  radionuclide levels  in  pas-
              teurized milk and for establishing environmental
              Measures  the level  of exposure  in  the total
              diet of a selected population  group.
              Tritium analysis in order to provide surveillance
              at selected surface water stations downstream
              for potential sources of tritium  release.
              Test  for gross alpha  and gross beta radiation
              and  specific  radionuclides when  gross  levels
              are unusually high.
              Test  for  strontium  90 content in relation to
                              TABLE 41.—Number of Stations  at Which Various
                                             Parameters are Evaluated in the Water
                                             Quality Monitoring Network
                                                                             of Stations
                              Dissolved  Oxygen
                              Specific Conductivity
                              Nitrogen          . .
                              Common  Ions    . .
                              Phosphorus  ..
                              Dissolved  Solids  .
                              Turbidity  .
                              Coliform   .
                              BOD .
                              Suspend Solids .  .  .
                              Radioactivity    .  .
                              Minor Elements   . .



   The Federal Government carries on  many activities
 that have an impact on environmental quality. It main-
 tains installations and buildings; manages lands; con-
 structs water  resource development projects; dredges
 waterways;  and operates huge fleets  of vehicles, ves-
 sels  and aircraft. Today, the Federal Government owns
 approximately 20,000  installations  and  one-third  of
 the  country's  land. In addition, each year it  awards
 well over 100,000 procurement contracts for the manu-
 facturing of materials, supplies and equipment. It pro-
 vides financial assitance to  support highway construc-
 tion, housing development, urban renewal, farming op-
 erations, economic development and recreation projects.
 It licenses construction and  operation of nuclear power
 plants; leases timber harvesting and other uses on Fed-
 eral  lands; and issues permits for dredging, filing in,and
 for discharging of industrial wastes into navigable waters.
  There  are several major programs designed to pre-
vent and abate environmental  pollution  from Federal
activities. All  Federally owned or  operated facilities
must meet environmental standards. Those who receive
Federal contracts,  loans,  grants, licenses and permits
must comply with environmental  standards. In  addi-
tion, the National  Environmental  Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) requires  Federal agencies to prepare  a  de-
tailed statement  on the environmental  impact  of all
major  Federal actions which  significantly  affect  the
  These  broad-ranging programs  were  established to
insure  that the  Federal Government's  own activities
will not cause environmental  degradation. EPA partici-
pates heavily in these  programs, providing the Federal
agencies with technical assistance on a broad range of
pollution control and environmental planning subjects.

  On February 4, 1970, President Nixon issued Execu-
tive Order 11507 requiring that all buildings, installa-
tions, structures and  other  properties  owned  by  or
leased to the Federal  Government  be designed, oper-
ated and maintained to conform with  air and  water
quality standards and related plans  of implementation,
including emissions standards, adopted pursuant to the
Clean Air Act  and the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act. In those cases where there are no such standards
in force for a particular geographic area or in those
cases  where  more stringent requirements  are deemed
advisable,  EPA  may  establish air  and water quality
Municipal golf course built  on  sanitary  landfill:  Jackson, Miss.
                                    DocllllM'nr;!  I'llolo

 standards  for the purpose of the Order, including re-
 lated schedules for implementation.
   The  Order directs  each Federal agency to maintain
 surveillance  over  its facilities  to ensure that the stand-
 ards  are  met on  a continuing basis.  In addition,  the
 agencies must consult with EPA concerning  the  best
 techniques  and methods  available for  the  protection
 and enhancement of the environment and the adequacy
 of  the  performance specifications for proposed pollu-
 tion control  measures.
   Since issuance of Executive Order 11507,  there have
 been a number of legislative and  executive  changes
 which have  a direct  bearing on  the  President's pro-
 gram. Both the Clean Air Act and the Federal Water
 Pollution  Control Act were amended  to place greater
 responsibility on  the  Federal agencies to ensure that
 their  facilities meet Federal, State and local pollution
 control  and  abatement requirements.  The Solid Waste
 Disposal  Act  was  amended  to  require  the  Federal
 agencies to comply  with guidelines issued by  the Ad-
 ministrator for solid waste disposal  at facilities under
their  jurisdiction.  Federal agencies  were directed  by
Section  402 of the Clean Air Act to consult  with EPA
concerning measures to abate noise pollution problems.
TABLE 42.—Remedial Actions  to  Control Pollution
              from  Existing  Federal  Facilities *

                                       Budget Authority
                                           1972   1973
Environmental Protection Agency ..........    2.8     3.9    4.0
Department of Defense  ..................   86.8   153.9  232.2
Atomic Energy Commission ...............    0.5     2.4    8.1
Department of Transportation ..............    1.0     7.7    7.2
Department of the Interior  ................    6.2    46.9   11.9
Department of Agriculture ...............    7.2    20.8   29.3
Department of Commerce  .................    0.2     0.5    4.1
General Services Administration ...........    1.5    18.4    0.0
National Aeronautics & Space Admin .........    0.7     3.0    0.9
National Science  Foundation  .............   —     —    —
Department of Health, Education & Welfare  ...    0.0     0.9    4.8
Department of State  .....................   —     —    —
Smithsonian Institute ....................    0.0    —    —
Federal Power Commission ...............   —     —    —
Department of Justic (Prisons)  ............    0.1     2.6    0.0
U. S. Postal Service ....................    0.4     1.4    2.0
Department of Housing & Urban Development   —     —    —
Veteran's Administration .................    4.4     6.3    4.5
Appalachian Regional Commission ..........   —     —    —
Tennessee Valley Authority ...............    0.1     0.1    0.2
Department of Army (Civil Works) .........    3.8    11.6    5.4

    Totals  ............................  115.7   280.4  314.6
  *CAs reported  by Agencies  and  verified  by  Examiners  for the
Special Analysis  for Selected Environmental Activities, January 18,
   Executive Order 11507 requires that Federal  agen-
cies complete or have underway by December 31,  1972,
remedial actions necessary to achieve compliance with
existing  air  and  water  quality  standards.  Since  the
Order was  issued, the  agencies  have been designing,
and  initiating  necessary  abatement measures.  The
President's budget requests for 1971, 1972, and 1973
included $116  million, $280 million,  and $315 million,
respectively,  for  pollution abatement needs  at Federal
facilities.  Table  42 presents  the budget requests  by
each  agency for Fiscal  Years 1971,  1972,  and  1973.
These funds  represent a substantial increase over those
budgeted in  prior years and  indicate the high priority
given to the  program.
   This does  not mean that the task of controlling pol-
lution from Federal facilities will be finished by Decem-
ber 31,  1972. Some air  and water  quality standards
have  come into effect since  the  Executive Order was
issued and  standards will continue  to  evolve during
the next few years. Thus, Federal  agencies  must view
pollution control as a continuing responsibility. In addi-
tion,  in  some cases it  has  been  necessary to  grant
extensions  to projects subject to the deadline because
pollution control  technology  is  not now available.  In
such  cases,  the  agencies  must  schedule  appropriate
abatement  projects as  soon  as  the  necessary  control
technology is developed.
   EPA provides technical advice and assistance to  the
Federal agencies in this effort. Such assistance includes:
advising the  agencies on the types of  corrective options
required and the  scheduling of such  actions; reviewing
agencies' fiscal plans for the Office of Management and
Budget and recommending budget priorities for projects
contained in  the plans; and working with  the agencies in
justifying their budget requests to the  Congress.


   Several programs have  been initiated  in response to
legislative and executive mandates that actions be taken
to  control   pollution  from  federally supported and
authorized activities.  Section 306 of the  Clean  Air
Amendments of  1970 specifies that no Federal agency
may  enter into any  contract for the procurement  of
goods, materials or services  where the  contract is  to
be performed  at  a facility which has given rise to  a
conviction  for  any offense of violating clean air stand-
ards.  This  prohibition  continues  until  the Adminis-
trator of EPA certifies that the condition giving rise to
a  conviction has  been corrected.
   To implement  the provisions of  Section 306,  the
President issued Executive Order  11602 on June  30,
1971, which requires the Federal Government to use its
procurement activities,  grants  and  loans  to  achieve
environmental   goals.  EPA   is  currently   developing

regulations to institute  a fully operational program to
insure that Federal financial assistance  goes  only to
those who comply with clean air requirements.
   Already the Federal purchasing power has been used
to  specify certain qualities  in  the  products which it
buys. For example,  the General Services Administra-
tion  has changed  its  procurement specifications  to
require that paper  purchased by the Federal Govern-
ment  contain  a  specified  minimum  percentage  of
recycled material. Another example is the President's
TABLE  43.-Environmental Impact Statement Process
                      DRAFT STATEMENT
         WITH CEQ

•'.<••' '.' Jr^.
'"•*»,,, PUBLIC
                                      STATE AND LOCAL
                                      REVIEW DRAFT
directive that Federal vehicles, whenever possible, will
use low-lead or unleaded gasoline.
  Section 21b of the Water Quality Improvement Act
of  1970,  requires  that any applicant  for  a Federal
license or  permit  to conduct  an activity  which  may
result in any discharge into navigable waters must pro-
vide a certification from the State that the  activity will
not  violate applicable water  quality standards.  The
licensing or permitting agency must notify EPA of such
applications and  certifications. In  those  cases  where
standards  have been set by  EPA or where  the State
does not have the  authority,  such certification must be
obtained from EPA.
  The Resources Recovery Act of 1970, Section 2lib,
requires that  each Federal agency  which issues any
license or  permit for disposal of solid waste shall, prior
to the issuance of  such license or permit, consult with
EPA  to  insure   compliance  with   guidelines   being
developed by this  Agency.

  NEPA requires that all Federal agencies include  in
every recommendation or report on proposed legisla-
tion  or other major  action significantly  affecting the
environment a detailed statement assessing the environ-
mental effects of the  action, the adverse  impacts  that
cannot be avoided, alternatives to the proposed action,
the  relationship  between short and long-term uses  of
the  environment  and any irreversible  commitment  of
resources involved. These statements are often  called
702 statements or environmental impact statements.
  These environmental impact statements are reviewed
by Government agencies which have jurisdiction by law
or which have special expertise on the environmental
impacts involved. Because of its authority  and expertise
in the six primary areas of pollution control—air, water,
pesticides, radiation, solid waste, and noise—EPA re-
views  virtually  every  impact  statement  that is  filed.
EPA's comments  are  available to the public, as are
copies of the  impact statements. The  facets of the
impact  statement process which  involve widespread
coordination  and  review and  public disclosure, are
intended to  make certain that full consideration is  in
fact  given to the  impact of all major Federal actions
on the environment.
  The impact statement requirement has had an impor-
tant  effect  on  the  planning  process of  the  Federal
Government. Since the National Environmental Policy
Act was signed on January 1, 1970, more than 2,500
statements concerning major Federal actions  have been
filed. Of those,  many of the actions have been signifi-
cantly modified to avoid environmental hazards pointed
out  by EPA,  other  agencies and  the  public.  Some
projects have even been halted while additional environ-
mental  studies are conducted.

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Cooling towers used in waste heat
   For instance, in the case of the Trans-Alaska Pipe-
 line, EPA  suggested that the responsible agency, the
 Department of Interior,  investigate the environmental
 effects of the whole water and land transportation sys-
 tem, not just the pipeline portion of the system; that
 alternative  routes  be  studied; that consideration be
 given to using a single corridor for a number of pipe-
 lines  rather than  using  separate corridors for  each
 pipeline; that the effectiveness and dependability of the
 seismic and leak monitoring systems be further investi-
 gated; and that the consequences of the pipeline on the
 permafrost  be  further studied.   The  Department of
 Interior has recently released the results  of  a major
 new investigation into the environmental consequences
 of the project. This inquiry was in direct response to
 the  questions raised by  concerned groups, including
   Similarly,  the Tocks  Island  Lake  Project  which
 involves construction of a dam near Stroudsburg, Penn-
 sylvania, on the Delaware River also raised some con-
 cerns in EPA. In its September 1971 comments on the
 draft impact statement for this project, EPA requested
 additional information on the Tocks Island Reservoir
 Project in regard to water quality.  After a review of
 this  information,  EPA concluded, in its comments on
 the final impact statement issued in December of 1971,
 that water quality in the  proposed reservoir would be
 a serious environmental problem under existing waste
 treatment conditions in the  Upper  Delaware Basin.
 EPA suggested land use  controls  and well-designed
liquid  and  solid waste  disposal plans  to prevent pre-
Peach Bottom, Pennsylvania: A high-temperature gas-cooled
reactor nuclear power plant.

mature aging of the lake. The Council on Environ-
mental  Quality instructed the Corps of Engineers not
to initiate  construction until additional  studies could
be completed on means to remedy the environmental
problems associated with the dam  and until plans to
remedy the environmental problems could be developed.
  EPA also  commented on the Atomic Energy Com-
mission's revised environmental impact  statement on
the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, to  be built on
the shores  of the Chesapeake  Bay.  EPA's comments
indicated that the plant would probably exceed Mary-
land State temperature standards more frequently than
suggested in the statement. In addition, EPA stated its
opinion that  the  proposed method of reducing power
output in order to meet standards would not be prac-
tical during periods  of  peak  power demand. Further,
it was indicated that current  Maryland standards may
not be sufficient to adequately protect aquatic life, and
that a tentative agreement between EPA  and the State
of Maryland was reached to revise Maryland's water
quality  standards. Finally, EPA suggested that addi-
tional cooling for the  Calvert Cliffs Plant be  further
evaluated and that the  operation of the first reactor be
closely  monitored to  determine the impact on  the
Chesapeake Bay.
   Although EPA's primary mission objectives are to
prevent, abate, and control pollution, it too must pre-
pare impact statements on its  own actions if they  will
have a significant impact on the environment. EPA pub-
lished proposed procedures implementing NEPA in the
January 20, 1972, Federal Register.  These procedures
established the administrative  framework within EPA
for analyzing the environmental effects of wastewater
treatment  construction grants and other programs  and
for preparing any  necessary impact  statements. These
procedures have already been implemented, and over
20 impact statements have been prepared and circulated
for interagency review.
   Clearly,  the  Federal  Government is devoting sub-
stantial resources in terms of money,  manpower  and
expertise  to  the President's commitment to  control
pollution from Federal  activities  and to the develop-
ment  of  sound environmental  planning  in  Federal
decisionmaking.  EPA's Federal activities program  is  a
significant contribution to that commitment. EPA  will
continue to provide its assistance and expertise to  the
Federal agencies in their efforts to operate in a manner
consistent  with a clean, safe environment.

   Environmental problems overlap national boundaries
and transcend ideological barriers. Because the oceans
and atmosphere are global systems, pollution in any of
their part effects many nations. The  smoke and toxic
effluents  of  one country pollute  others.  Penguins  of
Antarctica and fish in the deep ocean contain DDT
although they are thousands of miles from the pollution
   Because pollution is global, unilateral action alone is
not sufficient  to combat it.  Many of the initiatives
needed  to attack world  environmental problems  are
new,  require coordinated action  and demand  novel
methods  of international  organization and cooperative
action. Recognizing this fact, President Nixon said in
transmitting  his 1970 Report to the  Congress   on
Foreign Policy for the 1970's: "We know we must act
as one  world in restoring the world's  environment,
before pollution of the seas and skies overwhelms every
nation." The United States and other  nations are seek-
ing to combat pollution through international coopera-
tive action, and EPA is acting to support this effort.
   EPA is responsible for developing and implementing
international  cooperative  agreements,  coordinating  its
activities with other nations and  maintaining contact
with other United  States agencies involved in foreign
affairs. EPA  deals with multilateral organizations, bi-
lateral programs, science  and technology  and interna-
tional  exchanges.  Specialists participating  in  EPA's
international  activities come from EPA Headquarters,
the Regional  Offices, Research Centers  and labora-
   EPA pursues its international activities in an effort
to encourage world-wide  action to prevent further de-
terioration of the environment,  to reduce, and if pos-
sible to  eliminate  existing  pollution  and to improve
the quality of life for present and future generations.
The  information and  experience  gained  through  co-
operative efforts enhance  the Agency's knowledge and
expertise which in turn contributes to the domestic pro-
gram. The assessment and transfer of pollution abate-
ment technology from other countries  also assists EPA.
   Most of the Agency's  international activities  today
are directed toward the exchange of information,  co-
operative research, data collection and the production
or promotion of environmental investigations.  Some
cooperative  activities consist  of action programs  for
preventing or reducing pollution. Most require the  ex-
change of informational material  or  personnel. Many
stem from United States membership  in a wide variety
of international organizations; others arise  from new
and  pressing needs to meet immediate environmental


   During 1971  EPA devoted particular emphasis to
assisting  in  the  preparations for  the  United Nations
Conference on the Human Environment, which was held
in June 1972 in Stockholm. The Conference was the first
major  world-wide  environmental conference and may
well  be a landmark in the development of international
environmental cooperation.  The Conference was in-
tended to be  a global convocation to stimulate action on
environmental problems affecting the interests of all na-
tions. Special attention in the session was given to ways
to reconcile  national  activities in the fields of environ-
ment and economic  development.  Five  Conference
topics of special interest were marine pollution, monitor-
ing and surveillance, conservations, soils and a declara-
tion on the environment.
   EPA specialists have taken an active part in the work
of the Preparatory Committee. They  participated in the
work of the Working Groups on. Marine Pollution, and
Monitoring and Surveillance of Global Pollution, and in
other aspects of Conference preparation. They led U.S.
preparations  for  the agenda items on the Identification
and  Control of  Pollutants  and Nuisances of Broad
International Significance.


   EPA participates in the work of a number of multi-
lateral  intergovernmental organizations concerned with
environmental matters. During  1971, EPA specialists
took an  active  part  in  the  continuing environmental
activities  of  the  United  Nations  specialized  interna-
tional organizations, such as the World Health Organi-
zation  (WHO),  the  Food and Agriculture Organiza-
tion  (FAO), the World Meteorological  Organization
(WMO),  the United Nations  Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)  and the Inter-
national Atomic  Energy Agency (IAEA). They were
active  in the WHO/pAo Codex Alimentarius Com-
mission on pesticide  residues in food and in the  UN's
Joint Group of  Experts on the Scientific Aspects of
Marine Pollution (GESAMP).
   EPA experts  play  an active  role in the work  of the
Environment Committee and  Sector  Groups  of the
Organization of  Economic Cooperation  and Develop-
ment (OECD),  which is comprised of the major in-
dustrial nations of the free world.  OECD is concent-
trating on economic and trade effects of environmental
protection measures,  particularly in  the fields of water
management, air pollution,  noise abatement and the
undesirable effects of pesticide residues.
   In the North  Atlantic Treaty Organization's Com-
mittee  on Challenges  of  Modern  Society  (NATO/

CCMS), which, at  the suggestion of President Nixon,
is  working on  special problems  of industrialized so-
cieties,  EPA specialists  are  leading cooperative pro-
jects on air pollution and development of low pollution
motor vehicles. They are also participating in projects
in advanced wastewater treatment and the investigation
of river basin management on the St.  John River be-
tween Maine and New Brunswick.
   EPA is assisting  the efforts of the Intergovernmental
Maritime  Consultative Organization (IMCO), partic-
ularly in  preventing  marine  pollution  from  oil spills.
It is also  assisting  the Economic Commission for Eu-
rope  (ECE), by taking part  in the 1971  Prague Sym-
posium  on environmental problems. The ECE is serv-
ing  as  a  forum for information exchange  between
Eastern and Western nations on pollution control.
   The  international  community  made  progress last
year  in developing cooperative  approaches to gather-
ing and compiling  global economic and scientific in-
formation, which will assist in understanding the level
and effects of environmental pollution.  The interna-
tional monitoring  of  global  pollutants is of growing
interest. At the request  of other nations EPA is pro-
viding  detailed information   on  U.S.  standards and
abatement  methods.  The Agency  is  serving  as an
International Reference  Center for air pollution at the
request of the World Health  Organization.


   One  of the  most rapidly developing areas of inter-
national  environmental cooperation is  in the bilateral
field. EPA  is  actively  participating in  this growing
field  and is  working to expand  its bilateral activities.
   Major  bilateral  programs  are  developing  with the
neighboring  nations  of  Canada  and Mexico. During
 1971 EPA experts joined in the preparations for the
June U.S.-Canadian  Ministerial  Meeting  on   Great
Lakes Pollution. This meeting concluded a Great Lakes
Water  Quality Agreement between the two  nations to
combat pollution on the Great Lakes.
   Meanwhile close U.S. and Canadian  pollution con-
trol cooperation on  the Red River, Rainy River and
Lake of the Woods, St. Croix River and in the Great
Lakes  and their connecting  channels continued within
 the framework of  the International Joint Commission,
 a unique and competent international  body created  by
 the Boundary  Waters Treaty of 1909.  The  Commis-
 sion  is also investigating air pollution  in the Detroit-
 Windsor  area.  EPA officials  are active on all the Com-
 mission's  pollution advisory boards.  They  also  took
 part  in discussions with Canadian officials concerning
 possible  oil spill  pollution   from tankers  along the
 southern west  coast boundary between  the  two coun-
   Close  bilateral cooperation with Mexico is also un-
 der development. In 1971, EPA met with its Mexican
 counterparts to assist in establishing an  air monitoring
                                      I	1C1-M
Polluted section near Gulf Coast, 100 miles south of HauMon, TV.ra.s.

system for Mexico  City, exchange of information and
experience for  establishing  national  air  and  water
standards in  Mexico, and agreement  on a loan of air
monitoring equipment  for exchanging comparable data
on  the effects of air pollution  at high  altitudes.  They
also took part  in  Mexico's  first pollution abatement
conference in Monterrey.
  Bilateral exchanges  with Japan, France and  other
countries  also moved  ahead in 1971.  The  U.S.  and
Japan  have exchanged environmental information  for
many years  under  the U.S.-Japan  Cooperative Pro-
gram on Natural Resources. Joint  air and water pol-
lution programs began in 1970  and in  June 1971  the
two  Governments agreed  to  exchange information on
curbing air pollution from automobiles and on apply-
ing advanced technology to sewage treatment.  EPA
representatives also took  part  in  the first  U.S.  trade
exhibit on pollution  abatement technology  in  Japan
which resulted in large sales of  U.S.  equipment.  They
also took part in the  exchange of experts and docu-
mentation in air and water legislation  and standards.
With France, EPA  specialists are cooperating in  plan-
ning of the  pollution-free model  city,  Le Vaudreuil.
Cooperative activities are  also underway or under con-
sideration with  Germany, Spain, Switzerland, Sweden
and  the United  Kingdom.
  During 1971, EPA  air pollution officials visited the
USSR  at Soviet invitation as part of a bilateral scien-
tific exchange agreement. Polish authorities visited the
U.S. to discuss  possible air and water pollution and
solid waste  management cooperation,  and  EPA  ex-
perts made a return visit to Poland. An EPA team

visited  Romania  to  discuss  advanced   wastewater
treatment. In trilateral discussions EPA, Canadian and
United Kingdom officials met in a continuing series of
talks  on pesticides, and EPA, Swedish and Canadian
officials  continued  consultations  on  phosphates and

  Activities under  EPA's  Special  Foreign Currency
Program were developed and broadened during  1971.
Fifteen  joint projects in air  and water pollution and
solid waste management were  conducted with  India,
Israel,  Poland and  Yugoslavia  valued  at $3.5 million
in Fiscal Year 1971.
  These cooperative  activities  relate directly to EPA
and  foreign country needs. They merge the scientific
and  resource  capabilities of the countries  in a con-
certed  attack  on specific environment  problems while
contributing  valuable  knowledge  and  experience  to
supplement the  Agency's domestic  programs.  Admin-
istered by  the Office of International Affairs, the pro-
gram is funded  from excess  foreign currencies  accru-
ing to  the  United States under various  U.S. programs
in countries  overseas. During  Fiscal Year 1972  ap-
proximately 7.5  million dollars were available to fund
new cooperative activities under the program.
  In addition, EPA activities supported through dol-
lar grants and contracts in countries, other than those
under  the  Special  Foreign Currency  Program, draw
upon the skills  and knowledge of foreign  experts to
assist domestic programs. Awards made include those
to institutions  in England, France, Japan and Sweden.


   During the  past year, EPA engaged in a broadening
program  of  exchange  activities  with  other  nations.
EPA briefed over  1,200 visitors, including the science
attaches of Embassies in Washington and Foreign Press
Corps, other government officials, scientists, engineers,
journalists and industrialists.  EPA specialists met with
a  wide  range  of foreign  experts, among them the for-
eign news editors of 15 leading Southeast Asian news-
papers;  representatives  of 20  Japanese  firms; labor
representatives from Australia,  Germany, France  and
Israel;  Members  of  Parliament  from  Brazil, Italy,
Germany, the Netherlands and the  United Kingdom;
and  local government officials from  New Zealand  and
   The  Agency  continued an  extensive information
program,  distributing technical  and  descriptive mate-
rial to pollution  agencies and experts around the globe
and  mailing  pertinent  information   to  U.S.  Science
Attaches throughout the  world.  Plans have  been initi-
ated to  develop  an  Agency-wide International Visitors
Service  and regional tours of  EPA facilities throughout
the country for  foreign visitors.  Steps are now being
taken to assist the  Agency for International Develop-
ment to  train environmentalists  from  developing
Opening day of the Trout season of Kings River, Fresno, California.
                                     Documerica Photo


   EPA's  expanding international activities in 1971 re-
flected  the growing  awakening to  the  international
nature  of  common environmental  concerns.  Like the
United  States, many  nations  realize the need  to up-
grade their environmental programs and  organizations
and to  broaden  their policy  and legislative  authority
to  deal  with environmental   degradation.  Australia,
Canada, France,  Germany, Great Britain, India, Japan,
New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Switzerland and the
United  States have  reorganized or  plan to improve
their environmental  protection  programs. Multilateral
                          organizations stepped up their environmental activities,
                          and  the  international community  as a whole took  a
                          giant step forward in employing international  coopera-
                          tion  as a tool in preserving environmental quality. The
                          year also saw a  major  stride toward a  cooperative
                          approach to combating international pollution and en-
                          vironmental problems. A number of developing nations
                          question the need for strong pollution abatement efforts
                          in light of their pressing economic development needs.
                          Many nations, however, recognize  that the broadening
                          and strengthening of cooperative programs is  essential
                          if countries are to  deal  effectively  with the  problem
                          of global pollution.
                                TABLE  44.—Special Foreign Currency Program
       Program & Country
 FY 1971
Number of
for FY 1972
Estimated No.
 of projects
for FY 1973
Air   	   3,427,153

India	       —
Poland  	     315,727
Yugoslovia  . .      	   3,111,426

Water	     254,000

India       .  .       	       —
Poland   	       —
Yugoslovia      	      54,000
UAR	       —
Pakistan   	       —
Tunisia   	       —
Israel	     200,000

Solid Waste	      33,566

India    	      33,566
Poland  	       —
Yugoslovia   	       —
Pakistan 	       —

Pesticides & Toxic Mat	       —

India       	       —
Poland   	       —

Radiation   	     161,000

India    	      81,274
Poland  	       —
Yugoslovia	       —
UAR    	       —
Israel   	      80,240

Noise   	       —

Poland  	       —
Yugoslovia	       —
OIA Program Support	       —
Estimated No.
 of projects
                            100,000          1
       Total  	   3,876,233
    ' Includes $343,000 as transfer to National Science Foundation for Translations.
    2 Includes $60,000 as transfer to National Science Foundation for Translations.